Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cullen328, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

Draft: Joseph Pasinski III

• 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)

Pinging Le Panini —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:55, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

@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)

@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)

So I've proved to my brother that this article is not possible to do, because it doesn't meet the notability criteria. Can I have the article deleted now? It kinda hurts my reputation too, to be honest. Le Panini (talk) 01:11, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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 (talk • contribs)

(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)

Well, @ColinFine:, I don't know (and you don't say, though I wish you would) just what in my description gives you the idea that it isn't appropriately sourced. I'm still waiting for more than the 3 pages I got on 14 May (as I intimated, even I don't think they're appropriate for a variety of reasons), but you seem to take a harder stance than I get from reading WP:RS and the like. For instance, it states:

"Source reliability falls on a spectrum: highly reliable sources, clearly unreliable sources, and many in the middle. Editors must use their judgment to draw the line between usable and unreliable sources.", and

"The term "published" is most commonly associated with text materials, either in traditional printed format or online; however, audio, video, and multimedia materials that have been recorded then broadcast, distributed, or archived by a reputable party may also meet the necessary criteria to be considered reliable sources."

"It is convenient, but by no means necessary, for the archived copy to be accessible via the Internet."

The first quote is self-explanatory, I think, and note that the second quote says both 'online' and 'reputable party', not 'reputable publisher'. It's my understanding that the party conducting the 'Proof of Concept' tests for Promessa is indeed reliable and reputable with usable source, and definitely a third-party / independent party not affiliated with Promessa except for these tests. I'm still unclear on the exact relationship between the two, but have asked those questions. The third quote indicates to me that - as at least I would expect - online access is preferable to "a major library" (though both would be ideal), not only because many people can't readily get to a major library, but it's got to be awfully major to hold every test and report conducted in every country around the world... Sweden, in this case.

You seem to shoot them down prematurely, IMHO, while I'm just waiting to find out answers and hopefully see the whole document so I can, as WP:RS says, "use my judgement" (plus I'm writing snippets of responses timed so that my 48 hour limit doesn't run out). BrettA343 (talk) 02:36, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@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)

@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)

@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)

Hi, BrettA343. I wasn't clear, because your description leaves unstated various points. It is not clear to me whether or not the PDF in question has been published - which, as you point out, is not necessarily clearcut. It is now common for materials to circulate on the internet whose provenance is unclear, and in some cases in varying versions: when have such things been published?

If the report is available only from the subject of the article, it is at best self-published. If the subject and not the originator publishes the report, there is no way for a reader to tell whether the subject might have altered or (for example) cherry picked the document. I know nothing of Promessa, and have no reason to doubt their good faith; but in general this is a concern. But I am happy to wait and see how it looks when you have the document and have decided how to reference it. --ColinFine (talk) 09:24, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

Sorry.

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

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)

@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)

@Bonadea: Thank you very much for that, I did not see that in the manual of style — Preceding unsigned comment added by JazzClam (talk • contribs) 12:24, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

@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)

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)

@Bonadea: (did the ping work now? xD) thanks for the answer — Preceding unsigned comment added by JazzClam (talk • contribs) 11:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@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)

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)

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)

• Hi JKDonehue I have put a {{draft}} template on the page so you now have a blue button to submit (remeber to publish changes after pressing) Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:40, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

Courtesy link: Draft:Castore. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:57, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

(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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

@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)

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)

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)

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)

@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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

@ColinFine: Thanks for the clarification! —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:01, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

@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.

@Lukasrobertcorey:, we never call ourselves wikipedia-ers. We call ourselves wikipedians, or WP:EDIANS. Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 07:27, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

@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)

@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)

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)

@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)

{{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)

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)

@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)

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

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

Bio page

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

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)

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)

@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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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

@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)

• AaqibAnjum, on 26 March, you declined this, saying "Submission appears to be a test edit". How did it, or how does it, appear to be a test edit? You also wrote "Passes WP:GNG but fails WP:Layout and WP:Tone". I agree with you on tone, and you and Timtempleton are free to argue over WP:GNG. What was/is the problem with layout? -- Hoary (talk) 22:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

@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)

Population Borneo

Resolved

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

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

Please see Borneo#Demographics.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:38, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

How to publish a new article

Resolved

 – Published. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:33, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

Courtesy: Draft:Cameron Martin (artist). David notMD (talk) 14:38, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

This article is a done deal, cleaned up, sourced and published (by Theroadislong).ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:31, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

thx for the good advise. Could you pls also comment on the question about editing history? --Dranoel26 (talk) 14:43, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

Add {{subst:submit}} to the bottom of the page you want to submit. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:00, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

@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)

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)

Courtesy link: Draft:Jamie Dolan (film producer) DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:13, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

Arjin

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

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

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)

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)

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)

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)

@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)

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)

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)

Help editing the article I wrote

FYI

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

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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

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)

Anyone? – Chrisvacc - ✆ 20:15, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

(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)

@Chrisvacc: If you don;t get an answer here, try asking at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Religion RudolfRed (talk) 20:24, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Alright thanks @RudolfRed:, @ColinFine: - Chrisvacc - ✆ 20:36, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

And @ColinFine: - what do you mean there was an edit conflict with my appeal? – Chrisvacc - ✆ 20:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

Oh yea lol. I posted my question then a few minutes later two people posted theirs – Chrisvacc - ✆ 22:26, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Adding character to list, help?

Denkichu (talk) 19:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

@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)

@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)

@Andrewhistory: see also Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-04-01/WikiProject report.--Moxy 🍁 22:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

@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)

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)

@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)

@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)

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)

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)

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)

@Le Panini: Try Wikipedia:User page design center. Hillelfrei ^talk 03:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Hillelfrei, that page is inactive and archived. Any others? I want a service too. Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 03:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@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)

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

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)

@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)

According to the template on the article, it is still under construction.-- Toddy1 (talk) 04:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@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)

@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)

AlanM1; I mean the same. Sorry for my bad choice of words. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 15:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Links

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)

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)

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)

@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)

@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)

@Rvptiger18: replied on your talk page. Hb1290 (talk) 06:11, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

@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)

@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)  

@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)

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

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

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)

(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. Second fact found on page 114 from the same book

References

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick Moyes (talk • contribs) 12:37, 20 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoingBatty (talk • contribs)

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: (Redacted);50.45.206.131 (talk) 10:06, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

Just going to add that it would be near impossible to find a representative photo of this, even one without copyright issues, due to Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Image use policy#Adding images to articles, and WP:OI. Any photo of a real person used to represent this is pretty much going to be based upon someone's interpretation of what a typical "Karen" looks like; so it would have to be a photo or image that is considered something used by reliable sources critically discussing this stereotype like perhaps a meme that has received lots of coverage in reliable source. Any photo of a still living person is likely going to be seen as a problem per WP:MUG; so, most likely it would need to be a some other type of image (e.g. poster) which "shows" what a typical "Karen" looks like. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

@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)

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)

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)

@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)

How can I Make Better Pages ?

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

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

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

Article about how can Alexander Kalombe article go public  ?

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

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

@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)

@BrettA343: I suppose the virtue of having it appear to all users, including those who are able to edit the page, is to make them aware that there has been controversy or other activity that has caused the page to have to be protected. This knowledge can be helpful in an editor's decisions on how/what to edit. E.g., they might want to investigate the talk page first to see how their desired edit relates to past activity. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

@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)

@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)

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)

I don't see any benefit to telling people not to use ALL Caps in multiple places. Those are people who don't pay attention. One notice is enough. Oh well. McClenon mobile (talk) 22:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

If you can find a number of third-party sources to create an article about her, then it could be possible. Otherwise, it's unlikely. Le Panini (talk) 17:55, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

How big is her YouTube channel? Very few are notable enough to appear on Wikipedia. See WP:NYOUTUBE. Rotation4020 (talk) 19:27, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

CousinsTeam indef blocked because it is the name of a company. David notMD (talk) 23:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Grace Wan Wikipedia Page

Blocked

 – OP blocked for sockpuppetry in regards to a salted article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:37, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

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 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

(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)

Courtesy link to deletion discussion prior to salt. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grace Wan TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:31, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

See also Grace wan and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gwan123. We're up to nearly a full decade of this. --Finngall ^talk 20:23, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

OP has been sockblocked. --Finngall ^talk 21:29, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

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)

@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)

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)

Hello! The only suggestion I myself would give is to thread the smaller paragraphs into a couple of big ones. Other then that, it seems well sophisticated! Le Panini (talk) 18:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@LilMew88: It is important not to use in-group terminology or jargon in Wikipedia articles, and also to think about the audience. Articles about marketing have a tendency to become more and more laden with buzzwords and marketing talk, and so when you add or rewrite a section it's really easy to fall into the same kind of writing. But in fact, Wikipedia is not written for marketers and people who understand their peculiar version of English, so I have done a little bit of rephrasing of your edits for that reason, and also to give the text a more neutral tone (we don't want to give the impression that marketing is inherently a positive thing or something that improves the lives of regular people.) The entire article would need a re-write to bring it to a more encyclopedic standard, and that's quite a big task...

Another thing to keep in mind is that we can't use Wikipedia articles as references. Instead of using <ref> tags and adding a citation with the Wikipedia article, simply add a wikilink to the relevant word. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 13:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much bonadea and Le Panini!!! Super helpful advice!! I am working on rewriting the entire article, so I will use these tips moving forward, and hopefully we can get this thing back up to par! Thanks again, LilMew88 (talk) 15:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection

Hi, I was wondering how I would make a request for semi-protection for Israel Kamakawiwoʻole because it is the Google Doodle for today. Thanks! xRENEGADEx (talk) 18:39, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@XRENEGADEx: Welcome to Wikipedia and for wanting it to be safe. You can post at WP:RFPP to request the page be protected. It will only get protected if there is a high amount of vandalism or other disruption occuring. 18:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I'll take a look at it. Thanks! xRENEGADEx (talk) 19:02, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

To add, I highly recommend you look at using the Twinkle gadget here WP:TW. I've been using it for years and it's excellent for purposes like that. Rotation4020 (talk) 19:23, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Rotation4020: Yeah, I looked at WP:RFP and saw the recommendation for Twinkle. Currently reading the documentation. xRENEGADEx (talk) 19:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

The Richard_Chase article seems to have some problems

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

Can a more experienced editor take a look at it and see if they also think there are some problems?

I'm seeing potentially original research and some grammatical issues like "Murder spree".--Hiveir (talk) 18:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

That's an unpleasant article I didn't need to read. I cleaned it up a little. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Can i learn about Enduring Freedom?

 108.209.226.41 (talk) 19:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Are you referring to Operation Enduring Freedom? Rotation4020 (talk) 19:25, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Characteristics of the lead

Is the lead simply a summary or is it a summary that includes a definition, notability, context, key points and any important controversy as per [[1]]?

Another editor and I are having a disagreement. He says the lead is simply a summary and nothing but a summary, without the rest. He quotes:

"Provide an accessible overview

See also: Wikipedia:Summary style

The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article. The reason for a topic's noteworthiness should be established, or at least introduced, in the lead (but not by using subjective "peacock terms" such as "acclaimed" or "award-winning" or "hit"). It is even more important here than in the rest of the article that the text be accessible. Editors should avoid lengthy paragraphs and overly specific descriptions – greater detail is saved for the body of the article. Consideration should be given to creating interest in the article, but do not hint at startling facts without describing them.

In general, introduce useful abbreviations, but avoid difficult-to-understand terminology and symbols. Mathematical equations and formulas should be avoided when they conflict with the goal of making the lead section accessible to as broad an audience as possible. Where uncommon terms are essential, they should be placed in context, linked and briefly defined. The subject should be placed in a context familiar to a normal reader. For example, it is better to describe the location of a town with reference to an area or larger place than with coordinates. Readers should not be dropped into the middle of the subject from the first word; they should be eased into it."

My response was that yes, this is a description of summary, but it is not a limiter saying that a summary excludes those other characteristics. It's been my understanding that a good summary includes these qualities and the other ones as well. Could you clear that up for us please? Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:19, 20 May 2020 (UTC) Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:19, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777: Every situation is different. You want a fair and balanced summary without giving anything undue weight. For example, minor controversies are often avoided in the lede since that can be an opportunity for editors with a conflict of interest to push a point of view. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:23, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

I get that. Controversy was mentioned simply as existing, in one part of one sentence, but that isn't what's going on I don't think. It isn't about the controversy or POV pushing. It is about what should be in the lead. It was previously one sentence and was tagged as "inadequate." I wrote a lead that included a definition, etc. and another editor has since disagreed, saying a lead is a summary and only a summary and should not include definition, notability, etc in it. It is currently 3 paragraphs, explains the content of the article and is located here [2] if you want to take a look and critique it. Before, a reader had to assume what was meant and that it mattered. We are disagreeing over what the lead actually contains. We need outside input to clear this up. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Timtempleton Sorry Tim, I neglected to include a ping--or do I need to? Does the system automatically notify you? I noted you needed to ping me, so I am unsure. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:47, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777: Pinging is always good unless it's my user page. I'll take a look. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Discussion moved to talk page with more eyeballs. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Userboxes

How do I put userboxes on my user page? Dragonlover21 (talk) 19:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Dragonlover21: Userboxes are usually templates that you can call: for example, {{User Copy Edit}}. There are many userbox templates floating about Wikipedia. If you can't find one that suits your purposes, you can try asking at Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/Ideas to ask a volunteer to make one for you. I suggest reading WP:USERBOXES to understand what you can and cannot put in a userbox. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:39, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Sources

I recently published one of my first articles ever and shortly after publishing the article someone added a bunch of sources. The article is for Elucid and the sources are 14 through 31 on the discography. I was wondering whether sources for a discography is standard practice on Wikipedia (I've checked other articles and haven't seen any). I was also wondering whether Bandcamp is considered a good source and if so does that me citing iTunes, Spotify, or SoundCloud is also appropriate?

I was also curious whether blog posts are ever acceptable as a reliable source. For instance, Pigeons & Planes is a music blog owned by Complex Magazine. TipsyElephant (talk) 20:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi TipsyElephant. A blog can sometimes be considered to be a reliable source for Wikipedia as explained in WP:NEWSBLOG, but self-published or user-generated content is for the most part considered unacceptable. Whether the blog owned by Complex is considered reliable and whether it can be used might depend upon whether the magazine itself is considered reliable, how much editorial control it exerts over what's written in the blog, and the context in which you want to cite the blog as a source. For example, if you just want to cite it to support some fairly benign content the magazine says about itself, then perhaps it would be OK as a WP:PRIMARY source per WP:SELFPUB. On the other hand, if the content is something about a third-party (particularly a living person) that has a good chance of being seen as contentious, then perhaps it wouldn't be such a good idea per things like WP:BLPSPS. You can always ask for more opinions on either the article's talk page or at WP:RSN. When a source is cited and nobody challenges it, WP:SILENCE is often assumed until someone does; when someone does, however, the article talk page is usually the best place to try and sort things out (at least at first) per WP:DR, and then WP:RSN is a good place to go when article talk page discussion fails to resolve things.

The same applies to the other sources you mentioned in that in some contexts they might be seen as reliable, but not so much in others. If you take a look at a page like WP:RS/P, you might find some general assessments of them there, but you may need to seek input at WP:RSN for specific feedback about a specific use. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:27, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

PetScan Gurus onsite!? ;)

Hi guys, regarding PetScan I seem to be too stupid - I like e.g. to search for all articles which exist in ES WK but not in EN with a given category... any hints how to achieve this? Language=es, Has none of these templates=en, category=xyz?! Any hint highly appreciated... CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@CommanderWaterford: You might have more luck posting on the PetScan talk page. Wikipedia talk:PetScan TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:26, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Change colour of name

See abow. I want to change it from red to blue. Mirrored7 (talk) 22:29, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Umm... I think that if you click on the red link (it’s your userpage BTW) and create it, the link will turn blue. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(My profile | My contribs | speak to me)} 22:47, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Mirrored7: if after that you don't like blue, you can visit this page to change it to another color. Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing your signature. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:24, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Poof it is blue. As Tim advised, you can also get fancy about your signature. David notMD (talk) 23:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Now that's something I didn't know, thanks guys. Also to add another question, what's the best way to revert it to default if we ever want to? Is there another code? Or just blank the page? Rotation4020 (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Peer review

So, when I clicked on an editor’s contributions, I found that they hade made edits to a subpage of Wikipedia:Peer review. I clicked on the link, but I’m still a little confused. What exactly is peer review? (I’ve found that asking an editor sometimes gives me a better answer than reading a page...) Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(My profile | My contribs | speak to me)} 22:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Total Eclipse 2017: Sometimes on Wikipedia (quite a lot of times, actually) you have to be prepared to actually read stuff for yourself, rather than relying on others to spoon feed you information. This is one of those times. You have already given us the link to Wikipedia:Peer review, so please at least read the first paragraph. That should tell you the basics. If you're still confused, Wikipedia even has an article about it (see Peer review). Nick Moyes (talk) 00:42, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

References to articles witin Wikipedia

 Gerald S. Walton (talk) 22:50, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gerald S. Walton; what is your question with references to articles within Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Remove "This article has multiple issues" from page

Hello,

I have methodically gone through my biography to try and remove template messages. I have inserted citations for verification. I have followed Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies but the messages that:

"This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. (June 2017) The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies. (April 2020)"

still remain at the top of the page. Please can anyone advise.

(KingoftheWoods (talk) 23:11, 20 May 2020 (UTC)) KingoftheWoods (talk) 23:11, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi KingoftheWoods - it's discouraged for people to write about themselves, since they may not follow site guidelines about verifiable and accurate content. Please review WP:EDITREQUEST to post a request for help on the David Day (Canadian writer) talk page. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:21, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

This tags are added and removed manually by users. You are free to remove it yourself if you believe an article no longer has these issues. Rotation4020 (talk) 10:59, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Rotation4020 whilst that advice is true in general, if the user has a conflict of interest i.e. in this case they are the subject of the article, then they shouldn't be removing tags from the page. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:09, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, absolutely. I just wanted to add to what Tim said, for if the user comes across another article in future. Rotation4020 (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

AfC process vs. Autoconfirmed or confirmed users article creation

Hello, what's the difference between the AfC process vs. the statement on Wikipedia:User access levels that "Autoconfirmed or confirmed users can create articles"? Does this mean that if I become a confirmed or autoconfirmed user, I can create articles without going through the AfC process? How do I tell if I'm a confirmed or autoconfirmed user? Thanks Eric.c.zhang (talk) 23:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Eric.c.zhang: The difference is that if you create the article without going through the draft process, then you won't get the benefit of feedback from a review. If you create the article directly in main space, then it may get deleted if another editor spots major problems with it. Unless you are experienced with the article creation process, I strongly suggest you go through the review process even though it can take quite some time. You will normally become auto confirmed when your account is at least 4 days old and you have at least 10 edits. If you go to your contributions page, at the bottom there is a link to see what user rights you have. I am not sure why it is not showing you are autoconfirmed, since your account normally would be by now, unless I am missing something. RudolfRed (talk) 23:34, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Ah okay. Great thanks! I'm not sure why I'm not autoconfirmed. Eric.c.zhang (talk) 23:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Eric.c.zhang: According to this, you're implicitly a member already. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:43, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Review this re-post

Hello, I've been needing help with the publication of this article. Since 2017, I've been unable to get published; the problems range from minor editing to references. Regards!  Hip matter (talk) 03:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Hip matter, "African American Girls and School Discipline Disparities: A State-Sanctioned Violence", an opinion piece you have posted on your Talk page, is an "article", but not an encyclopedic article. It's more of a position paper or a recommendation for societal change, and seems to qualify as WP:Original research, As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia cannot host non-encyclopedic content. You should seek out online venues which host the type of writing you offer.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:14, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Hip matter. I agree with Quisqualis's assessment that what you're working on (at least in its current form) is not really something suitable for a Wikipedia article. In addition, you probably should move the content to either a userspace draft or the draft namespace if you wish to continue working on improving it in the hope of someday submitting it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review. Your user talk page is really a place for others to try and communicate with you about things related to Wikipedia, etc. and the longer you leave this content on your user talk page the greater the chance that it will be removed per WP:UP#NOT. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:22, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Malayeen Karim

Draft: Malayeen Karim Hello! I have a draft that has been waiting for around 6 days for a review and one draft that was reviewed in a day. Is that normal? Many thanks to you, Maha92o (talk) 06:29, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Maha92o, this is entirely normal. Reviewers select the articles they will review, so please be patient. It can take weeks to get a review.--Quisqualis (talk) 07:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

To reinforce that - it is not a queue. There are close to 2,000 drafts in the 'pile' and reviewers pick what they want. Sadly, can actually take months. David notMD (talk) 13:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Updates on page 'undone' by Coffee and even older version loaded!

This page is about to have major traffic due to a national broadcast on BBC and is now redundant. Concerned that if we spend more time making revisions these will be wiped too! Coffee considered the revisions 'promotional'..can only think this was the insertion of the term 'world's greatest' instead of 'many of the great' orchestras'but anyone who knows their music will know this is true! A statement of fact not a promotion!! Worse she reverted the copy to a version that was up 10 years ago so it is now misinformation.

Tried to update my wiki page and 'Coffee' undid them all and reverted to a version that is so old it's pointless! What do? such a waste of tim! Henri of Wells (talk) 07:29, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Charles Hazlewood.

Henri of Wells: yes, adding promotional phrases like "of the world's best", and adding entire paragraphs which cite no source, is pointless, as such edits are very likely to be reverted. I see you refer to the article as "my wiki page". If you are Hazlewood, you should not be editing the article at all (except to revert vandalism and correct obvious errors). Instead you should write on its talk page, giving details of any changes you would like to make and providing references for them. Maproom (talk) 08:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Much of the content just removed was added by User:Megs91 back in 2009, but it was not referenced then, and remained unreferenced. Content can be added back with supporting references, but a wholesale reverting of Coffee's cut (and Maproom's restoration of that cut) is not warranted. David notMD (talk) 13:14, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Referencing

What style of referencing is recommended for use by wikipedians? Robbiegibbons (talk) 07:44, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Robbiegibbons. Since Wikipedia is edited by all kinds of people from all over the world, it doesn't have one particular "house citation style" that everyone must use, but instead allows a variety of styles to be used. You can find out more about this in Wikipedia:Citing sources and Help:Referencing for beginners. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:36, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Why am I getting warnings?

Why am I getting lots of warning for editing and why are most of my edits are removed? Even after putting relevant points with links why am I also subjected to be warned and remove? Sarker Ahtef (talk) 08:29, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Sarker Ahtef, welcome to the Teahouse! Your edits are being removed as you are expressing your own point of view, which does not follow Wikipedia's neutral view policy. Encyclopaedias are a source of knowledge, not opinions. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 08:44, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Can I add an image to an article that is pending review?

I have just written an article (Draft:Edinburgh Festival Voluntary Guides Association) and it is now pending review. The article is about an organisation, so I thought I would add the organisation's logo to the Infobox. So I started the File Upload Wizard, and declared that the image was non-free. So far, so good.

But when I entered the title of the article into the wizard, it told me that no article exists with that name. This is presumably because the article hasn't yet been approved. I tried entering the article name pre-pended with "Draft:", but that made no difference.

So it looks like it is not possible to add images to articles before they are approved. Is that correct? Mike Marchmont (talk) 09:16, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Mike Marchmont: yes and no. Non-free images (which logos usually are), may not be added to anything except a published article: please see WP:NFCC. In fact, non-free images may also not be kept in Wikipedia unless they are used in an article. Free images (usually from Commons) may be added to a draft. --ColinFine (talk) 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC) Edited to correct a typo in this paragraph. --ColinFine (talk) 10:43, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine : Thanks for your prompt reply, Colin. This is perfectly clear. I will just wait until the article has been approved before uploading the logo. Mike Marchmont (talk) 09:57, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:TheRunawayGuys

• Draft:TheRunawayGuys

Hello, I'm writing an article on the collaborative YouTube channel 'TheRunawayGuys', as I think the group is notable enough for their own article and not just a redirect to the Chuggaaconroy article. I think this due to the fact they are one of, if not, the first group to do collabs on YouTube in their manner, plus they have many panels at conventions as well as their partnership with Direct Relief. However, at the moment the draft won't be accepted due to citing of unreliable sources. I was wondering if anybody could help me with this. Thank you. Captain Galaxy (talk) 09:37, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Captain Galaxy. Wikipedia notability isn’t really something we can “manufacture” or edit into an article as explained in WP:ARTN. Subjects either receive sufficient significant coverage to justify having a Wikipedia article written about them or they don’t, and in many cases it’s simply WP:TOOSOON for an article to be written. It isn’t possible, however, for a broad guideline like WP:N to cover every possible case related to assessing a subject’s Wikipedia notability, which is why there are also various subject-specific notability guidelines as well, but even these in some cases might not still be too broadly construed to clearly say “this subject is definitely Wikipedia notable”. YouTubers in particular might be a subject which doesn’t receive the kind of coverage in traditional reliable sources that more mainstream entertainers, etc. tend to get, and thus they might rely of more niche types of sources instead. Perhaps you should try asking at WP:YTP for feedback on your draft because the members of that WikiProject are likely going to know what types of sources are generally considered reliable for this type of thing and where to look for them. Even if it turns out that the consensus is that an article cannot yet be written about this group at this moment, that could change down the road and there are WP:ALTERNATIVES to Wikipedia which might actually more suitable (i.e. less restrictive policies and guidelines and more editorial control) for this kind of stuff. — Marchjuly (talk) 10:41, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly:Thank you for the advice, I'll go check WP:YTP. Captain Galaxy (talk) 10:50, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Vorsham New artists about submissions

Hi Dear , I Just create the article for British-Iranian Rapper knows as Vorsham His on the rise now First time my submission is decided because of the reference about Spotify things and this not acceptable and I change the reference to unique news about him and I resubmit how I can make sure my articles go live 🙏🏻

Here the link plz can u review

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vorsham 148.252.132.163 (talk) 10:42, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

If this person is "on the rise", they likely do not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician. A person must have, so to speak, already arrived, not just be up and coming, in order to merit an article on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 10:44, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

My userpage problem

Hi, everyone. Recently, I face a intimidating problem in my userpage. I can't adjust the position and location of the "my contributions" template properly. I welcome experienced users to help me solve this issue. :-)

}} Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 10:51, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Hypersonic man 11, I did what I guess you were trying to do. Please have a look and see if it is. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:19, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Please delete my account

I was writing to my bank and ended up on Wikipedia somehow,I have tried for two days and cannot delete my banking information. Can anyone help? Pawladobe (talk) 11:24, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Pawladobe. Accounts on Wikipedia cannot be deleted. I couldn't find any banking information associated with this account. If you could link to us where you posted it, we can help you further. Interstellarity (talk) 11:42, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Interstellarity, the thing to do is to point them to appropriate private channels, not ask them for more details publicly. Cheers! Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:45, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: My apologies. If you don't mind, I will let you take over helping this editor. Interstellarity (talk) 11:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Interstellarity, I apologise for my previous edit; I wrote it in a hurry, in case the OP might be drawn to make yet another edit pointing to information that needed suppression. Note that the edit they alluded to was the only one they have made, other than this very post. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:08, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Pawladobe, the information has been removed from public view. Only the most trusted few can ever see it again. Please change any private details that can be changed, so the information you posted becomes unusable anyway. Unfortunately, accounts can not be deleted. You can simply abandon it if you wish to not edit any further.

For the future, please note that all edits you make within Wikipedia are still public; therefore you should pursue private channels, such as emailing, to bring such matters to attention. Your post here could as well have drawn unwanted attention to those banking details, since this one too is one of the very public pages on Wikipedia. You can use the form at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/Oversight to send an email requesting deletion of personal, private information as outlined at Wikipedia's Oversight Policy, if the need arises again. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:08, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

clarify use?

clarify use [https://books.google.com/books?id=kvpby7HtAe0C&pg=PA18 18] is incorrect or correct in |pages=[https://books.google.com/books?id=kvpby7HtAe0C&pg=PA18 18] ?

for example the issue is on Abella. the above code is copied from Wikipedia:Citing sources. i find it sometimes particularly when quoting book. i have read Template:Cite book but i could not find info. according to me :

• correct : {{cite book |last=Rawls |first=John |title=A Theory of Justice |publisher=Harvard University Press |date=1971 |page=18 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=kvpby7HtAe0C&pg=PA18}}
• incorrect : {{cite book |last=Rawls |first=John |title=A Theory of Justice |publisher=Harvard University Press |date=1971 |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=kvpby7HtAe0C&pg=PA18 18] |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=kvpby7HtAe0C&pg=PA18}}
• incorrect : {{cite book |last=Rawls |first=John |title=A Theory of Justice |publisher=Harvard University Press |date=1971 |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=kvpby7HtAe0C&pg=PA18 18]}}

if there are multiple citations with different pages, i want to avoid {{rp|9–57}} and use the following code :

• Rawls, John. [https://books.google.com/books?id=kvpby7HtAe0C&pg=PA18 ''A Theory of Justice'']. Harvard University Press, 1971, p. 18.

please clarify Leela52452 (talk) 12:24, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Requesting help to see if the 2nd draft of my article meets the WP:NPOV and WP:TONE criteria before I resubmit it

Dear Teahouse hosts,

The first draft of my article Draft: Nipun Malhotra (social entrepreneur) was declined on the ground of WP:NPOV and WP:TONE issues. Based on the feedback received and after reading multiple articles, I have tried and changed the writing style extensively. Please note that I have also looked at other similar pages to understand the accepted format. (I'd be happy to share the details of the pages I have referred to in case that's required.)

I'm writing to request one of you to kindly go through my edited draft to see if this is worth resubmitting. Following is the relevant link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nipun_Malhotra_(social_entrepreneur)

Thank you! Nipman (talk) 12:38, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Nipman. Welcome to the Teahouse. If you writing an article about yourself, stop. In the eyes of Wikipedia, this is called a conflict of interest which means you have a personal connection with the subject. Someone else will end up writing an article for you if you are notable. Please see our policy on autobiographies. Interstellarity (talk) 13:06, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

The actual wording at WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY is "Writing an autobiography on Wikipedia is an example of conflict of interest editing and is strongly discouraged." David notMD (talk) 13:30, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Submitting WP Policy Proposals

Where/how can I post a policy proposal? For example this is a failed proposal. I'm not sure how and where to post my own. Hopefully one that won't fail :P

But seriously. I want to post a proposal that prefers apolitical sources to right/left biased ones.  – Chrisvacc - ✆ 13:13, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@Chrisvacc: Probably best to visit the Reliability WikiProject and post on the talk page. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Reliability. You face an uphill battle since feelings about bias vary wildly. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@Timtempleton:Well there's a general consensus about the bias of different sources. Like most people would agree that Fox News has a right bias, CNN has a left bias. https://www.adfontesmedia.com/?v=402f03a963ba and even the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources list mentions which sources have bias – Chrisvacc - ✆

WP:Village pump (proposals) discusses proposals; WP:Village pump (policy) discusses policies. There is also WP:Village pump (idea lab). Please read the headers on those pages to decide where you want to start. Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:46, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:IXL Learning

Hello! I'm in the process of writing about IXL Learning, a parent education company (I think that's what they're called, its what I call it.) One of the companies IXL Learning owns is ABCya.com, which already has a pre-existing Wikipedia article. What should I do for this case? Should I briefly describe it on my article or some requirement like that? Thank you for your time. Le Panini (talk) 14:20, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Le panini. Generally not: just Wikilink to it, so the reader will see a link, and can follow it to the relevant article. Once your draft is accepted, the article about the parent company should be wikilinked to the one you're writing, either by editing the text to refer to it, or else in the "See also" section. --ColinFine (talk) 15:29, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Is it appropriate to simplify regular wikipedia vocabulary?

For example, one article said ~doing x increased a person's language paradigm by 45~

I want to change that too ~doing x increased a person's language vocab by 45~ Hiveir (talk) 14:25, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@Hiveir: Welcome to the Teahouse. It depends on context and the article. Under normal circumstances I'd say yes, but if it's a linguistics-themed article it might be important to keep it that way, as "increasing a person's language vocab by 45" is also unclear; 45 words? 45 percent? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Internet Archive for dead links

I'm new to Wikipedia, and all my edits have been simply copy-editing. I was editing the Stephen A. Zeff article, and I noticed this link in the references. It now leads to a 404 page, but there is an Internet Archive save for it here.

Thank you, Just gonna edit a bit (talk) 14:48, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Najee Dorsey Submission -- Other ways to talk about "Explore"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Najee_Dorsey

I have seen articles on Wikipedia use "explore" to describe what artists do (Radcliffe Bailey). How else should I state this? I thought about using "depicts". Do you see any other instances of this problem (wording) in my submission? I want to get it right this time. Thanks for your help. ClairCarol (talk) 14:39, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@ClairCarol: Welcome to the Teahouse. I agree with your assessment of using something like "depict" rather than "explore", as the former is more neutral than the latter. Saying something along the lines of "Dorsey is known for creating Southern African American-themed works" might also work as well. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:06, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Merge page for Felischa Marye

Hello, I was submitting what I thought was a new page but to my surprise there was another page that had the same information. I was told to merge the two pages but I am not sure if I did it correctly as the editor has not responded.

This is my page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ArborChamp/Felischa_Marye

This is the page that I merged my information into. I have made the necessary changes but I am just not sure if I did it correctly. Please advise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Felischa_Marye ArborChamp (talk) 14:43, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

I work for an research institute, tried to update the wikipedia page and some editor undid my changes falsely, help?

I was tasked by my institute director to update our wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterloo_Institute_for_Nanotechnology I made the updates, just about what research we do at the institute and new facilities and published them and within seconds received a notification from an editor (not one associated with the institute) saying my changes were promotional when they are not, I'm stating facts about our institute? I am new to this and very confused on how to publish my changes again or even how to speak with this editor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:I_dream_of_horses about why she thinks something is promotional or against wikipedia policies?

Any help is greatly appreciated. Thank you! WIN Waterloo (talk) 15:02, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@WIN Waterloo: Welcome to the Teahouse. I dream of horses was following policy. One thing editors should understand that articles that relate to them do not belong to them. Furthermore, you are highly discouraged from editing pages that are related to you as you would have a conflict of interest, unless you are the subject and are removing vandalism. Facts need to be sourced in reliable, independent sources; you can go to the article's talk page and submit edit requests to suggest content changes paired with reliable sources. As an aside, if you wish to keep editing here on Wikipedia please change your username, as there is a username policy that forbids editors from using their organisation's name as you have done. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:13, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Addendum: I am more inclined to agree with I dream of horses' reversion after taking a glance at what they reverted. The language used was not appropriate for an encyclopedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:20, 21 May 2020 (UTC)