Wikipedia:Teahouse

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

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.

To read the newest questions, skip to bottom
About the Teahouse

Most recent archives
1212, 1213, 1214, 1215, 1216, 1217, 1218, 1219, 1220, 1221, 1222, 1223, 1224, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1229, 1230, 1231

Misuse of Photo

Hi there,

My name is Kelly McCormack and my wikipedia page is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_McCormack

on June 10th a photo was put up on my page that was taken from my facebook page. It was a photo that my sister took with my phone, and I own the rights to it, and I would like it taken down. The person who posted this photo does not own the rights. As you can see, it was not taken professionally, and very obviously taken with a phone - which was mine. If you would like proof of my identity, I can provide that, but I would like to have this photo removed.

thank you! Kelly 2001:569:7CFC:A000:E1BE:8701:E4D0:4BFA (talk) 19:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy- at Kelly McCormack, Kim Leung claims to have taken that photo at a 2017 event. David notMD (talk) 19:58, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kelly. I would advise against editing your Wikipedia page because you have a conflict of interest. You will need an edit request on the article talk page stating that you would like to delete the image. You can use the {{request edit}} template to add it to the queue of new requests. I hope this helps. Interstellarity (talk) 20:01, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly is not asking to add a photo, but rather to delete a photo. The editor who added it in June - Kim Leung - has a previous history of adding a photo to this article without having copyright to that photo. David notMD (talk) 20:04, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited my comment to accurately answer her question. Interstellarity (talk) 20:11, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would also suggest, Kelly, that you register an account and email info-en@wikimedia.org for instructions on establishing that the account as actually that of the subject of the article Kelly McCormack. And of course declare your conflict of interest with regard to that article. I have noted at commons that there is a challenge to the rights on this image. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:51, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DESiegel I have been told that OTRS verification of identity is only done in cases of the user being blocked. 331dot (talk) 21:12, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That was not my understanding, 331dot, but I could been mistaken. Neither Wikipedia:Contact us/Article subjects nor Wikipedia:Volunteer Response Team explicitly says one way or the other. The latter does say Volunteers may provide more active assistance for defamation and privacy issues and for requests from the subjects of articles. It is hard to know whether thge above request is valid or not without a verified identity. And while the OP could create User:Kelly McCormack get blocked, and then request unblock after communicating with OTRS, that seems a pointless hoop to jumop through. I'm not on the OTRS team, so I am not sure of the proper course to follow. Perhaps Sphilbrick who is on that team could advise. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:31, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DESiegel, I've been interested in the issue of confirmation of identity primarily because most such inquiries at OTRS are not solving the right problem, but it has been frustrating to get people on the same page.

This may turn out to be an example of addressing the wrong problem. The person claiming to be Kelly McCormack wants to know how to prove her identity on the assumption that this would aid in the removal of the photo. That man may not be true; it isn't obvious that it will help, and it is harder to do than Kelly might realize. Many people assume, understandably, that they can provide a photocopy of a license or passport but OTRS policy is not to accept such documents, which makes confirmation of identity challenging in some cases. In this particular case, I trust that Kelly agrees the real issue is the removal of the photo, and if that happens she may not care whether anyone confirms her identity or not.

The real issue is whether the person claiming copyright of the photo is accurately asserting copyright. If the answer is no, it doesn't matter whether the person claiming to be Kelly McCormick is Kelly McCormick or someone else.

I used to be an active participant in permissions but I'm less involved because frankly it's exhausting. I note that the photo does not have EXIF data displayed, which is a potential red flag. Not having this information could be (but not necessarily) a sign that the image was extracted from someplace else as opposed to a personal photograph. While it is acceptable to take a photo which has EXIF information, and post a cropped or modified version without the EXIF information, it is not uncommon in such situations that we request that the person claiming to be the copyright holder provide the underlying photo with the EXIF to prove that they are in possession of it. There are many people active in OTRS that have far deeper knowledge of these details than I have, but it might make sense to make that request of the person claiming copyright. If in fact they cropped it from Facebook page they are unlikely to be able to satisfy the request. If in fact they took the photo and an event as they claimed they should be able to provide it. In other words, the claim to copyright might be settled without jumping through the hoops for proof of identity. S Philbrick (Talk) 21:52, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Remark addressed to Kelly McCormack: if your sister took a photo using your phone, then she, not you, owns the copyright to the photo, and can legally donate it to Wikipedia. That's how copyright law works. None of us can change that.

Question addressed to Kelly McCormack: do you believe the person using the name "Kim Leung" is your sister? If they aren't, if for instance "Kim Leung" merely copied it from your Facebook page and uploaded it to Wikipedia claiming it as her own work (sadly, that kind of thing often happens), then that picture is not acceptable here and should be deleted. Maproom (talk) 22:28, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maproom is exactly right and I'm sorry I missed that point. If your sister took the photo then she's the initial copyright holder even though she used your phone. If she transferred the copyright to you, then you are the copyright holder, but you are not the copyright holder simply because it was your phone. S Philbrick (Talk) 00:42, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Observation I'm pretty confident that Kelly, the original IP poster here, has a very strong case, as I'm pretty sure the uploader is a serial image copyright violator. I judge that, not only from their Commons Talk Page showing a past history of deletions of dubious images, but also by the three current uploads which DESiegel and I have just challenged them about there. In my view the editor (User:Kim Leung) needs to be indeffed from Commons and all their contributions deleted as quite untrustworthy. After an hour of snooping around the internet, and some reverse image searching, I've definitely found two more crop and upload jobs they've made. None of their uploads have EXIF data and are of such low resolution that I think the evidence is overwhelming they've breached policy over at Wikimedia Commons. But because Wikimedia Commons is a separate project from Wikipedia (with its own administrators and protocols) I cannot take that action myself. Nor can I warn or block a user here for actions they've made elsewhere. Anyone know how to report a user on Commons (rather than simply flag their individual uploads for deletion)? Nick Moyes (talk) 00:50, 3 August 2020 (UTC) [reply]

Nick Moyes I have reported the user at c:Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. We will see hope commons admins follow up. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, DESiegel. Let's hope so. In the meantime, I have found yet another copyright violation - this time a blatant screen grab from this Nicki Minaj YouTube video (2mins 47 sec in, if anyone's curious enough to check it out). I decided not to report the single file at this point in time, but identified it on their user page on Commons for an admin to consider. I believe we should be proactive and remove the image of Kelly McCormack from that article (which I have just done), though any removal may well be reverted if a Commons investigation hasn't yet started into the actions and uploads of the editor in question. Please keep an eye on the article. Nick Moyes (talk) 02:14, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update: All photographic 'contributions' from this user have now been deleted, as every one was a copyright violation. They have been warned that they will be blocked if this ever happens again. To Kelly McCormack: I do hope we've demonstrated that we listen and that we care. I'm sorry you have been upset and inconvenienced by someone else's illegal actions. May I ask if you might still consider providing an image of yourself that you do actually own, and which could be placed in the article about you? If so, please let us know, and we will guide you through the simple steps in properly releasing a photo. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:36, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A note: Nick Moyes other Admins (Including informing the "IP" in case the person returns). Hello, I just saw where Nick stated " though any removal may well be reverted if a Commons investigation hasn't yet started...". Not being an Admin I am not privy to all the workings of your authority but I am somewhat familiar with policy. An action somewhere else (like Commons) does not matter here. Reporting clear violations there is a courtesy. If an image is removed because of likely of highly probable copyright issues, especially as an Admin, and more especially as an Admin involved in an active discussion where the validity of the rights of the editor using the image is contested, and removal (we can call it temporary), is for the protection of Wikipedia as well as the claimed owner. There would be no valid contest to such a removal, we can call it a courtesy removal pending resolution. Reversing such a removal could be an enforceable violation. Considering:

1)- An image was being used and the use (copyright) is being contested as a "Misuse of Photo" by someone claiming to be the subject. The fact that the claimed owner did not, or possibly even now, in-fact legally own the copyright, is of a lessor importance,
2)- There was an ongoing discussion where an editor has claimed to own the copyright, by using the image and the release, not by being involved here,
3)- There is enough evidence that the ownership of the editor using the image is questionable (now confirmed) especially lacking the EXIF information,
4)- There was consensus (more than one editor) of issues that would allow the image removal pending resolution. This could be done by any editor and a reversal with a warning should it be reverted. A possible block could result if an edit war is attempted when the removing editor happens to be an Admin. In my opinion this is where an Admin can make regular edits and usurp Admin authority if necessary, whereas I (or an other non-Admin editors) would have to request Admin assistance. Please correct me or give opinions if Admins here feel differently about this.

If an editor using an image cannot provide the evidence (especially when requested), then a request to the person claiming ownership can be requested. It is absolutely correct that the person that took the picture owns the copyright, at least by US copyright law. Exceptions would be for hire (requiring a contract) or an arguable defense if the subject and camera owner sets a timer and simply gets someone to hold the camera as a portable human stand.

Subject ownership issue could simply be solved by the sister transferring ownership or selling the picture to the subject for a penny, and providing an affidavit (notarized or multiple witnessed depending on state law) that the subject became the lawful owner. A copy of this ownership transfer, and an uploaded copy of the image with the EXIF information, should more than suffice to prove ownership beyond a reasonable doubt without going the route of personal identification.

However, that is an after-the-fact solution to actions intended to protect the subject, Wikipedia, and the WMF. It regards policy with legal considerations. I applaud Nick for taking proactive steps that are also inline with "Dealing with copyright violations" (third paragraph), as well as the in-depth edit summary. Any editor could do this but policy specifically states Administrators may at their discretion unilaterally revision delete copyrighted content. I am not sure what the "revision" part of delete entails but "deletion" is clear. It is better to remove material or images as a prevention, especially on an informal personal request and when there are likely issues, than to allow suspected copyvios to exist. This is my opinion based on policy and I welcome opinions concerning this. -- Otr500 (talk) 15:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

anyone can help please

I'm very sad, 3 Drafts are not accepting because i am ip and not editor, all have sources, And they refuse for the same reasons. Everyone rejects drafts, nobody helps, we try hours, and they easily refuse in seconds. 1-Draft:Sherif Salama, 2- Draft:Napoleon Wal Mahrousa, 3- Draft:Ali Mansour. --41.35.85.111 (talk) 22:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC) 41.35.85.111 (talk) 22:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note this was posted about 10 hours ago above at #Submit Draft:Ali Mansour. Please don't do that. If you want to add to your previous posting, just edit that section. You have been given lots of feedback on the article page itself regarding notability (and lack thereof) and unsuitability of sources like blogs, interviews, and IMDb. It has nothing to do with you being an IP editor. If others have something to contribute, they will respond in time – we are all volunteers with real lives to attend to. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:22, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed Draft:Sherif Salama and I am sorry but it needs work before publication can be considered. -- Otr500 (talk) 12:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

     Just make an account, and it will save the drafts, its also not the best idea to be an ip editor, because people have access to a lot of info.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://elcinema.com/person/2140347/	Independent	Appears to be reliable	Directory entry	✘ No
https://alwafd.news/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B7%D9%86%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D8%AD%D9%81%D9%89/3025076-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%8A-%D9%85%D9%86%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%B4%D8%AF-%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%AD%D9%8A-%D9%8A%D8%B7%D9%84%D9%82-%D9%85%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D8%A5%D8%B8%D9%87%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%AC%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%84-%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B1-%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%88%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%8A%D9%84	Largely what the subject said about itself, probbably interview	Appears to be reliable	A few sentences, most by the subject, not even a full paragraph	✘ No
https://www.msr4.com/art-news/%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%8A-%D9%85%D9%86%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1-%D9%8A%D9%83%D8%B4%D9%81-%D8%B9%D9%86-%D8%AF%D9%88%D8%B1%D9%87-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%85%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%84-%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%88%D9%86/	Appears to be largely independent	? I'm unsure about the reliability of this website	? More coverage than the last one, but still questionable	? Unknown
https://arabic-media.com/articles/id/posts.php?title=Backstage-filming-of-Saraya-Abdeen-series	Appears to be independent	Probbably reliable	Largely about the film, not the actor	✘ No
https://dhliz.com/artist/ali_mansour/	Appears to be independent	Appeas to be user-editable, at least I saw something like a rate button	Directory entry	✘ No
https://www.dostor.org/2616509	? Apepars to be largely what the subject reported, but I cant say that for sure using google translate	Appears to be reliable	A few paragraphs.	? Unknown
https://akhbarelyom.com/news/newdetails/2878459/1/-%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%8A%D9%83-%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AF-..-%D9%85%D8%AA%D8%B9%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%8A%D9%84%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%82%D9%84%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%AD%D9%84-%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1	? Largely stuff by Mansur on His works, Partially reported by the subject	Appaers to be a somewhat reliable source in general	Largely about the place he is, describing the wonderfull nature there	✘ No
https://www.almasryalyoum.com/news/details/1392385	Largely what the subject reported	Appears to be a reliable newspaper		✘ No
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EUVGasEHWE	Interview with the subject	? Youtube can be a questionable source, and without language knowledge it hard to determine the reliability	17:20 Minutes	✘ No
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgEGrMwC7AM	Interview with the subject	? Youtube can be a questionable source, and without language knowledge it hard to determine the reliability	12:18 Minutes	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Note:I had to use google translate to asses, which makes things rather difficult. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:37, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Victor Schmidt mobil, source No. 4 about the actor and tells about his role in the series. Translate the content of source: The artist Ali Mansour said that he considers himself lucky, because he participated in a work with the star Yousra, and Ali Mansour embodies within the events of the series "Saraya Abdin" a character (a French photographer) who came to Egypt to take the first photo inside Egypt, and the picture was of the family of Khedive Ismail (Qusai Khouli The mother, Pasha (Yusra), is inside the Abdin Palace garden.
and all sources speak about Ali Mansour and what he does, you can be sure with google translate (Translate the content of sources). and source assess table shows that there are source newspaper, and sources Independent reliable. Thank you. -102.45.13.38 (talk) 16:02, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Otr500 , Okay, I will work on Draft:Sherif Salama more thanks. This is a very famous actor in the Arab world. -102.45.13.38 (talk) 16:10, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Victor Schmidt mobil, New source "Ali Mansour reveals his role in the series "Napoleon wal Mahroussa." elfann.com. -41.35.87.185 (talk) 18:13, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info about Draft : Eugènie Jeanne Devolle

My Draft has not been selected even though I have put a reference and I have a tip to do when you go to the reference. Please Review again. Yours sincerely Science Wiki Guy (talk) 14:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC) Science Wiki Guy (talk) 14:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiki-Nihaal: Wikis are not reliable sources because the users generate the content. This includes Wikipedia itself. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info, I have more references now.Science Wiki Guy (talk) 14:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiki-Nihaal: No, geni.com is not reliable for the same reason; the users submit the content. This disqualifies most social media sites. Please also note that notability is not inherited. Just because someone is a relative of a notable person does not make themselves notable. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:54, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Wiki-Nihaal. If you are referring to Draft:Eugènie Jeanne Devolle the ball is firmly in your court. It is quite unacceptable as a new article right now, and needs much, much more work from you, as explained in the rejection notice left by Theroadislong. Which bit of that did you not understand? Please DO NOT resubmit that draft for review until you actually know what needs to go into a new article. Try reading WP:YFA, to start with. Looking at your talk page, you appear to have attempted to create this page with minimal content on three or four past occasions over the last few days, and each has been deleted because they were wholly insufficient as an encyclopaedia page here. There will come a point where, if you keep trying to create this article based on virtually no references and malformed text, you'll be seen as just wasting everyone's time. Take your time - there is no rush. Better to spend weeks or months getting it right than having future page-creation blocked ('salted') for time wasting. (I feel we might be getting close to that point, which would be a real shame) Just remember, you cannot use any 'user-generated' page (like other wikis and genealogical sites) as a reference to prove notability. You need to stop and search for proper books, magazine or journals which go into depth about the person, and appreciate that 'Notability is not inherited'. The parent of a notable person doesn't automatically deserve a page of their own - it's up to you to find in-depth sources which prove they're notable in their own right. Notability doesn't just mean you provide a few links to show when she was born and died, or who her kids were. Please read Wikipedia:Competence is required to appreciate some of the concerns I have over your approach to contributing here. Slow down, and perhaps you should give The Wikipedia Adventure tour a go. There are 15 badges to collect as you learn the basics of editing. RegardsNick Moyes (talk) 15:07, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiki-Nihaal: One thing that anyone writing an article about a subject should do is to look for existing articles in the encyclopaedia that demonstrate what a proper article is supposed to look like. For example, in this case, if Eugènie Jeanne Devolle is supposed to be notable as a fashion designer, you might compare your article draft with Coco Chanel. Do you see the differences? Nobody expects you to start out with a complete article like this, of course, but it should at least have the "bones" of an article (sections, at least some prose written in English sentences, references, etc.). This is, of course, after you have resolved the notability issue addressed by others above (i.e., three or more published, reliable, independent sources with in-depth coverage of her). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I read she was a washerwoman! Science Wiki Guy (talk) 04:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC) I have found only genealogical sites as a reference, I am going to check other non-genealogy websites or leave it alone and go to some other topic Science Wiki Guy (talk) 04:55, 5 August 2020 (UTC) Is peoplepill a good reference website? Science Wiki Guy (talk) 08:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki-Nihaal, when you are unsure about the reliability of a source, you should first check the list at WP:RSP and if it is not mentioned there, you can perform a search to see if it has been discussed somewhere else. If you can't find that either, you can ask about it at WP:RSN.

In this case, assuming you mean peoplepill.com, its about page says it publishes user-submitted profiles about any person they are familiar with. Crowd-sourced or wiki-style content publisher is not a reliable source (see WP:UGC). Its articles (probably not all) near the bottom (just below the share buttons) say that the content was taken from Wikipedia which is another evidence that it is not a reliable source. Getting back to Wikipedia, I didn't find it with Ctrl+F at WP:RSP. Searching wikipedia showed that it has been discussed or used in other articles, but it does not seem to have its own Wikipedia article (not a good sign). It however has an entry at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks/PQR#PeoplePill. Since Wikipedia is not a reliable source, mirror and fork websites that publish content taken from Wikipedia are not reliable either. The website is apparently blacklisted, so the edit filter doesn't even allow editors to mention it, so that would be the end of that. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:12, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

teach me how to edit

Can you teach me how to edit? I am new to Wikipedia. Kemah2020 (talk) 22:25, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kemah2020: As Timtempleton said you can use that link. I just give you two little advice: When your edit is almost done, don't forget to sign it with ~ ~ ~ ~ but don't use spaces between them. Also, to reply to a user, use {re|username} (of course with two accolades in each side)Aminabzz (talk) 16:19, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kemah2020: Here's a good place to start. Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:34, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to make a colorful and fun signature

I would like to know how to make my signature colorful, beautiful, and fun. I don't know how to do it. I know some basic HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, in case I need to know it. Thank you. Friend505 (talk) 22:57, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Friend505: You've only been editing 12 days, and have spent far too much time posting on other people's talk pages, and not really adding much yet to the encyclopaedia. Why not wait to make fancy signatures until such time as people think you're genuinely here to make a difference? I've been here 10 years, and still haven't got around to showing off with a clever signature. But see WP:CUSTOMSIG if you really feel you must. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:44, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, Nick Moyes. Yeah, I am going to start improving articles, which is what a Wikipedian should do. Sorry, and thanks. Friend505 (talk) 10:54, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Makes one think: Working on 11 years and no fancy signature. I might have to start thinking about it as I am sure at least some might think I am trying to make a difference. Maybe I will set 50,000 edits as a goal to get one. At my present rate that would be 2065 and I can schedule it for a 108 year birthday gift. -- Otr500 (talk) 20:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to upload an image to an existing article. I am a new user. NOT auto confirmed yet, but i already uploaded to wikimedia successfully.

How to upload an image to an existing article. I am a new user My account is NOT auto confirmed yet, but i already uploaded to wikimedia successfully. However, i do NOT want to wait for 4 days and 10 posts and i want the image to be uploaded immediately right now to this below link. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chellapilla_Venkata_Rao In the above link i want to incorporate the below image which i successfully uploaded to wikimedia. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Prof_C_V_Rao_final.jpg I would appreciate if anyone can do this for me. Thechellapillas (talk) 23:06, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Thechellapillas. To be brutally frank with you, I do not believe the photo you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons of the 61-year old person who died in 1971 genuinely belongs to you. If it does, I would have expected to see a larger file size from a scanned image. I think this is a cropped image from another photo taken by somebody other than you, so I am not going to answer your question until you can reassure me that it is actually your own. Where did you get it from? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:25, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Given your User name and the name of the person in the photograph, it is possible that you are a relative. That, however, does not make you the holder of the copyright to the photograph, which belongs to the photographer. David notMD (talk) 00:47, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick/David. Yes indeed this is a photo graph taken from an original photograph of our family album. The original photograph dates back to 1950s when it was originally taken. As rightly said, i am relative (grandson C.Maharaj Saran) of Prof. C Venkat Rao, and on observing a Wikipedia page about my grandfather, i have informed it to my father. Then my father Prof. C Gopal has pulled out the family album and shared this picture through whatsapp. I have the original picture received (before cropping) as well , if it is of any help ! And as i mentioned earlier, this photograph is a family photograph clicked decades back and is the only available source of information about my late grandfather which i could upload, as nothing else is available on internet! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thechellapillas (talk • contribs) 01:04, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the file to the article is fairly easy to do; however, there are other issues which you should resolve first before you try and edit the article again.

The first has to do with Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Since you're claiming that the article is about your grandfather, you're going to be considered to have a conflict of interest with respect to anything written about him on Wikipedia. Please carefully read through the conflict of interest page as well as Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide for more reference, or look at the "welcome-coi" template I added to your user talk page. You need to make sure that your edits are in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

The next thing has to do with the copyright status of the photo you uploaded. Generally, the person taking a photo, not the subject of the photo, is considered to be the copyright holder. So, unless you actually took this photo yourself, it's probably not going to be considered your "own work". The way you've described the photo, however, makes it seem like it possibly was taken by a family member. If that was the case and the photo was simple handed down from one generation to another until it finally got to you, then it's possible that the photo could be considered a case of c:Template:PD-heirs. You probably should ask about this at c:COM:VPC to make sure and you're probably going to need to be fairly certain as to who took the original photo. Another thing you could try would be to ask your father to send a WP:CONSENT email to WP:Contact OTRS explaining where the photo came from and why he believes he is the copyright holder. If everything checks out, an OTRS volunteer will verify the license and then you can add the file to the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:29, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Team Wikipedia/MarchJuly It was unfortunately that i ventured to do something on wikipedia since we found the page was about my grand father ! The amount of correspondence, clauses and conditions which are there are really surprising ! Guess genuine people will always have to prove themselves, that is the nature of the present day world !! We don't even know which member of family took the photograph in 1950s. All we know is it is in our album, and after 70 years, we thought it found a place.!! Let us leave this here. please go ahead and tell admin to just delete the photograph i uploaded. Thanks to all the volunteers for their time on this matter Thechellapillas (talk) 15:54, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Significant Coverage Issue?

What are some suggestions on other sources to use? The ones I chose were published, reliable and secondary sources independent of the subject. Please advise. Anything helps. Thanks much.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. Billingsleymusic (talk) 23:17, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Billingsleymusic Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It seems that you are attempting to write about yourself- this is not usually a good idea. While not forbidden, autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged per the autobiography policy. People naturally write favorably about themselves, and Wikipedia tries to have a neutral point of view.

In order to merit an article, you must show that you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician, with significant coverage in independent reliable sources completely unconnected with you and that have chosen on their own to write about you in depth. One is an interview with you, which does not establish notability. The rest only confirm certain pieces of information and do not have in depth coverage of you by someone who chose on their own to give it. In order for you to succeed in writing a Wikipedia article about yourself, you need to forget everything you know about yourself and only write based on the content of independent sources. Most people have great difficulty doing that. If you haven't already, please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 23:26, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Billingsleymusic: You may wish to read WP:NMUSIC and WP:NBIO to understand the criteria needed for an article to be accepted here. If you are genuinely a 'notable' person, as defined by Wikipedia, we'll give you a big hug and help you in every way we can. If you're here to promote yourself and your business, you can be sure you won't get far. Finding good reliable sources are the key to having an article accepted here. Please act on the guidance offered at this page. Regards, 00:26, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Billingsleymusic, and welcome to the Teahouse. The thing to realise is that, in an article about you, Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything that you say or want to say, whether you have published it directly, said it in an interview, or provided it in a press release. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with you, and have not been prompted or fed information by you or your associates, have chosen to publish about you. --ColinFine (talk) 15:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do i get more people to offer an opinion?

I started this account just to add some information about my favorite bar in Richmond. It's called GWARbar, and was started by the band Gwar. It's called that by the owners, it's spelled that way (GWARbar) everywhere inside and outside the bar, and every single news story about it spells it that way. One guy decided that it shouldn't be spelled that way and he seems hell-bent on getting his way. He even just made a change to name it GwarBar, with a capital B, and absolutely nowhere does this bar name have a capital B. Okay, fine, that's one guy, that's his opinion. How do I get more people to offer an opinion on this capitalization issue? In loco parenti (talk) 01:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi In loco parenti. The best place to discuss this would be on the article's talk page which is what you seem to be doing. Since there are only two of you involved in the discussion and the two of you appear to be unable to find some common ground and resolve things, you can try Wikipedia:Third opinion or Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. Another thing that you could try would be to scroll up to the top of the article's talk page and look to see which WikiProject's are listed; you could then add a Template:Please see to the talk pages of those WikiProjects to let others no about the discussion. Please understand though that the main thing that's going to be taken into account is whether the name is correct per relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, not whether it's the way the band spells it or the way it's spelled in news stories about the bar. So, your going to have to establish that the way you think the name should be spelled is in accordance with these policies and guidelines. FWIW, you both seem to have gone past WP:3RR by your continued reverting of each other; content disputes rarely are considered an exemption to the three-revert rule per WP:3RRNO and there are really no winners in an edit war. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:09, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marchjuly, you may remember me, I recently left you a "blast from the past" thank your on your talk. So I hope you know that I respect your experience and opinion. However, the above aituation has me baffled. I offered a compromise, on the tp for Gwar, but the other person (NJZombie) fears that if we make an exception, we will create a "precedent".

I am a WP conservative AGF type, but I am confused. Would you be willing to look into this? I think GWARbar restaurant is a good compromise section header, conserves the actual "brand name" and lowercase restaurant is MOS compliant. GwarBar does not make sense to me. Anyway, thanks for your consideration, I trust your expertise and your ability to "explain" tricky rules. Regards, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 03:15, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really an expert on explaining things, and am not sure what other advice I can give than what I posted above. Besides, there are now others involved in the discussion that's currently taking place on the article talk page; so, perhaps a consensus will be established either way. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add a sub-category to a main category

Hi,I would like to add a new Sub-Category to an existing Category, but don't know how to do it.

The main Category is "Category:Province of Canada". There is a sub-category, "Electoral districts of Canada East".

I am starting to produce articles on the electoral districts of Canada West, and would like to add a sub-category for those articles, entitled "Electoral districts of Canada West", but I don't know how that is done.

Thanks in advance. I really appreciate the Teahouse. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:19, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: You add subcategories to their parent categories the same way you add an article to a category, i.e. by placing a link to it in source code. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 04:30, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Links: Category:Province of Canada, Category:Electoral districts of Canada East, Category:Electoral districts of Canada West

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: You actually add the category to the article, not the other way around. If you have an article "Foo" that you want to place in Category:Electoral districts of Canada West, you edit the article (Foo) with source editor, go to the bottom of the page, and add [[Category:Electoral districts of Canada West]] on a new line. If there are no other categories there already, add an extra blank line above the new category. Once you save it, the article will appear at Category:Electoral districts of Canada West.

To make Category:Electoral districts of Canada West a sub-category of Category:Province of Canada, edit Category:Electoral districts of Canada West with source editor and add [[Category:Province of Canada]] to the bottom of the page (which is empty at the moment). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:50, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! done! --Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 07:25, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About Wikipedia

I make a article but wikipedia can not approved, I follow all the instruction of wikipedia. Sheelatiwari123 (talk) 05:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sheelatiwari123. You didn't mention the name of any article in your post, but perhaps you're referring to Draft:Ganesh Prasad Tiwari. Try talking a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:Notability (people) for some general information about the types of people that Wikipedia considers it OK to create an article about. The main problem with the draft is that you've not cited any reliable sources to allow others to verify what you've written and show that the person you're writing about has received the significant coverage necessry to be considered Wikipedia notable. You can find out some general information about how to write article and add citations in Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners, but the main reason the draft was declined is that you've haven't provided any citations to reliable sources so that the AfC reviwers can assess the subject's Wikipedia notability. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Using `{{rp}}` for references that are only used once

I noticed that the article on Biblical criticism seems to use {{rp}} (with ref name) every time that a page number is referenced (over 200 times), even for references that are only used once. I don't think this is how {{rp}} is meant to be used and it seems unaesthetic. Should it be changed, and if so, what would be the best way of going about it? If I only have time to fix some of them, will that ruin the consistency of style and be worse than doing nothing at all?

What follows is what I've found from looking into this myself, if you know the answer, no need to read it:

The page on {{rp}} states: "This is a relatively uncommon method of citing page numbers, usually used when other methods produce undesirable results. It is used in about one out of every 300 articles at the English Wikipedia... Use this template when you are referring to specific pages within a source which is cited many times in the same article." [emphasis mine]

On the other hand, the page on named references states: "You may optionally provide reference names even when the reference name is not required. This makes later re-use of the sourced reference easier."

On the GA review page for that article, this issue may have been alluded to in a comment which raised an issue about the fact that {{rp}} was being used even when the citation itself already had the page number (internally). This was fixed by removing the page # from (inside) the references (so that only {{rp}} was used). Yaakovaryeh (talk) 04:49, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yaakovaryeh: I'd suggest opening a discussion at Talk:Biblical criticism and pinging the main contributor to the article by starting your message with {{Ping|Jenhawk777}} (similar to what I did here to ping you). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From draft to live

When will my page move from the draft section to a live page, visible to all?

My page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Praveen_Kenneth Tassie 244 (talk) 05:30, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tassie 244: the draft hasn't been submitted for review yet. I have added the submit button for you. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC):@Victor Schmidt mobil:[reply]

Thank you for this. Could you even review the article too? Tassie 244 (talk) 14:12, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tassie 244: It will be reviewed by a new page reviewer in due course, please be patient. As noted in the submission template, there are over 3,000 drafts awaiting review. Efforts to "jump the line" don't usually succeed. Do you have a particular need for an urgent disposition of the draft? 331dot (talk) 08:49, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rfc: 'Template:AFC submission|T' is too massive and distracting

Hello, greetings

At outset itself I do apologize my bit stronger statement, is used to express my displeasure strongly enough.

Since I came on Wikipedia, I have been observing many improvement notice hat note templates as examples of 'curator's dilemma' turned into 'curator extremism' rather than purpose of help and encouragement those seem to have been used frequently for expression of bad faith and threatening. If at all in main space then can be understood to an extent, but even in Draft namespace I come across this 'Template:AFC submission|T' which is massive and distracting to content contributors, and template page informs is used on 40,000+ pages .

I am not totally against improvement notice templates but many times those can be saved for limited use. At times I have seen if a curator takes an extra step and help out in writing better an distracting improvement notice can be avoided. Any ways I am not too pleased with size of Template:AFC submission|T

Thanks and best wishes

Bookku (talk) 05:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bookku. A better place for you to discuss any concerns you have about this template's wording or how it's being used is probably Template talk:AFC submission or maybe even at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation. There's not much that can be done about it here at the Teahouse, and because the template is (as you point out) so widely used, even a slight tweaking of it might have a huge ripple effect across the entire project even in some ways that aren't entirely obvious. This is why this template has been protected so that only certain editors can edit it. Also, the Teahouse is not really a good place at all to try and start an WP:RFC since the Teahouse is merely intended to be a place for editors to ask general questions about Wikipedia editing, etc.; it's not really intended to be a place for RFC types of discussions. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bookku Sorry to hear you have strong displeasure at seeing these templates. I am not sure how or why you regard the templates as an "expression of bad faith and threatening". They serve many important functions which include extra parameters: 1)- Notification the subject is a draft, 2)- status (streamlined multiple use), 3)-Links for various tools, help tools, space for comments, and as I understand notification for bots. While you may be familiar with navigating Wikipedia many "new editors" are not so the resources provided in the template are intended to help those editors.

As this seems to be important to you maybe you could explore on the template talk page, or other relevant places commonly used for such discussions per Marchjuly, if there is a possibility to collapse certain areas of the template. This might find favor in such a discussion. -- Otr500 (talk) 12:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator note I've removed the RFC template (diff) because there isn't a question, and discussion should first be held as described above (either at WT:AFC or at the template talk). If anyone feels this was grossly inappropriate you are welcome to re-add the RFC notice. Primefac (talk) 13:32, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Updated website?

I thought Wikipedia is updated and has everything but come on, it doesn't even have an article about Simp (slang). Can someone create as it has been used mostly this generation and become prominent with many reliable sources available. 176.215.144.107 (talk) 07:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary, and generally does not have articles on words. Perhaps you want Wiktionary's entry for "simp" ? Maproom (talk) 06:54, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh really? the Karen (slang) has its own article as it has the same amount of sources as Simp does. 176.215.144.107 (talk) 07:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that an article should be created about this subject, then you can get the ball rolling by creating a draft and then submitting it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review. If sufficient reliable sources exist and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary isn't considered an issue, then the draft should have a good chance of being accepted. As for Karen (pejorative), see WP:OTHERSTUFF as to why one article existing automatically means other similar articles should also exist is not generally a good reason for creating those other articles. The "Karen" article actually was discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karen (slang) with clear support that it should have an article about it; so, if you think an article about "Simp" could survive a similar deletion discussion, then the draft you submit should have no problem being accepted by an AFC reviewer. If you're not sure how to create a draft, then perhaps someone at Wikipedia:WikiProject Linguistics, Wikipedia:WikiProject Popular Culture or some other relevant WikiProject would be willing to work together with you on it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:26, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AFAICT, this should simply be a redirect to Simpleton. Not sure exactly what the title should be (whether (slang) is the right disambiguator). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Auto confirmed user

How to become auto confirmed user on Wikipedia? CGIIITL (talk) 08:28, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CGIIITL Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You are autoconfirmed when your account is four days old and has 10 edits or more. You might want spend some time in those four days learning more about Wikipedia by using the new user tutorial. I will add that it is possible to submit an article draft before that using Articles for Creation(which is really a good idea even once you are autoconfirmed) 331dot (talk) 08:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CGIIITL. While I agree with what 331dot said, I would also point out that new editors who try to create an article straight away (even by AFC) often have a frustrating and disappointing time. I would advise any new editor to spend a few weeks or months improving existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works before they even try it. (We have thousands and thousands of existing articles which would benefit from some work!). When you think you understand enough about notability to try, I suggest reading your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 15:43, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Willie K: My edit was not accepted (just found out)

In Willie K's biography, 2 years (1991-1992) were not included in the original text. These are the 2 years I worked with Willie making his two most famous CDs. Everything is completely verifiable: Awards, Hit Songs etc... Why it was omitted is a mystery to me so I added it. The Wikipedia turned down the edit??? How can I proceed? Here is the text I submitted: In 1991 and 1992, Willie came to Honolulu from Lahaina, Maui, playing in Waikiki at Keone's, Lewer Street with packed audiences. KDE Records (Kapena label) produced Willie's first two albums: "Kahaiali‘i" and "Here is my Heart", both recorded at Rendez-Vous Recording, Honolulu. His manager was Ken Thompson (KT) and Music co-Arranger / Producer / Engineer / Musician was Pierre Grill. The first album received 12 Na Hoku Hano Hano Awards and every song became a hit that are still Willie's biggest legacy. "Good Morning", "Katchi Katchi Music Makawao", "You Ku‘uipo","North Shore Reggae Blues", "My Molokai Woman", "Ho‘okipa Surf Song", "Honey Girl". Percussionist Tony Flores contributed greatly to the lively sound of those recordings and performed with Willie during that year. The second album "Here is my Heart" included: "I Will Dance For You", "Appleberry Hill", "Here is My Heart", "Koi", "Waterfall", "Waiulu", "Love and Desire". All those were later re-released in new CDs. “O Holy Night” was also recorded at Rendez-Vous Recording with Pierre Grill. PierregrillHI (talk) 09:53, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, PierregrillHI. Your edit was removed as you gave no references to enable anyone to verify the details. Thats the reason -plain and simple. The reverting editor even left a message on your own talk page to explain. You may re-insert it with a citation or two. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:28, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PierregrillHI: That would be User talk:PierregrillHI#June 2020. There are several links there to relevant details. You might also see WP:ERB for how to insert the required reference(s). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:20, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Questions from a beginner:

Hi everyone,

My company wants me to create them a Wikipedia page and in all honesty I'm not sure where to start. I have made ten edits and tomorrow my account will be four days old, does this mean I'll be able to publish live articles? Also, how can I upload company pictures? Lastly, I was simply editing my Sandbox for practice but it wouldn't allow me to save the changes because it deemed them as harmful to the article, why would this be?

I appreciate any help I can get! MattHHM (talk) 13:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MattHHM, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks like your company is local to me here in Derbyshire, England, so perhaps I can advise. Firstly, please tell your bosses that Wikipedia and our volunteers are not here to help them get free promotion for their business, and that they're acting unreasonably if they've set this as a goal for you. Just tell them to build a better website. Read WP:NCORP to ascertain our notability criteria for businesses. If your company cannot meet them, it will stand absolutely no chance here. You should look for independent, in-depth articles or publications which have paid attention to your company. You ignore your own website, social media, PR notices, Marketing Derby eshots and all the rest. Look for national or international coverage in mainstream media or publications. If you can't find any, then tell your bosses you cannot do their bidding. It's as simple as that. Having actually managed to find good sources, you would use them and only them to create a draft page. You would need to follow our obligatory policy on declaring paid writing. See WP:PAID. Forget pictures at this stage. It's meeting notability that counts - the rest is fluff that can be added later. You would start with a draft using our wizard at Articles for Creation and only submit it for review once it's looking like it'll meet our notability criteria. If you tried to place it directly into 'mainspace', chances are it would get speedily deleted as pure promotion. Bear in mind that most editor spend months learning how to edit before ever thinking about creating a new page. It's the hardest of tasks here - akin to never having driven and then being told to shoot up the M1 to Scotland. You stand a good chance of crashing en route. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick, thanks for your response. I should probably explain that I am not actually employed by Hot House Music, I am an intern employed by The University of Derby. This is part of my University work to improve my degree, therefore I don't believe there to be a conflict of interest. There is a 4 star review by The Guardian on the company and international press articles from their tours to the USA, does this meet the notability criteria? Are you also saying that I cannot link the website or social media accounts? I am simply creating this page to display information for the public on a growing UK business, isn't that allowed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MattHHM (talk • contribs) 14:58, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MattHHM: thanks for getting back to me. Yes, you still have a conflict of interest, in my view. Not a problem if you follow the declaration instructions. Just declare you are being paid by Derby Uni to write about Hot House Music. (Just out of interest, is this a task set by Cbderbylib, and which course are you doing? I ask as I am keen to foster good relations with the staff at UoD, having helped to run an editathon there 2 years ago, and am happy to guide staff if they need help. If you're on a business or marketing course and they're teaching Wikipedia as a marketing tool, one of us probably ought to have words with your course leader.) Whilst it's OK to include one link to an official website in an 'External links' section, don't put in other social media accounts - thats too promotional, and anyone interested can simply go to the website link and take it from there. If you can provide 3 good in-depth articles in national media and not brief, rehashed PR Puffery, then you do stand more of a chance. You didn't link to any of them, so I can't comment further. Just carefully read and follow WP:NCORP for notability criteria. There are millions of brilliant but non-notable businesses in the world, and Wikipedia is not here to give any of them a 'leg up', but to summarise in a brief, encyclopaedic manner just those subjects that the world at large has already taken note of. So, the brief answer to your question "I am simply creating this page to display information for the public on a growing UK business, isn't that allowed?" is NO! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:36, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Moyes: Not one of mine! 217.169.14.135 (talk) 15:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It would help if I was logged in... Cbderbylib (talk) 15:46, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One further point, on top of Nick's excellent advice, MattHHM: something that people inexperienced in Wikipedia often don't understand is that an article is not for the benefit of the subject. If the subject derives some benefit from appearing in an article, that is lucky for them, but it figures nowhere in Wikipedia's purposes; and since the subject has no control whatever over the content of the article, some subjects do not find it beneficial: see WP:PROUD. --ColinFine (talk) 15:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One point, MattHHM. Our policy on paid editing specifically includes interns as "paid editors". It also includes employees (or contractors) who are assigned to edit articles as part of their jobs, even if there is no specific payment for editinmg. It also includes employees with a general duty to promote the company, even if not specifically assigned to edit Wikipedia. So from your statement above you would be considered a paid editor, and must make the proper disclosure if you are to edit or create any such article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:43, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone, I appreciate all of your comments, they have helped tremendously! I wanted to ask if you believe the following articles and pieces would be useful to include on the page, some are about the company and some are regarding the Director Jonathan Eno:

I will make it clear before publishing the article that it is paid editing as well; I want to ensure that I abide by all necessary terms and conditions. Thanks, Matt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MattHHM (talk • contribs) 15:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing any in depth coverage of "Hot House Music" in any of those sources, only passing mentions, also, blogs and YouTube are rarely considered reliable. Theroadislong (talk) 15:18, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have you been specifically asked to create a Wikipedia article about this company as part of your university work? Such things are extremely unfair to the student who is expected to dive right in and successfully create an article- which is the hardest thing to do on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 15:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MattHHM Here are my quick thoughts on your sources:

1 is an insider magazine - not sufficient

2 is the briefest of mentions (a phone number) - useless

3 As much as I admire our local man, John Forkin, Marketing Derby is, well, a marketing website

4 Deadlink - YouTube is rarely useful for meting this essential notability criterion

5 Dead link University of Derby pages might carry some weight, though the founder of HHM is an alumnus.

6 Is another Marketing Derby product - not suitable

7 No mention of HHM - but interestingly, we see its founder Jon Eno was awarded a British Empire Medal. I'm not sure how my fellow Wikipedians regard Queens Birthday Honours medal as a sign of notability in its own right. But I feel a page about him , not his company, might stand a very slightly higher chance at the moment.

Did you mentioned a Guardian article somewhere? That'd be interesting to see. Generally, businesses require 3 good in-depth sources to reach 'Notability'. I have left a note on your talk page asking you to disclose WP:PAID work now, before making any further edits to your sandbox. Best wishes. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:43, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick, Thanks, your responses have been really insightful. Here is a link to the Guardian Article - https://www.theguardian.com/music/2007/mar/27/jazz It was made back when Hot House was called East Midlands Youth Jazz Orchestra, of course this will be explained for the readers. Thanks, --MattHHM (talk) 14:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MattHHM That article is just a passing mention, not in-depth and confers no notability. Theroadislong (talk) 14:27, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understand not all of these have international reach but could any of them be used: https://www.uknewsgroup.co.uk/the-key-fund-investing-in-hot-house-music-schools/ https://nationaljazzarchive.org.uk/explore/journals/jazz-uk/jazz-uk-62/1268337-jazz-uk-62-0004?q=JAZZ%20NEWS https://www.isaschools.org.uk/2018/04/20/ben-trumpets-his-way-to-musical-success https://www.staffordshire-live.co.uk/whats-on/whats-on-news/wil-pearson-screaming-kicks-big-1448301 Thanks, --MattHHM (talk) 14:38, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Asking for opinion about the title of a new article

Hi, I just created the article Verraco of the bridge, Salamanca, translating it from the Spanish Wikipedia. But now I'm thinking that the correct title should be: Verraco of the bridge (Salamanca), as in the Spanish version. I'm planning to move the page to that name, but I was hoping to get a second opinion or confirmation that this is right from a experienced editor here.

By the way, I'm not sure if these types of questions are appropriate for the Teahouse or if I should be asking in the Help desk.

Thanks again! Alan Islas (talk) 13:24, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, if there is only one "Verraco of the bridge" why would you need the added disambiguation? -- Otr500 (talk) 15:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Otr500, thanks for your reply. That is a good point. I think I was just following the title of the Spanish version, without questioning the reason, as you did.

It is true that including the name of the city where this statue is located does help understand what this is. The word "verraco" is not common in Spanish either. However, context is explained in the lead and article itself, so I guess it doesn't matter that the title may sound a bit cryptic for some readers, as long as there is not another one. I think I'll move the page to simply "Verraco of the bridge". --Alan Islas (talk) 23:43, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing w/ IPs (i.e. logged out)

This question has been on my mind the last few days. I see a lot of edits from pretty seasoned editors in a logged out state i.e. with their IPs rather than their user names.

Are there some scenarios when editing with IPs is more preferable than editing with user names? I can only think of deliberately wanting to remain anonymous, but, my thinking is an IP would give out more than an user name. Just not able to think of any justification.

PS: This question is not about questioning the option (of editing anonymously in a low friction manner) itself. But, trying to understand the rationale for why someone with an user name would edit using IPs.

Cheers. Ktin (talk) 15:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC) Ktin (talk) 15:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ktin: Each person will have their own reasons, but one possibility is that a user may be experienced but not have an account or the user may have forgotten to log in. You are correct that an IP address is less private than an account name. RudolfRed (talk) 15:34, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ktin: People who use shared computers (e.g., at a public library) probably find it easier to not have to log in every time, since they can't (and shouldn't) save their credentials. There used to be a security concern for those behind some corporate/private proxies (not sure if that's still the case). Some people do it for illegitimate reasons, too. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User page review request

I submitted my user page (in sandbox) for review back in May and I wanted to find out, if I am in the queue and if so how long will the process be for review and approval to post on wikipedia?

Thank you, Rfolk7X Rfolk7X (talk) 15:21, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft User:Rfolk7X/sandbox has not been submitted for review? You need to click the "submit" button. Theroadislong (talk) 15:30, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I took a quick look at Draft:7X Energy, Rfolk7X.

One possible issue is that a number of the currently cited sources seem to be based, in significant degree, on statements by the company 7X Energy or its officials. Such statements are, of course, not independent and stories largely based on such statements may not count as independent either. Evidence of significant investigation and analysis by the publication, even if a company statement is used as a starting point will generally render such a report independent for Wikipedia purposes. Several sources that are independent reliable sources and that each include significant coverage are generally required to satisfy WP:NCORP and have an article about a company.

Secondly, your user name suggests some connection with the company, and the article is largely Fromm the company PoV. What is your connection with the company, if any? Please review our guidelie on conflict of intere4st and our policy on paid editing. Note that a person who edits Wikipedia as part of his or her job responsibility (including as an unpaid intern) is still considered a "paid editor" for purposes of this policy, as is anyone receiving or expecting to receive any financial compensation for editing. SAnyone who fit5s the definition of a "paid editor" must disclose this as described in WP:PAID. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:25, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to make a video in your article?

How do you make videos in your article????????

Rishav134278 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rishav134278 (talk • contribs) 2020-08-05T16:42:47 (UTC)

Hello, Rishav134278, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm guessing that your question means "how do you upload a video and add it to an article?" The answer is that, just like any other media, you start by making sure that the copyright of the video is suitable for use on Wikipedia (most videos you find on the internet are not), and then you upload it to Wikimedia Commons using the Upload wizard. If you really mean "make" the video, then I'm afraid that Wikipedia can't help you: you'll need to use some external software. Also please have a look at image use policy: videos are not always appropriate for Wikipedia articles. --ColinFine (talk) 16:00, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rishav134278 If this is about your sandbox, please note that we already have an article about Milky Way. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:47, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy: Rishav13478 has since deleted Sandbox on Milky Way Galaxy and started one on a computer game. David notMD (talk) 20:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate articles, what to do?

I've come across two articles which are virtually identical, created by the same user: Lilienthal Large Biplane Glider and Lilienthal Large Biplane. It seems that both were created in Feb 2020, with one being accepted straight away, while the other went into drafts and was only published months later. A week ago I tagged both articles as dupes, and queried the whole thing with the creating editor, but have had no response. There's some work to be done on the article(s), but I don't know which one to edit, as I don't know which one will be kept (I'm assuming not both?). Unsure as to how to proceed — any guidance appreciated! TIA, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The final title should be the most common name for this biplane found in the literature. The second article will just be redirected to the this final title. Ruslik_Zero 19:04, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have done the redirection to Lilienthal Large Biplane, after making sure that all relevant info and references were copied, and the copying properly attributed (most of the articles were already exact or near-exact duplicates). If there is a later consensus that the title should include "glider", a move request can easily switch the two names. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:31, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, @DESiegel: I'll leave a note to that effect on the creator's talk page, in case they're wondering. Presumably the dupe tag can also now be removed? Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder, DoubleGrazing. I have now removed the tag about duplication from the article. I'll leave you to discuss with the creator, since you have interacted with that editor before. I did leave notes on both talk pages, and in the edit history. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:48, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @DESiegel: I wasn't trying to nudge you to do it (remove the tag), I genuinely meant to do it myself, but forgot. However, now that you've done it, I don't need to. :) Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The wiki as being quick has surpassed me

Where is the 5 minutes guide to successfully start a page? Hi years ago I successfully started some pages writing a couple of sentences. Now it seems overwhealmly complicated and I get lost in pages of info about how to write. Drafted two articele and both just deleted. An hour of wasted time? Where is the 5 minutes dummies section to get started. How to get into a dialog with whom canclede the articles etc? Thorsenrune (talk) 18:26, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As you do not have any deleted edits, please, clarify which articles you think have been deleted. Ruslik_Zero 18:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thorsenrune. The best overview of how to write an article is Your first article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The draft article Draft:Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi has not been deleted. It has been declined since it is unreferenced. You can add proper references and submit it again. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:48, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is evidence of only one of your drafts being Declined. Were you not signed in while working on a second draft? David notMD (talk) 20:23, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thorsenrune. A five-minute guide to creating an article is like a five-minute guide to running a marathon, or a five-minute guide to performing a violin concerto. Years ago, Wikipedia used to accept any old scrap that somebody wanted to write; now we are more concerned with verifying that when people add to our six million articles (thousands of which are seriously substandard) they add things that will actually improve Wikipedia. This is extremely difficult for a inexperienced editor, and often they will waste many more hours than one laboriously creating an article about a subject which fails Wikipedia's criteria for notability. My recommendation is always to spend a few weeks or months improving some existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works before they try it; and then to study your first article and start by finding the reliable independent sources, because if the sources don't exist, then any and all work that they put into their article will be wasted. --ColinFine (talk) 21:25, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Title of the topic "ISO 29110"

The title of the topic is "ISO 29110", it should be "ISO/IEC 29110". How can I change the title ? Claude Laporte (talk) 18:50, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Claude Laporte: Hi. If it is 100% uncontroversial, the page can renamed by any user who has an account older than four days, and has more than 9 edits. But in wikipedia terminology, "page renaming" is called as "page moving". So you should be able to see "move" option at the top of the page, if you are accessing wikipedia from a computer. But in 99% cases of the page moves, some other editor objects to the new title. So I would recommend you to go through this requested moves venue. Further details are there. If you still have doubts after going there, please post here. Regards, —usernamekiran (talk) 19:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hatnotes

Hello. I am definitely not a new user, but hatnotes do confuse me, a lot. I recently moved Omphaloskepsis to Navel gazing after closing a move discussion. Could someone please add a hatnote to Navel gazing stating something along the lines "for the fetish, see Navel fetishism", or "for paraphilia about navels, see Navel fetishism", I guess you got the idea lol. Thanks a lot in advance, —usernamekiran (talk) 19:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, usernamekiran, and welcome to the Teahouse. I added a hatnote to Navel gazing using {{for}}. {{about}} is also often used to create hatnotes. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot D. It is very much appreciated. See you around :) —usernamekiran (talk) 21:25, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to retrieve an account login to submit a draft?

Hello, I am working on a wiki for my company and would like to submit the draft to Wikipedia. However, it seems like the previous person who was working on the draft before me (no longer at the company) has already made an account and I would like to see how I can get into that account. I don't know the password or username but it seems like the username was under the company name. Any suggestions? 135.180.65.116 (talk) 19:34, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You cannot access an account created by someone else, you will need to create your own account for your own use, and you cannot grant anyone else access to it.

A "wiki" is a type of website, not an individual page on a website. You are working on a Wikipedia article. You should use Articles for Creation to submit the draft for review by an independent editor, but before you do, you must review and formally comply with the paid editing policy(this is a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory); you should also review conflict of interest 331dot (talk) 19:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IP editor. An account is for one unique person and one person only. You cannot use an account created by someone else. Accounts consisting of a company name are against policy and will be blocked if discovered. You need to open a new account and immediately make the mandatory Paid editing disclosure. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:42, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If that person created a draft, then it should exist and be available to you to edit. Try searching on Draft:Name of your company. However, if the content was on that editor's User page (a common beginner's error) or in their Sandbox, it may be harder to retrieve. David notMD (talk) 20:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

when is the event taking place

Sobayi (talk) 20:07, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sobayi: Welcome to Wikipedia. Are you looking for a Wikipedia event? Which one? We can't help you with non-Wikipedia stuff. RudolfRed (talk) 20:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to write in wikepidwia

Asaju shalom great (talk) 20:07, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Asaju shalom great: I have no idea how to write in wikepidwia. But if you'd like to write in Wikipedia instead

please see WP:YFA. --CiaPan (talk) 20:44, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Asaju shalom great: Welcome to Wikipedia. Check out the interactive learning game at WP:ADVENTURE. RudolfRed (talk) 20:46, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes

Hi Teahouse. I'm trying to add a footnote.

In here (ie in the Teahouse) the markup ^{[note 1]}, displays the footnote, but in my sandbox it doesn't. It shows the [note 1] superscript, but not the footnote text.

They're exactly the same, I copied and pasted. Utterly mystified. Can anyone throw any light on the subject?

Thanks Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 20:18, 5 August 2020 (UTC) Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 20:18, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ why don't notes display?

You haven't saved anything to your sandbox since 1 March. If you save the version which is causing you problems, we can look at it. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks David Biddulph. It's true I'm very out of practice. Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 21:57, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't have a {{reflist|group=note}} you won't see the ref txt, but will instead see an error message, as we had here in the Teahouse until another editor's recent edit; look back at this version. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, Maryanne Cunningham using {{#tag:ref|<content>}} is not the usual way to create a footnote. Using a pair of <ref>...</ref> tags is much more common. Also, unless you have at least two different kinds of footnotes, the group parameter is unneeded. Most articles have only source footnotes. Some also use informational notes, or other kinds, and then specifying the group can be useful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:12, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See Referencing for Beginners and Help:footnote for more information. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure why but I think I have seen less experienced editors do that before. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It will work, the #tag parser function can be used to invoke any HTML tag or specialized Wikipedia tag using HTML-format, such as <ref>. It is mostly used inside templates where the usual syntax will not work, or where the tag properties are to be supplied as parameters. I suspect some advice page or other uses it and is being copied, but the most common advice pages on this topic, WP:REFB, Help:footnote, and WP:CITE do not advise this method. If you meant groups, then Help:footnote does explain how to use them, for completeness, but most articles have no need or reason to use them. Some do. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:26, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks DESiegel. Actually, I am using both informational notes and citation references (the latter are easy, and behave themselves, or maybe I've just used them more). I copied the {{#tag:ref|<content>}} from another page, and it appears somewhere in Referencing for beginners. (But there's so much in Referencing for Beginners it's hard to know what's usual and what isn't). Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 21:57, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, Maryanne Cunningham, I would advise reading Help:Footnotes#Footnotes: groups, where it suggests using <ref group=groupname>Content</ref> for non-citation footnotes, but points out that if these notes are to be displayed, code such as {{reflist|group=groupname}} must be placed in an appropriate section, usually a different one from the section where the main {{reflist}} or <references/> tag is placed. Such a section might be titled "Notes" or perhaps "Informational notes", or some other suitable title might be used. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:15, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dublin Zoo wiki Page

Corrected a typo where a hippo had choked upon having caught a ball. The page says a "call", when I corrected this it was then removed and deemed unconstructive. Furthermore I corrected a typo wherein it was said of the lions that "these spread in 1857". I corrected this to "these bred in 1857" as 'spread' makes no sense. This was also removed and deemed unconstructive.

Both of these corrections are in fact construction and I see no reason why they would've been flagged! 78.18.231.134 (talk) 23:50, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected them again, hopefully they aren't reversed this time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.18.231.134 (talk) 23:57, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like a good edit to me. @TheSunIsAStar147147:, what's your reasoning for reverting it? dibbydib 00:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

it was a mistake. i initially thought it was bad, but i was wrong. sometimes I mistake-revert. apologies for that TheSunIsAStar147147 (talk) 00:07, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Music

Can a page of ALL heavy metal bands with pictures be created titled Heavy Metal Bands ? Ddemod (talk) 01:39, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ddemod. It's not clear what you're asking? Do you want to create an article called "Heavy Metal Bands" ? There already exists articles titled List of heavy metal bands and Heavy metal music. For reference, Heavy metal bands redirects to the former, while Heavy metal band redirects to the latter; so, I'm not sure any new articles about this are needed.

Does your question have to do with adding images to an exisitng Wikipedia article? If that's the case, then whether it's OK to do so will first depend on the copyright licensing of the files you want to add and then depend on whether a WP:CONSENSUS has been previously established regarding image use in the article. Have you tried discussing your idea on the talk page of the article to which you want to add these images? -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:26, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another point, Ddemod, is that Wikipedia rarely has lists of "all" anythings. Nearly all list articles are of items which meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Most heavy metal bands in the world (like most bands of any type, most artists, most companies etc) do not meet these criteria. --ColinFine (talk) 10:21, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to delete redirect from my sandbox?

I created a page in my sandbox, eventually redirected on mainspace. Now, how to delete sandbox page and that redirect?? ❯❯❯Praveg^A=9.8 03:26, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pravega. You should be able to just remove the redirect from the sandbox, by just clicking "Edit" and then blanking the page. You can also add {{db-author}} to the sandbox if you want the page deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pravega: WP:RTOA should help you, but instead of altering the redirect link, you simpy blank the page. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:08, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a cover for a music album

I know this isn't wikimedia but I wanted to upload an album cover. Can anyone explain it to me in details. And giving me the wikitext will also be needed IDCWII (talk) 04:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IDCWII. Can you provide the name of the article to which you want to add the cover art? Most album cover art is considered to be protected by copyright which makes it quite tricky to use when it comes to Wikipedia articles because it's considered to be non-free content. Wikipedia's non-free content use policy generally allows non-free album cover to be uploaded per item 1 of WP:NFCI, but this is generally only when the album cover is going to be used for primary identification purposes in the main infobox or at the top of a stand-alone article about the album in questions. Using the file in other articles or in other ways is very hard to justify and therefore almost never allowed as explained here. So, if you can provide the name of the article where you want to use the album cover, it would be a bit easier for someone to try and assess whether that would be OK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:49, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need help Developing an article

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The article in question has been deleted per WP:G11 and the OP has been blocked per WP:SOCK; so, there's unlikley anything further going to be accomplished here at the Teahouse. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:22, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone! I hope you're having a good day. I need help from you all to develop my article JD Software. It's a software development group and I really want to write about it for some reason. I just got a {{db-notability-notice}} on the article, and I want you to help me develop it so I can get the notice removed. Any help will be appreciated. Thank you! ThisIsMyWikipediaName111 (talk) 05:02, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ThisIsMyWikipediaName111. Are you connected to this company in any way? The reason I'm asking is because I noticed that you've uploaded File:Jdsoftware.png to Wikimedia Commons and are claiming that it's your "own work"? Assuming that is really the company's logo and assuming that it's your own work, then that indicates at least an WP:APPARENTCOI with respect to anything written about this company on Wikipedia. So, if you're connected in some way, then please carefully read through Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (particularly the part about WP:FCOI).

If you've got no real connection to the company and just want to develop an article about it, then perhaps you'll be able to find someone at WP:SOFTWARE or WP:COMPANIES who might be able to help you do so. The first thing that you or anyone else is going to need to do though is find much better sources to establish the company's Wikipedia notability per Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) because the ones currently cited in the article don't even come close to meeting WP:CORPDEPTH and are not even considered reliable sources for Wikipedia's purposes.

Finally, if you're not connected to company and you didn't actually create it's logo, you shouldn't really be claiming the logo as your own work. Only the copyright holder can do that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:43, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Marchjuly! Wow, thanks for your quick response! Actually, I am connected to the subject. That means I need to disclose COI right? That's fine to me. And the logo, I've gained permission from the owner to upload it to Wikimedia Commons. I don't really understand about uploading stuff to Commons, that's why I made that mistake. Sorry for that. But anyways, thank you for responding! ThisIsMyWikipediaName111 (talk) 05:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you for clarying your connection. Please follow the instructions in WP:COI#How to disclose a COI. Make sure you comply with WP:PAID if you're being compensated in any way for your edits; undisclosed paid editing is prohibitted by wmf:Terms of Use and those who do and are discovered end up being blocked.

As for the logo file, it's not enough for the copyright holder to say it's OK for you to upload the logo; they have to give their WP:CONSENT to basically allow anyone anywhere in the world to download the file at anytime for any purpose, including commercial and derivative use. Please see c:COM:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder for more details on how they can do this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:05, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)@ThisIsMyWikipediaName111: The sources in this article do not establish how this company meets WP:NCORP.

Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Secondary?
https://jdsoftware.fandom.com/wiki/JD_Software_Wiki	Appears to be an Independent Wiki	User-Generated	Startpage of a Wiki.	Tertiary source
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/JD-DOS	Wikimedia Foundation Wiki	User-Generated Wiki	A book with 4 pages.	Actually probbably already tertiary
https://jdsoftware.fandom.com/wiki/Programs	Appaers to be the only page in said wiki	User-Generated	A single word.	Tertiary
http://jdsoftware.rf.gd/index.php/Development_Team	Subjects own website		More about the staff members, not the company	Primary source (subject's website)

To prevent an admin from hitting the delete button, one would have to add sources that are reliable independent of the subject and have some coverage of the subject. If such sources can't be found, its probbably WP:TOOSOON. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:01, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you for all your help! I really appreciate it, and you know what? The article might actually be too soon to be on Wikipedia. I'm gonna look for more sources, but if I find it impossible, I might delete the page myself, or abandon it. But anyways, I really appreciate all your help! Thank you! ThisIsMyWikipediaName111 (talk) 06:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot delete the article; only an adminstrator can delete a page. Sometimes blanking a page can be done when you created the page and are pretty much the only person to have ever edited it, but I wouldn't suggest you do that here and have reverted your blanking of the page. The article has been tagged for speedy deletion per WP:A7; so, if it's not improved fairly quickly, it's likely going to end up deleted sometime soon.

Now, if you want sincerely want to try and work on improving the article, perhaps you can request that it be draftified instead of being deleted. This will give you time to work on improving the draft and looking for better sources. Then, when you think the draft is ready to become an article, you can submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review. You still will need to declare your COI or PAID connection, but it will be OK for you to work on the draft and try to bring it up to article standards. If you think that's something you might want to try, then perhaps one of the administrators who are also Teahouse hosts can drafity the article for you. You can also post a request on the article's talk page, explaining your COI and that you would like the article draftified so that you can continue to work on it.

Finally, the template {{Connected contributor}} should be added to the top of article talk pages, not to articles; so, I moved the one you added to the talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:01, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wrong file uploaded by mistake

Hi! I just got to know I had uploaded wrong file on "Wikimedia Commons" which were used in 2 different subjects on Wikipedia. I have deleted them from from Wikipedia where they were used, but i am not aware how to delete it from Wikimedia commons. I had saved the image file only for reference as i had to upload similar image file to make a topic better ( Randomly selected from community portal) Pls guide me how to delete the image file from Wikimedia commons. ( I need to do that on urgent basis because the uploaded file(by mistake) might be a copyright issue. Thanks in advance. Shekhar in (talk) 07:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shekhar in. If you just uploaded the file to Commons, then you can reuquest that it be speedily deleted per c:COM:CSD#G7. If more than seven days have passed since you uploaded the file, however, then you will need to request the the file be deleted per c:COM:DR. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:46, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help, but i'm still not sure where to make that request. I've requested the deletion in the edit section of the file. Is this what was required or I need to make that request somewhere else? Pls guide. Thanks again for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shekhar in (talk • contribs) 08:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Shekhar in: You may just copy and past the following in the edit section: {{SD|G7}}. If you give us the link to the image, we can also check if you did it right. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:11, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @ Ganbaruby I did it write & its deleted . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shekhar in (talk • contribs) 10:05, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to create a new language Wikipedia?

I want to create a new language Wikipedia. How do I do it? Science Wiki Guy (talk) 07:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC) Science Wiki Guy (talk) 07:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Science Wiki Guy. See meta:Language committee/Handbook (requesters). You didn't name the language. See meta:Requests for new languages#Wikipedia for existing requests. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:55, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Telugu Language Science Wiki Guy (talk) 08:48, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiki-Nihaal: The Telugu Wikipedia already exists at te.wikipedia.org. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:03, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Translation of existing article from German into English

I have been tasked with the translation of an existing Wikipedia article from German into English. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handschriftencensus Is there anything different about the process of publishing an article in this case? The sources are in German language, would this present any problem? Hroberth Dunbar (talk) 08:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hroberth Dunbar: Hello, fellow translator! The process would be exactly the same: the subject still needs to be notable enough for an article to be written (regardless if it exists in other languages), you can still submit through the article wizard for another editor to check, and it still needs to meet the three core content policies (neutral point of view, verifiability, no original research). German sources are not a problem; an English source is not better or worse, but they're weighed equally. The only downside is that it might make it harder for other editors to verify your content if they can't read German. Good luck! ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:01, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One more point, Hroberth Dunbar: you say you have been "tasked" with the translatio. Generally the only people who would "task" somebody with translating a Wikipedia article are people who are connected with the subject of the article. If this is the case, they, and hence the person they have given the task to, have a conflict of interest: you need to read about this and make suere you comply. Further, if this is in any way part of your employment (whether actually paid or not), you will classed as a paid editor, and must make the corresponding declaration. --ColinFine (talk) 10:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ColinFine and Ganbaruby, I created a user page which details that I work at the Institute at the University of Marburg which hosts the project. I will submit a paid contribution disclosure with the article. Is there anything else I should know?

Courtesy ping:ColinFine and Ganbaruby on behalf of OP (unformatted/unsigned). Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:46, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My article about York von Heimburg was not accepted

I just translated the article from the German wikipedia https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/York_von_Heimburg, where it has been online quite some time. What can I do, that the english version will be accepted too? Thank you for your help, Angela Aschiller1211 (talk) 08:49, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aschiller1211: The reason that your draft at User:Aschiller1211/sandbox was declined was because the subject doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability policy for people. Just because an article exists in another language does not mean that it should be created on the English Wikipedia. You'll need to add more reliable sources that demonstrate that the subject is notable, and because this is a biography of a living person, you'll need to attribute all infromation to such reliable sources. Also, in your edit summary, you say that the draft was written "on behalf of York von Heimburg". If you are closely related or being paid by von Heimburg to write the article, you'll need to disclose this relationship. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answer. I disclosed in my user space https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aschiller1211 that I do work for York von Heimburg as I am PR consultant for the company IDG in Germany. Which additional disclosure do I have to make? Angela

@Aschiller1211: Good start. First, take a look at the conflict of interest guideline and realize that while you are not banned fro writing the article, it is very difficult for you to write in a neutral manner because of your close association. Also see WP:FAMOUS, which is an essay describing why you might not want to have an article written. If you still want to write the article, figure out if the subject meets the notability policy for people. If the person doesn't, then it's best for you to not waste your time editing the draft, as it is likely to be deleted. Then, take your current draft and add reliable sources that demonstrate this notability. Look for independent sources that are not affiliated with the subject, like newspapers or books, and not PR releases or the company's website itself. Attribute all of this information in the article to these reliable sources, making sure to stay as neutral as possible with your tone and word choice. Then, you can submit again! Do not submit before all of these points are addressed, ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:45, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Aschiller1211. The formal declaration required is explained at paid editing. Also, remember that Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything that von Heimburg says about himself, or that people associated with him have said, whether directly, or as reported in interviews or articles based on press releases. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with him, and not prompted or fed information by him, have chosen to publish about him. --ColinFine (talk) 09:49, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Boutitboi

having trouble getting Wikipedia page approval i real your message how can i get your assistance sir? Boutitboi (talk) 09:11, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Boutitboi, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not quite sure I understand your question. If you're wondering why your draft at User:Boutitboi/sandbox was not accepted, it's because the subject doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability policy for people. Because this is a biography of a living person, you'll need to attribute all infromation to reliable sources. On a separate note, your username makes me suspect that you may be closely related to the subject. Please read WP:COI and make sure to disclose any relationship and keep in mind that articles must be written in a neutral point of view - that is, not being written in an overly promotional manner. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:28, 6 August 2020 (UTC) i was wondering can you help me edit the Wikipedia page that i'm having problems with, how much do you charge for your assistance with getting this Wikipedia approved???[reply]

Hello, Boutitboi. This is a volunteer project. While there are people who will take your money for editing Wikipedia, they are either ignorant or dishonest, and I advise you to avoid them. The fact that you are willing to pay somebody to edit Benjamin Boi (I presume that is the article you are talking about?) suggests that you are here not to build an encyclopaedia, but for promotion, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. The article is likely to be deleted because it is a copyright violation. --ColinFine (talk) 10:43, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editor now blocked indefinitely for promotion and misuse of talk page. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:28, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are opinion pieces from journalists of 'deprecated outlet' banned ?

My recent edit to NDTV was reverted because 2 of the 3 citation to the claim was opinion pieces written by journalists of a RW News outlet. Is this justified ? User:श्रीमान २००२ (User talk:श्रीमान २००२) 10:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, श्रीमान २००२. If a source itself has been deprecated, then I would not expect any content from it to be used as a reliable Source on Wikipedia. (A good example here in the UK is that of the WP:DAILYMAIL newspaper where any references used from that newspaper (even to the most innocuous of stories) are being expunged from this encyclopaedia, following a decision not to accept it as reliable source in any way. Opinion pieces from any newspaper always have to be treated with extreme caution because they are, as the name suggests, just opinion of one person, and are often biased or not 'mainstream' and are certainly not presented by that newspaper with full editorial control and oversight. So an opinion piece from a deprecated source is inevitably going to be treated with extreme distrust, and be swiftly removed. Does that make sense? Nick Moyes (talk) 12:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Moyes: Thanks for the reply, I just wanted to confirm that if such opinion pieces are published in reliable newspaper/magazines (as was in my case) will they we considered RS ? User:श्रीमान २००२ (User talk:श्रीमान २००२) 04:07, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My tuppenceworth: they would be considered Reliable Sources for the opinions of the writers of the pieces, but not for actual facts about the subjects concerned.

Such an opinion might be admissible in a Wikipedia article if the opinion-piece writer were particularly eminent in, or relevant in relation to, something to do with the Wikipedia article's subject, but since a major purpose of opinion pieces is often to take a contrarian stance and foment discussion (so as to increase the host newspaper's circulation or prominence), occasions when this would actually be useful Wikipedially are probably rare. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.121.160.95 (talk) 04:38, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to add images in a page

Champion's BOSS (talk) 13:32, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to add image in page Champion's BOSS (talk) 13:32, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Champion's BOSS, and welcome to the Teahouse. It would be much easier to help you if you told us which article you are wishing to add an image to, and (more importantly) where the image comes from. If the image is already in Wikimedia Commons, it is easy; if it is an image that you took yourself, it is nearly as easy - you just have to upload it first; if it's an image you found somewhere on the internet, it is more difficult, and may be impossible. Uploading images has the full story, but if you told us about the image we might be able to advise you. --ColinFine (talk) 14:32, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Endorsements

Can someone please provide me with all the information needed for political endorsements. For something such as a Congressional race, there is not as much of secondary coverage for an endorsement. If Twitter is sourced can the tag Template:Primary source incline be used? Does the criteria for a Twitter endorsement differ in regards to the Presidential campaigns vs. a Congressional Race? Pennsylvania2 (talk) 14:45, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pennsylvania2 and welcome to the Teahouse. We don't, as far as i know, have a specific guideline on political endorsements. But I would,say6 they should not be mentioned in any article unless they have been discussed in reliable secondary sources. I could post on my social media that I endorse this candidate or that one, but mentioning that in a candidate or campaign article would obviously be undue weight. Even if a notable person makes such a statement on social media, if no independent secondary source reports it, I think it is still undue weight to mention it. Even with a secondary source, there can be consideration of whether it is appropriate to include, and it should not be automatic. If that means no endorsements are mentioned inn the article, so be it. WP:NOTNEWS, and Wikipedia's purpose is not to be a catalog of campaign events. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:55, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What if, for example, Kamala Harris sends out a Tweet endorsing someone. She's clearly notable. Would her Tweet not be notable, though?Pennsylvania2 (talk) 15:39, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, Pennsylvania2. What a notable person tweets is not automatically notable, any more than what they had for lunch. Remember that a Wikipedia article should be based close to 100% on what independent people have published about the subject. Apart from uncontroversial factual information like places and dates, Wikipedia isn't interested in what the subject (or anybody else) has said, published, or done, unless somebody independent has talked about it in a reliable organ. --ColinFine (talk) 16:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previously Deleted Article: Draft:Evan Luthra

I reviewed Draft:Evan Luthra and saw that it had been previously in article space and had been deleted. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evan Luthra. I declined the draft, and have been asked by User:Fayssaloss to explain the reasons for my decline, and would like the comments of other experienced editors. My primary reason was simply that I seldom accept a draft when there has already been an article but the article has been deleted. The instructions for AFC reviewers include that the reviewer should make a judgment that the article is likely to survive a deletion debate. If there already was a deletion debate, it is likely that another one would be similar to the past one. I see that a comment has been inserted about the past two years, and I have not read the deleted article, but it looks like it is probably more of the same. Should I request that the deleted article be made available for me to compare against? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Robert McClenon. I've just emailed you a copy of the last of the four separate deleted version of this article. (I'm not aware of any other way to give you access). The current draft still seems very promotional, with some references giving the briefest of mentions whilst others, like the Daily Mail, are deprecated, and others still are just interviews. Bearing in mind its history and promotional intent, I might err on the side of declining again. (I haven't gone through every reference, but they all seem much of a muchness). Nick Moyes (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert McClenon I would agree with a decline as the draft now stands, but not primarily because of the old AfD. Indeed I wouldn't give that much weight, the main issue was notability, and the ordinary review process already addresses that. Two years can be a significant time and notability can develop during it. I do not that a draft should be automatically or near-automatially declined because of a previous AfD, particularly one as long ago as this. If there are valid sources more recent than the AfD, and if the sourcing is good enough to warrant acceptance if there had not been an AfD, and the isues raised in the AfD are addressed, then I would accept. In a marginal case, the prior AfD should be a point against acceptance, in my view, but only in a marginal case.

The current draft, however, does not seem to have many cites sources which are reliable, independent, and include significant coverage. i would decline on those grounds, if reviewing today. If bettr sources are found and added, and things like the Daily Mail removed, I would be willing to accept. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, User:Nick Moyes - I have reviewed the deleted article, and the draft doesn't add much to the deleted article. Both the draft and the deleted article describe someone who is famous for being famous. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:DESiegel - I respectfully disagree that I should not give the deleted article much weight. As you said, the deletion was for (lack of) notability. As an RFC reviewer, I should take into account whether a draft is likely to survive an AFD. This one already did not. My assessment as to whether the draft satisfies notability should be informed by my knowledge of what the community has already decided constitutes notability. They have already been skeptical in the case of Luthra. So I should give the history of a deletion debate considerable weight. You mention the age of the AFD, two years ago. It appears to me that not much has really changed. Also, if there was a previous deletion, I really should consider whether the resubmission is a marginal case. So I respectfully disagree as to how much weight to give to a previous deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I publish a content from my personal sandbox as a new page

Hello, I have completed drafting a page on a contemporary author in my personal sandbox. I want to publish the same content now. How should I proceed? Please help. I do not want to make any wrong live edits. I have done that mistake once earlier, hence I want to be more careful now. Wikipagebanai (talk) 15:57, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wikipagebanai, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added a header to User:Wikipagebanai/sandbox, with a button you can pick to submit it for review. I haven't looked at any of your sources, but it looks to me from their titles as if several of your them are not independent, or not reliable (eg anything with 'blogspot.com' is probably not reliable). Please have a look at WP:CSMN. --ColinFine (talk) 16:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much ColinFine . I have submitted the article for review as per your instruction. Wikipagebanai (talk) 17:05, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted it, Wikipagebanai, but you don't appear to have followed my advice yet about looking at your sources. To be honest, the review is likely to take a long time - until somebody sees it who either speaks Bengali, or is willing to spend time using a translation program to review your sources. I don't think there is anything you can do to speed it up, but you can improve your chances of getting it accepted by looking critically at your sources. Again, I'm just looking at the titles, but it is unlikely that a blog will be regarded a reliable source, and antything from the publishers or that says "Author at ... " are unlikely to be independent. The Worldcat sources appear to be papers by Basak. None of these sources I have mentioned contribute at all to meeting Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Are any of the sources places where people who have no connection with Basak have chosen to write at length about her? If not, then your draft does not establish notability, and any time you or anybody else spend on the draft will be wasted. --ColinFine (talk) 10:00, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How can I get an AFC review?

I re-submitted an article for creation (Draft:Centerstone) in early June and am awaiting review. It had been deleted but I worked with another Wiki user to ensure it met all of the guidelines this time. I also added it to some wiki projects, but it is still awaiting review. Any tips are much appreacited! Rlambert327 (talk) 16:03, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rlambert327, and welcome to the Teahouse. As it says at the bottom of Draft:Centerstone, "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,196 pending submissions waiting for review". I know this can be frustrating, but in the meantime, how about broadening your experience of Wikipedia and adding to its value by improving some of our other six million articles? --ColinFine (talk) 16:18, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, ColinFine : I have made some edits here and there and will continue to do so! I will try to be more patient. ☺Rlambert327 (talk) 16:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you associate yourselves with a lot of criminal activities or is it only the ones you can avoid with such a 'genius' position? Guilt by association does fit aiding criminals

2600:1011:B14E:CD8F:8DB1:9169:9D76:E2E9 (talk) 17:12, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you have a question about how to edit Wikipedia? That is what this page is for. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Templates

How to get a template for a new article? Sharae Davis (talk) 17:15, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sharae Davis and welcome to the Teahouse. That depends. There are many different templates, for many different purposes. Many articles do not need or use any templates. What kind of template did you want, and for what purpose? Perhaps the most common template to use in an article as an infobox, but there are many other kinds. Please give more details so we can be of help. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:21, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hello, Sharae Davis, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm guessing that you don't mean Template the way we use it in Wikipedia: rather, you're looking for an outline for the shape of an article? The trouble is that getting the format of an article right is an insignificant issue beside the much more challenging matter of getting the sources. New editors who plunge straight into the very difficult task of creating a new article before they have spent some weeks or months getting used to how Wikipedia works tend to have a disappointing and frustrating time. Vey often they start writing before looking for sources; and if they cannot find suitable sources, then all the work they may have put in is wasted. Hundreds of articles are deleted every day, many of them by inexperienced editors. I suggest you look at your first article, to get an idea of the scale of the task. --ColinFine (talk) 17:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I put a manual template into an article? Sharae Davis (talk) 17:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In Wikipedia Sharae Davis, a template is a special page which can be inserted into another page, often with parameters. It can simply provide a piece of boilerplate, like {{welcome}} or provide complex conditional replacements, like {{cite web}}. If you mean that kind of template it is placed into an article in the source editor by placing its name in double curly brackets ({{ }}), along with any parameters. So if there was a template Template:Example, it could be used by putting {{Example}} into an article (or other page) or perhaps {{Example|Value1|Value2|Value3}} or {{Example|parm1=Value1|parm2=Value2|parm3=Value3}}, depending on the parameters supported by a particular template.

If by a manual template you mean simply a preformatted text skeleton, not using Wikipedia's template transclusion mechanism, one can write that in any test editor one pleases, adn simply paste it in to an article or page in edit mode. We don't are how you get text into an article, it is the final result that matters.

But in either case, to give a really helpful answer, we need to know what the purpose of your template would be, and probably what article or potential article you have in mind. Then we can give much more specific help, which would probably be more useful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh in future please ask followup questions here at the Teahouse by adding to the existing thread, not by starting a fresh thread, unless the previous thread has already been archived. Thank you. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Contributing written thesis for consideration as resource of possible interest to Wikipedia community

Several years ago I published an open-source Master's thesis, which receives consistent interest and downloading. I was wondering if perhaps this freely-available open-source document might be of interest for those who utilize Wikipedia for research. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiknave (talk • contribs)

Hello, Wikiknave, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid it is unlikely that your thesis is appropriate for Wikipedia, as Wikipedia does not accept original research. If some of the content of the thesis is suitable for a Wikipedia article, i.e. it is a neutral summary of reliable published sources, but does not make any attempt to advance its own arguments or draw any conclusions, and if it is licensed in a way compatible with Wikipedia (eg CC-BY-SA, that will allow anybody to reuse or alter it for any purpose as long as they attribute it) then you could copy that part of the text into a Wikipedia article; but otherwise no. It is possible that it might be appropriate for Wikibooks - I don't know enough about that project to be sure. --ColinFine (talk) 18:35, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikiknave: You didn't say what article(s) it might relate to, or provide a link to it. But if you genuinely feel it might be a resource that could interest editors working on a particular topic (even if they don't use it as a WP:RS), you could always drop a note on that article's talk page and link to it. There's a good chance - at the very least - that your thesis contains some stonking references that could prove useful pointers. From an academic perspective, it's essential that your thesis is your own original research, containing your own opinions and conclusions. But that type of WP:OR is precisely what Wikipedia studiously avoids using as a reference. But it's a kind offer and possibly worth linking to on the relevant page. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User page clearly representing an organisation

I have come across a user page which obviously represents a (seemingly non-profit) organisation, which I am aware is not allowed under the username policy. However, the username does not and instead suggests an individual person. What should be done regarding this? Link is here[1]. Yellowleaf23 (talk) 18:05, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yellowleaf23: Welcome to the Teahouse and thank you for the report. Among other things, User:Environmentalist101 is a copyright infringement and will be deleted shortly.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:08, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yellowleaf23 I have deleted User:Environmentalist101 as a direct copy of an outside website under G12. If it had not been a copyright infringement, it might well have been speedy deleted as promotional under G11. If neither of those had applied, and it looked like a valid attempt at a Wikipedia article, I might move it to draft space for further development, and informed the creator of what I had done, with a link to WP:USERPAGE and a brief explanation of what a user page should be for. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:14, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up to How do you I stop the Mental Disorder article from constantly being re-edited to equate mental disorders with mental illness, when they are not the same thing?

I need to have a discussion about this issue because my changes keep getting reversed and I do not want to get in trouble, but I need this article changed, so please some talk to me about it. Sincerely, Dr. Christopher Binetti Cbinetti (talk) 19:10, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Cbinetti: You have already started a discussion at Talk:Mental_disorder and that is the place to get consenus on your proposed changes. RudolfRed (talk) 19:14, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Still Life (film)

Victor Schmidt wrote to me and it took me to here. I've been trying to put my film The Still Life (2007) on IMDB for years. Mr. Schmidt said IMDB is not good enough because user generated. I also included rotten tomatoes and Amazon. The film was released by Warner Bros. It is an EASY find on the internet. Can someone help me get the page up? Rifken (talk) 19:15, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rifken and welcome to the Teahosue. I see that you have started a draft about The Still Life at User:Rifken/sandbox. At present it is a long way from being an acceptabel Wikipedia article. It is a one-sentence description of the film, plus a cast list. It is supported by a cite tomteh IMDB, plus Rotten Tomatoes. In order for there to be an article about this film, it must be shown to be Notable a term that Wikipedia uses in a special sense. While there are several ways to demonstrate the notability of a film, as described in our guideline on the notability of films, the most usual and desirable is to cite several sources, each of which is reliable, each of which is independent of the film and its cre4ators, and each of which contains significant coverage of the film. Mainstream critical reviews (not trivial mentions, several paragraphs about the film at least) can serve as such sources. So can other discussion of the film in reliable sources. Blogs and fan sites will not help. Neither will the IMDB, or other wikis, or fan fora (because they are user-generated, they are not considered reliable). Amazon and other sites selling copies of the film will not help, because they have a motive to promote the film so they can sell more copies, they are not considered independent. Sources do not need to be online, although it is helpful if they are.

Also, you write of "my film"; if you wrote or produced this film or were at all closely associated with it, you have a conflict of interest. Please read the linked page, and declare your connection with the film as described three, if you have one.

Please remember that many released films, perhaps the majority, are not notable and will never have an article on Wikipedia. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:55, 6 August 2020 (UTC) @Rifken: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:55, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for helpful feedback and suggestions

I have talked with multiple long-time wiki users and some say the article I am working on (Draft:Centerstone) meets all guidelines while others decline it from being published. I have voiced my "conflicts of interest" on my user page and have tried to model this entry after other non-profit organization pages. I've also used multiple sources from external publications to back the information I am providing. I'm told that it contains advertising language, but no one has been able to pinpoint exactly where the problem is. I am looking for any and all helpful feedback so that I can get this approved! Draft:Centerstone Thank you! Rlambert327 (talk) 19:21, 6 August 2020

Hello, Rlambert327 and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know who told you that Draft:Centerstone meets all guidelines (I don't see any such comment on the draft, its talk page, or your user talk page) but I disagree. The tone of the draft is, in my view, quite promotional. Such text as Centerstone has grown through mergers and affiliations to include more than 150 physical locations in six states (Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky, and Tennessee) and a nationwide network of telehealth and remote providers and Centerstone formally created its Research Institute in 2008 to further the organization's aim to advance the delivery of mental health care. and others are classic marketing language, and not at all appropriate for a neutral Wikipedia article. The currently cited sources seem to be a mix of local coverage, probably based on company press releases, trivial directory listings (Bloomberg), comments about its mergers that do not discuss its operations, routine coverage of the appointment of an officer of the organization, other tings based on PR, and perhaps 1 or 2 useful sources. There must be several independent and reliable sources, each of which should offer significant coverage. I don't see that at the moment.

Also, when a draft is declined, the reviewer is saying that it is not yet ready, and you have more work to do. If you disagree, reach out to the reviewer or ask here or at the AfC help desk. Otherwise, work on fixing the issues before you resubmit. Resubmitting without making any changes wastes the time of all involved, and tends to annoy reviewers. Remember, you may be paid for this, but the reviewers are volunteers. They are under no obligation to review your work at all. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this feedback, DES. I can address those two points you mentioned, but I don't see how that is any different from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochsner_Health_System which uses news articles and their own website as sources or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acadia_Healthcare which does the same thing. Rlambert327 (talk) 21:08, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

other poor quality articles exist is not a good argument. Theroadislong (talk) 21:16, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please note, Rlambert327, that both of the article you link two have maintanence tags, adn might be nominated for deletion if they are not improved. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New additions

I want to suggest several additions to Wikipedia. How can I do that?

There were three pioneer women in motor racing journalism in Mexico, the first one was Abril del Río in daily newspaper La Jornada, she still covers amateur sports and car racing. She is the only one lady to have FIA FI accreditations for all Mexican F1 Grand Prix of the second and third era.

The second is the late F1 commentator Patricia Brault, who did so in Imevision TV Network (now TV Azteca). Also with FIA F1 accreditations.

The third one is Rosa Elena Torres (who was the first one to work in a full time basis only in motorsports journalism in Mexico and the most international of all. She was correspondent in Autosport (UK), Motoring News (UK), On Track (US), Auto y Pista (Mexico) and The Paddock Magazine (UK) among other magazines worldwide.

Only Abril and Rosa are still alive.

Also, there's a drag motorcycle driver and car racing driver called Jorge Mendoza.

All were active mainly in the 80s and 90s and there aren't many references about them on-line. However, about Patricia there should be videos in TV Azteca. About all others, there should be references maily in magazines and newspapers.

(Forever Jose (talk) 19:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)) Forever Jose (talk) 19:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Forever Jose, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can suggest them at requested articles, but the truth is that the take-up from there is very low. Wikipedia is a volunteer project, so people work on what they choose. If you want there to be an article on a particular subject, (and you can demonstrate that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, otherwise it is a waste of everybody's time) your best bet is either to write it your self (possible, but difficult for inexperienced editors) or interest somebody else enough that they do it. One possibility is to ask at appropriate WikiProjects if somebody is interested - you might try WikiProject Motorsport, WikiProject Mexico, or WikiProject Women in Red. If you want to give it a go yourself, start by reading your first article. --ColinFine (talk)

Thank you @ColinFine:

Priscila Perales

A few years ago, I read about Priscila Perales in Wikipedia (English and Spanish) and most of the information and a photo, was about another lady that somebody posted instead of Priscila's info.

That situation lasted a long time and later was solved, but those pages still need more work. I wanted to edit them but I had no time. With the pandemic, I'm taking advantage I'm at home and I've wrote a draft in my computer about her with real information.

I started editing the page in Wikipedia, but every time I did so, everything was deleted. They claimed it wasn't referenced information (I don't know yet how to add that), and in one edit I wrote the date of birth was in Wikipedia in Spanish and still wasn't accepted.

On top of that, I've added her books with ISBN and they were deleted too. However, for another beauty queen (Lupita Jones), her books are mentioned in her Wikipedia page.

What did I do wrong? I feel that wrong information prevailed more time in Perales page and now that I want to post real one, it's not possible.

Any suggestions? Should I forget this edit and pursue others?

(Forever Jose (talk) 19:41, 6 August 2020 (UTC)) Forever Jose (talk) 19:41, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Information may be true, but adding if requires verification in the form of references. Hence you additions reverted. See Help:Referencing for beginners. David notMD (talk) 20:26, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Byron Janis's Wikipedia profile omits the name of his first wife, with whom he had his only child

Wife missing from profile 2A01:4C8:485:DB41:8CF:9DE6:38E9:A195 (talk) 20:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Byron Janis TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:37, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP editor. Welcome to the Teahouse. It is in there - first wife June Wright (mentioned in the infobox, but no citation); second wife Maria Cooper. I agree that it's unclear who he had the child with. If ever you feel something is missing from an article and you have a reliable source to support it, you are free to either edit the article or leave a message on that particular article's talk page for someone else to check and insert if it's a good source. Thanks for raising your concerns. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC) [reply]

Well done for subsequently posting your concerns at the talk page, where I've repeated my answer. Any form of published obituary or biography that you can unearth may well give that information. If you find a source, do please post it there. Thanks again, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, how do I use the service award progress template?

Hi, guys,
I want to display my service award progress using the service award progress template. (I have it on my user page; take a look at the code for it.) However, it's not working. Maybe I haven't given it the right attributes? The instructions say that I need to put in the year, month, date of my registration, and the number of edits that I have made. Please take a look at the template in the link provided. However, my template is malfunctioning. Please take a look at my user page for more information. Thank you. Friend 505 22:59, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Friend505: I don't see that you provided |edits=. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:50, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Hi Friend505. I think the template you added is working as intended. It might look like it's not working because you've added so many templates to your user page that they they are overlapping and getting in each others way. trying removing all of the templates you added except {{Service award progress}}, click "Show preview" and then see how the template looks. Maybe by stripping away some of the other stuff you can better see if the template is doing what you wanted to do. I did notice, however, that you didn't include the |edits= paramater in the template. Try adding that and see if things look better.

Now some general advice. Userpages can be an important way for us to let others know about our Wikipedia activities and other stuff we might find interesting; however, if we really want other editors to see us as being WP:HERE, then the best way to do that is to focus on actually trying to improve articles. There are over six million articles and pretty much all of them can be improved in someway. Even if all you do is simply try and correct spelling or grammar errors, or try to find citations for articles which aren't very well sourced, you'll being doing quite a lot to help improve Wikipedia. Many expereinced editors don't even bother creating a userpage or only create only a very basic one just for show, but instead focus on trying to find ways to make Wikipedia better. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: Thanks for your help, Marchjuly. (I know I have been repeatedly told to focus on editing articles instead of asking for help and stuff like that; I will start to write and improve articles. I hope you found that I actually made a draft article that was not approved for submission.) However, by "malfunctioning", I mean that it is displaying a negative number. Thanks. Friend 505 10:24, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Friend505: It isn't obvious why you describe the template as "malfunctioning". As Marchjuly told you, |edits= is a required parameter for the functioning of Template:Service award progress, but you didn't provide it. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:33, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@David Biddulph: Hi, David Biddulph, I added the number of edits, but on the time progress bar, it still displays a negative number. Could you please take a look? Thanks. Friend 505 10:48, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@David Biddulph: Hi, David Biddulph,
The other problem is that the edit count displayed in the template isn't changing. I already have 549 edits compared with 537 edits when I added the edit count attribute/parameter, and it displayed as I already made 337 edits in the 800 edits required to get to Novice Editor. However, now, I've got 549 edits (I can see that in my preferences) but it isn't updating to 349. After I post this message, it will probably be 550 edits and the template edit count should be 350 edits. Thank you. Friend 505 11:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You will find discussion about that template at Template talk:Service award progress. Can we please let the Teahouse concentrate on people who are interested in how to improve the encyclopedia? --David Biddulph (talk) 11:55, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@David Biddulph: Thanks, David Biddulph. Good idea. I was just about to think I should go to the village pump for help on this subject if I cannot get the help I need here, but great idea, the template talk is the best place to ask questions like this about the template. Thanks, and sorry for bothering you again. Friend 505 12:10, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Friend505, the number doesn't update itself; you have to update it every time you want it to reflect your progress accurately. As a new editor, I suggest every 50/100 edits. The negative percentage was discussed at the template's talk page and has now been fixed. Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:37, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Usedtobecool: Oh, thanks, Usedtobecool. However, according to the template documentation, it seems like the number will update itself. It's okay; I will go to the template talk page for further discussion of this issue. Thanks, everyone, for giving me so much help and advice. Thanks! Friend 505 12:40, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editor at Hebrew Wikipedia, wondering where to report.

Hello. There is an IP editor at a certain article the Hebrew Wikipedia page (I can supply links if needed) who is deleting sourced material for reasons to do with their personal opinion (a clear case of WP:OR). I believe they (likely the same person) also did this a while back on the English version on the page (Eastern European Jewry) as well on another Hebrew page, with similar edits, deletions, and inapropriately personal and OR edit notes (I reported them at WP/ANI and I think they were blocked). I understand that because now it is on the Hebrew and not the English site, I cannot report them at WP/ANI. Does anyone know or have a link to the Hebrew Wikipedia equivalent page where they can be reported? Thank you. Skllagyook (talk) 00:32, 7 August 2020 (UTC) Skllagyook (talk) 00:32, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Skllagyook as you point out, there's not much that anyone can do here on English Wikipedia about a problem you're having on Hebrew Wikipedia. If you look at the left-hand side bar of the Teahouse page, you'll see a section called "Languages". Those are links to pages on other language Wikipedias that are similar to the Teahose. If you can find one that's in Hebrew, then clicking on it will probably take you to Hebrew Wikipedia's Teahouse like page. You should be able to ask for assistance there. For reference, the same left-hand side bar language section can be found pretty much on all English Wikipedia pages. Some page may have more languages listed, but clicking on the link should take you to an equivalent page on the other language Wikipedia. One thing about this though is that when discussing things on another language Wikipedia, you're probably going to need to be able to communicate in that particular language. You can try posting in English and you might get a response, but the discussion might primarily take place in the other language. Another thing to remember is that each language Wikipedia has it's own policies and guidelines and its own community. Some of those things might be quite similar to English Wikipedia's way of doing things, but others might be quite different. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:42, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: The disruptive IP was also making their edits to the Ashkenazi Jews page, and they actually weren't blocked after I reported them (the page was semi-protected). I have found the link I was given earlier (to the Hebrew Wikipedia's equivalent to the ANI page). (given to me at the below link where I filled the report) :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1038#IP_making_unsourced_and_badly-sourced_edits_to_Ashkenazi_Jews_and_edit_warring,_refusing_to_discuss_in_Talk (and they gave me this link: https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/ויקיפדיה:בקשות_ממפעילים)

Anyway, thank you for your response. Skllagyook (talk) 01:47, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Sinfonia Latina Map upgrade

Help with pin placement, that shows the various locations this festival has been held.

location Barranquilla Colombia Venues 1./ Teatro amira de la rosa 2 Club Campestre

--Deanna Coakley (talk) 01:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC) Deanna Coakley (talk) 01:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Short hand language

Sorry for being unclear with my first question. Okay I have actually two questions today. 1- what would I have to type to find a list of short hand internet slang that all teens (except me) are using? Example (idk)meaning - I don't know. Does that page exist? Number 2 can I not change my user name without an email address ? I really don't have one. I know it's an inconvenience but I have no personal computer. Thank u . Ddemod (talk) 01:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ddemod. Wikipedia has a general article about slang that contains a section about social media and Internet slang, but Wikipedia isn't really intended to be a type of online dictionary for teenager slang. There are probably lots of websites such as the Urban Dictionary where you'll find some examples of slang; so, you might just need to Google any slang you come across that you're unfamiliar with and see what comes up.

As for your second question, I'm not sure what you're asking, but perhaps you can find the answer you need in Wikipedia:Changing username. I believe a confirmed email address is only needed when you're requesting a "Global user account rename request", but it's not necessarily to make a Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple username change request. In addition, not having a computer doesn't automatically mean you cannot have an email address. You're editing Wikipedia without a computer, and many devices like tablets and smartphones can that can access the Internet can be used for email. Finally, there are also public computers like the ones you might find at a library or an Internet Cafe where you can also access email and lots of free email service that don't seem to require that you own a personal computer to sign up. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:33, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Want to add a school.

Hi, I am quite new here and trying to contribute as far as I can. Well, I am diving directly into the subject. The school where I study is really a nice one, it's quite old and the most renowned school in our area. So it definitely deserves a wikipedia page, so that people can know more. I have created an article in my sandbox, provided all the basic informations and also given the references. I want this to be reviewed. Please tell me how can I?

draft link:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mahdee_Mohammed/sandbox

Mahdee Mohammed (talk) 04:30, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mahdee Mohammed. You might be misunderstanding what Wikipedia is about. You seem proud of your school so I can understand why you might want to create a Wikipedia article about it; Wikipedia articles, however, are really only intended to be written about the kinds of subject described here. Articles aren't written for subjects or on behalf of subjects, and Wikipedia isn't really interested in what a subject might have to say about itself. Schools can have articles written about them on Wikipedia, but only when they are considered notable per Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Schools. Simply existing is not enough and the school has to have received significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to be considered OK to create an article about. Just from looking what you've done so far in your sandbox, I don't think it would be appropriate for your "draft" to be upgraded to an article at this time. If you tried to add this as an article right now, it would likely end up tagged or nominated for deletion fairly quickly. You might want to ask the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools or maybe even Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladesh about this; perhaps, one of them can give you some more specific advice ways to further improve the draft so that it has a better chance of becoming an article someday. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:40, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editor on 2019–20 Chelsea F.C. season

User: Ledinhvuchelsea continues to delete perfectly referenced data citing no reason. This user has a history of similar behavior acting as though he was the owner of the page with multiple incidents in the past that led to him being warned and blocked for a period. Looking for administrative help with this. Prawny007 (talk) 06:43, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prawny007, Generally the place to ask for admin action is WP:ANI. But since you've reported it, I will deal with it here cus we're not a bureacracy CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 07:49, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Any change?

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T259872

Hi greetings, were there any changes in notification system? Normally, when we get a new message in talkpage, it will give a notification and a message "You have got some message" with an yellowish orange background over talk link. Now the feature seems changed. The coloured background has disappeared now. Why these happens? Please help. PATH SLOPU 07:26, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Path slopu: You'll probably have better luck inquiring at WP:VPT. I still got the yellow background some time in the last day or so, though I've noticed that neither alerts nor notifications indicators appear automatically for the last few weeks until I refresh the page. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:21, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AlanM1:Thank you.--PATH SLOPU 08:41, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Path slopu: Hi, Path slopu, I've also found that when I get new messages, it doesn't have the yellowish background. You know, I kind of like the yellowish background. I don't know whether or not you guys like the old one, but I do. It started not having the yellowish background around yesterday or two days ago. I'm not sure. Maybe I'm going to go to WP:VPT to ask for help about this. I just wanted to tell Path slopu that Path slopu isn't the only one who's got this issue. Friend 505 10:51, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reports. This appears to be an accident, and is being tracked in our bug tracker at phab:T259872. the wub "?!" 15:56, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Bups Saggu

Header inserted by ColinFine (talk) 13:30, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

how long after you done required amendments does it take to approve a new page

article bups saggu how long after you done required amendments does it take to approve a new page ReadingPro123 (talk) 12:54, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ReadingPro123. (I inserted a header, because you had just tacked your question onto the previous section about something else). The answer is, there is no set time. Wikipedia editors are volunteers, who work on what they choose, when they choose. What I can tell you is that none of the four references that you have added since the first time your draft was declined two days ago has come anywhere near the minimum standard for a reference to contribute to notability: that it is independent of the subject and has substantial coverage of the subject. A million poor sources do not add up to one good one - indeed, having too many poor sources is usually a sign that the subject is not notable. Submitting it a third time in two days without substantial improvement may well be seen as disruptive editing, and I advise you to read WP:Common sourcing mistakes (notability) very careful and find some appropriate sources before another reviewer gets to your draft. If you cannot find any, then the subject is not notable, and all the time you or anybody puts or has put into this draft is a waste of time.

I also observe that the only article you have edited besides this draft is Lehmber Hussainpuri, and that was to insert a link to Saggu (which won't work until such time as there is an article, not a draft, about Saggu). This makes me ask, what is your connection to Saggu? If you have any connection at all with him, you need to be aware of Wikipedia policies on editing with a conflict of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 13:46, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi had only ended the other article as noticed in search it comes up. That's all. Looking at articles of fellow people in the genre. That is what they have all referenced to as well So I thought they were good referenced. Some are of BBC which is a big organisation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReadingPro123 (talk • contribs) 14:02, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again ReadingPro123. Unfortunately we have thousands and thousands of substandard articles, many of which would get deleted if anybody noticed them and had the time. If you want to compare an existing article, choose one which has been a good article or featured article, not a random article which may or may not be of any quality. The BBC is generally a reliable source certainly; but that is not the only criterion. We require that sources be completely unconnected with the subject (because we are basically not interested in what the subject or their associates say about them, but only what independent people say about them). Please read the links I gave you.

You say "fellow people in the genre", which makes me ask again, what is your connection with Bups Saggu? --ColinFine (talk) 18:49, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok. I will look through it.i just meant as a new user, I did look at fellow people are also known for being a bhangra producer and singers as a structure to know how they are laid out but now understand they may not be correct but as they are published I thought they were. I have no connection just interest in that music field and saw there wasn't a page for that artist. And saw you are able to create pages so wanted to try. Totally newbie but did think I followed the right structure. Will look again thank you for all your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReadingPro123 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, ReadingPro123. I'm sorry if I came over as suspicious: the fact is that we do get lots of people coming her basically to promote themselves (or their band, their company, their school etc). It's a pity that so many people who want to edit think that the best or only way to add to Wikipedia is to create a new article: as you have discovered, that is a very difficult process for new editors. I hope your experience hasn't put you off contributing. You may like to try The Wikipedia Adventure to learn more about editing; and then you can look for articles in your area of interest that need some work. --ColinFine (talk) 21:25, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up to Can I change my 'sources' to 'references'?

Can I talk with "Going Batty".....I can relate to that...Elisabet Stacy-Hurley 12:54, 7 August 2020 (UTC) Elisabet Stacy-Hurley 12:54, 7 August 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elisabet Stacy-Hurley (talk • contribs)

The place to talk to that editor is User talk:GoingBatty. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) --David Biddulph (talk) 12:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sadas Company description - Feedback request

Hello, I would like to ask some feedbacks for a company page for Sadas written some days ago. I followed the advises received in the previous topics and I want to ask other feedbacks to be sure before the publication. I created a trial page in my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Giuseppe_Ardolino/sandbox. I kindly ask support in order to respect Wikipedia best practices. In meanwhile I keeping updating the trial page with new references for each paragraph. Thank you Giuseppe Ardolino (talk) 13:15, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reference

How many reference need for create living person biography article?. TintuArunav (talk) 13:48, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TintuArunav:, welcome to Teahouse, if the person is notable, you need atleast three reliable sources to pass WP: THREE. Also see WP: Notability for more. Thank You. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 15:03, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} Thank you for your valuable response.TintuArunav (talk) 19:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

please explain the last 2 lines of Robert Ludlum's book "The Holcroft Covenant"

"The Tinamou was killed at last. By the Tinamou. They were everywhere. It had only begun." Please explain this ending. Jassiken (talk) 14:01, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Teahouse is for help with editing Wikipedia. You should post general questions at the reference desk, assuming that a similar question has not already been answered there. Doctor Whooves (talk) 14:54, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jassiken:, welcome to Teahouse, we are here to respond/help on Wikipedia based question. I can't understand if you are talking about a article of a book or directly a book? — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 14:58, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

editing a page

I am the assistant of Laura Letinsky (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Letinsky) and she needs me to add to her Wikipedia page, but each time I make edits they get reverted for "conflict of Interest" reasons. How can I fix this and edit her page successfully? Lletinsk (talk) 16:18, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lletinsk: thank you for your disclosure and welcome to the Teahouse. You have a conflict of interest, so you should not be editing the page directly. The policy has been pointed out to you twice on your talk page. Please post any edit requests for the article at the article's talk page. As you are an employee undertaking editing as part of your job, you will also need to follow our paid editing rules. Thanks. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:21, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Left align an instance of NavBox?

I'm trying to amend the alignment of the NavBox template I want to left align it as in the first example, but with the table below it, as per the second example. Any ideas?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Dave_F63/sandbox&action=submit

Is there a webpage to recommend which would help me understand? Is using the NavBox template the best way to link to on page anchors? Dave F63 (talk) 16:24, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

redirect

Hello. I have a question to ask. How can i make a search term directly redirect to a said page? Thanks. Daniel D. 78.98.153.190 (talk) 16:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Daniel! There's actually a handy little tool at Wikipedia:How_to_make_a_redirect. —valereee (talk) 16:43, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In over my head

I have engaged in a discussion I had perhaps better stayed out of as a young editor, but apparently I upset some fellow Wikipedians and we cannot seem to get over it. The issue has been taken to the NPOV board, the SPI board, and now also some administrator board. I am sure much of the burden also rests on me, but I do not know how to end this and simply going back to making valuable edits (as valuable as I can, at least). If anyone with experience here could take a look or share some helpful advice, I would be very grateful. Thanks!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Chris_Heaton-Harris StanTwoCents (talk) 16:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

StanTwoCents, what I would advise is that you make an absolute apology at the noticeboard taking responsibility for the entire brouhaha, apologizing for the entire mess, asking for a second chance to try to learn how to contribute helpfully, and promising that you will confine yourself to making small edits with clear edit summaries until you've got enough experience that you can look back on this and understand why it happened. —valereee (talk) 16:52, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Valereee, for your response and advice. StanTwoCents (talk) 17:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Transition metals: Anions

Hello! As a student, I would like to ask if you (chemists) can make a page, regarding about relativistic effects to transition metals, resulting in them forming the aforementioned anions. So far, I already searched for three hours in google and still hasn't found a single plausible, satisfactory and accessible site that could elucidate to me why. I know this is too much to ask, but nonetheless I need it, so I can get a boost, and withal, finally become chem lord. Furthermore, if it ain't too much to ask, can you provide me with links, or PDFs and such? Thank you all for answering my query! Ice bear johny (talk) 16:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you have been unable, in three hours of searching, to find anything published about relativistic anions of transition metals, then it's most unlikely that Wikipedia, which is based on published sources, will accept an article on the topic. Maproom (talk) 17:12, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But if you want to ask people if they know of any sources about the idea, the science section of the Reference Desk is a good place to ask. --ColinFine (talk) 18:54, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive deletion by an admin in a biography article

Dear friends, an admin deleted roughly half of the biography article Alexander-Martin Sardina (historian, former MP in Germany) leaving it now a de facto stub. I know that articles on persons can be contraversial but in this case, I would say the admin has gone too far. For whatever reason, he seems not to have a neutral point of view. In addition to that, I would assume that it's just difficult for Americans to fully understand how the political system in Europe works on a state level. I listed 9 ponts on the talk page why the deletion of some sentences and paragraphs should be restored from my point of view. The admin did also not reply to follow-up questions above that although he got pinged. Therefore, I would love to see "Third Opinion" contributions on that dispute but that would formally require two arguing parties on the talk page... That's why I ask experienced users here now to look into the case, go through my points, try to understand my counter arguments, and suggest or implement a solution in the best case. I thank you all for participating in advance; assume good faith, pls. 2003:E3:D70D:8900:5CD:7069:8FE5:749C (talk) 16:47, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The place to discuss an article is on its talk page, and I see that you have raised the question at Talk:Alexander-Martin Sardina, which is the right place. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:04, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Waiting period for moving to public forum

Hello,

How long do we have to wait until we can move an article on our talk page into the public forum? BaracutaG9 (talk) 17:08, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Puzzled on how to get the article throught :)

I see that BaracutaG9 has been indefinitely blocked. Maproom (talk) 17:28, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Phil Greiss

Hi guys!! so happy to have found a place where I could maybe get clarity ... in 2014 I had written an wiki article in French about canadian record producer Phil Greiss, the article went through the validation process with no problem. But he's well known over there and has been at it since around 1998, numerous recognitions, not a lot of press though but tons of credits, accolades and awards relevant over there.

I decided to re-write the article in english but can't seem to get through the notability checks it seems, even though since 2016 he has worked on pretty big records such as JBalvin's Mi Gente (about a billion streams on spotify so far), David Guetta's Goodbye feat. Nicki Minaj witch gathered about 220Million streams, and as of today (right now!) he has a #1 Top50 Global Spotify song with Jason Derulo's Savage Love wich he co-wrote, and the song is entering the top10 of the billboard hot 100.

I'm not sure how to get the article through as he now has even more notable accomplishements than in 2014

Shall I add every single work and credit from the now deceased french article? Henri Grace (talk) 17:13, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Henri Grace, the draft was declined because, in the opinion of the reviewer, the references were not good enough to establish Greiss as notable, in the sense in which that word is used here. Standards at en:Wikipedia and fr:Wikipedia differ. The decline notice is intended to encourage you to find and add better references as evidence of notability: they should be to published sources which are reliable, independent of the subject, and contain significant discussion of Greiss. Adding a large number of even poorer references, as you propose, won't help at all. Maproom (talk) 17:27, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Whats the best place to propose a new article if I'm not sure of its notability

I'm considering making an article for the Pediatric Cancer Research Foundation, and possibly some of the organizations they work with. Theres not any great news articles that I can see, but there are a few websites listing charities that talk about the organizaton, and they are listed on the IRS website of course. I think they've done some good work, and are connected to some notable folks online, so I'm wondering if anyone could help me find some good references, or let me know if y'all think it isn't notable enough to warrant an article. https://pcrf-kids.org/ there is the organizations website, and this is the IRS listing for their charity. PhoenixJCC (talk) 18:16, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, PhoenixJCC, and welcome! Creating an article from scratch is not easy for new editors. Neither of those websites would support the organization being notable enough for an article. What you need to find are lengthy discussions of the organization at multiple (rule of thumb I use is three) reliable non-affiliated sources. The pcrf-kids source is obviously affiliated, and the IRS listing is just that: a listing; can be used for filling in information but not for proving notability. It looks like they might have incorporated in 2015? It would be a pretty unusual nonprofit that became notable within 5 years of incorporating. —valereee (talk) 18:41, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think they're most notable for being the charity that the Variety/Vinesauce Is hope events raise money for, they're twitch streamers who do a yearly charity event to raise money for PCRF more about that can be found here they've raised over 100k a year for the past 3 years, and I want to say 700k over the past 5 years. the streamers collectively have hundreds of thousands of viewers. I figured that the charity itself would be more important than the streamers associated with it, but they consistently get viewers and consistently get folks to raise money so they may be more notable as people than the charity is as a charity? I'm not sure though. EDIT: also the PCRF page says that the organization has been around for 38 years and has raised 47 million dollars, I'm assuming they changed what they were listed as a few times.PhoenixJCC (talk) 19:09, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid, PhoenixJCC, that none of that has anything to do with notability as Wikipedia defines it, which is almost all about there being enough independent published material about the organisation to base an article on. Wikipedia is basically not interested in any information which comes from the subject, or from people or organisations associated with the subject, including information in interviews and press releases. It is only interested in what people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about it. --ColinFine (talk) 21:16, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Red links?

Can I get some? LovelyCardigan (talk) 18:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC) LovelyCardigan (talk) 18:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LovelyCardigan, sorry, not sure what you're asking? —valereee (talk) 18:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

sorry I ment requested articles??? LovelyCardigan (talk) 18:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@LovelyCardigan: I assume that you want to write an article about a topic that doesnt have an article, but is regarded as "Would nice to have one about that". You can search in Wikipedia:Requested articles for a topic. Then please proceed with the steps below:

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

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 18:54, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) LovelyCardigan, you're interested in suggesting articles that need to be created? You can do that at Wikipedia:Requested_articles, or you can do it by redlinking (placing two brackets on either side of a mention) the topic in a current article. For instance if I see Lucy McPhee mentioned in an article and I think she deserves an article of her own, I can change it to [[Lucy McPhee]] and turn it into Lucy McPhee. That tells other editors that you think a particular subject might make a good article. —valereee (talk) 19:06, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What to do when an opposing party does not respond to a discussion?

After an edit war involving multiple users on List of My Hero Academia characters, the page was indefinitely protected, meaning a discussion has to take place to resolve it. However, the opposing party has not responded to the talk page since it was protected. This is in no way to report them (as last time I asked a similar question, it transformed into an ANI report, which was not my intention then, and certainly is not now), but I am curious on what to do with the discussion when the other party does not respond. I don't want to abandon it, because I believe the discussion to be very important to the readability of the page, but I have no idea what to do, as I already alerted Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Lists and Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Anime and manga about the edit war. Do I just wait to see if a third party responds, and if so, how long does that usually take? 72.219.72.215 (talk) 18:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of My Hero Academia characters is only semi-protected. That means that autoconfirmed accounts can edit it. If you were to register for a free account and become autoconfirmed, you would be able to make edits to the article, although should carefully avoid edit warring and follow the Bold, revert, discuss cycle. You could ask for a third opinion or follow dispute resolution. I see that in your two most recent posts to the talk page, you did not ping Serial Number 54129, and that editor may not be aware of your comments. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Transform Howey Ou draft into an article

I created the draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Howey_Ou. Now, I would like to transform the draft into an article. Could anyone walk me through the procedure please? Your help would be much appreciated. Azastorr (talk) 19:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Azastorr:, welcome to Teahouse, I just checked your draft and found it need some more work on it like copy-editing etc. Well you have questioned about draft to article. There is procedure called AfC. Or simply draft submission. You can place {{draft}} tag at top or bottom of a draft. This generates a submit button. You can submit with that. And a reviewer will see your draft and move it to an article if everything is okay. If not, he/she will decline and define a reason for declining draft submission. You have to work on it, then submit again. Thank You.— The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 19:52, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stub-class high-importance articles

Hi, is there any good way to find high-importance, stub-class articles (as opposed to just looking for one of the two) Yellowleaf23 (talk) 19:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Yellowleaf23. Yes, absolutely there is. Find the WikiProject that covers the topics you're interested in (a good way to do that is look at a relevant article's talk page and follow the links from there. Each WikiProject usually has an 'Assessment Chart' - a multicoloured chart showing article importance versus article quality assessment. Click the corresponding number to see the articles that fall into that category. Thus from Matterhorn you'd go to WP:ALPS. We have 69 High Importance stub article, which, when you click the right cell, takes you here. From there you can choose articles that interest you. Of course, that summit is also of relevance to WikiProject Switzerland and WikiProject Italy, so you might choose the Italian project, check their Assessment chart, and find these 58 High Importance stub articles]. Accessing articles via this route and focusing on important stubs is one of the best ways a committed editor can work through and improve overall Wikipedia content with the least overall effort. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 19:58, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Expand to show a typical assessment chart (WikiProject: Mountains of the Alps)

Mountains of the Alps articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
Quality	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
GA	1	1					2
B	7	3	3	1			14
C	12	24	26	41		2	105
Start	5	81	232	392		2	712
Stub		22	212	2,008		2	2,244
List		1	4			1	6
Category					46		46
File					6		6
Portal					2		2
Project					2		2
Template					5		5
NA	1			3	5		9
Assessed	26	132	477	2,445	66	7	3,153
Total	26	132	477	2,445	66	7	3,153
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 17,490			Ω = 5.68

About publish my article issue

hi, I am Ahsan, from Bangladesh. My Wikipedia page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ahsan617364 Actually I am a newbie in Wikipedia and this is my first article published on 26 July 2020.

Draft:Magician Razu

Its a magician biography and I don't understand why my article is not published. I have given all kinds of references from Google like different news sites. Suggest me what can I improve in this article. I have absolutely no idea about Wikipedia article, there is no one to guide me, I am doing so much on my own from a different website and Wikipedia page.

Please let me know what is the problem of the article. I seek the cooperation of experts. help me Ahsan617364 (talk) 20:10, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ahsan617364, and welcome to the teahouse.

You have undertaken perhaps the hardest task a new editor can, that of creating a new article from nothing. Please read Your First Article. Please read the list of steps given above in the section #Red links?. Wikipedia only has articles about notable topics. Most people are not notable, for example I am not. Please understand that you need to cite multiple Reliable and independent sources, each of which should include significant coverage of the subject. There should be at least three to five such sources cited. Note that a passing mention in a major site is of no value. A few good sources are far batter than many bad ones. I cannot read the sources you have cited, so I cannot comment specifically on their value. It would help if you provided English-language titles of the sources. This can be done with |trans-title= and |trans-work= in a citation template. Do note that the Daily Mail is considered an unreliable source and should not be used. Perhaps Vinegarymass911 who reviewed and declined your draft, would care to comment in more detail. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:09, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

self citing a company's website as a description of their services.

Seriously, can anyone give a better place on where to get the info on what a company does and specializes in other than the company's own site? Geekymutt (talk) 20:47, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Geekymutt Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are instances where primary sources are acceptable- but Wikipedia is primarily interested in what independent reliable sources say about a company, including what it does. Companies usually describe themselves favorably. If you are having trouble finding independent reliable sources stating or suggesting what a company does, it likely doesn't merit an article in the first place. 331dot (talk) 21:03, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We're the primary installer of a government system for museums, doing things they don't, and the company responsible for the lion's share of the Science on a Sphere systems installed all over the world. I don't describe the quality of services, or install -that'd be subjective and biased information. I describe the specialization of what we do. - Objective information you can gather looking at the site.

You don't really get put in a magazine or your companies named plastered all over a museum's or government facilities for doing the work. NOAA isn't even mentioned usually. Honestly most citings for science on a sphere is from NOAA, the govt agency selling the licenses, that should fall under the same umbrella here.

We're the ones installing the systems, servicing them, and creating data for the companies requesting them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geekymutt (talk • contribs) 21:12, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Geekymutt. Wikipedia is not a directory of every business. It is an encyclopedia that contains articles about notable businesses, which means that independent reliable sources have devoted significant coverage to the company. Please read and study Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Any acceptable article must comply with that guideline. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:39, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Geekymutt. If your company has not been written about in depth by people who have no connection whatever with the company, then I'm afraid it does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article about it will ever be accepted. Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything that the subject of an article says about themselves, or that their associates say about them: an article should be almost entirely based one what unconnected people have published about them, and if there is no such coverage, then there is literally nothing which can go into an article. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 21:34, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance needed to fix issue and clear warning box

Link: American Sleep Apnea Association

There is an error box and I can not figure out how to use it. We would also like to add our Logo if possible. Thank you SleepAdvocate (talk) 20:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC) SleepAdvocate (talk) 20:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SleepAdvocate: I uploaded your logo but also significantly edited the promotional and unsourced info that was in your article. It would unlikely survive a deletion discussion without more sources. In order to demonstrate the notability of your group, the article should be based on profiles of your organization in independent third party publications, not just passing mentions. See WP:GNG and WP:RS. The sourcing now is poor - hence the more sources needed tag. Also please see WP:COI, which suggests you request edits on the article's talk page rather than doing them yourself, since you have a conflict of interest. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:38, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hello, SleepAdvocate, and welcome to the Teahouse.

First of all, who is "we". Wikipedia accounts are for individual people, adn msut not be shared. If you are acting as an advocate for, spokesperson for, or employee of the American Sleep Apnea Association (or any other organization) you must declare that you are a paid editor as described in that policy page, preferably by using the template {{paid}}. If you have some other connection to the Assocation, you may have a conflict ofm interest and should declare that.
Secondly, that notice was added manually by some editor because that editor believed that not enough sources had been cited in the article. It can be removed manually when an editor in good standing who thinks that there are sufficient sources. Often three to five independent and reliable sources, each of which includes significant coverage (say at least several paragraphs about the topic) is enough. Currently there are exactly two cited inline sources. One is from the association ()and so is not independent), and the other is two pages of a book. On followi9ng the link it turns out that there are two passing mentions in the book, each identifying an affiliation of a person mentioned. There is no detailed discussion of the association. This is not significant coverage, so currently there are none of the needed three to five sources.
Third, the current tone is not appropriate. The article is currently written in the first person plural: We accomplish this mission through education..., At the ASAA, we envision a world ..., and In the meantime, we work towards a world ... The article addresses the reader directly: ... support groups that you can find on our website ... None of that is appropriate. A Wikipedia articel should be written in the third person, and should not address the reader. Any mission statement should be presented as an attributed and cited quotation, not states as a fact.
Fourth: listed events should include dates. Consider what happens if someone reads the article in two or five years time. Will such a reader know if the events are in the future or long past?

In short, this article does not currently meet the required minimum standards for inclusion. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:45, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I turn off email notifications?

Template:Email user notification says that there's a template on top of my talk page that enables or disables me to receive emails. However, I do not want to receive emails. I have already went into my preferences to disable other users from directly emailing me, but I still receive emails when somebody comments on my talk page or mentions me. Is there a way to disable it completely without removing the email associated without my account? Unnamed anon (talk) 21:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unnamed anon In your Preferences, go to the notifications tab. 331dot (talk) 22:02, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wait-staff

Wait-staff here are incredibly discourteous, I have been waiting almost 24 hours and not received my Arnold Palmer (drink)! And it better come with a paper umbrella! Btw, since I'm here...do edits to your own userpage/talkpage or sandbox count towards the minimum number of edits you must have before you can create a redirect page? I'm just asking because it seems annoying if I need to go make 12 edits to Donald Trump before I'm allowed to make a minor redirect page to help people from confusing the new non-notable Roxborough Apartments in Ottawa from the historical Roxborough Apartments which were notable and share an article with Confederation Park which was built on their ruins. It seems like a fitting redirect page to create, yet I need minimum edits first? So what counts as an edit? Is this one? Bicarbonatedesoude (talk) 22:25, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bicarbonatedesoude, any edit, no matter where you make it, and no matter how inconsequential, counts towards your edit total, but we ask that you avoid cynically making repetitive edits to increase your edit count.--Quisqualis (talk) 01:22, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bicarbonatedesoude: Yes, they all count. But there is so much real work to do, why not just find an article you care about and make some improvements to that for a while. Before you know it, you will qualify for everything you want to do.--Gronk Oz (talk) 02:39, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How can I make my article more "Constructive"?

Hello, I recently discovered that a large financial firm based in New York called IronHold Capital was not on Wikipedia. I thought this was odd so I quickly gathered as many sources as I could and drafted up a pretty nice summary of the firm. However someone kindly wrote back that I need to be more "constructive". Besides inserting a lot of detail and citations (which I did) what else can I do? Happy to do more but just want to know what direction I should be going in! Thank you in advance! Poweredxsolar (talk) 02:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Poweredxsolar, I think the edits that they were referring to that they said were unconstructive were edits you made to , because this isn't the right place to put a new article. I see that you have now written the article in your sandbox and submitted it for review. This will be reviewed by an editor who will either approve it and move it to the main article space, or else provide you with feedback on the article. Pi (Talk to me!) 02:10, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is WolframAlpha reliable?

Is WolframAlpha usually reliable? ~Abraham236 (talk) 02:41, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] why don't notes display?

[note 1]