Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cordless Larry, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

ns12

ns4

Featured article

How do I get something to be the featured article on Wikipedia? I’m trying to put Weezer on there. Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

See WP:FAR --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok? Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Per WP:FA & WP:FAC, it needs to go through a lengthy process before it can be featured. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

? Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

@Theobegley2013: Can I help you? As Tagishsimon said, the process to have it featured is long and complicated. Raising the article to Good Article status is probably a good first step before shooting for Featured Article. And even Good Articles are pretty hard! You'd need to do a lot of work. (for reference, here's an example of an unsuccessful GA review). Cremastra (talk) 22:31, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Indeed. Here's a Featured article candidate review which took about 6 weeks to complete starting from the point that the nominator thought the article was of sufficient quality. FA is super-hard to achieve. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:07, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Theobegley2013. You might want to aim for WP:GA status first since the process is a bit less rigorous and everything needed for GA-status is going to also be needed for FA-status. You might also want to discuss this on Talk:Weezer to see whether you can find anyone else interested in helping you or get some other input. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Why are you using WP abbreviations? Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:25, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Click on the links, Theobegley2013. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree to aim for taking the article from B-class to Good article before nominating for FA. For both GA and FA, reviewers like to see that you made significant improvements, as evidenced by many edits, before nominating. David notMD (talk) 03:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

And for GA there's the 10% threshold, correct? Cremastra (talk) 13:12, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

@Cremastra 10% of Wikipedia articles happen to have GA status, but that's not a threshold rule. It could be 100% if the rate of improvement of existing articles outpaced creation of new/unmaintained articles. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:13, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Shushugah: I meant that the nominator had to have contributed more than 10% of the article. I'm pretty sure that's one of the GA criteria. Or am I hallucinating? Cremastra (talk) 02:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It's not an explicit part of the WP:GAN instructions, however there is certainly discussion. Part of the issue is technical, who gets credit, when there's mixed/multiple authors? Last relevant discussion I found is here Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations/Archive 15 § Overanxious nominators ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:26, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Don't worry, you're not hallucinating. At WP:GAN/I, there's a footnote stating that a nomination is uncontroversially drive-by when the nominator is either less than 10% of the article or ranked sixth or lower in authorship, and there is no post on the article talk page. I believe the post on the article talk page part covers when there's mixed/multiple editors. (There's a warning template for it as well: Template:Uw-ga-driveby) ayakanaa ( t · c ) 01:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Disappearing pictures

Is there a problem with Commons? I'm not seeing any images, just blank spaces in articles? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 20:51, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

@Murgatroyd49, hello! For me it's normal, the problem is likely on your side. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

That's what I was afraid of! I've done a complete reboot and tried different devices, still no images. All other websites I've tried are fine. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 21:02, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

@Murgatroyd49: Our actual images (not the file pages) are stored at https://upload.wikimedia.org. Claygate railway station displays an image at https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/33/Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg/300px-Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg. Does that link work for you? If not then it may be your Internet provider which currently fails to retrieve pages from that domain. Such things can happen. A few interface images are hosted here at en.wikipedia.org. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.png is displayed in the lower right corner. Does that work? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:43, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I can see the button but not the Claygate image. The link just locked up so it looks like I can't access the server. Must have words with my ISP. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:30, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Right, contacted my ISP and they twiddled a few things and the images came back. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:45, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm seeing the blank spaces too. I can see images if I go to Commons, but not on Wikipedia, apart from the main page. --Northernhenge (talk) 22:21, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Northernhenge: If Commons works then it's probably a different issue. Maybe someting in your browser or a browser extension is set to block images which are loaded from another domain than the page you are viewing. Commons is at https://commons.wikimedia.org and our images are loaded from https://upload.wikimedia.org so they are both at wikimedia.org. Can you see https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/33/Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg/300px-Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg? Can you see the same image in the infobox at Claygate railway station? If the anwers are yes and no then my domain theory sounds right except it doesn't explain why you can see main page images. What is your browser? Years ago one of the common browsers (not sure which one) had a feature where it was easy to accidentally block images from another domain. Can you try another browser on the same computer or Internet connection and test whether it works there? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:46, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes and no on Safari on iPadOS 17.2, but the Claygate page displays correctly on Android Chrome v120. I therefore assume it's a setting on the iPad. Thanks for your help. --Northernhenge (talk) 00:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Northernhenge: I'm trying to narrow down what may be blocked. Can you see the Claygate image at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1937264#P18? At https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg? Can you see an image saying "a WIKIMEDIA project" at https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.png? (One of a few interface images which are loaded from en.wikipedia.org and not upload.wikimedia.org) Can you see the same image in the lower right corner of this page? If you have a "Desktop" link at the bottom of the page (meaning you are on the mobile version of Wikipedia) then click that before checking the lower right corner. You can return to the mobile version by clicking "Mobile view" at the bottom of the desktop version. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I can see the wikimedia button image but not the others. Northernhenge (talk) 01:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @PrimeHunter: for your continuing help. Unfortunately I need to go offline for a while, but it's much appreciated. --Northernhenge (talk) 01:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

And now I’m not seeing images in Commons either. I’ll keep looking for iPad settings, given that it seems ok on Android. Northernhenge (talk) 00:59, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

If images come and go at Commons then it may not be a setting after all. Somebody at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Images slow to load mentioned a varying image problem which appears to affect the UK. I guess from User:Northernhenge that you are in the UK so maybe you just have to wait for something to become more stable. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Not sure if red-herring or related, but T353849 is a server-side parser error related to images with geotagging. DMacks (talk) 04:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Where to begin?

Hi! I've been lurking on Wikipedia for a year now (and refuse to log in on my phone), but I'm not really sure where to start. I've basically run out of copyediting tasks or I'm hesitant to move on to the harder ones given a general lack of knowledge on both source & visual editor.

Also, what is the best place to report vandalism? I watch recent changes quite often, but often don't know what the best place to report those is. Thanks in advance! Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 01:27, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Schrödinger's jellyfish thank you for your contributions. Best place to report vandalism (if necessary) is Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and I would recommend installing WP:TWINKLE to make warnings easier. Is there a reason you don't log in on your phone? It would make additional tooling/communication easier. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:07, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I use a manager. Would having a mobile-exclusive account be alright, as long as I make it clear that it's me on the other device? Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes; something like "User:Schrödinger's jellyfish on mobile", perhaps. -- Hoary (talk) 02:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Schrödinger's jellyfish, your first paragraph: Forget visual editor: you're likely to run into its limitations sooner or later. (Or so I infer from what I've read about it. I've never been tempted to try it.) Source editing with syntax highlighting is the way to go. (Unfortunately I'm chronically unable to remember where within Special:Preferences I've enabled syntax highlighting; and when I look for this option there, I don't find it.) You will often be warned not to rely on your own knowledge when augmenting articles. And indeed you should not do so. However, your own knowledge is of great importance when editing: it helps you find good materials, to understand those good materials, and to faithfully summarize what's said in those good materials. So start with articles on subjects you know something about. -- Hoary (talk) 02:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Syntax highlighting is under Gadgets → Editing. Folly Mox (talk) 02:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you both! I've turned it on. Already makes it a million times easier to use! Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

As for editing on your phone, Schrödinger's jellyfish, I am going to be immodest here, and suggest that you read my essay, User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing. I have done 99% of my editing from smartphones for many years. Cullen328 (talk) 06:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I've linked it on User:Phönedinger's jellyfish's page so I can get to it more easily. I didn't even know about the smart punctuation thing! Just disabled it. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:09, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Schrödinger's jellyfish: If you're looking for more copyediting tasks, you could try updating these articles to remove the "double dollars" (e.g. change "$50,000 dollars" to "$50,000"). The same issue occurs with euros and pounds. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Citations with authors with middle names

When citing a work where the author has one or more middle names, should the middle name be put in the last name or the first name parameter, or outright ignored? Examples:

Last name param: Mackenzie, William Lyon, Title; OR Mackenzie, W. L., Title

First name param: Lyon Mackenzie, William, Title; OR Lyon Mackenzie, W., Title

Ignored: Mackenzie, William, Title; OR Mackenzie, W., Title

Which is correct? Cremastra (talk) 17:17, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Cremastra: Hello! I usually put the middlename along with the first name, but you also can do |author= instead of |last=, |first= Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:23, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks; I also usually put it in with the first name. Forgot about the author param. Cremastra (talk) 17:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It depends on whether his surname is "Mackenzie" or "Lyon Mackenzie". Both are possible, in general. But looking at the article, it seems clear that this particular man's surname was "Mackenzie", so he should appear as "Mackenzie, William Lyon". ColinFine (talk) 17:32, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Since we have some "usually"s and a "wrong venue", seconding ColinFine just above that the general case is unanswerable. It will always depend on what the "middle" name connotes for the individual in question. For most individuals of Anglospheric cultural extraction, the "middle" name is a second bit of the personal name. Not so everywhere, and WP:SUR has got guidance about it, including the fun exception (paraphrasing) "if not covered here, check this". Folly Mox (talk) 18:50, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't matter, but experienced editors usually post at the Help Desk Mach61 (talk) 17:57, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It's easier when people put hyphens in their own names, so A-B C has first=A-B and A B-C has last=B-C. That used to be common practise for UK surnames but I see it less these days. --Northernhenge (talk) 22:27, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

C-class

Hello, I was just wondering where I could request that my article on Perothopinae could be promoted to C-class, or maybe even B-class? Based on the criteria that I've read, I think the article is okay for B-class. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 01:56, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Memer15151, hello and welcome to the teahouse. Personally I think the class-rating is not that important: it is usually not displayed to the reader, and there is quite a bit of grey area between different classes. Criteria of WP:Good articles and WP:Featured articles are more clearly defined and objectively enforced. If you wish to do more on Perothopinae, feel free to aim for GA level. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 02:14, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Memer15151, in my opinion, you have done a very good job and this is one of the best articles on a lesser known insect species that I have ever seen. I have upgraded it to B, and encourage you to take it to a Good article review. Cullen328 (talk) 02:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much! You made my day. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 02:39, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Memer15151. I was adding my reply while Cullen323 was adding his; so, it seems this has been resolved now. For reference, though, WP:ASSESSMENT ratings (outside of WP:FA and WP:GA) aren't really official ratings per se; for sure, they're based on certain criteria, but basically their assigned by users such as you and me without under going through a formal review process. So, if you feel the article meets the B-class criteria, you can "promote" it yourself; if someone disagrees, they can "demote" it back to where it was. However, since you describe the article as my article it might be better to let someone else promote it instead to avoid any appearance of bias. You can try asking about the article at the WikiProjects whose scope it falls under and explain why you think it meets the "B-class" criteria. Someone may see your post, agree with your assessment, and promote the article. Similarly, someone may see your post, disagree with your assessment and explain why. You could also seek a WP:PEERREVIEW as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:44, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm aware of peer reviews, and I was thinking about it, but I currently have an active peer review for Combat of Goldberg, and based on what I remember, you can only submit one at a time. Thanks for the help! UserMemer (chat) Tribs 02:49, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

fwiw, @Memer15151:, whereas Wikipedia:Peer review seems to be a general 'how could this article be improved' forum which may well have a one article per person per time period restriction, there are other forums for article review. I think the suggestion being made in this thread is that you consider nominating Perothopinae for Wikipedia:Good articles review ... GA being the next higher quality rating for articles above the B-class which is now sported by the article. Having an article in peer review does not prevent you nominating an article for GA. (And after that, you could consider either an A-class review or a featured Article review. Or you could do none of these things :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:47, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi again! Yes, I nominated it for a GA. It would be cool to see it become one of the 7 beetle GAs, considering there are hundreds of thousands of beetles.

Kind regards, UserMemer (chat) Tribs 12:21, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

More images would be nice. In nature. larvae. Eggs. Wings open? And curious, could you provide links to a few of the beetle GAs? David notMD (talk) 19:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to say that the image I added is the only one I found licensed under CC-BY, CC0 or CC-BY-SA. Examples of GA-class beetle articles include Colorado potato beetle, Emerald ash borer and Tansy beetle. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 19:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Can I include in Donald Trump and Joe Biden's Wiki?

Biden’s economy vs. Trump’s, in 12 charts[1] from Washington Post. I want to anlyse the idea given by them.

Brandflock (talk) 08:04, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It's unlikely to be a good idea. Commentators opinions on the US economy probably have little to do with biographies of the two individuals. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:10, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Brandflock, discussions of the economic performances during the two most recent administrations are better suited to Presidency of Donald Trump and Presidency of Joe Biden. The article you linked to is probably not the best source, since it is a high level overview based on discussing charts and graphs. I think that using more analytical pieces that quote a range of prominent economists would be a better approach. That's my opinion, at least. Cullen328 (talk) 08:26, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

So you don't think that Washington Post crticsed them and it will create bad impact to the world? Brandflock (talk) 08:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

This has little or nothing to do with wikipedia. No, today's washington post opinion is tomorrow's chip wrapper. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I can see millions of Wikipedia articles which criticised wiki's. I am thinking because noone noticed it and I am not political wikipedia editor, I relate myself with business and economics here so please check the reference I given as link. Brandflock (talk) 09:07, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It is one of tens of thousands of articles on economics loosely related to politics. It does not move the dial. It has little or no significance. It is unlikely you will be able to make the encyclopedia better by doing anything as a result of the article. Please take the advice being given to you and drop this idea. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

World recieved conflicts because of economics and its significant topic as I can see and it will remark Wikipedia more in the world so people should get aware of the drama behind business and economics. Brandflock (talk) 09:58, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

But it would need to be written up in WP by someone with competence. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:10, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It got covered by an experienced media executive so I came here to take solution that can be in wiki or you all be disagree and if you all are not able to help me then why you should be agree on me. Brandflock (talk) 12:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

stop. ltbdl (talk) 16:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Brandflock indef'ed. We're done here. DMacks (talk) 22:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Query about coding language

What coding language does source editing use? Adityaverma8998 (talk) 17:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Adityaverma8998: Hello! See Help:Wikitext. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your help but I have another question, which is that if any article uses complex language and jargon the can I use ChatGPT or Bard to make it more simple to understand and replace the complex language of the article to simple language to make it comprehensible to a wider audience? Adityaverma8998 (talk) 18:05, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Adityaverma8998: It depends on the subject of the article. If it is something niche, for example, something related to category theory, then I don't think it is a good idea to simplify existing text. Also, check out https://simple.wikipedia.org Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

In addition, be wary of using AI to make edits to Wikipedia. In general, human edits are preferred and AI edits have some issues, both in accuracy and in copyright status. I'd recommend using AI to help you (like brainstorming) but not to generate actual article text. This legal note from the Wikimedia Foundation elaborates a bit: m:Wikilegal/Copyright Analysis of ChatGPT. Bsoyka (talk) 18:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Adityaverma8998: Absolutely not. Do not use the output of ChatGPT as an input for Wikipedia. Fullstop. See Wikipedia:Large language models. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood me. I am not saying that AI can be used as input in wiki articles. The question was can complex sentences by simplified using AI because a simpler version would be comprehesible to wider audience.

Picking up info or data from AI is obviously not a good idea. Adityaverma8998 (talk) 20:48, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Adityaverma8998 However you phrase the question the answer remains the same. No. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:56, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

How are you going to replace complex sentences with simple sentences generated by ChatGPT if those simple sentences are not an input to Wikipedia? Look, Adityaverma8998, I'm not up for playing with words. I'm not misunderstanding you. You want to remove human-written sentences and replace them with ChatGPT-written sentences, because you believe for some reason that there are complex sentences which readers do not understand, which could be simplified so that readers do understand them. It may or it may not be that there are complex sentences which could be simplified. It may or may not be that ChatGPT could achieve the simplification. The jury must be out on both of those two speculations. But the guideline answer is still no; use of ChatGPT on WP is not welcome. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

At this point my request is close to being a moot point, but anyway: Adding references to examples of such texts might have been an idea... Autokefal Dialytiker (talk) 21:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Such simplifications may be more appropriate in the Simple English Wikipedia.

In this 'Main' English Wikipedia, the level of language complexity is, I believe, ideally intended to be suitable for a University undergraduate not studying the topic in question (although I can't now find where I read that). See also Wikipedia:Manual of Style, Sections 15 and 16, and Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_manual,_guidebook,_textbook,_or_scientific_journal, Point 7.

Wikipedia currently contains a good deal of over-complex language, usually in articles written by experts in their applicable field, and certainly this should be clarified, but preferably by a fluent native/competent English speaker/writer capable of doing so without distorting the text's meaning or introducing falsifications – so far AI applications have not demonstrated the ability to do this. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 00:56, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Archive my talk page

Can someone help me place what's on my talk page in the archive. Everytime I try to do it I make a horrible hash of it. TIA MaskedSinger (talk) 19:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I just added the boilerplate to automate archiving on your talkpage. Hopefully within a day or so it will trigger for you. It's a little annoying that the standard user-talk header, the auto-archiver, and the archives-list are three separate templates that also interact with each other sometimes. DMacks (talk) 20:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much!! MaskedSinger (talk) 05:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Looks like you're all set: [2] [3] Enjoy the lack of clutter! DMacks (talk) 03:18, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Trying to add withdrawal info of a train from a UK train operator

I'm trying to figure out how to add information that Nova 3 trains have been withdrawn from TransPennine Express service as off the December 2023 timetable on this Article. The issue I'm having is that the only sources about the withdrawal are from before the withdrawal took place so any edits keep being reverted due to lack of recent sources. The only other evidence is that the trains have been removed from the TransPennine website, have not been visibly recorded (that I can find) on any services since the timetable change and do not show up on any services on RealTimeTrains. I was wondering if I was to email TransPennine directly and get a direct quote that the trains have infact been withdrawn (as announced in August) by email, if there would be a way to cite that and if that would be a valid source for wikipedia?

Thanks in advance

@Alexbrassington Alexbrassington (talk) 20:01, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Alexbrassington: Welcome to the Teahouse! Email correspondence from the company would not count as a verifiable published source. I suggest posting at Talk:TransPennine Express do see if other editors could help you find sources. GoingBatty (talk) 20:07, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

References such as this would be fine. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Myself and others have already tried to use the articles from September and August as sources but each time the edits have been reverted due to no source of withdrawal, just an announcement from the past that they would be Alexbrassington (talk) 20:19, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

So sounds like it would have to be a case of trying to get the company to publish an article or press release confirming that the trains have been withdrawn? I don't see how this would be different to them confirming by email but I understand that it's hard to prove that an email is genuine so I suspected that would be the answer. Surely though, if they said in August that the trains would be withdrawn and have said nothing since then the assumption should be that they didn't change their mind rather than assuming that they did? Alexbrassington (talk) 20:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps @Danners430: could explain why they are accepting forward-looking statements in citations 28 & 29 such as this supporting the assertion that TPE will be using a rolling stock in the future, but not supporting forward-looking statements that TPE will not be using the rolling stock in the future. It seems like very unhelpful WP:POINTY editing to use two different standards. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

The difference is that that’s a published image in a rail magazine showing a locomotive that has already been liveried - it’s not a statement for example from TPE saying “we will apply this livery”, it’s already been applied. When it comes to the withdrawal, no source that I’ve found states that the plans to withdraw actually have gone ahead - how often have we seen plans to withdraw stock being announced, then being pushed back quietly? Example being GWR’s Castle HSTs. Of course, you and I know this isn’t the case - but it’s not WP:VERIFIABLE.

I might also add that the above source was likely added before I was regularly active, so I can’t really comment on whether it should’ve been used - I haven’t retrospectively looked at sourced in most cases. Danners430 (talk) 20:55, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Both references are of the same type, in that they both make forward-looking statements. If your head is turned by one having an image, I have a bridge to sell you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:13, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It seems to me to be completely appropriate for the article to say that the company announced on such and such a date that they will start or stop using particular stock. But in the absence of a reliable report that they have done so, the article should not say anything further. A picture in a reliable source with an appropriate caption would be adequate for this, but not a picture on a random website. ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

This has been my view, and in the absence of any other consensus what has been written in the article. Danners430 (talk) 21:57, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I've amended the page per https://www.tpexpress.co.uk/travelling-with-us/the-nova-fleets ... we are entitled per WP:PRIMARY to rely on TPE to define what its current trainsets are. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:13, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Alexbrassington, the best place to discuss this is Talk:TransPennine Express. Please ping the editors who objected. Cullen328 (talk) 21:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I hadn’t spotted that TPE had updated their site - that definitely counts as a source! Danners430 (talk) 08:02, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

do examples need citations?

So i am wondering if examples require citations like if i said that a example of a emergency was a house fire would i have to cite somewhere that said that? 50tr5 (talk) 22:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It's a bit silly, 50tr5, to provide a reference for an assertion familiar to most people and questioned by almost none. I don't suppose you're really asking about that example. Which examples of what are you actually asking about? (Just reveal one or two examples of the examples.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:SKYISBLUE. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 01:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Creating a soccer national team page

Hi there,

I'm trying to create my first national soccer team page and I'm having issues. When I click on publish the players, results and references mess up and move to the side (looks okay when I click edit). Can anyone assist with this issue?

This is the page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AMcwamcwa%2FSouth_Africa_national_under-15_soccer_team&wvprov=sticky-header Mcwamcwa (talk) 22:48, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello Mcwamcwa,

I saw the article, good work!

It seems to me that all of the stats are in one of the boxes on the table. Try separating all of the boxes out.

Happy editing! Geardona (talk) 22:53, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! Mcwamcwa (talk) 23:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

The problem seems to the player box. I tried adding spaces in between and everytime I do they get removed and the template sticks to it's default setting. Mcwamcwa (talk) 23:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, let me try to fix it, I will try to keep the info intact but may need to use placeholders. Geardona (talk) 23:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I fixed it, the issue was in the source editor, the templates needed space. Geardona (talk) 23:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Mcwamcwa (talk) 23:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Mcwamcwa: I can understand if you are confused. You used VisualEditor which sometimes render differently than the saved page. The "Show preview" button in the source editor shows how the page will really look if it's saved. The end of Help:VisualEditor#Getting started: the VisualEditor toolbar mentions "The Switch editor button" you could use. Some things are also easier to do in the source editor, and some are simply impossible in VisualEditor. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll try source editor next time. Mcwamcwa (talk) 23:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

requests for [insert word beginning with c here]

how does starting an rfc work? do you just use the template in any given article's talk page and ask about whatever it is that might require more people's opinions? cogsan _{(give me attention) (see my deeds)} 00:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

RFC's are a part of dispute resolution, intended for users who have a content disagreement with each other.(read this) for more.

If you do feel a RFC is necessary these are the steps to create one, there is a template in the article I have linked.

Hope this helps,

Geardona (talk) 00:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

so it's just adding the template, putting fitting words under it, and not using it for small scale squabbles between two people, because that's what third opinions are for

thanks cogsan _{(give me attention) (see my deeds)} 01:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

That is correct (to my knowledge). Geardona (talk) 01:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

How to delete a redirect?

I want to create a new article, but there's a redirect obstructing it. How can I have the redirect deleted to claim that namespace for my upcoming article? Sajjad Altaf (talk) 01:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Sajjad Altaf. If it's OK that you will not be registered as the page creator then you can convert the redirect to an article. See Wikipedia:Redirect#How to edit a redirect or convert it into an article. Your contributions will still appear in the page history. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Isn't there an alternative solution? Is there a template available that I can place at the beginning of the article to request its deletion? Sajjad Altaf (talk) 02:09, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sajjad Altaf: If the draft has been approved by WP:AFC you can use {{Db-afc-move}}, otherwise you need to list it at WP:RFD. Whatr is wrong with PrimeHunter's solution? RudolfRed (talk) 02:14, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

If you submit a draft for review at WP:AFC then others will probably take care of it for you if the draft is approved. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:59, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I see Sajjad Altaf has chosen to create their article at Khurd, Pakistan, leaving Khurd as a redirect to Khurd and Kalan. Honestly, until we get the ability to receive notifications for arbitrary articles (not just ones where we're in the database as first editor), I can't really fault the decision, even if it does feel a little vain. No comment on notability, sourcing, or article title. Folly Mox (talk) 04:30, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Khurd and Kalan may be the primary topic anyway. I have added a hatnote there to Khurd, Pakistan.[4] PrimeHunter (talk) 12:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

how make new name for link

Not sure if I'm using the correct terminology. To get to the "Encephalitozoon cuniculi" article, I can type in that name or "E. cuniculi" or "E cuniculi". However, if I'm editing a different article & want to link to that article, within the square double brackets, if I put in "E. cuniculi", it gives a red link (page does not exist). How do I edit it for this to work? I know I can do "E Cuniculi | E. Cuniculi", but my understanding is that using "E." is the correct way to indicate this organism. Thanks. Sunandshade (talk) 02:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

Try expanding the name maybe, or am I misunderstanding the question?

Thanks

Geardona (talk) 02:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I want to be able to put into my article "E. Cuniculi" (in double brackets) but that does not work. Sunandshade (talk) 02:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Sunandshade and welcome to the Teahouse! E. cuniculi should work (not piped), but if you capitalize cuniculi (you shouldn't anyway, per WP:NCCAPS) it won't work. ayakanaa ( t · c ) 02:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks everyone. It was capitalized. I did a cut/paste from somewhere & didn't notice that. I know it should NOT be capitalized but I missed it. But funny how "E Cuniculi" (no period, capitalized) DOES work. But I'm not going to use that. I'll be using "E. cuniculi". Sunandshade (talk) 02:29, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunandshade: E. cuniculi is a blue link for me. Can you clarify your question? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RudolfRed (talk • contribs)

@RudolfRed:: One pedantic, but important point: That the link is blue, only says that it exists - I've lost count of the number of links I've had to correct because somebody ignored the question of whether the link was for the correct "John Smith", so please get in the habit of checking this... Autokefal Dialytiker (talk) 08:42, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunandshade: This shows the only current redirects are E Cuniculi and E. cuniculi. Wikilinks are case sensitive on all characters except the first so E cuniculi and E. Cuniculi don't work. The search box is not case sensitive so you can enter "E cuniculi" or "E. Cuniculi" in the search box. See Wikipedia:Redirect for how to make more redirects, but we try to limit redirects which only differ in their casing. If E. cuniculi is the correct or preferred way to write the name then a redirect on E. Cuniculi would encourage editors who write it in a poor way. We do have many redirects from poor casing but a lot of them go back to before the search box became case insensitive, or they were made by editors who remember that time. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining that. The proper way is for the redirect to be only "E. cuniculi". That way editors are forced to write it correctly. However, if "E Cuniculi" is removed, that could break a lot of links. However, if I'm reading this correctly, only Holland Lop uses the (incorrect) link. The others are this discussion & my sandbox. Is it ok for me to remove that redirect? But then someone searching would have to type the "." after the E. What is best? Sunandshade (talk) 05:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunandshade: I updated the Holland Lop article to use the correct redirect. GoingBatty (talk) 05:55, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Great. Should I remove the "E Cuniculi" redirect, as discussed above? I'm new here & don't want to make changes in haste. Sunandshade (talk) 06:02, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunandshade: Redirects can only be deleted by administrators. Others can nominate for deletion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. E Cuniculi was created in 2010. It takes more to delete an old than a new redirect because it may have unknown incoming links from external sites, and it may be linked in old revisions in page histories. Also, there is no redirect on E cuniculi or any other casing without a period so if we delete it then it will not work to type "E cuniculi" or other casings in the search box, and we do like that to work for plausible searches. I would just leave it. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I appreciate you explaining the history of how things work here. Let sleeping dogs lie, as they say. Sunandshade (talk) 04:20, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Indexing my page in search engine

How to fix my page is not indexed in search engine. When i search the name of article. Chparveshtaak (talk) 02:28, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Chparveshtaak: If it is a new article, then it may not have been through WP:NPP review yet, as there is a large backlog. Unreviewed articles are not indexed by search engines. If not reviewed in 90 days, then it will be indexable by search engines. RudolfRed (talk) 02:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Chparveshtaak: Please be specific and name the page and search engine. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:40, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Chparveshtaak: Are you referring to the Dangar Khera article you created? (Remember that it is not your page - see WP:OWN). GoingBatty (talk) 04:08, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Some help at Miss Universe Philippines 2023

Hi, I'm currently dealing with another editor adding unsourced content after I remove it from the article. Is there a limit to how many reverts I can do? I've put some notices on their talk page asking for them to add sources. I will revert for a third time, and then leave it. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

For the record, I think they're good faith changes, I just don't think they know how to access their talk page or they're not seeing my edit summaries. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Given this edit and their overall pattern of inserting the same sentence or two in many different places in the article, it's clear this editor is not able to contribute constructively, so I have blocked them. Wikipedia:Mobile communication bugs or not, edit-warring and disruption with BLP implications cannot be allowed to continue. DMacks (talk) 02:56, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Would someone editing like this instead go to WP:AIV? Not sure if it's just disruptive editing, or if it's vandalism. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

AIV is ok for extensive and obvious disruption that's not literally "vandalism" (in the wikipedia-specific meaning). It's typical after escallating user-warnings to level 3/4 with no change in behavior. But admins are active (or at least lurking:) in lots of other places too. DMacks (talk) 03:02, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

If you're still around, we've got a similar disruption going on at Dissocation here. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:59, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

That's just vandalism, but multiple IPs joining in. Will push some buttons after I refill my coffee.... DMacks (talk) 03:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

A few others did the needful. DMacks (talk) 03:11, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

The needful may need to be done again... is there a chance that User:Mutia ti la union updates or User talk:110.54.154.78 are trying to do the same thing? My hackles may just be raised for no good reason. I'm aware that IP connections can't really be disclosed, but probably worth keeping an eye on. Same wording of "there are 5 presenters". Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 03:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm aware of WP:SPI but don't know if I should post there with only IPs. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 03:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, SPI would be slow and not very helpful. Takes a few days, it's obvious, and only really IPs involved. And Philippines IP pools are fairly dynamic. So it doesn't need CU tools but instead needs prompt "any admin can do this" action. WP:RFPP is the alternative when lots of IPs/accounts are a problem on one page. DMacks (talk) 03:27, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Alright, I'll keep that in mind for the future! I've put a request for protection on the page. Thank you for the help in reverting, blocking, and sending me to the right places! :) Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 03:30, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

What to do about a conflict of interest with removal of sourced information?

It's me again! At both Rukhsar Rehman & Faruk Kabir, User:BAPASSPHD has been removing sourced information without providing a good reason. On their talk page here, they claim to be from their legal team. This is a violation of WP:COI, right?

I'm unsure how to proceed here and would appreciate some help! Thank you for your time! Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 04:59, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Schrödinger's jellyfish: User talk:BAPASSPHD shows that the user has been blocked. GoingBatty (talk) 05:32, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

The blocked user may have a point. There was a rash of stories, all from unreliable sources, all echoing eachother, all the 29 and 30 Jun 2023, specifying that the couple had decided to end their marriage. That has somehow been parleyed into 'they are divorced' on WP. Seems like a major BLP fail on WPs part. --Tagishsimon (talk) 05:44, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I wasn't too sure on that part. I did check the deprecated sources on WP:RS, but didn't see the cited one (or any of the top results) on the list. What's the right thing to do here - edit the text of the article to just reflect "they are ending their marriage", remove the claim entirely, or keep it as-is? Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 05:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I've put a note on both talk pages. I'd be in favour of removing the divorce business from both articles, since the sources are unreliable, and the supposed divorce may not have happened. --Tagishsimon (talk) 05:56, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm so so sorry - I just did some further looking and it looks like the same articles are popping up from June of this year. Read over a few of the articles and they're essentially garbage. 100% worth removing. In the future, I'll be sure to look more into BLPs before charging in headfirst. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 06:00, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

No reason for you to be sorry; you were trying to do the right thing in dealing with the COI editor & you're clearly acting in good faith. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Schrödinger's jellyfish: I also added {{connected contributor}} on the article talk pages. GoingBatty (talk) 05:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Apparently, User:BAPASSPHD now indef blocked despite having been confirmed correct in denying the divorce. I left a note on Talk page how to appeal block, and in the future, because paid, propose changes on Talk pages versus editing articles directly. David notMD (talk) 09:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

First Steps in Article Creation

Merry Christmas to all you fine folks at the Teahouse.

I was just wondering, how do I start creating pages and articles on Wikipedia? I want to do so for a cartoon I'm surprised hasn't had a dedicated page to it. The show in question is Kody Kapow, a cartoon that used to air on Sprout, and later Universal Kids for a short while after the rebrand of the channel. You don't have to provide me with exhaustive details, but I was wondering how to begin making an article, as I have yet to do so. Specifically, however, I was wondering what some good sources are which relate to the show. Accurate sources, I mean. I hope it's not too much trouble and not too silly a request and question.

Thank you, and I hope your holidays are going merrily. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 06:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

We would probably point you at WP:YFA and WP:RS, but equally note that there is no certainty that reliable sources exist for Kody Kapow, which might be why there is no article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:14, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. If perhaps you can find an accurate source, would you please let me know? I'm pretty sure I can explain the synopsis, characters, and (if I can find some way to watch them) the episodes, but I would like to fact check myself, just in case, because if I can help it, if it's inaccurate, I wouldn't include it. If I know it's inaccurate, anyway. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 06:19, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

This, probably. Maybe this. Again, maybe. ditto. This. The common theme for all of these is that they look like legitimate news sources, not blogs, fandoms, streaming services &c. Good luck. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:26, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for going through the trouble. Hopefully I can find at least something I can use. I won't ask for any more assistance, because I don't want you to go on potential wild goose chases, since into is so scarce, though I will let you know if what I read is accurate. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 06:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Triviatronic9000. The first step is also the most important step by far. Identify several reliable published sources that are entirely independent of Kody Kapow, and that devote significant coverage to that topic. The next step is to format references to those reliable sources, which is described in Referencing for Beginners. At this point, the most difficult part of the process is done, and you have not yet written a single word of prose. Then, you neutrally summarize in your own words what the reliable sources say, leaving out everything that is not verified by those sources. The rest is formatting the draft to Wikipedia's house style but that is straightforward. The first step is the hardest and most important step. Without identifying sources that comply with policy, it is not possible to write an acceptable Wikipedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 06:42, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I do not like to disagree with Tagishsimon, but, in my opinion, all the coverage in the sources linked above was generated by press releases and public relations by the show's creators. I do not see any independent coverage there. A phrase like The show is billed to launch followed by lengthy quotes from a network executive does not indicate independent coverage. A phrase that says that Sprouts has greenlighted a new animated series is evidence that the coverage is generated by public relations, as the author has clearly not seen the (future, at that time) series, and is parroting network talking points. We learn from another that Jason Alexander has been tapped to lead the voice cast which is set for premiere July 15. This is not independent reporting. It is clearly recapitulation of a network press release. And so on. Cullen328 (talk) 07:09, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Can I use the website of the company that made the show? Or is that not independent enough? I ask because I saw that it was on there. Kodiak, the production company is. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 13:46, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

You can use that to corroborate uncontentious facts about the show, but not to demonstrate the Notability of the show, as it is clearly not independent of the show. Indeed, it's about as non-independent as a source could be. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 14:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

New article

How can I create a new translated from uk:Територіальний центр комплектування та соціальної підтримки article with no registration? 46.211.78.23 (talk) 10:26, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

First, get plenty of practice improving existing articles. When you are improving them successfully, decide if your proposed subject is notable (as notability is defined by and for Wikipedia). If so, then create a draft, basing this on reliable sources (as reliability is defined by and for Wikipedia). In the summary of your very first edit, say that it's a translation of the Ukrainian-language article. Reference your draft, scrupulously. Then submit your draft for promotion to article. -- Hoary (talk) 12:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thankyou for descrihing a process! But where (what namespace) exactly have I writfe a draft at? Because now it mostly say: You can't create pages as unregistered editor. 46.211.84.183 (talk) 16:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I would suggest following along with Your first article, which includes an Article wizard button. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you.  Draft:Territorial center for recruitment and social support 46.211.98.60 (talk) 17:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

See also WP:TRANSLATETOHERE. Note that notability defined by the English Wikipedia may be stricter than other language Wikipedias. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

i don't see there anything about more strict notabiity. Can you please write where exactly I can read about such notability difference? 46.211.84.183 (talk) 17:00, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

For more information about what is considered wikinotable on the English Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Notability. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hope it has enough of notability already. 46.211.98.60 (talk) 17:18, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

And how to connect it to d:Q56356604? It tells draft can't be connected. 46.211.98.60 (talk) 17:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

That's correct, IP user. Only once it has been accepted into the encyclopaedia can it be linked to other language articles. ColinFine (talk) 11:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

thank you in advance. 46.211.84.183 (talk) 17:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Replacing a redirect with a new article

Hi, the article draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kezia_Hayter is ready to publish but there is a redirect on the page "Kezia Hayter". Can someone please publish the draft over the redirect, or leave me instructions on how to do so? Thanks and merry Christmas to all those celebrating today! MurielMary (talk) 10:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Done! -- Hoary (talk) 12:27, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

It was indeed ready to publish. Good work on that draft-now-article by both of you. A merry Ziemassvētki to you and all. -- Hoary (talk) 12:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@MurielMary: You could have used {{db-afc-move}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I've also found the folks at the technical move requests board helpful, especially if you explain that the draft in question is ready for mainspace. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Where to report bugs on Wikipedia

I guess I've found a bug on Wikipedia. Where can I report it? Aredoros87 (talk) 15:53, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aredoros87: Hello! See Wikipedia:Bug_reports_and_feature_requests. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 15:54, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Aredoros87 (talk) 15:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aredoros87: I suggest you first say what it's about here. Then we can guide you to the right place, say if it has already been reported, or maybe fix it right away or explain that it's not a real problem. Most things don't belong at Phabricator. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:17, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I already reported it. Here's the link. Aredoros87 (talk) 18:23, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aredoros87: Yeah, it's definitely a weird glitch, I tried doing it and not only the note dublicates, it triples when "Cite" is unclicked and gets quadrupled when clicked again and so on. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:13, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I didn't know about the clicks. Good catch :) Aredoros87 (talk) 20:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aredoros87: I made a simpler test page User:PrimeHunter/VisualEditor note duplication. Phabricator does seem appropriate here although I'm, not sure they will care enough to work on a fix. They may just write it off as an odd but inconsequential interaction between VisualEditor and the implementation of {{Infobox scientist}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:02, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

It's not specific to scientist infobox. I tried it with different infobox. And I still reproduce the issue. Aredoros87 (talk) 21:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Actually it's way more complex. Now I added another note with same group name outside of the infobox. When I switch to VisualEdit mode, this time the note outside of infobox disappears. Aredoros87 (talk) 21:13, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aredoros87: Is it related to Wikipedia:VisualEditor#Limitations footnotes issue with infoboxes? RudolfRed (talk) 21:46, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Not exactly I guess. Aredoros87 (talk) 11:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Can A Muslim Say Merry Christmas

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

OP's question not related to Wikipedia editing at all, seems to be rhetorical and most likely runs afoul of WP:NOTFORUM. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

---

Muslims are warned not to say “Merry Christmas” in Islam. This is because Islam teaches us to stay away from joining in festivals and traditions that do not agree with our beliefs. “Merry Christmas” could seem like something nice, however, it may also be seen as supporting beliefs that are against Islamic principles. Preventing the copying of rituals from other religions is the main problem. Muslims are reminded to uphold their religious beliefs and avoid celebrations connected to other religions, such as Christmas. To put it another way, Muslims are advised to show others kindness and friendship in non-Christmas-related ways. Talhaahmed25 (talk) 17:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Talhaahmed25: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have any questions related to Wikipedia? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Can A Muslim Say Merry Christmas Talhaahmed25 (talk) 17:29, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Folly Mox (talk) 17:31, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

the answer is not Muslims are warned not to say “Merry Christmas” in Islam. This is because Islam teaches us to stay away from joining in festivals and traditions that do not agree with our beliefs. “Merry Christmas” could seem like something nice, however, it may also be seen as supporting beliefs that are against Islamic principles. Preventing the copying of rituals from other religions is the main problem. Muslims are reminded to uphold their religious beliefs and avoid celebrations connected to other religions, such as Christmas. To put it another way, Muslims are advised to show others kindness and friendship in non-Christmas-related ways Talhaahmed25 (talk) 17:33, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I don’t think this is Wikipedia related, do you have anything actually related to editing? Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talking Heads) (DANTE) 18:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

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

Citation

Can this be used as a citation for an article? Thanks, Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 20:48, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Wikiexplorationandhelping: Hello! Which article are you referring to and where do you want to include the citation? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Wikiexplorationandhelping Welcome to the Teahouse this Christmas Day. You didn't supply any context to your question, but I'm pretty sure the answer is likely to be "No!". A short looping video with Josh Hutcherson's name on it hardly seems like proof of anything other than the fact he may exist - and that is not in doubt. How exactly would you propose it would be supporting a specific factual statement added to the article about him? Nick Moyes (talk) 21:00, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

How do I go about making a page about this foundation I am in

Hi, Im new on wikipedia. My friends gave me the task of making a wiki page but i got a speedy decline. What should i do. this is the draft of the article.

Extended content

Title: Puzzler Foundation Introduction: The Puzzler Foundation is a non-profit organization, registered as a 501(c)(3), dedicated to supporting underprivileged children through various educational initiatives. Founded on December 2nd, 2021, and headquartered in Michigan, USA, the foundation's mission revolves around leveling the educational playing field for children with limited resources. With a strong emphasis on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) education, the foundation has been instrumental in providing books, educational tools, and infrastructure support to enhance learning opportunities for children in underserved communities. The Puzzler Foundation's approach is rooted in the belief that access to modern technology and quality education is crucial for fostering confidence and competitiveness in today's global, tech-centric society. Its efforts extend beyond the local community, having made a significant impact across several continents, particularly by donating STEM-focused books and facilitating essential infrastructure development in educational settings. History: The Puzzler Foundation was established in 2021 by individuals deeply motivated by their personal experiences and family histories. The founders, having a direct connection to the challenges of growing up in underprivileged environments, particularly in rural India, were inspired to create an organization that could make a tangible difference in the lives of children facing similar challenges. This background played a pivotal role in shaping the foundation’s mission and approach. In its early years, the foundation focused on small-scale, community-based projects, gradually expanding its reach and impact. Over time, the Puzzler Foundation has evolved, marking significant milestones such as expanding its programs to multiple continents, reaching thousands of children through its book donation and STEM education initiatives, and developing substantial infrastructure projects to aid educational development. Mission and Vision: The mission of the Puzzler Foundation is to enrich the lives of underprivileged children by providing them with the necessary tools and resources to succeed in a technology-driven world. The foundation is committed to fostering an environment where every child, regardless of their socioeconomic background, has access to quality education and the opportunity to develop critical skills for their future. The vision of the Puzzler Foundation is a world where educational inequalities are minimized, and every child has the chance to reach their full potential. This vision is pursued through a combination of direct educational support, resource provision, and infrastructure development, all aimed at creating a more equitable future for children in underserved communities. Programs and Activities: The Puzzler Foundation operates several key programs to fulfill its mission. One of the primary focuses is on STEM education, where the foundation provides resources and learning opportunities to spark interest in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. This is achieved through the donation of STEM-focused books, educational toys, and STEM kits. Another significant area of work is infrastructure development, where the foundation contributes to building and enhancing educational facilities to create conducive learning environments. In an orphanage location in Tamil Nadu, they have worked on giving food, beds, and a wall, and more recently, they have received a donation to build a solar water heater so the children can have running water throughout the day and night. Additionally, the foundation organizes book donation drives, offering a range of educational and enriching reading materials to children. These books have been provided to schools near their headquarters in Detroit, Michigan. These programs are designed not just to provide immediate educational resources but also to inspire a long-term love of learning and exploration in the children they serve. Funding and Support: The Puzzler Foundation's operations and programs are funded through a combination of private donations, corporate sponsorships, and fundraising events. As a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit, it relies heavily on the generosity of individual donors and the support of businesses committed to corporate social responsibility. The foundation also engages in crowdfunding campaigns to support specific projects and initiatives. This diverse funding model enables the Puzzler Foundation to maintain and expand its outreach and impact. The foundation places a high value on transparency and stewardship, ensuring that the funds received are used effectively to advance its mission of empowering underprivileged children through education. They are currently accepting donations through their website at https://puzzlerfoundation.org/.

Thank you Clarkgf1 (talk) 21:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Clarkgf1: Hello! Did you post it on your user page? Because I see that it got deleted previously and on the talk page there is a message about speedy deletion of your user page. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

"How do I go about making a page about this foundation I am in?" The short answer is that you don't. Theroadislong (talk) 21:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: the version that @Clarkgf1 posted here also falls under WP:G11, what do you think? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:24, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes precisely it is unambiguous advertising or promotion and would be speedy deleted. Theroadislong (talk) 21:28, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Clarkgf1, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you look back through this page and its archives, you will find hundreds and hundreds of questions that are basically the same as yours, many of them based on the fundamental misunderstanding that Wikipedia is a place to tell the world about yourself or something your are involved in. I recommend that you look at WP:BOSS.

If your organisation meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - basically that there has been enough independent material reliably published about it to base an article on - then there could be an article about it. Since you are connected with the organisation (you have a conflict of interest) you are likely to find it hard to write in a sufficiently neutral way about it, and you are discouraged from doing so. If you press ahead with it, you will need to forget everything you know about it, and write a summary of what the independent sources say even if you think they are wrong. "Mission and Vision" is exactly the sort of thing that does not belong in a Wikipedia article, except in the rare case that an independent commentator has specifically discussed these.

Also, since you talk about being "in the foundation", you are almost certainly what Wikipedia regards as a paid editor (even if you are not financially compensated), and must make the appropriate formal declaration.

My suggestion would be that if you wish to contribute to this amazing resource, you forget about your foundation entirely and find existing articles that you would like to improve; but if you are here solely to tell the world about your foundation, then you find another outlet for your promotion. ColinFine (talk) 22:13, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Uploading from Openstreetmaps

How does one upload a map from OpenStreetMaps with lines drawn. Please and thank you! Cwater1 (talk) 00:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Maybe {{Maplink}} --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:59, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I am still learning about contributing. Cwater1 (talk) 23:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Adding information based on what one's family members said...

... is not allowed. Perhaps someone can explain this better than I did to a new well-meaning editor here. He already made one edit and I fear we have to revert them. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:12, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

How can I get this post approved?

Hello,

I tried to publish a biography about Cal Currier, the youngest person to sail trans-Atlantic solo, and it was denied for being "not adequately supported by reliable sources." It was supported by 10 news articles and he has been a highly publicized person. What can I do to make the article better so that it is approved?

Thanks,

West WestCurrier (talk) 06:00, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

It - Draft:Cal Currier - seems a bit WP:BLP1E and a bit WP:NOTNEWS. And you may well have a WP:COI. I don't see why sailing a boat from place A to place B merits an encyclopedia article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:13, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@WestCurrier: I suggest starting a discussion at Talk:Transatlantic crossing to see if it would be a good fit to include this person's achievement in that article instead of trying to write a full article about it. RudolfRed (talk) 06:20, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

In my opinion, his solo crossing does not belong in Transatlantic crossing or Transatlantic sailing record. I cleaned up the draft, but Tagishsimon's points probably apply. David notMD (talk) 12:25, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

How do I get a second wiki user name?

I would like a second username to separate contributions on a completely different topic. How can this be done, please? This is for a guebuibe "sock puppet :-)" ----MountVic127 (talk) 07:32, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

create a second account. Do check if it passes WP:LEGITSOCK though. – robertsky (talk) 09:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Svg logo

Hello everyone! How to create svg logo for Wikipedia articles? Do not forget to tag me while replying. – 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™ 🗿 08:13, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Akshadev You may find the advice and guidance that you need on logo re-use in articles at Wikipedia:Logos. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:46, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Prose table needed

To make a point at a Talk page discussion (here) I need an example of an article which contains a Table where much of the content is prose, and not just a bunch of cells with figures or short strings. Can you think of a good example of a prose-full table? Mathglot (talk) 08:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Mathglot: I think pretty much all pages about episodes of TV series contain such table: for example, Doctor_Who_(series_4)#Episodes Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 10:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Deltaspace42, very much appreciated! Mathglot (talk) 04:25, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Maplink Template

When I try using the Maplink template, the map doesn't show at all, just an error message. The template instructions just doesn't seem to give me the right details, and it seems these maps are connected and created by an outside source. How do I pinpoint what location I want to find on the Maplink and in what form? (e.g. zoom, line, shape, etc.)
- Alex26337 (talk) 11:03, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, so update: I found some information, but now I don't know how to find the QID on Open Street Maps. Can someone give me a detailed, understandable answer? (I've been confused for some of the instructions on the Help pages) - Alex26337 (talk) 11:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Alex26337: Hello! Please tell me what article are you working on? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:53, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm working on Matshakatini Nature Reserve. I recently created this article and I'm just trying to add more information. - Alex26337 (talk) 12:46, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Alex26337, the openstreetmap id for the locator map of Musina seems to be 611439. I'm not sure if you will be able to add that to the template or whether you'll need to create a Wikidata item for Matshakatini itself. Folly Mox (talk) 12:54, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh right, the how-to bit: click on "Wikidata item" from the vertical ellipsis menu (or wherever the page tools spawn in your skin). The Wikidata page should have an Open Street Map number. Folly Mox (talk) 12:56, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Folly Mox Firstly, I see this location has the wikidata ID, which is what I'm mainly looking for. However, the one I need is for this location, which doesn't have its own wikidata ID, and I don't think I can just plug one in, 'cause the IDs are unique.

Secondly, is this vertical menu on OpenStreet Maps or Wikidata? - Alex26337 (talk) 13:01, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, it seems all I have to do is make a new wikidata page for this information, and I can link the map. Am I correct? (Sorry, all this is happening so fast) - Alex26337 (talk) 13:08, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry I missed your follow up question. I was making breakfast then attending a different thing. I see you've created a Wikidata item for the nature preserve, and linked it on OSM, which is in fact the procedure I would have suggested had I seen these messages in time. To answer unnecessarily the other question, in my skin on Wikipedia (Minerva), the Wikidata item as well as Special:WhatLinksHere, Special:PageInfo etc are within a three vertical dots menu on the top right of the interface. It seems you've located this as well.

Apologies for not getting back to this sooner, but it appears you've figured it out in the time it would have taken me to explain anyway ☺️ Folly Mox (talk) 13:39, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Image crop gone wrong?

Hello, I tried cropping the fair use image on Neuro-sama's infobox to center it better, but instead of having the updated picture on the article, now we have a distorted version of the old image. Does anyone know what went wrong and how to fix it? Thanks. SunflowerYuri (talk) 11:19, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @SunflowerYuri, not exactly sure about your concern. From what I can see, the figure is in the center of the image, and every thing looks good. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 11:42, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@SunflowerYuri This is almost certainly an issue with your browser. Try to WP:BYPASS your cache. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:56, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, you were right, this was an issue with my browser. I tried on another browser and it looks right. Thank you for your help! SunflowerYuri (talk) 12:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I want to be an editor!

Please help me destroy vandalism on Wikipedia. 2601:98A:A00:DB50:D03F:7377:C578:7742 (talk) 13:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Then stop doing stuff like [5]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:43, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

IP address blocked for one year for two acts of blatant vandalism. David notMD (talk) 15:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Why was my article not reviewed?

I've been waiting for weeks for my draft, Fabien Vienne, to be reviewed. When will it be reviewed? Bera678 (talk) 15:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Maybe never. That's volunteers for you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:19, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

It's been reviewed four times and declined four times. Theroadislong (talk) 15:32, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Bera678: you've resubmitted it four times. Does that answer your question? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:44, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Now Declined five times. David notMD (talk) 15:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Per WP:N, there aren't enough independent secondary sources about the topic. Stoplookin9 (talk) 15:54, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Is that bad? Bera678 (talk) 15:56, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Bera678: It means that if that is all there is to talk about Vienne, then the draft will never make it to mainspace. What irks me when I read it is that it doesn't have a neutral point of view and it comes off as promotional at some points. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:32, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Please help me to improve my draft: Bera678 (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I am not an AfC reviewer and I'm not interested in editing drafts. I would ask reviewers who've declined your draft for help, preferably by presenting to them sources that you think are reliable for Wikipedia's standards. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:29, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Clarification on sources

This may seem like a stupid question but why are secondary sources more reliable than primary sources in Wikipedia's case? Is it because that they are more factual than them as they are basically just a very thorough analysis (and maybe correction) of the primary sources?

Thanks 2A0A:EF40:1003:E01:B01F:22B6:A0A4:B6FC (talk) 15:52, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Basically you can't trust the primary sources because they will write about themselves with bias (obviously). And you also need to show notability of the subject because for every subject in the internet you can find primary sources, but they are only notable (and deserve an article on Wikipedia) if they are covered in many secondary (independent) sources. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 15:54, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the (rather speedy) reply! Just wanted to make sure, that's all. 2A0A:EF40:1003:E01:B01F:22B6:A0A4:B6FC (talk) 15:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

IP editor: you might like to read the essay WP:USEPRIMARY. Not all primary sources are "bad" or "biased" and not all secondary sources are "good". The latter may have mis-interpreted the former. The point is that secondary sources show that a topic is likely to be wikinotable because some independent writer has commented on the primary material. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:27, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 13:59, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

AfD page

I was recently part of a discussion about the WP:AFD page and possible changes to it. Where do I go to talk about that? 100.7.34.111 (talk) 16:07, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

IP editor: from your contribution history, that discussion seems to be at WT:Articles_for_deletion#Saying_I_could_have_AFD'd_the_last_article_when_I_couldn't. There haven't been any more comments for a week now. You can still pursue individual deletion requests in a different thread there and/or make a specific proposal for a general change at the Village Pump: WP:VPR or subpages. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:19, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Specifying childen

I am trying to find editing guidelines for specifying children in a biography box. For example, my edit of Natalie Wood's two children was reverted because one of the children doesn’t have her own distinct Wikipedia article "yet". There appears to be a policy involving citing a number and the word "including", but my multiple attempts to locate the help or template, or guideline for this specification have failed. I have two questions, but answering the "how" will answer the "what". That is, what are the guidelines -- where are they described?

But more importantly is: how should I be able to locate the correct relevant guideline ON MY OWN? There are so many guidelines, I don't understand how to navigate or search the guidelines to find answers to specific issues such as typified by this one.

Lastly I have seen hypertext brackets to pages which don't YET exist, and it is permitted. But when I made a hypertext link to Natalie Wood's 2nd daughter and the page doesn't exist YET, the editor reverted my change due to her article doesn't exist. Where can I read about when making hypertext links to nonexistent pages is okay or not? James Rodriguez 17:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrodor (talk • contribs)

For infoboxes, the best place to start is the infobox template page, so {{Infobox person}} where there is a section explaining the expectations for the child= parameter: "Typically the number of children (e.g., 3); only list names of independently notable or particularly relevant children. Names may be preceded by a number to show total children and avoid implying that named children are the only offspring. For multiple entries, use an inline list. For privacy reasons, consider omitting the names of living children, unless notable." In general, if you type help: and then some word - help:redlinks - into the search box, you'll be taken to the appropriate guideline or policy. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:14, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Superb. I just tried the tip of searching for "info:infobox" and it took me right where I wanted to go. This may be meta, but how should a new editor have learned that little tip about searching for "help:..."? Obviously there's some basic "how to use Wikipedia help search" stuff i never read from the get-go. James Rodriguez 17:24, 26 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrodor (talk • contribs)

@Jrodor: Most visitors are only readers and we are making an encyclopedia for them so the search box only searches our encyclopedia articles at first and not all the behind the scenes stuff. A search results page has a "Search in" box where you can choose to search other places. In the desktop version of the site ("Desktop" at the bottom of the mobile version), the top right of search results pages have a "Help" link to Help:Searching which explains more. wp: in front of a search is often more useful than help: for editors. wp: (alias for Wikipedia:) searches the Wikipedia namespace which means pages starting with "Wikipedia:". We use those pages for a lot of things. help: searches pages with "Help:" in front. We use that much less. You use the mobile version which omits many interface links and doesn't have the "Help" link. Mobile screens are usually small but I often think the mobile version omits too much. See Wikipedia:Red link for links to non-existing pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:01, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Jrodor, good question. If you start at Main page (on a laptop), there is the link "Help" in the meny on the left, where you find a link to "Help:Searching" and there you will learn about namespaces, including the "help namespace". This is not bleeding obvious, but it's there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Jrodor: Welcome to the Teahouse! I find searching for a shortcut like "WP:SEARCHTEXT" usually takes me to the right policy, guideline, or essay. For example, I just tried WP:CHILDREN, which is a shortcut to Wikipedia:Protecting children's privacy. GoingBatty (talk) 23:41, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Notability criteria for a specific restaurant

Hello. I am planning to write an article about a local restaurant. However, I'm not sure if it's going to be notable. What makes a restaurant notable? TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 17:48, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@TrademarkedTWOrantula: Hello! See WP:ORGCRIT. A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is presumed notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Also be careful, if you are an owner of this restaurant or you are working there, it would be a conflict of interest. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TrademarkedTWOrantula. Please pay careful attention to the section of that guideline found at WP:AUD which says Attention solely from local media (e.g., the weekly newspaper for a small town), or media of limited interest and circulation (e.g., a newsletter exclusively for people with a very unusual job), is not an indication of notability. At least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary. Local newspapers will provide run of the mill reviews of almost every new restaurant that opens in their communities, and this routine coverage does not establish notability. Consider an article I wrote about a small restaurant in a very remote area of California, Whoa Nellie Deli. I used sources published in three major California daily newspapers located hundreds of miles away, plus one in Texas, and three national publications, the New York Times, Gourmet, and The Atlantic. Cullen328 (talk) 19:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

strikethrough of text in the body of an article

i was editing and i clicked on an article that had a whole paragraph of strikethrough text in the lead section of the article. what is this about and should i do anything with that? i've never seen that before. this article Toothlessness Iljhgtn (talk) 18:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn: Hello! Someone noticed that the text was duplicated but was not bold enough to just remove it, so they put strikethrough. I've just removed this paragraph entirely. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:33, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I've looked a bit further in the history, so they removed it entirely first, but they just said "Fixed typo" in the summary, then some other editor saw this and decided to revert this edit because they probably thought that it was just another vandalism. Yeah, that's why you always need to write in the summary why you removed something. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I didn't think it looked right for there to be a strikethrough in the main space like that. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:14, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Never seen that before.. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:15, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

How do I delete my own draft?

I wrote a draft for this restaurant, but after reading WP:AUD, I don't think it's notable. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 20:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@TrademarkedTWOrantula: You can place {{Db-self}} at the top of the page and an admin will delete it. RudolfRed (talk) 20:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

No more references for my draft

I literally got the only websites on the intenet for my draft Draft:Quizimaze.

The photo lower down is a reference itself for the section questions. Orastor (talk) 20:24, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Orastor: Sources don't need to be online. If there are no more sources, then the subject is not notable and doesn't merit an encyclopedia article. RudolfRed (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Editor falsely pressing charges for block evasion

Moved to WP:ANI

Need some help improving my own draft

Hello, I would like some help or advice to improve my draft Draft:Tomb Raider I-III Remastered, which is about an unreleased game that isn't out until February (which may explain why my submission has been declined several times before and I really wanted to submit for review this as a real full article). MinionsFan1998 (talk) 05:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! As the declining reviewers have mentioned, the game being unreleased certainly does affect its likelihood to be approved at AfC. I think you've got a really great start here, and I certainly encourage you to keep working on this draft, as more reliable sources come out. If you haven't already, I'd suggest looking at the WikiProject Video Games list of reliable sources, and see if you can find anything new. Being that it's been over a month since it was last declined and it hasn't been edited very much since then, I'll also say that patience is key here, and you'll want to wait until the article has significantly improved since it was declined. Leading up to its release, more and more reliable sources will become available, and you'll be able to get it up to mainspace quality. Remember, Wikipedia has no deadline, and good luck! sawyer * he/they * talk 06:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

It is an interesting one. It needs to demonstrate notability, and right now that seems to rest on refs 9, 10 & 11, all of which are stories dated 14 Sept 2023 and presumably reflect a press release. Ref 2 appears to be the company producing the remaster (?) and so is not reliable. The wait and/or find better supporting refs seems to be good advice. Presumably there will be reviews in a couple of months, which should help. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@MinionsFan1998: Once reviews are published by reliable sources, you'll be able to add a "Reception" section, which will help with the notability requirements. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:39, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Solar permitting use

Solar permitting use 49.249.83.10 (talk) 08:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Do you have a question about using Wikipedia that's related to solar permitting use? 331dot (talk) 08:28, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

how cite IUCN website

There is a citation to the IUCN Red List website in the Collared Pika article. I looked at how it was cited, since I wanted to so the same thing in another article. I assumed it would use "cite website" but instead is used "cite iucn". I looked in "Wikipedia:Citation_templates" to get details but it did not appear there. I thought that page had ALL citation templates. Where can I get help details on "cite iucn"? Thanks. Sunandshade (talk) 10:31, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunandshade: Hello! See Template:Cite_IUCN. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 10:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll give that a look. Just wondering why it wasn't in "Wikipedia:Citation_templates". For us newbies, it's hard to find. Sunandshade (talk) 10:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

There are a lot of bespoke citation templates used in special topic areas. Wikipedia:Citation templates goes over the general ones for the CS1 templates and the sfn / harv family. According to this crude search, there may be nearly 1900 different "cite [something]" templates (although many of them are certainly redirects). Folly Mox (talk) 12:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Wow, I had no idea. That explains a lot. Sunandshade (talk) 01:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:European_Seniors%27_Union too promotional?

A few months ago I published an article about the European Seniors' Union, which is active in the European Union to represent the interests of older people. It was previously pointed out to me that this article comes across as promotional and relies too much on primary sources. In the meantime, I have deleted a number of items that could be considered promotional. In addition, I have added several links to press websites and independent organizations. I just received the message that my contribution was placed in the draft space because it was still too promotional. Can anyone explain to me what is missing or too promotional in this article?

(See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:European_Seniors%27_Union)

Luxil (talk) 12:14, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Luxil: Hello! Phrases like these: played a significant role in..., The organization is dedicated to..., in response to a growing need..., gained recognition..., develop crucial resolutions..., reflect the ESU's commitment to...

They give the promotional tone to the article and that goes against the neutral-style policy. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Wait, why does it show that you sent this message at 12:14 UTC? It's still 11:43 UTC. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Luxii, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks to me (I have only looked quickly) as if most of your references are either to the Union's own publications, or to official publications of the EU or its bodies.

Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

The University of Goettingen paper might be a suitable source - I haven't seen it - but I don't think any of the others are.

Sections - or even sentences - on "goals and values" are almost never appropriate in a Wikipedia article about an organisation, because these almost always come only from the subject. Only if an independent commentator has discussed the organisation's goals and values specifically (and at some length) will it be appropriate to mention them.

The section "Aged people's driving licence discussion" has no relevant citation, as far as I can see: the citation given does not mention the Seniors' Union anywhere, and is therefore of no value whatever for this article. ColinFine (talk) 11:53, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

One-line pages

Hi! Lately I have been adding references to articles that have been marked as unreferenced since many years. I stumbled across several articles regarding municipalities in Barbados:

• Baxters
• Breedy's
• Bruce Vale
• Chalky Mount
• White Hill

(there are probably more of them)

They are all one-line articles which provide no added value to the encyclopedia and have been marked as unreferenced since 2009. While populated places fulfill the requirements of notability, I wonder if such articles should be kept on Wikipedia. Today they would not be accepted as a new page.

I tried reading the guidelines for deletion and merging and I didn't find a "best practice" on how to deal with this kind of content. How would you proceed? The pages could possibly be improved by finding sources and additional information, but nobody has touched them for almost 15 years. Broc (talk) 11:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Broc: Hello! You can try searching for sources, but if you can't find anything, then you can nominate these articles for AfD. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:23, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Deltaspace42, thanks for the answer. I thought of looking for references, but I was wondering: does an article whose entire content is "Baxters is a village in the parish of Saint Andrew in Barbados." deserve a page of its own? Broc (talk) 13:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

there may be references, but the author just didn't care enough to use them. otherwise, no. ltbdl (talk) 13:56, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Ltbdl: then the article should be moved to the draft space, am I right? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 13:57, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

no. the drafitication process is only for new articles (generally, 1 month old or less). although it can happen as an afd result. ltbdl (talk) 14:06, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Deltaspace42 @Ltbdl thanks for your input. I added references to one of the pages, see this edit. Would you consider the page of sufficient quality? It still seems extremely barebone and I think today it would not be accepted as a new page. Broc (talk) 15:31, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Broc: You may find more such articles by looking at these articles created by Dr. Blofeld in 2006. GoingBatty (talk) 15:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Vial of Life

Hi, just reporting a couple of possible issues with Vial of Life:

1. Punctuation is poor, e.g., the use of hyphens. One example: is no longer able to express their own preferences - due to illness or unconsciousness.

2. The various references to vialoflife.com/vialoflife.org/"Vial of Life.com" seem to border on advertising... though the site seems to be down anyway.

3. Factual errors, e.g., Due to his historical claim to the Vial of Life name, no organization can copyright the name. That's wrong twice over. First, copyright applies to expressions of ideas, not to names. Trademarks do apply to names, but a name that was only in historical use isn't trademarkable, generally speaking—and the particular name may not be defendable as a trademark anyway due to its low distinctiveness. As it happens, the semantics described are actually closest to the semantics of patents.

4. The article is US-centric, e.g., The names of the other more comprehensive physician orders (MOST form or POLST form) will vary by your state. The only states I have are "awake" and "asleep" :P

Would be nice if someone could at least drop an appropriate template ("This article has multiple issues" or whatever) at the top of the article. Thanks. 2A0D:6FC2:6A92:3F00:0:0:0:5F9 (talk) 11:17, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor! Just be bold and drop the template yourself or even try fixing some of the issues you mentioned here. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:25, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. Added the box in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vial_of_Life&diff=prev&oldid=1192070680. I'm afraid I don't have time to fix the issues. Cheers 2A0D:6FC2:6A92:3F00:0:0:0:5F9 (talk) 12:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

did a do there, and

• how does "emt" stand for "emergency responder"? i thought it stood for "emergency medical technician". it's what wiktionary says, at the very least
• the state thing is a skill issue, i'm half-asleep roughly 30% of the time

cogsan _{(give me attention) (see my deeds)} 13:42, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! The best place to report content issues such as these is the article's talk page: Talk:Vial of Life. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:23, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Venting

I just spent several hours trying to finish revisions on an article. When I was ready to publish, I got a message saying there was an edit conflict and I could not post my work, or had to do it manually.

Wikipedia really needs to figure out how to have one editor at a time working on an article. Two hours worth of work is just gone. I am not happy.

ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 13:30, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@ProfessorKaiFlai: Hello! There is a template for this situation: Template:In_use Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 13:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

WOW! Yesssssssssssssssssssss!

What a relief, I will never have this experience again. Thank you!! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 13:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm just going to point out that the template's only to let other editors know someone is working on an article; it doesn't prevent them from editing the article itself. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:55, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

ProfessorKaiFlai, I'm not aware of how the Visual Editor handles edit conflicts (it sounds like: not well), but in the source editor you're able to copy the source of the article including your changes, and can close and reopen the editor and paste the source back in, and manually incorporate the edit you conflicted with.

In general, the safest thing to do is save your work often. Two hours is an extremely long time to work on a single edit, and an edit that complicated will be difficult for others to review. If you find yourself working on an edit for more than fifteen or twenty minutes, it's probably a good idea just to publish your progress and then start up again where you left off. Best, Folly Mox (talk) 14:34, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, the Visual Editor does not handle edit conflicts very well unfortunately, and I totally agree about making smaller edits. It's a lot easier to work methodically and in sections, and you're much less likely to run into problems with your work being lost! Perhaps working on an individual section or issue with the article and publishing it, and repeating that process, will be a more effective method. :) sawyer * he/they * talk 14:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@ProfessorKaiFlai: I've enabled the Paragraph-based edit conflict beta feature in my preferences, which sometimes helps to resolve those conflicts when someone else is working on a different section than I am. GoingBatty (talk) 15:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you all for these responses. I have found that once you get that edit conflict message there is not a way to get back to visual with your work saved. It has to be done in source, which I found to be too much in the wee hours of the morning.

It seems to me that we the editors are being left to scramble the best we can to address this issue. I have actually had this happen even while making what I think is a minor change that doesn't take a lot of time.

There must be a way to make sure that when you hit the EDIT button, that you are the only person working on that article. All others should be sealed out until your work is completed. Then if people want to change or undo or whatever, they can do so.

This is a technical problem that I'm sure the wikipedia higher ups can solve. I hope they see my rant and are moved to act! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 21:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

This is not exactly a new problem, ProfessorKaiFlai; only new to you. So for instance you suggest an edit lock on the article once a user hits the EDIT button. Two seconds of thought would lead you to the conclusion that such a feature would be misused, both by users to who hit edit but never subsequently hit submit; and by editors who maliciously want to lock other editors out of an article. You say it's a technical problem which you're sure can be fixed; but here we are, twenty-some years into wikipedia with this unfixed. Does that not give you a clue that there's a fairly fundamental problem? I don't know what the visual editor does when it comes across an edit conflict: I see there's zero documentation on edit conflicts in the visual editor, who does speak to the wretchedly shambolic nature of the wikipmedia foundation. It would be interesting if anyone familiar with that editor could enlighten us. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I use the source editor on my smartphone, and I try to remember to copy my edit to my clipboard before I click "Publish changes". If I run into an edit conflict, I just immediately paste it and then publish the changes. Cullen328 (talk) 22:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: Last time I got an edit conflict in VE, it popped up an error message (Your changes could not be saved because of an edit conflict. Would you like to resolve the conflict manually?), along with a button "resolve manually". Clicking the button takes you to the exact same place as if you had used the source editor. Victor Schmidt (talk) 22:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

t/y Victor. Good to know it does make provision; obvs, probably unfamiliar territory for a new editor, so easy to see how an edit conflict can still lead to loss of data. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:00, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

как задать вопрос ?

как задать вопрос ? Виктор Рахман (talk) 16:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Виктор Рахман: Привет! Это английская Википедия, и тут лучше говорить на английском. У вас вопрос именно по английской Википедии? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:13, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! What question would you like to ask? If you'd prefer to continue in Russian, I'll point you in the direction of Russian Wikipedia. sawyer * he/they * talk 16:15, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sawyer-mcdonell: judging by his user page, he's banned there. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Нужно сделать текст моего аккаунта сделать доступным любому землянину по гипер-ссылке : ".........".

Нужно сделать текст моего аккаунта - первой единственной страницы - сделать доступным любому землянину по указанной гипер-ссылке : ".........".

Виктор Рахман (talk) 16:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, what question are you asking? Nevermind, they've been indef blocked sawyer * he/they * talk 17:00, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

photos of newish public art in the US

Hi! I'm trying to understand the rules about uploading photos of public art in the United States, specifically photos I've taken of 3D public artworks that are not mine, of artworks that are not very old.

The rules I read here (Wikipedia:Image use policy) seem to say that if I take my own photo of someone else's 3D public art, the photo is considered a derivative work, but I'm unclear about whether that means I can upload it to wikimedia commons or wikipedia.

This page here seems to say I *cannot* use photos of 3D artwork: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Buildings_and_sculptures_as_works_of_art

But I'm confused because there is this entire public art project on wikipedia, in which all of the examples I've looked at include photos (by people other than the artist). Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts/Public art/Showcase#Lists of public art and there are a lot of other examples.

The goal is to add it to a wikipedia page, so if it's allowed on wikipedia but not wikimedia commons, that would be good to know too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krhettn (talk • contribs) 18:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Is there an exception I am missing? I want to make sure I don't break the rules, but the rules seem to contradict what I see. Thank you!

Krhettn (talk) 17:58, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Krhettn: Hello! Looks like there are different rules for different countries. For US, see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/United_States#Freedom_of_panorama

And this is a table with shortcuts for other countries: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Shortcuts Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:03, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you also @Deltaspace42 (sorry I didn't realize yours was a separate reply at first)! Krhettn (talk) 18:38, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

In the US, the page on Commons you linked to shows that photos of buildings are OK but photos of sculpture are not, even if the sculpture is permanently located in a public space. That contrasts with the UK, where both are OK. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:08, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes thank you @Michael D. Turnbull - I saw that, and that's the reason for my question because it seems opposite to what I see on wikipedia pages about public art in the United States. Are all of these other entries about public art just violating the image rules?

Krhettn (talk) 18:24, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I think I'm mainly confused about how these get approved or persist if they're violating the rules, so I'm trying to figure out if there is some exception here or what I am missing. Krhettn (talk) 18:27, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes thank you @Michael D. Turnbull - I saw that, and that's the reason for my question because it seems opposite to what I see on wikipedia pages about public art in the United States.

Also sorry I missed this reply until I edited my question slightly then it appeared. - I clicked "subscribe" but I am not getting notified of replies here. How do I see updates here? Sorry I haven't used this before. Krhettn (talk) 18:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Are all of these other entries about public art just violating the image rules? Krhettn (talk) 18:23, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Can you link to an article where you believe the rules may have been broken? Incidentally, if you are subscribed to this thread, you'll get notifications when others reply: they should be top right of the page near your username. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:29, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I was looking at examples here List of public art in Indianapolis.

The link about Non-free content guidelines posted below might have answered the question of why these are allowed to have images.

I'm not getting notifications (no idea why!) but reloading seems to be working. Krhettn (talk) 18:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Krhettn, a few may be violations. Articles about a particular piece of 3D art can use a low-resolution image of that art under the Wikipedia:Non-free content guidelines. Those images have to be uploaded here, not on Commons, and must meet all the requirements of use. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I was looking at examples here. List of public art in Indianapolis

Thank you for the link. The Non-free content guidelines says "a photo of a copyrighted statue (assuming there is no freedom of panorama in the country where the statue was when the photo was taken) can only be used to discuss the statue itself, not the subject of it." so that seems to mean that I can use a photo I've taken of public statues. Is that correct? Krhettn (talk) 18:45, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, but carefully. Follow the instructions in the document I linked and take a look at File:Imploding Cube by John Simms.jpg's description to see what the result will look like. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Krhettn The list of public art in Indianapolis has the images it does in a way that is valid for Wikipedia. All those on that page are of sculptures that were created before 1928 or in some cases before 1978 (see this explanation). Images of sculptures more recent than 1978 can only be used under the fair use provisions within the article about the sculpture itself and hence not in a list article. Assuming you refer to your draft about the Igor Fokin Memorial, note that you can't place your image there until the article is accepted into the encyclopaedia, as fair use doesn't apply to drafts. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:38, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @StarryGrandma and @Michael D. Turnbull ! Yes I'm asking about things that are mostly more recent than 1978, but the Exploding Cube you mention is also an example of that (several in the chart for Indianapolis show dates in the 2000s, and these are the examples I was referring to). I see that I have to use specific resolution requirements to do that.

Thanks also for the info on including a picture after it is a regular article instead of a draft! I was wondering what order to do that in. Krhettn (talk) 19:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh, and it also depends on how long ago the artist died. DS (talk) 21:13, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Krhettn: Images uploaded locally to (English) Wikipedia or globally to Wikimedia Commons aren't officially vetted or otherwise examined before being uploaded; in other words, there's no formal approval process and it's mostly assumed that those uploading images either know enough about image copyright and relevant Wikipedia and Commons policies to either know what they're doing or know to ask for assistance if they don't. Unfortunately, not many people bother to do their due diligence when uploading their images and just assume that (1) it's automatically OK to do so and (2) someone else will fix things if it's not. In addition, many people misunderstand the meaning of "public domain" and "free license" and just are assuming that anything that can be downloaded for "free" online must be OK for Wikipedia from a copyright standpoint. Furthermore, many images of 3D works that people upload to their social media accounts or other websites that have absolutely nothing to do with Wikipedia are also incorrectly licensed, either unintentionally or intentionally, but Wikipedia users often just take these people at their word and assume they know what they're doing. This means that lots of images are uploaded to both are ones uploaded with incorrect or at least questionable licensing requiring further examination. In many cases, these images can simply fly under the radar until someone like yourself asks about them or otherwise indirectly makes their existence known to others via a question that mentions them. So, yes it's quite possible that some of the images being used in Wikipedia articles (even ones uploaded to Commons) that you've seen are copyright violations that will need to be further discussed to determine whether they need to be deleted.

Under US copyright law, creative works with a known author and a known date of first publication are, in general, eligible for copyright protection for up to the greater of 95 years after their date of first publication or date of creation, or 70 years after the death of the creator depending on when the work was created. There are also lots of conditions and other caveats that apply, and most of these are explained pretty well here. As for 3D publicly installed artworks in the United States, there is no automatic freedom of panorama for such works and whether they're eligible for copyright protection depends upon when they were installed, whether they were published with a copyright notices, whether they were formally registered for copyright protection and several other things. So, before you upload anything under a free or public domain license, I strongly suggest that you ask about it at either WP:MCQ or c:COM:VPC to let others help you sort out whether it would actually be OK to do so. Please note that under various versions of US copyright law, "publication" didn't necessarily mean "publicly displayed" when it came to 3D works of art.

As for non-free content, you're correct in that Wikipedia does allow such content to be uploaded locally (Commons doesn't allow any non-free content at all), but there are lots of restrictions placed on it. Wikipedia's non-free content use policy is much more restrictive by design than US copyright law and there are ten criteria that need to be met for each use of non-free content. Wikipedia policy generally allows non-free content to be used as long as freely licensed or public domain content that is capable of serving essentially the same encyclopedic purposes of any non-free content can neither be found or reasonably created. It also prefers alternatives to non-free content such as WP:WIKILINKs or text be used whenever possible. So, a non-free image of copyright protected 3D work of art publicly displayed in the US can sometimes be uploaded and used, but usually only when the image is used for primary identification purposes in the main infobox or at the top of a stand-alone article about the work itself and usually only when it's an image you've taken yourself. Trying to use such images in other types of articles or in other types of ways (for example, to illustrate individual entries in an article like "List of public art in Indianapolis" is almost always considered WP:DECORATIVE and not allowed per WP:NFLISTS. All of the images currently used in that article appear to be ones uploaded under some sort of free license to Commons, and are not non-free images. Whether they're OK for Commons is something that might need to be further examined, but that's a separate discussion that will need to take place on Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:56, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Wow thank you @Marchjuly for this super thorough answer! I am trying to fill in more information for public art / monuments near me, in general. Luckily, images would only be on a page about the monument/sculpture itself, not a different page as you said is prohibited, but I'm not sure how to be sure no other image can be found. I will just not add any images for newer works for now, to will err on the side of caution (for ones that aren't super old anyway), until I can figure out how to check if other images exist. (This is kind of a bummer since I was hoping to upload some really nice photos I took.) It looks pretty straightforward that I can add photos of the super old monuments at least (that part seemed pretty clear - that's why it wasn't part of my question). Anyway, thank you again! Krhettn (talk) 03:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

By the way, do these get deleted, or can I save these answers and links here? This is my first teahouse question. Thanks again! Krhettn (talk) 03:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

After a few days of inactivity this question will be archived. If you click on the icon in the top-right corner of this section, you can get links that you can save somewhere. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

What is a good question that I should be asking of the Teahouse?

i have asked many questions here, but never asked what i should ask. I once heard from a mentor that one of the best questions to ask is, "What question should I be asking?", so I am applying that now here too. just seeing if there is anything that i could be doing to improve. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:27, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn: Some good questions to ask would be, "What makes a topic notable enough to merit an article?" (that one usually causes a lot of problems with newer users, and for that, read WP:GNG), "What can I do to improve Wikipedia?" (see the task center), "Where do I go when I need help from users to do something specific?" (see WP:Noticeboards). You can ask any questions that you have personally here that's related to Wikipedia. Cheers ‍ Relativity 20:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

wikipedia page

I created a page and submitted / "Published" on December 14th 2023 and have not had a response.

What is my next step?

MichaelCousins1 (talk) 21:30, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@MichaelCousins1: Hello! Did you create an article about yourself in your sandbox? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:31, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

So, first of all, you need to create a page in Draft space, not in your sandbox (see Help:Your_first_article).

Secondly, if this article is about yourself, it constitutes conflict of interest. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @MichaelCousins1, your next step is to wait. Make yourself a cup of tea. Get a good book. The articles for creation process runs on volunteer time, volunteer interest, and volunteer patience, just like the rest of Wikipedia. Cheers, 🎄Cremastra 🎄 (talk) 21:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Cremastra: this user created an article not in draft space, but in their sandbox, and it looks like the article is about themselves, judging by the nickname. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

...and, I note, they haven't actually submitted the draft for review yet (and if they did, it would be immediately declined). Thanks for the info. 🎄Cremastra 🎄 (talk) 21:39, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

(..edit conflict.) I did make the move to Draft while this debate was going on but would fully support the arguments made above. Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@MichaelCousins1: Your next steps would be a) read WP:COI b) find reliable sources to use as references for the article, per WP:RS and add references perhaps per Help:Referencing for beginners. Right now it has none. c) press the 'submit for review' button in the template on the article. As it is, per the comments above, it stands no chance of being promoted as an article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:47, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

The page in question is Draft:Michael Cousins, btw. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MichaelCousins1, and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, like many new editors, you have mistaken Wikipedia for a site where it is appropriate to tell the world about something (a.k.a. to promote it).

Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. It follows that, once you have found those independent sources, you will need to forget everything you know about yourself and write an article based solely on what those sources say.

Do you see why it is hard to create an article about yourself? ColinFine (talk) 22:21, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Help with editing pages for Russian and eastern European figures

Hi, I have noticed that a lot of the articles of lesser-known Russian and eastern European figures in the English wikipedia contain sparse information and very few sources.

I recently revamped the article for Pavel Blonsky and did some work on the article for Lev Kassil. The problem is, there are very few if any sources on these two in English.

I was wondering if anyone had access to reputable Russian sources that could be translated, or would be willing to directly translate from Russian? Or if I should be asking this somewhere else? MunsterManicotti5092 (talk) 22:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

A better place to ask than this one (though not necessarily the best) would be Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia. (Yes, this announces at its head "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Russia page", but it clearly is not.) A problem you'll face is that a vast number of articles on subjects that don't routinely appear on TV in the US or Britain have poor sourcing or are otherwise feeble, so it might be good to point out very briefly why such-and-such a proposed improvement is particularly important. ("Very briefly", because readers tend to bristle when requests seem to tell them that the requesters' interests/obsessions are more important than whatever happen to be the readers' own.) Incidentally, Blonsky is described as a paedologist but with no link that I notice to the article paedology, which in turn tells us that it's the study of children's behavior and development (as distinct from pedagogy, the art or science of teaching, and pediatrics, the field of medicine relating to children). Pedology is not commonly recognized as a distinct field of study; therefore, many people who would be described as pedologists are instead described as pedagogues, psychologists, pediatricians, etc. Clearly ⟨paedology⟩ and ⟨pedology⟩ are merely two ways of spelling the same word, but it's odd to see them juxtaposed like this. And the article's membership of Category:Pedagogy is even odder. So you see, the list of things that must be improved is endless. -- Hoary (talk) 23:21, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

how to list examples of videos/tv ads in an article

hello! i am currently trying to work on the article Partnership to End Addiction . it is written majorly in an editorial/ad type way, but there are a lot of examples of descriptions of ads im not sure how to write in the wikipedia manual of style, keep, or remove. an excerpt from the current version of the article:

In one television commercial, a camera zooms in and out on two adolescents, one of whom is trying to get the other to try marijuana. The tagline then reads: "A friend who offers you drugs is not your friend." It was a "strikingly different tack" from the milder Just Say No campaign.

it doesnt look "right" for wikipedia, but im stuck trying to think of how a description of a video should be written out. should i leave this as is? should i change the formatting (if so, how) or clear it completely. there are plenty of these in the article, how many specific examples of descriptions of ads does an ad company article need? (0? 3? 5?) ive been having difficulty finding similar articles to reference. any other tips or notes regarding this article are highly appreciated, thanks :) Sydpresscott (talk) 23:06, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

It seems to be reasonable handling for the subject matter. I'd be inclined to leave it alone. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:14, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Sydpresscott, you ask for other comments. If the article is written in "an editorial/ad type way", then something is very wrong. It shouldn't read like newspaper articles, if that's what you mean. And it should definitely neither be, or read like, an advertisement. A sample:

The ad had varyingly impactful effects on viewers. Student Taia Lubitz felt the "brain on drugs" commercial was not accurate, since she saw fellow students smoking marijuana whose brains were clearly not frying. She claimed that the ad "stirred her curiosity" and that the scare tactic was really more of a "dare" tactic.[9] Student Sepideh Modrek said that "The fried egg commercial really scared me when I was in high school. I remember picturing that egg in the frying pan and thinking that it wasn't worth it."[9]

Does "varyingly impactful effects" mean anything other than "various impacts"? Our idiolects may differ, but to me, "student Taia Lubitz", "student Syd Presscott", etc sound very strange. But, more importantly, why pick just these two students out of (I imagine) hundreds of thousands, if not millions? (Maybe "One student felt ... Another student said ..."?) -- Hoary (talk) 23:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

i agree! it has a warning template about it, and it is largely written/edited by someone who works there. I am having a hard time finding specific examples like that, so thank you!

also general question (to anyone,) how much cultural context from the outside of the subject of the article is necessary? how much (if any) information about "cultural attitudes" about drug use have a place in the partnership for a drug free america article Sydpresscott (talk) 23:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

this is my rewrite

The ad had various impacts on viewers. One student felt the "brain on drugs" commercial was not accurate, since she saw fellow students smoking marijuana whose brains were clearly not frying. She claimed that the ad "stirred her curiosity" and was really more of a "dare" tactic.[9] Another said that "...the fried egg commercial really scared me when I was in high school. I remember picturing that egg in the frying pan and thinking that it wasn't worth it."[9] Sydpresscott (talk) 23:44, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sydpresscott: Look at other articles about ad campaigns for examples of how to describe the ads without writing like an ad. Foe example, You Will about AT&T's ad series, or Got Milk RudolfRed (talk) 00:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Sydpresscott, in this edit, I made the prose of one section slightly less ponderous. I'm sure that other editors could find more flab there that could easily be cut. (Within the section, I also fixed misuse of the Cite templates' "last" attribute.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:25, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Sydpresscott, I went through another section, but I didn't fix a stunning mistake in a cite template within the section, because I would have had to look at the web page in question in order to know exactly how to fix it, and in order to do that I'd have to disable ad blocking, and I couldn't be bothered. But really, I start to wonder whether taking "Famous fried eggs: Erika Alexander" to be an author's last name might indicate a brain on drugs. -- Hoary (talk) 02:56, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Ebsco access number

Searching for an article to add as an external link "https://search.ebscohost.com › login ebsco The History of Messianic Jews and the State of Israel, 1948 ..." appeared after I'd scrolled through snippets and clicked "repeat the search with the omitted results included". When I clicked "Publish changes" an error notice mentioning ebsco appeared which included "You can link to https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?AN=<access number> (the ebsco 'permanent link' to the record), the access number is sometimes visible in other ebsco links (the number after 'AN='), or available from the ebsco page that you are visiting.". Where is the relevant access number which will make the URL acceptable? Where do I add it? Do I need to change the URL in any other way? Mcljlm (talk) 23:46, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I've found the access number for the article in question via The Wikipedia Library. Here it is: 158043326
I've also found a DOI for this article, which may be helpful for you: doi:10.2979/israelstudies.27.3.06.
If you need more help, or PDF access, let me know. Happy editing! sawyer * he/they * talk 01:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

References

Draft of existing mainspace article

Hello, I noticed that article Hwang Hyun-jin already exist but only consist a redirect to Stray Kids article. Meanwhile there is also Draft:Hwang Hyun-jin which is not completed (barely have any information and sources). I'm wondering if I can request to move the draft to mainspace or should I improve the page first before request move article? Please give me a guidance, thank you! Shenaall (talk) 01:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Shenaall Improve then submit for review. He needs to be notable on his own outside of the group he is with. If you can make a decent article on him and his accomplishments alone then the reviewer can make the move happen. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 01:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Shenaall, the draft must make it clear that reliable sources (for which reliability is as defined by and for Wikipedia) demonstrate that he is notable (for which notability is as defined by and for Wikipedia). -- Hoary (talk) 01:52, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

for PDF citation, which page # to use?

If my citation reference is an online PDF document, which page # do I use? The page # that is printed on each page (could be i, ii, etc.) or the page # that my PDF viewer says I am reading. If the doc has an un-numbered title page & several i, ii pages, then the printed page could be 5 but the PDF page could be 10. I've tried to research this in WP but could not find the answer. Sunandshade (talk) 01:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! In my editing, I generally go with the number printed on the page of the PDF, rather than the page number that the PDF viewer uses. I don't think there's a guideline for this, so it's up to the individual editor. If a certain book or document is available on multiple platforms, e.g. Google Books and Internet Archive, then the printed numbers will likely be the same, whereas the "PDF" page numbers are more likely to be different. If you need any more help, let me know! sawyer * he/they * talk 01:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Too bad there's no guideline. Makes sense to use the printed page #, but wondered what others thought about this. Whichever I use, it would be good to specify in the citation which page # I used. Is there a way to specify that? Sunandshade (talk) 02:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any specific way to mark which page numbering, but perhaps you could include it next to the page number, e.g. "pages=52-53 (printed)" or something along those lines. sawyer * he/they * talk 02:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Sunandshade, I have a strong preference on this (the same as Sawyer-mcdonell's), and following my preference has never landed me in any trouble -- nobody has "corrected" or even questioned my numbering. But I can't cite any guideline or similar for the preference. If you ask at Help talk:Citation Style 1 you're likely to get expert and policy-citing advice, fast. -- Hoary (talk) 02:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Sunandshade, per the other two answerers—you should use the page number printed on the page. The page numbers in a given PDF file are often correct, but can be offset or otherwise wrong depending on the care and provenance of the specific PDF file and the nature of the source. I've had to manually edit many of my PDFs to make the page numbers of the file agree with those of the original source. Remsense留 02:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Baptismal names?

I'm looking at Felicia Montealegre Bernstein. It gives her name as "née Felicia María Cohn Montealegre". But I found on Geni.com that her baptismal certificate says Felicia María Josefa de Jesús. Do we include or not include baptismal names? --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 02:14, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

It seems to me that this is a changed name, so use both in the title, then choose the most recent one for the rest of the article.

For example: Jack Benny (born Benjamin Kubelsky, February 14, 1894 – December 26, 1974)

(from here)

Happy editing!

Geardona (talk) 02:41, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Why is it a "changed name"? I don't know how baptismal names work in Latin cultures - or how we usually deal with them in Wikipedia articles. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 04:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

There is no specific policy for those types of names, so that seemed to me to be the closest analog in wikipedia policies, am I misunderstanding the concept? Geardona (talk) 04:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Copyright and sister projects

I am writing an article on the Denver attorney W.W. Anderson. I found a photograph of Anderson on a Wikisource page, but I’m unsure of it’s copyright status. I can’t find the photo on Wikimedia Commons. Do Wikipedia sister projects also follow the same copyright rules that Wikipedia does, and can the images on a sister project be transferred between projects? Roasted (talk) 02:33, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Roastedbeanz1: Each project has their own rules. If you click the photo it should say what the licensing is. RudolfRed (talk) 02:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Roastedbeanz1: Yes, Wikisource does follow copyright rules - see Wikisource:Wikisource:Image guidelines. What is the link of the photo on Wikisource? GoingBatty (talk) 02:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Is it this one? c:File:Bench_and_bar_of_Colorado_-_W._W._ANDERSON.png? It is on commons and is public domain. RudolfRed (talk) 02:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Roastedbeanz1:, copyright has expired on all photos published over 95 years ago, and such photos can be re-used by anyone for any purpose without restriction. On Wikimedia projects, best practice is to provide information about the photographer, date and provenance, but this is not a legal requirement. Cullen328 (talk) 09:00, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

SFN fixes for citations written in the same year by the same author

I'm in the process of expanding and improving the article for Mieczysław Weinberg and have hit a bump with sfn referencing. Two of the sources I use are authored by the same person and were written in the same year. This causes an error message to appear. How can I fix this? Thanks! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 02:37, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi CurryTime7-24. See Template:Sfn#More than one work in a year. The short answer is that you label one YEARa and the other YEARb. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you!! CurryTime7-24 (talk) 02:42, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Having links to portals, categories etc on your userpage for reference...without accidentally adding yourself to those categories... How to?

I just decided to make my userpage a useful resource for myself, with links to things I find myself coming back to and intend to use. Among those links are ones to wikipedia Categories, Portals.

Once done adding all that, I found I had added myself TO some of these things, when that shouldn't be the case. No matter what I try to call myself, I am not a branch of mycology.

Obviously I need to undo that... but how do you add links to categories to a page without adding the page to the category?? Is it just by posting the plain url link, as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mycology_organizations ? I had switched them to internal page links with [[ brackets and maybe that's the problem. I just wanted them to not look as chaotic as plain url links do, and be more readable.

Thank you! MariahKRogers (talk) 04:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Colons in links. diff. Whether all of these are needed, who knows, but they don't harm. --Tagishsimon (talk) 04:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Like this format [[:___|___]]

Nice. MariahKRogers (talk) 04:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Where references can be added in discussions about creating an article with different sources in various places outside of the lead section

How can references be added during discussions about whether or not to keep an article in different places? Are only admins allowed to do this or else regular editors get blocked? I’m new so I don’t understand how alot of policies get made on Wikipedia yet but I will learn soon? Thellosnellow (talk) 06:02, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

References can be added to articles at any time, including when the article is being discussed in a deletion discussion. References can be added by anyone. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Need Help Getting Started on Wikipedia

Hello, Thank you in advance for helping me. ‪CAPTAIN RAJU suggested that I come here for help. I just created a user name and password. My name is Demetrius. I created my account in order to create a Wikipedia for a Musical Artist. I was experimenting with building her infobox within the Sandbox to see what it looked like to test my coding. It was deleted. Obviously, I need to be setup up properly before creating this Wikipedia. I also need to declare a COI. I took all of the photos on her album covers and except 2 albums. I thought I would upload all of the images, album covers (high resolution) first and then work on the article to connect to them. I need help with how to get started in the right direction. Any feedback you have, I am willing to learn.

Thank you,

Demetrius

Wiki-Wiki-2028 (talk) 06:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

If you have a conflict of interest, then probably the best you can do is not to write the artice. The images on Commons would be very welcome. But you are fundamentally compromised when it comes to the article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Someone told me that declaring COI does not disqualify me from writing the article. So look as the article is written according to Wiki standard, I should be okay. What I can trying to accomplish is getting started. For example, I want to build the article in the Sandbox. I have written all of the code. However, I may use the Wizard to actually do this because I understand it is easier. The way I would like to start is first upload all of my images so I can refer to them in the article. What I would like to know is how to start. From reading the information, it looks like log into my account and starting building my article on the Musical Artist. I am trying to understand what I did that cause the Speedy Deletion. The only thing that was on the page was an infobox with information and a photo.

Wiki-Wiki-2028 (talk) 07:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Wiki-Wiki-2028, please note the following:

(1) You may own the copyright to the photos, but do you own the copyright to the album covers, which presumably also include typography? Even if so . . .

(2) Do you realise that by uploading images to Commons, you are irrevocably giving permission to everyone in the World to re-use them for any purposes, including commercial ones, provided that they include attribution? Are you sure you want to do this?

A more usual course for album covers is to upload a low-resolution image to this (English-language) Wikipedia (not Commons) for the single purpose of illustrating an article about that album only (not one about the artist) under the 'fair use' criterion. This can only be done with an already-existing article – such 'fair-use' images must not be uploaded into Drafts, and will be deleted if they are. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 07:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I not only own the photos, I created the album cover as well. It just that I did not fully understand the process and the best choices to make. As I have said before, I am learning about this maze of content and the process. It would be nice if if people would tell me what I need to do and point me in the right direction like you have done by explaining where and how to upload images under 'fair use.' If I have many album covers that correpond with the aritlce, how can I submit a draft for review with a reference or connection from the article with the album cover. I thought that if the artlcie is about a Musical Artist and they released an album that is mentioned in the artilce, the draft will have [[name of album here]] that will say no image is found. many red letter becasue there of not havomg the artwork that is mentioned. Then my article would be flagged and taken down artilce would be flagged for takedown for not having proof of of the album shown?

Demetrius

Wiki-Wiki-2028 (talk) 11:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

A reason COI editors are not okay, Wiki-Wiki-2028, is that they write complete nonsense such as "This album cover for 'He Loves You' by Angel Sessions is a visual symphony that encapsulates the essence of love and spirituality" when the photo just looks like someone miserable leaning against a wall. So, look, start your COI infested article at Draft:Angel Sessions and submit it to Articles for Creation, and we'll take it from there. --Tagishsimon (talk) 07:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Wiki-Wiki-2028 T is being overly blunt, and perhaps promising too much. Yes, a person with a COI can create and then submit a draft to AfC as long as the COI is declared. (If paid or in any way compensated, then the situation is paid and WP:PAID applies. Teahouse hosts usually limit contributions to advice - not co-authoring, so no "We'll take it from there." The Speedy deletion was because you were creating content at your User page. See WP:UP for what goes there. Create and submit the draft using WP:YFA without album cover images, as images do not figure into deciding notability. Ditto for Infobox. WP:NMUSIC applies. David notMD (talk) 08:53, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I now understand that I do not need to declare COI. The term was mention as part of the deletion because I created an article on my User page. I thought I need to declare in order to have it put back up. I did not fully understand the process. This is what I trying the learn. I read the information, however the only way I can really understand is to try, fail, and learn, and try again. I am not being paid at all. I may not understand this process. I am only a volunteer. I am simple looking for people you can genuinely help me.

Demetrius

Wiki-Wiki-2028 (talk) 10:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay. To see if I understand how to do this correctly, I am going to write the full article.  I have to add

{{subst:submit|Wiki-Wiki-2028}} at the top of the article? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:AfC_submission/draft

How would I upload all the album covers and other images for the article so they come to you?  This weekend, I am going to closely review my article, and put all of the code with citations and references that I have and send it to Articles for Creation.  Whatever you decide to use or not, I leave that up to you. Please help me with the steps to do this in the way you are requesting.  Thank you for your feedback.

Wiki-Wiki-2028 (talk) 10:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Self-styled editor moving pages illicitly and issuing threats

A registered Wikipedia user Alirezadubai said they had the ability to get a page I was editing [Sue Williams (writer)] published for a modest payment. I thought they were going to research some missing citations. I then realised all they were doing was moving the page past the CfC process (against the rules) and I refused to pay. Now they are threatening to block the page and my topic's name. At no time did I give this person our logins or permission to do anything except edit the draft. I now see the page is being deleted section by section because the citations it required are not there. So, firstly, here's a warning to avoid these conmen. Secondly, how can I get the material back so I can continue working on it. JimmyT1967 (talk) 07:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi! This is a documented scam that has happened to other editors before. Please see the page Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning for more information. sawyer * he/they * talk 07:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

There seem to be a couple of versions of the draft; you can see all of the versions of each at their histories - 1, 2. You'll understand we have limited sympathy (which is to say none at all) for someone who has paid to get an article onto WP and got their fingers burned. WP is not a platform for your promotional activities. --Tagishsimon (talk) 07:50, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

JimmyT1967 "refused to pay" once they realized it was a scam and not legitimate editing work. sawyer * he/they * talk 07:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

And your point is? --Tagishsimon (talk) 07:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

That they did not go through with any kind of payment and that we, as welcomers of new editors, should assume good faith. sawyer * he/they * talk 08:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

There's no good faith to assume when an individual rocks up to tell us they're tried to subvert the system to get their article published. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:08, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

There is plenty of good faith to assume, they've recognised they were a victim of a scam and that it was not legitimate editing work. Paid editing is not prohibited, provided it is declared and falls within policy, per the terms of use. Polyamorph (talk) 11:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Someone needs to tell your colleague Tagishsimon to pull his/her/their head in. Jumping on anyone who has made an honest mistake and then tried to correct it - and in such an abusive way - is that what Wikipedia is really about? JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

But judging by your other comments, it does seem to be a platform for you to pay out on lesser mortals with your snide comments. Personally, I think someone who has written a number of books that have helped to highlight the plight of street kids, African women suffering from serious birth injuries, the victims of discrimination and heroic doctors who are changing people's lives, and still has time to win awards for her true crime and travel writing does deserve recognition. I have seen the effect she has on young women writers - especially as a lecturer at Boston University - inspiring them to achieve their own potential. Her only fault was to ask a newbie like me to get it on Wikipedia. Thanks for the advice, but cool your jets, man. It'll make you a nicer person to be around. JimmyT1967 (talk) 08:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Last comment was directed at Tagishsimon JimmyT1967 (talk) 08:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

JimmyT1967, User: Alirezadubai is an account set up two weeks ago that has 28 edits in total. In contrast, I have been editing Wikipedia for over 14 years and have made over 100,000 edits. This is what we call a "throwaway account", set up for deception and theft. We call them "undisclosed paid editors" and they are blocked when detected. The draft I took a look at, Draft:Sue Williams (Writer), has no less than 31 references, plus 11 external links and seven "Critical studies and reviews". That may look impressive but experienced editors can quickly see that all of that is hogwash and padding, and that none of it establishes the notability of this author. I will block the scammer, but it will have little effect, because these crooks just open another account and start fresh. I highly recommend that you cease all communication with this person and similar people. Cullen328 (talk) 08:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I can just about, through the tears, recommend you read WP:AUTHOR, WP:GNG and WP:COI, Jimmy. Meanwhile, perhaps your subject could write a promotional article on James Dunbar? --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:25, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

So you know how to access Google? Wow, you must be a genius. What's your point? You do know that writers who are successful in one field, use another name in a different genre? Again, I don't get your point - except to show how clever you think you are (which seems to be the foundation of all your contributions here). And I'm guess Tagishsmon isn't your real name either. So tell me, o wise one, are you a flamer or a troll - I can never tell the difference. JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:27, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hogwash and padding? Wow, you must all feel so smug and self-satisfied passing judgement on real writers who make a living in the real world, and make a difference to other people's lives. I have made an honest attempt to satisfy your arcane rules on what is acceptable and what isn't by providing genuine information about a real person who has published 25 real books with real publishers. If there is "padding" it's because I was adding more information because I thought that was what was being demanded but the "editors". And it turns out what she should have been doing, it seems, is getting people to write about her and not her books. Shame, because she isn't seeking publicity but some validation as a working class girl who has achieved a remarkable level of success. I declared a COI right at the start - big mistake - but I have tripped over another hidden rule and not done it on this page. It seems I have wandered into a world where you can't make an honest mistake without being ridiculed and belittled. It is your collective process of only offering criticism rather than meaningful and helpful advice that leave the door open to the scammers. Pedestrians! JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

The meaningful advice was to read WP:AUTHOR, WP:GNG and WP:COI, Jimmy. I hope you've done that. We can haggle about whether pay to play is an 'honest mistake'. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:34, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

When the wise ones of Wikipedia decline to offer specific advice and somebody turns up in your email saying they know what's wrong with your submission and they know how to fix it, that's not subverting the system, anymore than, say paying a lawyer to write an official letter. He told us he was part of the system and as soon as we realised he wasn't, we canned him and reported it. I know this is probably wasted on you but then I don't have your monstrous intellect and impeccable and unfailing sense of right and wrong to guide me. JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:43, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

STATUS: Draft:Sue Williams (writer) exists and User:Alirezadubai has been indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 09:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Sue Williams (Writer) also exists. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

JimmyT1967 The great majority of refs (5-23) confirm that she is the author of the listed books. None of that contributes to confirming her notability. What is essential is refs to published content about her. David notMD (talk) 09:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Also, back in January your declared a COI on your User page. The nature of your COI should be mentioned on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 09:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your reasoned response. For the record, I am Sue Williams partner and I also function as her tech help, for want of a better description. That's how I got involved in thois schemozzle in the first place. My full name is James Dunbar Thomson. I too am a published author and I write a newspaper column about apartment living under the name Jimmy Thomson and crime novels under the name James Dunbar. I only say this to satisfy the genius who is Tagishsimon who seems to think he has discovered something of note. My singular failure here, in trying to get Sue's page published, is to misunderstand the definition or parameters of "notability". In my world, having 25 or more published works - every one by long-standing established publishers - would make you "notable". Ironically, Sue has always eschewed self-promotion - hence the lack of published material about her, rather than her books - and only wanted a Wikipedia entry to establish that she's had a long and successful career as a writer and to bring together her myriad publications under one researchable umbrella. This is my failure, not hers. JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Your other failure was entering into an agreement to pay someone to get your article published. I feel we should not overlook that bit. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

See my previous comments about the difference between paying for professional assistance and trying to "subvert" the system. And I didn't pay anything, even though the page appeared as a published item. I realised the person was an imposter when I noticed that there had been no changes. By the way, what's your real name and maybe you could list your achievements, especially those you have made without outside help? No? Hmmm, I thought not. JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: this is the teahouse. It is for welcoming new users and not a battleground / drama board. As I mentioned above, paid editing is not prohibited provided it is undertaken in accordance with the terms of use. Please assume good faith. They have recognised they made a mistake, and their comments indicate they want to do the right thing. It is our job to advise them politely how to navigate the associated COI and paid editing policies, not to chastise them. If you can't behave accordingly then please let others deal with it. Polyamorph (talk) 11:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

JimmyT1967, Sue Williams' purpose here, as you describe it, sounds very reasonable. It's just not what Wikipedia is for. (This is not to say that Wikipedia doesn't have plenty of articles just like that. It does have them. Improving some of these and deleting the rest is a major chore.) If she really wants that, it's what suewilliams.com.au is for, or could be for. I see that she has written a lot of books. What substantive reviews of them have there been in what Wikipedia classes as "reliable sources"? Try summarizing and citing those. Doing this would likely add up to demonstrating what Wikipedia classes as "notability". NB not blurbs; instead, reviews in newspapers and the like. (And not interviews, either.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@JimmyT1967 It is perfectly possible that one or more of Williams' books could be wikinotable, without her being so owing to lack of suitable sources. Please read the page I have linked regarding the notability of books. One drawback of Wikipedia's policy on the biographies of living people is that every factual statement has to be backed up with an inline citation: that's because verifiability is the key. I would expect that reviews of some of her books in sources meeting these criteria should exist and would be a good place for you to start drafting suitable articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:00, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

2023 Israel–Hamas war

The content in the above subjected line is shows false report of Israeli military's casualties, can you please correct this. Since the casualties count also reduced after few days again.. it's false and seems israeli propaganda 2409:40F2:1015:EA9D:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 09:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Please discuss on the talk page of the article, not here. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

IndusInd Bank Partnership Section

Hi, I have added content with reliable source to expand the IndusInd Bank Article referring to Partnership section. Would like to understand whether it was promotional content or can this be added again? VKG1985 (Talk | E-Mail | Contrib) 09:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

If this removed content - diff - is the content in question, it should not be re-added since it is entirely promotional in tone & content. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:50, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the revert & addressing it. Next time will make sure to add appropriate content rather than promotional. VKG1985 (Talk | E-Mail | Contrib) 10:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

hello need help to improve my article draft

i tried to create an article, but it declined due to its looks advertisment for the system, but it isnt, i just added corporation information, please help me to improve and fix it so i can publish it =]

thanks so much, Rea H. Rikoshar (talk) 10:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Rikoshar Hello. I see that you declared a COI; if you work for RS Royal Services INC, the Terms of Use require you to make the stricter paid editing disclosure.

Wikipedia is not a place to merely provide information or to merely tell of the existence of a company and what it does. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company and what makes it important/significant/influential, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 10:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

thanks for the first article guide,

can i get some more help regard this? Rikoshar (talk) 10:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Rikoshar You should first make the paid editing disclosure. It's strongly advised that people not attempt to edit about their companies at all due to the conflict of interest- company employees are usually too close to their companies or too much into marketing to be able to write as Wikipedia requires. Please read WP:BOSS and have your superiors read it too(if you've been asked to be here). However, if you still wish to proceed, you should first gather independent reliable sources that give your company significant coverage so you can summarize what they say in an article. These sources should not include staff interviews, press releases, brief mentions, announcements of routine business activities and the like. The sources should give extensive discussion as to what they see as important/significant/influential about your company- not what your company sees as important about itself. 331dot (talk) 10:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

thank you for you answers and information,

ok i will look now for reliable sources,

and about the paid discloser, im not getting paid for it. nobody getting paid for this Rikoshar (talk) 10:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

WP:PAID is required if you work for the company even if not specifically being paid to edit the Wikipedia article. David notMD (talk) 11:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:RS Royal Services INC was Speedy deleted. You can try again, but all content must be neutral point of view and varified by independent (non-corporate) references. David notMD (talk) 11:08, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Request for promotional links removable

I have seen an article link that promotes their articles so I don't assess to remove as I am new, I am requesting for removable https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uczenie_g%C5%82%C4%99bokie Drakeshrao42 (talk) 10:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I think that might be Polish wikipedia? If so, you'd need to raise it there, not here, which is Englih wikipedia. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:24, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Should I register for that language and i don't how to remove the link Drakeshrao42 (talk) 10:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

You can probably just start a thread on https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tablica_og%C5%82osze%C5%84 in English; someone will pick it up. It's not clear to me what the issue is - "an article link that promotes their articles" - so please try to be as clear as possible when raising it there. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)