Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AlejandroLeloirRey (talk | contribs) at 01:10, 28 December 2020 (→anything and notable wikipedia). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


This is the teahouse
Shortcuts

Eman235, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.
Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host
New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2–3 days.


Place of Birth guidelines

Where are the place of birth guidelines?

My city's official area is 141 square miles. The city status belongs to that 141 square mile area. Those 141 square miles consist of the main namesake town, and 100's more towns, villages, hamlets and neighbourhoods, the majority of which have been part of the city for 100's or 1000's of years. Some people in those towns, villages neighbourhoods, and hamlets outside of the main namesake town, like to think of themselves as separate entities entirely, when the fact is they aren't. They are part of the city whether they like it or not. I've even seen TV programmes filmed in areas less than a mile or two from the city centre being described as being "near the city," or "just outside the city." Even some of the local councillors (most of which live in those areas), newspaper reporters, and tourism office workers, don't seem to understand that fact. They all refer to those areas as being "near the city" or "just outside the city."

Those towns, villages, hamlets, and neighbourhoods are constantly described on Wikipedia as being "near the city" or "just outside the city," and the same goes for the Wikipedia articles on people born and raised in those areas.

It annoys the hell out of me!

I've tried to correct some of the older ones in the past, with the correct county and the correct city, but they're always reverted, usually by people who aren't from the area, and don't know what a British city is. If that isn't the case, then it's people saying we need to stick with what the county was called before 1974, or claiming that the town/village/hamlet/neighbourhood wasn't part of the city at the time of their birth, which like I said above, I'm 99% sure isn't the case for the majority of them. Although I've yet to research the 100's of neighbourhoods of the city properly, to find references of the years when or more likely if those neighbourhoods were independent, and when they joined the city.

The birth place annoyances are one of the main reasons I've cut down editing on Wikipedia, to focus on editing IMDB instead.

I'm slowly adding, correcting, and updating, 100's of films, TV series, TV episodes, shorts etc of productions which filmed in my city, and adding 1000's of missing episodes, cast/crew members, companies, filming locations, release dates, run times, title images, screenshots, occasional plots etc in those same productions which have nothing to do with the city, especially when I notice there's a lot of episodes missing in a TV series for example. I've corrected/updated most, if not all of the birth places for the people who were already added as being born in the city, and I occasionally add missing credits or information on their profiles too when I stumble across them. I must have added at least 20 missing productions mainly from the 1970's to the 1990's (either filmed in my city, or containing people born in my city), around 500 missing TV episodes, and 1000's of cast/crew members in the last month alone, the majority of which I had no idea about until I stumbled across them on archive websites, and neither do the film office today. Just last week I stumbled across an old national news article for a British sports champion from my city, that hardly anyone in the city, never mind the big names in the sport itself, have heard of, so I've got a few films of him winning his title to add to IMDB now too.

I've also got a small list of around 50 people born in my city (big names, and people you and I had never heard of) who's birth places I've added to IMDB, along with around 5-10 the references each, all of which I've archived on the Wayback Machine, so eventually when I have a few thousand (film, TV, news, music, sport, literature etc) people on my list added to IMDB, I will be going through Wikipedia adding their birth places to their articles if they have one, or creating them if they don't, and I'll have all the references backed up, just in case they go missing. Danstarr69 (talk) 23:55, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing against your intentions, Danstarr69, but Wikipedia policy prevents us from using IMdB as a source, as it's user-generated. Even your sourced additions to IMdB won't qualify, based on their being subject to revision by anyone at any time. You may want to complete your birthdate project in a different sequence of steps.--Quisqualis (talk) 00:15, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Danstarr69. When it comes to place of birth, Wikipedia states what reliable sources say, not what individual Wikipedia editors think is right. So, if a reliable source says that Person A was born in Keighley, then that is what their Wikipedia article should say. You cannot conclude that, since Keighley is part of the City of Bradford, the article should say Bradford instead. Your enthusiasm for Bradford is fine, but please remember that Wikipedia is not a place to right great wrongs. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Danstarr69 I have another thought on this, perhaps only peripherally relevant to how things are/should be done in Wikipedia. Is what you're asking really desirable? Do people born in one of these villages or hamlets necessarily think of themselves as born in the big city? Or do they identify--perhaps proudly--that they were born in this or that village or hamlet? My mother was born in Stockport, Cheshire--not a village or hamlet, I grant you, but bear with me here. I first visited there, from America, in 1980--with my mother, who hadn't been there in quite a few years. Driving there, approaching the city, we saw a sign that said (more or less, I think) "Stockport Metropolitan Burough of Greater Manchester." When I read it out loud, my mother said, "You mean, Manchester's eaten it?" The cities of Stockport and Manchester used to border each other in adjacent counties. They had carved Stockport out of Cheshire and Manchester out of Lancashire (all with several other cities, towns, villages and no doubt a hamlet or two) and made them "Greater Manchester." Guess what?? My mother was still born in Stockport, Cheshire. What's more, her family in England--knowing all this full well--still addressed letters that way. And even at that time, my mother's cousin still lived in Staleybridge, and my mother's uncle still lived in Oldham. For the rest of their lives. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:41, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Quisqualis Now where exactly did I say I'm going to use IMDB for references? I didn't.
I said I've saved all the references I used to get that information on IMDB, as IMDB has a policy of using current locations and current location names, no matter where they were located or what they were called in the past.
Whereas Wikipedia apparently has it the other way around, where you have to use locations and location names which are a million years out of date, or simply incorrect.
That's why I'm asking for the guidelines on birth places to see if it's actually true about not using current locations and location names.
Danstarr69, walls of text may confuse some readers. I read where you stated, "eventually when I have a few thousand (film, TV, news, music, sport, literature etc) people on my list added to IMDB, I will be going through Wikipedia adding their birth places to their articles if they have one, or creating them if they don't, and I'll have all the references backed up, just in case they go" and may have misunderstood your plans.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:50, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've saved the references I used to get them on IMDB in one of my 3 private Blogger blog pages (one for random stuff, and the other two for things about my city, or it's people), which I'll probably publish one day. At the moment I just use Blogger as a place to save information like the links I used, in separate unpublished posts along with the birth places and/or birth dates for each person to stop them from getting mixed up.
Cullen328 what their Wikipedia article should say is Keighley, Bradford, West Yorkshire. The same goes for people born in other City of Bradford neighbourhoods, mini neighbourhoods, estates, squares, landmarks, parks, moors, fields, woods, or wards like
Extended content
Addingham, Addingham High Moor, Addingham Low Moor, Addingham Middle Moor, Addingham Moorside, Airedale, Aireworth, Alder Carr Wood, Allerton, Altar Wood, Apperley Bridge, Ashbourne, Austby Gill, Autherim Bottom, Baildon, Baildon Green, Baildon Hill, Baildon Holmes, Baildon Moor, Baildon Wood Bottom, Bailey Hills, Bank Top, Bankfoot, Barcroft, Barkerend, Barley Cote, Barron's Wood, Beanlands Island, Beck Hill, Beck Wood, Beechcliffe, Beldon Hill, Bell Bank Wood, Bell Dean, Bell Wood, Belle Vue, Belmont Wood, Ben Rhydding, Best Lane Bottom, Bierley, Bierley Hall Wood, Billy Bushes Wood, Bingley, Bingley Moor, Birkey Bank Wood, Birks, Birks Wood, Black Carr, Black Hill, Black Hill Bottom, Black Moor, Black Mountain Millennium Green, Blackhill Plantation, Blakey Wood, Bloomer Hill, Blue Scar Clough, Boggart Wood, Bogthorn, Bolton, Bolton Outlanes, Bolton Woods, Bond Clough, Botany, Bracken Bank, Bracken Hall Green, Bracken Wood, Bradford Moor, Braithwaite, Branshaw Moor, Branshaw Plantation, Briery Wood, Brighton Wood, Broadstone Wood, Brocka Bank Moor, Brook Hill, Broomfields, Brow Bottom, Brow Moor, Brow Wood, Brown Royd, Brownroyd Hill, Brunthwaite, Brunthwaite Crag Wood, Buck Park Wood, Buck Wood, Buckley Green, Bull Coppy Wood, Bull Greave Wood, Burley in Wharfedale, Burley Moor, Burley Woodhead, Buttershaw, Cackleshaw, Canterbury, Carr Bottom, Carr Clough, Carr House Gate, Carr Wood, Cat Clough, Catherine Slack, Catstones Hill, Catstones Moor, Catstones Wood, Catton Wood, Chapel Green, Charlestown, Chellow Dean, Chellow Grange, Chellow Heights, Chip Hill Clough, City Park, Clayton, Clayton Heights, Clews Moor, Cliff Wood, Cocking Wood, Cockshot Dam Green, Coney Wood, Cop Hirst Wood, Coppy Wood, Cornmould Heath, Cottingley, Cottingley Bar, Cottingley Moor, Cottingley Wood Estate, Crag Wood, Cragg Wood, Craven Wood, Crawshaw Moss, Cringles Plantation, Cripple Croft Plantation, Cromwheel, Crosley Wood, Crossflatts, Cross Roads, Crossley Hall, Crow Nest, Cuckoo Nest Wood, Cullingworth, Cullingworth Moor, Currer Wood, Cutler Heights, Cutshaw Moor, Daffels Wood, Daisy Hill, Damems, Dark Wood, Dawson Wood, Dean Fields, Delf Hill, Delph Hill, Delph Wood, Denholme, Denholme Clough, Denholme Gate, Dirk Hill, Doctor Wood, Dowdy Wood, Dry Clough, Dudley Hill, Dungeon Wood, East Bowling, East Bowling, East Buck Stones, East Morton, East Riddlesden, Eastbrook, Eastburn, Eastwood, Eccleshill, Egypt, Eldwick, Eldwick Beck, Elm Wood, Esholt, Ewe Hills, Exley Head, Fagley, Fairbank Wood, Fairweather Green, Far High Field, Fell Wood, Fenny Shaw, Ferncliffe, Field Wood, Five Lane Ends, Flappit Spring, Forster Square, Four Lane Ends, Fourlands, Fowler Hill Plantation, Frizinghall, Gannerthorpe Wood, Geraldine's Wood, Gill Wood, Gilstead, Gingerbread Clough, Girlington, Goitside, Goitstock Wood, Goose Eye, Goose Eye Wood, Goose Hill, Great Clough, Great Gill, Great Horton, Great Peat Moss, Great Ridge Wood, Great Wood, Green Clough, Green End, Green Hill Wood, Green Holes Clough, Green Side, Greengate, Greengates, Greenwood Wood, Griff Wood, Grove House, Guard House, Haigh Fold, Hainworth, Hainworth Shaw, Hainworth Wood, Hanging Fall Wood, Harbour Hole Bottom, Hard Nese Clough, Harden, Harecroft, Hart Rhydding Wood, Hawkcliffe Wood, Hawkstone Wood, Haworth, Haworth Moor, Haycliffe Hill, Hazel Head Wood, Headley Clough, Heaton, Heaton Grove, Heaton Moor, Heber Moss, Heber's Ghyll, Henacre Wood, Hermit Hole, High Brunthwaite, High Carr, High House, High Moor, High Utley, Higher Holme House Wood, Highfield, Hill Green, Hill Top, Hills Wood, Hirst Wood, Hog Hill Flat, Hog Holes Clough, Holling Plantation, Hollin Wood, Hollins Wood, Hollings Wood, Holme, Holme House Wood, Holme Wood, Holy Croft, Horton Bank, Horton Bank Bottom, Horton Bank Top, Horton Grange, Howden Wood, Hudson Wood, Hudson's Wood, Hunger Hill Plantation, Idle, Idle Moor, Ilkley, Ilkley Moor, Inderpendent Quarter, Ingrow, Intake Wood, Ive Stones Clough, Ives Plantation, Jacob's Wood, Jay Tail Wood, Jer Wood, Jerrison Wood, Judy Woods, Keighley Moor, Kirkstall Wood, Kit Wood, Knott Wood, Knowle Park, Laisterdyke, Lane Bottom, Lane End, Lane Head, Lawkholme, Laycock, Leaventhorpe, Lee Lane, Leeming, Lees, Lees Moor, Lidget Green, Lister Hills, Little Clough, Little Germany, Little Horton, Little Horton Green, Little London, Little Ridge Wood, Little Round Plantation, Little Round Wood, Little Wolf Stones, Little Wood, Lodge Hill Wood, Long Lee, Long Ridge End, Longlands, Lousy Wood, Low Ash, Low Baildon, Low Crooks Wood, Low Fold, Low Green, Low Moor, Low Plain, Low Springs, Low Utley, Low Wood, Lower Grange, Lower Holme House Wood, Lower Intake Rough, Lower Kirkstall Wood, Lower Ridge Green, Lower Wood, Lower Woodlands, Lumb Foot, Lumb Gill Wood, Manningham, Marchup Plantation, Marley Brow Wood, Marsh, Marsh Top, Marshfields, Maud Wood, Menston, Mickle Moss, Micklethwaite, Middle Moor, Middle Moor Clough, Middle Moor Flat, Middleton, Middleton Woods, Middleway Meadows, Midgeham Flat, Midgeley Wood, Mill Carr Hill, Mill Wood, Millennium Green, Moor End, Moor Side, Moor Top, Moorhead, Moorhouse Moor, Moorhouse Wood, Moorside, Morton Moor, Mountain, Murgatroyd Wood, Myrtle Grove, Nab Hill, Nab Rough, Nab Scar, Nab Water Rough, Nab Wood, Nailer Rough, Nan Scar, Nell Bank Wood, New Road Side, New Town, Newsholme, Newsholme Dean, Norr, Norr Hill, North Brow Wood, North Plantation, North Wood, Northcliffe Woods, Nun Wood, Oakenshaw, Oakworth, Odsal, Odsal Wood, Old Allen Moor, Old Dolphin, Old Hanna Wood, Old Hills, Old Ibber Flat, Old Snap Bottoms, Old Spring Wood, Old Wood, Oldfield, Owlet, Oxenhope, Oxenhope Moor, Panorama Woods, Paradise Green, Park Fields, Park, Park Wood, Park Wood Bottom, Parkside, Paul Clough, Pawpots Wood, Pellon Wood, Penistone Hill, Pennythorn Hill, Pickles Hill, Pickles Rough, Poggy Wood, Pollard Park, Ponden Clough, Ponden Wood, Poplars Farm, Priestthorpe, Queensbury, Race Course Plantation, Ravens Scar, Ravenscliffe, Red Mires Clough, Red Mires Flat, Redcar Plantation, Redcar Tarn, Redding Wood, Renold Wood, Rhodesway, Riddlesden, Ripleyville, Rivock Edge, Robin Hood Wood, Rocky Valley, Roger Meadow, Rombalds Moor, Rosse Wood, Rough Plantation, Round Hill Wood, Round Plantation, Round Wood, Royd Wood, Royds, Royds Cliff Wood, Royds Hall Great Wood, Ruin Bank Wood, Rye Loaf Wood, Ryecroft, Ryecroft Plantation, Saltaire, Sandy Lane, Sawood, Sawood Moss, Scar Top, Scholemoor, School Green, School Wood, Scotch Fir Plantation, Shackleton Wood, Shearbridge, Shipley, Shipley Glen, Shipley High Moor, Showfield, Silsden, Silsden Moor, Simpson Green, Slack Side, Slatesden Clough, Small Banks, Small Tail Wood, Smallden Clough, Snail Green, Snow Hill Plantation, Spa Flat, Spa Hill Clough, Spring Bank, Spring Crag Wood, Spring Gill Wood, Spring Wood, Springfield, Spy Hill, Square Plantation, St Paul's Wood, Stairs Hill, Stake Hill, Staithgate, Stakehill Plantation, Stanbury, Stanbury Moor, Staygate, Stead, Stead Hall Wood, Steeton, Steeton Moor, Stockbridge, Stone Top Wood, Stoney Ridge Plantation, Stony Hill Clough, Stony Lane, Strong Close, Stubham Wood, Sugden Wood, Sun Hill, Sun Hill Clough, Sun Side, Sun Wood, Sunny Dale, Swain House, Swaine Green, Swartha Wood, Sykes Bottom, Thackley, Thackley End, Thackley West Wood, The Coppice, The Glen, The Green, The Nosegay, The Out Moor, The Roughs, The Shay, The Tarn, Thornbury, Thornton, Thornton Moor, Thorpe, Thorpe Edge, Thwaites, Thwaites Brow, Todley Hill, Toftshaw Bottom, Toller, Tong, Tong Park, Tong Street, Town End, Transfield Wood, Trench Wood, Trough Bottom, Truncliffe, Twist Wood, Tyersal, Tyersal Gate, Undercliffe, Upper Common, Upper Fagley, Upper Green, Upper Marsh, Upper Ridge Green, Upper Wyke, Vicar Wood, Walker Wood, Wapping, Waterloo Clough, Weather Royds Wood, Weecher Flat, West Bowling, West End, West Ing Wood, West Morton, West Park, West Riddlesden, West Royd, West Scholes, Westgate Hill, Westgate Hill Plantation, Westwood Park, Wether Hill Clough, Whetley, Whinny Hill, White Abbey, White Crag Moor, White Crag Moss, White Crag Plantation, White Moor, Whitley Head, Wibsey, Wibsey Slack, Will Clough, Willy Hall's Sprout, Willy Wood, Wilsden, Windhill, Withins Flat, Withins Slack, Wood End, Woodhouse, Woodside, Worlds Hill, Worth Village, Wrose, Wrose Brow Plantation, Wyke, Wyke Common etc (plus more neighbourhoods I know of which I haven't added to the list yet) all of which are "in the City of Bradford," not "near" or "just outside" the city.

Uporządnicki

  1. Bradford is a city with a population of 539,776 and an area of 141.47 square miles.
  2. Manchester is a city with a population of 552,858 and an area of 44.65 square miles
  3. West Yorkshire is a county
  4. Greater Manchester is a county
  5. London is not a city. It doesn't have any real borders. It's just an unspecified area in the county of Greater London which contains 2 cities. Those cities are: The City of Westminster. And the City of London which is the 3rd smallest city in the UK by population and the smallest city in the UK by area.

Bradford as you can see is 3 times bigger than the city of Manchester. Bradford also had a bigger population than Manchester until 2015. 20 years of Manchester focused propaganda, has led to a population increase of over 160,000 people.

You're proving my point that Most people don't know what a British city is.

  • Stockport is not in the city of Manchester.
  • Stockport is in the county of Greater Manchester.
Now is someone going to direct me to the Birth Place Guidelines?

Danstarr69 (talk) 16:20, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stockport WAS in the County of Cheshire. Manchester WAS in the County of Lancashire. And there WASN'T a county of Greater Manchester. Until there was. And that was all within my lifetime. The point is, not the details and technicalities of what is a city and what isn't. The point is that villages and hamlets that might now be parts of cities or of Greater This or That at one time or another have had their own identities. And people from these places might still identify as being from these places. Uporządnicki (talk) 02:54, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Size of navigation popups

make Navigation Popup Pictures Bigger + load faster How does one make Navigation Pop up Pictures bigger? the reference tooltip preview has loads bigger pictures but it cuts offs the Introduction of a new hyperlink Topic

The Navigation Pop up feature can be better if it loads faster pop ups seems to not cut off the intro of a new topic Vibrato3 (talk) 18:15, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Vibrato3: You're probably better off asking at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Vibrato3: Looking at WP:POP#Options, I don't see an option for that exactly. However, adding:
window.popupThumbAction='sizetoggle';
to your personal javascript file changes it so that clicking on the image expands it to fill the width of the popup (I think). There are other options shown there that control the initial and max size of the popup. This may do what you need. Just click on this red link: User:Vibrato3/common.js to create your personal javascript file, add the code shown above (and any other options you might want) to it, and click Publish changes. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:15, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AlanM1 the javascript code is almost perfect, just if the picture would load larger without Toggling it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibrato3 (talk • contribs) 02:31, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To post a biography of Albert Soiland, pioneering radiologist (1873-1946) and use images from unique sources

For example, from the archives of a private club that he founded, and from an heir . . . How can I attribute and use those? I know I can receive permissions from both sources. MartinKL1947 (talk) 02:47, 24 December 2020 (UTC) MartinKL1947 (talk) 02:47, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MartinKL1947. You can find out more about images in Wikipedia:Image use policy, Wikipedia:Copyrights#Guidelines for images and other media files and c:Commons:Licensing; however, if you're referring to Draft:Albert Soiland then I think you might better for you to focus on trying improve the content (text) part of the draft first and leave the images until later. The draft is not going to be assessed based upon how many images it has, but rather on whether it's written in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Perhaps take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Help:Your first article, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view would be good places to start, but you might also want to look at some Wikipedia:Featured articles for examples of how Wikipedia articles are expected to be written. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:06, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hello MartinKL1947. I think that Soiland is notable as a radiologist, a yachtsman and a philanthropist. Here is a New York Times article from when he died. Please read Your first article. You can use a low resolution non-free portrait of a person who is dead, according to the policy on non-free images. I suggest that you focus on writing properly referenced biographical text before worrying about additional images, which can be very complex if you are not the copyright holder. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:13, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
MartinKL1947, I have looked at your draft and it needs to be extensively rewritten to comply with the neutral point of view. Currently, it reads like a hagiography, and instead, you should write in a dry "just the facts" style. Let his accomplishments speak for themselves. Do not include anything that is not backed by a reference to a reliable source. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:36, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the real estate purchases section, as has nothing to do with his notability. David notMD (talk) 07:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I found 7 sources for an addition I made. Someone keeps deleting them, and my addition.

I edited the Santa Baby article to add a couple of sentences about the Michael Buble version. I found 7 sources, and added 3 more today, for a total of 10. Someone else keeps removing it. I don't know what to do. Please help. Benicio2020 (talk) 16:36, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Benicio2020, Please read WP:REFBOMB. If the Buble version made numerous "worst" lists, just use 2 or 3 examples, please. We don't want to belabor this version of the song in the article, as that will be WP:UNDUE emphasis, as well as recentism.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:32, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I understand. However, the person that removed ALL of my additions kept changing his story - first my additions weren't neutral, then the references were bad, etc. Also, it's not recent - the references were from various years. Not just this year. Benicio2020 (talk) 00:37, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I also want to add that I just looked at the article again. The user took out Sydney Morning Herald and the Houston Chronicle as not being reliable sources. Since when are legitimate newspapers considered not reliable? Benicio2020 (talk) 00:43, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Sydney Morning Herald source was removed as a mistake and I have since added it back. I never removed all of your additions. Also, you never used The Houston Chronicle in the article to begin with. I reverted your edits because you added a large number of unreliable sources to back a claim saying that a song was hated by critics. To me, this screamed of a neutrality problem. I kept the sources you added that were reliable, and removed the ones that weren't. Carbrera (talk) 01:03, 25 December 2020 (UTC).[reply]
@Benicio2020: Disagreements such as this are typically best resolved by following WP:DR and discussing things on the article's talk page. Wikipedia wants us to be WP:BOLD, but sometimes others might not agree with our boldness and thus may revert (either partially or completely) or otherwise try and improve upon that edit. When that happens, except when it's obviously a case of WP:VANDAL, it's generally best to follow WP:BRD (not WP:BRDD) and try and resolve things through discussion on the article's talk page. So, that's probably what you should do now so that you can clarify why the changes you made are in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines and see if there's a WP:CONSENSUS to make them. Keep in mind WP:UNDUE because that seems to be relevant to the content you added. In addition, please try to remember that WP:ONUS is upon the person wanting to add content to an article to establish a consensus to do so. Most Wikipedia editors are WP:HERE; so, if your reasons for wanting to add this content are strongly based on relevant policies and guidelines, you'll find that others are more likely going to agree with you than not. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:11, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So why didn't Carbrera "discuss" "on the article's talk page", which you said is the preferred way "resolve things through discussion"? he just reversed my edits, multiple times. I'm having a hard time understanding why he's treating me like I'm the bad guy, when according to everything you've said, he's been doing the exact same thing I have except worse, because at least I added information to the article (with sources!) and he's just deleting it. Benicio2020 (talk) 14:17, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
​When an editor is bold in making an edit and another editor reverts them because they didn’t think it was an improvement, the next step in WP:BRD is generally for the editor wanting to make the change to discuss things with the other editor and try to figure why; in other words, the WP:ONUS is on the editor wanting to add the content to seek consensus when others are in disagreement. In fairness to you, Carbrera didn’t leave much of an edit summary when they reverted you the first time; it would’ve been much better had they did because it might’ve helped to stop what followed. FWIW, quite a number of editors might have done exactly what you did and reverted the revert and restored the material once again; however, once it was removed a second time, it would’ve been best to slow down and try and resolve things through discussion. There were things that both you and Carbrera probably could’ve done better here. It might have been better for Carbrera to follow up their second revert of the content with a article talk page post explaining why, but hindsight is 20/20. Nobody wins an edit war so at some point somebody needs to be the one to start discussing things because that’s the way things typically get resolved on Wikipedia. When the editing of an article gets a bit heated, there’s a tendency for edit warring to happen and the best way to try and avoid that is to try and remain WP:COOL. You both seem to want to genuinely want to improve the article, but just got off to a rough start. Instead of trying to assign blame for that bumpy beginning, it might be better to put it in the past and figure out whether there’s a way you can work together to make the article better. Does it really matter at this point how you got here now that the you know that the way forward is through article talk page discussion? If you really feel this is a behavior issue that needs to be addressed, then you can seek assistance at WP:ANI. Before you do such a thing, you might want to look at WP:BOOMERANG and Wikipedia:ANI advice if you’re not familiar with how administrators noticeboards like ANI. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I'm not reading through a Byzantine melange of links just for this one edit, I started to and it made my head hurt. You have policies contradicting policies at this place, I can see why so many people hate this website. Benicio2020 (talk) 15:14, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help evaluating sources/new articles

Hello and happy holidays! I recently created a page for RareGuru, and it was reviewed by one reviewer then moved back to draft by another due to the opinion it does not have enough sources. I would like additional eyes on this and assistance/explanation on the sources I have found, as I believe they meet the criteria for being independent and credible and how I would go about getting more opinions on it to support this vs just moving it back, if others feel the same.

I was also working on another article for Thunder & Bolt, which I have not yet moved from draft status and am now hesitant since I am questioning whether my judgement/evaluation of sources is correct and would like input on this as well to avoid the same scenario.

Thank you. Mlepisto (talk) 17:05, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, RareGuru, the article has a promotional tone and only discusses what the app's creators have said about themselves. You need to have content which restates what reliable sources have said about it.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:22, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I will work on improving how I wrote it. This is just my natural style (and I am ESL so it can be challenging for me to get it right). What do you think about the isssue about the sources that was brought up on my talk page? That is my main concern. Your help is appreciated! Mlepisto (talk) 17:42, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yust a note @Mlepisto: two of the refs (8 & 10) go to the instagram login page. Since instagram is not a reliable source, you are probbably better of searching for something different. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:47, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, RareGuru. At present, not a single one of the sources cited is independent of the subject. Those that at first sight might be are all based in interviews. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. . Please also see WP:CSMN. --ColinFine (talk) 17:50, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Mlepisto:, You need to have content which restates what reliable sources have said about RareGuru.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:59, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Further, @Mlepisto:, "I have worked as a freelance SEO with a number of clients." triggers our predatory instincts.--Quisqualis (talk) 18:03, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, which is why I tried to explain on my talk page without violating confidentiality that I don't work with small orgs, further I have no clients who are app developers, which is relevant here and How low (if any) value the Wiki links are and that I will do the best I can to disclose any COI, such as the example on Talk:Exuma. I would think disclosure and Disclosing it broadly and attempting to explain this would be better than not. I don't even report/remove rampant Wiki link spam I find from competitors due to it being Possibly perceived as COI, although I have asked for guidance on that matter.
It seems RareGuru does not qualify. I can accept that. For further educational purposes, I would Appreciate input on Thunder & Bolt. My motivation here is based my personal interest in medicine, disease, and this young individual seems to be worthy of note, but as I said and have here been shown, I may not be understand the criteria of sources due to my own confusion.
Thank you. Mlepisto (talk) 19:51, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Refs 5-10 don't help, as Wikipedia does not consider own websites, blogs, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc. as contributing to notability. Ditto for interviews, albeit not a likelihood for Thunder and Bolt. David notMD (talk) 20:00, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that while they aren't considered to adding to notability, references like that would be appropriate to provide proof of the accounts. Would it just be better to list them in External links like some companies have? Or should they just be omitted? Do you think Thunder & Bolt would qualify based on the other sources so far? I was kind of 2/3 way through this when the other one was moved back, and I don't have a problem digging for more as I recall seeing some other features, but at the same time I don't want to spend a bunch of time on something that might just end up being fruitless. Thank you. Mlepisto (talk) 15:47, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have just received this message by a bot on the Afrikaans Wikipedia even though I never edited that particular Wikipedia. Link. Why did I receive that particular message on that particular Wikipedia? Also, I received an email that I got that notification as well. I would like to turn that off. I know how to do on the English Wikipedia, but I would like to do it globally. If you can guide me in the right direction, that would be great. Interstellarity (talk) 21:01, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interstellarity, go to your Preferences → Notifications and see what happens if you uncheck the "Show notifications from other wikis" option. I don't have a clue as to why you received a message on Afrikaans, though it seems like you were spotted by a bot for welcoming. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 21:05, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tenryuu: Try sending me a message on the Afrikaans Wikipedia and I'll tell you what happens. Interstellarity (talk) 22:19, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Interstellarity: I sent you a message there. Special:CentralAuth/Interstellarity shows your account on af.wikipedia.org was created 23:17, 23 December 2020 (UTC), probably because you viewed a page there while logged in to your unified account. Some wikis send welcome messages to new accounts with no edits. A bot welcomed you at af:User talk:Interstellarity. Just ignore it. I have a proposal at meta:Welcoming policy: "A wiki is only allowed to post welcome messages to users if their account was originally created at the wiki, or the user has at least one non-imported edit there." At Special:GlobalPreferences#mw-prefsection-echo you can disable email notifications about talk page messages. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:25, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: Thanks for the help. Can you send me another message to confirm that the setting is working as intended. Interstellarity (talk) 22:29, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Interstellarity: Done. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:31, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: It worked. Thanks for your help. Interstellarity (talk) 22:35, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, didn't see this earlier. Well it seems the issue has been resolved, and I received my own bot message on there as well. Jolly good. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 06:55, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Create page

Hello, I would really like to make a page on Noah Beck. Sadly I do not know how to. If anyone can advise I would appreciate it, Many Thanks, Lexi ItsLexiM (talk) 21:09, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsLexiM: I've added a welcome message to your user talk page that includes various helpful links, including one to WP:YFA. Note that the order of the steps is important, especially that you determine you can demonstrate notability of the subject, and then to gather the WP:reliable sources that you will summarize for the article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:41, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Find your reliable sources first, as that is your foundation. The article builds from information in those sources. The site List of most-followed TikTok accounts has links to TikTok people who have articles about them. These may be good models. I also checked to see if someone is already working on a draft about Noah Beck and the answer is "No" (as least as a "Draft" but if working in their own Sandbox I would not find it). David notMD (talk) 02:12, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ItsLexiM and David notMD: I don't know which Noah Beck this is about, but this search of all namespaces (including User: namespace pages and sub-pages like sandboxes) shows that Joseph.ls.213 appears to have written something about the Youtuber on his user page back in August. There are other mentions that may be relevant or need linking to the article after/if it's created. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

T'was The Night Before Wikimas...

Saint Jimbo arrives to help a pair of sleepy editors.

'Twas the night before Wikimas, when all through the Teahouse
Not an editor was stirring, not even a mouse.

The references had been inserted by users with care,
In hopes that St. Jimbo[who?] soon would be there.

Most editors were nestled all snug by their beds,[relevant?]
While visions of new articles danced in their heads.
When out from a keyboard there arose such a clatter
I sprang to my screen to see what was the matter...

read on...

Click to continue reading

...When, what to my wondering eyes should appear,
but a question on sources and how to use them well here.
More rapid than eagles these questioners came,
And the hosts from the Teahouse welcomed each one by name.

Reindeers #1 to #3 (left to right):
em Dasher; Images and Actrial
Reindeers #4 to #6 (left to right):
Patrolled; Users and IPs

"Now, em Dasher! Now, Images!
Now, Actrial! Now, Patrolled!
On, Users! On, IPs!
On, Young and on, Old!
To the top of each article, be it long, short or tall,
Now, type away, type away, type away all!"[This quote needs a citation]

As dry words that before an old dictionary fly,
when they meet with a synonym, mount to the sky,[citation needed]
So, onto these articles the edits they flew,
With a sleigh full of facts, and citations, too.

And then in a twinkling, I saw on the page
Our wiki-creator: a man of great age.[dead link]
As I checked it on Commons and was turning around,
Down my router St. Jimbo came in with a bound.

Over 6 million articles he had flung on his back,
And he looked like most users with the editing knack.
His eyes – how they twinkled! slightly square – but how merry!
Too much editing, folks, had turned his nose red like a cherry![medical citation needed]
His droll little mouth was drawn up like a bow,
And the beard on his chin was as white as the snow.[citation needed]

St. Jimbo: "Happy Editing to all, and to all users a good night!"
Facial composite of man wanted for questioning in connection with digital break-ins on Christmas Eve.

A wink of his eye and a twist of his head
Soon gave me to know I had nothing to dread.
He spoke not a word, but went straight to his editing,
And filled bare urls; did sourcing and crediting
And confirming notability with a tap on his nose,
And pressing "Publish changes", back up my modem he rose.

He sprang to his sleigh, to his team gave a whistle,
And away they all flew, leaving me to my epistle.[anachronism]
But I heard him exclaim, 'ere he drove out of sight,
"Happy Editing to all, and to all users a good night!"

(with grudging acknowledgement to Clement C. Moore, 1823.)

...Seasonal greetings to all at the Teahouse. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:24, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here is my Christmas greeting to the Teahouse:
This year, many people had COVID to fear,
The holidays are getting near,
One thing that will be clear,
We will still have holiday cheer,
Happy holidays and happy new year!!
From Interstellarity (talk) 22:31, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It was all quiet down at the Teahouse,
With nary a burning question to douse,
The hosts stood like deer,
Awaiting the new year,
Waiting for new users to espouse.
—Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 01:49, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hahaha this is great! Seasons greetings to all! {{u|Sdkb}} talk 05:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, this is my voicemail. If you're getting this, that means I'm doing stuff IRL, which may come as a surprise to Wikipediholics. Please leave a message after the beep. Le Panini [🥪] 06:33, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Just want to say a massive thank you to everyone who has been here helping out through this rough year. Merry Christmas! Hope you have/had a great Christmas. Neon (Talk) 01:15, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Neon Richards for your very kind words. The Teahouse would like to wish you a merry Christmas as well. Check out my Christmas wishes in the section T'was The Night Before Wikimas.... Wikipedians have said positive things about my poem. Interstellarity (talk) 01:30, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the sentiment, and intent really goes very far. Please just note that some of us are Pastafarians, others of us give thanks to the IPU, Jehovah 1 and Eris. Anyway, may the reflection off Russell's Teapot light your way, and always remember that colorless green ideas sleep furiously.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:41, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I, for one, celebrate The Great Pumpkin during this blessed time. Le Panini [🥪] 06:31, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No question

 125.25.191.96 (talk) 03:57, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No answer. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 05:17, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No further snarky comment. Le Panini [🥪] 06:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Approval of Article

 Courtesy link: Draft:Raz Klinghoffer

Please do visit my draft. I have already submitted and got it declined because of lack of notability. But now my client has sent me the reference where it has been written about him. The references are Wikialpha and Everybodywiki. He is a musician and have not released an album, but has released a lot of songs in youtube. I need to know weather the given resources of Wikialpha and everybodywiki are enough George Maverick (talk) 06:39, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

George Maverick, welcome to the Teahouse, and thanks for disclosing your affiliation to Klinghoffer. After taking a quick look at the references provided, some of them are not acceptable as they're user-generated content, like Wikialpha and Everybodywiki. Klinghoffer's official website is listed twice, and there's one to Serena Foster's for some reason. The reviewer is concerned that given the references currently provided, the draft would not meet Wikipedia's notability standards for musicians, and suggests looking for more reliable, secondary sources that significantly cover Klinghoffer. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 06:48, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
George Maverick: please have a look at WP:CSMN. Merry Christmas. --ColinFine (talk) 11:30, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Musical notability criteria

 Courtesy link: Draft:Yeh Shuhua


Hi, I would like to ask how do I merge a draft article into an existing article? I have tried to make an article for a person but apparently it keeps getting declined and they ask me to merge it into an existing article. This is what they wrote me: "The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at (G)I-dle. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you." I hope that you can guide me since its my frist time editing on wikipedia. Thanks. Justin03 (talk) 07:16, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting situation, as each of the other women in the K-pop band (G)I-dle is the subject of an article, plus the group article, yet your attempt at Draft:Yeh Shuhua has been declined four times. David notMD (talk) 07:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I dont get what you mean, I'm sorry could you explain abit more detailed to me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justin03 (talk • contribs)

@Justin03: If each of the other members of this band have a page, it means that Yeh Shuhua is probably notable, too. To get the article approved, though, you need to demonstrate it. The way you can do that is to read through WP:NMUSIC, and then give us the links to the three sources that you think best fulfill those criteria. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 09:19, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sdkb: Hi, would like to ask if a billboard article talking about their debut release works as a reference for the notable thingy?Justin03 (talk) 12:22, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Justin03, by "billboard article" do you mean an article from billboard.com? Quite possibly, but I can't say for sure without actually seeing it. The sources need to be independent of the band, and they need to have more than just a passing mention of Yeh Shuhua as an individual. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 03:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Sdkb: Unfortunately, the article is mentioning them as a group and I dont quite think that is suitable for her individual page. And do you know where can I get help from profesional editors? I'm getting headache trying to edit this alone. Thank you in advance :) Justin03 (talk) 04:02, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Justin03, there are no professional editors on Wikipedia; it's all volunteers except for the folks at the Wikimedia Foundation running the servers, and they have no control over content decisions like approving an article. There are people on the internet who will take your money to try to get a page published, but most are scams and even the ones who aren't can't make a topic notable that's not notable. Some of the Teahouse hosts are among Wikipedia's most experienced editors, so you're in the best place you can be to get help. The only other place I'd suggest that might help would be WT:Korea, where you might find an experienced editor who wants to help search for sources. We or they can only help so much, though, since the problem is sources and sometimes those just don't exist.
For this page, there's a chance they do exist, and it's possible that the reviewers just haven't found them because e.g. they're in Korean. But they're the bottleneck. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Sdkb:, Thanks alot for your help, I will go there and try to ask for help. Hope they can kinda guide me through. If not I will come back here and ask for more help. Hope you guys wont mind. Thanks :) Justin03 (talk) 04:41, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Should I remove all Youtube references for my page to be published?

HI, Do I need to remove all youtube references for my page to get approved? Please advise. Venusorion (talk) 09:43, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Venusorion. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. . Few if any of the current sources meet that requirement. Also see WP:CSMN. Merry Christmas. --ColinFine (talk) 11:32, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Venusorion, to simplify Colin's words: Wikipedia is mainly based on WP:RS. Although YouTube videos can be used sometimes, it's not always (see WP:YOUTUBE). GeraldWL 12:57, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review my article.

Hi, I need my aricle to get reviwed, please do it fast. George Maverick (talk) 11:34, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@George Maverick: Our reviewers are volunteers, and there is an extensive backlog of submitted pages. We choose which articles to review based on our own personal references, which often prioritize pages where we see particular encyclopedic need. We do not prioritize pages where the author makes entitled demands that we move their page to the front of the line. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 11:43, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(Most) Teahouse hosts are not reviewers. After Draft:Raz Klinghoffer was Declined on 25 Dec you made minor changes and resubmitted. In the yellow submitted box, says "This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,649 pending submissions waiting for review." That is the reality. David notMD (talk) 11:47, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@George Maverick: So you are being paid to promote your client here, which is not what Wikipedia is here for. Now, you're demanding that we, unpaid volunteers, help you do so. Right. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disintegration reviews

There is no professional review box on the cure's disintegration album page to my knowledge. Can anybody edit it in? Frystir0000 (talk) 12:51, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy: Disintegration (The Cure album). This has been a Featured Article for a long time, but from View history entries, appears many editors feel it continues to need tinkering. David notMD (talk) 12:53, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding of my Biography

Respected Sir/Mam,

My name is Chirag Jain. I am a notable author from India. And, I would like my biography to be added in the wikipedia. Being of the notable, the media have covered article of me(my book). So, is it possible?

https://www.amazon.in/Search-Another-Life-Chirag-Jain/dp/1636400469/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Chirag+Jain&qid=1608905023&sr=8-1 https://www.prlog.org/12849923-chirag-jain-debuts-with-his-book-in-search-of-another-life.html 2405:201:3013:7072:B533:17C4:38C1:2259 (talk) 14:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP editor. An Amazon sales listing and a press release are insufficient to establish that an author is notable. Please read WP: AUTOBIOGRAPHY and Your first article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:01, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An Amazon listing and a press release do not constitute reliable sources and confer zero notability I'm afraid. Theroadislong (talk) 18:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming you are the same author as asked this yesterday, please read the answers you got there, at #Adding of my Biography. Basically, there is no effectitve service for providing an article on request; and when somebody asks for an article about themselves, they are usually here for promotion which is forbidfden on Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 18:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! If you are really Chirag Jain, then search about yourself at wikipedia. There is already an article for you. It was created on 9 March 2020. I am from West Bengal. Thank you. India Meteorological Department (talk) 5:21, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Not the same person as Chirag Jain. David notMD (talk) 19:29, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bulleted list; bullet points

Has anyone suggested that a "bulleted list" came from "bullet list" (targets, target points that resemble a "hit list" since the dot represents a bullet hole in the back of a targeted gangster (FBI)? Otherwise, why use the word "bullet" which has only one meaning that is lead-filled (Pb), and not 'graphite pencil lead'(Cg). Is there any more research on this from antiquity? Dictionary

Search for a word bul·let /ˈbo͝olət/ 

Learn to pronounce

Filter definitions by topic See definitions in: All Weapons Sport Printing Cosmetics noun 1. a metal projectile for firing from a rifle, revolver, or other small firearm, typically cylindrical and pointed, and sometimes containing an explosive. Similar: ball shot slug lead

2. PRINTING a small symbol, such as a solid circle, printed just before a line of type, such as an item in a list, to emphasize it. Definitions from Oxford Languages Feedback

REF. www.wordsense.eu/bullet/

REMUDA 93225  174.134.154.181 (talk) 14:12, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse. I believe you may have intended to post this sort of question at the language reference desk. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 15:18, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EISENBERG Paris page / cancellation of draft

Dear Sir or Madam,

My last article draft was removed as "promotional/ advertising content" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenberg_Paris

I kindly ask for your help as I don't understand what promotional is in this text - all facts indicated there are REAL and PROVEN (not advertising exaggeration or just senseless description):

- facts about the founder/owner of the brand and his main steps to develop the brand - original names of existing lines within our brand / years of launching + its general action to understand what these lines are about. - names of awards received from different media (with links / proves)

There were no "advertising" description, just proven real facts which are important to give general information about the brand, its history and development. All facts are proven with links.

Please, advise, what is advertising criteria and what information about the brand is allowed for publication?

Thank you very much in advance. Malfoyn (talk) 14:16, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Malfoyn: I assume you refer to Special:Diff/995883078/prev by 185.165.160.150. On Wikipedia, advertising has a broader meaning than usual it not only refers to big coloured "By"-Buttons, but also other peacock terms such as "high-end stores" or "high tech innovation" Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Malfoyn. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. . --ColinFine (talk) 18:09, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

I am trying to create references, but there are two references that link to different URLs, and they both say 1. Why is this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by D4135t~enwiki (talk • contribs) 14:37, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi D4135t~enwiki. I'm not sure what you mean. Draft:Orawan Paranang had no references when you posted here. After the post you added two references which have different numbers 1 and 2 when I view the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:01, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

old - new article

I was asked by a new editorto help him with an article on Draft:Tuvia Ruebner, a leading Israeli poet. His first draft had been rejected for publication, and was, indeed, flawed. I cleaned it up, deleted a lot of editorial stuff, and resubmitted it for publication. However, I now realize that there is already a stub article about Ruebner, Tuvya Ruebner (I had missed it because his first name was spelled differently.)

So the question is, does this article really have to go through the new article review process, or can I simply replace the existing stub with the expanded article?

Thanks for your help,

Ravpapa (talk) 15:26, 25 December 2020 (UTC) Ravpapa (talk) 15:26, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ravpapa, and welcome to the Teahouse! I've just declined the draft - now you can merge the content of this draft to the existing article. Afterwards, you can ask the original creator of the draft page to mark the draft page for deletion using {{db-self}}. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 15:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the lightning response! Ravpapa (talk) 16:02, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft article has been reported for speedy deletion

I need help with publishing an article on Wikipedia. It has been reported for speedy deletion Anikesh5 (talk) 15:56, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anikesh5, the question you asked here is the only one made by this account. What draft are you referring to? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 16:00, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Anikesh5, your draft (Draft:Sneha Rakesh) was deleted because an editor thought that its content sole purpose was to promote something and an administrator agreed. This was done under criteria G11. Pahunkat (talk)
Once a draft (or article) has been subjected to Speedy deletion by an Administrator it disappears from Wikipedia and also your own editing history. Your only option to recovering content is to contact the editor who deleted it. David notMD (talk) 17:03, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Anikesh5. As well as being overtly promotional, your deleted draft was a copyright violation, since it included material copied from two other websites. That is not permitted. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:56, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anikesh5. I took a look at the draft, and, noting its extreme promotional language —
— Examples of such promotional content

A neutral encyclopedia article would never say things, for example, like:

  • "...an innovation-driven client-centric organization..."[1]
or
  • "...is a proactive and committed one stop solution delivering Influencer marketing, Digital Marketing, and Public Relation inbound marketing agency..."[2])

References

  1. ^ Sohini A. "Company Profile: Akarmaxs Tech Pvt. Ltd". Freelancer.com. Retrieved December 24, 2020.
  2. ^ TiP -The Influence Pro Marketing and Advertising. "About us". LinkedIn. Retrieved December 24, 2020.
as well as other hallmarks of copying from involved primary sources, I have now noted in the logs for the deleted page that it was a copyright violation of [at least] these sources. I will post a note about this on your talk page. If any article is possible on this subject, it must be written in your own words, and in neutral language. Please note that this draft cannot be undeleted because of the copying issue.

Also, because proposed articles like this are almost never posted except by insiders, please comply with our mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements before editing further. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g., by posting to your user page the following: {{paid|user=Anikesh5|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}.

Also, if any new draft is created by you, please post a filled-out {{subst:connected contributor (paid)}} template to its talk page. Regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:45, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Sources.

Hi there!!! I have created a article and is ready to get published. I have got the permission to use the contents as references of my client's Website, which is mentioned in my User page. Please do let me know that which is the non- reliable source of the mentioned resources. But to my knowledge, all the resources are truly reliable and is not been mentioned for a Self- promoting purpose. Looking forward to hear from you!!!

Thanking You, George Maverick George Maverick (talk) 16:10, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Raz Klinghoffer was already Declined once, which history you erased by recreating the draft. The draft has been submitted, and as it says in the draft box, it is in the pile of 3,000+ drafts waiting for review. That said, in my opinion it will be Declined again, if not outright Rejected. Your references - an interview, his website - do not qualify toward establishing Wikipedia notability. What is needed is stuff written about him by people with no connection to him. David notMD (talk) 17:10, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, George Maverick. Your reference to "permission to use the contents" shows that you still do not understand how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia is not interested in whether your client wants an article about them (or doesn't), or what they want to see in such an article. Their website can be referenced only in the limited ways allowed for primary sources, but "permission" is not relevant. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. . Your repeated demands to get published give a strong impression that you are not here to build an encyclopedia, but to promote your client. --ColinFine (talk) 18:39, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi George Maverick. I have deleted the draft as a blatant copyright violation. I was initially going to attempt to remove each infringement with a note, and leave the draft up, as pared down to next to nothing with the decline in place, but it quickly became clear that it was impossible–your direct copying and [far too] close parphrasing from multiple sources, as intertwined and existing from first edit forward, made it unsalvageably tainted. I will leave a note about this on your talk page. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:41, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I should probably stop asking questions here, but...

Is it possible to be a bureaucrat but not an admin at the same time? JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 20:46, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JJPMaster. It is theoretically possible to be a bureaucrat without being an administrator, but is highly unlikely in practice. It is a position with stringent standards and performing administrative work is the only practical way to show that a candidate is qualified. See Wikipedia:Bureaucrats for complete details. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:57, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(e/c) Hi again JJPMaster. Questions are always welcome. Keep asking! (trolling by asking non-good faith questions, designed to waste our time, has occasionally happened and is really the only exception I can think of—which has nothing to do with your questions).

Yes, it is possible. As per the opening sentence of Wikipedia:Bureaucrats: "Bureaucrats are Wikipedia users, usually administrators...," (emphasis mine). That language cannot but admit of a "yes" to your question (if accurate – of course administrative pages sometimes misstate things). But couple that with the fact that the requirements for becoming a bureaucrat have no administrator-status, condition precedent (see also WP:RFB) and the answer in the affirmative becomes clear. Whether anyone has ever actually become a bureaucrat, without first attaining the admin flag, is a different question (I don't know the answer). However, it seems not very likely—because of the nature of attaining the position, would normally require that prior experience—as proof in the pudding. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fuhghettaboutit, thank you, but, what does (e/c) mean? JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 21:09, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, JJPMaster: it means edit conflict - which quite often happens when answering on this page. Fuhghettaboutit didn't have to add it, but did so to show that they had been editing at the same time as Cullen, so there might be overlap in their answers. --ColinFine (talk) 21:26, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Images

How do i know if an image is in the public domain and I'm allowed to put it into an article? Mekeit (talk) 22:06, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mekeit. The vast majority of images you find online are restricted by copyright. You need solid evidence that an image is in the public domain. All images published before 1925 are public domain due to the copyrights expiring. Images created by employees of the U.S. federal government in connection with their job duties are public domain. Wikimedia Commons has millions of freely licensed inages that you can use. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:22, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

If I know something in an article is false or missing content, but I either can’t find a citation or feel it doesn’t need one, and I don’t want to get my work deleted, what do I do? Grnphythn53 (talk) 23:44, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Grnphythn53. You cannot edit an article based on your own personal knowledge. I suggest that you discuss your concerns on the article talk page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:25, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(e/c) Hi Grnphythn53. If something in an article is known to be wrong and is not cited to a reliable source, then you can simply remove it. Upon doing so, the onus of returning that content is on anyone wishing to retain it to provide a reliable source, using an inline citation that directly supports the content – it cannot be returned, within bedrock policy, without doing so. Please see the section of the verifiability policy, known by the shortcut, WP:BURDEN. I strongly recommend that upon any such removal you state essentially as I have here, and specifically link to the policy upon the removal in your edit summary (see e.g., here and here).

On the other hand, if something is cited to, and directly verifiable in, a reliable source, that you "know" anecdotally/on your personal knowledge to be wrong, do not remove it. Instead look for a reliable source that verifies the correct facts, and possibly discuss the contradiction on the talk page, citing the opposing source. If you can't find a source and it's already reliably sourced, that the end of that. See Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth.

As to content that does not need a source, please see Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue. Informing some of the foregoing, please note also that there are only four types of material that require inline citations (though I would change this policy, if I had my druthers): 1) Quotations; 2) Contentious material (whether positive or negative) about living persons; 3) Materially that has been challenged (e.g., through an edit summary like the ones I linked as examples, or through adding a {{Fact}} template in relation); and material that is 4) likely to be challenged. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:39, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suicide epidemic issue

[OT redacted]... Christinepittet (talk) 23:48, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Christinepittet: I'm sorry, but this is a forum for questions regarding using and editing Wikipedia. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Christinepittet. I see that you wrote Draft:Daniel A. Gair. That is not acceptable for Wikipedia because it is unreferenced and written with a strongly personal point of view. Please read Your first article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:31, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for guidance regarding the "Daniel A. Gair" article I appreciate it. I need to formulate the content in a way where that article becomes more relevant to the general public. I guess media/communication is all about formulating the data where it can fit better to the system.If it is not systematized it would be lost in chaos of big data. Kisses, love you. Christinepittet (talk) 09:44, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's also about knowing where you're writing, and we have zero interest in glurgy crap or any other sort of promotion, especially if it is unreferenced. We're an encyclopaedia, not Chicken Soup for the Soul. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 16:49, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need guidance

Hi, I need abit of help with my current draft Draft:Yeh Shuhua as I am new to wikipedia editing. I don't even dare to resubmit now as I'm scared of it being deleted. I've put in alot of hard work in it and I really hope someone will help me out. Thank you in advance. Justin03 (talk) 02:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Appears you have been trying to add references between submissions, but given Declined four times by four different reviewers, strongly suggests that she - of the six women in the K-pop group - has not been written about enough to sustain an article. Reviewers mentioned not meeting musical notability criteria as a weakness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs)
Alright thanks, and do you know where can I get editors to help me edit my errors? Justin03 (talk) 04:00, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, for two reasons: we don't encourage mercenaries, and notability isn't a matter you can write your way out of. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 16:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reuse of Image's Content.

Hi!!! My client has now granted permission for the usage of his image's content and has uploaded it in Wikimedia commons. But I have a doubt. How to mention that I have the copyright and images for use in the draft?? Please help George Maverick (talk) 02:16, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As pointed out on your Talk page not six hours ago," Your additions to Draft:Raz Klinghoffer were removed in whole or in part, as they appeared to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material was in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license." The problem was not just the image. It appears you have started over again at Draft:George Maverick/Raz Klinghoffer. Even if the subject of the draft has renounced copyright to the content on his website, you still have done nothing to meet Wikipedia's definition of notability, as the first of three refs is an interview and the second, his website. David notMD (talk) 03:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Whoop - as I was writing that an editor deleted it for copyright infringement. David notMD (talk) 03:12, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
George Maverick has created the same draft Draft:George Maverick/Raz Klinghoffer after it was deleted for copyright infringement, in a way that no prior editing history visible. David notMD (talk) 04:22, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need permission to use a picture in my book I am writing on memory improvement

I need permission from wikipedia or the original creator to use this image...in my book. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cc/Arcimboldo_Earth.jpg/800px-Arcimboldo_Earth.jpg

You may plz also tell me about the original creator or copyright holder to contact for his/her permission to use this image. Mukeshhere (talk) 02:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need no permission to use this image as it is in the public domain, you can use it for any purpose. The file is at c:File:Arcimboldo Earth.jpg on Wikimedia Commons. Dylsss(talk contribs) 02:53, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Mukeshhere, in addition to Dylsss' answer, please keep in mind that while the image can be used for any purpose, it must be properly attributed (i.e., you must state where you got the image from) per Wikipedia's reuse policies. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 04:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so, Tenryuu. The image is public domain, not under any license, so there is no requirement to give attribution (though it would be appreciated if you did so, Mukeshhere). --ColinFine (talk) 13:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am tagged for disruptive editing

Could anyone please explain why my edits are tagged as disruptive? I am not sure who to ask about this. I already started the disruption resolution process but I'm confused on who to talk about this.

Thanks in advance.

Disruptive editors who do not assume good faith from other users

Moved from WT:THQ § Disruptive editors who do not assume good faith from other users
 – Marchjuly (talk) 10:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AGF is a fundamental principle on Wikipedia. What can we do about those self-taught master reverting artists such as this guy, who do not assume good faith from other users and have never stopped questioning the reliability of edits made by other people and virtually asked for sources to be included in every sentence other people wrote instead of trying to improve the articles themselves or stay away from editing those articles which themselves have limited or little knowledge? In my opinion, this type of users have generated more disruptive edits than positive contributions. These users are probably the second worst type of users on Wikipedia, just better than those pure vandals. Is there a direct path we could report them if they are getting out of control? 120.16.155.104 (talk) 03:37, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 120.16.155.104. The editor you referred to above has been blocked, so that appears to have been resolved. As for the other parts of your post, my suggestion is that you keep assuming good faith and try to engage these types of editors until it becomes quite apparent that they aren’t listening to any of the advice they’re being given. If the situation doesn’t improve, you may have no choice than to bring up the editor’s behavior at one of the administrators’ noticeboards; however, before you do that you should at least explore other options first. — Marchjuly (talk) 10:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to change the name of the article

How to change the title of already created article Shivsa008 (talk) 03:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shivsa008, see Help:Moving pages. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:32, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sikvs

 50.67.30.223 (talk) 04:45, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 04:52, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hello can you share my website to all people plz

 Welcome to news (talk) 05:12, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 06:33, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Worth a shot, though. But yeah, no. Le Panini [🥪] 07:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Inserting your website into an article is spamming, and resulted in you being indefinitely blocked. You can appeal your block, but if your only intent is to promote your website, you will fail. David notMD (talk) 12:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Translate

I was wondering if someone who speaks dutch can translate the title from this link for me? [1] An editor at FAC recommended I asked here. Thanks a lot! The Ultimate Boss (talk) 06:22, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Ultimate Boss: Wikipedia unfortunately doesn't have a really good translation hub at the moment; WP:Embassy, which was supposed to be that, is pretty dead. What I've tried is going to e.g. Dutch language, searching for an active recent contributor who indicates they speak Dutch on their user page, and asking them. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why not look at Category:User nl? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 06:32, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano: since there are 1800 editors in that category, 95% of whom are not experienced or active. Babel is broken. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@The Ultimate Boss: Note you can give both the foreign and translated title. See Template:Cite web#Foreign language and translated title. I don't speak Dutch but "Jaaroverzichten" could be translated "Year overviews". PrimeHunter (talk) 08:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Random question for other hosts who are familiar in this part of wikipedia (as I am more into part of the vandalism side at the moment), do you need to be bilingual to take part or could you use something to digitally translate and then manually go in and make it readable. (P.S. Sorry if this is wordy I couldn't get my point across very well) SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 18:18, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Bilingualism is preferred; machine translations are rarely, if ever, 100% accurate. Especially so the further you get from the Romance and Germanic languages. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 18:24, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Can confirm; recently had a little problem over content on a page due to the use of a machine translation. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 18:26, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I had asked, a while ago I worked on some translation for Catherine Vidal (actress) and these two lines alone took me five minutes trying to decipher what it meant, and it's just French! SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 18:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Ultimate Boss, an active Dutch speaking editor is Drmies. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:07, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dating System in articles; CITED REFERENCES

I have an interest in and expertise in history, particularly of Eastern Europe, he Mediterranean basin and the extended Middle East and Central Asia. I have edited a few articles wherein the BCE/CE dating sysatem appears in the article BUT IN THE REFERENCED SOURCE WORK, where the BC/AD system is used. To maintain legitimacy and accuracy between the article and the cited reference, I have edited some of the dates in articles where BCE/CE is NOT in the referenced work. Many times this takes more than a bit of investigation and effort in to accessing the cited reference work , so that I am sure of being accurate. I have been warned by an editor Doug weller who has informed me that I am in danger of a "Block", implied that I have an agenda, and that "Reference sources, Do NOT matter" (Emphasis mine). I cannot believe this is true for any work that seeks to be called an Encyclopedia,and should thus give the highest regard to references about references. I want to continue to edit inaccuracies I notice in WIKI and expand the types of edits I make. correcting inaccuracies between WIKI articles and cited references should NOT precipitate the threat of a "block". Thank you. Please advise on how to proceed. Lookout657 (talk) 07:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lookout657, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Era style says: "Use either the BC–AD or the BCE–CE notation consistently within the same article. Exception: do not change direct quotations, titles, etc." Apart from that, it doesn't matter how a source writes a year. It's not an inaccuracy to reformulate something in a source if the meaning is the same. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:40, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To elaborate on it's not an inaccuracy to reformulate something, if a source says that someone wore slacks but the wikipedia page said trousers or pants then that wouldn't be out a lack of deference to the source material - it would be still be faithful to the source but written for the reader. Equally if the source said that the subject were in deutschland geboren but the en.wikipedia page says they were born in Germany. --Paul ❬talk❭ 12:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Lookout657, it is disruptive to change the existing dating system within an article without a good reason, and there is no requirement that Wikipedia's dating system must comply with the source, since 150 BCE is identical to 150 BC. It is especially disruptive to impose a Christian based dating system on articles about China (or other articles with no connection to Christianity), as you have done. Many non-Christian editors very much oppose that type of change. I suggest that you take Doug Weller's advice and abandon this behavior. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:23, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bigg Boss Tamil Multiple Edits

Hello there :) I am SPEcial EDItor 2020, and I have a question to clarify about the Bigg Boss Tamil Wikipedia Page, if that is ok :)

In sites Bigg Boss Tamil 1, 2, and 3 Nominations Table , an account 2A01:4C8:A8:1542:894A:AFC6:6E77:7A21 has been changing the fontsize multiple times by adding the code "<blockquote style="padding: 0em; overflow:auto;">" . When I reverted the font size to the normal size, the user left a talk page on my User Account saying that I did not follow the rules and that I would be blocked from Wikipedia if I reverted the edit.

Considering that the original font size before the user's edit was similar to my edit, I feel that I didn't do any mistake in editing the Wikipedia page. Incase if I am wrong, I am extremely sorry for my mistake, and I hope you can forgive me :)

So my question is, which font size is supposed to be correct for the Bigg Boss Nomination Table ?, and if user 2A01:4C8:A8:1542:894A:AFC6:6E77:7A21 is wro g, will he be blocked from Wikipedia ? I need to know the correct font size to prevent any disputes happening in my talk page (User (2A01:4C8:A8:1542:894A:AFC6:6E77:7A21) has already left a talk page before this issue), thank you so much for helping me, and I hope that no more confusions will happen in Wikipedia :) SPEcial EDItor 2020 (talk) 13:31, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SPEcial EDItor 2020: <blockquote> does not change the font size. Usually, it's used to signal that a text is a quote by putting extra padding around it, like so:

This text is inside a blockquote.

In the Bigg Boss case, it's padding is set to 0em (no thickness) to put the extra-wide table into it's own "scrollable box" as opposed to running off the page. I haven't seen this formatting trick before, but I see why it's there. With any dispute, you should reach consensus with other editors on the article's talk page. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your answer is appreciated :) Thank you so much for clarifying this issue — Preceding unsigned comment added by SPEcial EDItor 2020 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SPEcial EDItor 2020 First of all I did not do anything wrong. User:Cyphoidbomb told you and gave you a warning to not put the size to 60 but still you did not listen. When it says in WP:FONTSIZE that it should be at 85%. The second is that I did tell you about why the blockquote was needed is because the table is going off the page. And what the user above has said is completely right so hense don’t remove it. The blockquote is nothing to do with the font size. And last Special Editor I did not say anything about the rules in this [2] it was just about the blockquote. I only told you in the earlier one when you was keep changing the font to 60 last month remember. So don’t lie please as that is not nice — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4C8:A8:1542:E47F:AE97:F1E:42D2 (talk) 18:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: Please sign your messages on discussion (talk) pages by adding a space and four tildes to the end of the last line of your message, like this:
    This is the last line of the message. ~~~~
    The four tildes will be automatically converted to a signature that contains your linked username and a timestamp, which helps readers understand who said what. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

about editing a semi protected article

hey i just edited eminem article i added some more information about him but i cant see it on the main google page only inside wikipedia i mean when i search eminem on google the information i put doesnt appear under his name on the main google webpage Shreyas2710 (talk) 14:47, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shreyas2710, it takes time for Google to update it. Just be patient. GeraldWL 14:49, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hey check ur EMAIL — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreyas2710 (talk • contribs) 15:11, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft

How do you change a draft into a finished article? Welbinatorr (talk) 16:04, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Submit it for review with {{subst:submit}}. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 16:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As in type that in at the top. This submits the draft to Articles for Creation (AfC). There are thousands of drafts waiting for a Reviewer, so the wait can be days to several months. Reviewer will accept or decline; if the latter, will provide reasons. David notMD (talk) 17:40, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maslingfing

 Maslingfing (talk) 19:14, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Maslingfing, and welcome to the Teahouse. You don't seem to have asked a question about editing Wikipedia, which is what this page is for. However, you have made a number of inappropriate edits to Wasser, which I have reverted, and left a message on your User talk page. If you wish to work on English Wikipedia, I suggest you take The Wikipedia Adventure, to learn how we work here. --ColinFine (talk) 19:25, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

I was curious what is considered "Significant Coverage" when discussing WP:GNG. Is one good source enough? Is three or five enough? Is there a concrete threshold or is it super vague and up for interpretation? I've seen articles rejected for not being notable despite have a dozen sources, but maybe the sources weren't considered "Reliable". I'm very unsure when an article meets WP:GNG or not so any clarification will be welcomed. TipsyElephant (talk) 21:00, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TipsyElephant, and welcome to the Teahouse. Does WP:CSMN help? --ColinFine (talk) 21:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's a little helpful, but do you know if there's anything concrete concerning the "Significant Coverage" criteria? TipsyElephant (talk) 21:08, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
TipsyElephant, we can't be too concrete, since a sentence in a blog about some subject just doesn't mean the same as a full article in a leading magazine. I think significant discussion in three important publications is enough for most editors. Drmies (talk) 21:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
TipsyElephant: you need at least three (maybe two, if they both cover the subject in great breadth and detail) sources each of which is reliable, independent, and has significant coverage of the subject: see WP:SIGCOV. --ColinFine (talk) 22:41, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) @TipsyElephant: Just to clarify, "significant coverage" is about the content within a given source. The content about the subject must be more than just a passing mention. E.g., an article that talks about a band as a whole, mentioning its members' names only once, would not be considered significant coverage for use in an article about an individual band member. There should generally be at least a paragraph or two about the subject – something you might be able to reasonably summarize and put in the article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Change Username

How can I change my username? Jack Reynolds(talk) 21:25, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JackReynolds05Singer Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS. 331dot (talk) 21:33, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, thank you!! Jack Reynolds(talk) 21:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there no flood flag on enwiki?

I always wondered this, ever since I discovered its existence on Wikidata. So, why does English Wikipedia not have the flood flag? JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 21:45, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For those who, like me, had no idea what JJPMaster was talking about, see d:WD:Flooders. --ColinFine (talk) 22:43, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

remove notice of lack of references

I added some references to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollikins I was thinking to remove the tag that says the page had "no references" and replacing it with on that says "more references are needed". As now there is some but more are needed or just having no tag there either way works for me. Ty78ejui (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC) Ty78ejui (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC) The notice is still there so if no one objects I will have to remove it myself. Ty78ejui (talk) 23:12, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ty78ejui, yes, when you add references to a page that was previously unreferenced, you should definitely replace the maintenance tag. Be bold! {{u|Sdkb}} talk 10:20, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's removed, Thank you. Ty78ejui (talk) 18:25, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The central banks.com website

I wrote an article for this website I admin and i am wondering why you would decline the article. I admin this site and want it indexed in Wikipedia so that others can learn about my website. I have no references for it because this is a website that I made. This is confusing..... Thesireofplebs (talk) 22:31, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thesireofplebs, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that, like many people, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. You "want it indexed in Wikipedia so that others can learn about my website" is the very essence of promotion, and is not permitted anywhere in Wikipedia. If reliable sources, wholly independent of you, have published about your website, so that it meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then we could have an article about your website. You should not be the one to write it, and once it is accepted into Wikipedia, you will not have control over its contents, which should be based not one what you say or want to say, but almost entirely on what those independent sources say about it. --ColinFine (talk) 22:49, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thesireofplebs, please read the guideline Wikipedia:Notability (web), which should clarify things for you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1087#List_of_South_African_artists/_Nerine_Desmond

FYI
 – Link to previous Discussion added -Maresa63 (talk) 10:00, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments re Nerine Desmond[[ page on ‘List of South African artists’ 1) I realise that I may not have made it clear that I am David, the son of Nerine Desmond. I had left this ambiguous because of all the warnings by Wikipedia editors about Wikipedia's inbuilt prejudice against contributors writing about a family member. 2) I am disclosing this so that I can cite a an actual example of WHY the statement on that page regarding ND painting in [now] Namibia, and in Zanzibar and Kenya, is incorrect. I have already outlined the absurdity of lugging around paints, turps, easel etc; as part of her luggage. But I want to point out that Nerine was too poor to even AFFORD an actual studio! So that our lounge (in whatever rented home we occupied) also served as her studio. SO that six decades later, a mere whiff of artists′ turpentine is redolent (literally) of my teens! 3) I now realise that I used the word 'infers' when I should have written 'implies' (belatedly recalling the dictum 'YOU infer; I imply')… Finally, if I knew HOW to contact the editor 'Rudolf Red', I would like to point out that his comment that 'I am now at Stage D (referring to the nameless person who had made incorrect assumptions (such as in [2] above). Stage D [discuss differences of opinion]. HOW do I 'discuss' with an anonymous 'editor"? ```` DeSoto 383 (talk) 00:21, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DeSoto 383: If there is something in an article that you want to change, then start a discussion on that article's talk page. That is what "Discuss" means. RudolfRed (talk) 00:33, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DeSoto 383, it appears that you are editing with two accounts, the other being David Desmond. Please use only one account and abandon the other. You have a conflict of interest regarding Nerine Desmond and should limit yourself to making edit requests at Talk: Nerine Desmond. What you call "prejudice" is based on 20 years of experience that shows that close relatives are almost never capable of editing articles about their family members in a neutral, policy-compliant way. The sort of personal anecdote you recounted above is an example. That kind of thing does not belong in this encyclopedia unless previously described in a published reliable source. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble with an aggressive editor

Made thorough edits to one Wiki article, and have had one editor aggressively undoing my edits demanding a paid disclosure? I’m not being paid for these edits, and have significantly improved the factual accuracy and citations in this article but they are not allowing any space for collaborative discussion. Not sure how to proceed? These edits were objectively amended by others and were up for months. Think this person operates with a bot? Please advise! Elp1108 (talk) 03:12, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Elp1108 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure why you say there has been no space for collaborative discussion; according to your edit history you have not attempted to discuss this issue on the article talk page or any talk page, with the exception of one post on your own user talk page. How did you come to write about Bally Shoe? You don't have to be specifically paid for specific edits to be a paid editor- any paid relationship with a subject you are editing about needs to be disclosed. If you have none, then simply inform the user who brought up the matter. In looking at your edits, I can see why someone might think that you are a paid editor- but again, if you are not, please say so and explain to those involved what the source of your interest in the subject is. 331dot (talk) 08:09, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Confirming that your declaration of not paid is buried on your Talk page. The proper place to declare not paid and no conflict-of-interest is on your User page. Only after doing that should you invite GSS to a discussion on the Talk page of Bally Shoe. None of the reverts were done by a bot. David notMD (talk) 10:50, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Elp1108: you responded in December to a post from August, made by GSS on your user talk page. It is unlikely that any editor will keep track of all user talk pages they post to, at least not for several months; if you want to get another user's attention in a talk page post you can "ping" them using a template, for instance {{re|USERNAME}} or {{ping|USERNAME}}. The template will create a notification for the user, provided you also sign your post like you did above. More info here. Also remember to post your response below the post you are replying to. Your response to the August post on your user talk page was inserted above the heading for that section, so it was not easy to find even for someone who knew it was there.
As for how GSS noticed that you had reverted their edit, that is also a feature of the software: when you revert another user's edit, they will automatically get a notification. I agree with their revert, FWIW; your edit included very promotional language, for instance this, which does not belong in an encyclopedia. If it had been me, I'd have removed the list of shops as well, because that's also not something an encyclopedia needs, but that's a different matter. [edited to add] As a matter of fact, David notMD did that while I was writing this! Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:01, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Film plots greater than 700 words

Are there examples of pages where editors have come to a consensus around a film plot summary greater than 700 words? The filmplot policy explicitly allows for this, but in practice I haven't seen it yet.

Thanks! 66.76.58.10 (talk) 03:22, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@66.76.58.10: The plot setion in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1 is about 840 Words. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:51, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In the Tall Grass has 772 words; it can't be compressed further since a forced compression would make the plot confusing. GeraldWL 12:53, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

How do I edit???????? BananatheGreat (talk) 04:18, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BananatheGreat. Try playing The Wikipedia Adventure. And visit Wikipedia:Community portal. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:23, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced Material

I need help on whether or not I should be removing unsourced material. Specifically, Florida's 1st through 13th House districts.

Example: "This district features a large military presence, serving as a bedroom community for the various naval bases in Jacksonville, as well as Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay in nearby St. Marys, Georgia. This district contains Naval Station Mayport, located in Mayport, and the Blount Island Command, located on Blount Island. There was a vacancy between November 22, 1988 and January 18, 1989 as the incumbent, Gene Hodges, resigned after being appointed to the Florida Parole Commission. Army veteran Allen Boyd won a special election to fill the seat. There was a vacancy between September 1, 1998 and November 4, 1998 as the incumbent, Randy Mackey, resigned after being convicted of federal tax evasion. The seat remained vacant until the general election a few months later. Donald L. Tucker served as Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives from 1974 to 1978." From Florida's 11th House district.

I'm pretty sure some of this information can stand alone, such as the last sentence about Donald Tucker, but there is a lot of unsourced information. I also went ahead to one of the sources (The People of Lawmaking in Florida) and nothing on page 88 has to do with the district itself.

I'm trying to clean up some of these articles, but I wanted to confirm with other editors before I do anything and delete the information. It should also be noted districts 1 through 13 all use the same second source (The People of Lawmaking in Florida, pg. 88). FredModulars (talk) 06:41, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello FredModulars. The first thing to try to do when encountering unreferenced though plausible content is to search for an acceptable reference. The Almanac of American Politics is a biennial source going back decades that includes detailed prose describing the history, demographics, politics and unique aspects of every single congressional district. The second step is to tag the assertion according to the documentation at Template: Citation needed. I recommend removing the content only if good faith efforts to verify it are unsuccessful, and you truly believe that the content is false or highly dubious. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:57, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Cullen328. I should mention that the articles I'm referring to concern the Florida Legislature, not the United States House of Representatives, which is why I believe the almanac won't help (from the Wikipedia article I don't think it delves into state legislatures, but you tell me). I believe the content isn't false and I will try to reverse engineer sources to verify it. Thank you again.— Preceding unsigned comment added by FredModulars (talk • contribs) 08:12, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Should I list all publications of a short story?

If an entry for a short story lists several books it was published in, should I add additional books it is in that I know of? Is there a limit to how many, since some stories will have been republished dozens of times?

(Is there a policy if style guide I missed that answers this question?) Cptbutton (talk) 12:03, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cptbutton, hmm, I'm not sure if there's any concreate guidance on that. I'd say use your editorial judgement—if the entries feel useful, add them; if not, go by this rule and don't. If you're still unsure, maybe ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 12:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Cptbutton: My view is that it would be OK to list other publications in which this short story appeared, providing those publications are, themselves, notable, or likely to be notable if someone were to attempt to create an article about it, and if you can give sufficient detail of that carrier publication for the statement to be verified. We try to avoid filling articles with pure lists of trivia, so err on the side of caution, please. I suggest that in Billennium (short story) you don't add such detail to the lead, but create a separate section listing key publications in which such a story has appeared. (PS: I have just changed the article assessment to Start-class from stub, though a few more references would be helpful, if possible.Nick Moyes (talk) 12:50, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes: like the "Publication History" section in The Seed of Earth? Cptbutton (talk) 13:10, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Cptbutton: yes, that approach makes sense to me, though articles about novels aren't my area. (The page you linked to seems well established, but totally unreferenced. Maybe every work by a major author is deemed notable, but I'm surprised such an article has stood for so long without being dealt with one way or another.) Nick Moyes (talk) 16:50, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What to do first when there's an article of the same name?

I want to make an article for a village called "Pickersgill". It's red-linked in Settlements of Guyana (the template), and I found sufficient sources for notability (Census, news, etc). However, Pickersgill already exists as a list of folks with that as a last name. I only have a vague idea about dab pages, and I'm not sure if I can assume the page name can be moved easily after I create the article. How should I approach this?

Advice? Estheim (talk) 12:33, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Estheim. It doesn't sound as if the village would be the primary topic, so I would recommend your first option. Don't forget to put a hatnote at the top of your article. --ColinFine (talk) 16:10, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Will do, ColinFine, thank you! Estheim (talk) 23:46, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doubt about chronological order of music albums.

Hi!

Every wikipedia page related to music albums has an infobox. Inside it there is a "Previous Album" field and a "Next Album" field. My doubt is about which album I should put in those two fields. Let me explain a bit more. There are many categories of album that an artist can release: "Studio Albums" and "Live Albums" just to name a couple. The question is: when editing "Previous Album" and "Next Album" fields, should I include only albums of a specific type or every album? In other words: should an artist have one single chronology or one chronology for every type of album he/she released?

I hope I explained my doubt decently enough to be understood.

Thank you very much in advance for your help!

Lapo Furio92 (talk) 14:56, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Furio92, every album. But if the artist has no other albums, you don't have to put it; it's not required. GeraldWL 15:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Gerald Waldo Luis thank you very much! I'll have to undo some of my previous edits. I'll fix everything in the coming days. Thank you again for the support! Lapo (talk) 15:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up to Changing font size to print an article for visually impaired?

I have asked this before but all responses regarded BROWSER settings. My brother has no computer. I must print hard copies for him to read.

Changing font size to print an article for visually impaired? My 76 year old brother is visually impaired and is doing physics research. He does NOT have a computer. I must print articles and take to him. I can't seem to copy & paste an article in such a manner that I can then increase the font size so that he can read the article with data loss. In doing this all the equations are lost. One example is an article titled: Calculus of variations. If I download the PDF it keeps the equations but I can't edit the font size on the general text. Is there anything short of having to purchase ADOBE ACROBAT to make this possible? This will be an ongoing issue.

Thank you! 50.82.62.160 (talk) 16:38, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for your and your brother's problems, but most people who read and answer questions on this page are editors, who have no inside knowledge of the software or other technical details. You are more likely to find somebody who can help at the Technical section of the Village Pump. --ColinFine (talk) 16:48, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Adobe acrobat reader is a free download: just search for it online from get.adobe.com. It has pretty good facilities these days, including the ability to print at a custom scale. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your other alternative is to print directly from within Wikipedia. Instead of using "download as .pdf" from the WP menu, try "printable version". This allows a choice of zoom up to 200% and will scale the maths equations correctly. That size font ought to be OK, I would hope. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:13, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Have you read the answers over at Wikipedia:Help desk#Archives/2020 December 13#Changing font size to print an article for visually impaired? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 17:23, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question on closing/archiving a discussion

This discussion has been closed as a demonstration of how a discussion might be closed. Editors with valid comments to make may still wish to add them, and should feel free to do so, despite the apparent conflict. After three days of inactivity, this closed discssion will be archived and must not then be re-edited. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:54, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hello Teahouse editors. So recently the Wikipedia:WikiProject Current events had a discussion that has concluded. I am the lead coordinator of the WikiProject and this is the first discussion that the WikiProject dealt with. How do I go about closing the discussion and archiving it. The idea is like how a AFD closes, but I do not know how to actually close it with the fancy ways of "Please don't edit this discussion" and I do not know how to archive.

Any guidance is appreciated. Thanks in advance. Elijahandskip (talk) 16:55, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Elijahandskip, the easiest way to close a discussion is to use the XFD Closer gadget in your preferences, which will add a "Close" link that you can click to customise block messages. Alternatively you can use {{archive top}} and {{archive bottom}}, which requires that you type in the parameters instead of having it automated by the aforementioned tool.
For archiving, consider reading WP:ARCHIVE, as there are different methods to manually and automatically archive. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 17:20, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. Tenryuu, I saw that WP:Archive is about archiving a talk page. Is there any other procedures I need to follow if it wasn't on a talk page? The discussion was on the actual WikiProject's main page. Also on the archive page, would I use the talk page or the article page. (I highly assume talk page, but I am not sure). Elijahandskip (talk) 19:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Elijahandskip, I would consider it as if it were this page: the Teahouse archives questions on here in a Questions subpage before sub-organising it into archives. I'm not aware of any required procedures to follow if it's not a talk page, though you might want to add a link to the archive subpage on your WikiProject's main page so that it can be referred to easily. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 20:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thank you! Elijahandskip (talk) 20:23, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Taking down template message.

I fixed the page Pune Vidhyarthi Griha's College of Engineering and Technology to make it neutral and not promotional. How do I take down the message at the top of the page. It is not showing up in editing. Whimsicalghost (talk) 16:56, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Whimsicalghost: You already removed it in this edit: [3]. Or is there something else you are asking about? RudolfRed (talk) 18:55, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@RudolfRed: I figured it out Thank You!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Whimsicalghost (talk • contribs) 19:33, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Artical Create

Hello Peace be upon you i have a question 1. why i don't have artical page to create ? and 2. How i can finding and create the the page ? 3. My artical page can publish in internet and can if any person or, me search to subject my artical show that ? Iam.20.O (talk) 18:02, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Iam.20.O. For information about how to write a Wikipedia article, please read Your first article. You seem to have difficulty writing clearly in English. Perhaps you speak another language better. If so, please consider contributing to the version of Wikipedia in that language. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Table in Wikipedia

I want to ask a question. How to remove the empty cell from the table in Wikipedia without affecting any other cell from row or column. Nikunj12387 (talk) 18:14, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nikunj12387. Please read Help:Table. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:19, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikunj12387: Without an example of exactly what you mean, I'm going to guess the correct answer is "you don't". A table, by its nature, is a rectangular grid of R rows of C columns. There are R × C cells that must exist, and you can't just remove one. If the value of a cell should be empty, there are various things you can change the value to, including just a space ( ), {{N/a}} or {{Emdash}}, depending on the need. (This generalization ignores rowspans, colspans, and other special formatting tricks that are described in Help:Table.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:21, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikunj12387: I think AlanM1's reply makes a lot of sense. If there's something you think we're failing to appreciate, do please follow up with some specific examples or links to pages you'd like to modify. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Finding images

How do i find images for articles and make sure they're in the public domain? How are things such as logos allowed to be put in articles? Mekeit (talk) 18:43, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mekeit. This is sort of hard to answer; there's so much involved given the breadth of your questions. Here's a bunch of point that I hope help. I am going to collapse this, as too intrusively large.
A bunch of Image points
  • For clarification purposes: not all free content images are in the public domain – a large portion are under a suitably free and and compatible copyright license;
  • But when you do find such images, they are usually hosted at the Wikimedia Commons – which allows their use at all Wikimedia projects, rather than just here. Images at the Commons can be displayed here natively – so that's where you should: i) search for existing, and ii) upload – such suitably licensed and public domain images;
  • More rarely, we allow the use of non-free copyrighted images, including for logos, under fair use. they must, however meet the non-free content criteria. See Wikipedia:Non-free content;
  • Since you specifically asked about logos, some are eligible for upload to the Wikimedia Commons as public domain material because they only consist of typefaces, individual words, slogans, or simple geometric shapes, and thus are not eligible for copyright protection. See, e.g., {{pd-textlogo}}.
  • Please note one significant exception to the bullet point above: some such images may still be subject to copyright protection in their home country, if from a country (such as England) that recognizes the sweat of the brow doctrine, and thus must be uploaded to Wikipedia for use here, rather than to the Commons. See, e.g., {{PD-ineligible-USonly}};
  • You can use an advanced Google Images search to try to locate suitably-free images. Once at Google Images, go to Settings → Advanced search → usage rights: → Creative Commons licenses → once a specific image is invoked → License details → compare against the list here;
  • Flickr is also a ripe place to search for free images, but please be aware of "license laundering".
  • You might try the "FIST", Free Image Search Tool;
  • Please note that the starting point for a random image found on the internet is: it is assumed to be fully non-free copyrighted (and there is no need for an image to display © or similar). For free status, we look for affirmative and verifiable evidence of a free copyright status. This excludes a vast cross section of images you find on the Internet, and through a plain old Google images or other non-targeted search;
  • So, you must look for an affirmative release by an image's owner (e.g., the owner so states in relation to the image);
  • However, some images pass into the public domain because of some situational status, such as that the image was not subject to copyright in the first place (e.g., an image created by a U.S. federal employee during the scope of his or her duties), or because of timing, coupled with publication status—which can be summarized as the image being:
  • Created/photographed prior to 1900 (whether published or not) = PD.
  • Published before 1925 = PD — but only in the U.S. Wikimedia Commons images must be suitably-free also in the country of origin, so for foreign images, you must check its source country's copyright rules, and if not PD there, it can be uploaded to Wikipedia, but not to the Commons.
  • Published after 1925 and up to 1977 without a copyright symbol = PD
  • Published between 1978 and March 1, 1989 without a copyright symbol and not registered since = PD
  • Published from 1925 to 1963 with a copyright symbol and copyright not renewed = PD
  • Unpublished and created/taken before 1925 = PD 70 years after author's death (so the author's identity must be known).
  • Unpublished and created/taken after 1925 = too complicated to get into. See more here
Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm surprised by the the occurrences of the date 1925 in the "hidden" content above. I thought the relevant date was 1923, has been so for many years, and does not advance with time. Can you confirm that 1925 is now correct? Maproom (talk) 21:44, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Maproom: Based on Wikipedia:Public_domain#When_does_copyright_expire? 1925 is correct for the United States. RudolfRed (talk) 22:30, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On January 1, 2020, all works copyrighted in 1924 entered the public domain in the U.S. In a few days, on January 1, 2021, the same will happen with works copyrighted in 1925. And so on each year into the future, unless the law is changed. This article published a year ago discusses a few of the famous newly copyright free works of 1924. Expect similar articles in days to come about works of 1925. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:47, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources in drafts: Part II

I have seen that my thread about drafts was archived almost a month ago. I have some doubts that are still unsolved, but I will start with the tweets. I have found two tweets that might be useful: this one might help to verify André's cameo on Red's Dream (although the user misnamed André by the bee's name instead of his actual name, which it is derived from a Greek word meaning "man") and the other one might verify the existence of a Christmas card featuring André and Wally B., as well as the Stained Glass Knight from Young Sherlock Holmes.

Whilst Twitter is included in the list of sources which are unacceptable, I have seen that there is a template about using tweets as references. In brief, I have had to ask about the use of these tweets before including them in the Pixar-themed draft, as I do not know that these tweets are reliable or not.--André the Android(talk) 21:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, André the Android. I'm afraid not. The only circumstances in which a user-generated source like Twitter can be used are 1) when the subject of an article tweets from their verified Twitter account, in which case information can be used in the limited ways allowed for Self-published sources; or 2) in theory, if the tweet is from the verified account of a recognised expert in the field (this exception is occasionally used for blogs; I've never heard of it being used for Tweets). A tweet by a random person on the internet is never acceptable as a source. (See WP:TWITTER and WP:TWITTERREF.) --ColinFine (talk) 23:53, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

anything and notable wikipedia

wouldn't be better to have two separated wikipedia, one for really notable stuff and one for not really notable stuff? here there are 2 type of authors, those who believe that only very notable article should be kept and those who believe the more articles we have the better it is. Wouldn't be best to have one wikipedia ruled on strict rules about sources and notability and one with softer rules? Now on wikipedia the notable-reliable sourced articles are mixed with hardly notable with not strong sources. Most of the users can't tell a good source from a bad one and they can't tell what/who is really notable and this generates a lot of confusion. there are good things in both the approach (hard/soft approach) so why don't we implement them both but on separated pages?. Having two different web sites we could have one omniscient wikipedia where one can find about everything even though one knows one needs to double check and we would have a reliable enciclopedia where one can find only notable articles with the best sources. just my thought --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 23:22, 27 December 2020 (UTC)&nbsp[reply]

@AlejandroLeloirRey: feel free to create a page about any non-notable person at Peoplepedia. I'm sure there are many other sites and free blog pages that allow anyone to write about anything they like. There's also Deletionpedia], too. I suspect others might say that we focus on notable topics, so why worry ourselves about creating a parallel site for non-notable topics when so many other platforms offer that already? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:31, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes: because as a metter of fact we have notable bios and articles mixed with not notable bios and articles and it is hard to establish how notable is something only because it is on wikipedia. For example, if I find a magazine or a company on wikipedia does it mean that such a mag/comp is actually notable? can I trust all of its sources? at the moment no, not at all. Especially with niche articles establishing notability can be very important for the reader also. If I am not a gemer but I am doing a research of the most relevant videogames can i consider a videogame irrelevant/relevant for being on wikipedia? at the moment the answer is no... --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 00:21, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you find a non-notable article, you can work to improve it, or propose it for deletion. Just because there are some non-notable articles, does not mean we should create a parallel encyclopedia filled with non-notable articles. RudolfRed (talk) 00:36, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Wikipedia is a "work in progress". Feel free to help us remove the chaff, and retain the core content Nick Moyes (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes: @RudolfRed: actually I have improved and have nominated for deletion a lot of articles but still, there is a frange of people who wants to keep as much as possible and a frange who wants to get rid of anything that is not not undeniably and universally notable (once again hard with niche articles) therefore you will not always have success in having the not notable articles removed so the result is a bad mix of the two visions. We have an enciclopedia that might have a reasonably notable subject deleted because it met a certain kind of authors when nominated and a totally not notable subject kept for the same reason... using such an enciclopedia could be tricky. plus, I feel we should make a list of reliable sources and anytime once wants to use a source not included into the list he has first to submit it for approval, if approved that source will be added to the list... just a few ideas, not trying to impose anything :-) --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 01:10, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&oldid=996676181"