Wikipedia:Teahouse

AlanM1, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

What does Wikipedia say about representing castes on articles of living persons

Hello, I am a less experienced user on Wikipedia and I need help.

One user Fylindfotberserk insists on placing castes on the Early Life article of Neil Nitin Mukesh. The source for the castes he has listed is a YouTube video where his father is seen mentioning the castes of his grandfather and grandmother. Is this necessary to be put in the article?

The user has now had his page fully locked to prevent me from editing.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4063:4004:395f:cfca:977e:6652:cb28 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Need review on this

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.

There is discussion about this also ongoing at User talk:TheChunky#Basant Rath moved to draftspace and it seems a bit counterproductive to be concurrently discussing the same thing on two different talk pages. So, I'm closing this discussion and suggest that any further comments be added to the discussion on The Chunky's user talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:08, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Hi, the article Basant Rath was created by me a month back. Till now no other editor had reviewed it, so that Google can index it. Kindly review. Thanks — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 19:47, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Why is it important that the article is indexed, TheChunky? John from Idegon (talk) 20:37, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, after reviewing the article, I sent it back to draft. TheChunky, please explain why you moved it to mainspace in the first place. It's weakly sourced and very poorly written. Please work on your sourcing and if you need help with style, come back and ask. Out of curiosity, what is your relationship with the subject of the article? John from Idegon (talk) 00:50, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

John from Idegon reverting to draft is not the solution. I have the pending changes reviewer rights. That's why I put it to mainspace via AFC. And remaining style, there was copy-editing tag already there. It was written in almost good way. And I don't have any links to the subject, the subject is an controversial IPS officer in Jammu and Kashmir who became viral on various controversies available in references as well as you can check news too. Hence it falls under WP:GNG and also crosses WP:THREE . Reverting it to draft without placing any discussion is not the rule. You know better than me. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 12:12, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

TheChunky, pending changes reviewer rights has nothing whatsoever to do with getting articles to mainspace. Draftifying articles unready for mainspace is one of the options available to article reviewers. This is done in accordance with WP:NPPDRAFT. However, because the use of WP:AFC is voluntary, no one may force another to put articles through that process. Therefore, if you object to the draftification of your article, you may move it back to mainspace and ask that the reviewer put it through WP:AFD instead. Lastly, a general FYI to consider before challenging draftification: If one moves a draftified article back to mainspace without adequate improvement, AFD can redraftify the article and force it to go through AFC. In addition, repeatedly adding unready articles to mainspace may be seen as disruptive and a resulting community discussion may impose editing restrictions on such editors to only create articles via AFC. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:51, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

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

Advice for improving draft article re: notability

Hello Teahouse, I'm working on creating my first article, Draft:Theresa_Greenfield_(2). An initial draft was rejected for not sufficiently establishing notability, so I have made edits to: (1) add new sources demonstrating significant national news coverage and importance, (2) replace primary sources with reliable secondary sources where possible, and (3) provide further details. Is there anything else I can do to make the article more likely to be accepted now? Thanks! Js2112 (talk) 19:58, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Js2112 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Typically, merely being a candidate for office does not meet the notability guidelines for politicians- which would mean that she would need to be notable for something else to merit an article at this time(unless she wins her election in which case she would then merit an article, even before being sworn in). There are rare exceptions to this (such as Christine O'Donnell) but in those cases the subject needs to have extensive coverage in multiple independent reliable sources, nationally if possible. Based on what I see I'm not convinced that Greenfield rises to the needed level of notability at this time, but nothing will happen to the draft for six months(assuming you don't edit it) so my advice would be to wait and see if she wins. 331dot (talk) 20:04, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, 331dot. Yes, I understand that simply being a candidate doesn't necessarily establish notability, but it shouldn't preclude it either. In this case, I do think that there's substantial national coverage of Greenfield in multiple reliable sources, as well as copious amounts of state level coverage, as I've tried to document in the article. I also thought that the race being close and reasonably likely to decide the overall control of the Senate makes it notable. As far as I can tell, every single other 2020 Senate candidate in a competitive race already has a page, and Greenfield is at least as notable as many of those (clearly more notable than some). Js2112 (talk) 20:37, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Js2112, the only thing that affects the notability of this person is the facts about this person. What is or isn't in other articles, nor the existence of other articles, has any bearing whatsoever on this article. John from Idegon (talk) 00:55, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

John from Idegon, in my opinion, notability is met in this case under "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage." Of course, terms like "major" and "significant" in this context are somewhat subjective. One way of evaluating these words is to see how much press coverage other similarly situated politicians who have already been judged to pass the notability threshold have received. By definition, that amount of coverage can be assumed to meet the "significant" criterion. That's the sense in which the comparison may be relevant. Js2112 (talk) 02:58, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Your assumptions are incorrect. Sorry. John from Idegon (talk) 05:14, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

John from Idegon, can you clarify which assumptions you're referring to? Thanks, Js2112 (talk) 05:39, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Js2112, there is a very strong presumption among experienced editors that unelected candidates for political office are not notable except in highly unusual circumstances that do not seem to be present here. In most cases, these people will have had Wikipedia articles long before their candidacies were announced, for other reasons. Perhaps they are movie stars or major corporate CEOs or the like. Instead, these unelected candidates should be described in neutral articles about the political race, which devote equal attention to all major candidates. In this case, that article is 2020 United States Senate election in Iowa, and that is where neutral information about Greenfield belongs. If there are other 2020 Senate challengers in other states who have never been elected to high office or achieved significant notability outside politics, please bring them to our attention here, so that we can evaluate their notability. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:10, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with some of the above. Assuming that all the cites are as legitimate (that they say what they are quoted to say) as the 5 I read, it seems that the case has successfully been made for notability. It's an important race (for the balance of power), with both candidates polling inside the margin of error, according to the well-cited national sources. I dislike politics and most politicians pretty intensely, so I can understand if the preference here among like minds is to cover these candidates in hindsight, and I would be OK with that. However, if other candidates are being covered in advance, I think to not allow this one would be inconsistent unless I'm grossly mis-understanding a much (perhaps unreasonably) higher-than-normal bar for notability. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:07, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Cullen328. Yes, I've noticed this strong presumption in browsing through other related discussions! What I don't understand is where it comes from. It's not in WP:NPOL, which just says that running for office on its own doesn't guarantee notability, and then provides two specific criteria to define notability: holding state/national office or receiving significant press coverage. How did this additional presumption evolve into the standard, and why does the second NPOL criterion no longer apply? Js2112 (talk) 17:08, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Js2112 I thi8nk this comes from an excess of promotion. Many candidate staffs, political operatives, and activists have thought that a Wikipedia article about their favored candidate would enhance that person's chance of election. Thus there have been many attempts to create articles about people whose only claim to notability is being a candidate, and the more or less routine coverage that comes with any candidacy, particularly for an office which would confer notability on an elected holder. As a result many editors have tended to discount coverage of a candidate as a candidate. The argument has also been made that the entire electoral campaign constitutes a single event, and thus WP:BLP1E applies to deny notability. I think this reaction has gone too far, and I think we probably need an RfC to clarify just what our policy and practice should be. That said, when a candidate has no coverage except in connection with a campaign, and is no more extensive than J. Random Candidate for that office would expect, an article is quite possibly not justified. Significant Coverage unrelated tom the campaign would significantly help any attempt to argue for retention of an article about a current candidate. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:31, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Js2112 I.e., find sufficient coverage about her pre-political life that would make her notable as an "urban planner, businesswoman, and real estate developer", yes DESiegel? At the risk of being WP:POINTy, do you think someone is reviewing all the other candidates in this election to ensure we aren't letting some slip through the cracks (by trivially auto-confirmed editors who didn't try to follow the rules)? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:11, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes that would be sufficient, AlanM1. But If there are sources about the person's pre-campaign life that at least contribute to notability, even if they do not clearly establish it, along with above-average coverage of the candidate, say national coverage for a state-level office (in the US system), I would be inclined to accept that. However, not all editors will agree with that position. The exact details might matter at an AfD, along with exactly who joins the discussion. I hope,you find this helpful, Js2112. But I will say that the position taken by John from Idegon above does not, in my view, have a broad general consensus. Rather the matter is disputed. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 02:19, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1 Having dug up everything I can in the course of writing the article, I think one would be hard-pressed to make a strong case for notability based on her pre-political career. She certainly had significant success in real estate at the local and state level, but there is very little coverage of those achievements. I don't know whether anyone else has reviewed the other 2020 Senate candidates for omissions or notability (I rather doubt it, based on what I've seen), but I have. As I mentioned above, there are several other candidates who do not appear to have better-established notability but whose Wikipedia articles have been accepted uncontroversially. I haven't posted specifics because I'm not trying to get pages deleted; I'm arguing for a more inclusive standard. I have not found any other competitive races where a major party candidate lacks their own article. Js2112 (talk) 07:15, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Js2112, in my opinion, it is likely to be easier to make the current notability standards less inclusive, than more. So, as far as levelling the playing field among legislature candidates who have not previously been elected is concerned, seeking deletion of those that have gone through the cracks may be the only viable option available.

As for your draft, AFC reviewers give their individual opinions based on their experience and the criteria that they judge on is whether the article is likely to survive a community-wide deletion discussion (WP:AFD). If you are convinced that the subject is notable, and would like to settle it at AFD, you can ask the reviewer to accept the article solely to put it through AFD. I recommend you carefully go through arguments for deletion made in this discussion on a similar subject before you decide whether to take that option. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Usedtobecool. When I wrote "I'm arguing for a more inclusive standard," that was a bit imprecise. What I'm actually arguing for is the WP:NPOL standard to be applied as written, rather than how the interpretation appears to have evolved away from that since the rule was defined.

As a relative newcomer here, I'm not totally clear on what the difference is (in practical terms) between the article being declined by an individual reviewer and being accepted and then nominated for deletion. Just that then multiple people get to weigh in? On the Annamie Paul page, there was only really one vocal contributor (who has expressed the same opinion elsewhere) arguing strongly for deletion and a strict standard. Almost everyone else seemed to be somewhere between neutral and in favor of keeping the article. Js2112 (talk) 08:50, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Js2112, yes, Wikipedia works on WP:Consensus which would what an AFD outcome would constitute. I mentioned it because (1) AFC does sometimes get it wrong, some accepted articles are later deleted by AFD and Carlo Masi, for example, was rejected by AFC but kept in an AFD. (2) All editors are equal and no one editor, however experienced, on principle, has the right to dictate whether another's article may be included in the encyclopedia, only the community consensus has the power to do that. So, in the interest of complete transparency, you ought to know that that is the last option available to you (3) At least one editor above seemed to suggest that Greenfield may be notable, so it's not a clear-cut failure of Wikipedia notability for an AFD to constitute a waste of everyone's time (4) Sometimes it's just more efficient for everyone to have a definitive seven day discussion than to have months of reworking, resubmitting, declining, and discussing in multiple fora.

I linked the Annamie Paul page because the one vocal contributor is one of the representative voices of that position (which I agree with almost entirely) and they presented almost exhaustively their argument for the same. Do note that Paul and Greenfield may not be at the same level of pre-election notability, and that that AFD was called a weak-ish consensus by the closer despite it having as you say one vocal advocate for deletion. They also noted that the result was unusual, for "redirect" was the expected usual outcome. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:03, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

As for applying standards as written, because of the nature of Wikipedia, it is more a feedback loop rather than a hierarchy from someone who gives the commandments to the rest that abide by them. Guidelines are deliberately written so as to allow subjectivity and interpretation. When they are first written, they are written by a consensus of editors and the consensus may evolve and change as editors grow and change. Sometimes, practice may become so entrenched as to make the written guides archaic in which case the written rules get changed rather than the community adjusting itself to outdated rules that no longer seems to have consensus. I am generally for limiting AFD discussions to exactly what the notability guides say because that's what the page creators do when creating new articles. But, that does not always happen. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:14, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, I would have no objection to revising the guidelines so as to more accurately reflect the current consensus. That seems like it a productive step forward, and would be completely consistent with the Wikipedia ethos. As you say, a situation where people write articles based on the official guidelines, only to be told afterward that the de facto standard is something completely different, is not ideal.

Given the current situation for the page in question, is there anything to lose from AfD? Js2112 (talk) 20:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Js2112: I think Usedtobecool was describing the general way guidelines are formed rather than discussing the specific case. In the case of the article you have written, the written guideline (WP:NPOL: Just being (...) an unelected candidate for political office does not guarantee notability (...)) and the practice at AfD align fairly well.

If you have searched for notability evidence (outside of the election coverage) and found none, the AfD is virtually guaranteed to go "delete". "Nothing to lose by going to AfD" might be true for you now that the article is already written, but if you force an AfD on an open-and-shut case (wasting the time of all AfD participants in the process) you will not make many friends. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:52, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Tigraan, what I've been trying to get across is that the NPOL guideline is not limited to stating that "an unelected candidate for political office does not guarantee notability." Another part of the guideline says that "[m]ajor local political figures who have received significant press coverage" are "presumed to be notable." It doesn't say anywhere that election-related coverage doesn't count. To take some limiting cases, presumably we would all agree that a serious US presidential candidate is notable by virtue of his/her candidacy alone, even if there was nothing notable about their earlier life. On the other hand, a city council candidate who has never held any other office or been previously notable is generally not going to qualify. (Although I see that my local city council candidate in the November election actually does have an article despite zero non-campaign related coverage.) Then the question is where in the middle ground to draw the line. To me, a major party Senate candidate in a competitive race should be considered notable with sufficient independent coverage, even if that coverage is mostly or entirely related to the election. But I recognize that others may disagree. Js2112 (talk) 23:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Js2112, the draft seems to be quite poor (excellent formatting, excellent campaign ad, but makes poor encyclopedic entry and raises all the red flags). It is obvious from reading it that you have a close connection with the subject. So, you need to disclose it per WP:COI. Media frequently picks up on rule-breaking on Wikipedia associated with political campaigns. So, attempt to misuse Wikipedia without transparency can hurt the campaign itself, not just the integrity of Wikipedia. I just made a few illustrative edits and rolled it back to your version. You can access my edits from page's history and see if it helps. Less focus on aspects of her life outside-of/before politics, dial the way down on political talking points and if there is, better coverage about both her runs; do that and it may start to resemble a Wikipedia article. As it is, I don't think AFD would do you any good. The obvious downside is that AFD might say she should not have an article until she wins which would make it harder to try again even if she receives loads of coverage before election day. Having now looked at the draft, I think right now, AFD would only have downsides; there's work to be done to make it read like an encyclopedia entry. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)merged here after an accident split the discussion into two. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:18, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, thanks for the suggested edits - I appreciate that very constructive effort. I will go through them more carefully when I have a little bit of time. As I said above, this is the first article I've written, and I attempted to pattern it after those of other Senate candidates, so either I missed the mark a bit or was misled by them. To be clear, I have no connection to Greenfield or her campaign; I don't think I even know anyone who lives in the state of Iowa. Js2112 (talk) 17:34, 16 September 2020 (UTC)merged here after an accident split the discussion into two. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:18, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Archived discussions

Hi, what on earth is Lowercase sigmabot III and Muninnbot? What do they do, how do they work, what does it all mean? I keep getting messages from them on my talk page. 314WPlay (talk) 08:33, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

314WPlay They are automated programs (WP:BOT) created to do something hopfully helpful, in this particular case telling an editor what happened to their Teahouse question and where it can now be found. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:48, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@314WPlay: You seem annoyed. Note that it does provide useful information that is deemed necessary because of the principles of WP:TPO. The archiving of Teahouse threads older than three (?) days is necessary because of the volume – to keep the page down to a manageable size for readers. Because the archive bot moves your post (that you may have bookmarked), it is necessary to inform you that it happened and to give you a link to the new location. Is there something the bot maintainers can do that would make these reminders less annoying? Suggestions can be made to Muninnbot's maintainer at User talk:Tigraan. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:59, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: I've calmed down a bit now. "For readers" - you mean people scroll through and read this? I thought I was the only one who looked through the questions other editors were asking here. The reminders could be useful if I ever want to review my question. I guess I ask questions at Teahouse so I should face the consequences! 314WPlay (talk) 19:22, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@314WPlay: If nobody scrolled through and read questions, they would not get answered, would they?

You can turn off Muninnbot's notifications by copy-pasting the following magic words (including the curly brackets): {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} at the top of your user talk page (User talk:314WPlay). This tells the bot not to bother you. (That information can also be found in the bot's notification itself.)

I am completely open to a change in the design of the notifications but I would need more detailed feedback: is the notification too big? The color too pale? The font too frightening? Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:00, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Tigraan: I think you’re right. Obviously the good people that host Teahouse read the questions, yes. I sometimes also review them (of course I can’t answer). I’ll tell you if I have a specific suggestion for a change of the notification design but nothing specific comes to mind. 314WPlay (talk) 12:39, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Article containing unreferenced material

I have come across an article (25th Genie Awards) that has no referenced material and has an unreferenced banner dating back to 2009. What should I do? Jackovski1 (talk) 09:00, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Jackovski1, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for asking about this, and wanting to help improve Wikipedia. The answer is that you have a range of possible actions, but there is nothing that you should do. If you have the time and interest, the best thing to do is to research the topic, and either find some good independent reliably-published sources, and edit the article to cite them, or conclude that there is not enough material to establish the subject as notable, and nominate it for deletion. If you believe you have added adequate sources, you can remove the {{unreferenced}} tag. Ideally you'll then edit the article to make sure that it contains only material which is found in the sources. A less effortful option is to find one or two sources and add them - you could then change the tag to {{refimprove}}. And a third option is that you do nothing at all but pass on by, as hundreds or thousands of other people have probably done over the last 11 years. --ColinFine (talk)

Thanks for that. Jackovski1 (talk) 06:33, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Help add a new Column in the Help page; about Language and font settings.

Especially https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Multilingual_support
and https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Universal_Language_Selector
these two article.

"For multilingual font support, visit Help:Multilingual Support. To learn about how to use Language and font settings, see the MediaWiki article on Universal Language Selector."

RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 11:12, 14 September 2020 (UTC) RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 11:12, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

PS: I tried but I cannot focus within multiple HTML tags and column divide tags. So I request more expert editors to add the paragraph or column RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 11:15, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@RIT RAJARSHI: I'm afraid I don't understand what you're asking. Each page already has a link to the other in what is thought to be the appropriate place. Regardless, the best place to make suggestions for a page is on its own talk page (e.g., Help talk:Multilingual support). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Thank you. to troubleshoot non-rendered fonts, these are some very good resources. Many mobile phones and some computers does not show these special characters. It will help to get rendering support. RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 14:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

User names: why not more transparent?

I imagine this must have been discussed before, but I haven't found it. Most editors have unguessable identities, and I don't understand why that is allowed. When I first registered in June I used my real name (Athel Cornish-Bowden) but then I noticed that hardly anyone else did, so I asked for it to be changed to something slightly less obvious, but easily guessable by anyone who knows me.

However, most names are totally obscure, and I don't think that is a good idea, as it allows people to make scurrilous edits secure in the knowledge that they are effectively anonymous.

Something I hadn't realized is that it's apparently possible to make edits without being registered at all, just using an IP address like 68.163.55.110 -- about as anonymous as one could want. 68.163.55.110 posted a series of edits to the article on Maud Menten I was working on today, introducing sentences like "she was also a loser who sucked dick n was a big bitch with no life" -- as clear a case of vandalism as I've seen. That was in 2006, and I hope procedures for detecting vandalism have evolved since then. I imagine that 68.163.55.110 now has a permanent block, but how to find out? Was 68.163.55.110 blocked? When? Permanently? Athel cb (talk) 17:40, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Athel cb! Many editors value their Wikipedia:Privacy (see that link) and anonymity is an integrated aspect of WP. Personally I want my WP-stuff on WP, and is quite pleased to edit under pseudonym. Others think differently, and that's up to them. IP:s are not more anonymous, they are for example easily geographically located. Well, so am I, but that's becase I put it on my userpage (and it could be an elaborate lie/online persona thing).

As you can see in the article history [1], that IP was on a brief vandal spree February 6, 2006‎ and the edits were swiftly dealt with. Anyone can edit, but from that follows that someone else can edit again. I don't know if they were blocked or not, but it's not that interesting by now since IP:s change. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:18, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@Athel cb: Nowadays we have a range of 'bots' which can detect and immediately revert bad faith edits like that, and even give an automated warning to the editor. If they continue, we block them! That said, we do still have problems, but the most insidious are either the intentional or the unintentional introductions of incorrect information. (Look out for next months Wikipedia newspaper called 'The Signpost' for a recent shocking and accidental case of an innocent person being wrongly accused of being a child murderer, which nobody spotted for a while, and which we're all very concerned could have happened in the first place.) Bear in mind, too, that many editors work in contentious areas or in countries where freedoms to use the internet are far more controlled than they are where you or I live. So being able to edit pseudonymously or as an IP gives those people access to contribute safely. Because interested editors can watch specific pages, they get alerted whenever a page changes and can assess the value of the edit. Oh, and we even use AI to assess the likelihood or otherwise of edits being made in good or bad faith (see here for how editors can use it to monitor 'Recent Changes'). It's quite fun to see what the kiddies like to get up to here... and then revert them! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:03, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both. I wondered if there was an efficient automatic bot for detecting common typos, such as repeated words or writing "teh" for "the". I've noticed that when I've written, say, "in terms of of" it gets flagged within a matter of hours. That's one that I do fairly often, because if I type "ito" it gets expanded immediately to "in terms of" but I sometimes forget that "of" is part of the expansion. I think the reason I was taken aback by the vandalism of the article on Maud Menten as she is by no means a controversial figure. No doubt if I were editing an article about Donald Trump I'd see a great mass of vandalism. Athel cb (talk) 06:36, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Athel cb I don't know of any WP:BOT for that, but it's not really my area. I know there are some editors who regularly search WP for common misspellings (see Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings).

Vandalism comes in many flavors. If you notice an active vandal editor/IP you can ask for blocking at WP:AIV. If you notice an article that has vandal problems from several editors/IPs, you can ask that the article is protected at WP:RFPP. Donald Trump, for example, has such protection, marked with a padlock in the upper right corner. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Loads of sources for a statement

Hi, so now I want to know why in articles some sentences have several citations. Is one not enough to refer to? What is the benefit of citing many sources? Thank you. 314WPlay (talk) 20:01, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, 314WPlay. Welcome to the Teahouse. Sometimes sentences contain several separate facts, with one source not being able to verify all of them. That's why multiple sources are cited. It's important that we don't rely on multiple sources to imply something that neither of the sources does; this is what we call synthesis. You might find occasionally in articles on contentious subjects that several sources are used to support the same fact; this is editors trying to prove that the information contains due weight. It's rarely if ever a necessary thing to do, as talk page discussion can handle this. Zindor (talk) 20:15, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

314WPlay Zindor summed it up very well, but for more info you can read this essay - Wikipedia:Citation overkill. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:29, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Especially in the sciences, I sometimes see a primary source that first introduced an idea (often the main topic of the article or a major subtopic) paired with a seconary/tertiary one that is a review of the topic (especially of its history). That way we give direct credit for the originator and as a key ref to trace citatations for research purposes but also meet WP:RS that it actually is the authoritative or original publication. But I agree that these can often be split into separate sentences or separate locations in a sentence. "The Smith theorem was proposed by Smithy Smith in 1894.[ref to Smith's 1894 work][ref to major review of the field that identifies this as the original pub and eponymous nature]" DMacks (talk) 10:30, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Zindor, Timtempleton, DMacks and anyone else: Thank you for creating a welcoming environment and your answers. Would you mind working through an example with me? Take the article defining Expatriate and the sentence "This has caused controversy, with many asserting that the traditional use of the word has had racist connotations." Why six sources there? 314WPlay (talk) 19:38, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

314WPlay, "many" is a WP:WEASEL word. I read two of the sources and neither said "many ...". So, the best guess is, they are used for WP:SYNTHESIS. You can't verify the claim but if you question it, the author may challenge, doesn't each source convince you that at least one person thinks it is racist? And isn't six "many" enough for you? Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 20:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: But then does that mean that the sources are being used to imply something that none of them say? 314WPlay (talk) 12:44, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

314WPlay, please read the six sources and see if any one of them says the thing that they are being cited for. If any of them does, just leave those for verification and remove the rest. If none of them do, then we'll know the answer to your question, won't we? Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:41, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Editing a page that's been written in a language other than English

Hello again! I am wondering how to edit a page that has been written in German: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Chase?oldid=179428496 (it is also partially translated into Dutch: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Chase). I didn't find directly relevant help on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Interlanguage_links. Do I create an English language version of the existing German one? If not, do I create a link on the English-language Wikipedia? There is nothing in the English-language version about this musician and I would like to create either a page for him or add additional material to the German version (e.g., date of death; additional discography). Thank you. Franburke2 (talk) 06:26, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Franburke2. That's a very good question. Each language wikipedia is a separate entity. If you can write fluently in German or Dutch, you could edit those pages yourself in the relevant language. Your user account name is valid on all Wikipedias. Because I only speak 'Urlaub Deutch', there have been a couple of times when I felt it worthwhile to leave a short message in English on the article's talk page, apologising for writing in the wrong language, but pointing to some iportant reference or some major improvements I've made to the English Wikipedia article. It's then up to any editors watching that page to decide if my note is worth acting on (or simply deleting as not being in the right langauge!).

Because each Wikipedia operates under its own policies, it's possible that a person notable in one Wikipedia might not be deemed notable here, or vice versa. See WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:NARTIST for what our notability criteria are for such people. If they do meet them, then you could start a Draft article at WP:AFC and submit it for review and feedback. Don't rely just on 'Google Translate' to convert an article - it needs thoough human checking before going live. See also WP:TRANSLATE. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:01, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Nick Moyes - I'll give the WP:AFC option a try. The musician in question was English, so it's surprising that there's nothing in that language about him. Franburke2 (talk) 07:41, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Franburke2: You're very welcome. I'v only now had a chance to look at the de-wiki and nl-wiki pages and, to be honest, there's insufficient there to merit a page here via a direct translation. Our [[WP:N|notability criteria] are somewhat higher, I'm afraid, so you will need to look around to find more detailed references about him, or evidence of his musical achievements meeting our specific music criteria. Im not a music buff, so I won't offer detailed advice on how to do that - but it's in the guidance pages. I'm not saying you won't find them, but focusing on that (in the context of the notability criteria I gave you) will avoid you wasting time on the wrong things. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:15, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again, Nick Moyes. Yes, the German and Dutch pages were a little thin on references, and this Tommy Chase one may be a bit of a challenge too. I've created music pages before (e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JayDee_Maness and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steppin%27_Out_with_a_Dream) so am aware of the challenges of creating pages with a limited number of references. I'll have to consider this one and will drop you a note if I do manage to create a solid page. Greatly appreciate the feedback! Franburke2 (talk) 13:04, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Status on the article upload

Hi there,

can you please let me know what the status is for the article submitted titled International Fund for Houbara Conservation? I have tried multiple times to upload it with no luck.

Any feedback will be really appreciated.

Thanks! Sylvia

ActionGavril (talk) 07:05, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Draft:International Fund for Houbara Conservation Declined twice, resubmitted 20 August, waiting for a reviewer. In my opinion very likely to be Declined again, as there are large sections of text with no references. David notMD (talk) 07:12, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

ActionGavril I did some format clean up. Major weakness is still lack of references. The sections Conservation activities and Conservation model and strategy appear twice (subsections in History and as sections). David notMD (talk) 07:30, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

IFHC actions are described at Houbara bustard. Improving content there may be preferred to trying to create a separate article about the organization. David notMD (talk) 08:04, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@ActionGavril: I agree with David. At a cursory glance, the article has no lead, lacks references, and is full of promotional 'peacock' phrases (no pun intended). Example: "The programme’s blended learning approach builds on the wisdom of the late Sheikh Zayed and the UAE Government’s ambitions to create tomorrow’s leaders through education and initiatives." I'd be happy to see a WP:REDIRECT to the conservation section within the bustard article in the first instance. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:15, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Are song lyrics Copyvios?

Do song lyrics meet the criteria for WP:Copyvio? And if they do, should I just do the usual copyvio process (remove, template, notify editors etc.)? Thanks in advance. Opalzukor (talk) 08:10, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Opalzukor. Yes, most lyrics will be copyright, unless very old songs (over 70 years), or placed in the public domain by the artist with an appropriate licence. See Wikipedia:Lyrics and poetry for more guidance, remembering that this is an encyclopaedia. Quoting small parts of a song, if relevant to the encyclopedic nature of the article might be appropriate in certain circumstances of interpretation, based on what reliable sources say about them. But just putting in lyrics for lyrics sake is not OK here, and those edits probably ought to be revdelled, too Thanks for your question. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

In that case, what should I put as the url? Just "song lyrics", or a link to a song lyric providing service, or something else? Opalzukor (talk) 11:24, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Opalzukor: Sorry, I missed your reply as you didn't 'ping' me, so I've only just seen it. I advise you to leave out all links to lyric sites. Let an editor go look for lyrics by themselves. We can't stop other people posting copyrighted content that they do not own, but we mustn't be linking to sites which contains such content, as it you would be going against our policy of supporting free content. Just leave out any such links, please. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:29, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes:I seem to have messed up. Another editor stated that they had replaced my copyvio report with a more fitting one, however, while my version was up, I had linked to a lyric providing site. Should I get it oversighted, or is all ok? Again, thanks. Opalzukor (talk) 17:26, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Opalzukor: Goodness, it's not that serious that an edit with a simple link in it needs to be either oversighted or even plain old r≠evdelled. That's really overkill. Just a simple edit to remove the external link is all that's necessary. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:59, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Is that the rollback feature possible on devices?

I edited Wikipedia using my mobile tablet. I have the permission to have rollback rights, to end vandalism. Is the rollback feature appear or available on some of the mobile devices? Rdp060707 (talk) 08:31, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Rdp060707 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know about the app or mobile version, but they do appear if you use the full desktop version in a browser on your tablet. 331dot (talk) 08:40, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Rdp060707, Yes, they do appear on all smartphones. @331dot, I think they may be slightly confused as they apparently do not have the Rollback flag. Celestina007 10:58, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Celestina007: Is that true that a rollback feature will appear on all smartphones, but desktop version? Rdp060707 (talk) 01:33, 15 September 2020

@Rdp060707: yes. Rollback links show up on all devices, no matter if they are a tablet/smartphone/Desktop Computer/Laptop/... if you use the desktop version of Wikipedia. (Hint from me: Use a responsive skin in your preferences - makes things easier. I prefer timeless) Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Victor Schmidt: Okay, that's all, and thank you for your understanding. Rdp060707 (talk) 07:44, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Help me to improve Draft:Camden Monarchs and understand reason of decline

Reason of decline AFC Draft:Camden Monarchs

Hello,

Please help me finding the exact issue in this draft Draft:Camden Monarchs. I have used reference of only those secondary links which are already used inside the other published articles. Also websites( abaliveaction.com; basketball.usbasket.com; nypost.com; bronzemagonline.com; nationalblackguide; inquirer.com, etc) are independent in nature I am open to modify or remove those part of this article which does not fit.

Thanks a lot. Vsp.manu (talk) 09:13, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Pinging DGG, the decliner. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 10:21, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Vsp.manu, only four of the sentences in your draft are about its subject. Maproom (talk) 11:24, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

my references are in the wrong section

I am working on creating an article in my sandbox. I have a reference section and a list of the references I used, only they are not together, the references show up at the end, just prior to my categories. While I know I can move my reference section to the end to make a make shift fix- as it it will appear that the references are in the correct place, how do I actually get them there.I am hoping there is an easy fix for this.

Below is my copy & Paste

<redacted> BF (talk) 10:08, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

This isn't the place for a copy of your draft, so I've removed it. You just needed to link to User:Thebaconfairy/sandbox. You'll find advice at Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

In particular, it looks as if you've tried to use list-defined references, so try looking at WP:LDR. David Biddulph (talk) 10:23, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi David, sorry about the copy and paste, I didn't realize. My references are still in the incorrect place despite following the correct formula, I even tried matching the spacing in the heading to see if that might fix it. This is the 11th article I have written and none so far have had this issue.

BF (talk)

Does this fix, in accordance with WP:LDR, do the trick? David Biddulph (talk) 10:31, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

The difference is that on most of your earlier articles you didn't try to use list-defined references. You did try to use them on the most recent article before this one, but once the syntax was corrected it can be seen that you defined one reference which you weren't actually using to support the text. David Biddulph (talk) 10:38, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the help. I didn't realize I had done it differently! BF (talk)

Someone removed my photos which relate to the wiki page

I added two photos of Troika pottery objects that I own to the relevant Troika Pottery wikipage but some user called 'Theroadislong' has removed them with the comment.... 'These do NOT illustrate anything mentioned in the text'.

As the two photos are very relevant to the page by showing what other items the pottery produced and rarity etc they should not have been deleted. I did earlier mistakenly add two links under the photos which I appreciate I should not have done and I removed them.

Surely the photos on their own do not cause a problem and add to the page?

Iappreciate any help on this.....Thank you!

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Troika_Pottery&action=history Troikafloyd (talk) 12:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

The place to discuss the article is at Talk:Troika Pottery. If you are connected with the subject you should read about conflict of interest, and (if relevant) about paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Fix YouTube personality page

Can someone help me fix a personality for a YouTube channel to meet the guidelines of wikipedia please IZeeYou2 (talk) 13:28, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IZeeYou2, and welcome to the Teahouse. I presume you are talking about your User:IZeeYou2/sandbox. The only way that that can be made to meet the guidelines for a Wikipedia article is for it to demonstrate that McJoeGames meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - roughly, that several people who have no connection with him, and have not been prompted or fed information by him, have chosen to write about him and been published in reliable sources. Nothing that you know about him is relevant to Wikipedia unless it has been published in a reliable source. Hardly anything that he or his associates have said or published are relevant to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is only interested in sources independent of the subject.

By choosing to start your career as a Wikipedia editor with probably the most difficult task there is - creating a new article - you have I'm afraid embarked on what is likely to be a course of frustration and disappointment. I always advise new editors to spend a few months improving some of our six million articles, and learning how Wikipedia works, before trying it. --ColinFine (talk) 14:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Well ColinFine, why doesn't SocialBlade count as a third party of YouTube, i dont think it has any connection to it, but third party of YouTube sources does wikipedia like? IZeeYou2 (talk)

@IZeeYou2: Socialblade does nothing to establish notability because it is 1) not realy independent (its based on youtube data, which is a user-generated source and in this case dependent of the subject and 2) does not contain WP:SIGCOV. Youtube is, like already mentioned, not considered reliable because it is user-editable and therefore neither helps to establish notability. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:14, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Huge problems with an administrator, help needed fast

There's an administrator that has issues with me that go beyond policy, into PA. I've learned to avoid them. Today they (unilaterally?) changed a page from Bio without living parameters to a BLP [2], which stopped me [3] from reediting [4] problems on a controversial page 11th Panchen Lama. I've a block on BLP due to the same administrator, ends 29 September. Also today, they just threatened a block for PA [5], but I have no idea what they're referring to. I am very careful with conduct. Received PA's yesterday, threats today of sockpuppetry and other rubbish. It seems they're not following policy or guidelines, and not worried about it. I've tried to resolve matters but any communication with them seems to get. twisted. Is it possibe for you to reason with them? Or explain to me what's best to do? Thanks so much! Pasdecomplot (talk) 14:03, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

If you are really worried, go to WP:ADMINABUSE or WP:RFDA. HeartGlow ^(talk) 14:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

HeartGlow30797, perhaps you missed it because you were not pinged (see this thread if you did), but your premature advice to escalate the situation got a teahouse guest in trouble very recently. Luckily, this time the links don't go to anywhere like WP:ANI (which actually has an advice on its header that reads:"If you're just plain confused, ask at the Teahouse.") or WP:ARC directly, but please stop playing a guessing game with the answers, there are no awards. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:48, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Pasdecomplot, I am looking into it and will post a full reply soon. In the meantime, please do not worry or take any drastic action. I am quite sure she will not block you (she was just warning you that someone else might). Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:51, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Pasdecomplot, if you are topic banned from BLPs, that means that you are topic banned from articles about living people and making any edits about living people in any other article or talk page. It does not matter whether it was marked as a BLP in the talk page. You should have known you were violating your topic ban when you were typing in the text that you added to that article as you were clearly writing about one or more living people. If any other admin aware of your topic ban had seen your edit, they would have bocked you. Valereee seems to have chosen instead to add the notices on the talk page and to inform you so you would stop editing the article before someone else noticed.

As for the template about PA, that is one of the standard templates that editors give when they notice a personal attack; admins and non-admins, everyone can give that notice. It does not mean that they will block you. But an admin visiting your page may notice it, investigate it, and block you if they too agree that it was a personal attack. Or, if you make another edit that she considers a personal attack, she might report you to another admin. Valereee and you now have a significant history, so she can not block you per WP:INVOLVED. IIRC, she was not aware of this when she blocked you the first time, but she does after the ANI discussion that followed. She is just trying to help you. She realised that some issues with your editing stem from you being in mobile platform and tried to say as much at the recent ANI but you were quite hostile to her there. At this point, I think it's best the two of you stay away from each other, and I am sure she will do so if you ask. But I am also quite sure you will get into more trouble not less with her staying away (to give just one example, if you have a BLP topic ban, any other admin would have blocked you for making that edit to the Panchen Lama article, and asked questions later). Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Usedtobecool pinged you on talk. I understand your logic, but the official categories are what matters in this issue. The page in question is officially a Bio without living parameters, as clarified by admin last June, and as of today in the page's info. I have permission to edit the Buddhist pages since their category is not BLP. So, it not about " should have known" since there was nothing to know. Aside from that, thanks for reaching out and the advice! Pasdecomplot 16:34 15 September 2020 (UTC) 16:40, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

There is much BS to refute above, almost as if digging oneself into a bottomless pit, and at Teahouse of all places.

1. Received PA's yesterday, threats today of sockpuppetry: Where are the specific personal attack(s)? This message on potential sockpuppetry is a calmly-worded advice against yourself hypothetically engaging in such, not a "threat" that sockpuppetry would occur.
2. I've a block on BLP due to the same administrator: Nope, that was placed by El_C on 29 Jun.
3. they just threatened a block for PA, but I have no idea what they're referring to: Yes, you do have an unequivocal idea, "The message above supports the sense of untrustworthiness" [of Valereee]. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 14:51, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Gosh, CaradhrasAiguo, those edits..."Chinese leadership" and "leadership by China"... Thinking of humbly proposing a category of policy called WP:AKGG (apparatchik goobolee-gook). Pasdecomplot 16:41 15 September 2020 16:40, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

CaradhrasAiguo, lol...I'd actually interpreted that as a PA on you, not on me. If I'd thought it was on me, I'd have just ignored it. :D —valereee (talk) 18:30, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

​ @Pasdecomplot: I've struck two incorrect timestamps that you created manually above. I'll note there are other examples on your talk page. Please don't do that. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:55, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @AlanM1, it's not intentional, but an equipment issue. I'll coordinate clocks. I appreciate the ping.Pasdecomplot (talk) 09:12, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Pasdecomplot: Please sign your messages on discussion (talk) pages by adding a space and four tildes to the end of the last line of your message, like this:

This is the last line of the message. ~~~~

The four tildes will be automatically converted to a signature that contains your linked username and a timestamp, which helps readers understand who said what.

You don't have to rely on your own clock being right or that you format it correctly if you let the server take care of it (the one above was missing a comma, which I just fixed; bots and user scripts rely on the format being correct in order to find the timestamp). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Trying to figure out reference error for Steve Warren

Trying to figure out reference error for Steve Warren Gettingpasttaken (talk) 15:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Gettingpasttaken, I'm not sure what you're asking for help with? —valereee (talk) 19:51, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Gettingpasttaken: I moved your question into the body and renamed the section. Some things don't react well to having wikimarkup in section headings; they should just be concise plain-text headlines. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:00, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

References

Adding a name to a list

Yesterday, I added a name to a list, and, though imperfect (programming is Greek to me) I published it, and viewed it after logging out. Today it's gone. Might it return, or do I need to try adding it again? Gettingpasttaken (talk) 15:23, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Gettingpasttaken No. You attempted to add a person to the list of notable alumni in the article Stephen F. Austin High School (Austin, Texas). Wikipedia requires that people qualify as notable alumni only if there is an existing Wikipedia article about them. Having references is not sufficient to qualify. David notMD (talk) 15:32, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

David notMD, is that a rule written down somewhere? My general practice is that it's okay to add a person without a page to an alumni list, so long as it's done alongside references establishing their notability. Edmund Kuempel appears to pass the general notability guideline without too much trouble.[6][7] {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

It looks like the relevant guideline is at WP:LISTPEOPLE, and it refers to notability, not having an article. I'm going to re-add Kuempel to the page with the refs. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:ALUMNI says more or less the same thing.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Question about biography of a living person

hi I raised concerns about malicious editing of the biography of a living person Peter Tufano. An editor reverted the version to a previous one, and asked that edits be discussed in the talk. That change has now been undone, without discussion. What should I do next? Nasilemak1973 (talk) 15:35, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Nasilemak1973, any material about living persons, if challenged, must remain out of the article, until a consensus is reached for its inclusion. It is incumbent upon editors seeking to add any such material to start a talk page discussion and attempt to gain consensus. Challenged material should not be restored before that happens (WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE). See WP:DR for how consensus may be reached. An admin and teahouse host has now protected the article. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:49, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I reverted the contentious material and semi-protected the article. Interested editors should discuss the matter at Talk: Peter Tufano. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:50, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

 Unijoce (talk) 15:43, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Unijoce, do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:52, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Adding an image to Allan H. MacDonald article

• Link: Allan H. MacDonald
• @Janeannp: Note: Moved to new plain-text section heading. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I need to know how to upload the image for Allan MacDonald. It seems the process is rather convoluted, and I've been getting different answers, to no avail. Please help! Jane Ann Parker (redacted). Thank you! Janeannp (talk) 15:58, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Janeannp: I have to agree that image is a rather complicated. Lets start with two simple questions: Is the image licensed under a free license such as CC-BY-SA? Are you the copyright holder of the image (most likely in this case the photographer)? If you can respond to one of the questions with yes please upload the image using the the Upload Wizard over at Wikimedia Commons. Uploading images to commons has the adventage that they can be used on any Wiki hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation, not yust Wikipedia. The Wizard will assist you in getting things right, and afaik at the end present you the syntax to include the image. If you must answer no to both questions, I recommend going to WP:Files for Upload. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:13, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I have been given permission by Dr. MacDonald to publish his photo, and I have already uploaded the image to Wikimedia Commons. What I don't understand is how to get that image onto his Wikipedia page. It seems like a nearly impossible task, I don't know how others do it! Thanks for your help. Jane Ann

Paragraph

I am a new Wikipedian. I am wondering how to start paragraphs and also link words to other articles. Thanks You Magister001 (talk) 17:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Magister001, welcome to Wikipedia. To link words to other articles you simply have to place the word inside square brackets, [[Buffalo]] would create Buffalo. If you would like the text to display a different word than the title of the page you are linking to, you need to add a pipe character, like this [[Bubalina|Buffalo]]. You can find more info about linking at Help:Wikilink.

When creating paragraphs in articles be sure to leave a blank line in-between each paragraph and remember not to start sentences with numbers. If you would like to create new sections, most of the time you would place two equals signs = on either side of the section title. There are other types of headings and you can find more information about this here. When replying to people on talk pages, you should indent replies and start your new paragraph immediately below the other editors text. Let me know if you need any further assistance. Regards, Zindor (talk) 17:32, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Contents

Does the contents box just randomly show up? Or do I have to do something? Magister001 (talk) 18:04, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Arceus24, yes it comes automatically when there are enough items for it (4 sections, if I remember correctly). There are magic words to control its appearance but that's not something you need to worry about as a beginner. Read all about it at WP:TOC. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:12, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Aagh!

The article that I was working on! where do I find it?! Magister001 (talk) 18:14, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Arceus24, is it Eddie Fantastic? There should be a link at the top of any Wikipedia page, right beside the log out button, that reads "Contributions" which will take you to your contribution history at Special:Contributions/Arceus24. All articles you've been working on should be listed there. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:34, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Arceus24: I assume you mean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Arceus24/sandbox/Eddie_Fantastic Simply save the URL in your browsers boookmarks or somewhere else where you can find it with ease. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:38, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Is there a reason your User name is Arceus24 but your signature is Magister001? That can confuse other editors who are trying to contact you. David notMD (talk) 18:43, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

How do we deal with a page that no notability but I am a new user?

 RobotDaneellives (talk) 20:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

RobotDaneellives Any editor, i.e., you, can submit an article to WP:Articles for Deletion. A review process takes a week or two. Interested editors state their opinions to keep or delete. At the end, an Administrator decides. David notMD (talk) 21:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: The article in question is Joanne Pransky. David notMD (talk) 21:10, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

h

I though only edits to mainspace should be added in an account's contributions history. Where do I take this idea? - Regards, Wikimeedian | Discussion 20:25, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Wikimeedian. Your best bet is Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab). Regards, Zindor (talk) 20:47, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Wikimeedian. I honestly don't think that suggestion would be welcomed by anyone here at all, as it would effectively hide all edits other than those to mainspace. I really wouldn't waste your time suggesting it. It's a definite non-starter. Unless I have misunderstood your idea, doing that would allow you to abuse other editors, add nonsense to talk pages, vandalise WikiProjects and damage templates with nobody knowing you'd done it. What, might I enquire, is your rationale for thinking that would be a good idea?

If your wish is not to have another editor's full list of contributions bloated out with all their trivial edits to their user page, or whatever, you can simply select which namespace edits you want to see. Look for the Search for contributions dropdown menu at the top of the Special:Contributions page - it is easily missed. Thus, here are all your edits, and here are just your edits to mainspace. And is a different view of your 71 edits, thus far. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC) (@Wikimeedian: fixing my duff ping, sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:08, 15 September 2020 (UTC)) P

@Nick Moyes: Sorry that was a poor description what I meant by that statement was not to completely remove the edits that are not in mainspace, but to have it so that accounts only display mainspace contribution(s) and more broadly only have them "Count as" real edits, which would also solve a variety of different problems such as mistaken AutoConfirm-ation and edit display badges. - Regards, Wikimeedian | Discussion 22:26, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

(Also like you said there are some exceptions such as Maintenance Categories) - Regards, Wikimeedian | Discussion 22:57, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Wikimeedian: That won't solve the scenario you are trying to prevent. My edit count is lower than it could be because I try to make all my edits to an article all at once, and don't use bots. If someone's goal was to get a high mainspace edit cont, they'd simply break their contributions into smaller chunks, and use a bot, and voila - high edit count! Bring on the badges! But seriously, you can go to [[8]] and see edit counts. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:41, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Sorry I didn't quite understand your oppose, why does this not solve these problems? - Regards, Wikimeedian | Discussion 22:46, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Wikimeedian: Ah, OK. I can partly appreciate where you're going with that. We still need 'Special:Contributions' to show all types of edit, but in my view I'd quite like to see only mainspace edits counting towards certain contribution-based rights - but that probably isn't the view of many of the editors who are active 'behind the scenes'. The problem I think Tim is trying to highlight is that it can be so easily gamed, that changing the rules would have little effect. For example, I once saw one editor make 204 mainspace edits in quick succession, but, in doing so, they only added 15 words to one article in that time (diff)! Nick Moyes (talk) 22:56, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Oh thank you for explaining that, I didn't realise how easily that could be exploited... - Regards, Wikimeedian | Discussion 23:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't think most editors do. But those who do (and want to) will. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:10, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't see a reason for that benign comment as this was obviously discontinued, anyway it is 7:20 where I live so (when I posted this obviously) I'm going to bed in a few hours so I'm not going to respond to any replies. - Regards, Wikimeedian | Discussion 23:23, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

It's just some further wisdom for you. You're actually quite fortunate that Nick Moyes took it upon himself to understand and discuss the merits (or lack of) in your idea. The editors at the central venue i directed you to might have been far less friendly! Zindor (talk) 23:45, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Wikimeedian: (ec) I can't imagine what that is in response to, but we already have plenty of tools (like xTools) that can give you all the statistics you want. Special:Contributions can be filtered by namespace and set to display 500 edits per page. The thing is, it's an "extremely silly subject" in the view of most seasoned editors, some of the reasons for which are mentioned above. We, as a community, are here to build an encyclopedia, not to collect hats. Any sort of gaming of edit counts just to get to auto-confirmed or extended-confirmed almost always results in the person doing something against the will of the community. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:47, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes:, @Wikimeedian:, @Timtempleton:, @AlanM1:, After reading the above, I am feeling rather embarrassed. I have edited, on an irregular basis for 4.5 years. Recently, it dawned on me that my edit count "entitled me to a badge", and not long after I posted the first one, my count crossed the line (8000 edits) for the next higher level, which I posted on my user page. Most of my edits are WikiGnome edits, and even when I edit text, I do it in small sectional increments, because of the small editing pane of my Ipad. I also compose a great deal, in my Sandbox, etc., for final transfer to other places. So, compared to an article writer, I don't deserve an Editor Badge, and I don't wish to create a false impression of grandeur and achievement. As of today, only 63.8% of my edits have been Mainspace, and nearly 20% to User. I have removed the Veteran Editor badge. Thanks for discussing this topic. Per AlanM1, the true joy of editing, is doing good work for the community. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 22:56, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Tribe of Tiger: Gnomes are people too! Othurwe ize wed HAVE Just Another piel ofwebjunk. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 02:37, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Tribe of Tiger: I agree - don't be so hard on yourself. Anyone who contributes regularly, and in whatever way or ways that may be, is helping to maintain and enhance this amazing project. Yes, in ine sense we are all unsung heroes whose work other people benefit from. That information sharing and improvement is really a reward in itself, but sometimes it is nice to have a bit of recognition. It's nice when it comes from other people, but there's nothing to be ashamed about for you taking pride in your edits, wherever they may have been made. So long as you're learning, enjoying, and not harming the Project, then you're a helpful editor, and should be proud of that fact. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:25, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, @Nick Moyes:, for your kind words. AFAIK, I have been helpful and done no harm. I have reconsidered, and I am pleased to claim the rank of "WP:Tutnum", which seems like a lovely title for a WikiGnome. Much better than "Veteran Editor". Such fun, and humor! The pleasure of doing "good deeds", and helping others, is a yet another marvelous incentive to work on WP. Yes, we have many people, playing their parts, both large and small, and doing good work. Best wishes from a (now) Proud Tutnam Gnome, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 02:03, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Uploading Photos

I am trying to upload a photo that I took myself and own all the rights to, but I keep getting an error message saying I can't upload it and that I must own the content in order to do so, but I DO own the rights to the photo. How can I fix this? TlntAgnt (talk) 22:02, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

TlntAgnt Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You cannot upload images to Wikipedia until your account is four days old and has 10 edits or more. I would add that if the person you are editing about is your client, you must make the Terms of use required paid editing declaration, and also review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 22:05, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@TlntAgnt: Just to be clear, barring a valid free-use argument, by uploading and licensing images with CC-BY-SA, you are allowing anyone to re-use the image for any purpose, including commercial, as long as they attribute the source, which will be "Wikipedia" and, if they want to dig for it, the history of the page/image, which would show your username (TlntAgnt). Even with a free-use image, someone wanting to re-use it can make a similar argument to re-use it. This is all pretty atypical for what I assume are commercial headshots. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:49, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

TlntAgnt, generally, for uploading photos, you want to go to Wikimedia Commons, the sister project to Wikipedia that serves as the repository for most images used on Wikipedia. (Uploading images directly to Wikipedia is mainly for images that we do not own the license to and are using only under free use.) The conflict of interest rules there are also less strict than those on Wikipedia. Once you upload an image to Commons, you will be able to use it on Wikipedia; see WP:IMAGESTART. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:10, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Finding the right article

What's the best way to find a great article to write about? Hello, I am new here and I wanted to write an article that hasn't been talked about. While there are many articles like that, whenever I find something that's very interesting, I realize that it's something that's already been written about here in Wikipedia. How did you find the right sources to create your article? W AnwarAfnan (talk) 00:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC) Alif Anwar

@AnwarAfnan: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to add to it. Browse the list at WP:RA where there are many articles requested by other editors. See if you can find one that looks interesting. Read WP:YFA on what's needed for an article and use the wizard there to create a draft for review. RudolfRed (talk) 00:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@AnwarAfnan: Do realize, though, that writing a whole new article from scratch is one of the most difficult tasks to do here. It requires understanding a policy and guidelines including notability, WP:TONE, WP:NPOV, how to find and cite reliable sources, article layout and the Manual of Style, etc.. The best way to gain that knowledge is usually from the experience of making small improvements to existing articles to see how they are put together and how the syntax works. Of course, as you hinted at, the most important first step is to find sources that demonstrate notability of the subject, without which the article will not be allowed to exist, regardless of how well put-together it is. Finding those sources about recent subjects is usually a matter of Google-searching for it, preferably among the "News" and "Books" categories. Access to stores of academic journals, like JSTOR, EBSCO, T&F, Cambridge, etc. helps. Older subjects may require some searching at WorldCat and actual legwork at libraries (WP:RX can sometimes help if you have a specific request). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

AnwarAfnan, consider browsing topics you're interested in and have some knowledge of, looking for improvements you can make. You may find a factual error that you can find a reliable source for correcting, or a typo you can fix. Doing that for a while helps you learn WP policies, so when you discover a missing article, you'll know how to write it. For me, I often discover missing articles by reading or listening to coverage about topics that are non-white/male/western. You'll find a ton of missing articles in topics centered on women, people of color, and countries where English isn't a primary language. —valereee (talk) 02:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

There are literally millions of articles that need to be improved. Quality rankings (shown on article Talk pages) rise from Stub to Featured Article. David notMD (talk) 04:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Have a Nice Life (Band)

Hey there I was wondering why there isn’t a page for the album “Sea of Worry” by Have a Nice Life?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Have_a_Nice_Life

 TRod1155 (talk) 04:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Articles are only written when somebody is in the mood to write them. If you can derive material about this album from independent, reliable, published sources, you're welcome to create a draft, at Draft:Sea of Worry. -- Hoary (talk) 05:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi TRod1155. Just going to add to what Hoary posted above in that albums are expected to at least satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Recordings in order for a Wikipedia article to be written about them. So, if you feel that the album does, then you can start working on draft for a potential article. If, on the other hand, you're not sure whether the album is Wikipedia notable, perhaps you should try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums because the members of that WikiProject should be able to help you sort things out. FWIW, articles are being created all of the time, but one of reasons articles end up deleted is because their respective subjects aren't considered to be Wikipedia notable enough for a stand-alone article to be written. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:02, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, TRod1155: Marchjuly makes an excellent point. It's particularly important here because the band Have a Nice Life has such a short article. If this is all that can be said about the band (from independent, reliable, published sources), then this suggests that you'd be wasting your time attempting to create a draft on one of their albums. If on the other hand it's not all that can be said about the band (from ditto), then improving the article about them is probably a better idea than creating the new draft. -- Hoary (talk) 07:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Too many references?

Hi. The article Bilal U. Haq shows a maintenance box that says:

"This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: The huge set of references authored by him are inappropriate and need to be trimmed, or the text trimmed. The are a bibliography though peer reviewed papers can be references used sparingly"

I find it difficult to know the best number of references to use. Before the article was approved, a reviewer said there were not enough references.

If I remove references 1 through 12, 16 and 25, will it be good enough to remove the maintenance box?

Sincerely yours. Sandromaquine (talk) 08:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Removing the citations of his own works would be a good start. Also, you should remove the citation of Wikipedia, which does not regard itself as a reliable source, to avoid circularity. Maproom (talk) 08:35, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

In my opinion, deleting 18-26 would be enough to warrant removing the tag. David notMD (talk) 13:56, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

The wikipage updated by me has been labeled as ' created or edited for undisclosed payments'

 Arti Koul (talk) 08:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Arti Koul Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. What is your question regarding your comment in the header? 331dot (talk) 08:47, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Two editors, one since blocked as a sock puppet and the other suspected of being a public relations company doing undisclosed paid editing (UPE), were instrumental in creating and editing this article. The label is there (Rashika Singh) because of them, not you. David notMD (talk) 14:03, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

User:FMEINDIA also now blocked as being at Wikipedia for promotional purposes and suspected UPE. What is your connection to FMEINDIA, as you appear to be editing the same articles? David notMD (talk) 05:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

How to "Write a book" in wikipedia?

"Write a book" in Wikipedia

Dear sir, I have seen move my Sandbox as a book. Is it sufficient to create a book here. Is there any difference between Article and Book? Rahul Soman^{talk - contribs} 08:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

For information about "Books" in Wikipedia, try reading Wikipedia:Books. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

New Article

Where can I start a new topic/article and work on it before publishing it? Will it be possible to work on it without other members contributing before it is ready? Gabby 09:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Vedlagt Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you wish to draft a new article, you should use Articles for Creation. Other users should see that you are working on a draft(assuming you save your edits as you progress by clicking "publish changes" which should be understood to simply mean "save") and refrain from editing it. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Sandbox

There is a previous article in my Sandbox that has been published.

How do I start on a new article when the old article is in the Sandbox? 

   --Gabby 10:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Vedlagt:

Note that User:Vedlagt/sanbox is still empty, so you could also create an article there. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 10:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

That is empty, but if you include the "d", User:Vedlagt/sandbox isn't empty. In the top left-hand corner it say "(Redirected from User:Vedlagt/sandbox)". Clicking on the link there gets you to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Vedlagt/sandbox&redirect=no which can be cleared, or replaced by new content. The OP does have a draft which had been mistakenly moved to a non-existent user's user page, but it's now at User:Vedlagt/Reverend Johannes Arondeus. The OP has confused the issue by splitting their questions between the Help Desk and here. David Biddulph (talk) 10:34, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

How can I delete an article that is still in my sandbox to make room for a new one? The article there has been accepted and published. Will it effect the article on Wikipedia?

Gabby 11:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Vedlagt Gabby 11:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Try reading the answer to your question immediately above. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

User:VedlagtStill have a problem clearing my Sandbox.

Gabby 11:35, 16 September 2020 (UTC) Gabby 11:35, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Please stop creating new sections when you are following up on an existing discussion. If you don't tell us what you're problem is, we can't help you. What stopped you clearing or editing the page when you went to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Vedlagt/sandbox&redirect=no ? And please don't start a new line with a space, because that screws up the formatting of the text, and please sort out your signature, as you were advised on your user talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Transition Integrity Project Affiliations

Transition Integrity Project says it is a bipartisan organization!

Why isn't there a link as to "all of its affiliations"? "The Transition Integrity Project, an organization with ties to George Soros’ Open Society Foundations and to the Chinese Communist Party-linked think tank The Berggruen Institute, has outlined several tactics the Left and Deep State plan to use to secure a Biden victory in the 2020 presidential election, including mail-in voting, suppression of speech via social-media censorship, and “mass mobilization” (read: riots) on America’s streets". https://www.newsbreak.com/news/2055812827751/soros-linked-org-prepares-for-election-coup-calls-for-mass-street-uprisings Justinell (talk) 13:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Justinell: The original article [9] is published by The New American, which is considered unreliable through consensus on Wikipedia (see WP:RSP). Saying that an organization "has ties to" another is also too vague: how exactly are they related? You'll need to find a reliable source for the claims you make. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 15:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

2 ranches -same name

this concerns https://www.inaturalist.org/places/cibolo-creek-ranch, which is located in Bulverde Texas.The Wikipedia entry that iNaturalist is using drags up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cibolo_Creek_Ranch, which is 435 miles west of my place. I just need to be able to use a correct description of our ranch on the iNaturalist page. Our ranch legally has the name. It is registered with the state of Texas as Cibolo Creek Ranch and also with Dunn and Bradstreet as Cibolo Creek Ranch. I don't want to edit the west Texas historic ranch away, even though it legally doesn't own the name. How do you settle when two entities have the same name and can I edit? I am 75 years old, so please folks, be kind. 162.72.8.110 (talk) 16:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC) 162.72.8.110 (talk) 16:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. I am 68 years old and respect my elders so I will try to be kind. First of all, Wikipedia has no control over how another website displays information so you would have to take that up with the iNaturalist website. The ranch described in the current Wikipedia article definitely deserves an article because it is historic, on the National Register of Historic Places, movies were made there, a Supreme Court justice died there, and so on. We do not pay much attention to legal formalities regarding names and instead go by what published reliable sources say. I have no idea whether your ranch deserves a Wikipedia article. As for the matter of how Wikipedia deals with two or more entities with the same name, we call that disambiguation and we deal with that all the time. Can you edit? Yes, you can but you have an obvious conflict of interest regarding these two ranches. Set up an account, declare your conflict of interest, and I will be willing to help you further. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:46, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Note: For reference, the property in discussion appears to be 1410 Obst Rd., Bulverde, TX, 29.737441°N 98.470298°W / 29.737441; -98.470298 and is 352 miles "air distance" due east of Cibolo Creek Ranch. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for Invitation

Thanks for inviting me to the tea house Rqndom - Liibtard Liibtard (talk) 16:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Liibtard, I have added a header to your post to prevent it from interfering with the previous poster's query. Please in future click the big blue "Ask a question" button at the top of this page, which will automatically start a new section, rather than just adding your post on to the bottom of someone else's.

Oh, and Welcome to the Teahouse. Did you have a query about editing Wikipedia?

[You should reply, if you want to, by going to the next line after this post, starting it with three colons and immediately continuing with your text (no space needed).] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.218.14.16 (talk) 17:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Talk page

I am very new to Wikipedia and haven't been here for a while.

How can I answer a message on my Talk page? (talk) 17:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Vedlagt: Your user talk page is at User talk:Vedlagt. Please use the edit links next to each section header ("edit section" imo), and indent your post with one : more than the previous one. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:15, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Vedlagt: There's a full explanation at Help:Notifications, bu the key things you have to know are:

• If someone leaves a message for you on your talk page, there's an assumption that they've also temporarily added your talk page to their watch list. This means they get notified of any edit made by anyone to that page. That way they can keep an eye out for a reply. (I therefore saw your attempt to reply to me, and your subsequent deletion of it)
• To ensure another editor receives a red 'notification' (shown above), you need to correctly include their username and correctly sign your post with four keyboard tildes and save everything together in one single edit. (it doesn't work if you forget one bit and add it later). The correct way to name someone is Vedlagt or User:Vedlagt or @Vedlagt: which are written as {{u|Vedlagt}} or [[User:Vedlagt]] or {{re|Vedlagt}}. You cannot simply type an @ symbol in front of the name: use the third format to create that. PS: Your signature is still wrong - you've omitted your username. Why not go back to your user preferences and set the signature to default to avoid more problems? Nick Moyes (talk) 17:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

What should I do if I made multiple mistakes reporting a WP:COPYVIO?

So I attempted to report a possible copyvio on Let's Hurt Tonight. However, I messed up at multiple stages involving the source of the lyrics, and I may have used the wrong templates. What is the recommended course of action? Should I get a rollback of the mistaken sourcing? Opalzukor (talk) 17:08, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Opalzukor: The main issue I see, from an outside perspective, is that template is designed for a different situation (when the issue is a whole article, not a whole section). I've just reverted the article to right before the offending lyrics were inserted, and asked an admin to revision-delete the page history where they were shown. Template:Copyvio-revdel I think is closer to the correct one you were looking for, for future reference - it comes with usage instructions as well. The fact that some of your edits were hidden reflects nothing on you - it's simply the best way to hide the copy-vio. -- a lad insane (channel two) 19:20, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a ton. The problem was, I couldn't find a source, so I was unsure on exactly what to do. I know, I should be bold, however I should also check other examples of similar things. Again, thanks. Opalzukor (talk) 20:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Upload 3 images

I'd like to request someone to upload 3 images for me so I can use them on the same article (Teppen), I'm aware Wikipedia:Files for upload exists but I find it complicated to request this there as well as to upload the images myself (I'm afraid of selecting an incorrect license when uploading). The 3 images and their sources are below:

• https://teppenthegame.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/battle1_01_en-1024x498.jpg
  • Source: https://teppenthegame.com/en/news/guide/0000004.html
  • Purpose: The screenshot of the game, I will use it in the article as an example.
• https://teppenthegame.com/_materials/img/logo.png
  • Source: https://teppenthegame.com/
  • Purpose: The logo of the game, I will use it at the infobox template.
• https://teppenthegame.com/_materials/img/e-sports/2019/world-championship/result_pict_top.jpg
  • Source: https://teppenthegame.com/en/e-sports/2019/world-championship/
  • Purpose: A picture of an esport event of the game, I will use it in the article as an example.

Please upload these if possible or give me clear instructions on which license to use and such.

JyuHachiJyu (talk) 17:09, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, JyuHachiJyu. I've only looked at the first one, but I see no evidence that it has been freely licensed, and therefore it may not be used in Wikipedia unless you can show (and the onus is on you, wanting to upload it) that its use meets all the criteria in the non-free content criteria. The Logo is a different case, and according to logos, logos are often uploaded as non-free images. --ColinFine (talk) 17:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Create a page

Can someone please help me I am trying to create a page bit it keeps saying error Alisha rains (talk) 17:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Alisha rains and welcome to the Teahouse. You have successfully created the pages TikTok dance (although that was later redirected to TikTok#Features and trends), and User:Alisha rains, and Draft:D.R.E.A.M. Can you give the name of the page you were trying to create, and as much as possible of the exact error message that you received, please? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:50, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi the page name is called https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Unathi_Nkayi&action=edit&redlink=1 if you want to find it you can go to idols south Africa to find it Alisha rains (talk) 6:45 17 september 2020 (UTC)

It appears you want to create a page about Unathi Nkayi, who also goes by Unathi Msengana (her married name?) who is/was a judge on the TV music talent show Idols South Africa However, I cannot find your contribution to a draft. Are you using WP:YFA? David notMD (talk) 05:25, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

No have not created it yet because it keeps saying that there is a error Alisha rains (talk) 16:13, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Alisha rains, it would help if you said what exactly the error message says, verbatim if possible. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:49, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok I am going to try again it's starting to work now let me try again thank you so much for helping me Alisha rains (talk) 21:15, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Article repeatedly denied

I want my article (Draft:Xent), but it keeps getting denied, what do I need to add/change to make it become approved Jonyk56 (talk) 18:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jonyk56: You would need to add reliable (no user-generated content) independent (no interviews or press releases) sources with some coverage (not yust routine announcements or directory-like entries) to show that this subject meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jonyk56: I just googled Xent and XenText and can find no media coverage suggesting an article will be accepted at this time. The two sources you currently use in the article are a primary source and a paywalled textbook that I can't read. It's likely WP:TOOSOON. This information was left by the patrollers. It doesn't matter since the sourcing is so weak, but the phrasing also isn't right, and you wouldn't put someone's Twitter handle in an encyclopedia article. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Jonyk56. I'm really sorry, but I agree with Tim templeton in that, in its present form your daft draft article is simply an attempt at promotion of a new, non-notable product, and stands absolutely zero chance of getting into what we call 'article space' on Wikipedia. (See WP:PROMOTION for why that's not ok with us). That's not to say it isn't a marvellous programme - there are millions of marvellous things out in the real world (including me!) which will never, ever meet our 'notability criteria' and thus will never have an article here. You might like to read WP:NSOFTWARE to appreciate that until mainstream, independent media outlets have written in detail and in depth about an item, it will never be covered here. So WP:TOOSOON is a reasonable page to point you to, with the faint hope that maybe, one day, it will be big enough, noticed, written about and deserve its own article here. But that time is not now, I'm afraid. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm guessing Nick meant to say "draft". —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:50, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Doh! Pinging @Nick Moyes:. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:52, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Goodness, sorry, no insult whatsoever was intended by that typo. I do apologise, and have fixed it. Thanks, AlanM1 for spotting that. (It's so easy to make innocent mistakes like that in pubic platforms. It happens to me all the time! I now sometimes ask Lee, my grandmother, to check what I write, but I've not found GrandmaLee to be as good as the adverts on YouTube suggest.) Nick Moyes (talk) 22:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Climate_Assembly

Hello What do you think about Draft:Climate_Assembly ? I'm french and I'm not sure that I can write in english. Original comment on the draft was missing coverage. I think that this is solved. I have written https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembl%C3%A9e_du_climat_du_Royaume-Uni as well. Thank you IBG2018 (talk) 18:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@IBG2018: from a first view it looks good now. One minor point though (that will not prevent the draft from being promoted to an article): Please use past tense to refer to past events. For example, when you state "In January 2020, a randomly selected and representative group of 108 UK citizens, aged 16-79 is selected." you likely wanted to say "In January 2020, a randomly selected and representative group of 108 UK citizens, aged 16-79 were selected", since the selection is completed. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:09, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Even more minor nitpick: I think it'd be "was selected", not "were selected", since the subject is thte group and not the individuals, but I might be wrong. -- a lad insane (channel two) 19:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@IBG2018: The article should be called UK Climate Assembly. If it's accepted it can be moved. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:15, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

When would it become obvious that a consensus has been reached?

On an RFC I started about whether 20 kilobytes of character descriptions being warred in and out is appropriate, 4 users, including me, have commented that the content is appropriate; that the descriptions are short, basic, and factual enough that there are no concerns of original research; and that the series itself works as an unreferenced primary source (thus going within the verifiability guidelines. In addition, a fifth user who did not take part in the discussion has added the content back in after its most recent removal. The other party in the discussion, Serial Number 54129 and Drmies, have not commented on the RFC at all, and the few examples of original research that Drmies gave in an edit summary have been taken out of the page. Does this mean that a consensus has been reached, and if either of them removed he content without discussion again (I’m personally more worried about Serial Number based on him reverting to the same version without an edit summary once a month for quite some time), would it be appropriate to report them to ANI for breaking WP:DISRUPT, WP:STONEWALL, WP:DROPTHESTICK, WP:WABBITSEASON, and WP:IDHT? For reference, several merge proposals on Talk:List of recurring The Simpsons characters passed with only 2 or 3 votes on some of them, but those were far less controversial prior to the proposals. Seeing the merge proposals on the Simpsons pages reach consensus with so little votes makes me believe that my RFC has a consensus based on it having more votes, but I’m not 100% sure. Unnamed anon (talk) 19:22, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Unnamed anon, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry to hear that you've been caught up in a content dispute, it's one of those unfortunate situations that we all would like to avoid. My advice would be to let the water settle rather than bringing this to WP:ANI. It might be the case that the editors involved are exhausted of the topic, and so avoided the RfC. ANI is a last resort and it might boomerang back on you.

Going forward it could be an idea to start an RfC about the scope of MOS:PLOT at a venue with a wider audience such as MOS Talk or the VP. Regards, Zindor (talk) 20:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Zindor: Thank you for your regards and suggestions. I probably shouldn't have mentioned my ANI plans, as I did ask about that in a previous Teahouse question. After all, the last removals done by the other party have been almost a month ago, though I am nervous that they will return. My question was mostly about whether 5 users is enough for it to be considered a consensus, and if I or someone else should close the RFC as "consensus in favor of including the content". Unnamed anon (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Unnamed anon: I normally refrain from assessing discussions because my opinion might differ from the editor that actually closes it. But because this seems to be concerning you, I'll give you my thoughts on how it looks generally. There's a lack of thorough discussion in the RfC, and some editors in support have noted the lack of participation; therefore it wouldn't be surprising if it was closed as no consensus.

The positive thing here is that several editors noted support for your proposal. So if you have to start another RfC, don't be disheartened, they'll probably turn up again to support a similar proposal. I hope this helps. Zindor (talk) 20:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

All that being said, if the content addition isn't reverted again, you might end up with what's called a 'stable consensus'; where the new status quo is assumed to be the consensus Zindor (talk) 20:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Biden Contact: How to get message to Joe Biden

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.

Although the original question didn't really fall within the scope of the Teahouse, it was asked and answered in good faith and there's probably nothing more which needs to be added. The OP should try and directly contact Biden's campaign as suggested below if he wants to further reach out to Biden regarding this kind of thing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:44, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

I would like to get message to Joe Biden. How can I do this?

Extended content

I do not want Biden to lose this election. Here some things I want Biden to consider. "Joe you do not have a plan for Covid-19, just a slogan." Trump is developing a detailed plan. This is a political leadership issue, not science. Science is a resource that we will use identify options, but you Joe Biden must identify values and priorities and lead a reluctant nation. Brian11lloyd (talk) 20:20, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Brian11lloyd, Wikipedia is not social media, and we have no idea how to contact Mr. Biden. You may want to contact his campaign.--Quisqualis (talk) 20:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Brian11lloyd You might read his Covid page on his campaign website [JoeBiden.com]. This is a help site for Wikipedia editing. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

His campaign site has a contact page: https://go.joebiden.com/page/s/contact-us -- FactOrOpinion (talk) 21:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

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

How to put pictures

 Ibbatson (talk) 20:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Ibbatson, try Wikipedia:Images. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Is there a tool to help determine what pages people ultimately choose after using the search bar (context: Russia investigation)?

I'm thinking of creating a "Russia investigation (disambiguation)" page, and I'm wondering whether there's any WP tool that would let me check how often someone who enters "Russia investigation" into the search bar selects the page with that title vs. selecting "containing ... Russia investigation," and if they select the latter, what page they eventually choose to look at after scanning the search results.

Currently, "Russia investigation" redirects to Special Counsel investigation (2017–2019).

Based on a quick search of related pages, someone searching on "Russia investigation" might instead be looking for:

• Mueller report (redirects from Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election)
• Senate Intelligence Committee report on Russian interference in the 2016 United States presidential election
• Crossfire Hurricane (FBI investigation)
• Russia investigation origins counter-narrative
• There are also multiple pages along the lines of Timeline of investigations into Donald Trump and Russia (2019), each with a different time-span (before July 2016, July through election day 2016, the transition, the first and second halves of 2017, the first and second halves of 2018, 2019, 2020-2021).

I recognize that I'm unlikely to do any harm by creating a disambiguation page, and my sense is that it should be secondary, leaving the primary as a redirect to Special Counsel investigation (2017–2019) and adding a hatnote there, though if the consensus were to make the disambiguation page primary, I can do that instead and eliminate the redirect. But right now, I'm mostly wondering if there are any tools that will help me investigate whether it would be good to create a disambiguation page and what pages to include. Thanks. -- FactOrOpinion (talk) 21:17, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, FactOrOpinion. I'm afraid we have no sophisticated 'Google Analytics'-way of seeing who has searched any of our 6,000,000+ articles. It is possible to see 'article views' for any individual page. And if there's a possibility for confusion, different types of HATNOTE can be added to the top of an article to help those arriving discern if this is the page they wanted, or to push them off to a more appropriate page or pages. I won't comment on the specific alternatives here, but it could be worth raising any concerns on the talk pages of the respective articles. This search lets you see which articles have used the term "Russia investigation" anywhere within it. Hope this brief reply is of some help. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Thanks. I'd done a quoted search prior to posting my question, but am not familiar with using a tilde as part of the search term. What is the effect of the tilde? -- FactOrOpinion (talk) 12:53, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@FactOrOpinion: The single tilde before a word or couplet in the search box stops the search tool finding just that word and returning only that result, or taking you to that page - instead it displays all occurrences of that word. At times, this can be very helpful. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:43, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Request to turn the Wikipedia page named "Pootis" into a redirect page

I wanted to turn the Wikipedia article named "Pootis" into a redirect to the article for Heavy Weapons Guy, which instead is a redirect to this section about him on the Team Fortress 2 article. Unfortunately, it said only administrators can create the page. I wanted to do this because the would-be subject of the article, "pootis", a misheard phrase derived from "Put dispenser here", a voice command of his in Team Fortress 2, is mainly associated with him, and I wanted trying to access the page to not lead to a dead end, the intent of many redirects on Wikipedia on and to any page. I eventually thought to come here to seek permission for the redirect to be created, hoping this would eventually result in the redirect being created. Childishbeat (talk) 21:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Childishbeat, welcome. I suspect most people would just type in 'Heavy' if 'Pootis' didn't redirect them. Anyone who knows the alternative names (Pootis, Pootis Spencer, Pootisbirb, Fat Scout) also knows the official name 'Heavy'. Others might have a different opinion but I think this isn't worth a redirect. Zindor (talk) 21:47, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Childishbeat, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm really sorry to disappoint you, but (assuming I understand you correctly) It would not be justifiable at this stage to create a redirect from a minor catchphrase in a video game to an as yet non-existent article about one character in that game (currently at Team Fortress 2#Heavy Weapons Guy. It would be based, I assume, on this, which doesn't recognise it as his catchphrase, but an internet meme based upon themisunderstanding of that fictional character's accent. The best you could do is actually mention this in a single sentence in that section of Team Fortress 2 (with a citation, of course), but be aware others might well remove it as WP:FANCRUFT which it does rather sound in danger of becoming. Then, that word might be found if anyone used our search facility to look for it. But a redirect is - if you pardon the pun - overkill. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:55, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorting by more citations needed or refimprove

Hello. Is it possible to sort for articles based on "refimprove" or "more citations needed" tags? I know that you can sort for unclear notability. Thank you very much. Caro7200 (talk) 21:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Caro7200: Most maintenance templates cause the article they are transcluded into to be added to a category, so you can just click on the categories to see the pages that are in them. The doc for {{More citations needed}} says This template adds the article to Category:Articles needing additional references from September 2020, and Category:All articles needing additional references, both hidden categories.. Note there are dated categories for each month, as well as one giant one. The "Random page in this category" link doesn't seem to work at the moment. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Caro7200 (talk) 23:57, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Request a page or write myself?

Hi everyone -- I work for Portland Pet Food Company and would love for a page to be created about our company. Given my work, I know there is a conflict of interest. I'm happy to try and draft a page for review, but thought it was worth asking to see if someone would be open to writing it for me. I went ahead and compiled some relevant links, if helpful. Please let me know! Thanks.

Portland Pet Food Company website: https://portlandpetfoodcompany.com/

Portland Business Journal: https://www.bizjournals.com/portland/news/2020/08/06/portland-pet-food-company-goes-global.html

Pet Product News: https://www.petproductnews.com/archives/psc-names-20-top-performing-pet-companies-to-join-its-accredited-ranks/article_07ffc49b-fe5b-5820-badc-afa5a6a11dae.html

Pet Food Processing: https://www.petfoodprocessing.net/articles/13967-portland-pet-food-adds-canada-japan-to-distribution-network

Pet Product News: https://www.petfoodindustry.com/articles/9397-portland-pet-food-company-expands-internationally

Portland Business Journal: https://www.bizjournals.com/portland/news/2019/09/06/familyrun-canine-cooking-operation-is-a-howling.html

Pet Age: https://www.petage.com/pet-industry-women-are-pushing-barriers/

KOIN: https://www.koin.com/local/multnomah-county/portland-pet-food-so-good-even-kohr-harlan-will-eat-it/

Food Industry Executive: https://foodindustryexecutive.com/2019/06/upcycling-companies-giving-new-life-to-food-byproducts/

Outside Magazine: https://www.outsideonline.com/2395779/best-dog-gear-2019

Pet Age: https://www.petage.com/the-portland-pet-food-company-story/ HannahPortlandPetFoodCo (talk) 21:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, HannahPortlandPetFoodCo. Welcome, and thank you very much for coming here to ask. Looking at those sources, I see nothing that merits an article on Wikipedia. They're all insider business articles and brief mentions of products. there's nothing in them that suggests the world at large (outside of the pet food industry) has sat up and begged for others to pay attention to your company. That's not to say your company isn't a great business - like hundreds of thousands of others, but we need at least three independent, in-depth articles about your company that are not based on promotional insider press releases before our essential criterion of 'Notability' is met. You can read more about that by going to this shortcut: WP:NCORP. You should probably also read this bit about ';what Wikipedia is not: WP:NOTADVERTISING. Unless you can find far better and more detailed, mainstream media-type sources, then I'm afraid you would simply be wasting your time and that of our reviewers in having to reject it. Sorry to disappoint you, but I hope you appreciate it was eminently sensible to have asked here first. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Sadly, requesting an article is a dead letter office (great majority of requests never get acted on). Also, not just COI, but paid, so if you intend to pursue this (and I agree with Nick, to not to), you must declare paid on your User page. See WP:PAID. David notMD (talk) 05:34, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

First question

How many people join Wikipedia a day? Taeeees (talk) 22:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Taeeees. That's a very hard question to answer (and not really what the Teahouse is about), but there is a very marked difference between the number of accounts created each day and the number of new real, editors actively contributing (even with just one edit) each day. I couldn't find the answer at this page of Wikipedia statistics, but you could visit Special:Log/newusers and extrapolate a daily average if you were so minded. (If the 'contribs' link is still red, and not blue, it means that account name has not yet made any edits. You could try asking at the WP:REFDESK as that's a place for asking esoteric questions, whereas we are here just to give help and assistance in the actual processing of editing Wikipedia. (PS: Well done on starting The Wikipedia Adventure - you've just 13 more badges left to collect now!) Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Who may reject or approve a new article?

Dear Teahouse - thank you for your help and feedback. Yesterday, I submitted the page for a Brooklyn-based indie-rock band that I've worked on for a long time, and read and learned a lot to do things "right". Draft:Girl_Skin Upon learning that new submissions would take 2 months and longer, I braced myself to wait for 8 weeks and more. Looking at it only one day later again, I saw that it already got rejected! The reasons given are disputable but what makes me really wonder is: the page has been rejected by someone who is a Wikipedia editor for less than 2 months. I always thought, and long time Wikipedia editors confirmed this, that one would need to be more experienced in order to approve or reject a new submission. (editing the draft, I will point out the notability better because bands with even less notability do have a Wikipedia entry.) Thank you very much. Elkenyc (talk) 22:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Elkenyc Hello. Please note that it is usually a poor argument to cite other articles as a reason for yours to exist; see other stuff exists. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us. This is why each article is judged on its own merits. If there are bands with articles that do not meet the definition of a notable band, feel free to point those out so they can be addressed, we could use the help.

The user who declined your draft has been a user since 2015, so I'm not sure where you got the two months figure. 331dot (talk) 22:55, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

. . . but since you ask, the qualifications needed to be a reviewer are listed here. -- Hoary (talk) 22:58, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :Welcome to the Teahouse, Elkenyc. The editor (CNMall41) who rejected the current version of your draft on the grounds of a lack of suitable references demonstrating notability has actually been editing since 2014, and has over 27,000 edits to their credit (see here). I think you not unreasonably misinterpreted something on their userpage, which confused me a bit, too. But some editors can and do gain experience here very quickly, and it's the level of their activity and proven competence and judgement which is really important in whether they're allowed to review new articles and give feedback, not how many months or years they've been editing for. You might like to read WP:NBAND for our guidelines on notability for groups (as well as WP:GNG) plus WP:COI for how to declare any Conflict of Interest if you are connected with the band in any way. The feedback on your page indicated that sources showing more in-depth coverage, rather than mere mentions, is what you need to find. It could, of course, simply be WP:TOOSOON. I accept there are many old articles here which are probably not notable by our modern standards, and when we spot them they do tend to get put up for a Deletion Discussion. Feel free to list any such groups you feel are not notable, and we can look at them. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Elkenyc. Others have already addresses the reviewer qualifications. But I want to mention that your draft was not "rejected" it was "declined" which really means "not accepted yet". A "Rejet5" notice says "This will never be an article, stop wasting your time and ours". A "decline notice" says "This isn't ready yet, please improve it and try again." Most drafts that are submitted to AfC and eventually approved go through more than one decline/improve cycle, in my experience.

Also, about the wait time: drafts submitted for review are reviewed in no particular order. Each editor sho chooses to do reviews does them in whatever order s/he pleases, so a draft may be reviewed minutes after it is submitted, or not for months. The estimates at the top of the notice are fo0r a near worst-case situation. There are many drafts waiting for attention, and not so many reviewers.

Feel free to ask further specific questions here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:12, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

As mentioned above, Elkenyc, reviewers take on the articles they feel comfortable reviewing. For example, I'm both a new page patroler and an AfC reviewer. My main field here is sociopolitical geography and when I am purposely out to patrol, that's all I look at. Music groups are a popular subject so I'd guess your wait shouldn't be too long. Not offering any opinions on the decline as I haven't read your draft. However it's been my experience that notability is one of the harder concepts for a new user to grasp. Almost every draft gets declined at least once, most more than that. If asked, I always advise new editors to spend at least 6 months doing general editing, and reading up on notability (the best way to do that is read, without participation. WP:AFD discussions. The process of removing poor articles is probably the best place to gain understanding of notability). John from Idegon (talk) 02:48, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. I believe everyone already addressed my qualifications so I won't mention them again. I will say that the draft itself lacked a few things that would point out notability. First, the references used are not considered reliable (WP:RS) or simply mention music or appearances, not something that goes into detail about the band so they would not qualify under WP:GNG. The second is that there is no mention (and I could not locate in a WP:BEFORE search) of any charting or anything else under WP:NBAND that shows why they are notable. Finally, the critical reception and editorial sections make the draft look more like a fan website than an encyclopedic article. I will reiterate what was said above in that the article is not "rejected," only "declined" for the moment. You are more than welcome (and encouraged) to continue working on the draft and submit for review once you feel the issues are addressed. Good luck. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Posting a translated page

Hello, I've just translated a wikipedia page from english to portuguese and I am trying to post it, but as soon as I hit the button to do so, it gives me a warning about how "this action was identified as a copy of a wikipedia page". Can I post it anyway? It isn't a copy, it's just the english page translated to portuguese. Thank you.02:19, 17 September 2020 (UTC)IsaCesco (talk)

}} IsaCesco (talk) 02:19, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi IsaCesco, are you trying to post your Portuguese translation to the Portuguese Wikipedia? Pi (Talk to me!) 02:32, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@IsaCesco: See answers at the help desk, and please avoid posting the same question in multiple places.  RudolfRed (talk) 02:34, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@IsaCesco:, different language versions of Wikipedia are separate organizations. We cannot help you with issues on another Wikipedia. You'll need to find the help you need at Portuguese Wikipedia. John from Idegon (talk) 02:57, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Deleted page

why my page is deleted before submitting. I have been trying to create a profile of mine from past one week but wikipedians are deleting it and not letting me publishing it for review. they state that it contains advertising content but that certainly is not the case. kindly help me out with this Devraj Priju (talk) 06:02, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Devraj Priju: I reccomed that you drop the stick.

• First of all, autobiographys are strongely discouraged.
• Secondly, if you write yourself, you have an obvivous conflict of interest which makes things hard for you, as people tend to write more favourable about themselves
• Thirdly, please be advised that there are reaons why you dont want an article

I cant read deleted pages, so I cant see what in there, and how worse it is, so I am going to ping Jimfbleak. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:32, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

mr. victor i certainly understand your point but i have written the facts about my life and moreover i am not publishing this article for advertising, i am doing it to establish my existence in entertainment field as other colleagues of mine

Devraj Priju All content here must be based on what good-quality, independent, published sources have written about a subject, and never on what the subject wants to say about themselves. If you do actually meet our notability requirements, someone is sure to want to write about you (see WP:NBIO or WP:NACTOR.) Nick Moyes (talk) 07:01, 17 September 2020 (UTC).

@Victor Schmidt mobil:, thanks for ping. In response to a query from @Devraj Priju:, I posted this detailed guidance on COI and how to write biographies, but to no avail. I'm reluctant to block the account, but that is an option given that this editor seems unwilling to follow our guidelines and has made no useful edits at all. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:51, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

mr. victor schmidt , mr. nick moyes and mr. jimfbleak please help me out with this page i really dont know how you want me to write this page because i have taken reference of shiamak davar's page and remo d souzas page ... my content is also kind of similar to their pattern only words are different. kindly help guys

@Devraj Priju: I strongly suggest that you abandon this effort to write a Wikipedia article(not a "profile", we don't have "profiles") about yourself. You've been told why this is not a good idea. Please also review other stuff exists; other similar article existing is not a reason for yours to exist. 331dot (talk) 10:23, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Devraj Priju: Please supply links to at least three online resources which have written about you in detail and in depth, and which would have allowed anyone to have verified everything you wrote about yourself in your deleted sandbox. It was very promotional and self-serving, and totally unsupported by citations. That is not how this encyclopaedia operates. Unless you can at least do that, you cannot create even a draft article about yourself here, and any attempt will also be deleted again. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:46, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Controversial topics

Hi, I am a new student editor in a class using the WikiEducation Course program and was wondering how to best represent controversial topics. I want to accurately portray all perspectives found in the relevant literature while editing but I also don't want to risk having one of my first posts deleted. Any suggestions? Bellanapodano (talk) 11:22, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Even experienced editors get reverted (not deleted, as the View history will show what you changed and that it was reversed by a subsequent edit, with reasons given by that editor). There is no penalty for editing in good faith. Given you are considering editing B-class articles with a long and contentious history of edits, I suggest you look at the Talk pages of those articles, including archived Talk content, to see if your intended change has been hashed over previously. David notMD (talk) 11:38, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Bellanapodano. Welcome to Wikipedia editing. It looks like the Wiki-Ed advisors for your course are Helaine (Wiki Ed) and Ian (Wiki Ed), who are both quite experienced in helping students navigate through Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines; so, you might want to discuss this with them. Editing a controversial topic can, in general, be quite tricky even for experienced editors, but students in particular often seem to run in trouble with others when they try do so. You seem to be interested in Transcendental Meditation, but that article is under discretionary sanctions because it tends to attract lots of attention and generates a bit of drama because it seems to be a topic where there's lots of disagreement. So, my gut feeling is to suggest that you try to avoid such topics like that until you've been around awhile and are not facing any time constraints or deadlines related to your class work. Wikipedia editing can sometimes move at a slow pace, but that pace can become even slower when dealing with a controversial subject and trying to establish a WP:CONSENSUS among concerned editors to make even what might seem to be a minor change. -- Marchjuly (talk)

Having peeked at your list of possible articles to edit, and your position that "Transcendental Meditation" predates the Maharishi, I predict that any content you add along those lines will by swiftly reverted. David notMD (talk) 11:51, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Marchjuly. In general we recommend student editors avoid controversial topics. They're just too challenging an area to learn to edit. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

My edit button does not work

here

Good morning, Hoary (talk). I am slowly fixing the vague and unverifiable sources you advised I do to make my draft acceptable. I was trying to modify the first section of my draft to substitute unpublished (unverifiable) references with published (verifiable) ones , but my edit tab does not seem to work. I will still have to wait some time to access Ecuadorian newspaper sources to put newspaper titles and dates to the newspaper clippings I have used in my references which you have rightly described as "vague." They say they cannot access their archives because of the pandemic. This is what they wrote:

"Dadas las condiciones actuales de trasmisión del COVID – 19, tanto en el país como a nivel mundial, la Biblioteca de las Artes tiene restringido el acceso y los servicios que ofrece a sus usuarios, como medida de prevención. Por el momento, no se puede acceder al Archivo El Telégrafo. Por lo mencionado, lamentamos no poder ayudarla con su requerimiento en las próximas semanas. ¿Hasta cuándo necesita esta información?"

Given the actual conditions of COVID-19 transmision in the country as well as world wide, the Biblioteca de las Artes has restricted access and services if offers its patrons, as a precautionary measure. For the moment, the archives to Telégrafo cannot be accessed. For the above reasons we are sorry not to be able to help you in your request in the following weeks. When do you need the information?"

Reviewer Marchjuly (talk) recently wrote: "Since you're still working on only a draft, other editors are pretty much going to leave you be and might only edit the draft if there's a serious policy or guideline violation that they feel needs attention." It was my understanding that I had six months to address these issues before I resubmit the draft. Thank you both for the attention you are giving to my Wikipedia draft and for answering my question.Oscar Waldoosty (talk) 13:02, 17 September 2020 (UTC) Oscar Waldoosty (talk) 13:02, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Oscar Waldoosty. Criterion WP:G13 says "Any pages that have not been edited by a human in six months" (my emphasis). So it's not a deadline for resubmitting, it is simply whether you appear to have abandoned the draft. If you are still working on it, there should be no problem. --ColinFine (talk) 15:22, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine (talk). I believe I have found the problem. Somehow my editing function has switched to a new format. I will explore it and see how I can edit my draft under this new format. The old format was similar to the one I'm using now to write to you and I had become (ahem) quite proficient at it.Oscar Waldoosty (talk) 01:48, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to How do I publish a draft?

Follow up question on Michael K. Hole wiki page

Hi there, I'm sorry it took me a minute to reply on my last thread. It was archived so I'm copying and pasting an important note here. Am I good to submit this article for review? I am not being paid to do this Wiki but I do know Michael. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Michael_K._Hole Thank you!:

Hello Victoria7yu. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Victoria7yu. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Victoria7yu|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Theroadislong (talk) 18:33, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with this. I am not being paid to do this. I know Mike and wanted to try my hand at Wiki. Please let me know next steps or anything I need to do on my end. Thanks so much.Victoria7yu (talk) 18:21, 9 September 2020 (UTC) Victoria7yu (talk) 13:11, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Victoria7yu. If you are not being paid or doing it as part of your job, then you should not use the {{paid}} disclosure, and it is not mandatory for you to make any disclosure. But to avoid further hassle, I recommend that on your User page User:Victoria7yu (which does not yet exist) you explain that you know him, so you may have a conflict of interest; but that you are not a paid editor. I would say to do it on the talk page of the Draft as well, but another editor has already explained it there. --ColinFine (talk) 15:28, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

many thanks! ----

A blue, submit your draft button is in the template above the draft. Once submitted, it takes days to months before a reviewer either accepts, declines or rejects. There is a backlog of thousands of drafts, and it is not a queue. David notMD (talk) 16:39, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

thank you for the help! ----

On using templates...

Hey there, I'm trying to write a biography article draft that's currently on a work-in-progress page. I'd love to utilize the "biography of a living person" template, but it's not allowing me to edit it when I import it in. Any pointers for a newbie? Whcohen (talk) 14:23, 17 September 2020 (UTC) Whcohen (talk) 14:23, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Whcohen, and welcome to the Teahouse. I suspect that you are misunderstanding what a template is. The template {{biography of a living person}} is simply a box that may be added to the top of an article to warn the reader that it is a BLP and subject to the more stringent referencing rules: it has no parameters, and there is no reason for you to edit. I'm guessing that you are thinking that the template gives you an outline for the structure of a biography article: that is not how we work. You can find information about that at MOS:BIO; but we don't have a template in that sense. (In my personal view, it is right that we don't provide an easy way to handle the superficial details of creating an article, because the structure and appearance of an article is far less important than the much harder task of finding appropriate independent sources, or the next hardest task of writing an article based almost exclusively on those sources, and not on personal knowledge, or on what the subject has said, done, or published. My experience is that editors who plunge into creating articles before they've learnt about all that typically have a frustrating and disappointing time, so I don't want us to encourage that). --ColinFine (talk) 15:42, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

{{subst:Biography}} does exist; I'm just not so sure how helpful you would find it. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:01, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Can I write a page about an International Artist ?

The page is about an International Hyper-Realistic Rangoli Artist Pramod Sahu, Based In Raipur Chhattisgarh, India. He's the recipient of the Platinum Award for Art. Website: http://pramodsahu.in/, His Art Organisation Chhapaak: https://www.chhapaak.com/  Chhapaak (talk) 06:57, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Chhapaak, if you want to create an article about Pramod Sahu, you should start by ignoring those two web site you have mentioned, and instead find several reliable independent published sources that discuss him. Then you should base your article on what those independent sources say. Maproom (talk) 07:22, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Chhapaak. Your username suggests that this account is both promotional and might have multiple users, including Pramod Sahu, its founder and CEO. As such, this is not an acceptable username to have, and you would be best advised to cease using it and to create a new account to edit from. An acceptable one might be PramodAtChapaak as this is clearly one person. But then your account would need to declare that it has a Conflict of Interest and in editing a topic as a founder or paid employee. We would also need a clear declaration of 'paid editing, explained at this link: WP:PAID. You would also be advised not to write about yourself, but leave it to others to do -see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. If the basis for an article on you/him is the Art Award, it would need to be a major, nationally respected award, and you'd also need sources that talk about him/you that are independent of the artists own writings, websites, employment and social media. (I won the Derby Arts Festival for my slip-trailed ceramic stoneware pottery some two decades ago, but that will never make me a notable person in Wikipedia's eyes!) So, the significance of the award itself would be of great relevance here, as well as being able to demonstrate that reliable, third party sources have written about the subject in detail and in depth. You/he is clearly a wonderfully skilled artist, but that isn't sufficient in its own right to merit an article about them/you here. See WP:NBIO and WP:NARTIST for more advice on what meets our 'Notability' criteria. Hoping this helps. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:13, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Eligibility of an Article

Hey there, I just got some article of Chahna Soni from google. And I thought about to contribute on wikpedia. So can anyone tell me is this sources enough to create her Wikipedia article.

Article list

Times Of India- https://m.timesofindia.com/life-style/healthfitness/health-news/samaritans-spread-hope-and-goodnessin-face-of-the-pandemic/articleshow/77428220.cms

Hindustaan Times - https://www.hindustantimes.com/brand-post/chahna-soni-is-acing-beauty-and-lifestyle-influencing-game/story-qKfcAAApUsKb8ydn8ZJxZN.html

Ib Times - https://www.ibtimes.co.in/chahna-soni-racing-ahead-many-multiple-fields-health-fitness-lifestyle-beauty-influencer-826232

The Indian Saga - https://www.theindiasaga.com/saga-corner/revealed-beauty-blogger-chahna-soni-shares-homemade-masks-for-healthy-skin-and-hair/amp/

Iwm buzz- https://www.iwmbuzz.com/lifestyle/fashion/chahna-soni-redefining-field-beauty-health-fitness-unique-style-influencer-blogger/2020/08/12

Ibg News- https://www.ibgnews.com/2019/07/19/chahna-soni-the-mumbai-young-lady-making-big-on-social-influencing-business/amp/

News track live- https://english.newstracklive.com/news/quarantine-skincare--internet-personality-chahna-soni-shares-how-her-routine-has-changed-during-quarantine-sc24-nu293-ta293-1103726-1.html

Thanks Bijoyonline30 (talk) 15:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Bijoyonline30, welcome to the Teahouse. While you have found some significant coverage published in reliable secondary sources, there's some further analysis needed here about the independence of the information.

The Hindustan Times for instance marked their article a 'brand-post', and state at the bottom that it's a company press release. This means it's a primary source and we can't use it for establishing notability.

When it becomes apparent that an individual or company is willing to pay for news coverage, it means that you have to scrutinize sources even more closely than usual, and look for significant coverage in only the most reliable of sources.

Out of those sources, i'd say the Hindustan Times is the most reliable, which is shown by their transparency. Editors have noted concerns about promotional content in the Times of India being disguised as reporting, and i have suspicions that the TOI is being less than transparent in this case too.

International Business Times is unreliable per WP:RSPSOURCES. The News Track and IBG News articles are primary source interviews, so not usable.

So in short, based on your sources, i wouldn't consider Soni notable enough for an article on Wikipedia. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 16:42, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

How can I fix an article that was declined?

I'm a first time editor and have had my first article rejected. I'm not sure I'm using the references correctly as the subject matter is worthy of an article. She is a Canadian actor and activist and is the Co-chair of Canada's only actor's union and is doing very important work for diversity, inclusion, and anti-racism. As an actor, she has appeared on show like Star Trek and in the cult award-winning film Berkshire County. I look forward to any help you can offer. Samdal35ton (talk) 16:13, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

courtesy link: Draft:Samora Smallwood

Hello, Samdal35ton, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Please read WP:NACTOR,which specifies Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.. Minor roles do not count towards notability. See also WP:BIO. Note that sources used to establish notability must be reliable, published independent sources, and each must include significant coverage of the subject. Blogs, fora, and fan sites are not considered reliable and should not be cited at all. Neither should the IMDB. Interviews with teh subject and pieces written by her employers and associates are not considered independent. Neither are press releases or stories closely based on them. and brief mentions in the cour5se of stories about other things are not significant coverage. I see some blogs and interviews in Draft:Samora Smallwood. I have not had time to look at the other sources in detail yet. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:26, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Are really old books free of copyright?

I found some text at First Presbyterian Church (Macon, Georgia) which appears to be copied verbatim from this old book. The book doesn't appear to have any copyright notice, and appears to have been published in 1912. Should it be removed? Thanks! Jacona (talk) 17:02, 17 September 2020 (UTC) Jacona (talk) 17:02, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jacona: Thanks for your question! Every work first published before 1923 has been in the American public domain since 1998. So no it does not have to be removed as it falls under pubic domain. Best! Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 17:06, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much, The4lines (talk · contribs)! Jacona (talk) 17:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@The4lines: FYI, to avoid plagiarism and reader concern/confusion, we should acknowledge where we have incorporated public-domain materials. I've added a template in the footnote that does so. Thanks for pointing this out! Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:50, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Gen 8 Pokemon

Are there any pages for specific Galar Pokemon yet? UB Blacephalon (talk) 18:00, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Blacephalon: We have the article List of generation VIII Pokémon. I'm not sure what a Galar Pokemon is. Generally, we don't have articles for specific Pokemons like we used to. See WP:POKEMON and Wikipedia:Poképrosal for some more info about why not... I'm sure there's plenty of discussion elsewhere though. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Well there are Plenty of Pokemon that have theier own specific page on Wikipedia, e.g. Bulbasaur. Galarian Pokemon are Pokemon that have been introduced in the 8th generation of the Pokemon franchise. I was just wondering If their will be any or planned on creating any pages on Pokemon from the Galar Region? UB Blacephalon (talk) 18:10, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Adding the new EP of the show in the cast mention of the bio.

Hello! I tried editing our show's show twice and the edit was denied. Second edit I was told to stop vandalizing the page. The page in question - The Bobby Bones Show: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Bobby_Bones_Show&action=edit

Here is what I was trying to fix:

Bobby Bones is accompanied by co-hosts Lunchbox (Dan Chappell) and Amy (Moffett-Brown), along with sidekicks Eddie (Garcia), Raymundo (Raymond Slater), Mike D. (Deestro), Morgan #2 (Huelsman), “Utility” Hillary (Borden), and Scuba Steve (Executive Producer).

I wanted to add me to the show bio in the body of the wiki post. I've been added by someone into the box on the right as a producer. I was looking to update the bio as well.

Also, if possible...can my name in the box on the right be hyperlinked to my google search - similar to Raymundo on the main page within google:

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS874US874&biw=1280&bih=642&sxsrf=ALeKk028Figz8I1ImAlum8r9zklAwlYPiw%3A1600366534052&ei=xqdjX9DkAoWr5wL6iZjoAw&q=scuba+steve+bobby+bones&oq=scuba+steve+bobby+bones&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzICCAAyAggAMgIIADoECAAQRzoHCAAQFBCHAjoECAAQQzoCCC46CAguEMcBEK8BOgYIABAWEB46CAgAEBYQChAeUJQhWJkqYKoraABwAngAgAFciAHQB5IBAjEymAEAoAEBqgEHZ3dzLXdpesgBCMABAQ&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwjQ35b25fDrAhWF1VkKHfoEBj0Q4dUDCA0&uact=5

Thank you for your time and help!

-Steve ScubaSteveRadio (talk) 18:17, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: The Bobby Bones Show. You added your name and that you are Executive Producer. The ref identifies you as in the cast, but not as EP. Hence your edit reversed. In the info box (right), the only person with a name in blue is Bobby Bones, because there is a Wikipedia article about him. David notMD (talk) 19:26, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi David,

That is also incorrect. I am the executive producer, can that also please be changed? I recently left On Air With Ryan Seacrest. Please feel free to check out my Twitter & IG: @ScubaSteveRadio or email me for credentials -

I used to work with On Air With Ryan Seacrest and was listed as an EP there - can we please edit our page to add that tab with my name?

Link to their page for the example - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Air_with_Ryan_Seacrest

Here is my verified twitter for confirmation: https://twitter.com/scubasteveradio

And here is an article posted on our show page with my title: https://bobbybones.iheart.com/featured/bobby-bones/content/2019-11-20-meet-our-new-executive-producer-scuba-steve/

Thank you for your time and help!

-Steve ScubaSteveRadio (talk) 20:21, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, ScubaSteveRadio I added you as EP, since the supplied source supports this. Note that giving us a twitter connecvtioin is of no value in future, as that is not considered a reliable source, even if verified. The PR is not independent, but is an acceptable source for this kind of info.

Also, in future, please do not followup by starting a new thread. Instead just edit the existing thread to add your new post at the bottom of it. Also, please do not start a line with a space as if to create a paragraph indent. The wiki software interprets this as the start of a code block, and formats the paragraph in a monospaced font, with a grey background. This does not look well for normal text. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Can wikipedia be edited without Javascript?

Can I? How will disabling Javascript affect my experience? What features would I be missing out on? IveGonePostal (talk) 18:52, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@IveGonePostal: Wikipedia itself doesn't rely on having JavaScript to edit, as you just need an understanding of Wikitext to write any article on this site. However, JavaScript is used by some of the useful tools on this site, like VisualEditor, many of these gadgets, and user scripts. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 21:50, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

h

Is there a way that i can search image categories on commons? - Regards, Wikimeedian | Discussion 19:05, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Wikimeedian, welcome back. If you go to the search page, immediately below the search box you can deselect several namespaces leaving only 'Category' selected. From there you can search for a category name, click on the category and browse the images. Zindor (talk) 19:12, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry Wikimeedian, were you asking if you could search within the categories themselves? Zindor (talk) 19:21, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

oh, yes - Regards, Wikimeedian | Discussion 19:30, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

The commons category search function (deepcat) doesn't seem to be working for me. Hopefully someone else here has an answer for you. I'd suggest in the meantime asking a question at over at the Commons Help desk. While we do possess some knowledge of our sister project, we primarily deal with English Wikipedia issues here. Regards, Zindor (talk) 19:49, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Wikimeedian: Please use a descriptive title for your questions not "h". RudolfRed (talk) 21:55, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

How to create a Vietnamese page for the same concept to the English page?

I would like to know how can I create a Vietnamese page for the same concept to English page. Thanks. Timothymateo (talk) 19:10, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Timothymateo: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to expand it. See the guidance at WP:TRANSLATE. RudolfRed (talk) 20:18, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Infobox Judoka wird nicht angezeigt in der vorschau

Hallo, ich bin neu hier, ich habe versuch einen Artikel über einen Judoka zu erstellen und habe dafür die Judoka Infobox verwendet aber in der Vorschau wird mir jemand die Box nicht angezeigt, kann mir sagen welche Fehler ich gemacht habe. SportMASSIV (talk) 19:35, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

SportMASSIV, wir haben kein {{Infobox Judoka}} am English Wikipedia, bitte nutzen {{Infobox sportsperson}} stattdessen. Merken auch dass diese seite für das englische Projekt ist: Artikeln müsssen auf Englisch geschrieben sein. Wenn sie lieber auf Deutsch kontribuieren würden, können sie Deutsche Wikipedia hier finden. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:47, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Where is the Paid Contributor Template?

I have been trying to post an article on behalf of a client and I was told because I am posting on their behalf, I need to use the Paid Contributor template.

However, I am not able to find this template. When I go to my sandbox and post the content in, it says I should be using the Paid Contributor template, but there is not a link to the template. Please help. SRSchreiber (talk) 20:23, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

You can find them on Wikipedia:Paid-contribution_disclosure. Ruslik_Zero 20:31, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Appears you have properly placed it on your User page. David notMD (talk) 23:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Is there a way to permanently remove notifications?

I marked all of my notifications as read, but I can still see all of them in my notifications bell. I received a few notifications from a user who I believe has been acting hypocritically towards me, and removed the message from my talk page, but I still can't get rid of the notification in my notifications bell. Is there a way to delete specific notifications so that I am unable to see it, or is it stuck there forever? I have already muted future notifications from them. Unnamed anon (talk) 20:30, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Unnamed anon: I don't think there's a way to completely remove them. They will go away eventually when you've got newer notifications that pushes the old ones to the bottom, but they'll still be visible at Special:Notifications. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 21:40, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Don't Understand Why Page Was Deleted

My page, "Movement-specialist" for my company Stick Mobility was deleted for disruptive editing and I am wondering why? The account that deleted it said there was promotional text on my page; however, after re-reading it countless times I do not see any promotional text. What can I do to have my page re-published?

The link for my page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Movement-specialist

Thank you in advance! Movement-specialist (talk) 21:31, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

FYI to other hosts, this user is blocked now. RudolfRed (talk) 21:53, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Movement-specialist

There were several problems with the page. But first and foremost, it was wholly, 100% promotion. It read like a company brochure or promotional flyer, or a company web site. I am notoriously more tolerant of marginal promotion than most expoeriened editors here, and i would have deleted this withotu a second tho9guht. Phrases such as The system combines joint mobilization, strength training, and deep fascial stretching to increase athletic performance, reduce risk of injury, and accelerate recovery., The company’s primary customer focus is on helping coaches, athletes, and medical practitioners, and The neuromuscular drive benefits from Stick Mobility come as one's body is better able to coordinate their muscles as one unified mechanism to produce movement. are all blatant adspeak. If you don't see anything promotional about those statements, than i think you have been leaving in a world of advertising for much too long. Note that "promotion" here does not mean just "Buy X" it emans anythign intended to convey the idea that "X is good." rather than neutrally describing X.

Secondly, the page was sourced entirely to the company's own website. There were no independent sources at all.

Thirdly, the page was incorrectly positioned. It was on your man user page. Your user page should be about you as a wikipedia editor. It can contain information about your interests and skills, so people know what you might be able to edit well. It can contain lists of editing accomplishments, and plans for future editing tasks. it can contain some brief biographical info, but nothing that looks like an attempt at an article about yourself, your company, or your projects. see Wikipedia:User pages for more details.

If you want to \write about some other topic, please read Your First Article and then use the article wizard to create a draft under the [[WP:AFC|arti8cles for Creation[[ project. But if you want to write about yourself, your business, your organization, or anything that you are closely connected to, you have a conflict of interest and should read that policy page before starting or you may well waste a lot of time. The best advice on how to write such an article is: don't. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Unclear

TAHIR TALIB JOYIA CITY FORT ABBAS DISTRICT BAHAWALNAGAR PUNJAB PAKISTAN — Preceding unsigned comment added by TAHIR Talib joyia 277 (talk • contribs) 21:55, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

TAHIR Talib joyia 277 did you have a question about how to edit Wikipedia? If so, please state more clearly what your question is. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:03, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Editing Issue

When I go to edit an article, it brings me to the edit page of and old version of the article, leading to many errors. Is there something I'm not doing right? Le Panini (talk) 22:51, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Le Panini: please provide an example. What article is this, and what page do you start at to edit it? If you are already looking at an older version, then the edit button will start editing on that version. RudolfRed (talk) 00:03, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Le Panini. I think you must be doing something very wrong indeed! All I can think is that in desktop view, instead of clicking the 'edit' or 'edit source' tab for that article, you're going first into the 'View History' tab and then clicking one of older date-stamped versions of an article. But you would see a warning notice at the top of the page to highlight that you're about to edit something other than the current version.

The only other causes might be that somehow your device is displaying an older, cached version of a page from a previous visit, rather than reloading the page afresh, as normally happens (in which case, hit F5 to refresh the page, OR that your edit has coincided with that of another user, and you're getting an 'Edit Conflict' situation and a possible warning message. That kind of thing happens a lot at the Teahouse (because it is so often edited, but it rarely happens on infrequently visited pages. Do any of these sound likely? If not, next time it happens, could you copy the url you're seeing in your browser and supply that to us with further details of what happened? Nick Moyes (talk) 00:04, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

How do you join a WikiProject?

Hello! I was wondering how do you join a WikiProject? VolgaDnper1488 (talk) 23:39, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse VolgaDnper1488. You can learn more about them at Wikipedia:WikiProject, but there is no formal joining up process. Wiki-projects are simply groups of editors who have coalesced around projects with specific themes to improve articles in that area. Whilst you can add your name to their participants list if they have one, there is no real need. Active projects may steer editors towards certain activities, so monitor their talk pages as well as the main project page. Most have an article assessment chart which shows you how many articles are relevant to that project, their quality and their importance, as identified by that Project. Clicking one of the numbers in that chart gives you a list of articles - often a great way to find articles of a quality or priority that matches your editing interests (High importance stub articles are those crying out the most for improvement) Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:53, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Delete account

Can you delete my account? I don’t use Wikipedia anymore Josh paul sites (talk) 01:09, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Josh paul sites. Wikipedia accounts cannot be deleted as explained in Wikipedia:Username policy#Deleting and merging accounts. If you no longer wish to edit, you can simply just stop using your account and stop editing. You may also WP:RETIRE if you want or request a courtesy vanishing as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:20, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Unpublished Article That's Gotten Lost

I believe that I have contributed an article that should have been published. It was my first real attempt and when I first published it I got some criticism that I took to heart. I've improved the article (I think substantially) but now no one is looking at it. Is there anyone who would be willing to take a look and publish it, or tell me what I should do to improve it? Here is the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Texas_Administrative_Judicial_Regions

Thanks so much in advance. RedBeardBandit (talk) 02:30, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

@RedBeardBandit:It is right there at the link. What do you mean that it is lost? Reviews can take a long time, just be patient. RudolfRed (talk) 02:43, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Signatures (With Colour and fonts)

This may not be a very important question, but I just joined wikipedia over a month ago, and I have seen many good, many bad edits. Some edits in talk pages and user pages have colourful signatures and different fonts. I have been getting the hang of the functions in the editing window, but there is only one function I do not know about. I usually sign my posts with tildes, but to make my edits unique and recognisable, I want to know how this function works. Thanks! EpicRice (talk) 02:46, 18 September 2020 (UTC) EpicRice (talk) 02:46, 18 September 2020 (UTC)