Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cordless Larry, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

ns12

ns4

Relativity between two same things

Wikipedia auto-filter of source is, and well very good, for, well blackish-source-interception. However, is it because of political stand-point, or is it really "a bad new source", to eventually restrict user against citing Global Times source. If you want to go further arguing with me, why not let me interpret and explain to you the reality. Is that when I cited Global Times source and confirm my publish of edit, one nuisance would pop-up, saying clear that the source I'm citing is not reliable or whatever, who impose this restriction? Gosh, second step I took, was however, tried to find Global Time's trace in other article, I found a bunch of it. Like India News citation, as in 2020 China-India Skirmishes, the news was directly sourced from global times, acting s third party, then, why not you, together, restrict the website's citation availability. Besides, being one of one of the only, well state-owned news media, it has full coverage of everything, that is, well, possible to be covered by their news team. Lots of Chinese (mainland)-news-sources is based on Global Times as reference (full-copy) while being cited through third party websites, like SCMP, India Times etc., to source news form Global Times. Who can explain this? If Global Times is unreliable, I think third party could not live, then, as of now. Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 13:00, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

INFORMATION FROM WIKIPEDIA'S ARTICLE ON Global Times: "The Global Times is a daily tabloid newspaper under the auspices of the Chinese Communist Party's People's Daily newspaper, commenting on international issues from a nationalistic perspective. The newspaper has spread unfounded conspiracy theories and disinformation related to the COVID-19 pandemic." And, per Global Times, disinformation about other topics. David notMD (talk) 13:19, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Every news has its on views on cases, it doesn't mean it has a joint-conspiracy theory of doing things, even though "you" hate the ideology of CCP doing things, leaded by leaders in your "own country", accept this as a controversial point of view. Just accept and justify it. For fake spreading of news, you can't prove it clear, I can say this statement is false, and is brought up by western community to counter CCP. I believe a lot didn't cared about news transparency and unpropitious/incorrect of it, but as part of their country's worldwide efforts to destabilize all communist governments, they ramp up against CCP, like as news agency such as BBC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 14:17, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

This is a reliable sources discussion. Anyone want to weigh in? David notMD (talk) 14:59, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

There is near unanimous agreement, per this discussion [1] that the Global Times is a tabloid propaganda rag, and is thus a "deprecated" source. AdmiralEek (talk) 15:15, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

If, Global Times, per anti-ideological "editors", is a tabloid propaganda rag, and is thus a "deprecated" source, then why we cite third-party source that is copied and sourced directly from Global Times, isn't this indirect distribution of propaganda. Say it steadily for your self, Wikipedia is for everyone and is free for everyone to share their thoughts, and censorship does not occur under political standpoint or ideological-prejudice. If Wikipedia wants to play political propaganda censorship, why not BBC, CNBC et. cetera. get banned, as they follow western ideology and is on the conspiracy of Western propaganda. These are the inequality of news availability, and I request fellow Wikipedia to remove the restriction. Within the limits, I can also say BBC spread fake Chinese deprecated news out and is a tabloid propaganda rag, and this is why it gets banned. SO, IF YOU WANT TO PLAY THIS CARD WITH ME, GO DO IT TO BBC, #EQUALITY AND FREEDOM OF NEWS AVAILABILITY AND NON-POLITICAL-"SIDE VIEWS" OR STANDPOINT. So, you see, the Western accused G.T. of spreading fake propaganda, and thus, G.T. is restricted, then, on the other hand, China accused BBC of spreading fake and "counterfeit" propaganda in and around China, so, why not, we restrict BBC citation. With such, I DON'T THINK EITHER G.T. OR BBC IS WRONG, BUT POLITICAL JUDGEMENT AND CRITICAL POLITICAL BLACKISH/ENVIOUS OF THE CHINA ERA THAT causes G.T. TO GET THIS TREATMENT, AND, POLITICAL REFRAIN AND avenges/TIT-FOR-TAT caused BBC TO GET BANNED. SO WHY NOT, IN THIS COMMUNITY, LET'S CREATE POLITICAL-FREE ENVIRONMENT, and stop the restriction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 04:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

You said "Wikipedia is for everyone and is free for everyone to share their thoughts". No, Wikipedia is definitely not for everyone to share their thoughts. Our articles report what reliable sources have said. We have judged that Global Times is not reliable and BBC is. It's not about which ideology a source has but whether their claims are considered reliable. Western sources can also be unreliable. The British Daily Mail was the first source to be deprecated. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:04, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@Hypersonic man 11: There is also a big difference between the Chinese state censorship banning media from the whole country, and Wikipedia, a privately run website, choosing not to report what somebody claims. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:16, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

It's unclear to me how allowing use of a source that apparently disseminates propaganda would "create a political-free environment", Hypersonic man 11. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:38, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@User:PrimeHunter, this is per Wikipedia, not form me @User:PrimeHunter, if the whole state media team is banned, BBC and others should get banned for Eastern's violation and controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 11:38, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

The two cases aren't remotely comparable: the BBC is editorially independent of the British government. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:14, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry, stop arguing and interpreting in a political standpoint, the "independent" means non-sate-own, and you are credibly just going recklessly against CCP AND communism ideology like other Wikipedians to destabilize Chinese presence in the growing world. BBC, i know, it isn't backed by state, however, it is whirled inside the case, of spreading of fake news, and, is considered a "deprecated" source, as per China. Neither of them is wrong, I know, "but" they are just dragged by political tensions. Say it your self, BBC also spread fake and unapproved news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 13:02, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry, no, I didn't credibly mention disseminating propaganda would create political free environment, but, I meant Western Wikipedians follow a conspiracy of destabilizing growing Chinese presence, instead of saying it is a propaganda spread-room, we can say it is an insightful source of Chinese article. For the propaganda, every government has it, and you're gonna adapt to China's today, in 21st century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

If your beloved Chinese dictators conquer the World then they can close Wikipedia or use it in their propaganda. Until then, the editors decide what to do. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:29, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Whoa, don't go any further with this, I first mention news availability, not pro-parties, why do you have to meddle with politics against each-other in Wikipedia? Do you want to go any further? Until then, your snubs are deleted and you are round-up-ed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 13:47, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

AdmiralEek pointed out that in 2020 there was a month-long debate on Global Times as a reliable source and the decision at that time was "Result: Global Times is deprecated and is now considered an unreliable source; WP:SNOW close. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)" A new RfC discussion could be started, but for now, that decision stands. David notMD (talk) 15:51, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD, Neither does I want to be whirled into the politics, however, just saying, that none of the bilateral media group is a deprecated or unreliable source, they, particularly is forced by state and their conspiracy held theory to go against each and other, BBC is forced to spy-report Xinjiang camps and create counterfeit and fake news, to convince others to go against China's ethnic issues, does we have to meddle with propagandas here, I could held BBC up for commenting on Eastern issues from a nationalistic perspective. The newspaper has also spread unfounded conspiracy theories and disinformation related to the Xinjiang reeducation camp and is considered a deprecated source. I could do this, if @DavidnotMD wants G.T. to continue get restricted in citation, from a western perspective and reckless conspiracies, you should, however, consider to do this to BBC, from an eastern perspective and conspiracy theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 03:28, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't expect this to be month long, however, I will fight until eastern gets the justice, ZH:Wikipedia also cites Chinese state-media news, and I strongly believed that they are much more ahead than us in Chinese article, for the time being, I am also ZH:Wikipedia member, and I do want to take the move if rights doesn't exist here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs)

@David notMD, so, how was it now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 03:58, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

@Hypersonic man 11 Multiple users (from what i'm guessing, i'm not going to make myself read this whole thing) have told you GT is not going to be a source used on this wikipedia, there has also been many discussions people have posted, keep arguing like this is going to go nowhere. I'd also like to note that GT is owned by People's daily, which is a newspaper company in China, can you guess who runs it? : ) Max20characters (talk) 17:45, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

@Max20characters, What's wrong with state-owned, do you got any clue Al-Jazeera and other news media don't get such brutal treatment. I will go forward with it, you can argue with me but not without a reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 05:05, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Hypersonic man 11 The difference between PD and other state owned news media is that the CCP is known for spreading false information. : ) Also, just a tip, you should put four tildes (~) after your text to sign it. It makes wikipedia look nicer. Like this -> Max20characters (talk) 16:34, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Max20characters, thanks for your assist. However, if you want to point out Western accusation of GT spreading fake news, you should rather refer to Eastern accusation of BBC news spreading fake and mislead Xinjiang concentration camp news. Instead, you should also take a look at state-owned Qatari Al-Jazeera case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 04:11, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Why is this even an arguement, It is impossible to avoid some type of bias, and everyone has their own biases, I personally, plan on avoiding what I know I am biased about, that way, I can properly contribute to this website, honestly, with ANY news agency, we should probably cross-reference the news sources with others, and take a middle stance between the sources, that way, that we get a wide range of information, and can hopefully avoid issues like this in the future, or issues in credibility, or, say some propaganda/false information doesn't get in Kiri621x (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

I might have misunderstood you, Kiritami (621), but we shouldn't take a "middle stance" between sources when one is unreliable. Please see WP:NPOV, which tells us that we should be "representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic". Contrary to the heading of this section, in this case we're not talking about "two same things". Cordless Larry (talk) 08:51, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Hypersonic man 11 I never said GT spread fake news though? I said the CCP spreads fake news. Also, if you can provide me a source that the eastern has accused BBC news of lying that's not from a chinese owned media, I'd be happy to read it. : ) Max20characters (talk) 17:10, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Max20characters, https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/16/china-blocks-bbc-world-news-after-uk-revokes-license-of-cgtn.html#:~:text=China's%20National%20Radio%20and%20Television,of%20damaging%20China's%20national%20interests., this is your basic reference, if per you, CCP spread fake news, it is not a news agency, how can it spread news, it is through a news agency to spread propaganda, and BBC is the case here.

@Kiri621x, how can we avoid if everyone don't tolerant, you can argue, but, at least, show some respect, in, this debate, if, we stop this, next user would still argue with it. You say it right, wide range, but the range you got, is from GT, so why aren't we arguing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 03:17, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Hypersonic man 11 Hi,I don't exactly understand, there has been multiple news media that has called out China for the xinjiang camp, like business insider, the guardian, radio free asia, etc. but you decided to pick on BBC because it's owned by UK goverment. Even though everyone who has more than 1 braincell in their head knows China built concentration camps for uighur population. Also, I asked for a source that accused BBC of lying that's not from a chinese media, because obviously they would try to cover up the xinjiang events happening now. Max20characters (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Max20characters, IF, you don't understand, don't go ahead. You can report and called out for certain scenario, but reporting misleading news and blackish reports based on nationalistic propaganda and prejudice-mental views is right, wdyt. Now, what did GT mis-reported, say it out. Unlike others, you are just going recklessly against "CCP". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 01:01, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Why I am Locked and Blocked Globally !?

Yesterday i found my User User:Auramstate has been locked and Blocked globally ! What was my mistake?

1. I don't have create any article
2. Don't have multiple accounts
3. I don't think ,i did any mistakes in 22days.
4. Talk normally with other.

I sent 2 email to Official team but no response.

What should i do ?

I am not worried that my account is blocked. bcoz it's just a wikiaccount not my bank account.😛

I just want to know what was my mistake?

I am not familiar with mobile editing so please don't mind if any mistakes. 45.118.105.26 (talk) 04:19, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@45.118.105.26: I have checked the account. Both your ip nor your account are blocked. You can see here that Auramstate is not blocked. Here you can see that your IP is not blocked either.EGL¹²³⁴ 04:23, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@EGL1234:, While i am trying to login with my wikiaccount credentials result shows . Your account has been globally locked. Yesterday i got email with mention You are blocked from Wikidata for infinite. 45.118.105.26 (talk) 04:34, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@EGL1234: Your link does not work for me, but Special:BlockList does say "The account Auramstate is already locked globally." RudolfRed (talk) 04:38, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I fixed my link. RudolfRed (talk) 04:43, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed:@45.118.105.26: That's relly weird. Maybe you should just create a new account, request a new account, or just appeal. EGL¹²³⁴ 04:40, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@45.118.105.26: The lock doesn't appear to have originated on wikipedia, maybe tell us where the lock did originate from. EGL¹²³⁴ 04:43, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@45.118.105.26: You can appeal your lock on meta here. Thanks. EGL¹²³⁴ 04:45, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@EGL1234:, I can't login with User:Auramstate and credentials and don't have far knowledge how to find out lock's originate. Massege show while i am trying to login (You are globally Locked)😊 And got a email User:Auramstate you are blocked from wikidata for infinite. 45.118.105.26 (talk) 05:03, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@45.118.105.26: Hi. You could still appeal, and prove that you have access to the account, by verifying the email, which you of course have access to. EGL¹²³⁴ 05:08, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@EGL1234:, Yes i can access my email which is verified with my wiki user name. User:Auramstate was a auto confirmed account also. Thank for your suggestions. I will follow your suggestion 😊.Thanks again with regards.45.118.105.26 (talk) 05:27, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@45.118.105.26: No problem :) EGL¹²³⁴ 05:28, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I personally have always been extremely uncomfortable with hidden evidence and blocks that are not transparently explained. Anything that feels like its against due process rubs me the wrong way. But that is the way sockpuppetry cases are handled. Anyway, the block was issued at Wikidata. Here's the block log, from which you can see who blocked you, with the reason being "CheckUser", meaning that evidence indicated you were a sockpuppet of someone.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:29, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit:

What is "sockpuppet" exactly, means wiki tech team found that i have multiple accounts during CheckUser? If this is the reason then wiki tech team needs development. 😂🤣 I join wikipedia 23days ago. edit and learn how wiki works during my office time bcoz i don't have any officework in my office. Before some day i though why spending time on YouTube lets try wikipedia atleast gain some coding knowledge. That's it. I don't have any other accounts. Now i set my mind to create my own website and spending time there to writing blogs. 😊 Thanks with regards. 45.118.105.26 (talk) 05:49, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I cannot see what checkuser found on Wikidata exactly, and even if I were able to publish it somewhere on Wikipedia. In general, CheckUser is a powerfull tool because it has access to the connection IP/user account, and can also see the used browser. In this case, the checkuser seemed to be ironically a followup of this thread on the Wikidata Burecrat Noticeboard opened by Auramstate. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:38, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt:, Yes I User:Auramstate Open a discussion but as request not against of any user. i saw the particular user marked vote for delete even an entity have Viaf, worldcat number and an inter wikilinks and argument with other user to proof how the entity is notably. That's why i feel this is an undid subject thats no one noticed about the problem so i am set a notice to Wikidata Burecrat. everyone can read the conversation. My words r not intentionally nor pointed to abuse to the particularly user but the Wikidata Burecrat have to find out to the reported user's explanation. the user mention clearly he/she have multiple accounts and his/her words like *How can a new user found me that i am blocked and how can a new user get touch with burecart!!!!. really..😂🤣. Is this an explanation!, and the burecart decide that i am found guilty 😋 and my punishment is globally locked. Some one please tell to the wikimedia foundation please don't not allow several tools to new user they can find other user's activities! I can't stop laughing dude... Anyways i learnt lots within 23days of my wikipedia journey and it's a memorable. Thanks to all and special thanks to the tea house members and hosts. 45.118.105.26 (talk) 07:31, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

For anyone who's reading along, there was curious cross-wiki argy-bargy Z vs QW and QS vs IWI: [2][3][4][5] But Auramstate's global contribs have a different language distribution from those users. Anyone’s guess whom the checkuser found Auramstate to be the same as. (Aside: I couldn’t find an SPI for QW's original block here on EN.) I wonder about global CU locks, is there no documented SPI process on Meta? Fuhghettaboutit's observation about lack of transparency may be apt. Or it could be that I’m not looking in the right places. — Pelagic ( messages ) – (06:52 Thu 25, AEDT) 19:52, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Pelagic: I would just note that before posting last night I looked at the global contributions of the blocking Steward, and I too was unable to find any such pertinent SPI or SPI analogue they use at Meta/Wikidata, et al. – despite finding his or her involvement in a variety of such cases--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:07, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Appears they have a light-weight procedure of requesting a steward lock without another formal SP investigation. Presumably a lot of cases are documented on other wikis before being escalated to global intervention. But what if they aren’t? (Apologies, I’m learning about this as I go.) With UCoC Enforcement on its way, I’m concerned that the idea of "long term abuse" could get broadened and there will be more undocumented lockings.

I just searched through https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global/2021-02 and couldn’t find anything pertinent. The instruction If the account name is grossly insulting or contains personal information please contact a steward privately ... wouldn’t seem to apply to the locked user, AFAICT.

— Pelagic ( messages ) – (08:34 Thu 25, AEDT) 21:34, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I am actually worried about this case, but I get the feeling we would need someone with checkuser access on Wikidata. What currently is most concerning for me is wether the evidence behind the block was of technical or behavoiral nature, and the fact that it is nowhere realy documented. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:17, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: Yeah, me too. Sure, the underltying reason could be legitimate but for all we know the OP is more like Josef K. than we know. Yes, Wikimedia's a private organization; we don't have courts nor treat our policies/guidelines like statutes but we properly care about the spirit of our guiding policies and cultural norms—and our culture in most areas is all about transparency. Not here. Even SPI cases are concerning in their lack of transparency but at least there we see some process playing out. If we did take up a more court-like process there would have been multiple notices required before a default judgment issued and could be enforced, which would be vacated in a heartbeat if lack of due process in its issuance was discovered.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Red Devil Battlebot

I need help with finishing an article page. I really need help with the page Red Devil Battlebot that I made, I don't know how to finish it off well, and every time I make an attempt I look at other people's examples and realize how much better their articles are. 0crock 18:24, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link; the draft being discussed is at Draft:Red devil battlebot. 331dot (talk) 18:28, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@0crock Hello and welcome to the teahouse. Are there any more articles about the robots featured in the show? Starman2377 (talk) 18:43, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Starman2377 Yes, I basically just tried to implement the features of the BioHazard Battlebot page. 0crock

@0crock I see that the BioHazard Battlebot page is lacking citations. So make sure you're article has correct citations. Starman2377 (talk) 19:15, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Starman2377 Alright, thanks for helping man! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 0crock (talk • contribs) 19:16, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@0crock You're welcome! Need anything else? Starman2377 (talk) 19:30, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Starman2377 Not at the moment, thanks for asking though! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 0crock (talk • contribs) 19:31, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@0crock Understood, Happy editing. Starman2377 (talk) 19:34, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Starman2377: As it turns out, the article for BioHazard was created in 2006 and was therefore probably a victim of early Wikipedia's much more lax citation standards. I've compiled a preliminary list of potentially useful citations on the article's talk page and plan to use them to improve the article, and I plan to do the same to help 0crock with their Red Devil draft. While I'm convinced BioHazard meets notability guidelines (I was genuinely ready to bring it to AfD before I started digging up sources while performing WP:BEFORE), I'm not really sure if that's the case for Red Devil at a glance, but it's worth looking into, since it kind of seems on-the-fence right now. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 21:56, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

As a good-faith, but not helpful response to this request, Fandom and Facebook have been added as sources and I had to fix the indentation above. Sooner or later, when not receiving help, people are usually relatively successful at finding correct instructions on various pages such as WP:RSP. They're less likely to find such pages when receiving unhelpful instructions by other new editors. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:55, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Very few (any?) of the individual battlebots have been the subjects of Wikipedia articles. Even your mention of BioHazard has no references, and thus at risk for being nominated at Articles for Deletion. For Red Devil, I doubt that Fandom or Facebook can be considered reliable source references, and the Battlebot website content is just a name mention and photo. David notMD (talk) 21:48, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, David notMD. While I think Red Devil's notability status is more ambiguous (see above), I found a handful of sources that make me believe BioHazard meets notability guidelines just doing a few minutes of WP:BEFORE, so I'm starting work on improving the article – more firmly establishing notability and bringing its citations up from 2006's to 2021's Wikipedia standards. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 22:14, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD @Starman2377 @TheTechnician27, So I need an overall idea of what you guys think, if I work on this article enough to make it good, will it be able to meet Wiki Standards, or will it not become posted. ~ 0crock

My personal opinion based on a preliminary search for sources is that the answer would be 'no', as I think it falls just shy. For context, this is the list of reliable, third-party sources I was able to find about Red Devil. I also searched for it under the name HyperActive but couldn't find anything. This could just be a case of WP:TOOSOON, though, and I think keeping the article intact in the draftspace could be worthwhile. To be entirely clear, though, none of this is a reflection on you as an editor; this is just a matter of whether or not Red Devil falls short of Wikipedia's notability guidelines. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 22:45, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@0crock Don't give up! I think you can still try to make your article the best it can be, I think you may need help with it aswell. Starman2377 (talk) 15:59, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Starman2377 Thanks for encouraging me, I will continue working on the draft. ~ 0crock — Preceding undated comment added 18:06, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Where to post/get help with a suspected case of WP:Citogenesis?

What is the right place on Wikipedia to either record or get help with investigating a suspected case of citogenesis? The information in question was added in 2007, uncited. Since then, a number of places have repeated the information in extremely close phrasing to that on Wikipedia, but I cannot find a single source from before 2007 that mentions it.

I strongly suspect citogenesis, but am unsure what the procedure is to "prove" it or add this to a list. There *are* what we would usually consider "reliable sources" that share the information, so I am concerned that the information might end up back on Wiki again, this time cited. Thanks for your help! Ganesha811 (talk) 23:35, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Ganesha811. If this really is a case of citogenesis that's gone undetected for 14 years, it sounds like it's going to be a mess to deal with. For reference, would you mind linking the article and specifying the relevant citation(s)? TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 23:59, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, for sure! So the article in question is Joseph Bazalgette. Earlier today I removed (diff) a paragraph with a story about him planning of London's sewers. Another editor had earlier marked it with some citation-needed tags. The info was added by User:SmokeyTheCat in 2007 (diff), who seems to have been a fairly prolific user at the time, but has been inactive since 2015.

As I said, I cannot find *any* reliable sources that include this anecdote from before 2007. That is not to say that none exist, but I looked for about 45 minutes today using Google Books, JSTOR, and other resources. On the other hand, post-2007, there are sources that seem to have this story included, often using phrasing extremely close to the wiki source. From the Institution of Civil Engineers, from The Spectator, from The Hindu, from the Museum of London (in modified form). There are also several books on Google Books from this decade with the same story, such as these two, both about 'creative thinking.'

There are innumerable contemporary committee reports and whatnot that show up about Balzagette and his sewers, but none of them mention the specific calculation that was given on Wiki. In particular, none of them contain that specific quote, which since it is supposedly a direct quote should be easier to find. This is a long post, but I hope it adequately covers why I think this is citogenesis. Thank you for your help, TheTechnician27 Ganesha811 (talk) 00:34, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ganesha811: Well, I definitely see your point, and it's a worrying one (I also see you likely found it through the r/TIL post, which somehow got 90k+ upvotes for an uncited piece of trivia in a Wikipedia article; classic r/TIL). I found this book from 2001 but, unfortunately, no instance of that quote anywhere. In the meantime, I've placed the offending material on the talk page for ease of access, and I'm going to try to track down an expert from a relevant WikiProject in the hopes they'll be able to provide a pre-2007 source. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 01:06, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

In the meantime, I've been looking for sources, and Aline van Duyn, writing for the Financial Times, seems to have really messed up on this one: their 2009 article "Insight: Accounting for unforeseens" reads: "When planning the sewage system, the engineer “took the most dense population, gave every person the most generous allowance of sewage production and came up with a diameter of pipe needed. He then said ‘Well, we’re only going to do this once and there’s always the unforeseen.’ So he doubled the diameter to be used,” according to a Wikipedia entry. [emphasis mine]" Thankfully, they at least attribute it, but you'd really think that if it isn't cited and you can't find anything to attest to it that you wouldn't even include it in your article. Mercifully, that does tell us something, though: in 2009, the markets editor for the Financial Times likely couldn't find a source for this quote or event, which definitely makes this more suspect. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 01:26, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ganesha811, TheTechnician27: I have located the content in a book, word-for-word, from here (see content started at the very end of page 13, and spilling over through the first paragraph of page 14). However, there were two editions – a first in 1996 and a second in 2009, i.e., pre- and post-dating the addition of the content to the article. So, it could be unattributed plagiarism and infringement of the article, only included in the 2009 edition's content seen at the posted link. A post to WP:RX would seem to be in order, asking if someone can access and is willing to check the 1996 edition.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:21, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit, thank you. I was able to locate a version of the 1996 edition online through a friend's academic account and it did not have the anecdote included. I suspect the author plagiarized from Wiki for the 2009 edition. Ganesha811 (talk) 20:49, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

In such a context, I would remove it from the text, and leave a commented-out note explaining what happened. "If you want to restore this anecdote to the article, you must cite it to a source from before 2007." DS (talk) 18:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

DragonflySixtyseven, that seems reasonable. Good notion! Ganesha811 (talk) 14:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Are these two articles talking about the same subject?

I stumbled across the article Palar River (Kaveri basin) and noticed a disambig at the top to the article Palar River. Upon closer inspection, the one with the disambig "(Kaveri Basin)" has only had two edits: one when it was created less than a year ago by Vijethnbharadwaj, and one when Wolfgang8741 provided the disambig, possibly not realizing these two articles could be about the same subject. The same map picture is even shared between articles.

If they are the same, what would I even do in this case? Merge the content into the main article and then just make the duplicate a redirect to the main article?

As an aside, I had to blank a very obvious case of plagiarism from the main article that had been sitting there since 2015. Is there anything else I should do besides adding this information back in in my own words? TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 04:08, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi TheTechnician27. I have not looked at first issue. As to the second (good catch!), for future reference (since I have taken care of the issue at the article), you would mark the history for redaction using {{copyvio-revdel}}. I wrote more expansive instructions for what to do in two places that might be of interest: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions#Step 1: Quick-fail criteria → click show → scroll down to Copyright cleanup instructions → click show; and Wikipedia:New pages patrol#copyvio cleanup. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:31, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@TheTechnician27: Palar River (Kaveri basin) mentions the Palar blast, so I think they're writing about this river: [6]. Some of the references also mention a "Palar River" that forms the north border of Erode. I think it's plausible that they're not the same river. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:53, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi @TheTechnician27:,@Wolfgang8741:,@Fuhghettaboutit:,@Ganbaruby:. Palar River and Palar River (Kaveri basin) refers to two different Rivers. Palar River is an independent River which takes birth in Nandi Hills, Karnataka, flows through Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu to get drained up in Bay of Bengal. It flows through Bethamangala, Kuppam, Vaniyambadi, Ambur and many other towns. Palar River (Kaveri basin) takes birth in Northern Part of Erode district adjacent to Kambathrayan Temple in Tamil Nadu, flows through Kadambur covering Guthiyalathur Extension R.F. later forming border between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu states, passing through villages of Ookkiyam, Hoogya, Gopinatham and drains up to Kaveri River near border village of Palar, just before Mettur Dam. Since these two Pages gives info on two different Rivers with same name, I wish to retain both the articles. The same map picture can be used since the attached map did not refer to a single River, but depicts Hydrography of entire Tamil Nadu/Puducherry, 90% of Kerala and few parts of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. Entire path of both Palar River and Kaveri River (Palar River (Kaveri basin) is a tributary of Kaveri) can be seen in this Map and hence it is justified to retain the same. Moreover this Map is not a Political/Provincial Map. It is a Physical Map and Hydrography is very much a content of such Maps. -Vijethnbharadwaj (talk) 08:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Is the tool to "Fix ambiguous links" broken?

Good evening, Teahousers. I have an article which is still an incomplete draft, so I have {{Userspace draft}} at the top. This creates a box which includes links to some tools, one of which is described as "Fix ambiguous links". But when I click on that to run the tool, it gives the following error message:

This site can’t be reached

69.142.160.183 took too long to respond.

I have tried running it again several times, with the same result. Is this a known problem? Is there a work-around? Or who should I report it to?

In case it is relevant, the page in question is User:Gronk Oz/Paul Rolan. - Gronk Oz (talk) 08:52, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Gronk Oz. It appears that the server for the tool is down but I'm not sure who to report that to. All this tool does is check for Wikilinks in the text of the Draft that go to disambiguation pages rather than directly to the correct page. I use a much simpler colour-based way to do that, from which I note that your link MD (which shows in orange for me) is the only one that needs attention. If you want to implement that colour-based mechanism, let me know and I'll dig out the instructions to set it up on your account. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:50, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

VPT comes to mind as a place to report it. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 13:19, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, all. --Gronk Oz (talk) 23:33, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Gronk Oz: Reported at Template talk:Automated tools#Template-protected edit request on 25 February 2021 on your behalf. GoingBatty (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz:  Fixed by Paine Ellsworth. GoingBatty (talk) 04:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Wow, quick service - thanks, everybody! --Gronk Oz (talk) 07:33, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

How do I change the importance of a Wikiproject?

I was trying to change the importance of Draft:Coup (game) from N/A to Mid. Can anyone tell me how? Am I even allowed to? Grantastik talk 18:42, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Grantastik sure, edit the |importance= parameter on the template. Though, generally, it doesn't make sense to set that until the article is published. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 19:54, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)  Courtesy link: Draft:Coup (game) @Grantastik: I'd wait to see if it is accepted first. I'm not sure the current sourcing demonstrates notability. See WP:GNG. And technically you are trying to change the importance of the draft, not the related Wikiproject. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:56, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Grantastik, next to anything mentioned before the importance of a Wikiproject Rating for a Draft does in no way speed up its review, it has not much sense modifying it on a Draft. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:00, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Grantastik: To add to what others have said here, there's a decently high threshold for an article to be considered of Mid importance to a WikiProject, at least as far as precedent is concerned. Just as an example, articles such as 2008 United States presidential election and the 2001 anthrax attacks are categorized as Mid-importance articles for WikiProject United States. 'Low' importance is essentially the norm the overwhelming majority of articles, and this importance is separate from its quality scale (see: WP:ASSESS). As I've come to understand it, a 'Top' priority article is one where it would be majorly detrimental to a WikiProject to not have an article about it (as an example, Joe Biden, Spanish–American War, and the United States Bill of Rights for WikiProject United States; 'High' is where a WikiProject would be conspicuously lacking without it (as an example, Apollo 13, Kansas, and Brett Kavanaugh for WP US); 'Mid' is fairly important to an article; and 'Low' is one that contributes to the breadth of knowledge of the WikiProject's subject field, but whose absence from the project would not be very conspicuous. There's definitely some flexibility between these, and there are plenty which I would change (for example, 'Dewey Arch' is somehow Top importance, while John Adams is only High), but unless Coup has had a large impact on the world of gaming, there's just no good reason in my eyes to assess it as being of Mid importance. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 17:16, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

How to change the name of a page

There is a page i came across..where the spellings and name of the person about whom the page is made are wrong..i wanted to change the title but don’t know how to do it Ibaadat (talk) 05:36, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ibaadat: It's called a move, and instructions are at WP:MOVE. If there are other editors that might oppose to your move, please gain consensus first through the steps at WP:RM#CM. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ibaadat: What Ganbaruby says about the procedure is correct, but if you are trying to move an existing article about a person to a different title, because you want the article to be about another person with a similar name, you must not do that – it is called article hijacking. (I am basing this comment on your recent edits to Zain Khan Durrani. You can create a draft at Draft:Zain Khan and submit it for review through the Articles for Creation process, but please review this information first.) --bonadea contributions talk 08:46, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Question on sources

what if you dont find any relevant sources that can back up some information that has nit been cited? Could I switch the information to fit my relevant sources ? Santanavictianny (talk) 06:26, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

what if you dont find any relavent sources that can back up some information without citation? Could I switch the information to fit my relavent sources ? Santanavictianny (talk) 06:42, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Santanavictianny. You have given any real specific details in your question (e.g. an article name); so, it's a bit hard to give you a specific answer. Please take a look at WP:UNSOURCED for more details, but sometimes it might be OK to simply add a template like {{citation needed}} instead of simply removing the unsourced content; it's not necessarily wrong to remove unsourced content, but perhaps it's not always necessary to do so either particularly if it seems reasonable that a source could be find to support the unsourced content. In many cases, it may depend upon the the nature of the unsourced content. If it's a serious claim that might have WP:REALWORLD implications (particularly about a living person), then removal might be the best thing; however, if it's more of a minor claim unlikely to have a major impact if left in the article, then perhaps adding a maintenance template is OK as a temproary measure to give others a chance to try and find a source. As for the other part of your question, if you can find a source that contradicts what's unsourced in the article, then you can be WP:BOLD and edit the article to reflect the source you found. Sometimes, however, reliable sources may contradict one another and it's can be hard to know for sure which one is correct; in such cases, it might be better to re-phrase the content to reflect this disagreement among the sources instead of just picking one over the other, assuming that that WP:UNDUE is not a problem and the sources are for the most part considered to be equals in terms of their reliablility as a source for Wikipedia's purposes.

Finally, please try to give a host the chance to respond before reposting the same question or a similar question. All Wikipedia editors are WP:VOLUNTEERs and sometimes you just need to be a bit patient when asking for assistance. If you want to add on or correct something you previously posted, it's not always necessary to start a new discussion. Since you're a student editor, you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines for some general information about how editors interact with each other via talk pages or noticeboards. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:00, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Adding more information in templates

Dear editors and others of Wikipedia. Forgive me for I am new to this site. I have enjoyed using Wikipedia for as long as I can remember. However, after visiting the site so many times, I feel that somethings are missing. For those who don't have time to read every single piece of information on some historical or current leader. politician, etc, etc. They don't know how to get this information. I propose a couple of ideas for the templates.

Extended content

Ideas What I am proposing is this. Tenet: Progressive, Neutral or Conservative With this, users and those visiting the site can learn what their favorite historical or current leaders' tenet is. For example. Oda Nobunaga, Qin Shi Huang and Cao Cao were Progressive. Sun Quan, Sanada Yukimura, Zhang Liao, Minamoto no Yoshitsune and Tokugawa Ieyasu were Neutral. Adolf Hitler, Takeda Shingen and Zhuge Liang were Conservative. These are just a couple of historical individuals to give you an idea. Ideals: Ambition, Fame, Talent, Family, Determination, Mastery, Greed, or Justice. With this, users and those visiting the site can learn what their favorite historical or current leaders ideals are. Fame: Shimazu Yoshihiro and Minamoto no Yoshitsune Talent: Toyotomi Hideyoshi and Kuroda Yoshitaka. Greed: Dong Zhuo, Tokugawa Ieyasu, Matsunaga Hisahide and Lu Bu. Justice: Sanada Yukimura, Hosokawa Tadaoki, Liu Bei, Zhuge Liang and Zhao Yun. This give you an idea. Tier: C, B, A or S. With this, users and those visiting the site can learn what their favorite historical or current leaders tier. S: Cao Cao, Oda Nobunaga, Zhang Liao, Zhuge Liang, Qin Shi Huang, Minamoto no Yoshitsune and Toyotomi Hideyoshi. A: Kuroda Yoshitaka, Miyoshi Nagayoshi, Hosokawa Tadaoki, Akechi Mitsuhide and Shimazu Iehisa. This gives you an idea. Rebellious: 1 ~ 15 14: Date Masamune and Ōtomo Sōrin. 13: Miyoshi Nagayoshi. 12: Oda Nobunaga, Toyotomi Hideyoshi and Kuroda Yoshitaka. 11: Imagawa Yoshimoto. This gives you an idea.

If these ideas are added to templates, it should help users and newcomers learn must faster and more efficiently on what or who they wish to learn about. It doesn't have to just apply on people, but policies, groups, organizations or whatever it can be applied to.

This is what I propose to help Wikipedia help those who want to known this type of information is essential to any avid leader or newcomer. Like with everything, Wikipedia must move forward. If not, those who do not are doomed to fail. That is all I have to propose at the moment. Azuchi1579 (talk) 09:15, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Azuchi1579, if you have a proposal, the best place to take it is to the WP:VPI. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 09:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Azuchi1579: Clearly, you've put a lot of thought into this idea. However, that may be the problem in adopting it here because the nature of Wikipedia is exactly opposite of that, disallowing any form of original research. Instead, as an encyclopedia, we write about what reliable sources have written about a subject. Even if there were reliable sources that had "pigeon-holed" people in exactly this way, I'm sure there would be other reliable sources that would disagree, making it incorrect for us to just pick one or to do any form of synthesis to try to make it fit this model. Instead, we neutrally summarize the different points of view of those sources. (See the blue links and the other pages to which they link for the related policies and guidelines.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:08, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Company Wikipedia Page

Hello, I have one question regarding my page content. I created content for my business where I have discussed everything about my business along with other relevant information and relevant links. But I don't know what is promotional there or please let me know how we can write a company page which also not appear promotional. Dear, I need your help here. ButlerJan (talk) 10:58, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Please see your talk page. Firestar464 (talk) 11:00, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

ButlerJan (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Like others sometimes do, you seem to have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia does not have "company pages" written by and under the control of those companies, like a social media page would be. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with articles about companies, typically written by independent editors. Those articles summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company wants to say about itself, only in what others unaffiliated with the company say about it. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves, even if they are not soliciting customers or selling something. For you to write an article about your company, you would need to forget everything you know about it and everything on your company website and only write based on the content of independent sources. Most people cannot do that. If you just want to tell the world about your company, you should use your own website, social media, or other forum where that is permitted.

Please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures you must make. 331dot (talk) 11:05, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

lowercase sigmabot III not archiving article Talk

I added the MiszaBot archiving template to Talk:List of multiplayer browser games a week ago but lowercase sigmabot III still hasn't archived it. Here's the code:

{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo=old(90d)
| archive=Talk:List of multiplayer browser games/Archive %(counter)d
| counter=1
| maxarchivesize=75K
| archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}}
| minthreadsleft=5
| minthreadstoarchive=2
}}

That was copied from Help:Archiving a talk page#Sequentially numbered archives, I just copied and pasted the Talk page title into the archive= field. I've done this before and never had a problem so I'm stumped. User talk:Σ suggested asking here, so here I am. Ideas? Woodroar (talk) 14:04, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Woodroar hmm, I can't seem to find the issue. On my TP I use ClueBot which works fine - maybe try that? Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 14:21, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Giraffer, I was considering that but thought I'd ask here just in case. If nobody figures it out by the time this thread gets archived, I'll do that. Thanks for taking a look! Woodroar (talk) 14:26, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Woodroar: There was a blacklisted link which prevents the bot from saving the archive. I have deactivated it.[7] Come back if it hasn't archived in two days. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:29, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

PrimeHunter, ohhh, that makes sense. I'll remember to look for that going forward. Thanks and cheers! Woodroar (talk) 14:32, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Inanimate Insanity Declined On WIkipedia..

This Question Is Kind Of Interesting To Me. I Tried To Create An Article Based Off Of Inanimate insanity. But It Showed Me A Decline Article By Many Users. So How Come The Article Was Declined And Is Not On Wikipedia? Waistprate (talk) 15:45, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Waistprate. You'll find some info at this link: Inanimate Insanity. The article-name is currently WP:SALTed. Your draft Draft:Inanimate Insanity (Internet Series) currently has no citations to WP:RS, so it fails WP:GNG as-is. Existing is not enough. WP:YFA may be of help to you. Consider editing Inanimate Insanity Wiki, the internet is vast. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:00, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

How to distinguish notable people with same name

 Tinyskeptic (talk) 16:21, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Tinyskeptic, depends on situation. Compare George Washington, George Washington (trombonist), George Washington Carver and George Dewey Washington. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:33, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

FAW offensive 1986

How do I obtain a copy of the map of the FAW front line in 1986 82.22.110.215 (talk) 16:28, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@82.22.110.215: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. What kind of computer are using? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starman2377 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

You might ask at the appropriate Reference Desk (and specify which FAW you mean). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:59, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Entering a notable person with the same name as another

How do I distinguish an existing notable person already on Wikipedia with a new entry having the same name? Tinyskeptic (talk) 16:40, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Tinyskeptic, and welcome to the Teahouse. As Gråbergs Gråa Sång noted above, there are a few ways this can be done. It can be a bit subjective if you use parentheses, but please read WP:NCDAB. If you're still not sure after reading this, you could say who the existing notable person is and who the subject of your new entry would be, and we could probably give you a suggestion. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tinyskeptic, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. My advice is not to worry about this question at all until much later. If you are contemplating the (much more difficult than it looks) task of creating a new article about somebody, then my advice to anybody who hasn't already successfully created several articles would be to use the articles for creation process to create a draft. When you've developed the draft to the point where it might be ready to go into the main encyclopaedia, you submit it for review: if the reviewer accepts it, they will look after moving it to an appropriate title and handling disambiguation as necessary. I would actually go further, and advise not even thinking about creating a new article until you've made several hundred improvements to existing articles that have not been reverted by other editors: at that point you are more likely to have some understanding of what is required in an article. --ColinFine (talk) 17:29, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Jack the Ripper - story - references needed

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_the_Ripper

I wish to request references be cited in this story to the claim that the "canonical five" were prostitutes. This claim has been adequately disputed. Such a claim is hearsay even if it is considered to be part of the historical record. A claim such as this, without references perpetuates a potentially prejudicial stance, whereas it may be what popular journalism at the time claimed as being true, is now considered hearsay and requires references as to the origin(s) of this claim - or at the least, a disclaimer of some kind as to the legitimacy of such a claim. See "The Five" by Hallie Rubenhold, copyright 2019, Mariner books edition 2020.

NOTE: The preview of a request for references by appears to be unsupported. My edits not being accepted due to page protections. BobKat107 (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@BobKat107: Please discuss this on the article's talk page Talk:Jack_the_Ripper RudolfRed (talk) 16:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

(ec)BobKat107, try to discuss this at Talk:Jack the Ripper, it's the place to start, and not protected. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:57, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

BobKat107, I found these previous discussions, you may or may not find them interesting: Talk:Whitechapel_murders#Prostitutes?, Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_188#Whitechapel_Murders. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:01, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Changing user name

How do I change my username? Alicced (talk) 17:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Alicced Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse, Here is a link to request a username change. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Changing_usernameStarman2377 (talk) 18:25, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

why why why

hilary clinton how come no one ask her what she meant by refuges are fast cash in her wiki texts why isent no one asking bicth clinton what she meant when she said refugies are fast cash in her wikilink text 75.118.248.113 (talk) 19:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

The Teahouse is a place for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. Do you have one? Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 19:48, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

make a wikipedia page

Hello, I was wondering if I could make a wikipedia page on a content creator? 73.70.157.196 (talk) 21:18, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Start with reading WP:BASIC. If you conclude "Yep, I have those sources, no problem", move on to WP:YFA. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:25, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Policies/guidelines about overediting

Hi there! I just wanted to know whether there is any policy or guideline which says something like "in order to prevent the revision history of an article to become clogged up, editors should ensure that all the information they want to edit is done at once". Thank you! EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 21:30, 26 February 2021 (UTC) Clarification - what I mean when I say "at once" is "in one edit as opposed to dozens of minor edits". EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 21:33, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@EvanTaylor1289: I agree with the comment in the essay Wikipedia:Editcountitis that a person shouldn't make lots of small edits to an article just to increase their edit count. However, there can be times when it's beneficial or easier to make a few edits in a row to the same article. GoingBatty (talk) 21:43, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

GoingBatty thanks! EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 21:45, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey EvanTaylor1289. I am betting the germ of this post is an absurdity – and extreme example of this playing out – but "legitimate" reasons that I can think of for "chunking" edits include:

1. Chunking (writing);
2. (this is a big one) making sure that any changes that might be seen as controversial (and thus more likely to be reverted) are separated from any edits that are not, even if closely related in concept/form – so that if and when one is reverted, other edits the same reverter might not object to, are not roped in
3. (in the same vein) any reverts that may be re-reverted ("revert last as ____, and copyedit")
4. (another big one, though I don't know that it's well known) any edits that remove or add line spaces (or swap paragraphs, and similar), for the reason that they make it much, much harder to parse what was changed in the diff view – indeed when doing a copyedit, I will sometimes attempt to make all changes that avoid this in one edit, and do the spacing in the next, for just this reason (I have been reverted on this basis);
5. edits incorporating copied content from other articles, where the edit summary is used to provide the copyright attribution (and when fixing missing attibution) for obvious reasons;
6. when removing copyvios, for separating distinct by copied source, as noted in the separated edit summaries;
7. Where you believe the edit summary is important for listing different tasks, not just for other editors' understanding, but so that you can see what you did, to review later (maybe years later) in an organized and non-haphazard fashion.

Best regards.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Some articles need so much work that it would be impossible to do everything in one massive edit. As long as Edit summaries identify what parts of the article was being revise, and a description of the edits, multiple edits should not cause problems for subsequent editors. Example: during raising Vitamin K to Good article, I made >100 edits. David notMD (talk) 02:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

It is, however, possible to do a great amount in one massive edit (my own most recent example). -- Hoary (talk) 08:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Wow! This has received many replies! The reason I asked the question os because I noticed that someone had done >100 minor edits to one page in a row. I THINK this should be covered by David notMD‘s response though

Sometimes I copy a section to my Sandbox, work there, then replace the original with the revised. I would not do an entire article. In the example you mention, if truly minor edits, sounds like someone running up their edit count. To what end? David notMD (talk) 04:15, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Can I use this image?

I wanted to know if I could se this image KPRC-TV-2018 Logo.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by ItsJustdancefan (talk • contribs) 00:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@ItsJustdancefan: What do you want to use File:KPRC-TV-2018_Logo.png for? It's already used on the KPRC-TV article. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 01:10, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi ItsJustdancefan. All of the images you have uploaded to the Commons appear to me to be copyright violations, with you claiming to release the ownership over content you don't own. I could be wrong, but can you please explain how you own the copyright of these various works (I would normally think that are owned by big companies, like NBC, and similar) such that you have the authority to release them under Creative Commons licenses? (I would note that it's possible some of these may be not subject to copyright in the first place, as too simple geometric shapes and text, but that is a different issue).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
    @GoingBatty: It's in use there because this user uploaded the image and then added it to the article.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:16, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Guy Crescent

Hello. I would like some help.
I am currently in the process of translating the article Draft:Guy Crescent from the French article. I just don't know what the procedure is for putting attribution to the original article in the other language. If someone could please move the article to mainspace (I will continue translating afterwards; I'm not done yet) and do the correct procedure, that would be very helpful. Thanks. Paul Vaurie (talk) 01:24, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Vaurie: Welcome to the Teahouse! For the attribution procedure, see Help:Translation. Happy translating! GoingBatty (talk) 01:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Hey, is what I did ok? And secondly, I don't know how to create the talk page... could you do that for me? Thanks. Paul Vaurie (talk) 01:45, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Vaurie: To create a talk page, you click on the "Talk" tab at the top left of the article. I created it for you with a couple of WikiProjects and the {{Translated page}} template. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again! Paul Vaurie (talk) 01:57, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

DISPLAYTITLE position

Hello,

Whereabouts in an article should one place the DISPLAYTITLE magic word – in the rare case that it should be used? MOS:ORDER doesn't appear to have any thoughts on magic words other than DEFAULTSORT.

Thanks, ritenerek^talk :) 01:29, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ritenerek: Welcome! Template:DISPLAYTITLE says it can be used anywhere within an article. However, it's usually placed at the top (before the article content). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:35, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Okay, GoingBatty, cheers! ritenerek^talk :) 01:39, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Edit count

Is there any way I can view my edit count? LOMRJYO_(About) ^(contribs) 02:21, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Lomrjyo: Welcome to the Teahouse! At the top right corner of any page, click Preferences. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Lomrjyo, and welcome to the Teahouse! There are a couple ways to do this. For starters, if you're on desktop and go up to your 'Preferences' tab, you can view it under 'Basic information'. Likewise, for more advanced information, you can go to your 'Contributions' page (also up top if you're on desktop), scroll to the bottom, and select 'Edit count'. In your case, that would return this webpage. Hope this helps, and congratulations on 200 edits! TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 02:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Warning: once you learn about xtools, you'll never stop checking, it's so satisfying. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 06:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

HUGGLE check HUGGLE check HUGGLE check! Although I've managed to stop it now, thankfully. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 09:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Other Than Engliish

If a editor is contributing to english wikipedia in a language ither than english, think he is contributing in japanese, then how should I warn him? ExclusiveEditor (talk) 03:44, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: Use one of the templates at Wikipedia:Welcoming_committee/Welcome_templates#Non-English. RudolfRed (talk) 03:51, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Election?

How is a administrator elected on Wikipedia? ExclusiveEditor (talk) 05:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: see WP:Requests for adminship. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 05:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

It's a small group! Only about 500 people with Administrator status are currently considered active (another 600 or so less active or have stopped participating in Wikipedia). David notMD (talk) 08:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

References

I am a newbie and I apparently have a problem with references and citing sources in the article named Fred Belloni. I have been reading several times about this subject and cannot seem to get it right. Thank you. Bello239 (talk) 11:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

It's not an article; it's a draft. It now has one long section. Within this, two assertions (or not) are referenced:

• "He was the only one"
• Either (A) "in the row of East Indies composers" or (B) "He was the only one in the row of East Indies composers".

However, "He was the only one" is, by itself, meaningless: He was the only one what? "[I]n the row of East Indies composers" doesn't state anything; "He was the only one in the row of East Indies composers" raises the question: Which row?

I don't like to say this, but these two references are, as they stand, worthless.

The rest of the section is unreferenced.

William Walton is another article on a composer. It's much longer, and much better referenced. Length is not necessary; good referencing is. Please examine the article William Walton to see how it's done. -- Hoary (talk) 13:00, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: draft is Draft:Fred Belloni. As Hoary wrote, ALL factual statements about Belloni must be supported by citations. Equally important, the style of writing is not encyclopedic. David notMD (talk) 15:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Self vandalizing and reverting

If a user is vandalizing and then reverting those edit himself then what warning should be given? ExclusiveEditor (talk) 14:24, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

ExclusiveEditor, I would say still the same warning, as they're still vandalizing. Perhaps you could also say disruptive editing. βӪᑸᙥӴ • Talk • Contribs 14:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: Hard to say without knowing the real specifics; looking at the edits, seeing how many and their contours; knowing the user name and studying what's going on. Maybe a tailored warning essentially saying "what the hell is X about" or maybe a block's in order. Can you disclose?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Merger deadlock

I recently started my first attempted merge proposal at Talk:Mosaic theory (litigation). It's kind of a complicated one, but it felt important enough for me to try to do it. One of the editors I pinged for comment came back and—they were not happy (and rude). It's only us two on the talk page, and I think we're just going to be deadlocked with WP:NOCONSENSUS. What can I do (without seeming to WP:FORUMSHOP)? —Wingedserif (talk) 14:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Wingedserif: I was originally going to suggest putting in a request for comment, but the RFC pages says to NOT do that for mergers. Instead, as Wikipedia:Merging#Notify involved users (optional) suggests, you can ping others who have edited the page in the past to comment. Good luck - hopefully you can come to an amicable resolution; TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:29, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Article regarding historical/genealogical organization

I did some basic editing for an historical group I belong to, and apparently all of the edits were accepted. Then I wrote a brief, original article about the umbrella organization that curates and guides these types of historical groups. It's been in existence since 2002, and has wide breadth within the field of history and genealogy...and certainly does not market or fundraise in any way. I linked it properly...it was tight. (Maybe someone could review it my finite history), and I immediately received a "this article has been flagged for instant deletion" from a wiki editor (Valdemar2018) who appears to be an expert in writing articles on insects...which is all good; but perhaps not the person to vet the nature of my topic. There did not seem to be an explanation about why my article was going to be deleted...not sure if it actually was deleted...but I'm wondering if perhaps I teed it up in the wrong location or something. It certainly has significant relevance in juxtaposition to the many societies and organizations in wikipedia that come under its purview, so it did not seem logical at all...and happened almost instantly. I "appealed" the instant deletion decision and made my case, and received the final note:

"the user page is not for to create articles, also the content is in your sandbox. Regards Valdemar2018 (talk) 05:57, 27 February 2021 (UTC)"

Anyway, just making the effort to add to the corpus of my area of expertise, with content that is not trivial, self-serving or profit-driven...but absolutely appropriate. What am I missing?

Many thanks.

Barry C. Howard Barrychoward (talk) 15:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Barrychoward, and welcome to the Teahouse. Based on what I'm seeing at User:Barrychoward, you have indeed written in the wrong place. That page is for, if you want, to write a little bit about who you are and what you do/want to do on WP. Start a WP:DRAFTS instead. You can just copypaste the current text for starters. Next, in no particular order, you need to get rid of the in-text external links, and apply the art of inline citations, see WP:TUTORIAL, and consider the guidance at WP:NORG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok, userpage now gone, but if you want, you can ask for a so called WP:REFUND. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

I see now you made User talk:Barrychoward/sandbox, good (forget the WP:DRAFTS bit). So, if this is to be accepted as a WP-article, WP:NORG is your hurdle. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:43, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Turned one of your in-text external links to a reference. David notMD (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

I have draftified the content (and left a detailed message at user's talk page about some relevant nstandards and how to submit to AfC).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:13, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Who is Tikashi6969? + Should I do not vandalize Wikipedia?

When I go to the old revision of "Tikashi6969" of the Emirates on 8 February, there's an title "is the Sh*tiest airline in the world. its overpriced and sucks. end of story." It later reverted at same UTC (22:42). On 10 February, I saw that "Tikashi6969" has been blocked without expiration (also as "indefinite"), as resulting vandalizing Wikipedia. Should I do not vandalizing Wikipedia and getting blocked indefinitely? Lkas123 (talk) 15:55, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Lkas123: Welcome to the Teahouse! I do not know who "Tikashi6969" is, but they weren't here to improve the encyclopedia. Their vandalism has been reverted, and the user has been blocked. On the other hand, your edits look like you are acting in good faith to improve Wikipedia articles. Keep up the good work! GoingBatty (talk) 16:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Well, yes, do not vandalize articles! I reverted your edit to Emirates (airline), as in my opinion, the wording was better before. However, I also consider that your edit was a good faith attempt to improve the article versus vandalism. David notMD (talk) 16:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Pre-translation cleanup

The article about my company's product (PolyAnalyst) presently has a cleanup tag. I have done some work to make it neutral, but it is hard for me to judge neutrality with my COI. The thing is, we are preparing to translate this article into five other languages (Russian, Chinese, Korean, French, and German), so I would like for it to be neutral first to aviod multiplying any potential bias problems by five. Is anyone here willing to help with the cleanup or verify neutrality? Sam at Megaputer (talk) 16:07, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Sam at Megaputer: Since you have a COI, you should not be editing the article directly. In the future, please post your suggestions at the article talk page (Talk:PolyAnalyst) with a {{request edit}} template, and an uninvolved editor can assist you. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 16:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty:: Thanks for cleaning up the formatting. You got any comments on neutrality? Those neutrality templates are supposed to facilitate cleanup, and not just hang there indefinitely as a badge of shame, but sometimes it feels like they are used that way. Any comments or edits that you would like to make on this subject are quite welcome. Sam at Megaputer (talk) 18:08, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Sam at Megaputer: I'm much better at cleaning up formatting than determining what and how to rewrite to resolve the {{Paid contributions}} tag that Theroadislong added a few weeks ago. Maybe Theroadislong will have some comments. (I do wish the template had a date on it.) GoingBatty (talk) 21:49, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Is United's 777-200ER have been retired, like Delta Air Lines?

When I saw the United Airlines fleet, there's something missing, there's no 777-200ER. United has 19 Boeing 777-200 (non extended range) and 55 Boeing 777-200ER, but when I saw, it was combined to non extended range version from 19 to 74 by Realbruno and the Realbruno's describe changes written "United has 777-200 not 777-200er". Please someone fixed it. Lkas123 (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Lkas123: Welcome to the Teahouse! The best place to have a discussion about this article is on its talk page: Talk:United Airlines fleet. If you can, provide a published reliable source to support your suggestion. I hope you and Realbruno (and others) can come to the appropriate consensus. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:41, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Removing of red flag From Tess Onwueme page

 Courtesy link: Osonye Tess Onwueme

Most sorry about the Copyright links to the external homepage and any other problematic issues and errors indicated, I am New to Wiki posting and not familiar with your rules. Please, I would like the unacceptable changes I made removed Or revert to the previous Wiki content. Will greatly appreciate your restoring the Wiki page content with your red flag alert removed. Thanks for your understanding. Ginger Weird Man (talk) 16:47, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ginger Weird Man: the infringing text has already been removed from the current page revision, we are currently waiting for an admin to delete the infringin revisions. Until then, the red bordered box at the top has to stand. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

It is done. Please be aware, Ginger Weird Man, that the copyright issue was not the links you added, but the content that was copied from the links. We cite sources to verify information, but the information must be written in our own words (and not just at a surface level). Thank you for understanding.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC) P.S. The reverting user did not post a notice giving information on the infringement issue, so I have done so at your talk page using the template {{uw-copyright-new}} (nudge, nudge; wink, wink @ Cabayi).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:09, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

​Special:Diff/1009216007 ??? Cabayi (talk) 22:10, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Having Trouble adding previous teams played to infobox basketball Biography

Hi, Im editing a Basketball player bio page Aaron Pervis Williams and I need help with adding career history/previous teams played inside the info basketball biography template info box. The field is called 'years and teams'. I get an error message whenever trying to add information. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks! Feed2wiki (talk) 17:53, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Feed2wiki, while editing the infobox of Aaron Pervis Williams, you added a parameter named "years1,team1". But Infobox basketball biography does not support a parameter of that name. You can read Template:Infobox_basketball_biography/doc for a list of the parameters that it does support. They include "years1" and "team1", separately. Maproom (talk) 18:10, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Articles of living person without their photo

Why so many articles of biographies of persons are existing without their photos ? 223.178.144.61 (talk) 18:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Because no-one has found and added a suitable photo. The problem is often that there's no available copyright-free photo. Maproom (talk) 18:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a strict image use policy, and images need to be freely licenced. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi person editing from 223.178.144.61. For them to be used in Wikipedia articles, images must be:

1. in the public domain; or
2. released under a suitably free and compatible copyright license; or
3. used under fair use, but only if they meet all ten of the non-free content criteria.

Very few images will meet these requirements. In particular, with some limited exceptions, images of living persons can't meet the fair use criterion of "no free equivalent", because the possibility always exists, while they are alive, that someone can snap a photo somewhere and release it. Please note also that unlike many websites, where someone can license a non-free copyrighted image for use at that site, we don't allow this. For these reasons, many biography articles do not have any image, and many others have a non-professional quality image because the only one we can use was one taken at some random location by an amateur (rather than, e.g., a professional headshot) who then released the copyright of the image under a suitable license. And even this last is restricted – see Commons:Photographs of identifiable people. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:21, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Also, for living people, the third criteria mentioned above (fair use) cannot generally be used. Which is why many living people don't have photos. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:36, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

But it is wired and feels like incomplete. when a naive reader like do not see photo of the person related to that article.Many folks paste photos on WP from here and there under fair use policy.But still I don't know how to use this fair use policy and pick photo from somewhere and paste it on WP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.178.144.61 (talk) 10:12, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

The fair use policy accords with the Wikimedia Foundation's interpretation of US copyright law. Please either (A) make sure that you understand this policy (which is necessarily complex) or (B) don't upload photographs or other images for which you claim "fair use". -- Hoary (talk) 11:58, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Submit a draft for review

Hello, I published an article on Wiki in spanish and now I have translated it into english. There are some differences between the spanish wiki editor that I may not understand. What should I do to submit the article for review here? I can't find a button where it indicates it. Thanks --DianaMTancredi (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC) DianaMTancredi (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Fabiana Barreda.   Maproom (talk) 18:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@DianaMTancredi: I have added the submit button to your draft. For future reference, if your draft on the english Wikipedia does not have a submit button, you can place the code {{subst:submit}} (as it appears when viewing this page) to it to submit for review. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:34, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Banners

Someone recently pointed out to me that the class parameter for a Wikiproject banner is better left blank for Drafts and Redirects because those articles are likely to change in the future and the class is auto-populated simply by virtue of the article being in Draft or Redirect space. I was curious what the standard conventions for WikiProject banners in general, but I'm specifically interested in whether it would be better to have a shortened WikiProject banner for Categories and Files because they are unlikely to change, but would be auto-populated. Would a short banner without a class parameter be best or should the class be included? Or if it doesn't matter, what would you suggest? I would assume that it's best to keep a standard convention across a large number of articles so if I'm making sure it's one specific way for an entire WikiProject what would be ideal? TipsyElephant (talk) 18:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, please have a look over here, this might help Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia/Assessment CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@CommanderWaterford: Thank you, but I looked over that page and it doesn't seem to say anything about whether I should include those classes or not. It says "For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter", which implies that it's optional I guess. Is there a benefit to including the class? TipsyElephant (talk) 02:07, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Oh, never mind. There's a recommendation to ask somewhere else. Thank you! TipsyElephant (talk) 02:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

"salt" in the Wikipedia context?

Im involved in my first AfD process. In the discussion, people are referring to "salt", as in "consider salting" as if it's a type of page deletion. So, the stupid question: What is "salt" in this context? Rklahn (talk) 21:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Rklahn "Salt" refers to preventing the creation of an article in the first place, as in "salting the earth" to keep plants from growing. Articles are salted if they are repeatedly created and continually do not meet guidelines. 331dot (talk) 21:29, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Makes perfect sense. Thanks for the quick answer. Rklahn (talk) 21:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Rklahn: - See WP:SALT. GoingBatty (talk) 21:58, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Also see Salting the earth for the historical meaning. Given the value of this product in ancient times, salting the land of a defeated enemy may have been more symbolic than functional. David notMD (talk) 22:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

GoingBatty I spent a long time trying to find WP:SALT. I think I know where I went wrong. It's a type of page protection, not a type of deletion. Hopefully, this discussion gets indexed, and the next editor has an easier time. Rklahn (talk) 22:20, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Rklahn, here is a useful tip for finding policies, procedures and guidelines on Wikipedia. Type WP: in the search box, followed by a plausible keyword (in this case SALT). Most of the time, you can find what you want very quickly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

How to have custom fonts on Wikipedia?

I want to make Wikipedia display fonts that I want. NOT change the font that other people see, I just want to read it in a different font, specifically Fraktur.

How do I make it so that when I read Wikipedia, I see the German Fraktur font? I have squat computer programming experience. KleinesMurid (talk) 21:50, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@KleinesMurid: I haven't tried that before, but see Help:User style#Samples. GoingBatty (talk) 22:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

UV Light is the source of the fields and unifys the forces: Unification and the handwritten imagination of a mind out of time the sea

Extended content

UV Light is the source of the fields and unifys the forces as IT IS THE SOURCE OF ALL THE FIELDS Einstein was wrong in so much that the speed of light is only a constant for large things and can not be applied to very small thigs such as electrons. Action of non local distance and conservation of the strangeness can be conserved at great distance with a rederivation of the Einstein equation so that we can express the need for all things to be translated in space equally including time and the speed of light and in such Cause and effect and planks distance becomes a relativistic quantity. This is easily done using Faradays constant as unit by which can express all things as relative by the inverse of the square of the distance 3 sq root (X2 - 5). I have uploaded some equations Ive jotted down and scanned in and I see you like science so lets see if you are one the 12 people Richard Feynman mentions in the 1964 Messenger lectures that ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND RELATIVITY AND QUANTUM PROPOSITIONS. If we assume by dropping mistaken axiomatic logical and adopt a more Mayan wisdom to our mathematics then we can begin to understand Magnetisms role as a frequency of UV radiation and in such establish a unity between matter at the Faradays constant as this is the only co-ordinate that has any axiomatical mathematical potential to unlock the laws of that which is very small and apply it to that which is very large. My discovery however poses a serious problem however as Im sure you will understand molecular chaos theory and magnetic fields very well. We have removed all lumps of stuff acting on the big lump of iron in the centre of our lovely planet so we can look more lovely as idiots. Oh what fun but here's the kicker....TRIANGLES WILL SWEEP OUT AT EQUAL DISTANCES AT EQUAL TIMES NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU YOU WORK TO PROVE THIS THE NULL HYPOTHESIS. So now the fields are different, what's more is that now the lumps are getting more UV CHARGE than they were and the atoms are now jiggling (as my brother in arms Feynman would say) and niggling wrong ,,,so jiggling wrong in the wrong place. So now the ANGULAR MOMNRETUM has changed and tilted and you and I both know proof of a tilt in angular momentum would be hard to do in line with CAVENDISES weighing of us all so we would need another way to infer this, Lucky are we that you can tell a great deal about the surface tension and behaviour of a sphere by looking at its core. Ours has sped up since the nuclear era by 4.8 mph (or kmh I forget which I appologise)giving us the predicted outcome of a tilt in angular momentum.....CORE SUPER ROTATION Now they are pissin about with Apollo 11 type missions to space in order to drain the val allen belt which is pretty easy but those muppets know nothing of high energy protons or how to calculate G magnetic flux in relativistic terms. Nor to they know how to calculate the Quantum flux of the martian bluberrie using relativistic multhiphase flow equations. anyway Im sending this then Ill write out some equations scan them in and send them, over A Beautiful Mind

Feinsteinium77 (talk) 22:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Umm... What language is this? Words look like English... --CiaPan (talk) 23:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Feinsteinium77: If this is about an article, discuss on that article's talk page. Otherwise this may be WP:OR RudolfRed (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

I have blocked this editor because they are not here to build the encyclopedia. They are here only to promote their fringe theories. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:08, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Credit discrepancies between album releases

Hello. I am doing some work on the article for the album Operation: Doomsday but there are significant differences in production, writing, and feature credits between the original 1999 Fondle 'Em Records vinyl release, the 2001 Sub Verse Music re-release, and the 2011–present Metal Face Records re-release. I would think that the best thing to do would be to use the writing and production credits from the original 1999 Fondle 'Em Records vinyl release, but I'm not sure if there is a specific way that Wikipedia says you're supposed to handle discrepancies between album credits. Hostagecat (talk) 23:35, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Hostagecat: Hi there! Posting on the article's talk page was the right thing to do. It may take a few days for another editor to respond, so posting here an hour later was premature. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Album article style advice#Personnel might provide some guidance. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:17, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I was mostly wondering if there's like a WP: thing for it, like a rule standardized for all album articles. --Hostagecat (talk) 00:27, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I am a new contributor. I have something in sandbox and not clear on how to get it moved out to start process.

 Radicalmoney (talk) 23:47, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Radicalmoney: I moved your sandbox to Draft:Mara Leveritt for you. When you're ready to submit it (after converting the external links to references, for example), you can remove the <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags. GoingBatty (talk) 00:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

How to determine revert rule in articles

Hello. Just recently there have been a few seemingly non-constructive edits at the Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry page. I think that page may be under the 1RR rule (as opposed to the usual 3RR rule) but I am not sure. On some pages there is/has been a notification that shows when you are about to edit, informing you that 1RR is in effect, but on this page there seems not to be. How can I determine what the rule is there? Thank you very much. Skllagyook (talk) 23:54, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Skllagyook: see the banner on the talk page Talk:Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry. 1RR is in effect. RudolfRed (talk) 23:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Thank you. I see it. Skllagyook (talk) 00:48, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Notability requirements

Hi There. Because of the rise in interest of Spacial Sound and my direct role in rebirthing Quadraphonic music creation, I have been asked to publish a wikipedia article. I have very cited multiple credible articles and have satisfied the criteria of:

1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.[note 1] 7. Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.

i'm new to publishing on wikipedia, so any guidance would be helpful. thank you. KamranV (talk) 01:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Kamranv: Welcome to the Teahouse! I'm curious - who asked you to write the autobiography which is now at Draft:KamranV? In the "Spacial Music" section, I suggest adding a reference for the first sentence and additional references for the second. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:57, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Instructions I don't understand

I was curious what the instructions at the top of this article mean Category:Podcast logos and why you're supposed to do it. I looked through the current files and it appears that only a few follow the instructions. So why should anyone follow those instructions if simply adding the category like you would on a regular page does the same thing? TipsyElephant (talk) 01:38, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I think you intended to say: "I was curious what the instructions at the top of Category:Podcast logos mean and why you're supposed to do what they tell you to do." If this was indeed your intention: Because, I think, doing so not only adds the file to the category but also adds a warning template to it. -- Hoary (talk) 08:19, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Image Question

When uploading an official cover art via "Upload file > Upload a non-free file" there is a required field that says "Author (author / copyright owner of the original work)". I was curious what I should do if I don't know who the author is. Should enter "unknown", "NA", or something else entirely? If I already entered something like "unknown" for an image would that be cause for the image to be removed later? Also, how specific should I be about where I found the image? Can I just say the website or should I provide a link? TipsyElephant (talk) 01:44, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Welcome to the Teahouse! I would use the record label as the owner, and the full URL of where I found the image. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: What if the cover art is for a podcast? I guess use the network? But what if it's an independent podcast? TipsyElephant (talk) 02:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: I would list the podcast as the owner of the cover art. GoingBatty (talk) 02:05, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Non base 10 numerical systems

Non base 10 numerical systems Hello, I am new to wikipedia and want to create an article explaining numbering systems that are not base 10 and how those work and how to change those values into base 10. I searched for it, but I didn't find the thing that I wanted to write about. I'm just worried that I may have missed a page where the topic is written that I didn't find because I didn't put in the required keywords to find that search result. Is there anything I missed? Jsjsjjals83828 (talk) 03:32, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Positional notation and Decimal each have referenced content about systems that are not base 10. David notMD (talk) 03:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jsjsjjals83828: Category:Positional numeral systems has more related articles. GoingBatty (talk) 03:44, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

BOXING

Here you list Willard Bean as World Champion' ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willard_Bean ). Why do you not have his name listed here? ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_middleweight_boxing_champions ) PLEASE CORRECT. 69.11.65.11 (talk) 05:47, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP 69.11.65.11. The content about this in Willard Bean states as follows:

In 1905, Bean claimed the title of middleweight champion of the world. Although it was not until 1910 with the formation of the International Boxing Union that world title fights were created, until that time champions were generally recognized by public acclamation. The World Middleweight boxing champion at the time was Tommy Ryan.

Perhaps the reason Bean isn't listed in List of world middleweight boxing champions is because he only claimed the title, and wasn't recognized as the world champion at the time. If this isn't correct, then you can discuss this at Talk:Willard Bean or Talk:List of world middleweight boxing champions and see what others might think. You should, however, be prepared to provide a citation to a reliable source which supports such any changes you want made to either article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

dead link

may I change the dead link to a good one? Rishi1010 (talk) 06:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Rishi1010. Please see WP:DEADREF for more on this, but a dead link isn't necessarily removed just because it's dead. So, if by "good one" you mean that you found an archived version of the dead link, then you can add that to the original citation containing the dead link. If, on the other hand, you mean you find a new source that supports the same content as the dead link, then you can add that as a "new" citation in addition to the dead link one. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:28, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

If by "a good one" you mean a link to healthynord.com, then no you may not. -- Hoary (talk) 08:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

no follow backlinks

Sir, may I get a no-follow backlink from Wikipedia. My content is full of information and it is valuable. Rishi1010 (talk) 07:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

If you are asking about healthynord.com, you may still not add that to any Wikipedia articles. Please read the information on your user talk page. It contains links (the words in blue) to explanations. --bonadea contributions talk 08:10, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Create page

How do I create a page? Mrcow20069 (talk) 08:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Mrcow20069 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Successfully creating a new article(not just a "page") is one of the hardest things to do here on Wikipedia. It takes much time, effort, and practice. You will greatly increase your chances of success if you gain experience first by editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. That will help you learn about some of the various policies and guidelines that there are. Users who dive right in to creating articles often end up disappointed and with hurt feelings as something they worked hours on is mercilessly edited and even deleted by others. I don't want to see you have bad feelings so I would recommend that you not dive in just yet. It would be a good idea for you to use the new user tutorial.

If you still want to attempt to create a new article, you should read Your First Article, and then, if the subject meets the Wikipedia definition of notability and you have at least three independent reliable sources with significant coverage, you can create and submit a draft using Articles for Creation. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

How to request for new article ?

Hello , Many subject and issue do not have articles on WP.I am from India's Maharashtra state.I think many issues about around deserve articles.I think WP is not just place to make article about notable peoples ,film stars and politicians.As WP community we must have to make articles on the issue and burning topics like about farmers bad situation in Maharashtra , Women's rights.I am mentioning , suggesting some title and topics should deserve article - Agriculture in Maharashtra , Farmers suicide in Vidharbha , North Maharashtra (Geographical region of northern Maharashtra) , British rule in Maharashtra , Maharashtra wildlife , Wildlife sanctuaries in India , Rivers of India , Droughts in Maharashtra , Crime against womens in India , Domestic violence against womens in India / Maharashtra , Police corruption in Maharashtra , Corruption in Government offices in Maharashtra/India.If WP community think some of these topics deserve seperate article please create it. 223.178.144.61 (talk) 10:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You can request that articles be created at Requested Articles, though there is a severe backlog there, to the point where it will be a long time before your requests are acted on, if ever. The best way to see that an article is written is to do it yourself using Articles for Creation and after you read YOur First Article, but you will want to learn about the process first, and maybe edit some existing articles, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. 331dot (talk) 10:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

331dot Thanks brother for responding all the way from my favourite country England.I did this before reading your suggestion.I created a article about a small village in India - Kothadi but so far it is not live.You can see it : Draft: Kothadi.If it takes so much time I start feeling I'm wasting my precious time.If some educated folks like join me to create these articles it'll be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.178.144.61 (talk) 10:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Great start on a valid-looking article. Needs ref for the population and the literacy information. David notMD (talk) 12:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Drafts don't go "live" automatically. If you think your draft is ready, you can use this link: WP:SUBMIT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:36, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

How to write successor , previous office holder name in Infobox ?

Hello friends , while editing a article about former office holder Eknath Khadse , politician.I am not able to add his previous office holder's name , Chief minister's name in which cabinet he was minister.Also not able to add governor name.I tried to add by visual and non visual way , but I couldn't.I think Infobox office holder don't have these options.that man was three times minister.Can someone fix this issue. 223.178.144.61 (talk) 10:49, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

In {{Infobox officeholder}}, you can populate the existing |predecessor1= and |predecessor2=, and add |predecessor3= and |predecessor4=. If you would like further help, I suggest you post in the article's talk page: Talk:Eknath Khadse. Please provide a published reliable source for the information you would like added to the article as well. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:14, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

World Square revision undeletion

World Square revision undeletion User:Sphilbrick (talk) deleted the revision history of article World Square apparently due to copyright issue. It's not copyright and it is all gone all the hard work I put in. Please revert my edits and get everything back except for unintentional copyright is just the Future section of World Square using the article this site. --User:BugMenn(talk) 21:51, 28 February 2021 (UTC) BugMenn (talk) 10:51, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

You should probably discuss this issue on the talk page, first. Please also read the policy document about Copyright violations for more information - Cameron Dewe (talk) 11:13, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

PS: Please check your talk page and follow what you have politely been told to do by User:Sphilbrick, too. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 11:20, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

BugMenn Hi here Kundan Dhayade from India.you said someone deleted your edits.It could probably happened due to you copied lines from some other Websites's articles.copy paste WP don't allow.write everything in formal words in your language , do not copy exactly from website or book it's illegal under copyright law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.178.144.61 (talk) 11:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Bugmenn also contacted me on my talk page. I have provided an explanation of why rollback was used and what the editor can do to restore the non-copyrighted edits.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

How to create new Infobox ?

Can someone tell me how Infobox are create on WP. 223.178.144.61 (talk) 11:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, Infoboxes are one application of templates in articles. As such, you can find instructions on using them in on the template pages, for instance Template:Infobox_person#Usage. --Paul ❬talk❭ 12:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

(Resolved) Does removal of promotional information amounting to about half the article require a talk page discussion?

I removed some promotional information from the Wikipedia article about FIITJEE this morning, and returned less than an hour ago to remove some negative information from the article, because the newspapers that were used to cite the information had redacted the negative information and hence I couldn't find evidence that the information was true. I was reverted entirely, and was told to discuss the removal on the talk page. I've started a discussion there, but I want to know whether removal of promotional information like in this case requires a discussion. 45.251.33.44 (talk) 11:42, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, I believe your removal of info was correct. It was reverted because often large removals of text from articles by non-registered users (IPs), are flagged as potential vandalism, and can be reverted as such, as yours was. The text you removed was blatantly promotional, and while I appreciate you removing it, it is generally preferable to remove as little as possible and reword as much as possible. I've added a tag that adds the page to a list of articles that read like an advertisement, so hopefully someone should help clean it up, but in the meantime I suggest you don't try to remove info until Serols agrees. Thanks, Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 12:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Resolved

 – This issue has been resolved. I now understand that I could have avoided this issue by not making big changes without any discussion. 45.251.33.44 (talk) 12:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Hi I'm new to Wikipedia Sho majozi (talk) 13:08, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome! Do you have a question about editing? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:32, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Hi I'm new to Wikipedia how does this work Paris Benjamin (talk) 13:14, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Paris Benjamin. Try WP:ADVENTURE and WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Frustrated

Many, many times I have tried to improve an article someone deletes my hard work. I quit Wikipedia years ago for the very same thing, but figured I'd give it another chance, but it's happening again. I'm about to quit forever! 174.250.246.103 (talk) 13:16, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Since the IP you're currently using has 2 edits in total, it's hard to give any advice without more what/when/where. WP:COMMUNICATION may be of help to you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

What is Template:Reviewing request?

Can't find much more info on this template I stumbled across (can't remember what page I saw it on) and just wondering what it's used for and can you still edit an article that has it? Is it requesting review of unpatrolled new page and if not is there a template for that or just something that you wait for until page comes up in page curation queue? -- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 13:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC) HistoricalAccountings (talk) 13:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@HistoricalAccountings: The template is part of a series for standard stuff in discussions on Wikipedia. It is probbably intended to serve as a temporary status notification for request-like noticeboards such as WP:RFPP so that others are aware that somebody is looking into the issue, to reduce the number of times where two admins try to decide on a (very complicated) request simuntaiously.Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: Thank you, couldn't figure it out. Is there a template that can be added to a new page that hasn't been reviewed/patrolled yet or may have been overlooked or is that just something you wait out? -- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 13:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@HistoricalAccountings: unreviewed pages end up on Special:NewPagesFeed and can be filtered from there. You don't need to put some special tag on them. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:47, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Hi I'm new to Wikipedia how does this work Rose Bulma (talk) 13:35, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Rose Bulma: try Help:Introduction or the Wikipedia Adventure Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:38, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Looking for some help of native-language speakers interested in 1960s/70ies rock

Hello, I am new on wikipedia and wrote an article about the protometal band Poobah from Ohio (rock fans might be familiar with the name). I translated the article into english, but I am not a native speaker. I got a cleanup template message on the article and need some help to get it fixed. People with some knowledge of counterculture, psychedelic rock and similar things would be very welcome. The article is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poobah_(band) GegenkulturForschung (talk) 13:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC) GegenkulturForschung (talk) 13:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)