Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Shrekxy64 (talk | contribs) at 19:40, 1 February 2020 (→Username Struggle). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is the teahouse
Shortcuts

Stormy clouds, 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.

(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.)

Is this a good article?

I have written this article with references from news and blogs.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jantroon_(Dhar)

Jantroon_(Dhar)


I had made firstly a draft today i was writing its talk page then suddenly it showed directly writing an article. I copied all my draft and added the same in above article.


I don't have any more online references for adding more details. But I personally have researched about the place..

Is there any mistakes in the article? Kindly fix it or let me know. - Anzer Ayoob (talk) 16:44, 29 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anzer Creation (talk • contribs) 04:07, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello, Anzer Creation. Making a referenced article is already a good step, the one that new users usually fail to achieve (although the fourth reference is to a blog, hence not a good source - see WP:IRS for details). However, the article is not written from a neutral point of view: for example, one of the beautiful tourist destination[s] is opinion, not a fact you would find in an encyclopedia. The worst however is But the Govt has always ignored its development despites repeated requests. If govt. develop this place... which is something you would find in a local party electoral leaflet. I will change that soon.
Some light copyediting might be needed too, but that is not such a big deal. TigraanClick here to contact me 08:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Anzer Creation: I am concerned that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons a watermarked image, clearly marked as The Chenab Times, yet have claimed it has a Creative Commons licence. I find that highly unlikely, so will probably recommend it for deletion. Before I do, I'm giving you a chance to edit that image and add in a url to clearly demonstrate that the Chenab Times has definitely released it on a CC-BY-SA licence. I somehow doubt you will be able to do that. My attempt to reach their domain fails. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.) Nick Moyes (talk) 12:52, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Nick Moyes: , I am an administrator in Chenab Times, I have not any plain image file related to Jantroon, so my CT members sent me this image. Now I found the URL in The Chenab Times for this image which is https://twitter.com/thechenabtimes/status/939366961338761216 . As I am a new user so please don't delete that image file. I will try the procedure to add license url soon. Anzer Ayoob (talk) 13:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Anzer Creation: I am happy to give you some time, though I cannot promise that another editor will not see it and propose it for immediate deletion as a copyright violation. If you are an administrator of the Chenab Times, you presumably know that it's web domain cannot be reached at all, and also that someone sending in an image does not give you the right to release it under a free commercial licence, as you have done. The twitter link you supplied will not be sufficient, I'm afraid. Bear in mind that an image does not help convey notability, so it is not essential to the article. You could consider adding a map to the page instead. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:00, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Moyes: Yes, due to restrictions in Jammu and Kashmir, India. The Chenab Times had shut down it's website for some time six months ago. Till the situation goes normal here in J&K, we will restore it soon. I will update plain (without watermark) version of the image if i found in my laptop. I think plain images don't need URL which is captured by me or my CT team?

Map idea is also good but I am new user, I need time to learn about how to add accurate maps. -- Anzer Ayoob (talk) 15:17, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the image: the biggest problem is not the watermark, which is a technical problem, but copyright, which is legal. With or without watermark, you cannot upload an image you do not have the rights to. Assuming you are indeed the "administrator" at the Chenab Times (we have no way to know that for sure over the internet), it still does not mean you have the legal authority to release the copyrights of the picture. Even if the "administrator" has ultimate authority for all legal decisions of the Chenab Times (~CEO or such), the copyright might still rest with the photographer who took it rather than the corporate entity. TigraanClick here to contact me 16:03, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Anzer Creation: To be clear, please tell us who created the picture and how they are related (employee, anonymous contributor, etc.). Are they willing to release it under the CC BY-SA license that is required, which basically means it can be modified and used for any purpose, including for profit? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:37, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AlanM1:, the picture is allowed to release under CC BY-SA by our original author of the picture while submitting it to The Chenab Times. Anybody can make fair use of pic. That pic is not for sale. -- Anzer Ayoob (talk) 16:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Anzer Creation: Anyone can create an account on Wikipedia. We simply have no proof that you are a member of staff of the Chenab Times, let alone one authorized to release the picture as CC-BY-SA. I am going to nominate the picture for deletion on Commons; if you want to re-upload it, read WP:DCM carefully before trying to re-upload it, and follow the appropriate steps so that we can ensure you are not just a rando who grabbed the picture from the Chenab Times Twitter feed. (It would be nice to have the no-watermark picture, too.)
I am not doing this to spite you but out of important copyright concerns. The previous posters were lenient enough to not list the picture for deletion because they expected a valid licensing would be forthcoming; reading your posts, I have little confidence this will happen if the image is kept live. TigraanClick here to contact me 15:32, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Haiphong Maritime High School article w/exception of date copied from wn.com

whole article Haiphong Maritime High School copy pasted from https://wn.com/mobile/haiphong_maritime_high_school except date. please verify Leela52452 (talk) 11:52, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Leela52452. The Wikipedia article was created in 2011, and has been edited several times since. The text at wn.com seems to be the same as this version from last November, so it seems almost certain that the wn.com entry is a copy from Wikipedia. This would be perfectly legal if they attributed it, but since they haven't, wn.com are violating the licence. --ColinFine (talk) 12:03, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
More precisely, they copied this version from 2011. They are listed at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks/VWXYZ#World News Network. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:10, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, ColinFine wow, i did not think that way. there is no date in hyperlink. is there any way to find info. Leela52452 (talk) 12:16, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Can you clarify that question? What do you mean by info?--Quisqualis (talk) 18:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think they want to know how to see when a webpage was created, or how to discover its provenance 194.75.231.3 (talk) 12:12, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a protocol for creating pages meant for entertainment?

I think I have seen pages somewhere that have comical intent. Is this true, or am I making it up? If it is true, I would appreciate sample articles, and the pertinent information. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mulstev (talk • contribs) 17:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pages for comical intent exist at many places on the Web; however, the comical intent of Wikipedia is limited to wry remarks on pages which have an instructional or advisory nature. I hope this answers your question.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:31, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Mulstev, in short, Wikipedia does not host comical content. It's a serious encyclopedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:33, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Quisqualis, I am afraid that you are incorrect. WP:FUN. WP:GAFDEW. WP:WikiFauna, just to name a few. moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 17:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Mulstev. Please read Wikipedia:Humor for an overview. Encyclopedia articles should not be written humorously in Wikipedia's voice. However, there are many humorous Wikipedia essays available for your reading pleasure. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:37, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, thanks to all. I appreciate it.Mulstev (talk) 18:15, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not ethical behavior of Korean users How can I act if he ignores this warning?

In the article Balhae, the user User talk: Koraskadi tries to organize a revision war to block the balanced position of all three parties to the conflict in the article. I warned him about the inadmissibility of such behavior. and about that, he should improve the text if it is really poorly written and put patterns about the lack of sources if they really are not enough and not delete the text. How can I act if he ignores this warning? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balhae&action=history Aek973 (talk) 18:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That editor has previously been warned for this behavior and will be reported again.--Quisqualis (talk) 18:47, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that you may be editing as an IP:185.17.129.116. If so, Aek973, this creates confusion, especially in cases like this. Do try for consistency in using one or the other (it's vastly preferred that you log in).
Also, please try to engage diplomatically with the other editor on the article's Talk page. Not being a Korea subject expert, I cannot tell what the contention is about.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:00, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it’s me - sometimes authorization flies, I don’t notice it, I’m editing it. And then I see that authorization has flown. But then I correct my signature. Making authorization Aek973 (talk) 19:15, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and I just registered? I was wondering if this project was worth my time at all. And part of the edits made before.Aek973 (talk) 19:33, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But I looked at the history of edits and read the edit page - this user does not accept any diplomacy - he tries to bring people to the conflict and then looks for a way to blame them for this conflict. He is overly motivated to uphold the position of his country. Instead of an equal and balanced approach.
I am not against the fact that the Korean position would be fully presented in the article, I support this. But I want the position of China and Russia to be fully presented as well. I want the article to finally become balanced and neutral in 12 years. Since there is no common position, the views of all three sides should be equally represented. I suppose it's neutral. Or do I don’t understand something about the concept of neutrality of this project? Aek973 (talk) 19:22, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is a discussion which should take place on the talk page of the article of the article. Just post your concerns there for all to see, and note that English speakers may have difficulty understanding what the problem is.--Quisqualis (talk) 01:44, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Theroadislong joined to user User talk: Koraskadi in the same behavior - organizing a war of edits by unreasonably rolling back an entire section with added links instead of setting the template that additional links are required, or the template to check the authenticity of the source. He clearly acts in conjunction with the user User:Theroadislong. One year ago users User:Gnomsovet and User:Hatchiko They were blocked for joint actions. Obviously, that users User talk: Koraskadi and User:Theroadislong must be blocked for the same reason. Where do I go for this? Aek973 (talk) 05:25, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The user User:Jungguk has joined these actions. In raticle Balhae controversies He provokes a war of edits to remove the positions of three parties in order to seek information in favor of the ideology of his countries - South Korea. Help take action against this. He also did it in the Balhae article - the face is clearly coordinated work that violates the rules of sock-puppet. After that, the article was blocked on a completely incomprehensible version with a distortion in favor of South Korean state ideology - Korean ethnic nationalism. Please Help Aek973 (talk) 05:46, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Aek973, Howdy hello Aek973! As a note of caution, I would not accuse random folks of being sockpuppets, or of collusion without evidence. Doing so may be considered casting aspersions and is looked down on strongly. Before making such accusations, please look into them thoroughly, and if you think there is an actual issue you could report it at the appropriate noticeboard. But in this case, it is quite clear that Theroadislong is nobody's sockpuppet, and isn't using any sockpuppets. Just because more than one editor agrees to something doesn't make them socks, it means that they are forming consensus: the foundation of Wikipedia. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:16, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CaptainEek: As far as I can see, the most recent entry to which you apparently reply, is about User:Jungguk, not User:Theroadislong. --CiaPan (talk) 20:35, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
CiaPan, Two entries above Aek973 writes that Koraskadi and Theroadislong must be blocked, and then writes about Jungguk. Regardless, unless one has evidence of socking, you shouldn't just bandy around accusations of such. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:48, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging User:Koraskadi. The author of the thread, User:Aek973 tried to ping you, Koraskadi, three times. Alas they used a link to your talk page instead of the User page, so you probably hasn't been notified on this talk. So now I'm notifying you on behalf of OP, and on their request (User talk:Aek973#Pinging other users). --CiaPan (talk) 11:33, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As uninvolved user I reverted article to the state before edit war. admin protected article for few days so that people can work on solution i suggest that we not let emotions cloud judgement and use state of article before edit war which staied like that for a long time before edit dispute. last, as a Korean I remind you south korea is a democratic country without any state ideology. sorry for my bad grammar i normally use grammar checker app but i changed computers and now i cannot get app for some reason.
i also urge everyone not to edit war and follow wikipedia policy. Jungguk (talk) 17:48, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LIFE OF SAMUEL G HAVERMALE

I COPIED AND PASTED THE BIOGRAPHY OF SAMUEL G HAVERMALE AS INSTRUCTED BUT NY PICTURES DIDN'T COME WITH IT — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hovermale (talk • contribs)

Note for helpers: see WP:Teahouse#SAMUEL G HAVERMALE for context ~~ OxonAlex - talk 19:52, 29 January 2020 (UTC) [reply]
No, Hovermale, I'm afraid adding pictures to anywhere in Wikipedia is a two-stage process (first upload them, and then add them to an article); and questions of copyright make this even harder, and some images cannot in practice be used at all. I suggest you add a note to where you have uploaded the text listing what pictures you have, and where they come from. If they are old enough to be in the public domain, then they can be added easily; but if not, then we usually require that whoever holds the copyright (usually, the photographer) explicitly license them in a way appropriate to Wikipedia's needs. --ColinFine (talk) 23:33, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hovermale FWIW - I don't see any posted info on Talk:Samuel G. Havermale. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:21, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Timtempleton: They posted their full essay to an incorrect namespace, an admin moved it to their user talk page, after which Quisqualis reverted it and provided feedback. Check the history at User talk:Hovermale if you want to have a look. --Finngall talk 20:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

COI editing question

Is it permissible to make small edit corrections to an article that you have COI with, for example, deleting an extra word, correcting a date, and adding a missing word in the name of a film? Thank you! LorriBrown (talk) 22:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@LorriBrown: If you've declared that WP:COI on your userpage, that would be fine. You could even note it briefly in any edit summary if you feel someone might take objection. I would say it's not worth the aggravation to place an edit request for minor typos, and the like. I know you've done that for bigger edits, so don't worry unduly about tiny corrections. If anyone challenges you, just accept it as the position of another editor - or refer them to the advice given to you here. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:27, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nick Moyes Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LorriBrown (talk • contribs) 23:28, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi LorriBrown. You can find a little more about this in WP:COIADVICE, but as Nick says above you should make sure to leave an edit summary explaining why. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:36, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Marchjuly Thank you! LorriBrown (talk) 05:13, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Windows Communication Apps

I have no trouble citing http or https files, but have no idea of the syntax to cite a file such as: file:///C:/Users/great/AppData/Local/Packages/microsoft.windowscommunicationsapps_8wekyb3d8bbwe/LocalState/Files/S0/4/r491[1090].pdf DMBanks1 (talk) 23:39, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DMBanks, unfortunately its not feasible to "cite" things like that. Wikipedia can only use other websites (http/https) as sources - its just not possible to cite things from your local computer (see file URI scheme). theinstantmatrix (talk) 00:03, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is not off my computer. I assume it is part of the MS web, so maybe its needs some prefix. If you copy it into a web search on any computer, this file produces a bus route map.DMBanks1 (talk) 00:21, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I put that into my address bar and into Google and got no results. "file:///C:/Users/" leads me to think it pertains to your computer only.--Quisqualis (talk) 01:33, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I searched my C: drive, but nothing came up. As far as I can tell, it exists only as an attachment to an email. Does the address bar also read all my email attachments when locating a file, or does opening an attachment (but not saving) leave a hidden duplicate even after the opened file is closed?DMBanks1 (talk) 02:25, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DMBanks1, If it is an email attachment, then it does only exist on your computer, and shouldn't be used as a source here on Wikipedia. We can only use things like books, magazines, websites, that sort of thing. If you can find the file you want on the internet, then that can work. If you don't have a version that you can link to, providing author, title, publisher, etc. should be enough. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 04:28, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I am gradually grasping some of this tech stuff.DMBanks1 (talk) 14:50, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Username Struggle

Hello. I am having trouble with username customization, as you can see by my mess of a signature. My current code is [[User: Shrekxy6|ShrekxyShrekxy64. Any ideas? [[User: Shrekxy6|ShrekxyShrekxy64 " 00:41, 30 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shrekxy64 (talk • contribs)

Hi Shrekxy64. I'm not sure what you want the code to do but every opening [[ needs a closing ]]. Is this OK: Shrekxy64. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:47, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Thank you. Shrekxy64. 19:40, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

nl:Anne Marie Hoogland w/o any sources

this article does not have any source Leela52452 (talk) 02:01, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Leela52452. You will have to ask that question on the Dutch Wikipedia. The Teahouse can only provide advice about editing the English Wikipedia. Each language version of Wikipedia is run separately. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

are Kiandieri and Kianderi same ?

hello, i am confused after reading both articles description. Leela52452 (talk) 03:17, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Leela52452, Howdy hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! It does seem that they were about the same place, with slightly different spelling. I have redirected the longer article into the article with the infobox, as the infobox version at least had location data. The non-infobox version was in essence entirely unsourced, and thus its prose was not very useful. Its page history could be used to expand the main article, but I somewhat doubt its utility. Regrettably another African place article that exists, but is very hard to write about because the lack of good sources. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 04:24, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a person listed on a page whose name links to another similarly-named person who is not the same individual. What is the best way to undo the link or have it removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidlow47 (talk • contribs) 07:20, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The page is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_U.S._Figure_Skating_Championships ...and the person linked is Colleen McGuire, which links to Colleen L. McGuire, who is not the same person.

The 1983 US Figure SKating Championships page should not redirect to Colleen L. McGuire, US Army, who served beginning in 1979. The Colleen McGuire who competed in the 1983 US Figure Skating Championships in the Junior Dance division did so while she was still in high school in Branford, CT, and so could not have been serving in the US Military four years earlier, in 1979. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidlow47 (talk • contribs) 07:24, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Davidlow47. What you're describing is the main reason why articles with similar titles are disambiguated. How such a problem is resolved depends upon whether a Wikipedia article about Colleen McGuire the figure skater already exists or whether you intend to try and create such an article about her if it doesn't.
If the article already exists, then the way to fix the problem is to change the link so that it links to the correct article. If such an article article doesn't already exist, but you'd like to create one because you feel she's Wikipedia notable per either WP:BIO or WP:ATHLETE, then you should first create the article and then change the link as necessary. Since Colleen McGuire is what Wikipedia refers to as a WP:REDIRECT page, an assessment will need to be made as to whether one of the women is considered the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC or whether the articles about both women should be disambiguated. This can be a bit tricky so it might be better for you to work on a draft for an article about the figure skater as Draft:Colleen McGuire and then submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review; if the draft is accepted, then the AfC reviewer who does so will see that a redirect page already exists for that name and therefore the reviewer will sort things out with respect to disambiguation.
Finally, if no such article exists and you've got no intention of trying to create one, then the easiest thing to do would be to remove the link syntax so that her name is displayed as simple text and not a link. The way to do that would be to edit the article and look for [[Colleen McGuire]] and just remove the brackets around her name. Click "Show preview" to check that you've done it correctly, and then click "Publish changes" when you're ready to make the edit. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:48, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the incorrect link and added an internal comment about it at Special:Diff/938346896. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 17:08, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Davidlow47: Extremely gud catch, this should be on your highlight reel! I've lost count of the number of times I've seen e.g. Krishna appearing in a Bollywood film (I wonder how they can afford him). Earlier today, I came across James Mason as a writer for a kids' TV series aired in 2011 (somehow, I doubt it).
I agree with what has been said above. Two other things you can do. (1) Turn the bad link into a redlink by adding a parenthetical qualifier - if you're sure what the qualifier should be. (2) Perhaps better still: tag the bad link as {{disambiguation needed}}. You will have done all you need to flag the problem up, and friendly expert WikiGnomes will sooner or later solve it one way or another. In the meantime, readers can see there is a problem of some sort, and shouldn't be misled. Narky Blert (talk) 00:15, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for Wikipedia writers

Hi I am part of a Saas company looking for wikipedia writers to write about our products. Anyone with writing experience in the IT field would be prefered. Looking forward to connecting on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymous4993 (talk • contribs) 07:41, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anonymous4993. The first thing you probably should do is carefully read through Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) (in particular Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Products and services), Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and then Wikipedia:Ownership of content to figure out if Wikipedia is the best place to try and have your company or its products written about, or if you'd be better off trying some other outlet. You will also need to understand and accept that your company will not have any direct editorial control over what's written and it will not be able use Wikipedia for any type of promotion. So, if you read through those pages and still want to try and find some who might be willing to create such an article, then you can try Wikipedia:Requested articles or perhaps asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Internet. If your company or its products are deemed Wikipedia notable, you might get lucky and find someone willing to create an article about it. It's also just possible that you may simply have to wait until someone decides to create an article on their own because they think the subject is something worth writing about. That probably sounds like a bit of a slam against your company, but it's really not intended to be. It's just that all editors are volunteers and thus tend to create content about subjects that interest them as opposed to literally being tasked by someone to create an article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:08, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A note on your website describes the restrictions if you or any other employee of the company decide to attempt to create the article(s) yourselves. David notMD (talk) 11:12, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I meant on your User page. David notMD (talk) 13:01, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@David notMD: You meant on their User talk page → User talk:Anonymous4993#Managing a conflict of interest.
Pinging Anonymous4993 as well.
--CiaPan (talk)

More Source references in media player entry for "Comparison of audio player software"

Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen,


the entry Draft:Sayonara Player has received enhancement with lots of new sources for getting released. The german entry is also being updated.

Could somebody please check it?

The final target is to get this player included for listing it in Comparison of audio player software

Thank you very much for your help in advance.


Kind regards from Kassel in the middle of Germany

Dominic

Edited links acc. Nick Moyes comment below (Thanks to David notMD :)) Dominic2105 (talk) 12:53, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic2105 (talk • contribs) 09:29, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dominic2105V: please check you links. The page doesn't exist under that url. Just supply a working (blue) wikilink and we can look at it. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:13, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy: here is a working link to the draft: Draft:Sayonara Player. David notMD (talk) 11:15, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do you cite a segment from a news network?

This is a super credible, news segment from CTV news that I'd like to use for a Wikipedia article I'm writing: https://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1775334 I'm using that reference for this statement. DJ Blitz is a Manitoban radio host and DJ. He is currently a host on Virgin Radio Winnipeg. Do you use this template with curly brackets?: cite web |url= |title= |last= |first= |date= |website= |publisher= |access-date= |quote=

Also, can someone take a look at this real quick before I submit it for review? It's a short one: User:Krisrobertson/DJ Blitz Just want to make sure it's solid. It's a non biased article yet still demonstrates importance of notable person. Also, a link to their social media page http://www.facebook.com/djblitzwpg shows that they are currently verified on Facebook. This is a major indicator of notability. Is verification on social media considered as a factor for notability? I'm assuming so. Very few people are able to obtain the blue check

Krisrobertson (talk) 11:39, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Krisrobertson. You seem to be asking two questions which are somewhat related, but are slightly different; so I will respond to them separately.
Sources cited in Wikipedia articles are bascially required to meet two criteria: (1) be reliable and (2) be published/reasonably accessible. Sources don't need to be available online so it's possible to cite things like news broadcasts, TV shows, etc. as long as the source itself is considered reliable. You have to be a bit careful with WP:INTERVIEWs, however, in that they sometimes are just promotional types of fluff pieces and you also need to be careful with editorial types of converage because it may be a bit undue or original research; in general, a news report appearing on a major TV network with a reputation for editorial control should be OK to cite. There are different ways this can be done, but a template like Template:Cite news or Template:Cite AV media would probably work.
Your other question seems to be related to Wikipedia:Notability which can be a bit trickier to answer. Generally, a person is considered to be Wikipedia notable if they meet Wikipedia:Notability (people); in other words, they have received significant coverage in independent reliable sources. There are various other guidelines that also can be applied, but receiving significant coverage is the most basic one. I'm not sure whether a person having their FB account officially verifed makes much of a difference, particularly if that's going to be their only claim to Wikipedia notability, but it might be given consideration if it's one of many things being used to show a person is Wikipedia notable. You might want to ask about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment to see what some others may think. Draft:DJ Blitz has already been submitted to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review, but was declined. My personal opinion is that it might be WP:TOOSOON to write an article about this person since most of the sources you're citing are really just "trivial" types of coverage and not really anything which would be considered significant coverage. Please note that not having a Wikipedia article doesn't mean Blitz isn't a cool guy or a great DJ, and perhaps his career will really take off sometime in the future and he will start receiving more significant coverage as either a radio host or as a DJ. Even if that never happens, however, it still would mean he isn't a cool guy or a great DJ. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:13, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Review

Hello. I submitted this draft more than 3 months ago and it is still under review. I read somewhere to contact users on the related WikiProject page but no one there seems to focus on Turkish art or art galleries in general so, I didn't know who to contact. Please help! :)) Kilicsultan (talk) 13:52, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As it says in the brown box on Draft:Yahşi Baraz, "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 4,112 pending submissions waiting for review." Category:AfC pending submissions by age/3 months ago has 466 drafts at present. The number of reviewers who can read Turkish is limited, so it might help if you were to provide English translations of the relevant parts of your references. WP:There is no deadline. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:05, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to redirect?

Hello! I am in a dilemma about redirecting an article. It's showing me the following information's:

Symbol redirect arrow with gradient.svg This page is a redirect: From a page move: This is a redirect from a page that has been moved (renamed). This page was kept as a redirect to avoid breaking links, both internal and external, that may have been made to the old page name. When appropriate, protection levels are automatically sensed, described and categorized.

Name of the article given by me: Anjan Chowdhury (Square Group)

Can someone suggest me how to solve this issue. SSR1989 (talk) 16:38, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't an issue. That is created automatically when a page is moved. What question are you trying to ask? Do you want to use your sandbox for something else? If yes, just edit it and delete the redirect. - X201 (talk)

Help with Pending Changes

Hello. The article Mahavir Karna has 1 pending revision (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahavir_Karna&oldid=937860521&diff=cur&diffonly=0), but for some reason, the pending changes review bar does not show up for me. Please help quickly, I do not know what to do. ωικιωαrrιorᑫᑫ1ᑫ 16:57, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What do you for me! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaif wani (talk • contribs) 16:58, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kaif wani: Sorry, your input is not helpful. I need help from someone who is actually willing to help me. ωικιωαrrιorᑫᑫ1ᑫ 17:02, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiWarrior9919: the page log says that page protection expired earlier today at 13:30 UTC, which explains why we see no pending changes to be reviewed. Both the change you linked above and a newer one show in the history. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 17:16, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My Opinion!

give me advantage of some brief discourse — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaif wani (talk • contribs) 17:27, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kaif wani: Please do not make disruptive edits like these on Wikipedia. Doing so could very likely result in the loss of editing privileges. ωικιωαrrιorᑫᑫ1ᑫ 17:50, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Random observation, better keep the nukes such as SPI for serious offenders with more than ten edits, and suggest a second account or IP for a SPI, the CUs are elite but not psychic. –84.46.52.25 (talk) 10:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

reviving entry on political party in Georgia

Hi,

I tried to create the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lelo_for_Georgia -- yes, it is a stump but previously similar beginnings went through, so that other people can enrich it. The party has been created by one of the most prominent businesspeople in the country. It has been covered in various outlets, including Al-Jazeera, and I added more references.

What can I do to revive the submission? It will not be perfect for sure, but wasn't the idea that one collaborates at Wikipedia, rather than a single person having to develop a fully fledged article?

And yes, I do not yet know how to tag lots of things, but I kind of feel Wikipedia should make it possible for people like me to contribute, too.

Thanks Hundnase (talk) 18:16, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hundnase, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, Wikipedia does make it possible for people like you to contribute. But creating a new article is very difficult - not primarily for technical reasons, but because a) it takes a lot of work locating resources and summarising them; and b) because it is a way of working that many people are not used to. (That's why I always advise new users to spend a few weeks or months improving existing articles before they try it).
Many of English Wikipedia's six million articles were created a long time ago, when we were less careful about their quality than we are today. In an ideal world, all these inferior articles would have been improved or deleted by now. But Wikipedia is created by volunteers, who work on what they choose; so we end up with many many inferior articles. But we no longer accept articles that do not meet our current standards. Your draft can remain a draft, and you can edit it and invite other people to do so; but until it has adequate independent sources it will not get accepted as an article. --ColinFine (talk) 20:41, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What makes a reference "independent"?

I have submitted an article about a company which has been declined because the subject was not considered notable. That submission had three references, and I have now found a fourth, to newspapers that published feature articles reporting exclusively on the company and its involvement in some newsworthy activity, and which included interviews with company executives, photos and details about the company. These were not press releases. They were not paid for by the company. Independent newspaper editors sent reporters to get a story. I have been told that these newspaper articles are not considered independent by Wiki editors. Is this true?DriverSafety (talk) 18:24, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DriverSafety, and welcome to the Teahouse! You may want to read this short policy, which should give you an idea of what an independent source is! If this doesn't help, please feel free to tell me here and we can help you further! Thanks again! Puddleglum 2.0 19:22, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
For the record: discussion continued on askers TP. Puddleglum 2.0 21:04, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

reliable sources

Which of the following are reliable sources that can be used for satisfying notability:


legacy.com

prabook.com

encyclopedia.com

amazon.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.175.106.246 (talk • contribs) 19:22, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Legacy.com is an online publisher of obituaries, prabook.com is a crowdsourced information site "about any person who ever lived" (from their FAQ), Encyclopedia.com is simply an aggregator of already-published information, and Amazon.com is a commercial website selling books and other things. So none of those can be used to show notability. If information is found in Encyclopedia.com, it can be tracked back to the original publisher – and that could very well be a source that indicates notability, but encyclopedia.com itself is not a source (just like Google, which has no content, only indices of content exising elsewhere). The others are either crowdsourced or commercial. --bonadea contributions talk 19:50, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So if there is an obituary in legacy.com published in a local newspaper, which I cite, and another obituary that I found, can those 2 be used to create a notable article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.175.106.246 (talk) 19:55, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think that an obituary would depend on several factors- obituaries are sometimes written by the deceased person prior to their death, or (more often) a family member. I don't think that would establish notability. 331dot (talk) 20:00, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An obituary is sometimes written by a journalist at the newspaper, pretty equal to other articles from that paper. Recent discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Obituary. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:42, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
New York Times has obituaries written by newspaper staff and others paid-submitted. I have seen Wikipedia editors cite a NYTimes obit and not distinguish type. I would consider only the former as reliable sources. David notMD (talk) 22:01, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Obits might be suitable for citing basic facts, like dates and places of birth/death, but as to the original question, I don't think they are not typically usable for notability. It seems that an obit that is more in-depth, written by a neutral party, is generally about someone about whom there is significant coverage anyway, so there should be better sources out there for such a person. Who is the subject? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 00:10, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Recently I wrote that enwiki has at least one rule + at least one template for everything. Of course it also has at least one essay + at least one shortcut for everything, e.g., WP:NOTOBITUARY. –84.46.52.25 (talk) 10:19, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to make a Good Article.

I'm trying to make a good article by providing facts and more things. I cite things and currently it is a Work In Progress in my sandbox. I'm asking this to see if anyone has good tips on how to make it aesthetically pleasing, please message me back! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tsunami307 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have anything in your sandbox. You can find advice at WP:Your first article. When you have experience on editing Wikipedia, you can also read about good articles. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:59, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As DB noted, "Good article" has a specific meaning within the rating system. My assumption is that you want to create a draft that will be accepted. Be aware that your User page is not a place to work on a draft. Use either your Sandbox or start a draft. David notMD (talk) 22:04, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

<style>

How does <style> work? Does it have to be like this or can <style> stand on its own? Helloimahumanbeing (talk) 20:52, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Helloimahumanbeing. 'style' is an HTML attribute that takes as values one or more CSS declarations. You can use it in many HTML tags. For general use, <span></span> tags don't do much of anything by themselves; so, to produce green 15 point serif text, one might use <span style="color: green; font-size: 15pt; font-family: serif;"></span>, producing this. w3schools might be of interest. Eman235/talk 06:03, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
<style></style> tags also exist: see w3schools' reference. They don't, however, appear to work on Wikipedia, which allows only a subset of HTML. Eman235/talk 06:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Helloimahumanbeing: Your example: <b style="color:white"> Date</b>, while functional, is not recommended. Generally, if there is a way to do something using Wiki Markup Language (WML; Wikitext; Wikicode), that is preferred. In this case, '''Foo''', which renders Foo, is the preferred way to bold text, and there are templates used to change foreground and background colors, e.g., {{Font color|white|green|Foo}}, which renders: Foo. AFAICT, the <style> tag is not supported (only the style attribute of other tags (like <div style="foo:bar; bak:baz;">). (I apparently didn't save this earlier) —[AlanM1(talk)]— 06:22, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
+1 at style element (tag) not allowed, same idea as link, meta, and script elements in the head. The rendered wiki markup ends up in a div as part of the body (below the head). To get a better idea add ?action=raw to any enwiki URL without a ? —84.46.52.25 (talk) 10:28, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Waiting for the other article editors to take their turn answering

How many days should I wait for the other editors to take their turn in a dialogue I started on the talk page of Jabberwocky about putting a reference to the Muppet Show production of Jabberwocky? --AlainV (talk) 22:05, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AlainV, Anytime you are having a discussion, you will have better participation if you use the Template:ping to let them know that you have replied. Most folks don't watch the pages where discussions are happening. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 22:49, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AlainV, it depends on what you're waiting for. For instance, in the discussion at Talk:Jabberwocky, you don't need to wait for Anna to chime in before replying to David. However, if you were to form an agreement with David without input from Anna, you should probably ping her and wait a few days before going ahead and implementing it, unless the agreement is something that Anna would clearly not find controversial. signed, Rosguill talk 23:27, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a visual editor version of this ping? --AlainV (talk) 23:30, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to use the Insert menu option, the template's name is {{Ping}}, and then the parameter is the editor's username (without the User: prefix). signed, Rosguill talk 23:33, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You mean that I should type two of those curly brackets to the left, write the editor's name (as many times as there are editors in the talk page?) then type a pipe, then type ping and then type two more curly brackets?--AlainV (talk) 18:50, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citing Archival Sources

Can public archives be cited on Wikipedia and what is the correct format for citation? Stirpicult (talk) 23:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stirpicult. I'm not sure what you mean by "public archives". Do you mean archived versions of old webistes/webpages found by using things such as the Wayback Machine, etc. or do you mean national archives/repositories like National Archives and Records Administration.
In the former case, as long as the original source material meets Wikipedia's definition of a reliable source and you're fairly sure that the archived version is a true representation of the original source (i.e. it's hasn't been changed in any way), then it should be OK and even help to cite the archived version as explained in Wikipedia:Citing sources#Preventing and repairing dead links. in this case, you're still really just citing the original source and simply providing a convenience link to an archived version of it.
In tha latter case, it depends upon the nature of the source you're trying to cite. If the content is something being generated by the public archives, then you will have to assess the archives's reliability as a source based upon the context of how you want to use it as a source. Public archives, however, generally host content generated by others; so, you're going to need to assess if what's being hosted is a reliable source for Wikipedia's purposes. Official documents, etc. are generally considered to be primary sources which can be used in some limited ways, but secondary sources are generally required when it comes to trying to add interpretations of such sources to Wikipedia article. So, once again, whether a "source" can be used depends upon whether it's considered to be reliable and the context of how it's going to be used. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:39, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Headings

I’m newly signed on here. I’m having difficulties finding info re adding a “Notable People” heading to an existing page. I would greatly appreciate assistance specific to that and also, direction to info for learning more about creating/editing pages. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1HJHJ (talk • contribs) 00:31, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 1HJHJ. You can find out a little more about how to add a section heading to an article in Wikipedia:Manual of style#Section headings and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout#Body sections. Please note though that adding a new section to an already existing article is sometimes a contentious thing to do; so, while it's OK to be WP:BOLD in doing so, you should follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution if you're WP:REVERTed by another editor. Moreover, on Wikipedia the word "notable" often is used to refer to Wikipedia:Notability which takes a slightly different meaning thant perhaps how the word may typically be used out in the real world; so, a "Notable people" section generally is assumed to mean a "Wikipedia notable people" section; in other words, often the most basic criterion for inclusion is that person in question already have a Wikipedia article written about them.
As for some more general information about creating articles or editing pages, you might find Wikipedia:Adventure, Wikipedia:Your first article, Wikipedia:Everything you need to know and Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia helpful. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:19, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Corporate Notability

To Whom It May Concern,

In order to establish Corporate Notability about a company (Akasa) that makes PC components, I have submitted an article for review, but it did not pass the review by the editor due to lack of reliable sources among other reasons. I have seen some similar companies use the same sources I have used in order to establish credibility. Can you tell me, do the below articles count as significant coverage?

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13943/akasa-turing-passively-cooled-chassis-for-intel-bean-canyon-nuc https://www.anandtech.com/show/14259/he-asrock-a320tm-itx-motherboard-thin-itx-for-amd-apus

The Wikipedia article in question is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Akasa_Group#cite_note-3. Thanks.

Best Regards, Nick Lenczewski — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickL1771 (talk • contribs) 02:01, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NickL1771 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It generally is not a good idea to cite other articles to justify your own; as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. Please see other stuff exists.
The sources you cite seem to be just basic product descriptions, and are not significant coverage of the subject which in this case is a company. The company itself must have significant coverage in independent reliable sources, not just its products. For example, Microsoft merits an article because many sources write about it as a company, not just its products like Microsoft Windows.
I would ask if you have an association with Akasa Group? If you do, you are required to read and formally comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies(the latter is a Terms of Use requirement if you are paid or editing as part of your job duties). 331dot (talk) 02:11, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi NickL1771. Just want to add that having a Wikipedia article written about your company might seem like a totally great thing, but there can be a serious downside in that neither you nor your company will have any final editorial control over the article content. You won't be able to use it to promote the company and you won't be able to automatically keep out any negative content/press about the company. What to leave in and what to leave out will be determined through consensus established in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not to make sure Wikipedia is actually the best option for you and your company, and that there aren't perhaps better ways to get your name out there. "Wikipedia notablilty" is not really the same as credibility and your company shouldn't really need to have a Wikipedia article written about it for it to be considered credible by others. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:25, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting My Article submitted

Salutations people of Teahouse,

I am working on an article and submitted it for review. Sadly this article was declined. I would like to get this article accepted, do you guys have any tips or suggestions on how I can make my article better, and worthy of submission? I really want this article to be on Wikipedia and want to make it a great one!

Sincerely, 8miceinabox --8miceinabox (talk) 02:57, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

8miceinabox Greetings. If [[Draft:The Irisian Republic[edit source]]] was the draft article you referred to then you would read the texts on the pink panel where it stated what is needed to improve the draft. Also there is a personal message from the reviewer below the pink panel. Basically, the content of the draft article need to be supported by significant coverage of independent, reliable sources for verification. Kindly read WP:42. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:22, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, 8miceinabox. This has to do with Draft:The Irisian Republic which seems to be some kind of game that you and your buddies made up recently. Your game is not eligible for a Wikipedia article unless it receives significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Unless you can produce those sources, you should stop trying to write this article, because you cannot be successful. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:28, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up to Help in writing

About the reliable sources so "Sarin foundation" has multiple news publications. Some of the sources are

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/18-teams-to-compete-in-global-moot-court-today-753345 https://aerohelp.com/en/mootcourt/leiden-sarin-international-air-law-moot-court http://www.thevoiceofchandigarh.com/national-institute-of-singapore-wins-the-10th-leiden-sarin-international-air-law-moot-court-competition/ https://spotidoc.com/doc/1700227/the-first-5-years---sarin-foundation

Kindly advice if I can publish about Sarin Foundation. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.164.34.115 (talk) 06:05, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. Three of those don't even mention "the Sarin Foundation", and what they say about things related to it are just passing mentions; the last one is published by the foundation, so is not independent.
The question you need to ask is, "Where have some people, wholly unconnected with the Sarin Foundation, chosen (unprompted by the Foundation, and not relying on press releases or interviews from it) to write at length about the Foundation, and been published in reliable places?" Such resources are really the only ones which are relevant, and certainly the only ones which confer notability. --ColinFine (talk) 10:18, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to delete a page?

Little_Goguryeo I nominated for removal. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Little_Goguryeo and Talk:Little_Goguryeo I explained why. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2020_January_31&action=history I added a delete request. But for unknown reasons, he did appeared without a title in the list of topics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2020_January_31. What to do next? 06:43, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Aek973 (talk)

You didn't format your request properly, see WP:Articles for deletion. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:10, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Region Filter in Recent changes patrol

Namaste all Wikipedia users,

Can anyone help me to find filtered results region wise in Wikipedia:Recent changes patrol. So my question is: Is there any possibility to filter results for a particular country in Wikipedia:Recent changes patrol? DMySon 06:44, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. Country by editor isn't possible for logged-in users, for IPs "GeoIP" is black art, and for everybody you'd need CheckUser rights before you can abuse + lose them. Country by topic of the edited article makes no sense, what are you talking about? –84.46.52.25 (talk) 10:43, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Using the wrong hyphen in articles

Initially when editing articles I used the hyphen found on the normal Querty keybard (eg 3-4). Then I found a bot came round and converted it to the accepted Wikipedia one. I was able to use the latter by copying and pasting from corrected articles. Is this 'correct' hyphen on tthe normal keyboard? You need good eyesight to see the difference between the two types of hyphen.BFP1 (talk) 07:24, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The use of dashes and hyphens is covered at MOS:DASH, and at WP:How to make dashes. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:31, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks DavidBFP1 (talk) 08:09, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle Rollback vs. Rollback Privileges

Hi and greetings! This is my first question in Teahouse. I'm a little confused about the rollback feature for reverting vandalism on Wikipedia. Twinkle also offers rollback feature and the other kind of rollback is accessible to only users belonging to rollbackers group. Are both rollbacks same? Or what additional privileges does exclusive access to rollback feature offer. If both have same functions then why is there such a rollbackers group instead of using Twinkle! Can anybody make me understand? — The Ultimate Let's Talk 08:16, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Ultimate Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Both groups you describe are functionally the same; the main difference being that any logged in user can make use of Twinkle without asking permission. Twinkle was a tool developed to make some tasks easier to perform(not just rollbacks). However, if Twinkle is misused, one can lose access to it. Rollback rights just grant the ability to perform rollbacks, and not other functions(unlike Twinkle). 331dot (talk) 09:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@The Ultimate: I would like to clarify something 331dot said. Twinkle is a tool that you get one you are autoconfirmed. If you misuse it, your account will be blocked from editing. Interstellarity (talk) 15:24, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unless I am mistaken, Interstellarity, Twinkle is not automatically enabled when a user is autoconfirmed. It needs to be requested at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:28, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@David Biddulph: I think you meant that it needs to enabled which is what I meant say in the first reply. Interstellarity (talk) 15:29, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Making my Biography Live on Wikipedia

hey guys im Bjorn. I just have one question? how do i publish my bio so that it can be live on wiki. Thanks in advanced! — Preceding unsigned comment added by B major SA (talk • contribs) 08:56, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't. Please read Wikipedia's view on autobiography. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:00, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @B major SA: This link will take you to a guide that explains how to write articles that won't be rejected or deleted but be aware that Wikipedia is not the place to promote your music career. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:00, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@B major SA: Hello. I would add that what you wrote is more appropriate for a social media entry than an article in an encyclopedia, as Wikipedia is. It is blatantly promotional in nature, and cites no independent reliable sources to support its content- only your website, which is not acceptable. As noted, autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged here. This is because people naturally write favorably about themselves, and not with a neutral point of view. If you meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable musician, someone will eventually take note of your career and write about you here. Also please understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable; there are good reasons to not want one. 331dot (talk) 09:04, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help me that this page is now completed to submit

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jasrasar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamsouravrana (talk • contribs) 09:12, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Iamsouravrana Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have submitted your draft for review. As noted in the yellow box on your page, there are over 4100 drafts awaiting review. As reviews are conducted by volunteers in no particular order, it could take several months before your draft is reviewed. You will need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Ok, Thanks for your reply. User:Iamsouravrana(talk)

Quoting a News Citation from foreign language and including a translation

This is my first time including a quote from a foreign language with an automated translation for an existing Template:Cite_news citation.
It looks like the automated translation needs cleanup from "Spraybox's father" to maybe some thing like "Aerosol bottle's father", but I have no knowledge of Norwegian.

To get experienced help, would it make sense to put in a

{{subst:Needtrans| Language=Norwegian| Comments=What is the best English version of 'Sprayboksens far er norsk'? Perhaps 'Aerosol bottle's father is Norwegian' }} ,

as seems to be suggested by Wikipedia:Pages_needing_translation_into_English#Translation_template_usage's Not English section?
It isn't clear from the section as it also seems to imply that this would work:

{{not English| Language=Norwegian| Comments=What is the best English version of 'Sprayboksens far er norsk'? Perhaps 'Aerosol bottle's father is Norwegian' }} ,


On the formatting of the citation in References, I wasn't able to get the translation to work with the quote= parameter of the cite news template, so I instead appended the Template:Verse translation template after, yielding Aerosol_spray#cite_note-4 :

Kvilesjø, Svend Ole (17 February 2003). "Sprayboksens far er norsk". Aftenposten (in Norwegian). Archived from the original on 30 June 2008. Retrieved 6 February 2009.


From: Aerosol_spray#References

Thanks! Comments? --Lent (talk) 11:17, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Lent. I don't know anything about the formatting, but the English idiom is "the father of..." Presumably, "The father of the aerosol spray". --ColinFine (talk) 13:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Danish withdrawal from the European Union

Could be maybe very positive if you give a "start" for "Draft:Danish_withdrawal_from_the_European_Union" (if this article is acceptable/good) due to BREXIT today. Wname1 (talk) 12:48, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just being curious here: why could it be maybe very positive? Lectonar (talk) 12:51, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and it needs to be submitted via the process laid out here. Lectonar (talk) 12:55, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What might be happening today is of no relevance to getting an article reviewed, Lectonar. WP:NOTNEWS. --ColinFine (talk) 13:36, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware of that, I was just repeating what the OP said, because I am curious as to what impact today would have on the review of the draft. Lectonar (talk) 13:44, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, Lectonar, I meant to ping Wname1. --ColinFine (talk) 15:42, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It also sounds as if OP has an agenda or WP:SOAPBOX here. As ColinFine mentioned, we are WP:NOTNEWS. We don't promote particular articles because of outside events. Bkissin (talk) 14:26, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mayhem caused by unsourced material on Wikipedia

@Ali Zifan, CASSIOPEIA, MisterElection2001, MB298, and Number 57: There is apparently no source that gives election results by borough for Alaska in the 2016 US Presidential election. This Vox article [1] lead to this late night comedy clip [2] where, at 9:30 in the clip, Trump's staff is accused of giving him a bullshit map of the 2016 Presidential election results. In FACT: I believe that Wikipedia's map (originally made by Ali Zifan, but it's not his fault) is the bullshit map. We were following the results as given us in a tweet- a tweet!- from something called https://cinycmaps.com/. Nobody knows if that information is accurate, because nobody knows the vote totals by borough. The "answer" lies in a catacomb of data here: [3]. But if there's no secondary source reporting actual vote totals by actual boroughs, (not "estimated vote totals"), then I think we can say pretty clearly that Wikipedia IS the fake news. God save us.

Check my math on this- am I making sense here?

Can anybody good with Alaska stuff fix this? See discussion here: [4] Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Geographyinitiative Hi, I would comment on certain venues to seek help and general info and will leave the particular issues address above to other editors who know have more knowledge on American politics. Teahouse is platform for helping new user on editing questions. For any discussion of article, user can go to the article talk page. You can check if a source reliability here - see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. If a source is not reliable then you can remove the ref from the article and place {{cn}} or remove the content itself if the content deem controversial. If a source is in question you can go to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Please note, Wikipedia is not a source, see WP:CIRCULAR or a news sites and content of Wikipedia is based on the source provided and "if" (not talking about the article you mentioned above) an independent, reliable sources indicate some fault info, such as the final score of a match is 25-29 instead of 24-49, then the content of the article will remains so until the source corrected itself as Wikipedia is all about verification. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 22:47, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Is there a page/list of all articles contained with a template? Example {{ current related })Elijahandskip (talk) 14:02, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best option would be [[Category:Current events]]. Wikipedia:WikiProject Current events looks like it's inactive. Bkissin (talk) 14:33, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Current_related --David Biddulph (talk) 14:37, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Elijahandskip. You can also use the search box: hastemplate:"current related". This can be combined with other search options. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:20, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Having Issues submitting for Review

I have been having issues all of a sudden in the article 'Tupocracy'. I tried several times to submit for review but I seem to be making mistakes. In fact the article is not clustered around other articles within my watchlist. I Couldn't tell what exactly is the problem. Kindly help look through it as I am trying as much as possible not to cause damage to the Wikipedia environment.

--Niftyrules™ 14:03, 31 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niftyrules (talk • contribs)

--Niftyrules™ 14:38, 31 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niftyrules (talk • contribs)

You have made a dog's breakfast of a whole load of mistaken page moves, including of your user talk page. According to what you wrote on Talk:Tupocracy, 'Tupocracy' is a new body of knowledge that you are working on. That is therefore not an acceptable subject for a Wikipedia article, see WP:Neologism. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP still pending Review

The article ‘Kunle Adeo-Ojo’ BLP started by me has since been waiting on review for as long as I can remember. Can any editor in the house kindly help put it through to the mainspace or better still state reason for the delayed response.

--Niftyrules™ 14:37, 31 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niftyrules (talk • contribs) 14:37, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Kunle Ade-Ojo was reviewed & declined. The feedback is on the draft page, and at your user talk page which you mistakenly moved (& I have requested be moved back). You have resubmitted it, but less than 6 days ago; as it says on the draft: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 4,113 pending submissions waiting for review." --David Biddulph (talk) 14:53, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HELP ON SPEEDY DELETION

Good day admins

i really want to help but i don't thinks that my wiki account is strong a enough to contest for speedy deletion of a article created by a fellow nigeria about an article about celebrity author and motivational speaker as i think there is a enough proof of notability online and from trusted source like pulseng theguardian and other local news papers and portals online i strongly recommend that its article should not be deleted . Article: Gaius Chibueze. Wilsonharry454 (talk) 15:05, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The place for the discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gaius Chibueze. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:10, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Wilsonharry454: There's no issue of "strong enough" related to anyone's account. Just make a good argument and it will be considered. A "good argument" means provide the links to the sources that you believe provide notability (that the other responding editors somehow did not manage to find). If you don't want to provide a complete citation, at least provide a link to the specific articles. Please try to use punctuation to make your posts easier for others to read. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:31, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Urn (band),

Greetings, I am working to re-work/update this page with verifiable content as I do not wish for it to be deleted. I am seeking advice/counsel in terms of properly editing this content as I am not a seasoned editor. Thank you for your time and consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyreal13 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there,
This type of message should be on the Talk page for the article you're trying to update. I should ask however if you're in any way connected with them? If you are a member of this band, their manager, or in anyway affiliated with them, you need to declare a WP:COI on your user page, and you should also consult WP:NOTE to see if an article is necessary in the first place.
Please remember WP:VERIFY - an article of any subject, especially a band, needs third-party sources discussing it, not simply listings of where the band is playing as confirmation of their existence. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 17:40, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tweets as Sources

Are tweets from verified twitter users appropriate sources? For example, if Elon Musk's verified account tweets a fact about Tesla would that be an appropriate reference for an edit to Tesla's page?

Also, if a tweet contains an MP4 video file, would that be an appropriate reference to refer to something that occurs in a video? For example, if a structure collapses and a twitter user recorded video of the event, could that be used as a reference to make an edit to the structure's page detailing its collapse?

Caratacus54AD (talk) 16:41, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Caratacus54AD, for Twitter, see WP:Twitter-EL, and WP:TWITTER - it usually isn't a suitable source, and if information exists elsewhere it isn't shouldn't be used. There are some occasions in which it is suitable, for which you can use the {{Cite tweet}} template. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 17:09, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to donate an image to the commons?

Hi everyone, thank you beforehand for your help.

I'm trying to donate a picture to the commons, however on the guideline on how to do this - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries - they explain that you should send the request from an email associated with your name/website in order for them to be able to confirm your identity. It happens to be the case, that I do not have an email server associated with my name or publicly listed, to send the request. Is there any other way that I could provide proof of identity for my request to be taken into account? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MariaDelgadoDKM (talk • contribs) 16:57, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MariaDelgadoDKM, given the small number of people who answer email queries, I would send an email asking. You're much more likely to get a good answer there than here, as there are only about 150 - 200 volunteers that can access email. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 17:04, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Information for potential reference requires account to view

There is a reference I would like to add to an article, but the website it is on requires a user account to view. I'm sure this happens often enough, what's the procedure for situations like this? --PuzzledvegetableIs it teatime already? 17:12, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Puzzledvegetable, it can be used. There is no requirement that references be easy to access, per WP:PAYSITE. Just add it as normal, possibly using {{Account required}}, or {{Subscription required}} to mark it. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 17:24, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Puzzledvegetable: If you are using one of the {{Citation}} templates, just add |url-access=subscription. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 01:46, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bullying on my Talk page

Hello! I'd like to report something and ask your advice on how to handle it. User:CAPTAIN RAJU is attempting to bully me on my Talk without cause.

As you will see here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:CherryGonzo77), CAPTAIN RAJU posted a very threatening and baseless comment on my Talk page.

She alleged that I "vandalized" the Alfred Cowles page. Except I didn't, and I can prove it.

This is my edit - I changed the capitalization of two words, consistent with the WP:MOS.

Here is the exact edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alfred_Cowles&diff=931574695&oldid=917684255

I'm going to @CAPTAIN RAJU: out of fairness so she is aware that I'm reporting her behavior to you guys.

Wikipedia has a very big problem. A lot of users who have been on here a while are power tripping. They falsely believe they are better than other people, and use the platform to elevate their own ego-based false self worth.

The purpose of Wikipedia and its pillars are very important, and there's NO PLACE for that type of power-tripping behavior on here.

Thanks for reading, and I look forward to your reply. --CherryGonzo77 (talk) 17:50, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I concur that was an over-reaction on the part of RJ (meaning the severity of the warning put on your Talk page). However, going forward, I doubt your paths will cross again, so I suggest moving on. As for the article in question, you de-capitalized two words, RJ reverted that, and subsequently Theroadislong restored the decapitalization. David notMD (talk) 18:05, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi CherryGonzo77. You are not the only person who has complained about this sort of thing recently and Captain Raju has promised to be more careful. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:17, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@StarryGrandma and David notMD: He reverted this edit to Kiev which is not vandalism. I sent him a warning on his talk page. He corrected his mistake, did not respond to the post, and archived it after. Interstellarity (talk) 18:57, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And, not wishing to 'pile on' I have however just left a friendly note, inviting Captain R. to read and follow Wikipedia:Communication is required, pointing out the expectation that they will respond directly to editors who raise reasonable concerns about their editing actions. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:39, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

seeking second opinions

hi. i am seeking second opinion on the article balhae controversies. editor aek973 has changed the links in the article of Balhae to bohai which redirects to balhae. since bohai redirect to balhae i think it is better to put the link as balhae. what do you all think? see this where all the links to balhae were changed to bohai https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balhae_controversies&type=revision&diff=938440781&oldid=938369797Jungguk (talk) 18:28, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

by the way i am no ones sock puppet Jungguk (talk) 18:28, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jungguk, You can always request another opinion at the Third Opinion board. If you're in a content dispute, thats a good first step. You can also engage in any of the processes listed at dispute resoloution. As to your second point, what prompted you to say you're no one's sockpuppet? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:09, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi I will do that soon. editor aek973 put out the fake lie that me, koraskadi, and theroadislong are sockpuppets which is a lie. but i want to follow all policy so i will soon request the third opinion. Jungguk (talk) 19:16, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jungguk, Thats not chill on aek973's part. If you could include a link to the place where he said that, it'd be most helpful. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:30, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CaptainEek:I think this will help: [[5]]. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 19:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Research for Population Density of the U.S.

I'm doing research on population data on the United States and I noticed that when I search for a city, I wonderful table shows the populations dating back to the 17th century. Is there a database or research that has begun that shows the population of each state for the past 200 years? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Engmaxine (talk • contribs) 18:53, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Engmaxine: Possibly the US Census data at [6] RudolfRed (talk) 19:19, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Updates needed to Government section of this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Bend,_Washington

I am the Communications Manager for the City of North Bend and noticed the Government section of this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Bend,_Washington needs updated. North Bend has a new mayor and councilmembers. I was hoping someone would be able to make these updates in the Government section of the North Bend, WA page for us.

Mayor: Rob McFarland Councilmembers: Brenden Elwood, Jonathan Rosen, Ross Loudenback, Alan Gothelf, Chris Garcia, Mary Miller, Heather Koellen

Thank you so much!

Jill Green — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.129.248.178 (talk) 19:37, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 19:53, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is adding information about temporary suspended flights allowed in Wikipedia?

Hi there! I wanted to ask that is adding information about temporarily suspended flights allowed in Wikipedia? Due to the recent spreading of coronavirus, many airlines have temporarily suspended flights to China. As per User: Andrewgprout, "Wikipedia is not a directory to add info about temporary suspension of flights". So just wanted to confirm this from other users about the addition of temporarily suspended flights to airport articles. Regards-- User:FlyJet777 (talk) 20:51, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FlyJet777, Howdy hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! Unless I read the actual discussion, I don't think I could give accurate feedback. My rough take is: we are WP:NOTNEWS, so we don't report breaking news or routine coverage. But, if flights being cancelled has encyclopedic value, then it could be added. It would depend on the quality of sources, and the nature of the coverage. From what I can see, you were changing Infoboxes based on the data. I would personally be against that, but I don't think we have a policy that says so. Articles should have content that is generally stable over the long-run, and updating based on real-time events is not exactly useful, and provides a lot of maintenance overhead. Hope that helps. Still, you may wish to have a more in-depth discussion on the talk page of an article, or somewhere else that will get suffucient traffic, like Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
CaptainEek Hi Captain! Thanks for the explanation! So should I remove all the information about the temporarily suspended flights? What do you suggest? Regards-- User:FlyJet777 (talk) 21:04, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you do not wish to discuss it on the relevant article Talk pages as suggested above by User:CaptainEek, you should undo your edits so as not to make work for other editors.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There are several articles getting many edits per day as each little morsel of the coronavirus story is published. Most of it seems to be contrary to WP:NOTNEWS. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 02:07, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Error contacting the Parsoid/RESTBase server (HTTP 409)

Hello world! New to being an editor...can anyone explain why i continue to get the error "Error contacting the Parsoid/RESTBase server (HTTP 409) when i attempt to publish my page. any help would be appreciated@ANelson244

ANELSON244 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your account has too few edits and is too new to be able to directly create articles(not mere "pages"). However, it seems that your article draft was deleted under the "not a web host" speedy deletion criteria. This may be because it was completely unsourced. You would need to offer independent reliable sources indicating that the nickname you use is in widespread use and discuss the nickname in order for it to merit an article. If you just have sources that use the name, you might be able to make an addition to the Arlington, Texas article, if not a standalone article.
Even if you get the 10 edits and wait for your account to be four days old so you can directly create articles, this is not usually advised unless you have extensive experience in article creation. It is strongly suggested that you use Articles for Creation to submit drafts, even if you don't technically need to, so that any problems are worked out before the draft is formally placed in the encyclopedia, instead of afterwards. You may find it helpful to use the new user tutorial before you edit further. 331dot (talk) 22:01, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New article submitted, but declined. Are second opinions possible?

I have recently submitted a draft for an article. It was declined. Is it possible to request another (or other) opinions? tx.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Spacestronaute (talk • contribs) 21:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spacestronaute, there is no evidence that the first opinion should be overridden. A message on your Talk page states: "Only speculations about the topic are documented. No reliable sources can be found." This is not going to change no matter how many opinions you get.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:04, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I must agree with the comments you were given on your draft. You need independent reliable sources to support your content. If this organization does not have significant coverage in independent sources, it would not merit an article at this time, no matter how well the text is written. Getting additional opinions will not change this- and even if it did and someone placed your draft in the encyclopedia, it would likely be nominated for deletion quickly.
If you work for or are otherwise associated with the organization, you should review conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 22:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hi Spacestronaute. There's no limit on the number of times you may submit a draft for review, and many drafts are submitted multiple times before being accepted. When an AfC reviewer declines a draft, they are basically saying there's some potential of this someday becoming an article, but that there are still some things about which need to be improved; a rejected draft, on the other hand, is generally considered to have no chance or very little chance of ever becoming a viable article. Anyway, the reviewer usually gives their reasons for declining the draft at the top of the article in the AFC template or in separate comments; so, if there's something that's unclear, then you can post a message on the reviewer's user talk page and ask for clarification. You can also ask for feedback at WP:AFCHELP as well or perhaps even on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject where you might find editors familiar with the general subject you're trying to create an article about. For reference, drafts for articles which are continuously be worked on and improved are not really at risk of being deleted per speedy deletion criterion G13; so, as long as you continue to work on it and don't keep trying to submit the same declined version over and over again for review, you'll be OK.
Now, if what you're specifically asking about is Draft:Gender Mosaic, then perhaps taking a look at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause might give you a little insight as to what Wikipedia and AfC reviewers are generally assessing when they look at such drafts. Things like promotional tone, formatting errors, etc. can usually be cleaned up, but Wikipedia notability is not something that even the best writer can create and Wikipedia notability (or a lack thereof) is one of the main reasons that drafts end up being declined.
Just for reference, if you do submit the draft for another review, you most likely will get another reviewer, and there's a chance that they might see things differently; AfC reviewers, however, tend to be a fairly experienced bunch who all assess based upon the same general criteria so it's more likely that the same issues will be cited if you simply resubmit the same version. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:26, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why the Clevelander hotel in South Beach Miami doesn't have his own Wikipedia page?

Is a well-known hotel nationwide and even around the world. I don't know how to create a Wikipedia page, that is why I'm asking this question. MannyPC (talk) 22:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MannyPC Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If it doesn't have an article, it simply means that no one has written about it yet. For this hotel to merit an article(not just a "page"), it must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources and meet Wikipedia's definition of notability. That could be books, news coverage, any reliable source with a reputation of editorial control and fact checking. 331dot (talk) 23:03, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

False information

How to I edit false information on a page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.197.15.217 (talk) 23:16, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. Please understand that Wikipedia simply summarizes what independent reliable sources say about article subjects, without any claims as to the truthfulness of the information. We summarize and let readers decide for themselves what is true. Please see WP:TRUTH. If there is incorrect information in an article, you are welcome to edit it to remove the information; if you do, please provide an explanation in an edit summary or on the article talk page, so other editors will know your reason(which should be more extensive an explanation than "it's false"). This is especially important if the article is about a living person, see WP:BLP. If others disagree with your changes, you should discuss the issue with the other editors to arrive at a consensus as to how to proceed. 331dot (talk) 23:25, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article Overhaul

Hello, is there a basis for when it is appropriate to overhaul an article? I have taken an interest in a few local buildings that have articles with redundant and/or poorly written sections.

I.E. Woodfield Mall, I have made some recent changes to reduce redundancies and un-sourced material, but for instance the section about what stores opened in what year seems to be excessive, and a more concise section would in my opinion be better. Tjdilly (talk) 23:43, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shorter can be better, especially as so many of those store mentions do not have references. David notMD (talk) 23:48, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Negro Dollar facebook & instagram hyperlinks, 404 website

it contains notability tag of 2011. no secondary or other sources. can we nominate articles for deletion ? Leela52452 (talk) 04:14, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Make it so, subst:PROD rationale NN + orphan + unsourced since 2011, or similar. –84.46.53.231 (talk) 04:41, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Leela52452. That is an unreferenced biography of a living person, so the very existence of this article in that state is a policy violation. I did a quick check and see no evidence that this rapper is notable. Please read Wikipedia:Deletion policy and take whatever step you believe is correct. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:45, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, yes, BLPPROD allows a SPEEDY deletion, it can't get simpler. –84.46.53.231 (talk) 04:54, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Articles without Wikidata item

For an album article I assumed that a corresponding WikiData item will be started by bots, but that is not the case: There's a Category:Articles without Wikidata item, populated by various templates needing Wikidata used mostly on BLPs, e.g., birth place. So now I assume that adding articles manually to this hidden maintenance category makes no sense, and I should simply create the item—PoC for the record label item—is that correct? –84.46.53.231 (talk) 04:33, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up to Need feedback on whether I'm on the right track

Hi,

Thank you for your help thus far. I've been a bit sidetracked with other projects, but would like to get stuck into the wiki page and finish it off. However, after loggin in, I have difficulty finding the page that I created. Could you direct me in how to access this page? The page name is 'modbiotics'.

Kind regards, Lizmo1977 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lizmo1977 (talk • contribs) 04:46, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lizmo1977. I looked at your list of contributions and noticed Draft:Modbiotics. I assume that is what you are talking about. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:51, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lizmo1977. I haven't done more than glance at Draft:Modbiotics, but I notice that not a single one of your references has the word "modbiotics" in the title. That is not definitive, of course - one or more of them may have extensive material on the subject - but it does raise a warning flag. References supporting the specific things you talk about in the draft may be useful, but unless several of them are in-depth discussion of the word and concept of "modbiotics" specifically, then they do nothing to establish that the subject is notable. I wonder if this isn't TOOSOON. --ColinFine (talk) 10:26, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are user created imaginative illustrations Original Research?

I have just found this image: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikbalang#/media/File:Tikbalang_The_Philippine_Demon_Horse_Commons.jpg being used on Tikbalang. Wikipedia:No original research#Original images says: Original images created by a Wikipedian are not considered original research, so long as they do not illustrate or introduce unpublished ideas or arguments. It is not verifiable or a notable image. It illustrates or introduces the artist's own ideas of what a Tikbalang should look like. I believe it should be removed as Original Research. --Danielklein (talk) 04:54, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do the math. user inactive since 2011, image used on 4 enwiki articles and on 8 other wikipedias, almost 13 years since 2007. –84.46.53.231 (talk) 07:04, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how that's relevant. But as far as I can see, the very poor image does illustrate what is described in the lede. It would be good to have a better one, but I don't think it misrepresents or reinterprets the concept as described.--Shantavira|feed me 07:21, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Shantavira I don't know what a Tikbalang is supposed to look like apart from having legs so long that when it squats its knees are above its head. The image is certainly not like that. How can I be certain that anything else in the image is representative? --Danielklein (talk) 12:47, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help!

User:MassiveEartha gave me a fine brief introduction to editing quite long ago now, Sunday 1pm 9 April 2017 at Shakespeare's Head. I never found out how to send her thanks. Any help with than? Not sure where I'll find a response to this query. Thanks, User:ClintonL — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clinton45 (talk • contribs) 08:02, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Clinton45. That is very nice. You can leave a message for her at User talk:MassiveEartha. She is an active editor. I have pinged you so you should be notified of my response. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:12, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nayef Alsayed

hey I was wondering why my article was declined? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herobarhoam (talk • contribs) 08:43, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Herobarhoam: You need to cite some professionally-published independent mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically and primarily about Alsayed but not connected with, dependent upon, nor affiliated with him.
In other words, you need to cite newspaper and magazine articles or books about him. However, those don't exist, so there's not really any way to write an article about him write now. Wikipedia is not a social media site, it is an encyclopedia that just cites, summarizes, and paraphrases professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources, without addition, nor commentary.
Click this link to see instructions on how to write articles that won't be rejected or deleted. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:51, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

what is potential energy

potential energy is the energy a body has due to its position — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhiz blessed (talk • contribs) 09:46, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mhiz blessed: what is your question about editing Wikipedia? (that is the only purpose of this page). If you want to read more about potential energy, we have an article Potential energy. --ColinFine (talk) 10:29, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would also add that if the article ColinFine linked above does not fully answer your question, you are welcome to visit the science reference desk. CThomas3 (talk) 17:09, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dr David Gallagher

I just created my page yesterday and you want to speedy delete it.

Please help me go through the page and edit it so it is compliant with your policies and guidelines, because I did spend a lot of time on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr David Gallagher (talk • contribs) 11:07, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David. Wikipedia strongly discourages writing an article about yourself. There is too much conflict of interest.Charles (talk) 11:14, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Dr David Gallagher (edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are a few points to bring up with you. First, you edited your user page, which is not article space, but a place for you to introduce yourself to the Wikipedia community in the context of your Wikipedia editing or use. It isn't a place to post your autobiography or tell the world about yourself in general. For information on what is acceptable content for user pages, please see WP:USERPAGE.
Second, please note that autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged on Wikipedia(though not forbidden). This is partially because people naturally write favorably about themselves, and not with a neutral point of view. Wikipedia much prefers that independent editors write about subjects that they have taken note of and chosen to write about. Essentially, in order for you to be successful in writing about yourself on Wikipedia, you need to forget everything you know about yourself and only write based on the content of independent reliable sources. This is usually difficult for people to do about themselves- while technically possible, I haven't seen it done in my many years here.
In your case, you wrote a summary of your professional qualifications and works you have done- which is more appropriate for a social media type page about you, where you can say what you want about yourself. Wikipedia is different- as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is interested in what independent reliable sources state about subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability(in the case of an academic, that is defined at WP:NACADEMIC).
If you truly feel that you meet the notability guidelines(you might from what I see), you should really not write about yourself directly- but you may create and submit a draft for an independent review using Articles for Creation. You may wish to read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial first. 331dot (talk) 11:21, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr David Gallagher: In contesting the deletion, at User talk:Dr David Gallagher#Contested deletion you wrote who has legal rights to self expression (diff). Please see WP:NLT. Assuming you wish to continue editing here, you may want to strike the problem language (surround it with <s>...</s>). Thanks. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 13:07, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is uploading an image from another person's tweet in Twitter to Wikimedia Commons allowed?

Hello! I have a question: "Is uploading an image from another person's tweet in Twitter to Wikimedia Commons allowed?" For example, am I allowed to upload the image from here: https://twitter.com/seaofshadowsSOS/status/1187782833642856450?s=19? Thanks! LV1000 (talk) 15:09, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LV1000, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid the answer is, Almost always not. The only images allowed to be upoaded to Commons are images which may be freely used by anybody for any purpose, without payment. In practice this means that either they are in the public domain (usually by having been published long enough ago), or the copyright holder has explicitly and irrevocably licensed them under a licence which allows this, such as CC-BY-SA. Unless the copyright holder has publicly declared such a licence (for example, by posting the picture on their own website with a copyright statement saying so), the only way an image could be used in Commons is if the copyright holder (not anybody else) follows the procedure in donating copyright materials. --ColinFine (talk) 16:58, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If somebody tweets a photo along with proof that the photo was originally published before 1924, then that is OK. But that is pretty rare. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:56, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In the spirit of saying more than no, an example where the source was published under a free licence. An image search with Google or TinEye could also help to find a source and figure out if it is (allegedly) free. Use {{LicenseReview}} for unclear uploads on Commons. –84.46.53.117 (talk) 19:38, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Table not sorting correctly

The table at Tommy Tour#Preview concert in the U.K. and North American leg (1 May – 19 June 1969) doesn't sort correctly. How can I fix it? Chrisnait (talk) 15:44, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Chrisnait, and welcome to the Teahouse. One of the rowspans had more rows in it than was left in the table, causing the sorting error. I fixed that and now it appears that the table sorts correctly. I hope that helps! CThomas3 (talk) 17:32, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Cthomas3. Chrisnait (talk) 17:44, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Haitham bin Tariq

Alright, so sometime around the 14th of January (2020), the line "His record in government under Qaboos has been described by The Economist as poor.<rеf name="veconomist11" />" in the Haitham bin Tariq article began to be removed, by various people, mostly Omani IPs and Sultan159. A short description of his tenure under Qaboos is indeed in the Economist article if you're wondering. This culminated in an edit war on the 24th of January (UTC), which, to be honest, I'm not proud of participating in. On that same day, after I stopped reverting his removals, he responded on my talk page, which, I did want him to do, to explain the reasoning behind the removal (hence the "unexplained removal" message in my earlier reverts). I wrote a reply about 14 hours later, but I have not yet gotten a response. However, it is obvious that does go on Wikipedia, and can respond, as evidenced by his post-24th edits on the article, as well as, most recently, on my user page. As for the reply, I might've misused/misunderstood the WP:s I was citing. Anyway, I would like if he replied again, and to reach some kind of consensus on the line, as edit wars are immature and a waste of time. --toweli (talk) 15:50, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Replied toweli — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sultan159 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fandom reliability

Question: Would a fandom related to a certain topic be a reliable source for use on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daysant1144 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Daysant1144 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to Fandom Wikis like Wookieepedia or Memory Alpha, those are user-editable sources and would not be acceptable as a reliable source, just as Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source. If those wikis contain cited information that has a place here, you should use that citation instead of the wiki itself as a source. 331dot (talk) 16:43, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with everything 331dot said above. Unfortunately a lot Fandom wikis aren’t super-stringent about sourcing, but you could certainly ask on the wiki's discussion boards about where they obtained the information. Many of those wikis have dedicated editors with a great deal of source material, and even if it isn’t directly cited, they could probably point you to where you could look it up yourself. CThomas3 (talk) 17:00, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Context matters, nobody is going to remove about four references of a historic "official wiki" on Freeciv, unless they have a better source—I'd be supposed to know that "better" source. Likewise nobody is going to elaborate "historic" on that article, e.g., the co-founder Angela of Wikia (together with Jimmy Wales) contributed, there is no other list of People (= developers), and this used to be the only Wikia wiki with a GPLv2 licence.
Fandom (website) was added to RS/P as generally unreliable recently. –84.46.53.117 (talk) 18:54, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Time Pyramid

Whats the time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohsen.mehraban730 (talk • contribs) 19:30, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mohsen.mehraban730 Hello. This page is a place to ask questions about using Wikipedia. Do you have a question about using Wikipedia? 331dot (talk) 19:33, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&oldid=938683824"