Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by LilMew88 (talk | contribs) at 17:54, 20 May 2020 (→‎Edits to Digital Marketing: Looking for feedback on my first big edit!:)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


Advice please - Copying and augmenting a Swedish Wikipedia article onto the English Wikipedia site

I was surprised to see that there is no English Wikipedia entry for the musician Hank C.Burnette (real name Sven-Åke Kenneth Högberg).

There is a Swedish Wikipedia entry which is a "stub".

I'm a fan of this musician, particularly his superb track "Spinning Rock Boogie".

I have found a Facebook page apparently written with his endorsement and his YouTube channel. So there is plenty of material to allow this entry to develop beyond a "stub".

Would it be OK to write an English Wikipedia entry for this musician and to copy what is already written on the Swedish Wikipedia page for him, and then augment it?

Or is there some way of mirroring the Swedish page into the English Wikipedia?

Many thanks for your help.... Wizzlewick (talk) 09:06, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wizzlewick, and welcome to the Teahouse. You are welcome to try creating an article about Burnette, and to make use of the sv-wiki article as part of it (see Translation for how you must attribute this). However, you should treat this as creating a new article - which is one of the hardest tasks in editing Wikipedia. You will need to show that Burnette meets the criteria for notability - references in the Swedish version might do that, I haven't looked (English sources are preferred in en-wiki, but not required: as long as the source is reliable, and independent of the subject, it can be used). Different Wikipedias have different policies, and just because there is a sv-wiki article does not necessarily mean that he will meet the criteria for en-wiki. His own Facebook and YouTube channel are self-published sources, and cannot contribute to notability.
As I said, I suggest you treat this as creating a new article, in which case, please start with reading Your first article, --ColinFine (talk) 09:35, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Wizzlewick: welcome to the Teahouse! ColinFine was a little quicker, but I'll post my response even though it duplicates some of what he says: Facebook and a person's YouTube channel are not considered reliable sources at English Wikipedia, I'm afraid. The Swedish Wikipedia article doesn't actually have any sources that would be acceptable for an article in English Wikipedia, and I can't find anything in a quick Google search, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he would not be considered notable. Notability is the important factor here: primarily this notability guideline, but for a musician this is also relevant. As he was signed by Blue Horizon, it is possible that the musician-specific notability guideline is met. My advice would be that you create a draft article, using the Articles for Creation process, making sure that you include reliable secondary sources for all claims in the article. If something cannot be sourced, it unfortunately cannot be included. When you have created a draft, an experienced editor can review it and see whether it meets the requirements. Hope that makes sense. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 09:40, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Creative commons

Before I accidentally create a copyright violation: this means I can safely upload a picture to wikipedia, right? Licks-rocks (talk) 10:12, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More than that, Licks-rocks, you can upload it to Wikimedia Commons, so that it can be used by any Wikimedia project. It will go along with File:Moycullen - Connemara Marble Industries marble - geograph.org.uk - 1608807.jpg and two other relevant photos from Geograph which are already in Commons. --ColinFine (talk) 12:18, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
thank you ColinFine, I will be sure to do that, then! now to figure out how ^^--Licks-rocks (talk) 12:26, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to edit the title of a wiki page

Hi, am completely new to this so looking for some tips. Firstly, how do I change the title? There doesn't seem to be an Edit function for this? See attached url. The name is mis-spelt, should read Su, not Sui.

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

Secondly, I corrected the spelling within the main contents page but everything simply got reversed the next day. Did I do something wrong or is this simply someone telling me I'm wrong! If so, what is the etiquette for politely telling them that they are the ones who are wrong!

Thanks TanjungAru (talk) 10:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TanjungAru, welcome to the Teahouse. There are often different ways to write foreign names in English. "Peter Lo Sui Yin" and "Peter Lo Su Yin" have around the same number of Google hits and both forms are used in references in the article. I don't know whether there are criteria to say one form is "more correct" but the article should be consistent witht the title and not break links. You changed "Peter Lo Sui Yin.jpg" to "Peter Lo Su Yin.jpg" in the image name in the infobox. The name of the image is File:Peter Lo Sui Yin.jpg so a red link was displayed instead of the image after your edit.[1] The title of a page is changed by moving the page. See Wikipedia:Moving a page. You cannot do it as a new user but there are valid reasons for both names so you shouldn't do it without discussion anyway. See Wikipedia:Requested moves if you want the title changed. Then the spelling inside the article can also be changed. See also Wikipedia:Article titles#Foreign names and anglicization. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Learning the ropes without getting hanged

So I'm brand new here (not a bot) and am just learning how this all works. I did make some mistakes just starting out (did I mention that I'm new here?), but the blowback was absolutely staggering. And then after only having an account for about 3 hours, someone then nominated my account for a speedy deletion. I mean wow, not very welcoming to new people who are just learning how to do this. I don't know if I was just very unlucky in my experience or if this place really is just a wild west of Reddit style trolls as well. All I'm saying is that my first few hours here were very unwelcoming. ThePoliticalAtheist (talk) 12:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, ThePoliticalAtheist, and welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, you've inadvertently broken one of our biggest rules - hence the blowback. Problem is, this is an encyclopaedia about 'notable' subjects, and our userpage is purely for us to say a little about ourselves and our interests in editing this encyclopaedia. What you've done is effectively create an article about yourself, in totally the wrong place, and in a way that looks to others as wholly promotional. So, we have a system whereby pages that breach our guidelines (see WP:USERPAGE can be proposed for 'speedy deletion', as yours has been.
Had you wanted to have written about yourself -and assuming you were notable enough to meet our notability criteria (see also WP:NBIO), then the place to have done it was at Articles for Creation, where you would create a draft article, fill it with citations to independent reliable sources that talk about you in depth and in detail, and then submit if for review. We have a guidance page (shortcut: WP:NOTWEBHOST) which explains why it might seem to you like you've trodden on a landmine with your first step. And also WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY which explains why it is a bad idea to try to create an article about yourself here, rather than let someone else do it.
Having just looked at all your contributions, I can see you already created a draft article at Draft:Daniel Fisk Bennett, so having roughly the same content on your userpage is just not what we do here. I fully expect that page to be deleted very soon by a fellow administrator. But I should add there there is absolutely nothing to stop you then creating a new content which just says a few lines about you and your interests in contributing to this encyclopaedia. "Something along the lines of 'My name is Daniel Fisk, I love politics and hope to contribute in a neutral way to articles in my field of interest."  
What you've unfortunately done today is rather equivalent to someone getting into a car for the very first time, setting off up the freeway at full speed, then wondering why you got involved in a massive car crash, with everyone running to the scene. Like learner drivers, good Wikipedia editors start off slowly and learn the rule of the road before heading into mainstream traffic. I can't teach you how to drive properly from a single post here at the Teahouse, but do have a go at The Wikipedia Adventure and maybe browse through some of the key links at Help:Getting started, and ensure you understand Wikipedia:Notability (people), which is key to getting any article about a person into this encyclopaedia. Creating a new article from scratch is the second hardest thing anyone can do here. The hardest is trying to create one about yourself, especially if there aren't any independent, reliable sources you can use to demonstrate 'Notability'. In that case, it would be completely impossible, and LinkedIn would be a better route.
Hope this helps a bit, and sorry your first foray was a bit rough. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:45, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We all have scars from our early days. Stuff heals. A very common newbie error is to think Wikipedia is social media (another is pasting in copyright protected content). David notMD (talk) 12:58, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Do note, ThePoliticalAtheist that your account has in no way been proposed for deletion, it is only the page User:ThePoliticalAtheist that has been tagged for speedy deletion. A Wikipedia user page is primarily for describing the user as a Wikipedia editor including the user's activities, interests, and skills. It may also include views on Wikipe3dia policy or direction. It may also include limited biographical content so that others may understand the background from which you edit. It should not look like a Wikipedia article about yourself. Have a look at my user page or those of other hosts and responders you see here on the Teahosue for some examples. It is not ma "wild west" here, there are rules and guidelines, but they are somewhat complex and new users often fall afoul of them without any intention to do so. No oner thinks that you had IL-intent here, but many people do try to engage in self-promotion by building "articles" which really aren't articles about themselves on their user pages. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 13:00, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While you are here, you should know that Facebook and YouTube are not considered citations that meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, as they are user-contributed without professional editorial management. If you truly believe that you are article-worthy, I suggest you copy all the content you created to a place outside Wikipedia and then try to come back via Articles for Creation. David notMD (talk) 16:20, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ThePoliticalAtheist: Consistent with what others have said above, please consider the following. Before making an edit to an article on Wikipedia, which is an encyclopedia like Encyclopædia Britannica or Encarta, ask yourself what your motivation is for making the edit. If it is to add to the encyclopedic content of the article in a way that you might expect to do if you were working as an editor of one of those other encyclopedias that I mentioned, and you are correctly summarizing what is written in WP:SECONDARY reliable sources, go ahead and do it, and cite your source(s). Otherwise, consider one of the many other outlets that may welcome the content. I hope this helps. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

new user, crime and punishment (should be combined with the "new article" topic on teahouse)

Please help me i am new to english wikipedia. See Talk:Crime and Punishment DonGuess (talk) 12:38, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DonGuess and welcome to the Teahouse. I see that you made a post, asking about the use of Russian in the novel at Talk:Crime and Punishment. I don't see anything obviously wrong with that post. Did you have a question about how to edit the English-language Wikipedia? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 12:45, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,DES, thank you for the answer! Should i somehow connect my russian account to the english one? [1] DonGuess (talk) 12:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you use the same account name, DonGuess, the Wikimedsia softwarte connects any and all accounts on different projects that yoiu may have automatically, without you needign to take anby action. If you used a different account name, the accounts will be separate, and you should probably post a note on User:DonGuess linking to your other account, and not use both accounts here on en.Wikipedia. It is generally b etter to keep to a single account, although there can be legitimate reasons for using more than one, as long as this is properly disclosed. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 13:05, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

 – Moved sections from below. GoingBatty (talk) 14:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Crime and Punishment". Hello I am looking for an experienced user who knows russian language

How can i find such user? I need help with Talk:Crime and Punishment. DonGuess (talk) 13:23, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, DonGuess. You find what you need at Wikipedia:Translation or Wikipedia:Translators available. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:31, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

link in the Crime and Punishment article

 – Moved section from below. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:31, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can i add the following reference in the External links>Criticisms section: Text about "Crime and Punishment" on "Polka" project or does it require a preliminary discussion? DonGuess (talk) 14:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DonGuess: I see you already posted this request to the Talk:Crime and Punishment page. If it meets the Wikipedia:External links guideline (and presuming you have no conflict of interest), then you may add it without further discussion. I suggest you add "(in Russian)" after the link. If other editors disagree with your addition and remove it, this will kick off the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. GoingBatty (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please, show me page about using curly brackets without any keyword as hat note. I can't find this what is it.

I saw strange hat note on Viral shedding. {{Influenza virus life cycle}} What is it? Is it similar Template:Short descriptionPoetVeches (talk) 12:56, 15 May 2020 (UTC) Ah, I see, it's just Template:Influenza virus life cycle. I have no questions, just found answer myself. Excusme for bothering. PoetVeches (talk) 13:04, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PoetVeches. I already wrote a reply with more details so here it is. Things in {{..}} are usually template calls, in this case to display Template:Influenza virus life cycle. See Help:A quick guide to templates. It's not a hatnote. Hatnotes are only one type of template. Hatnotes are often (not always) at top of an article, but many other templates can also be at the top. Template:Short description is usually placed at the top. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:10, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) No worries PoetVeches. In my view the best way to learn is to ask a good question and then answer it yourself before anyone else does! (I've just tweaked your post so that the link to the template is visible, but that the content itself doesn't display on this page.) Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PoetVeches and perhaps other lurkers: Nick's edit was necessary because wrapping Example in double braces (curly brackets) WP:TRANSCLUDEs the page Template:Example (i.e., replaces {{Example}} with the content of Template:Example) when rendering the page. To prevent that (e.g., when discussing a template on talk page, like we're doing here), you can wrap the template page name with a template like {{Tlx}} with the code {{Tlx|Example}}, which renders as {{Example}}, providing a link to the template (usually displaying its documentation) instead of performing the transclusion. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Im making a page

but im getting comments

Aight. So i made a page on OHL player Nick Robertson. He was drafted by the Leafs, prolly gonna play with them next year. I'm getting told that A) He hasn't played in a fully professional league (even though players like Byfield and McMichael have pages and they haven't played in pro leagues yet)

and B) he's not notable enough, even though he led the CHL(OHL,QMJHL,WHL) in goals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nick_Robertson_(ice_hockey) go see for yourself if he's notable enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nolanisntfunny (talkcontribs) 13:16, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To somebody who knows more about sports than I do: This is about Draft:Nick Robertson (ice hockey). -- Hoary (talk) 14:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nolanisntfunny: Welcome to the Teahouse! At the top of your draft is a big red template with lots of helpful hints. If you click the [show] link next to "Improving your odds of a speedy review", you'll see that it encourages you to add a WikiProject template on the draft talk page. In your case, you can create Draft talk:Nick Robertson (ice hockey) with the template {{WikiProject Ice Hockey}}. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:54, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nolanisntfunny: Re: go see for yourself if he's notable enough, it's up to you to demonstrate notability with the sources that you cite in the article, currently:
1. An entry in a database, which is maybe suitable for citing statistics, and does nothing to establish notability.
2. Same issue as #1.
3. Might be OK. Find a couple more of these, from independent sources (i.e., the text should read nothing like this source so we know it's not just from a press release)
4. Might be OK.
5. Doesn't mention Robertson at all.
6. Exactly same cite as #2. You should instead use the same cite by naming it the first time using the "Ref name" field in the citation tool, which produces the code <ref name="USAHockey">{{Cite web |...}}</ref>, and then referring to it later with the code <ref name="USAHockey" /> (instead of using the citation tool). This is also discussed at WP:EASYREFBEGIN#Re-using a reference, again and again.
So, you currently have two sources that might contribute to establishing notability, based on general Wikipedia guidelines, and my complete lack of knowledge about sources specific to hockey. Also note that other stuff exists, so it's not a valid argument that there are other articles existent for non-notable players – Wikipedia has been less vigilant in the the past, and editors are constantly at work to delete articles that shouldn't be here (the process is non-trivial and takes a lot of time, as it should). Find some more sources and you should be OK. Please also see WP:EASYREFBEGIN for how to properly format cites – there's more to it than just bare links. Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1 and 2 are supposed to be about simple things like birthday, height, weight, stats. 3 and 4 are good. 5 is supposed to confirm the fact that the season was cancelled due to the Coronavirus. 6 is an error on my part. Nolanisntfunny (talk) 01:30, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

could you please remove this page that was made behind my back by my ex girlfriend i would greatly appreciate it

 71.225.182.229 (talk) 13:07, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which page? We have millions and this is the only edit by your IP address. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:12, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
user:PrimeHunter Can't you read their mind?? McClenon mobile (talk) 17:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The IP address geolocates to Philadelphia. Philadelphia incategory:"Living people" gives 24,182 results. So close. Or maybe it's about this page. Darn, already deleted in 2009. I'm out of ideas. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:54, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is te best place to learn

what is te best place on wikipedia to learn and practice on edits ? Stonertone (talk) 13:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sandbox, but your conversions into blue of your user page and user talk page suggest that you already know your way around Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 14:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Stonertone: Welcome to the Teahouse. In addition to using the Sandbox, you may also want to try out Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure if you're looking for an interactive tutorial to Wikipedia itself. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Stonertone: You might also enjoy the tutorial at Help:Introduction. GoingBatty (talk) 14:35, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New article

Hello! what should i do if I want someone to make an article about a website in russian language? I am ready to help this person in any way possible.DonGuess (talk) 14:41, 15 May 2020 (UTC) DonGuess (talk) 14:41, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, DonGuess. Are you asking for an article about a Russian website or an article about a website that is to be written in Russian? If it's the latter you are probably better off heading to the Russian Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @DonGuess: I'm presuming you are asking about creating an article on the English Wikipedia about a Russian-language website. Since creating a new article can be challenging, I suggest you spend a few weeks improving existing articles here. When you're ready, I suggest you first read Wikipedia:Notability (web). If you are able to gather enough independent reliable sources to demonstrate notability, then you can follow the instructions at Help:Your first article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:49, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
GoingBatty, I personally think that the website is very notable because it contains wiki-like (I don’t mean that it copies from Wikipedia, it doesn’t) texts about russian literature and a Wikipedia reader who is interested in russian literature rather probably knows russian good enough to at use this website. But I don’t want to be blamed for conflict of interested (which happened with my russian account) so I’d like someone else to rate the notability for me. Thank you,DonGuess (talk) 15:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, DonGuess. Wikipedia's concept of notability is, in my view, poorly named, because it is nothing to do with the quality, importance, fame, or popularity of the subject. We often see people saying "I think X is notable because" and giving a reason which has nothing whatever to do with Wikipedia-notable. I'm afraid your comment is in the same category. Apart from some field-specific criteria like winning major prizes, notability is almost entirely to do with what has been written about the subject: it is imossible to deteremine notability by looking at the subject itself.
This does mean that certain categories of subject are under-represented: there tends not to be much written in mainstream sources about film editors or YouTube personalities, for example - and the same is often true of websites, even if they happen to be a stunningly useful resource. So in order to establish that your site is notable you need to present at least three places where somebody wholly unconnected with the site has chosen to write about it at some length, and been published somewhere with a reputation for editorial control and fact checking. These don't have to be in English, but they must be reliable, independent, and contain substantial material about the site. --ColinFine (talk) 15:50, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ColinFine, I agree with what you’re saying, thanks for the answer! So what should I do if the object of the article I want to add is related to literature? Also please see [[2]], about Polka and my other discussion on Teahouse by the title “new user, crime and punishment”,DonGuess (talk) 21:28, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, DonGuess, I'm not sure what you are asking. You find suitable sources, or you give up on the subject. I'm not sure what relevance is to a question about specific wording in an existing article. --ColinFine (talk) 22:05, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DonGuess: The general notability guideline is at Wikipedia:Notability. On the right side of that page, you will see a blue table with links to the more specific guidelines, such as Wikipedia:Notability (books). GoingBatty (talk) 23:00, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update to wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Brandenburg I googled ILCP and it does exist and is a good site for anyone interested in nature conservation.

I am not savvy on editing--could someone update wiki site for Jim Brandenburg? Thank you! 71.226.224.219 (talk) 15:58, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The reason that organization is in red lettering in the article about Jim is because there is no article about the organization. You can de-red it by removing the double brackets at both ends of the organization's name. OR, you can create an get accepted an article about the organization, it which case it would become blue lettering. David notMD (talk) 16:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hello, IP editor. As that site's front page does not directly support anything in the article, I have moved it to the External links section. I also updated the cite to the page about Jim Brandenburg becoming a Fellow of the ILCP. I don't know if the ILCP is notasble enough for a Wikipedia article on the group. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:28, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Find signature based on user

Is there a way to find and display a user's signature based on his username? Any template? I'm asking this for my talk header. 3125ATalk!Contributions! 16:39, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 3125A and welcome to the Teahouse. You can find most users' signatures on their replies on their talk pages by searching "User talk:Example". I'm not sure what you mean about this being related to your talk header. Hillelfrei talk 17:19, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I know. I am learning template coding. Maybe I shouldn't put it on the talk header. 3125ATalk!Contributions! 17:21, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Qualifications For Published Autobiography

Is my write up qualified for Publication on the platform for public consumption? Thanks Eldgboye (talk) 17:00, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eldgboye: welcome to the Teahouse. I have removed the biographical text you had added to your user talk page, and posted an explanation there. If you want to try your hand at writing a Wikipedia article, please read this information first. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 17:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You removed my contribution!

47.195.3.60 (talk) 17:08, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How rude! Wikipedia is bad! Do not use it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.195.3.60 (talk) 17:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor, your edits were not constructive to the subject. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking Alpha -- Reliable Yay or Nay?

Hi, I am preparing to start editing Wikipedia and have come across your reliable resources part. I have a question- Is Seeking Alpha ok or not? Thanks Jim --Bravo7711 (talk) 17:27, 15 May 2020 (UTC) Bravo7711 (talk) 17:27, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bravo7711, Welcome to the Teahouse! The Wikipedia page for it (which is not a reliable source) says it provides crowd-sourced content. If that is true, each document from it might have to judged based on who the author is, and then if the author/s turn/s out to be known expert/s in the topic of the work, it may be cited with attribution. It is difficult to give a specific yes or no, without context. Generally, a question on reliability of a source should be presented as "Is this document a reliable source for making this claim in this context in this Wikipedia article?" WP:RSN is where these are discussed. Feel free to visit that noticeboard, read the instructions at the top, and start a post there to get feedback from editors more specialised in evaluating sources. I found one previous discussion on Seeking Alpha from a quick search—Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_289#Seeking_Alpha. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:08, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I need help

my little brother (actually no lie I have a little brother) keeps making edits logged out. it is logged out, as he does not know my password, but whenever he does that I need to quickly revert it. how do I stop him from making nonconstructive edits. I know it is a common excuse, but it is true. Firestar9990 (talk) 17:54, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stop him getting at a computer? No, seriously, Firestar9990, anybody may edit without logging in. If a particular IP address (or range of addresses) keeps doing unconstructive edits, than that address (or range) may get blocked; but short of that, there's nothing you can do except control his access. Alternatively, maybe you can get him interested in actually helping Wikipedia, especially if you can model that behaviour yourself. --ColinFine (talk) 18:19, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, colinfine you have helped me. Firestar9990 (talk) 19:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy

I just want to ask, would you say this: "Although possibly declining in number in some areas, spotted hyenas are not protected outside of reserves and are considered problem animals in the 8th Schedule of the Parks and Wildlife." is more accurate than the original (" Although possibly declining in number in some areas, spotted hyenas are not protected and are considered problem animals in the 8th Schedule of the Parks and Wildlife.")? Obviously, I know they're protected in reserves (since that's the whole point of reserves: to protect wildlife), but I'm not sure if that's an accurate way of putting it.  Redstoneprime (talk) 17:57, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(This is about Spotted hyena) - @Redstoneprime: Animals being protected inside reserves is invariably the case, and does not require specific sourcing. This sounds entirely fine to me, and may not even need stating. But if you do, it shouldn't need an additional reference. I think there's a modicum of being overly finicky going on regarding edits to this article at the moment. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:57, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Elmidae Thanks. Also, I can understand why people are being a bit finicky, due to there not many reliable sources when it comes to more up-to-date research (such as how males can lead the clan, for example). Plus, doesn't "problem animal" refer to animals that attack/prey on humans and livestock/destroy crops (talking about individuals, of course, rather than entire species). Redstoneprime (talk) 20:26, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Overly finicky? I don't see what is not clear about our WP:Verifiability policy. The above is not a WP:Sky is blue matter. And "sky is blue" is an essay instead of a policy or guideline anyway, and has a counter essay.

Please don't WP:Ping me for any reply to me in this section. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 00:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


hello, I'm new. I just got an article declined. I cant't work yet in source edit. i need to go back to the wysiwyg editor. How?

 Digig0th (talk) 21:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Digig0th - well, it looks like you did not gave reliable sources for your article draft, have a look over here Wikipedia:Reliable_sources and try to improve your article draft with other, more reliable sources. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering what topics I should do as I just joined Wikipedia

Lamjustin045 (talk) 21:34, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Lamjustin045 and welcome to the Teahouse. You may be interested in trying out our interactive introduction, The Wikipedia Adventure. If you mean "do" as in "create articles", it may be better to start by editing and doing other tasks than creating new articles, because creating an article is the hardest task on Wikipedia. As for which topics, we can guide you further if you let us know which areas interest you. Hillelfrei talk 22:03, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Lamjustin045: We have over 6,000,000 articles here already, and of very varied states of perfection! Whether you're a pedant and simply like to fix grammatical or spelling errors, add better references, or want to add additional content based on Reliable sources to subjects you have an interest in, you're bound to find something here to keep you busy. Try Wikipedia:Community portal or Wikipedia:Task Center to give you a few ideas. Let us know when you've fixed them all! Nick Moyes (talk) 22:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arzamas

I think, a reader of this Arzamas article could be searching information about the website https://arzamas.academy/. Should this link be added into the article? DonGuess (talk) 22:07, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DonGuess: It looks a little promotional/business-like to me, rather than a genuine academy or university, so just adding it to 'External links' doesn't seem right - but then I've only quickly glanced at a Google translate version of the site. I would focus on actually adding factual content to the article - perhaps with a section on education or culture in the city. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:18, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes:, Sorry, I think you might have misunderstood: this is an educational website and it is named after the Arzamas Society — Preceding unsigned comment added by DonGuess (talkcontribs) 22:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DonGuess: Arzamas is a city near Nizhny and Arzamas Society is a defunct literary society in St. Petersburg. I don't see how the website is related to either, but I don't speak Russian, so maybe I'm missing something. If the website is WP:NOTABLE (doubtful), then it would be the subject of its own article entitled Arzamas Academy. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AlanM1, thé problem is that there is an article about it in Wikipedia but it is in russian language I will give you the link later. Does that fact by itself make the website notable by the way? DonGuess (talk) 02:39, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DonGuess: The fact that a topic has an article on another Wikipedia doesn't inherently make it notable for the English Wikipedia - see Wikipedia:Translation. GoingBatty (talk) 02:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DonGuess: I.e., Russian Wikipedia is a completely separate project from English Wikipedia (and all the other Wikimedia projects). Each has its own rules and procedures. English Wikipedia probably has the most restrictive rules regarding notability (I referred to WP:NOTABLE above) and suitability of sources (WP:RS). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes: here is the article https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arzamas, as you see it’s actually spelled in English, that’s why I think it requires disambiguation page --DonGuess (talk) 22:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone help me assess whether the sources do establish notability of my draft article?

Hi, the initial version of my article on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Scantrust was declined because of lack of notability. The reviewer's comment was that "Corporate notability is based on what independent reliable sources have written about the subject". In the first version, I had indeed emphasised sources which were for the most part newspaper articles that contained quotes or looked like they were based on interviews. I now better understand the concept of secondary source, so I made efforts to collect sources such as book chapters and scientific articles which analyse primary sources that deal with the article topic. I now published a second version but have not submitted yet, as I want to make sure it stands a chance to be evaluated more favourably in regards to notability this time. I would very much appreciate if I could get feedback, in particular on whether references 1 to 6 can help establish notability. Please that note my COI is declared on the article talk page. Many thanks for your help! Factfox (talk) 22:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC) Factfox (talk) 22:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Factfox: Are those sources specifically and primarily about Scantrust, or do they just mention Scantrust in passing or as part of a general trend? They appear to be the latter, rather than the former. Here is a step-by-step recipe for articles that won't be rejected or deleted. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hello, Factfox, and welcome to the Teahouse. I looked through the first 6 refs, and I would saythis is improved, but not yet ready. Several points:
  • In at least two cases, you have a |url= parameter which holds a link to a WorldCat (OCLC) listing. Please don't do that. The |oclc= will give that link. "url=" should only be used for a link that goes to an actual copy of the source. If no such copy is available, online, leave "url=" blank or just remove it from the template.
  • Ref 1: Hyperledger Cookbook This looks likie the kind of source you want, but since I can't see the actual source, i can't evaluate it fully. You could use |quote= to provide a quote showing a key passage that supports the article. BTW, does all of chapter 10.2 support the articvle? if not, please use |page= or |pages= to give the exact location, unless the text does not have page numbers (aka unpaginated).
  • Ref 2: "Blockchain for food: " Again no link to an online copy provided, so i can't asses the depth of coverage, but again looks like the right kind o0f source.
  • Ref 3: EPFL Annual Report There appear to be only two single-sentence mentions of Scantrust. They are not unhelpful, but this is not an in-depth source, and you need several of those. Also please provide the date or at least the year, and the publisher in the ref.
  • Ref 4: "Safeguarding township tourism ..." Again the looks like a good kind of source, but its discussion of Scantrust is quite brief.
  • Ref 5: "Adopting Industry 4.0 Technologies ..." Again I can't asses the depth of coverage. Where there really 20, pages about Scantrust? if not either give just the pages you are citing, or give the exact page and the range for the whole as well, such as "Pages=5-6 [1-20]" (but just "pages=5-6" would be fine). Again |quote= might be useful if no online version is available
  • Ref 6: "A Copy-Proof Scheme..." again this is the right kind of source, and again I can't see the depth of coverage. I can only see the abstract, which does not mention Scantrust. Be sure to include "url=access=subscription" to indicate the paywall, and the use of |quote= would help.
  • also the lead section still has a bit of a marketing/PR tone, but that isn't severe enough to be a major problem. Still, try to sound less like a marketing flyer.
What is needed to establish notability is several independent published reliable sources, each of which has some depth of coverage, say at least several paragraphs devoted to Scantrust. A professional review of thither products would be particularly helpful. You seem to have the independent and reliable parts right -- many editors have trouble there.
Good luck with further editing. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:41, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sources do not need to be specifically and primarily about the article subject, but they do need to give some depth of coverage to that subject. A mere passing mention or a 1-2 sentence discussion will not do. @Factfox and Ian.thomson: DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Newer users have a harder time gauging what counts as "in-depth" (which is a bit subjective), and any source worth citing at all that is specifically and primarily about a topic would definitely meet that criteria. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:51, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That is true, Ian.thomson but I fear an over-reaction. I have seen a new user given that same "specifically and primarily about" wording reject as a source a book about Jazz Musicians that devoted 5 pages to the career of a particular trumpeter, because the book was not primarily about that person, and I have seen claims that a "12 best {software type} of {year}" that devoted a dozen paragraphs to a product was not in depth because it was not "primarily about" that product. So I tend to object to that wording. I understand that it is meant to make clear that slightly more than passing mentions, say three sentences, is still not enough. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DES and Ian.thomson, thank you very much, I really appreciate you taking the time to give your expert feedback.@Ian.thomson, I have read many things on notability and I must say it is to get it wrong or a bit off, so your guide comes as a neat summary of the key points to keep in mind. To your question, some of the sources have one or a few paragraphs, but not entirely about Scantrust. I understand they must not all contribute to notability. On the other hand in the first version, I had put a number of newspaper and magazine articles entirely on Scantrust, but they were discarded for having quotes and appearing like interviews, even though I thought that they could in part be considered as secondary sources, as they also had commentaries from the journalist. @DES, it is very nice of you to have taken the time to look through the references and give me very specific recommendations on what to improve. I will make the corrections and additions, and also have a few other sources that I didn't think of using and which could contribute to notability. If you do not mind, I will let you know when the draft is updated. Thanks again to both of you Factfox (talk) 18:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Joseph Pasinski III

Hello! I've written a short summary about someone who is closely related to me, in a neutral matter. I'm still working on some more credible sources, such as his music origins, so for now, I'm not asking it to be published but rather reviewed and suggested/declined about. Thank you for your time. -- Le Panini (talk) 01:26, 16 May 2020

You need to add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft and save it. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:54, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging Le Panini —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:55, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Le Panini: Since you have a conflict of interest because he is closely related to you, please disclose that fact on your user page - see How to disclose a COI. GoingBatty (talk) 02:53, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Le Panini: After that, I suggest you gather your independent reliable sources to determine if he meets Wikipedia's notability criteria for musicians. If so, I suggest you follow the guidance at Help:Your first article to summarize what the reliable sources say about him. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:56, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Creation of the Maiara & Maraisa Page

Hello, I request the creation of the page: Maiara & Maraisa, referring to two successful Brazilian singers that I think is worth having in our articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justicy john (talkcontribs) 01:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:REQUEST Zoozaz1 (talk 02:11, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many editors do not consider WP:REQUEST useful, as the number of editors willing to create an article on a topic they know little/nothing about is small. David notMD (talk) 09:11, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitrazny Komitet Application/Заявка в арбитражный комитет Википедии

Hello, please make an application for the Komitet for my unblocking Здравствуйте! Пожалуйста, подайте заявку о моей разблокировке DonGuess (talk) 02:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DonGuess: The Teahouse is for help with the English Wikipedia. To request to be unblock on the Russian Wikipedia, please follow the instructions at ru:Википедия:Блокировки#Разблокировка. GoingBatty (talk)
@DonGuess: Correction - please follow the instructions posted on your talk page at the Russian Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 03:06, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Claims of suppression of corruption

 – The heading above was added by Tenryuu at 03:49, 16 May 2020 (UTC).
  • Asuman Ozdaglar: (Redacted)Father (Wikipedia Entry)

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

She was born to İsmail Özdağlar and Zahide Özdağlar on 16 December 1974.[4] Her father was a (Redacted) former Minister of State between 13 December 1983 and 15 January 1985 in the 45th government of Turkey.[5] Asuman Ozdaglar is married to economist Daron Acemoğlu.


Wikipedia keeps removing that her father was a (Redacted) former Minister of State between 13 December 1983 and 15 January 1985 in the 45th government of Turkey.

Why does wikipedia which supports freedom of speech hides corruption? 73.170.116.146 (talk) 03:24, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Daron Acemoglu: (Wikipedia Entry)

He is married to Asuman "Asu" Ozdağlar, a professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)[10][19] and daughter of İsmail Özdağlar, a former (Redacted) Turkish government minister.


Wikipedia keeps removing “a former (Redacted) Turkish government minister”. When Wikipedia supports free speech why does it hide corruption and true facts? 73.170.116.146 (talk) 03:30, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP 73.170.116.146. I think you’ll find the answer you’re looking for in WP:FREESPEECH, WP:VERIFIABILITY, WP:RGW and perhaps even WP:BLPCRIME, WP:BLPCOI and WP:PUBLICFIGURE. Wikipedia article’s are only intended to reflect what written about something in reliable sources and content or claims which is likely to be contentious (particularly content about a living person) is likely going to be removed unless it’s something supported by citations to very strong reliable sources and isn’t considered to be WP:UNDUE. When there are disagreements over this type of thing the best thing to do is to follow WP:DR and discuss the content on the relevant article’s talk page. Repeatedly trying to add such content will not only likely continue to lead to it being removed, but may also be considered disruptive, edit warring or a combination of the two. Finally, please be careful about any claims you make about another person on any Wikipedia page, especially if they’re still living. — Marchjuly (talk) 03:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hello, IP editor. Wikipedis may support free speech in general, but it is far more important here that statements of purported fact are supported bt reliable sourcws. That ism particularly true when the fact is controversial, and even morwe true when the fact is about a living person.. In that last case unsourced negative or controversial statements need to be sourced or removed promptly. Pleas do not add statements to articles that nay person is "corrupt" unless you re prepared to cite a reliable source for it right away. mDES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 03:52, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse! "Wikipedia" does not remove your edits, other volunteer editors remove them because you are not providing a reliable source for your claim. This is part of the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. You boldly added a claim, and another editor reverted it. Instead of similar edits again, discuss it on the article talk page - Talk:Asuman Özdağlar, and provide your reliable sources. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:My Dream Beside Me

Hello! I started an article about a film entitled My Dream Beside Me. I was wondering if there was any current feedback on the progress I have so far. I'm going to get to further paragraphs in time. Also, it appears that it isn't labeled as a draft, but instead a full article, which is not the case. Is there a way where I can revert it to a draft state? Thank you for your time. Le Panini (talk) 05:04, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Le Panini: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I moved your article to Draft space, you can find it at Draft:My Dream Beside Me. Once you are ready to submit it, you can click the AFC button and reviewers will give you feedback. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 05:51, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Le Panini: Please review Wikipedia:Notability (films) and add more independent reliable sources, such as reviews from more prominent newspapers and magazines. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film for how to organize your draft (e.g. the details of the critical response belongs in its own section). Films are released, not published. The Internet Movie Database is abbreviated IMDb. I suggest you choose {{cite web}} (instead of {{citation}}) for each reference, and fill out the |work= or |publisher= parameter for each reference. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:39, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the tips! I do have a collection of newspapers talking about the film, but they all come from the same site, which I already sourced. Is this still allowed then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Le Panini (talkcontribs) 16:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Le Panini: If you have multiple newspaper articles from the same newspaper that each provide significant coverage to the film, it's OK to use each one. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 03:04, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable. FINALLY (I know, I'm sorry), normally I get multiple things of information from one source. When I try to cite the same source twice, the reference URL appears twice in the reference list instead of once. Does that make sense? How do I properly cite the source? Thank you for your time.

Le Panini (talk) 05:02, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Le Panini: Assuming you're using the source editor, you can give the opening ref tag the name attribute and then call it later. It would look something like this:
 <ref name="test">Lorem ipsum</ref>
 ...
 ...
 <ref name="test" />
will render:
[1]
...
...
[1]
Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:08, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b Lorem ipsum

How to add relevant citations for review and what are the fact checking sites which wikipedia accepts

Hi There,

I am trying to create producer's page. It is for one of my knowns. I am getting troubled finding proper citations that wiki can accept. Since it is my first time and I find it difficult as it got rejected. May I know what notable citations are accepted. And just to let you know. I am creating a page for well knowned producer in pollywood industries but yet to make some presence on wikipedia. Please help me out here Itsanupkumar (talk) 05:32, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Itsanupkumar. You have been given clear instructions numerous times on your talk page. Please click on the blue links there for further clarification.--Shantavira|feed me 12:16, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Shantavira Each one of the decline and reject messages on User talk:Itsanupkumar includes an invitation to discuss the matter or to ask questions about it at the Teahouse. It seems a bit bitey to give the above answer in view of that fact.
Itsanupkumar, that said, Shantavira was not incorrect. Wikipedia only has articles about notable topics including notable people. Wikipedia defines "notable" in a special way, and notability is largely defined by citing multiple independent published reliable sources that discuss the topic in detail. The reviewers believe that Draft:Anup Kumar (music producer) is not supported by such reliable sources. Note that interviews with the subject of a biographical article are not normally considered to be independent sources, and so they do not count towards notability. Note that most people are not notable ,in Wikipedia's terms. Also, Wikipedia articles must be neutral -- not written to praise or attack a person or topic.
Wikipedia does not have a specific list of acceptable sources. In general, sources must have some sort of editorial control, so that someone using judgement stands between the writer and the readers, and must have a good reputation for fact checking. One can ask about particular sources at the reliable source noticeboard. Also, sources establishing notability must not be financially or otherwise closely associated with the subject.
Itsanupkumar, Please do follow the links in this message and on the various messages on your talk page, and read the linked pages. Please do not keep submitting your drafts with minor changes. Note that no amount of improved writing will; convert a non-notable topic into a notable one. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

100 meters and ethnicity I belive your artical is wrong Matthew Boiling ran a sub 10 second 100 meter

 68.79.207.23 (talk) 05:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you have a question? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
According to Matthew Boling (not Boiling) he ran a 9.98 but it was wind assisted and so does not count . His personal best for record purposes is 10.11. Meters (talk) 06:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hi there , i got 3 alert from wikipedia some like this requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia and that one or more external links you added have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia, dear wikipedia i m new here i dont know how to use this and wr to attached link , i know i m not that perfect but i will learn , plz guide me in simple way how can i submit my story or link,

plz check this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Thakurmanjeet777#May_2020

thanks and regard, Thakurmanjeet777 (talk) 06:31, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not all that much we can say beyond what user:Liz already said: Do not add links to your personal blog to any article on Wikipedia. Your personal blog is not a reliable source for anything (see WP:RS, in particular WP:RSSELF) and it's not an appropriate external link to be adding anywhere (see WP:ELNO point 11). Meters (talk) 06:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Where is this article designated stub class?

New-York Central College: I want to remove the stub classification, but can't find what to remove. Thank you. deisenbe (talk) 09:59, 16 May 2020 (UTC) deisenbe (talk) 09:59, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are two separate stub features: stub templates on the article and |class=Stub in WikiProject tags on the talk page. New-York Central College doesn't have stub templates but Talk:New-York Central College has four |class=Stub. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:13, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Deisenbe: do you mean the WikiProject classifications on the article's talk page? The article itself does not have a stub template, but I see that the WikiProject banners on the talk page all say "Rated Stub-class". That classification can be changed if you edit Talk:New-York Central College and change "class=Stub" in the project templates to some other grade. The grades are described at Wikipedia:Content assessment. Hope that's what you meant? --bonadea contributions talk 10:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's it exactly. deisenbe (talk) 10:24, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

what is south african emotional history

 Solby wolby (talk) 13:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Solby wolby: Welcome to the Teahouse, a place to get help with using or editing Wikipedia. If you have a question about a particular article, you can ask at the article's talk page. For more general topics, you could try the Wikipedia:Reference desk. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 14:42, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copy right ? //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/m30_morter

I am using several military technical weaponry descriptions from Wikipedia articles for my book, being carful not to use any artistic views just the technical information about the subject. Can I use this information with out citation from the sources and copy rights of articles? Is their a Wikipedia copy right or citation that I need to use?

George Louisuhl (talk) 15:35, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Louisuhl, text on Wikipedia is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Therefore, if you copy text from the page, you will also have to release under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. You can read more here: WP:CC BY-SA and WP:REUSE
@Louisuhl: Welcome to the Teahouse! You might also want to read the suggestions at Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. Instead of citing Wikipedia, you might want to read the books and articles at M30 mortar#References and cite those instead. GoingBatty (talk) 15:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New articles/pages

Hello there, how long does it take for an article/new page to be published on Wikipedia? I set up a page yesterday but it's saved as a "draft" so far.... Locky1986 (talk) 16:14, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Locky1986 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You created a draft, not an article. To submit it for review, add {{subst:AFC draft}} to the top,(as you see it when reading this page, without the nowiki tags I placed in the edit window to suppress their function here) and then you can submit it for a review. 331dot (talk) 16:26, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Locky1986 I presume this is about Draft:"Who I Am" (Melanie C Song). Drafts most often get to the main article space by being submitted to mteh Articles for Creation process. There they are reviewed by an experienced editor, and if the draft is accepted, it is moved to the main article space. It is also possible for any autoconfirmed user to move a draft directly to the main article space, but then all the strict rules apply without time to refine the draft, and such an article might well be deleted promptly. I do not advise that route. AfC reviews are done by volunteers, and each reviewer picks which items to work on, in no particular order. Some tend to choose the oldest available, some the newer ones, so a review can happen in days or take two to three months.
Please be aware that Wikipeedia only has articles about notable topics, and most individual songs are not considered notable. Notability is most often demonstrated by citing multiple independent professionally published reliable sources that discuss the topic in significant detail. See our guideline on the notability of songs for more detail. In the draft you created as it now stands, there are several cited sources: a potify link, which will not help establish notability; an interview with the singer, which is notm considered independent and so does not help either; a Rolling Stone article which is of some help but is a bit on the short side for the purpose; an official video which is not independent and so does not help with notability; YouTube versions of the song which are not independent; a Yahoo news article which seems to be essentially an interview; and two chart listings which will have some value. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why did my Wikipedia edit get removed?

Why did my contribution edit recently get eliminated or eliminated? Nazeerahabdulrahman (talk) 16:39, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nazeerahabdulrahman, it is considered improper to add references to articles written by yourself when there is no need to do so (i.e. the content is already properly cited). Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion. --MrClog (talk) 16:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)@Nazeerahabdulrahman: It was removed as ref spam according to the edit comment. Courtesy link [[3]] It appears to be a link to a paper you wrote. You should put an WP:EDITREQUEST on the talk page. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 16:53, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's my pleasure to here. Please I'm have regarding on how to publish Article, biography etc in Wikipedia. I publish a biography of one responsible international professor, but I don't know how the biography will be confirm on Wikipedia.

Article content

Tyler L. Adam (born 8 August 1968) is an American as well as international academic and media scholar.

Birth and academic career

Tyler L. Adam was born on 8 August, 1968. He was educated at the University of Florida (B.A. in Communication studies, 1990), M.S. in Communication Theory in 1992, and the Florida State University (Ph.D. in Communication & Educational leadership, 1995). He is an organizational specialist. He was a D'Aquin Endowed Professor of Communication at the University of Louisiana from 2006 to 2013, and was an assistant and associate professor of Communication at the University of Louisiana from 1998 to 2006. He began his career as a full time instructor in 1993 with the University of Arkansas at Monticello.

Later life and career

He has focused on internationalizing his professional network, thereby expanding his academic perspective. He held several appointments because of this global shift. Currently, he is in Dubai as Dean of Media and Mass Communication at the American University in the Emirates, located in the the smart city tech hub of silicon Oasis. Previous to that, he was in Nassau, The Bahamas as Dean of Continuing Education and Lifelong Learning at the university of the Bahamas. He was also in Mexico City as a Distinguished Foreign visiting professor at Monterey institute of technology (2017-2018). As well, he was also based in Kuwait city at the Gulf University for science and technology as professor of mass Communication (2015-2016). He was also vice Dean at The University of Business & Technology in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (2013-2014).

He also taught in Pescara, Italy, as Da Vinci Fellow of Strategic communication at D'Annunzio University (fall 2012). While on appointment in central Asia as a CIES Fulbright senior specialist, he was selected of Academic Affairs at the Kazakhstan institute of Management, Economics, and Strategic Research (2011-2012). From 2004 to 2010, he was the graduate studies director at University of Louisiana, where he mentored numerous graduate students into top Ph.D. Programs. In 2006, he was a JSA professor of Communication at Yale University. He was also a McGee fellow at specializing in New Communication Technology (NCT). During summer, 1997, he was appointed as visiting scholar at St. Benet's Hall at Oxford university. As well, he was a Debate Coach at the Florida State University from 1990 to 1993, a champion debater at the University of Florida from 1988 to 1990.

REFERENCES

(Redacted)

spintronics: the dawn of quantum computing ... - University of The Bahamas Abbas Kwarbai (talk) 16:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Abbas Kwarbai: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you would like to write an article on Tyler L. Adam, please go through the process over at WP:YFA and create a draft for the article. Please also take a look at WP:EASYREFBEGIN as your sentences must be cited to your references as shown. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:51, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Abbas Kwarbai: I see you already have a draft at Draft:Tyler L. Adam. Please review the criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (people) to determine if he meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If he does, gather independent reliable sources and summarize what they say. GoingBatty (talk) 16:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the positive response GoingBatty, I have gone through the notability, and found he is notable to be here in Wikipedia. And the links I used all response to content, so what should I expect now? As in, how many days now should I expect for publication on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abbas Kwarbai (talkcontribs) 17:27, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How many days does it take to publish Article/biography on Wikipedia. Please someone should help me to edit the biography of Professor Tyler L Adam which is already on draft

 – Section merged from below by —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:42, 16 May 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Please I need to someone to assist me to review my article ( biography of Professor Tyler L Adam) and I want to know how many days will takes for publication Abbas Kwarbai (talk) 17:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome top the Teahouse your draft Draft:Tyler L. Adam has not yet been submitted for review, but before you do submit, please be aware that we need in depth independent sources to establish notability and Amazon is not a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 17:56, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Borrowing instructions from another host here - You created a draft, not an article. To submit it for review, add {{subst:AFC draft}} to the top,(as you see it when reading this page, without the nowiki tags I placed in the edit window to suppress their function here) and then you can submit it for a review. However, if you submit it as it now exists it will be declined, because references need to be embedded in the text. See instructions on how to reference WP:EASYREFBEGIN. Once submitted, it takes days to weeks, sometimes months, for a reviewer to act on the draft. An alternative is to make the draft an article yourself. If you do this, I can assure you that the article will then either be reverted to draft or else nominated for deletion. It needs improving. David notMD (talk) 18:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ADMIN HELP NEEDED: Much of content of draft appears to have been copied from https://wcsajournal.com/editor-in-chief/ David notMD (talk) 18:27, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NOT NEEDED ANYMORE: Draft nominated for Speedy deletion because of copyright violation. David notMD (talk) 18:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding information about Formula season 2018

Hello Wikipedia,

I had a question about editing. I have been trying to ad some additional information and some subtle changes. But It has been corrected again. I was asked to give a credible source so I gave the source. but it was again deleted and restored back to before.

What Am I doing wrong here?

Kind regards Baeron. Baeron28 (talk) 17:02, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Baeron28. I see you have applied the same edit three times to 2018 Formula One World Championship, and SSSB has reverted it each time. I know nothing about the subject: I don't know whether you are right, they are right, you're both right, or it's a matter of interpretation. But I do know that the way for you to proceed is to open a discussion on the article's talk page Talk:2018 Formula One World Championship, and try to reach consensus with the other editor. Please see WP:BRD --ColinFine (talk) 18:15, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Baeron28: it's an interpretation error and this is my bad for not explaining it in my most revert.
Where f1.com lists NC we put something more specific (DNF, DNQ etc.) So where it says DNF in the source you cited that doesn't correspond to DNF at 2018 Formula One World Championship. Instead the DNF in the source is is referenced in the article by the dagger which indicates a note which says something along the lines of "driver did not finish but is still classified as he completed 90% of the race distance".
The finishing places which we use in our (WP:F1's) articles (and therefore the results matrices) corropsond to the column on the far left of the source you cited, ([4]) the column which says a time or DNF is then used to determine if the note:"driver did not finish but is still classified as he completed 90% of race distance" applies to drivers who were given a number in the far left column, in this case it does. Hope this is a helpful explanation and apologies for not being clearer earlier.
SSSB (talk) 18:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi how do I allow people to hoover over my name and get information on myself to do with acting

Hi how do I allow people to hoover over my name and get information on myself to do with acting Andy Parkers (talk) 17:05, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Andy Parkers: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is, unfortunately, not a social media network. Writing about yourself is strongly discouraged per our autobiographical policy as it is extremely hard to write factually about oneself. Perhaps LinkedIn, Facebook, or Instagram would suit your needs better? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:10, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John Henshall (Photographer) – could I please seek advice on the issues and deletions?

How can I retain the hard work I did in getting the 'John Henshall (Photographer) submission onto Wikipedia? The facts that were put up were factually true and cleared with the man himself. What evidence do you need – please? Also, there was no financial implication in any way. I can provide further detail and advice as to why I felt that John deserved an entry – especially as he received an Honourary MA from The University for the Creative Arts. There was a link to the oration speech if you care to look. I would like to get it right – so any helpful advice would be welcomed?

The link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Henshall_(photographer) White.BS (talk) 17:17, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote as an Edit summary "All information is correct and is confirmed from John himself." The editor who removed all the content did not contest its truthfulness, only the lack of published references in support of the factual statements. What John says (to you or in interviews) is not considered a reliable source. David notMD (talk) 18:32, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Separately, you have been asked on your Talk page to explain your connection to John_Henshall_(photographer). Do you know him personally? Are you working on this article for him? Are you being or have been paid or otherwise compensated? Please cease editing until you address this. David notMD (talk) 18:36, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Receiving an honourary MA from The University for the Creative Arts would not make anyone notable in Wikipedia terms and the fact that you gave the oration speech implies that you have a conflict of interest which you need to declare. Theroadislong (talk) 19:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oisso Sabas

Nyakunga (talk) 18:16, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyakunga: Welcome to the Teahouse. Did you have a question about how to edit Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protecting A page

Resolved
 – OP directed to WP:Requests for page protection. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:14, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings seniors, I have come across a page which was unnecessarily edited regularly and some editors have deleted the content regularly requesting you to let me know can we protect such kind of pages and if yes what are the criteria for doing that.--Thoufiq313 (talk) 19:10, 16 May 2020 (UTC) Thoufiq313 (talk) 19:10, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Thoufiq313: All details can be found at WP:Protection policy and requests can be made at WP:Requests for page protection.
SSSB (talk) 19:27, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You will see that Draft:Sri Niranjana Swamy was given move protection to protect against the move war in which you were involved. The draft can be submitted for AFC review, rather than being moved prematurely to mainspace without review. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

David Biddulph Sir, Thank you for the information, Point noted Sir. The page Draft:Sri Niranjana Swamy was edited regularly but not yet approved requesting you to enlight me on the issue so that I can fix the problem.

SSSB Thank You Sir, The information was Useful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thoufiq313 (talkcontribs) 19:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help to edit Evidence-based education

I would like to make some significant edits to this page but want to be respectful of the other editors. I think the charts should be removed because they have no date, are not verifiable, appear to be out-of-date, and are too difficult to keep up-to-date. I would replace them with other information that would allow the reader to find the current information they may want. See my comments on Talk:Evidence-based education. I have reached out to two former editors but have not received a reply as yet. The article also needs an introduction and new information to make it more accurate and current. Can I just go ahead and make the changes, or is there some other protocol? Thank you. John (talk) 20:10, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jnhmunro: I see that you posted on both Talk:Evidence-based education and Talk:Scientifically based research. Some suggestions:
  • You could add {{Merge}} to the top of both articles to help advertise your suggestion.
  • You could consolidate the discussion on one talk page. To do so, you can have both {{Merge}} templates point to one of the talk pages, and then add a note to the second talk page pointing to the first.
  • You could also post your draft on a separate page, such as User:Jnhmunro/sandbox, and provide a link from the talk discussion to your draft.
Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 22:21, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will do as you suggest. John (talk) 13:01, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citing Pages in a Multi-Page Document vs. Only Including Said Pages in a Subset Document

I have an instance where an outside source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promessa_Organic) has suggested including a cover letter and only certain pages (Page 77 and 79) in a .pdf file documenting a 'Proof of Concept' test relating to promession (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promession), and I am questioning the validity of that approach, as opposed to citing those pages in the reference in the (existing) WP article, but including the whole document in a .pdf. The whole document is currently of undetermined length (I just haven't asked how long it is) and was written by an external company to the outside source. The .pdf document (whether the 3-pager or the whole thing) would be stored by Promessa and referenced by a URL in the WP article. The problems with their approach, as I see it, include:

  • The pages in the current short .pdf document mainly contain images of a test result, but that doesn't preclude the possibility of other images that may give conflicting test results.
  • WP users wanting to validate information relating to the test can't see any (unknown) context around the test that may or may not be in Pages 1-76, 78 and 80-end.

Basically, I think the whole document - currently only in paper form as I understand it - should be converted to a .pdf and included by Promessa.

ADDENDUM: What a complete and utter waste of time Wikipedia's archiving bot (Munninbot) makes of this Teahouse sometimes. It archived my question (above) "because there was no discussion for a few days" when I entered it on May 14 and it's only May 16 now (i.e. a "couple of days" is not "a few days"). I'm dealing with a company in Sweden re this matter and am waiting on a related response to an email I sent to them on the 14th, Marchjuly's first response gave me lots to look up, I'm not full time on this and I sleep sometimes. And why is MY question archived anyway? I see questions that have been dormant since May 10!

What's the hurry re archiving after only 2 days (or even "a few days" when the last response has questions)? Timing of this bot should be corrected. BrettA343 (talk) 20:22, 16 May 2020 (UTC) BrettA343 (talk) 20:22, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marchjuly's response from Archive added by BrettA343.

Hi BrettA343. Your question seems to be a mix of multiple questions involving various policies and guidelines, so I'm not sure what you're trying to ask or where to start. Sources cited in Wikipedia articles need to meet WP:RS and not be WP:UNDUE. If a source is deemed reliable for Wikipedia's purposes, all that it needs to be is published and accessible so that anyone who wants to verify the accuracy of the source can do so. The source doesn't need to be readily available online and it can even be behind a WP:PAYWALL or otherwise cost a fee to see as long as it can be verified by someone who wants to do so; so, there's no need to upload an entire document or link to an entire document for verification purposes as long as it's possible to verify in other ways as explained in WP:SAYWHERE. Being available online and in its entirety certainly makes a source easier to assess, but it's not something that's required. Finally, official documents, etc. often fall under WP:PRIMARY and although they can sometimes be cited, there are limitations to how they can be used. So, the first thing you might need to do is assess the reliability of the source itself and determine whether it's a PRIMARY or WP:SECONDARY source based on the the way its being used. The place to discuss such a thing would be on the relevant article's talk page or at WP:RSN. Once it's be determined whether the source is reliable, then perhaps the next thing to figure out would be to how best cite it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by BrettA343 (talkcontribs)
(edit conflict) Has the document been published by a reputable publisher, BrettA343? If not, the article probably shouldn't be citing it at all. It doesn't matter whether a resource is online or not: what matters is that it has been published, so that in principle (eg via a major library) a reader could obtain a copy.
Certain information can come from the subject's own website (see PRIMARY), but it doesn't sound as if the information in question is appropriately sourced, from your description. --ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@BrettA343: It appears that the bot that archives this page is Lowercase sigmabot III. It looks at the User:MiszaBot/config at the top of the Teahouse code, which is set to archive after 48 hours of inactivity. You mentioned that there are discussions that haven't had activity since 10 May that haven't been archived. I think part of the issue is that the #Deletion of file section was not signed properly. I've added {{unsigned}} to that post, in the hopes that the bot will archive a lot of the old discussions. GoingBatty (talk) 22:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@BrettA343: The discussions last updated on 10 May have now been archived. Thanks for bringing the problem to our attention! GoingBatty (talk) 15:37, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@GoingBatty: You're welcome about 'bringing the problem to your attention', but can I also suggest you change the message from "a few days" to "48 hours"? Or even better, archive after a few days (please specify how many days you've chosen)? I find myself having to pace my responses so the 48 hours doesn't 'catch me' again because I'm still waiting for Promessa's reply to my email (it's another time-waster). BrettA343 (talk) 04:42, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discography

In an article about a piece of music we often add a discography. Recordings are provided with a date (year). Do we prefer the recording date or the (original) release date of the recording? e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Concerto_(Brahms)

Thanx for helping! MMenz (talk) 00:05, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MMenz: From perusing Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies/style, it appears we use release date. GoingBatty (talk) 01:02, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

how do i undo edits?

how do i undo edits?

I made some edits and didn't know i had accidently deleted image/table. i don'y know how to fix it. I need to "undo" those changes. Digig0th (talk) 01:27, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Digig0th: You can access the page history on the top right, and you will see an "undo" button by each edit. Hillelfrei talk 02:32, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New fact for Jennie Kim fanpage (with source)

Hello, on Jennie Kim's Wikipedia page it's shown that Jennie's only Music Video Filmography was her SOLO Music Video. Yet Jennie also starred in GD's Music Video to 'THAT XX' (year:2012 title:THAT XX director:Han Sa Min( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-Dragon_videography ) role:female lead role) [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j57IzkTFnT8 ] which is clearly written in her Wikipedia page [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennie_(singer) [On September 1, Jennie made her first public appearance as the lead actress in G-Dragon's music video "That XX" from his solo album, One of a Kind.]] yet not included in the Music Video Filmography. Please fix that if you can. :) The fact is also included on That XX official Wikipedia page [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/That_XX [The music video features G-Dragon playing two parts: himself, and the cheating boyfriend of the female character (played by Jennie from Blackpink).]]  Xlivrey (talk) 01:29, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Xlivrey: Welcome to the Teahouse! Please note that Jennie (singer) is an encyclopedia article, not a "fanpage". Please post your suggestions to improve the article on the article's talk page: Talk:Jennie (singer), along with any independent reliable sources you have. Thanks for your interest in keeping the article up to date! GoingBatty (talk) 03:33, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

What if the topic that you are writing about is worthy of having a Wikipedia page, but there aren't enough sources? For Draft:Nitro Type, everything mentioned was self evident just by going to nitrotype.com. Anything that you couldn't learn from there I sourced as well. Nitro Type is a really big site, with millions of races each day, so it seems wrong that it would get declined because of not enough sources. Could you guys maybe reconsider please? Apparently I am not the first to try and write a Wikipedia page on the matter, so it seems like others are running into the same problem. DVORAK Typer (talk) 11:22, 17 May 2020 (UTC) DVORAK Typer (talk) 11:22, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HiDVORAK Typer, User DGG declinded your draft, perhaps you contact him directly to clarify what the reasons for the declination might have been. Reasons for the declinations are giving in the infobox on the Draft Page - looks like your draft reads like an advertisement and this is not allowed on Wikipedia. Have a look over here: Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion. CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:30, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, DVORAK Typer. Indeed you are not the first: many many people who come here do not understand what Wikipedia is and how it works. In order to be a neutral encyclopaedia, Wikipedia is basically not interested in what a subject says about themselves: it is only interested in what people unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject. So, while certain non-controversial factual information may come from Nitro Type's own website, the bulk of any article about it must come from sources wholly unconnected with it, and only such sources contribute to its notability. --ColinFine (talk) 12:02, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, DVORAK Typer. Currently Draft:Nitro Type does not include any Independent sources at all. Such sources Are essential to establish the notability of the topic. All cited sources now are to nitrotype.com, or nitro-type.fandom.com/wiki. Might add that a fan wiki is pretty much never a reliable source here, and simply should not be used. Also the draft as it now stands is far too detailed for the subject. Wikipedia is not a game guide or how-to manual for games or software of any kind. It is also not for promotion. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:09, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your first sentence ... worthy of having a Wikipedia page, but there aren't enough sources is a contradiction, revealing a mis-understanding. Because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia (a WP:TERTIARY source), it doesn't have articles that are directly about subjects. Instead, it summarizes what independent reliable WP:SECONDARY sources have written about the subject. If those sources do not exist in sufficient number and with sufficient detail and depth, a policy-conformant Wikipedia article cannot exist because it would have no (or insufficient) useful content. There is no concept of "worthy of having a Wikipedia page" as a value judgement (which we would not be worthy to make); it's all about WP:NOTABILITY, as evidenced by sources. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:06, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that all makes sense. But how can a page like this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Middle-earth_characters exist? There are literally no sources, and nothing that could not be learned just by reading Lord Of The Rings. I am literally a huge fan of LOTR, and think it should be allowed to be an article; which it is, but I mean really? However, this journey has actually been in a way encouraging. I had always though that Wikipedia was literally terrible, but it truly is hard to make an article, you guys really care about credibility. DVORAK Typer (talk) 23:10, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DVORAK Typer:List of Middle-earth characters is allowed to exist without sources because it consists of links to articles about the characters, each of which has sources. That means each character has been written about enough by people unrelated to the author.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 14:49, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

submit article for review

Hi,
As a newbie in Wikipedia I have a very basic question, that I seem not to find an answer to. I finished writing an article (in my sandbox) and want to submit it for review so it can be published, but I see no such link/button.

Thanx, Danishom (talk) 14:19, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Danishom, don't worry, please have a close look at Help:Your_first_article#CreateyourDraft ... you just have to add the Submit tag {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft+Publish Changes to submit it. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:06, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Danishom, by the time I got there, the button had already been added. I would like to note though, that, as a biography of living person, the article requires inline citations, in order to be accepted. Please consult WP:REFB and add citations to reliable sources for all claims made in it (WP:V). Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:08, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Seconding that without references, User:Danishom/sandbox will be declined. David notMD (talk) 15:15, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Hello, Danishom. I have added a header to your sandbox with a submit button. However, I advise you not to pick that button yet, because your draft is unreferenced. Every single claim in a Wikipedia article should be dsourced to a reliable published source; and while it is not compulsory to cite the source for everything, reviewers will probably not accept a draft - especially a biography of a living person - without extensive citation. While your draft is well-written and well laid-out, I suspect you have made the same mistake as countless other new editors, and written from what you know, rather than from the sources. Original research is not permitted in a Wikipedia article, and that includes any information not previously published.
I also note that you have uploaded all the photos in the darft, claiing them all as "own work". In most countries the copyright in a photograph is with the photographer unless there is an agreement to the contrary; so I am a little dubious about the copyright status of some of these. It also makes me wonder if you might have a conflict of interest in writing about this subject. --ColinFine (talk) 15:18, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiable sources for living person

Hi,

As a first timer, I am not sure how to add to a thread (edit the sources?), so I am opening a new Q. 1. As was suggested by a user, I added a {{AFC submission|||ts=20200518150434|u=Danishom|ns=4}} but it displayed the above but no submit button
2. More important, I am writing a article about a living (89 years old), globally renowned scientist and innovator.
I am told that ALL content will require inline citations to independent reliable sources.
If I am writing about his childhood and his years through WWII, how does one get independent reliable sources? e.g. if the house he lived in was bombarded by the allied forces, do I need a reliable source for that? If he was arrested and jailed by the Czech communist regime, do I need to go into the archives of the judicial system of Czechoslovakia from 1948? Do I need to present a birth certificate to prove that he was born in Budapest in 1931, as appears in the article?
This all seems highly improbable

Thanx Danishom (talk) 15:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Any material for which you can't provide a reliable source should be removed from the draft. Please read Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. The advice you received from the editor who added the submit button was "I advise you not to pick that button yet, because your draft is unreferenced", so your draft will obviously be declined.. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:16, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have put nowiki tags around the submission template in this question, because your edit had submitted this Teahouse page for AFC review. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a trial page to print out to work with?

Hi! My name is Jan. Id there a test or trial wiki page form that I can print out to work with so I can familiarize myself with who it looks and where things go?TiBUchon (talk) 22:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC) TiBUchon (talk) 22:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@TiBUchon: If you're looking for a page to test things out, you are always welcome to use your sandbox to try things out. If you would like something closer to an orientation course, try out The Wikipedia Adventure. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:58, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of blank wiki page for reference

 – Merging section with above. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:26, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am new here and I am in need of a blank wiki page layout for reference while creating my first page. One that will show where all the information should be added to the page. I would like to print it out so that I can look at it as I create the wiki page. Is there one? I have not been able to find one while researching. TiBUchon (talk) 23:13, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@TiBUchon: I suggest you use Help:Your first article, and refer to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout. GoingBatty (talk) 23:28, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, TiBUchon. I would echo what GoingBatty says: please study "Your first article", and understand that getting the format of an article right, though important, is of far less consequence than getting the sourcing and citing right. Formatting can be easily corrected, but creating an article about a subject which turns out not to be notable is a waste of effort for you and everybody else. --ColinFine (talk) 08:51, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One more quick question...

Hi, so, my last question was answered quickly, so I decided to ask one more. I was wondering, how do I clear my notifications page? Thanks, Dragonlover21 (talk) 23:34, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have asked the same question at the "help desk". Please look for answers there, not here; and in future avoid asking the same question in more than one place. -- Hoary (talk) 02:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Sorry.

Dragonlover21 (User talk: Dragonlover21|talk]]) —Preceding undated comment added 12:21, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How/whether to deal with problematic users

Hi!

Though my user is old, I have only recently become more active in editing Wikipedia, mostly by patrolling the "recent changes" page. There I came across a user making unsourced edits going against the existing sources, Frontier Place. I reverted the edits and warned him, but I kept watching his edits. He is very active, and does a lot of good work, but communicates very little and often makes controversial, unsourced or sometimes outright wrong edits. For example, over the last weeks he has been changing all mentions of "Stockholm Metro" to "Stockholm Tunnel Rail". This seems to me to go against the talk page on Talk:Stockholm_metro, where the conclusion seems to have been to use "Metro", which also seems to be used for most other European (partly) underground public transport systems. He also removed a lot of mentions of the Åland Islands being Finnish, removed mentions of Sweden as a country in favor of the European Union, was banned for 72 hours for sourceless edits of several pages on the coronavirus epidemic, and all of this with basically no communication, sources or public reasons.

It also seems really likely to me that the account belongs to the same person as Linde Place, who was blocked for using sockpuppets to circumvent a ban. Their contributions are extremely similar, and Frontier Place starts editing about two weeks after Linde Place's users were banned. I left a message on the talk page of the user that signed the sockpuppet investigation, CFCF, but he hasn't replied, and is semi-retired.

My question is what to do about users like this? Should I tell someone, and if so, who?

Many thanks in advance for your help! Knuthove (talk) 00:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Knuthove, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have raised at least two distinct issues.
  • If an editor makes what you think is an incorrect or ill-judged article edit, or one that violates a previously established consensus for the article, I advise following the Bold, revert, discuss cycle You revert the edit, and then start a discussion on the article talk page, pinging the editor you reverted to invite him or her to the discussion. If possible, engage the editor and try to discuss the reasons why the edits are well-judged or not. Focus on content, not contributors. If the editor refuses to engage, or just repeats the edit and will not listen to or consider discussion, you can pursue dispute resolution. Do not repeatedly revert. In many cases that would constitute edit warring which is never helpful, even if you are correct abnout the content issue. There are a few limited exceptions: These are listed on the page about edit-warring linked above.
  • Of an editpor is acting improperly -- making insults or violating conduct policies, raise the matter on the user's talk page first. If mthat does not work, follow the advice in WP:DR on conduct issues. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 03:38, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you suspect that a blocked or banned user has returned under a new account, or that one user is operating multiple accounts improperly, go to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations and follow the instructions there. Do not make such accusations or suggestions anywhere else. Remember that several different editors may have similar editing patterns and interests, unless th4ese are very unusual indeed.
I hope that advice is helpful. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 03:38, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you DES! That was helpful. I will read the articles you linked, and probably try to take it up directly with the user. Knuthove (talk) 12:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A final follow up question: When it says on the user page that LindePlace is "blocked indefinitely", and I can't see that he has been unblocked, or that FrontierPlace has indicated that that account is a clean start, then that would mean that if they are indeed determined to be the same person, then it would be a violation of the ban, right? Knuthove (talk) 12:38, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Knuthove Quite probably, but you can't be sure and have no need to make such a determination. A clean start will not normally be publicly announced or disclosed. In any case that is for the SPI or a possibly blocking admin to determine. Starting the SPI and providing any available evidence is all that you need to or should do in such a matter.
Note that a block is not the same thing as a ban, although banned users are normally blocked. A ban is a determination that a specific person should not edit Wikipedia, for a specific time or indefinitely: it is made by community consensus (often at WP:ANI) or by ARBCOM. A block is a removal of permission settings preventing editing by a particular account, for a specific time or indefinitely, normally made by an admin. A ban may be enforced by a block, but many blocks are not bans. Editing in violation of a ban or block is normally grounds to block the account used to make the edits, and to extend the ban or block on the person making them. A block applies to an account, a ban to a person. However a person whose account is blocked should not use or create another account to avoid the block, nor edit without logging in to9 any account. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 13:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DES, again, thanks! I was not aware of the difference between blocks and bans. I will submit a case to the SPI through Twinkle, and have them take it from there. Knuthove (talk) 13:09, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to write article?

 – Heading created. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:29, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Everyone . How can I write an article that is approved? What type of reference i should use for my articles ? Sogand Kamranii (talk) 04:57, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sogand Kamranii: Assuming this is about Draft:Tina Akhondtabar, the older version Draft:Tina Akhoondtabar has been declined three times and finally rejected since the person is clearly not notable enough to merit an article. (Other draft and article pages about the same individual have been created and deleted a few times, both before and after that draft was rejected, and a number of different sockpuppet accounts have been involved.) No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 07:16, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How can I have an article created by another unbiased editor?

I have an article that I feel should be added but I am personally involved in the subject matter. What can I do? Rightventracleleft (talk) 05:23, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rightventracleleft: If you are personally involved, you should declare your WP:COI on the article's talk page with {{connected contributor}} and on your own user page with {{UserboxCOI}}. Once the draft is fleshed out you should restrict your contributions to edit requests on the article's talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What can I do... about having the article created? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rightventracleleft (talkcontribs) 05:32, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Rightventracleleft, the first thing you should do is mention here the name of the article you are proposing.--Quisqualis (talk) 07:22, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For posting an Educational article

 DIXIT2306 (talk) 05:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to post and article or Educational information to provide better information regarding the Indian youth and for all who need the information.

Https://www.drsarkarinaukri.in is the place where i am shring the information right now.

Hello, DIXIT2306, Your "generosity" in "sharing" a commercial website with Wikipedia goes against Wikipedia's mission, which is not to promote Sarkari Naukri. You don't appear to be here to make an encyclopedia,--Quisqualis (talk) 07:08, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DIXIT2306 Please understand that Wikipedia is not for merely providing information or merely educating people. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent reliable sources state about topics that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 09:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My article submission for my own company was decline.

I recently created a page for my own company but it was declined https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cytron_Technologies. I try to write it from the neutral party, no selling, no promoting, validated references and I follow how my peers writing for their own company. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adafruit_Industries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SparkFun_Electronics

I want to know how can I improve the article to be published. is remove the product section works? Engtong (talk) 05:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Engtong: Welcome to the Teahouse. The issue the reviewer had was the tone you used, which is promotional. An example is The product was unveiled in 2018 and managed to run a successful crowdfunding campaign at Kickstarter; emphasis added. There are also details that do not matter to a casual reader, such as where all of them are in purple color PCB and in purple color packaging. There is this sentence: simple design of manual test buttons is the signature feature of Cytron Motor Driver made its [sic] stand out from its rivals, which compares the product to competing brands, and is absolutely not neutral and serves to promote the product. The content under "rero Educator Conference" only speaks to its purpose and does not provide any other details besides that. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Engtong, it is pretty hard to write about your company neutrally, no matter how hard you try. It's better to leave it to other, more experienced writers to deal with it and I recommend you edit something totally unrelated. Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 07:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do you ensure that we have good evaluation of sources? Good quality of sources used

How do you ensure that we have good evaluation of sources? How does the Wikipedia experts herein ensure that new editors are thorough with the sources selected before proceeding to the "citations added" section? Habelgmsa (talk) 08:06, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All new articles, either at Draft stage or when created directly as an article, are scrutinized by one or more experienced editors who choose to do that sort of work on Wikipedia. The sources used are checked to verify their Reliability and that they actually do support the facts that are being cited to them. Also, these reviewers will check that everything in the article is cited to reliable sources.
In the case of a Draft, the reviewers might themselves add better sources, but if they cannot find such sources they may Decline the Draft, meaning its author is asked to improve it before resubmitting it (other editors can contribute to this). If the author is unable or unwilling to do so after several resubmissions and declines, they may decide that the subject is unsuitable, and Reject the Draft.
If the article is created directly, without going through a draft stage, it will be similarly evaluated, but will likely be judged to a higher standard, and may be changed to a Draft or deleted entirely, depending on its potential or lack of it. Newly created articles are usually reviewed fairly promptly by the New Pages Patrol. New articles are not made visible to the web crawlers that compile search engine indices until they have been approved by the NPP or after 90 days, whichever comes sooner: Drafts are of course never visible to the crawlers.
Some new editors may ask at the Help Desk, Teahouse or Reliable Sources fora such as the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard about whether their sources are suitable; I believe most do not, so they are judged as part of the review process.
Once an article has been accepted, various editors interested in its subject will add it to their watchlists, which will alert them every time an edit is made to it so that they can, should they wish, check the edit's quality and any new source it may have cited.
I've doubtless left out some details, which others will, I am sure, add. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.24.23 (talk) 14:30, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism section within Wikipedia

What is the vandalism section within Wikipedia? Habelgmsa (talk) 08:09, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Habelgmsa:, hi, sorry what exactly do you mean by this? As in, where would you go to report vandalism, or where our pages on handling vandalism are? Nosebagbear (talk) 08:24, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Habelgmsa:. You might find what you are looking for at Wikipedia:Vandalism.--Shantavira|feed me 10:21, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article wrongly made a draft and put for AfC

An article I created has been made a draft and put for AfC by another user.

The message I received says that it was due to the article not following the Neutrality, Verifiability and Notability guidelines. However, the contest does follow all guidelines and it was already reviewed by a fellow editor/moderator.

The article in question is Satguruma Paramahansa Sadhvi Trideviji

How can I report the unjustified behaviour from this user? Iair.rozen (talk) 08:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Iair.rozen: – while it can perhaps feel as if a move to draft space is some kind of unfair treatment, it is in fact a way of trying to save an article that does not meet the minimum requirements for a Wikipedia article. An experienced editor moved an article you had created, which was nowhere near ready to be part of the main encyclopedia, to Draft space so that you could work on it further. You moved it back to the main encyclopedia without addressing the issues, and now it has been deleted as unambiguous promotion. Important: Please have a look at the note the other editor left for you on your user talk page, where you were asked to declare whether you have a conflict of interest, before you made any other edits. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 08:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Autoconfirmed user

How do I know that I am an autoconfirmed user? Frankhad (talk) 09:48, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Frankhad. Well, you aren't one yet, but when your account is 4 days old and you have made at least 10 edits, you will automatically be assigned that user right. You can find what user rights anyone has by going to one of their userpages and clicking 'User contributions'. At the bottom of that page, click the 'User rights' link to view what user rights they have been allocated. (See here for yours). Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:23, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Religious Article Problem

While browsing the "Very likely has problems" section of the "Recent Changes" tab. I saw an edit on the Shia Islam Article placing "PBUH" after every reference of Muhammad. PBUH means "Peace be Upon Him". The purpose for the edit was labeled as "Kindly use "PBUH" (Peace be upon him) with the name of holy prophet Muhammad PBUH last messenger of ALLAH. As you write the name of ISA AS." I am very for properly labeling religious figures, and this is, through a small bit of research, the proper way to label Muhammad. However, this is slightly confusing, as any person visiting this article without knowledge of this fact may be confused by this, taking it for vandalism. Adding PBUH after every reference of Muhammad also makes the link to Muhammad's article turn red, as there is no article named Muhammad PBUH. How should I fix this issue? I think i could fix the problem with people taking the extra "PBUH" by placing a note at the bottom of the article describing that PBUH means "Peace be upon him" and that this is the proper way, or should I just revert the PBUH-ing. And how should I fix the link? Should I remove PBUH in that circumstance or should I place PBUH, outside of the Muhammad link. Like this Muhammad PBUH.

Thanks JazzClam (talk) 11:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JazzClam: Please remove it if it has been added after the name. This is discussed in the Manual of Style. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 12:21, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea: Thank you very much for that, I did not see that in the manual of style — Preceding unsigned comment added by JazzClam (talkcontribs) 12:24, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@JazzClam:, thanks for asking, and apologies for the correct, but rather abrupt answer above. It is in MOS, but a summary of the key points and the reasoning is best found in the Muhammed page FAQ (Q5 for this one). Nosebagbear (talk) 10:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure why Nosebagbear apologised, as they were not in any way responsible for the response that they personally found overly abrupt. It is perfectly fine to supplement other people's responses without belittling their efforts to help. --bonadea contributions talk 10:33, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea: (did the ping work now? xD) thanks for the answer — Preceding unsigned comment added by JazzClam (talkcontribs) 11:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@JazzClam: A ping doesn't work if you don't sign the message. See Help:Notifications. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:14, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

submit article

How do I submit my draft article JKDonehue (talk) 12:09, 18 May 2020 (UTC) JKDonehue (talk) 12:09, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I submit my draft article : International Law of Maritime piracy. It is completed and I am ready to submit it I can find a 'submit for review' button I have tired the source editor ; writing in {{AFC submission|||ts=20200518123308|u=JKDonehue|ns=4}} but that did not seem to work. JKDonehue (talk) 12:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now at Draft:International Law of Maritime Piracy. I recommend the creator address the comments added to the draft while waiting for a review. David notMD (talk) 13:13, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Draft:International Law of Maritime Piracy fails to make it clear, in its opening sentence or even in its lead, what it is about. Is it about all laws against piracy? Or about such laws enacted since the establishment of the United Nations? Or about such laws currently in force? Or about some particular law? Also, the diagram File:UNCLOS Maritime Zones .png is misleading. The distance is measured to the nearest land, not to the first land that is reached by travelling westward. Maproom (talk) 07:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please I want to reintroduce Tyler L Adam

I want to reintroduce professor Tyler L Adams to wait Wikipedia. I'm looking for someone to review it. Abbas Kwarbai (talk) 13:13, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Abbas Kwarbai: Your draft was deleted for copyright violations. Have you read the note that David notMD left on your talk page? Also if you do have a connection with Adam Tyler or if you are being paid to create the article you must disclose it. See WP:DISCLOSEPAY for more details. REDMAN 2019 Stay at home:Protect the NHS:Save lives (talk) 13:21, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't been paid to introduce professor Tyler L Adams. He is my mentor who has being helping me on my researches. So, I'm drafting the Article about him which is not correlate to any website write up about him. Abbas Kwarbai (talk) 13:29, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Abbas Kwarbai: Being your current professor, you clearly do have a WP:COI. That's nothing to be ashamed of - just be open about it and follow the instructions at WP:COI to make transparent your personal knowledge of the subject. You can do this by putting a COI declaration on your userpage. Thank you. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So yes, you can start over. I recommend you declare your relationship to Adam on your User page and then create/submit a draft via Articles for Creation. The problem with your deleted draft is that you had copied copyright protected content from websites and pasted that into your draft. To succeed, the facts must be true (and referenced), but the wording yours. David notMD (talk) 14:31, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is VERY possible that Dr. Adams has not been written about at length by independent sources which can be used as citations, meaning that he does not meet Wikipedia's concept of notability. David notMD (talk) 16:14, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

delete entry

How do I delete an entry in the history list? 75.170.42.233 (talk) 14:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The only way is to ask an oversighter. See WP:Oversight. --ColinFine (talk) 15:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to delete a hyperlink in my article that I have put in for review.

How to delete a hyperlink in my article that I have unfortunately put in for review.

Draft:Jules Franck Mondoloni Under the heading Publications - Media - Museum collections - Galleries[edit]

Published books illustrated by Jules Franck Mondoloni: Hello: I don't know how to delete this written below. I wanted to change the hyperlink by deleting then replacing, and this is what now appears in my article.

 ,SortField:!n,SortOrder:0,TemplateParams:(Scenario:,Scope:Default,Size:!n,Source:,Support:)))) Filitosa, 1987
,Scope:Default,Size:!n,Source:,Support:)))) Lumières de granite: la Corse à l'aube de son histoire, 1990

My user name is Reknil43 and my article is Jules Franck Mondoloni I need help with my references too. I am 77 years old and find it a daunting task to understand how to correct my mistakes and, such as above "deleting a hyperlink", as well as creating the references that include the pages references. I mistakenly entered my article to be published too soon. I thought that I could still edit it as I did in the sandbox. Reknil43 (talk) 15:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission has been rejected so you can continue to correct it. The best bet would be to delete the section Draft:Jules Franck Mondoloni#Publications - Media - Museum collections - Galleries in its entirety, as it has no references but numerous misplaced external links. You can find advice about references at Help:Referencing for beginners, but you also need to read the link which you have been provided to WP:Notability (people). --David Biddulph (talk) 15:56, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Reknil43:, I made some repairs to your article. Dave Biddulph's advice is good: delete that section for the moment. New editors often try to create large articles, which are harder to pass AFC than smaller ones with good sources. I also removed all the uses of Wikipedia itself and Flickr as sources (see WP:RS) and all the external links to flickr.com, as we do not link to external site in the body of the article. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The draft suggests you have a large amount of personal/private information about Mondoloni. I see you have properly declared a COI on your user page. A problem remains - information you have about Mondoloni personally, if not published somewhere, cannot be used in the article even if true. I can guess that this applies to details about his education, etc. David notMD (talk) 16:25, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New article

I have made up a new draft article for well-known sportswear company Castore. It is very odd that they do not already have one. A reviewer refuses to approve the article on the basis that the company do not meet notability requirements for Wikipedia, which, for anyone living in the UK, seems patently bizarre when they are the main sponsor of the country's most famous tennis player and the kit provider for one of the UK's biggest football clubs. How can I challenge the decision of this one reviewer? Bluegene18 (talk) 15:49, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:Castore. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:57, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Bluegene18, and welcome to the Teahosue. The term "notability" is perhaps unfortunate, because Wikipedia uses it in a special sense. Here a topic is notable if and only if independent publications have "taken note" of the topic by writing about it in detail in reliable sources. Notability is typically demonstrated by citing multiple independent sources that discuss the topic in detail. Being a widely known company, or sponsoring popular events or people, does not indicate notability in this sense. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Bluegene18: - two different reviewers considered it yesterday. There are actually a number of reliable sources. What is killing it, source-wise, is that interviews and quotes don't add towards significant coverage because they're inherently non-independent. Huge amounts of the content included within the sources is from either a Castore director, or Andy, or a(nother) sponsor partner. Companies have higher corporate requirements than most articles in Wikipedia. If you wish, you can go to the AfC Help Desk and state that you thing the decline and reject were unwarranted given the quality of the sources - another reviewer will take a look at it. However, have you discussed it with Robert McClenon? You need to do that first. Nosebagbear (talk) 16:09, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both for your help. I will add in even more neutral sources and resubmit the article. Bluegene18 (talk) 08:06, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Bluegene18, you say you "will add in even more neutral sources . . . ", suggesting that you have written text in the article and will now look for (Reliable) sources to support it: this is exactly the wrong way to go about writing a Wikipedia article.
The optimal procedure is, having decided on the subject of the article, to first gather Reliable (published, independent, editorially vetted) sources discussing the subject (at some length) and then write the core article using only facts included in those sources – this and only this will reliably establish the subject's "Wikipedian Notability", if I might coin a term.
Having thus drafted an acceptable article, one can then add minor and uncontrovertial facts from other non-independent sources (such as taking the name of a company's CEO and its current number of employees from its own website), and from Reliable sources that only list or mention the subject in passing, but such sources (and/or one's own knowledge) should not be used to create the initial basis of the article – going about the task in that way makes it many times harder to achieve an article that will pass muster with Wikipedia's requirements. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.32.223 (talk) 12:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Been trying

I've been trying to unsubscribe for years from this. One of your experts helped me write a page at MOMA and then you proceeded to tell me it was an advertisement. I don't know my login,password, etc and want to unsubscribe immediately!  2601:700:4100:26A0:90FF:B04D:5CC6:4433 (talk) 16:21, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you have forgotten your account information, just abandon attempting to regain access to it and abandon your account. There is no way to delete an account or "unsubscribe", for both technical and legal reasons. 331dot (talk) 16:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hello, editor with IP ending in 5CC6:4433]. I am afraid that there is no such thing as a subscription to Wikipedia. I suspect that you created an account, specified an email address, and set up automatic email messages on certain events occurring. The only way to remove those alerts is to log back in to that account and change the preferences. Given that you apparently registered an email with the account, the password could be reset if the user name for the account was known. If you know the name of the article you worked on (and that was deleted) it might be possible to find the name of the account. Or if you know the name of any other article or page that you edited, and the date it was edited, it might be possible to find the user name. But without that, I am afraid there is nothing anyone can do here. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:31, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
checkYHello IP editor. You do not even need to know the Wikipedia user account name. Just go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:PasswordReset and type in the email address to which you are getting all these unwanted watchlist notifications. You should then be sent a temporary password. I had to do this the other day for a spare account I rarely use. The message I received was as follows: "Someone (probably you, from IP address xx.xx.xxx.xxx.xxx) requested a reset of your password for Wikipedia (<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page>). The following user account is associated with this email address: Username: NM Demo Temporary password:1x2x3x4x5x This temporary password will expire in 7 days.You should log in and choose a new password now. If someone else made this request, or if you have remembered your original password, and you no longer wish to change it, you may ignore this message and continue using your old password."
OK, so with your new temporary password and your account name included in part of the message, just type in the temporary password, then create a new password that you won't immediately forget. Now, having logged in, go to your account 'Preferences' (it's a link right at the top of the page in desktop view), and go to the 'User profile' tab. (Courtesy link). Scroll down to 'Email options', where you will see your email address, and have the option to remove it completely. You will no longer be able to access that account if you forget your new password, but you won't get any more email notifications. To be doubly sure, then go to the Preferences>Notifications tab, where you can deselect all the notification types that send you alerts by email (Link). That should do it. If for some reason you fail to get back in, your only option will be to set up an email Inbox rule at your end to block or delete all messages that include 'Wikipedia' in the name. Perhaps you'd come back and let us know how you get on? All the best, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)     [reply]

How to create a page on Wikipedia

How to create a page on Wikipedia Hi. Okay, here is my question: How do you create a page on Wikipedia and I don't mean a user page, I mean a page about a celebrity that is not on Wikipedia.

Kind Regards, Candy:) --Candy luv music (talk) 16:52, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to create a page on Wikipedia

How to create a page on Wikipedia Hi. Okay, here is my question: How do you create a page on Wikipedia and I don't mean a user page, I mean a page about a celebrity that is not on Wikipedia.

Kind Regards, Candy luv music 🍭💖🎶 --Candy luv music (talk) 16:56, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Candy luv music! First, take the time to read WP:BASIC, and WP:BLP. If you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem", move on to WP:YFA and perhaps WP:TUTORIAL. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:07, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Candy luv music!
Creating new articles from a blank start is one of the harder tasks on Wikipedia, perhaps the hardest an inexperienced user is likely to face. In future I urge you to use the Article Wizard to create a draft under the Articles for Creation project. There, an experienced editor will review your draft once you think it is ready. Only when a reviewer approves will the draft be moved to the main article space. This avoids the situation where a deletion is requested soon after the initial version of an article is posted.
Also, please read Wikipedia's Golden Rule and Your First Article, if you have not already done so. The advice there can be very helpful, in my view. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:45, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some steps which, when followed, often lead to success in getting an article accepted:

  • First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our specific guideline on the notability of people. Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
  • Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
  • Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
  • Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
  • Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
  • Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
  • Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request here or at the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.
Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:45, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am currently working on a poem available at (User:TheBirdsShedTears/sandbox). I want to know that if i add original lines of the poem within Quote box, will it considered a copyright infringement or allowed by the Wikipedia? Thanks TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 17:06, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hello TheBirdsShedTears, and welcome to Wikipedia. Our guideline on this is at Wikipedia:Quotation, which says: While quotations are an indispensable part of Wikipedia, try not to overuse them. Quotations are loose, ambiguous style that is common in fiction and journalism, and is generally not suited to encyclopedic writing. Long quotations crowd the actual article and distract attention from other information., and The copied material should not comprise a substantial portion of the work being quoted and a long quotation should not be used where a shorter quotation would express the same information. What constitutes a substantial portion depends on many factors, such as the length of the original work, and the importance and relevance of the quoted text to that work. and The quotation must be useful and aid understanding of the subject; irrelevant quotations should be removed.
Also, since this poem is in Urdu, the original will be of value largely to those who know that language. A translation of a few lines might be of value, but it is essential that the translation be of high quality. A published translation from a reliable source of good reputation for translation would be best, but must be attributed to the published translation properly. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:40, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please someone should access my publication on draft

This is the biography of Professor Tyler L Adams. Please someone should assist me in accessing it because I tried to follow all Wikipedia rules when I'm publication it. Abbas Kwarbai (talk) 19:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please give me a few moments to make some changes. Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 19:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC) TeaHouse Host[reply]
@Abbas Kwarbai: - I have put your page up for speedy deletion on the Copyright violations, once again. You are highly encouraged to learn how to create an article Wikipedia:Yfa and the proper format Wikipedia:Mos, as well as Biographies of living people Wikipedia:Blp. I have also noticed you submitted this earlier today and a lot of questions have been posted to the teahouse and on your talk page which need to be addressed and discussed prior to trying to create this article. Also remember, everything on Wikipedia is everyone's, not just yours. Therefore this is not your publication so please keep that in mind. Once you get a good grasp of the way in which this can be accomplished, please let us know and we can assist further. Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 19:30, 18 May 2020 (UTC) TeaHouse Host[reply]
My draft is deleted immediately because I have violeted copy right. But this draft is a new brand. So please I want to know where my draft is been copy. Meanwhile, which website is my draft related interms of copy right. Abbas Kwarbai (talk) 20:45, 18 May 2020 (UTC) (Pasted from my talk page) Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 20:54, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Abbas Kwarbai: - Please keep the conversations here and not on my talk page, please. Again, you have to paraphrase the information, and just changing one word in a sentence copied from a source is not paraphrasing. That is still a copyright violation. Again, I encourage you to completely go through the links posted throughout the teahouse in response to the article and also to answer the questions posed to you. Thanks! Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 20:54, 18 May 2020 (UTC) TeaHouse Host[reply]

Well thank you for your feedback but actually I wrote this article on my WhatsApp and later copied it from there to Wikipedia. So that implies is plagiarism? Please have tried all my possible way to do it but couldn't. I only know my draft might be wrong but I have subjected and look into numerous wiki bio and draft this one. Please the kind of assist I need from is to directly tell me how do it please.

@Abbas Kwarbai: I am not super privy to the details of this draft but from what I have heard it is because you have copied and pasted over material from your sources, which is not allowed. This doesn't have anything to do with where you originally drafted the article. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Abbas Kwarbai if indeed you wrote the online version which your Wikipedia draft seems to be copied from, you have two options. 1) post a release on the https://tyadamsphd.com/) page, releasing that text under the CC-BY-SA free license so that anyone in the world may use the text subject to that license. Then there will be no copyright issue on Wikipedia. 2) Re-do the text in a significantly way, so that the facts are much the same, but the writing is so different that it would not be a copy even if someone else had written the first text. (#2 is also the proper procedure if you did not write the first text. If the first text copiewd significant content from its sources, again do #2)

Once one of those is done,. we can deal with formatting issues, but the copyright must be dealt with fist, one way or the other. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:55, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Look over new article

Hey y'all, working on creating Draft:Snoqualmie_Valley_Record and would love a look over. This is my first real article and would love a look over. Hope everyone is having a great Monday! NoahRiffe (talk) 20:23, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@NoahRiffe: Welcome to the Teahouse. I would start by addressing the concern that Robert McClenon has with the sources being used; he would prefer you find reliable sources that are not associated with the newspaper. From a copyediting point of view the word "in" is inappropriately capitalised in some places, like The newspaper was again sold after just 4 years to King County Journal Newspapers, In December 2000 [...] (emphasis added). Be wary of your tone, as phrases like The paper traces its beginnings back [...] do not fit the voice the encyclopedia conveys. I'd opt for something more neutral, like "The paper originated from [...]" —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:11, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tenryuu: Thank you so much! I appreciate your help and dedication to Wiki!!

How long does it take for a new page to get reviewed and published?

How long does it take for a new page to get reviewed and published? Specifically Draft:Terrence BarnichPizzaman787 (talk) 20:45, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has not been submitted for review yet? Theroadislong (talk) 20:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Pizzaman787, welcome to the Teahouse. I have added a box with a submit button. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:55, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Pizzaman787: When your draft is ready and you submit it, you'll see a yellow box on your draft that will say something like: "This may take 6 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,392 pending submissions waiting for review." GoingBatty (talk) 22:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
FYI - It's not a queue. Reviewers look at the pile of drafts and select the article they want to review next. So, can be days, weeks, months. David notMD (talk) 01:42, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I created sections. Currently, your refs are 'naked' URLs. Fix those before submitting. David notMD (talk) 01:49, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What qualifies as a "Popular" youtuber?

In my short time patrolling Recent changes, I've fixed many a case of people advertising their own youtube channel on an article about a videogame. Usually it will include a few content creators that are popularly identified as "Popular". For example, in one of my cases it was in the terraria article, It had Chippy Gaming and Khaios, two relatively popular youtubers, along with another youtube channel which matched the name of the person who made the edit, which i will not name for privacy purposes. So this brings me to my question, in order to talk about certain video games, one must talk about it's community, which often includes "Popular Youtubers". But that term is relative, one person may think that a youtuber is popular while another may not, and there are also no sources to cite saying that someone is popular except subscriber counts and other oft referred to counts of popularity. But until the community decides on a proper definition for the term "Popular" this will always be relative. So is there already a definition? Or do we as wikipedians need to decide upon this? Thanks, JazzClam (talk) 21:22, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JazzClam Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There is not a specific definition of a notable "YouTuber", so the general definition of a notable person would apply. Subscriber counts or viewership are easily gamed so they aren't used as a notability metric. 331dot (talk) 21:35, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed JazzClam, "popular" (which is indeed hard to define, and harder to prove) is not really relevant here at Wikipedia. Instead we look for "notable" performers, whether on YouTube or on any other medium. That depends on coverage in reliable sources, not on audience numbers, subscribers, views, or any other measure of popularity. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:39, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, Template:UIDESiegell so notability is what matters, so if they have done something important or famous? Such as perhaps having coded the modding API for a certain game, or having made it? JazzClam (talk) 09:20, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JazzClam: Well, sort of but not really – even if they coded the API for WoW they would not be notable enough for a stand-alone article if there wasn't significant coverage about them in independent reliable sources. (And if there were such coverage and an article about them, they would be described as a coder rather than a YouTuber – a notable person who also creates YouTube videos would probably not be presented primarily as a YouTuber.) If someone has created a series of YouTube videos with game descriptions, for instance, they might be notable for that, but only if secondary sources have talked about it. I'm thinking about the many YouTube channels that exist with playthroughs and rule descriptions of board games, here (so not the same thing but similar) ; many of those are really good and very popular, but they still wouldn't be considered notable for Wikipedia's purposes. One important facet of notability is that it is permanent, which popularity is not! Hope that makes sense.
Btw, when you ping someone, it doesn't work if you only put their user name within curly brackets – see the introduction to H:PING for more information about how you write a ping. I like {{yo|Username}} because it is short and super-quick to type on a keyboard, but as you can see in the help page, there are other commands you can use as well. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 09:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so generally, unless a youtuber is particularly notable, they should not be included, and since in youtube, and in gaming spheres in general, notability is basically the popularity of a youtuber, they should generally not be included? JazzClam (talk) 12:37, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree – I don't think most youtubers would be considered notable at all. notability is basically the popularity of a youtuber Only in the general language – Wikipedia's definition of "notability" doesn't include popularity. Notability for a youtuber is determined in the same way as for any other individual (with the exception of some people who are covered by one of the specific notability criteria) : if reliable independent sources have written about them in depth, they are notable, otherwise not. A youtuber who is not popular and doesn't have lots of subscribers or views could still be notable if they have plenty of coverage in reliable independent sources, and vice versa. --bonadea contributions talk 14:13, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copy and paster error: merging draft with an article published in main space

Resolved
 – Draft's history merged to the article by DESiegel. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:12, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I created Draft:The Black Caucus at Penn State but I did not mean to publish the draft. I then tried to delete the draft and publish directly into the main space the same article, The Black Caucus at Penn State; however, I now have the error that the draft already exists. I requested that the page history of the draft be merged into the main space article. I got the message that an Administrator has to review the merge request. How long will this take? J.AE.W23 (talk) 22:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Unfortunately, I'm not sure. Thousands of requests come in and out, and there's a big wait for stuff like these. At the max, it could take six weeks, but that's unlikely. If I'm wrong, someone else will correct me. Le Panini (talk) 22:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello J.AE.W23 A history merge shouldn't take too long. I'll try to do it later tonight, if no one else has gotten to the matter. That does not settle what happens to the article, or draft, however. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question

When I tried to edit an article(bishop Aukland) to add a notable person it got reverted. So what is the criteria for a notable person? 1st Username (talk) 22:48, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@1st Username: The invisible comment about the subject you deleted from the article has a link to Wikipedia's guidelines for what makes a person notable. Please refrain from also editing other people's comments on the talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:59, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict; I didn't see Tenryuu's answer until after I posted this) As is clearly explained on the talk page message that you deleted, that consensus is that the subject doesn't meet our WP:BIO notability requirement. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User pages

I just wrote and submitted my first article for Anthony Radetic. Wikipedia said that I should move the page from user:Lipav123/sandbox/draft: AnthonyRadetic to draft:AnthonyRadtic, so I did. When I click on my user name of Lipav123, it continues to say that I don't have a user page. I am confused. I registered under Lipav123 and created the article. Lipav123 (talk) 22:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! In order to create a user page under your username, just click on your account name in the top right corner. This will bring you to your user page, which doesn't exist yet. To create your user page, just follow the instructions and type in the box below, and submit it. This should create your user page, and you can go back and change and customize it to your delight! Le Panini (talk) 23:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
After typing in the box, you have created your user page, so now your user page is asking to create your own user page. Happy editing(?) Le Panini (talk) 23:46, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: IXL Learning

Resolved
 – Title has been renamed to desired name. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm writing an article about IXL Learning, a very notable company that owns multiple sources, including ABCya, Quia Books, IXL, Quia Web, and a couple of others I can't name off of the top of my head. But I accidentally called the Draft IXL (Website) instead of IXL Learning. How do I make the switch? Thank you for your time. Le Panini (talk) 23:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC) Le Panini (talk) 23:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Le Panini: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to add to it. Don't worry about the name for now. Work on the content of the draft. After the draft is reviewed, it can be renamed as part of moving it to main space, RudolfRed (talk) 23:40, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Le Panini, RudolfRed, To avoid confusion, I moved the draft to Draft:IXL Learning, as requested. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC) @Le Panini:} DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Luisinho Gamer

Luís Henrique Correia Ferreia, mais conhecido como,Luisinho Gamer,(Faro,2 de Março de 2003) é um Youtuber,estudante de GPSI,poderá ser um grande youtuber português

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Luisinhogamer (talkcontribs)

@Luisinhogamer: This is English Wikipedia. Please write in English, and remember that we are not here to help you promote yourself. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to ask for help at the Portuguese Wikipedia, you may do so here: [5] RudolfRed (talk) 00:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:IXL Learning

I want to add an image of the IXL Learning logo like the other company articles have. Can somebody help and or guide me through this process? I tried to study how to do so but it's still unclear to me. Le Panini (talk) 04:06, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Le Panini: First question: is the image copyright-free or does it meet our non-free use criteria? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:08, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I tried uploading an image that I found that would fit the draft well, but it was declined. I've done this before on my Edgenuity article, so I don't understand what makes an image copyright-free. Le Panini (talk) 04:12, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The image use policy can be found here. If it's the logo of a company it is most likely copyrighted and unfit for Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:18, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, company logos often are used in Wikipedia, as non-free content. One of the conditions of that use is that they must be used in an article, and cannot be used in a draft. So once your draft is accepted, Le Panini, you will probably be able to upload the logo to Wikipedia (not Commons), and use it in the article; but you mustn't upload the logo while it is in draft. See LOGO. --ColinFine (talk) 09:10, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I thought it was some weird condition like that. How do I remove the images from the Wikipedia commons then? Le Panini (talk) 14:28, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ColinFine: Thanks for the clarification! —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:01, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Changes Error

Dear fellow Wikipedians, As you can see in my contributions, I have not made any edits. My IP address changed, and that has caused my account to stop working. Can anyone explain? But just basically I'm not new btw.

I was looking at the recent changes page, although I've noticed something which I think might be a bug. Whenever I click "view new changes", in the new changes was a supposedly new edit, which was in fact one that had appeared before. This prompted me to think that the user was doing the same edit over and over again, although looking at the page history, there had been no edit warring and only one of that edit, even there were clearly two edits in the recent changes.

I'm not sure if this is a glitch or just me, so can another person please just tell me what's going on? Thanks, XLK123 (talk) 05:07, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi XLK123, welcome to the Teahouse. Your account was created eight minutes before this post so I'm not sure what you refer to. "View new changes" at Special:RecentChanges just means that the list is updated without reloading the whole page. Already displayed changes are not removed unless they have dropped out of the selected number of changes (or less likely the selected time period). There should be a horizontal line between the new and already shown changes, but a few of the new changes may appear below the line. This appears to be an error. Maybe it only uses seconds and the English Wikipedia is too busy for that. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:30, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Page for Marvin Chun?

I am a new wikipedia-er, and I think Marvin Chun meets the criteria for a page. I have some experience with professor pages (as a user), and his notability is greater than many others with pages. He has over 30k research citations (https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=mNT0MKIAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao) and is in a senior administrative position at a notable university. Is Marvin Chun Wikipedia Page worthy? What are some good resources for going about making a page for him? Thanks (and sorry if this isn't the right place for this)! Lukasrobertcorey (talk) 06:03, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lukasrobertcorey:, welcome! For now, see: Wikipedia: Notability (academics). I'm sure another helpful and friendly Teahouse volunteer will have something more to add. 107.15.157.44 (talk) 07:14, 19 May 2020 (UTC) ... and yes, this is a fine place for this.[reply]
@Lukasrobertcorey:, we never call ourselves wikipedia-ers. We call ourselves wikipedians, or WP:EDIANS. Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 07:27, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@107.15.157.44: Thanks! Is this how I reply? (I hope it is). I believe he meets criteria 1, 3, 5, 6, and 8 (http://www.marvinchun.com/files/Chun_vita.pdf). I'm a little intimidated by the process of starting a page. I should first make it in my sandbox right? I need an image, but probably one nobody really owns? I should read a lot before I start I assume. Also, I will use wikipedians from now on. Thanks for the correction Lukasrobertcorey(talk)
@Lukasrobertcorey:, please sign your messages using 4 tildes> ~~~~ By the way you can'r reply to IP addresses in this way but the procedure is otherwise the same (so you can notify me with {{re|Eumat114}}. Anyway the IP editor has said much. If in doubt, you can create a draft and let us see. (I'll check on this soon.) Thanks, and happy editing! Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 07:31, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Lukasrobertcorey: Starting an article from scratch is considered the most difficult thing to do for beginner wikipedians; but, it looks like you've overcome the difficult 'notability' problem, so don't be intimidated by the process. Images uploaded do indeed need to be copyright-free (with exceptions). There's not a lot to read, but WP: Your first article & WP: Referencing for beginners are usually recommended (you can probably skip them). The best way to start is to ... start! When questions or problems arise, you're always welcome back. Btw, {{re}} actually does notify me (because I'm special?). 107.15.157.44 (talk) 08:59, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure {{re}} notifies you? At WP:AIV I can never notify IPs because they are anonymous. Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 13:15, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Eumat114: I do get a notification banner whenever something is added to my talk page, but I'm not sure that {{re}} generates them. Now that I've checked, it looks like some sort of 'talkback' gadget puts a message on my talk page, which creates the message notification (?). 107.15.157.44 (talk) 19:22, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
{{re}} is a redirect to {{reply to}}, and the documentation at Template:Reply to states "IP addresses are only notified if you post to their user talk page." GoingBatty (talk) 21:40, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Author Entry Notable Enough for Wikipedia?

I am a chef, teacher, and author - and have published two books. I would like to include these and my biography on wikipedia. I am wondering if an author or two books passes the "notability" muster or not. Warren Laine-Naida (talk) 06:37, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Warren Laine-Naida: Welcome to the Teahouse. Generally, no, an author with two books isn't notable. Can you provide reliable, independent sources that cover you significantly? This is before we take your conflict of interest and writing about yourself (which is extremely discouraged) into account, which you would have to declare on the article's talk page and on your user page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:42, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you! I thought as much. I appreciate you taking the time to answer. Warren — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warren Laine-Naida (talkcontribs) 06:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile, suggest you remove you website addresses from your User page, as that is considered promotional. Wikipedia is not social media. David notMD (talk) 10:18, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New article writing

I am an employee at Success Point College. I am one of the Success Point College's team members. They granted me to write the Success Point College article. I am very new at Wikipedia. I want to keep my college title as Success Point College. I prepared a sandbox content. When I moved to the article it is deleted. Please guide me on what do's or do not's. Also, guide me on how can I write a fresh article for our college. Abhishekolkata (talk) 08:14, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Abhishekolkata Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are an employee of the College, you must review and formally comply with the paid editing policy, a Wikipedia Terms of Use requirement. You should also review conflict of interest. Successfully writing a new Wikipedia article is the absolute hardest thing to do on Wikipedia, it is even harder when one has a conflict of interest. What you wrote was moved to Draft:Success Point College for further work, because it did not currently meet Wikipedia standards.
You seem to have a common misconception about Wikipedia; Wikipedia is not a place for organizations to tell the world about themselves. This is an encyclopedia, which has articles that summarize only what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Wikipedia is not interested in what a subject says about itself, even if only to say that it exists and describes it offerings, as what you wrote does. In order for you to succeed in writing a draft about your own college, you essentially need to forget everything you know about it, everything on the college website, and everything the college says about itself, and only write based on the content of independent sources that have chosen on their own to give your college significant coverage. This does not include brief mentions, routine announcements, or staff interviews. Wikipedia is also not concerned with whether or not a potential article subject wants an article or not, nor are we (frankly) concerned with what any person has been tasked with doing. If you just want to tell the world about your college, you should use social media, your own website, or some alternative forum where that is permitted. If you truly feel you can write a draft about your college that only summarizes what others say about it, you should use Articles for Creation to submit such a draft. Feel free to show your superiors this message. 331dot (talk) 09:05, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The draft is at Draft:Success Point College, but it is not yet fit for submission for AFC review as you have no references to published reliable sources independent of the subject to demonstrate its notability. As you are an employee you need to read about conflict of interest, and you need to make the mandatory declaration of paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:11, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Article Advice? Any way to expedite publishing?

Hello! I am working on creating Draft: Todor Georgiev and I would love it if someone could take a look at it and give me some tips. It is my first full article. Also is there any way to expedite its approval and publication? Thank you! Elenatheodora (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Elenatheodora. I went through your draft, and these are some tips I have to give:
  • If possible, use English sources, which are more convenient for most editors. However, if there is no English alternative to a non-English source, it’s okay. For more information, see Wikipedia:RSUE and Wikipedia:ANNOTATION
  • If possible, please get more information about personal life (age, education, where he worked before (if he did work elsewhere before Adobe) etc.). Note that this information should come only from reliable sources like news articles about this person.
Besides these, I can’t tell whether this person is notable enough to have an article (because he seems to be the creator of many revolutionary technologies, but there are no mainstream newspapers which have written about him).
RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 10:25, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bio page

Hi, How can someone create a bio page for himself? 196.75.28.158 (talk) 09:59, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They shouldn't, see the autobiography policy. Wikipedia does not have "bio pages", it has articles written by independent editors, summarizing what independent reliable sources say about persons that are shown to meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Wikipedia is not social media where people tell the world about themselves. If you truly feel you can write a neutral encyclopedia article about yourself(technically possible, but a rare thing, I've never seen it happen successfully) you should read Your First Article and use Articles for Creation.
If you create an account, you get to have a user page, where you can introduce yourself to the Wikipedia community in the context of your Wikipedia editing or use. It isn't a place for one to tell anything and everything about themselves, though. 331dot (talk) 10:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly to change?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hassan_Mohamed_Esufally This person has been featured in multiple newspapers (with an independent editorial team) in Sri Lanka, Australia, and the Philippines. He has also been featured in multiple televisions interviews, magazines and is a notable public figure in Sri Lanka. I have included 24 links to his achievements and stature. What exactly would I need to change to get the article approved? ( I included links from reputable newspapers such as daily mirror, Sunday times, etc) Do I remove the links from youtube/social media? Add more above the line media? There are lots more links I can include. If you simply google his name lots of articles come up. If one of the editors could help me edit this so it gets approved that would be sincerely appreciated :) HandR12 (talk) 10:12, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HandR12: While I can't speak to how reliable and independent the sources are (the one thing I can say is interviews are primary sources, which are not as preferred as secondary sources), I agree with DGG's evaluation that the draft is quite promotional. Get rid of phrases like in history and accomplished, as those are terms usually used to promote a subject. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:07, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When will my article be reviewed and approved?

My article Draft:Kwonjungho was reviewed on the 14th of April. I have since made major edits to it but they have still not been reviewed for approval. Is there any way I can know when it will be reviewed/approved? Thank you! FayeHamblettJ (talk) 10:31, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FayeHamblettJ You need to resubmit your draft for review in order for it to be considered; click the "Resubmit" button on the screen in the most recent decline message. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Before you resubmit I suggest you delete Selected group exhibitions, as none of that is referenced, and also improve the format of the references. David notMD (talk) 14:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My Draft is declined. Please help me to improve my draft.

Resolved
 – Published at Jitendra Kumar Soni as notable civil servant, who has received national awards. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 00:11, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My Draft:Jitendra_Soni is declined. Please help me to improve my draft. Pkpunjab (talk) 11:02, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pkpunjab: Unfortunately, the draft doesn't demonstrate why Dr. Jitendra Kumar Soni is notable, at least in the eyes of Wikipedia. Please read WP:GNG for a better understanding of what makes a subject notable. For example, rather than listing his books, you'd need to show that they are notable, such as by including independent reviews in the media. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 19:01, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Hoary, I need to re-check the earlier version of article on my laptop to see exactly that what made me regard it as a test edit. The creating editor posted the same message on my talk page which has been answered by Toddy1 mentioning related issues like Layout and Tone. I'll need some time to see the test issue exactly. Regards Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 22:56, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to nominate Professor Peter C Terry for entry

Peter is Professor of Sport Psychology at the University of Southern Queensland, where is also Dean of the Graduate Research School. He has also ended 9 Olympics as a consultant. Further details will be supplied if he is considered a suitable candidate, which I sincerely hope he will. Jshunter40 (talk) 11:14, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jshunter40 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you feel that a potential subject merits a Wikipedia article, you should just go ahead and create one. Article subjects are not "nominated", they are just written by editors. Please understand that a Wikipedia article should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about a subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability(in this case, the definition of a notable person). Succeeding at writing a new article is challenging, if you don't feel comfortable doing it, you can make a request at Requested Articles, but there is a backlog of literally thousands upon thousands of request, and your request there might not be acted on for a long time, if at all. The fastest way to see an article written about this professor is to do it yourself. You may wish to learn more about Wikipedia first, by using the new user tutorial and editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get an idea of how Wikipedia operates. Reading Your First Article will help as well. 331dot (talk) 11:26, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to add an image in infobox person and the title of the article?

I am unable to add an image in infobox person and title of my article is my username but i want to givee it an another name,how to change it? Tetradelectro (talk) 11:29, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tetradelectro, and welcome to the Teahouse. I suppose you refer to User:Tetradelectro/sandbox.
  • First, do not worry about the name. After you click the "submit" blue button requesting a review, the page will be moved to Draft space, and the name can be changed at that time or later.
  • Second, before you can add an image to the infobox, you must upload it to Wikimedia commons, see Wikipedia:Uploading images.
  • But more important than either of those is the issue of notability. Wikipedia only has articles about notable topics. The normal way to demonstrate notability is to cite detailed coverage of \the topic (in this case the person) in independent published reliable sources. Sales numbers, view counts or numbers of followers, no matter how large, do not suffice to establish notability. No amount of editing or formatting will convert a non-notable topic into a notable one. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 11:55, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Translators community

Hello! Is there a community of russian-english (or english-russian) translators?--DonGuess (talk) 12:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC) DonGuess (talk) 12:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Translators are listed at Category:Translators ru-en and Category:Translators en-ru, also Wikipedia:Translators available#Russian-to-English and Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Translators. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:23, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vintage Actor's Pictures

Hello! I'm JazzClam, but you can call me Jazz, Clam, anything really. I was looking around Recent Changes and somehow found myself on an article about Ken Osmond, the actor who played Eddie Haskell on Leave it to Beaver who sadly died on the 18th, and I saw that the picture on the top of the page is Osmond, Circa 1962. So is the picture meant to be updated? or is the picture meant to represent the version of Osmond, or any actor really, that most people come to the article looking for? That being them in their prime? Thanks, JazzClam (talk) 12:55, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It seems reasonable to have a photo from the time that he was best known, but if you have an alternative suggestion the place for discussion would be the article talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:02, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@JazzClam:@David Biddulph: There's a more recent photo at the bottom. But David's advice is always sound in any case. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 19:08, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Population Borneo

Resolved
 – Not a question for the Teahouse; directed to relevant link. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:09, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is the population of Borneo?  82.217.24.162 (talk) 13:52, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Borneo#Demographics.--Shantavira|feed me 14:38, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to publish a new article

Resolved
 – Published. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:33, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have drafted an article in my sandbox, and I would like to know how I can now proceed with creating a new article on Wikipedia using the contents in my sandbox. User:Ashaw315/sandbox Thank you very much! Ashaw315 (talk) 14:03, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse Ashaw315 I have moved your draft to the correct location, added a submit button and did a bit of copy editing for WP:MOS Good luck. Theroadislong (talk) 14:14, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy: Draft:Cameron Martin (artist). David notMD (talk) 14:38, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This article is a done deal, cleaned up, sourced and published (by Theroadislong).ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:31, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Page history after moving Sandbox into Wikipedia

What happens with the Sandbox author's editing history after moving a new article from user space into article space? Will the history be reset automatically or does a history reset need to be requested? Dranoel26 (talk) 14:19, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dranoel26 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. When you move a page from draft to main space, the history goes with it. You could just create a new page and copy/paste the text from your sandbox, but I'm not sure why you would want to remove the edit history.
Be advised that unless you are extremely experienced with creating articles, it is a good idea to submit your draft for an independent review using Articles for Creation. 331dot (talk) 14:24, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
thx for the good advise. Could you pls also comment on the question about editing history? --Dranoel26 (talk) 14:43, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Dranoel26 I did; "When you move a page from draft to main space, the history goes with it." 331dot (talk) 14:53, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
thanks
@Dranoel26: If you want to submit it for review without a long page history then you could copy the contents to User:Dranoel26/Jewish Princedom in feudal France or Draft:Jewish Princedom in feudal France. You are allowed to make many user subpages for drafts or tests. You normally have to credit the original page in a copy per Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia, but it's not required when you are the only contributor. Don't move it to one of those pages since it brings the page history which would then also be brought to a mainspace article after a second move. It's possible to delete the page history later but only for administrators and they may see no good reason to do it. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:55, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Add {{subst:submit}} to the bottom of the page you want to submit. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:00, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
is there not any simple way for the administrator just to reset the history (specially with a single contributor)?--Dranoel26 (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dranoel26: It's much easier for you to just copy the page, and it's unclear whether an author request is even a valid reason for partial deletion of a page history. Wikipedia:Deletion policy, Wikipedia:Selective deletion and Wikipedia:Revision deletion doesn't mention it. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:50, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Jamie Dolan (confusion with approval?)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Jamie Dolan (film producer)

Article Name: Jamie Dolan (not approved)

Hi there,

I had an editor review my page and it wasn't accepted and he asked some valid questions that I clarified because the questions he asked would go for an actor but not a film producer. In that sense meaning, a lot of producers don't have profile pieces done on them but we are usually mentioned to be producing these films by top publications in entertainment if our projects are of a certain caliber.

So essentially I was told that there wasn't information provided which would translate to me producing any notable films that would accommodate being eligible for a Wikpedia Page. And to specify on my end, 2 of the 3 films I referenced both were theatrically released in the US/UK and one in specific entitled Ladyworld has its own Wikipedia page which I tagged and has my name listed under the producers.

And I submitted about 20 references all from the top publications in entertainment media (Variety, Deadline, etc) in which they cover me producing these films. There's even one article in specific from Deadline announcing my company MUST B NICE in which they did a full profile on us again which is rare except if you're doing a company announcement. A lot of these articles wouldn't per se be profiles on me because that isn't as common for producers but I submitted a variety of published articles that are either 1) announcing the film I produced 2) announcing the release of the film I producer or 3) actual reviews from top reporters of the films I've produced. All of which mention my name as producer on these projects.

Let me know if you can assist me here because I do understand how a submission with no guidance on the above may have not been approved but I have the information to back it. So thank you! Jafilmmaker23 (talk) 14:56, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:Jamie Dolan (film producer) DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:13, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Jafilmmaker23. The reviewer pointed you to WP:NCREATIVE. Please read that guideline page. Section 3 of that (which seems to be what you are trying for) says: The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. Note that the work must be well-known for this to app;ly. That is much more than merely having had a theatrical release. A "notable" film is one that has, or could well have, its own Wikipedia article. "well-known" means more than that, it is not far short of "famous".
As for the references all from the top publications in entertainment media, I check the first few. All were brief mentions, one or two sentences. None discussed you or your work as a producer in detail. A mere mention that a film is being released and you produced it with no further detail is of no value at all in demonstrating Wikipedia-notability. There must be detailed discussion of you or your work. If there are a few good cites they are buried in a flood of bad ones. Film reviews can work but only if they discuss the contribution of you as a director in some detail. Discussing the film but merely mentioning your name and that you were the director (or producer) is not helpful here. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:32, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You have been given links to a variety of pages with extra advice, such as Help:Referencing for beginners and WP:Notability (people), but it sounds as if you are writing about yourself, so you ought to read the advice against autobiography. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:38, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was the original reviewer, and was about to ask the submitter a question, but they have already answered whether they have a conflict of interest, which they do. I was planning and am planning to raise a question about whether an inconsistency between the notability guidelines for actors and the notability guidelines for producers and directors was intended, which makes it more difficult for producers and directors to qualify than for actors. However, my question has to do with drafts in general, especially those who are not submitting autobiographies or paid editing. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:02, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arjin

 2409:4064:2EAA:2943:D47A:E0E5:F81E:D097 (talk) 15:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a question about using and editing Wikipedia? --David Biddulph (talk) 15:51, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Entry - How To Question

Good Afternoon:

Since there is not currently a Wikipedia page for my 22 year radio broadcast career, I would like to begin the process. What is the procedure for creating this? Can someone assist? I worked in the following markets: New York, Dallas, Houston and Tampa.

Thank you!

Dan Stevens

Email: (Redacted)  108.46.35.55 (talk) 17:22, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse. You may begin the process to create an article if you meet the criteria outlined in WP:BASIC User:Zoozaz1 17:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged - please read WP:YOURSELF. (And note that a Wikipedia article about yourself might not be in your best interests per WP:FAMOUS). Hillelfrei talk 17:52, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I change the name of a draft article I am writing?

How do I change the name of a draft article I am writing? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hassan_Mohamed_Esufally

How do I change the draft name of this article? I added the subject's middle name but I want to remove it now and change the title to "Hassan Esufally". I would genuinely appreciate your help :) HandR12 (talk) 18:22, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HandR12: The article was rejected declined. I would wait until the article is accepted before worrying about changing the name. If it is, you can easily move it to rename it.TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Actually "Declined" rather than "Rejected" (which is more severe), but the draft needs work before resubmitting. As Tim noted, name changes are not difficult. David notMD (talk) 19:39, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you were asked on your Talk page if you either have a personal connection to Mr. Esufally, or are being paid or otherwise compensated for creating this article. If neither, please state that on your Talk page. If either, address on your User page, per WP:COI or WP:PAID. David notMD (talk) 19:43, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help editing the article I wrote

 – Section merged. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:24, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I get someone to look at my draft article before I submit again?

I recently received this reply to my question which was really appreciated. I have attached it below.

In reference to this, I have taken out the phrases "in history" and "accomplished". I wanted to also if I can "chat" to an experienced editor who can have a look at the article before I submit it again. How would I do this? If someone can help me with this and also tell me how I can use my talk page to get the assistance that would be appreciated. What else can I include/exclude to get this article approved?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hassan_Mohamed_Esufally This person has been featured in multiple newspapers (with an independent editorial team) in Sri Lanka, Australia, and the Philippines. He has also been featured in multiple televisions interviews, magazines and is a notable public figure in Sri Lanka. I have included 24 links to his achievements and stature. What exactly would I need to change to get the article approved? ( I included links from reputable newspapers such as daily mirror, Sunday times, etc) Do I remove the links from youtube/social media? Add more above the line media? There are lots more links I can include. If you simply google his name lots of articles come up. If one of the editors could help me edit this so it gets approved that would be sincerely appreciated :) HandR12 (talk) 10:12, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

@HandR12: While I can't speak to how reliable and independent the sources are (the one thing I can say is interviews are primary sources, which are not as preferred as secondary sources), I agree with DGG's evaluation that the draft is quite promotional. Get rid of phrases like in history and accomplished, as those are terms usually used to promote a subject. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:07, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

 HandR12 (talk) 21:25, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New article: Draft:Lhouette

Hi All!

I hope you are all safe and well! I have submitted a new article for Lhouette https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lhouette. I am hoping I have done the page correctly. I have announced that I am paid on my Talk page by my company and Lhouette but wasn't sure if I need to do this on the article also.

Loisspencertracey (talk) 18:57, 19 May 2020 (UTC) Loisspencertracey (talk) 18:57, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't actually submitted the draft for review yet and before you do you will need to find a substantial number of reliable independent sources to support all of the unsourced content per WP:BLP Pleae also note they will need to pass WP:NARTIST. Theroadislong (talk) 19:02, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Theroadislong. I thought I had published the page? I have checked with both WP:BLP and WP:NARTIST and I think it should match them to its best ability.

Loisspencertracey (talk) 19:15, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy: Draft:Lhouette. "Publish changes" means that you are saving your edits. Wikipedia uses "Publish" instead of "Save" because the place you are saving it to can be seen by other editors. The draft is not yet submitted. I see that you have properly declared paid on your User page. Much of the content needs references. David notMD (talk) 19:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you David notMD. I have added references and also links to notable Wiki pages. Loisspencertracey (talk) 20:00, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citations on Religious subjects

Are there any policy pages explaining how to find appropriate citations for articles on religion? Would we cite religious scholars? How do you destinguish froma Reliable sourceand an unreliable one. I'm not that up-to-date regarding the academic study of religion in general, so I'm looking for some information on how to write articles on it. By the way, is there any way to search just Wikipedia Policy pages? In other words I was looking for religious policy but what I ran a search all I got was normal articles. Thanks – Chrisvacc - 19:29, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone? – Chrisvacc - 20:15, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) with your appeal. Hello, Chrisvacc, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid I don't know the answer to your first question: possibly if you ask at WikiProject Religion somebody may be able to advise - put a question on the talk page, if the project pages don't have the information you need.
As to your second question: you need to search the "Wikipedia" WP:namespace. If you pick magnifying glass in the search box, it will take you to a more general search page, where you can select which namespaces to look at. On the other hand, if you are looking for policy or explanation of a particular term, it is often worth trying to search the term with "WP:" on the front - for example, when I linked to "Namespace" above. --ColinFine (talk) 20:23, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Chrisvacc: If you don;t get an answer here, try asking at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Religion RudolfRed (talk) 20:24, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alright thanks @RudolfRed:, @ColinFine: - Chrisvacc - 20:36, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And @ColinFine: - what do you mean there was an edit conflict with my appeal? – Chrisvacc - 20:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Chrisvacc, I mean that when I hit "Publish changes", it gave me an Edit conflict, which surprised me a little because we were far from the bottomo of the page, where most changes happen. It turned out to be because you had added the line saying "Anyone" since I had last refreshed the page, so that was what I was conflicting with. --ColinFine (talk) 22:25, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yea lol. I posted my question then a few minutes later two people posted theirs – Chrisvacc - 22:26, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding character to list, help?

Denkichu (talk) 19:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I was going browsing through the list of dragons in film and television, and there's one dragon missing from the list. I'd like to add but I don't know how to do that. The only thing I can edit is the source, and I'm not gonna do that, messing things up. So what to do?

@Denkichu: Welcome to Wikipedia. If you're not comfortable with the editing, you can make the suggested addition on the aritcle's talk page. If you want to learn how to edit, try the interactive learning game at WP:ADVENTURE. RudolfRed (talk) 20:12, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

can someone please tell me about wikiprojects

I would like to know how wiki- projects work. I also like to now which projects are bad and why HISTORIAN (talk) 19:41, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrewhistory: Welcome to Wikipedia. You can learn about how projects work here: Wikipedia:WikiProject. What do you mean by what projects are bad? RudolfRed (talk) 19:52, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrewhistory: If you've not discovered them yet, the rather technical-looking 'Assessment' sections of WikiProjects are a really great way for a keen historian like you to find articles that would benefit most from some tender, loving care and some skillful editing. At Wikipedia:WikiProject History the colourful table shown here allows you to find articles of different quality assessment. Short 'Stub' artciles, especially those deemed of greatest importance are the ones most usefully improved. Just click on the numbers in the relevant cells to see a list of corresponding articles, and maybe one or two will take your fancy. (As an aside, I was quite surprised to see that so far, of your 220+ contributions here, just 26 have been to actual articles, with most being to list your own personal history interests in your sandbox.) Hopefully, you might find one of the many WikiProject assessment charts a really good way for you to get stuck in to some good, productive editing. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:32, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrewhistory: see also Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-04-01/WikiProject report.--Moxy 🍁 22:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Tacopina - Template Message Box Removal

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

Can the template message box be removed as soon as possible, I have tried everything. Need Help! 2604:2000:1303:560F:DC79:51F4:1AC1:158B (talk) 20:50, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you also IP address 100.35.70.184? You don't have any contribution to Joe Tacopina on this IP. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:57, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello IP editor. The main template notice really needs to stay there until someone gets around to addressing the issues highlighted by it. There are many unsupported statements, each of which need inline citations to permit verification. For some unknown reason, IP 100.35.70.184 has removed the individual 'citation needed' templates without actually doing anything about addressing the underlying issues of absence of citations. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussions regarding Deletion I would like to confront the editors and especial the one who threatened me in the last message

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.




Please show me how to create a discussion page so I can invite the people deleting my addition and put a stop to it. There is not a valid reason given, just opinions Wlholmesiii (talk) 00:39, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wlholmesiii: Welcome to the Teahouse! Making the same edit three times in a day is called edit warring, and is not appropriate. When you're concerned about the deletion of your addition to an article (e.g. List of coups d'état and coup attempts), the best place to discuss it is the article's talk page (e.g. Talk:List of coups d'état and coup attempts) with reliable sources (not opinion articles). This is the last step in the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. You may also be interested in reading Template:Cite web for tips on how to format references properly, and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#Sources for consensus on frequently used sources. GoingBatty (talk) 01:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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.

New User with company name

I did not know how to report this, so posting here with hope that an Administrator will take action. User:Bestproductsguide joined today and is spamming a ref to the "Best Product Guide" into articles (Vitamin C, others). All that deleted as product spam but the user should be advised to change name. David notMD (talk) 01:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@David notMD: I think adding the template of admin help along with a relevant message on the user's talk page may help rightly. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 01:26, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@David notMD: You can add {{uw-username}} if you want to the editor's user talk page, or you can post about it at WP:UAA depending upon how egregious the violation is and how likely you think it is that the user will respond to a "warning". Lots of editors will simply change their username when it's pointed out to them that it's a problem, but some never respond and end up getting WP:SOFTBLOCKed anyway. Note, UAA and soft blocking is uually only for simple username violations; anything such as spamming or other types of disruption often is better to point out at WP:ANI, WP:AIV, or some other relevant noticeboard. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:36, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

how do i prove a scholar is highly cited?

How do I prove a scholar is highly cited? Ebonyheins (talk) 01:37, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ebonyheins. Are you trying to create a new Wikipedia article about an academic/scholar? If so, then perhaps you should take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (academics), in particular the section titled Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Citation metrics, for some more information. You might also want to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Science and academia for suggestions as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:42, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User Page Pizzaz

Hello! I've seen some other people's user pages and how they designed them, and I was wondering how I do that to my own. They have things such as charts, redirects, fun facts (eg. "This person is a fan of Abe Lincoln"), etc. Any tips? Thank you for your time. Le Panini (talk) 03:11, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Le Panini: Try Wikipedia:User page design center. Hillelfrei talk 03:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hillelfrei, that page is inactive and archived. Any others? I want a service too. Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 03:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Eumat114:I'm not aware of a userpage "service". The design center page is inactive, but many of its contents, including the style page, contain active templates which can be used now. If you would rather just ask me how to add something to your user page, feel free to drop a message on my talk page. Sorry I can't be of more assistance. If another editor sees this message and knows of an existing active user page project that I am unaware of please let me know. Kind regards, Hillelfrei talk 03:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


@Le Panini: Take a look at WP:USERBOXES. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New article

Hello the article Karwan-I-Islami is not Live inspite of its creation some 24 hours ago can anyone tell me how much time it will take for going live Mariyaibrahim (talk) 03:46, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mariyaibrahim:The article is definitely live on Wikipedia. If you are wondering how long it will take before it is indexable on search engines, it should be as soon as it gets reviewed or in 90 days, whichever comes first. Hillelfrei talk 04:06, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
According to the template on the article, it is still under construction.-- Toddy1 (talk) 04:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Mariyaibrahim: The random procedure of Wikipedia is that unpatrolled articles are disabled for Google indexing. What I'm seeing is that, the article in reference is unpatrolled. Wait for new page reviewers to review it. Best - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 04:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@AaqibAnjum: ? Nothing "random" about it, AFAICT. This is done to keep people from gaming auto-confirm and creating poor, non-policy-compliant articles, usually for some kind of promotion, just to get them to appear in a Google search. Still, people try it many times a day . (No reflection on the subject article; I'm speaking in general.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 15:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AlanM1; I mean the same. Sorry for my bad choice of words. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 15:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone! I need help with adding a link. I can’t seem to find a way to get rid of the google.com part without the link being inaccessible. If someone could please help me with this that would be great. I was previously blocked for not having links and now that I have links my edits are once again being deleted since they are not accessible. Thank you! Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 06:46, 20 May 2020 (UTC) Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 06:46, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Someone was kind enough to help me already on their talk page. Thank you all! Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 06:50, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The change watcher's unfair removal of my edits

Unfair removal of my edits by User:Hb1290


Hi,

I recently made an edit in the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devendrakula_Velalar with a disclaimer and additional section with relevant references. The user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hb1290 has reverted my change without any justification. I would like to get a clarification regarding this. Rvptiger18 (talk) 07:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rvptiger18: welcome to the Teahouse. The best place to ask a user why they made a particular edit is on their user talk page. In this case, the reason is clear, though: first of all, as you say, you added a disclaimer in the article itself stating that its information was not true. Such disclaimers do not belong in any Wikipedia article. If you have reliable sources supporting your assertion, post to the article talk page and explain why you believe that the information is incorrect. You can't simply add the claims to the article in Wikipedia's voice, when they go against the existing, sourced information. In addition, you had added a notability tag which did not apply to the article. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 07:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea: Thanks for your reply. I have taken this issue in the user talk page of Hb1290. My contention is that the use of the name "Devendra Kula Velalar" is objected by different velalar communities and this name is not recognised by Indian government or Tamilnadu government. There is no proof existing to substantiate that this name "Devendra Kula Velalar" represents the Pallar community which this page is describing about. Rvptiger18 (talk) 11:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Finding a specific edit #?

I was wondering if there was a way to find a specific edit # I performed without manually counting lines in my contributions list. I'd like to go back and add some editing milestones to my talk page, edit #100 in particular. But what if I wanted to know what edits #192 and #4937 were? Is there a special search for that somewhere? If so, what's the process? CYAce01 (talk) 08:29, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, CYAce01. What a great, nerdy question! In the days when we used to be able to display 5,000 of our past edits on a single page, I remember once going back and creating an Excel spreadsheet of my first 20,000 edits. Nowadays we're only allowed to display 500 edits at a time, which would have made the task much harder. But luckily for you, you've only got c.430 edits, so you'd find that a simple job. Once they're in Excel, you'll have access to row numbers. I'm guessing you're in the US, as over in the UK here we only infrequently use '#' to mean 'number', so I had to spend a few moments decoding what your question was after. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:37, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes: Thanks for your time and the timely response. More questions arose: 1) Is there a page with a search function for finding particular edits? 2) How about a downloadable file I could import into excel? 3) Or do I have to manually enter the data into excel, row by row? If so, I was hoping for a more efficient process! CYAce01 (talk) 10:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CYAce01: You're welcome. Firstly you can go to your own user contributions page, and click the dropdown 'Search contributions' menu, which allows you to display edits you've made in particular parts (namespaces) of Wikipedia, or to select a date range. At the very bottom of the page is a link to 'Edit summary search' which will find strings of words if you've included them in your edit summary, but it can't search for words used in the edits themselves. There's no simple way to download a list for all your edits as CSV or .xls file, but neither would you have to download them row by row. You could display 500 at a time in the User Contibutions page and paste those into a spreadsheet - a simple task for you at this stage. We do have various other tools for searching across Wikipedia. One useful set can be found here. Does that answer your questions? Nick Moyes (talk) 10:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)  [reply]
@Nick Moyes: Yes. That helps a lot. I now have an excel spreadsheet listing ALL edits. Thanks again! CYAce01 (talk) 12:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to give reference from a book which is not published online

 TheChunky (talk) 08:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TheChunky. Sources cited in Wikipedia article don't need to be available online. As long as the source is considered to be reliable, is published and accessible, and is used in proper context, then it can be cited as explained in WP:SAYWHERE. Being available online does make a source easier to verify, but it's not required. One thing though about citing sources not available online is that you should try and provide as much information as you can about the source as explained in WP:CITEHOW; so, the more information you provide about the book (e.g. author, publisher, year published, isbn number), the easier it will be for someone to track down if they wish to verify the source. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:10, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, TheChunky. There's no problem using the same citation method to reference a printed book. But do try and include the precise page number where the cited statement appears in that book - especially if it's a long one! To reuse a reference, give it a 'ref name', then on subsequent uses you 'call it up' by that name, without having to re-enter all the details again. See WP:REFNAME for a full explanation. You can then use the {{rp}} template to add specific page numbers immediately afterwards. Forgive the shameless plug, but it might look something like this:
  • First fact found on page 29 of a book.[1]: 29  Second fact found on page 114 from the same book[1]: 114 

References

  1. ^ a b Willmot, A.; Moyes, N. (2015). The Flora of Derbyshire. Pisces Publications. ISBN 978-1-874357-65-0.

Inclusion of a picture for the /wiki/Karen_(slang) entry?

Re the entry for /wiki/Karen_(slang)...might it be appropriate to include an image that portrays a typical Karen? Here is a photoshopped pic I made and posted onto reddit: https://i.redd.it/n780vh9rw8u41.jpg 50.45.206.131 (talk) 10:06, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you're trolling us, but the answer is an emphatic NO! Not only have you taken a copyright image, faked a new slogan on top of it (see here), you've then posted it on Reddit and expect we might want to take it from there and add it to Karen (slang). No, we do not! Nick Moyes (talk) 10:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My page is not published.

My Page shiva kumar actor is not Published.Please guide me . I have updated my profile.And have account since 9th April 2018. Donot have much Knowledge what is the error . Please Help/guide .

Thank you
shiva kumar Shiva Kumar Actor (talk) 10:46, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Shiva Kumar Actor: welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately it looks like you may have misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia. It is not a web host or platform for posting personal profiles – there are other websites that do that, but not this one. Wikipedia is meant for encyclopedic articles about notable subjects (and defines notability in very specific ways: these are the notability criteria for actors). In addition, autobiographies should be avoided, that is, if and when you do become notable per Wikipedia's definition of notability, somebody who is not connected to you in any way will probably write an article about you at some point. Hope that helps. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 10:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How can I Make Better Pages ?

How can I Make Better Pages ? Tencars111 (talk) 11:07, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tencars111: creating a new Wikipedia article is really difficult, particularly for a new user. I recommend that you start by making monor improvements to existing articles instead. Maproom (talk) 15:14, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Making a draft into an article

how can i make my draft article to a wikipidea article.please tell CousinsTeam (talk) 12:09, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tencars111: if this is about Draft:DeepaPriya VG, your first step should be to decide whether you're writing about a person or a Youtube channel, and your second should be to find some reliable independent published sources that discuss your chosen subject in depth, so as to establish that it's notable.   Maproom (talk) 13:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
CousinsTeam, if this is about Draft:DeepaPriya VG, your first step should be to decide whether you're writing about a person or a Youtube channel, and your second should be to find some reliable independent published sources that discuss your chosen subject in depth, so as to establish that it's notable. Then base what you write on those sources. Maproom (talk)

RajeshKhanna

RajeshKhanna is widely considered as the biggest ever Superstar & also as cellu loid God no other actor in the history of the film industry has seen the mass hysteria that was created by him which can be verified by just googling his co-stars have testified that he has given the max no of solo hits compared to all other stars not only that in terms of impact there are many articles in google on him which you have not researched a small eg.Jack Pissey the man who made Bombay Superstar on RajeshKhanna when spoken to on the sea of fans who turned on his death informed he does not remember any person political film or any rockstar having such a recall value despite being out of the radar for two decades earlier you wiki page described him as one of the most successful & influential actors of Indian cinema now it has been edited why? it is evident that wikipedia is not complete in its research on RajeshKhanna & if i would say biased 2409:4040:412:5933:0:0:1AA2:60A1 (talk) 12:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse - the revisions made to the article were obviously made because of "spelling and grammar errors", you can see the lasted revisions in the Tab "View History" in the upper right corner of the article. CommanderWaterford (talk) 12:36, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
IP editor: You are right: Wikipedia is not complete. There are over 6,000,000 articles in Wikipedia, and nobody is suggesting they are all complete. In fact, only 6,828 are regarded as of the highest 'Featured Article' quality. We welcome editors (all of whom are volunteers) who are willing to add content (based on reliable, independent sources). If you want to make suggestions, feel free to leave ideas and links to sources on the article's talk page. If you can, please try and punctuate your posts. The odd fullstop here and there makes it much easier to understand what it is that you are trying to get across. Thanks for stopping by at the Teahouse. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:46, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IS MY ACCOUNT STILL THERE AS YOU HAVE DELETED MY PAGE

SIR /MADAM IS MY ACCOUNT STILL THERE WITH MY NAME "SHIVA KUMAR ACTOR" AS YOU HAVE DELETED IT. AND IS MY DATA SAVED FOR ME . I REQUEST YOU TO RECONSIDER MY PAGE AND TELL WHAT TO DELETE. I WILL GET MADE AGAIN UNDER GUIDANCE OF SOME EXPERT OF WIKIPEDIA. ONLY ONE THING HURT IS WITHOUT PUBLISHED YOU PEOPLE DELETED MY PAGE . THANK YOU SHIVA KUMAR ACTOR Shiva Kumar Actor (talk) 12:24, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shiva Kumar Actor, please have a close look on the welcome message on your talk Page - furthermore I recommend reading Wikipedia:Autobiography, writing an autobiography like in your case on Wikipedia is an example of conflict of interest editing and is strongly discouraged. CommanderWaterford (talk) 12:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Shiva Kumar Actor: Please do not write in capital letters; that is regarded as SHOUTING! and is deemed as very rude and aggressive. Yes, you're account is still active, but your self-promotional userpage has been deleted as it breaches our policies on non-promotion. See WP:USERPAGE. I'm afraid its content is no longer available to you. Please use LinkedIn if you want to promote yourself. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:34, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article about how can Alexander Kalombe article go public  ?

 Johntommy988 (talk) 14:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which parts of the feedback (at User:Johntommy988/sandbox and on you user talk page) do you not understand? The words in blue in the feedback are wikilinks to further detailed advice. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:37, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Johntommy988, welcome to the Teahouse. There seem to be a problem with the given references in your draft, for example the first one is not reachable at all. You will need to add some reliable sources to your article draft. As soon as you added them you can try to resubmit the draft like it is written in the big box in your sandbox. CommanderWaterford (talk) 14:41, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request 'autocomfirmed' user status to edit 'Parachute' and add an 'Annular and pull-down apex' photo

The 'Annular and pull-down apex' section under the 'Parachute' article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parachute) has a photo of an RAF drogue chute and I'd like to replace it with a pull-down apex canopy pic, so apparently need autoconfirmed status. Can I get it please?

I'd move the RAF drogue chute photo elsewhere (likely replacing "A jumper in Venezuela with his parachute on his back", but not necessarily.) I've got 110 shots on WP so far, so I hope I have enough experience to warrant autoconfirmed status. BrettA343 (talk) 15:15, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BrettA343. You have autoconfirmed (in fact, extended confirmed) status. What is the problem you're seeing? (You don't need autoconfirmed status to upload to Commons anyway.) --ColinFine (talk) 15:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, ColinFine. The problem I'm seeing - for the first Wikipedia article I've yet come across - is a big pink box stating: "Note: This page is semi-protected so that only autoconfirmed users can edit it. If you need help getting started with editing, please visit the Teahouse."
I have no issues uploading to Commons, but wasn't going to go through updating the Wikipedia article when, as far as I knew, I didn't have autoconfirmed status. If people generally have this on Wikipedia, I suggest that the unusual big pink box gets removed. But since you say I have this, I'll now try editing 'Parachute'. Thanks! BrettA343 (talk) 16:11, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@BrettA343: The warning is visible to all users who attempt to edit the page. I get that too when I come across protected articles (and find it annoying), but it's there to let people know that they can make edit requests on the article's talk page if they're not able to edit it directly. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:14, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HOW TO CREATE AN ARTICLE ABOUT ME WITHOUT BECOMING FAMOUS.

HI WIKIPEDIA, I AM A NEW USE. HOW CAN I CREATE AN ARTICLE ABOUT MINE OR MY COMPANY. I AM NOT FAMOUS FOR ANYTHING.HOW CAN I MAKE A ARTICLE? I AM A MUSICIAN. CAN I MAKE A ARTICLE ABOUT MY SELF PLEASE . PLEASE ANSWER ME. IF YES HOW? EXPLAIN? CousinsTeam (talk) 15:48, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, articles of this case are very hard to pass on, so be sure to read up on the help sections "My first article" and "notability" to get you started on rules and regulations. Someone else might link the sources for me because I don't know how to. Good luck! Le Panini (talk) 15:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi talk, Wikipedia is not the place to make yourself famous at all :) Have a look at Wikipedia:Autobiography and please have also a close look of the Welcome Message I left you on your talk page, there you got good starting points to read what you can do and what you should not do. CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:12, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CousinsTeam: Please dont write in all capital letters. Itss considered yelling and will definitely not cause others to be encouraged to help you. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Victor Schmidt: I'm starting to feel like that needs to be added to the page's edit notice Hillelfrei talk 16:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. I see about 1 request per week on all the help boards I monitor regulary. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:37, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Lawrence Ypil article?

Hello!

I'm editing and creating articles this month as part of the APAHM Edit-a-thon with Kundiman, which is focusing on addressing the erasure of Asian American writers online. I created an article for Lawrence Ypil yesterday, which was immediately deleted for not being notable enough. Is there some way to review this process? Ypil is an important contemporary poet, and I believe he deserves an article.

Thanks for your help! Tomatotots (talk) 16:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tomatotots. The article was deleted yesterday under criterion A7: Article about a real person, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subjectt. You could ask the deleting admin Anthony Bradbury to put the content in your user space, and he may agree: I don't know. I suggest you read your first article, and if you can show that Ypil meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - not your definition - create a draft using the Article Wizard. --ColinFine (talk) 17:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

creating an autobiography about my mother. she is a musician.

how can i create an autobiograpg about anyone.my mother is a musician and have s youtube channel. can i create a autubiography about her. how. how to give references. CousinsTeam (talk) 16:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By definition you can't write an autobiography about your mother. An autobiography is about yourself, and for advice against that see WP:autobiography. If your mother is notable in Wikipedia's terms (see also WP:Notability (music)), someone could write an article about her, but it oughtn't to be you that writes it as you have a conflict of interest. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Grace Wan Wikipedia Page

Hello,

I am writing to you because I am trying to publish the Grace Wan Wikipedia Page, and a Wikipedia editor wrote that he declined it, because I called her page Grace Wan (Actress). I tried to publish the page as Grace Wan, but it was declined again and it said that it was declined because it's protected by an administrator. How can I contact this administrator when I don't know who he is? Please reply as soon as possible as my time is limited.

Sincerely, Max266 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Max266 (talkcontribs) 17:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Max266 - Firstly, please sign all posts on talk pages with 4 tildes ( ~~~~ ) which will add your signature and a timestamp.
Secondly WP:There is no deadline - things will take as long as they take - rushing is rarely the best solution.
Thirdly, to answer your question, you should speak to User:Anachronist, who create protected that page, and who last edited at 16.18 today - although he tends to edit in the early hours UTC - Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 17:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Max266: As far as I can tell the draft was never submitted for review with {{subst:AFC draft}} and there are no records of the draft being declined in the page's history. The most that I see is a discussion on the talk page after it got moved. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re-Submitting an Article

 Courtesy link: Draft:Night Bass Records

Hello Teahouse! I submitted an article for a record label called 'Night Bass'. The submission was declined because it read too much like an ad. I would still like to re-submit the article. What I'd like to know is - Are there any penalties for editing and submitting an article too many times? My plan is to take a bulk of the article out and cut it down to the real solid facts. Do you think that's an effective course of action? Thanks so much for taking the time in reading this! ZoeShanks (talk) 17:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ZoeShanks: Welcome to the Teahouse! I'll say work on it as much as you can to cut off the promotional bits (I strongly suggest you read WP:PUFFERY) before sending it back for review. The only real penalty is annoying reviewers who look at drafts with barely any improvement that they start to consider rejecting it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:12, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Digital Marketing

Hello Teahouse! I took the plunge based on your advice and recently made my first bold edit on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_marketing would love to hear your feedback before I keep going:) Thanks so much! LilMew88 (talk) 17:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]