Wikipedia:Teahouse

Maproom, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

(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.)

Article submit question

Hello, I would like for advice in how to properly submit this article so it is not rejected. I've read several wikipedia pages about how to properly send an article however I can't quite grasp on why it is not notable enough. thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sukoner (talk • contribs) 16:45, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

If you are talking about User:Sukoner/sandbox, it already has been rejected. You submitted it and it was declined, and the feedback in the box on the draft page gave you lots of useful links, including to WP:Notability, but without addressing the problem you resubmitted it and not surprisingly it was rejected. Before you try again you need to to read all the useful links in the feedback you received on your sandbox page, together with the other useful links in the welcome message on your user talk page. When you've read those, if you want to write about a subject which is notable and you have specific questions, please free to ask them. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:08, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

You also appear to be writing about yourself. Even if you are notable, this is strongly discouraged. QuiteUnusual (talk) 09:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

The bible

Hello. I'm writing an article about the bible. Its a summary and I'm going to be explaining a lot of events that taking place in it. Im asking wether is accepted if I use pictures that are already existing in the wiki on ather articles but not owned by me??? And what should I follow to use that pictures???Sethabi ba sethabi (talk) 17:27, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Sethabi ba sethabi, Howdy hello and welcome to the teahouse! Well we already happen to have a lot of articles about The Bible. I'm not sure what you could write about that we haven't already written about. If you have reliable sources that discuss the bible, you could add that to the relevant page, such as a specific book of the bible. What exactly do you wish to write about?

In terms of images, yes you can include other images on Wikipedia, as our images are generally free use, as long as attribution is provided. A complete guide to images can be found at Wikipedia:Image use policy. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 17:45, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

I want to give a light and a describtion of who is who in the bible and to whom do certain culutres and norms belongs to. To put to a paper of what I have uncovered. To tell the trueth that the bible tells. Sethabi ba sethabi (talk) 23:33, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Sethabi ba sethabi Wikipedia is not for posting personal opinions or original research as to the content of The Bible. We already have a great many articles about The Bible, you have independent reliable sources to expand on that content, please offer it- but this is not the forum for posting your own views. 331dot (talk) 00:24, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I have not given my opinions on it yet, but the way you puts it I get it, because even if I had to copy a story from somewhere and come paste it on wiki, I would still had to write it on my own way and it would still cost my comments on it, and thus says I'm not on the site I was looking for.

Any a way thanks Sethabi ba sethabi (talk) 20:17, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Nicholas Clinch edits hard to source

Please pardon me as this type of question has been answered before, but I found the references confusing.

Someone else has written a page about my late father, Nicholas Clinch, a famous mountaineer. I would like to fill out a few gaps, factually, without turning it into a hagiography. I understand I'm supposed to reference only facts reported elsewhere. I can refer to his New York Times obituary, but there are items missing. His personal life paragraph did not mention his parents' names or his education - he started serious climbing while a student at Stanford. Key reference items such as his birth certificate, college degrees, major awards, and his climbing journals are in my house.

Since I can't edit, "He is the son of Virginia Lee and Nicholas Bayard Clinch, and and I know because I'm their granddaughter," what is my approach here? Thank you. Coachlbridges (talk) 05:39, 10 February 2020 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:141D:9:E92:1D99:A203:AF57 (talk) 05:24, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia uses published reliable sources independent of the subject. Unpublished information which you possess would be classified as original research and couldn't be used to support changes to a Wikipedia article. Thank you for asking the question. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

@Coachlbridges: I've carried out a library search. There are a few other references available but they don't provide the information you are looking for. You may have seen these already: one is very comprehensive though and is a good source for more detail in the article. There's a reference to his education here. If you fancy yourself a writer, perhaps you could write and publish his biography?! He certainly seems worthy of one. All the best - QuiteUnusual (talk) 14:30, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I added that Alpine Journal obituary ref to the article. Left suggestion on your Talk page about adding Infobox and photos. David notMD (talk) 15:47, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

How to improve article's non-encyclopedic style

Hi, I have been working on gathering a lot of information on Draft:Laia Cabrera, a videoartist. I am non-native english speaker, and I would love to have some help regarding the writing style to be able to improve the overall article. I believe the references are fine, and the construction of the article is correct. But if you also have feedback in that regard, I am most open to suggestions. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yessadeouve (talk • contribs) 05:27, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

@Yessadeouve: it can be hard to sum up what is an encyclopedic style, and opinions may vary, but I think that the key point is that an encyclopedia article should read like an unbiased summary of what other (reliable) sources say about the topic. If you have information, opinions, or descriptions that have no basis in a source then probably they should be removed. I would go through each section and ask yourself 'is this what the source is saying, or is it what I am saying as a writer of the article?'. If it is the latter, then it probably needs to change.

With regards to your specific article:

• Most of the career section is ok in tone, in that it is fairly factual and unbiased but it is a) too long and detailed and b) hugely lacking in sources.
• The Art Work section is highly unencyclopedic and I suggest you delete this and start again. Phrases like As a filmmaker and visual artist, she uses a variety of media: music, video, narration, projected images that fuse cinematographic arts; music, dance; Photography; theater; visual arts; voice; writing. Feeling of timelessness, human landscapes: faces, fragments of the body. or "Is there an edge of belief?", "Claim your place" and "Shifting Gaze" were a step forward in the search for forms of identity: the projects explore the relationship, the lack of communion and the ethics of desire-belief-beauty. or, most of all Where are the limits of our understanding of emotions, how do we relate to others and how do we handle differences? sound like art gallery brochures, not an encyclopedia.
• Video art projects and Video Installation Projects suffer from the same problems as Art Work above. The film intends to frame the connection between micro and macro, the invisible labyrinths that connect us with the unconscious and the sudden changes that are beyond our expectations in life. is not the language of an encyclopedia. These are also far too long. An encyclopedia article is not the place for an in depth description of every piece of work an artist has ever done.
• You also appear to have the article copy-pasted twice on the same page. Make sure to delete one or it will cause no end of confusion.
• The references need fixing - in most cases the problem is that you have correctly used double {{ to open a cite, but only a single } to close it. You just need to go through and add a closing curly bracket to the broken references.

I hope this helps. Hug^syrup 09:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

• @Yessadeouve: There are various policy and style guidelines one could cite for authority (WP:NPOV, WP:PEACOCK etc.) but my general view is that a good Wikipedia article should be boring. If you elicit zero emotions (positive or negative) in the reader, they will be using their brain rather than their guts to process the information they are presented with (and if you do not think that is a positive, Wikipedia probably is not for you). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 13:40, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Not without some merit, but another school of thought is that keeping the readers interest is a good thing. Boring compared to many news-media, sure. Dry, dusty and bland is often our style. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

i want to enroll for learning courses, how can i do that?

i just simply want learning materials and how to locate them — Preceding unsigned comment added by DENNIS GBONDA (talk • contribs) 06:34, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, DENNIS GBONDA. Did you see the response to your question here last July, which is now archived here? I would ask the same sorts of questions - it's not clear to me whether you're looking to learn about Wikipedia, or learn about other stuff using Wikipedia. Perhaps you could clarify? Cordless Larry (talk) 08:39, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Trying to find the raw data for a chart

Hi all I am newbie editor and am trying to find the raw data used to publish the article on SARS. This one - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2003_Probable_cases_of_SARS_-_Worldwide.svg#/media/File:2003_Probable_cases_of_SARS_-_Worldwide.svg

I have checked the WHO data source and it does not have it in this format readily so am guessing the user who put the chart together collated the data manually from the WHO data.

How can I access the raw data OR request the user who published the chart (Phoenix777?) to share the data?

Would appreciate any guidance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neelmurty (talk • contribs) 14:01, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Neelmurty. You can contact Phoenix7777 at their talk page User talk:Phoenix7777. (They should get notified of this discussion, because I linked to their user talk page). Since that File in on Commons, the person who uploaded it won't necessarily be active on English Wikipedia, and in general it might be better to contact them on their User talk page on Commons; but in fact, Phoenix7777 has been active on enwiki today. --ColinFine (talk) 17:42, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

How do I start a new topic?

British silversmiths are not represented on Wikipedia and if we don't do it soon, there won't be anybody alive that can write about them. Derek Styles wrote a fantastic book that I know he would be happy to pass on its content. Who should we contact? PS. I wrote about Alex Styles a while ago and the copy was knocked back because it came from the book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:7D19:A000:1D5B:D031:E708:CD66 (talk) 14:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Wikipedia is not for merely documenting the content of a book or merely documenting a subject; Wikipedia summarizes what multiple independent reliable sources state about a subject. If you have multiple sources that describe silversmiths in Britain, an article could be written about it. If you just want to spread the word about this book or just document it- there are other forums where that is permitted. 331dot (talk) 14:44, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the teahouse. As an encyclopedia, we include information from reliable sources, not from people's own knowledge or memory. I mention that to explain why, in fact, Wikipedia doesn't need to worry too much about there being nobody left alive who remembers a particular topic. As long as there are reliable sources about them, there is always scope for an article.

On this particular topic, there is already an article on Silversmiths, and I can't help wondering if there is enough material to make a whole new article about one particular nationality of silversmiths? Bear in mind that Wikipedia is not a history website as such, and is not the place to document all the details of a historic topic.

As far as the Derek Styles book goes, if it is published then it can certainly be used as a source for any article. We don't need permission from the author, since we would be using it as a source and not directly copying content from it (a lesson you appear to have learnt before!) so there is no need to contact anyone. Hug^syrup 15:08, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Why my Company page has been declined from submission?

I have added a page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:4th_%26_Reckless The page consists of information about my company. This does not contain any other self-promotion lines. Please tell me how can I make changes to it? How to improve the chance of the submission? Nicole.roberts19 (talk) 14:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Nicole.roberts19, because for anything to have an article here, it needs to have received significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the topic. Your business has not, therefore we can't have an article about it here.

Please read Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability ~~ Alex Noble - talk 14:46, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Nicole.roberts19 (edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft does not have independent reliable sources with significant coverage of your company indicating how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Not every company merits an article on Wikipedia, even in the same field. Content about the "mission" of the company like "The brands mission is to design looks that inspire women to embrace their style in all aspects of life" is wholly unencyclopedic, as a company's "mission" can change at any time and is impossible to independently verify. You are finding out that it is difficult for company representatives(which you properly disclosed) to write about their companies because the goal of a company representative and the goal of Wikipedia are usually fundamentally different. Wikipedia has no interest in spreading the word about your company, we're just here to write an encyclopedia of human knowledge for the benefit of humanity. 331dot (talk) 14:50, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Is this OK now? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:4th_%26_Reckless Please check. I have added 3 references. Nicole.roberts19 (talk) 15:31, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

@Nicole.roberts19: unfortunately not. Two of the references you added are to LinkedIn, which is not a reliable source. And the only mention of the article subject in the InStyle article appears to be the mention, in brackets no less, '(I actually grabbed a mint green suit for myself from 4th & Reckless)'. This in no way qualifies as substantial coverage. Hug^syrup 15:56, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

There are three mentioned articles. TrendHunter.com, InStyle.com and Who What Wear UK. Is it still not ok?Nicole.roberts19 (talk) 13:00, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Nicole.roberts19, user-generated content is not considered a reliable source on Wikipedia, and Wikipedia is not social media. and not for promotion.--Quisqualis (talk) 16:22, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Swapping redirect and article?

Hi! Yesterday, I created the article Summer Reading Programs. I realized after creating it that it doesn't match Wikipedia's conventions for capitalization of article titles.

I found that Summer reading programs existed, but just redirected to the Collaborative Summer Library Program.

I changed the redirect to point to Summer Reading Programs, but now I'm wondering if there's a mechanism/procedure for shifting the content to Summer reading programs, and changing the capitalized version to a redirect or candidate for speedy deletion?

Thanks for any guidance! LindsDe (talk) 17:55, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

LindsDe, it can be done, but you'll require the assistance of an administrator or page mover. Easiest way of doing this is to place {{Db-move}} on the correct title. Fill this in like so {{db-move|1=PAGE TO BE MOVED HERE|2=REASON FOR MOVE}}.

If it helps with searching, this is what's called a round robin page move. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 18:59, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

@LindsDe and Alex Noble: A round-robin page move is actually a little different where two pages are swapped but both page histories are preserved. The title should be singular Summer reading program per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals). That is also a redirect but has a long page history which includes this version before The Official Summer Reading Program was added, so I'm not sure we should really start over with a new article. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:45, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

@LindsDe, Alex Noble, and PrimeHunter: I have moved Summer Reading Programs to Summer reading programs via WP:ROUNDROBIN. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 21:56, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Tea Consumption Per Capita.

Todays Teahouse refreshments come to you from a Peshawar tea kitchen

Pakistan is the seventh largest tea consumer in the world, however, it is not even mentioned in the list on Wikipedia:

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

Can this be corrected, please?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.10.249.2 (talk) 20:24, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. The place to ask this is on the talk page Talk:List of countries by tea consumption per capita. The information seems to be sourced (though https://www.statista.com/statistics/507950/global-per-capita-tea-consumption-by-country/ requires a login, so I haven't checked it); so you would need to provide a reliable published source for your information.

I wonder if you might be thinking of this article, which does put Pakistan 7th: but it's not in tea consumption, but in rate of increase of consumption. Or perhaps you have some other source. In any case, please argue it on that Talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 21:07, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Don't forget the biscuits (from ISB)!

—[AlanM1(talk)]— 01:29, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Requesting assistance on referencing work by article subject

Hello, I submitted my first article (on a living person) December 31 and it was promptly rejected due to lack of NPOV and reliable sources. I believe both issues are now satisfactorily addressed. Before resubmitting, I have a few questions:

1) Subject wrote a number of newspaper articles, many in major publications. Do I simply reference each one with a citenews footnote?

2) Would I do the same with her phonographs? (This would be in addition to a couple of secondary source footnotes.)

3) To substantiate her years at the United Nations, would pages from the UN phone directories be acceptable? (I have cover of ea directory showing year and her listing, including department. The other listings are illegible.)

4) If I cannot substantiate art awards, do I have to omit them?

5) If I cannot substantiate her broadcast work, do I have to omit? (I can cite few secondary sources, but not for most.)

6) The only substantiation I have for her creating the Nixon Coloring book (under several pseudonyms) is a receipt from the publisher and all the original art boards. Shall I omit?

Thank you for your assistance. Carol Berney Gonzalez (talk) 20:27, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Carol Berney Gonzalez, and welcome back to the Teahouse. I think you are a bit confused about references. References in a Wikipedia article are there to corroborate information in the article, Works by the subject, Draft:Beryl Bernay, are not references and should not be cited, unless you are using them as sources for information in the article (which should be limited to the kind of information appropriate to primary sources). The guide to what you are trying to do is at MOS:WORKS.

The answers to all the rest of your questions is in WP:V: if information cannot be verified from a reliable published source then it should not go into the article. So yes, in most cases you must omit.

Remember that a Wikipedia article is not an assemblage of everything known about a subject: it is a summary of what independent commentators have chosen to say about the subject. --ColinFine (talk) 21:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

ColinFine, thank you for clarifying. Carol Berney Gonzalez (talk) 22:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Do people get paid to edit on wikipedia?

I am a new editor to wikipedia looking to better understand the editing process. I would like to know do higher regarded editors get paid to edit on wikipedia? If so, how would one get that title? JEby1 (talk) 23:50, 10 February 2020 (UTC)JEby1

No, Wikipedia does no pay editors. Editors are all volunteers. Meters (talk) 23:55, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

If only. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

There are people who self-promote themselves as editors' for hire. Not through Wikipedia. If they get a paying client, they are required to comply with WP:PAID rules. David notMD (talk) 00:33, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

JEby1 Where would Wikipedia get the money to pay you with? 331dot (talk) 00:59, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Will Wikipedia consider keeping it's own database of sources which editors can refer to and curious readers can refer to?

Will Wikipedia consider keeping it's own database of sources which editors can refer to and curious readers can refer to? It seems that sometimes sources that I click on in the bibliography refer to either an online book that I'm prevented for accessing, or a page with very little content, let alone a means of searching if the citations are used properly. With that being said, I feel that it would be an amazing feature of Wikipedia to store or have access to a library of books which can be accessed. Not sure if this is feasible economically, but I think it would be very nice to see. Thank you for your time.Jakes22 (talk) 23:50, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

While this certainly sounds like a good idea at one level, it's just not how we do things. We provide guidelines as to what makes a good source (WP:RS, etc), and there's a forum where people discuss poor sources. And, the quality of specific sources is an important part of WP:AfD discussions. Beyond that, editorial decisions, such as what sources to use, are almost entirely up to individual editors. As for access to a library, we do have arrangements with many databases and libraries to provide free access to wikipedia editors. See WP:LIBRARY. I have a few subscriptions through there, and it's an invaluable resource. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Additionally, Google Books has free or limited views of many books, as does archive.org, and Wikisource (not sure about "books" here, but lots of something). The WL that Roy mentioned is especially useful for gaining access to newspapers.com, which has archived copies of newspapers with rudimentary search, from 18th century until current. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 01:17, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Jakes22: I want to thank you for your question here today, as it reminded me that some years ago I suggested that, on one of the WikiProjects I'm involved with, we should collate a list of relevant books that our members had access to at home. I just found it languishing in an old archive, so have moved it onto our main project page, (here). Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:32, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

how do I know if a source is reputable enough to be a source on Wikipedia biography page?

Hi,

How can I be sure if a website (blog) is reputable enough to be on a Wikipedia page? It is not a personal blog page, but instead an award-winning food blog...do I just post the name of the website here?

Thanks!Alwayslp (talk) 00:07, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Alwayslp: This is a tricky question. Blogs are rarely reliable sources for content, since there's no journalistic oversight, but in rare cases content from a notable blog that gets media coverage could be considered noteworthy. In other words, a specific post and blog could be considered notable, but they would still not be appropriate to use as sourcing, as defined in WP:RS, specifically WP:USERGENERATED. And if a blogger gets sufficient media coverage for their blogging, they might qualify for an article, as with the surprising to see List of Nigerian bloggers. (Disclosure - I haven't read the list in depth, but the bloggers listed are seemingly often notable for things besides their blogging.) So to summarize, a blog might be notable, but rarely will one be usable as a source. If you want to post the name of the blog, I can review its coverage for notability purposes. Hope this helps. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:38, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your reply - It's very helpful...I'm wondering about the food blog called

if it is considered a reliable source...

Thanks again for your input. Alwayslp (talk) 00:45, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Alwayslp: I think context is important, and depends what kind of statement you want to sauce source from the blog. Looking at its 'about' page, it clearly has a number of editors running it, including one alleged to be a NY Times food writer. So it might be a bit more reliable than many others. I should mention that we do have a noticeboard for discussing reliable sources (see WP:RSN), though personally I like to stick with my favourites: Worcestershire and Soy.

On a different note, might I compliment you on some incredibly detailed edit summaries that you use. Possibly the most detailed I've ever seen for minor edits. Thank you - though feel free to reduce the level of detail if it ever gets too much! Nick Moyes (talk) 01:05, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

References

@Alwayslp: It already has an article. Serious Eats. It was considered notable or has somehow escaped deletionist attention. (I think it's fine - it's profiled in NY Magazine's own blog Grubstreet [[1]].) Therefore, if you wanted to use one of the blog posts as a source for information added to another article, such as for a fictional restaurant XYZ Restaurant, you could say something like "The Serious Eats blog showcased XYZ Restaurant for its soup dumplings." or something like that, and I don't think you'd have a problem. But context and content are key, so don't be surprised if you get any pushback for a different reason. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:43, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both for your help and insight! Alwayslp (talk) 02:26, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

I would like to deep-edit this Wikipedia Page - Indian Institute of Rural Management

Hi, I came across this page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Institute_of_Rural_Management - and realized that I could add/change much of the info as per what I have read about this institute in notable Indian magazines like India Today and Business India. Can I just go ahead and edit, or do I need to seek permission or follow a procedure for making any changes? Thanks in advance, Tycheana (talk) 07:08, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello Tycheana! The process is WP:BOLD. Cite your additions, use edit summaries, and be prepared to discuss if someone disagrees. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:56, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Gråbergs Gråa Sång, thanks for the guidance. Do I need to mention a code at the head of the article to indicate that am going to be operating under WP:BOLD? And after editing can I remove some of the comments on top, like the article being orphan, because it is no more an orphan? Many thanks, regards, Tycheana (talk) 08:13, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Everybody is operating under WP:BOLD much of the time, but try to leave a good WP:ES so other editors have a better chance to understand what you are doing. On the orphan thing, check the link near the top of the article that says "Learn how and when to remove these template messages". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:20, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Leave a message on the article's Talk page regarding your project, Tycheana, in order that other editors should be warned. Also, there is a Template, which perhaps User:Nick Moyes or User:Cullen is aware of and can refer you to, which you place on the page you are working on, which advises that the page is being edited a lot by one person, and not to edit at this time.--Quisqualis (talk) 16:13, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

I think you mean Template:Under construction. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:31, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Tycheana:The template {{In use}} is probably better for short periods of activity when you want to avoid edit conflicts, or being challenged half way through making changes. Remove it as soon as you're done. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:02, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks Gråbergs Gråa Sång, Quisqualis and Nick Moyes for the guidance. I will use the {{In use}} template and also mention on the talk page that am revamping the info. With the {{In use}}, do I need to mention my name just so other users are aware and can get in touch if the need be? Regards, Tycheana (talk) 07:44, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

There's no need. Anyone wanting to know who is working on the article simply has to look in the page's history to find out. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:06, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm one of the editors of kannada wikipedia, who has contributed 900+ articles and half dozen articles in english.

(Radhatanaya (talk) 07:09, 11 February 2020 (UTC)) Respected sir,

I'm an old hag of 76 years from Mumbai, and has been an editor in kan wikipedia, since 8 + years. I want to add pics to my created articles, but I have been banned not to do so. The reason being. I have two pen names, 1. Radhatanaya, 2. Rangakuvara Created 900+ articles in kan language, (under the pen name Radhatanaya) Created half dozen articles in english (Under the name Rangakuvara)

I have uploaded several pics other than mine. It was my mistake I feel sorry and apologize for it.

Now please lift the ban on my uploading pics. I assure you in future I upload the pics taken by my camera.

With regards,

-Radhatanaya I will not use Rangakuvara in future.

@Radhatanaya: It is Commons that blocked you, not us. To appeal a block, add {{unblock|reason for the request}} to commons:user talk:Radhatanaya. However, as you had an unblock request denied last month, I'd wait a while before doing this. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 09:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Radhatanaya: The admin reviewing your unblock request at c:User talk:Radhatanaya#Requesting for unblock did so because there was no answer to the issues raised in the "Oppose" comment at the bottom (by elcobbola). If you do submit another unblock request (that page, not here, is the correct place), be sure to read and understand each of those comments and address them. I can understand the multiple account issue and why you might lose track of which account you were logged into. It just needs to be clearly stated that you won't use multiple accounts again. Violating copyrights is something a lot of people not familiar with the issue can make until they are stopped. Admit, show you understand what the correct action is going forward (as you did by stating you'll upload photos you take yourself Y), commit to communicating with others when they leave you messages about problems, and your contributions may again be welcomed. I hope this helps. (Non-administrator comment) —[AlanM1(talk)]— 23:34, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Editing a page content

How does editing of a page work and how is the talk option different from editing the actual doc? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishal210891 (talk • contribs) 07:27, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello Vishal210891 and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia:Tutorial may be a good place to start for you. The talk page is for discussing changes to the article with other editors. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:59, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Talk pages are for discussing improvements to an article Vishal210891, or for suggesting edits to be made by other editors.--Quisqualis (talk) 16:07, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

rejected draft page

Hi,

My new page draft has been declined, and I'm not 100% sure why.

This is the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Drops_(company)

Is it too broad? One-sided? Not well written enough? Can someone help me with specific things to include / delete?

Thanks, G — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pappgab (talk • contribs) 08:58, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Pappgab Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The draft was declined because- as noted in the draft- it reads as an advertisement or other promotional piece for the company. It isn't an advertisement in that it is actively soliciting sales- but it just merely tells about the subject. Wikipedia articles must do more- they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about the company that show how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. The sources you offer all seem to be routine announcements, press release-type articles, or announcements of routine, unremarkable "awards"; none of these things establish notability. (for example, "Drops was named by Fast Company on their 2019 list as one of the 350 most innovative companies in the world" means very little to anyone other than the company, unlike an Academy Award or Grammy Award) The key with independent sources is that their coverage must be significant; the source must have chosen on their own to write about the company in depth. I might suggest that you read Your First Article to get an idea of what is being looked for in new articles. Using the new user tutorial may help as well.

If you work for this company, you are required to comply with the paid editing policy and formally declare that(this is a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory if you do work for them). You should also review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 11:34, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

It reads like PR or advertising. You need to examine good WP articles to observe proper tone, and then apply it to your article. Tone consists not only of wording, but also what is talked about. If an article is based on PR releases, it necessarily will not contain objective, outside material.--Quisqualis (talk) 16:04, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

не могу войти в систему

У меня есть старый кабинет , но я не знаю информации о доступе никакой , помогите востановить доступ плиииииз — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.40.107.159 (talk) 09:09, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, your IP is not blocked on English Wikipedia or globally. You'll need to follow the instructions on the block notice (or whatever notice you see) if you want us to help you. If you don't understand English, maybe try asking a friend for help. If you're having trouble on different language Wikipedia, such as Russian Wikipedia, you'll need to contact them for help. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:33, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Article deletion

Hi, i'm new here, and i would like to know, what is the reason that certain articles get deleted, even ones that have been there for a long time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbob99 (talk • contribs) 11:17, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Sbob99 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are different types of deletion processes, with different criteria- but in general, articles are deleted if it is determined that the subject does not meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability as determined by a community discussion called Articles for Deletion. Some articles might be speedy deleted if they meet specific criteria as determined by an administrator. There are also Proposed Deletions which are meant for completely uncontroversial deletions(but do not meet the speedy deletion criteria).

An article existing for a long time is not a barrier to deletion; as this is a volunteer project, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected for years. If there is a specific thing that prompted this question, I could give more specific help. 331dot (talk) 11:24, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi, Sbob99! Possibly Wikipedia:Deletion policy and Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion may be of some help for you. More at the list of policies in the Wikipedia:List of policies#Deletion section. --CiaPan (talk) 11:29, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Sbob99, during Wikipedia's early expansion phase, we accepted a lot of weak articles on non-notable subjects. Now, we have the luxury of reviewing them against current standards. If a junk article is old, that is little indication of its encyclopedic worth.--Quisqualis (talk) 16:01, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Visakhapatnam International Airport

How to rename the Page I am unable to rename 6 years ago a user redirected to Visakhapatnam Airport from Visakhapatnam International Airport but now Government Of India recognised Visakhapatnam Airport as Visakhapatnam International Airport In the same way Vijayawada Airport also — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ktdk (talk • contribs) 11:25, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Firstly, Ktdk, we use the name most commonly used, not the offical name, per Wikipedia:Official names and WP:COMMONNAME. If you think the new name is now the most commonly used name, there is the Requested Moves process at Wikipedia:Requested moves. As this is a move likley to need discussion, you should place {{Requested move}} on the article's talk page, with your justification. The closer will be able to either delete the redirect, or perform a round robin page move, in order to swap the article titles.

Thanks, ~~ Alex Noble - talk 11:33, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

With the airport's own website http://visakhapatnamairport.com/about.htm and the Airports Authority of India https://www.aai.aero/en/airports/visakhapatnam both referring to it as Visakhapatnam Airport, you would need some pretty convincing evidence to convince us that the name has changed. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:48, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Ktdk Note that an airport can receive international flights and not have "International" be a formal part of its name. 331dot (talk) 13:04, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Update with the times

I want to ask if all the encyclopedia entries are updated in real time, because I find that most of the popular entries are updated quickly, but compared to some unpopular entries, few people update according to what happened in real time.Invokerishard (talk) 14:43, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Invokerishard: Wikipedia is edited by volunteers who choose what articles to work on. So, to a certain extent it is updated ‘in real time’ but you are absolutely right that less well-known topics tend to attract fewer editors and so sometimes take longer to update. Many of our entries are probably ‘out of date’ to a greater or lesser extent, but everyone is free to update pages if they see incorrect information (and if they have a reliable source for the correct info!). Hug^syrup 14:52, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Invokerishard (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a volunteer project, where people do what they can when they can. Articles are only worked on when someone is motivated and has the time to work on them. This is usually the case for popular topics, as you already seem to be aware, but with less popular topics, fewer people are interested enough to update them constantly. Wikipedia has over 6 million articles, but only tens of thousands, maybe a few hundred thousand of regular editors(don't know the exact count). If there are articles that you feel would benefit from you editing or monitoring them, I invite you to do so. 331dot (talk) 14:53, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

It's fairly common for articles on obscure subjects to fall out of date. If you are reading a biography of a long-dead person and the tense is wrong in the first lead paragraph (is instead of was, etc.) or (very commonly) in subsequent paragraphs, please feel free to change it.--Quisqualis (talk) 15:40, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Submission declined

I submitted a post on behalf of Brona C Titley, I was asked to by Brona. It is all from her CV of her own work. Could you help me get it posted or know how to get it resolved. Many thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brona C Titley (talk • contribs) 15:37, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Firstly, please see WP:NOTRESUME and WP:RELIABLE SOURCES and, especially, Your first article. Wikipedia is not social media. It's an encyclopedia and does not accept "profiles" or "pages" from people who are not not notable.--Quisqualis (talk) 15:44, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

There may be a problem, Brona C Titley, with your user name. User names may not be the same as an article's title, nor should it be the name of a living person other than the user. Wikipedia has an autobiography policy, as well.--Quisqualis (talk) 15:52, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

grammar.

good time of the day for all people here. new to Wikipedia, but had some experience with FANDOM editing. looks like it is not that different.

anyways, scrolling around talking stuff i noted one thing: literally everyone spoke on perfect English. like, capped letters, 's perfectly placed...it really made me aware, since English is my second language, and i dont really type that way (as you can clearly see).

do i have to change my typing ways or its fine? also, i know that writing like that while editing aint gonna get me anywhere so ill most keep writing like that on forums and discussion pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SomeRandomONE (talk • contribs) 15:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

It's perfectly fine on discussion pages, as long as others can understand you, SomeRandomONE. You may sign your posts with four of these things in a row: ~ --Quisqualis (talk) 15:56, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@SomeRandomONE: Wikipedia is a collaborative environment and grammar is an agreement between writer and reader to make communication efficient. It comes down to whether you want people to easily read/understand what you write, or to have to re-read and stumble over it and maybe miss your point in the process. Take a moment to preview your posts, add punctuation and capitalization, and you'll be rewarded. Of course (as I think you understand), in articles (pages in "mainspace"), please do follow the WP:MOS, grammar, etc.; if you don't, you're making work that another volunteer editor has to clean up. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 00:10, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Requests for adminship

So, I checked my watchlist, and it said that two "requests for adminship" were open. What are those, exactly? King of Scorpions 16:06, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

King of Scorpions, for users to be become admins, in order to be able to delete pages, block users, etc. there has to be a discussion first. At an RFA, users essentially vote (although it isn't a numerical vote), for if the user should become an admin or not. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:31, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for answering my question! Sorry to keep spamming everyone here so much... King of Scorpions 16:33, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

It's not "spam", King of Scorpions. Your questions are, in fact, rather interesting, insightful and educational.--Quisqualis (talk) 16:36, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Quisqualis, I am very glad to hear that. I have found the Teahouse really useful in my editing... King of Scorpions 16:40, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Questions about conflict of interest

I work at a University as a writer and communicator. A large part of my job is writing about scientific papers coming out in peer-reviewed journals, with the goal of helping non-technical audiences understand the science and other research being conducted. My background is in science and science writing rather than in marketing or communications, and I know how to write in a non-promotional, encyclopedic style. I've noticed that a few of our very prominent faculty members are not in Wikipedia, and I'd like to remedy that. I am not worried about their notability, but I was wondering about the conflict of interest issue. I've read that I should disclose any conflicts. I'm happy to do this. However, I'm wondering if I will go to the trouble of creating the article and then find that the article is immediately removed. Someone suggested that I find a non-University employee to post something I compose, but this seems dishonest. Thanks for your thoughts! CatZan (talk) 16:06, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

CatZan, The best way to handle this is to first follow through with WP:PAID, then work on your articles using the Articles for Creation system. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 16:17, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

CatZan Thank you for your honest approach. Ideally someone without any connection to the subject would motivate the creation of an article. However our COI rules mean that it is possible to clearly declare your connection and then submit article drafts via AFC, as moonythedwarf says. At that point the article would get reviewed by an independent party. Were it accepted, you would likely be best to request any changes via the article talk page at that point.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:23, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

ThatMontrealIP, You have no idea how grateful I am someone was honest for once. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 16:31, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

ThatMontrealIP, Thank you so much for your advice! CatZan (talk) 17:00, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Moonythedwarf, Thank you so much for your advice! CatZan (talk) 17:00, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

CatZan, I have a suggestion that's only just ocurred to me, so others might shoot it down in flames, but . . . you probably know someone in another University in a similar position to yourself. Perhaps you could agree with them that you will work on draft articles about their University's candidate subjects while they work on yours.

Provided that the two of you do not directly exchange any details about the subjects, you would thus reduce the degrees of COI and unconscious bias involved, and find it easier to stick to facts available in citable, independent, published Reliable sources without including personal knowledge. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.58.107 (talk) 00:18, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

WIkI projects

Hi, I am a new to editing on Wikipedia and wanted to understand how to get involved with specific projects - particularly those focusing on education, universities and in terms of location, Oman. I have visited some of the project pages - but could do with some useful and practical tips on how to get involved. (NUSTOMAN (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 16:24, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

NUSTOMAN Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I think most if not all of the projects have no formal process to become involved, but if there are specific things required to "join", those will be described on the project page. Most of the ones I have seen simply invite the user to add their name to a list of participants- then you have "officially" joined. 331dot (talk) 16:35, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Editing Questions

Hello, I am a new editor and I am taking a course using the Wiki Education course program. What does your editing process normally look like? Does it vary based on the specific article you are editing or do you have a process that you adhere to? Also, what sparked your interest in editing Wikipedia articles - why did you start and why do you choose to continue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oludara Orederu (talk • contribs) 17:13, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello Oludara Orederu! Congratulations on taking a Wiki Education course! I'm happy to hear people are willing to learn more and share their expertise! I've been editing for about 15 years at this point, and my editing process has varied widely over the years. When I first began, I added small bits of information to existing articles, and then moved on to try creating articles for subjects that had red links. As I got older, I began helping with other projects. Today I help our articles for creation project by figuring out whether draft articles meet the standards to become full wikipedia articles. My original interest and motivation to edit on Wikipedia came from a variety of sources: I wanted to help share information with people, but also my teachers had cautioned against using Wikipedia as a source because of misinformation and vandalism. I wanted to help make Wikipedia into a source where that was less of an issue. If I could give you any advice as you take this course (and perhaps continue your Wikipedia journey) it would be these little tidbits:

1. Don't let this website become Serious business. What do I mean by that? I don't mean make silly articles (we have our fair share of those). Instead, try to avoid getting angry or upset at another editor, or feel as if you own an article because you did a substantial amount of work on it. To be honest, we are all collaborating together, and there is a whole world outside of Wikipedia that it is not worth getting into petty fights with people on the internet.
2. Understand Wikipedia's ideas around reliable sources and notability, and more importantly, what Wikipedia is not. We shouldn't be creating articles to help promote someone, or help a company profit, or provide our own ideas about the life, the universe and everything. We are here to compile information about topics and put it in a format where people can understand and become better informed. Do you understand what I mean?

Thanks for asking your question! I hope that helps, and drop by again if you have any other questions. Bkissin (talk) 21:35, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Oludara Orederu, My editing process is nearly unchanged since many years ago as an IP editor. It may be the case that I was born to be a copy editor, but I attempt to read and understand an article with a copy editor's eye. If the language is annoyingly unclear, I try to fix it, including typos and punctuation. If the references interest me and I find that one is dead, I tag it, or fix a ref I check out that is improperly formatted. Sometimes the sections or paragraphs are disorganized, and I rearrange them. Sometimes, tangential or otherwise irrelevant material must be removed, including POV or DIY material, occasionally, whole paragraphs.

If promotional or otherwise slanted language is present, I enjoy removing it or toning it down to the dullest possible version of the truth. Basically, anything that bugs me as a Wikipedia reader gets fixed. If it needs a complete rewrite or more citations, I have the option of either mentioning it on the article's Talk page or using a template to tag an article or one of its sections. Sometimes I do the heavy work of a near-rewrite or finding sources, but I'm usually on to the next subject, unless the article somehow hooks me. You don't necessarily need to be knowledgeable or interested in a topic to rewrite an article. You learn by doing.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:17, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

How to find 'Edit'?

How to find the edit button on fandom? — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Cast217 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

The Cast217 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This board is for asking questions about using Wikipedia; Fandom is a completely separate organization from Wikipedia. The answer may also depend on which Fandom website you want to edit. You might try asking at the Reference Desk. 331dot (talk) 17:30, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

A question of nationality.

I was reading the Bio on Peter Pratt, the British singer. I was quite surprised to see that Wikipedia had defined him as English. Perhaps I'm incorrect, but I would state, 'I'm British, born in Birmingham, England and went to school where I was taught English'. Any thoughts on the subject? J. goldenthroats.fandom.com/wiki/Peter_Pratt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jotabug (talk • contribs) 17:58, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

The page for which you provided the URL is on Fandom, not on Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:12, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes, but Peter Pratt also says English. It's not clear-cut, some advice at MOS:ETHNICITY. It depends on what sources say (I'm not saying the article is currently following what sources say, I have no idea). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:24, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

How do you participate in a request for adminship?

How do you participate in a request for adminship? What I mean is, are there any guidelines on how to vote in one? (This is sort of a follow-up to my previous thread a few hours back, I just didn't have time to come back until now.) King of Scorpions 18:35, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

King of Scorpions, Wikipedia:Advice for RfA voters is essentially the guide. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 18:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Alex Noble Thanks! Will go check it out. King of Scorpions 19:01, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, King of Scorpions. Has anyone told you that your recent change of background colours in your signature makes it quite illegible? Dark blue text on a black background requires perfect vision to discern. And not everyone online has that perfect vision; maybe you might consider altering it a bit, please? Nick Moyes (talk) 22:51, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, I actually already did; here's my new one: King of Scorpions (my talk). Is it more readable? King of Scorpions (my talk) 22:53, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@King of Scorpions: Great stuff! Much clearer. Good luck with the mentorship, by the way. Looks like you've got a great person guiding you. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:55, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes:My mentor is teaching me a lot about Wikipedia... King of Scorpions (my talk) 23:02, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

What do i need to do before i can create my own article?

Hi. I would like to know, what must i do before i can start writing articles myself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbob99 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Sbob99, Writing articles is difficult. On a technical standpoint, however, you need to have an account registered for four days and have ten edits (I think). You can create the article as a draft immediately, however. It might be better to request the article's creation, though, so more experienced editors can help you create the article... King of Scorpions 19:41, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Help:Your first article provides some guidance. Wikipedia:Articles for creation provides process. Neither of these is about getting experienced editors to help you create an article. Rather, they provide instructions on whether a topic is article-worthy, and how to. Lastly, no one "owns" an article. With certain limits, once it exists, anyone can change it. David notMD (talk) 20:18, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Northern Ireland Flag

Theres is an editor who is changing the Northern Ireland to the Union Flag, on numerous wikipages this appears to be political see Cumbria for example. Wales + Scotland usually show their own flag, Northern Ireland should be the same. Is this acceptable?

Devokewater (talk) 20:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes, since as I've already explained to you - Northern Ireland does not have a flag. See WP:IRISH FLAGS, Template:Country data Northern Ireland#Other information, and one I didn't mention before Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Icons#Overbroad use of flags with politicized connotations. The latter states to "take care to avoid using them in inappropriate contexts" such as:

• "Use of the Ulster Banner to represent Northern Ireland in inappropriate contexts; see Northern Ireland flags issue and Wikipedia:Irish flags for details."

FDW777 (talk) 21:00, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@FDW777: The template actually shows the correct Northern Ireland flag. Devokewater Devokewater (talk) 21:12, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Is anyone allowed to comment on the ANI boards?

Ive been reading the ANI board a lot (hard stuff to read, but am trying to get a feel of what NOT to do. Also, the Wiki essays are absolutely fantastic,) and I was just curious if anybody is allowed to comment on various matters on the board? At times I wish I had the ability to an outsider's perspective, but I am uncertain if that is unwelcome, against a guideline, a policy, not how the board should be used, or if only people's involved or admins can comment on it. It is in fact a good tool for looking up how not to be an asshat, though. That is for sure. It points you to many guidelines and polices to learn, and how not to break them. As Yoda said: "Failure is the greatest teacher." XD

I hope this is the right place to ask this. Still have a lot to learn. SageSolomon (talk) 21:39, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@SageSolomon: Unless someone has been blocked or topic banned, they're generally allowed to post on ANI.

That said, ANI is for matters that require (near-)immediate administrator involvement that are not covered by other boards (such as the edit warring notice board or the vandalism noticeboard). This place and the WP:Help Desk

While non-admins can comment, it's not supposed to be a peanut gallery (...not supposed to) and comments (admin or otherwise) are supposed to be attempts to apply policy or common sense to a situation (not continue disputes, whether content or personal). That said, one of the things that lead to me becoming an admin was regularly commenting on ANI threads. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:20, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson: Actually that was very helpful. And yeah, the last thing I would attempt to do is to stir the pot, or bludgeon, or make any of those situations worse than what the people involved are already dealing with. That isnt any kind of help what-so-ever. From what I understand, its suppose to be an incident and conflict resolution board. Not a place to go take sides in an argument and continue drama for drama's sake. On that we agree. My question did get answered though, and for that I kindly thank you. ^_^ Is it the same way with the other boards and here at the Teahouse? Or should some places be left to more experienced editors and admins? SageSolomon (talk) 22:44, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@SageSolomon: I don't recall anywhere on this site where we say "admins only," though there are certain actions that can only be done by certain individuals. A good rule of thumb would probably be that if you can't help, don't post. Asking questions so you can help the site is helping us to help you, so don't worry about that; I mean situations where one has no useful information, insights, or capabilities (that sort of stuff tends to end up more on the administrators noticeboard rather than ANI specifically). Ian.thomson (talk) 23:17, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @SageSolomon: mind if I chip in with an observation? I lurked at WP:ANI quite a bit before I stood to become an administrator (which only happened the other week), and only chipped in rarely when I felt I could make a useful contribution, or maybe to announce an offer that I would go off and deal with the situation that had been raised. If you can help defuse a situation, that seems the best time to contribute. But it's also fair to say that we all work by community consensus, and often it is non admins expressing their opinions on what action to take about an issue raised at ANI that leads other admins to implement that action. I think this was one of my earliest contributions there - some two years ago.

Just like WP:ANI, you can also learn a lot by watching and reading posts here at the Teahouse. I'm sure I learned more here than I ever did at ANI! And just as at ANI, we welcome anyone contributing answers here, providing it's done in a spirit of friendliness and welcome. That's the ethos of the Teahouse. You know, sometimes a new editor can bring a perspective and relate better to another new editor facing difficulties than some of us older hands can. The trick is to know when to keep quiet and let others respond, and when to appreciate that one can offer just as good a helpful answer on another topic as anyone else can. If they decide to stick around, editors with a reasonable amount of experience might then want to sign themselves up as a 'Host' here. It's not a formal permission, or anything, but we do expect hosts to have a broad experience of editing, and we gauge that by asking new hosts to have a background of some 500 mainspace edits before they sign themselves up. I can't check how many edits you've made, thus far, as the tool to do so is not functioning right now. But I must applaud you on your sensible approach to understanding how Wikipedia works, as you've explained on your userpages, rather than diving in at the deep end right away, and ending up drowning as so many impatient new editors do. I wish you well on your own exciting Wikipedia adventure. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:31, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Propose undo of revision 940138053

A recent revision to Ann Walker of Lightcliffe in the External links section has me wondering if the revision is following proper policies. While I've made a number of revisions to this page and am the original author, I am still a relatively new editor and don't know all of the policies, nomenclature, markup, etc. to properly address this on the associated Talk:Ann Walker of Lightcliffe page. So I'm asking here for some advice.

1) Is this edit an issue to be considered as it is in violation of policies; and

2) If so, how do I address it without getting into a potential editwar with the editor that made the change?

Comparing edit 940138053 with the previous, you'll notice a paraphrased, simple description written by me was replaced with a straight copy and paste from the external link's mission statement.

I presume this edit may have been done by the non-profit's co-founder. I cannot ask them if they made these changes as I am not on speaking terms with them any longer, by their choice. Thus, I do not wish to revert the edit myself if it is found not to conform to policy. I really don't want to kick off any sort of confrontation with them. However, I cannot be 100% sure the co-founder is the source of the edit. The IP address (anonymous edit) is within 10 miles of the suspected co-founder's known place of residence. Thus, it is highly likely the co-founder is the source of the edit.

Any assistance and/or advice you can provide is greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Kimdorris (talk) 23:44, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Reverted as copyright violation. David notMD (talk) 02:26, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Much appreciated. Kimdorris (talk) 02:41, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Kimdorris: BTW, since you found out how to get the revid, when discussing it, you can use links like [[Special:Permalink/940138053]] to produce Special:Permalink/940138053, which is a link to the page appearance as of that revision. You can also use [[Special:Diff/940138053]] to produce Special:Diff/940138053, showing the difference between that revision and the previous one. As with all wikilinks, you can add a custom name for the link like this: [[Special:Diff/940138053|this change]], which produces this change. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 15:18, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the instruction. Kimdorris (talk) 23:01, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

The co-founder (using a signed in account) has now made additional edits to the Ann Walker Memorial External link description. This is again a copyright violation as copy is taken directly from the newly relaunched website (for which I have updated the URL).

When reverting these edits, please keep in mind another user removed the copy in Legacy section as well as External link for Ann Walker Memorial Foundation. Kimdorris (talk) 23:01, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Need help with an article's references

Hi fellow Wikipedians, I need help with an article's references. I am trying to publish an article on a Canadian journalist and diversity consultant, Hamlin Grange. However, I've tried to follow multiple reviews and guidelines provided by 3 different editors, resulting in a great deal of confusion. If somebody can please provide some clarification and review it now, that would be really helpful. The references include the following:

• Feature in Who's who in Black Canada 2
• An article on the subject in the Globe and Mail. It is the most widely read newspaper in Canada.
• Significant coverage in a HuffPost Canada article. Huffington Post is also a popular and reliable news media outlet.
• Coverage in a book on racial bias published by University of Toronto press.
• Significant coverage in an article in Ryerson Review of Journalism.

The subject has significant secondary notability, as well. He is a recipient of several awards and honors, all of which are covered independently in the aforementioned sources. He has published papers and co-authored 2 books with his wife. He serves on the board of several private and government organizations. All of this is covered in the sources above and others cited in the article.

I have seen articles with much less credibility and reliable sources assessed and published on Wikipedia. At this point, I am confused as to what I am doing wrong. One of the reviewers told me yesterday that the subject may be notable, but I need to fix inline citations. Another one told me today that I need to add more reliable sources. One other reviewer told me that there should be at least 3 reliable sources, which I have provided.

Sorry for the long post, but really need some clarification here. Thank you. FelixtheNomad (talk) 00:14, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Here is a small tidbit of clarification, FelixtheNomad. The article WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS states Wikipedia's policy on poorly sourced articles. I wish it was mandatory reading, as those useless articles are misleading a lot of new editors.--Quisqualis (talk) 02:37, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Quisqualis for your response and sharing this link. I agree, it should be mandatory reading. I will, therefore, quote something from it

"This essay is not a standard reply that can be hurled against anyone you disagree with who has made a reference to how something is done somewhere else. Though a lot of Wikipedia's styles are codified in policy, to a large extent minor details are not.".

My question remains. I do not want to argue over why other articles exist and this one cannot. I am trying to discuss the problem with this article and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS does not answer that. FelixtheNomad (talk) 12:22, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link Draft:Hamlin Grange and also pinging John from Idegon as the most recent reviewer. shoy (reactions) 15:02, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

• I had a quick run of the sources from a notability point of view. I think the Globe and Mail + Ryerson pieces, together, carry the day; however, you are not helped by the inclusion of subpar sources. Clearly other editors might have other opinions: WP:GNG says "multiple sources are generally expected"; my interpretation is that "multiple" starts at two, but I know others consider three a bare minimum; on the other hand, I am probably more picky than most about which sources qualify.

1. [2] is probably worthless. I strongly suspect a Who's Who scam (where you get a notice as long as you pay); the GH entry looks OK, but the next one is for a math teacher with no apparent claim to fame that says "over the years, he received praise from students and colleagues".
2. [3] is meh (no critical coverage, just an interview)
3. [4] Site header says "Corporate Communications, Writer & Photographer". 'nough said.
4. [5] is OK I think, though not very detailed
5. I cannot access [6]
6. [7] is a blog piece that contains Actually, I know who Hamlin Grange is. He's an old friend.... Well, it's honest at least, but it's not independent.
7. [8] is an interview (for the relevant part), not independent
8. [9] are plainly WP:ROUTINE mentions
9. [10] - interview, not independent (and a rather softball interview FWIW)
10. [11] is actually good
11. I cannot access [12] but I strongly suspect it's a blog based on the URL
12. [13] passing mention
13. [14] an award has value proportional to how well-respected the organization that gives it out is. I suspect Reelworld (red link) is not a significant organization but have not looked in detail.

Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:54, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

New editor need help

I am new to the wiki world and i thought i had everything in order after so much studying before i wrote the article on Beth Griffith manley. did i not have enough info in i researched artists that where on similar shows and studied the pattern of the article and where they pulled there sources. Please help.

messages i received: This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. and only see routine coverage stemming from her participation on a reality show. fails otherwise — Preceding unsigned comment added by RayMan419 (talk • contribs) 01:21, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

It's possible, RayMan419, you have just wasted some editing time writing an article that can never be published. See the sad possibility at Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Reality show participants known mainly or only for the show only very rarely are notable enough to be in Wikipedia. I assume Snooky is, but I have not checked.--Quisqualis (talk) 02:30, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Beth Griffith Manley. Possible that in time her music career may qualify, but for now, my opinion is WP:TOOSOON. David notMD (talk) 02:50, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia Related Question

I am a new editor in a course using the Wiki Education course program. My question relates to the classes given to each article. How are classes for each article determines and what classifications in forms of editing are looked at to determine the grade? Are there any tools that can help a new editor make their page stand out in order to earn a higher class? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhocine (talk • contribs) 01:25, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Dhocine: Check out this page: Wikipedia:Content_assessment. It has a nice table with details on what you are asking. RudolfRed (talk) 02:09, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Dhocine. You can also ask your course's Wiki-Ed advisor Shalor (Wiki Ed) about this at User talk:Shalor (Wiki Ed). -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:28, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Dhocine, also note that below Featured and good articles, which have an element of peer review, the bottom 5 layers don't have strict criteria, and can be set by anyone without discussion, hence can be a bit arbitrary and subjective. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 15:38, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Unofficial wikipedia page

The Wikipedia page for Cambridge school srinivaspuri (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_School_Srinivaspuri) is not made by the official personal from our organization. Please make us the formal admin of the page. We can provide all the necessary documents for the ownership of the organization and we can mail it from our organizations formal email id. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Csnpd (talk • contribs) 02:51, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Csnpd: Welcome to Wikipedia, but you misundertand how it works. See WP:OWN. Articles may be edited by anyone. If there are changes you'd like to propose, discuss on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 02:55, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Csnpd: Also, accounts must be controlled by only one person. You cannot have a group account, if that is what "we/us" means in your question. RudolfRed (talk) 02:57, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Csnpd. Please read Wikipedia:Ownership of content, but basically Wikipedia articles are not owned by the subjects they are written about and thus what you're rquesting be done is simply not possible. If you have concerns about the article or some of the content contained therein, and are connected to the school is something more than a casual way (e.g. an employee of the school), then also please carefully read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. There are ways you can discuss any concerns you have about the article or any content contained therein, but neither you nor anyone associated with the school is going to be granted any sort of "final editorial control" over the article. That's simply not what Wikipedia is about. If you'd like to find alternative to Wikipedia where you can have such control, please take a look at Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:01, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Entry about me

Hi, I am the subject of a Wikipedia entry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Martin_Taylor) that was written several years ago by a fan. It's factual but outdated. I am not very computer literate and would like for the entry to be updated. Can someone help? My personal blog is hoppinjohns.net. My business of 33 years I recently passed on to my niece (hoppinjohns.com). In 2018, in preparation to move overseas with my partner of 27 years (and husband of 10), I donated my culinary library (see https://www.hgtc.edu/about_hgtc/news_center/2018-john-taylor-donates-collection.html) to a culinary school and my papers to the College of Charleston (see https://www.postandcourier.com/features/renowned-cookbook-author-hoppin-john-taylor-donates-papers-to-college/article_ce492672-5344-11e8-b385-b301a012cf16.html). In 2018 I was awarded the Amelia Award by the Culinary Historians of New York for my expertise "in culinary history, with deep knowledge in the field. And ... for a having "demonstrated generosity and extraordinary support to others in the field, helping to shape and elevate culinary history into the academically-respected discipline that it is today." In 2019 I moved to Phnom Penh, Cambodia, with my husband, Mikel Herrington, who is the Peace Corps Country Director here. (seehttps://www.peacecorps.gov/cambodia/directors-welcome/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.74.216.2 (talk) 03:05, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 110.74.216.2. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Dealing with articles about yourself for some information as to how to receive assistance with this kind of thing. You might also want to look at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide#Steps for engagement since it also contains some information relevant to this type of thing. Finally, please try and remember Wikipedia:Wikipedia is in the real world in that you're not required to register for an account to edit Wikipedia, but your IP address will be freely visible to others if you edit using an unregistered account. Moreover, since Wikipedia has no way of know who someone really is, it has no way of know whether you are actually who you say you are. I'm not saying you're not, but there's just no way for anyone to know for sure. One of the benefits of registering for an WP:ACCOUNT is that you can have your identity verified as explained in Wikipedia:User names#Real names if you'd like there to be no doubt that you are who you say you are. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:14, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

John, I've taken the liberty of copying your post to the talk page of the article here, where interested editors may respond. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:06, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

General advice on filling out this entry

I've created a couple pages in the past and wanted to get back into it. Any advice on bulking up this page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_VanDerWerff

Also, for a picture, if I gain permission from the person who took the photograph I want to use, am I cleared to use it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaggieGlass (talk • contribs) 04:35, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy note: a totally different user has submitted Draft:Emily VanDerWerff many times once already; AfC patrollers deemed VanDerWerff not notable enough Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 07:34, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, MaggieGlass, and welcome to the Teahouse. Things have moved on a bit since you last created an article, in 2016. The WP:AFC process and the creation of Draft space mean that we are more picky about articles created in main space than we used to be: I don't think the original version you created of Barry Jenkins would survive in main space today; it would probably get moved to Draft space to be developed.

Rotideypoc41352's comments above suggest that the absolute first task for you in creating an article about VanDerWerff is finding the sources required to establish that she is notable. (Actually this is the absolute first task for creating any article - but since her notability has been examined in the past, you need to overcome that hurdle).

As for a picture: I advise not worrying about this until you know that you have established that the article is worth writing. But then - yes, to use a picture, the copyright holder (who is usually the photographer) must explicitly release the image under a suitable licence: see donating copyright material. Note that it is not sufficient for them to give permission to use the picture in Wikipedia: one of Wikipedia's guiding principles is that the material in it be reusable by anybody for any purpose, as long as it is attributed. --ColinFine (talk) 10:54, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

my bio of the life is rejected will you help me thanks

hello david i wrote about my life and all bio life and its been rejected bt wikipedia tem. and they said if you want to subit article or profile which accepted wikipedia ask for help so i came here for help how can i make my wikipedia account world wide with my bio let me know thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hard Singh Rapper (talk • contribs) 10:21, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Hard Singh Rapper Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have a common misunderstanding about Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not like social media where people can tell the world about themselves. Wikipedia is a different type of website. It is an encyclopedia, and as an encyclopedia Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say about a subject that meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability; in this case, the definition of a notable musician. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves, in helping their career, or in enhancing search results for them. Please also understand that autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged per our autobiography policy. If you have reviewed the notability criteria and truly feel that you merit an article here, you shouldn't be the one to write it.

Also understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one. You cannot lock it to the text that you might prefer, or prevent others from editing it. Any information about you, good or bad, can be in the article as long as it appears in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. Please keep this in mind. 331dot (talk) 10:29, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Hard Singh Rapper: In case it wasn't clear, click on the blue links in the text above to read the details of those policies if you need further clarification. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:11, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Question about Current Events Section

Can an experienced editor give a good “definition” of the Current Events Portal. Recently it has been unclear what is “notable” for that portal. Something that effects a lot of people in one country vs no one in another country.

Thanks for the help Elijahandskip (talk) 14:32, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Elijahandskip, you might want to see Wikipedia:How the Current events page works if you haven't already. The portal follows pretty much the same criteria as the In the News section of the main page, which can be found at Wikipedia:In the news#significance. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 15:45, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip: Note that, like most all pages, it has its own talk page at Portal talk:Current events. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:14, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

"noindex" tag on new articles

I've noticed that some new articles are set to "noindex", like Shanelle Arjoon. What does that depend on? --Gwenda73 (talk) 16:00, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Gwenda73: See WP:NOINDEX. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:20, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

​New articles are hidden from Google until they have been reviewed by someone or until 90 days have passed. This is mainly to prevent spam and attack pages from appearing in Google results. – Thjarkur (talk) 18:43, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

How do I delete a Wiki page ?

I own legal rights to a page listed in wiki due to unethical editing my page has infomations which are demeaning and incorrect. How do I delete that page from Wiki. i do not want any information on Wiki listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishal210891 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Vishal210891, you're going to have to give us more details here. The only scenario when you would a legitimate legal right to get a page removed is if it was a copyright violation. If it is a page about you, we might sometimes delete it on request, but only if we should have never had a page - i.e. a completely non notable person. See WP:BLPDEL. We generally don't just delete pages though because someone told us to. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 17:31, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

If this is about Raheja Developers, there is absolutely no way we're going to delete an article because it has (sourced) negative information on your company. We report what the sources say, and if the sources don't reflect positively on your business, then that's what we'll write. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 17:36, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Posting a New York Times Week in Review 1993 archival photo of Jewell Jackson McCabe Candidate for NAACP Presidency in 1993

We would like to post a New York Times archival photo on the Wikipedia page of feminist, businesswoman, activist — Jewell Jackson McCabe from her historic barrier breaking race in 1993 for President of the NAACP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.28.125 (talk) 17:13, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

• There's several issues here. First, you say, "we". That makes me think you are representing some company or other organization. You should be aware that sharing of accounts is not allowed; see WP:NOSHARING for more about that. Also, see WP:COI for our policies about conflicts of interest and disclosure. As for the photo itself, if ran in the New York Times, they almost certainly own the copyright. In theory, you could contact the NYT and ask them to upload the photo to Commons and re-license it under one of our acceptable licenses, but it's exceptionally unlikely they would be willing to do that. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:49, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Jewell Jackson McCabe [15] Post: New York Times “Week and Review”1993 Archival Photo Head Shot of Jewell Jackson McCabe Candidate for NAACP President

Trying to have Wikipedia update Jewell Jackson McCabes Wikipedia profile to include photo of her groundbreaking first woman in 1993 serious candidate for NAACP President. The Sunday April 1993 the NYTS Week and Review section — cover page lower left hand corner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bijounoir13 (talk • contribs) 18:03, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

How to get a Wikipedia authorized photo posted on my Wikipedia page

requesting a Wikipedia approved photo on my Wikipedia page Jewell Jackson McCabe  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bijounoir13 (talk • contribs) 18:14, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bijounoir13 this was already answered a few sections up, under the heading "Posting a New York Times Week in Review 1993 archival photo of Jewell Jackson McCabe Candidate for NAACP Presidency in 1993". Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:56, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link Jewell Jackson McCabe. The article should have a photo. Bijounoir13 If you want to contact Mrs. McCabe and see if she has another photo that she owns the copyright to or one which the photographer will assign rights to Wikipedia, there are instructions here Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. If you get stuck you can ping me on my talk page. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:14, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Page title change

Where do I go to suggest a page title be modified? I wrote an article on the 1941 swing song Yes, Indeed! (1941 song) and there is a page for a simliarly titled but different song that reads "Yes Indeed (song). I think the 2018 song should have the year in the description for clarity. Where do I go with such a request? Thanks. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 20:22, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@DiamondRemley39: Hola y bienvenidos a la casa de te. Page title changes what we call moving a page can be nominated at requested moves. Click the link for more info. Interstellarity (talk) 23:14, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, DiamondRemley39. A relevant bit of policy is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC: if one instance of the name is much more likely to be what people search for than any other, then this meaning is the "primary topic", and does not need a parenthetical disambiguator. In this case though, a quick search suggests to me that while there are more hits on the 2018 song, the difference is not overwhelming, so probably neither of them is a primary topic. --ColinFine (talk) 23:50, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

WP:RM is the place for discussions, but for uncontroversial moves you can WP:MOVE the page yourself. Since this was now an WP:INCDAB I've moved the 2018 article back to its original title, Yes Indeed (Lil Baby and Drake song). – Thjarkur (talk) 23:55, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Fundraising mentioned in article

I am uneasy with the extent that fundraising content exists in Ann Walker of Lightcliffe, including body of article and External links. Any Wikipedia policy? David notMD (talk) 20:34, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree. I have removed both from the article. Maproom (talk) 22:37, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you David notMD and Maproom for looking into this issue. I was unsure as well. Appreciate the assistance. Kimdorris (talk) 00:05, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

could someone please protect the site Connie Glynn?

An anonymous user repeatedly commits vandalism on the site, I have no desire to revise this five times. Could someone please protect the site temporarily for registered users only? Or how else do you deal with repeated vandalism? Thanks for help! Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 23:24, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Gyanda. I have put a final warning on that IP's user talk page. You can request page protection at WP:RPP. --ColinFine (talk) 23:55, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much, he already again did vandalism on the site :-( --Gyanda (talk) 23:59, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Adding a low res book cover image

I'm looking for an easy step-by-step guide to adding book cover images to articles about books. Any help? Thanks.TFM1000 (talk) 23:34, 12 February 2020 (UTC)TFM1000

Hello, TFM1000, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid I can't find a step by step guide to this. The relevant policy is at WP:NFCC, the general guide to uploading is at Help:Upload. You need to upload to Wikipedia as a non-free image (not to Commons) and use the Template:Non-free use rationale book cover as the rationale. --ColinFine (talk) 00:04, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

from sandbox to the world

So now I have an article in my sandbox. How do I get the world to see it?

sharable insights

Sometimes we humans see deeply into the nature of things, assisted by the convergence of influences upon his or her life unique opportunities for participation are evolutionarily appropriate, but ask, is this such a forum? I dunno so here it goes: Two Statements: Dark Matter is concentrated spacetime; and Dark Energy is Entropy. Rob Richardson MD