Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 5.24.160.16 (talk) at 18:21, 6 May 2020 (→‎Hello). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Demetris1175 (talk) 18:21, 6 May 2020 (UTC)demetris harrisCite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).[reply]

Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Thanks for the warm welcome

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

I believe the lag is in the internet itself, not with Wikipedia servers. And in the US anyway, it's magnitudes worse if you access the net via cell towers. In the area I live in, new subscribers have a two week wait for a land line ISP, and stores have neither laptops or tablets. For kids thrust suddenly into homeschooling, sometimes the only available access is via cellphone. John from Idegon (talk) 21:02, 5 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]

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]

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]

@Marinated Potato: If you believe that he meets notability standards, I suggest reading up on WP:YFA and using the article creation wizard mentioned there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC) Gsy65reegfjsh4;:how do I make a article about coryxkenshin (he is a gamer)[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.

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]
@Teblick: Oh, yeah. Figured it out the same way. Thank you. NawJee (talk) 18:25, 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]
@Andrewhistory: Shameless plug: If you are interested in copyediting, there is a Guild of Copyeditors here on Wikipedia that regularly gets requests to have articles being nominated for FA or GA to be looked over. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:55, 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]

Why I meant 20,000 bytes. Sorry for not being clear. Rodrigo Valequez(🗣) 20:31, 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]
The problem is that, since these are informal usages which would rarely be used in written work (other than in modern-set fiction), there aren't likely to be many reliable sources discussing them, unless one or more linguists have decided to study the phenomenon and have published articles in academic linguistics journals. You could try searching, or asking at, some of the organs listed in that article's External links section. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.81.243 (talk) 19:15, 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.Cutie Toh (talk) 12:43, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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]
@Leela52452: The reason it may not be used much on some other wikis is that other language wikis (like ruwiki) may, by convention, name their biographical articles with Surname, Forename, so they would sort correctly in categories already (without a DEFAULTSORT key, since it would be the same as the title).
It's not a question of mandatory or not; use it when needed, don't use it when its value would match the title anyway. It's unnecessary to edit an article solely to remove an unnecessary DEFAULTSORT, but if you want to remove it while doing some other work, go ahead.
As mentioned above, common usage on enwiki include articles named for people (which are usually titled with Forename Surname and so need {{DEFAULTSORT:Surname, Forename}}), or newspapers or films that have titles starting with "The", like The New York Sun (which needs {{DEFAULTSORT:New York Sun, The}}). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:34, 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]
@DESiegel: thank you for the advice. My question is, what is the best way to approach inappropriate comments and incorrect edits from a recent editor? From what I have read, it seems that the recommendation is to directly message the editor on their user talk page or discuss the edits on the article’s talk page, as you mentioned. However, Justlettersandnumbers has already posted a very inappropriate and derogatory comment on my talk page, and I do not want to inflame the situation or engage with them. Their comment on my talk page is below:
“So, here’s a thought, Marissascavuzzo: why don’t you see if you can get someone to donate a photograph of him that makes him look a bit more like a serious and very notable scientist, and a bit less like those advertisements for cheap dental care in Croatia? Perhaps you could even take it yourself? I see that there are plenty of better images on the internet, but it may not be easy to obtain permission for those.”
I prefer not to engage directly after this derogatory comment. I am hoping that someone can help fix the incorrect edits, which were correct, factual, and cited previously. I can post a list wherever you suggest. Also, is there a way to have the derogatory comment removed from my talk page? Thank you! Marissascavuzzo (talk) 12:10, 6 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]

Hello Gråbergs Gråa Sång, no it is this individual: https://www.bjjee.com/interview/highest-ranked-black-belt-in-france-paulo-sergio-santos-we-must-be-an-example-for-our-students/ https://www.bjjheroes.com/bjj-fighters/paulo-sergio https://www.instagram.com/paulosergiobjj/?hl=en http://www.psphoenixbjj.com/?page_id=6 — Preceding unsigned comment added by BasicsOnly (talkcontribs) 00:57, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@BasicsOnly: You're going to need three or more sources that professionally-published and are not dependent upon, connected with, nor affiliated with you or Paulo Sergio Santos -- but are still specifically and primarily about him. Without those, there can be no article. Here is the clearest recipe I've been able to come up with for articles that won't be rejected or deleted. It includes steps that users with a conflict of interest can follow to get the article started. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:02, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ian.thomson. Would this help?

Several Articles Referencing Paulo Sergio Silva dos Santos (Paulo Sergio Santos) including one Wikipedia Article which references him: https://jits.fr/athletes/paulo-sergio-silva-dos-santos http://karatebushido.com/paulo-sergio-santos-6-fois-champion-du-monde-de-jiu-jitsu-bresilien/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_Jiu_Jitsu#Notable_Alliance_Black_Belts https://www.icelandreview.com/news/icelander-european-champion-bjj/ https://ibjjf.com/results/international-master-senior-jiu-jitsu-championship-2006-results/ https://www.ikusa.fr/JJB/ceinture https://alliancebjj.com/instructors/notable-black-belts/ https://www.bjjheroes.com/bjj-fighters/paulo-sergio https://cocepjiujitsubresilien.wordpress.com/about/lequipe-pedagogique/diplomas/

works created: https://www.amazon.com/Santos-Paulo-Sergio-Brazilian-Jiu-jitsu/dp/B004FF455M/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=sergio+santos+jitsu&qid=1588727981&sr=8-2&swrs=F36F154660B1A7D931E59A8075119264 https://www.amazon.com/Brazilian-Jiu-Jitsu-Alliance-Standing-Techniques/dp/B00EWJ407Y/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=sergio+santos+jitsu&qid=1588727981&sr=8-3&swrs=F36F154660B1A7D931E59A8075119264 https://www.amazon.com/Alliance-Brazilian-Jiu-Jitsu-Basic-Techniques/dp/B004FF8JFO/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=sergio+santos+jitsu&qid=1588727981&sr=8-4&swrs=F36F154660B1A7D931E59A8075119264 https://www.amazon.com/Alliance-Brazilian-Jiu-Jitsu-Advanced-Techniques/dp/B004QITICS/ref=sr_1_5?dchild=1&keywords=sergio+santos+jitsu&qid=1588727981&sr=8-5&swrs=F36F154660B1A7D931E59A8075119264 — Preceding unsigned comment added by BasicsOnly (talkcontribs) 01:23, 6 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]

Cogaidh The article you mention provides exactly the advice on how to create a good article. You might also find The Perfect Article helpful. Just try to cover all the areas mentioned as well as you can and if you think it's ready for GA, follow the instructions at WP:GAI. If you have a question on how to fulfill one of the specific areas, feel free to ask. Hillelfrei talk 17:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good start for Good article would be to find a B-class article on a topic you are familiar with. Do everything you can to improve it. Including checking each reference to see if works and supports the factual statements in the article. Search for factual statements that are not referenced. Reference. Nominate. In time a reviewer will start the process by writing everything that is still wrong with the article. Fix everything, until the reviewer is happy. David notMD (talk) 21:24, 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]
My name is a company! I wasn't aware of that, my last name is Choi (Chinese/Korean ancestry) and Com because that's my mother's maiden name. Apologies for that. --Choicom (talk) 18:30, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Then I don't think there's a problem. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:09, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In response to everything earlier, I am thinking of doing an area on his political beliefs (which he has made very clear on several occasions on media outlets including the NY Times, Wall Street Journal and The Guardian), as this is very much related to his editorial control of his media empire (which mostly publishes politics and global affairs publications) Hopefully this helps. EDIT:: It's just that for one of his political stances, he has chosen to do a editorial piece on one of the publications he owns --Choicom (talk) 19:13, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can I take this as ok then?--Choicom (talk) 20:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that it sounds like we can use the source to say that "He has described his political views as X", but not "His political views are X". The latter would require independent sources. Does that makes sense, Choicom? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:53, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it does, thank you Cordless Larry --Choicom (talk) 20:57, 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]
Ok, were you just "having problems finding info" as in you just couldn't find the Wikipedia article? Do you mean "having problems finding info" as in you can't find information or sources to add to the article? Hillelfrei talk 17:33, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The latter.2600:1004:B01E:280B:DD23:6623:E67B:B523 (talk) 17:35, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, I recommend looking at the relevant MOS if you plan on significantly adding to the article. You can find information from Google as long as it is a reliable source and you cite it. If you meant that there is a lack of information online, we can't really help you there because we don't have any connection to the availability of sources on a given topic. If you really can't find info, feel free to contribute to another TV-related article with more available info. Feel free to follow up with further questions. Hillelfrei talk 17:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me add photo of my grandfather to the article

Could someone please explain me how I can add the photo of my grandfather Coy Pereira to the article Coy PereiraDebbie Nair-Pereira (talk) 18:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Debbi Nair-Pereira: Welcome to the Teahouse. Do you hold the copyright to the photo or someone else? Wikipedia would like the copyright holder to know that in most cases, the image must be free of copyright; if it has a copyright, it must be waived, meaning that anyone, even those outside of Wikipedia, can use it for their own purposes. If you understand that, consult WP:CONSENT to read on how to waive the file's copyright, and WP:UPI for our image policy. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:59, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

Hi tea house

My draft submission was recently rejected by Sulfurboy stating sourced with a press release. I asked him several times on his talk page (here) to point to even one reference that he believes looks like a PR but he did not answer any of my questions and closed the discussion. I had reworked on overall sourcing and made significant changes that removed promotional content and non-reliable sources. I had only included sources that were secondary, reliable, and discussed the topic in detail. I doubt if he even cared to check the sources before taking his actions. He also removed all of my edits. What do I do to fix this issue? thanks in advance. 2405:204:288:6273:5E02:A7FA:C95F:2FA1 (talk) 19:11, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find a single source in that draft that is not either a press release (protip: when the exact same gushing text is found in two different publications [4] [5], it originates from the company – and that was the one that you said was the best and most authoritative source), blatant churnalism, or a trivial mention of the company in an article about something else. I agree with Sulfurboy's assessment. --bonadea contributions talk 20:33, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The draft has has three Declined and then a Rejection. The reviewers left nine comments. An editor using an IP address (you?) removed declines in the hope that would not prejudice the next reviewer. Sulfurboy is not the problem here. David notMD (talk) 21:30, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

user page of a new wikipedian

Hello, I am a new comer to wikipedia or a new wikipedian. I am so glad to be a member in wikipedia family. my concern is how to make my own user page and let it reflecting in search engines such as google, Bing and so on.

Thanks all and nice time, Wael Wael M. Badawy (talk) 19:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. You should not try to write an article about yourself. See WP:AUTO. Work on other areas of the encyclopedia instead. RudolfRed (talk) 19:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User pages are not indexed by search engines. The purpose of user pages can be seen at WP:User pages, so you need to remove the current content which looks like a fake article. If you don't remove that content tje page is liable to speedy deletion under criterion WP:U5. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
David Biddulph I do not think that User:Wael M. Badawy fits the criteria for being a WP:FAKEARTICLE, and if it were tagged for speedy deletion uinder U5 , I would decline the deletion. It is true that a bit more about the user's Wikipedia goals and activities would be useful, but WP:UP specifically permits Limited autobiographical content although a user page should not be a simple CV or resume. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with David B. This looks, smells, tastes, sounds like a fake article, right down to a Table of Contents and a professional-looking photo. Most of the content should be removed. David notMD (talk) 21:33, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Wael M. Badawy: As others have told you, user pages are not indexed on search engines. While there's not much information to go on, it does not appear you are interested in building an encyclopedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your answers and reactions. Highly appreciate your comments and recommendations. I just asked for help not to listen to such big words Fake articles, smells, tastes, and so on. Excuse my ignorance of the nature of Wikipedia. I tried to read but it is impossible to get all at once. I have a lot to report about (articles) and serious to have a contribution but how to do with minimal biographical content. Furthermore, I submitted to remove the article you spoke about but it still shines. Thanks for your patience! Wael Wael M. Badawy (talk) 02:46, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help request

I am very new to wikipedia. Apperrantly, I cannot manage to make something that I made myself. Could you seem to help me? KRII Randy (talk) 20:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 – Merging section below. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

help me plzz

I cannot make my own article. Could you seem to help me? :( KRII Randy (talk) 20:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Creating a new article is not an easy task for new users. There is guidance and a wizard for creating a draft at WP:YFA. The usual advice is to start by working on improving existing articles instead. RudolfRed (talk) 20:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

neutral text for wikipedia page

 Courtesy link: Draft:Ross Petty (pediatrician)

Hello! My article has been rejected as the reviewer said I added too many adjectives. Is there a list of approved phrases to describe a scientist with remarkable achievements? I have found some wiki pages using the same phrases I used, how come my article keeps getting rejected?.

Thanks! LJimenez2004 (talk) 20:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LJimenez2004 You can find a list of words to watch here. Hillelfrei talk 20:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
LJimenez2004 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, it is a poor argument to cite other articles or article content as a reason for yours to exist. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, and can only work on what they know about, it is possible for inappropriate content to go undetected and unaddressed, even for years. See other stuff exists. If you wish, feel free to point out these other problematic articles so they can be addressed.
Regarding your question, a Wikipedia article should only summarize what independent reliable sources state, and do so with a neutral point of view. Descriptive adjectives are just an opinion and are not neutral. I don't know if there are specific words that are at issue, but the draft reads as a glowing promotional piece for Dr. Petty. It should read as a dull encyclopedia article, neutrally describing what independent sources say about him. 331dot (talk) 20:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @LJimenez2004:. I didn't see many adjectives that could have got the article rejected. I am assuming the person who reviewed the article caught some of the adjectives/phrases in the "Background" section. Things like "is known worldwide" and " he has made numerous contributions" and "this system is currently used throughout the world" might be places where adjectives were flagged. I would just read through the article and try to shorten some of the adjectives. For example, "this system is currently used throughout the world" can be rewritten as "this system is used around the world". Throughout is an adjective that could have been flagged for sounding too much like a person's writing and not a dictionary writing. Hopefully this helps. Elijahandskip (talk) 20:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The fundamental problem is not with the adjectives. The adjectives are just a symptom. Wording like "Petty has taught countless professionals" makes it clear that the draft has been written by someone who is here to promote Petty, rather than to write neutrally about him as Wikipedia requires. Maproom (talk) 06:42, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

3RR clarification

Just to be clear, It is not a 3RR violation if I'm editing subtle vandalism, Or if I do 3 edits in a row regarding different content in the same section, correct? Darwulf (talk) 20:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Darwulf Removing obvious vandalism does not count as violating 3RR. See WP:3RRNO for more information on this. I'm not sure what you mean by 'subtle' vandalism, but if any reasonable person would agree that an edit is vandalism, there is no problem. 331dot (talk) 20:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can link to the page in question publicly, but the original set of 3 edits by me was done without an account, so my IP is exposed. The lines I removed appeared to be satire and nonsense though, so I think it was obvious if you read it, but not if you skimmed it. IDK how to use the PM/DM system (if there is any) here but I can link you to the page in question if you want so we are on the same page. Darwulf (talk) 20:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Darwulf There have been times when at first glance I thought an edit was nonsense but after saw that it really had something to do with the article in question. So as long as it is actual nonsense, it's fine to revert. As for "different content in the same section" sounds like you are removing it, not reverting it. But if you mean reverting multiple previous unconstructive edits, it's generally considered one revert (or a rollback). Hillelfrei talk 20:57, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ehhh, I don't think linking would hurt really and would get a clearer picture of what happened, ill just censor the link after. Check history on Second American Civil War Darwulf (talk) 21:03, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Link will remain to provide context for readers, Thanks for hiding IP <3
Darwulf I'm assuming you're the deleted IP from a few hours ago. You did not revert, or undo any edits. You removed content that had been added in the past. The 3RR only applies when you undo an edit someone else makes, the intention being to stop an edit war. If the edit is lost in the edit history and you simply notice the silly content in the article and remove in in three different edits, your edits are justified. An sufficient explanation in the edit summary is required when removing content, and you did a good job of that. Feel free to ask if you have other questions. Hillelfrei talk 21:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hillelfrei Yup, that would be me. And thanks, I try to be clear about things. Semi-related question regarding edit etiquette, Is it considered better to have smaller "itemized" edits, like I did, Or should those have been condensed into one edit? Darwulf (talk) 21:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Darwulf I never thought about that, I kinda just edit as I go along whether it takes one edit or multiple and leave edit summaries as required. It's a great question. Can you post that as a new question so someone else will answer? (because people might not read this chain as it looks answered) Hillelfrei talk 22:21, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

wikipedia and wikitia? why all my info is there??

Hello! I was starting the edition of my article that got rejected and when I google some stuff... The EXACT info I was writing was already published in WIKITIA. I´m new and I don't know how is that possible or what is the difference between Wikipedia and wikitia.. So I send my article, got back the article with the rejection and some changes (made by the reviewer I guess??)... and that version was the one that was published (I hope I explained myself).

The publication was made on May 3 and I´ve been working in this for weeks, someone took my info? is that possible? 

https://wikitia.com/wiki/Ross_Petty_(pediatrician)


Thanks LJimenez2004 (talk) 21:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitia seems to be a project to write an encyclopedia, but where verified experts in a field must approve an edit to any article related to that field. Their article (which does seem to duplicate what you wrote) was created, as you saw, on May 3rd. I might be slightly in error, but I think someone could only use text from Wikipedia if they give attribution. 331dot (talk) 21:13, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, the Wikitia home page contains the following licensing information:
"Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike. Wikitia is an advanced version of Wikipedia.org of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organisation unless otherwise noted."
Please read Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks for additional information about this type of website. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wikitia claims to be For Verified Experts Only, but they've been taking a lot of content from Wikipedia's draft space and republishing it without attribution. I don't know if all their content is like that,but I wouldn't be surprised. DS (talk) 22:13, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Would that be a legal matter for the Foundation to take up, or would individuals need to?(just curious more than anything) 331dot (talk) 22:22, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot The foundation has, i9n the past, taken the position that copyrights to contributions are held by the editors who made them,. not by the WMF, so individual contributors must complain or take legal action when their individual copyrights are violated, Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks used to include a sample letter of complaint, and i have sent out a few myself over the years. The unfortunate thing is that, at least for US editors, this leaves little recourse if the infringer won't comply. US copyright law is focused on economic damages, and the economic value of an individual article is normally too low to be worth suing over. Statutory damages are not available if the copyright was not registered, and almost no one registers individual Wikipedia edits with the Copyright office. A DMCA takedown notice might work. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I find the phrase "an advanced version of Wikipedia.org" both offensive and (probably deliberately) misleading, but I doubt there's much can be done about it. --ColinFine (talk) 08:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ilmafarah soyan

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Ilmafarah soyan (talk) 22:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[1] ilmafarahsoyan is aname of a company[reply]

References

  1. ^ ilmafrah soyan
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Is it considered better to have smaller "itemized" edits, or condense edits?

When I edit, I tend to itemize my edits into small related sections. Is this proper, or should edits be condensed? Darwulf (talk) 22:33, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Darwulf: Welcome to Wikipedia. You are doing it a good way. It is good practice to make several small edits instead of one big one. It makes it easier to see what changed and if someone objects to one of the changes then only that one can be undone instead of the whole big thing. RudolfRed (talk) 22:59, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions for improvement

Hi, Two of my articles were rejected, and I have addressed the issues mentioned by the reviewer. I have resubmitted the articles and would appreciate help from a senior editor for improving these so that they are not rejected again. 1. Draft:British Nuclear Medicine Society 2. Draft:PET for Bone Imaging Thanks Earthianyogi (talk) 22:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC) Earthianyogi (talk) 22:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Earthianyogi, I had a look at the BNMS article. I removed the material that related to the future conference per WP:CRYSTAL, and the material about membership and so on. One thing to keep in mind is that Wikipedia is not here to publish operational details about an organization: those belong on the organization's web site. We take amuch longer view and talk about the history of an organization as well as its accomplishments. The article is in need of reliable independent sources. I doubt the BNMS article will be published unless you can find and add more of those. As the original reviewer said, "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article", which is true unless you can find more sources.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Earthianyogi:It's important to understand the differences between a primary and secondary source. With Draft:British Nuclear Medicine Society, you've supplied two references. One is to the organization's website, which is clearly a primary source, and the other is to a book which is edited by one of its founders and apparently one of its past presidents. This is a primary source as well. User:KylieTastic rejected the draft for lack of independent reliable sources supporting notability, and rightfully so. The article is still missing such sources. Consider; if we accepted it as notable using just the primary sources, we would be saying the organization is notable and worthy of an article because the organization says they are notable. I'm sure you can see the problem there. With Draft:PET for Bone Imaging, a very cursory review seems to show it is well sourced. It has yet to be rejected, and is currently submitted for consideration. You should know there is this section of an article; Bone_scintigraphy#PET_bone_imaging. If this article becomes live, that section should probably be modified to indicate there is a main article for the subject. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:11, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hammersoft: and @ThatMontrealIP:. Thanks for your feedback. Your points are well taken. I have added a few more secondary sources to the BNMS article. However, please note that this is not my organization or I do not work here. This is just my way of learning something new, and in this case, by creating successful articles on Wikipedia. Thanks again. Earthianyogi (talk) 00:13, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed status question

Hello everyone, do edits using gadgets like Twinkle count towards the 500 edits required for extended confirmed status, or must all 500 edits be main space edits? Thanks. ExemplaryScholar (talk) 00:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ExemplaryScholar Semi-automatic edits such as those are included. Hillelfrei talk 00:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ExemplaryScholar: Your concern with reaching extended confirmed status is, well, concerning. These type of things are not to be aspired to, but instead are just supposed to happen as you gain legitimate experience. We have seen, over and over again, those who come here with the idea of racking up privileges and awards, burn out quickly (or have corrupt intent to begin with). If your intentions are honorable, please keep this in mind. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AlanM1 Although gaining permissions is not my main goal, I want to eventually have a broader reach within the community by editing more popular and trending topics yet still want to do this by doing something I enjoy and have already spent hours on: stopping vandalism. I will keep what you said in mind though, thanks. ExemplaryScholar (talk) 03:14, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inserting non-free images into articles

I've had my first article Bailey Doogan accepted and posted. Now I'm trying to insert three images of the artist's work. They meet the fair-use criteria. I actually received the files from the artist and have her permission to use them. I just can't seem to technically get the files inserted. When I used the Wikipedia upload function, it wouldn't accept the upload because I couldn't find a fair use category that the program would accept. I found the "Non-free 2D art" template that other artist articles have used, and I filled it out, but it loaded directly into my article. It should be part of a larger attachment that is linked to the inserted image. I'm running out of options. Does anyone know how to access the form that comes up when you click on an inserted image and then click on the "More Details" button? Here's an example of the page I'm talking about from James Pringle Cook's article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:James_Pringle_Cook_Whisper_2_2013.jpg

Thanks! Dactyl123 (talk) 00:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC) Dactyl123 (talk) 00:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dactyl1123. I am assuredly not an expert on this, but nobody else has answered, so I'll try. It looks to me as if the rationale that Mianvar1 used to upload those pictures is not one that the creators of the upload wizard chose to include - in fact, it's pretty clear from the wording that they didn't believe that it is appropriate to upload an artist's 2D work as fair use in an article about the artist. I guess you need to upload the file manually, but I may be wrong. In any case, you would not be adding the template to the article, but to the file description.
I have pinged Mianvar1 (who is still active) and perhaps they will come and advise you better. --ColinFine (talk) 17:12, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Repinging Dactyl123. --ColinFine (talk) 17:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proper (minimal) Formatting for a See Also Section

Hello, I am trying to add a See Also section to an article. I am having trouble figuring out the formatting. I am getting a redundant See Also next to the entry, when it is already in a See Also section. What is a general help article on Wikipedia that gives examples of proper formatting?

I also am not sure how I should be formatting an external reference. The article these questions are regarding is "Colundi". Also, how what is the format for linking to another article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaisgossman (talkcontribs) 00:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jaisgossman and welcome to the Teahouse. For a "See also" section, jsut give a bulleted list of article links. For example, one line might be typed as * [[Microtones]] which would render as:
That also shows you the format for an article link, The template {{see also}} is for use in hat note3s at the top of an article, not for a See Also section. Help:Cheatsheet gives many useful examples of formatting. Referencing for beginners describes how to do reference citations in detail. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Change in fonts for displaying differences from Watchlist

In the last two days I noticed that when I display differences for Watchlist items the changes are shown in a different font from what appeared before May 4. Is an option available for changing back to the previous font? Eddie Blick (talk) 01:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eddie Blick. See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Thursday font change. Adding the below code in your CSS is suggested. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
.diff-editfont-monospace .diff-addedline,
.diff-editfont-monospace .diff-deletedline,
.diff-editfont-monospace .diff-context {
  font-family: sans-serif;
  font-size: 88%;
}
Thanks, PrimeHunter! I appreciate your help. Eddie Blick (talk) 02:29, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

not sure if the activity is, but seems like it is, a conflict of interest

I don't have much experience with WP:COI, but think I found one at Andreas Luiskandl. Thus far only 4 editors have made changes to this pretty new article, but there's one that has made 130 edits to the page. The users name is Cioprofileedit (talk · contribs) which if spaced out is "COI Profile Edit" and the page is for a career CIO. I know there's a template for COI I could put on the person's talk page, but before I do I'd like to get some feedback/guidance whether this really should seem strange to me. Thx. ToeFungii (talk) 02:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC) ToeFungii (talk) 02:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ToeFungii:! Welcome to the Teahouse. - I looked at the article and the user and I see where your concern lies. I feel the same. I actually noticed quite a few things and posted them on the page as well. If you would like to take a look, you can edit or delete (as can anyone else) what I put in the banner. Thanks GalendaliaChat Me Up 04:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and put what I think is the softest coi notice. I suppose there may be no coi, but the fact that they've only edited this single article with their username seems to make it likely there is some relationship. Then again, they may have just started with this one article; then again if they edit all cio articles their name would still potentially indicate an issue. I don't know. But thanks Galendalia for at least making me think I'm not crazy and for the edits you did on the page. ToeFungii (talk) 04:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No worries! I always got your back! TTYL GalendaliaChat Me Up 04:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Posting copyrighted images in articles

I also posted this on the media copyright questions page, but I'd like to post this here as well to get some more views on this. So here it goes...

Hello all! I was trying to add a few images to some Wikipedia pages I wrote and another user reversed my additions. Before I go to dispute resolution, any of the resources here, and in order to avoid an edit war, I'd like to know if I'm justified in adding these images to these pages:

I'd just like another opinion on this, as I'm not really sure what to do, or even how to add NFCC images to articles in the future without them being removed.

I look forward to hearing from you.--Historyday01 (talk) 02:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC) Historyday01 (talk) 02:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Historyday01: and welcome to the Teahouse. You are correct in posting this question in the copyright questions, as they will be the ones to best assist you in this. Most of the hosts in that forum have the experience to best answer that question for you and address your concerns for the posting. Thanks GalendaliaChat Me Up 03:43, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. If I have any other general questions, I'll be free to post them here.Historyday01 (talk) 12:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How can I get editing authority on the Pocahontas article?

How can I get editing authority on the Pocahontas article? There is some imprecise writing, such as the Wayne Newton claim to being a descendant of Pocahontas through her "son". The son that this claim refers to is not the documented son, Thomas Rolfe, but a separate oral tradition son whose existence is contested. The footnote (6) for this clause is linked to a source that does not even mention Wayne Newton. (For the record, the reference to Glenn Strange is not mentioned in this source either, but at least the "son" being referred to in his case is the same as the one in the source.) Texasstorm (talk) 02:47, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Texasstorm and welcome to the teahouse. Thank you for noticing the inaccuracy. You can press "view source" on the top right and on the screen that comes up, use the "Submit an edit request" link at the bottom right to make an edit request which will be reviewed by an experienced editor. Hillelfrei talk 03:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious barnstars

I recently got 2 barnstars from the user YahooYahoofefefe. However, they were very suspicious. One of them just said "yo", and the other one said "yO BRo can you tell me how you find out about the Gold Certifccation of Blow my Mind Davido pls ? im checking their website it's not showing certificatiosn". This looks suspicious, and a search for "Gold Certification of Blow my Mind Davido" gave no useful results. The username also looks suspicious. Do I need to do anything about this? CrazyBoy826 (talk) 03:22, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @CrazyBoy826:! Welcome to the TeaHouse! I will take a look and take all of the appropriate actions for you. Thank you for bringing this to our attention! GalendaliaChat Me Up 03:29, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CrazyBoy826: hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Seeing as that user has no other contributions, it strikes me that someone has decided to yank your chain a bit, for unknown reasons. Sorry about that. I would just delete them. If it reoccurs it can be looked into further.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted the changes for you and submitted a report to verify it is not a sockpuppet. GalendaliaChat Me Up 03:35, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the God of Israel and how was he seen ?

In the book of Exodus, 24th chapter, 10th and 11th verse, it states that "they saw God, seventy four people not including the nobles in the eleventh verse, how do you explain this to someone when St.John 1 and 18 state that no one has seen God at anytime. 2600:1700:BE80:CE0:F8CF:3089:FDA0:6539 (talk) 04:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is for questions related to Wikipedia editing. You could try asking your question at the reference desk.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:37, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A7 and G11

hello please anyone help me i made a page that took me a lot of time about someone and they just deleted my page according to A7,G11 rules which I didn't understand what do they mean anyways and my page got deleted please I will try to repeat everything but any advice before starting ? Issaje (talk) 05:41, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The rules are explained at A7 and G11. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:11, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Read WP:YFA carefully. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:21, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nawal Benzaouia appears to be a young woman who organizes fashion shows that include women with disabilities (Downs, wheelchair...). While this is admirable, a quickie search at Google did not find enough content written about her to meet Wikipedia's concept of notability. Her own website, LinkedIn, Facebook, etc. do not qualify as references. See WP:TOOSOON for discussion of attempts at articles about someone too soon in their career. David notMD (talk) 10:35, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox Query

Hi, hope you can help. I'm still very much learning the ropes and have followed a tutorial by Edinburgh University Wikipedian in Residence to help me get started. I'd like to create multiple Sandbox pages for other articles but I'm not sure how to go about this and I've hit a wall trying to find help online. Any advice gratefully received. Dratsie (talk) 08:56, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dratsie and welcome to the Teahouse! Feel free to experiment in your own sandbox by clicking Here. If you want to make more than one sandbox (like I have), simply make another one! For example, if you want to make a sandbox name Sandbox2 click here and put what you want in it. Feel free to read WP:SANDBOX to learn more. — Yours, Berrely • TalkContribs 09:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Can I create another one?

I joined Wikipedia about a week ago so I didn't really know about this but I'll make my corrections. Since my article has been declined and speedily deleted,can I create another one? Abigail Tetteh (talk) 09:16, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Abigail Tetteh, yep, you can create as many articles as you want! Since your article was deleted, I highly recommend reading WP:INTRODUCTION and WP:GNG. It is quite likely that your article was deleted as it wasn't notable enough, so I really recommend reading GNG. If you don't mind me asking, what was the article? When I looked at your contributions this section on the Teahouse was the only edit I could find. — Yours, Berrely • TalkContribs 09:24, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Berrely: users talk page shows copyright infringement. GalendaliaChat Me Up 09:43, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Galendalia: thanks! As Galendalia just pointed out, your sandbox was recently deleted as you had copied text from another website. Wikipedia's policies are very strict about copyright infringement and per WP:COPYVIO, that should have been deleted. However, you are free to create your sandbox again, as long as you don't put any copyright infringing text on it. — Yours, Berrely • TalkContribs 09:47, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing articles

I would like to know how to find articles that need editing due to grammatical or spelling errors.

Thanks. Jardinski (talk) 09:36, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jardinski, a good way to find articles that need some typo fixing is by pressing the random pages button on the sidebar. You will almost definitely find some articles that need so editing. You might also want to consider checking out . — Yours, Berrely • TalkContribs 09:41, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jardinski, check WP:Community portal. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:14, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Global Chess Festival

Hello, my text has been declined. Could you please give specific instructions how to improve it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Global_Chess_Festival. Thank you!Katikov (talk) 10:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC) Katikov (talk) 10:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks to be a refs problem. Some of the content of the draft perhaps not supported by refs? I think that a larger issue is that all of the refs are from chess publications. Can you find write-ups in non-chess publications? Given events held in Hungary, perhaps Hungarian newspapers and magazines? Do not have to be in English. David notMD (talk) 10:46, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Sandbox

Hello,please I'm sorry for asking similar questions from multiple locations. Can I create a new sandbox? Abigail Tetteh (talk) 10:38, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Abigail Tetteh: Yes, you can create a new sandbox by going to User:Abigail Tetteh/sandbox and typing in the edit window. Just don't copy text from other Web sites. Deor (talk) 11:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Colorado COVID-19 web page

I have periodically been editing the Colorado COVID-19 webpage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_Colorado) by adding the latest data from the CO Department of Public Health. Recently the web page was redirected from its previous site, which was titled "2020 Coronavirus pandemic in Colorado". Midway down the page there is a valuable data table titled "2020 Coronavirus pandemic cases by Colorado County". This table no longer appears to be editable: when I click the edit link it opens an Editing Template window that is mostly empty except for some language about redirecting... "Redirect Category Shell". It appears that the redirect of the original webpage to the new one hasn't correctly transferred the data file behind this table... please advise how to do so. Thanks! StanfordPostDoc (talk) 11:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed — Yours, Berrely • TalkContribs 11:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good article vs Featured article

Can any one explain difference between Good article and Featured article in just simple words. Wiki 🎮 Play 11:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @WikiGamee: and welcome to the Teahouse! A good article has to meet strict criteria and when it does it becomes promoted. The article you listed above will show the requirements. The featured article is stricter in its standards as stated on the page you linked above plus the added feature of being on the home page of Wikipedia. I hope this helps you. Feel free to elaborate more if you still find yourself not understanding. Thanks Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 11:47, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Featured article criteria. Of ~six million articles in English Wikipedia, 0.1% are FA and 0.5% are GA. David notMD (talk) 16:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

what to do with 2 references for same sentence on Ben Barres

the article contains 2 references ( ref 1 ) and ( ref 2 ) saying same thing for text :

Attending a West Orange school, Barres excelled in mathematics and science and was impressed by his eighth-grade teacher, Jeffrey Davis.

should i delete one [ ref 1 ] and retain another [ ref 2 ] ? Leela52452 (talk) 11:42, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Leela52452: thanks for stopping by. I recommend you do not remove the references as I see them used in different sections of the article. They are also archived pages so if you were to remove them and later down the road someone who needs them may not be able to find them. I hope that helps. Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 11:53, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Leela52452. I don't think there's really any need to delete either reference as long as they are both to reliable sources. If we were talking about an excessively large number of references to support the same simple statement and a WP:OVERCITE type of situation existed, then it might make sense to pick out the best ones and drop the rest; however, two references isn't really excessive, at least in my opinion. In some cases, it can even be a good idea to have multiple citations as sort of a backup in case one citation becomes a WP:DEADLINK, one is a WP:PRIMARY type of source, or the content is particularly something that is contentious. If you're really concerned about this, then you might want to consider asking about it on relevant article's corresponding talk page to see what some others might think. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:57, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft improvement or deletion

Hi, I was writing a draft about this 19th century Italian ceramicist, Vincenzo Molaroni, but I can't find any substantial information on the subject. It also seems to be not/vaguely notable. Should I create a stub on this with the information and resources available (additional info can be added to what's already there, but not much) or should it be deleted? Thanks. NawJee (talk) 12:02, 6 May 2020 (UTC) NawJee (talk) 12:02, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NawJee. There are really no deadlines per se when it comes to drafts which means you can continue working on it and trying to improve it at your own pace if you like. Things like WP:N don't really apply to drafts like they do to articles; so, as long as the draft is a good faith attempt and not about something frivolous, it should be OK. The only thing you do need to worry about is leaving it go unedited for too long so that it doesn't get mistaken as an abandoned draft. If you create a WP:STUB, it might survive (even for quite some time), but there's always a risk that it will end up WP:DELETEd; moreover, the idea behind a stub is that the subject's Wikipedia notability is pretty well established, but there's room for improvement and that the article has the potential to eventually evolve into a much more developed article. Perhaps you can find some members of a relevant Wikiproject who can help finding sources and assessing notability. You can always submit the draft to WP:AFC for review when you think it's ready and see what happens. Being accepted via AFC doesn't mean an article can never be deleted, but AFC reviewers tend to be fairly experienced editors and typically don't approve drafts that are likely going to end up quickly deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
NawJee, please see WP:ARTIST for more detail. From first glance this seems to have a certain prospect; please feel free to improve it and add more sources! Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 12:41, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Marchjuly:, I understand that there are no deadlines and that they are usually deleted if left unedited for 60 days, but I am concerned about the notability and availability of content. Anyhow, as Eumat114 suggested, I'll improve the draft and add what sources I can find. The reviewers at AfC can then best judge if it should be published at all. Thank you both for answering. NawJee (talk) 17:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability Assistance

Hi. I am a writer. I work in the Australian comedy industry. I am a newcomer to Wikipedia editing and would like to show that a subject I intend to create and, with the help of others in the industry, edit is important and noteworthy as an article. It is an article on a broadcaster, producer and promoter David - Dave - Taranto, who worked in Melbourne radio, recording and live comedy production in the nineteen nineties in Melbourne Australia. His work, which included running the Melbourne Comedy Festival, occurred at a time before comedy in Australia became a more organised professional industry. However, his work is notable as he was active in establishing the organisations that exist today. He was hands on in creating comedy management. As he had such a big impact on Australia's comedy industry I believe an article on Taranto would be very important contribution to the history of comedy in Melbourne and Australia. Can you help me?Crashingdown Man (talk) 12:03, 6 May 2020 (UTC) Crashingdown Man (talk) 12:03, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Crashingdown Man: Welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse. It seems like this will be a great article so to help you get accustomed to Wikipedia and articles and the policies, I recommend you go to https://dashboard.wikiedu.org/training/students and you login with your Wikipedia account and start at step one. This will be a great resource for you! Thanks Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 12:14, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Crashingdown Man. While this person sounds interesting and he may have done lots of good things, the main thing you're going to have to self-assess is whether he meets Wikipedia:Notability (people) or Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. There are lots of people out there who have done lots of great things, but whether they can have Wikipedia articles written about them often depends upon whether they have received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent or secondary in nature as explained in Wikipedia:Notability#Notability requires verifiable evidence.
If you feel this person is Wikipedia notable and you want to try and create an article about him, then my suggest to you would be to start with a draft and submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review when you think it's ready. Writing articles can be tricky even for experienced editors or writers because Wikipedia has various policies and guidelines and it's own style when it comes to what it wants from articles. You can find out a little more about this by looking at pages like Help:Your first article or Help:Referencing for beginners, but you might look at some of the other pages linked to in the "Welcome" template previously added to your user talk page for reference as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:35, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Crashingdown Man:. All the advice above is excellent. On a practical level, I suggest you start by collecting your sources. In Wikipedia, "notability" is principally determined by what reliable sources say about the subject. So collect the sources that talk about the contributions that Taranto made, as you describe. They could be newspaper articles, magazines, television coverage, books, even significant industry awards - they all build the case to show his notability.--Gronk Oz (talk) 13:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please help with a submission for Macedonian Aviation UK

Can an Editor at Wikipedia kindly help me as a retired 74 year old I am having so much difficulty submitting what I feel is a most interesting submission on my former airline Macedonian Aviation. I was exclusively the founder, owner and creator of this unique British airline. No one except myself have any copyrights of what I would like to submit below. To make a submission is so terribly difficult and any help you can give me would be so gratefully received. Thank you in anticipation. Roger Byron-Collins

Extended content

MACEDONIAN AVIATION Requested submission below

Early in 1972 the all British owned airline, Macedonian Aviation was formed to operate passenger and cargo charter flights. It started with the purchase of an 11 seat de Havilland Dove G-APZU from Lulsgate Air Services at Bristol airport. The airline was initially based at Luton airport operating under the AOC of McAlpine Aviation. Shortly afterwards Harry Chang, a pilot of the recently collapsed 'troop carrier' airline, Lloyds International approached the owner as he had available two contracts with Conoco and The Ford Motor Company. The first was to move offshore oil rig workers around North Sea ports and the second to convey spare parts for the recently introduced Ford Capri between Dagenham and Dusseldorf. With these contracts a loan was secured from Williams and Glyns Bank for Macedonian Aviation, a subsidiary of London based property company Macedonian Securities Ltd to expand their fleet and establish their first base at Southend airport. Harry Chang was appointed as chief pilot and with the Conoco and Ford Motor Company's contracts in place, Macedonian purchased the 'workhorse' of British Aircraft Corporation Filton - a Dakota DC3 G-AMPO c/n 33186 in 30 seat configuration. This aircraft was used to fly the engineers working on the Concorde production between Bristol, Filton and Toulouse. In the summer of that year an application was made to the Civil Aviation Committee to obtain their own AOC. The CAA chairman at the time was Lord Boyd-Carpenter and when it was granted he passed comment that "The applicant at only 26 years of age must be the youngest person in British aviation history to be awarded with an Air Operator's Certificate." ​ ​ On 8th August Dakota G-AMPO's first flight was a weekend inauguration trip to Amsterdam followed by a service check with Dan Air at Lasham and re sprayed at Eagle Air Services at Leavesden, as was the Dove. The Dakota crew underwent training with Dan Air at Lasham and it paid many visits to Gatwick and Southend during this period. Also in August 1972 Dove G-APZU went into service for passenger charters with several flights to Jersey, Amsterdam, Le Touquet, Hamburg, Copenhagen and Oslo. Unexpected publicity was achieved when a special charter for the Dove was undertaken between the 6th to 12th November 1972 when Michael Jackson and the Jackson Five were flown between their concerts in Paris, Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Wembley. The following week the aircraft was chartered by Donny Osmond and The Osmonds for their UK tour. Dove G-APZU went into service for passenger charters from Southend in the October with several flights to Hamburg,Copenhagen and Oslo. ​ ​ However on 4th September 1972 Dakota G-AMPO undertook a very eventful trip. The airline owner's business partner was to marry an Indian diplomat's daughter at the All Saints Anglican Church in Beirut, Lebanon and a wedding party of 25 guests flew out on an MEA scheduled flight from Heathrow. After the marriage ceremony the wedding reception was held at the waterfront St George Hotel, owned by the airline owner's friend Fady el_Khoury, son of the Lebanese President. The following day Palestinian Terrorists murdered Israeli athletes at the Olympic games in Munich. On the 8th September 1972 the Israelis retaliated by attacking and besieging Beirut Airport which was closed and there were no scheduled flights to get the guests out of Lebanon. Harry Chang the head pilot was called from Beirut who said he would take the Dakota from Gatwick to extract the party and knowing the airport well advised the guests to remain on the beach by the airport which he would overfly and once he had landed the group were to run to the aircraft and they could embark. Some 12 hours later after refuelling at Genoa and Brindisi G-AMPO landed at Beirut airport escorted by Israeli military aircraft. The entire 25 wedding guests climbed over the perimeter fence and sprinted for the aircraft which did not shut down and it took off again within minutes for Nicosia Cyprus with the Israeli escort. Some of the wedding party continued their celebrations at The Dome Hotel in Kyrenia (before the island was divided). The wedding guests returned to the UK with Cyprus Airways and the crew and the owner returned in the Dakota 2 days later to Gatwick via Genoa. ​ ​ Later in September 1972 after completion of crew training G-AMPO returned to Southend to commence operations. On November 5th it took its first paying passengers to Amsterdam. The Dove G-APZU departed Southend on November 4th 1972 for a trip to Oslo Fornebu Norway for​ 4 days. Over the winter season the Dove operated a multitude of charter fights to Belgium, France, Germany and Holland. Finally the Dove G-APZU was sold to Shackleton Aviation in February 1973. By the spring 1973 G-AMPO was busy flying almost daily to Jersey, Ostend, Brussels and Saarbrucken. On May 3rd 1973 it flew a service to Groningen - Bergen - Birmingham - Brussels - Southend. By the summer that year the Dakota was working flat out on regular flights between Coventry - Jersey, Birmingham - Cologne, Southend - Castle Donnington - Stornoway. It also undertook many flights for Intra Airways. In November and December it was flying to Brussels, Calais, Cologne, Coventry Exeter, Geneva, Glasgow, Lisbon, Malta, Marseilles, Newcastle and Saarbrucken. During these months it was carrying various car components for the Ford Motor Company and transferring gold bullion for the UK Treasury to and from Germany, Belgium and France. In December 1973 Macedonian commenced oil rig support business for the first time and as a result the Dakota was then relocated to Aberdeen in connection with this contract. With this massive increase in work load Macedonian looked for more DC3s to buy and in March 1974 they purchased from Jersey, British Island Airway's last 3 Dakotas. The first 2 aircraft G-AMHJ c/n 13468 and G-AMRA c/n 26735 arrived at Southend March 8 1974. They were in a convertible cargo/passenger configuration and were moved to Aberdeen on April 27th 1974 for transportation of crews and equipment to Sumburgh on the Shetland Islands. Dakota G-AMPO arrived in Aberdeen also in April but was moved back to Southend that spring for services to Amsterdam, Belfast Gibraltar, Hamburg, Hurn, Heathrow, Le Havre ,Lisbon, Ostend, Rotterdam, Saarbrucken and Teeside. Then in September the third ex BIA DC3 G-AMSV c/n 32830 arrived at Southend. In April 1974 Macedonian Aviation acquired the former Dutch Limburg Airlines route from Rotterdam to Le Havre replacing their Fokker Friendships with Dakotas.​ ​ During summer of 1974 the owner was hearing that the oil companies were going to insist on turboprop operations opened negotiations to acquire 3 Aer Lingus Viscounts and 6 Air Canada Viscounts or 3 Eastern Provincial Heralds. These negotiations were not successful and having appraised the cost of running a turboprop operation was sure would not be profitable so sold the entire Macedonian Aviation as a going concern. ​ ​ Following the sale on November 6th 1974 all the aircraft returned to Southend and the new owners were unable to raise finance to support turboprop operations by the end of the year they ceased all flying. The aircraft went to Humber Airways followed by Eastern Airways who operated the Heathrow - Norwich - Humberside scheduled service. ​ Macedonian Aviation's fleet of 6 Aircraft:​ ​ DH104 Dove 6 G-APZU (04511) Douglas Dakota G-AMPO (16437/33185), G-AMPZ (16124/32872), G-AMHJ (13468) G-AMRA (15290/26735), G-AMSV (16072/32830)

ByronCollins (talk) 12:11, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, ByronCollins and welcome to the Teahouse. The above displays as a single huge paragraph, and is very hard to read. Also, posting entire proposed drafts to the Teahouse is usually not helpful. The above does not seem to cite or refer to any sources. Wikipedia articles should be based on published reliable sources not on personal knowledge. Are there sources from which this information can be derived? If so,, what are they? Is there sufficient coverage in sources to make this former company notable? I could copy this to a draft for you, but without sources it cannot go anywhere. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 12:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DESiegel, for courtesy: the draft is at Byron’s sandbox. Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 12:46, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I see, ByronCollins, that you already created this at User:ByronCollins/sandbox, and had previously posted similar content at Macedonian Aviation which was deleted as a copyright infringement of this site Note that even if you do, in fact, own the copyright of the content on that site, Wikipedia cannot accept it unless the site includes a compatible free license, and that even if it wee to be freely released, There could not be a Wikipedia article on this topic unless there are independent sources that cover the topic in some detail. That is what makes a topic notable here, as a rule. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 12:53, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hi ByronCollins. The first thing that is going to need to be established for any article to be written about the company is whether it meets Wikipedia:Notability (companies and organizations). Basically, it's going to have to be shown that the company received significant coverage along the lines explained in WP:CORPDEPTH. If it can be established that the company is Wikipedia notable, then perhaps an article can not only be written about it, but also avoid ending up being deleted. You might want to try asking about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airlines because the members of that Wikiproject are probably good people to ask about the notability of airlines like this.
The next thing for you to consider would be Wikipedia:Conflict of interest based upon what you posted above. Even if it turns out that an article about the company can be written, you might not be the best person to try and do so. Wikipedia doesn't prohibit conflict of interest editing, but it's something that is highly discourage because people connected to subjects they are trying to write about often (even unintentionally) try to present things in a manner that isn't always in accordance with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and other relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines like Wikipedia:No original research, etc. COI editing also tends to be viewed suspiciously by many editors (rightly or wrongly) which might lead to tension with others. You best chance might be to make your case for an article at WikiProject Airlines and see if you can find anyone there to help create the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:56, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitia and Wikipedia Lebanese Yacht Club

Dear All, Kindly note that i notice that my draft article for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lebanese_Yacht_Club is now published on Wikitia https://wikitia.com/wiki/Lebanese_Yacht_Club (it was copy paste from my article before doing some updates on it) can you please advise if this is a normal thing to expect... waiting for your urgent comment. Princesse Marissa (talk) 12:49, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Princesse Marissa, and welcome to ther Teahouse. It seems that Wikitia is a site that copys information from Wikipedia, apparently without fully complying with the Wikipedia license. See #wikipedia and wikitia? why all my info is there?? above on this page. Note that if Wikitia did comply fully with the license by providing proper attribution, they could legally copy any page or sewt of pages from Wikipedia that they might choose. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 13:00, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Dear, DESiegel, Thank you, the info are correct there but i still did some other modifications and same others users who help me enhance my article...if i leave it as it is there...and later on my article here hopefully is approved here...can i do this?
waiting for your feedback. Princesse Marissa (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Princesse Marissa, yiu don't have to do anything about the Wikitia page, and it will in no way affect the possible approval of your draft here, one way or the other. The Wikitia site might or might not pick up the changes to the page here -- we don't have any control over that. You can safely just ignore it. You could comp-lain about the improper license compliance, but all they have to do is add an acknowledgement and a link and they are in full compliance. I'm not sure it is worth the trouble to complain, but that is up to you. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 13:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DESiegel, thank you, much appreciated your response, i was just worried if it might affect the possible approval of my draft here (hopefully) ...but since it won't affect as per your advise...i will ignore it...thank you very much again :) Princesse Marissa (talk) 14:00, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A-Bomb

why did the U.S. drop the atomic bomb Sumdogg3492 (talk) 13:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Teahouse is for asking questions about using and editing Wikipedia, so your question doesn't belong here. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:55, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sumdogg3492 I might direct you to the article about the bombings, Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. You may wish to use the Reference Desk for other similar inquiries. 331dot (talk) 14:45, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing history articles

Which references are okay to use for history articles? If I'm writing about a sixteenth century topic, is it okay to use nineteenth century sources? There are many websites that combine information from various origins. Some of them come from major organizations, such as government institutions, while others do not. What qualifies a source to be reliable enough for describing a historical topic, and what are the optimal proportions of each type of source to be used on Wikipedia.

I'm currently writing an article on Simple English Wikipedia (simple:User:Naddruf/History of Ireland) but I thought it would be better to ask here.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 14:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Rakesh20001 (talk) 14:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rakesh20001, is this related to the above thread? Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 15:24, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hello, Rakesh20001 and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know about the simple English Wikipedia, but on en there are no hard and fast rules.
  • Sources must be reliabel but it is something of a judgement call whether a given source is reliable. One can post a question about a specific source at the reliable source noticeboard and hope for advice from experienced editors there. To get such advice you must identify the specific source, AND what statements will be sourced to it.
  • Sources must be published. This generally means that ancient manuscripts are not usable as sources directly, only modern printed editions of them.
  • When using nineteenth century sources, watch out for out-of-date theories and scholarship. It would be well to check against a more recent source, if one is available. On some issues current scholarly consensus has changed drastically since the 1800s, on others not nearly so much.
Good luck and welcome again. Without specifics, that is about as far as i think i can go. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:36, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DESiegel Thank you for helping. It was me who asked (User:Rakesh20001 must be confused somehow). Specifically, I'm wondering how much direct research is okay to use. Is it okay if a lot of the sources are arguments by some historian about a minor topic, and I use them to source general events? For example: if the source is this article about fortifications in a particular area and I use it to reference dates in which various kings ruled. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41585270. This is not the main point of the article. Or, do I need to use general outlines of Irish history as references?—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 15:46, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Naddruf sorry for the confusion. Any reliable source may be used. The fact you are using the source to support need not be the central topic of the source. However, if it is a very brief mention, one might not be as confident that the author of the source checked minor details as one is that the author checked issues that are of major import to the work s/he was writing. If the issue is disputed among scholars (historians in this case) and more than one view could be considered mainstream, i is often well to give both views (or multiple views iof more than 2) with proper citations to sources that support each. If there is a single clear consensus, or the matter is basically factual (e.g. "King Casmir IX was crowned in 1287") we do not need huge numbers of sources that all support the same statement. Does that give you what you need? For a specific question, visit the RSN (link above), and ask "Is source X reliable for statement Y?" Does that help? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:13, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I Know this is a bit radom but what facts or new section should i add to my real page

I Know this is a bit radom but what facts or new section should i add to my real page

I Know this is a bit radom but what facts or new section should i add to my real page. PLease acesses my page here and suggest what to do. Acess page here

--HISTORIAN (talk) 16:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC) HISTORIAN (talk) 16:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Andrewhistory. There is no specific list of sections you should have on your user page. Lists of interesting facts from Wikipedia articles are OK, but I would advise against having too many of them. Some users include lists of articles they have worked on, or created, or areas they plan to work on, or particular skills or resources they have and are willing to make available to others. Some list opinions about Wikipedia policy issues. You can have a look at User:DESiegel for what I choose to list. But I advise against spending too much time on your user page. Work on articles should be much more important and take up more of your Wikipedia effort. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:DESiegel thanks for the help. I looked at the user pages of you and many other people. I can't help but notice those boxes with the info like "this user likes/does etc" how do I do that HISTORIAN (talk) 16:24, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries provides a LONG list of Userboxes that you can use on your User page. David notMD (talk) 16:44, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Those are Userboxes, Andrewhistory. Follow the link to read about what they are and how to use them. I am not fond of them myself, but many users find them very desirable on user pages. I will only say, don't go overboard, and spend more time on articles than on your user page, please. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:47, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you forgot to add Shania Twain as one of the “notable concert & events held” 70.67.23.53 (talk) 16:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)Thank you Shirley[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The article says that it is a partial list. If you have suggestions on something to improve the article, you can start a discussion on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 16:50, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New person asking questions?

WHERE THE HELL IS WHOLELOTTARED Gsy65reegfjsh4 (talk) 16:32, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

can someone make an article about coryxkenshin please Gsy65reegfjsh4 (talk) 16:35, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CoryxKenshin is a YouTuber. If you think he is article-worthy you can give it a try. David notMD (talk) 16:39, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Picture edits

how do you edit pictures Sumdogg3492 (talk) 16:44, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sumdogg3492: Why do you want to edit pictures instead of uploading your own? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Conflict

I have been in contact with an editor about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgii_Nelepp Today I got a page called Editing Conflict providing a place and instructions to resolve the conflict. Now I can't find it to use. Please help me bring up the Editors Conflict on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgii_Nelepp.Opera Snob (talk) 17:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC) Opera Snob (talk) 17:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Opera Snob: As far as I can tell there is nothing resembling a link to the dispute resolution dashboard on the article, its talk page, or your talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An Edit conflict is where one editor changes a page while another is in the processes of editing it. That sort of edit conflict is different from an edition dispute where editors disagree on what changes to make, but it can occur during a dispute, and may confuse things.Was it an edit conflict screen that you saw, Opera Snob, perhaps? or was it a link t Dispute resolution perhaps? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:46, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
When there is an editing dispute, the first and best place to try to resolve it is the article talk page, in this case Talk:Georgii Nelepp. I don't see any recent discussion there --only a long comment over 2 years old. I advise you, Opera Snob, to post your view of what shgould and should not be done in the article to that tlk page, and to ping the other editor(s) involved to join that discussion, DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am in agreement with DESiegel on this in the point of "is where one editor changes a page while another is in the processes of editing it" as I see this a lot, so I know when I am adding comments I write in and code everything, then I copy the raw text to my notepad just in case this happens, as it happens quite frequently. Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 17:56, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody teach me on how to make an article and tell me what we need an article on

Can somebody teach me on how to make an article and tell me what we need an article on I would love to make one and I tried a few days ago but that got regeted because of sourses and not be notable neough it seems like all the topics are taken HISTORIAN (talk) 17:54, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrewhistory: Please refer to WP:YFA. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:59, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again @Andrewhistory: - I recommend that users go through training so they are familiar with all sorts of policies, templates, guidelines, etc. I hope this will help you head in the right direction. Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 18:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Do i need an account to say something? Is there a place I can comment in articles? 5.24.160.16 (talk) 18:07, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@5.24.160.16: You can edit but your name is your Ip. You can comment on the page talk page. The4lines |||| (You Asked?) (What I have Done.) 18:11, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What do I press to access a talk page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.24.160.16 (talk) 18:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC) I found a button on the top of the page, next to where it says article. It says “talk” on it, is that a talk page?[reply]