Wikipedia:Teahouse

Tigraan, 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

Technical help with fixing a tracking category

Hi all, hope that you're well! I am seeking some help fixing up a tracking category at {{Peer review}} and was hoping someone could help.

In brief, an editor puts {{Peer review}} on an article's talk page and then selects what type of peer review page they want. Then, a peer review page is created.

However there are often problems with this. I am trying to implement two tracking categories so I or a future bot can fix up some uses of this template. The code is on the template but not working. My aim is:

• If a peer review page isn't created, add the article to Category:Unopened requests for peer review
• If the template isn't used in the talk namespace, add the article to Category:Wikipedia peer reviews not in talk namespace

I have been having trouble implementing them and was hoping someone knowledgable around here may be able to help :). Tom (LT) (talk) 23:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Tom (LT), you may be better off asking your technical question at WP:VPT, The Village pump technical questions page on Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Tom (LT): If I understand your question correctly: you can add the category to the current page if pagename does not exist with:

{{#ifeq:{{PAGEID:pagename}}|0|[[Category:Unopened requests for peer review]]}}

To add the category to the current page if it is not in the Talk namespace:

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Talk||[[Category:Wikipedia peer reviews not in talk namespace]]}}

—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

It seems that pagename is Wikipedia:Peer_review/{{PAGENAME}}/archive{{{archive|}}}? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

CSD tag removed by IP address

Hello Teahouse folks, could I please get advice about a CSD situation? Recently I tagged an article for being promotional, but then the article creator removed the tag. My understanding is that the creator cannot remove it, so I re-added the tag but then it was removed by an IP address.

The IP has no other edits and I am suspicious that it is the same person who just deleted the tag while logged out. Could you please suggest what I can do about this? Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 23:26, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello 1292simon. The Criteria for speedy deletion states: "For most speedy deletion criteria, the creator of a page may not remove the deletion tag from it; only an editor who is not the creator of a page may do so.". This indeeds sounds like the creator of the article is removing the speedy deletion tag. Only CheckUser's can verify if it's the same user. However, this doesn't sound serious enough for them to be involved. I recommend to just retag and let Administrators get to it. If the removal of the tag continues, alert Administrator of the page and user at The Administrators noticeboard Incidents page. Eyebeller (talk) 23:43, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Eyeballer. Many thanks for your help. As suggested, I will retag the article and see how that goes. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 23:49, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi 1292simon. The template seems to have been removed yet again. You could try re-adding it again, but someone has connested the speedy deletion of the article on its talk page which makes the tagging contentious and it will likely just continue to be removed. At some point, any benefit Wikipedia might get from a retagging of the article for speedy deletion is going to be outweighed the disruption caused by edit warring over the tag. The IPs might may be WP:SOCKS and end up being blocked, but you may end up blocked too even if you're really only mean well. So, if you truly believe that this article should be deleted as WP:SPAM, then perhaps try asking for direct administrator assistance at WP:AN or Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam. If you're not so sure, then you might also try nominating the article for deletion at WP:AFD instead. WP:BEFORE doing so it might be a good idea to seek input first from relevant WikiProjects like WP:AFRICA or WP:PRIZE to see what some other editors who might be familiar with that type of article may think. If there's a way to WP:PRESERVE the article, than outright deletion might not be necessary. At the same time, if the community consensus is that the article should be deleted, then IPs will not be able to stop that from happening. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

I nominated the page for semi-protection to stop removal while logged out. The responding admin deleted the page instead. —teb728 t c 02:17, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

The article has been restored a draftified instead per WP:RPP#Anzisha Prize. Since you tagged the article for speedy deletion 1292simon and the creator has posted on your user talk page, perhaps you can explain what happened and recommend that the creator to submit the draft to WP:AFC for review instead of trying to re-create the article again directly in the mainspace. Trying to do the latter will only likely lead to the article being deleted again, most likely for good. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for your help with this. I'm quite confused about how this all unfolded, but glad to see that the article has now been moved to Drafts.

In general, it seems like a loophole that the article creator can just log out to delete a CSD tag as an anonymous IP? Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 06:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

• @1292simon: Editing while logged out is permissible and is not grounds for sockpuppetry sanctions by itself. However, removing the CSD tag of an article that a person created is not allowed; that prohibition bears on the editor, not on the account with a specific username. I would say the "loophole" is fairly minor, because a new user who pops up at a new article's page after it was CSD'd is quite obviously the creator or someone acting in coordination with them. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 10:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

• Ahh, thanks Tigraan for your explanation. 1292simon (talk) 10:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, its very possible it's the same person a gd fan (talk) 16:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Cn span

How do you add/remove a citation span? I've been seeing that template from other articles. Thankyou Apollogone (talk) 04:50, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Apollogone, are you referring to Template:Citation needed span, which is a less-used alternative to the more common Template:Citation needed? For both, you can just delete it once you've added a citation, although for the span template, you need to be a little more careful with the code. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Apollogone. You can find some information on this kind of thing in Template:Citation needed span. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Apollogone: The key with the span template is to be sure not to remove the statement that is wrapped with it. E.g., In:

{{Cn-span|date=October 2020|text=This is the statement.}}

you remove the red and add the purple, changing it to:

This is the statement.<ref>{{Cite ...}}</ref>

I hope this helps. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: This is great thank you. I'm still familiarizing myself with the templates because there's alot. Btw, would there be any reason why I shouldn't remove the statement wrapped with a span? Apollogone (talk) 09:43, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey thanks to all who enlghtened me. Sure is a help! Apollogone (talk) 09:40, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Apollogone: The reason is that statement is rendered as part of the article. The purpose of the template is to mark that statement as needing a cite. So, the point of this is, when you find a citation for the statement, you remove the template and add the cite. If you can't find a cite, the advice at Template:Citation needed/doc#How to respond to this tag is Except for contentious claims about living people, which should be immediately removed if not cited, there is no specific deadline for providing citations. Please do not delete information that you believe is correct solely because no one has provided a citation within an arbitrary time limit. If there is some uncertainty about its accuracy, most editors are willing to wait at least a month to see whether a citation can be provided. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

How to tag my article

As most of the Teahouse editors know, I am a new editor who has just been autoconfirmed. I am looking to get my first article (Draft:Karikku published in my first attempt and am really thanfkful to the experienced editors for the help A section showed me that I should tag my article to improve my chances for a faster review. Can you please advise me how to do it, or you may do the needful yourselves. I am in no hurry Assassin7177 (talk) 05:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC) I just spotted a new issue Draft:Karikku_YouTube_Channel discusses the same topic as my (Draft:Karikku. But the first one was declined. So will it reduce my chances for success — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assassin7177 (talk • contribs) 05:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Assassin7177: That section tells you to give WikiProject tags on the talk page. I've gone ahead and added WikiProject India and WikiProject YouTube at Draft talk:Karikku. This lets editors involved in those WikiProjects to see that there's an article relevant to them that needs reviewing, hopefully getting you a faster review. There's a lot of pending drafts to review, so be patient! The other draft will not reduce your chance for success; the only thing that matters is how well you've written your draft. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:51, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

There are at least two complications here. First, it appears that the Original Poster has changed their user name. At least that is what it appears, that they are may be either User:Assassin7177 or User:Atlantis77177. Second, the title of their draft has a history, and the title Karikku is create-protected (salted) in article space. If the subject of this new user's draft really is different, disambiguation will be necessary. However, I haven't seen the deleted article. Only administrators can view deleted articles. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Surely there is no need for disambiguation? If the topic has (unexpectedly) become notable, the create protection can be lifted by an admin, once an AfC reviewer has accepted it. --bonadea contributions talk 18:52, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

User:Bonadea - That is true. I had disambiguation on my mind. If their topic is a different topic with the same name and is notable, the create protection can be lifted. I think that their topic is a different topic, although I am not sure. I don't think that their topic is notable, which is a different matter. Also, if their topic is notable, and is accepted, it may be necessary to watch the article to ensure that it is not hijacked. But anyway. They first need to establish notability. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:17, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Edits to PEROSH

Hi, I'm new! I've spent all afternoon editing the page about PEROSH and adding lots of citations - it came up with a warning before that there weren't enough references. I checked each edit as I went along. Now all the changes have vanished. What can I do about this?  PEROSH2 (talk) 18:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

It looks like you had a number of edits removed as they were made with a conflict of interest. I'd take a look at the guidance on conflicts with particular reference to declaring them properly and then making appropriate edit requests on the article's talk page. --Paul ❬talk❭ 20:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

• Note: This seems to be related to #Hi, apparently all my edits were removed by a user hiding behind the name 'Tradescantal'. Why does wiki allow this?, about three hours later. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi yes I've had a mail to say I have to make a declaration that it is paid content. It's not but I'll see if I can construct a declaration that is truthful - ie doesn't say it is paid content. I used the username PEROSH2 to make my affiliation crystal clear. I'm still trying to find my way around the system! I'm on holiday and can't spend much more time on this so if that doesn't work will give up. As anyone who looks at my edits will see, I've been adding in lots of external references (ie things not published by PEROSH) which is what the existing page has marked up as being short of. PEROSH is a partnership of national research institutes for occupational health and safety. It's vision is use of scientific evidence to inform the work of policymakers at national, European and global level.So for example at the moment scientists in the member institutes are providing scientific evidence that is being used to inform the national covid response. I guess a partnership of scientists set up to share knowledge between national institutes, work together on projects, and with a vision on use of scientific evidence to save workers lives and protect their health just doesn't fit the boxes wiki has. Will have a go at the declaration if I can navigate to the page. Alternatively if one of the wiki editors can go through and decide if they want to add in any of the external references I've cited (things like publications in the British Medical Journal on occupational health) that would be great MT at PEROSH (talk) 12:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC) .

Capital Punishment

Hey- I'd like to get some feedback on Talk:Capital punishment. Is there a Wikipedia policy rule against using colors in a map on Wikipedia in away that is not neutral? Geographyinitiative (talk) 19:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC) Geographyinitiative (talk) 19:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

illustrating statistics by color is not a bias. Facts are not always pretty.104.35.254.90 (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Geographyinitiative, I'm not sure what you're asking. Can you clarify what you mean by "colors in a map on Wikipedia in a way that is not neutral"? —valereee (talk) 21:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

As the OP says on the linked talk page, they object to the color scheme in File:Capital_punishment_in_the_world.svg, where countries that practice the death penalty are in red, countries that have statutes allowing it are in orange, and countries that ban it are in blue. While I frankly doubt that the color scheme amounts to bias, there would be a case for better accessibility to go from darker to lighter colors (or the other way around) down the list of legends. Right now, both extremes (death penalty allowed or banned) are the darkest colors, which makes it hard to interpretate for color-blind readers (to see a black and white version, go to [1] -> "contrast" tab -> desaturate page). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Christina Borum

I just want a wiki page. As a published author, I know I am not famous but I think that once you google my name I come up no one else. My books come up, my information comes up and that should be enough for a page right? Christina35221 (talk) 20:00, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Christina35221: See WP:NAUTHOR for the guidelines on articles about authors. If you fit, you can make request at WP:RA RudolfRed (talk) 20:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

There is a declined autobiography here Draft:Christina Borum with zero reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 20:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately, existence is not a criteria for inclusion in WP. It is "notability" based on a specific type of information, recognized authorities that publish very credible news and information. Get the national and international press to comment about you, your industry or profession, not merely what can be self published.104.35.254.90 (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, not to nitpick, @104.35.254.90:, but there's no such thing as A criteria. There might be many criteria. Or ther might be A criteriON. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:08, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Christina35221, nobody in the entire world has a Wikipedia article, not even Jimbo Wales. Wikipedia has articles about notable people (and other notable subjects). If Wikipedia at some time has an article about you, it will not belong to you, it will not be for your benefit, you will not have control over the content, it may or may not say what you would like it to say, and it will be almost entirely based on what people with no connection to you have published about you, not on what you say or want to say. That is because Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a publicity outliet. --ColinFine (talk) 21:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Canis dirus trouble

I am sorry, but I am very annoyed and worried. On the Canis page, the list of species did not include C. dirus, and when I added it as a species, I later got a notification that I may be blocked from editing if I did anything else bad. Can you help me? Procyon 2.0 (talk) 21:51, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Procyon 2.0: The word "extant" means "still around." It does not mean "extinct," which means "not around." ExtAnt and extInCt are not the same word. Dire wolves are extinct, not extant. That's why your edit was reverted as vandalism. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree that that was why your edit was reverted, Procyon 2.0, but I cannot see in the least why William Harris warned you for vandalism. It looks to me like a good-faith, but slightly mistaken edit. The earlier edits to Liopleurodon, Kepler-17b and Betelgeuse also look like inappropriate but good-faith changes by somebody who is keen to contribute, but rushes into editing without learning how Wikipedia works. Care to comment, William? --ColinFine (talk) 22:24, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

I concur with your assessment Colin, and have apologised on Talk:Procyon for my over-reaction. The earlier string of escalating warnings on that Talk page were not all for vandalism, and your observation about Betelgeuse not actually being vandalism is correct. William Harris (talk) 07:54, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Fadolín

Hi - what is the problem with the intro for the article of Fadolín? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fadol%C3%ADn

? It says the intro is unsourced - but there are three sources, including the New York Times, a curated new music publication, and the American Viola Society.

This article is modeled on the article for the 5-string violin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-string_violin

The only difference here is that it is about a six string violin.

Thank you. ZabarSafari (talk) 00:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, ZabarSafari, and welcome to the Teahouse. No, the difference is in the quality and independence of the citations: and that is far more important than almost anything else about the article. I haven't looked at them all (if you formatted them as citations rather than bare URLs they would be easier to evaluate - see REFB) - but the ones I have looked at are either not independent (classicalmpr.org, American Viola Society - and the latter is annoying without a page number) or just passing mentions (NYTimes). Please see WP:CSMN. --ColinFine (talk) 00:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

None of ref 1, 2 or 3 confirm the sentence "The name "fadolín" was etymologically derived by Ljova (Lev Zhurbin) as a portmanteau of FA-DO-vioLIN). David notMD (talk) 01:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

As a subscriber to the New York Times, I am always interested in looking at their coverage of a topic. This is what they had to say about this topic: "There was also a pensive piece for fadolin (a six-string violin) ..." That is a sentence fragment, or what is commonly referred to by Wikipedia editors as a "passing mention". What is required is significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. The General notability guideline says that:

"Significant coverage addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material."

So, the draft article needs references to reliable, independent sources that discuss this fadolín topic in detail. One reference in the draft describes the word as a neologism. Please be aware that Wikipedia does not accept articles about recently coined words. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree you -- the issue is that the sources for fadolín are right now rather disparate. The true origins of the name "fadolín" are that Ljova had a "baby-naming contest" for his new 6-string viola in 2008 (see ) and the winning answer was FAMIola -- a viola with a FA and a MI. By connection, if six-string viola-sized instrument with added FA and MI strings was a FA-MI-(vi)OLA, a violin with extra FA and DO strings became a FA-DO-(vio)LÍN. This has not been explained elsewhere, and the sourcing is murky.

However, the instrument builder Eric Aceto has built 26 of these instruments (by his count), and the naming convention of calling a 6-string violin a "fadolín" is becoming more common, see for example or and more generally --- so yes, most of the work is being spread on Facebook, though fadolín has also received mentions in the New York Times, and also in the New Yorker . It has also been used in an academic context at Princeton University . The body of work for the instrument is rapidly expanding.

Thank you for your guidance and patience! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZabarSafari (talk • contribs) 17:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

References

Citation changes

If a citation URL redirects to a new URL (eg. an organisation updates its website URL although the content of web page is still relevant) - is it best to add a new citation for the new URL next to the old citation, or should the existing citation be updated to include new URL and retrieval date? There may also be updates to the associated Wikipedia text based on the updated webpage used in the citation. Gobiidae (talk) 03:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gobiidae. Wikipedia doesn't necessarily delete no longer accessible citations for the reasons given in WP:DEADREF. So, in my opinion, if the "old" url is no longer accessible, then you can probably treat it as a "deadlink" and try to find an archived version of it. You can then update the WP:ACCESSDATE (i.e. "retrieval date") parameter and other relevant parameters accordingly. If you're absolutely certain that the old source and the new source are identical not only in content but in the context used and that only the url has changed, then you probably could simply just replace the url and tweak the other citation parameters as needed. If the old source and the new source are different, however, then it might be better to cite them separately. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Marchjuly --Gobiidae (talk) 07:17, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

My article was declined

My first article was declined yesterday. I request the Teahouse editors to lend me a helping hand by doing necessary edits for my article, as it is really important for me--Assassin7177 (talk) 04:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC) Assassin7177 (talk) 04:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Your draft was declined by an pretty experienced editor named DGG for the following reason: "This is a PR notice for a non notable youtubechannel. The references a re usual PR that is found in newspapers". DGG is not only an AFC reviewer, but is also an administrator, an oversighter and a checkuser. In other words, DGGs is someone who has been around quite a long time who has an established track record of having a really good understanding of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The Wikipedia community only confers such user rights on editors that it fully trusts to do what's best for Wikipedia. So, it might be best for you to ask DGG on his user talk page to clarify why he declined the draft and what he thinks is needed for the draft to be ultimately accepted.

You've asked about this draft previously at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1081#Help me improve my article, Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1081#Help me improve my article_2, Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1081#Changing the title of an article, but what you seem to not be understanding is that Wikipedia editors can't make a subject Wikipedia notable through editing. It makes no difference how well written or formatted an article is if the subject hasn't received the significant coverage in reliable sources that it needs to establish its Wikipedia notability. While the subject of this draft might be quite important to you, it's still going to have be something that's deemed Wikipedia notable to Wikipedia's readers for an article to be created about it. It could be that this is simply a case of WP:TOOSOON and that an article just can't be created about this subject at this particular time. It might also be a case where those wanting to create an article about this subject need to start looking to look for some place other than Wikipedia to create content about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:51, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Marchjuly (talk) Thank you for your advise. I have asked DGG about it and am expecting response to come fast. But still, could you comment on my information provided without concentrating on the subject, as in that way, I could atleast be sure that my style of writing is proprer

Assassin7177, writing is OK while notability is lacking.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Is it considerable as a reliable source ?

I found [2] it was an article This which was deleted because it was having promotional publications, though I found [3] from Dinesh Lal Yadav so my question is shall I consider it as reliable or promotional? as there is no bylineDtt1^Talk 07:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Question-2 - if there is an article which is on a reliable source but is an interview so can it be considered as reliable, can we use it ?

If I understand Q1 correctly, DJ Felix was deleted via AfD even though it had a ZEENEWS reference, and you are now asking if a different ZEENEWS article can be a reliable source reference for a different person. Answering requires someone who knows reputation of Zee Media Bureau. David notMD (talk) 08:11, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Even if an interview is published in what's generally regarded as a reliable website/magazine/newspaper, what the interviewee says in the interview normally isn't usable. See Wikipedia:Interviews. As for Zee News, unfortunately it goes unmentioned in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, and there's no clear and recent discussion in the archives of WP:RSN. I suggest that you ask about it on WP:RSN. My own reaction to what's said in the article Zee News (and particularly from the content of what's now its seventh endnote) would be to avoid it as a source for any material that might have political ramifications. -- Hoary (talk) 08:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

New York Times articles (pre 1970's)

Hello! I am doing research on a topic that is discussed in older New York Times articles (pre 1970's). I can see some of the preview text and the date, but I cannot see the author's name. It seems that only current subscribers can see the author's name. Are there editors who are NYT subscribers that can look up the author information? This must be a frequent problem. The Times is such a valuable resource for citation. Thank you! Thriley (talk) 07:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Thriley. You can try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City or Wikipedia:WikiProject Newspapers and perhaps you'll find someone who has access to the NYT's archives. You might also want to consider asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:03, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I will consult those pages. Best, Thriley (talk) 08:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thriley, I suggest that you visit Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library/Databases/Requests#New York Times to see if the access described there via ProQuest would help you. I have been searching NYT via ProQuest for several months, and I have found it to be very useful. Eddie Blick (talk) 23:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Twinkle

How to revert someone's edits; I mean how can I revert someone's edits which appear disruptive? And How to use and enable Twinkle to my account.  Abhishek Kasaudhan 123 ( talk) 08:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

How to revert someone's edits: Help:Reverting. You can enable Twinkle in your Preferences, section "Gadgets". Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Abhishek Kasaudhan 123: Remember to include a good edit summary when you revert someone! For Twinkle, if you don't revert for vandalism, the gadget will have a pop-up asking for your edit summary. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 11:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there; I'm still a bit confused about one thing that sometimes while reverting someone's edits, I saw people mentioning something like this, "Undid revision 95836362 by XYZ." So, do they manage to it manually/on their own; or some special tools help them. In addition to, if there are such tools, then how can I enable them to my account and use them for reverting disruptive edits? Abhishek Kasaudhan 123 ( talk) 13:16, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Abhishek Kasaudhan 123: When you look at the "View history" tab of an article to see the edit history, each edit has an "undo" link at the end. See WP:UNDO. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey there; I can't find the undo option anywhere! Or maybe its not being enabled to my account; if it is so, I would love to see the procedure of unlocking it. Please help me through out this. Thanks Abhishek Kasaudhan 123 ( talk) 11:46, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Trying to understand whether or not it's okay to use a company logo or not

Hi all! So I've recently started developing the page Stonewell Cider. I know it's a long way from finished, but I have plenty of stuff that I'm going to tack on in the coming weeks before I submit it for publication. My question is whether or not I can put its logo on the page or not. I read WP:LOGO but honestly couldn't really make heads or tails of it. Thanks in advance! Xx78900 (talk) 10:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Xx78900 Hello and welcome. As I understand it(and you might wish to wait for some other opinions), company logos can be used as fair use, but must be uploaded to Wikipedia directly and not Commons(where fair use images aren't allowed). 331dot (talk) 10:18, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

331dot Thanks for the reply! I think I'll upload the image then as the page remains only a draft for now anyway. If someone comes along with a good reason for deleting it, I'll do so. Cheers! Xx78900 (talk) 10:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Xx78900: Please see WP:DRAFTS#Preparing drafts for more details, but non-free content cannot be used in drafts. If you add such a file to a draft, it will be promptly removed per non-free content use criterion #9. My suggestion to you would be to first get the draft you're working on approved, and only then start worrying about adding a logo for the company to it. It's matters not whether the draft has a logo in it; it only matter whether the company you're trying to create an article about is deemed to meet Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, Xx89000. Your question is like "Please tell me how I can build a turret on this house that I haven't yet found a plot of land to build it on. --ColinFine (talk) 12:54, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Thanks for the reply! And cheers I'll leave off the logo for now then no worries, I did read through but I didn't clock hat drafts didn't count as articles, my bad. I'm fairly confident it will be considered notable when it comes through as it is discussed at length in a variety of national newspapers so I think it will pass. I'll hold off on the logo though. Cheers. And @ColinFine: I'm not sure my question was quite as extreme as you made out, nor deserving of a rude reply.Xx78900 (talk) 16:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Xx78900 By the way, Draft:Stonewell Cider goes to your draft whereas Stonewell Cider does not. And, in my opinion, minor/local organization awards do not contribute to notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. David notMD (talk) 14:38, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and the advice, I'm still new to the whole thing! Yes, the smaller awards may not be notable, but I felt they were worthy of inclusion anyway, as they can be sourced. I have multiple sources from a variety of national newspapers discussing the company (or at least its roducts) in a non trivial manner, so notability shouldn't be an issue by the time I bring the article up to a stage where I feel comfortable submitting it. Cheers. Xx78900 (talk) 16:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Donald Trump

Your write up about Donald Trump seems very negative compared to Barack Obama or Joe Biden. Why is that? 90.253.183.164 (talk) 10:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Articles on Wikipedia are not positive or negative, they simply summarize what independent reliable sources say about the topic. If you have changes to suggest that are sourced to independent reliable sources, please offer them at Talk:Donald Trump. Note that Wikipedia does not claim to be free of bias; the sources are presented to the readers so they can evaluate them and judge them for themselves. 331dot (talk) 10:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Articles on Wikipedia are not SUPPOSED to be positive or negative. Articles on Wikipedia are also written by human beings who, with the best of intentions, will still at least HAVE their individual biases and beliefs. I haven't read the articles in question here, but I hope no reasonable person would think that positivity/negativity could never happen in Wikipedia. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:19, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

AzseicsoK I should clarify that the intention is that articles are not positive or negative- and if the OP feels changes are needed that enhance that goal, they should propose them. However, if coverage in independent reliable sources is "negative", any Wikipedia article about the covered topic will be "negative" as well, irrespective of the biases of the editors. Article content will not be whitewashed. 331dot (talk) 13:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

331dot, I also note now that you DID make clear from the start that " ... Wikipedia does not claim to be free of bias ...," a caveat that I overlooked when I first looked to comment. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

AzseicsoK, to argue that everyone has a bias is not to say that the tone could be neutralized. Plus you're arguing in a professional tone to someone new to the Wikipedia customs. You know how people look at Wikipedia outside. "It's editable, don't trust it!" "It's not written by academics." "It's not a research paper!" "It sounds like a fandom site." When meeting such people, talk nicely-- after all, that's what Teahouse is. GeraldWL 17:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Gerald Waldo Luis actually, you make me see that I wasn't clear in my intent in my original statement. I wasn't talking to the new person; I was responding to the person who answered the new person. (And my second comment--on reflection, worded very badly) was meant to acknowledge that I didn't read all the way to the end of that second person's answer before I responded. I was picking apart something--a bit from the wrong sided, I admit. If I came off as "not nice" to the new person, I apologize. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Need general advice about adding a character image

Hello! I have been busy rewriting the page Lloyd Garmadon in the hope of raising the article class from Start to GA. I would like to include an image of the character, but as I have never done this before I am concerned about copyright. There is an image of the character in Wikimedia Commons (File:Lloyd.webp) but it has been nominated for deletion. Should I attempt to find a suitable free image or avoid adding an image altogether? Any general image advice would be very much appreciated. Thank you so much! Fieryninja (talk) 10:35, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Fieryninja. Wikimedia Commons doesn't accept any type of fair use per c:COM:FAIR; so, unless the image you want to use can be verified to meet c:Commons:Licensing, it will be near impossible for Commons to keep it. Wikipedia does, however, accept certain types of fair use content uploaded locally as non-free content; however, the policy on using such content is quite restrictive. For fictional character images, it kind of depends on the nature of the character. If the character is basically the same appearance as the actor who is playing the part and the actor is still living, then it can sometimes be hard to justify using a non-free image because a free-equivalent image of the actor from around the same period of time is simply often considered acceptable to serve the same encylopeadic purposes as a non-free one per WP:FREER; however, if the character appears in special make up or in a special costume, then sometimes a non-free image of the actor as they appear in character is allowed. For the most part, non-free images of animated characters tend to be allowed since basically there's no way for a free equivalent to be created or found absent the original copyright holder of the character doing so. Such images are generally OK as long as they are used for primary identification purposes either a the top of or in the main infobox of a stand-alone article about the character, but much harder to justify when they are used in other articles or in other ways. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your response. It has really helped me understand the general concept of fair use. I have studied the fair use guidelines and conclude that as the character is animated and bears no resemblance to any living person and cannot be replaced by a free image, then using a non-free image is acceptable under the criteria of fair use. I have also done further research in terms of the copyright guidelines published by Lego, which is the copyright holder. In their Fair Play Brochure they make the following statement about use of their copyrighted material under the heading Misuse on the Internet, "The LEGO Group owns copyrights to all of the building instructions, publications and photographs used in its catalogs, on its packages and websites. Copying, scanning and distributing these materials in the internet would be an infringement of the LEGO Group’s copyrights. Nevertheless, we permit very limited reproduction of our copyrighted material on websites for non-commercial purposes only, e.g. posting on a website to exchange information or making fair use commentary)." I believe therefore that is acceptable to use an image of the character that has been published on the Lego website for the purpose of illustrating the character in the infobox. I welcome any feedback from contributors on this subject before uploading it. Thanks Fieryninja (talk) 11:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

What to do with dead links?

What would be the first action taken when seeing permanent dead links? Should it be removed immediately or taken care of in an alternative way? And si there a difference between "broken" and "dead" links? Apollogone (talk) 10:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC) Apollogone (talk) 10:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Links taggged as permanentely dead should not be removed. Instead, they should be replaced with an alternative link that is working and supporting the content in question. AFAIK the terms "broken" and "dead" are often mixed up, howewer, "dead" is used to adress more permanent failures, while "broken" referes to links that are temporarely unavailable due to server overloads, temporary server misconfiguaration (such as expired SSL certs) or similar reasons. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Publishing A Page?!?

Hi, I am looking to publish a page that has been in my drafts for about a week now. I do not have a publish button, although I have been on wiki for some time now. How do I get the page reviewed and published?

Do I need to allow more time? Correctioncontributer (talk) 11:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Correctioncontributer Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added the appropriate information to your draft to allow you to submit it for a review. However, if you were to do so, I think that it would be rejected. This is because it does little more than tell of the company and what it does. Wikipedia articles (not just a "page") must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Brief mentions, name drops, announcements of routine business, interviews, and other primary sources do not establish notability. Please see Your First Article for more information.

If you are associated with this company in some way, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you could be required to make. 331dot (talk) 12:03, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Correctioncontributer. Drafts aren't automatically published; you either (1) need to do so yourself or (2) submit the draft to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review. I wouldn't suggest you try and do (1) unless you've got an established track record of creating viable articles. Lots of new editors try (1) only to see their work tagged or nominated for deletion (sometimes rather quickly) because it's not considered to meet the basic criteria for a Wikipedia article. So, (2) might be your best option since it will given an experienced AfC reviewer a chance to look over the draft and assess whether it has what it takes to be a viable article. If the reviewer feels it does, they will move the draft to the WP:MAINSPACE; if not, the reviewer almost always explains why and sometimes even suggests things that need to be approved. Having a draft declined by a reviewer is not the end of the world and you can resubmit for another review again as long as you don't keep resubmitting the same declined version. Since you're draft seems to be about a company, you might want to look at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for some general idea as to what types of things an AfC reviewer is going to be looking for when they assess the draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Extinct or extant

Hi, it is me again, Procyon 2.0, with another question. I know the difference between extant and extinct, extant meaning in existence, and extinct meaning the opposite.But how do I mark a species as extinct? Procyon 2.0 (talk) 12:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Procyon 2.0: this is about your edits to Canis, yes? The point is that you added the species to a list headed "Extant species". It would need a separate heading "Extinct species". I don't know if there is a special way to do that: you'd have to look at Template:automatic taxobox. --ColinFine (talk) 13:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

The dodo is (famously) extinct. Go to the article dodo, prepare to edit it, look in the infobox, copy the relevant property–value pairs, copy them into the article you want to edit, get your browser to go back from editing dodo. -- Hoary (talk) 13:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

SandBox Content

Hi Teahouse, I would like to ask your guidance on what to write in a sandbox? maybe you can share some samples.

Thanks Dil Dilthor (talk) 13:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

The point of the sandbox it to write, or do, whatever you want with it. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

However, its a good place to start draft articles before they are submitted for review. Wikipedia:Requested articles is a place where articles are sorted into a category, so pick one that interests you. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

But keep in mind that certain policies, such as copyright and harassment, still applies to the sandbox. You shouldn't also take benefit of the sandbox to make Wikipedia a promotional or social media platform. GeraldWL 13:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I use my Sandbox to be sure that I have properly created a reference before pasting it into an article. And if I intend to revise a section of an article, I copy it into my Sandbox, work there, then paste back. David notMD (talk) 14:44, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Interesting. I use it to transform paragraphs or infoboxes that would take much time (i.e. the sidebar at COVID-19 pandemic), or to make drafts.

Grammar Flaws

When one of the most important issues in Wikipedia is related to grammar issues, and many articles have clear grammatical flaws, why correct these flaws faced the reverted and the message of managers to not correct these flaws? Arvinwikiedit (talk) 14:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

While you did fix some grammatical issues, you did introduce wording that wasn't correct in some cases. Instead of manually going through and fixing the changes, the users just revert the whole thing. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 14:20, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

You have been advised on your Talk page that in many instances the grammar or spelling was correct before your changes, or there may be a choice, with both corrrect. For example, see Serial comma. David notMD (talk) 14:50, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

TFWiki.net

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:TFWiki.net This is my first article which I am currently working on. Could someone help me build up this page. It's a very important website that deserves a page. Nosecone6133 (talk) 14:25, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Nosecone6133. Absolutely the first thing you need to do, before you write another word, is find at least three places where people who have no connection with TFWiki have chosen to publish a signficant amount - at least a few paragraphs - about it in places like major newspapers or books from reputable publishers - no fan-sites, wikis, or blogs, and nothing self-published. If you can do that, then you can write an article, by forgetting everything you know about the site and summarising what these independent commentaries say about it. If you cannot find three such sources, then the site does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and any further effort you spend on it will be a waste of your time. If you haven't already read your first article, that would be a smart move. --ColinFine (talk) 14:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Nosecone6133: Also, just to clarify, nobody and nothing "deserves a page" on Wikipedia. Articles here are not for the benefit of the subject. It may be that Wikipedia and its global readers would benefit from an article, summarizing what the sources that Colin wrote about above have written about the subject. It's important to keep this distinction in mind when choosing sources and writing an article here. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

My article gets rejected again

What do i have to do to register a new page, concerning real businesses, and institutions that operate in my city Tirana, Albania ? Brenton Kotorri (talk) 14:38, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Brenton Kotorri: I assume this referes to Draft:Balfin Real Estate & Hospitality. You would realy need at least three independent (no interviews or press releases) reliable sources (no user-generated content) with significant coverage (not yust passing mentions) about the subject. Please also note that "declined"!="rejected". "declined" means "Eh, this is not ready for mainspace. Please improve it." while "rejected" means "Sorry, this cannot be a Wikipedia article, please stop wasting everyone's time". Your draft was declined. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:54, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I see, however, that a draft on this subject was declined earlier, and then deleted as promotional. Be aware that a mention of a company in a list, or the results of a Google search do not qualify as qualifying references. David notMD (talk) 14:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brenton Kotorri (talk • contribs) 09:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Can I downloaded music on Wikipedia?

Please I do not know if I can download music on Wikipedia Mhiz Destiny (talk) 15:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Please be more specific in your meaning. Britmax (talk) 15:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

What? Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 15:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Download music "from" Wikipedia? or Upload music "to" Wikipedia? Maineartists (talk) 15:33, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, according to your user page, Wikipedia is not social media. It's an encylopedia, for information. You can't download music here. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 15:34, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Technically you can download some old music (some of Beethoven's works or some national anthems for example) from Wikimedia Commons if it is there. But you definitely can't download newer music (if I recall correctly, the page on Oppa Gangnam Style has a short excerpt of the song as it is deemed to be important for the article, but technically it is non-free media and is hosted on Wikipedia). 45.251.33.192 (talk) 05:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Byte deducted

Hi I'm Mhiz Destiny i reverted someone's edit and my byte was deducted I do not know if I did the right thing or not please I need advise Mhiz Destiny (talk) 15:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

It seems to be the edit made on [4]Jerusalema. You removed an external hyperlink, thinking it was a typo. Read up on the article linked to learn how it works and how to script it. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 15:39, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Are LinkedIn, IMBd and Filmibeat reliable sources Atlantis77177 (talk) 16:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

LinkedIn and IMDB are definitely not, although we often include IMDB in an external links section i.e. not as a source. See WP:RSPSOURCES for the rationale behind each. I'm not familiar with filmibeat, but it would really come down to where they are sourcing their material from. --Paul ❬talk❭ 16:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

IMO Filmibeat looks very doubtful for at least anything WP:BLP-related. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Own page

Can someone change their own wikipedia like age or hometown etc Roberts Hogg (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Roberts Hogg, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to people editing the Wikipedia article about them (which is not their "own": it does not in any way belong to them) then the answer is No, they are strongly discouraged from directly editing the article, except to revert obvious vandalism (but some people interpret "vandalism" as meaning "anything I don't want in that article": this is not the meaning). People with a conflict of interest, including the subject of an article, are welcome to make an edit request on the article's talk page. See AUTOPROB for more. --ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Question For Wikipedia Editors (reposted because I forgot the subject line)

This website is so incredibly wild to me. You have hundreds, if not more, professionals and experts creating articles about the most menial subjects. Almost every conversation I've seen in talk pages is formatted like a professional letter, and as I've been led to believe, 99% of the people who work on Wikipedia don't get any money for their work. Which brings me to my question, directed towards the more long-term or senior editors and admins here: Why? How did you get started here? Why do you keep going? If you have one, what's your real-life job, and does that job affect the work you do here? Do you do this because you enjoy it, or because someone needs to, and you can't stop? Do you see yourself still doing this in five years? Ten? When do you retire from a job that has no boss, no pay, and no hours? *How* do you retire from something you can't get away from?

Thank you for your time, Locke TheLockeDoctor 16:33, 27 October 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thelockedoctor (talk • contribs)

Hello, Thelockedoctor. I can only answer for myself: I have been editing here since 20062005; until 2011 I was also in full-time employment, but I retired then. I do it because I love being part of a huge, non-commercial, collaborative project; and I like helping people (and "non-commercial" is actually one of the most important points for me). I also volunteer at a local tourist site, I'm a trustee of a charity, and I was one of the founders of a company which for twenty five years has been running theatre venues at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe with entirely volunteer labour: I don't see this as all that different, except that I'm entirely free to do or not do what and when I want. It can get addictive, but isn't always. --ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Also see WP:Why to contribute. --ColinFine (talk) 17:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I do so becuase I have time to spare and Wikipedia was quite usefull in my life so far, so I want to give something back. Side Note: There have been 118,638 editors with at leats one edit or logged action in past 30 days. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

To Learn the Truth, Read My Wikipedia Entry on Sichuan Peppers has a little on that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:18, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thelockedoctor, it's actually tens of thousands of active editors and millions who have ever edited, per Wikipedia:Statistics. I edit because it's a ton of fun. :) I like collaboration, and I love discovering a topic that is missing. —valereee (talk) 18:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

All of the above, plus it's a learning experience – a way to keep the mind sharp. I'm a (non-web) software developer and it's an opportunity to learn a new environment and set of languages. It's also a way to learn about subject areas that I would likely never be exposed to, in the process of copy-editing a page on a mountain in India, town in Russia, esoteric corner of mathematics, etc. I also occasionally get to use some of my life experience (hopefully) for the benefit of the project and its users. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:28, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Citing

Can I link to sources that are not publicly available, such as citing a research paper on a paid-for database? WildeViolets (talk) 17:35, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

WildeViolets, hello! Often yes, see WP:PAYWALL. JSTOR is a popular source around here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

?

&D4135t;D4135t (talk) 17:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Please don't add nonsense to the Teahouse. --a gd fan (talk) 19:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I do not see that as nonsense. D4135t was advised to visit Teahouse, and in a very succinct way asked what Teahouse is. The answer - a place to ask questions about how edit or create Wikipedia articles. David notMD (talk) 01:24, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

approving page

Hi.

I'm not sure why my wiki page won't be approved? Arushi kapoor (talk) 18:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Your draft User:Arushi kapoor/sandbox was rejected, it has no sources and nothing to suggest that the subject is notable. Theroadislong (talk) 18:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Arushi kapoor, assuming you mean User:Arushi kapoor, that page is meant to write a little about what you do and like to do as a WP-editor (WP:UP), it is not a place to submit an article. If you want to try that, start at Help:Your first article. If this is about you or someone you work for, see WP:AUTOBIO and WP:COI first. WP:BLP and WP:TUTORIAL can also be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:15, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Help

Hello. I created an article -Draft:Dmitry Borisovich Volkov. It was reviewed and remarked about the ad style. The article was translated from the Russian Wikipedia. I ask experienced editors to help me look at the page with a professional eye and correct the style of the article. It is difficult for me to do this since I am not an English speaker. I am asking for help from a native English speaker. Please help correct the style of the article. Many thanks! 2A00:1FA1:41D2:7D38:4008:5E01:7DDA:6715 (talk) 18:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I think that's going to be difficult. If the sources were in English, I would advise that rewriting the article from the beginning is going to be easier than "correcting the style": delete the whole draft, keep only the reliable published independent sources, and then write the article based on what those say. But when the sources are in Russian, you're going to need to find a native English speaker with a good understanding of Russian. Maproom (talk) 21:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I very much ask anyone who has knowledge of the Russian language, please see the article. I will be very grateful for your help! 95.153.128.35 (talk) 05:35, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Remove imbedded link

I was looking at the state of Georgia's 128th Congressional session. My grandfather - Senator #19, Roy Noble from Vienna - is NOT the person that is hyperlinked to his name. How can this incorrect hyperlink be removed? 2600:1700:5850:7F30:4C96:8D5D:455B:846 (talk) 19:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Which article are you referring to, IP editor?--Quisqualis (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi person editing from ...455B:846. I have fixed the issue with this edit. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Automatic number of contributions

Hello, I need help with a userbox. There's a userbox named Template:User contrib, and I usually put my contributions manually, (eg: 505, then 567, then 613), and it's inconvienient. Is there something to put in there that makes the contribution number grow automatically? (sorry for the bad grammar) --a gd fan (talk) 19:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi a gd fan. I don't think this is currently available and would require someone writing a new module/program/magic word for the purpose, or that a bot be dedicated to regularly updating the template's number parameter on userpages containing this (and similar) templates. I don't have the technical background to explain why that is, but I base my post on the fact that none of the various templates that provide counts of aspects of user contributions have this feature, despite that providing such a feature would be such an obvious improvement to these types of templates, as well as on reading Template talk:User contrib#Automatic Updates (and the silence to the post at Template talk:User contrib#Why aren't the edit-counts filled automatically? (like it's done for the mobile userpages). Of course, posting a question like yours to a public help forum like this sometimes makes it happen (but I wouldn't hold my breath)<--see that? I'm daring someone to show their amazing programming skills, making it more likely to happen;-) Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:28, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: Well, I though MediaWiki had a built it command like {{PAGENAME}} and {{BASEPAGENAME}} for a user's contribution number, and if it did, it would be something like {{CONTRIBNUM|(user)}} a gd fan (talk) 20:36, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I looked at magic words before posting above, and it isn't there AFAICT.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Notability

I am new here. I am thinking about writing an article here on Daniel Zdrodowski who is running for Circuit Attorney in the St. Louis Prosecutor election against Kim Gardner (the latter already has a wikipedia page).

My question is this : is Daniel Zdrodowski notable enough for a wikipwsia page? ce (talk) 19:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

ce, notability does not arise from candidacy for office, so, in the absence of notability as a person, no.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:52, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Charlie Emery (edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Per the Wikipedia definition of a notable politician, merely being a candidate for office does not typically merit someone an article. There are very rare exceptions to that(such as Christine O'Donnell) but in those cases the candidate receives outsized coverage in independent reliable sources, far beyond a typical political candidate. If Mr. Zdrodowski wins his election, he would then meet the notability definition(even before he officially assumes office). If he is notable for something else, he could merit an article for that, which could then include the fact he is seeking public office. 331dot (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I have edited a page which name is World Sunni Movement and it is not indexed by google

Why some article is not index by seacrh engine. Can anyone help to index this page Superman3355 (talk) 20:18, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Superman3355 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Articles are not indexed by search engines until they are formally marked as reviewed(or 60 days I think). Do you have a particular need for it to be seen in search engines quickly? 331dot (talk) 20:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

331dot Thanks. I am new and at first reviewer tagged some issue and I had solved that now what can I do for index. I am very interested to write in wikipedia but for this problem I am worried. Thanks again.

You cannot control the indexing of your article. If it passes review, or after 90 days following creation, whichever is sooner, will determine indexing of articles on Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:50, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Please take a look at this edit request

Hello, can somebody please take a look at this edit request on the talk page of Fardad Fateri. It is a small request. Direct link is available here - Talk:Fardad_Fateri (the last request on the page) GoMetroGo (talk) 21:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

GoMetroGo As noted in the request, "The requested edits backlog is very high. Please be extremely patient. There are currently 111 requests waiting for review." Efforts to "jump the line" don't usually work. Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 21:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to Music

 Clizi (talk) 22:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

As said before, this is a reference desk on editing Wikipedia. Instead, click this link -> Wikipedia:Reference desk, and someone there will gladly give you trivial facts about the media. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 22:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Paid Tag Removal Help

Hello everyone,

Is there anyway for the paid tag to be removed from this page The_Urban_Legend_(comics)? I tried tagging the admin, but he is unresponsive. Many thanks! Zerotimesfour (talk) 22:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Zerotimesfour:, removing a {{paid contributions}} tag requires removing the text that is at issue. It appears that about 66% of the current text was authored by two suspicious accounts, one of which was blocked for undisclosed paid editing. At that level of suspicious editing, is probably best if the entire article were to be re-written by a neutral party who has no conflicts of interest. I hope that helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Zerotimesfour:, I have cleaned the article up. It's now free from promotional nature. GeraldWL 05:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Interface/Style Question

Hello. Is it possible to edit the links I see at the top of my page, for my Talk page, Sandbox page, Watchlist, and others? I would like to add reference links (like to the Manual of Style or a user sub-page) to this list. Thanks, — Longchess (talk) 01:57, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

While I don't think you can change those links, you can add those links to your User Page. JackFromReedsburg (talk) 02:18, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the response: I was taking a look at Help:User style and wondered if there was a way to change those elements, but adding the links to my user page will serve as well. — Longchess (talk) 02:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Longchess, it'd be possible to do that with a user script, possibly modeled after User:Lourdes/PageCuration. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Sdkb, thanks, that worked perfectly! — Longchess (talk) 12:13, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

My First Article Could Use a Second Set of Eyes, Please?

Hi, I've been working on getting the following article up, but keep running into minor issues. Is anyone willing to take a look at the article and offer advice for any other changes? I just made edits to the footnotes but would like to get an additional set of eyes before I submit again.

I appreciate any and all help ahead of time! Thank you. Duragdaddy (talk) 03:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Duragdaddy, The Declined reviewer called for better referencing. Also, minimally, remove the Link column in the tables, as articles are not supposed to contain hyperlinks. Better if the Online appearances and interviews table is completely deleted. David notMD (talk) 09:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

How to make Football kit png

Hello , How a football kit used in articles of  football clubs are made ?? Like I saw many editors upload png of football kit and how can I make football kit png .Is there any application to create it ?? Thanks WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 06:52, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

It's generated using the {{football kit}} template which combines a bunch of existing images. Your best bet is to find an article about a team whose kit is a similar pattern, copy the code and vary that. --Paul ❬talk❭ 09:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Uploading 100 images

Hi, I'm working on an article in my sandbox for 100 Views of New Tokyo. While I probably don't want to use all 100 images in the article (is this even allowed?), I found a few are already on wikimedia commons and thought it would be nice to upload them all and perhaps link to them. I don't really know how to do this, nor am I sure about copyright issues (the images were produced from 1928 to 1932).

The images can be found in good quality here

If it isn't possible to upload all 100, can someone just upload this one from 1929 for me?

Cheers, Dark Clouds of Joy (talk) 07:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

You'll want the template {{commons category}} Paul ❬talk❭ 07:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Not sure I understand. Is that what you use to link to commons?

Yeah so you'll want to insert {{Commons category|One_Hundred_Views_of_New_Tokyo_(woodcut_series)|One Hundred Views of Tokyo}} into your article (normally around the External Links/See Also section. --Paul ❬talk❭ 08:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

It seems I'm not allowed to use the "upload wizard" yet. It tells me to do it at commons. I think they are okay for copyright, but it is confusing as Japanese law is different than US.

Also, I don't fancy uploading a hundred images one by one, is there a handy bot or something? Dark Clouds of Joy (talk) 07:36, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Dark Clouds of Joy, to make search easier, we usually make categories. For example someone wants to find corona photos, they can find it at the coronavirus category. The upload wizard is only for copyrighted images. GeraldWL 07:40, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Dark Clouds of Joy: Unless I'm missing something that says the images are under a different license, the page you linked says at the bottom that it is "Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Visualizing Cultures Creative Commons License Creative Commons - some rights reserved", i.e, "CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 US", which is not a "free license" as required by Wikimedia Commons (because of the "NC" part). Unless you can make a case for fair use per WP:NFCC, they cannot be uploaded here or used in an article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry to be a pain, this copyright stuff is very confusing! The images were all produced from 1928 to 1932, I don't think the MIT has the copyright. As I said, there are already a quite a few images from this series on wikimedia commons: Category:One Hundred Views of New Tokyo (woodcut series) so I don't see a problem with uploading the rest. Dark Clouds of Joy (talk) 07:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

You're quite right, the copyright has probably expired on these images. If you look at Commons:File:Fujimori Kabuki-za.jpg you'll see that a relevant declaration re Japanese copyright law has been placed under Licensing. You can follow that example by clicking edit on that page and copy-pasting the code you find there. --Paul ❬talk❭ 08:22, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Also that is quite a cheeky claim on MITs part. --Paul ❬talk❭ 08:23, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks to you all for helping. I uploaded one image without too much trouble here I don't think I can stomach uploading the other ninety or so!

While I'm here, what's the deal with fair use? I'm working on an artist born 1899, died 1993. I can't find a photo of him, so would one of his prints (or more) be acceptable? Dark Clouds of Joy (talk) 08:38, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Fair Use really only extends to an image that identifies the subject. So if the article is about the artist, the fair use image would have to be of the artist. Self portraiture might count if that's the only image available, but a copyrighted image of something else definitely wouldn't. (An image of just the artists signature may be considered public domain, so long as it's not a caligraphic signature, as it's not considered a creative work in of itself). --Paul ❬talk❭ 09:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Ah, that's a shame. Thanks anyway. Dark Clouds of Joy (talk) 09:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC) (ps. Love the gnome!)

If I understand you correctly, all of these were published by 1932 at the latest. That's well over 50 years ago. If I understand commons:Template:PD-Japan correctly, then if the copyright of this series was held by its publisher, they're all in the public domain; but if it wasn't, then anything by anyone who died no later than 1967 is in the public domain; and anything by anyone still alive in 1968 is not in the public domain. (I doubt that the publisher owned the copyright, and if you say it did, you might have to provide evidence for this.) Incidentally, photographs are handled differently. I am no expert on copyright matters, and really the place to ask about it isn't here but instead Commons, specifically, commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. -- Hoary (talk) 11:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

We are not lawyers (or not those who represent the WMF anyway). I don't believe the WMF wants us to make decisions like this. If a page clearly states a restrictive license (as this one, I believe, does), I don't think it is up to us to try to determine if that license is invalid. It's just not important enough in the overall scheme of things compared to the risk of copyright violation, IMO. If you wanted to contact the page publisher (MIT) to seek clarification of the status, and present the argument, such that they will publish a clearly-stated free license for those images, then that would be the way to go, I think.

BTW, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is just as invalid an argument with regard to copyrighted images as it is for text. The presence of one (possibly-infringing) image in a series does not justify others. I'm certain that Commons and Wikipedia have many, many examples of copyright violations at any given time – some that remain for a long time. That has no bearing on what should be done in any particular case, which should stand or fall on its own merits. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:49, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Need Help

Hello There Hosts! I recently created an article Draft:Rohan Solomon which clearly meets the wp:gng criteria as it does have Independent Reliable Sources to it, But it got rejected by a reviewer stating This draft does not appear to indicate which of the musical notability criteria is satisfied. If at least one of the criteria is satisfied, please revise this draft appropriately, with a reliable source, if necessary stating on the talk page which criterion is met, and resubmit. But as I see that it is meeting the GNG criteria clearly, but I am not sure if its enough or not to qualify as The reviewer must have seen the links cited, It would be great if someone can guide me (if the draft is missing the major thing which isn't allowing it to pass the musical notability criteria. Thanks Dtt1^Talk 07:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Dtt1, it looks like there are 14 sources in that draft currently. Could you provide us with the three you think best establish Solomon's notability? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Sdkb Yes sure, The best three sources are-

• The Hindu - This
• Rolling Stone India - | This
• Telangana Today - This Dtt1^Talk 08:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

The first and third of those are based on interviews with Solomon, and so don't qualify as independent. The second is a listing, with no discussion. What Wikipedia needs to establish notability is several reliable independent sources with in-depth discussion of the subject. Maproom (talk) 09:40, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Government published books

Is government published books trusted on Wikipedia? and Is the books who published by government considered reliable source on Wikipedia?. The books like :-

1.Census of India, 1961: Madhya Pradesh Volume 8, Issue 2 of Census of India, 1961, India. Office of the Registrar General

2.Madhya Pradesh: Narsimhapur. Supplement Gazetteer of India Volume 7 of Madhya Pradesh: District Gazetteers, Madhya Pradesh (India)

3.Madhya Pradesh District Gazetteers: Chhindwara Gazetteer of India Volume 37 of Madhya Pradesh District Gazetteers, Madhya Pradesh (India) Sumit banaphar (talk) 08:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah--Paul ❬talk❭ 08:34, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

So can I make changes while using these sources as a reference (consensus)Sumit banaphar (talk) 10:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sumit banaphar: Only with consensus, which you don't have. Two other editors and I have objected to your edits. Courtesy links: Talk:Banaphar, Talk:Udal of Mahoba, Talk:Alha. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@◢  Ganbaruby! :-Sir just tell me one thing that if I'm providing you the links of government published books which is consider reliable source everywhere. Than what's the problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumit banaphar (talk • contribs) 15:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Answer me Sumit banaphar (talk) 06:40, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sumit banaphar: unfortunately the response from "Paul" (Paul Carpenter) above was misleading. A book published by a government is fairly likely to be a reliable source (in comparison to a personal blog, for instance), but if you take a moment to read the Reliable Sources guideline you will see that it is always a question of context. Per the reliable sources guideline, "[i]nformation provided in passing by an otherwise reliable source that is not related to the principal topics of the publication may not be reliable; editors should cite sources focused on the topic at hand where possible." For example, a census of India from 1961 could be used to verify population figures in 1961, although since it is a primary source it would be preferrable to find a secondary source. But it could obviously not be used to verify population figures for 1991, and as for information "provided in passing", it could not be used to falsify a reliable scholarly source from the 2000s. Questions about whether a particular source can be used to verify a particular claim in a particular article are better asked at the reliable sources noticeboard. --bonadea contributions talk 07:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes perhaps I should have mentioned that being considered reliable doesn't make it anything the most or absolutely reliable. --Paul ❬talk❭ 10:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@bonadea:-it is written in the page but honestly I didn't get that who to write the notice to ask that a source is realible for a particular article.So can you tell meSumit banaphar (talk) 07:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sumit banaphar: I will do my best. Please let me know if any of the following is not clear.

Start by searching the noticeboard archives, which you will find on the right-hand side of WP:RSN (the search box right under the text "Search the noticeboard archives".) Read any discussions that come up in your search, and see if it is in fact the same source that is discussed (for instance, if you search for "Gazetteer" there are some discussions about the old British Raj gazetteers of India, which are a different thing). If you should find a previous discussion in the RSN archives about one of the sources you are asking about, provide a link to that, and you should also link to the article talk pages where the sources have been brought up recently.

Present each source. The information you gave above (publisher, title, and so on) is just what is needed, except that you should also include the publication year and the page number(s) for the text you want to use as a source. If there are links to where the source can be read online, add those as well, but remember that the links are much less important than the source information.

Link to the Wikipedia article where you think the source should be used, and quote the exact statement in that article that should be supported by the source – or the statement you think is contradicted by the source you present. Give enough context from the source you present to make it clear what the source says; as far as I have been able to tell, the sources you listed above are not possible to read online except in "snippet view" which does not give a lot of context, so it would be very helpful to the people at RSN if you could also quote the parts that can't be seen in that view.

Since you are also trying to show that the new sources you present are more reliable than the existing source, you will need to explain why that is the case.

I hope this makes sense – other Teahouse hosts are more than welcome to chime in and explain bits I missed. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:47, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

New Article Creation

How do I find new topics to create an article and contribute? My area of expertise are cricket,real estate and listed companies. KnowledgeWriterSara (talk) 09:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProjects are a good way too find areas that need improvement or extra contribution. They're all structured slightly differently but most have a To-Do list or something similiar. You might want to take a look at the wikiprojects Cricket, Architecture and Companies. --Paul ❬talk❭ 09:17, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, KnowledgeWriterSara, and welcome to the Teahouse. As well as the advice Paul Carpenter has given you, please remember that creating a new article is not the only, or necessarily the best, way to contribute to Wikipedia. We have tens of thousads of seriously substandard articles (many of them created in the early days) which currently add little or no value to Wikipedia. Improving some of these (and nominating for deletion the ones which can never be turned into a satisfactory article) may add considerably more value to Wikipedia than creating a draft for a new article on a subject of doubtful notability. --ColinFine (talk) 10:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

I confirm the advice given above. If you want your contributing to Wikipedia to be pleasant and productive, keep away from creating new articles. Maproom (talk) 11:16, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

At a minimum, not until you have developed a clear understanding of what belongs and does not belong in an article, and what "reliable sources" means. David notMD (talk) 14:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Moved in to Draft Twice

Hi Everyone, i created an article 'Appu Series' few days back. One editor moved it into draft Draft:Appu Series (videos). However the page was deleted earlier and i was aware of it and the content was completely different, i didn't copy and paste from anywhere. Am i not eligible to create articles into mainspace? Nagarjunsuresh (talk) 11:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC) Nagarjunsuresh (talk) 11:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Nagarjunsuresh: You say that the two versions are the same, but I took a look at them and they're basically identical ([5] [6]). The move was carried out by 1292simon, who identified that the draft has "POV and tone issues" that you need to address before it can be published onto the mainspace. Just because your article is in the draftspace does not mean it's "deleted"! Instead, we just want you to work on it a bit more so that it can be brought up to Wikipedia's standards. Once you fix these issues, hit the "Submit your draft for review!" button, and a volunteer will check to see if it's up to par. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Which source do I use when they have the same contents

I've never run into this before, but I came across the same article written by the same person on multiple news outlets. Should I include all of them or only one of them, and which one should I include? My instinct is to include either the GlobalNews.ca source or the CTVNews source because the page I'm working on already has multiple sources from CBC and the Globe&Mail.

https://globalnews.ca/news/2438895/site-c-protesters-dig-in-prepare-for-arrests/

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/site-c-protesters-arrests-1.3394523

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/site-c-dam-protesters-in-b-c-prepare-for-arrests-1.2727299

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/site-c-dam-protesters-brace-cold-and-prepare-for-arrests/article28047465/ TipsyElephant (talk) 12:05, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

 Vidyanand Nandkeolyair (talk) 13:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Vidyanand Nandkeolyair: Do you see how on every page after "Keven Drews", it says "The Canadian Press"? That means that it's an article written by a reporter at The Canadian Press, a news agency, and the article is distributed through the various outlets listed above. In this case, any one of the websites is fine to use; just make sure to put "The Canadian Press" as in the |agency= field when you're using a citation template. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

profile for a former prominent athlete

I submitted a profile for a former prominent athlete. How does it get 'live'? Bhorler1975 (talk) 13:36, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Bhorler1975, While it may sound like a semantic difference, we refer to "articles" rather than "profiles".

I assume you are talking about Draft:Blair A. Horler

It isn't remotely close to ready.

Please read Wikipedia:Autobiography

Writing about yourself is highly discouraged.

No articles about living people are permitted unless they have references. You can read more about references and general requirements for new articles at WP:YFA S Philbrick(Talk) 13:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Bhorler1975: You will need to declare on your userpage whether you are actually Blair Horler, or are someone else who's simply chosen to user their name as your username. If the latter, you need to abandon the account and create a new one under which to edit from. I'm sorry to read in the draft that he's dead. Use of the term 'was' in the first sentence does seem quite clear on that point! This appalling edit you made a while ago does make me wonder if you're genuinely trying to write an article about him/about yourself. If you are, I suggest you try to gain more general understanding of how Wikipedia works before diving into the hardest task here - creating a non-promotional article about yourself that meets our Sports notability criteria. See WP:REFBEGIN for how to support every single statement about a living person with an inline citation. If you can't - just remove the rest. I suggest you start by giving The Wikipedia Adventure a go, and try to collect all 15 competency badges as you do our interactive tour. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:05, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Chums (company)

Hi,

I believe you rejected my article last night. I have edited it today but wondered if it needs editing more to be accpeted.

Your help would be massively appreciated

Thanks user (talk) 14:20, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

A reviewer Declined Draft:Chums (company) and gave reasons why. The hosts at Teahouse are not the reviewer. You have made some changes and resubmitted. David notMD (talk) 14:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Click0987. All but two of your references are not independent of the company, as they are clearly based on interviews or press releases; the remaning two only mention Chums in passing. None of these contributes at all to Wikipedia's criteria for NCORP, without which an article on the company will not be accepted. Basically, Wikipedia is not interested in anything the company says or wants to say: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the company, and have not been prompted or fed information by the company, have chosen to publish in reliable sources. Unless you can find at least three examples of such writing, then you are wasting your time and effort. --ColinFine (talk) 16:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

YouTube notability - BLP

Hello all, I am continuing to amend Draft: Malinda Kathleen Reese to get it up to shape re notability (The draft has previously been rejected and discussed in this Teahouse). I was directed to (and read) Wikipedia:WikiProject YouTube/Notability and this dicussion which states "However, official channels of notable organisations, such as Monty Python's channel, may be acceptable as primary sources if their authenticity can be confirmed"- so would this suggest that the YouTube citations in the draft- videos uploaded to YouTube by the subject on her own channel, in which she provides factual information about herself- be considered reliable sources?

Many thanks, Mojo0306 (talk) 14:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Mojo0306, checked the sources. Found RSes like The Independent, WSJ, etc, so it is notable. Will do a cleanup for the draft. GeraldWL 15:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis:, that would be great, many thanks! Mojo0306 (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Mojo0306: Yes, but treat them as primary sources, which you have to be very careful with. Basing an article on too many primary sources is not ideal; instead, we want independent, secondary sources. Also, primary sources do nothing to establish notability. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 15:04, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Brilliant, thanks for the guidance. The newspaper articles included in the list of citations (including Washington Post) should help with notability. Mojo0306 (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Mojo0306, per WP:ABOUTSELF they can be used a little for stuff like born in/born when etc. However, they do not help with WP:N, and content based on them should be minimal. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Many thanks. I have tried to use them as minimally as possible. Mojo0306 (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Notable or not? New article about indie band.

Hello. I'm interested in writing an article about the band Spring Offensive. Though I'm not sure if the article would be considered notable enough or not. I think the main issue would be that they haven't been active the last years with the exception of a concert they wanted to perform in May this year (which has been postponed to May 2021 due to the pandemic) . They toured a handful of countries in Europe when they were active and they still use their Twitter & Facebook page, their music is on Spotify, Apple Music, etc. and I've been able to find some articles about them to source the information about things like the band members positions, location, tour dates, the music released. Guidance on this would be appreciated. Thank you for reading. Neon700 (talk) 15:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Neon700: Notability is based on whether "a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (WP:N). They don't have to be particularly active, nor does their music have to be on streaming platforms. Instead, a good article should have multiple of these reliable sources to back up the information. Refer to WP:YFA for some general guidelines on creating an article. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 16:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Neon700: I've created a few articles on indie bands that have been accepted. The best thing to do is to search for articles that are not based on interviews or press releases. Reviews of their releases or concerts are best for this, in my experience. You may be able to find some interviews with the band that have an introductory section giving some background about them that you could also use, but this on its own would not confer notability. Start by trying to find the sources and summarise what they say, without adding any of your personal knowledge that is not contained in them. Good luck! 90.247.254.61 (talk) 12:16, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

That last comment was by me, but I forgot to log in! Turner Street (talk) 12:18, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Cleaning up my talk page

Hello Teahouse Hosts

Is it permissible to delete content from my talk page?

Thank you in advance for your help -- Bughub (talk) 15:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Bughub Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, you are permitted to remove content from your user talk page. There are a few limited exceptions to that, but none of those are really pertinent to you. Removing content from your talk page is considered an acknowledgement that you read it. 331dot (talk) 16:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Citing Sources Visually

Hello, I usually like to edit and add visually, because I don't really know how to do source edit on here. I got a message saying that one of my edits was deleted because I didn't cite a reliable source. Is there a way to add Cite sources visually, or am I stuck with having to do it all on Source Edit? Thanks in advance. Mr Mosaic (talk) 16:35, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Mr Mosaic, you can add sources in Visual Editor. When you edit, near the top of the page it says Cite. Click on that and it opens up a box into which under the Automatic tab you can enter a URL or ISBN, and VisEd will create a properly-formatted citation, which you then click to insert. —valereee (talk) 16:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Creating portals

Hello, I have a question. Can you make portals even if you are not an admin? And do you use the draft namespace? Because I'm trying to make a portal for wildfires a gd fan (talk) 16:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi a gd fan. Yes you can make a portal, but bear in mind the markup in portals is more unusual than articles and there's more of a focus on CSS, transclusion and features that rely on Lua module backends. The Portal space was overhauled in the not so distant past, automated features were added and the source code of most portals were made uniform; this gives the ability to make space-wide updates. If you do make a portal i would suggest basing it on an existing portal. The talk page of WikiProject Portals is a handy place to ask for help if you get stuck, although you're always welcome to ask here. Regards, Zindor (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

To answer the second part of your question, i've used sandboxes in the past when creating a portal. If you create yourself additional sandboxes, for example User:a gd fan/sandbox2, you can test transclusions between them. Zindor (talk) 17:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

There's also the secret Portal sandbox. Zindor (talk) 18:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Untitled question

Hello,

I created my first article and it got deleted twice anyway i took the remarks that were made to me and i tried as good as i can to make it compliant to wiki. Nevertheless i would really like to have some experienced users to have a look at it before i submit it again to see if there are any corrections i should make. The article is in my drafts. Fadidib (talk) 16:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

I assume this referes to Draft:Rudy Rahme. I dont have the time right now to make a full assesment (and that would not be done on the Teahouse anyway), but here are my two cents:

• The last sentence in the introduction is a classic example of WP:CITEKILL. One, maybe twwo references per fact. More is overkill.
• Not all sources appear to be reliable. Right the fist one I opened smells like WP:UGC.
• Not all sources are WP:SIGCOV.
• Some of the refrences lead to nowhere. For example, number 23, [7] causes a DNS error. the closest one I could come up with, [8] is not even close to WP:SIGCOV.

Note: If you want to make a cause of WP:NARTIST, there are probbably editors who are more familar with that. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:20, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedia Common Room

Where is the Wikimedia Common Room? Jake E Schmidt (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jake E Schmidt, welcome. Are you looking for Wikimedia Commons or somewhere else? Zindor (talk) 18:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

creating a wiki page for everyone to see

I have already created a draft but i don't know what to do after that TheDerpingMemes (talk) 17:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

TheDerpingMemes - I see your user page says "I create pages based on fictional story telling and roleplay" - I am afraid Wikipedia is not interested in such pages, such as Draft:Clevic aviation and space which you created - only pages based on reliable published sources - Arjayay (talk) 18:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

WhatsApp group.

Hi, thanks for inviting me. I want to ask you a question, is there any WhatsApp group relating Wikipedia administration? If it is then please add me there. باوا جی (talk) 18:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC) باوا جی (talk) 18:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi @باوا جی, there is an IRC chat, and a Discord (the latter of which is what I use). As far as I'm aware, we don't have a community WhatsApp group. Ed talk! 19:35, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@باوا جی There is also a specific IRC chat for administrators, but that is open only to those with administrator rights here on English Wikipedia. Personally, I think it best to keep most discussions out in the open, and visible for all to see. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

using primary sources for basic information

I've been reading up on when it's ok to use self-published sources, and am a little confused on how exactly it all plays out in real life.

The article I'm working on is for a musical artist who has a long list of releases, and for the release dates of all of these it's easiest to just use the artist's bandcamp page to get that basic information, rather than trying to find an interview for each one (many of them were minor releases of one or two songs and for these there probably isn't any independent source anyways).

But the guidelines say it's important that "The Wikipedia article is not based primarily on such sources." What exactly does "primarily" mean? Is there anything wrong with using a self-published source (the artist's bandcamp page) extensively for just getting release dates into the discography section? I'm not planning on using it much for the rest of the article, just that section.

If it matters, this is the page I'm working on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kadesh_Flow And this is the wikipedia guide page I'm referencing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Self-published_and_questionable_sources_as_sources_on_themselves Existrud (talk) 18:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Existrud: regarding "primarely", it means that articles should not be use many primary sources and only a few non-primary ones. There is no definite percentage I can give you, but over 50% primary sources you realy will get in trouble at AFD. Note that there shouldn't be any plain external links in article bodies, so either convert them to references or remove them. WP:REFNAME might also be of interest. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:25, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @Victor Schmidt:. Existrud (talk) 19:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

citations

Having trouble viewing and modifying existing citations in "edit source" mode. All I see is reflist. Having trouble initiating a citation; no clue. NoPatriarchy (talk) 18:34, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

You edit where the source is located, not the references section. (Superscript [#] indicates a reference.) All {{reflist}} does is list the references above where it's invoked on the page. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 18:46, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, NoPatriarchy. We have a couple of really useful guides you should read which make the seemingly complex task of adding inline citation quite straightforward. Our official guide is at WP:REFBEGIN, and one I threw together can be found at WP:ERB. Both have little videos you can watch, too. Let us know how you find them and how you get on. 18:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Taking a look at your recent edits to Battle of Virden, I can see you've struggled to add references immediately after statements, but instead have incorrectly added them to 'External links' section. I also see you are aware of this and are intending to fix it, which is excellent. I suspect you might be planning on using one source to support multiple statements throughout the article. In which case, I'm pasting below a short pioecve of advice reusing a reference, and identifiying different pages from the same book in different inline citations:...

...To reuse a reference you give the reference a name, then on subsequent uses you 'call it up' by that name, without having to re-enter all the details again. See WP:REFNAME for a full explanation. You can then use the {{rp}} template to add specific page numbers immediately afterwards, like this: First fact found on page 29 of a book. Second fact found on page 114 from the same book. You put the reference in the article text, but, by some computer magic, the reference appears in the 'References' section, without you having to add anything there.

References

I hope you find this helpful. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:37, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Social media as a source

Am I able to use a social media post as a proper citation if no published article exists? Brooklynguy7 (talk) 18:53, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse Brooklynguy7. In general 'NO!', because social media posts aren't regarded as reliable. However it depends what statement it is you're trying to support, and what link looks like. Very minor stuff about an individual can be supported with content from their social media stream, but should mostly be avoided. See WP:SOCIALMEDIA for more guidance on that. One could also consider presenting the statement and the link on the article's talk page to gather other editors' views before trying to use it within an article. Getting feedback on things like that is also a good way to learn. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes Thank you very much for answering both of my questions. I really appreciate the warm welcome as I'm figuring this all out. I appreciate your insight on using social media posts as proper citations. I made some edits earlier and was flagged by another editor because I used YouTube as my citation, so I was curious about the rule for social media posts too. I was discouraged by the flag, but like I said, I'm just trying to learn and be a better editor! So I very much appreciate your help! Brooklynguy7 (talk) 20:35, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Brooklynguy7, we have a page, WP:RSN, for discussing particular sources. Some sources have been up for discussion several times, and those sources were put on a separate list, WP:RSP, you may find it helpful. By now it's rather long, and you can for example find The Bible and Wikipedia on it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Brooklynguy7: I do hope you won't ever be put off by what we call 'templated messages'. They may seem a bit harsh or stern, but they are a practical way for experienced editors to quickly steer erring users in the right direction. It's true, that we do have four tiers of escalating massages, so if you start to find that's happening to you, or your edits get reverted, just stop, think wha you might have done that didn't fit in with an encyclopaedia, and by all means ask the other editor to explain what you've done wrong. If all else fails - just drop by here. We really are a friendly bunch, keen to work collaboratively, but with 6,000,000+ articles, and c.30,000 active editors, with new ones coming every day, we do get a bit rushed in our communications. Not putting you off, and helping you with any problems is our aim here. We serve tea, occasionally, too! Nick Moyes (talk) 20:52, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I really appreciate that a lot. Thank you! I'm definitely trying not to be put off by those messages (from bots and other editors), but I'm also still new and learning the ways. I want to get it all right and simply help improve pages for topics that interest me and I can see need some tender loving care! (I do love delicious tea too though!) Brooklynguy7 (talk) 21:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

2 Questions in One

Sorry for asking 2 questions at once but How do I create a good article and how do I add images to an article? Blaze The Wolf (talk) 19:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: Any article that one might call 'good' on Wikipedia is about a NOTABLE TOPIC, contains a short, concise WP:LEAD which summarises the page. Everything is written in a neutral, encyclopaedic tone, and is WP:VERIFIABLE because it contains REFERENCES to RELIABLE SOURCES, and links to and from other articles. Adding images is a stage further down the line, and you can't simply take a picture off the internet and add it to Wikipedia. If you link to the image you'd like to add, we can advise you if it's likely to be OK or not. All images found on Wikimedia Commons can be inserted into Wikipedia articles. Read YOUR FIRST ARTICLE for further guidance. Start with small, simple steps as you learn how things work here. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 20:29, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Ah ok thank you. I will probably add some images for my city to Wikimedia because I don't think there are enough and the city has changed a little. Again thank you for helping me out! Blaze The Wolf (talk) 20:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

OK, Blaze The Wolf Providing these are your own photos and are of reasonable quality, you can upload them to Wikimedia Commons. But you can't upload anyone else's (with a few exceptions related to certain types of licencing). See Wikipedia:Images for a load of links to different aspects of help relating to images, or c:Commons:First steps for uploading your own photos to Commons. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Yep they will be both. I actually live there so I can actually give my own images. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blaze The Wolf (talk • contribs) 21:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Replying back to a comment on a talk page

How do I properly reply back to someone's comment on a talk page? Or even here in The Teahouse? Thanks! Brooklynguy7 (talk) 20:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Brooklynguy7: You find the original thread/topic you created, click 'edit source', then you use a single colon to indent your reply.

Two colons indents it a bit more

Three colons even more still! So try to keep all the related discussions in one place. Read more at WP:TALKPAGE and WP:PING. (Remember to put something in the 'Subject' field if you do start a new discussion topic.) Nick Moyes (talk) 20:22, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Ah, thank you! I appreciate that. I'm learning!

OK, Brooklynguy7 One step at a time is always best- you're bound to make a few mistakes at first. No worries. If you want to 'ping' or notify someone in your reply, make sure you both include their username in the way you did (or the way I've just done in this reply) AND sign your own name within the same edit, by typing four keyboard tildes (like this: ~~~~) at the very end, then hit Publish changes. You can't add a signature on a subsequent edit or the notification won't work. Do give The Wikipedia Adventure Tour a try, too. Cheers Nick Moyes (talk) 20:34, 28 October 2020 (UTC)  

Appreciate it Nick Moyes! Brooklynguy7 (talk) 20:38, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

new on wikipedia

I am new on wikipedia and am having a difficult time in creating articles and editing the aricles i have an idea on. Niranadedokun (talk) 21:05, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Niranadedokun! WP:TUTORIAL and WP:ADVENTURE may be good places to start. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:16, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Niranadedokun, and welcome to the Teahouse. In my view, becoming a Wikipedia editor and trying to create an article straight away is like having your first music lesson and giving a public concert, or having your first German lesson and trying to make a podcast in German. I recommend you spend a few weeks or months making improvements to some of the tens of thousands of articles that really need attention, before trying to create a new one. --ColinFine (talk) 21:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Create a wiki page

Hey, I'm looking to a create a Wiki page for the founder of an organization I work for. How do I go about that? 172.81.70.50 (talk) 21:49, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid I'm going to give you an answer you probably don't want: DON'T DO IT.

In the first place, see my reply to the previous question, just above: creating an article is hard.

Secondly, creating an article about somebody you work with is even harder, because you are likely to find it hard to write neutrally about them: we call this editing with a conflict of interest.

If you go ahead with it, you need to bear in mind that a Wikipedia article does not belong to its subject, is not for the benefit of its subject, will not necessarily contain what the subject would like it to contain, and should contain almost no information which comes from the subject or their associates: it should be almost entirely based on what people who have no connection with the subject, and have not been prompted or provided with information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. That means that for you to write it, you would have to find these independent published sources, and then forget everything you know about your founder, and write an article based only on these sources.

Do you see why I say it is difficult?

But, if you still wish to try, as well as the links in my reply, please read WP:NBIO and WP:YFA. --ColinFine (talk) 22:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

And read WP:PAID

Is it possible to add new field to an existing Infobox?

Hello,

I would like to add the field "Chief Librarian" or "Librarian" to the Museum Infobox (the existing fields, including "Director," "Chairperson," and "Historian," are not quite correct). I checked the Infobox Help pages, but didn't see any information there. My apologies in advance if I missed something!

Many thanks for your kind help with this. Ellen.prokop (talk) 22:05, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ellen.prokop! As I understand it, you can suggest this change at Template talk:Infobox museum. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellen.prokop (talk • contribs) 22:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC+9) (UTC)

@Ellen.prokop: Welcome to the Teahouse. I might have suggested that it's a bit oxymoronic to want to add 'Chief librarian' to Template:Infobox museum when you really ought to be using and adding it to Template:Infobox library and deploying that one in Frick Art Reference Library, instead. I say "might", because the first museum I was employed at almost 40 years ago in Kirklees did have a horrible man in charge, under the job title of Chief Librarian and Curator, ostensibly running both its libraries and its museums service (everyone one else was kept firmly in their place by being called something like 'Principal Assistant Curator', 'Senior Assistant Curator' or 'Junior Assistant Curator' (guess which I was!)) But I wouldn't get too hung up on exact job titles, as Director seems pretty equivalent to me, and if there's some weird nomenclatural anomaly in this one institution, that can surely be explained within the article text without adding Chief Librarian as a parameter in a Museum infobox. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your insight.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellen.prokop (talk • contribs) 22:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC+9) (UTC)

Reference List

I had some questions about references and using a reference list. I'm currently working on this draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Art_Napoleon_(Artist)

I was curious how specific a source has to be in order to be used. For instance, I have a source that is not explicitly about Art Napoleon, but there is one paragraph on him in the source that mentions his age which I couldn't find in other sources. Is that sufficient for it being used as a reference?

I was also curious whether there is a standard formatting convention for a reference list. For instance, should the sources be ordered in a specific way? Should the metadata for each source be ordered in a specific way? And more specifically I was wondering when to use "work" as opposed to "website", and when to use "publisher" as opposed to "agency".

When is a reference reliable or unreliable? I have a number of different news outlets that are well-known and quite a few that aren't well-known, so when is a news outlet too obscure to count as reliable? Here's a list of the news outlets I used (do any stand out as unreliable?):

• The New York Times
• The Globe And Mail
• CBC
• GlobalNews.ca
• National Observer
• The Tyee
• The Hamilton Spectator
• The Province
• Winnipeg Free Press

The remaining news outlets are more questionable:

• Alaska Highway News
• Times Chronicle / Osoyoos Times
• The Georgia Straight
• Prince George Citizen
• Dawson Creek Mirror
• Muskrat Magazine
• First Nation Drum Magazine
• Eat North
• Darpan Magazine
• Briarpatch Magazine
• The Epoch Times

I also have a few references that aren't news outlets and I was curious what's allowed for non-news sources because those are the one's I've run into the most trouble with in the past. Here are the few that I'm currently using in my draft:

• http://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/01/21/1702811/0/en/Moosemeat-Marmalade-Cooks-Up-New-Flavours-for-its-Season-Four-Premiere-Airing-on-APTN-on-February-7th.html
• https://ammsa.com/publications/windspeaker/our-pick-cd-took-10-years-worth-wait
• https://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/03/prweb357529.htm

Sorry there are so many questions. TipsyElephant (talk) 00:13, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi TipsyElephant. You can find out a little more about the types of sources typically considered reliable for Wikipedia's purposes at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. You might also want to look at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources for some more information on some specific sources that are often asked about. Generally, a source isn't necessarily considered reliable just because it's well-known, but rather because it has a well-established track record and reputation for a fairly strong system of editorial control and fact checking. In other words, content is, for the most part, properly vetted before be provided for general consumption. Of course, this doesn't mean that a reliable source is also correct about what information it releases and also isn't sort of biased by the information it releases, but it usually means that the "facts" being presented are considered to be accurate (or accurate) as could be expected. Sometimes a source not very well-known by the general public might be considered a niche source and be reliable for certain types of subject matter and that often depends upon context in which the source is being cited.

You can find out some more information of "how" to cite sources in Help:Referencing for beginners. Generally, a properly formatted citation will be numbered in accordance with the order it appears in the article; so, for example, the first source the Wikipedia software finds used the article will be listed as number 1, and so on. If a source is used more than once and is formatted as such, each subsequent usage will appear under the same number as the initial usage. There are various different types of citation styles and some may use a slightly different type of numbering, but the one I've described above is probably the most common. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:34, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

BOBBY LEE CAMPBELL

can you help me write an article about myself Doebelly1 (talk) 00:35, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Doebelly1 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The best advice would be to not attempt to write about yourself. Autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged on Wikipedia per the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell about themselves; this is an encyclopedia, where articles about people summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person(there are also more specific criteria for certain fields like athletes, politicians, musicians, etc.). Wikipedia is not interested in what someone says about themselves. If you meet the definition of a notable person and are given significant coverage in sources(not brief mentions, press releases, interviews, etc.), someone will eventually take note of your career and choose to write about you.

In addition, an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. You could not lock it to the text you might prefer, or prevent others from editing it. Any information about you, good or bad, could be in an article about you as long as it appears in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. Please keep that in mind. 331dot (talk) 00:42, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Doebelly. Assuming you mean that you are Bobby Lee Campbell, I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Notability (people), Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a blog, web hosting service, social networking service, or memorial site and Wikipedia:Ownership of content because it sounds like you might be misunderstanding what Wikipedia:Articles are intended to be. If after looking at those pages you have any questions, feel free to ask them here at the Teahouse. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:44, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

didn't know that thanks for the information— Preceding unsigned comment added by Doebelly1 (talk • contribs) 00:47, 29 October 2020 (UTC+9) (UTC)

^ It is a terrible TERRIBLE idea to create an article about yourself. The only reason you would want an article about you would be if you were someone extremely famous and well known. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blaze The Wolf (talk • contribs) 01:21, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Doebelly1. When I did a Google News search for Bobby Lee Campbell, I found a lot of information about a fellow of the same name who died in January, 2020. I am assuming that you are another person with the same name. What exactly makes you notable and eligible for an encyclopedia article? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:12, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

G’day

Just wondering if I am able to upload a game logo and use it for an userbox, or if this is against the image upload policy. Thanks in advance :) Phrotonz (talk) 01:50, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Phrotonz: See WP:LOGOS. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:11, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Enough notoriety to create a page?

Hi all, I'm trying to create a page for a non-profit that I work for, but before I invest tons of hours into creating it, I want to gauge whether this project has enough notoriety to substantiate a wiki article. I am trying to describe an online database of contemporary classical music compositions. This database is free to submit to, and free to use, so it is not really an add for anything as there is absolutely no money to be made. the sources that I have right now are two audio interviews in podcasts with the founder of the project, a passing mention of the project in an academic university newspaper, a spread in a print journal called Choral Journal, and a spread in an international choral news print journal. Of the two print sources, the first article was written by the founder of the project and submitted to the journal, and the second article was a revision of the first article edited by me. The potential conflicts of interest aside, would this constitute enough notoriety to try and proceed? Thank you so much for any help and guidance. Anna.W.Music (talk) 01:56, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Notability is the word you are looking for, and "No. David notMD (talk) 02:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Anna.W.Music: To expand on the answer above, notability is determined by whether "a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (WP:N). Every source above is either not significant or not independent. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:04, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Page adding

How do I add a page on Wikipedia? Kapkzt Animates (talk) 02:00, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Kapkzt Animates: Writing an article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. See WP:YFA for more details. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Kapkzt Animates, as Ganbaruby says, creating an article from scratch is difficult. It requires extensive knowledge of Wikipedia policy, and for someone who has never edited before, it can be extremely frustrating. It's better for new editors to focus on making improvements to existing articles for a few months, which gives you the chance to learn our policies. What is it you're interested in writing an article about? There may be related articles that would also interest you and which would let you get that experience. —valereee (talk) 11:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Splitting a Page - When and How

I have been adding to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Art_Deco_buildings_in_Perth for a while now and it is getting bigger and bigger. Am wondering of the merits of perhaps creating more linked smaller pages - maybe by category? Any other suggestions? How Would do I actually implement a split? Anyone want to give me a hand setting it up please? PerthDeco (talk) 03:21, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@PerthDeco: At a size of roughly 20kb ([9]), it isn't big enough of a page to be split on the basis of size. There aren't distinctly different topics on that page either. Overall I don't think a split is needed, but if you still think so, the relevant guideline is at WP:SPLIT, and the procedure on how to do so is further down the page. Do not split the page without consensus! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 04:04, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

how would i publish the souce i created

will it be published or does it go through checking? Bijujoshua (talk) 03:48, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Bijujoshua: I assume you're asking how to publish your draft at User:Bijujoshua/sandbox. Unfortunately, at this state, the article does not show the subject's notability (WP:N and WP:SINGER). You currently have two sources, where one only has a passing mention, and a lot of the information in the article does not have reliable sources backing them up. Refer to WP:YFA for general instructions on how to create an article. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 04:10, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Youtube

Hello. I read WP:YOUTUBE and I am still a little confused. When exactly can you use a Youtube video as a citation? If your only source for a claim, or statement of fact, is a Youtube video, wouldn't that automatically make the claim UNDUE or OR (especially for a BLP)? Thanks! Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk) 06:32, 29 October 2020 (UTC) Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk) 06:32, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d. It is certainly true that the vast majority of YouTube videos are of no use as Wikipedia references. However, if the YouTube channel is the official channel of a reliable source such a a respected media outlet or an academic who has been previously published in the topic area, then the video may be reliable. A YouTube video that offers basic non-controversial biographical information may also be acceptable, if uploaded by that person. For example, the person saying they were born in such and such a town in a certain year, and graduated from such and such a university two plus decades later. If the person has a reputation as a liar, then the YouTube video should be excluded. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:02, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Cullen328: That makes more sense. I'm assuming if the person made a more contentious or controversial claim in a Youtube video, such as "I don't believe in climate change" or whatnot, then we would not be allowed to include that statement--unless, of course, we had a RS that reported on that statement? Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk) 08:00, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

They saying it on their own YouTube channel would be a reliable source for the fact that they had said it. But unless this had been reported on by independent sources, I'm not sure that that claim would be encyclopaedic. --ColinFine (talk) 09:23, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Reliable sources

What are reliable sources (definition) if I am writing an article about an artist? and how to submit that source of information for verification of wiki team. ? Please guide me Arvindervirk92 (talk) 07:18, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Arvindervirk92: Does WP:Reliable sources help you? There is also a list of sources who have been wiely discussed about their reliability. Its located here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:35, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Arvindervirk92, if this is about Draft:Riyaaz, I suspect you have misunderstood the "decline" notices at the top, which are misleading. It's not enough for the sources to be reliable. To establish that Riyaaz is notable, you'll need to cite several reliable independent published sources with significant discussion of the subject. The draft currently cites only two sources (one of them twice), and while Times of India maybe be reliable, neither of the sources has any discussion of him. Maproom (talk) 07:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Arvindervirk92 Hi, could i also add that YouTube is not a reliable source and will not be accepted as a source in any form of way as anyone can post on YouTube.Trains2050 (talk) 08:26, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

References

Hi, I've had a new page declined because it doesn't show any references. The problem is that all my references are on paper and pre-date the internet. The league's and competitions that the club competed in either no longer exist or the older recorded are not online. I do have plenty of photographs and documents though.

The page is: Draft:Northfield Harriers FC.

Thanks Andre AndrzejVillan (talk) 09:58, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

AndrzejVillan Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Reliable sources or references do not need to be online, but they do need to be publicly accessible for verification purposes. If the references are documents that are only in your private hands(i.e. not in a library or accessible newspaper archive) they would not be acceptable for referencing a Wikipedia article. I've linked to the draft so others can see it. A Wikipedia article needs to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of (in this case) a notable organization.

I'm wondering if you have an association with this team, if so, please review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation

I submitted my article for review but I saw this message at the bottom of the page Warning: The page Joe Lazarus redirects to Joseph Lazarus. Please ensure it is not a copy or that this page is located to the correct title. How can I fix that? Here's the draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Joe_Lazarus

 Donnaocchineri (talk) 10:29, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Donnaocchineri, that's nothing to worry about. At present, Joe Lazarus is a redirect to Joseph Lazarus. Your draft is about a drummer, the existing article is about a boxer (though the entity that placed the warning didn't realise that). If and when your draft is accepted as an article, it will be up to the accepting reviewer to deal with the redirect and to do any necessary disambiguation between the two subjects. Maproom (talk) 12:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

User:Donnaocchrineri - I thank you for being alert and asking a reasonable question about a reasonable notice. The procedure for dealing with multiple articles on different subjects with the same or similar names is known as Disambiguation. (It appears that you knew that, because that is the title that you gave to this thread.) In this case, I have disambiguated your draft to Draft:Joe Lazarus (musician). I have also added a note that, if it is accepted, a hatnote should be added at the top of the page for the boxer. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Are specific awards enough for a wiki?

I've been trying to find astronomy topics and I recently came across these awards pages. There are astronomers here who have won awards but don't have wikis. Can I assume their wiki articles would stick based on these awards? Or do I need to look at them on a case by case basis and have other features that would make them ready for Wikipedia? Thanks for the help! Petrie Prize Lecture, National Prize for Exact Sciences (Chile), Barringer Medal, Beatrice M. Tinsley Prize & Annie Jump Cannon Award in Astronomy.  Shootin Starz (talk) 10:30, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Each of those are Wikipedia list articles at which some of the recipients are not themselves subjects of Wikipedia articles. You are right to consider them potentially article-worthy, but the award itself is not sufficient to establish notability. One approach would be to model a draft on the existing articles about other winners of those awards, most of which have many references. David notMD (talk) 10:47, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

P.S. Remember to 'sign' and date your comments by typing four of ~ at the end. David notMD (talk) 10:51, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

If having won these awards gathered significant coverage (i.e. more than just a passing mention) then maybe. But it really comes down to how much has actually been said about them. --Paul ❬talk❭ 10:52, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Allegations in the controversy section and giant killer

Hello everyone, In the controversy section of D. K. Shivakumar, there are a lot of allegations about him and some not convicted by the court. I read about blp and it goes against it mainly WP:BLPCRIME.

There is also a word "giant killer" in the political career section. He is not known as giant killer.

I think his political opponents are adding these in the page. There are also content in the controversy which is out of context. I don't know all the policies, can it be removed? ಅರುಣ್ ಜಯರಾಮನ್ (talk) 11:00, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm working on getting rid of the unsourced stuff. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 14:32, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Deleted?

I made an addition to several articles, all of which dealt with the same issue. This was later removed and I’d like to know why. Can you please help me contact the person who removed my content so I can find out why. Thanks 172.58.59.70 (talk) 11:20, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have no other edits from your IP address other than this post; if you have an account, please log in before posting so we can look at your edits in order to help you. If you don't wish to do that; you may check the edit history of the article to see who reverted your edits, and begin a discussion on the article talk page, or the user talk page of the user involved. 331dot (talk) 11:28, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Would help if you provide the names of the articles. David notMD (talk) 14:55, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I want to change my username

Please help me how can I edit my user name Mehedi Hassan Lpn (talk) 12:59, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Mehedi Hassan Lpn the instructions for this are at Wikipedia:Changing username. If you have an email address attached to your account, you can make a request at Special:GlobalRenameRequest. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:02, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Director Matt Amato

Hello! My article about Director Matt Amato was denied after much painstaking work :( I would like some advice as I was very careful to follow guidelines with citations, relevant quotes, etc. Can you show me specifics of what you considered inappropriate so I can fix it? Of course, I would like to continue editing until it can be published successfully. Thanks for your guidance in advance! Producer 4.5.92 (talk) 14:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Producer 4.5.92, Draft:Matt Amato is absurdly promotional in tone. I assume that your are a PR professional: such people often find it impossible to write in the neutral, encyclopedic, tone which is required in Wikipedia. (It also contains several direct external links, which are against Wikipedia policy. But that will be much easier to deal with.) Maproom (talk) 14:28, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I see you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons a still from one of Amato's works, claiming it as your own work. That's likely to be deleted soon, as a copyright violation. Maproom (talk) 14:35, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

The declining reviewer left specific comments. Also, see your Talk page for requirement to either declare Paid editing or else clearly state that you are not being paid for this effort. Likewise, if you are personally connected to Matt, declare conflict-of-interest. David notMD (talk) 15:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Cyclone Josie help

Can someone help me on my Cyclone Josie draft? There is a link to it on my user page. CyclonicStormYutu (talk) 14:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

What specifically would you like help with? 331dot (talk) 14:26, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

 197.239.94.186 (talk) 14:31, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I need help editing the lead, Impacts, citing sources, and refs. CyclonicStormYutu (talk) 14:33, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Cyclone Josie. Teahouse volunteers provide advice, but are not here to become co-authors. Consider asking editors as Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones for help. Also, per User page mention of your fictional work, your Sandbox at Wikipedia is not a place to create fiction. Please copy elsewhere and delete. David notMD (talk) 15:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@David notMD: You said to delete the sandbox. I assume you haven't seen this discussion of it for the MfD: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:CyclonicStormYutu/Sandbox/Hypothetical Tropical Cyclones. CyclonicStormYutu (talk) 17:30, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Had not seen, and understand situation better. David notMD (talk) 18:21, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Undo

Please help me enable undo option; which will help me fight vandalism much easier than ever. Thanks Abhishek this side( Say hi!) 14:39, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Abhishek Kasaudhan 123: You, like everyone else, should be able to undo edits, and the link you gave tells you how. Sometimes, undoing will not work because there are subsequent edits that make a direct undo impossible, in which you'll have to manually change the text again. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 15:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Furigana

Hello,how do you add furigana To kanji? 178.40.29.168 (talk) 15:50, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not quite sure if you are asking how information about furigana can be added to the article Kanji, or if you're wondering about the process of adding actual furigana when you are writing kanji. If you are asking about editing the Wikipedia article, you could go to the talk page, Talk:Kanji, and ask your question there. I see that there is already some information about furigana in the article, but if you feel that something important is missing, that's the place to ask about it.

If your question has to do with the process, the Teahouse can't help you with that I'm afraid – this is a place for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. You could try the Reference desk, perhaps. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 17:18, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Johnny's disk

Hello, i am a noob and i am seeking help for a page about japanese jazz label johnny's disk. i have created a draft but as ai am a noob... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Johnny%27s_disk

thank you very much for help Cluster2600 (talk) 16:19, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Cluster2600. I'm afraid my advice to new editors thinking of creating an article is always "don't even think of it until you've spent a few weeks or months working on improving some of our tens of thousands of existing substandard articles and learning how Wikipedia works". Otherwise it's like going to your first French lesson and then trying to do a podcast in French.

The most obvious problem with your draft is that you have no independent sources. In an article about Johnny's Disk, Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything that Johnny's disk say, have published, or want to say. It is only interested in what several people who have no connection with the label, and have not been prompted or provided with information by the label, have chosen to publish about the label in reliable sources. If you cannot find such sources, then the label does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability and no article on them will be accepted. This means that if you don't begin by finding those sources, then all work you do on the article is liable to be wasted. Have a look at your first article for more. --ColinFine (talk) 17:47, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Using an image as a reference

Is it accepted to use a photograph of a document as an article reference? I have several photographs of old newspaper stories, indicating the notability of the article's subject. Will wikipedia accept those as references? Vtranz (talk) 16:58, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Vtranz: in the case you describe IMO no, but you can still cite the newspaper. Most of the mayor newspapers have archives. Make sure to include Newspaper name, release date, edition number, page number, article title, and likewsise. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:47, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Vtranz. The important part of a citation is the bibliographic information which will allow a reader to find it even if it is not available on the web - title, date, author, newspaper, page etc. A link is a convenience for the reader, not an essential part of the reference. A picture of the story will often be a copyright infringement anyway, and even if it is not, unless the image is from a reputable publisher, there could be doubt as to its authenticity. --ColinFine (talk) 17:50, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

thank you Victor and Colin. That is very helpful information! much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vtranz (talk • contribs) 18:28, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

Please where can i chat on wikipidia Habeeb Bello (talk) 17:00, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Habeeb Bello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Discussion about working on Wikipedia or about improving articles, usually takes place on the talk pages of articles, or on project pages like this one. But it is possible to get help via IRC: see WP:IRC (I've never been on it myself). If you are talking about chat for social purposes, then please note that Wikipedia is not social media: it is an encyclopaedia, and all our work here should be mainly focussed on building it. --ColinFine (talk) 17:54, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Deleting instead of fixing

How common is it for wiki editors to delete things instead of fixing them? I have been looking at some edit histories, and it seems to be very prevalent. This seems like a very callous, lazy way to go about editing...looking for edits that need a little work and deleting them instead of fixing them. Are there any rules against this? It seems like this could easily be used as a form of censorship and there should be clear rules against it. I added some very important information to an article and it was removed quickly, but only needed a quick improvement to make it work. I find this very disheartening, as I found this edit to be very substantial and it was my first edit. Covidtonthemurderhornet (talk) 17:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

User:Covidtonthemurderhornet It appears that you have a content dispute about John Ioannidis. You should discuss it with the other editor at Talk:John Ioannidis. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:08, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

It appears that the other editor explained their revert on the article talk page. I suggest that you reply to them there. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:11, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

i have a beginner question regarding wikipedia in general as well, in case you didn't notice....am i misunderstanding the purpose of this Teahouse section? Covidtonthemurderhornet (talk) 17:23, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Covidtonthemurderhornet. Don't be disheartened, sometimes editors communicate through making changes and providing concise edit summaries rather than direct discussion. I know this seems impersonal and blunt but it's the most efficient way of doings things. It seems from looking at the page revisions that the other editor kindly helped your edits conform to Manual of Style guidelines on a few prior occasions, rather than reverting them wholesale. It's our responsibility as editors to make sure our edits are correct, we can't expect other editors to fix them for us, even though they sometimes might. Zindor (talk) 17:31, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

You aren't necessarily misunderstanding. The purpose of Teahouse is to help new editors figure out how to edit Wikipedia. When we're asked about how to handle a content dispute, often our answer is, "Discuss it with the other editor at the article talk page." Teahouse doesn't actually try to intervene in content disputes.

However, your first question wasn't answered. "How common is it for editors to delete instead of fixing?" Well, it depends on a lot of things. We remove anything that isn't adequately sourced, especially if it's potentially libelous to a living person. We remove anything that is sourced to something that doesn't look reliable. In this case, I see your addition was sourced to biospace.com, which I haven't heard of, but which appears to be a news aggregator and job posting site. In general we wouldn't consider that a reliable source.

But again, the answer is going to be: go back to the article talk and discuss this with the other editor. —valereee (talk) 18:03, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

And you made a common beginner's error: changing content in the Lead without first incorporating it into the body of the article. After the revert, you took the appropriate steps, and the content is now in the article and the Lead. Separate issue: Edit summaries are for brief descriptions of the changes made to the article. Anything about why the changes were made belongs in Talk, especially if related to discussing actions of another editor. David notMD (talk) 18:39, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

please if you no the place where you can on wikipidia please send me the link Habeeb Bello (talk) 17:08, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

This is a place to ask questions, but you have not asked a question. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:12, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Masen146

 Masen146 (talk) 17:21, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Masen146. Welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 17:40, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

How do i add a page on wikipidia Habeeb Bello (talk) 17:51, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Habeeb Bello, please read Help:Your first article. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 17:55, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello again, Habeeb Bello. Please see my answer to the question #Johnny's disk a few items further up the page. --ColinFine (talk) 17:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Habeeb Bello! Assuming you want to create an article, first make sure you have sources that shows your topic is WP:NOTABLE, otherwise it's a waste of time. If you have that, read Help:Your first article carefully. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Bello Habeeb

is it possiple to edit your username Habeeb Bello (talk) 17:58, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Habeeb Bello, yes, WP:Changing username is a good place to start. If your rename is straight forward, you can use Special:GlobalRenameRequest, where a volunteer will rename you. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 18:13, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

how can i add or remove an article Habeeb Bello (talk) 18:27, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

You already got an answer on how to create an article: Help:Your first article. There are several options for deleting an article, including nominating article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Did you have a specific article in mind? David notMD (talk) 18:43, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Writing about living Dutch artist

Hey there! I am writing about a living Dutch artist and I was just wondering if quoting printed newspapers, exhibitions catalogues and art magazines (written by curators and art galleries) is consider to be reliable reference? She produced a lot of work before 2000s and there're few online version of these documents since most of them are not digitalised. How can I solve this? Thanks! Elisadesapinto (talk) 19:16, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I've just got a small question. I recently edited a wikipedia article although it said that the source I gave wasn't a valid source and I was wondering, what can I use for a source when editing something? AestheticAllison2841 19:20, 29 October 2020 (UTC)