Wikipedia:Teahouse

ColinFine, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help

Wikipedia

Draft:KURU Footwear

Hello, can you provide any advice how to revise this Draft:KURU Footwear and resubmit so it can get approved. It has enough sources for notability and it seems the content may be an issue. It was declined before because the page was about the company. I was advice to change it to a Product page instead. The last declining editor said the page sounded promotional, so I removed all promotional language and he still declined. I believe he felt there is still something sounding promotional, so tell me how to revise it please so it can get accepted. Downinit9 (talk) 02:06, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

hi @Downinit9 and welcome to the teahouse! unfortunately, this article has been rejected, which means it can no longer be submitted, so if you're interested in writing it's best to write about something else. are you somehow related to KURU Footwear or people involved in it? if so, there is a Conflict of interest, which means what you are writing may be slightly affected, perhaps unconsciously, to using words and such that promote the subject.

for example, the use of all-caps in the product names like The ATOM shoe model ... can feel unformal at times and could draw too much attention to the word (which yes, it's the focus of the sentence but it's not the something that is extremely important like say, the subject itself and should be emphasized, and even if it is it's best to use bold text instead). in general, all-caps should be avoided when it's not grammatically necessary.

happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:32, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

The draft is not impressive, but I wouldn't have rejected it. Downinit9's question above seems very reasonable. Melecie's question about COI is reasonable too; it should be answered. However, as for

what you are writing may be slightly affected, perhaps unconsciously, to using words and such that promote the subject. / for example, the use of all-caps in the product names like The ATOM shoe model ... can feel unformal at times and could draw too much attention to the word

-- this is hardly satisfactory. It's easy to ask a writer to change "ATOM" to "Atom", etc. (And although I'm not completely persuaded by the content of the table that Downinit9 has presented on the draft's talk page, I do take the table as evidence of a desire to satisfy reasonable demands. I'd guess that they'd happily perform the change of case.) So Melecie, can you point to convincing examples in the draft of "words and such that promote the subject"? -- Hoary (talk) 03:04, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary: you do have a point, my reasoning was very flimsy. apart from this there's honestly not really any specific thing I'd point about the article, I just tried to figure out why the reviewer rejected the article here. I probably went too far out of my skillset here, so I'll try to stick to mostly explaining the more general what's from now on and probably stay out of more specific article review questions for now.

apologies, also to Downinit9 for my poor explanation. happy editing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melecie (talk • contribs) 04:15, 2 November 2022‎ (UTC)

No apologies needed, Melecie. But perhaps MaxnaCarta could explain, either here or somewhere more appropriate, how/why the submission is "contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia". -- Hoary (talk) 06:17, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary thank you for stating this. I also want to know the same. How is the article "contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia" ??? and @MaxnaCarta needs to be more specific to their reasoning.I made several attempts to remove anything that sounded promotional. If anybody still thinks there is anything promotional, please let me know. I also just made all the CAPS lowercase. Downinit9 (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

The comments are specific. Time and time again this article was declined by other reviewers and me and resubmitted with little improvement. The initial nature of the article was heavily promotional. The article appears contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia because we are not a marketing site or business directory. A business needs significant coverage per NCORP. I wrote notability probable but it’s more borderline. I’m happy for any editor to undo my reject if they feel otherwise. This is just one of countless articles AFC have to deal with. I question whether this article is appropriate. It does not appear to be a properly notable company. I also suspect but have no evidence that the author has some sort of personal reason for wanting this to be published, I’ve not seen this much effort singularly focused into getting a company published from someone who is merely a fan of the company.

To me, this article is advertising. On the balance of probabilities, I think it is more likely than not this article was some sort of marketing. Intent matters. The purpose of this article is not to educate or inform, it is to boost the status of a company or product and market rather than provide knowledge. In this regard, I consider the company I sufficiently notable and the article to go against the purpose of Wikipedia

That said, my word is worth no more than anyone else’s. I do not reject most articles, instead a decline to allow resubmission. Im also the third person to decline this so it has not impressed other reviewers as to its notability or suitability for inclusion. That’s my perspective, and other editors can undo my reject if they so choose. I do not consider such action if taken by an editor other than anyone who has created or edited the article to be “wheel warring” or the like. MaxnaCarta (talk) 22:00, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Insufficiently notable** MaxnaCarta (talk) 22:01, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

@MaxnaCarta what you don't realize is that the initial 2 declines had a completely different content which was for Kuru "the company", not Kuru "the shoes". You can check this version to see. I was advised in the help forum that the company didn't meet the notability due to lack of articles about the company, but the product (the shoes) may meet the notability. So I revised the page to be about the shoe and resubmitted. So it is not accurate that the page was declined multiple times due to being promotional. The first 2 times it was declined due to lack of meeting NCORP. In my opinion, the prior declines have effected your judgment into thinking that this page is probably bad because there were 2 other editors before you who declined the page, and you didn't realize that I was resubmitting a completely different page. So while the company lacked enough coverage, the product has plenty.

As to your COI concerns, as I said before, I am just a fan of the brand. This is my first time submitting a page, so I am eager to get it accepted and but mainly I just don't believe that you were correct to decline it, so that is why I posted here. In addition, I am just trying to learn all I can about Wikipedia so this is just something fun for me to do. Downinit9 (talk) 00:33, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

What I said stands. I suggest instead of the Teahouse, you instead raise your concerns at the AFC Helpdesk. Another AFC reviewer can discuss this with you as I do not feel comfortable approving. I will leave a note that another AFC reviewer can disregard my reject if they feel warranted to approve. I will not approve and there is no obligation on me to approve anything - Wikipedians are never forced to make an edit. I am however, open to another AFC reviewer making the edit if they wish. MaxnaCarta (talk) 01:55, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Why is it necessary to duplicate this discussion at AFC forum? It seems there are admins and AFC reviewers here also participating. There are 2-3 people here that seem to be OK with the page, so you can also just go ahead and post it. I don't know why you are make it so difficult when there seems to be support for the page to get approved. Downinit9 (talk) 05:26, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm not gonna argue with you. I am the one with control over my actions. I do not need to follow a positive direction to approve anything. Find another AFC reviewer to consider your article. If an admin wants to override me - fine by me. I've left a note on the draft. I also consulted privately with some other reviewers - none support its approval. Please do not tag me further - I am withdrawing from this discussion and yielding the floor to another reviewer who can consider my reject merely another decline instead of a reject. Thanks and enjoy the day. MaxnaCarta (talk) 07:03, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Hoary, pure advertising is contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia. It seems to have been written by an advertising intern who doesn't understand the shoe industry, or even the product being promoted.--Quisqualis (talk) 08:37, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Quisqualis, I wouldn't be surprised if what you surmise about the creation of the draft is correct. And pure advertising is indeed contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia. But what I see now doesn't look to me like pure advertising. This is the version most recently turned down with advertising given explicitly for the reason, and it too doesn't look to me like pure advertising. Example: KURU footwear range from walking shoes, hiking boots, and women’s shoes. Most KURU footwear are designed to improve foot health conditions such as plantar fasciitis, bunions, and heel spurs. There's a difference between that and, say, KURU footwear spans the gamut from walking shoes and hiking boots all the way to loafers that combine the casual with the elegant. Comfort is a given -- most KURU footwear additionally enhances protection against foot disorders such as plantar fasciitis, bunions, and heel spurs. [Ugh, did I really perpetrate that?] NB I'm not defending the draft, just saying I haven't yet been persuaded that it should have been rejected. (I'm also not satisfied with the existing criteria for rejection, but this is a matter for a different discussion.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:18, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

A statement like Most KURU footwear are designed to improve foot health conditions such as plantar fasciitis, bunions, and heel spurs. is a medical claim, and we have exceptionally stringent sourcing standards for medical claims. Please see WP:MEDRS. Cullen328 (talk) 15:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you all for responding. I am the submitter of the page. As you can see, it is my first time attempting to make a page, so I am not 100% familiar with all the rules. I didn't purposely put these in caps to attract attention, I did it because I assumed that is how it is normally stylized based on their website menu and this page mens-shoes. I have previously seen pages that have brand names all in CAPS and assumed it was how you are supposed to do it, if it is the common way of spelling it. Also, I do not have any COI. I am however a customer and own a pair of their shoes, so I am making the page as fan, which I assume is ok and how most page on Wikipedia are made. I also tried to mimic all verbiage according to the sources, so did not make up anything that is not supported by the citation. i.e I am not just saying "designed to improve foot health conditions" ,,, this is according to several cited articles. But again if this is against some policy that I was not aware of then I can change it.@Cullen328 the statement also is not claiming anything medical, because the way it is worded, it says "it is designed to improve" the condition, but it doesn't say that it does for 100%. A claim is usually more concrete such as "KURU footwear improve foot health conditions such ...." ... so in this case i don't agree that this is a medical claim. In any case, there are numerous citations for this statement. Almost every article you read about them will say that these are the purpose of the shoes. If a company was making a "sun screen" and that is how its marketed, would you argue that it is a medical claim and not accept their page, when every single article about them says they make sun screens? Downinit9 (talk) 20:32, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

"that is how its marketed"

Perfect demonstration of why this article is not appropriate. MaxnaCarta (talk) 22:58, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

@MaxnaCarta please clarify which Wiki policy states that any company marketing their product should not be listed? Downinit9 (talk) 05:20, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles should not present a product as having medical benefits when those have not been demonstrated by MEDRS-level sources, regardless of what the company presents in its press releases.

A team of marketing specialists and lawyers might have managed to hack together a sentence that implies a health benefit (so that people buy the product) without claiming it (so that they don’t get sued for false advertisement). That may be a great PR feat, all involved might deserve and get huge bonuses for their great work of weasel-word-smithing. But the company’s interest is not Wikipedia’s interest (nor, should I add, the consumer’s interest).

Maybe the product or company should get a page (I have not looked deeply into it), but said page should not uncritically reproduce those weasel words (WP:NOTPROMO etc.). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:38, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

@Tigraan Nothing is fluff or weasel words. It may appear that way, but please check dozens of supporting articles. Please check my updated source analysis for some of the quotes I pulled regarding the supporting statements. In addition, just check some of the types of coverage they have gotten based on the title of these articles:

• The 8 Best Shoes for Heel Spurs, According to a Podiatrist,
• The 20 Best Shoes for Flat Feet, According to an Expert,
• Top 10 Shoes for Plantar Fasciitis Relief"
• 13 Best Walking Shoes for Women, According to Podiatrists
• Best Shoes For Bunions Of 2022-According To Podiatrists

(Are you Armenian BTW? if so shat shnorakal)

Downinit9 (talk) 17:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Did you look at the WP:MEDRS guideline you were linked above? None of those sources meet Wikipedia's standard for medical claims. Wikipedia cannot repeat medical claims without proper sourcing, even by trying to reclassify them as claims about how a product is marketed. MrOllie (talk) 17:56, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

I have changed the verbiage as such that it is no longer a claim. It now says:

"Many publications have stated the benefits of the shoes in regards to improving foot health conditions such as plantar fasciitis, bunions, and heel spurs."

Would this be satisfactory, since it no longer a claim? I am now stating the facts per the publications. Downinit9 (talk) 06:21, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

See also MOS:TM. If "KURU" and "ATOM" in these brand names are not acronyms, then we do not over-capitalize them to mimic the trademark stylization, and would instead render them as "Kuru" and "Atom". Cf. Sony, which we do not write as "SONY" despite the appearance of their logo.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  18:41, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

@SMcCandlish Thank you for the clarification. As I said above I had seen some pages with caps and assumed it was OK. I have gone ahead and changed everything to lower case. Do you see any other issues? Downinit9 (talk) 20:38, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Haven't pored over it any detail, so I don't have anything to add to what others have said above at this point. I was just passing by and noticed all the "marketing capitalization". :-)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:32, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Three points. First, a couple of people above seem to suggest that being an admin means that the user's pronouncement here should be taken more seriously. It should not. Instead, take any pronouncement on its merits. ¶ Secondly, on meanings. I think that one can say that the Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election were designed to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election. The attempts failed to overturn it. Being designed to effect X doesn't entail effecting X. Thus I disagree with Cullen328's judgment above that "designed to improve foot health conditions" is a medical claim. So much for semantics. As for pragmatics, an advertising standards authority might well disallow "designed to improve foot health conditions" for giving a not-so-attentive reader the impression that the product does "improve foot health conditions". This issue is, I think, outside the scope of WP:MEDRS; but I wouldn't be surprised if some other guideline here rules against easily-misinterpreted health-related assertions such as this. And even if there is no such guideline, I'd agree that articles should avoid such talk. Still, such talk isn't necessarily a matter of advertising. ¶ Thirdly, though we're urged to avoid whataboutery, pray indulge me for a moment. I quickly thought up a short list of shoe (rather than sneaker) brands, and came up with Bally ("Bally (fashion house)"), Birkenstock, Clarks ("C. & J. Clark"), Hush Puppies, Mephisto (no article), Dr. Scholl's, and Veldskoen. At a glance, the Clarks article is pretty good. The other articles are bad: lack of substance, lack of references, credulous use of junk references, celeb name-dropping, peacockisms, etc. "Other crap exists" is a keep/accept argument that's easy to dismiss; "other crap is near-universal" is a lot more problematic. A few minutes ago I nibbled away at one conspicuous example of awfulness in the Birkenstock article; but shoes hold little interest for me and the notion of devoting hours to clearing up shoe articles fails to thrill me. Downinit9, would you care to improve one or two of the existing articles on shoes? -- Hoary (talk) 01:04, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hoary, I certainly did not mention that I am an administrator, and I want my opinions on content matters to be evaluated the same as any other editor's opinions. I have nothing negative to say about this brand of shoes and maybe they are great. I do not know. I am not a shoe buff and wear cheap shoes because I am frugal. But I do have concerns about mentioning three very specific medical conditions in a sentence about shoe design. If somebody wrote a draft about a Mexican cancer clinic that said that they had developed a new Laetrile therapy regimen that is "designed to improve conditions such as lung cancer, breast cancer and pancreatic cancer", then I think that Wikipedia editors would rightly insist on WP:MEDRS compliant sources. I think the same standard should apply to less lethal but very painful medical conditions as well. Cullen328 (talk) 01:42, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Cullen328, it's only now that I see that the sequencing within my prolix comment might have given the impression that you were one of my "couple of people". Of course you were not. I'm sorry for not having been more careful. I agree with everything you say about references to mild medical conditions. (We also appear to have a similar approach to shoe shopping.) My major point is about the contrast between (A) en:WP's impatience with (and utterance of suspicions about) AfC submissions and (B) its pervasive pattern of tolerating the same phenomena in established articles. But now I'll do something useful: attend to the Birkenstock article. -- Hoary (talk) 02:18, 4 November 2022 (UTC) PS This is quite enough Birkenstocking for me. Others here are of course most welcome to take over. -- Hoary (talk) 02:50, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I have changed the verbiage as such that it is no longer a medical claim. It now says:

"Many publications have stated the benefits of the shoes in regards to improving foot health conditions such as plantar fasciitis, bunions, and heel spurs." Downinit9 (talk) 06:22, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I think that you'll have to list what publications stated the benefits of the shoes. Helloheart (talk) 02:27, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Otherwise, that could be seen as promotional and you can't really say "many." (I've read a Wikipedia help page on this, but I don't remember its name.) It's a bit like relativity; to one person, just three news sources could be "many" but to another person the minimum amount of news sources needed would have to be at least a hundred. I would word it as "Example 1 of a reliable news source, the Example Dos Times and Example to the Power of 3 Publications states that the shoes help in regards to certain conditions such as plantar fasciitis, bunions, and heel spurs." Another thing that you could do is add a quote, but I don't know if that would work for this sort of article. Helloheart (talk) 03:13, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Translation

I'v been doing work at wikipedia for a while now and would like to help with translation. I am fluent in french and English and was wondering how I could help / Get started. Msaskiw (talk) 21:26, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Msaskiw, welcome to the Teahouse. For translating into English, see Wikipedia:Translation. For translating from English, see Wikipedia:Translate us. There are also many maintenance tags for articles which need someone fluent in another language to address their issues, like {{Rough translation}} and {{Expand French}}. Often those templates place articles in categories like Category:Articles needing translation from French Wikipedia, which you can browse at your leisure to see if anything catches your interest. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks that helps a lot Msaskiw (talk) 20:18, 3 November 2022 (UTC).

Msaskiw, there is a backlog of articles needing help from translators at WP:PNT. The § How to help section on that page provides two ways of accessing articles that have been translated from French but have specific problems that need attention. For example, you could pick any article in Category:Wikipedia articles needing cleanup after translation from French. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 08:12, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Where to find approved posts?

I edited a page with no copyright notice but my contributions did not appear. Any leads? TIA. Ddperez6 (talk) 11:43, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

@Ddperez6 Your contributions to planning were reverted by @MrOllie, an experienced editor, as you can see by looking at the "View history" tab of the article. This is a standard part of our WP:BRD process as we seek WP:CONSENSUS about what should appear in the article. The correct place to discuss this is on the Talk Page at Talk:Planning. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:56, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Ddperez6 - apparently this is related to a PhD class of some kind? Many new accounts have shown up at that article (and others) and attempted to add information, only to be reverted because it did not meet our guidelines. If you've been given some sort of assignment, please direct your instructor to Wikipedia:Education program. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:54, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

I left an identical note on the Talk pages of all the new editors of Planning, as the edits have been essay-like in nature and with an improper reference format. Class assignments at every level are expected to be channeled through the education program. David notMD (talk) 14:30, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

And tell your classmates (and instructor), that per Help:Referencing for beginners, refs are inserted after punctuations. David notMD (talk) 14:34, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Ddperez6 (talk) 05:38, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Is there a quick link on how to avoid essay like compositions? I mean the general writing style? Ddperez6 (talk) 05:48, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Ddperez6, there's a general guide to writing articles at Wikipedia:Writing better articles, but getting the encyclopedic tone right is something that usually comes with experience. Your class's additions to Planning have had other problems as well, mostly the focus on adding content about COVID and communication which is not related to the article's primary topic. The article has now been semi-protected because the problems continued. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 12:49, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Is it possible to redlink an author name in a reflist?

I understand that redlinking a name is good practice to indicate someone should potentially get their own Wikipedia page.

But how do you do it in a {reflist}?

For example on the LaDonna Brave Bull Allard page, I'd like to redlink the author's name in the first footnote, but when I try it breaks the citation format. I tried doing each name separately and then both names together but it doesn't work.

Maybe it's not possible?

Here is the source code for the reference

Halpin, Mikki. "The Fiercest Woman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Says Young Natives Will Save the Planet". Teen Vogue. Retrieved 2021-04-15. Bkgood (talk) 16:20, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

author-link should work. Not sure about how this falls in line with WP:MOS. Sungodtemple (talk) 17:00, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

@Bkgood In the article itself, that reference uses {{cite web}} which is where to look for the documentation on how to use |author-link=someone. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:06, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

thank you so much!! Bkgood (talk) 13:00, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Reviewing Contribution to: Violence Against Women in Mexico

Hello everyone!

I recently expanded on the Violence against women in Mexico article as a part of a college course. Specifically I edited to the "cultural roots", "COVID-19 & Domestic Violence", " Maquiladoras & NAFTA" & "Impunity" sections . I am going to be making edits, if anyone has any suggestions I'd be happy to hear! Rovalle234 (talk) 16:26, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

@Rovalle234: it seems pretty good; the lead seems well laid-out, the section headings seem appropriate and follow the general layout you'd see in a Wikipedia article (origins, definitions, any particular instances such as covid-19, people's responses to it and social and cultural references).

The only pointers I have is that for subheadings, only the first word needs to be capitalised; "In film", instead of "In Film", etc. Subheadings don't need an ampersand (&) either; just the word 'and' is fine. (I'd maybe change "COVID-19 effects on violence against women" to "Effects of COVID-19 on violence against women", too.)

For the lead, I'd probably change the first sentence from "Violence against women in Mexico includes different forms of "gender-based violence" and it may consist of [...]" to "Violence against women in Mexico includes different forms of gender-based violence. It may consist of [...]". A wikilink to the article on gender-based violence is useful – no need to put the term in quote marks – and I think it reads better to split it into two sentences.

Other than that, your efforts seem good. The article is well-cited and commendable; you should be proud.—Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 17:19, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your suggestions @Ineffablebookkeeper, I will definitely be making those changes! Rovalle234 (talk) 18:19, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Arbitration

I edited Abraham Lincoln and slavery and another editor undid my edit. I explained on his Talk page the reason for my edit; he has not explained his objection to it. I know not to turn this into an editing war, so would someone explain the arbitration procedure, please. For details, look at User talk:Alanscottwalker, # 82, "Booth's comment." Maurice Magnus (talk) 17:49, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi again @Maurice Magnus. I think you're looking for Dispute resolution procedures. However, there's generally a prerequisite of discussion on the article talk page; I'm not sure whether a dialogue between just the two of you on their talk page will meet the requirements. You can always try, though. The best avenue here might be WP:3O. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:04, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Arbitration explicitly does not handle content disputes. You want to take it to 3O or MedCab next. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:24, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Maurice Magnus, the proper place to discuss this content dispute is Talk:Abraham Lincoln and slavery, which you have not yet done. Taking the dispute anywhere else will be declined unless you discuss it thoroughly at the article talk page. That always comes first. This dispute is not appropriate for ArbCom. Cullen328 (talk) 03:29, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Please see my comment titled "Quoting versus Paraphrasing" at Talk:Abraham Lincoln and slavery. Maurice Magnus (talk) 13:14, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Getting an article published

I'm having trouble finding the right sources to get an article published. It's a series of novels from 2013 and the issue is that it was published independently through an author with very little internet presence. The book did have a sizable impact on fandom culture and a lot of associated books do have pages. The series is All for the Game By Nora Sakavic. Nv1213 (talk) 18:14, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

@Nv1213, welcome to the Teahouse. It's entirely believable that the novels have popularity in online communities. However, until independent, reliable published sources cover the series in depth, notability will not have been achieved. If there are no reliable sources, then it could be WP:TOOSOON for a Wikipedia article. Fandom coverage is user-generated and therefore not considered reliable. If, however, the Fandom situation gets coverage in reliable sources, notability could result. Quisqualis (talk) 19:52, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Have you come across this Publisher's Weekly article yet? McCARTNEY, J. (2016). The Game Changer. Publishers Weekly, 263(43), 41. -- asilvering (talk) 02:41, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Pardon me for this question, but is Publishers' Weekly a publisher? Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 15:51, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

It's a journal - see Publishers Weekly. -- asilvering (talk) 15:58, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Publishers Weekly is a trade publication for the book industry. It publishes about 9000 book reviews each year. The reviews are short, averaging about 200 to 250 words, and the reviwers are paid as little as $25.00. In my opinion, such a review contributes very little toward notability. Cullen328 (talk) 03:40, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I did have that article as a reference when it was rejected. Nv1213 (talk) 04:37, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, you'll need more than just that - at least one other, usually more. -- asilvering (talk) 05:46, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Article on open flightmaps

Another newbie I'm afraid: I'm trying to write an article on open flightmaps (full disclosure: I'm a contributor there) and since it's my first one, I wasn't really expecting it to be accepted. I peeked a little on the article about OpenStreetMap which is similar in mission, but of course way bigger and more mature. (Comparable parts of the OSM article, however, don't contain many more primary nor secondary references.) The data and flightmaps are used both in real life (e.g. gliders or the helicopter rescue operators of CH, DE, AT and soon NL) as well as flight and ATC simulation enthusiasts. In other words: There is public relevance, but it's difficult to find secondary sources since it doesn't really hit the news. There might be references in blogs or video tutorials, but I'm not sure if those would be reliable enough. And there will be a better, more informative project homepage, but this takes time, contributing pilots have other things to do when the sun is shining. :-) Thanks a bunch for any hints! Svoop (legit) (talk) 20:35, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Svoop (legit), welcome to the Teahouse. You're right that blogs and video tutorials are (generally) not reliable sources; the project's homepage is also not going to help for the specific purpose of proving notability. Have you found any sources that meet all of our requirements (i.e. independent, reliable, published secondary sources, containing significant coverage)? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:43, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

It's not easy to find journal articles because aviation publications usually are behind paywals. However, I've added more references (including two journals) and rearranged the content to be more in line with similar articles: Comparing e.g. OpenSeaMap and my draft, what did they do better than me? Learning from other accepted articles might help. Svoop (legit) (talk) 18:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Svoop (legit), OpenSeaMap doesn't look very well sourced to me. It was created directly in mainspace in 2010, when standards were very different, and probably wouldn't pass muster today. Unfortunately, we don't have many folks who are interested in going around finding old, seriously substandard articles and either improving or removing them - it's thankless work.

Looking at an article like Google Earth would be much better; it's been rated a good article (which is not as fantastic as a featured article, but not shabby). If you need help getting to paywalled sources, the resource exchange is available, plus you might eventually be eligible for the Wikipedia library. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:57, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Random Promotion rather than historical fact?

The article on the Ivoryton Playhouse, a National Register site in Connecticut, has a lot of what I'd consider extraneous marketing detail (e.g. what times and days are the present management's children's show performed). I do not want to get into a dispute with the theatre's current management. Is there a more neutral edit could be made? Blue Water (talk) 22:07, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Example: "its productions were an artistic success from the start", unreferenced. Blue Water, please feel free to prune this thing ruthlessly. Don't refrain from doing so merely in an attempt to spare anybody's feelings. -- Hoary (talk) 01:13, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I have pruned it ruthlessly and moved it to be an article about the building rather than the theater it contains. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Anachronist I strongly disagree with your renaming an article that has existed as Ivoryton Playhouse since 2007, and is far better known as a well-known theater than as a historic building. I recommend you revert your name change and restore content about the theater, albeit without the laudatory phrases. David notMD (talk) 20:24, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Your objection is noted. I strongly disagree with you. I have moved this discussion to Talk:Comstock-Cheney Hall. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:21, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Distinguishing blue and black text

On my Desktop PC at least blue (linked) and black (plain) text are hard to distinguish. I am forced to squint.

• How can these colours be made more distinctive? ----MountVic127 (talk) 09:09, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

  You can edit Special:MyPage/common.css to change the style. For example, to turn blue links yellow, you could enter:
  

  a {
    color: purple;
  }
  <!--
  

  , and similarly for other colours. You can also use RGB codes, for example #00ff00 for green. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 09:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

-->

Thanks for your help. :-)

Green for links still has poor contrast compared to black.

Works with bolded black such as Distinguishing blue and black text if same as file name but not file sections.

Orange is already used for unresolved disambigs such as WTO (disambiguation) . . . another Teahouse person helped me with this.

Yellow over white has no contrast.

will try brown or purple.

What are all the named colours, such as lightgreen? ----MountVic127 (talk) 18:50, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

There is a list at Web colors § extended colors. You can also copy the hex values from this table and tweak them; the first two characters are the red part, the secon two the green, and the last are blue. They're hexadecimal, so 0 is the lowest and F the highest proportion. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 18:52, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again. I think that green/black contrast if fair enough and I will get used to it in time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MountVic127 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

MountVic127, the standard (for now) Vector 2010 skin has a fairly dark blue for links. If you're using that, you could try Vector 2022 which I has a lighter shade. You can change your skin at Preferences – Appearance. On the other hand, if the lighter blue doesn't help, just stick with the custom green. You could also consider underlining links rather than relying on color alone. Could be helpful, could be distracting – Wikipedia articles often have a lot of links, so it's a balancing act to make them “prominent enough but not too prominent”. Have you encountered many other sites where the links are difficult to distinguish? ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 06:20, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

GMIBM Efrata Modisi Church

I beg you not to delete the article for the GMIBM Efrata Modisi Church Babanguyo1999 (talk) 11:07, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Babanguyo1999 Hello and welcome. Please offer your arguments, preferably based in Wikipedia policy, as to why the article should not be deleted on the discussion page for the deletion proposal, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gereja GMIBM Efrata Modisi. 331dot (talk) 11:12, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

See also Help:My article got nominated for deletion! and WP:Guide to deletion. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 11:15, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Begging is pointless. See WP:BEG. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I think Shantavira meant to link WP:BEGGING. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:52, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

No. WP:BEG is relevant here, if somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:54, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are here to advise. None have any authority over deletion decisions. After 7-10 days an Administrator will make a decision. David notMD (talk) 13:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Shantavira WP:BEG redirects to Help:Referencing for beginners as I was writing this IP user stated the right link, lol. Light hearted sam (talk) 13:55, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Druware article

Hi helpful friends! I've been lazily but lovingly working on an article about Druware, a brand of cookware that was wildly popular (at least in New England) in the middle of the 20th century. I'm still working on dredging up additional sources to meet the bar of notability, but I'm wondering how to manage one aspect. There's a very active world of collecting midcentury enameled cookware, and Druware specifically. Unfortunately, Le_Creuset, Cousances, and Descoware get all the glory in Wikipedia, despite a paucity of high-quality references in their articles. (Not sure how those snuck into article space, but I'll try to suppress my jealousy for now.)

There are zillions of Pinterest boards, and hundreds of pieces of this cookware for sale at high prices at any given time on auction sites such as eBay. I'd think that this modern, observable activity could help support notability (some day, someone will look back on those auction pages and use them as sources to prove the popularity of the collection trade today)...but I'm not sure quite how to manage referencing the observable popularity that currently exists. Citing eBay search URLs doesn't seem particularly strong as evidence, due to their ephemeral nature. Is this activity at all relevant now, or shall we have to wait for the patina of history to give it gravitas? Thanks for any advice you might have. Kerri9494 (talk) 14:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Kerri9494, welcome to the Teahouse. Activity/popularity/sales are only tangentially relevant to notability. Sometimes those things generate coverage in reliable sources which we can then cite, and which might contribute to notability, but not always.

As for how those other articles got into mainspace - it was 2005, 2008, and 2007. I've heard those called the wild west days of Wikipedia. ;) 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

WP:WHATABOUT applies to draft reviews as well as for deletion discussions. Just because you create something that has the same level of sourcing as an established article, doesn't mean it will pass the notability tests. Those other articles may fail if put to the test. And since you've pointed them out, I'm going to give them a look to see if they shouldn't be examined by the community at WP:AFD. Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 14:46, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I don't know about Druware, but all the others are very well known. I will add the sources needed this weekend to blunt UtherSRG's valiant but entirely gratuitous sniping expedition in wanting to have them deleted. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:09, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I actually don't want them to be deleted. I want the sources found and added as they should have been years ago. One of them was tagged 11 years ago, one in 2017, and one never was, though definitely should have been. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:41, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

OK. I've added two for descoware for a start; will look for the others, including druware. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:41, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@UtherSRG I appreciate your point, but I'd like to clarify that I'm not asserting whataboutism to support a notability claim, I'm seeking advice on whether or not the current popularity of collecting Druware is relevant to a notability claim, and if so, what's the best way to include that information. I'll keep plugging along and do my best, and would still appreciate any advice you might have on that question. If the article doesn't reach notability, it doesn't reach notability. Thanks. Kerri9494 (talk) 15:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

As it says in the draft's submission header, the sources must be in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject), reliable, secondary, and independent of the subject. Read the info in those links to help guide you to what's needed. (And I'd say that Not sure how those snuck into article space sounds a bit of whataboutism to me.) - UtherSRG (talk) 15:39, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@UtherSRG My apologies. I expected my light-hearted orthogonal comment about the challenge of fairness in such an enormous corpus as Wikipedia would be met with similar levity in a "friendly place" designed to "get help", not find me chastised for whataboutism. Consider me appropriately admonished.

After having read the guidelines you've linked, I am still interested in some specific guidance regarding the issue at hand (modulo the helpful point about popularity being tangential to notability from @199.208.172.35) -- the role of popularity in relation to notability. It's pointed out in the discussion of notability that popularity "may enhance the acceptability of a subject" if it meets other notability guidelines (which I shall continue to work on).

While ephemeral auction links don't seem to be specifically addressed in any of those topics, to someone such as myself -- who is admittedly not as experienced with Wikipedia's bar for sources -- this information does seem to be somehow relevant. An eBay link with 229 listings (and perhaps more importantly, a consistent volume of hundreds of such listings at any given time, over the span of decades) doesn't seem like a passing mention; it seems reliable as it's a source from a decades-old company (considering the admittedly narrow but relevant Wikipedia:VENDOR use case for Wikipedia:Verify); it's secondary and independent in that eBay has no primary relationship to Druware, but yet clearly communicates -- simply by the persistent existence of its copious listings -- that there is brisk interest in the subject.

But on the other hand, it's an ephemeral eBay link. Which seems...weird as a source. But relevant. But still weird. I suppose it's possible that I'm the only who feels a bit of cognitive dissonance here, but I've seen weirder things cited in other indices, abstracts, and fact books. I'm just not sure how one would treat such a consistent but ephemeral source. Kerri9494 (talk) 16:42, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Kerri9494, a link to an eBay listing - or to hundreds of eBay listing - is very rarely going to be useful as a source. Not only are we in WP:VENDOR territory, but also WP:SELFPUB, not to mention original research if you're trying to use them as evidence of either popularity or notability. I think your time and energy would be best spent looking for better sources. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:00, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough, and consider me equally admonished for harshness in a friendly pub. Fowler&fowler is working on getting better references for the other articles. You can take a look at what they are finding and see if you can find similar references for Druware. You could also try building up a Google search by starting with "Druware" and then slowly applying various -website-name minuses to narrow in on possible helpful references. UtherSRG (talk) 17:28, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Honestly, after my first post to this friendly pub resulting in three reasonable articles being marked for deletion, requiring editors to scramble to improve them within seven days or risk them being removed from article space, I should probably go back into hibernation. Kerri9494 (talk) 14:00, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@Kerri9494: I hope you don't. That wasn't on you. Creating new articles is the hardest part of Wikipedia. Your desire to create the Druware article is commendable. We failed you by failing to ensure similar articles were up to snuff so that you'd have an easier time seeing what your goal should look like. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:22, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol/Review

I'd like to add to my skills the ability to help patrol new pages and review them etc. Do I need the New Page Reviewer permission for this? Or am I able to do that without the perm? If so, what does the perm add? Why would I want/need it? — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 15:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

See WP:NPP --> curation tool. -- asilvering (talk) 16:00, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Is this topic notable for an article?

I have created multiple articles and am planning to do another one, this time 1993 Hugo, Oklahoma shooting. I firmly believe it passes WP:GNG, but I don't know if it passes WP:NEVENT. Can someone look at the sources and determine whether it is notable enough for an article? Search "hugo walmart shooting" or "david mack flinn" to find sources. MelatoninEmbryo (talk) 16:20, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

If you provide links to your sources here, I think you'll get a faster response. -- asilvering (talk) 16:32, 4 November 2022 (UTC).

MelatoninEmbryo. An angry man bought a rifle, killed two strangers and then killed himself. Tens of thousands of Americans are murdered each year. WP:NEVENT says Routine kinds of news events (including most crimes, accidents, deaths, celebrity or political news, "shock" news, stories lacking lasting value such as "water cooler stories," and viral phenomena) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance. In evaluating an event, editors should evaluate various aspects of the event and the coverage: the impact, depth, duration, geographical scope, diversity and reliability of the coverage, as well whether the coverage is routine. This tragic event got heavy news coverage in the days that followed, as is routine. But what is the enduring significance of the crime? What was the duration of the coverage? Cullen328 (talk) 16:52, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Would U5 fit here?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yusef_Masushef

I don't think this content should be on wikipedia, but I want to make sure before I place the template. The Shamming Man has appeared. Sham me / Where I've shammed 16:39, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello Shamming Man! This appears to simply be a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. The userpage doesn't seem all that bad (really just stating their political views) so I don't think WP:CSD#U5 would apply here. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:42, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Well then, good thing I went here first. Until I self-doubt myself again, goodbye! The Shamming Man has appeared. Sham me / Where I've shammed 16:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

How to cite youtube videos

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Savannah%20Leach/Tokujin_Yoshioka?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template

I want to add a Youtube video to my article about a design artist. How would I cite the the video correctly into article I am not using the video for citing information but to show off the artists projects.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK9NilwKWAA Savannah Leach (talk) 17:08, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Savannah Leach. Please see Template:Cite AV media. Cullen328 (talk) 17:19, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Help

I posted a comment on a talk page for The page Nintendo switch for if I could post additional content, Then got sick, Came back in a month and nobody said or did anything. Golden. (talk) 17:34, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Wikikoolr: Hello koolr! I took a look at your talk page comment and am confused by what you mean by "Your page". Could you possibly elaborate? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:38, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

yes I made help pages in the past and people said I should probably add on to that page instead of my draft: Nintendo switch errors Golden. (talk) 17:47, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Wikikoolr: You still confuse me. I asked nothing about whether or not you made help pages in the past, I asked what you were referring to when you stated "your page". ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:49, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Nintendo Switch Errors, I think. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:50, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf The page is: Draft:Nintendo Switch Errors — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikikoolr (talk • contribs) 18:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Ah I see. I don't think that is ready whatsoever to be added to the main Nintendo Switch article. IT's only sourced to primary sources which do not establish notability at all. Wikipedia is not a database, which is basically what that draft is. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:16, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Wikikoolr: Also I suggest you change your signature to contain your username as there happens to also be a user named Golden and users could verily easily confuse you with said user (the "." is not enough to distinguish you 2) and could possibly be seen as an attempt to impersonate them. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:01, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Wikikoolr Your addition to Talk:Nintendo Switch would have been incomprehensible to anyone who read it, since you failed to link the information you wanted to add. You did in fact add some of that information to the article but this was reverted for the reasons already explained to you at the Teahouse, now archived at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1167#Can_an_editor_help_me_with_references_on_my_article. Please stop trying to add this particular content to WIkipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:25, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Question about my draft

Hi! I have been working on a draft Draft:Dark Hollow to be exact and I am yet to improve the plot and character list but I was wondering if I can add a link directing from an article to the draft since once it is moved to article space. My soon to be article will have links leading it and therefore won't be an orphan or is it against the Wikipedia policy or something.

Thanks in advance Wikiwow is just W0W!! (talk) 17:35, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Wikiwow1102, welcome to the Teahouse. It is, in fact, not allowed (it's one of the bullet points here), but you're free to keep a list for yourself of potential future links in, for instance, your sandbox, so you can quickly de-orphan your draft once it becomes an article. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:48, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

My Draft (Draft:Michael Ernest Kerr)

Hi, I would like to know what my wikipedia page is missing to be uploaded. Thank you. Zander123sims4 (talk) 17:47, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Zander123sims4: welcome to the Teahouse. One of the decline notices on your user talk page includes the following comment: "Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. Wikipedia is not for posting political profiles for aspiring candidates. Noting Ballotpedia is not an acceptable or reliable source."

Wikipedia articles have to be about notable topics, according to Wikipedia's definition of "notable". WP:NPOLITICIAN is a short-cut to the notability guideline for politicians. Please take a moment to read it, and note that Ballotpedia can't be used as a source. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 17:52, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Michael Ernest Kerr is a actual candidate for the house of representatives. I will remove ballotpedia as a source. Thank you. Zander123sims4 (talk) 17:55, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Zander123sims4, if you read WP:NPOLITICIAN, you will see that Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability. Please read that section and the general notability guideline carefully. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Removing Ballotpedia as a ref will not fix the issue that being a candidate does not make a person notable. Please stop resubmiting unless he is elected. David notMD (talk) 20:50, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Alternate account use?

I checked WP:SOCKPUPPET but couldn't seem to find anything: Is it allowed to create an alternative account to edit things like my hometown? I am interested in editing things of personal relevance; but would rather stick to non-traceable things on this account. DecafPotato (talk) 18:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @DecafPotato, welcome to the Teahouse. That would probably fall under the privacy criteria of WP:SOCKLEGIT and be allowed. Read the blue-linked items in the privacy section to be more aware of what to do or not do with your two accounts, and you should be able to stay out of any trouble. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:06, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Although do note that if you indicate a connection publicly between the 2 accounts then it defeats the purpose of having an alt to edit things like your home town. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:58, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf doesn't WP:SOCKLEGIT say that privacy-related sock puppets don't need to be disclosed? DecafPotato (talk) 20:40, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

You are correct, however it does say this about notification: "Editors who have multiple accounts for privacy reasons should consider notifying the arbitration committee if they believe editing will attract scrutiny." (emphasis original) ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@DecafPotato: Should probably ping you so you are aware. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:54, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

that thing (not here build a Encyclopedia)

what is it what it means? Lfierro74312 (talk) 18:42, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Lfierro74312: Hello Lfierro! Read WP:NOTHERE which explains what the term means. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:57, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank You Lfierro74312 (talk) 18:58, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

You can read about it here. It's just a broad philosophy built into Wikipedia editing that distinguishes between editors who want to help the project of Wikipedia by making it better, vs. those who are ultimately just promoting something, wanting to argue with people, or any number of other behaviors that aren't truly, genuinely helping build a better encyclopedia. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 18:59, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Lfierro74312, please be aware that creating a new account to get around a block is not allowed, and could get you into further trouble. I hope that is not the case here. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:08, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that is the case here. Block evasion by User:Lfierro743. Now blocked. @Lfierro74312: You must successfully appeal your block from your original account before you can edit Wikipedia again. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:51, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Anachronist: Just so you know, in the blcok summary you've accidentally put User:User talk:Lfierro743 which isn't a valid link. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:55, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Yes, that happens to me sometimes. More frequently than I care to admit. I wish there were a way to edit an error in an edit summary. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:57, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Agreed, but then there's also the issue of needing an edit summary for an edit summary, so would you be able edit the edit summary for editing the edit summary? Maybe i should create an essay about the edit summary paradox ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:58, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I've re-blocked with a corrected summary. Maybe this capability to edit a summary should be proposed at the Village Pump. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:00, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I feel like that has been proposed in the past. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:01, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Regardless this discussion should be continued elsewhere. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Discussion started (or re-started) at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Why can't I correct my own summaries?. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:16, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Multiple WikiProject questions

I want to know, how do people make WikiProjects? What do we do with inactive ones? SikiWtideI (Speak to the backwards police) 20:59, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi SikiWtideI. You can find out some more information about WikiProjects at Wikipedia:WikiProject. As for the inactive ones, that discussed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Dealing with inactive WikiProjects. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:03, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Spelling errors: how does one quickly, efficiently correct them?

I'm new and I'm a linguist and careful speller - in UK and US English (I see various articles use one or the other - a mix). However, the modest contribution I can offer is - for the time being - limited to pointing to spelling errors, or at least spellings that strike me as erroneous. For instance, on the page The Birth of a Nation, there is an illustration of a battle scene from the film in question, describing the action as "leaded" by a certain historical character. This struck me as odd, as "leaded" is a description of a process for enhancing fuel combustibility and not used in relation to the verb "to lead" (i.e. take a lead, form the leadership of), whose past participle is generally taken to be "led". Is there is simple path to correcting such errors, since the learning curve that appears to be needed to make even that small contribution strikes me as "steeped", if you'll pardon the irony? Jeepvee (talk) 02:08, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Just make them, and note in the edit comment that you are correct a spelling issue. Note that changing an article from one English variety to another is not allowed, though if the article has a mix and you are trying to adjust it to one or the other, announcing that on the talk page before you start can be helpful. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:29, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

hi @Jeepvee and welcome to the teahouse! Be bold and don't worry if you make a mistake! it's very simple to undo these mistakes by yourself or others, and we give a bit of space and time for new editors to understand and get accustomed to the many policies we have since it shouldn't really be expected one would be able to read and understand them, so if one ever makes a mistake, we'd rather help them understand what they're doing wrong and how they can make it right. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:41, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Merci! No, it would indeed be disingenuous to alter articles from one spelling convention to another simply for convention's sake. However, one does sometimes need to keep the dictionary to hand for more esoteric usages of language which remain confined to a particular region of the globe. In such cases, I might advocate in the case of, say, a reference to a "trunk" to add as a note: "(UK-EN: "boot")" (i.e. of a motor car) where confusion might otherwise reign. I shall boldly go where many have gone before ... Jeepvee (talk) 03:01, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

If you mean on a technical level, just hit "edit source" on the section the typo is in, fix it, preview/see changes to confirm you didn't make any inadvertent changes, type up an edit summary, and hit publish. You may also find the Wikipedia:Typo Team project a good read for guidelines about terms of which sorts of typos should be corrected (or not), their thoughts on ENGVAR, how to find typoes, and suggestions for edit summaries. Hope to see you around. Skynxnex (talk) 02:42, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks for your guidance! Which of "typos" and "typoes" is correct I shall leave to one side for the moment :-) Jeepvee (talk) 02:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@Jeepvee, on Wikipedia, we spell it "typos", from what I have seen. If there is a commonly-misspelled word, feel free to use the Search box on any page here to find pages with that particular "word". Also, when other editors misspell or typo anything on a discussion page, avoid correcting it at all costs! It's against the rules, for a variety of reasons. The Typo Team may have other tips and tricks up their sleeve.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:33, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Hence the ":-)" Jeepvee (talk) 04:34, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

For the record, I understood @Jeepvee's intent (and I was inconsistent in my spelling) but I think @Quisqualis's advice is useful going forward, even if it's tempting during meta-discussions. :) (Apologies if excessive pings.) Skynxnex (talk) 05:13, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

You can also take a look at WP:COPYEDIT for advice on simple copy editing (which includes correcting things like spelling, grammar, and punctuation). Check out the Guild of Copy Editors as well, since there is no shortage of this kind of work! WPscatter ^t/_c 04:37, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

How to mass revert edits by an user?

Sometimes I see an user which spammed links in many articles and it is a bit of a pain to revert them all. Is there a tool or a way that I can use to mass revert edits? Roostery123 (talk) 02:32, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

hi @Roostery123 and welcome to the teahouse! it seems that you're already using Ultraviolet. Twinkle allows you to revert changes from the contributions page, although I can't recall if it kept you there or moved you to another page while reverting (although it's still a useful tool which is also compatible with UV). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:56, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

How to give request to make a new copyright tag

Hi, I want to request the editors to form a new copyright tag for uploading files in Wikipedia Commons. What is the procedure and where can I request it? Ku423winz1 (talk) 04:26, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Try asking at Commons, not here. (The English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons are separate projects with their own standards and practices.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 05:14, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

i am trying to write an article about myself but whenever i complete it, it gets deleted i dont know i have been trying since yesterday please help me resolve this issue or it will be better if you can correct me

Account creation failing Bayuski (talk) 04:47, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Are you trying to create an account, or are you trying to write an article? You appear to be logged in to an account right now, are you trying to create a new one? WPscatter ^t/_c 04:58, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes i am trying to write about myself and achievements. i already created an account and i am a new user Bayuski (talk) 05:01, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

It's very unlikely that an article about yourself will be accepted. Wikipedia subjects must meet a threshold of notability, and on top of that it's very difficult to maintain a neutral point of view when writing about yourself. If you believe you are notable enough for an article you may request one be written, but please review the notability guidelines before doing so. WPscatter ^t/_c 05:05, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

You started by trying to create an article about yourself at your User page, which is the wrong place, hence deleted. See WP:YFA for how to create and then submit a draft. That said, unless you strongly believe that you meet the notability guidelines, you will fail. David notMD (talk) 10:09, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

You may want to read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. If an article about you is ever published on Wikipedia that article won't belong to you, and anyone who finds a reliable reference about you can add information to it, even if the edit contains something you don't want to be included. Are you certain that having an encyclopedia article about yourself is something you really want? Best wishes. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:50, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I would pay attention to what has been said to you by the previous editors. There have been many instances of people basically writing about themselves only to have it bite them on the ass later on. See Charlene McMann for one. Established notability and did something monumentally stupid later on. Subject and various sockpuppets have been trying in vain to scrub the page for years now. Regards,   Aloha27  talk  23:40, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Links

I was pressing the random article button (more times than I want to admit) and I came across an article. There was a template saying that it needed more links to integrate into Wikipedia and looked through the article it appears to have enough articles and I am not quite sure if I can remove the template. The article is Lob Bomb. Wikiwow is just W0W!! (talk) 05:03, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I meant enough links. Sorry Wikiwow is just W0W!! (talk) 05:04, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Wikiwow1102, Y Removed. Next time, I invite you to be bold. — ^Clyde!_Franklin! 06:16, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

About my autoconfirmed

My account didn't become autoconfirmed even after having more than 150 edits and my account is 4 days old can any one explain me about this Why is my account not confirmed? Jisshu (talk) 05:14, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Your account isn't yet 4 days old. It won't be until 08:21 2022/11/05 (UTC). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 05:16, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Jisshu, it takes 96 full hours. Is there a reason why you are in a hurry to become autoconfirmed? Cullen328 (talk) 05:48, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I see that you created MC STAN directly, without going through AfC. Be aware that Draft:MC Stan, by different editors, has been Declined several times, and earlier versions Speedy deleted. It is possible that your version does not meet the critera for notability for musicians, and is at risk for AfD. Your other draft (Draft:Emiway Bantai (rapper)) has been rejected. I recommend that for any other articles you intend to create, you go through the AfC process. David notMD (talk) 10:35, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Your effort now at Draft:MC STAN. David notMD (talk) 15:27, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Creating Article Page

To whom it may concern,

Hello, how can we create some articles on wikipedia. We'd started by creating one authors socialist biography which is not publish yet. We're new to wiki so can you guide us to contribute some informations realated. How much time its take to confirm our account?

thankyou. Nepaliabhilekh (talk) 05:38, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Nepaliabhilekh, you already have an account. It's the username "Nepaliabhilekh". You say "we". A username may only be used by one person. A second, third or other person may not use "Nepaliabhilekh" but may instead create, and edit as, a different username. Wikipedia does not want socialist biographies, or conservative biographies. It wants reliably sourced, neutral biographies of notable people (who of course may be, or may have been, socialist or conservative or apolitical). If you're thinking of submitting Draft:Aashish Jung as an article, please do not do so until you have done much more work on it. Currently, its very first paragraph -- Subject's complete name (birthdate – death) can be a lead-in to the subject's popular name. Describe the subject's nationality and profession(s) in which the subject is most notable. Provide a description of the subject's major contributions in the immediately relevant field(s) of notable expertise. -- is enough to disqualify it, and it has additional problems. -- Hoary (talk) 06:20, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@nepaliabhilekh:

• Hello, how can we create some articles on wikipedia. We'd started by creating one authors socialist biography which is not publish yet.

  is this about Draft:Aashish Jung/User:Nepaliabhilekh/sandbox/Template:Aashish Jung (आशिष जंग)? please stick to improving one version, preferably the one with "draft:", and don't do it on the page with "template:". i have nominated the template for deletion.

  the article will absolutely not be accepted, as it is highly malformed. it tries to use the template you created (don't do that) and has a lot of spelling and grammatical errors. the lead is just the default text too.

• We're new to wiki so can you guide us to contribute some informations realated.

  read up on help:your first article.

• How much time its take to confirm our account?

  to gain the autoconfirmed right, you need to have made at least 10 edits and your account must be at least 4 days old.

lettherebedarklight〔晚安 おやすみ〕ping me when replying 06:23, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

A) Please see Wikipedia:FIRST.

B) Please see Wikipedia:BIO, Wikipedia:NPOV and Wikipedia:VERIFY.

C) For your account to be autoconfirmed, your account needs to be atleast 4 days old, and it needs to have atleast 10 edits. ██ Dentsinhere43 is a new Wikipedian. 06:28, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Where to report vandalism?

Hi, A IP user did vandalism here [1], by deleting properly sourced paragraph. Due to many edits inbetween I'm not able to undo it. Someone her do undo that edit and stop that IP form further Vandalism.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 09:46, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @Rock Stone Gold Castle! Welcome to the Teahouse. The place to report vandalism would be at WP:AIV. ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
_{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 09:49, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Your Power, be careful when answering questions here to investigate and make sure the answer you're giving is the right one. What is called vandalism here is certainly not (though it does remove a valid citation, it seems like a good faith edit), and even if it was, AIV should only be used for repeated, persistent vandalism, ignoring at least 4 warnings beforehand. Pointing new and frustrated users there is only going to waste the admins' time. WPscatter ^t/_c 17:55, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@Wpscatter: Oh, well, I messed up there ... my bad for not checking the linked diff any further 😓 I was under the assumption that the deleting was being repeated. Anyway. Now while the editor could have indicated why the paragraph was removed in the first place, I do agree that calling it vandalism at first glance is at best poor judgment And ftr, the four-warnings guideline is not always a requirement especially with very egregious vandalism. Some folks skip straight to level 3 or 4 warnings, or go directly towards requesting a block. ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
_{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 23:18, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@Your Power:, I did not understand how to report there. Atleast two IP user : 122.162.146.102 did this [ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1120119991] vandalism many times. He writes his name in article. He should be blocked for editing, his name possibly is Digvijay Yadav, that's why he is writing it. Anathor IP is this - 49.37.241.79, He removed match-fixing done by Mohammad Azharuddin here [ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1120040896]]. I suggest to block these two IP users, to protect article from vandalism.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 10:03, 5 November 2022 (UTC) @Hoary:, Hi, can you solve this matter?Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 10:15, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Rock Stone Gold Castle, what you report is not vandalism, and should not be reported as vandalism. On Wikipedia, vandalism is used to mean "editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose". When someone expresses an opinion you disagree with, it is not vandalism. You should discuss the issue on the article's talk page. Maproom (talk) 11:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Rock Stone Gold Castle, I second what Maproom has written. Though you've already rather messed things up on the article's talk page with your comment "IP did vandalism". Please rethink what you have written there. You should not remove it, but you might consider striking it through. (Like this.). -- Hoary (talk) 12:22, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary: But the IP deleted large of amount of content without discussing on talk page, he didn't written a single word, why he did it. I just noticed in history some fishy thing, so tried to put infront of other editors. If removing reliable sourced data without discussing is appropriate? But what about other IP, he is adding his name as Board of Control for Cricket in India's CEO, often? @Arjayay:, @Wjemather: many times reverted his edits, earlier called it Vandalism [[2]]. (talk) 14:22, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

1929 Major League Baseball season

Hello and good day. Go to following article above. Go to Statistical Leaders infobox. How do I adjust National League header so it runs straight across like American League header on left? Please advise, cant figure out how to fix this. Thanks for your help. Have a good day.``` Theairportman33531 (talk) 12:28, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@Theairportman33531: done. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 12:47, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

It still wraps for me if I zoom a little. I see no good reason for that table to force a specific width so I have removed it.[3] PrimeHunter (talk) 23:45, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Please remove all inappropriate external links?

First artcile. Looks like I picked the wrong category for submission - musician. But, I finally hit an editor with some specific advice which I really appreciate! "Please remove all inappropriate external links from the body of the article"

1. How can links to a musician's past performances and song credits be inappropriate? This is what a musician does and is what makes the 'notable', right? I guess I was equating the links to citations.
2. Why don't the editors give SPECIFIC advice, like 'please remove the link to ........' Does Wikipedia have a markup function where the editor can actually mark items for suggested changes like most other document apps have?
3. How can a new contributor learn if no specific advice or examples are given by editors? Very frustrating.
4. Isn't 'notability' inherently subjective? Prior to doing my first article, I researched other musician pages, some of which have been up for years, and many were lacking the high level of notability seemingly expected currently. Is one editor's notability another editors notable?
5. Maybe I should try another less stringently moderated subject as my first article or contribution. Or, just give up and move on.

LPDan (talk) 14:01, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@LPDan: Hello LPDan! First, you've started out doing one of the hardest things on Wikipedia which is creating an article. It's usually recommended to have edited pre-existing articles first prior to making your first. Second, you can read about what is and isn't an appropriate external link here. I'm not really suited to answer your other questions unfortunately, but i hope this at least helps somewhat. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:10, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

LPDan: just "Jack Berry (musician)" would be enough for disambiguation. All external links from the main text of the article are unacceptable and should be removed. To establish notability, you need to cite sources, with <ref> tags. Maproom (talk) 15:48, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello, LPDan. Content about performances and song credits may be appropriate, but should be verified by properly formatted bibliographic inline references as opposed to external links. Also, performances and song credits do not make a musician notable. Instead, reviews of their performances and recordings published by independent, reliable sources help make a musician notable. External links do not belong in the body of an article. You can create a dedicated external links section at the end of the article, which normally contains a link to the subject's website or main social media site. Cullen328 (talk) 20:23, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Avoiding page history complications

The content on Hedgepeth and Williams v. Board of Education was pretty much entirely plagiarized from its original sources (some are now dead links, but they're still accessible through archive.org). I made a mistake in copy-pasting my revisions to a user sandbox (User:Galactic-Radiance/sandbox2) instead of moving the original article, and between that and the blatant copyright violations of the original page, I'm not sure what the next steps are for avoiding problems with the page history and attribution. From digging around, the first two options seem to be:

• Speedy-deleting the original Hedgepeth and Williams page due to the copyright violations and moving my sandbox version over to it. Wipes out the versions that are copyright violations, but also potentially results in attribution problems.
• Copy-pasting my revision over to the original page, requesting a history merge from my sandbox to the original article, and then requesting revision deletion of the plagiarized versions.

I've been around here long enough to know that there's a multitude of tools, policies, and request pages for edge cases like this. Is there a simpler option that I've overlooked, or would one of the above options be the best way to handle it, give or take some extra steps? –Galactic-Radiance (talk) 16:00, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@Galactic-Radiance: Both options can be done. Speedy delete with the appropriate tag linking to the copyrighted content, and replacing it with a fresh article. Alternatively, I can move the non-copyvio revisions from your sandbox over the original article, which would effectively delete it by replacing it. Drop me a note on my talk page when you're ready for this. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:25, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehmet_Oz

A minor inconsistency on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehmet_Oz It regards the length of time that Dr. Oz served in the Turkish Army. In the wikipage introduction, it states six weeks to maintain his Turkish citizenship. But later on in the article, it states two years: "Oz served in the Turkish Army during the 1980s for six weeks of mandatory training specifically for citizens who reside in foreign countries, to maintain his Turkish citizenship."

"spent two years in the Turkish army after college to maintain his dual citizenship."

Did he serve twice or is this just a typo, and, if so, can you pass this on to the editor? I attempted to send this information to the page editors but am not sure that I succeeded. Thanks, Ron Hines Ronaldhines (talk) 16:46, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Normally we'd want this discussion at the bottom (the most current) post of Talk:Mehmet Oz. Do you mind if I post this valid question there? I am looking into it and you may have a point. BusterD (talk) 17:28, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I have asked the question at Talk:Mehmet Oz#Sourcing for Turkish military service. I imagine there are sharp eyes on that talk page this weekend. Expect a reply and thanks especially for raising the issue here, since you weren't sure. There are 6 million plus articles and only so many eyes. We appreciate yours. Don't be shy about helping out. If you'd like to do so, keep coming back and asking good questions. BusterD (talk) 17:47, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

The bit about serving "two years" was not supported by the provided source and I've removed that from the Oz article. This source says he served for 60 days. Its being "six weeks" isn't supported by provided sources either. —ADavidB 19:39, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

en.wiki not picking up changes at commons

see Crimean peninsula. As of now, it shows correctly as part of Ukraine

The article Greenwich Mean Time (and others) invokes File:Time Zones of Europe.svg from Commons. Recently, a Russian editor 'revised' it (on Commons) to show Crimea as part of Russia. The disruptive edit has been reverted and, as may be seen from the example (right), is displaying the correct [according to international law] information. But for some reason I don't understand, the GMT article is still showing the vandalised version. I have tried completely shutting down my computer and restarting with no effect. Can someone check the GMT page to see if it is a general problem or should I just take it personally . If it is, how can it be resolved? (Null edits to the affected articles?)

[It must have worked before else the vandalised version would not have made it through.] 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:32, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

It looks fine to me on Greenwich Mean Time. Have you tries WP:BYPASS? ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 17:42, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

These things can take time to update because of technical things like web caching. It appears correctly on the page now. WPscatter ^t/_c 17:48, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Hah! I just KNEW it was personal! "Infamy! Infamy! They've all got it in fo' me! "

Yes, thank you Maddy, that resolved it. Exit, pursued by bear. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:55, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually, are you certain this edit was disruptive? According to this 2014 article, Crimea changed to Moscow's timezone in that year and I can't find a more recent source saying they changed it since. [4] WPscatter ^t/_c 18:00, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Not for me to say but I guess it is the de facto v the de jure problem. Right now, Crimea is occupied and controlled by Russia and declared by them to be part of Russia, so obviously all publically-visible clocks show Moscow time – or else. But by international law, Crimea is part of Ukraine, which observes Eastern European Time. Conventionally, such disputes are shown on maps using stripes or checker-board pattern. You would have to raise it at Commons.

Meanwhile a tid-bit for history fans: n parts of Ireland, Catholic rebels (until their defeat in the Nine Years' War) kept the "new" Easter in defiance of the English-loyal authorities; later, Catholics practising in secret petitioned the Propaganda Fide for dispensation from observing the new calendar, as it signalled their disloyalty. (Adoption of the Gregorian calendar#Adoption in Protestant countries) Nothing new under the sun. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:36, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I see that the equivalent image at Eastern European Time has been replaced by File:Time zones of Europe (Crimea disputed).svg, with Crimea striped. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:42, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Notability verification for a recent biographical entry

Hi there. I am an academic, and someone other than myself produced a biographical article on me. The article has recently been flagged with the following note: "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for academics. Please help to demonstrate the notability of the topic by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention. If notability cannot be shown, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted." I read through the notability guidelines, which lists being editor of a established academic journal in my subject area as one of eight sufficient conditions for establishing notability. I am Editor-in-Chief of such an established journal in my field of research. (It has been published since 1971, and has an international readership.) My question is: can anyone guide me in how I should notify the relevant Wikipedia Editors that (so far as I can tell) I meet the notability guidelines? With thanks! 24.60.151.5 (talk) 19:13, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Notability is judged solely on the subject being discussed in multiple independent and reliable sources. Perhaps you could provide a link to the article in question so that editors here can make an appropriate judgement? Thanks  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:28, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually, Velella, WP:NACADEMIC says Many scientists, researchers, philosophers, and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources. and it also says Academics meeting any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources, are notable, and one of those criteria is The person has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area. NACADEMIC is an exception to your otherwise accurate explanation of how notability is judged. Cullen328 (talk) 20:03, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I stand corrected, but, nevertheless, we do need confirmation that the Journal is indeed a "well established academic journal" that is headed by this person. A little more detail would help enormously.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   20:26, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Dear Cullen328 and Velella, thanks so much for your responses. In response to Velella's request, here is a link to the article in question: Mitch Green (professor)

It's easy confirm that I'm Editor-in-Chief of a journal, as can be seen by following this link. https://www.springer.com/journal/11406

(The other E.-i.-C will step down from that position at the end of 2022).

I look forward to hearing any further advice you might be able to offer, and appreciate your time. 24.60.151.5 (talk) 20:28, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I have added a reference verifying that you are editor-in-chief and removed the tag. Cullen328 (talk) 21:06, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much, I greatly appreciate that. 24.60.151.5 (talk) 21:08, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Nate Oliver

I was on the Nate Oliver (baseball) page. At the bottom of the article in the personal life section, it gives his date of death last month. The top of the article shows him as still alive. I did a web search for his obituary and cannot find anything. This is the first time I have seen this on Wikipedia.

I use Wikipedia to help write autograph requests. It is impolite to send auto requests to the family of someone who has passed. TideFanDan (talk) 19:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Nate Oliver ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 19:15, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello, TideFanDan. Another editor reverted the unreferenced claim that Oliver has died. I searched online and could find no evidence that he has died. He commented to a TV station in 2020 about the death of Joe Morgan so reporters know how to reach him. If you run across this again, just remove the unreferenced claim of death. Erroneous reports of death can be quite distressing to the subject and their friends, relatives and fans. Cullen328 (talk) 19:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Adding images of letters to navbox

I have just created a draft page for Tje (a ligature of Cyrillic Te and the Soft sign). As Tje is not yet in Unicode, I am wondering if and how it should be put into a navbox. (navbox: Template:Infobox Cyrillic letter) SlimyGecko7 (talk) 20:26, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Freezing the first row/column of wikitable

Is there a solution/possibilty that could freezing the first row/column of wikitable just like the function in Microsoft Excel? Unnamelessness (talk) 03:43, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes it is possilbe, what you are going to do is go to preferences then gadgets. Then you will go to testing and development when you see that, click the box where it says Make sure that headers of tables remain in view as long as the table is in view (requires Firefox v59 or Safari). `~HelpingWorld~` ^(👽🛸) 06:53, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

On the subject of Blackbeard the pirate.

2601:204:C502:7220:0:0:0:A357 (talk) 04:42, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Finding the coordinates of Baugh Creek idaho

So I am creating a page called Baugh Creek, and I put the coordinates of the supposed creek but it shows Oregon not Idaho can someone help? The source is https://www.topozone.com/idaho/blaine-id/stream/baugh-creek-2/ and thats where it says the cords the page im creating is User:HelpingWorld/sandbox. Thanks!`~HelpingWorld~` ^(👽🛸) 04:51, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Concerning wikipedia and BlackBeard

Blackbeard the pirate was said to light wicks on his hat to instill fear into his enemies. I think he light wicks on his hat prior to battle to have a source of fire to ignite things like his pistols (for example if his flints fell out), or a cannon fuse or rifle etc. as well as to instill fear. Readily available fire comes in handy and bic lighters (or zippo's) where not available in the 17th century. Thiebaudster (talk) 04:52, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

@Thiebaudster, you can discuss this on the article talk page, where editors familiar with the article can help out. You will have to provide reliable sources to verify the information provided. Kpddg ^(talk) 06:08, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Cannot login

Hi, I am very sure this time I didn't forget my password. Yet when I try to login today after a long time of not editing. I now get a message saying something is hijacking my login process and so I cannot log-in at all. I am however able to make a new account but prefer my old one if possible. Is there a simple fix for this? Simpleshooter999 (talk) 05:59, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

H:RP should help! It tells you how to reset your password and get your account back! `~HelpingWorld~` ^(👽🛸) 06:49, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Homosexual Serial Killers?

Is it ok too talk about homosexual serial killers? Simplystart (talk) 06:05, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Going to assume you have good intentions. Do you mean if it's okay to 'edit' articles about homosexual serial Killers like Jeffrey Dahmer? Well am not an expert here but seen other experts reject your questions before. But as long as such additions are noteworthy and relevant. I don't see why you cannot as long as you keep it appropriate for an encyclopaedia. Simpleshooter999 (talk) 06:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Policy stating that you're not supposed to edit on others' behalf

Does such a thing exist? If so, where can I find it? I think I've seen something similar to this on WP, but I cannot remember where it is and cannot find it. I'm asking this because an Uncyclopedia editor with a vanished WP account (and doesn't want to unvanish for some reason I don't think I've heard about) keeps finding things here and asks people to do stuff for them. ARandomPage (talk • contribs) 06:56, 6 November 2022 (UTC)