Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2600:1004:b01e:280b:dd23:6623:e67b:b523 (talk) at 17:26, 5 May 2020 (→‎Info on Canimals). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


tracing source of quote

Problem of induction has footnotes 18 & 19 referring to 2 quotes. I can't trace either note to a page in a volume with a title. Please help. Thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 12:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC) TBR-qed (talk) 12:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The quote for ref 18 is on page 38 at isbn 978-0-19-825060-9. Ref 19 doesn't refer to a quote. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:27, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @TBR-qed: - Did this answer help you or do you need more assistance? GalendaliaChat Me Up 07:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for asking. David's answer did the trick.TBR-qed (talk) 14:54, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question About improving a article.

I want to ask about improving a article.I want to improve Shah Sulaimān Nūri and want to give more detail about the person.but whenever i add some information,some user undo my contribution although i add reliable and 3rd party source and citation Saadulhassan2 (talk) 17:36, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Saadulhassan2, You did not provide appropriate sources, much of it appeared unsourced. Also, your additions were not neutral and in an encyclopedic tone, nor did they follow our manual of style. Our pages are for writing factual and succint accounts of our subjects, not long winding hagiographies or devotionals. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 18:28, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
CaptainEek, Ok I get it but what if the article's basic things cant be added in article and biography article become incomplete without these details?what should i do then? User:Saadulhassan2
@Saadulhassan2: Look for professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources about the subject, and then summarize the relevant parts and then paraphrase that summary (to avoid copyright violations). This guide I wrote has a section on finding sources. Also, write in a plain and simple way that even someone who hates the subject has to agree with what you wrote. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ian.thomson.Thank you very much.I want to ask one more question. the source which I cite on a article should be available online or I can also cite a source which is not available on internet? User:Saadulhassan2
Greetings @Saadulhassan2: - To answer your question about the sources they need to able to be accessed on the internet (preferably free websites if you can) however free registration and membership sites are ok, however, my POV is they are not very conducive to a user reading an article to have to sign up or pay for anything. You can have a look at WP:Cite and WP:BLP as well as in the article Ian linked in his response. On your user page, you should have a welcome page from someone (if not go to my talk page and let me know and I will happily put one up for you) that will have a link to the Wikipedia Adventure which will help you get very well acquainted with WP. Please do let us know if you need any further help or if you are ok now. GalendaliaChat Me Up 07:33, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Galendalia thank you very much for your support.I have welcome page.One more thing i want to know is what happen if the sources given are in some local national langauge i.e Urdu.In this case ,will my source be considered as reliable source or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saadulhassan2 (talkcontribs) 19:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Saadulhassan2: Sources in a foreign language are fine. It's polite to indicate what the language is, and even more polite to provide a translation of the title as well as original title; if you are using citation templates, they have parameters for both (language=, trans-title=). If there are also English-language sources for some of the information you are adding, it's best to add those as well for reader convenience, but we try to use the best sources we can, and that means sometimes using foreign-language sources. On offline sources, I have to politely disagree with Galendalia: not everything is online, so offline sources are fine, but the citation needs to include enough information for a reader to find it in a library: full title, author name, year and other publication info for a book (ideally also the ISBN if the book is recent enough) or name of periodical and date for a newspaper or magazine, page number for a book and if possible also for a periodical. (There are some very talented searchers here, and people with subscriptions to heavy-duty databases, who can sometimes track something down online with enough of the information, but the important thing is that a reader could theoretically access it.) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Saadulhassan2: - Hi I never said anything about offline resources. I was mentioning about restricted sites in which the user would need to pay a membership fee to access; for example, I was just copy editing an article and a few of the links point to a membership page, but yet perusing that same website, I found the exact same information, so I changed the source. I hope this helps clear things up. Thanks GalendaliaChat Me Up 20:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Galendalia: You said To answer your question about the sources they need to able to be accessed on the internet (preferably free websites if you can) however free registration and membership sites are ok, however my POV is they are not very conducive to a user reading an article to have to sign up or pay for anything. Emphasis added. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Saadulhassan2: You are allowed to use offline sources, as long as they are reliable and independent from the subject and they are cited properly as Yngvadottir said. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry that was my fault, I misread the end of the statement. I have stricken that out. Thanks for pointing it out~ GalendaliaChat Me Up 21:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much User:Tenryuu and User:Galendalia for your support and help. Now i am clear with my questions.Thank you very much again. User:Saadulhassan2 —Preceding undated comment added 21:57, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need assistance with a user

Hi. I would like a neutral person to please assist with another editor who has continued to make me feel uneasy. I am a new editor. I have been trying to be helpful. Also, if you would please read the section called "pneumothorax" on my talk page. That is the problem I am having. I have asked this user to refrain from further comments in that section. They have not done so. I feel this is harassment. Any assistance would be appreciated. Wikipedia is supposed to be friendly space. Thank you! Battykin (talk) 20:53, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Battykin: Added Template:Closed to the talk page section to emphasize that you want the conversation to be over. Unfortunately, everyone's passion to improve articles (combined with communicating without verbal tone and body language) can lead to heated discussion sometimes. There are 6 million other articles we can work on. From one "batty" to another! GoingBatty (talk) 21:10, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reply, but you have deleted the first section on my Talk page which I did not want removed. Also, I did not want to archive that section. I simply wanted the user to respect my request of ending the discussion there. I still want that on my talk page in case it happens again. I don't want to archive it.Battykin (talk) 21:20, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Battykin: Oops! I tried to look at your archive, but accidentally archive your first section. Sorry about that! I have restored it for you. GoingBatty (talk) 21:26, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Me thinks GoingBatty has finally gone batty and is talking to their alto ego! Fly batty, fly away! Lol GalendaliaChat Me Up 09:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Galendalia: I should have changed my name to WentBatty a long time ago. :-) GoingBatty (talk) 02:57, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@GoingBatty: lol GalendaliaChat Me Up 03:27, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

why wouldn't an article in the Simple English Wikipedia also appear in Wikipedia

My header pretty well sums up my question. It's prompted by finding Heather Heyer in the Simple English Wikipedia but not in Wikipedia. Cheers! Tarkiwi25 (talk) 01:04, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tarkiwi25: Welcome to Wikipedia. Each Wikipedia i a seperate project and articles are created by volunteers. Also, each Wikipedia has its own rules and guidelines for what may be an article. So either no one at this Wikipedia has taken an interest in creating that article, or the subject of that article is not Notable under the guidelines here. RudolfRed (talk) 01:43, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I found that Heather Heyer exists as a redirect to part of another article. Is that what you are looking for?
Forgot to sign. Isn't signbot supposed to catch that? RudolfRed (talk) 01:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
By default, Sinebot won't sign for experienced editors. You can opt in as described at User:Sinebot#Opting back in for experienced editors. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tarkiwi25, RudolfRed, and David Biddulph: I tried to connect Heather Heyer at Wikidata, but I receive a message stating "Could not save due to an error. The save has failed." Any clue how to resolve the error? GoingBatty (talk) 03:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@GoingBatty: That sounds like a question to ask at Wikidata rather than here. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:15, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@David Biddulph: Of course you're right. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 12:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, the answer was that the error was generated because Heather Heyer is a redirect on the English Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 02:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arrgh. I wrote a response but it got lost--and now I'm going batty--because Going Batty got in before I managed to publish it. Thanks, y'all.Tarkiwi25 (talk) 03:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And the answer for English Wikipedia would be that people who are only known because of one event e.g. victims of an attack, are usually not notable enough for a separate article about them. Which is why Heather Heyer has a section about her on Charlottesville car attack, but she would not be notable enough for a separate article. Relevant guideline is WP:BLP1E. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:43, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft article / Draft:Mohammad Reza Mesbah

Keyhan narimannia (talk) 11:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you haven't read what it says in the submission box on your draft: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,643 pending submissions waiting for review."? --David Biddulph (talk) 12:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Keyhan narimannia: I made some layout updates to your draft. You can continue working on it while you're waiting by inserting additional reliable sources. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
David Biddulph yes of course, thank you. Keyhan narimannia (talk) 12:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
GoingBatty thank you for edit.Keyhan narimannia (talk) 12:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Quite a number of the Wikilinks in the article point to articles in the Persian Wikipedia, making then all-but-useless in an English Wikipedia article. Is this standard practice?--Quisqualis (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Quisqualis yes, it's possible. the links are who use Persian wikipedia, are a movie or an director who are have just Persian wikipedia. we can use their or not use. however they are just some of links. Even WP:RS in other languages can be used, see WP:NOENG. Keyhan narimannia (talk) 07:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keyhan narimannia, I think Quisqualis was asking the other hosts. I don't believe it is standard practice, and they should be removed. Neither en.wiki or Persian wiki are reliable sources and the standards for sources and wikilinks are not the same. John from Idegon (talk) 13:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Replying to a comment on my page

Wabends (talk) 03:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)A tag has been put on top of my page that my biography reads as if someon has been paid to edit th epage. That is false because I have not paid anyone to do so. How do I respond to the original message placed on my page? Thanks in advance for your help. Wabends (talk) 03:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wabends: If you are referring to the Daniel Asua Wubah article, and you are actually Daniel Asua Wubah, then you shouldn't be editing the article, per Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline. If that is the case, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI. GoingBatty (talk) 04:05, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping to @Newslinger:. GoingBatty (talk) 04:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So, undisclosed paid is wrong, because you created the article about yourself? That is now the least of your worries, as the article has been proposed for deletion. Per Proposed deletions, "You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason. Although not required, you are encouraged to explain why you object to the deletion, either in your edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, do not replace it." David notMD (talk) 11:49, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed deletion tag removed by an article-independent editor, and undisclosed paid tag removed. Wabends should declare on User page the COI of creating an article about self. David notMD (talk) 13:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Wabends, as GoingBatty mentioned earlier, Wikipedia works best when articles are written by editors who don't have a conflict of interest. If you are Daniel Asua Wubah, then you wouldn't be considered a paid editor, although we strongly recommend that you follow the plain and simple conflict of interest guide. — Newslinger talk 13:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Wabends: I have add a {{Connected contributor}} to the article's talk page so that anyone who is going to edit the article knows of your affiliation with it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia servers slow? (lagging)?

Wikipedia servers slow? (lagging)?

hi. Are wiki servers experiencing overall too much demand due to the pandemic?. Whenever i try to edit like very large pages its very unresponsive and sometimes lags when i type. There is no problem with my computers ram or other. Rahbab Chowdhury (talk) 11:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MRC2RULES:, to the best of my knowledge, there weren't any technical issues in the last few days. While the pandemic has caused a bump in readership, we've had more before, and it hasn't increased the editing load, so I don't believe that's the issue. There were some technical issues a week or so ago. Major drags (even if the site ultimately loaded) would normally cause a bump in reports at places like down detector, which doesn't show anything in the last 24hrs. Are you saying it's slow, or it's slower than it was before C19? Nosebagbear (talk) 10:39, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

slower than before Rahbab Chowdhury (talk) 11:08, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Headline with artist name

Hey again and thanks for all the help I have gotten here so far!


currently working in my sandbox. Will the headline appear when i send the article for review. Like this:

Peter Lodwick (right font) __________________________________________________________________________ From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Best May MaySundAnd (talk) 12:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MaySundAnd: The text "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" currently appears on User:MaySundAnd/sandbox, and will appear when you move it to the draft space (as you can see on any other draft, like Draft:Beirut Yacht Club). However, the page name should be Draft:Peter Lodwick. Once it becomes an article, the page name will be simply Peter Lodwick. Keep working to add the reliable sources, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, MaySundAnd, and welcoe back to the Teahouse. Your draft User:MaySundAnd/sandbox has a button at the top that says "Submit your draft for review". When you think it is ready for review pick that button, and it will go on the list of drafts waiting for review. Review might take days to months, since we are all volunteers here, and work on what we choose. If a reviewer decides that your draft is suitable for Wikipedia, they will move it to main article space, and it will be named as an article.
However, I'm afraid that if you submit it in its present state, I am confident that it will quickly be declined. This is for several reasons, but the main one is that, as far as I can see, the draft does not cite a single independent source. This is a problem because Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything said or published by the subject or their associates, employers, or clients. All Wikipedia articles should be almost entirely based on material that has been reliably published about the subject by people who have no connection with the subject - for an artist, this most often means reviews in major publications (provided the reviews talk about the artist, not just about the works), or books from reputable publishers which contain substantial material about the subject.
This leads to the more fundamental point: Wikipedia accepts articles only about subjects which are notable in Wikipedia's special sense of the word - which normally means exactly what I have said above - that there are sufficient reliably published independent sources about the subject. Not every artist meets this criterion, but if the subject does not, then an article about them is not possible. Since your sources are not independent, at present your draft does nothing to establish that Lodwick is notable, and the draft will not be accepted.
There are some lesser problems with the draft as well. One is that even the sources which are cited are not cited in a useful way. Ideally each sentence, or at least each paragraph, should be cited to a source (and a place in the source) which supports the specific information in that sentence or paragraph: without this, a reader has no way of checking whether the information in the article is correct. (Even if it was initially correct, somebody may have changed it since - this is the encyclopaedia which anybody can edit). I don't think a reviewer would decline a draft just because a few statements were not sourced, but I think they would decline one with no inline citations. Also, there is far too much detail in the draft. This is an encyclopaedia, not the artist's website.
The amount of detail makes me wonder if you are associated with Lodwick in some way. If you are, please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's recommendations on editing with a conflict of interest. If further, you are doing this in any way in a paid capacity (eg if you are employed by one of the companies or theatres mentioned), you are required to disclose this - see paid editing. --ColinFine (talk) 15:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ColinFinefor the reply!

Hi again, after looking at this again I am confused about why this article cannot be published as there are so many other detailed wiki articles out there that also seem not to have independent sources but similar sources like the ones listed in this article. There are also aricles about musicions who have done almost nothing but still are recond as "notable". The artist im writing about has been active for years and done a lot internationally and in Norway, so why shouldnt he be "notable"?

The references are not done yet, but shouldnt the links provided counts as independent sources? Althoug they are not from a magazine or newspaper. Or else it will be very hard to find any links at all.

Best May — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaySundAnd (talkcontribs) 13:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MaySundAnd: Just because there are many articles that need to be improved doesn't change the criteria for creating a new article - see the essay Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. Your help in improving the other articles (or marking them for a notability check or deletion) would be appreciated! Regarding your draft at User:MaySundAnd/sandbox, some of the references may be independent sources. The six generic links after the official home page should be removed, as they don't specifically mention Lodwick. If would be helpful if you used inline citations in the draft - see Wikipedia:Inline citation for instructions on how to do this. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:10, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Summary
 – OP indefinitely blocked as a sock puppet. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I spent a long time editing and adding detail to the Augustus article, and then somebody came and deleted it all. It discouraged me from contributing to Wikipedia and it feels like I just wasted lots of my time writing it out and having it deleted. JuliusCaesar16 (talk) 23:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JuliusCaesar16 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It is discouraging to have one's work reverted by another editor, and it happens to everyone. However, it is not permanently lost, it is still in the article edit history. The other editor invited you to the article talk page to explain what your intentions are with your edits. The other editor was concerned that you were making such a large and extensive change to a featured article, and would just like to hear more about it from you. 331dot (talk) 00:02, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@JuliusCaesar16: While expanding articles is great, in this edit you added a lot of unsourced material. Wikipedia does is cite, summarize, and paraphrase professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources, without addition, nor commentary. I'll leave a summary of some relevant points on your talk page. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Complicated situation

Some days ago, User:Jaycharan Khandey turned Ghasidas from an article into a redirect to Guru Ghasidas. Guru Ghasidas page was previously a redirect to Ghasidas, where the main article was stored. Was this appropriate from a technical point of view? Seems like a cut and paste move to me. I think the article should stay at Ghasidas, since most academic works don't call him Guru Ghasidas, only his followers do. If the move was indeed inappropriate, can someone please fix it? TryKid (talk) 05:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TryKid, honestly, they shouldn't have done that without some sort of consensus, though, both articles were effectively the same page, so I think the editor was simply bold and went ahead with the edit, albeit without an edit summary. Comparing this revision of Ghasidas with the current one of Guru Ghasidas shows that one of the pages had been completely copy-pasted from the other, so the redirect was sutiable. — Yours, Berrely • TalkContribs 08:56, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, TryKid, and welcome to the4 Teahouse. Berrely is quite correct that this shouldf have been done by a regular move, not a copy&paste move. Since the target had some history, an admin or a page mover would have been needed to perform the move, and might well have insisted on a discussion first. I have opened a discussion at Talk:Ghasidas#Copy and paste move and loss of history and I would urge you to join the discussion there. Iam, willing to do a history merge once there is consensus on which name to use for the article. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

use my own images from one account to other account

Dear Wikipedia Members and editors

I uploaded my work images and my picture from one account which was Shahkars Architecture and used it in my other account which is Shahkarshah and I got deletion of page what should I do to fix it, kindly help me Shahkarshah (talk) 08:35, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shahkarshah, you have been repeatedly told on your talk page that Wikipedia is not a place to promote yourself. Why is that so difficult to understand? M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 08:45, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As well as that, it is important to know that Wikipedia is not just a place to host your images. Unless you plan to use an image for a valid reason, you cannot just put an image on Wikipedia like it is a place to put photos for your CV. Websites like [Imgur.com Irgur] are made for that. — Yours, Berrely • TalkContribs 08:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Altering my references

I recently noticed that an editor, following on from me, has been altering my references. Everytime {{cite xxx}} was mentioned he capitalized it I.E.{{cite xxx}}. Why? How does this help my code? What benefit is there? Broichmore (talk) 08:51, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Broichmore, I'll assume that you mean the author has been capitalising the "C" in cite. All templates, regardless of what you name them, start with a capital letter. If you were to transclude a template that didn't start with a capital letter, it will automatically redirect to the one that does. So really, this simplified matters. Generally, citation templates aren't capitalised, so I find it confusing as to why the editor was doing this, but really, it doesn't make a difference to the code. — Yours, Berrely • TalkContribs 09:06, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
BerrelyThat's exactly what I mean. I just noticed that you cleverly worked out what I was saying, I had not noticed before, that, (in this case) on the edit page a capital C is displayed on the article pane as c; -- I.E. I encoded Cite xxx, but on the top page (here) it looks like cite xxx. However your incorrect, when you say, all templates, regardless of what you name them, start with a capital letter. In the editing box they pull down on the tab as small case, and when you create the reference the template inserts the code in small case as {{cite xxx}}. When I grew up and learned to write code the style for coding was small case as was the internet... Your point on transclusion is interesting, I didn't know that, but does it apply here? The citation in the story text pushes the user to right cite in the references section whether it's capitalized or not. Hope that makes sense, this is stretching my command of English. In summary it looks like a waste of time on his part as well as being incorrect; or have I missed something here? Broichmore (talk) 09:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Broichmore, generally no damage has been done, though I would recommend probably leaving a message on the talk page of the user saying these edits are unnecessary. About my capitalisation point, I mean that, even if I were to link {{smiley}} it would link to {{Smiley}}, as templates have to start with a capital letter in the template space. If this is confusing feel free to ask about what confuses you. — Yours, Berrely • TalkContribs 10:05, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Broichmore: All templates do start with a capital letter (assuming they start with a letter at all). By this we mean the actual template name, e.g. shown at Category:Citation Style 1 templates. When you call a template it's optional whether to start with a capital. The same capitalized template is called in either case. It's not limited to templates. All Wikipedia page names start with a capital letter but it's optional in links. For example, Cat and cat make the same link to the article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat. {{lowercase title}} can display the name with lowercase at top of the page, e.g. at iPad, but the real page name is still "IPad". {{cite xxx}} and {{Cite xxx}} both call Template:Cite xxx, a template which happens to display its own name. A template does not know whether it was called with upper or lowercase so it always does exactly the same in both cases. We usually display code by placing it inside <nowiki>...</nowiki> as I did before. Sometimes we also add <code>...</code> to make it stand out from other text. Please post an example of the changes to your edits. I looked at many of your recent edits without finding it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:17, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Broichmore: In other words, {{Cite xxx}} is a peculiar (and confusing) case that is used for documentation, transcluding the wiki code {{[[Wikipedia:Citation templates#Examples|cite xxx]]}}. While it's probably not helpful to make an edit to a page just to "correct" the first letter of template transclusions to capital letters, it may be done automatically by some tools while being used to make other changes/corrections. Don't let it bother you – remember that none of us WP:OWNs the articles we work on – they are a collaborative effort, and an article of any reasonable size and value may have edits by hundreds or even thousands of editors over time. Some people do the hard work of finding sources and writing about them, while others (often called wikignomes) prefer to do the still necessary work of cleaning up typography and other minor issues. It's one big, ostensibly happy, ecosystem. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DIEUDONNE NAHIMANA

My article Dieudonne Nahimana has been moved to draftplace, and I want to remove it from there. What should I do? Ppt2003 (talk) 09:36, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ppt2003. The draft Draft:Dieudonné Nahimana was declined today for lack of reliable independent sources. You immediately resubmitted it without (at first) making any changes.
Please read up on notability and citing sources. In order for Wikipedia to accept an article about Nahimana, you will need to find several places where people who have no connection with him have chosen to write at some length about him - articles based on interviews (such as the Guardian and Iwacu articles) are not regarded as independent, and cannot contribute to notability. Note that candidates for office are not usually regarded as notable simply by virtue of that candidature: see POLOUTCOMES.
I see that, after re-submitting it, you did make a change; but your change was to replace a blog (an unreliable resource) by a Google-translation of a probably reliable but not independent source that was already cited. This does not improve the draft's notability (and Google translate is itself not regarded as reliable - sources in other languages are acceptable if they are reliably published)
I must warn you that if a reviewer happens to pick the draft up before you have made substantial improvements to it, they are likely to regard your resubmission as disruptive editing.
Please step back and pause, read the links above, and then spend time looking for substantial, reliable, and independent sources about Nahimana - and if you can't find any, conclude that it is TOOSOON, and give up. I am guessing that you are trying to get this draft accepted quickly because of the 2020 Burundian general election. But Wikipedia has no deadline, Wikipedia may not be used for promotion of any kind, and any attempt to get your draft accepted in a rush is likely to irritate reviewers.
While I have been writing this response, the draft has been declined a second time, and you have resubmitted it, again without making further changes. You are now definitely in the area of disruptive editing, and likely to get your account blocked if you continue. --ColinFine (talk) 10:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Declined twice, and then Rejected, which is more severe. The comment by the last reviewer is that candidates for office are rarely notable, and to not resubmit unless he wins the election. David notMD (talk) 17:12, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am in a fix about 3RR

If I revert the 6 unsourced pending edits (till this edit) made on this article, will I be blocked for violating WP:3RR?— Vaibhavafro💬 10:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vaibhavafro, no, it would be a single revert. Guy (help!) 11:03, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need administeator attention

There are many biased editor who are continuously vandalising the pageShakir Ali Noori ,needs an uegei administrator attention to Shakir Ali Noori Maizbhandariya (talk) 14:21, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Maizbhandariya: Welcome to the Teahouse! Removing puffery, confirming that the article matches the sources, and being concerned about a conflict of interest is neither vandalism nor bias. If you have a conflict of interest, please stop editing the article and use the talk page to make suggestions and declare your conflict. If you don't have a conflict, then please consider the "bold, revert, discuss" method: If you boldly make an edit, and someone else reverts it, then discuss it on the article talk page, such as why you think the {{COI}} template should be removed. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My user page sandbox data was deleted

I am new to using Wikipedia pages, i created userpage and wrote my info to sandbox. afterthat was the DATA was deleted and received warning email to delete all the page if i try to create like that data. I dont know how to use wiki. Please advice me step by step. thanks Ahmed 85.76.112.244 (talk) 14:22, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ahmed - welcome to the Teahouse! What was the user ID you were using to create the userpage in your sandbox? GoingBatty (talk) 14:39, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ahmed, if the content in your sandbox contained personal information, it may have been speedily deleted for being promotional, which is against Wikipedia policy. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding new texts on a subject?

Dear editors. I have just published the following book: 'The Lives And Extraordinary Adventures Of Fifteen Tramp Writers From The Golden Age Of Vagabondage'-- ISBN: 978-1627310840. Yes, I'm the author and so there is a conflict of interest, but the book introduces dozens of books by 15 tramps who wrote from first hand experience and only one of these (Bart Kennedy), is referenced on your page titled "Tramp". A page on Wiki' for "Vagabond" only brings up the TV series. I don't want to be accused of self-promotion, so do you have an editor with an interest in this area of knowledge who is able to provide a neutral update for the benefit of readers who might be interested in the subject?

Kind regards, and stay safe from the pestilence.

Ian Cutler

P.S. my Wiki' user name is TrampLiterature but I'm not happy about trying to add info myself. TrampLiterature (talk) 14:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@TrampLiterature: Welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse! Congratulations on the book, and thank you for recognizing your conflict of interest (COI). I'm sure you did a lot of research for your book, and your knowledge would be helpful in improving Wikipedia. It's fine that you don't want to update articles yourself. One thing you could do is discuss the topic with other knowledgeable editors on the article talk pages, such as Talk:Tramp and Talk:Vagrancy. I suggest you start small (don't spend the time writing sweeping changes to the established articles), and disclose your COI if you are recommending your book as a reliable source. Thanks for your interest in improving Wikipedia! GoingBatty (talk) 14:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking clarification on Nikola Tesla’s Background

 Julieribar (talk) 14:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Julieribar: Welcome to the Teahouse! If the Nikola Tesla article doesn't have the clarification you're looking for, you can follow the links in the References/Further reading/External links at the bottom of the article, or post a question at Talk:Nikola Tesla which might help improve the article, or submit a question to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 14:54, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 – Merging sections together. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nikola Tesla Backgound History Discrepancy

Hello,

It appears that Nikola Tesla had a serious illness, which interrupted his studies, while in in high school in Karlovac, which is in present day Croatia. His Wikipedia page indicates it was cholera, but his high school’s Wikipedia page indicates in was malaria. Could someone please provide some clarification?

The Nikola Tesla Wikipedia page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

The Gymnasium Karlovac Wikipedia page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gymnasium_Karlovac

Thank you!

 Julieribar (talk) 15:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Julieribar: You have a great eye for detail! This would be an excellent point for you to ask at Talk:Nikola Tesla. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 15:23, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you change the name of a file uploaded on Wikipedia and not commons?

Hello! I uploaded a cover art for an album here and I wonder if there is a way to change the name of the file, since I accidentally wrote it wrong (and it bothers me quite a bit). Do I have to upload it again or can you ask for it to be renamed in some way? Thank you in advance. DariuZzandor 15:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It'll need an admin or file mover; see WP:MOF. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
David Biddulph, Thank you for the quick answer, seems like it is already fixed. DariuZzandor 15:45, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Yep _ saw the post and sorted it. Had it been on Commons (which it isn't) one would use the MORE>MOVE tab and dropdown to request a change by a Commons admin. But I've now fixed this as it was on Wikipedia. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Moyes, Thank you very much! Regarding uploading cover arts on Commons, should I do that instead? I think some more experienced editors wrote somewhere that it should only be uploaded on Wikipedia since it isn't free to use. Is that correct? DariuZzandor 16:01, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DariuZzandor: My apologies - I didn't mean to mislead you. You did absolutely the right thing with a cover picture. In my mind I was referring to any Creative Commons image that you needed to get moved. Sorry for sowing any seeds of doubt through my failure to be clear. See WP:NFCI for the advice on non-free image use. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nick Moyes, No problem at all, thank you for clarifying! DariuZzandor 17:12, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

editing or adding new information to existing WIKIPEDIA entries

A wikipedia reviewer rejected an article I submitted but he suggested to edit other already existing because it may belong to that one. How I do this? Thank you DrDelaTorre (talk) 16:05, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, DrDelaTorre. What they mean is that instead of trying to promote the term you coined in a new article at Draft:The Cosmic Gorilla Effect, you instead attempt to expand content in a neutral and non-promotional manner at The Invisible Gorilla. I assume they are related? If so, we do ask you, please, to make a transparent declaration of any Conflict of Interest by noting this on your user page. See the guidelines at WP:COI for help with this. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DrDelaTorre: Looking into it a little further, I see there are various news stories like this which refers to the 'Cosmic Gorilla Effect'. I still think expanding the existing article is probably the way forward. At this point in time, one of our redirects could be created to send anyone searching for one term to the alternate-named page. Would you find that a sensible thing for us to do for you, as well? They are very easy to create, and immensely helpful. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:23, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your reply Nick! Yes the paper had a major impact in media and news. I have 3 questions regarding your answer: 1) do you have any template for COI? 2) Who does the redirect? I do it myself or WP does? 3) I do not have a user page, so I guess I have to create that first right? here I put information about myself? Thank you very much. Sorry to bother with questions. Nick Moyes — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrDelaTorre (talkcontribs) 18:17, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DrDelaTorre: Some suggestions:
  1. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI
  2. You can create the redirect, or ask for assistance here. We would need to know what exact phrase (e.g. "The Cosmic Gorilla Effect", "Cosmic Gorilla Effect", and "Cosmic gorilla effect") you would want to redirect to which article (e.g. The Invisible Gorilla)
  3. In general, a user does not need to create a user page at before they start editing articles, but you should add your COI to User:DrDelaTorre before editing any related articles.
Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 18:45, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted page entry

An entry was made to a page that concerns us, and was deleted by the writer a day later. Is there a way of finding that entry to read again? 2A02:C7F:147D:6900:907D:AC19:301D:A5D6 (talk) 16:58, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey IP and welcome to the Teahouse. You can see a page's history by pressing "view history" on the top right. Hillelfrei• talk • 16:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to verify whether it is a reliable source or not

Hello, A number of times I come across many website links that I've never heard of before. How can I know whether these are genuine reliable sources or mere spam/promotion? Lightbluerain (talk) 17:08, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lightbluerain: You can try to look for the publisher of the website, and see if there is any relationship between the publisher and the subject of the article. You may also find the information and editors at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard to be helpful. GoingBatty (talk) 17:24, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You can find clues on Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Ruslik_Zero 17:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Lightbluerain: In addition to the pages above, you can try WP:RSPSOURCES, which is a subpage of Wikipedia:Reliable sources that tabulates frequently discussed sources and see if the one you're looking for is listed on there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:41, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Thanks for all these links, I'll read them all. And, @GoingBatty: I'm not sure if looking for the publisher will help. Can you please explain how knowing the publisher can let me determine if the source is a spam or not? Lightbluerain (talk) 09:10, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Lightbluerain: For example, if the website publisher is a record label and the article is about a musician who is signed to the record label, then the website is not considered an independent reliable source. GoingBatty (talk) 13:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Got it. Lightbluerain (talk) 16:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

academic_advisors or doctoral_advisor ?

at the bottom "Acknowledgements" given as supervisor at PhD Research, which is appropriate ? Leela52452 (talk) 17:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Leela52452. Which Wikipedia article are you asking about? (If you're not asking about a Wikipedia article, then I'm afraid your question doesn't fit here: this is a page for assistance in editing Wikipedia, nothing else). --ColinFine (talk) 18:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
normally until now i found only advisors [ doctoral ] for a thesis. however, it has been given as advisors in abstract. my question is to treat both of them as academic_advisors if abstract does not specifically say as doctoral advisors or advisors  ? Leela52452 (talk) 01:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
extremely sorry provided incorrect hyperlink intially, now updated correct hyperlink Leela52452 (talk) 01:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Leela52452: You still didn't provide a wikilink to the article to which you are referring, which may help us understand your question. Please also indent your responses appropriately (I did so above for you). Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@AlanM1: i am talking about Hayley Fowler i will look into intending Leela52452 (talk) 05:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Leela52452: The external link you provided is to a page entitled "PhD Research", and is apparently solely about that. At the bottom, it says:
Acknowledgements
This PhD was funded by EPSRC and the Environment Agency in a CASE studentship award.
Supervised by Mr. Chris Kilsby and Prof. P. Enda O'Connell.
It seems these are her doctoral thesis advisors. The {{Infobox academic}} parameter should be:
| doctoral_advisor = {{Ubl|Chris Kilsby|P. Enda O'Connell}}
—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:09, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@AlanM1: that was quick, thank you, "supervised by" thrown me into confusion. Leela52452 (talk) 06:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Leela52452 (talk) 06:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Checking facts of author in article

 Triumph Banjo (talk) 18:41, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Triumph Banjo: Welcome to the Teahouse. Did you have a question about verifying the subject of an article? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Triumph Banjo: Welcome to the Teahouse! Are you referring to the Jack Wong Sue article? If so, it appears you removed some text, and your edit was reverted. This is normal as part of the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. You boldly made a change in good faith, and another editor reverted the change because they didn't understand. Your next step is to create a new section at the article talk page - Talk:Jack Wong Sue - where you can discuss your concerns in more detail. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 18:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Triumph Banjo: Also, if you have any conflict of interest, please be sure to disclose that in your talk page discussion. GoingBatty (talk) 19:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 – Merged section below. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:28, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to check/verify the decisions by Wikipedia of the authenticity of facts accepted for publishing

Article name (Jack Wong Sue) I'm new here so please excuse me for my ignorance in this whole process. Question. How do I check the information source of the article written below by Lynette Silver? Or.Where is the proof of this article by Lynette Silver? Where can I review the steps taken by Wikipedia to check Silver's information? The article says that official archives prove that he "lied" but I can't see the proof of this, am I able to source the proof Wikipedia used to publish the writings below? Again sorry for my ignorance. Below is the article in question.

In 2010, Australian military historian Lynette Silver disputed claims made by Wong Sue in his memoirs and said that official archives prove that he "lied". In particular, she questioned Wong Sue's claims that he:

Single-handedly killed a group of Japanese soldiers at Terusan, Borneo in May 1945, thereby saving the life of Lieutenant Don Harlem, as there were no enemy personnel in the area at the time; Took part in a raid on the Japanese garrison at Pitas on 13 June 1945, as he is not named in records of the action, and; Witnessed the last Sandakan Death March as he was in hospital when it occurred and was elsewhere when the other marches took place.[7] Triumph Banjo (talk) 19:12, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Triumph Banjo, if you click the small number at the end of the sentence, it will take you to the citation (that is, where the information came from), in this case here. If it's a web link (as it is in this case) you can then click on that; otherwise, it will tell you which book the information came from and the page number. ‑ Iridescent 19:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(adding) It looks like the link has changed since that article was written, which may have led to the confusion; the source in question is here (I've fixed it in the article as well). ‑ Iridescent 19:18, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Triumph Banjo and Iridescent: I updated the dates in the reference as well. GoingBatty (talk) 19:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Triumph Banjo: I updated a few other references as well. Would you happen to have the details for Reference #11 (e.g. article title, page number)? GoingBatty (talk) 19:46, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

how do I either tag or edit an article that shows bias and is not impartial?

How do I either tag or edit an article that shows bias and is not impartial? My question is in regard to the article Macrobiotic diet which presumes that only Western medical theory is correct and ignores the validity of other systems, in this case Oriental Medicine, otherwise known as Traditional Chinese Medicine, upon which the macrobiotic diet is based (and not on Zen Buddhism as the article states). The article uses language like "fad diet" and "quackery" applied to the macrobiotic diet. This presents a negative image of this diet and is misleading and one-sided.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macrobiotic_diet Jasper good (talk) 19:48, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the article's talk page, Talk:Macrobiotic diet, you will see that there has been exhaustive discussion of the term "fad diet" and there is a solid consensus that that term is well-sourced and belongs in the article. If you have good reliable sources supporting the claim that the diet is more rooted in TCM than in Zen buddhism, feel free to start a discussion about that on the talk page. As the changes you want to see are not uncontroversial, you will need to discuss them and make sure that you have a consensus in favour of them before you edit the article itself. --bonadea contributions talk 19:57, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

uploading a poster

Can you help me how to upload a poster in an article? We are the Great (talk) 20:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We are the Great, Like a movie poster? There are special restrictions for uploading material like that which is copyrighted. It must meet the Non free content criteria. For movie posters, that means using it only on a single article, and using the lowest resolution image feasible. For uploading help, see Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup/2. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 20:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is information emailed to the contributor a reliable source?

My first Wikipedia article was published a few days ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Balchowsky It is an article about a race car driver and builder from the 1950s and 1960s. I notified the owner of the one of Balchowsky's race cars -- Ernie Nagamatsu -- to let him know that I had an article about Balchowsky published by Wikipedia. I cited Nagamatsu's website as an external link in the article. Nagamatsu was a very close friend of Balchowsky and his wife. Balchowsky shared many stories with him and gave him many documents, pictures, race trophies, and car parts. In his letter of appreciation he gave me information about Balchowsky that is not included on Nagamatsu's website or published elsewhere (that I can find).

At first glance I feel that the emailed information is not a "reliable source" according to Wikipedia policy and should not be added to the article; and yet it seems a shame not to publish an eyewitness account which will not be available once the eyewitness passes.

Thanks in advance for your comments. InfoArchivist (talk) 21:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, InfoArchivist. I'm afraid that this doesn't get even as far as the question of reliability: sources must be published. Unpublished memoirs, whether from the subject or anybody else, may not be used as sources, as a reader has no way of checking the accuracy of content based only on unpublished sources. See no original research. --ColinFine (talk) 22:19, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, InfoArchivist. Although ColinFine's advice above is entirely correct, I agree with you that it would be a shame for such information to be lost to posterity. Since you have established a relationship with Ernie Nagamatsu, perhaps you could suggest to him that he go beyond posting (some of) it on his own website, and collaborate with a motor racing magazine or book publisher to produce published articles or a book that could include this material (which Wikipedia could then use as a reliable source).
I see from a brief web search that several articles about/interviews with Dr Nagamatsu, some mentioning his friendship with Max Balchowsky, are already online, and actually I wonder if Dr Nagamatsu himself might be notable enough for a Wikipedia article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.81.243 (talk) 14:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, ColinFine. Thanks for your concise clear explanation.
Hi, {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.81.243 Thanks for your helpful suggestions.

InfoArchivist (talk) 16:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Outside help

How do I easily access outside help for dispute resolution on a page? Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 22:21, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wjrz nj forecast See dispute resolution. 331dot (talk) 22:28, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Should I click dispute resolution notice board because that is not working for me. Thank you Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 22:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wjrz nj forecast Specifically(since you want outside help) click WP:CONTENTDISPUTE. 331dot (talk) 22:41, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I try clicking request dispute resolution but nothing happens. Do you know why? Thank you! Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 23:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wjrz nj forecast That requires a javascript to run. 331dot (talk) 01:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean I can’t request outside help? Is there another way to do it? Thanks! Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 02:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wjrz nj forecast Try WP:3O. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much 331dot! Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 02:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fulfilling the criteria for artist notable contributions

I recently posted a wikipedia draft about an artist whose work I follow, Irene Clouthier. She has shown in Art Pulse New York, Pulse Miami, Scope Miami, Scope New York in the US as well as Art Salamaca in Spain, Art Paris, Paris Photo in France and, Art Toronto International in Canada. Similarly, she has been represented by a number of galleries (including galleries in the US, France, Mexico, and Spain). She has been interviewed for articles about her work and has recently been featured on Mexican Cable series, Univision, and instagram meet the artist interviews. She has held solo shows consistently since 1998 in 4 countries.

In addition to her notable artistic highlights, she is part of a very political family and is well known throughout Mexico. Many of her family members are featured on Wikipedia.

I commented on these elements in my draft and am unclear why this would not be considered independent or notable resources.

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance. Lvaughan7 (talk) 22:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lvaughan7 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, that this person has well known family members that merit articles is irrelevant to whether she does or not. See WP:NOTINHERITED. If the claim to notability is that she is an artist, then she would need to meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable artist, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. The sources you have currently seem to just cite specific facts and not establish notability. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 22:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New here!!

Disregard
 – User blocked for sockpuppetry. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! So, I was wondering, how do I make a Wiki page? I've been looking at pages in the editor, and I noticed that there is code. I would really appreciate it if someone could explain it to me. Thanks! Kookie Cookie Knows What's Up (talk) 00:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kookie Cookie Knows What's Up, what is your relationship to the recently blocked account Kookie Cookie Knows What's Best? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marinated Potato: Ha! Busted! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.193.28.135 (talk) 17:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Article

Hey guys how do you make a new page? I am trying to make one for Jim Meck. Ya, he is my dad Marinated Potato (talk) 00:37, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Marinated Potato: I suggest going through WP:YFA to be guided in making your first article. However, if you do intend on going forward with it, you must disclose that you have a conflict of interest with the subject. What that means is that you are strongly discouraged from directly editing the article and should make changes via edit requests. Directly editing may result in you being reverted. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Marinated Potato: See WP:COI for more info on the previous response. Hillelfrei• talk • 00:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Marinated Potato: What is your dad notable for? Have you changed your mind about Wikipedia since your May 1st comment? 331dot (talk) 01:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marinated Potato;: He is a live entertainer on piano and is hosting Facebook live shows and has made it on the news three times — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.193.28.135 (talk) 17:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then you should review the definition of a notable musician to see if your dad meets the criteria. 331dot (talk) 17:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marinated Potato: He meets it, so how do I make the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.193.28.135 (talk) 17:49, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of my article

Deletion of my article

I found that my article has been removed from wikipedia, I have followed all the guidelines and I do not know the actual reason behind the removal!, it is about an Egyptian living female actor (Miral Mahilian) that has been mentioned in many different news articles, Egyptian movies and tv shows while submitting valid references! She has been mentioned in a wikipedia article before but in Arabic language, I wrote this article because people are mistaken between her and another actor, and that there is many wrong informations about her. to MMflython (talk) 01:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC) MMflython[reply]

@MMflython: Welcome to the Teahouse! It appears your draft is at User:MMflython/sandbox. You can keep working on it and submit it to WP:Articles for creation when it's complete. See Help:Your first article for lots of suggestions. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@MMflython: Also be sure that she meets Wikipedia's standards for inclusion: Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Entertainers. Based on her IMDb page, she may not have reached that level in her career yet. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:49, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why are Extreme views of liberal politicians removed?

Recently, manny leftist politicians have made extreme statements and their views covered up by editors. For example, a San Francisco supervisor bans SFPD from wearing thin blue line masks to support police during COVID-19 in an effort to support Black Lives Matter, a radical group calling for violence against and the murder of police officers. Your editors remove edits referencing these facts as unproductive. Why does wikipedia have a political agenda? 107.77.211.216 (talk) 01:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you have independent reliable sources to support these claims, please offer them. Wikipedia only summarizes what independent reliable sources state. Wikipedia has no political agenda, but sources can and do. However, that is up to the reader to determine for themselves. 331dot (talk) 01:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello IP editor. San Francisco supervisors are elected officials analogous to city council members and an individual supervisor has no authority at all over the police department. The decision to ban officers from wearing the "thin blue line" facemasks was made instead by the chief of police who is the professional manager responsible for maintaining police discipline. He instructed the officers to wear neutral, non political facemasks instead, according to this article in the San Francisco Chronicle. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As a general note, Wikipedia is neutral. If you feel an article is not neutral, you are welcome to take it up on the article's talk page, which can be found at the top left of every article. This will allow you to come to a solution. If, at the small chance the editor refuses to have a discussion, and they continue removing your reliably sourced and neutral entry without a sufficient edit summary, and again refuse to discuss their reverts, it is quite possible that the specific editor has a political agenda. This in fact does not represent what you refer to as "your editors", it is against Wikipedia policy, and you can involve an administrator at that point. However, it is unlikely it will come to this as most Wikipedia editors understand it's Neutral Point of View policy, so they will probably be more than happy to discuss your concerns. If you would like any further clarification on this matter in general, feel free to ask. Hillelfrei• talk • 01:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edicion en wikimedia commons

 CHEZTER457 (talk) 01:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 – Merged section below. — GoingBatty (talk) 02:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 CHEZTER457 (talk) 01:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I made a mistake in the source and author when uploading photos on wikimedia commons. How do I solve? Can I delete the photos and upload them again with the correct data, or can I edit the data without deleting the photos?

@CHEZTER457: Welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, you can edit the data. For example, go to Commons:File:IAA-101.jpg, click "Edit", make your changes, and click [Publish changes]. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Muchas gracias GoingBatty! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CHEZTER457 (talkcontribs) 02:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I'm starting to work on the Michael J. Todd article & I'd like to include a photo if possible. I am reading through the info on Copyright (Yikes), but then I found that Wikinews have a photo already. Can I use that on Wikipedia or not? If so, how do I go about it? Thank you --DSQ (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC) DSQ (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DeltaSnowQueen. That photo is locally hosted locally on Wikinews which has its own image use policy. Because the photo is copyrighted and used under a vague release from the police department, it is highly unlikely that it would be accepted for use on English Wikipedia or on Wikimedia Commons. An acceptable Creative Commons license or other acceptable free license would be required. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah that's a shame. I'll carry on reading and see if I can figure out where I can get a suitable picture from. Thank you very much for your help and your quick response. --DSQ (talk) 02:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, DeltaSnowQueen. I thought about your issue a bit more and then remembered that Todd has died. According to Wikipedia:Non-free content #10, it may well be possible to use that photo, but only in a low resolution version and only in his Wikipedia biography. Follow that policy carefully. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again Cullen328 Let's discuss it. Thank you for your further thoughts & guidance. To be honest this is clearly an area which I know nothing about and it seems more complex than I initially considered. I will read through the info you've provided and make sure I am fully clued up about copyright before I even consider uploading anything. I'm assuming that the picture used on Wikinews was his official photo from the GMP site; I can't even find it in their archives now, or anywhere else for that matter. The rationale used on Wikinews is just the standard text used by numerous UK Police forces within their website Terns & Conditions, for example [1]. I'm not sure I would've interpreted that in the same way. So, I'll stick to expanding the article until I actually know what I'm doing! Thanks again --DSQ (talk) 08:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


References

  1. ^ "Terms and Conditions | Police and Crime Commissioner for West Yorkshire | WYPCC". www.westyorkshire-pcc.gov.uk.

How to become auto confirmed user

Resolved
 – OP linked to Special:UserRights to check autoconfirmed status. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:02, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to become auto confirmed user


Your help is appreciated. Thank you. 666himself (talk) 02:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@666himself: Welcome to the Teahouse! According to Wikipedia:User access levels#Autoconfirmed users, most accounts must be at least 4 days old, and have made at least 10 edits. GoingBatty (talk) 02:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@666himself: ...and Special:UserRights shows that you are an autoconfirmed user. GoingBatty (talk) 02:54, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you  :) GoingBatty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 666himself (talkcontribs) 03:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

glost house

 223.204.64.78 (talk) 04:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP editor. Did you have a question about editing on Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with an edit

Hi, I need help with including a 'refn' footnote with citation in this article: Drones in wildfire management. I tried reusing reference number 34 in Note 1, but it appears as reference 35, with the same citation appearing again in the reference list. I tried to follow the Refn guide and miserably failed at it. If somebody can please fix this, I can see the diff and figure it out for later use. Thank you! NawJee (talk) 04:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@NawJee: I fixed it for you. As you were using the ref HTML tags, you did not give reference 34 the "name" attribute to be referred to for later use. If you ever want to recall the same reference that you have, for example, given the name value "foo", just type <ref name="foo" /> at the spot where you want the reference to appear again. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Tenryuu:, thank you for the edit and the explanation. I just checked the diff to see what you did. This was a bit tricky to figure out, but now I see how easy it actually was. Again, thanks. NawJee (talk) 05:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@NawJee: You're welcome! I consider it a minor achievement in helping people in a subject that I am still a beginner at. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tenryuu: As you should. Also, just checked your user page and noticed that there is a Guild of Copy Editors. I've signed up for it - hopefully, I'll be able to make useful contributions and learn along the way. Thanks! NawJee (talk) 06:10, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need help understanding what this user did

Can someone help me understand why this user seems to have inserted spaces in infobox's but they don't show up.
diff1 diff2 thx ToeFungii (talk) 05:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ToeFungii: The software trims white space, so you can space out code and text like this and it will still appear normally spaced (jump to source code to see what I mean). Spacing may be done to make code easier to read as a convention. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it's social distancing? David notMD (talk) 10:43, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Photos To Galleries

Hello. I'm a local photographer based in San Antonio, TX. I would like to add my photos of some of the landmarks here to some of the articles. Is this possible or allowed?


Thank you,

Michael Collazo Mcollazo1969 (talk) 08:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mcollazo1969 and welcome to Wikipedia. Good question, thanks for asking. Yes... to some extent. Take a look at [1]. If that seems ok to you, start uploading. HOWEVER. I see no general problem with you adding images to articles that have none of whatever, but we don't want you to start flooding WP with your own work either, like exchanging good images with your own, then "we" will start crying stuff like WP:COI and WP:PROMO. So, start carefully, and when in doubt what is "right" try asking on the article's talkpage. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:56, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, take the time to read Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Adding_images_to_articles. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do i make a custom signature?

Hello! I want to edit my signature into something more interesting. Could you tell me how? Rahbab Chowdhury (talk) 09:43, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MRC2RULES! See WP:CUSTOMSIG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

I was wondering, just curios, why Wikipedia values secondary sources more than primary ones . . . I mean, secondary sources obviously rely on primary ones? 17u9e (talk) 10:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 17u9e! The WP-philosophy is that Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources. Sometimes primary sources can be interpreted in very different ways, and in those cases we avoid leaving the interpreting to the editors. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
17u9e, Its about context, and the danger of original research. Reliable secondary sources are written and edited by professionals, who are generally better than us Wikipedians at things. A professor of history is always going to be able to provide a more context filled discussion of a historical event based off of the primary sources than Wikipedia editors could. And anyway, such conclusions on the part of a Wikipedia editor would probably be original research. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 10:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
17u9e, another reason we rely on secondary sources is that the author of the source is the subject matter expert. That means Wikipedia editors do not need to be subject matter experts to edit articles.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 12:27, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
17u9e, the definition of an encyclopedia includes tertiary. We don't write about the subject of the article, we write about what others have written about the subject of the article in reliable secondary sources. That's just what an encyclopedia is. There are actually places we prefer primary sources. Straight data without analysis is best sourced to an official source, which many times is primary. Secondary sources allow us to determine if what the edit is about is significant to the understanding of the subject. John from Idegon (talk) 13:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I anyhow edit?

 Toh Yu Heng (talk) 10:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Toh Yu Heng! I'm not sure I understand your question, but if you want a place to practise editing without messing with articles, you can create a personal sandbox, WP:ABOUTSAND has easy info how. WP:TWA could be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Toh Yu Heng, Howdy hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! You can edit in all sorts of areas. What sort of topics are you interested in? Also, as GGS says above, you should probably take The Wikipedia Adventure to introduce you to editing. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 11:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who blocked me?

Hello editors. Yesterday (May 3, 2020 IST), I was been blocked by a user on the charge of advertising. But there is no evidence that I have advertised anything or any brand. This has happened twice now. Can anyone tell me how search for that user? Excellenc1 (talk) 11:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Excellenc1: Aparently that was an WP:AUTOBLOCK caused by someone on the same IP range. Are you by any chance editing from an instituion network? To clear autoblocks, please see Template:Autoblock. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not from any institution network. Thanks for your suggestion. I will surely visit this page. Excellenc1 (talk) 10:13, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve copied the Nyuntam Aay Yojana article to my sandbox so as to help improve it, but having never seen or found any articles about election promises that could not be executed because the party that created it lost, I don’t know what information is suitable and what isn’t for the article (not to mention the fact that two-thirds of the article is the party’s prime ministerial candidate, an economist and a newspaper explaining why they think this promise is good or bad).
So, is this topic notable enough? And if yes, then what information should be added and what should be removed?
Regards,
RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 11:49, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copying an entire article to your Sandbox is considered extreme. A more cautious approach would be to work on one section at a time, or in this instance one paragraph at a time. Look at the Talk of the article to learn if changes you are considering have already been proposed and dismissed. All added content should be referenced. for content you delete, state your reasons in the Edit summary. David notMD (talk) 13:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Was this a political party platform for a 2019 election that it lost? If so, change entire article to past tense? David notMD (talk) 13:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi David notMD and thanks for your advice. I’ll be noting it down. However, I noticed that on the talk page, there was a discussion between the article’s main contributor and creator (Ms Sarah Welch) and another person (Club-sandwich), who highlighted the poor formatting and two other issues (which I think were minor, if they were even present). The article creator then picked the two minor issues and called them baseless, and the discussion ended with both editors accusing each other of bias, making vague allegations etc. So considering how the last (and only) discussion for article improvement ended, I think It’d be best for me to just edit the article alone, since it just needs rearrangement and trimming. By the way, I’d like to know if there is any guideline or general opinion on what to not add to such articles. And FYI, I copy articles to my sandbox only because sometimes I have to leave edits halfway through (especially if it takes more than a hour, because I’m a slow editor). RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 14:02, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. The 'don't work on the entire article all at once' caution came from watching a disaster unroll when an editor decided to copy the entire Grateful Dead article to own Sandbox, massively revise, and then replace the existing version. Luckily, he was indefinitely blocked (for other causes) before initiating that debacle. David notMD (talk) 14:40, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to be an administrator?

 Toh Yu Heng (talk) 12:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Toh Yu Heng In short, you spend years developing a good edit history that shows you understand Wikipedia policies, have good judgement, a good temperament, and have a need for the administrator toolset. A nomination is then made at WP:RFA where the community decides if the user merits the tools. Administrators have no special status and are like any other editor, they simply have tools that would be irresponsible for the entire community to have. You can do probably 95% of tasks on Wikipedia without being an administrator. 331dot (talk) 12:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Toh Yu Heng, note that future administrators actually make constructive edits, rather than non-stop vandalism. Their edits are rarely reverted. Also, they are not known for creating sockpuppets.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE: Does not appear that a sockpuppet investigation has been initiated. Suspect because of similarity of your name (Toh Yu Heng) and the editor you reverted (Cutie Toh). If this just coincidence, then state on your Talk page that you are not also Cutie Toh. David notMD (talk) 22:21, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About watchlists

Hi, I read somewhere that it is possible to set your watchlist as the home page when you log in. Is it possible? If yes, can you please tell how to do it? Can't seem to find an option for it in the preferences tab. Thanks. NawJee (talk) 12:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC) NawJee (talk) 12:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@NawJee: I don't think it's an option within Wikipedia, but you should be able to change your home screen or add a bookmark to a specific URL in your browser's settings, and you can make the URL your watchlist. Hillelfrei• talk • 13:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Hillelfrei: All right, thanks. I was taking the Wikipediholic test for fun and it asked if I have set my watchlist as the homepage. So, got me thinking. Anyways, thank you. NawJee (talk) 13:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@NawJee:, I think most browsers will let you designate more than one Web page to open when you launch the browser. I have my watchlist as one of six Wikipedia pages that open when I launch Chrome. You might look in your browser's settings for that option. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:47, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What can I do when someone vandalised a page?

 Toh Yu Heng (talk) 13:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Toh Yu Heng and welcome to the Teahouse. If you spot vandalism, just remove it. If the vandal persists, you can try to communicate with them and perhaps warn them to stop vandalizing. If they refuse to stop vandalizing despite multiple attempts at communicating with them, report it at WP:AIV and the editor will likely get blocked. See Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism for more information, and feel free to ask if something isn't clear. Hillelfrei• talk • 13:29, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Toh Yu Heng, the first step (and most important) would be to first check if there is any chance that the edit was not vandalism, because in some rare cases, perfectly good edits may look like vandalism (obvious vandalism is when someone adds bad words or nonsense or blanks parts of a page or does anything a sane, well-mannered person would not do to Wikipedia). After this, you should check which was the last proper version of the article, and enter that, then click on edit and then publish it (this is how I reverted vandalism before enabling Twinkle) if the vandal has made multiple bad edits. If it’s just one bad edit, then you can go with clicking on undo right next to the bad version of the article. RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 13:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Toh Yu Heng: For vandalism, you can undo the edits as you did on Omaha Beach. I saw you posted a notice about your reversion on Talk:Omaha Beach. Posting on the article talk page would be good if you thought the edit was done in good faith and a conversation would be helpful to gain consensus to improve the article. However, for straight up vandalism it would be better to post on the user's talk page instead, so there's a documented history of warnings, which is needed if it's necessary to block a vandal. There are are series of user warning templates that you can use on the user talk pages if you like. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I could not find DOB of Kay Dickersin, however the article has full detail. should i remove it ? can i update full name if it is found on anywhere in university & journal profile page ? Leela52452 (talk) 17:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Leela52452 and welcome to the Teahopuse. I have trimmed the DOB to the year on Kay Dickersin. If you can find and cite a source for her full name, it can be included in the lead sentence of the article. But the exact DOB should not be included for living people unless it has either been widely published, or published with the clear consent of the subject, such as on the subject's own web page. In either case a citation should be provided. Otherwise the year is enough. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
IMO birthyear should have a decent ref as well, per spirit of WP:BLP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A source is surely desirable, but a self-published source or a primary source is normally sufficient if the year is not controversial, and an unsourced year does not require prompt removal, IMO. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:21, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A good SPS would work, but WP:BLPPRIMARY? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recurring issues with an article and its subject recurring again - not sure what to do

A few months back I filed a sockpuppetry investigation to do with the pages Fiona Graham and Geisha#Non-Japanese geisha.

A number of editors had been repeatedly adding and removing content seemingly with a link to Fiona Graham, and this is a pattern that's continued for essentially a decade.

I thought a sockpuppetry investigation might finally stop the vandalism, edit warring and continued COI edits on these two articles, but evidently I'm too hopeful in my expectations, as an editor - user Truthisthebestpolicy (wish that name was a joke) - has recently retrod the old edits of removing details on a court case Graham was involved in, changing details on exactly what status of residence you need to work as a geisha in Japan, and under what circumstances Graham first left her original training.

My first question is if it's possible to undo or restore edits to previous versions of an article on mobile, because I haven't figured that out yet.

I think I'm in the right that they need reverting, but I don't entirely know, and I might simply be getting jumpy over the fact that this has happened so many times before. I'd appreciate some input.

My second question was, is it possible to lock just one section of an article? I know Fiona Graham has been extended protected before, but I don't know if it's possible to apply that to a certain section of an article or not.

If it is - it would be immensely helpful. Non-Japanese geisha are at times a contentious topic, and the article on geisha on the whole isn't the best at the minute. I've been trying to do whatever I can with it, but it really does impede process to have to deal with this first.

Again, I'd appreciate feedback on both issues wherever possible. Thank you! Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 17:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ineffablebookkeeper and welcome to the Teahouse. As you can see in Wikipedia:Protection policy, protection is not available for only part of a page, and it is rare for any page to be indefinitely protected except for recurring vandalism. (High-risk templates are a special case.) I do not see a justification for any protection on Fiona Graham at this time.
The recent edits by Truthisthebestpolicy to Fiona Graham seem on quick inspection to be reasonable and in line with previous discussions on Talk:Fiona Graham. I urge you to start a new discussion on the article talk page, explaining why you believe that specific edits are incorrect or unwise. It is possible to revert edits. There are several ways to do this, a simple one is to use the history tab to display a previous version, then edit that version and make a small change, or even a trivial one such as adding a space, and save. (See WP:REVERT) Please be sure the edit summary indicates this is a revert and why. Please follow the Bold, revert, discuss cycle and do thot edit war. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi guys, this is truthisbestpolicy. I did small changes yesterday on the page non-japanese geisha and Fiona Graham page. I personally know Fiona Graham and she asked me to change couple things on her wiki page as she is not able to do it by herself. I believe all changes I made are fair for both sides. I am trying to stay independent even I know her personally and I am trying to make my own opinion on all of this. She would like to delete whole section "wanaka gym" but I made it just little bit shorter and I left all sourced information in there. She also asked me to change non-japanase geisha site to make sure that there is an informnation who can become a geisha. Couple non-japanese ladies declare themselfs as a geishas without any permission recently and this could prevent such an action in the future. And there is a clear evidence that Sayuki was the first foreign geisha in Japan so I would leave her on the first place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthisthebestpolicy (talkcontribs) 02:09, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Truthisthebestpolicy. If you're editing on behalf on Graham, then you're also going to be considered to have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and should avoid directly editing the article about Graham or any content related to her yourself as much as possible.Since you're a friend of Graham, you might also want to let her know about WP:BLPSELF and WP:BLPCOI, etc. There are ways for her to try and address any issues she has with content about her on Wikipedia, and advise her that privately asking others to make proxy edits for her is not really a good idea and will likely only lead to more problems than it resolves. You both should follow WP:COIADVICE and WP:PSCOI#Steps for engagement instead as well as WP:DECLARECOI to avoid a misunderstandings by other editors. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to create a page for an artist I know

Hi all!

I want to create a page for an artist I know - Am I not allowed to create a page for him because I know him? I work with the Gallery also who sells his work which may work against me in this.

Any help would be great as I feel like it's a simple thing I want to do but goes against guidelines.

Thanks Loisspencertracey (talk) 18:56, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Loisspencertracey, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is no rule or policy against you creating an article about a person you know. However, this probably means that you have a conflict of interest, and you should declare that as described on that policy page. (See WP:DISCLOSE for details.) It is strongly advised that editors create articles where they have a COI through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process instead of directly.
If you are expected to help publicize this artist as part of your job, or if you are being in any way compensated for making such edits, your must follow the rules at WP:PAID and declare yourself as a paid editor. Failure to do so is grounds for a person being blocked from editing. If in doubt, disclose. See WP:UPE for details on how to disclose.
Also, be sure that the artist is notable before starting an article. See our guideline on notability of artists. Tryingto create an article about a non-notable topic usually leads to wasted time and no article.
I hope this is helpful. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Loisspencertracey: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest you work on improving existing articles before jumping in to create a new article, as creating a new article can be challenging.. Then read Wikipedia:Notability (people) and be sure the artist meets Wikipedia's notability criteria for inclusion in this encyclopedia. Then assemble multiple independent reliable sources that discuss the artist in detail. Then I suggest you follow the guidance at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. GoingBatty (talk) 19:21, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Loisspencertracey, I strongly agree with GoingBatty. Trying to start by creating a new article is likely to create frustration. Think of it like running. If you decided to take up running, would you start with a marathon? That what it is like trying to create a new article with no editing experience. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for all your help. I will have a look to see if the artist is seen as one that can be added to Wiki. I have done editing on Wiki before as I have worked with celebrities who have profiles already created. Loisspencertracey (talk) 11:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Loisspencertracey Your account is only two days old. Did you make your edits with another account or while logged out? Please also note that there is not a single "profile" on Wikipedia, that is a social media term. Wikipedia has articles. If you are working for these celebrities, you need to declare as a paid editor. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Two days old? That can't be right - I was working on this artist page for the last few weeks... Maybe because I only submitted it two days ago, that is what you are seeing? I will change my account to a paid one for future ref. Loisspencertracey (talk) 11:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Loisspencertracey Sorry, I see that you created the account four years ago but only edited recently, I was going by the contribution history of your account. You don't need to have separate accounts for paid and unpaid editing, you just need to declare for whom you are making paid edits and who is paying you. 331dot (talk) 11:56, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK many thanks, I will do this on my page to declare it. Loisspencertracey (talk) 12:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

what should i do?

what should i do?


Help i have no idea what to edit. If we need any topics I can do it but I am out of ideas. Please write about articles that need editing or topics that need an article .

--HISTORIAN (talk) 19:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC) HISTORIAN (talk) 19:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Andrewhistory, I can't really recommend a specific topic/article to edit. I will invite you to Wikipedia:WikiProject Current events, which is a WikiProject that improves articles on Portal:Current events and teaches users what to add to the portal. You can also go to Recent changes and just pick an article that was recently edited by another user and find a way to improve it. In short, pick any article you want to edit, and try to improve it. Hopefully this helps. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrewhistory: Thanks for your interest in helping out. You'll also find enough to keep you busy for a long time here Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:10, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Andrewhistory, I suggest that you look at Wikipedia:Community portal. It has links to a number of articles that need improvement. Near the top, links are grouped by type of improvement needed, such as "Fix spelling and grammar", "Expand short articles", and "Improve lead sections". Farther down the page you will see other opportunities for improving articles. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A question

Is there a maximum length a user page can be? Rodrigo Valequez(🗣) 20:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC) Rodrigo Valequez(🗣) 20:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Policywise there is none. However it should not be so long and so complex that people with weak computers and slow internet cannot load it. Ruslik_Zero 20:55, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, how many bytes is the absolute limit? Rodrigo Valequez(🗣) 21:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is extremely high. COVID-19 pandemic is above 300k bytes. In all fairness, a user page probably should go above 100k bytes. But to answer the question, it is extremely high, but I do not know the exact limit. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Have we conflated User page length with Article length? David notMD (talk) 21:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How many bytes would it take for my page to get deleted? Rodrigo Valequez(🗣) 22:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt there is a hard rule, but there are guidelines for what does and does not belong in a User page, and many editors have been kicked out of Wikipedia for spending an inordinately large amount of effort of their User page while neglecting to edit articles. For starters, I suggest you delete the Contributions section of your User page. Some editors list only articles they created; others don't even bother with that. Also, delete the Shortcuts section. David notMD (talk) 22:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve been preparing a better user page and that’s partially the reason of my inactivity. I usually contribute to articles on my computer and it’s not doing so good at the moment, I’m repairing it. Also, I don’t have a “contributions” section in my new user page I’m working on. Could I have a 100 byte user page is what I’ve been trying to ask. Thanks, Rodrigo Valequez(🗣) 22:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC) I use the shortcuts section, is their a reason for me to delete it? Rodrigo Valequez(🗣) 22:37, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, those shortcuts can be in your Sandbox. Did you mean 100,000 bytes for a User page?!!! Most are under 5,000. David notMD (talk) 01:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see anything wrong with the (short) list of shortcuts – mine is much longer (and in need of pruning), and it's an accepted and widely-practiced use for user pages. Sandboxes are for testing/practicing/temporary work space, not things you want to be permanent and use repeatedly. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:53, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not planning to create a 100 byte user pager, I’m just saying it might be 20 bytes or more. Is that acceptable? Thanks, Rodrigo Valequez(🗣) 13:23, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Again, are you asking 20 bytes or 20,000? David notMD (talk) 13:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

should infobox contain hard linebr?

Based on Help:Line-break_handling#Lists am i correct that an infobox should not contain a hard linebreak? The hard line break is the one with "less than sign,br,greater than sign". ToeFungii (talk) 20:54, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ToeFungii: It depends. The list templates should be used to separate items that form a list. br tags may be used to force a line break in the middle of a longer value in a place different than the typical browser. E.g., use a {{Ubl}} template for listing multiple parents, marriages, battles, etc., while you might use a br tag if you had an image caption like "This is a slightly too long image caption" and you wanted it to break more evenly or logically, like "This is a slightly too long<br />image caption" —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hegemony

@Nick Moyes: - @Galendalia: - @Maproom: Request for help from you and all others since as; I am still digging into the article Ehsan Sehgal to reach the bad faith and personal motives for spoiling that. I do not know if I am in the right place for honest, fair, and neutral editors who can execute Wiki rules with its essence to break the bad faith users' illegitimate hegemony. Thanks. 2001:1C00:1604:BB00:459B:2CED:129E:AAB0 (talk) 21:23, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and welcome. First off please start a discussion on the articles talk page and be sure to tag the appropriate parties. Typically you can get a resolution that way and civilly. If that does not work then there are other options. After looking at the pages and seeing what Storm has done and how long that editor has been here and they are a page reviewer, I’m sure they will have no issue in a discussion. Please stop with edit warring though as I see a lot of reversals of other editors works (and not just yours). To help you out, you should create a username to help out with the discussion. I hope this helps. GalendaliaChat Me Up 21:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused, I had bytes removed after making edit

I'm a bit baffled. I made an edit in the Mandie book series page and had bytes removed afterwards. I made some edits in the list of books in series, because there was a break in the middle of the list, and the original author or a later editor seemingly used two different methods of numbering the list. I changed it so that the list was all formatted the same way, and went on my way. I didn't make any changes in the text when I did that edit. I expanded a few sentences, but those were separate edits. Now in my contributions the edit is listed, and the page shows it, but 74 bytes were removed, and a reason was not given for why the bytes were renoved. I'm not upset the bytes were removed, but I do want to know why this happened, so I can avoid making the same mistake in the future. Lives4Christ (talk) 21:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lives4Christ, Spaces count as bytes. I looked at the edit you made and the negative byte count is from when you removed the 2nd column and combined it into 1 column. Hopefully this answered your question. Have a good day. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:49, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, maybe I don't understand what bytes are. Are they not like a editor point systen?Lives4Christ (talk) 21:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lives4Christ: A page's size is measured in (kilo)bytes. I'm guessing it also has to do with replacing the manual number system with the software's numbering scheme. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:54, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In your case, you deleted some spaces. Think of bytes like a log. If I change a "i" to a "I" the Bytes would be 0. If I fix "I llove you" to "I love you", the bytes would be -1 as I removed an extra "l". If I fix "I lov you" to "I love you", the bytes would shoe a +1. The bytes add and subtract also in the same edit. If I fix "I llove u" to "I love you", the bytes would show +1, because the extra "l" is -1, but the "yo" is +2. Hopefully this helps. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Lives4Christ: Another way of looking at it is that there is an ASCII table used to represent all the letters and punctuation used by computers. It turns out the code for a blank space is 32. So in order to render a space, the code has to record the number 32. If you expand the decimal number 32 to binary numbers in hexadecimal code (base 16), 32 = 00100000 (2 to the 5th power). So every time you remove a space, you're removing the string 00100000 from the code. As an example - removing two spaces shows a reduction of 2,520 bytes. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
More simply, Lives4Christ: No, bytes are nothing to do with an editor point system. They are simply a measure of the amount of material in the article. Reducing the byte count doesn't mean you've done anything wrong: It just means you've removed material (letters or spacing). --ColinFine (talk) 23:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, ok, thank you. I understand now. It looked like something bad because it was red. But now I get it Lives4Christ (talk) 23:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Uh – removing two spaces removes 2 bytes. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:15, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to Delete a Wikipedia Page

I work with the Bridgeton House on the Delaware on their marketing. This article "Bridgeton House" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeton_House, appears in the Google Knowledge Graph for "Bridgeton House" and "Bridgeton House on the Delaware" searches, instead of the official Google My Business listing for the property. Is there a way to delete this article so that no longer happens? Thank you! 2601:281:C600:1FD0:D930:2C36:54C9:D42A (talk) 22:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. You will need to report to Google that it is showing the wrong page in the search. RudolfRed (talk) 22:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 151.255.186.254 (talk) 23:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Google map still appears next to the Wikipedia lede in the Knowledge Graph, so people can click on that and find your information. I noticed the website was missing from the article's infobox, and so I added it for you. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moderation on Wikipedia

Hello everyone, I am currently looking for ways to improve my community moderation experiences and have been reading Wikipedia for a while now, yet I just decided to become a member/editor. I am finding it fun so far, but I am greatly interested in community moderation. To become an administrator, do you all have any specific tips for me to pursue this path, such as how long I should be a Wikipedia member, around how many edits I should have, and what kinds of things I should participate in for the next year or so to prepare my Wikipedia resume for an admin vote? Also, is it possible to become an admin if you enjoy participating in small copy-editing only such as grammatical fixes or adding hyperlinks? Thanks! ExemplaryScholar (talk) 23:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The minimum requirements to become a Wikipedia admin is:

1. Have an account 30 days.

2. Have 500 edits (not reverted).

I would also recommend joining a WikiProject. Hopefully this helps. Elijahandskip (talk) 23:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Elijahandskip: No, that's Extended Autoconfirmed status, not adminship. "The English Wikipedia has no official requirements to become an administrator." Ian.thomson (talk) 23:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @ExemplaryScholar: As I explain in this guide I wrote: If you have to ask, you're not ready to be an admin. If you're absolutely positive that you're ready to nominate yourself to be an admin, oh God no, you're not. You're probably only ready for WP:Requests for adminship when you know damn well why you shouldn't be an admin but other people insist you'd do a good job for some reason.
Small copy-editing stuff is an ideal start to the road for adminship. The RfA crowd generally also wants you to have written (or completely rewritten) a few articles to show you understand the various policies involved in that. Beyond that, developing a reputation for fighting vandalism, helping at the WP:Help Desk or here at the Teahouse, and resolving conflicts elsewhere -- those help tremendously. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ExemplaryScholar: There is some more information here: Wikipedia:Guide_to_requests_for_adminship. Don't start with the goal of becoming an admin. Just do what you can to improve and add to the encyclopedia. RudolfRed (talk) 23:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ExemplaryScholar (ec) While it is true that the above are technically the minimum requirements, if you self-nominate once you hit those benchmarks, your chances of success are close to zero. It generally takes years of edits; I believe many participants at the nominations page look for at least a year if not more. Discussion participants often also look for edit counts in the thousands. Both of these things help to show your contributions to the encyclopedia and demonstrate a good understanding of Wikipedia policies, good judgement, and a good temperament- but discussion participants look for many different things- including a need for the admin toolset. You won't be given it as a feather in your cap for your Wikipedia work- there needs to be a reason to give you the tools(such as you participating in a lot of deletion discussions, or vandalism fighting, etc.) I would suggest reading WP:RFAADVICE. 331dot (talk) 23:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would concur with RudolfRed in that it's best to not have the goal of becoming an administrator. That was not my goal when I began to participate here, my goal was just to help out where I could. I gradually moved into different areas and other users noticed my work and thought I would do well to have the admin toolset. While self-nominations are possible, it carries much more weight in my opinion to have others nominate you. Keep in mind that you can do probably 95% of tasks on Wikipedia without being an administrator. Just concentrate on what you can do to help. 331dot (talk) 23:54, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dotZ and others, I appreciate it. I also enjoy editing a lot, and administration is only one of my goals as it is another thing that I enjoy. Thanks for the help. ExemplaryScholar (talk) 23:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ExemplaryScholar Thank you for your understanding, and don't worry, the question is asked by many newcomers who mistakenly believe adminship is a trophy. You are not alone. If you have any other questions about editing, feel free to ask. Hillelfrei• talk • 00:12, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ExemplaryScholar: One thing that wasn't mentioned above and isn't emphasized enough in the guides is the absolute requirement (among those who will examine you) of significant participation in WP:AFD. It also seems to be largely about temperament, as perceived by your contributions in talk pages, edit summaries, etc. I can't imagine someone being fully-versed in the policy questions that will come up without having a year or two of experience and thousands of edits. (I am not an admin, but have some familiarity with the subject.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To become an admin, you must first go through a week-long public vetting process where dozens of people will examine all your edits to Wikipedia, and ask you questions about your experiences as an editor, about your knowledge of Wikipedia rules and customs, and about what you would do under various hypothetical circumstances. Then they vote on whether they think you're ready and have a suitable temperament (two very different things). Note that individual votes can be struck down if there's reason to think they're illegitimate. DS (talk) 14:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

pls find the images of a wellpapet in the world

 105.112.183.40 (talk) 00:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what a wellpapet is, but if there's an article, you can post your request on the article's talk page. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:18, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As a wild guess, it might be a mis-type for "wallpaper", but even if it is the request seems incoherent. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.81.243 (talk) 02:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Options to switch among different regions of Chinese versions.

What happened to the options of switching among different regions of Chinese versions? As a translator, I've been using wikipedia a lot in terms of finding common translations of proper names, etc for different Chinese spoken regions, but today I noticed the options to switch to different regions is are gone. Just wondering if anyone know how to bring that back. 142.255.108.254 (talk) 00:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain further? For example, I went to Cat and clicked on 中文 in the languages sidebar. When the page loaded up a blue banner popped up at the top which directed me to different Chinese versions. Is that what you're referring to? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) If this is about the WP:content translation tool, I'm unfamiliar with how it works, but you might be better off asking on that article's talk page. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know what Dazza means?

I came across some vandalism on this newly created page Dazza. It took some searching and found that it's supposed to be a nickname for Darren for Australians based on Urban Dictionary, but that's the only place I can find it stated as such. I'd guess I'd assume that it's correct because I see a bunch of hits for people named like "Darren Dazza", but I'm just curious whether it really warrants a page. Can I get some opinions? Thx, ToeFungii (talk) 02:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC) Here's the page history in case you can't get to the actual page because of the redirect Dazza History].ToeFungii (talk) 02:15, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly consistent with other similarly formed nicknames used in Australia and England. I've previously encountered "Bazza" for Barry, "Gazza" for Gary, and "Jazza" for Jack (McCreary, a character in The Archers) sufficiently often that I would have assumed Dazza was a variant of Darren without being told. I can't see that it merits an article of its own, but a redirect to Darren (with a brief mention of it there if an RS can be found) seems warranted. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.81.243 (talk) 02:35, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I found Dazza at Wiktionary and as short for Darren/Darryl, but with no cites. I was able to find Bazza at Wiktionary with cites. Gazza and Jazza are there also, but not short for Gary and Jack. I guess if there was some source other than urban dictionary I'd feel better about it. ToeFungii (talk) 03:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious why featured article is not protected every day

I'm just curious, as i'm getting more involved in fighting vandalism/disruptive edits, I've noticed that for the past 3 and maybe 4 days that the featured article gets blasted with at least a ton of disruptive edits if not outright vandalism. Has WP ever thought about protecting the page up front as I think the prior 3 days ended up being protected. It would only need 24 hours and it would stop the drive-by vandals. I realize it would hamper brand-new users, but i've not seen on these 3 days a brand new user that's made changes that have stuck. Realize there's give and take, but just curious. ToeFungii (talk) 03:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC) ToeFungii (talk) 03:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ToeFungii, thank you for fighting vandalism. In the top right corner to a page, you may see a padlock indicating that the page is protected in some form. You can read the protection policy here (WP:PP). If you think that an article does need protection, you can request for page protection here (WP:RFPP).
Since you are a vandal fighter, I recommend you looking into twinkle. It is a multi-purpose tool that can help you fight vandalism. You can even request page protection with it. {{replyto}} Can I Log In's (talk) page 04:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ToeFungii: It's great to see an editor like you who has so many insights and questions about Wikipedia. I recommend being adopted by an experienced editor to whom you can direct all your questions, carry on a dialogue, and receive guidance about contributing in general. Hillelfrei talk 04:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Umm Hillelfrei, you aren't replying to me. Please indent correctly. {{replyto}} Can I Log In's (talk) page 04:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ToeFungii's question was, "Has WP ever thought about protecting the [main] page?"--Quisqualis (talk) 05:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Because every time that has been proposed, there has been a consensus against it. It is thought to be more important that everyone can edit than to protect the article from casual vandals, and vandalism to TFA tends to be quickly reverted. More info in the list of perennial proposals. --bonadea contributions talk 05:10, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks all. Good to know that WP has at least considered it. Consensus is great, in a perfect life, but I'll have to read some of the counter arguments, and my noticing it for 3-4 days is a VERY small sample, so I do trust that masses weighed in with good points. ToeFungii (talk) 05:30, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quickly Flagging Questionable Pro-Industrial Content (i.e., Advertising or Promotion of Sector with supporting evidence)

I previously recall seeing pages that flagged in some manner to alert interested, responsible parties that the content may require relatively substantial revisions by an individual with some subject matter expertise. I have searched some of the help and tutorial pages at Wikipedia, and haven't located an option other than indicating something to be blatant advertising for an individual or company - that is not a suitable indication of the problem I frequently encounter, most recently today. Topics discussing the environmental and energy sectors can read excessively biased in favor of a specific technology, to an extent that the text reads like promotional material for an entire industry.

I don't have enough expertise to edit the article without research, but it would be beneficial to alert individuals - such as a casual browser from the web - that the article needs some work. Is there a way to alert a moderator to articles like this, to be reviewed and flagged if the moderator shares the visitor's evaluation of the status?


To demonstrate, below I've summarized some text from the article discussing Photovolatics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics), an article to which Google will refer users that search for "Solar PV", a topic often discussed in energy articles. Currently, within the first four paragraphs of the page, only the first reads relatively objectively and relevant to a description of the technology - it discusses the physics. The following three short paragraphs feature, include or mention:

"PV has become the cheapest source of electrical power in regions with a high potential" (potential is not explained - it has a link to an apparent solar industry group), "price bids as low as", "[panel] prices have dropped [by a] factor of 10 within a decade", "[this] competitiveness opens the paths to [...]", "the situation is urgent", "generates no pollution and no greenhouse gas emissions", and also "simple scalability", with a single citation for the "as low as [price]" up to that point. There is a brief interjection of information about connection to power grids, then back to "[photovoltaic] systems have long been used in specialized applications", [Industrial Association mentioned], "advances in technology", "increased manufacturing scale", "[reduced cost]", "[increased reliability]", and "[increased efficiency]", "financial incentives", such as preferential feed-in tariffs", "[more] than 100 countries now use solar PV.", with several more citations now included.

So, this can't be indicated to be blatant advertising per the rule set I reviewed, but the first half page of content is loaded with keywords suggesting a call to action, pricing and other financial incentives, performance jargon (competitiveness, simple scalability) either unqualified in context, or unqualifiable ("no pollution" - probably not true unless it evaporates at the end of the product's lifecycle), and an industrial association link. This reads like an industry association or environmental advocacy brochure, and very unlike a typical photoelectric cell article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoelectric_effect).

 Dasinmd (talk) 03:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dasinmd: Welcome! Thank you for seeing insight on how to handle these types of issues. There are numerous ways in which these can be flagged. One thing we strive to do is maintain neutrality and factual content. I direct you to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Citation_needed for more information. Thanks GalendaliaChat Me Up 05:15, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dasinmd: You are correct - articles should be written in a neutral tone, per Wikipedia's WP:NPOV policy. The previous answerer gave you a template to add a note for a specific sentence which requires a citation. If you feel that the entire article, or a section of an article is not neutral, templates can be found here here to alert editors of the issue. If you would like further clarification, feel free to ask. Hillelfrei talk 05:23, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hello

I just wanted to say hi Ihiiiiii (talk) 04:24, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ihiiiiii: Hello there Hillelfrei talk 04:48, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 – Merged section below --Hillelfrei talk 04:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

how do you delete your account? Ihiiiiii (talk) 04:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ihiiiiii, Users are currently not able to delete accounts. I recommend simply logging out and no longer using your account. Hillelfrei talk 04:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add a section?

I am editing my user page and I wanted to add a section to minimise use of space.

By:Cutie Toh (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cutie Toh (talkcontribs)

Hi Cutie Toh and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia:Writing better articles#Headings explains how. Hillelfrei talk 05:56, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Cutie Toh Unless you are referring to a hidden section? Then Template:Hidden shows how. Hillelfrei talk 06:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Cutie Toh: I realise you are new here. First off, please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~). Secondly, we all make mistakes at first and if that happens, someone else will undoubtedly drop by to point out that mistake. But when I see responses to them (like this), I do start to worry whether the new user is not going to accept responsibility for any bad edits they make. You have made some odd ones to begin with, so do please make sure all your edits are based solely on published, reliable sources, and are never based on your own personal opinions or knowledge. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:00, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Create article (draft) Linda Thompson

 Courtesy link: Draft:Linda J. Thompson

Hello, thank you to MurielMary and Robert McClenon for help with my first article. I've only ever made corrections before, and not familiar with source code. I have reorganised the page and fixed up links/references. Would appreciate any further advice you may have to get the article accepted.

Draft:Linda J. Thompson

Also, not entirely sure what I need to do about Disambiguation page.

Many thanks! Manamanash (talk) 06:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Manamanash: Welcome to the Teahouse, and congratulations on almost getting your draft published. I've tweaked the section headings to follow the Manual of Style with sentence case rather than title case. My personal suggestion is to give the external URLs descriptive names. If you're using the VisualEditor, click on the external link, click "Change text" in the box that pops up, then add text that accurately describes the site the reader would be sent to. If you're editing by source code, add the descriptive name after the URL within the square brackets (Example: [https://www.example.com Example site]).
As far as your disambiguation question goes, I think Robert McClenon is saying that if the draft is accepted into mainspace, he wants you to add an {{About}} tag at the top of the page that leads to the disambiguation page that he linked. After that, go to the disambiguation page and add Linda J. Thompson to the list that's already there and give her a suitable description like the other entries. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Manamanash, there are just a few parts to tweak before it's good to go.
  1. You might want to format the discography section according to Robert's advice.
  2. Typos and other issues, like 2 full stops together ("..") or 2 spaces together (" ").
  3. Please don't remove the AFC decline tag as you did here. These are kept as a record and for our convenience. Previous declines won't "count against" the draft; as long as you heed the advice of reviewers, the draft will probably be accepted.
Thanks for creating this draft, and stay safe! Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 09:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see this article posted on events leading up to the bombing of Pearl Harbor. It is much more factual and relevant than the one you have.

Hi I would like to see an article of Robert Higgs How U.S. Economic Warfare Provoked Japan’s Attack on Pearl Harbor  By Robert Higgs  |  May 1, 2006 Also published in The Freeman It has been posted on many different places on the web and it is so much better that the present one WiKipedia has on the events leading up to Pearl Harbor. How do I do this???? -- Jmarielloyd (talk) 07:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jmarielloyd! I see you brought this up at Talk:Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor/Archive_17#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_2_April_2019 a year ago, and got some, not a lot, of response.
Assuming you want to use this article as a source in one or more WP-articles, the WP-context here is WP:DUE, basically what weight should we give to Robert Higgs [2] in our articles? Personally I have no idea. You could try to ask for more input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history or perhaps WP:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. If, like you were told last year, Higgs is a fringe view on this, WP will give him zero or very little space. According to WP he seems to be writing in his area of expertise, so it may be reasonable to include something about his view at Events leading to the attack on Pearl Harbor or Pearl Harbor advance-knowledge conspiracy theory. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Krusty1979 (talk) 10:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Krusty1979, generally, if the same page is now under a new url, update it. But don't remove sources just because they are dead. The website could return, or someone could find an archived copy. For this reason, you can tag dead links with {{dead link}}, which informs others to have a look for it. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 12:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What should I do when somebody is rude to me on wikipedia?

 Tomdejohn (talk) 10:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You should tell the person to stop,if this persist,you should call an administrator. Toh Yu Heng (talk) 10:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tomdejohn: Who is the user in question? Ed6767 (talk) 10:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Issue resolved - warned user for biting newcomers. Ed6767 (talk) 10:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ItheBestin reprimanded me and Toh Yu Heng rudely. Tomdejohn (talk) 11:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I neither deny nor confess about any ongoing Tomdejohn said.I didn't write anything like that to him.ItheBestin (talk) 11:31, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Autofest City

I would like to make improvements on the details that appear on this page, including inserting photographs and improving links. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofest_City 2405:204:5119:A0D4:B81F:A7DF:6671:943F (talk) 11:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need anyone's permission to edit an article, but to upload images you will need to have an account. If you have an association with this organization, you will need to review conflict of interest and how to make edit requests. 331dot (talk) 11:23, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming a category

I created today Category:African-American college graduates before 1865. After starting to populate it, I realized it needs to be broadened: some attended college without graduating, some got the equivalent through tutoring; graduation as such was not the big deal it became later. So I want to change it to Category:African Americans who obtained higher education before 1865.

I cannot move it myself. Requested Moves will not accept it and directs me to Categories for discussion. However, since I just created it today and no one else has looked at it, I don't see that as appropriate either.

I am aware I have to manually change every link to the category, although I understand there is a bot to do this, which I know nothing of. }} deisenbe (talk) 11:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deisenbe, I'd just create your new category, move all articles to the new one, and then nominate it for speedy deletion under WP:G7. I see that you already moved it to a new title; now you'll need to manually move all articles to the new category, but deletion isn't necessary. I don't think 12 articles require bot assistance. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up to Declined Article

Hello Team, my article Draft:Shopnaw was declined when submitted. Based on the the reviewer's comment and the support of the house I have edited the article and improved on the referencing.

Below is the link to the updated article. kindly review for me if it's ok for re-submission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Shopnaw Kojo Essel (talk) 11:31, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want the draft reviewing again, use the blue "Resubmit" button. One minor point is that words such as Restaurants, Supermarket, Grocery, Pharmaceuticals, Electronics, Local Markets, Beauty, and Fashion are not proper nouns, so they should not start with capital letters; you'll find advice at MOS:CAPS. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong info or misleading info provided in a protected/locked article on wikipedia

a article on wikipedia naming North east delhi riots have information to the riots that happened in the Delhi. The article only shows the muslim side being the victim in the whole article whereas the reality of the riots that came later changed after slingshots found at the AAP party's member and also on a muslim school roof. Several stones petrol bombs and acid packets were shown in news in the rooftop of muslims. Several Videos went viral how the muslim people were throwing petrol bombs how they were throwing bodies in drain near the area. I know all the muslims are not bad. But dont change the information or modify on the side of one religion. How much more attention does they want ?? Leakyleaks (talk) 12:21, 5 May 2020 (UTC) Leakyleaks[reply]

Leakyleaks I think you meant to link to 2020 Delhi riots Wikipedia summarizes what appears in independent reliable sources. If you have specific suggestions for changes to the article and can support them with independent reliable sources, please offer your suggested changes on the article talk page as an edit request, on Talk:2020 Delhi riots. The subject is a contentious one, with strong passions on each side based in ancient religions, so it is important to be civil with other contributors regardless of their views(not saying you have been otherwise, just letting you know). 331dot (talk) 12:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

request for contact

Hi, can i have your email so that i am reach out to you and talk directly. Technology1987 (talk) 12:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the way it works. If you have a question about editing Wikipedia, ask it here. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Technology1987 I'm not sure if you are addressing a specific user, but you should not ask for email addresses in this public forum. You may communicate with other users on their user talk page, usually linked to in the signature of the user, or in a page's edit history. Some users have email from others enabled, if you go to their user talk page or user page, there will be a link of the left of the screen(if using a computer) called "email this user". As noted, if you just want to ask the Teahouse community a question, just ask it on this page. 331dot (talk) 12:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please a favor

So can a ask for someones help on making any type of list involving popular culture or urban legends? I can not do an article on here because it is hard to put in all those references. Could you help me get a better understanding on this? Thank you! Clockworkv (talk) 12:58, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Clockworkv: Provided your list follows Wikipedia's list criteria, you can find instructions at Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists. Please keep in mind that content will need to be sourced, even on a list, so your desire to creates a list as opposed to an article because you don't need to add sources to lists is not entirely true. You mention that you find it hard to cite references - don't be intimidated, it is not as hard as it looks in the Wikitext, and you can find a basic tutorial here. Feel free to follow up with further questions. Hillelfrei talk 15:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You can also try Help:Introduction for how to reference. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question

but for real What is sock puppetry because I heard of it, but have no clue what it is. Clockworkv (talk) 13:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is explained at WP:Sock puppetry. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:03, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockworkv (talkcontribs) 13:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another IMPORTANT question

So for a button Can we please make a button to favorite an article and put it on your list? PLEASE??? I would LOOOOOOOOOVVVVVE that so much? Please and thank you! Clockworkv (talk) 13:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clockworkv Every user has a watchlist where you are able to do as you describe. Every article has a white star at the top(if you are using a computer), if you click it to turn it blue, it will add that article to your watchlist. 331dot (talk) 13:10, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hello again, Clockworkv. Wikipedia doesn't really have "favorites" in the way that some web sites do. However There is a link to place an article on your Watchlist. This is an empty (or white) five-pointed star just to the right of the "View History" link in the setup that I use. When clicked it becomes a light blue, and the page is added to yoru watcvhlist. This lets ytou easily see recent changes to the page, if any have been made. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 13:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

is it mandatory to use {{DEFAULTSORT}} on every article page ?

i did ask same question on es wiki, it seems they are not using it much. every wiki is unique. until today i did not find a single which did not use it. after reading on Template:DEFAULTSORT

In the case of multiple default sort key tags, the last DEFAULTSORT on the final rendering of a page applies for all categories, regardless of the position of the category tags. This also means that a DEFAULTSORT tag included from a template is not effective if another DEFAULTSORT tag occurs later on the page, even if the later DEFAULTSORT tag is also "hidden" (included by another template).

, i have come to conclusion that it is not mandatory to use it. however, are there any exceptions ? is it ok to remove it on article pages [ ex : Patricia D'Amore ] ? Leela52452 (talk) 13:10, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It would be wrong to remove the default sort from that page, as without it the article's entry in each category would be sorted under P rather than D. An article doesn't need the DEFAULTSORT if it ought to be sorted in the alphabetical order of the article's title. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Leela52452, as far as I know, it is not a must to use it. However, on biographies, Wikipedia uses this to sort people names by last name, not first name. This means that for biographies (like the one you mentioned) the DEFAULTSORT tag (template) shouldn't be removed. Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 13:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) It is not necessary to use DEFAULTSORT at all if the article or page should be alphabetized according to its title (true for most articles). should be used if an article should be sorted by some other key than the actual article title. Particularly when the key word for sorting is not the first word in the title. This is common for Biographical articles, where the article title often starts with a personal or "first" name, but should be sorted by the family or "last" name. It is also common for List articles, where "List of X" should be sorted by X, not under L. Many articles sort under their unmodified titles. In such cases, DEFAULTSORT is not useful. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 13:24, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help with edits

Hi! I’m new to Wikipedia and need some help with my article. I have come to the teahouse a few times and it has been a very helpful and friendly environment. After posting to the teahouse last week, I worked with a copy editor to help improve my page. Another user then made several edits to the article but they removed factual statements, changed many sentences to be inaccurate, removed two sections entirely, and made a derogatory comment on my talk page. I am not sure where to go from here. I am hoping another editor can help me add back the deleted content and fix the incorrect statements. Thank you so much for your help! Marissascavuzzo (talk) 14:21, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to discuss edits to an article, the place to do so is on the article's talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Show me the article. Wynn Liaw (talk) 14:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are referring to these edits , Marissascavuzzo. I suggest that you post to Talk:Paul J. Tesar and ping Justlettersandnumbers asking that editor to explain the reasons for the edits. Justlettersandnumbers is an experienced editor, and I presume has good reasons for any removals, but it may be that consensus will not agree with them. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Marissascavuzzo: I'm concerned that you are referring to the Wikipedia article Paul J. Tesar as "my article". It is not your article - it is Wikipedia's article. When you have a moment, please review Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Justlettersandnumbers that there is no need to list journal articles. This is not a CV. And I pretty much agree with deletion of mention of the company. Yes, deep in the ref there was mention that Tesar is a co-founder, but naming who is CEO and what funding achieved is about the company, not about Tesar, who is the subject of this article. David notMD (talk) 16:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

a few porn actor pages I want to nominate for deletion.

I started creating a biography for Carlo Masi, during the process I saw that many gay porn actors bios do not fulfill anymore wikipedia guidelines neither for WP:BIO nor for WP:GNG the majority of these pages show hardly any sources and those which are shown are most often unreliable. The reason behind it is that when these bios were created the guideline on wikipedia were much different.

So, I started cleaning up those bios, I looked on wayback machione if I could find the link not anymore online, I looked on the web for further reliable sources and I added the templates "Notability" and "Refimprove". After that, I started nominating for deletion (WP:AFD) those which look hopeless to me. Sometime I will make mistakes evaluating the bios to be nominated but so far most of the bio I have nominated have been actually delete. As someone rose doubts about my WP:GF, before nominating other bios I added a message on their talk page to see if someone has a reason for not nominating it.

It follows the list of the pages I believe should be nominated:

Michael Brandon (pornographic actor)

Bobby Blake

Billy Brandt

Randy Cochran

R. J. Danvers

Chad Knight

Jeff Palmer

Will Wikle

I believe it would be fair to wait a week after the messages were posted on their talk pages beforse tarting the nomination process. I will treasure any piece of advic you want to give me. thank you.

Ps. I am not working on bios of dead porn actors as I don't know yet how I feel about deleting the bio of someone who is not with us anymore.

--AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 15:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AlejandroLeloirRey, and welcome back to the Teahouse. The post on your talk page that I saw did not in any way question your good faith. It said: I think that 11 Articles for Deletion nominations in three days in the same subject area is too many. In a narrow topic area like porn actor bios, there are probably only a few editors mwho could helpfully comment on AfDs or could attempt to improve articles so that they need notm be deleted. Those few editors can only work on so many articles at a time. As you know, such research is time consuming. The suggestion was that you nominate in smaller groups, perhaps, only 3 nor 4 in any given week, so that those who might want to respond have a chance to do so. This does not mean that you need to stop nominations totally, just limit the pace, please. It does not mean that anyone doubts your good faith in making these nominations,, or the WP:BEFORE work you have done on the articles. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
hi @DESiegel: actually I wasn't talking about that message, as a metter of fact that user has helped me a lot in the past and he only gives me good advice. I was talking of the last message here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2020_May_1#Van_Darkholme . it is from a non registered user which uses a colorful language. I will do exactly the way you suggested. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 15:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Biography

Sir Iam new here and and I want to create someone's biography page. Please help me with that. Thank you. NewProfiles (talk) 15:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NewProfiles Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have "biography pages" or "profiles". Wikipedia has articles. Those articles should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about a person, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person(there are also definitions for specific fields, like musicians or athletes).
As you have already found out, successfully creating a new article is the absolute hardest thing to do on Wikipedia. New users are much more successful when they first spend much time(months if not years) editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Using the new user tutorial is also a good thing to do, as is reading Your first article. You've already figured out how to submit drafts for review, it appears, so I would suggest you at least use the tutorial and read the links I have placed in this post.
If you are associated with the subjects you want to write about, you should read conflict of interest. If you are being paid to edit, you must comply with the paid editing policy(a Terms of Use requirement). 331dot (talk) 15:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, NewProfiles If this is the biography User:NewProfiles/sandbox, please don’t. Wikipedia doesn’t encourage people writing autobiographies, if you are notable somebody unconnected with you will write one eventually, but most of us are not notable enough to warrant an article here. Theroadislong (talk) 15:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)Hello NewProfiles and welcome to Wikipedia! To get some hang on how editing works, you can try WP:TWA. On creating a biography: Take the time to read WP:BLP and WP:BASIC. If you conclude "yes, I have those sources, no problem!" move on to HELP:YFA. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request for article creation

Hello, I was wondering if anyone could assist me in getting an article created for 6 time BJJ (Brazilian Jiu Jitsu) world champion Paulo Sergio Santos? I put the request in and also under the martial arts talk page, but I have a conflict of interest creating the article as I have trained with him before and he is a living person. Thank you! BasicsOnly (talk) 16:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@BasicsOnly: Welcome to the Teahouse! Before starting to create a new article, I suggest you work on existing articles so you can learn the basics of Wikipedia. When you're ready, there's lots of good advice on Help:Your first article. GoingBatty (talk) 16:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Hello BasicsOnly! Thanks for being open with your WP:COI. I was going to suggest Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts, but you thought of that, maybe you'll get lucky. You can also start the article as a Help:Userspace draft, write it as well as you can, presumably you have sources per WP:BASIC/WP:SPORTBASIC, and then submit it for review, see Wikipedia:So_you_made_a_userspace_draft#Ready!. Be sure to WP:DISCLOSE. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is this [3] the guy? Sounds interesting. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

How do we decide if a new source is a "mainstream" journalistic source? Ihaveadreamagain (talk) 16:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ihaveadreamagain Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure "mainstream" is the right word- Wikipedia uses reliable sources. In short, reliable sources are sources that have a reputation for fact checking and editorial control. If you have difficulty determining if a source is reliable, you can visit the reliable sources noticeboard. You may also want to peruse the list of perennial reliable sources to get an idea of what is and is not acceptable as a source, and why. 331dot (talk) 16:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Making an article into a good article

Hello everyone. I'd say I've been here for a bit and I'm pretty skilled at editing but one thing I've never quite gotten how to do is how to turn an article into a good article. I've read the pages about it such as WP:GA? but a full comprehension of what needs to be done really still eludes me. I wasn't sure where to ask but if someone could explain the idea to me that would be great. Thanks. Cogaidh (talk) 16:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Media Owner, op-ed on own publication

Hi,

I haven't begun writing the article yet, so I apologize that I can't give you a URL/page. I am doing research into a British media proprietor and have noticed that he's published an opinion piece in a publication he's the owner of. I'm worried that if I add that as a citation, it will be shot down. Is this ok or not? --Choicom (talk) 17:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)--Choicom (talk) 16:58, 5 May 2020 (UTC) Choicom (talk) 16:58, 5 May 2020 (UTC) Choicom (talk) 17:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Choicom. Thanks for asking your question! In general, we do not really consider opinion pieces to be reliable, but we do allow reliable, secondary sources such as those found on JSTOR or on news websites. Can you paste the exact link here and we can try to evaluate the reliability? :D Aasim 17:07, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Choicom: Welcome to the Teahouse. Have other sources talked about this opinion piece he published? Is the piece about himself, or someone else? Has someone responded to it? I'm not sure in what way it is relevant to the subject you are trying to write about. I agree with Awesome Aasim, it's a little hard to judge without reading the piece first hand. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Hello Choicom! Without more details, I think you're probably right, possibly it could have some WP:ABOUTSELF use, but you can't use it to argue WP:GNG. Also, your username seems to be the name of a company, and that's not allowed (many make that mistake). See WP:ISU. Something like "Kim from Choicom" is ok. Either WP:RENAME or just abandon this account and make a new one. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info on Canimals

Hi

I Seem to have problems finding info for the tv show Canimals, Is there anyone who could help me? 2600:1004:B01E:280B:DD23:6623:E67B:B523 (talk) 17:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, try asking this at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Article is Canimals Hillelfrei talk 17:24, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes.2600:1004:B01E:280B:DD23:6623:E67B:B523 (talk) 17:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]