Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Moved to bottom of page
Line 651: Line 651:


:@[[User:Francesco Carbonara testimone di Geova|Francesco Carbonara testimone di Geova]] Hello, and welcome. Do you need any assistance from us at all? [[User:Blanchey|Blanchey]] ([[User talk:Blanchey|talk]]) 12:34, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
:@[[User:Francesco Carbonara testimone di Geova|Francesco Carbonara testimone di Geova]] Hello, and welcome. Do you need any assistance from us at all? [[User:Blanchey|Blanchey]] ([[User talk:Blanchey|talk]]) 12:34, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
::The OP has been blocked. [[Special:Contributions/97.113.27.216|97.113.27.216]] ([[User talk:97.113.27.216|talk]]) 13:48, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:48, 9 November 2022

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


Minor edits

How to know if an edit is minor or not? Are talk page and user page edits considered minor, and should I provide an edit summary for these edits (these referring to talk page and user page edits)? Quantum XYZ (chat) 15:16, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Quantum XYZ and welcome to the Teahouse! WP:MINOR provides the following rule of thumb: ‘edits consisting solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of the content should be flagged as minor edits.’ The same goes for user and talk pages— it all depends on the content of the edit. Adding a new comment on a talk page wouldn’t be minor, but adding a punctuation mark would be. When in doubt, I wouldn’t mark it as minor. As for edit summaries, you’re not required to use them, but it’s considered good practice. HelenDegenerate◆ 17:09, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@HelenDegenerate: Thanks for your help! Quantum XYZ (chat) 12:24, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol/Reviewer

To become an NPP/NPR, an editor would need experience in reviewing new pages, which is what NPPs/NPRs do. How can I gain this experience without being one in the 1st place? Quantum XYZ (chat) 15:18, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Quantum XYZ Having general experience in the core principles of WP:V, WP:NPOV and recognising WP:RS are the main things you would require. Then head over to WP:NPP to find out how to apply. Given that you have only been editing from your account for a couple of months and that the NPP is, surprisingly, not heavily backlogged now, I suggest you spend your efforts elsewhere for the moment. You need 500+ mainspace edits before you can join their school. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:18, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael D. Turnbull: Thanks for your help! Quantum XYZ (chat) 12:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mayim Bialik humanitarian efforts

I'd like to add more details to Mayim's page about the work and/or partnerships she has done or is doing with many different organizations but for at least one, and I'm pretty sure there were a couple more, all I could find was a quote from her on the organizations site. Is it impossible to add those at all, would I need to just not add a link? I'm new to this and I'm unsure how to best to proceed. Hotpotato75 (talk) 22:16, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hotpotato75 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is intended to summarize what independent reliable sources say about a topic. To include charitable work of Mayim Bialik in the article about her, there must be independent sources that discuss it- her talking about her own work is insufficient. 331dot (talk) 22:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not to mention that such sections tend to be magnets for laudatory and opinionated editing. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 23:00, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I thought but I just wanted to be sure. Most people I know seem to care about what charities and humanitarian efforts their favorite celebs are supporting so I would like to add what I can even if that means there is nothing to add at this point for the ones I personally follow. Hotpotato75 (talk) 20:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know her in person so that she has given you permission to speak of her on a first-name basis? If so, you should not be editing her article directly; please read WP:COI. If not, you should not be calling her by her first name; please read MOS:SURNAME. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 17:34, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do I (propose to) start an Entry - "Westcoast Black Theater"

A friend of mine went to the "Westcoast Black Theater," which is mentioned in Sarasota, Florida but is without a Wikipedia entry. I would like to get develop an article for submission so I started to write down some thoughts here; User:Flibbertigibbets/sandbox#Westcoast Black Theater Troupe I was hoping to be pointed in the right direction, get some input about the draft, and get the entry started. I am trying to "hit" quite a bit above my weight class so any help or suggestions (or even constructive criticism) would be much appreciated. Flibbertigibbets (talk) 02:49, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Figured out how to create a draft page - "I am trying to "hit" quite a bit above my weight class so any help or suggestions (or even constructive criticism) would be much appreciated."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Westcoast_Black_Theatre_Troupe Flibbertigibbets (talk) 03:44, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Flibbertigibbets, Wikipedia has little or no interest in the "mission" of the subject of an article, or in what the subject has a "commitment" towards, unless either has been discussed by reliable sources. Reliability requires (among other things) independence from the subject. What have reliable sources said about WBTT? Summarize, of course specifying your sources. -- Hoary (talk) 03:53, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.. I will address that issue; the primary source issue, and the copyright issue. I guess that it would be easy to fall into "researching" Flibbertigibbets (talk) 04:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You need clarify what the subject of the draft is. At present, some of it is about Jacobs, some is about a troupe (a bunch of people who put on plays, right? Is any of them notable, in Wikipedia's sense?), and some is about an organization with a board. And you say above that your friend went there – so maybe it's an actual theater, a playhouse? Maproom (talk) 08:14, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is a really good point. Flibbertigibbets (talk) 12:36, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Flibbertigibbets This source [1] may be useful. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:15, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see you had that in the draft. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all the help! and Thanks for All the Fish! (<-that is a joke, could not resist!)
https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Draft:Westcoast_Black_Theatre_Troupe&url=
Draft:Westcoast Black Theatre Troupe Flibbertigibbets (talk) 16:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

i need help with making an article

greetings, i am tsu! truly impressive, isn't it? i'm new to the whole editing gig, and i only signed up to make an article of smth, have any tips? Tsuthehottest! (talk) 05:58, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend you do some minor edits first (e.g., copyedit and referencing) before you make your first article. Make sure the topic follows notability guidelines. ██ Dentsinhere43 is a new Wikipedian. 06:04, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
tysm!!! Tsuthehottest! (talk) 06:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome! Creating a new article is a tall order, and you will have better luck if you get a feel for the encyclopedia by editing existing articles first. A guide on creating your first article is available and very helpful, but it too recommends you don't jump straight to creating an article before contributing to the wiki in other ways. WPscatter t/c 06:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
alright, i'll start by editing other pages, but i kinda need help with putting in numbers like [1] Tsuthehottest! (talk) 06:07, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
oh btw, tysm!! Tsuthehottest! (talk) 06:07, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Those numbers are citations, and here is a guide on using them. Make sure your sources are reliable. WPscatter t/c 06:14, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ty!!!! Tsuthehottest! (talk) 06:18, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kuru Footwear Resolution (Support or Oppose)

Prior discussion on this Draft got archived without a resolution. Please see here. I have taken the recommendation of all involved and revised to reduce anything promotional. I have also removed the medical claims and changed it so that it says which publications have stated the benefit of the shoes. In addition, changed the all CAPS spellings to lowercase. Could we please have just a Support or Oppose vote? Support means the page is OK now to go live. Oppose means, it is not ready and needs more work or should be just declined. @melecie @Hoary @Cullen328 @Tigraan @MrOllie @SMcCandlish @Helloheart Downinit9 (talk) 09:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected and won't be considered again, time to WP:DROPTHESTICK. Theroadislong (talk) 09:07, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is not the purpose of the Teahouse. Cullen328 (talk) 16:44, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong I would really appropriate if you can post some specific reasons as to why? Have you checked the prior discussion? Several people have agreed that it can be improved and it just sounded promotional. No one has yet raised an issue with provided citations. I have now improved the article, so it needs another look. Downinit9 (talk) 19:24, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Many people raised issues with the citations, I was one of them. This article inherently makes medical claims, and the sources do not meet the required WP:MEDRS standard. Attributing the claims does not fix that problem. MrOllie (talk) 19:41, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The medical claims have been removed and revised. It is now just saying "According to publications..." and what they have stated. There is no medical claim anymore. Plus a shoe that is made for better walking conditions and health is hardly a medical claim. It is not a pill or medication. It has been rated in top 10 of walking shoes or shoes that help certain health conditions on multiple notable publications which also have Wikipedia pages, so they are coming from reliable publications. If what you say was the case, then many other shoe pages on Wikipedia should be removed that make similar shoes. Downinit9 (talk) 20:02, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is where you are wrong. Literally EVERY claim that would have a direct impact on human health or the practice of medicine REQUIRES sourcing that meets WP:MEDRS claims. It doesn't matter if the subject is a drug, a medical procedure, equipment, or clothing. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 20:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Even if it is the case, there are supporting sources from Wired, Men's Health, Well+Good, Footwear News, the Philippine Daily Inquirer, ABC, Self. all of which are credible publications with Wiki pages. Downinit9 (talk) 20:36, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at a few of those, but they were short mentions in listicles '18 best shoes for bunions' and so on. They don't meet WP:CORPDEPTH. Trivial mentions of the company aren't enough. - MrOllie (talk) 21:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are many other articles that are more in depth. These are pretty indepth: WIRED, University of Utah, HEALTHLINE, SUGGEST, inquirer (3 paragraphs), Salt Lake Tribune, theislandnow (6 paragraphs) and Footwear News has 4 articles, 4 articles together combined makes it significant coverage. Downinit9 (talk) 21:38, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You seem pretty focused on arguing here that the draft is notable, but this is not a venue that can help you with that at all. Discussion here is not going to overrule the AFC reviewers and make your draft into an article. One final piece of feedback: in the future (on whatever topic you write about next, this one is a lost cause), you should take a hard look at your sources and excise all the stuff that is trivial coverage or obviously closely based on a press release. You need to help anyone reviewing your article find your WP:THREE. MrOllie (talk) 21:52, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To elaborate the point of WP:MEDRS: it’s not just WP:MEDRS, it’s also an interaction with WP:UNDUE.
Magic Stone (tm) cures cancer - clear medical claim, and disallowed per MEDRS unless exceptional sourcing is provided.
Magic Stone (tm) cures cancer, according to X, Y and Z - technically not a medical claim (it is a claim about what X, Y and Z say). However, is it due weight to mention X, Y and Z’s opinion on the matter? I would argue no unless those are sources that one could cite for MEDRS matters. Otherwise, we are just bypassing MEDRS via attribution-laundering. It is pretty obvious that the general reader is more interested of whether the "cure cancer" part is likely to be true than by who claimed it was, and that a barrage of authoritative figures saying it works is the same as a Wikipedia-voice statement to that effect. (The current sentence in the draft is Several publications such as (...) have stated the benefits of the shoes in regards to (...).)
Of course, there are situations where X says (medical claim) is acceptable - either when MEDRS-level sources disagree and we need to present the dispute, or where the claiming itself is the interesting fact (e.g. "faith healer X claimed to cure cancer by voodoo, and was sued for false advertising"). TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 10:16, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Per Leth-Nissen

Hi,

The above mentioned article got dismissed.

I have two questions that I hope you can help med with.

  1. How do I cite all the music records, that I have produced or engineered, when Discogs.com is unacceptable?
  2. Another wiki user (an internationally famous author) wrote the text to the article about me - and that what's I have published. I am totally new to writing articles on wiki - so where do we go from here? Edit the text og letting him upload the article or?

Really hope that you can help me.

Kindest


Per SHAPEYourFuture (talk) 09:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SHAPEYourFuture! To aid question 1, there's a list of recommended sources for music related Wikipedia articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources. Hope that is of some help to you! Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 10:33, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, SHAPEYourFuture, ahd welcome to the Teahouse. One thing to realise is that 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. Another is that An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Please also have a look at why writing about yourself is so strongly discouraged.
My suggestion would be that you drop this draft, and work on other existing articles that interest you. On the other hand, if your only purpose in editing Wikipedia is to write an article about yourself, then I suggest you find another outlet that accepts promotion: Wikipedia does not. ColinFine (talk) 12:26, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
allmusic.com is acceptable per Wiki policy Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources. Do you have credits there? If not, I suggest you request them to add your credits and then try. Downinit9 (talk) 19:35, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Allmusic doesn't establish notability, though. It provides indiscriminate listings that are largely generated by the record labels themselves. MrOllie (talk) 21:29, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source

How to identified independent Sources can you please explain in simple words Jisshu (talk) 09:58, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For information about independent sources, try reading WP:Independent sources. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:02, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Jisshu (ec) Independent sources are those that are not connected to the subject in any way, and where the source chose on their own to write about the topic, without prompting by the topic. This would not include things like an interview, the subject's social media, or anywhere where the subject is speaking about themselves or just announcing what they do. There are times when such sources can be used, but never to establish notability. I would highly suggest that you use the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Term for too much written about an insignificant thing?

Hello, I could swear there was a policy/guidance about writing excessively about something insignificant within an article, but I can’t remember the name. What is the name for this? Asperthrow (talk) 10:53, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe WP:TRIVIA. Shantavira|feed me 11:02, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also Wikipedia:Due weight. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 11:13, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And if you mean putting in an article on topic A lots of text about a barely related B, then possibly you think about a WP:COATRACK...? --CiaPan (talk) 12:31, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The word "cruft" is sometimes used for this, as in WP:FANCRUFT or WP:GAMECRUFT. WPscatter t/c 16:46, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

edits not useful?

Why are my edits not useful? the information on the wikipedia page is very out of date and I am trying to update it with more relevant information. Harriseen (talk) 12:04, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Harriseen Welcome to the Teahouse. Your only major edit from your account was this one, which removed large chunks of information and references. It was reverted but if you think it was made correctly you need to discuss this on Talk:Net 1 UEPS Technologies as part of our standard WP:BRD process. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:13, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How to delete draft

Draft Jisshu (talk) 12:27, 7 November 2022 (UTC) How to proposed a Draft to be deleted[reply]

@Jisshu: If you are referring to Draft:MC STAN, which you put a PROD, you might want to use {{Db-g7}} since it is mostly your work. – robertsky (talk) 12:32, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate article

I was trying to make some minor changes to Wikipedia articles that needed them, just to contribute to Wikipedia. I came across George Appert, and it's a pretty empty page. I did some researching to find out more about this person, when I found a second page, Georges Appert, a biography about seemingly the same person. An external source on the page of George Appert proved this. Can I merge the two articles or delete one of them? DesolatedMelancholist (talk) 12:39, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @DesolatedMelancholist: Welcome to the teahouse! In this case, I believe a redirect would work if no one else has the same name and has an article. The course of action to take would be: 1. find the more correct name (Georges or George), 2. merge the other article into the correct name, and 3. make the other article a redirect to the correct name. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 12:42, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The articles appear to be about different people. They just happen to have the same birth years. I think more research is needed. Esolo5002 (talk) 14:58, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. When I looked at the pages someone erroneously added "painter" to Georges Appert. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 15:12, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I checked translations of George Appert and it has a Russian translation stating he wrote the book Ancient Japan which Japanologist Georges Appert also wrote. DesolatedMelancholist (talk) 15:29, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This does seem to be a case of "more research needed" - checking what the sources in each article say and evaluating their reliability would be a start (other language versions of Wikipedia are not reliable sources). It's possible that the dates in one or both articles are incorrect; the similar names may have led to confusion elsewhere. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:50, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Suicide

If a user on wikipedia mentions very serious topics like threats of suicide or self harm (or are telling that they're gonna kill themselves) , what is generally the first step should you take? Wikipedian10282 (talk) 12:49, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Responding to threats of harm. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:50, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Wikipedian10282 (talk) 12:53, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BLP dates related policies and guidelines?

Are there any help/ policy/ guideline / essay articles or previous discussions regarding dates mentioned in BLP articles such as Birth / marriage / death dates.

Question came to my mind after reading of synopsis of this linked dispute , any ways I wish to have more general answer for referring to policies in other BLP articles too for my own knowledge too.


Bookku (talk) 13:34, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have looke at the policies and guidelines of WP but found nothing of the sort. Maybe there is something, but i just didn't find it, sorry. MrYellowWatermelon (talk) 16:23, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the linked dispute, Iskandar323 is right, a source from 2011 can't be used to make claims about the present. For the presumed death of Rajavi in 2016, I think we should wait for the confirmation, as the death of someone is important. MrYellowWatermelon (talk) 16:26, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me improve an article?

Good day,


I hope you’re well? An article I created Draft:Neo Rapetsoa was recently moved to draft space. The editors reasons were that 1. There is a conflict of interest and 2. The subject is not notable?


The article has been reviewed before and the editor(s) said that the sources were good enough and that the article was well written.


Could someone pls help me navigate what to do to get the article published?


Thank you Alien Superstar (talk) 16:36, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Previous discussion: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1164#I need assistance with an article?. From what I can see, Draft:Neo Rapetsoa was moved to mainspace thrice, each time by Alien Superstar, and into draft by MrsSnoozyTurtle and Onel5969. @Alien Superstar:, do you have a conflict of interest or paid edits relationship either of which would need to be disclosed? Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 17:14, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was asked by the actress’s media team to create a page for her. Is there a way that I can declare this on the article? Alien Superstar (talk) 17:24, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Alien Superstar, please review WP:COI. You can place a declaration on your user page, which is easiest for everyone to see; there are also templates which can be used on the talk page of the draft/article. Others can place the latter for you. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Alien Superstar Please clarify "I was asked by the actress’s media team". Why would they do this? Are you being compensated for doing so or just helping out? Compensation would trigger the required paid editing disclosure. Note that Wikipedia has articles, not pages. This may aid your mindset. 331dot (talk) 17:35, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot thank you for your kind message and also noted about the correct Wikipedia jargon! Editor @199.208.172.35 has already explained how I can disclose that I was paid by the client to write the article for her. Alien Superstar (talk) 17:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for this! Alien Superstar (talk) 17:53, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you click the words "paid editing disclosure" in my post above, it will take you to the policy which provides instructions on how to disclose. If you find the coding too challenging, you may simply write a statement on your user page (User:Alien Superstar) to the effect of "I, Alien Superstar, have been paid by (who is paying you) on behalf of (who you are editing for, if different) for my contributions to Wikipedia". 331dot (talk) 19:48, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me improve an article?

I hope you’re well? An article I created Draft:Neo Rapetsoa was recently moved to draft space. The editors reasons were that 1. There is a conflict of interest and 2. The subject is not notable?Wikipedia:Conflict of interest Mr DC London (talk) 18:24, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you Alien Superstar, or are you just repeating the question above? Sarrail (talk) 18:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarrail I am just repeating the question as part of the training, thankyou Mr DC London (talk) 20:20, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly do you mean as "part of the training"? Are you being paid to edit Wikipedia and do you work with Alien Superstar at all? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:21, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Mr DC London, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? You've never edited the draft you mentioned. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:35, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am just going through the wikipedia adventure programme, thankyou. Mr DC London (talk) 20:22, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused. TWA should not be asking you to repeat a question someone else asked on the Teahouse. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

help

can someone please help me figure out how to use the Yi syllable Wu (Yi iteration mark) in my signiture? go to unicode and scroll to "Anomalies" to see it. also maybe help with the U+2118 and the U+FE18 ones Allaoii talk 18:31, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How to see in linked pages if the link goes to a heading?

For redirects, it says redirect to page#heading but for links in pages, it doesn't show. is it possible to show? because on List of north–south roads in Toronto - Wikipedia, there a numerous page that i created a redirect for just a bit ago. I found numerous pages that rather than linking to the redirect(Because i just made them), linked to say List of north–south roads in Toronto#main street rather than main street (toronto), which i just made. In the event main street (toronto) becomes a standalone page, some pages would just go to the undetailed version on the list. i want to find them and change them before this could ever happen. Humulator (talk) 18:38, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, are you asking if there is a way to see links to a specific page heading, as you can see links to a page by clicking "What links here"? In any case, the preemptive editing you wish to do seems unnecessary; in the event that Main Street (Toronto) does become its own article, then the section on List of north-south roads in Toronto would get a hatnote that looks like this:
And anyone following a link to the page heading would be able to get there easily. WPscatter t/c 18:46, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, what you said is what i am asking, i understand it may be unnecessary, but I still would like to see if its possible. it may be useful for other reasons and many times i wanted to see it out of curiosity. Humulator (talk) 18:51, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If there is a way, I don't know how. I just checked the links for Foul (basketball); Coach's challenge has a link to Foul (basketball)#Coach's challenge, but the link from Coach's challenge is lumped together with the rest of them. Narrowing the search by heading didn't remove the other links either. WPscatter t/c 18:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
welp, there's is almost certainly a way, probably with 3rd party things, but thanks for trying. Humulator (talk) 19:01, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Warren Beatty, Shirley MacLaine and A. A. MacLeod

Both the articles Warren Beatty and Shirley MacLaine mention their uncle A. A. MacLeod but while the Beatty article has "Canadian politician" the MacLaine article has "a Communist member of the Ontario legislature in the 1940s". I'm wondering if the details should be added to the former or deleted from the latter. While neither article mentions MacLeod again his includes "Both Beatty and MacLaine have referred to the MacLeods as a major influence on their own liberal political philosophy. One of Beatty's biographers has commented that his aunt and uncle were "the private inspiration" behind his portrait of Louise Bryant and John Reed in his 1981 film Reds." so perhaps both should.

Incidentally, the MacLaine article refers to MacLeod as "her mother's brother-in-law" while the Beatty article has "uncle by marriage". MacLeod's article describes his wife as the sister of their mother. Mcljlm (talk) 18:54, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcljlm I think that this is a case where the wikilinks really help. Anyone reading the articles can navigate to the MacLeod article or just hover-over the link to get the first sentence of his article, which gives the full information. If you are convinced something needs to be changed, you can just be WP:BOLD and do it, or use the Talk Page of the respective articles to discuss your suggestion. There will be lots of watchers for these high-traffic articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:16, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm convinced something needs changing but not sure which or whether to add to both, which is why I posted here. Mcljlm (talk) 00:33, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copied Text

Hi! I'm quite new to editing and have done well so far, and I am planning to write some additional information on a specific wikipedia article. Before I start however, I was wondering - if I copied the exact text from a different website to add to an article (and obviously gave citations for it), would that put me in trouble regarding copyright? Or do I have to slightly modify the original text before adding it in and publishing? Any help would be appreciated, thanks! Wikipedian10282 (talk) 19:15, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:PARAPHRASE: "Editors should generally summarize source material in their own words." Indeed copying large amounts of material from sources, even if they are cited, can be a copyright or plagiarism issue. Don't think of it as "slightly modifying" the original text, or aiming for a threshold at which there is no copyright issue; instead, you should aim to convey the information the source provides in an encyclopedic tone. Sometimes the appropriate wording is very similar, and sometimes it's very different. However, red flags should be going off if you're copying several lines of text verbatim from a single source. WPscatter t/c 19:22, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, that clears up everything! Wikipedian10282 (talk) 19:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Using the auto citation button

I'm currently trying to make an article on the genus Archangelia, yet I can't seem to be getting any result from the auto-citation machine when I try to input this citation into it https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336319358_UPPER_PRECAMBRIAN_AND_CAMBRIAN_PALAEONTOLOGY_OF_THE_EAST-EUROPEAN_PLATFORM_CONTRIBUTION_OF_THE_SOV1ET-POLISH_WORKING_GROUP_ON_THE_PRECAMBR1AN-CAMBR1AN_BOUNDARY_PROBLEM, is there anything wrong that I'm doing? If I turn it into a dead link on the article, I'll be converting it to an actual citation once I get a response telling me what is wrong. Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 19:28, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you have your draft of the article? - UtherSRG (talk) 19:50, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Rugoconites Tenuirugosus The citation bots are not infallible and in this case you'll have to create the citation "by hand" using the template {{cite book}}, filling in the standard parameters as listed on the template page. Convert the title to sentence case, not allcaps. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:03, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Podcasting as a reliable source.

Here is the question I want to ask all of you:

Are all podcasts a reliable source?

I wanted to ask that because I hardly see people citing podcasts as a source in articles they edit.

And I'm sure that news media organization does podcasting.

So, would you please explain if podcasting is reliable or deprecated source on Wikipedia? -- 204.129.232.195 (talk) 19:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think that podcasts can be reliable as long they contain factual information. —2600:1010:B12A:AE74:F835:F68:51C5:4C62 (talk) 20:01, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, that is incorrect. 331dot (talk) 16:26, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As a general rule podcasts are considered to be usable under the same circumstances as op-eds or blogs - if its showrunners are subject-matter experts and the podcast is focused on their area of expertise. Otherwise, podcasts generally lack editorial oversight. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 20:02, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If the podcast is an interview with the subject (which usually is), then it would be considered a primary source and cannot be used. If it is just commentary about the subject, then it can be used, as long as it is from a established and notable podcaster. Downinit9 (talk) 20:09, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano @Downinit9 But, would you elaborate even more? I wanted to go in-depth in podcasts. -- 204.129.232.195 (talk) 20:20, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what further information you are asking for, IP user. The format of a source is pretty well irrelevant, whether it is text, video, or audio. What matters is who published it. If it was published by an organization with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking, then it is probably a reliable source. If it was published by the subject of the article, or somebody closely associated with the subject, it is probably reliable, but not indepedent, so can be used only for limited kinds of information. If it was self-published by a recognized authority as Jeske said, it can probably be used. Otherwise, no. ColinFine (talk) 20:37, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Does that mean that I should cite podcasts as a source, if I want to edit articles to add information in each topic like culture, tourism, politics, history, science, comedy, geography, popular music, and health? Or may I might use blogs instead as a source? -- 204.129.232.195 (talk) 21:13, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Blogs are almost never considered reliable, they are user generated content without editorial oversight. Please see WP:RSSELF as blogs and many podcasts will fit in this category. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 21:17, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing to ask, what are examples of appropriate podcasts to cite from if many of them including those from App Store fit in WP:RSSELF and lack editorial insight? 204.129.232.195 (talk) 21:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Something like any of podcasts published by NPR - a news organization with a strong reputation for fact checking and accuracy. Well, except for the comedy shows. MrOllie (talk) 21:33, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Other examples? 204.129.232.195 (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MrOllie @Mcmatter @ColinFine And why are comedy podcasts aren't reliable anyway? I want to see it. -- 204.129.232.195 (talk) 22:43, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps because comedy doesn't pretend to be a reliable source of information? There may be facts buried within a comedy routine, but much of it will be (and should be) made up, and even things that a speaker claims as fact will not necessarily have been fact-checked. I suppose a comedy podcast could be a source for a claim that a certain person was in a particle podcast, or said a particular thing; but if there is no independent source saying this, does it belong in an article? ColinFine (talk) 11:17, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think it belongs to an article. But what other example of reliable podcasts besides thse published by NPR? -- 204.129.232.195 (talk) 16:22, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's very difficult to give you other specific examples. We've described to you what makes a source reliable and told you the actual format of a source is not greatly relevant to determining its reliability. Is there a particular answer you are looking for? Do you have something in mind, a podcast with a particular piece of information that is nowhere else? 331dot (talk) 16:31, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No thanks to the particular one, but thank you all for answering my question on "are podcasts reliable." Concluded. -- 204.129.232.195 (talk) 16:36, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sherry Sherrod DuPree entry send in over 12 months ago

Topics: African American Holiness Pentecostism; DuPree Pentecostal collections; Rosewood Massacre; Civil Rights; Atrocities Amil1825 (talk) 20:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You need to provide context; as it is this is a collection of unrelated words. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 20:19, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Amil1825, welcome to the Teahouse. There seem to be no other edits from this account. If a draft was created over 12 months ago and subsequently not edited for a six month period, it would have been automatically deleted. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:42, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds as if you are asking about what has happened to a Draft or an attempt at an article. We have an article Rosewood Massacre, but I can't find anything about the other terms. If you are asking about a draft or an attempt at an article, you need to tell us the precise name of the draft or article. ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

major article revision space

Through the talk page, I agreed to work with another editor to major revise the Matthew Bullock entry. In reading about sandboxes, which I planned to use for the re-write, I read on a page I cannot now locate that Sandboxes should not be used for major edits of existing articles due to the possibility of mis direction to that page during searches. What is the correct way to create a collaboration page? Thanks LetsTalkAboutBears (talk) 21:55, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to avoid that problem by editing one chunk at a time, which is recommended anyway, to avoid conflicting with other edits in the article space that may occur in the meantime. One of you should be able to collaborate in the other editor's sandbox space. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 23:21, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks LetsTalkAboutBears (talk) 12:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Robots operated by Google and the like are asked not to index sandbox pages, so a regular search via Google or similar should not lead anyone to any sandbox page. (Search robots can't be compelled to stay away, but most will stay away.) So you can forget about the particular worry that you express above. If editing "one chunk at a time" (which Pyrrho recommends and which indeed is often a good idea) cramps you -- perhaps because you hope to implement a change that will affect many sections, or you want to rearrange content -- feel free to do so in a sandbox: yours or your collaborator's, but of course not Wikipedia's all-are-welcome sandbox. -- Hoary (talk) 23:51, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you - this plan makes more sense for me. I think this particular article needs quite a bit of reorganization. I'll create my own SB page for it LetsTalkAboutBears (talk) 12:03, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you're doing this, whether alone or in collaboration, you might want to put the {{under construction}} template in the article. This does not prevent people reading and even editing it, but it gives notice that something is in progress. ColinFine (talk) 11:19, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Reading the link, it looks like my two options are {{under construction}} and {{in use}} both of which are for short term tagging during a period of major editing. My reading of the pages, suggests in use may be more appropriate while I am actively editing. Does that sound right? Thanks LetsTalkAboutBears (talk) 12:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Page number in a pdf of a journal

Hello Teahouse, I've tried finding the answer to this question but had no luck so I'm bringing it here. Is there a preference or a guideline to what page number I should use when referencing a pdf of a scholarly journal? As a specific example, I am trying to reference The Florida Historical Quarterly (direct link: http://palmm.digital.flvc.org/islandora/object/ucf%3A22393). The page I am referencing is "page" 25 of the pdf but page 345 of the journal. Which is correct? Thank you! Amscheip (talk) 00:31, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amscheip, I would say, from common sense, 345. Anyone who has a copy of the journal will be able to look up 345, but only people with the pdf can look up 25. Sungodtemple (talk) 00:42, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sungodtemple That makes total sense, thank you! Amscheip (talk) 04:04, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would go further than Sungodtemple. The essential part of a citation is information that will allow a reader first to evaluate whether it is likely to be worth looking at, and secondly to find the source if they wish to. A link to an online source is a convenience for the reader, not an essential part of the citation. It follows that the original page number is part of the reference, and the page number in the PDF is not. ColinFine (talk) 11:22, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is the concept of notability required because of limitations to server capacity?

At present, Wikipedia's servers (presumably) do not have the capacity to function as a repository of all past and present human knowledge. As such, the concept of "notability" is required in order to prioritize the use of Wikipedia's storage capacity. The potential exists, however, for Wikipedia to morph, one day, into just such a repository of all information. At that time, would "notability" be needed? Pyraminxsolver (talk) 02:34, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pyraminxsolver. There is no problem with server capacity, and concerns about server capacity have no impact on content decisions. I suggest that you read WP:Notability#Why we have these requirements for an explanation of how notability interacts with our three core content policies, which are Verifiability, the Neutral point of view and No original research. These interrelated policies and guidelines have enabled us to create the world's greatest encyclopedia, a top ten website that gets billions of pageviews per month, and to offer it to readers worldwide for free. Cullen328 (talk) 02:46, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No; @Pyraminxsolver: Thanks for thinking about this, but it's a matter of human capacity, not machine capacity. Thousands of Wikipedians use our WP:Watchlist to watch out for vandalism and stupidity. Anyone can edit, right? Unfortunately, the billions of people who have Internet access include people who don't understand, and those having dishonest intent. With only thousands of us to watch millions of articles, it can be difficult to keep up; I've already spent a few hours at it just today. This is not the only reason, but it's an important one. There have been online encyclopedias that had no notability bar, and they soon filled with advertisements, political promotion, and thoughtless rants. So, like other websites, we want to be able to do the thing we do, and for us that's an encyclopedia that is reasonably accurate, neutral, and even somewhat fair. If someone wants to operate a repository of all information, that sounds like a splendid thing for someone else to do but Wikipedia isn't trying to be everything; we have certain goals and let others handle other good things. Jim.henderson (talk) 02:47, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me

How can you make a template visible without the code showing up? SAWAKI IZ KOOL (talk) 02:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SAWAKI IZ KOOL: You use another template called {{template link}} which will link to the template while still keeping the curvy brackets. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 02:45, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

source libraries

How does one get or earn access to source libraries? Is there a WikiWay to sign-up when one is an extended-confirmed user? Elevedevie (talk) 03:35, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@elevedevie: is this about the wikipedia library? if so, the requirements for access are at least 500 edits and at least 6 months tenure, which you have met. or is this about something else? lettherebedarklight晚安 おやすみping me when replying 04:15, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your tip. I followed the link trail and bookmarked it for future use. Wiley Online was what I was looking for and it is one of the available sites.Elevedevie (talk) 23:26, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused.

So, I just joined, and I want to know everything about Wikipedia. Like I want to know how to edit and all that. I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 04:16, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@i forgot about cheese: the page help:introduction is a great way to learn how to edit. we also have the wikipedia:task center, a list of things you can do to help out. lettherebedarklight晚安 おやすみping me when replying 04:21, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 04:24, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why do people vandalize Wikipedia? I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 04:32, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@i forgot about cheese: see wikipedia:the motivation of a vandal. lettherebedarklight晚安 おやすみping me when replying 04:36, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's interesting, thank you. I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 04:53, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Where does Wikipedia get the money to run Wikipedia? Because if Wikipedia is so big, they must get money from somewhere to run it. I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 05:11, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@i forgot about cheese: wikipedia, and all the other wikimedia projects, are hosted on the Wikimedia Foundation’s servers. they are funded by donations. lettherebedarklight晚安 おやすみping me when replying 05:17, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why did people make Wikipedia? I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 05:25, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@i forgot about cheese: wikipedia was founded in 2001 by jimmy wales and larry sanger as a complementary project to nupedia. nupedia was an online encyclopedia intended to be written and approved by experts, but progress was slow. in contrast to that, wikipedia was founded so that anyone could edit it, and possibly speed up progress. lettherebedarklight晚安 おやすみping me when replying 05:35, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's also interesting. And what's the difference between Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia wikis? I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 05:40, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Because I really don't see the difference between Wikiquotes and Wikipedia, same with Wikimedia Commons. I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 05:44, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@i forgot about cheese: wikipedia is the free online encyclopedia, wikiquote is a free online collection of quotes, wikimedia commons is a free online file hosting site. lettherebedarklight晚安 おやすみping me when replying 05:48, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What's the @ symbol do at the beginning of your replies? I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 05:50, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also thanks for telling me that. I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 05:51, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@i forgot about cheese: the @ symbol does nothing. it is simply a convenience when i use the reply tool. the actual notification is sent when i link to someone’s userpage. see help:notifications. lettherebedarklight晚安 おやすみping me when replying 05:58, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How interesting. I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 05:59, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is such an interesting place; I can't wait to start contributing. I Forgot About Cheese (talk) 06:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked from editing (especially from pages I myself created/uploaded)

Almost all of my Wikipedia input has been accomplished via smartphone.

My prior smartphone malfunctioned and has been replaced. As I attempt to edit Wikipedia text using my replacement smartphone, I'm being blocked - especially from pages I myself created.

Yesterday, I attempted doing my Wikipedia editing utilizing a public-library internet computer, but found myself blocked there too.

I have done over 100 Wikipedia edits in the past and now fi

find myself blocked from doing any whats HELP! Paynethymaya (talk)Paynethymaya Almost all of my Wikipedia input has been accomplished via smartphone. Almost all of my Wikipedia input has been accomplished via smartphone. Almost all of my Wikipedia input has been accomplished via smartphone. Paynethymaya (talk) 05:26, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@paynethymaya: what does it say when you try to edit and find yourself blocked from editing? it could be an autoblock. lettherebedarklight晚安 おやすみping me when replying 05:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Paynethymaya. If you can clarify things a bit, then perhaps it will be easier for someone to help you figure this out. Since you've posted above using the "Paynethymaya" account, that account hasn't been WP:BLOCKed per se from editing Wikipedia. Are you perhaps trying to edit using another account? If you're able to log in to your "Paynethymaya" account, then you should be able to edit articles, unless there are some technical restrictions (e.g. page protection) in place to prevent you from doing so. If you're trying to log in from an IP address that has been blocked, then its quite possible that the IP has been blocked for reasons completely unrelated to you. For example, if you're trying to log in from an open proxy or using a VPN, then there's a good chance that IP address has been globally blocked as a preventive measure against abuse. The same could've happened in the case of a publicly accessible computer (e.g. one at a library) because of a past history of serious abuse from that IP address. In general, though, IP address tend not to be blocked all that much except when absolutely necessary as explained in WP:BLOCK#IP address blocks because such blocks can affect a very large number of users. Moreover, I don't think which smart phone your using matters much as long as the IP address your phone is using hasn't been blocked for some reason. Maybe you should try connecting to different networks and see which ones allow you to edit and which ones don't, and then perhaps avoid using the ones that don't. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:15, 8 November 2022 (UTC); [Note: Post edited by Marchjuly to correct the typo referred to below. -- 08:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)][reply]

Notability via a single source

Hi Teahouse. I just came across St. George's School (Vancouver) and noticed the quality of the article was pretty low. It mainly relies on primary sources, so I looked for secondary ones. Outside of a handful that mention the school in passing, the only thing I found was Saints: The Story of St. George's School for Boys. The fact that a book was published about this school tells me it is likely notable. But let's say someone tracks down this book and rewrites the article using information from it rather than the primary sources; that's not good either, right? Generally multiple secondary sources are needed to establish notability. I was considering opening an AfD for this article, but now that I know this book exists I'm not sure how to proceed. WPscatter t/c 07:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The link you post above says that the book was published by Mitchell Press. I searched for that name and quickly arrived at mitchellpress.com. Mitchell Press in 1979 may have been different from Mitchell Press in 2022; but FWIW the latter is described in the website (and particularly near the foot of this page) as a Canadian company that handles printing and related business. If you have material more or less ready for a book and pay Mitchell to print and bind it, Mitchell will print and bind it. And the reason why I looked this up is that back in the days before sleepy little used bookstores mostly went out of business, they'd frequently have piles of (somniferous) school histories from obscure publishers (if not the schools themselves), and presumably compiled by alumni for alumni. A school may be notable, but to me this isn't demonstrated by the mere existence of a book about it. NB this particular book may be quite unusually good, and gratefully read by people who've never been to the school; and the school may be notable too: I haven't investigated. -- Hoary (talk) 08:29, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hm... with that info, I'll open an AfD and see what other editors have to say about it. Thanks for your help. WPscatter t/c 08:33, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notability review (for re-submission)

Hi editors, there was a discussion about eligibility of sources for the draft on Draft:Bluebell Group to meet NCORP requirements. After some hesitation from one reviewer, the article was declined in July 2021. Since then, the company has been noted in more articles.

Below are five selected articles that I believe meet NCORP requirements (they are from independent news outlets and analyse the company within the wider industry for at least 2 paragraphs). Could someone kindly advise whether these indeed might qualify, and if I may resubmit the entry at this stage? Thank you for your guidance.

New since last submission

Cambodia: Khmer Times - https://www.khmertimeskh.com/50917137/high-end-labels-coming-to-cambodia/

China: Huxiu - https://www.huxiu.com/article/335703.html (in Chinese)

Previously submitted

Hong Kong: Wall Street Journal - https://www.wsj.com/articles/luxury-slump-slashes-rents-on-hong-kongs-glitzy-shopping-streets-11589284818

Hong Kong: Bloomberg - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-23/fresh-virus-wave-worsens-hong-kong-s-already-disastrous-outlook

China: WWD - https://wwd.com/business-news/mergers-acquisitions/exclusive-bluebell-group-takes-minority-stake-in-translatio-1234586551/ Gregocole (talk) 06:46, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gregocole, the Khmer Times article is based on a press release, and so not independent, and does not help to establish notability. (I can't advise on the others, as either I don't have access to them or they're in a language I can't read.) Maproom (talk) 09:45, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

can you check this draft 122.186.25.219 (talk) 10:54, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For a review, please resubmit it. 331dot (talk) 11:04, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any evidence of notability in Draft:Paswara Papers. Most of the sources are directory entries, not independent discussion. Maproom (talk) 11:43, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article

Hi! As a long term project, I want to take the Eschede train disaster there. But to make the right start, I want to choose the best sources from the beginning. I could not find what exactly a "high quality RS" is. I assume it would be books or academic articles, but are there any requirements for a publisher? I have added some books I could find to the "further reading section". Thanks in advance. PhotographyEdits (talk) 11:51, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, PhotographyEdits. You should read Verifiability and Reliable sources, both of which discuss this matter. When evaluating a source, you need to look into the reputation and credibility of the book or article, as well as the author, the publication and the publisher. The reputation of the publisher is definitely important. For example, books published by university presses or publishing houses specializing in academic literature are often preferable to books by general interest publishers that may be prone to sensationalism or promotion of fringe theories. Currently, I see that the most used reference is a segment of the US TV show Seconds from Disaster, which may have the benefit of being accessible for English language speakers. I very much doubt that is among the best sources for a featured article on this train wreck. You will need to familiarize yourself with the range of literature and rely on the best books and journal articles, which are likely to be in German. Cullen328 (talk) 18:48, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You should read reviews of any books you are considering using, to see what other experts think of the book. Cullen328 (talk) 18:50, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cullen328 Yes, I don't think the Seconds from Disaster is a good source either, so I want to remove that one. And the books that I could find were indeed in German, which I already added to the further reading section. But my question still is: how do I evaluate those books. Is an academic publisher like Springer always good enough for WP:FA? Some German publishers are relatively unknown and have no online information about their reliability. Can they be trusted? Not all books have reviws. PhotographyEdits (talk) 08:43, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please help me and let me know what am I doing wrong?

Hello could you explain to me like if I was a young child what am I doing wrong as this is the first article I am writing for Wikipedia?

I wrote the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kima_drink using this one as "template" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laranjada

I have tried to add as much information as available (just unfortunately the manufacturer of the drink has Facebook and Instagram presence but not website presence), and I am struggling to find what else do I need to find for it to be accepted or what I am doing wrong. Can you help me please? TheJusticeBear (talk) 14:53, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You need Wikipedia:RS to get any article accepted. Many topics deserve a wikipage but without RS we can't do much ShaveKongo (talk) 15:00, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have read the Wikipedia:RS and honestly I am struggling to find out what can I do... and now I was asked to "please place references directly after the content that they support" anyone can help me with that? TheJusticeBear (talk) 15:48, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is help with formatting sources here WP:REFB, please remove the Facebook, Instagram and YouTube sources, they are not reliable or independent so are no help in establishing notability. Theroadislong (talk) 15:51, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the help. But now seems like the page was speedy deleted by a user called Deb. TheJusticeBear (talk) 16:46, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TheJusticeBear, I'm sorry you've had a rather rough time of it - often people learn the hard way that writing a decent Wikipedia article is much more difficult than it looks, and our standards have risen over the years, so many articles exist that would probably not be accepted today. Few people want to go around doing cleanup work, unfortunately. If you spend more time reading and making small improvements to existing articles, you'll get a much better idea of how things work and your next attempt at writing an article may go much more smoothly. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:19, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notability issue with Draft article

Hello all, I submitted a draft article for review and it got rejected because of insufficient notable references. I have since added more references. Can you please help check my draft page - Draft:Deepak Reddy ?

Thank you for your time. Please do let me know if anything wrong with sources or if I need to add something?


Cinemaha (talk) 15:23, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Cinemaha: You might be able to make the case that WP:FILMMAKER #3 is satisfied here. That hinges on whether Manasanamaha is a "significant or well-known work" under the meaning of the guideline. (I genuinely do not know the answer.)
A more productive approach would be to find sources about Deepak (not his film). However, you do not need more references; you need good references, that satisfy all three criteria listed at WP:GNG: (1) significant coverage, (2) reliable, (3) independent. For instance, [2] is an interview with the subject, and therefore not independent.
I will also note that being a Guinness record holder does not count much in terms of notability - the company behind it is basically selling titles nowadays. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 16:32, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tigraan Thank you for your honest and quick feedback! Cinemaha (talk) 17:07, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Submission

Hello, how do I fast-track the review process for a draft I submitted? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:SeamlessHR Flack.inspired (talk) 15:31, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was declined on October 4th. The next day, you resubmitted it without changing much. If you simply resubmitted it without fixing any of the issues, why should another reviewer spend time on it?
That being said, I somewhat disagree with the message left by the reviewer Greenman. Don’t get me wrong, the draft is promotional and the decline was correct. However, promotional tone can usually be fixed.
A more pressing issue is that the company may not be "notable" (in Wikipedia’s sense of the term). If so, no amount of work on the draft will help. It would be useless to polish the draft to eliminate promotional tone, only to have the draft declined for lack of notability, which cannot be fixed inside Wikipedia.
Go find the three best sources you can that show the company is notable (in the special meaning linked above) and list them here, we will tell you if it’s plausible that the company is notable. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 16:06, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, SeamlessHR, you will need to change your username. See Wikipedia:Username_policy#Sharing_accounts: "SeamlessHR" is forbidden, "John Doe from SeamlessHR" is fine. Go to Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple to do that. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 16:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tigraan, there is no user named SeamlessHR. The OP is named Flack.inspired. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:21, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Huh... thanks for that, no idea how I got that wrong. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 16:28, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging Flack.inspired so that they can see my answer (or the part of it that’s not erroneous, at least). TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 16:28, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your honest and timely feedback. I'll go ahead and list the best three sources I found about the company;
https://disrupt-africa.com/2020/11/17/could-the-hr-tech-space-provide-africa-with-its-next-unicorn/
https://techcrunch.com/2022/01/12/nigerias-seamlesshr-raises-10m-to-expand-hr-and-payroll-solutions-across-africa/
https://techcabal.com/2022/02/25/payroll-fintech-takes-off-in-africa/#:~:text=In%20January%2C%20SeamlessHR,systems%20including%20payroll. Flack.inspired (talk) 07:53, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for listing those sources, Flack.inspired.
[3] is an interview. It may not be formatted as a series of questions and answers, but a large amount of the text is direct quotes, and much of the rest is clearly information that the company provided itself. As such, it is not an independent source. [4] suffers from exactly the same problems.
[5] is a better source overall. It is clear that the author of that article did more research than one interview. Unfortunately, the amount of article that is devoted to SeamlessHR is very low - it verifies that the company exists and raised a series A round, but that’s it. Therefore, it fails due to lack of significant coverage.
Other editors may chime in, but I believe that the company is not notable yet, and you should not write an article about it. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 12:46, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Flack Inspired, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm wondering, why should you be able to fast-track the review process. What is it about your draft that might justify putting it ahead of the other 2700 drafts waiting? ColinFine (talk) 18:30, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @ColinFine, thank you for welcoming me. I'm trying to get a hang of Wikipedia so I'm trying to figure out how long these processes take. Flack.inspired (talk) 08:53, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid there's no way to tell. Drafts that are obviously not acceptable are easy, so they tend to get declined or rejected quickly. Drafts whose references are obviously of high quality (not too many references, to well-known reliable sources, and with titles that suggest they may be independent, rather than interviews or press releases) may get picked up relatively quickly. But drafts with a large number of sources of very mixed quality, and drafts whose sources are not in English, may take longer, until a reviewer is motivated to pick them up and spend the time on them. But it really depends on the choices of the reviewers. ColinFine (talk) 11:06, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting a submitted article

Hi Teahouse, I mistakenly submitted duplicate articles. How do I delete one of them? The one I want to delete is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Onward_Medical Lombardes (talk) 15:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Lombardes: For future reference, you tag the page for speedy deletion under criterion G7, by putting the template {{db-author}}. (I have done that for you in that case.) An admin will come and delete it soon. Note that this is allowed only if you are the sole significant contributor to the page. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 16:14, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where would I go to suggest a policy?

Before anyone asks, I was going to suggest a policy that prevent anyone besides admins from making user pages of people who are indef blocked. Where would this be done? The Shamming Man has appeared. Sham me / Where I've shammed 17:15, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WT:BP, WT:UP, or WP:VPP would seem appropriate. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 17:18, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Top 100 most streamed songs on Spotify article

In the article the top most streamed son is "Shape of You" by Ed Sheeran, but Mariah Carey's "All I Want for Christmas (Is You)" has more streams on Spotify (Over 1 Trillion streams) and I was wondering if someone could change the article to reflect the facts. 72.107.156.157 (talk) 17:33, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I couldn’t find a page with that title, so I believe that this? If so, it is not currently protected, so feel free to make the changes yourself, as long as you can verify it with a reliable source! :) Blanchey (talk) 17:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All I Want for Christmas Is You does not have 1 trillion streams on Spotify. That's over 300 times more streams than Shape of You, and every person on Earth would have to stream it over 100 times to make up that many. You're misreading the number; it has just over 1 billion streams, and is not in the top 100. WPscatter t/c 18:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion

I would like to expand pages as wikipedia practice, but there are no guides i could find. Could someone link to a guide to help me expand stub articles? 56independent/notacoworcatTalk 19:08, 8 November 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 56independent (talkcontribs) [reply]

Lilian Steichen Sandburg biography

How does one begin a biography of Carl Sandburg's wife Lilian? Is there a format recommended and a specific layout, led, conclusion etc.?

Eric Davidson <redacted> 47.135.163.107 (talk) 20:14, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. First of all, please don't post your personal contact information here on Wikipedia; I've removed that bit. Help:Your first article is a good place to start learning how to create an article. Keep in mind that writing an article is much more difficult than it may look, especially for an inexperienced editor. Spending a few weeks - or even months - gaining experience by making small edits to existing articles would help you find your footing here and familiarize you with our processes. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:33, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

help on request

I was scrolling on the wikipedia requested articles, when I saw one subject I was interested in. So I started editing the articles but it didn't let me save it as a draft. If I'm correct the article I was editing is visible by everyone and already published.

How can I make it a draft so it can be peer reviewed once I'm done editing it ? Vincent-vst (talk) 20:26, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is about New System of Musical Theory, then you have indeed published it. Presumably you clicked a red link, which takes you straight to creating the article. If you wanted to create a draft instead, you could have typed "Draft:New System of Musical Theory" in the search box, and clicked the link in The page Draft:New System of Musical Theory does not exist. There also exists an article wizard which lets you create a draft and submit it for review. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 21:03, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
thank you @Maddy from Celeste Vincent-vst (talk) 05:42, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a good habit to ping people when replying to them on talk pages?

Users don't get a notification when someone replies to their comment unless the edits meets the special criteria. Unless they check the talk page again they won't know that someone replied. Should pinging be used more liberally? Frogging101 (talk) 20:42, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Frogging101 You don’t have to, but pings are very useful for many users, I personally always ping users when responding to them, although some editors will check to see if someone has responded sometimes, so if not it doesn’t matter. Blanchey (talk) 20:49, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Frogging101, welcome to the Teahouse. There's actually a new feature being implemented on Wikipedia which allows account holders to subscribe to a thread; they'll be automatically notified of any replies. See more here if you're curious about it. (Note that IP users don't get pings and can't subscribe to discussions.) 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:50, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Frogging101: Welcome to the Teahouse. With the Discussion Tools feature (which I think might only be available on the Vector 2022 skin), any discussion you're subscribed to will trigger a notification when someone adds a comment to it. Pings are still useful if you want to get someone's attention, and it will appear as an alert instead. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:42, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SpeedyDeletion Requests

Hello, I am seeking some help on correctly submitting speedy deletion requests on a protected page that's self-promoting and link stuffing . Would anyone be willing to help me circumnavigate the bureaucracies of WikiPedia to successfully embed the proper short-code? DiamondPuma (talk) 21:58, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @DiamondPuma, welcome to the Teahouse. I see there is discussion ongoing at Liz's talk page, and there does not seem to be consensus that this article meets any speedy deletion criteria. Please discuss issues with the article on its talk page. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:01, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Courtesy link: Disclose.tv, for the curious - 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:03, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Self-promoting" is a very odd way to describe Disclose.tv.   Maproom (talk) 07:59, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I mucked up an AFD - I don't want to cause chaos - can someone help me (or simply) complete the request

I seem to have mucked up proposing an article for deletion: Sanand Mitra. I would appreciate it if someone could help me follow though to completion so I don't create a mess or cause additional work. The reason would suggest the article be deleted is;

-The text of the article was originally from a user created marketing website

-The focus of the text was to market companies which may or may not exist

-I question the notability of the subject and his impact and reach 

-The chronology and career seems to be self authored, I don't think it would be relevant to anyone but the subject Flibbertigibbets (talk) 23:21, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On it ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 23:23, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Again.. I am very thankful! I think I will study the process a bit more; and perhaps find a youtube video. Flibbertigibbets (talk) 23:27, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. You may be interested in Wikipedia:Twinkle, which makes this significantly easier. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 23:29, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amount of contributions

How do I find how many edits I have made to this Wikipedia? SikiWtideI (Speak to the backwards police) 23:34, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

here. ██ Dentsinhere43 is a new Wikipedian. 23:37, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A breakdown across all attached Wikimedia projects is here. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 23:45, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! SikiWtideI (Speak to the backwards police) 23:56, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Author wanting Wiki Page

Hello, I recently published a book with Sterling Ethos and it's becoming a best seller. I'd like to create an author page because I will be creating other published works through them. I don't want to write it if I don't have to because I believe someone else's voice could be better suited. Thanks for any help! Maganolla (talk) 01:55, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on writing what is becoming a best seller, Maganolla. When it becomes a best seller, it's likely that somebody will create an article, of their own volition. There's no need to attempt to speed up this process. (Indeed, any attempt to speed it up is very likely to backfire.) But what do you mean by "creating other published works through them"? -- Hoary (talk) 02:52, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Thank you SO much for answering this! When I say "creating new works" I simply mean I intend to write more books with the publishers. I appreciate your advice! I'll resist the urge - def don't want it to backfire. Maganolla (talk) 03:13, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia does not recommend attempting autobiography (see WP:AUTO, and it has "articles," not "author pages." If in time you become well known and written about, someone else may draft and submit an article about you. There is a process for requesting an article be written about a topic, but that rarely works. There is also a possibility that your book becomes article-worthy, while not you (this actually happens sometimes). Basic advice - keep writing. David notMD (talk) 04:56, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Translating English articles into Spanish

Does anyone know how to publish pages in Spanish or does anyone know of a good Spanish Wikipedia editor? We have translated Shelley Jackson's page into Spanish, and we would like to publish it in the Spanish Wikipedia. Can anyone help us to do this? We are new editors. Blancaherr (talk) 01:55, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You'll find advice at WP:TRANSLATEUS. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:04, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Blancaherr. An important thing to remember when trying to do something like this is that each Wikipedia project has its own separate policies and guidelines as determined by the members of that project's respective community. Since English Wikipedia is the largest of the various language Wikipedia projects, many other projects have adopted or modified English Wikipedia's policies and guidelines; however, there still might be some big and important differences. Most of the Wikipedias seem to highly discourage WP:MACHINETRANSLATIONs and there may also be differences in how articles (including citations) are expected to be formatted and otherwise written. The only way to know for sure what differences exist between Spanish and English Wikipedia would be to ask at Spanish Wikipedia. If your Spanish is pretty good, you should be able to do so without too much difficulty; however, you shouldn't automatically expect the users of Spanish Wikipedia to be able to help you in English. Some might be able to, but you should assume you're going to nned to somewhat understand Spanish if you're planning on creating or editing content on Spanish Wikipedia. The Spanish Wikipedia equivalent to the Teahouse appears to be es:Wikipedia:Café and that might be a good place to start. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:22, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I'm actually a native Spanish speaker, but we were looking for help here, because we didn't really know anyone in the Wiki Spanish Community that could help us format and edit the article we translated. Anyways, we tried to ask for help in the Wikipedia:Cafe, but we didn't find much info. We will search further, though! Thank you. Blancaherr (talk) 04:16, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Blancaherr, you can try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spain. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alice Cooper

I read the biography on the band and artist Alice Cooper. I was wondering why no credit was given to one of the co-founders and musicians, Michael Bruce. 71.83.26.193 (talk) 02:05, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Bruce (musician) is mentioned in the very first sentence of Alice Cooper (band). He is mentioned in the fourth sentence of the biography of Alice Cooper, the band leader. He has his own Wikipedia biography. So, I am not sure what you mean by "no credit". Cullen328 (talk) 02:21, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of event

I was looking for events to write about and found the West Palm Beach Wendy's shooting. It was deleted in 2008 for lack of long-standing notability, but I found two sources from 2017 and 2018 that discuss the attack in detail. Surely this meets WP:NEVENT? MelatoninEmbryo (talk) 02:44, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, MelatoninEmbryo, what are these two sources? -- Hoary (talk) 02:54, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
First source and second source. MelatoninEmbryo (talk) 03:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MelatoninEmbryo: You can probably ask for a WP:REFUND of the deleted article to draft space, modify it as needed to reflect more recent coverage, and submit it at WP:AFC. The second source is IMO a strong argument to accept such an article, per WP:PERSISTENCE.
In any case, do not bring the case to WP:DRV (the "appeal" place for AfDs) - the AfD was probably decided correctly based on the sources available at the time, but it does not preclude recreation with newer sources. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 12:57, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page reset

How do i reset/clear talk page? Is there any way? Frryan404 (talk) 03:33, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Frryan404: you can archive talk pages, yes. see help:archiving a talk page for how. lettherebedarklight晚安 おやすみping me when replying 03:49, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With certain exceptions, you can delete content from your own Talk page. The assumption is that you have read the content and see no reason to keep it. Deleted content would not be visible on your Talk page, but any editor can find deleted content by clicking on View history. David notMD (talk) 05:00, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Audrey.m.horn so rude?

He deleted my work! 😡😡😩 Scarlett7910 (talk) 04:40, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want to delete this section now and issue a mea culpa, or get blocked for your behaviour? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 04:45, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) your edits on Audrey's page is certainly pot calling kettle black, without looking into the user interaction between the both of you yet. – robertsky (talk) 04:47, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You blanked their userpage, which is generally off-limits, then personally attacked them ("Fuck you fat bitch") without a second thought (if you bothered to give more of a glance at the edit history, you'd see that another user actually deleted the majority of your work). They listed the reasons in their edit summaries. I understand the frustration with your work being deleted, but WP:AGF - attacking other editors and putting them down isn't allowed here, especially with a response as vehement as yours. Continuing that behavior is sure to get you blocked.
Additionally, this line on your userpage ("Who i hate on wiki is Audrey.m.horn") reminds me of other people's userpages when I edited FANDOM, rigorously listing their on-wiki relationships and who they're friends with and hate. Wikipedia isn't FANDOM. Don't be reckless with your edits. You also have to provide references for info you add, not original research. — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 04:51, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Scarlett7910 It appears you've blanked his userpage... again. To be on Wikipedia, you need to have a certain level of maturity, and not childishly retaliate every time you get angry at somebody. — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 05:05, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Scarlett7910 Digging further into yours and @Audrey.m.horn's edit history, your anger seems misplaced. Audrey did not remove all of your work. The editor who reverted your work was @DanCherek at Far Eastern curlew, who stated that "revert to remove unattributed copying from https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/profile.aspx?id=20284 and https://www.dcceew.gov.au/sites/default/files/env/pages/ef45109a-9c9f-461f-a821-a3d78a2af8dd/files/eastern-curlew-consultation.pdf; regardless of licensing, it's not okay to just copy huge PDFs into articles with no formatting or citations". Dan later stated that "decline revdel, sources are licensed under CC BY 4.0, though restoration of any copied text would require explicitly acknowledging the copying". – robertsky (talk) 04:57, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Every article addition you have made have been reverted (by several editors), and you are on the verge of being indefinitely blocked, per reasons given on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 05:09, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Scarlett7910: Additionally, Dan had also left you a templated warning about source attribution on your talk page. Moving foward, what you should do are:
  1. Apologise to Audrey for this outburst. Don't take it out on Dan as well, it will be unnecessary and will likely result in an almost immediate block on you.
  2. Take a break. Come back later when you have cooled down. All is not lost yet.
  3. If you are still interested in having those texts be incorporated into the article, follow Dan's suggestions and do the appropriate formatting and citations.
The above are friendly suggestions. It is up to you to take it up. And oh, do not assume Audrey's gender, or anyone's. If you do not know the other editor's gender, just refer to the editor as 'they' to be safe. (With the benefit of an userscript that draws out editor's preferred pronouns via API, Audrey is 'she'.) – robertsky (talk) 05:16, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

change user name

how can I change my user name,can you tell me? I have serched many places but find no where to change it,so I came here for help. 每天都想睡觉的口天吴 (talk) 07:43, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @每天都想睡觉的口天吴 welcome to the teahouse, does Wikipedia:Change username help? Justiyaya 07:46, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ok, I got it. Thanks for your kind help. 每天都想睡觉的口天吴 (talk) 08:53, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

write an article unbiasedly

how to write an article about a company or an industrial product without being biased or sounding like an advertisement? It is really a hard thing. I tried may times but all sounds like ads. so I wonder if there are some special requirements that need to be adhered. If so, what kind of words or phrases should I avoid to use. thanks for your grateful help. 每天都想睡觉的口天吴 (talk) 07:48, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 每天都想睡觉的口天吴. Are you somehow connected to the company (or industrial product) you're trying to create an article about? In general, creating a Wikipedia article from scratch is a pretty hard thing for anyone, let alone a new user such as yourself, to do since there's lots of Wikipedia policies and guidelines related to how articles are expected to be written. However, creating an article can be especially hard when you're somehow connected to the subject you're trying to write about since it can be hard to neutrally write about such subject no matter how hard you might try. There's really no trick or secret skill to creating articles other than perhaps gaining a greater familiarity with how Wikipedia articles are expected to be written, and the only way to do that is to gain more experience at Wikipedia editing. So, instead of trying to create an article right now, maybe it would be better for you to try an improve some of the more than six million articles that have already been created per WP:CONTRIBUTE. Many articles are in need of improvement and one way to learn about how articles are expected to be written is to try and fix and improve existing articles. This gives you a chance to see how other more experienced editors apply Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines as well as what types of things are generally considered OK. You can, for what it's worth, always continue working on your draft while you're gaining more experience at editing Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:08, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
really fantastic advice,and that's exactly what i'm trying to do right now! In fact this company and some products are not connected to me for i just try to creat an article and I select the materials from the company's official webpage, cutting some adjectivs that are obviously biased such as top 3, ideal and so on. And now as you suggested, I shall try improve some articles first and later try to creat a brand-new article or item. Thanks again for your gracious advice and help. By the way, can you tell me where I can make improvements about other items? I got lost here. so many informations. 每天都想睡觉的口天吴 (talk) 08:26, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@每天都想睡觉的口天吴 Hello! Many newbies would start an article like that, but it's the wrong way for a WP article. Your job as an editor (on any topic), is to summarize WP:RS independent of the company, and if there are none/too few, write about something else. WP:GNG is your first hurdle. If you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!", move on to WP:YFA.
On where can I make improvements, try checking "Help out" at Wikipedia:Community portal. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:58, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
hahahaha, it does be so. SO next I will try from small things and after accumulating numerous skills and knowledges, I can write an article without being deleted. Again, thanks for your help and advice. So nice of you! 每天都想睡觉的口天吴 (talk) 09:04, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox positioning

Hello again all, I would just like to check if the infobox is positioned correctly on my draft of Draft:Volca Modular. It's looking a bit weird mobile view. That's all, thanks Schminnte (talk) 08:27, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The positioning looks good on my device. Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 08:32, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Infoboxes should always be on the second line of an article, after the short description. As long as it's there it should be fine! FishandChipper 🐟🍟 09:41, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review request for Draft:Hossein Maher

@User:Robert McClenon @User:echidnaLives Hi I solved some problems with this article: Draft:Hossein Maher - Wikipedia. Please do me a favor and review it. thanks Kabootaremesi (talk) 10:18, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kabootaremesi Hi, and welcome! I see that you have submitted your draft, so please wait patiently whilst it is reviewed. Eventually, a reviewer will either accept your submission and move it to article space, or will ask you to improve it. Hope this helps :) Blanchey (talk) 11:10, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I see it’s already been reviewed, and was declined. Please follow the instructions that the declining reviewer left. Thanks! Blanchey (talk) 11:11, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Blanchey Yes, the article has been reviewed in the morning and I added new sources at noon, as reviewer asked. now I'm waiting for re-review and I thought putting it here in sight, may be helpful for a faster check. Kabootaremesi (talk) 11:35, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kabootaremesi Oh I see, well, best of luck! :-) Blanchey (talk) 12:33, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

REferences

Hello. What if a subject / product/company /key person has no references in the media but in a way should be on wikipedia for the information. what to do in this case?

It can be about an insurance company for example. not cited in the media but it exists on the market in a specific country. can you help with this?

Thank you IngridSfeir (talk) 11:17, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IngridSfeir Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not for merely documenting the existence of a topic, like a company. A Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability(like a notable company). If a topic is not discussed in independent reliable sources, it cannot be on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 11:21, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image use

I am editing a Wiki article on nuclear emulsion that would be greatly improved by adding an image of one of the principal creators of that scientific device: namely Marietta Blau. She is the subject of a Wiki article that contains exactly the image I wish to use. The image is 'available' in Wiki Commons as File:Marietta Blau.jpg, but the file has been created with the restriction that 'It is only being used to illustrate the article in question', thus rendering it unavailable to any other Wiki article. The most obvious way to fix this would be for me to directly edit the File:Marietta Blau.jpg spec, to add my Wiki article to the list of allowed articles, and to adjust the wording accordingly. I attempted to contact the file's creator but got no response. How should I proceed? I should add that I did attempt to add the file unmodified to my article only to discover, as I expected, that it was quickly removed by a vigilant Wiki-bot. Reculet (talk) 11:26, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Reculet, and welcome to the Teahouse. First, note that the file File:Marietta Blau.jpg is not on Commons, but has been uploaded directly to English Wikipedia. This is because Commons accepts only free content, which the image is not.
The policy governing the use of non-free images in English Wikipedia is the Non-free content criteria. It is perfectly possible to use a non-free image in more than one article, but each use requires a separate justification according to those criteria. It does not seem to me that using it in nuclear emulsion would meet criterion 8: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding, but if you disagree, you may make a case (perhaps on Talk:Nuclear emulsion. Unless you can achieve consensus that that use of the image would meet all the criteria, then I'm afraid there is no way of using the image in that article.
There is a picture of her on Commons (at C:File:Marietta Blau Picture.jpg), but I'm about to challenge that, because I think it has been cropped from the picture in en-wiki, and illegally uploaded as "own work". ColinFine (talk) 12:30, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And I ec:d with you on Commons. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:39, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Reculet The version on Commons [6] is very unlikely to be "own work" and will probably be deleted. My understanding of WP:NFCI is that the image should only be used in the article about her. I wonder though, if it's actually old enough to be public domain, in which case we can put it on Commons and use however we like. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:38, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone will ce, clean-up these articles?

Hi, some random editor is removing entire sections of the articles without disscusing on talk page. I tried to talk him, but by his editing hist, its looks like he just undo peoples edits by Twinkle. The editor name is User: MrOllie The article I want your clean-up, ce are - Surrogate advertising, Fantacy sport, Professional wrestling in India and Sport in IndiaRock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 11:59, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rock Stone Gold Castle Hello, I haven’t actually had a look, but I would suggest starting a discussion with them, there could be good reasoning for removing the content in question, but if not, you could always seek help from an administrator? Removing content without consensus or good reason is not ideal, but then again, I don’t know the specifics. Blanchey (talk) 12:38, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Ollie left an explanation for deletion at Talk:Fantasy sport. You and Mr. O are on the verge of edit warring on Surrogate advertising. Mr. O has no edits on the other two. Proper places to dispute are the Talk pages of the articles in question. David notMD (talk) 13:01, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unsigned post

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Francesco Carbonara testimone di Geova (talkcontribs) 12:16, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Francesco Carbonara testimone di Geova Hello, and welcome. Do you need any assistance from us at all? Blanchey (talk) 12:34, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The OP has been blocked. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 13:48, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]