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.

Help

Wikipedia

How long does generally take to "Disciple" and New Christian ?

How long does generally take to "Disciple" and New Christian ? 2600:1700:8E41:4D40:1573:B9CD:CE98:1F91 (talk) 19:42, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Cullen328 (talk) 19:55, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

"Disciple" and "New Christian" are verbs? Who knew? David10244 (talk) 06:24, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@David10244 Wiktionary did! Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Wow. David10244 (talk) 03:44, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Help in what to include in article in order to get it approved

Hello. I need assistance in how to proceed in editing the article Draft:Sean Wheeler so that it can be approved. I have been editing it, following the instructions that several editors have suggested since I originally wrote it. On this last try, it was declined because of a lack of sources in the sections "discography", "1981", as well as for the birth date in the info box... so my questions are: 1- what kind of source is valid for the birth date in the info box? 2- the "1981" section does contain an independent source I included, which covers everything mentioned in that section... is this source not enough for that section? 3- will erasing the discography section (until finding the appropriate sources for it) help in the approval of this article? Thank you very much for your time. I appreciate all the help I can get Cachizalo (talk) 00:18, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Cachizalo, I notice that both File:Early picture of Mutual Hatred band with Sean Wheeler on vocals in early 80s.jpg and File:Mario Lalli and the Rubber Snake Charmers on Scandinavian summer tour 2022.jpg are your work. (Perhaps others are too, but I didn't look.) This suggests an unusually close relationship between yourself and your subject; or in Wikipedia-speak, a "conflict of interest". Comments? -- Hoary (talk) 00:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cachizalo: Welcome to the Teahouse!

1. Please provide the source that shows where you read what his birth date is.
2. The source in the 1981 section doesn't seem to mention The Sciotics, Bouncing Souldiers, Dr. Strangelove, Vein Train, Junkyard Angel, or Cactus Slim and the Other Desert Cities band.
3. Removing unsourced information - or providing reliable sources - will help.

Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cachizalo Not to pile on you, but editors often ask what kind of sources can be used for certain pieces of information. Or they have written a lot of material, and then they start looking for sources afterwards. As GoingBatty says, it's really very simple: "Where did you find that information in the first place?" If it is from a reliable source, then that's your reference. If it's not from a reliable source, then don't include the information. Good luck! David10244 (talk) 04:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

It takes a lot for the article to be accepted. If a draft is rejected, they usually explain why. Cwater1 (talk) 20:34, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Edit Request/Possible Data Innaccuracy

On the Climate of the United States article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_the_United_States), there is a section on extreme temperatures. Most of the information in there seems fine, except for 2 things: the June record low of -11F at Anaktuvuk Pass in Alaska is dubious because it seems like that year that the Anaktuvuk Pass weather station was having data errors. The other issue being the August record low of -6F at Snowshoe Lake, Alaska because when I looked at the climate data, it showed the coldest temperature ever recorded at Snowshoe Lake in August was 12.

Here are some sources:

https://xmacis.rcc-acis.org/

When you're in the page, there are some more steps you have to take to get to the data:

Single Station -> Monthly Summarized Data

Options Selection -> Output: Table, Variable: Min temp, Summary, Minimum, Year range: por-por (por stands for period of record, it will automatically take data from the first year data was recorded to the last)

Station Selection -> Search -> Anaktuvuk Pass -> Select the Anaktuvuk Auto weather station -> Click Go

This will bring up the coldest temperature recorded in each month (at the very bottom is the absolute records for each month) and you can see that in 1971 the data seems very erroneous. If you go back to the Single Station dropdown and select Daily Data for a Month and put 1971-06, and you'll see that the only data from that month was for a few days at the end of the month. You can do the same for other months in 1971 and most of them will show the same: just a few data at the end of the month. Infact, sometimes they are the exact same days with the exact same number in different months (for example May 1971 has the exact same data, doesn't seem right).

You can also do the same for the Monthly Summarized Data at Snowshoe Lake weather station (same steps as Anaktuvuk pass but different station name).

The source provided in the actual Wiki page is:

https://wrcc.dri.edu/Climsum.html

If you go here, there are also some steps:

Click on Alaska, click Anaktuvuk Auto (or scroll down to Snowshoe Lake). Scroll down on the left side of the page until you see Extreme Minimum, which also shows the coldest temperature recorded in each month for each year, as it did in the other page (absolute records for each month are also at bottom), and there isn't even data from 1971 for Anaktuvuk Pass, the coldest temperature recorded June shows as 12F. Similar for Snowshoe Lake: it has data from 1971 but the lowest wasn't at -6F, the record low for August there also shows as 12F.

If someone could find some more reliable sources for the June and August record low for the United States that would be great. So far the lowest temperature I've found for June is 8F at Mount Washington in 1945. I haven't looked into August temperatures yet.

Should the article be left like that until the actual values are found or should I just put in some preliminary data and keep looking? Akamaikai (talk) 03:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Akamaikai, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is much better to have discussions of an article on that article's talk page, where people with an interest in the subject are more likely to see it. ColinFine (talk) 11:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Akamaikai Regarding "it seems like that year that the Anaktuvuk Pass weather station was having data errors"; it seeming like it was an error is insufficient, there needs to be a reliable source that definitively says there was a data error or equipment malfunction that should discredit the information. 331dot (talk) 11:44, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

What if the source listed in the actual article shows that it didn't even happen? The source they listed doesn't even have any data for that year. And the other source listed has a different record from a different place. Akamaikai (talk) 14:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Interesting! You definitely should take this up at the article's talk page. Those who are frequent contributors or have an interest in that article will get notified and can respond! SpookyTwenty (talk) 15:28, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I mentioned it in the talk page. No response yet. I don't think many people look at that talk page considering the last time someone said anything in there before me was in December 2021.. Akamaikai (talk) 22:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Akamaikai, you could also try the talk page of WikiProject Weather. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

In addition to the IP user's suggestion, which is a good one, I'd say that the talk pages for articles can often go days or weeks with very little activity. My experience is that the parts of Wikipedia that involve interaction can be very quiet, with places like this the exception. SpookyTwenty (talk) 23:57, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

help for complate My article

 Courtesy link: Draft:Tamadon Investment Bank

Hi i need help for complate for my first article "Draft:Tamadon Investment Bank". Please help me for complate my article for Publish. Thank you Fsceo (talk) 05:14, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Fsceo Your draft has many issues but the most serious is that a major part of it is a copyright violation as it is taken directly from the bank's own website at this URL, as is obvious from the phrase fully committed to expanding our products and clients’ reach, strengthening our capital resources, and growing our business to create value for our clients. which should never appear in any Wikipedia article. You need to start again, after reading this advice and this advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Shouldn't the copyvio part be revdel'ed? David10244 (talk) 04:06, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Possibly, but it is only part of the draft and I'm not an admin, so I leave it to more experienced eyes who will be reading this Teahouse post to decide what to do. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:39, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Remove Earlier References

I have used a sample page of another personality for the template. After completing the editing I am unable to remove the references inserted by the earlier content user. Kindly Help! Nithinragavs (talk) 06:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Nithinragavs. I do not see why you are having a technical issue. I think that the far more important question is why you think that a person described as the "Honorary Consul General of The Republic of Palau to India" deserves a Wikipedia biography. That is by no means a strong claim to notability. Please explain why you think this person is notable, and what is your relationship with this person? Cullen328 (talk) 07:56, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @Cullen328 for the note. Firstly, I have resolved the issue by myself. Secondly any person who is working towards a good cause needs some kind of biography which can be looked into at a later date. The position he holds is not a permanent one but his works needs to be told through the page and that is what I am trying to do. I have met this person often at events where he mentors entrepreneurs especially women. He runs an NGO for underprivileged kids. So few reasons to create this page. Nithinragavs (talk) 09:53, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nithinragavs "any person who is working towards a good cause needs some kind of biography which can be looked into at a later date". Even if that is true, Wikipedia is not the place to write a biography on anyone who is working on a good cause, unless they are notable (click here). David10244 (talk) 04:21, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nithinragavs Encyclopedia articles are written in a dry, dispassionate tone. Remove phrases like "As a true visionary leader, he is looked upon by many as a guide and philiospher whose presence vibrates positivity, fondly known as "Guru"". David10244 (talk) 05:28, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nithinragavs, welcome to the Teahouse. Assuming this is about Draft:Dr Neeraj A Sharma. Did you notice that recerences actually are placed in the article text, not the reference section? Also, see WP:TUTORIAL on how to add references correctly, as of now you have several WP:EL:s in the text and that is not good enough. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

After first use of full name, all subsequent use of name should be surname (familial name) only, shich I guess is Sharma. David notMD (talk) 09:25, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thank you for the suggestions. Usually in India second name is not used much to identify a person. These surnames are very common and you will find about many Mr Sharmas' within a same region, hence the first name. I am referring the tutorial for the references section. Thanks again. Nithinragavs (talk) 09:57, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nithinragavs That may well be true in India, but Wikipedia's Manual of Style says to use surnames after the first mention. It's not likely that within one article the reader would get confused on who is being referred to. David10244 (talk) 04:08, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

IP vandalism deterrent?

I visited some celebrity articles to check their movie appearances, but the respective film/tv lists appeared to be heavily vandalized. The table cells were a mess! Upon checking their "View history" tabs to verify, there were about 4 or 5 IP addresses randomly editing and creating edit wars with numerous registered users. I'm not sure if the vandalism is/was being reported, but something's gotta give. Wouldn't it make sense to "convert" ALL wikipedia articles so that only registered users could edit anything?!?! All the wasted time on some of these articles with their long list of random IP reversions is sad, honestly. The "indefinite page protections" don't seem to be enough. Why not just block IP edits altogether in the first place? IP users don't even have a long-standing Talk page to communicate ideas about what they're doing wrong!

Converting wikipedia to "registered user only" edit mode would be beneficial to those who help move it forward. CYAce01 (talk) 11:09, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, CYAce01, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see WP:Perennial proposals#Prohibit anonymous users from editing for previous discussion on this. ColinFine (talk) 11:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@ColinFine: It doesn't seem those discussions went far and did much. What are the chances that the topic could be made into a wikipedia vote? Many wikipedia items get a voting system. Why not this topic? CYAce01 (talk) 16:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

CYAce01 Nothing on Wikipedia is decided by a vote, see WP:NOTAVOTE- decisions are made by consensus. If you were to dig pretty deep you would see this is an often discussed topic. In some ways it is preferable to have vandalism from IPs rather than from accounts. I don't wish to say why for security reasons, but people intent on vandalizing would find ways to do so even if forced to create accounts. 331dot (talk) 17:11, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@331dot: Sorry, but "Nothing on Wikipedia is decided by a vote..." is false. For example, the Arbitration Committee does their annual election process. In fact, there's a banner at the top of the screen during the event. There's even an annual announcement on my Talk page that states "...All eligible users are allowed to vote..." Key word: vote! The proposal discussions aren't doing justice! Let's finally put this IP address topic up for vote! CYAce01 (talk) 17:51, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are not related to Wikipedia content and policies; that's to what I was referring. 331dot (talk) 18:07, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Here's the latest "vote" I found in a quick search: Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF)/Archive 3#IP editing and Masked edits. Reading it, especially the closer's statement, might be useful to anyone who wants to take this up again. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:08, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

As noted, if you want to dive in and do the extensive work required to implement the policy change you want, you will have to do the research to see what objections there are or have been to the proposal, and write your formal proposal in a way to address those objections. This won't be as easy as it sounds, as it would need to have a broad discussion involving many editors. Again, please see WP:NOTAVOTE. Discussions are not conducted through a voting system as ArbCom elections are. 331dot (talk) 18:09, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

WP:NOTAVOTE also states that a poll is not forbidden. The proposals have obviously been brought up several times, but haven't done much justice. Wouldn't a poll help speed up the process in this never-ending "consensus" cycle? Why not try? CYAce01 (talk) 18:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Because consensus says that policy changes are not enacted through polls, @CYAce01. If you want to change that consensus, you'll need to make a proposal at one of the Village Pumps, where you've already been directed a few times. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

No, it wouldn't help. Polls are easily gamed as one person could create multiple accounts to participate. Very little, if anything, is ever final on Wikipedia, even through consensus, as consensus can change. I'm not sure what makes you think those intent on vandalizing won't just create accounts, but I don't need to know that. You've been told how you can proceed if you have the time to do the extensive work and research required to formulate a proposal and address the concerns of prior rejections. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@331dot: It doesn't appear that a poll on the topic has been attempted yet, so nobody knows if it will help or not, technically. The negativity and speedy rejection toward the option, without trying first, isn't helping matters. The fact that blocked IPs has been proposed so many times, by itself, speaks volumes. CYAce01 (talk) 03:49, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

If you want to try, go ahead and try, but as I said, you should only try if you have the time to do the extensive work and research required to formulate a proposal(which would need to be a formal Request for Comment most likely) and address the concerns of prior rejections. We aren't trying to be negative but what we are trying to say is that it isn't a quick and easy matter of just asking "hey let's ban IP editing", we're just trying to be honest with you. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@CYAce01, as the page ColinFine linked above says, If you feel you would still like to do one of these proposals, then raise it at the village pump. However, as it also says, you should address rebuttals raised in the past if you make a proposal along these lines. So you would need to do some research into the past discussions around this topic, then make a new proposal which includes a response to past objections. Note that IP masking is coming and may change how we all interact in the future, depending on how it's implemented. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Proposals after proposals...and IPs still getting away with vandalism. I still think a poll could work wonders here after so many years, regardless of what the policy says (still just my 2cents, but w/e). CYAce01 (talk) 19:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

CYAce01 – yes, a relatively tiny proportion of IPs vandalise; so do a great many people who register accounts, because registering an account is very easy. The vast majority of IPs do not vandalise. You may notice that I am an IP: I choose not to have an account for reasons I am comfortable with. I have been editing very regularly on Wikipedia as an IP for approaching 20 years and have never vandalised. Should I be blocked because of the acts of a relative handful of vandals? Some people in private cars drive irresponsibly and injure or kill others – should we ban all non-professional drivers? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.141.181 (talk) 21:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Governments do require people to register and demonstrate competency before being allowed to drive, so that might not be the best analogy for Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 22:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

But there is a difference between competency and professionalism. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@CYAce01 "I still think a poll could work wonders here after so many yesrs". Then start a poll! David10244 (talk) 04:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Sexualised content

Why does sexualised content get a platform here, yet so many worthy articles get rejected? What sort of precedence are you setting for our future selves? Do you understand the danger involved in the normalisation of degrading sexual content online? Get rid of it all NOW 2A00:23C6:B582:8501:A1DB:1DF6:6E49:BABC (talk) 11:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Wikipedia is not censored for any reason, as this is a project to write an encyclopedia of human knowledge. If certain content offends you, you shouldn't look at it. 331dot (talk) 11:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Additionally, if you had named the article in question we could have checked it for vandalism. (Edit: I'm assuming Belle Delphine is the article in question.)- X201 (talk) 11:50, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Personal attacks, like calling me scum, are not permitted. I can't speak to specific content that I am not aware of, you made a general statement. 331dot (talk) 11:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Starting an Articles for deletion is a valid path to have an article deleted. Calling for an article to be deleted on the Talk page of the article accomplishes nothing. David notMD (talk) 14:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

If you don't like what you see, don't visit the article. If you are curious about something though, you can visit another website if you wish not to see anything distrubing or learn how to hide certain images. Anything on Wikipedia is fair game and legal. Cwater1 (talk) 20:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Wait, if you didn't like what the person had to say, why did you read it? Herostratus (talk) 01:20, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Working on a draft for an article page, please help in reviewing the page

Hello members,

I've recently worked on a draft, which was declined (with very good insights). So I've tried to update the draft, with relevant sources and other related information. I need your inputs on the same, so that I can work on it and refine it in a better way. Please find the below draft link

Thank you for your time

Batreweydf (talk) 12:45, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Batreweydf Hello and welcome. You have submitted it for a review, so that is the way to get feedback. I will look at it and leave comments if need be. 331dot (talk) 12:49, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Batreweydf, first, the section "Business model" cites no sources. Why should the reader believe what it says? Secondly, the whole thing is written in a rather soporific corporate-speak. As an example, "Simplilearn's business model is centered around the sale of its online courses to individuals and organizations." Couldn't this be "Simplilearn sells online courses to individuals and organizations"? -- Hoary (talk) 12:55, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much @331dot for your valuable advice and support. I want to work on it again, and make it useful. Please advise Batreweydf (talk) 13:51, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

"Simplilearn sells online courses to individuals and organizations". Or, "Simplilearn sells online courses". David10244 (talk) 04:27, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The draft tells us more about its rounds of funding, and its acquisitions, than about its products. The section on "Product and services" is unreferenced. Does it actually have any products? Has anyone ever used one of its products, and written about it? As it exists, the draft gives the impression that the company may be a scam. There was a lot of that, a few years ago: set up a company, arrange multiple rounds of funding at ever-higher valuations, don't bother much with actual customers and turnover, and sell out to Softbank (which loves growth companies) at a profit to everyone. But I think Softbank has wised up to this trick. Maproom (talk) 16:04, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your valuable feedback.. I'm going to search for the references for the Products and services section, and update the same.. Batreweydf (talk) 05:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Nail Cicada

Draft:Nail_Cicada is a good redirect. OptimizeAllTheThings (talk) 14:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@OptimizeAllTheThingsHello, welcome to the teahouse, how can I help you? Lemonaka (talk) 15:18, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@OptimizeAllTheThings Welcome to the Teahouse! What makes this a good redirect? I don't see "Cicada" mentioned on the Neil Cicierega article. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:18, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@OptimizeAllTheThings For creating a redirect, you may follow Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Redirects_and_categories, but this is a poor direct, so I will discourage you from creating it. Lemonaka (talk) 15:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

It's easy to make that mistake:

Neil Cicierega

Nail Cicada OptimizeAllTheThings (talk) 09:39, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

You need to change three letters and remove three others to change from the "Neil Cicierega" to "Nail Cicada". If we wanted to create every redirect that is at most six letter change from the target, we would need more than 300 000 000 redirects for every page. For comparison, the number of articles in English Wikipedia is about 50 times less than that number.

The guideline to create redirects from misspellings is at WP:RTYPO. It says among other things if a single redirect contains multiple typos, it may be considered an unlikely search term and deleted. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:35, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Neil Sedaka? David10244 (talk) 08:04, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Declined article, more information

My draft, Draft:Solidarity_wage_policy, was declined for the given reasons of not citing reliable sources and reading as an essay. I'm uncertain about the second one, which appears stylistic.

The draft cites from two sources, both secondary sources, and draws its information from those. The Description section is a summary of the same information in cited resources. Schulten describes the purpose of a solidarity wage directly as preventing firms from responding to a competitive disadvantage by lowering their labor costs through wage reduction. Erixon also discusses this, along with the broader implications of the Rehn-Meidner model and some history. (I need to update the Schulten reference; it's a draft of DOI 10.1177/095968010282004, published in the European Journal of Industrial Relations, and a peer-reviewed source carries more weight.)

There are a number of things I did not cite, which I believe are in line with Wikipedia policy.

I didn't include sources for comparisons to a living wage because those comparisons are basic and supported by the relevant Wikipedia article itself, which details the several ways a living wage has been examined and described, all of which having to do with basic needs and cost of living rather than overall economic productivity. The article isn't about a living wage, so the wikilink should take the place of sourcing in that case.

The Comparison to a Living Wage section frames the solidarity wage against the living wage and gives basic implications. WP:NOR does not preclude basic calculations, such as comparing the inflation-adjusted minimum wage to a productivity-adjusted minimum wage. The difference in growth is substantial and only conveyed by this comparison. One could imagine a reader who feels that following productivity sounds "more fair," but was thinking more along the lines of $18/hr in 2021, while $25/hr in 2019 sounds ludicrous and, besides, that growth rate is fast. When I make political and theoretical arguments, which are not appropriate here, I propose that this rate of growth isn't "fast" but rather is fast relative to current policy; it is current policy that is slow. Politically, with this imaginary reader, simply not providing numbers is a way to persuade the reader (i.e. advocate for) that this policy which sounds more fair is better, as the suggestion is open-ended and doesn't run up against the degree to which the reader may believe the minimum wage should be higher. Because this omission can be persuasive, such comparisons are necessary as a means to remain objective and NPOV.

Raising minimum wage faster than what amounts to the average increase in total value (GDP) produced per hour worked is similar in nature to raising the minimum value in a set in greater proportion than the increase in the mean of the set (this should be obvious, but we're talking about mathematical reasoning on abstract economic concepts, so it's likely to be obvious in context to an economist but not a lay person). I feel it is valid and encyclopedic to explain clearly that the solidarity wage represents the maximum mathematically sustainable rate of minimum wage increase, and why that is. There are other interesting but not necessarily encyclopedic properties here, for example that any slower rate of minimum wage increase mathematically guarantees growing wage inequality (while this is true and trivially shown to be true, it's also a particularly powerful piece of political rhetoric).

That's information which I don't believe is original research, and which I believe could be left out specifically to shape the article into a persuasive (and thus POV) essay. That being the case, I believe this detail is necessary to retain NPOV; I will concede it is not as well written as I might like, not sure how to address that.

Okay, so now what do I do with it? John Moser (talk) 01:43, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Bluefoxicy, I did not read your whole comment.

The declining reviewer, User:S0091, said: Most of the content is unsourced. I think the sourcing is necessary. While your calculations seem to be correct, they still might be WP:UNDUE if secondary sources do not explicitly say that. You also need sources for the explicit data you mention.

Sentences like A solidarity wage is necessarily higher than a living wage in the long run, as it explicitly incorporates ..., Such disadvantages can only be addressed by investing in new productive capital ..., The per-hour GDP figures can only be known after the fact, so any solidarity minimum wage policy using this portion of labor productivity would set minimum wage to these levels in the following year or later. are non-trivial and should be sourced. Someone with no prior knowledge of economics might not immediately arrive at the conclusions you have, and you need to incorporate that knowledge into the article. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are "how to" advisors, but not content experts, so that huge block of text above no help. And yeah, in the draft, you have a lot of facts you got from somewhere,but not enough references. David notMD (talk) 04:19, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Bluefoxicy signing as John Moser. You state above that you are trying to write something that is "persuasive" and an "essay". If that is your goal, then I advise you to take your efforts to another website. Wikipedia does not include persuasive essays, with the exception of behind-the-scenes essays about editing Wikipedia. Article space consists of neutrally written encyclopedia articles, not persuasive essays. Cullen328 (talk) 06:46, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I think you misread the comment. I stated that if I were trying to write a persuasive essay, I would leave certain things out; and so I included those things to make the article NPOV. John Moser (talk) 17:32, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough, I got the GDP/H data from OECD and can cite that.

The part about competitive disadvantages is directly described in both cited sources.

As to a solidarity wage being higher than a living wage, I don't think anyone in the field has ever actually made the comparison because it's trivially obvious to an expert in the field. A living wage covers a standard of living; a solidarity wage bluntly just follows productivity, which means it increases luxury. Basically, if for every hour worked on average, 10% more were produced, the purchasing power of the solidarity wage would be 10% higher. That means you can buy 10% more. You can buy fancier food, a faster Internet subscription, more video games. This is so obvious to anyone familiar with macroeconomic wage policy that it's not worth mentioning. It'd be like telling someone that eating more donuts would result in consuming more calories from donuts.

That you can only look at collected empirical data after the fact is also obvious; but also so obvious that it is probably extraneous and I should just remove it. (I mean really, how are you supposed to know in January 2023 how much GDP was produced between January 2023 and December 2023?)

I don't know how often I'm supposed to put a reminder inline reference through the text I guess (blahblahblah[1] blahblahblahblah[1] blahbla[1] blah[1][2] blahblahblah[2] blahblah[1] 4 sentences 17 citations to the same source). John Moser (talk) 17:42, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

User abusing deletion power.

The user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Drmies

has gone on a deletion spree abusing the power they hold and deleting multiple pages with no issues. I'm going to ask that an Administrator reviews this user and also the pages they've recently deleted for no reason. On top of that they have deleted the page of a known Australian musician and i want to ask that that page be reviewed and potentially undeleted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Kidd Ausrapcontributor (talk) 02:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Seems to be part of a PAID (not upe) ring? Ausrapcontributor never created Big Kidd, it was created by Hakimj.

Anyways, to answer your question, I think User:Drmies isn't abusing admin powers. The summary says WP:G5, creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban. Might be something related with the above fact that someone else created the article and you are now 'reporting' it at the Teahouse. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:22, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I really think the pages that this user has recently deleted should be reviewed. There have been over 20 that have been deleted by this user in the past 24 hours that are not in violation of the reason this user states. As for Big Kidd

That page was not created by Hakimj

please check again and i want to request a review of Big Kidd and the others recently deleted within the Australian scene. They're not in violation of the reasons stated and an administrator that is not biased will see that. Thanks mate. Ausrapcontributor (talk) 02:32, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Ausrapcontributor, thanks for your comment, and next time please ping me, OK? Big Kidd was created by User:Medona of Arts, who is one of many blocked accounts by a person who's getting paid for writing up a ton such articles. So G5 is perfectly appropriate, since there are no substantial edits by other editors. Draft:Big Kidd was indeed created by Hakimj, and, eh, it was not good, and they were paid for it, and deleted for all the right reasons. And then it was recreated by User:MT320, who didn't declare a COI, and it was deleted, and then it was recreated by User:Revival938, who is blocked as a sock, and then it was moved and recreated by User:Honesty666, who is also blocked as a sock of Dictations. Shall I go on? I lost track of how many times it got deleted, including once via AfD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big Kidd (Rapper). So rather than undelete it, I am going to WP:SALT it, because this has gone on long enough. Drmies (talk) 02:46, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh, it was also created, twice, as Marcus Jacob Matthews, by someone who I suspect is Dictations. Drmies (talk) 02:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

• The place to make allegations of improper conduct by other users (including admins) is WP:ANI. Make sure to read the advice on top of that page before posting. Good luck. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:23, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
• Ehh, this is likely a meatpuppet or sockpuppet, I have warned them on TP. Lemonaka (talk) 11:31, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Confused about the rules

I’ve been trying to sort out all the rules about creating an article. I want to write a page for a framework I created and I would like to pay someone to do it. Is this permitted with full disclosure? Wshaia (talk) 02:26, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Wshaia! Welcome to the Teahouse! The rules on paid editing are complex, but yes, so long as the paid editor fully discloses that they are being paid and goes through the "Articles for Creation" process then it is allowed. The biggest problem is finding a paid editor who will be both honest about your chances so that you don't waste your money on an article that won't be accepted, and who is also honest about their status here - the vast majority of paid editors I see working on Wikipedia are banned, so even if they created the article, it would have to be deleted if it is discovered that it was created by a banned editor. You are actually much better off giving it a shot yourself and asking for help on the process. - Bilby (talk) 02:54, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Wshaia. If you created this "framework", then you have an obvious conflict of interest and need to conduct yourself very carefully. As for hiring a paid editor, I will express my personal but well-informed opinion that a large majority of paid Wikipedia editing services are unethical and fail to comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. A very large percentage of the articles produced by such companies end up being deleted. Your money would almost certainly be wasted. The few ethical companies tend to work for corporate clients and are very expensive. Cullen328 (talk) 03:00, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Wshaia I would add to the excellent advice here that Wikipedia is not interested in what you have to say about your own framework; it is only interested in what others wholly unconnected with it choose on their own to say about it, what we call independent reliable sources. If you just want to tell the world about your framework, you should use social media, a personal website or blog, or some other website where that is permitted. Wikipedia does not lead, it follows- Wikipedia is the last place that should have information on a topic, not the first. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft submission?

Hello, I have come across a draft that looks read to be published. How do I submit the draft now? I don't find any submission template on the page. Here Draft:First Y. S. Rajasekhara Reddy ministry 456legend(talk) 02:54, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

To me, 456legend, it doesn't look anywhere near ready to be published. All we learn is who was in it. What was/is this ministry noted for? What did it achieve? What did it fail to achieve? What (if anything) did it just timidly ignore? But I do read in it that it was the immediate successor to the second N. Chandrababu Naidu ministry, whose article burbles on at considerable length about who was who in that ministry, but keeps shtum about what, if anything, the ministry did. -- Hoary (talk) 04:58, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

However, 456legend, I should answer your question. Just add {{subst:AfC draft|456legend}} to the top of the draft. This will provide you with a submit option. When you take this option is for you to decide. -- Hoary (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hoary Okay, I got it. I will consider these points and only submit it after that. But yes I wanted to know how am I supposed to add a submission template. Thanks for that along with the suggestion.456legend(talk) 05:43, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hoary Hi, I have another doubt can you please clarify it? The doubt is, Am I supposed to insert the name of the person who created the draft page or is it fine to put my name in the submission template as saod by you in the earlier answer/reply. Just checking bc I haven't created the page but only contributed.456legend(talk) 03:15, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Moved List of monarchs by time

Draft:Move/List of monarchs by time → List of monarchs by time pls move @Tails Wx 122.52.27.204 (talk) 03:53, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

No. Please see this previous discussion. -- Hoary (talk) 04:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't know why they pinged me randomly, but it's something! Tails Wx 04:24, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

IP user: You appear to be evading a previous block for abusing multiple accounts, and I have now deleted your repeatedly recreated draft per this discussion. You have been told the page is nonsensical, and that one already exists, so why continue wasting your time and ours? If you have a view you want to express about page improvements, do so on the appropriate talk page of the article please. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:45, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

everything is ok but my article was declined everytime

everything is ok but my article was declined everytime but i use sources which is used on other article which is already published on wikipedia my page link is Draft:Gournagar Qnique (talk) 03:59, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Qnique, let me quote the text of your "article" in its entirety: "Gournagar is a village in the Khowai district of Tripura state of India." That's all. No more. It's not something that I'd call a draft for an article. Do reliable sources say no more about the village? -- Hoary (talk) 04:08, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello Qnique. If you read Help:Your first article you will see that one of the Things To Avoid is: “A single sentence or only a website link. Articles need to have real content of their own.” One sentence is not enough for an article. I looked at your references and learned what the village population is. That’s one bit of information to include. Has there ever been books or articles published that state any of the following: when the village was founded, who founded it, if the village has a school, any elected officials, any businesses?

Reliable references don’t have to be on the Internet. Look for published information that you can add to your draft article. Karenthewriter (talk) 05:38, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Well said. Also, the topography: Why is the village where it is? Is it on a river? Et cetera. -- Hoary (talk) 05:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Qnique. That is not an encyclopedia article. It is basically a trivial database entry. Surely you can do better than that. Cullen328 (talk) 07:11, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Refs do not have to be in English. David notMD (talk) 11:25, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Requesting assist on my new page

Hi, I've created a new article Mehzeb Chowdhury, and although I think it is suitable, I'd appreciate some assistance on the page to make it even better. Thanks. Mobasshir Rahman 06:00, 15 February 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xkalponik (talk • contribs)

Xkalponik, we read that this man "is an author, inventor, instructor, journalist, criminologist, criminal law barrister, social sciences researcher, filmmaker, and songwriter." This is a formidable range. Is he really notable in all of these? Cut from the introduction those in which he isn't really notable. It continues: "He is known for his invention of the MABMAT Crime Scene Imaging Rover." This suggests (though of course it doesn't say) that the invention of this thing is what he's primarily known for. Is he? If so, then it's rather odd that MABMAT Crime Scene Imaging Rover is a red link. I mean, Wikipedia is pretty compendious these days; can somebody really be notable if their primary notability is the invention of something about which no Wikipedia editor has bothered to create an article? -- Hoary (talk) 07:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary I appreciate ur feedback. By the way, there is indeed an article on his invention.MABMAT (rover) Mobasshir Rahman 11:22, 15 February 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xkalponik (talk • contribs)

Definitely a multi-talented man, but I removed a few of the career claims that were not referenced. David notMD (talk) 11:34, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft declined

Hi! I submitted a draft for an article about our company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Niedax_Group, but it was declined, because it did not qualify. I don't know what else to put there to make it qualify. Could you assist me here? Anne.Dimarakis (talk) 08:55, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Anne.Dimarakis, welcome to the Teahouse. One possibility is that, per Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), you can't. "Not have an article on X" is a common WP "solution." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:13, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Hey. I don't quite get it. What can I do now? Anne.Dimarakis (talk) 11:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Anne.Dimarakis, are there "multiple published sources" about the subject that are: (i) "in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)" and (ii) "reliable" and (iii) "secondary" and (iv) "strictly independent of the subject"? If so, excellent: cite them. If not, give up the attempt to create an article. -- Hoary (talk) 11:30, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Half the refs are to the company's own website. That does nothing toward establishing notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word, as what the company writes about itself is not independent. David notMD (talk) 11:39, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Your first (not only) hurdle is WP:N. Nothing by the company helps here (may have some WP:ABOUTSELF use, but irrelevant for now). Refs like [1] are clearly [2] not independent either. I see there's a German-WP Niedax Group, but unless there's WP:N-good sources there, it doesn't help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:17, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Declined draft

Hello, I made a draft about the company I'm currently working for Draft:NAFFCO: Vehicle Identification Numbers (VIN codes). I just need an advise if it is advisable to put the article inside of our existing company article (NAFFCO) instead of making it an independent article? JLGM1998 (talk) 09:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@JLGM1998 Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for your question. We already have an article on Vehicle identification number, so we do not need a second. Nor do I see how the huge amount of detail you put in your draft relates to your employer, which makes fire-fighting equipment. A VIN code seems overtly trivial for any machines made by this company. I do not recommend you progress with this. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@JLGM1998 Having looked at your talk page unblock request, I feel you are close to straying into territory you promised to stay away from. I recognise that you had this discussion with User:JBW about this article, but I feel your bosses are unreasonably expecting you to edit Wikipedia as part of your job. My advice is that you explain to them that they have no say in what goes onto Wikipedia, and that you will be blocked again from editing if you try. It would be better to find other unrelated topics to write about, or steer clear of Wikipedia entirely. I'm sorry to be blunt, but this will avoid you wasting your own time and ours. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:33, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia has Vehicle identification number, which has existed since 2003. Your draft as written serves no value, and should be deleted. To do that, put DB-author inside double curly brackets {{ }} at the top. As to adding something short about VIN to the NAFFCO article, how would that improve readers' understanding of what NAFFCO is and does? David notMD (talk) 11:52, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

The existing article does a poor job of explaining what NAFFCO is, which appears to be a company that provides fire-fighting vehicles and equipment, and also installs and manages fire extinguishing systems in buildings. A useful addition would be describing all that - with reliable source references - and also reviewing the existing refs for weaknesses (dead refs, interviews (not considered independent), refs for relatively minor awards, etc. David notMD (talk) 12:06, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@JLGM1998: Thank you for disclosing your employer on your user page. Since you are working for NAFFCO, you should not be updating Wikipedia's NAFFCO article directly. Instead, feel free to use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard to suggest improvements with reliable source references, and discuss them at Talk:NAFFCO. GoingBatty (talk) 16:25, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

How can I deal with a draft submitted by an unregistered IP?

Good afternoon!

I just wanted to ask a few questions about a draft I've recently run into and expanded by myself, which is about Swedish footballer Taha Ayari.

I think the article could be ready to get moved into the mainspace, as for WP:GNG, or at least in far better conditions than last time (@Eagleash rejected it, and rightfully so). However, it was originally created by an unregistered IP, which is likely subject to switch from a user to another.

If the AfC is ready, can I still accept it by myself? (I should address that I'm not registered as an official reviewer yet)

If yes, should I still send a notification to the IP's talk page?

Thanks to whoever will have time to reply.

Oltrepier (talk) 14:07, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Oltrepier: You probably should not be accepting drafts if you are not an actual reviewer yet. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf Fair enough... : D I'd be genuinely interested in signing up for that, though! Oltrepier (talk) 14:22, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Oltrepier: You can apply for the 'right' via this page, which also has details of the requirements etc. Eagleash (talk) 14:50, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

And you do appear to meet the citeria mentioned at WP:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:54, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Eagleash @Michael D. Turnbull Thank you, I'll take a look at it soon! Oltrepier (talk) 14:55, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

How to fix band navboxes?

On the page Twenty One Pilots, the navbox (I think that's what it is called) was broken. I got rid of it as a temporary fix, but I'm not sure how to fix navboxes. Please help me!

Balnibarbarian (talk) 14:59, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

It's an infobox. Arjayay has reinstated it, & added the }} characters at the end which had got lost. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:06, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Balnibarbarian (talk) 15:07, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Balnibarbarian, I have reinstated, and mended, the infobox, by re-adding }}
As for how do you detect the problem? I use the article's history page, looking at different earlier versions, until I find the edit that broke it, (in this case it was [3] this one} then look to see what has been added/subtracted. Broken boxes are very often due to unbalanced brackets, of several shapes, check the number of opening brackets and closing brackets and work out where the missing one should be . Arjayay (talk) 15:10, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind! Balnibarbarian (talk) 17:41, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Placement of inserted paragraph

I added a clarifying paragraph to an article and it was placed at the top of the article. I need to know how to move it lower in the article. thank you. CelestialBrightner (talk) 15:14, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @CelestialBrightner, welcome to the Teahouse. Your edit has been reverted for several reasons. Before getting to the problem of placement, it's more important to address the problem of sourcing. What is your source for the information you added? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

The source of the information I added was the commercial artist himself: my late husband Joe Traycheff. CelestialBrightner (talk) 16:32, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, CelestialBrightner. Anything that you learned through your relationship with your husband is considered original research and is not permitted on Wikipedia. Acceptable articles summarize published reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 17:03, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Please help me understand that a lie produced by a vice president of Tiffany is acceptable because a writer and then subsequent writers did not check their facts and published it at face value. ?? And Wiki continues to allow this falsehood? This event is an embarrassment to Tiffany and they are not likely to come clean about it. What recourse do we have? CelestialBrightner (talk) 17:55, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@CelestialBrightner, the goal of Wikipedia is to summarize what has been published in reliable sources, not to report what various people may believe to be the truth. If you can convince a reporter or researcher to look into the issue, and they then publish a story in a reputable newspaper or a book through a reputable publisher, then this will come within Wikipedia's purview. Until then, please do not attempt to use this platform to right great wrongs. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Ref #2 names Oscar as the creator of the design. If you can convince th Pro Football Hall of Fame to post a revision in it website - naming you husband - then he canbe creditied, with verification by the new ref. David notMD (talk) 03:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Formatting coords

Hello,

I am trying to add coordinates to Free State Gold Rush, which are 28.4541°S 26.7968°E.

Issue: Can't figure out the right syntax to get the coordinates to parse as 28.4541°S instead of 28.4541°N.

It is currently displaying 28.4541°N 26.7968°E, which is incorrect.
Assistance would be very appreciated, thank you.
Epifanove^💬 15:40, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Coordinates would not be appropriate IMO. This gold rush didn't happen in one mine, or one city. It happened in the entirety of Free State. If readers want the coords of Free State, they can look at the linked article. For that reason I will remove the coords. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 15:58, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Epifanove: Welcome to the Teahouse! Although the coordinates would not be appropriate for this article, please see Template:Coord to see the syntax for the template. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I see, thank you. Epifanove^💬 16:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Epifanove: For your future reference, the ISO 3166-2 country code for South Africa is ZA, not SA (which is the code for Saudi Arabia). And one indicates a south latitude, for decimal coordinates, by prefixing a hyphen to the numerical coordinate. Deor (talk) 00:07, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

That is very helpful, thank you. Epifanove^💬 00:14, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

User/talk page blanking

One thing I see a bit too much of is people blanking their own pages (or at least mass-deleting things) to "hide" warnings or "keep those idiots out of my turf". From what I know, that's something the rules say "isn't exactly sigma male behavior", but exactly how bad of an idea is it?

I ask this because I know of a few examples (which I won't drop) of known vandals having warning-ridden talk pages, and then blanking them once an admin hears about an instance. The cases I've seen have almost always ended with them blocked for unrelated reasons, though, which is kind of funny. cogsan (talk) 17:58, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san: Hello Cogsan! This is allowed per WP:NOTWALLOFSHAME as the warnings are still viewable in the revision history of the talk page. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Anyone can blank their talk page per WP:NOTWALLOFSHAME, but failure to listen may be a WP:IDHT. Tails Wx 18:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

It seems that's what most of those cases were, even if they ended up not being the cause of blocking.

So from what I understood, it really doesn't matter if the pages are blanked because some people know what the edit history function is for.

Thanks. cogsan (talk) 18:11, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the teahouse. The only thing cannot be blanked is rejected unblock request. However, I suggest archive the notice instead if you really don't like them show on talk page, which will be a better way than searching in history. Lemonaka (talk) 18:53, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I've seen at least one case of someone trying to do that, and THAT got reverted and ended with them losing talk page edit rights. cogsan (talk) 19:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I made it clear. Lemonaka (talk) 19:04, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of Page: Need Help asap

Hi, Recently a page for Sean Bielat was deleted based on a conclusion that he does not meet notable wiki guidelines. I tried to contact the admin, and while she did give me valauble advice and direct me here as a new wiki user, she did not respond to me asking about why his page was deemed not notable and if I could restore it.

So I guess I'm just coming here to see what anyone thinks I should do about this? Does anyone have any suggestions on how I can get his page reposted? Should I download the content from his old page and repost it with more citations this time? Or did I contact the wrong admin? I am very confused on what to do about this issue. Thanks so much! Sabrinalehman (talk) 19:22, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Has been deleted three times courtesy link WP:Articles for deletion/Sean Bielat (3rd nomination). Theroadislong (talk) 19:34, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Sabrinalehman, welcome to the Teahouse. Since the article was turned into a redirect as a result of an AfD, the place you need to go is Deletion review, but only if you believe you can meet the third criteria, i.e. if significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page. Do you have new sources, ones which were not already present in the article (you can see an old version here to check)? Have you read WP:NPOL and WP:GNG to make sure you understand the criteria? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:35, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank You!! I'm brand new to Wiki, so this is so helpful! These processes are very confusing and complicated. Sabrinalehman (talk) 19:47, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) "download the content from his old page and repost it with more citations" doesn't sound sensible. References aren't something you can add as an afterthought; they should be the basis of what you write. Instead of trying to create an article backwards, you should start at the beginning. Find several reliable independent sources with extensive discussion of Bielat, and write a draft based on them, citing them as you go. Maproom (talk) 19:36, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Fwiw, you can read the pre-redirect article here: [4] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:46, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank You!! Sabrinalehman (talk) 19:53, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Can Anyone also explain why the sources that were already provided on his page don't fit the Wiki notable guidelines? I'm not a regular user here and am not a writer, I am just tryong to get this page back up for him and could really use some help because this is not my expertise. Thanks so much for all the advice and help! Sabrinalehman (talk) 19:56, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Sabrinalehman, it's probably important to ask: do you have a personal or professional relationship of any kind with the article subject? It's not necessary for you to say what relationship if you'd prefer not to, just "yes" or "no". We have policies around editing with a conflict of interest. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Yes I am his and his wife's executive assistant! I'm sorry I had no clue that there were rules around this. Other professionals had been in contact with me to let me know his page was deleted and redirected. I will stop here if this is a violation of Wiki to try to repost his page. Also sorry I tried to delete the content here, to be quite honest the seriousness that was being imposed on me was kind of making me anxious. I had no idea that this was that serious!

If anyone is interested in rewriting his article that does not have a personal/professional relationship with him, it would be super highly appreciated! (: Sabrinalehman (talk) 20:30, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Sabrinalehman, you would qualify as a paid editor per WP:PAID, and would need to read and follow the instructions on that page; pay particular attention to the bits about making proper disclosures. It's tricky to operate as a paid editor here on Wikipedia, but not impossible. My advice would be to sit on this for a few days and read the various pages you've been linked to, then decide if you have the time and motivation to proceed. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:48, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I dont think I have the time for this no. But do you know if any other users would be interested in researching about him and recreating his page? I'm not sure how wiki works, do people just get randomly interested in an individual and then write about them on wiki? Is there a talk thread for asking others to research and write about topics? Thanks again for all the help! Sabrinalehman (talk) 20:54, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Sabrinalehman, believe it or not, that is indeed usually how it works. But groups of folks with similar interests do get together to form WikiProjects, which focus on particular subject areas. If you go to the talk page of WikiProject Politics, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics, and make a post asking for help there, someone might be willing to look into things. Maybe. We all sort of do what we like around here, and somehow it works.

I'd highly recommend showing the following page to your boss(es): An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. It's quite true, and may help explain things. Good luck! 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:00, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

You know what, after reading the article it is severly out of date, how do I try to get it reposted as an updated version? Sabrinalehman (talk) 20:03, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Sabrinalehman, you will need to go to Deletion review, as I said above. If you get it restored, it can be updated. Please also answer my question about a potential conflict of interest. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Sabrinalehman, please do not delete posts from this page. The section will eventually be archived. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:10, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Editing edit-a-thon dashboard in Outreach

Hi! Not sure what the proper forum would be but I was looking for any guidance on editing descriptions within the outreach dashboard platform - I found the following example and would love be able to use the bold/header features. As I am editing though I cannot seem to make anything work to get this look. Thanks! (example below, not my work)

https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/American_Physical_Society/Expanding_Space_in_Astrophysics_-_A_Wiki_Edit-a-thon_(April_10,_2022)/home CamrynBell (talk) 20:41, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @CamrynBell, welcome to the Teahouse. We're mostly focused here on giving help with using or editing English Wikipedia. A better place to ask might be at the Programs & Events Dashboard on meta. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:36, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Links to websites within text of a page vs. in citations

New to editing. Is it forbidden or generally frowned upon to create a hotlink to a non-Wikipedia page within text, say for example, to youtube or an established website?

I am getting the impression that citations are preferred, but the hotlink would be convenient for readers if it does not violate best practices. LBDon (talk) 21:03, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @LBDon, welcome to the Teahouse. That's referred to as an inline external link, and it is indeed generally frowned upon. As it says in the first paragraph of WP:EXTERNAL, External links normally should not be placed in the body of an article. You can read a lot more at the page I linked, but the basic idea is that if an external site contains information which you think is important, but you can't find a good way to include it as a reference, you should place it in a dedicated External links section at the end. But as this says, it's important to make sure Wikipedia doesn't turn into a collection of links - our focus is well-written encyclopedia articles. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:14, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks so much for the quick and useful reply. Definitely the impression I got, but felt the need to have a human confirm it. Grateful. LBDon (talk) 21:40, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

My status as a human is debated, but you're welcome. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:45, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Draftify, or add unsourced BLP banner?

A new article, Eider Mendoza Larrañaga, skipped AFC and was created in mainspace today. It has zero sourcing and is a WP:BLP violation. Should I send it to drafts, or add an unsourced BLP banner? Eider is a real person, and is in (political) office, with lots of search results that should allow for the article to be sourced without much trouble. I also think the article (on my initial glance) shows promise and looks to be well written, so I don't feel that gutting it for unsourced claims is appropriate, and it is not worthy of a del nom. Please advise. Thanks, Zinnober9 (talk) 23:12, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Zinnober9 I have prod it. Lemonaka (talk) 07:27, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Lemonaka @Zinnober9. There are over 20 sources at the corresponding article in the Basque language eu:Eider Mendoza, so the task is to find someone who knows that language and is motivated to include some of them. I don't know why G943 didn't do so when they created the English version. Also, Gandalf Grisa has worked on the Basque version as well as ours and presumably has the skills to transfer the sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I would have tagged it as unsourced and left the creating editor a comment, but the PROD notice on the creating editor's talk page has the same effect. David notMD (talk) 11:04, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

is it possible for me to make a page about my favorite youtubers?

I am simply curios if it is allowed Klaushouse2222 (talk) 00:58, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

No. WP is not a WP:WEBHOST. Please try Wikipedia:Directory of alternative outlets and see if y9ou can find a more appropriate venue. Heiro 01:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Klaushouse2222. Please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for some general information, but bascially it will come down to whether your favorite YouTubers meet Wikipedia:Notability. If they do, then articles about them can most likely be created; if not, then perhaps it's either too soon or will never be possible to try and do so. If you just want to create a fan page for these people, try one of these sites. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The youtuber I specifically was wondering about was Drew Durnil, a gaming and historical meme review channel with 1.31M subscribers. Klaushouse2222 (talk) 01:11, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The number of subscribers a YouTuber has doesn't automatically make them Wikipedia notable. Try asking about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Internet culture since one of the members of that WikiProject might be able to better assess whether Durnil meet a relevant Wikipedia notability guideline. For people, this is generally Wikipedia:Notability (people), but there may be a sub-guideline specific to YouTubers. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:20, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly, kind of, WP:NYOUTUBE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:44, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Question about the use of disturbing images

Hi all, I've been clicking around and editing the small articles in need of copy editing. I came up on this one on Wilfred Johnson, and I was surprised to see a pretty gnarly image of his murder scene, depicting his dead body. I read the 'FAQ' page on the use of disturbing images, which was largely ambiguous. I was curious if there are any guidelines or rules of thumb that more experienced editors have when it comes to this. I'm not sure, in this specific articles case, the image is certainly relevant, but I'm not sure it's 'educational.'

Thanks for your help!! MerlinCat2 (talk) 05:33, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MerlinCat2. I do not believe that this gory but non-specific image adds anything of genuine value to the article except for shock value. Wikipedia is not censored but shocking images should be used only when they clearly add to understanding of the topic. The editing guideline most applicable to this image, in my opinion, can be found at WP:GRATUITOUS. Cullen328 (talk) 05:50, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I removed it. 👍 Carpimaps (talk) 12:29, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

You want money? Really?

Wikipedia is asking for money from its readers in big, whiny ads on the top of pages. Still, Wikipedia just spent money on changing the layout to something much less readable, doing away with lists of contents and language links and other useful tools. How dare you? Don't ask for money when you just spent loads of it destroying the experience of Wikipedia, which used to be pretty nice. You should be ashamed of yourself. Shame! Shame! 2A00:801:707:A76F:0:0:3DD7:1803 (talk) 05:43, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Shame on you for entirely misrepresenting and misunderstanding the situation. Two can play the shame game. The volunteer editors who help out at the Teahouse have nothing to do with such controversial software upgrades, and nothing to do with fundraising. All of that is handled by the professionals at the Wikimedia Foundation, and volunteer editors have been struggling for many years to get the WMF to pay attention to our concerns. You just punched the wrong people. Cullen328 (talk) 05:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Plus, if you just spent five minutes registering an account, you would have much more privacy, and you could customize your user experience so that you could view Wikipedia using the old skin (which I prefer and use), and also never see a fundraising banner ever again. All you need to do is click a few buttons in "Preferences". Cullen328 (talk) 06:04, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Please avoid using personal attacks, this is against WP:CIV. No, nobody got or will get money except Wikimedia Foundation, we are volunteers. If you disagree with Foundation's behaviour, such as changing the layout to something much less readable, doing away with lists of contents and language links and other useful tools, please spoil your anger to them, not to us. Lemonaka (talk) 07:26, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia doesn't have ads, but it still needs money. The Wikimedia foundation has to pay for URLs somehow. the banner method is less intrusive than ads on other similar websites. would you rather have a banner pop up once every 40 minute, or have an ad float around while you scroll? and Vector (2022) is an ongoing debate. If you want to debate Vector(2022), consider registering an account and joining the debate! -Bad At This, The Kneecap Destroyer ^{(yell at me)} 13:23, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome and thank you for your question about donations! To hide the fundraising banners, you can create an account and uncheck Preferences → Banners → Fundraising. The Wikimedia Foundation does not track the identity of IP addresses, so it doesn't know your age, income level or whether you donated in the past.
None of the Wikipedia volunteer editors here who add and improve content in articles receive any financial benefit. We all simply contribute our time because we care about building a great encyclopedia for you and innumerable others around the world to use.
If you cannot afford it, no one wants you to donate. Wikipedia is not at risk of shutting down, and the Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts the Wikipedia platform and is asking for these donations, is richer than ever.
You are welcome to communicate directly with the donor-relations team by emailing donate@wikimedia.org. Thank you!

and

Are you asking about a sudden change to Wikipedia's appearance? It is because the default skin has changed from the Vector legacy (2010) skin to the new Vector (2022) skin. If you would like to change back to the old one, you can, as a registered user, click on the in the top-right corner and choose Preferences. Once there, go to Preferences → Appearance → Skins → Vector legacy (2010).
If you would like to leave feedback, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Vector 2022. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of page

Hi, i haven’t done this before but my page recently got deleted. I want to know if there is any possible way I can get a copy of it? I was really proud of it and I want to see it. - love, Alistar. Alistarrz (talk) 07:31, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@AlistarrzHello, welcome to the teahouse. For return a copy of deleted page, please read Wikipedia:REFUND Lemonaka (talk) 07:39, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Alistarrz. WP:REFUND wpouldn't apply if the page you're asking about is User:Alistarrz since that page was deleted per speedy deletion criterion U5. If that's the page you would like get a copy of, your best bet is to contact Wikipedia administrator Fastily at User talk:Fastily since they are the administrator who deleted the page. You can ask Fastily if they can send you a copy via email. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:21, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Alistarrz Whilst MarchJuly was right in what they said, your deleted user page was so way off what Wikipedia is about that it's unlikely that Fastily (a fellow administrator) will be willing to email you the contents of what it contained. This is a project to build an encyclopaedia, not a free-to-use platform for you to share information about your boyfriend - no matter how cute Jeremiah may be. If you aren't genuinely interested in improving a serious encyclopaedia, then I feel you would be better off making a personal blog on some other free platform. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:27, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Why?

Why don’t you have any information on Rhodesian ridgebacks but have the dogs name up but don’t know anything about them, they used to hunt lions in Africa long ago CourtnieCottrell (talk) 08:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. There is an article at Rhodesian Ridgeback. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:30, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

play sandbox

@Tails Wx play a sandbox 112.206.251.176 (talk) 08:52, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! the teahouse is a question forum for new editors, what is your question? also remember wikipedia is not social media! -Bad At This, The Kneecap Destroyer ^{(yell at me)} 14:37, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Wonder what's going on with people randomly pinging me. Anyways, they're trying to invite me to "play" at the sandbox ;) Tails Wx 18:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Always reverted

I was trying to add MRT (Singapore) station codes for future stations but everyone keeps reverting it. Nico27901925 (talk) 09:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hiya Nico! Welcome to the Teahouse! You may want to read WP:TOOSOON to understand why subway stops planned for the 2030s are not acceptable. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Josh B Hammer - Infobox Birthday

I was looking at Josh B. Hammer page and see that his infobox says he's 33, even though he just turned 34. I would have thought it would update automatically but it hasn't done so. Any idea why and how to fix it? MaskedSinger (talk) 11:06, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I did a WP:PURGE, and that seems to have fixed the problem. —Wasell^(T) 🌻🇺🇦 11:17, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh I see. Thank you!! MaskedSinger (talk) 11:18, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Clerkenwell crime syndicate

Can someone have a look at Clerkenwell crime syndicate a single purpose account editor has made mass deletions of articles without any comments, these articles were reliable, verifiable, independent hence they have been added back. Regards --Devokewater 11:59, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @Devokewater. Welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, these large scale, unexplained blanking of cited content is concerning. You could have activated WP:TWINKLE via your preferences which allows you to leave standard templated warning messages yourself. These could have been escalated if they continued. However, I have dropped the editor a notice asking them to start using Edit Summaries and have also taken the unusual step of leaving a high level warning to them that repeated unexplained content removal is liable to result in an editing block. Please continue to monitor the relevant articles and report them to WP:AIV if further warnings are not heeded. Reporting should occur after a 4th level warning has been given and only once the damaging activity continues with one or more subsequent edits. i.e. avoid a 'warn and immediately report' situation. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Devokewater Just to update you: I have toned down my warning to this editor as it would seem at that they have been trying to work on this article for some months. So, trying to WP:AGF I have asked them to ensure greater clarity in their edits in future to avoid being warned for vandalism. Please keep an eye on the page and communicate with/warn them if you are still concerned about any inappropriate or confusing editing behaviour. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Nick Moyes wasn't quite sure if this was vandalism or a genuine edit. Regards Devokewater 17:12, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Extent of COI editing

Just to be sure I haven't misread things. Using as an example a very clearly fictional writer named Mark Rex Woodman. If this guy were to edit his own page, while at least managing to keep the encyclopedic tone, then which of those scenarios would be okay?

Editing his name and profession, because he knows for a fact that his name is not "Fart Sex Woodman (nice >:])", and he's not an "AO3 degenerate", as his article currently says.

Adding info about some deed of his (like donating 300 bucks to Boy Next Door foundation) that hasn't been fully reported by reliable sources (like not discussing the value or when he donated).

Adding info that was made public at around the same time he made the edit, or a while after (like saying he bought the rights to understanding understanding the concept of love right before the interview where he announces it is released).

Adding info about his family, like his 2 year old babychild Regina Rex Smolitzer, that was made public and reported by reliable sources.

Talking about details that someone could get wrong on his talk page, "just in case", but only requesting edits on the case someone misreads info on reliable sources.

In order, I think they'd be...

Okay because removing vandalism is an uncontroversial edit;

Probably not worth mentioning if the news haven't bothered with it, and thus not okay;

Not okay because he did it too early, and most likely wouldn't be okay if he waited either, because of the COI issues;

Okay, but it'd only be worth mentioning Regina by name (or any traits she might have, like respiratory issues) if she herself was notable enough, otherwise who cares;

And lastly, ultimately okay, but kind of annoying.

How much of that is wrong, how much is right and how much depends on context? cogsan (talk) 14:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san Welcome to the Teahouse. The guidance is at WP:ASFAQ. Please read that carefully and if you have more questions, just ask them here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:18, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The only OK thing for that person to do would be to remove vandalism or blatantly false (unsubstantiated) content. All else should be done per an WP:EDITREQUEST, and they still ought to place a WP:COI notice on their userpage. 'Facts' known to the person, but not verifiable by anyone else need to stay well away from Wikipedia, as should WP:TRIVIA. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:32, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds about right. Thanks. cogsan (talk) 15:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san was that a silvagunner reference? Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 15:50, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

It was two of them. cogsan (talk) 15:57, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

adding court case

I am trying to add a court case into some reseach that I completed on cyberbullying Lpsherman1219 (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The referencing at Draft:Cybullying is a mess. There are three reference lists, and several error messages in among them. Where there's a link included, it never links to a relevant document. I suggest that you clean up the existing referencing before adding further references. (Also, the entire draft seems to be about US findings, though it doesn't say so.) Maproom (talk) 16:32, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

As noted at the draft, Cyberbullying exists. David notMD (talk) 18:43, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

which is sad Cwater1 (talk) 20:30, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

how do i add notes or footnotes or whatever?

I'm a bit new to using source editor and since footnotes don't work on visual editor I don't really know how to do them properly on source editor (or wikitext or however it's called). SignedInteger (talk) 16:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@SignedInteger: Welcome to the Teahouse. I think the guidance you're looking for is at Help:Footnotes. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

thank you! SignedInteger (talk) 17:52, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Trademark name infringement

Hello, I have a question regarding a trademark name. If the name is used on a Wikipedia article can the name of that article be removed if someone trademarks the name. Wikipedia is known to pop out in all search engines as the first article hindering the brand of that trademark. For example an artist trademarks their name for good and services. A Wikipedia article with that same name keeps popping up in search. Can it be edited? 107.115.227.65 (talk) 17:54, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP user. We follow our style guide at MOS:TM. Wikipedia does not treat trademarks in the same way as other publications (for example it does not use the ™ symbol). The only indication a word is a trademark (if it is used in a context where that is true) will be an initial capital. Article names are not altered just because someone has trademarked some word within it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:10, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Not without a good reason other that it being trademarked. If the name is there as a result of being properly cited and being relevant to the article, one would expect the name to be there. If SEO is an issue, I suggest that you deal with it through tinkering with that website and other SEO activities. We are not here to help promote one's good and services. – robertsky (talk) 18:14, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Having said that, it is reasonable for the Wikipedia article for the person to have a link to their official website, per WP:ELYES. So even if the person using the search engine ends up at the Wikipedia article, it will be easy for them to go to the official website as their next stop. GoingBatty (talk) 20:25, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

"can the name of that article be removed if someone trademarks the name"... Wikipedia can use a name in an article, and in an article title, even if the name is trademarked. David10244 (talk) 08:40, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Use of External Link vs. Reference

Appreciate explicit guidance on when it is appropriate to use an external link instead of a reference. My impression is that the links are to places that the reader might use to accomplish something practical vs. a citation that simply backs up information in the text?

Thank you! LBDon (talk) 17:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@LBDon Please read the guidance at WP:EL. In general, external links are not used in the body text of an article, so are not in themselves citations. Some external links can go in a special section at the foot of an article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I had read this, and actually was referring to the external links at the end of the page, not to inline links to external sources.

While having read the following: "Some acceptable external links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy." I am still unclear, and if more clarity is available I would be greatful.

I do not understand the difference between a citation (which may, indeed, also "contain further research that is accurate and on-topic" with what is pointed to by an external link at the bottom of the page. I don't believe that citations are off topic and inaccurate.

Is there a functional difference between the two? LBDon (talk) 18:42, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Inline citations are placed within the article text, and generate a superscript number which links to an entry in the "References" section. The "External links" section will normally contain not many entries, and provide information which doesn't support any specific part of the article text. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Michael, another way I might ask the question is: When would I use an external link at the bottom and NOT use a citation? When would I use a citation and NOT use an external link at the bottom? Any answer to those questions would really nail it:) LBDon (talk) 18:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@LBDon A citation is used to reference the source of information that is stated in the article. An external link is a convenience link to "further information" that is not already included in the article. The most common external link is the subject's own website. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft username

Hi, when inserting a draft submission template on a draft article, should I put the name of the creator of the draft page in the draft article submission template username column?? And am I allowed to submit the draft for review when I am a contributor to the article or is it that the person whose name is mentioned in the template username is solely allowed/responsible for the submission of the draft article? 456legend(talk) 18:25, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@456legend: Hello and welcome! For the username, it's best to put the username of the person who is shepherding the draft through the editing process. Even if its not the person who created the draft, it's more useful to know "who is going to be responding to questions or taking care of problems". The original creator is not necessarily the same as that person. That being said, we expect people to collaborate, and that includes drafts. No one person is responsible for anything at Wikipedia, and that includes draft articles. If there are multiple people collaborating on a draft, they can all work on it whenever they want. It's important to have at least one person who is taking responsibility, but it can be any number of people. --Jayron32 18:32, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Jayron32 Thank you very much for the detailed explanation. Recently I have been working on improving in a draft that has already been created by someone else and many other contributed on the article but it had got deserted and I have taken up the work in expanding it, so can I add my name to the username after the I completely finish the draft?456legend(talk) 18:39, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, exactly that. The username is just "who is the reviewer going to be communicating with". It doesn't limit other people from helping, it just gives the reviewer a single point of contact for communication. --Jayron32 18:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

okay thank you very much456legend(talk) 23:23, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Citing an appendix to a news source

I want to cite an appendix that was included with a newspaper, but how would I go about this? The original newspaper is called Nordlys, and the appendix is called Bilag Nordlys. They also have separate page counts (out of a total of 100 pages, the appendix comprises 40). Right now I have the following: Rein, Marit (25 January 2007). "Giftige rockere satser høyt" [Toxic Rockers Aim High]. Nordlys (in Norwegian Bokmål). Vol. 106, no. 16. p. 28. The problem is that both have a page 28, so how do I go about citing this? ArcticSeeress (talk) 18:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

If the appendix is called "Bilag Nordlys" I would have thought that you would change |work=Nordlys to |work=Bilag Nordlys. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I contemplated doing that, but then the volume and issue don't match up with the work the appendix is attached to. For reference, bilag is the Norwegian word for appendix, so I'm not sure the editors/publishers even consider it to be a separate work from the newspaper itself. ArcticSeeress (talk) 19:03, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikihow summarizes 3 styles and "Appendix of Nordlys" would seem to be how all three handle. Slywriter (talk) 19:15, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I suppose that would work, but then "Appendix to" would be italicised, which I'd rather avoid. Is there a way to supress the formatting of specific text within a citation template? ArcticSeeress (talk) 19:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@ArcticSeeress: Is it page 28 of the appendix? If so, maybe use the |at= parameter instead of |page=:

{{cite news |last=Rein |first=Marit |date=25 January 2007 |work=Nordlys |volume=106 |issue=16 |at=Appendix, p. 28 |title=Giftige rockere satser høyt |trans-title=Toxic Rockers Aim High |language=Norwegian Bokmål}}

Rein, Marit (25 January 2007). "Giftige rockere satser høyt" [Toxic Rockers Aim High]. Nordlys (in Norwegian Bokmål). Vol. 106, no. 16. Appendix, p. 28.

Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 20:32, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

That's perfect! Thanks for the help, folks. ArcticSeeress (talk) 20:38, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

New Page

Hi good day,

Our company would like to dedicate a page, or 2 depending on what is allowed that highlights and explains what is the difference between financial emigration, ceasing ones tax residency, and how it impacts ones life.

Please advise on the steps thereon,

Thank you 209.203.58.118 (talk) 18:45, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, please disclose your company in your userpage in accordance with WP:PAID, also read the Paid Editing Essay to make sure nothing you write violates NPOV

Hope this helps, and welcome to the teahouse!

-Bad At This, The Kneecap Destroyer ^{(yell at me)} 18:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Are you considering an article about the company, or about these two topics with no mention of the company? Also there is no "our" or "we" in Wikipedia. Each account and non-account IP must represent only one person. Lastly, be aware that Tax residence exists. David notMD (talk) 18:55, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. Because this is an encyclopaedia of notable topics, and not a 'how to do it manual', my first question would be to ask what existing articles you have identified here, and what information gap your proposal would fill? Then I'd ask what reliable, published sources you would base such an article on (but not your company's own website or other promotional site or service). If you genuinely think there is a gap, then the best way to start an article is to dedicate some time (weeks not hours) to learning how to edit Wikipedia and what its protocols are before ever attempting the hardest task anyone can do here: namely, creating an article from scratch. Then I'd point you to Help:Your first article and suggest you begin creating a draft which can be submitted for review and feedback when you think it's ready.

Creating a free account is a sensible move, too. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

In addition to all of the above, your company would need to fulfill WP:N for organizations, which are pretty stringent requirements. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Why do references keep moving to the table?

I'm not unintentionally making it go inside the table myself, am I?

Vostani Serbije (I'm trying to add Modern Serbian to the page, but I run into a multitude of problems when trying. After plugging all the leaks, this one is too strong for me to patch it myself. In my analogy, the leaks are the issues and confusion that came with editing the page, and the patching is me overcoming the issues. I can't figure out how to fix this issue. A little bit of help please? Kxeon (talk) 20:09, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Kxeon: Welcome to the Teahouse!  Fixed the table in this edit. When the References are listed in the table, it's a sign that you didn't properly end the table. See Help:Wikitable for more info. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Kxeon (talk) 21:45, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Duchy of Burgandy

My name is Enio de Carvalho Dias and my wife is Ana Celia Carvalho,"Gonzalez" . we met back in 1974 in New York City, and got married on March 22nd 1975. both myself and my wife are the direct descendant of Wlhelm Van der Haegen and his wife Margareth of Savoy, Duchyburgandy (talk) 20:45, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Duchyburgandy, welcome to the Teahouse. Is there anything you'd need help with? If you're looking to write an autobiography, keep in mind that they are heavily discouraged, as well as our conflict of interest policy. Silikonz💬 21:42, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Where to find articles needing grammar fixes or needing links to other pages?

Hi! I am new to Wikipedia and want to help edit. However, I cannot find articles that have the issues I am good at fixing. I have tried the recommended suggestions, though every one of them seem to not have the issues I am good at fixing. Is there a way I can search for articles such as these to fix them? Cinnacat (talk) 22:16, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Try here and here AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 22:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Cinnacat (talk) 22:28, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cinnacat: Welcome to the Teahouse. The community portal has some standard maintenance tasks under the "Help out" heading. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! Cinnacat (talk) 22:27, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cinnacat: Thank you for your eagerness to improve Wikipedia! To find articles needing grammar fixes, try doing searches for poor grammar such as "They is" insource:/ They is / and carefully review each article to see if it truly needs to be changed.

To find articles needing links to other pages, you can look at Category:All dead-end pages, which I review almost every day I'm onwiki. GoingBatty (talk) 04:58, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Editing my personal Wikipedia Page. (MaterialScientist denied changes.

Hello , How do I make changes (updates ) to my page without the bot reversing and locking me out of being able to edit my page. Cameradirector (talk) 23:06, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

(Courtsy link) Welcome to the teahouse Cameradirector! what page are you referring to? do you mean your Userpage? or a page about the real you? if its about the real you its a COI and you cant edit the page, you could leave a message in the talk page though! update: i checked your edit, and it qualifys as page blanking, large quantities of information have been removed for no discernable reason. if you want, you could include in explanation in your edit summery -Bad At This, The Kneecap Destroyer ^{(yell at me)} 23:29, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Cameradirector: Greetings, and welcome to the Teahouse. Assuming that you are John Stuart Scott, this is not "your personal page", but rather an encyclopedia article about you. As such we need to base the information therein primarily on reliable sources which are independent of the subject. In light of this, we strongly discourage the subjects of articles from directly editing these articles for conflict of interest reasons. Instead, it is preferred that you submit edit requests to the article's talk page, where they can be evaluated by experienced editors. --Finngall ^talk 23:40, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Cameradirector. When you write my personal Wikipedia Page, that indicates that you have a misunderstanding about this website. Wikipedia does not have "personal pages". Instead, it has neutrally written encyclopedia articles that summarize what reliable independent published sources say about the topic. Because you have a clear conflict of interest, you should confine yourself to making well-referenced , formal edit request at Talk: John Stuart Scott. Please read about article ownership. Cullen328 (talk) 23:53, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I removed date and place of birth because there is no ref to confirm that information David notMD (talk) 02:58, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Early life

Officialdonzil (talk) 01:48, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@Officialdonzil: Welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have a question about using Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 05:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Sourcing Issue

I submitted a draft of an article on a pharmaceutical executive Craig Tooman. I used citations from pharma and finance industry sources, some of which may have gotten their sourcing from press releases. The article was rejected as reading as too promotional and for questionable sources. In retrospect, I get the promotional criticism and I'm working on striping that down. What I don't get is the sourcing criticism. Major media organizations regurgitate press releases on a daily basis: earnings statements, hirings, firings, etc. Nobody says, "Tsk, tsk, New York Times, you are just quoting from a press release." Yet that seems to be the standard here. And if I cited a Times article that was, in fact, a rewrite of a press release, I doubt editors would question it. I'm new here, and maybe I'm missing something (very possible!). But this seems like a strange, inconsistent bias. ClydeIsKool (talk) 03:40, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

You are mistaken. Wikipedia editors do not automatically assume that a piece in a usually reliable source is independent of the subject: pieces based on press releases are usually identifiable from their style, and their close resemblance to other pieces in different sources. In any case, a given source piece may be reliable or unreliable, depending on what in Wikipedia it's being used for.

As for earnings statements, appointments and the like, such minor and uncontroversial details can even be referenced to the subject's own Website, but while websites and press releases are acceptable to corroborate those specific details, they can never be used to support the Notability of the subject, which is a very different thing.

Note that the above is general advice, I have not and will not look at your specific draft. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.55.125 (talk) 04:09, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@ClydeIsKool: Welcome to the Teahouse! For those references that are press releases, you may use {{cite press release}} instead of {{cite web}}. The notability criteria for people can be found at WP:NBIO. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:11, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

new format for main page

Why isn't there a "search" field on the main page? 174.67.208.167 (talk) 05:52, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The search field should be at the top of the screen with a . —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:55, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Wiki specialist needed

Hi

I am looking for a Wiki specialist to write / edit and publish an article on Sandton, Gauteng, South Africa and Claremont, Cape Town South Africa. DeeJooste (talk) 08:08, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, DeeJooste, I think you may want to see Wikipedia:Requested articles and post your request at an appropriate sub-page there, e.g. at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places. --CiaPan (talk) 08:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@DeeJooste: Wait, aren't Sandton / Sandown, Gauteng and Claremont, Cape Town the articles you need...? --CiaPan (talk) 08:39, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Yes, they are there already. I am not great with wiki, there are edits on those pages that need to be done. DeeJooste (talk) 08:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@DeeJooste: OK, so probably the best way to request any fix or expansion to those articles is by submitting an appropriate request at their respective Talk: pages (see Help:Talk pages for more info) – Talk:Sandton, Talk:Sandown, Gauteng or Talk:Claremont, Cape Town. Those may be watched by editors involved in creating those articles, or just interested in the subject, so this may be a relatively fast way to reach them.

You can find some hints on requesting edits at Wikipedia:Edit requests. That is a routine designed for editors who can't or shouldn't edit Wikipedia articles themselves, anyway the hints given there may help you to prepare a good, clear request. Good luck! --CiaPan (talk) 09:11, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft declined and I do not agree

Hello, Bieneba (talk) 09:31, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

I perfectly agree with the decline, considering you seem to push pseudoscience. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 09:34, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

What do you mean by pseudoscience?

The research is there and valid. Can you please elaborate Bieneba (talk) 09:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

I can tell you from experience that no autistic person wants physical contact. Nothing can change that. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 09:37, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Could someone help me with these arguments please? Am I stating this correctly and is there a chance it will be accepted?

Thanks so much for your help.

I do not agree with the copyright infringement for this link: https://www.qsti.org/published-studies/

This page lists the research done and it should also be listed on the Wikipedia article. The list will always be the same and can be found on other websites too.

Can this be corrected please?

Also the copyright infringement for this link is not valid. https://www.qsti.org/qst-autism-parent-resources/

The text is the official description of the questionnaires used in research done by Dr. L. Silva. I will ask the QSTI (Qigong Sensory training Institute) for approval to use these descriptions as I feel they should stay the way they are. These descriptions were also copied by https://www.acupuncturewithzen.com/qigong-sensory-autism-qsti/

I rephrased the text that was an issue but cannot change the list with research articles as the official article titles need to be in the list. Do I resubmit for review? or do I wait on a reply from you?

Thank you

Bieneba (talk) 09:34, 17 February 2023 (UTC)