Wikipedia:Teahouse

GreenMeansGo, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help

Wikipedia

EDITORS THAT DON'T KNOW THE FACT BASED INFORMATION

WHO DO I SPEAK WITH ABOUT TERRIBLE EDITORS THAT DO NOT DO RESEARCH TO ENSURE INFORMATION ADDED IS CORRECT OR FALSE BEFORE REMOVING THE CONTENT? 38.34.101.69 (talk) 03:28, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Would you be surprised to find out that yelling here, without any context, is not "WHO [you] SPEAK WITH"? ~TNT (talk • she/her) 03:37, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Yelling SHAME ON YOU!! probably isn't a good first step to a productive discussion about Wikipedia content. You may be interested in reading up on the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Particularly, I recommend seeing WP:BRDD, as it has some good guidelines for effective discussion. Bsoyka (talk) 04:17, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

As on your Talk page, added content can be true, but unless references are provided at the same time, will be reverted (reversed). The proper place for a discussion is the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 10:19, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, 38.34.101.69! The above editors explain the context very well. You might want to read WP:RS for sourcing guidelines, if your information is correct or incorrect. Also, please read WP:CIVIL, as this "TERRIBLE EDITORS" kind of language is ripe to misinterpretation. Best regards — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — 23:05, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

I had the same problem. I edited the article to say that the US election was rigged (because it was), but my edits keep getting deleted. And when I tried posting on Talk pages about it, those posts keep getting deleted too. Nobody is even giving me an explanation about why everything I post keeps getting deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1011:B164:8F32:F5BE:7351:AB2:2746 (talk) 00:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

here's one (that I've already given below in your section): Verifiability. just because something is true doesn't mean it can be added to wikipedia, it has to be verifiable as well. your edits state no reliable sources so it has been reverted. 💜  melecie  talk - 01:02, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Requesting inputs

Greetings,

Adequate and nuanced overview for even non– Muslim audience is expected out of the articles Muslims and Muslim world. Whether the articles are achieving that purpose adequately? Requesting and expecting proactive participation in providing inputs from non–Muslim audience too along with Muslim users.

Since the article Muslim world is tagged various improvements it can not be submitted to formal review process still I feel the article deserves more inputs for content improvement.

Requesting your visit to the articles

• Muslims and
• Muslim world

and provide your inputs @

• Talk:Muslims#Requesting inputs and
• Talk:Muslim world#Requesting inputs

Thanks

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 06:30, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

@Bookku Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for your interest in improving these articles. At the top of each talk page is a list of WikiProjects that might be interested in helping to improve the articles. You can ask for assistance on the WikiProject talk pages. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:47, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Seeking advice on article's title change

What should I do to get an article's title changed? FoxtAl (talk) 07:00, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Discuss it on the talk page of the article. If it gets community approval, you can move it. If you do not know how to do that, someone in the discussion will either do the move or help you to do it. --Bduke (talk) 07:19, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

In addition to @Bduke, you can also move it yourself. If you are on mobile, then go and switch to Desktop site. If you are on desktop, then click on an article, click on more, then select "Move". Hope this helps! Cool guy (talk • contribs) • he/they 01:26, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Newspaper ad as a source?

In the intro section of Major-General's Song, the statement [The song] is difficult to perform because of the fast pace and tongue-twisting nature of the lyrics is cited to the leading sentence of a random advertisement in a local newspaper. I don't think that's a reliable source. 79.179.70.90 (talk) 11:05, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

It looks to me like a theatre review by a named journalist. It was published in the Times Leader, which according to Wikipedia "became known around the country as a growth platform for young journalists, photographers, and newspaper executives". Maproom (talk) 13:02, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

That reference has been with the article for more than eight years. Can you find better to supplement it? David notMD (talk) 13:06, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't know a better source, but I still don't think the present one is reliable. Kimberly Davis' piece isn't about patter songs; it's about what plays are on. It consists almost entirely of the theatre's "menu" (what plays are on, when, at what prices, and even the phone numbers for ordering tickets), except for the leading sentence, which about patter songs. Leading sentences like this aren't necessarily reliable (if we go by first sentences, I could probably find references that call this year's basketball champion "the best team in the world"). In particular, I doubt the Times Leader fact checked the first sentence; I assume that sentence reflects what Kimberly Davis considered to be common knowledge. 79.179.70.90 (talk) 15:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Reference #2 at Patter song (which itself uses the Major-General's Song as an example), has: "A comic song in opera and operetta that are characterized by a moderately fast to very fast tempo with a rapid succession of rhythmic patterns that each have a syllable of text to be sung by the singer. The text is often filled with difficult, tongue-twisting lyrics that are very..." Perhaps the sentence in Major-General's Song can be changed to "Patter songs are considered difficult to perform because of...", using this replacement ref. David notMD (talk) 17:26, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Done, thanks! 79.179.29.199 (talk) 23:00, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

How to tell which categories are tagged in a draft I created and submitted

Hi. I recently wrote and submitted a draft, and then added a number of additional citations after I got initial feedback. I also believe I added a couple of category tags, but I'm not confident that I did this properly. I don't know how to tell which categories are currently tagged in the draft, and I'm especially keen on making sure the single most pertinent category is now tagged. Any advice appreciated. Rxbbarber (talk) 15:02, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rxbbarbar, and welcome to the Teahouse. Categories should not be added to a draft, but only to an accepted article. You may however specify categories inside the template {{draft categories}} - they will then be displayed in the draft, but the draft will not actually be added to the category until it is moved to main article space. ColinFine (talk) 16:31, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, ColinFine. My understanding was that there was a way of tagging a few categories to help ensure the most appropriate reviewers would become aware of the submission. In this case it seemed appropriate to me for people involved in the category groups "documentary films about New Orleans", and "high school marching bands from The United States" to know about the submission, as they are in a position to judge criteria such as "importance". From what you wrote, it looks like what I should do (if I haven't already, or if I can figure out how) is to specify categories inside the template. Thanks again. Rxbbarber (talk) 12:59, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

To be more specific: On the draft page I choose "edit", then choose "add tags to your draft". I see a pop-up: "Template/Generated from AFC submission". I then see a form which at the top reads: "The "AFC submission" template doesn't yet have a description, but there might be some information on the template's page." Below that I see seven boxes where I can add or edit text, labeled: 1. 2. ns, ts, u, decliner, declinets. I understand "decliner". The others, not so much. I impetuously wrote in two official subcategories in the 1 and 2 boxes, having no idea whether that was appropriate, useful, or a bad idea. Sorry to be asking these newbie elementary questions. Rxbbarber (talk) 13:10, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Need advice about how to find proper links

Hello fellow Wikipedia editors,

I recently joined this community and I am having a wonderful time. However, I am having some difficulty finding proper links to edit certain pages. Does anyone have any helpful advice that could possibly help me?

Thegreatcapybara (talk) 02:22, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome, Thegreatcapybara! Can you provide an example of one of these certain pages? Bsoyka (talk) 03:05, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

are you talking about protected pages? you can send an edit request to edit those pages for now, and you gain permissions to edit extended-protected pages (ones with a blue lock) after getting extended confirmed, which can be obtained after 500 edits and a month. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 03:09, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

No, I am not talking about protected pages. Thegreatcapybara (talk) 18:10, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

I wanted to add something to Imperialism under the Belgium section and I think I'm good on how to identify a good source for an article. I just don't know where to start looking.

Thegreatcapybara (talk) 18:37, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@Thegreatcapybara: Check out Help:Find sources; some great places are listed there. Bsoyka (talk) 22:35, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Thegreatcapybara (talk) 22:38, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

What is considered notable?

I'm just curious. SpiderBreadIRL (talk) 04:11, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Hey, SpiderBreadIRL! See Wikipedia:Notability for the actual guideline. In particular, the section "General notability guideline" is typically the most important. Happy editing! Bsoyka (talk) 04:22, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I was just curious because it seems like every Marvel character to ever exist has an entire page dedicated to them. SpiderBreadIRL (talk) 19:48, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@SpiderBreadIRL Oh, it can go way beyond that: Captain America, Steve Rogers (Marvel Cinematic Universe), Captain America (Ultimate Marvel character)... To be fair, the last one may not survive a WP:AFD. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:58, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

There's 10 different articles about Spider-Man and different versions of him, and probably more that I don't know of.

Spider-Man

Miles Morales

Spider-Woman

Spider-Ham

Peter Parker (Marvel Cinematic Universe)

Peter Parker

Alternate versions of Spider-Man

Peter Parker (Sam Raimi film series)

Peter Parker (Insominac Games character)

Peter Parker (The Amazing Spider-Man film series) SpiderBreadIRL (talk) 01:09, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

@SpiderBreadIRL There's a few Supermans and Wolverines as well, but Spiderman may be the "winner" on en-WP. Like Bsoyka said, WP:GNG is the mark. Another aspect is of course that more people are interested in writing about these figures on WP than, say, Antonio. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:03, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft article: a major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject

Hello, can someone explain why there is a concern about a close connection to the subject of the draft-article, and how to solve this? CollinsSr (talk) 12:18, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

CollinsSr Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume this is about Draft:Mario Kleff There are various clues that suggest you have an association with the subject. If you do, that should be declared, see WP:COI and WP:PAID. If submitted for review and accepted, that will address the tag. 331dot (talk) 12:24, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. I'm curious about the clues because it can not be, and there is no payment. Maybe it's about the writing style... I'll go over and review the sources to not violate the copyrights. CollinsSr (talk) 14:40, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

CollinsSr Even if you are not paid, do you have an association with Mr. Kleff? 331dot (talk) 14:44, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

CollinsSr New accounts which have as their only activity the creation of an article about a living (or dead) person are often asked if there is a personal or paid connection. If neither, then a statement to that effect on your Talk page is sufficient. You do seen to have some knowledge of obscure facts about Kleff (his interest in motorcycles) which hint at a connection. David notMD (talk) 15:19, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

I have just discussed this matter and it seems that even a friend of a friend can be considered a close connection. In truth, I am from Pattaya, but without direct connection to the subject. And believe that his crazy motorcycles are well known in this region. So there is nothing special or hard to find out. I have also read log files and discussion on Wikipedia and found the judgement over the top. This person has really made interesting things here in the city, and in my opinion deserves to be mentioned. But again, pershabs I am the wrong person... CollinsSr (talk) 15:48, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

CollinsSr Your connection, as described above, is distant enough that in my opinion does not rise to COI. Please state as much on your Talk page and proceed. As for the motorcycle metion, if it is important enough in your opinion to be in the Infobox then it deserves a referenced sentence or two in the article, perhaps under a created Personal life section that could also include the legal fracas of his owning leopards. Neither topic would contribute to establishing his notability, but would provide color. David notMD (talk) 17:40, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

CollinsSr - could you please elaborate upon your comments above: "I have just discussed this matter and it seems that..." and "I have also read log files and discussion on Wikipedia and found the judgement over the top". With whom did you discuss, and what/where are the log files and discussions and judgement you are relating to? Thank you.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 00:43, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_176#Mario_Kleff for background on this. MrOllie (talk) 02:40, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. I will do some more homework on what is considered notable. CollinsSr (talk) 03:23, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your input MrOllie - I was involved with this and other associated articles, and I was interested to know with whom a new editor had been conferring, and how the "judgement" had been located, etc, as queried, but is without response from the OP.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 12:43, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

I understand now better notability associated with content and independent and reliable sources. Therefore, an article about a living person requires deeper research. CollinsSr (talk) 11:30, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

CollinsSr, could you please answer Rocknrollmancer's questions above: "With whom did you discuss, and what/where are the log files and discussions and judgement you are relating to?" Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 21:30, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

How to fix rounding on my signature at bigger font sizes?

My signatures background has a rounding of 9q, which looks good on the regular font size, but in bigger fonts, such as my welcome to K-9NFL, it looks more like a rounded square. Percent values make it an oval shape, not a stadium. Can I fix this somehow? --QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 19:56, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Probably. QuickQuokka, why have bigger font sizes (especially for one's own signature)? Incidentally, the closest I can see there to an attempt to change a font size is <span style="font-size: 18px; color: #666; "></span>, which achieves precisely nothing. Can we please forget about prettifying signatures and return to the matter of improving articles? -- Hoary (talk) 00:10, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: This is really a CSS question rather than a Wikipedia question, but the answer is that if you want a dimension to scale with the text size you should express it in em rather than in a fixed unit like Q. --bjh21 (talk) 22:45, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Determining the grade assigned to an article

When I read an article, sometimes I would like to know how it is graded. Occasionally, I would like to dig deeper into the history of the article such as when it received a particular grade and how that came about. How can I find such information? Humphrey Tribble (talk) 03:58, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Hey, Humphrey Tribble! Does this information at Wikipedia:Content assessment help? Happy editing! Bsoyka (talk) 04:10, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

That link give criteria for the ratings. Top of the Talk page shows the ratings. For GA and FA, Talk page also shows date. Any editor can change ratings from Stup to Start, Start to C-class, C-class to B-class (or down-rate). Ideally, those editors are using the Content assessment criteia. There is a kludgy method toward dating the upgrades. Why the interest? David notMD (talk) 04:35, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

I have come across articles about early American history which are rated as good, yet which seem to contain inaccurate information or have other deficiencies. So I would like to know what the article looked like in its early days and at the time it was assessed, to compare with the current article. It is possible that historical events have been reevaluated over recent decades but the articles have not been updated. Consequently, the first thing I need is to confirm the current assessment. I can do that now that I know more about how Wikipedia works. Thanks. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 18:19, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

That article tells me the process, thanks.

I have also explored further. The articles mention a star or similar symbol at the top right in the desktop version, but I don't see it on my iPad. Yes, I have requested both the mobile and the desktop versions. No such animal; perhaps it is the quirk of iPads.

Nevertheless, I found the "..." menu which got me to "page information". No joy there either, but at the very bottom there are some external tools. Revision history statistics and WikiCkecker both produce a page on which the assessment is listed, amongst other information. At the very bottom of revision history statistics there is a list of projects and grades, but I don't understand the connection.

It is unfortunate that Wikipedia is such a complex entity. Almost from my first edit I have had to wrestle with the overhead of abbreviations, jargon, and procedures, when I just want want to improve accuracy and the quality of writing.

Thanks for your help. I welcome any other tips. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 06:27, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Humphrey Tribble - the stars indicate Featured Articles, green pluses indicate Good Articles, which are formally vetted articles. Not many have them, but to confirm if your ipad will show them, take a look at the article currently on the Main Page - it should show a star.

We definitely are a complex site, with many rules, but the key facet of that is that you don't need to know the vast majority of rules for the vast majority of editing. Help:Intro is the smoothest path to starting editing, and as long as you continue to be polite and source your edits, then the rest can come more slowly. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:26, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

A good idea to test today's featured article. However, nothing I do displays a star. I will explore this again when I can try it on a desktop computer. Thanks. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 18:04, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Humphrey TribbleFA and GA articles can be delisted, then re-promoted years later. Dates of actions are shown. See Talk page of Jimmy Carter or Vitamin C as examples. Often, articles that made FA or GA years ago no longer meet current standards, but have not been challenged. As for viewing older versions, clicking on View history (top menu). This shows a chronolgical list of article edits. Clicking on the date for any of the edits will show what the article looked like after that edit. David notMD (talk) 18:51, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Can you swear in Wikipedia?

p Dulken (talk) 05:28, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

It's not WP:CIVIL and swear at someone is not okay. But mild curses are usually tolerated. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:45, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

And we do have an article called Fuck. HiLo48 (talk) 05:46, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Dulken See also WP:NOTCENSORED. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:02, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

• @Dulken: In spite of what you might have been told  ;) I refer you to Jimmy "utter fucking bullshit" Wales :D SN54129 16:10, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Please help!!! Robert McClenon is constantly stalking me around!!!

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

---

I have recently noticed one thing, this reviewer Robert McClenon seems to be way too interested in "me" and stalking me and my works. He/She is literally "stalking" me around. I kindly request him/her to do "their" business in a proper way as this is Wikipedia not their private house or street. I am not the only editor whom they have to bother about, there are several editors who are working here. He/She is always behind me wherever I place my views or requests. Honestly, it is stalking and very annoying!!! Aren't the experienced editors supposed to help the new ones? But here he/she is just constantly trying to put some "allegation" by constantly bothering me with their comments. I'm trying my max to give "cold shoulder" but he/she doesn't seem to stop!!! Are they the only "responsible" editor/reviewer in Wikipedia or what? Please someone ask them to stop unnecessarily irritate!!! Commonedits (talk) 05:59, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

This doesn't look like stalking to me. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:09, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Not that, he/she was there when I submitted deletion review for Priyanka Choudhary and constantly pinging in his/her comments, had immediately declined the Draft:Priyanka Choudhary when I asked it for a re-review in the deletion review section, declined Draft:Bhumika Gurung without reading it's references and giving a very "invalid" reason for declining it (i.e. he/she had not even read the sources which were independant and reliable and gave the reason that the sources are not independant and reliable). After that, he/she already gave a comment on Draft:Chahat Pandey to which I had given the reasons how Chahat Pandey is WP:N with her multiple lead roles but then he/she keeps pinging me and "insulting" me by again and again leaving "weird comments" in that draft!!! Is he/she the only reviewer in Wikipedia? I think there are several other reviewers too right? Then why is he/she so interested in my works???? Commonedits (talk) 06:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

(1) It's probably safe to say that somebody choosing to call themself "Robert" identifies as masculine and may be referred to as "he". If the slight lack of total clarity about this worries you, Commonedits, you may prefer to refer to him/them as "they": "Singular 'they'" is, I think, welcomed by virtually all English speakers not afflicted by either "language 'expertise'" or senility (two factors that I tend to think are interrelated). (2) I see no "weird comments" by Robert McClenon on Draft:Chahat Pandey. Rather, I see constructive and amicable comments. (If I'd commented, I'd have noted the claim that "Pandey rose to fame", inferred from this that people had described or discussed her work, and asked about any substantive content. As it is, the draft doesn't convince me that anybody has thought her of sufficient interest to comment on her.) (3) Please don't use multiples of "?" or of "!": it's hard to take the resulting text seriously. -- Hoary (talk) 08:16, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary - Thank you so much for your advises on grammar and punctuation, I'm choosing to follow them and going to give a blind eye regarding what you said about the editor because it's very well clear that you are siding up with them and justifying their stalkerish behaviour! It's okay, now I have got to used this behavior from the experienced editors of Wikipedia! Thank you Commonedits (talk) 09:09, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

I think that most of the editors here agree with User:EvergreenFir and User:Hoary, but I will add a few comments to User:Commonedits. The reason why I commented on all three of your Deletion Review requests is, first, that I am one of the regular editors at Deletion Review. I check on Deletion Review frequently and comment on all of the requests. Second, your requests all implied that you wanted to use Deletion Review to reopen the deletion discussions. Also, you called attention to yourself with your angry edit summaries on 8 March and 9 March. If you don't want other editors to think that you are angry, then don't express your anger in Wikipedia. If you go around expressing anger, some editors may check on you to make sure that you aren't breaking anything. Robert McClenon (talk) 11:06, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Robert McClenon Fyki, there is a difference between getting "offended" and "being angry" "I am offended with you and your behavior with me" and that is different from "being angry". If you really have so much time then please go contribute in Wikipedia instead of poking your nose unnecessarily into my affairs, trying to instigate me and then later make it an allegation against me! Thank you!Commonedits (talk) 11:11, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

It's you. When several highly experienced editors, reviewers and administrators try to advise you, and you get combative, it's you. And there are several contradictory facts about your comments. At one place "I'm sorry but Wikipedia seems to be a very strange platform with very stupid rules and very weirdest administration!!" whereas at another "I'm editing in Wikipedia since the past 5 years..." On a separate note, you posted on an editor's talk page "My friend asked me to approach you for reviewing my drafts Draft:Chahat Pandey, Draft:Zaan Khan and Draft:Bhavika Sharma." The Khan draft was created in February by User:Jha09. Is that also you? I added a comment to your AfC for Bhavika Sharma because there is long history of attempts to create an article about her, the most recent deleted and salted in January 2022. David notMD (talk) 11:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

David notMD Honestly, I'm sorry for confusing you with my varying "tones". It's just that I'm polite to those who are polite to me and "very impolite" to those who are impolite to me. On what you had asked about User:Jha09, my answer is a "no". I am not really aware of such an account. You can investigate on it. Lastly, with respect to Draft:Bhavika Sharma, yes I know there's a long history of attempts of creation which is why I had asked for it in the "deletion review". However, thanks for your comment there and wishing you a very good day! This is not a contradictory tone, I'm really wishing a good day!😅Commonedits (talk) 15:17, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

In Draft:Bhavika Sharma, the Life and Family section states:

Chahat Pandey was born on 26 November 1998 in Mumbai city of Madhya Pradesh to Bhawana and Mani Pandey. She has three sisters, Kirti, Divya and Deepika Sharma

. That appears to be partly about Bhavika Sharma and partly about Chahat Pandey, so that it appears that Commonedits jumbled the information about the two actresses in writing the drafts. I see very little reason for reviewers to try to verify information in drafts that have been sloppily composed. (The Sharma draft has now been tagged for G7, user-requested deletion.) Robert McClenon (talk) 16:04, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for reviewing and rejecting a draft which I had nominated for deletion even before you rejected it! LOL! Anyhow my intention was not of promoting Chahat Pandey in Draft:Bhavika Sharma. It was an error that happened because I took Chahat's article as base for Draft:Bhavika Sharma! Commonedits (talk) 16:11, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

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

MOS for Flag pages

Recently on the page White-blue-white flag there has been a removal/reversion/removal sequence involving a section illustrating 'similar' flags. A claim is made that 'similar' flags are never illustrated on flag pages; this however is contradicted in, for example, the Rainbow flag where there is a section 'Other rainbow flags'. The Free Speech Flag carries a picture of an example embodiment of the FSF. So that's about a 50:50 split between examples for and against within the few cases I have checked in the Category:Activism flags; is there a description of accepted custom and practice in this matter, ideally a MOS for Flag pages? Yadsalohcin (talk) 06:41, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Yadsalohcin: I don't think there's a specific MoS page for articles about flags, but I don't think one is entirely needed for this. Just try discussing this on the article's talk page, per the BRD cycle. Happy editing! Bsoyka (talk) 11:50, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

It seems to me that listing "other (rainbow) flags" is not the same as listing "similar" flags. In the first instance they are all rainbow flags. If they are other white-blue-white flags then why not include them? If they are merely "similar" then I would say that is too vague to be helpful.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:40, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks both for these helpful observations and suggestions.Yadsalohcin (talk) 18:51, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Promo Content Understanding

Is there any definite guide or a better explainion which can share about the promo content. If we are writing a draft or a bio page, how do we know if it is promo or not? Everyone is having different understanding. Some people keep the funding while some remove info from the page? Can we write about the awards any individual got? Can we write the list of other products on a company page? Writing pros and cons of services/products? What kind of info wiki promotes and what is not at all we should do? Behind the moors (talk) 09:18, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

That's a reasonable question, Behind the moors, but I doubt that there's a good, simple answer. You can write about awards, provided that there's evidence that people other than the winners pay attention to the awards. (Plenty of "awards" these days are "pay to play", business arrangements whereby people pay, get grand-sounding but meaningless "awards", and can then add these to their CVs in order to impress the credulous.) If a company has products that are of some note, and if there aren't tiresomely many of these, you can list them. However, leave comprehensive lists to the company's own website. You can write pros and cons by summarizing what's written about these in reliable sources. -- Hoary (talk) 09:46, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

You will find more information at WP:PROMO. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:53, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

WP:NACTOR

Does music videos adds to notability of subject because in WP:NACTOR it is not specifically mentioned. Thanks Akb bhatia (talk) 13:11, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

No. Only WP:Reliable sources add to notability. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:42, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

MobileAction Wikipedia Page

 Courtesy link: Draft:Mobile Action

Hi here I'm trying to get my wikipedia page approved, your colleague previously mentioned that I need an additional resource - perhaps from an industry analyst or something.  This is my page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mobile_Action?action=edit / can you please guide me - I reduced the text for the sake of objectivity and found an ebook of Phiture - Would I need extra resource or edits at my text after using this. (adding link: https://mobileaction.slack.com/files/U02BK7J9QLX/F035X8FQ4RY/the-advanced-app-store-optimization_ebook_2022.pdf?origin_team=T039J92R9&origin_channel=D034WG7C7T5 Lifeatmobileaction (talk) 13:26, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

It still reads like blatant promotion and requires citations. The section on "Some partners and customers" is completely irrelevant. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:47, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Note: OP has been indefinitely blocked for editing without disclosing a paid relationship and sockpuppeting. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:51, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Date format question

I have a question regarding Denzel Curry's page. Should the last subsection of the career section be named "2022–present: Melt My Eyez See Your Future" or just "2022: Melt My Eyez See Your Future"? I followed Nicki Minaj's example but I don't know if it's right. — Castlepalace (talk) (ctbs) 17:45, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

No one at all? :/ — Castlepalace (talk) (ctbs) 20:09, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

My page was deleted due to some reasons but still showing on browsing results

I created a page to try how is going to be randomly but then it was deleted , I thought it was some internet uploading issue so I tried reposting again and same thing it’s deleted after few seconds and then after this I realized when I type the title of the page it still show the information I wrote on google results even if the page was actually deleted. Can someone help get rid of this ? Mogelivich6 (talk) 16:01, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mogelivich6 Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia editors cannot control what Google displays in their search engine or how often they update their information. GoingBatty (talk) 16:04, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Darryl Ware II

A bot responded to edits of the article with "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you." Could you refer to "Draft:Darryl Ware II" and make any corrections that you can make from your end that would instantly publish the article? I listed the news citations below the article as requested. 199.80.75.2 (talk) 16:07, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Theroadislong is a human user, not a bot. I suggest reviewing WP:EASYREFBEGIN to learn how to place the footnotes properly in Draft:Darryl Ware II. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:10, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are volunteers here to advise, but not be co-authors. The comment stated that the use of linkedIn and Darryl's website as references all need to be removed. References need to follow the text they support, not be clumped together. Draft:Darryl Ware II was created by a registered account, so if that is you, then log in to that account to communicate. Last, BUT MOST IMPORTANT, there is nothing at the draft that suggests that Ware is Wikipedia-notable. He is a candidate for mayor of Shreveport. He has held no prior elected office. Consider this WP:TOOSOON David notMD (talk) 17:10, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Page move Lalibela (Ethiopian Emperor) to Lalibela (Emperor of Ethiopia)

Hello another user moved the name Lalibela (Emperor of Ethiopia) to Lalibela (King of Zagwe Dynasty) without engaging other ediitors (controversial). I tried to move it back with some minor mishaps ahumm.., i couldn't move it back because of existing redirect, question how do i remove the redirect, so that it goes back to Lalibela (Emperor of Ethiopia)? Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 16:55, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Use Special:MovePage/Lalibela (Ethiopian Emperor) QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 17:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

This needs a page mover or admin to do it. tagging @Johnpacklambert as recently active admin casualdejekyll 19:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

I do not believe I have administrative privileges, so I do not believe I can do it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:39, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

The automated tool.. it lied to me... how could this be...^[Humor] This is me being stupid, sorry. Let's roll the dice again... @Rosiestep casualdejekyll 22:43, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll, Dawit S Gondaria, Johnpacklambert, and QuickQuokka: Done. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:59, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Rosiestep: Thank you! Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 23:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Will Smith's Violence

Why is Smiths wiki page so protected that his violent act at the Oscars can't be noted on his page yet his crummy film is? Smith is a sham and his Oscars should be revoked. JillyD1904 (talk) 17:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

This is not a forum for you to opine on Will Smith. Please use Twitter for that. The page is protected to stop disruptive editing. See WP:DE and WP:SEMI EvergreenFir (talk) 17:26, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

The occurrence at the Oscars is definitely noted on the article. From "Will Smith" (see that page's history for attribution):

During the 94th Academy Awards on March 27, 2022, Smith walked onstage and slapped presenter and comedian Chris Rock after Rock joked about his wife Jada Pinkett Smith's shaved head with a G.I. Jane reference. In 2018, Pinkett Smith was diagnosed with alopecia and later shaved her hair off due to the condition. The incident stunned television viewers and the live audience, who were unclear if the altercation was scripted. Smith then returned to his seat and yelled to Rock, twice, to "Keep my wife's name out your fucking mouth!" Later in the night, Smith was named Best Actor for King Richard and apologized to the Academy and the other nominees, but not to Rock, in an emotional acceptance speech. Rock declined to press charges against Smith.

Bsoyka (talk) 17:47, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

References

Is there any template to encode text into Base64?

Is this a dumb question? Is it even possible to do with wikitext? QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 17:27, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: There isn't one that I know of, but in theory I'd assume it's possible with a Lua module. Why do you ask? Bsoyka (talk) 17:48, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Bsoyka: Just curious ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:24, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Bsoyka: I found a piece of code here that is licensed under the MIT license. Can I copy-paste it here? QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:37, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: IANAL, but I think so, as long as you include the text of the MIT license with it. Bsoyka (talk) 18:57, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Help with Lua module

I'm trying to make a template that can encode text to Base64, and an editor told me to use Lua, so I copied the code from here. I'm very unexperiened with Lua, so how do I do it??? I tried {{#invoke:Base64|base64.encode(input)|Test}}, but it gives an error. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:47, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Maybe try asking at WP:VPT. Bsoyka (talk) 18:58, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

What is the purpose of the template, anyway? casualdejekyll 18:59, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll: So that you can encode text in base64 QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 19:08, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

And what are some use cases for why this might be relevant to building an encyclopaedia? ColinFine (talk) 19:16, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

"Splinter article" that isn't a splinter article but being denied

I've been working on the article Draft:Omiki but it was rejected from AFC due to not meeting exceptional criteria of notability due to allegedly being a splinter article from Religion and alcohol. The problem is that the article really isn't a splinter article at all, Omiki just currently redirects there for some reason. Omiki is a specific ritual of offering alcohol that is wholly distinct from general shinto views on the ethics of alcohol much like how Sacramental wine is completely different from Christian views on alcohol. How do I get the draft into mainspace? MaitreyaVaruna (talk) 19:01, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @MaitreyaVaruna! Looking at the draft and the comment @AngusWOOF made, it appears the issue isn't directly about notability, but rather just our (often unfortunately bureaucratic) process. Essentially, the place to propose the new article is at Talk:Religion and alcohol rather than Articles for Creation. Fortunately, I see you already raised that issue at Talk:Religion_and_alcohol#Shinto a month ago, and since it didn't get any reply, that's implicit consensus to proceed. Launching the draft requires a bit of administrator technical help, so I've made a request on your behalf at WP:Requested moves; it'll likely be handled within a day or so. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:42, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Sdkb, this wasn't given a proper split request WP:SPLITTING treatment at talk:Religion and alcohol. Do you still want to spin it off? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:10, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Trouble getting our page approved.

Hi All,

We have a page that keeps getting disapproved for promo or spam. I understand why the disapproval happened the 1st time. However, we've gathered more information and added it to help people understand about our channel and not push anything. Any help is greatly appreciated. Draft:YoReSpot America4life1987 (talk) 19:49, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

America4life1987 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has articles, not pages. This is a subtle but important distinction. If you work for or represent this social media platform, you must read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. Your draft was clearly promotional- you don't have to be actively soliciting or selling something. Wikipedia is not a place for organizations to tell the world about themselves or their offerings; Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about an organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Instead of trying to force the issue, I would suggest that you allow independent editors to take note of your platform and write about it on their own- note that any article about your platform is not yours to control, see WP:OWN. 331dot (talk) 19:58, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation @331dot We will do just that. America4life1987 (talk) 20:02, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

America4life1987, Adding more links to Wikipedia policy and guidelines would just lessen the affect of the information @331dot has provided but I would caution you that when you say "we" then it immediately causes some editors to think that multiple persons are using your Wikipedia account for the purpose of adding information to this draft or for editing Wikipedia here. Each account should be edited by one person. This is why we encourage you to come up with a unique name for the account which belongs to you. When several people use the same account for editing here we call that meatpuppetry and it could get you sanctioned. Just be careful and make sure only you use this account. Follow the other instructions provided to you by @331dot and you should be in a good spot. Happy editing and good luck with the article. --ARoseWolf 20:20, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Is there any tool present

Hello Wikipedians is there any tool present so that I can translate the page Oindrila Sen to other languages? @@@XyX _talk 21:00, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Bijoy2020:Once you become an extended confirmed user, you can use the Content translation tool. Until then, you can simply translate it manually by rewriting the text and copying the templates. (See Wikipedia:Translate us for more information) — Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 21:09, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

AfC question

Hello, previously I submitted this question to the Teahouse, I wanted to ask if this newer draft of the article I'm referring to in my previous question, linked here on my sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ab31488/sandbox, though still a work in progress, is in a more Wiki-friendly state to be recreated as an article at AfC? Thanks, Ab31488 (talk) 21:24, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Ab31488 Hi Good day. You previous links on your message to Teahouse could not be read. As per your article in User:Ab31488/sandbox, at the current state the subject is considered not notable and will merit a page in Wikipedia main space. Pls read notability requirements and WP:Your First Article first. You can create a draft page for your article via Wikipedia:Articles for creation and pls read the info/links and follow the instructions. Once you have written the article, pls submit the draft article for review and ask for assistance if you have any further question at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 23:00, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Can I add a page that was deleted?

In early 2021, I created a page called WhiteHat Jr. about an ed-tech company. However, it was deleted soon after due to “not being notable”. Now I want to create a page about the same ed-tech company (with its new name, BYJU’S Future School) and now I feel like it is a bit more notable. Can I go ahead with the creation of this page? Vamsi20 (talk) 21:58, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

If It was deleted by Discussion page deletion then go for Afc reviewing process. @@@XyX _talk 22:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Vamsi20 (talk) 23:03, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Help needed to write an rfc for Flag of Alabama

I brought concerns of WP:STONEWALLING and WP:BADFAITHNEG to the WP:ANI and some editors suggested I write an WP:RFC instead to get more input. However, there has been extensive criticism of the rfc and requests to close it without discussion. I am not trying to make a biased or leading rfc so I am asking for help in tweaking the rfc. I have tried asking users to elaborate with little success.

The topic of debate is Confederate symbolism in the state flag and whether or not that information should be included in the MOS:LEAD.

I attempted to make an unbiased rfc with multiple options. This is what I came up with:

"Should we include information that the flag of Alabama is based on the Confederate battle flag in the MOS:LEAD?

A: Yes, there is sufficient evidence that the state flag of Alabama is based on the Confederate battle flag and should be included in the lead.

B: No, there is disagreement over the origins of the state flag among reliable sources and no mention of confederate symbolism should be included in the lead.

C: No, the state flag is based on the Spanish colonial flag and that should be included in the lead instead.

D: No, there is disagreement over the origins of the state flag among reliable sources and that should be mentioned in the lead.

What sources are considered reliable for this issue?"

How do I fix this so that discussion can continue? I also had an editor accuse me of WP:CANVASSING because I made an rfc. I don't think rfcs are canvassing, if they are please let me know. Desertambition (talk) 23:05, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Desertambition, I have very little (or no?) experience of creating RFCs; however:

"Should the MOS:LEAD say that the flag of Alabama is based on the Confederate battle flag?

"A: Yes, there is a general consensus among reliable sources that the state flag of Alabama is based on the Confederate battle flag and therefore this should be included in the lead.

"B: No, there is disagreement over the origins of the state flag among reliable sources and therefore no mention of claimed Confederate (or Spanish, or other) origins or symbolism should be included in the lead

"(i) and neither should the fact that there is disagreement.

"(ii) although the fact that there is disagreement should be mentioned.

"C: No, the state flag is based on the Spanish colonial flag; and therefore this Spanish origin should be included in the lead instead."

Arranging an RfC is the right thing to do. (Of course, advertising this RfC selectively, to those who you suppose would tend toward the one side rather than the other, as well as in the standard manner would be canvassing.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:42, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I have no objection with what you wrote and I hope it is sufficient for other users. I will edit the current rfc with these revisions. If I should open a new rfc instead or do something differently please let me know. I have not advertised this rfc to any users and do not plan to unless specifically requested. I will ping every user who has engaged on the current rfc to let them know the rfc has been revised. Desertambition (talk) 23:49, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Desertambition, there's no false modesty above: I don't remember having launched any RfC (though I suppose I must have done at some time) and it's very rare that I even participate in one (I only notice them when they're well under way and I can't bring myself to read such a wall of text). Please don't launch any RfC until you get some informed comments (and perhaps suggestions) here. -- Hoary (talk) 00:10, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary: Ok sorry, should I close the current rfc? Desertambition (talk) 00:12, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm just going to close it pending more input. Desertambition (talk) 00:12, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary: Also, I was trying to close the discussion but I don't know why my formatting isn't working correctly. I was trying to follow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Closing_discussions#Writing_a_summary but it's not working properly. Desertambition (talk) 00:23, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Desertambition, I've just looked at Talk:Flag of Alabama, for the first time. I hadn't understood that the RfC was already in progress. One criticism that you got there was spot on: You mustn't reword one or more of the options of an RfC after it has got under way. I mean, if option P says XYZ, and I agree with XYZ, then I'll plump for P (preferably stating my reasons for doing so); but if P is subsequently redefined not as XYZ but instead as WXY, then my earlier vote (my "!vote") is being misrepresented. There does seem to be an extraordinary level of hostility on that talk page. An early start to a replacement, debugged, carefully thought-out and carefully worded RfC would surely get a hostile reaction (however unjustified). I'd put that article on the back burner for a time while you concentrate on other articles. But don't abandon it. -- Hoary (talk) 00:38, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. I will wait for a while. It is frustrating that editors continue to edit the article while refusing to engage in good faith or build consensus. Desertambition (talk) 02:04, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

my first article - draft named Merry Moor Winnett -

I want to add a photograph to my draft article (entitled Merry Moor Winnett). I have loaded my photograph into Wikipmedia Commons as a free image. It is a portrait of the subject. I have read the instructions on how to place an image in an article. However, (when editing the article) there does not seem to be a place to put the image. No space that has "edit" near it. The information box looks good (thanks to someone)...but it seems not to be a place to put an image. I realize that my article is a draft article that may or may not be approved by the editors. Also I realize that the process is lengthy. I have learned a lot already during these editing sessions. Photocher Photocher (talk) 23:44, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Photocher. You state: I have loaded my photograph into Wikipmedia Commons as a free image. Before getting into how to add it to the article, are you the photographer who took the image in 1975? I'll show the link as a courtesy to others who may see this (File:Merry Moor Winnett, 1975.jpg). Thank you.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 00:08, 29 March 2022 (UTC) (I am not a Teahouser)

hi Rocknrollmancer! by the way, you don't really need to say you're not a teahouser, anyone can answer questions here regardless or not of being a host. happy editing to both of you! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:39, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

It's my dedicated sig-line! .--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 00:42, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I am the photographer who took the image in 1975. We belonged to the same photography conference. I suspect the image will need to be re-sized? It is a high resolution jpeg which I think suits the recommendations of Wikimedia. Thanks. Photocher Photocher (talk) 00:45, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

hi Photocher! for Draft:Merry Moor Winnett, you would add the image inside the infobox, in the image variable. given that you use the visual editor which I have no experience with (I use source all the time), I unfortunately do not know how to do that using visual editor, but I've went ahead and added it to your draft. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:56, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

ThanQ Photocher - I had to check as I could see it was processed by scanner - some people think that a modern process means they have the right to upload it as 'own'. The normal place for a portrait image is in the infobox, where present, and it auto-resizes, normally not needing manual adjustment; otherwise top-right corner. There were fields missing from the infobox as added to your draft; these are known as 'parameters'. I've added a caption and alt text for users of screenreaders, where the device reads aloud the description. You can change this if not in agreement with my summary. rgds,--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 01:12, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I just looked at the article. The image is there. Hooray. Thanks an editor. Your instructions were very clear. This image of her was a "happy accident" of a photograph that reveals much of her art theory. It is strange (and wonderful) how those kind of things happen. It was done on color negative film. I scanned and digitized it. Lucky to have found it after all these years. Again, thank you. From Photocher Photocher (talk) 17:21, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Is "striking" a peacock word?

Would me saying that 2 books have a "striking" resemblance be peacocking/ puffuery? sina lukin ken e sitelen ni la sina sona e toki pona. mi olin e toki pona. (talk) 02:06, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

lon. casualdejekyll 02:11, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, striking can be a peacock word because peacocks strike there tails I guess TigerTurtle (talk) 02:26, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

@TigerTurtle - The user was asking about the guideline WP:PEACOCK. "peacock words" in this context means words that promote the subject of an article casualdejekyll 02:28, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Lionsleeps26, if a reliable source says that Thappad is "strikingly similar" to The Slap in one way or another, then citing the source to say this wouldn't be puffery; and I don't see how it could be peacockery. BTW, please remember that signatures are intended to aid communication, not to impede it. -- Hoary (talk) 02:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

If a reliable source does say that, also remember to put in quotation marks to show that it isn't in Wikipedia's voice. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:13, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Lionsleeps26 Your love of Toki Pona as an invented language does not mean you should burden people with that as your visible signature. David notMD (talk) 07:17, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I see no problem with it though it should be sohrter. casualdejekyll 22:05, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

And that's why I'm glad I have Convenient Discussions installed, so I only see people's usernames and not their customised signatures. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:46, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Can someone explain to me how I can make my declined article better

My article was about, how to make globbles! But it was declined!!! can someone help me make my article about how to make globbles better! TigerTurtle (talk) 02:12, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

TigerTurtle, Wikipedia is not for how to guides.Slywriter (talk) 02:13, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Oh 😔 sorry TigerTurtle (talk) 02:20, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Please read the decliners reasoning. Perhaps Wikibooks would be more to your liking? casualdejekyll 02:14, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

How do you find the decliners reasoning?? Btw thanks 😊 TigerTurtle (talk) 02:21, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Oh and I’m also new here (just started today) TigerTurtle (talk) 02:19, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft:How to make globbles was actually Rejected, which is much more severe than Declined. In the opinion of the reviewer, a how-to draft from your own experiences, with no references, has no potential toward becoming an article. It has been nominated for deletion. David notMD (talk) 02:28, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome newcomer TigerTurtle. There's nothing wrong with making a few mistakes on Wikipedia, as long as you're working to learn more, and to know just what Wikipedia is about. I suspect that I am older than you are, for I grew up knowing about printed encyclopedias, and it was easy for me to understand what types articles would be found in an online encyclopedia. It may help you to read What Wikipedia is not (though you might find it rather long), and Help:Your first article. When I first learned that Wikipedia existed I started out by searching for articles on subjects that interested me, and reading what was written. That helped me to figure out more about what was in this wonderful 6 million+ article website. I hope you continue on and find a way to help out. Karenthewriter (talk) 17:04, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Extensive references to the DSM-IV: would it be appropriate for me to update the information to the DSM-5?

Basically reading psychopathology articles I've noticed that lots of them have huge amounts of information that comes from the DSM-IV. It would be a great source, if it hadn't been superseded...in 2012. While the DSM-5 is not without controversy, every new edition of the DSM will necessarily have some controversy around it, and given that the DSM is extensively peer-reviewed and prepared over a long period of time, as well as it being the closest thing there is to an official source of information in all of psychiatry (well, jointly with the mental disorders section of the ICD-11 - speaking of which, the same problem applies where I'm seeing lots of references to the ICD-10) it seems sensible to me to have a certain level of deference to the experts and trust that the most up-to-date information is the most accurate in absence of a specific reason to the contrary. My opinion is that in the vast majority of cases updating to the DSM-5 would be best, but I'm relatively new to editing Wikipedia so I thought I'd ask about it here first. Anditres (talk) 02:15, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

A good question, Anditres, but one that would be better asked at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychology, because it would likely get many more informed readers there than here. -- Hoary (talk) 02:57, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thank you, I shall ask it over there. Anditres (talk) 03:22, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I’m new to Wikipedia..

Hello! im new to Wikipedia (just started today) and I don’t even know how to use this website!! could someone please tell me how I use this website! 😊 TigerTurtle (talk) 02:23, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

My first recommendation is always for you to stop by Wikipedia:Five pillars and Wikipedia:NOT to learn about what Wikipedia is. casualdejekyll 02:27, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse TigerTurtle, if you want to get started editing, the welcome message I left on your talk page contains a few links that would familiarize you with some basic policies and guidelines, and if you don't know where to start, try the task center, thanks for contributing to this project! Justiyaya 02:28, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

On your Talk page there is the aforementioned WELCOME with blue words or phrases, each of which links to guidelines. David notMD (talk) 02:30, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

My wikipedia page got deleted

I created a wikipedia page draft, titled 'Nursing Employability Excellence Program' but it got deleted. Source: https://skillzip.com/Neep/ The source is credible and genuine and the information provided in the wikipedia page was strictly for the informative purpose. What should I do now? 1Nanoscience2 (talk) 04:06, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

@1Nanoscience2: Welcome to the Teahouse. It doesn't seem you've ever created a draft of that name (no deletion logs showing up), but I've moved your other page to Draft:Nanoschool, as it isn't a suitable article for Wikipedia as it is right now. I strongly suggest you read and absorb Your first article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:17, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

@1Nanoscience2: The article (not draft) at Nursing Employability Excellence Program was deleted for being advertising. Follow the guidance at WP:YFA before trying to recreate it. RudolfRed (talk) 04:25, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

1Nanoscience2, much of the draft was about the purposes and goals of NEEP, as described by CCNE. But Wikipedia isn't much interested in what an organization says about its own project or product, no matter how laudable this may be. (People who want this can go straight to the organization's own website, and read it there.) Instead, it wants commentary from reliable, published, disinterested sources. -- Hoary (talk) 09:06, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Help needed with formatting a discussion closure

Hello, I tried to close the discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Flag_of_Alabama#Request_for_comment_on_Confederate_symbolism with a summary but clearly my formatting is messed up. Can someone please explain how I messed it up? I was trying to follow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Closing_discussions#Writing_a_summary Desertambition (talk) 04:30, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Melecie fixed it in this edit. Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:33, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes that happened immediately after I posted. I am very thankful. I think I just had one too many brackets? Desertambition (talk) 04:36, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

(way too many edit conflicts) hi Desertambition! you seem to have accidentally closed the {{Archive top}} prematurely, so that it didn't get to see the result and status parameters. I've fixed that over there by removing the first closing brackets from {{Archive top}}. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 04:38, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I appreciate that a lot. Desertambition (talk) 04:39, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

The header has already been fixed by Melecie. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 04:34, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that happened immediately after I posted. Very thankful. Must have misread the guide. Desertambition (talk) 04:37, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

2022 Pakistani political crises

Hello, I am looking for opinion and help, I have asked a few editors on their talk pages as well. I wrote this article about 2022 Pakistani political crises, first it was renamed, then redirected and then merged, lastly an editor copied all the test from my article to another article. The larger article was merged into a smaller article, is there a way to rectify this? also the page was removed from my page creation stats and my work on the article is no longer referenced to me because another editor copied and pasted everything to the new article. Now this editor is the top contributor the article, even though he just copied the text from a previously existing article. Elmisnter! (talk) 09:25, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Elminster Aumar, what were/are the titles of the "larger article" into which your text was copied, and the "smaller article" into which the larger one was merged? (However, it's my bed time. I may look into your explanation several hours from now, but of course I'd be delighted to wake up and discover that somebody else had beaten me to it.) -- Hoary (talk) 13:22, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I'll try to unravel the knots here. Elminster Aumar created a draft 2022 Pakistani Political Crises[1]. They then moved it from draft space to main space [2]. Mar4d moved the article to 2022 vote of no confidence in the Imran Khan ministry thus giving it a new title [3]. MasterOfMetaverse redirected that article to No-confidence motion against Imran Khan[4]

There was no proper merger discussion had on the article talk page Talk:No-confidence motion against Imran Khan and no consensus was gained for any of the moves. --ARoseWolf 15:45, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Good morning, world. And thank you for the excellent explanation, ARoseWolf. On the face of it, the moves seem reasonable. (I'm not saying that they were right, or that discussion was unnecessary, just that a quick look suggests that they were sensible.) If the histories were merged (as has already been suggested), would the result be significantly unjust, Elminster Aumar? ¶ If the histories are to be merged, then the sooner the better: improvements should come later. But they definitely should come. Consider this randomly picked example: A few days ago, on 6 March 2022, Prime Minister Imran Khan, while addressing a public meeting in Mailsi area of Punjab province, said that he is ready for a no-confidence motion. He had asked the opposition are they ready for what I will do to them (opposition) in case the no-confidence motion failed? Built-in obsolescence, superfluity, direct/reported speech confusion, 3rd/1st person confusion, all in just two sentences. -- Hoary (talk) 23:34, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary Well most of the editors who gave input in this article have displayed, with their edits, that they want this article to be about the vote against the Prime Minster, however, there are several political situations happening at the same time, which is why I believe it is a political crises,

1. Opposition also submitted a no confidence motion against the Chief Minster in Punjab, who already resigned

2. President has involved the court for the interpretation of the constitution.

3. Opposition is also planning the no confidence motions against the speaker of the assembly and against Chief Minister of another province.

4. Ruling party wants to disqualify dissident members for life

5. Political rallies from both opposition and government

6. Threats of violence by Government minister

7. Allied government parties' bargaining

My vote is that there should be one article, mentioning political crises, the vote against the Prime Minster should be the main heading but there are many other subjects that will be covered. There is sufficient material here to take this article to good article status. And yes of course, if we keep the article in its current state, then it should be in such a way, that my stats for page creation and contribution are not removed.

The paragraph you mentioned was part of the smaller article. The editor who made the smaller article, makes a few pages every week, they should've mentioned this in a better language. Also the person who copied this did not read thee article, they just copied it. Thank you. Elmisnter! (talk) 04:39, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Elmisnter!, I wonder if a history merge is something that you'd really want. Only administrators can merge histories, and this explanation of the process is intended for administrators. However, if you read it, you may change your mind. Since it was you who asked for the history merge, I think you're free to remove the request for this. (Just be sure to give your reason for doing so.) Now, should the one title be merely a link to the other, or should the former be reverted to an article? One thing is clear: Wikipedia doesn't permit "content forks", so a moderately detailed account of one event, or one series of events, shouldn't appear in more than one article. If the one article again became two, the person who'd proposed this should be willing to do a lot of the deletion of duplicate material very soon after the separation. If you think that there should again be two articles, I think it would be best to propose this on Talk:No-confidence motion against Imran Khan, and to advertise this on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pakistan, inviting readers to go to the talk page article and discuss the matter there. (You could also put individual invitations on the talk pages of all users who've been major contributors to either article; however, if you do this, be very careful to avoid any selection that could possibly be interpreted as "canvassing" those users who are likely to agree with you. All in all I'd suggest that you do not inform any individual users.) -- Hoary (talk) 05:31, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary, My first priority is to have the material and page creation credited to me via history merge, then once the no confidence vote is completed and things conclude then I will update the article further. untangling both article now can be very difficult, I believe. Elmisnter! (talk) 07:48, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Also I read the history merge, it seems this case will be complicated as well. Elmisnter! (talk) 07:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Elminster Aumar, if that is indeed what you hope for, then of course you are free to propose it. -- Hoary (talk) 08:17, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Making links for commons in Wikipedia articles

Can I encourage people to start putting in links to commons on Wikipedia. Examples: a prominent link or the more discreet version.

There are astonishing numbers of biographies on wikipedia without a portrait, where PD portraits are available. Astonishing numbers of artists without a gallery or link to their artworks. --Broichmore (talk) 11:17, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Morthouse and Dead house

To me it seems like Morthouse and Dead house both describe the same concept. What's the process of dealing with doublicate pages like that? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:26, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Merging should have the relevant instructions. Toofllab (talk) 13:55, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

How to upload easily a non-free album cover here on Wikipedia

Hi! I was trying to upload the album cover of 3rd Desire (Reve) by creating its source and by using a template used by another user to upload 2nd Desire Tasty - Kim Woo-seok.png, but the image doesn't appear unlike on the file I mentioned. Did I do something wrong or no? Bloomingbyungchan (talk) 13:09, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Did you use Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard or Wikimedia Commons to upload the album cover? Toofllab (talk) 14:04, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I tried to create the source by typing in the browser's search bar the link to wikipedia adding /wiki/File:the name of the file + the image format. Regarding the format, is it better to use jpg instead of png for an album cover? Bloomingbyungchan (talk) 14:11, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Is there a reason why you cannot use Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard? ~Anachronist (talk) 14:15, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I can use it, I just thought a file could be uploaded on Wikipedia by just creating the source. I didn't know there was a file upload wizard here on wikipedia, just like on commons, because it's my first time trying to upload a file directly on wikipedia. Bloomingbyungchan (talk) 14:20, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy vanish

I'm considering requesting a courtesy vanish (WP:VANISH) and I have a question regarding the policy. On the what vanish is not section they say the following, when you request a courtesy vanishing, it is understood that you will not be returning, do they mean that I cannot or, at least, shouldn't create a new account in my whole lifetime or only for a considerable amount of years? Could I, let's say, create an account after 5, 10 years? Thanks. SadAttorney613 (talk) 14:03, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

It means exactly what it says: you will not be returning to edit Wikipedia. Ever. If you intend to create a new account see Wikipedia:Clean start instead. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:14, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) hi SadAttorney613 and welcome to the teahouse! vanishing is more or less a permanent action when you do not intend to ever return to active editing and don't want to be associated anymore, so it may be better to retire and return to the account in the future instead if you don't mind. happy editing and reading! 💜  melecie  talk - 14:14, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

SadAttorney613 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The policy states "If the user returns, the "vanishing" will likely be fully reversed, the old and new accounts will be linked, and any outstanding sanctions or restrictions will be resumed." I'm fairly sure it wouldn't matter how far in the future you returned. You should only request a vanishing if your intention is to not return at all. You may wish to ask a functionary as the vanish policy suggests, but that's how I understand it. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Create content

Hey there! I am doing some research for my job. I am the assistant at a marketing firm and need to know how to create a wikipedia page for a client? They are looking to be deemed a public figure on social media and having a wikipedia page would help them a lot. Could anyone help me figure this out? 96.227.180.208 (talk) 15:07, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia articles(not "pages") are not for the benefit of their subject. There may be benefits, but those are on the side and not our primary goal. There are in fact good reasons to not want an article about one's self. Wikipedia has no interest in anyone's internet presence or in how social media views them, our only interest is in summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Please read Your First Article. We usually recommend that new users first edit existing articles, in order to learn more about Wikipedia. Using the new user tutorial also helps(you need an account to do that).

If you are editing for a client, you are required by the Terms of Use to formally declare that fact, please read the paid editing policy, as well as conflict of interest. It's easier to make such a declaration with an account, but it's not required that you have an account. 331dot (talk) 15:11, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Talk page? Secret edits?

Draft:Jusaburō Tsujimura

Hi! I'm new on Wikipedia, (about a week old?) I made an account because artists I am interested in often do not have wikipedia articles. I have submitted four drafts – some of which I will return to and without being accepted or denied, there will be edits added and suggestions made, but with no username attached or any way to follow up. Is this something these editors will see if I follow up on their comments? Are there some (social?) implications I am missing when someone edits and comments in the code of an Article without approving or denying it?

(example above – I said that Tsujimura worked at "the Ningyōza puppet theatre" I came back to the draft and saw a footnote that said "vague," when I went to edit the page it said "vague | which Ningyōza?" I edited the sentence to be more general, but I don't know who left this comment, and made some more helpful/general edits on my draft)

I also more generally cannot quite understand my Talk page or how it functions? Any tips? Chainsawpunk (talk) 16:02, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @Chainsawpunk! Those footnotes you're referring to were added by Hoary, a fellow content creator who helped my first draft get published, actually. For communication with users, you can resort to talk pages for public discussion and interaction. For more information, you can check out Help:Talk pages and Wikipedia:User pages. If you have questions for Hoary (or any future user), you can either ask them on their personal talk page at User talk:Hoary, or you can begin a new discussion at Draft talk:Jusaburō Tsujimura, where you can ping Hoary there (using the code "{{u|Username here}}". Panini! • 🥪 16:18, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

(Side note, I figured out who made the comments via the article's history. If you look to the top right near the search bar there should be a "View history" tab, where you can see all changes made to an article alongside links to other cool statistics.) Panini! • 🥪 16:21, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

You have a Talk page, as does each article and draft. As Panini wrote, View history shows who has edited articles and drafts, in chronological order. A green number means that there was a net addition to the draft (the person may have added and deleted content, but combined, more added). Red number means content cut. Clicking on prev shows what was changed. Clicking on the date shows what the article looks like after the edit. In addition, on drafts, some editors choose to leave a Comment at the top. The intent there is for the draft reviewer to see what concerned the comment maker. Do not reply there. Instead, address issue in draft or on Talk page. When a draft is accepted by a reviewer, that person removes all the Comments. David notMD (talk) 20:47, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Or a little more precisely: When a draft is accepted by a reviewer, the reviewer virtually always does this as part of a complex but semi-automated process, as part of which every comment made at the top of the draft by any reviewer is deleted. If the reviewer (more or less perversely) doesn't use the semi-automated process, then they should "manually" remove any comment. (However, any comment on the draft's talk page is conserved, as the draft's talk page is transformed into the article's talk page.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:36, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Chainsawpunk: I said that Tsujimura worked at "the Ningyōza puppet theatre" I came back to the draft and saw a footnote that said "vague," when I went to edit the page it said "vague The Japanese word ningyō means doll(s) or puppet(s), and the Japanese word ningyōza means puppet theatre(s), or perhaps puppet theatre troupe(s). A puppet theatre/troupe in a Japanese context usually means bunraku (though there is, or has been, at least one showing dramas via puppets operated by strings, and thus not bunraku). More bunraku theatres are called bunrakugekijō than are called ningyōza. In Japanese script, there's no orthographic distinction analogous to that between "theatre" (a common noun) and "Theatre" (part of a name) in English. (Chainsawpunk, you'll know all of this; but the others here probably won't.) The only place calling itself ningyōza these days is, I think, the one in Awaji; though I could be wrong. However, the mid-1950s weren't 2022, and the draft seemed to imply that Tsujimura moved to Tokyo where he got a job at some ningyōza. Back then, I believe that there were ningyōza in Osaka, in Tokushima (more often termed Awa (no) deku/deko, 阿波(の)木偶), and a few elsewhere -- perhaps one in or near Tokyo, though I don't know offhand. Even with today's shinkansen, one doesn't commute between Tokyo and Awaji (or indeed Tokushima, or, if one is sane, Osaka). So I wondered which ningyōza this could have been. Incidentally, Duckduckgo reveals that "Fujinami Company" is almost certainly Fujinami Kodōgu (藤浪小道具). Hope something here helps! -- Hoary (talk) 23:17, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

It helps a lot!!! Thank you so much. I'm going to fiddle with the wording a bit today and re-edit. I appreciate your help very much. Chainsawpunk (talk) 14:35, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Potential prerequisites

Hi all. I've been on Wikipedia for some time now, but I hope I can still ask questions here as I am still fairly new to editing in Wikipedia. I'm wondering if, to edit an article, you need to possess a specific level of literacy in English, or be in a specific age range? I suppose the only requirement is to speak English well, as I've seen many articles with broken English be refined over time. So, out of sheer curiosity, do I need to have a minimum level of knowledge in the English language or are edits still acceptable regardless, as long as I do my research properly? Any help is appreciated. - KoolKidz112 hit me up 16:20, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

KoolKidz112, given the message above, you are probably well versed enough to edit a Wikipedia article. Also, there is no age requirement for editing Wikipedia. Sungodtemple (talk) 16:23, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

While there isn't an age requirement to access or read Wikipedia, KoolKidz112, if you're a young editor I suggest you read Guidance for younger editors to review points like not giving out personal information online. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:11, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @KoolKidz112! While you need to have a basic understanding of English language and grammar, non-native speakers are treated equally. As long as your additions are high-quality when it comes to the information you want to add, we won't mind if you slip up every once in a while; someone will come and patch up the errors in due time. For more information, see WP:NNS. Panini! • 🥪 16:27, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Help about report

Since a time the user Kheng Lengnew writtes a text on Khmer language, in userspaces (Userpage, user talk page), it's principally a draft of an article, her userpage was deleted for these reason, and editions on Talk pages was reverted, but doesn't stop, even being warned. What do you recommend me to do with this user? Emolga826 (talk) 16:48, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

It appears the user is copying content from km.wikipedia.org and using their user pages as sandboxes. If someone knows Khmer, perhaps they can communicate that User:Kheng Lengnew/sandbox would be the appropriate place to make these edits. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:54, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Why is Pluto listed as a dwarf planet?

As far as I know, NASA/IAU (I forgot which) put it back as a planet in 2017.

Or am I completely wrong? Blocky44 (talk) 16:50, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Blocky44 If you have a reliable source stating that Pluto's classification has changed, please offer it on the article talk page, Talk:Pluto. I suspect that's the sort of thing that would get noticed and changed quickly had that been done, though. 331dot (talk) 16:52, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah they would probably do that.

I personally think it should be considered a planet again because it is very interesting.

But apparently the IAU decides in 2006 that it can never be a planet until it gobbles up all the other KBOs and clears its orbit. Blocky44 (talk) 16:55, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Pluto is still a planet in New Mexico, but I know that's probably not what you were asking about.

Pluto still a planet, in New Mexico Desertambition (talk) 16:56, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

How I Killed Pluto and Why It Had It Coming Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:43, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Removing an intrusive image

Hi, there is (at least) one intrusive image of a band - is it possible to remove this from the wiki history? The file is called 'Year of the Pineapple 2016.jpg' which can be found here. Particlemc (talk) 17:24, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Particlemc. That image has been removed from the article but I see no need to remove it from Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 17:33, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

The image [5] is alive and well, so to speak, on Commons, a related site. At the linked page there is a link for "Nominate for deletion", you can make your argument there. If commons deletes it, it will disappear from old versions of the WP-article as well, we sort of "borrow" pics from there.. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:41, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Particlemc, just an observation but because there was no edit summary it made it more difficult to find exactly which edit this picture was added on, obviously by the uploader, and which edit it was removed on, one of your edits to the article. Edit summaries really do help save time for others. I encourage you to read Help:Edit summary. --ARoseWolf 19:11, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

User:Particlemc, how is the image intrusive? I can only think that one or both of the people pictured doesn't want the image in Wikipedia. We, being kind, have removed the image. Wikimedia Commons is different, it's a different website, mostly run by different people and with a different mission, and they won't delete it, no. But if we keep it out of the article (which probably it won't even be put back in), it'll almost certainly just sit unused and unseen on Commons forever, so hopefully that's good enough? Herostratus (talk) 22:28, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Cryptic message

he was famous an good for what he did 64.53.103.206 (talk) 17:58, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Glad to hear it, IP user. If you care to tell us who "he" was, and how this is relevant to editing Wikipedia, somebody might be able to help you. --ColinFine (talk) 18:09, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Revise ?

Does revise mean to do it again or just to look at your work because I have to revise something and im not sure if I should write all of it down in my book? TigerTurtle (talk) 22:30, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

This looks like a better question for Google. The Teahouse is for questions about Wikipedia, @TigerTurtle casualdejekyll 22:37, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

@TigerTurtle Revise means you are changing what you wrote earlier. You are Reviewing if you're looking at your work. Oftentimes Reviewing leads to thinking that you could make a few changes to improve a paragraph, and then it is time to Revise what you wrote. Karenthewriter (talk) 01:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Moving current information into a new page/subdividing Vivian Beaumont Theater page

Hi I'm planning to create a page for Lincoln Center Theater which currently redirects to Vivian Beaumont Theater . A large portion (around half) of the information on that page would make more sense to have on this page since it is not really about the Vivian Beaumont but about Lincoln Center Theater (of which Vivian Beaumont is a small part). I know that one shouldn't copy information from other wikipedia pages in general but I'm assuming since this is essentially proposing subdividing the current page and removing it there that it would be okay to copy this information over to the other page? Thanks KNY22 (talk) 23:20, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Actually, copying content from one Wikipedia article to another is fine as long as in the Edit summary you clearly state where it came from. I suggest you create the draft for LCT and get it approved at Articles for creation. Only after that, remove content from Vivian Beaumont Theater. When doing that, rather than removing all, you could leave a short version as a section, and have a See link to your new article. Good luck. 02:05, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@KNY22: For details of the procedure, see Wikipedia:Splitting. Deor (talk) 17:23, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Help with sockpuppetry

In November 2020, a few days after I first created this account, I forgot my password and didn’t click the forgot password button for some reason, but created another account called Maccoun. I didn’t know anything about sockpuppetry at the time. Eventually, I remembered my password and edited in this account. I never edited to anything on the account except for 3 edits on that user page. Now, one year later, the account came to mind and I am scared something might happen to this account. What should I do? Vamsi20 (talk) 23:33, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

@Vamsi20

Since the old account isn't blocked, you are allowed to have multiple accounts as long as you follow Wikipedia policies regarding 2nd accounts: Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry#Legitimate_uses_of_alternative_accounts. It is best to disclose the 2nd account on your user page to make sure everyone is on the same page. Rlink2 (talk) 23:36, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Or just abandon Maccoun, as you only made three edits there, back in 2020. David notMD (talk) 02:08, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Rlink2

How should I disclose the account on my user page so that it fits into it? Vamsi20 (talk) 21:21, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Vamsi20 usually just a notice on both accounts, or at the very least your main account, would be fine. See Wikipedia:ALTACCN for more info. Rlink2 (talk) 22:02, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Why do all of my posts keep getting deleted?

All I did was write true facts, but they keep getting deleted with no explanation. 2600:1011:B164:8F32:F5BE:7351:AB2:2746 (talk) 00:44, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! wikipedia does not solely rely on truth, it relies on verifiability. unless you have reliable sources proving that it's actually rigged, it cannot be added. see Verifiability, not truth for more, from that page: It is not good enough for information to be true, and it is definitely not good enough for you to ... believe it to be true. Wikipedia values accuracy, but it requires verifiability. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:49, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello! If it’s information that’s already on Wikipedia, no wonder they won’t let you!but, you could make a article about them in your ownwords? 😊 TigerTurtle (talk) 01:56, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Ps, hope I helped (I’m new to Wikipedia so I’m not a expert 😓 TigerTurtle (talk) 01:57, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@TigerTurtle: That isn't the issue here. The issue is that there isn't a reliable source being provided to support this claim. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:24, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

The issue is a flagrant violation of WP:NONAZIS. Go to conservapedia, IP. I'm sure they want you there. casualdejekyll 04:41, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Using a Government written biography as a source?

Hi there! I submitted a biography about a notable person for review and it was rejected due to the content feeling like it was "written by a fan".

I understand completely where the feedback is coming from and why it was rejected. The wording used in the draft came from a government written biography (as a part of the award the notable person received) and thus I am assuming they did their research, my questions is... how can I use the government bio as a source? or do I need to reference the sources that they used in their biography?

Here is the link to the draft page if it's helpful: Draft:Geoffrey Lorigan

Thanks in advance, let me know if any other information is required.

Ealder3301 (talk) 01:01, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ealder3301, when a group gives an award, what they write is focused on the wonderfulness of the person and they write in that way. An encyclopedia article is not the same thing. It has to be neutral and also has to be completely written in your own words, not copied from what someone else has written. At the bottom of the award web page it says "Copyright 2022 Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet". Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously for legal reasons. You can use the bio as a source for information; in that way it is fine as a reference. StarryGrandma (talk) 01:15, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarifications, I will re-write/update accordingly :) Ealder3301 (talk) 20:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

License tagging of photos

Which license tag should be used for a photo:

A) Taken by the subject (provide a link, if possible);

B) Taken by the author (provide a link, if possible);

C) Taken by a friend or relative of the subject (provide a link if possible).

Neither subject, author, nor friend/relative have the desire to retain any copyright. Pghmedicine (talk) 01:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Pghmedicine! For an image being uploaded by the person who took it, use {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} on Wikimedia Commons. The easiest way to do that is to just follow the upload wizard (commons:Special:UploadWizard). Best, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 01:27, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

From the point of view of licensing, it makes no difference what the relationship is between the photographer and the subject, unless there is a legal agreement between them that assigns the copyright. In the absence of such an agreement, the copyright belongs to the photographer (whether that is the subject, somebody known to them, or a random person who snapped them) and only the owner of the copyright has the power to license the image. ColinFine (talk) 08:36, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Pghmedicine:Even if none of them have a desire to retain the copyright, the photographer will retain the copyright until such time as he or she does something to release it. We can't know what anyone's desires are otherwise! The answers from @Sdkb and @ColinFine are spot-on. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 10:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Portals

What is a portal on Wikipedia? I just joined WikiProject Feminism yesterday, and I saw that there is such a thing as the Feminism Portal, but I am unsure of its purpose and how it is different from the WikiProject? Also, how is a WikiProject in general managed? Are there project leads/admins to guide the project along? Sruthijayanti (talk) 01:26, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Sruthijayanti! A portal is a somewhat unique way of organizing Wikipedia content that allows readers to browse a topic area. You can find lots of information on them at Wikipedia:Portal. They're somewhat unpopular among many editors, who feel that they were an experiment that never really got off the ground and attracted many readers.

A WikiProject differs from a portal in that it's designed mainly for collaboration among editors rather than for readers. WikiProject Feminism is a WikiProject that works on all articles related to feminism. You can see from its talk page that there are a few discussions going on, but nothing super active. This is somewhat typical for project talk pages. If you'd like to see a more active WikiProject, check out WikiProject Women in Red, which aims to close Wikipedia's gender gap by writing articles about notable women who did not have them previously. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 01:34, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you!! How do editors actually collaborate through WikiProjects if active discussions are scarce? Also what are red links on Wikipedia (guessing they are links to pages that do not exist)? Sruthijayanti (talk) 01:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

On your second question, see WP:REDLINK. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

If I make a fidget article , will Wikipedia approve?

So I’m wondering if I should make a fidget article.. but I’m worried wikipedia will not approve if I make a article about them? What should I do?? TigerTurtle (talk) 01:53, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

hi TigerTurtle! Fidgeting and Fidget toy exists as well as some others at the disambiguation page Fidget, are you thinking of a different thing? 💜  melecie  talk - 01:54, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Why do people not trust Wikipedia?

It seems to me, a lot of people don’t trust Wikipedia! I think it’s because anyone can write on Wikipedia, and that is true! But Wikipedia always checks through everyone’s articles? I believe Wikipedia is true 😊 and that it gives heaps of information of what your looking for! (New to Wikipedia 😊) Thanks!! - TigerTurtle (talk) 02:03, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@TigerTurtle: Our article Reliability of Wikipedia has some great information about this. ––FormalDude talk 02:05, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

There is to "Wikipedia" that checks article truthfulness. It's just one volunteer editor after another trying to improve existing articles, including reverting if wrong information is added. David notMD (talk) 02:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I think you mean no Wikipedia? 💜  melecie  talk - 03:16, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

To add to what David says above, no one on Wikipedia is checking for truthfulness, only accuracy of the information found in referenced reliable sources about a notable subject as described in WP:N. Truth can change from person to person and would be a poor criteria for what should be included or not. --ARoseWolf 13:37, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

TigerTurtle We don't want people to trust Wikipedia blindly as Wikipedia is not a reliable source. We want people to examine the sources provided in articles and determine things like truthfulness or biase for themselves. 331dot (talk) 13:41, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Is there a faster way to make articles?

Is there a way to make articles that do not need to go through the AfC/draft process? Blocky44 (talk) 02:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

For editors who have only recently joined, and are attempting their first article, as you are at the so-far unsubmitted Draft:DS Tucanae Ab, it is advised to go through AfC. Yes, there is a backlog that could mean weeks to months before it is reviewed. Skipping that and moving the draft into mainspace means that it goes to the New Pages Patrol, where a reviewer might decide to accept, bounce it back to draft, Speedy delete or start an Articles for Deletion process. David notMD (talk) 02:28, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Blocky44. For almost all the accounts active for four days or more, and with ten or more edits, the AfC process is entirely optional. Such editors can move their draft content or sandbox content to the main space of the encyclopedia without advance review or approval. However, these articles are scrutinized by the New Page Patrollers, and articles that are out of compliance with Policies and guidelines are usually deleted quite quickly. Writing articles that are policy compliant is much more important than writing articles quickly. Cullen328 (talk) 03:23, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

So, how would an autoconfirmed user bypass the AfC process? Blocky44 (talk) 03:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

See WP:MOVE. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 04:16, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Blocky44, see WP:MOVE. You would simply move the content from your draft or sandbox space to the main space of the encyclopedia, and the New Pages Patrollers will evaluate it. Be sure that it is policy compliant first. Cullen328 (talk) 04:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

thank you Blocky44 (talk) (contribs) 04:30, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Blocky44 Drafts are reviewed in no particular order, obvious ones can be accepted within minutes of submission, you have however not submitted Draft:DS Tucanae Ab for review yet? Theroadislong (talk) 10:48, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

To elaborate, there are ~3,000 drafts at AfC. It is not a queue. Reviewers look at titles that catch their eye. Conscientious editors also eyeball the older submittals. An editor put a submittal template on your draft. You decide. David notMD (talk) 11:44, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

British or American

What determines if an article is british or american englsih Jishiboka1 (talk) 03:11, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Jishiboka1: Welcome to the Teahouse. There's more guidance at the manual of style, but one thing that generally tilts an article to a variant of English is if the subject has ties to a particular nation. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:14, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

hi Jishiboka1 and welcome to the teahouse! that would be cultural ties first of all: if something is located in a British English-speaking country then the page would be in British English, and same for American English. if that does not apply then it's probably be what is used first and then it should be kept consistent in the article, see MOS:ENGVAR for more on this. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 03:14, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Fandom

Is Fandom.com basically "encyclopedias within an encyclopedia" in which, as I've noticed, even TV shows have their own separate "wikis" on the website and heavily detailed articles that would otherwise not be considered notable enough to have their own articles on Wikipedia? I've noticed that due to Wikipedia seemingly any website on the Internet that has the word "wiki" in it is pretty much an encyclopedia-like website. Hgh1985 (talk) 04:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

hi Hgh1985 and welcome to the teahouse! this is not the place to ask about Fandom, but sure I'll answer: it's basically a wiki hosting service for basically anything, so stuff that won't make it to wikipedia may make it to a fandom wiki if someone decided to add it in. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 05:12, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Hgh1985: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikis are in general just sites where users are able to contribute freely (for the most part) to pages. They don't have to be encyclopedias, though the software gears itself towards that use. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:32, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Are people here allowed to import content from there? I would not think so because what would the citation be? Blocky44 (talk) (contribs) 16:12, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blocky44 Per WP:USERG, Fandom is mostly useless for WP-purposes in itself, but it's not impossible they can have useful sources. A decent wiki can be an acceptable External link, like at James_T._Kirk#External_links. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:52, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Something weird in the mobile app

I'm QuickQuokka (No access to account currently), and I noticed a very weird thing about the mobile app while browsing the r/Ani_bm subreddit.

The Hebrew article for Carl Friedrich Gauß displays File:Mike Wazowski.png at the top. As you can see, it is not mentioned in the source code of the Hebrew article, and doesn't have file usage on any wiki according to Commons. Would upload a screenshot, but don't have privileges, as I'm logged out. 212.39.89.223 (talk) 04:48, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

This is a reddit image, but I checked and it's true: https://i.redd.it/g3743sjwjdq81.jpg 212.39.89.223 (talk) 04:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi QuickQuokka, it appears to be fixed on Hebrew wiki already and I've tagged the file on commons for deletion (hopefully I used the right template, not so familiar with commons stuff) Justiyaya 05:55, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Though I can't find the version of the article you mentioned... Justiyaya 06:24, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Justiyaya: Hmmm... You said it's fixed, but I still see it. 212.39.89.155 (talk) 08:37, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I can't see the "File usage on other wikis" section there so I assumed it was fixed, pinging DGtal because I think he probably knows much much more about this Justiyaya 08:50, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: d:Q6722 212.39.89.155 (talk) 10:23, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

The whole story is a result of a now reverted massive vandalism of the Carl Friedrich Gauß wikidata item. It was already reverted by the time I checked it and the display should be OK again the moment you refresh or, if required, clean your memory cache. DGtal (talk) 09:05, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Justiyaya 09:27, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Confirming this QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 14:01, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Completely restarting someone elses draft?

There is currently an existing Draft for the mobile game BitLife (Draft:BitLife), which is quite poorly written (loads of trivial details, almost no references, not encylopedia style) and has been rejected a few times. I believe that this game is notable enough for a Wikipedia article, is it appropriate for me to completely clear the current draft and start over, including the "submission declined" notices? Thank you! ☽☆ NotCharizard (talk) 09:52, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Notcharizard Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The draft was only declined, not rejected- rejected would mean resubmission is not possible. You are welcome to edit and or rewrite the draft, but the prior notices need to remain. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

The creating editor has not edited since February 2021, so feel free to discard as much of the content as you wish, and replace it. Leave the existing declines. But you can either add a Comment above the draft that you have done a massive makeover, or state same on Talk page of the draft. After you submit it to AfC it will be judged on what you created, with no prejudice because of prior declines, as long as it is clear that major changes have been made. David notMD (talk) 11:50, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Maproom and I cut the draft by 90%. David notMD (talk) 11:56, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Pictures copyright question.

Hello several months ago, i was referred to somewhere regarding copyright questions about photographs. I forget where...help? Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 10:42, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria: Please see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:03, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: Thank you! Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 11:17, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Requesting some opinion or suggestion

Greetings to you! Hope you're doing well. My apologies if I have bought the topic up at the wrong place.

I had posted a Question/suggestion on the talk page of List of Mughal empresses but unfortunately, the page doesn't seem to get much attention and the suggestion is likely to be left unseen. Is there any way to bring attention (suggestion/discussion) to it?


Manavati (talk) 12:42, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Manavati. Since you only posted the suggestion yesterday, I should wait several days to see if anybody does respond. You could also post a pointer to it at WT:WikiProject India. If after, say, a week, nobody has responded, then go ahead and make your change. My suggestion would be that, rather than removing them completely, you marked those who never became Empress in some way, but I have no strong feeling.

As for your suggestions about the redirects: the purpose of a redirect is to help somebody who comes looking for a subject where they haven't given the name the same as the corresponding Wikipedia article, or where there is not an article on that specific topic, but there is another which covers the topic in some way. It doesn't matter whether the redirect is strictly accurate, as long as it is likely to be helpful rather than unhelpful. If you think they should be changed or deleted, please see WP:RfD. But read WP:Redirect first. ColinFine (talk) 13:26, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

What changes required in my Article to get Approval.

Hi TeaHouse, What changes required in my Article to get Approval. Could you please help me out in this. Here is the draft for your reference. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hamstech_College_of_Creative_Education Farooq80 (talk) 12:44, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Farooq80, perhaps the problem is epitomized in: With its motto of “Learn.Believe.Create.”, the institute nurtures creative youth who wish to pursue non-conventional careers and provides industry-centric training to them in order to help them excel in their respective professional fields. This sounds to me like routine corporate ad copy. Wikipedia is not a conduit for PR puffery; it's an encyclopedia. Just what do reliable sources (which must of course be disinterested) say about this place? Summarize what they say and attribute it. -- Hoary (talk) 13:30, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Farooa80, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid the answer is, "Throw most of it away, and start again with independent sources". Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. I haven't looked at your sources themselves, but judging from the citations it looks to me as if not a single one meets that description.

I feel I must ask - what is your connection with the College? Usually people who come to Wikipedia and almost immediately create a highly promotional article about an organisation are connected with, if not employed by the institution. If you are, you should read conflict of interest, and make your connection clear. Further, if you are in any way paid by the college, you must make a formal declaration of this: see paid editing ColinFine (talk) 13:33, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Correcting Subject Names

How do I fix an incorrectly spelled subject name? The wikipedia article "Era of Good Feelings" should be named "Era of Good Feeling". How do I drop the "S"?

Here's the link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Era_of_Good_Feelings Lord Milner (talk) 12:49, 30 March 2022 (UTC) Lord Milner (talk) 12:49, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Lord Milner. Technically, the page would need to be WP:MOVEd to the new title, but in this case it might be best to be WP:CAUTIOUS and propose the title change at Talk:Era of Good Feelings to see what other might think. There reason why I'm suggesting this is that a quick Google search shows the period being referred to in both ways by various publications and websites. Encyclopedia Britannica even states as much here; so, instead of moving the page, adding something about the different ways of referring to the period to the MOS:LEAD of the article might be all that's really needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:16, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

You don't drop it, Lord Milner. Instead, you go to Talk:Era of Good Feelings and there write out your proposal for a title change. Note that the talk page shows that others have already proposed the same change. However, their proposals seem to have less reasoning and evidence, more indignation. Try to be persuasive. Get agreement. If you succeed, then retitling ("moving") the article will be easy. -- Hoary (talk) 13:22, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Obviously, I'm from the United States, and there is no discussion about this. We are all taught the same. The word "Feeling" in this sense, is plural. The connotation of "Feelings" suggests something different, something amateurish. "The Era of Good Feeling" is both academically and linguistically correct. So, two changes need to be made: one to add the word "The", and a second to delete the letter "s".

@Lord Milner: On the omission of the in the article title, see WP:THE. Deor (talk) 21:16, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

My first article

Alright, so I decided to simply make my very first Wikipedia article, it is on a man who is mentioned in the town of Standerton in South Africa and the man is a friend of mines ancestor, I got a portrait of him and some info, but my trouble is linking the sources in the right places, because I put them in the end Joshua Izaak Aronson (talk) 13:28, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Joshua and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, you have embarked on one of the most difficult tasks there is for a new editor, and I would advise you to put the project on one side for a few months while you learn how Wikipedia works by improving some of our six million existing articles. But in answer to your question, Referencing for beginners is a guide, and if you haven't read it already, I recommend you start with Your first article. ColinFine (talk) 13:36, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

If you really need to submit some articles, perharp a wp:AFC is also very helpful. Pavlov2 (talk) 14:00, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: Joshua Izaak Aronson —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:09, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

WRONG PLACE. Your User page is for a bit of information about you. Use WP:YFA to create a draft, and when ready, submit it to Articles for Creation for a Reviewer to decide. Help:Referencing for beginners explains how to format references and insert those into the text. The software automatically provides superscripted numbers and puts the refs in the References section. Most important - if there are not published articles about this person, to cite as references, then no hope. David notMD (talk) 17:44, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Standerton exists as an article. Notable people are listed, notable meaning that there is a Wikipedia article about each. Those could be models for what you hope to accomplish. David notMD (talk) 17:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

copyrighted content

hi- I submitted an article for creation and it was rejected for copyrighted content. The content is part of the researcher's biosketch and he uses the same wording on several platforms. How do I get it published on Wikipedia if it will be repeatedly found as similar text in other locations? Mfahey sralab (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Mfahey sralab Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You shouldn't be simply transferring any content from this biosketch; you should be summarizing what independent reliable sources say about Richard Lieber. 331dot (talk) 14:48, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mfahey sralab. To enlarge on what 331dot said, there are two separate problems here. One is that you must not copy copyright material (including anything which has been published) unless it has been released under a suitable licence. But in any case, a subjects own bio is almost certainly not appropriate for an encyclopaedia article about them. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 15:09, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

how to get an page of a person thats not listed on wikipedia?

please let me know TheInternetContributer (talk) 15:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

TheInternetContributer Hello and welcome. I think you are asking how to create a new Wikipedia article about a person? Creating a new article is the hardest thing to do on Wikipedia. It is usually recommended that one first gain experience and knowledge by editing existing articles in areas that interest you, so that you learn more about how Wikipedia works and what is expected of article content. Using the new user tutorial is also very helpful. Both of these things will greatly increase your chances of success in creating a new article and lead to less frustration.

If you would still like to create a new article now, you will first need to review the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person to see if this person you want to write about meets it. If they do, you should gather at least three independent reliable sources that give the person significant coverage on their own(that are not an interview or brief mention of the person) so that you can summarize them in a draft. You may start the process of creating a draft at Articles for Creation(new users cannot directly create new articles). Please also read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 16:04, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

editing the info box - my first article - draft: Merry Moor Winnett

I have located another reference for the specific death date for the subject (person). Today I added the obituary to the references. I am wondering how to add the date of death to the information box at the top of the article. Currently the info box has the year, 1994. The date is October 17, 1994. Aged 42. The reference is number 21. Do I just click on the info box and attempt to type? Thanks. Photocher Photocher (talk) 16:01, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

In the template {{Death date and age}} simply change "1994" to "1994|10|17". Deor (talk) 16:59, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Photocher: Forgot to ping. Deor (talk) 17:25, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done, @Photocher:, @Deor:. I have been doing some futher research on this and could see the infobox had not been updated, so fixed it whilst the tabs were open. Thanks.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 18:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Photocher Photocher (talk) 19:11, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Image manipulation

Okay, okay, this is going to be incredibly pedantic. I was just looking at University of Bristol and noticed in the alumni section that the picture of Paul Dirac is a mirror image of that used on the article about Dirac. The two are exactly identical, the picture having been mirror-imaged, which is acknowledged in the picture's name at Commons, but not in Bristol University where it's used. The Dirac article is the correct way round.
Should we be using mirror images like this? It is, ultimately, a manipulation with no justification. The risks are small but real: some people do not have perfect facial symmetry; many people part their hair asymmetrically. Musicians adopt asymmetric postures to play their instruments, and the question of whether someone was using their right hand or left to sign a historic treaty might matter. I feel we should not be reversing the photo because it is no longer an unbiased view of Paul Dirac. In the case of Dirac, he's a fairly symmetrical bloke, neither hand is visible and he's not doing anything except smiling at something to the right (or left!) of the photographer. But if we do it with him, at what point do we declare that Enid Smith's left ear is bigger than her right ear, so we can't flip her picture? Better to avoid the whole flipping problem by not doing it.
I'm raising it here rather than Commons because it's the usage that is the problem. If someone wants to write about the relationship between theoretical physicists and their mirror images, they're most welcome to put the illustrations in Commons. But I don't think we should be showing people the wrong way round unless it's required by the context, and made clear. Elemimele (talk) 16:31, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

MOS:IMAGES#Editing images says, Images should not be changed in ways that materially mislead the viewer. For example, images showing artworks, faces, identifiable places or buildings, or text should not be reversed (although those showing soap bubbles or bacteria might be). Deor (talk) 16:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Elemimele: Forgot to ping. Deor (talk) 17:24, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Can Anyone Help Me Out in Making An Wikipedia Page Of A Person who is already famous and verified on social media and hass many articles about him!

Please help TheInternetContributer (talk) 16:23, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@TheInternetContributer, I have moved your query from the talk page to this one, which is the correct place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. As for your query, which article do you want to make? See Help:Your first article, which is a guide for creating articles. Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:36, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Please note that having verified social media account is irrelevant, and being famous does not necessarily equate with being notable. Theroadislong (talk) 16:53, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Verified on social media doesn't help at all. Read WP:BASIC. What are the best 3-5 sources demanded per that guideline you can think of? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:38, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

See also the reply tou had at Wikipedia:Teahouse#how_to_get_an_page_of_a_person_thats_not_listed_on_wikipedia?. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:40, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

USS Minnesota BB-22 page question

Hello! I was reading up on this new submarine (USS Minnesota (BB-22)) and had a question about the statement in the first sentence that, "USS Minnesota (BB-22), the fifth of six Connecticut-class pre-dreadnought battleships, was the first ship of the United States Navy in honor of the 32nd state.". I think this is inaccurate. There was an earlier ship named Minnesota during the US Civil War that fought at the Battle of Hampton Roads in 1862. More information here: USS Minnesota (1855). Any questions, please let me know. Thanks! 67.45.96.42 (talk) 16:56, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please direct concerns about an article to its associated talk page, in this case Talk:USS Minnesota (BB-22). 331dot (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

According to USS_Minnesota_(1855) that ship was named after a river, not the state. RudolfRed (talk) 17:02, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

GA reviewing difficulty

Hi everyone!

I recently picked up the article Möbius strip for a GA review. As soon as I looked at the article, I felt pretty confident that it did not meet the GA criteria, but I thought that I would try to work through the issues with the nominator (David Eppstein) to see if it could be sufficiently improved. From the beginning, however, David Eppstein responded badly to my suggestions and refused to make many proposed edits. Eventually, I was frustrated and decided that I couldn't do the serious overhaul that the article needed if Eppstein wasn't going to cooperate, so I decided to just fail the article instead. This triggered a string of angry messages, which I responded to as best as I could, but culminated in David Eppstein threatening to report me to an admin.

At the moment, David Eppstein has immediately renominated his article - which is frustrating for me, because I feel like it invalidates my perspective as a reviewer and I truly believe that the article does not meet the GA criteria at the moment. He also posted a notice spreading the news of my "bad behavior" to other editors. Although I have been editing Wikipedia for several years, I have never been involved in such a serious conflict, and I'm not quite sure how to respond and defend myself. Does anyone know where I should go from here?

Mover of molehills (talk) 17:14, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I'd suggest you re-look at your work. You shut down the review over your personal feelings, not the article content. If you can not work well with others who may be critical of your review, then GA is not the place you should be spending your time.Slywriter (talk) 17:25, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mover of molehills: Reading the review, it seems that everything was going fine with some civil back-and-forth on the suggested edits. I don't understand why you think the author was not responding well or why you jumped to failing the review. I suggest you discuss it at Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations where other editors familiar with the GA review process can weigh in. RudolfRed (talk) 17:29, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. Perhaps David Eppstein could have been more diplomatic in questioning your close, but I can see why he was annoyed – the initial close seems to come out of the blue and doesn't properly explain why the article does not reach GA standard. And his conduct in the review before the close seems to have been perfectly polite and his explanations for why he didn't want to make some of the proposed edits appear well-reasoned. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 17:54, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Where you should go from here is do nothing. David Eppstein is within his rights to resubmit a failed GA. I myself have recently done so twice, each time succeeding with the next reviewer. From a look at Eppstein's User page, appears he has brought more than 30 articles to GA, so he may have been irate as your choice to terminate, but that does not matter. You go your way, he goes his, he may or may not succeed at the new attempt. David notMD (talk) 18:03, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, all of this feedback is useful. Personally, I still feel that the review deserved to be determinated because the article does not meet the GA criteria, but I understand why David Eppstein felt I was being too abrupt. I just hope that he does not spread too much criticism of me on the forums. Mover of molehills (talk) 18:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I hope this does not put you off from being a GA reviewer. We need as many as possible. David notMD (talk) 18:10, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

At the moment, David Eppstein has immediately renominated his article - which is frustrating for me, because I feel like it invalidates my perspective as a reviewer and I truly believe that the article does not meet the GA criteria at the moment. I can understand how this could be frustrating, but it's basically how the process works. See the second-last question at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations/FAQ. In my experience, there's a lot of variance in how different reviewers (and nominators) interpret the GA criteria. I think the "understandable to an appropriately broad audience" part of WP:GACR's 1a is very important, and you provided some good feedback in that area, but I do think you're interpreting the criterion more strictly than an average reviewer would. My overall suggestion would be to put this review behind you and move on. Colin M (talk) 18:13, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Your comments led to some genuine improvements in the article that will, I think, materially increase its accessibility to non-experts. That's good! I second the suggestions above: take this as a learning experience, move on, and try another GA review when you feel up to it. If you do, I'd suggest sampling the other GA's in the subject area of the one you choose to get a sense of how the community has interpreted the GA criteria in that area. That might help prevent wires from getting crossed. Cheers, XOR'easter (talk) 19:23, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Not sure how to edit.. 🤨

I’m not really sure how to edit one of the articles I saw because I see some sentences that I want Tao change a bit but it’s not letting me have the option to edit! Can I please have some help with it? Thanks 😊 ❤️🧡💛💚💙💜- TigerTurtle (talk) 19:55, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

TigerTurtle Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Some articles are protected from editing by newer accounts or IP users in order to prevent disruption or vandalism. If you would like to edit an article but cannot, please post on its associated talk page. For example, the talk page for the Joe Biden article is Talk:Joe Biden. There should be a link to the article talk page at the top of the article(in Desktop mode, at least). There you can post what exactly you would like to do. If you mark your comment as a formal edit request(click for instructions) other editors will be more likely to see it. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

You need to provide the article name. David notMD (talk) 21:28, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Question about image

Hello, I am trying to upload a image to this page. But I am being notified that the image has already been removed and isn't letting me try to add it. I did add additional text with a citation. In said citation that image was included and needs to elaborate on the wiki page. How can I get this image posted in the page?

Thank you,

Enchantingplateau (talk) 20:30, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Enchantingplateau, do I understand it correctly that you want to add the picture of the painting from here:[6]? If so, afaik you can't, "Photo courtesy of Wilkes Heritage Museum" reads like the copyright of that photo belongs to that museum, and so we can't use it unless they release it under a WP (well, Commons, really) -acceptable license. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:43, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

What to do if I find someone I suspect keeps failing to adhere to WP:NPOV?

There is a controversial article under discretionary sanctions where someone keeps reverting edits from other users. I suspected a biased view from the user, and my suspicions only grew when I went to the user's page and found this comment they had made: "Unfortunately, I probably can not edit neutrally this subject. This is really a killer. Here is my perception of these events:" (then they proceed with a poem about it basically saying what they think about the subject). Is there anything I can do about this? What is the proper way to follow? Thanks in advance. --AdrianHObradors (talk) 20:32, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Could you provide the article link, so we might be able to look it over? Thanks! Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 20:34, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, it is War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Highly controversial theme. --AdrianHObradors (talk) 20:36, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I see the user you're referring to. Are you familiar with the bold, revert, discuss cycle? If an edit is made by A, and B reverts it, A should now suggest the edit on the Talk Page. If that discussion goes nowhere, and there is no consensus, there are then methods of dispute resolution, such as 3O, RfC, and others. The fact that the user made that comment about neutrality seems not applicable here. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 20:43, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I was not familiar, I will read upon it and apply it, thank you. By the way, unrelated, but I don't get notifications when someone replies to me on talk pages. Have I gotten a setting wrong or is there anything I can change so I do get them? Thank you! AdrianHObradors (talk) 20:46, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

You are pinged when someone tags you like this @AdrianHObradors:. I can't recall if there's a notification setting for replies without a ping (anyone else?), but of course you can add Talk Pages or The Teahouse to your watchlist, and monitor that way. Also, regarding the other editor, if one editor is truly being disruptive and refuses to cooperate with other editors, there are user warnings, and ANI that might be applicable. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 20:53, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Pyrrho the Skipper, you have been very helpful. And yes, that was the way I was doing it, I was just wondering if there was an easier way that I had overlooked.

And that article is a very difficult subject, very prone to strong biased feelings. Either way I hope everything can be resolved on the talk pages, and I will make use of the resources you have provided. Thanks again! AdrianHObradors (talk) 21:04, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Flickr

So I have historically tried adding some photos OF other objects (a box of [[Cheerios]] for example) and the image gets reverted because of alleged "copyright violation." I thought that if you take a picture of something, maybe you need to leave enough background or what have you, but if it isn't for commercial purposes, and I am NOT claiming it is MY work... then I am in the grounds of "fair use"? Please do not direct me to some other links, as it is fairly complicated, and I'd love it if an expert could help actually explain this in laymans terms to me. Also, I created a Flickr account because someone told me that that is a better/easier way to do what I am trying to do (upload images of stuff in my home that is helpful to the encyclopedia when and where appropriate). Thanks! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 20:39, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Th78blue. Image copyright policy is very complex, but I will try to keep it simple. First of all, Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons are stringent about copyright, and many other websites are much more lenient. The graphic design of the box of Cheerios is copyrighted and so use of any photo you take of that box of cereal is restricted by the manufacturer's copyright. When you take a photo of the natural world and utilitarian objects, you own the copyright and can freely license it if you want. But when you take a photo of anything that is a creative work from the last 95 years (in most cases), the creator of that work also has a copyright interest. This applies to most packaged commercial products, sculptures, paintings, posters, logos, book and video covers and the like. Think of any image as being either "free" or "non-free". Free images are those that have been freely licensed or those that are free of copyright, usually because the copyright has expired. Any free image can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, and used freely by anyone. Non-free images must be uploaded to Wikipedia, and are subject to stringent limitations on their usage. Cullen328 (talk) 21:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

For a chart showing which Flikr licenses are acceptable on Wikimedia Commons, please see Wikipedia:Upload/Flickr. Cullen328 (talk) 21:42, 30 March 2022 (UTC)