Wikipedia:Teahouse

A lad insane, 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

Why was 2A02:C7C:9AFE:FE00:8883:EAE6:A711:9253 banned ??

can you please let me know what he did so I can avoid doing the same. 90.214.152.236 (talk) 13:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, you can check his contributions. Most, if not all, of his edits were nonsense and he was blocked from editing certain pages which he vandalized. CanonNi (talk) 13:34, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

I see good that he was banned 90.214.152.236 (talk) 13:42, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Because article talk pages are only to be used for discussion of how to improve an article. See WP:TALK.Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:41, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Also why does the my singing monsters page not have an islands tab?? 90.214.152.236 (talk) 13:40, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

What exactly do you mean by your "singing monsters page"? CanonNi (talk) 13:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

It's the name of the game "my singing monsters" which I really enjoy 🤗🤗 90.214.152.236 (talk) 13:45, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Most likely because the topic doesn't meet WP:NOTABILITY. CanonNi (talk) 13:50, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

My Singing Monsters does meet notability and has a page. If it doesn't have a table of islands, that may just be because no one has added one (which the user could address) or because it is deemed trivial information. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok I will make sure I can help wherever possible 90.214.152.236 (talk) 13:44, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Technically, the range User:2A02:C7C:0:0:0:0:0:0/32 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • robtex.com • Google) (which 2A02:C7C:9AFE:FE00:8883:EAE6:A711:9253 belongs to) is (partially) blocked, not banned. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:08, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

personally I think he should be judging by his contributions page 90.214.152.236 (talk) 15:31, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Wait is he unmanned today?? 2A02:C7C:9AFE:FE00:482C:9ADF:B556:CFC2 (talk) 09:48, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

No, he's still partially blocked from editing certain pages. CanonNi (talk) 11:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

which ones ?? 90.214.152.236 (talk) 18:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Please see the top of the contributions page, it shows which pages they've been blocked from editing. Bongi Mbonambi, Deglet Nour, Denise Welch, Forest Gate Community School, Jefté, John F. Kennedy Jr., List of Super Smash Bros. series characters, Talk:World Book Day and Talk:British Post Office scandal CommissarDoggo^Talk? 18:33, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Umm my ip adress changed to his 😫😫😫😫😫😫😫 2A02:C7C:9AFE:FE00:ADCB:676A:60A8:6A8C (talk) 09:21, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

IPv6 addresses can change. To solve this, you can create an account. CanonNi (talk) 09:24, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

How to follow the active debate on Wikipedia bias?

EDIT: Thanks all I got some helpful resources here and I’m going to continue the conversation in some of the more targeted venues. Thanks again

How can editors follow the active debate over alleged left-leaning bias[1] on wikipedia? What teams are working on it? Are there RFCs or projects helping to research, understand and assess? Specifically, who is addressing left-leaning bias that affects reporting on [2]over political issues like Communism, Far Right and how we associate biography pages with these political affiliations.

This question is more about understanding the process & people involved than finding a conclusion to whether Wikipedia is biased at all.

Some areas I’ve searched

• Talk:Communism
• Talk:Far Right
• Talk:Far Left Politics
• WP:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Mass killings under communist regimes
• WP:Requests for comment/History and geography

Are there projects or committees that are actively addressing this topic? I see lots of discussions on talk pages, but those can be chaotic, hard to follow , and don’t seem to lead to a conclusion or decision.

Tonymetz 💬  21:03, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Your question seems to have as a premise that Wikipedia has a left-wing bias. This is a strange notion.126.255.97.137 (talk) 22:12, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

The allegations may be unfounded but they are certainly not strange. Greater critics than me have raised them and they are worth addressing even if they are wrong. Tonymetz 💬 23:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Here’s a good example discussion with no clear resolution

What I’m asking for is how editors can follow those types of discussions and understand any resolution. And who is responsible for those resolutions? Tonymetz 💬 00:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

@Tonymetz I see lots of discussions on talk pages, but those can be chaotic, hard to follow , and don’t seem to lead to a conclusion or decision. That is, however, our process, so if you're looking for discussion of these issues on Wikipedia, that's where you're likely to find it.

In addition to what other editors have mentioned, your question seems also to be based on the premise that, because it has been claimed by outside commenters that Wikipedia has this or that bias, there must be some central authority that (a) takes that claim seriously, and (b) has the responsibility of formulating a response (either to the allegation, or to the bias).

None of those things are true. The content of any given Wikipedia article is the product and responsibility of the editors who contributed to that article. There is no editorial board overseeing their work, and there is no approval process for "publication" (other than some peer review, if an article under pending changes protection is edited by anonymous or inexperienced editors). In short, There is no cabal, not even the Cabal to Eliminate Political Bias.

Plenty of people discuss Wikipedia's purported systemic biases, often at great length and with furious passion. But it's rarely discussed on Wikipedia, because discussing anything in the context of "all of Wikipedia" is just too broad to be useful. Specific accusations of a particular instance of biased content would most appropriately be discussed on the Talk page of the article in question. Any discussion anywhere else would most likely be directed there. FeRDNYC (talk) 11:20, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I’ll call this “the wikipedia myth” . In reality, less than a fraction of a percent of Wikipedia accounts are editors Among those, only a sliver participate in editing controversial pages. When a minority change is made, it’s usually overridden / reverted. When there’s an edit war, the page is locked.

Again, I’m not here to argue in favor of the bias. My question is about how any controversial topic is managed and resolved. There’s a lot of content on the early phase of conflict resolution , but little info on how resolutions and decisions are made. Tonymetz 💬 18:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

In reality, less than a fraction of a percent of Wikipedia accounts are editors A more accurate statement is, "less than a fraction of a percent of Wikipedia accounts edit pages". But don't take that to mean that the rest of the accounts have some other responsibility BESIDES editing pages. In truth, all accounts are editors (anyone can edit), heck even non-accounts are editors, since you can edit English Wikipedia without being logged in.

Most account-holders don't, or only rarely, avail themselves of that ability, though, it's true. (And it's something many people are always looking for ways to improve.) The rest of them either use their accounts only for reading, or don't use their accounts at all. (There are metric bit-tons of abandoned accounts.)

When changes are reverted, those reverts are nearly always performed by peers (other editors) — just like anyone can edit, anyone can revert someone else's edit. That's not an administrative/managerial action, it's an edit like any other.

When pages are protected, that's an Administrator action which any user can request. If the article's edit history shows a pattern of disruptive editing, it's protected to prevent further disruption. It's most definitely not a decision to lock the content in any particular state. In fact, administrators are well known for protecting The Wrong Version of the article. FeRDNYC (talk) 06:34, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

You made some good points thanks for your thoughts and help on this. Tonymetz 💬 16:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Tonymetz Perhaps some of these article will be of interest to you: Category:Wikipedia content. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:32, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Larry Sanger is deeply biased against Wikipedia and has been glaringly wrong about online encyclopedias for over 20 years. Nothing he says should be taken at face value or given much attention. Cullen328 (talk) 02:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

thanks! this 2nd degree link was helpful Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wikipedia along the lines of what I've been looking for. Tonymetz 💬 16:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes but it's a common allegation and often discussed . I'm asking how to follow the debate. Tonymetz 💬 02:36, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

@Tonymetz: There's Talk:Ideological bias on Wikipedia, but that would just be discussing how to improve the article Ideological bias on Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 03:39, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

That’s a great resource thanks. Do things ever resolve from the talk page? A decision or RFC ? I find the talk pages overwhelming. Tonymetz 💬 04:57, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Tonymetz, there is no index of places to watch; there is no committee working on it, for or against. Wikipedia is a volunteer project where nobody has more authority over content than anyone else. The bias, where they are there, are there 1. because the world itself has bias and Wikipedia is a tertiary source and/or 2. because of the makeup of the editorbase working on an article. It would not be an organised group of editors or an editorial committee in or outside of Wikipedia deliberately working to make it so.

People who come in with the notion that they're going to fix Wikipedia get into trouble very soon because there are no heroes and villains here. Wikipedia is just what happens when you build a wiki encyclopedia on the internet under the United States laws in the early 21st century. That said, to provide you the information you are looking for with the understanding that how you use it is your sole responsibility, you probably want to start by watching the reliable sources noticeboard and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics, government, and law, perhaps WT:USA as well if you're an American. The first two pages will give a list of discussions most of which will get clear resolutions. The discussions are evaluated by editors who are not involved in those discussions, as explained at WP:CLOSE. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:40, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

The idea that there is no authority or status is a bit disingenuous and almost a myth here. There are committees e.g. for WP:ARC , WP:SPI and others. Plus older and higher volume accounts end up having more authority when edits are accepted, and when new articles are published. Some articles are only editable by certain users. Not anyone can write an WP:RFC or edit WP:MOS

What I’m aiming to do is understand how resolutions are made and enforced.

The resources you’ve shared are helpful and thanks. Tonymetz 💬 18:40, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Here's a visualization of the hierarchical structure I'm referring to WP:Administration#Human_and_legal_administration Tonymetz 💬 21:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Ensuring the harmonious implementation of the project's editor consensus-developed protocols governing the creation and development of all types of pages are editors elected or appointed to certain roles: i.e., functionaries like stewards and the Arbitration Committee, alongside bureaucrats, and administrators, all of whom ultimately derive their own authority from the Wikimedia Foundation.

from WP:Administration#Human_and_legal_administration Tonymetz 💬 21:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Tonymetz You can try to search the talk-space for whatever:[3]. WP:SIGNPOST may have content you find interesting. Perhaps the archives at User talk:Jimbo Wales too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for WP:SIGNPOST that’s helpful ill have a look. Tonymetz 💬 18:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

• WP:Wikipedia_Signpost/2023-11-06/Recent_research and
• WP:Administration#Human_and_legal_administration

are two resources that come close to model for what I was looking for. thanks again for your help , you pointed me down the right thread. Tonymetz 💬 21:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

He’s not alone. Visit controversial pages on politics and popular science you will see a vigorous debate over this. Tonymetz 💬 19:01, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

References

Help updating wiki with COI tags

Hello, my wife's wiki page is very out of date, incomplete and inaccurate. I tried to edit it myself and was told that was a COI, which I fully understand now (I've never edited a wiki before). It was suggested that I post here to get help from other editors to update it with COI tags and proper sourcing. I have an updated entry ready to go, any help would be greatly appreciated! Here is her page:

Susan Mosher Nycwriter2 (talk) 15:39, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

We appreciate your making full disclosure of your conflict of interest. Post on the article's talk page, explaining what changes you'd like. DS (talk) 15:51, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I posted my request on the talk page but have gotten no responses. Am I supposed to notify editors here in the Teahouse? Or should I use the Edit Request Editor? Sorry for my confusion. Nycwriter2 (talk) 14:30, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Nycwriter2 One advantage to using the wizard is that your suggestion ends up in a template ({{edit COI}}) which alerts editors who work on these requests: see the template link. Some articles have very few watchers, so no-one may otherwise notice your request. You'll get faster responses if you make things as simple as possible for others by adding one edit request per suggestion and use a format like "Change X to Y, please, based on such-and-such reference". Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Be sure to provide reliable sources which corroborate the information you want to add or change. Please note that sources that host user-generated content without editorial oversight are not considered reliable. In particular, neither IMDB nor BroadwayWorld are considered reliable; see WP:RSP for a list of commonly discussed sources. CodeTalker (talk) 16:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

@Nycwriter2: You may also wish to use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

How do you make an edit request?

I wanted tó Make an edit request on a extra protected page. Blackmamba31248 (talk) 15:41, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Use the article's talk page. Identify the sentence that you want changed. Specify what you want it changed to. DS (talk) 15:51, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I did dó that, but then it was removed almost immedanyly, and í got a warning from an andiminastrptar on my talk page that sáid “ The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.

Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to your being blocked from editing.” Blackmamba31248 (talk) 16:15, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

@Blackmamba31248 That was a general warning because you had contributed to a contentious topic, specifically the one discussed at WP:PIA. It didn't imply you had done anything wrong and the editor who added is experienced but not an administrator. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:43, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Blackmamba31248, and welcome to the Teahouse. As Mike Turnbull says, Selfstudier (who is a very experienced editor, but not an admin, by the way) put that message on your talk page, but it was not a warning directed at you.

Your edit at Talk:Mandatory Palestine was not very useful, because you neither specified precisely what change you were recommending to the article, nor gave a source for your claim; but I don't understand why Selfstudier removed your post there. ColinFine (talk) 16:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Because it was not an edit request and non EC editors are not permitted to do anything other than file edit requests, per WP:ARBECR. Selfstudier (talk) 16:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

See WP:EDITREQ for more details. CodeTalker (talk) 16:13, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

It is not necessary to use the formal template but it should be clear that it is an edit request (change X to Y) and sourced as necessary. Selfstudier (talk) 16:58, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I mistundertood Blackmamba31248 (talk) 23:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Peter the Great and the Gregorian/Julian calendar

I noticed that in Peter the Great's Wikipedia page is incorrectly stated that he introduced the Gregorian calendar in Russia. According to my history of Russia book (written in Dutch) by J.W. Bezemer, he did introduce the Julian calendar. I also asked ChatGPT about the matter, which told me the Gregorian calendar was only introduced in Russia in 1918. Mioche28 (talk) 18:22, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Mioche28. The best place to discuss this is Talk:Peter the Great, and there are some fairly recent comments about this issue on that page. Cullen328 (talk) 18:33, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

ChatGPT is unreliable. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:36, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Mioche28. However, in this case ChatGPT is right. See Old Style and New Style dates. Be bold and fix the error, IMO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cclowe (talk • contribs) 20:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Advice about a editor

after many years I need advice about the editing of user: Zacwill, who has decided that a quote referenced by many is not a quote and should be removed for the third time. The article in question Sir Charles Trevelyan, 1st Baronet. I have removed a quote from houses of parliament via the independent newspaper which the editor described as a blog and have produced 3 extra references and a wikilink but the quote was once again removed with the summary of ‎(see previous edit summary). Advice on the suitability of the world renowned quote, the references and further steps to take. Once I know how to take this matter further I will obviously notify the editor. With thanks. Edmund Patrick – confer 19:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Edmund Patrick, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The very first step in any content dispute (which is what you have) is to discuss the matter on the article's talk page, according to WP:BRD - as far as I can see that has not happened yet.

If the various editors involved are unable to come to a consensus, dispute resolution tells you what further steps to take.

If the issue is about the reliability of a source, WP:RSN is where to get that resolved. ColinFine (talk) 19:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

thanks, a constructive RfC now up and running. Edmund Patrick – confer 12:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Requesting information regarding copyrights status of image

Hello, this is my first post/comment/question on Tea House.

Well, I have a question, I have been working to develop an article, and recently it was proposed on March 21, 2024, for deletion: Baris Ozgur, and now I have received a notification that the image that I have used in the article (I had uploaded it at Wiki Commons) is violating copyrights as the same picture is being used by a person on LinkedIn (I assume the subject of the article is on LinkedIn).

However, the subject of the matter is that I have not taken this photo from LinkedIn but from another source, i.e., https://filmfreeway.com/BARISOZGUR. Now what is the way forward. Can I use this? as I thought this photo was publicly available in a public database.

If not, what is the way forward? Do I need to get permission from the subject or anybody else? Thank you. Sibtehassanbutt (talk) 19:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

The site seems quite specific that it isn't a free resource based on their about page, which says that creators retain 100% of the rights to the things they upload. You would have to get permission from the subject to use their image or ask them very nicely to upload one to Wikipedia themselves. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 19:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I am also following the instructions laid out here WP: UPI. I hope I am going in the right direction. Sibtehassanbutt (talk) 19:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Sibtehassanbutt, to be perfectly clear, you cannot upload any image to Wikimedia Commons unless you have written evidence that the image is freely licensed, or convincing evidence that the image is in the public domain, or you are the photographer and are willing to freely license the image in a legally acceptable way. Otherwise, do not upload any image because you are at risk of violating copyright law. Cullen328 (talk) 10:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

COMMENT: Alright, thanks for your guidance. I have a few questions here:

1. I want to use my own picture for my user page, do I need to give Wikimedia Commons written permission?
2. Wikimedia Commons is blocked in certain areas of the world (see: Censorship of Wikipedia) by the local authorities, and on top of that, Wikipedia doesn't allow logging in through VPNs. What is the recommended course of action in such a situation? Sibtehassanbutt (talk) 12:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Sibtehassanbutt, if you upload a selfie to Wikimedia Commons, you are the copyright holder and you will need to freely license the image in writing. This happens during the upload process. If someone else took the photo, then it would be best for that person to upload the photo. As for dealing with restrictions on VPNs, please read Wikipedia:Open proxies. Cullen328 (talk) 19:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

thank you. Sibtehassanbutt (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Adding content to a reference template

Q: How do I add a citation to a reference list that has been created using the reflist template? Chris Lowe (talk) 21:03, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Chris Lowe, and welcome to the Teahouse. You should find the answer in Referencing for Beginners. You add the citation where it applies in the text, and as long as you've put it inside <ref> ... </ref> , the software will automatically put it in the reflist. (I'm not familiar with editing with the Visual Editor, but I believe it wraps the citation appropriately). ColinFine (talk) 21:32, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Updating a Disambiguation page

Springfield Park (Jacksonville) was previously named Confederate Park and is still listed as such on the disambiguation page for Confederate Park. I am unsure what the best way is to update the disambiguation page to reflect the park and page's new name. I've looked at MOS:DAB, but I'm still unsure of the best practice in this particular scenario. – OdinintheNorth (talk) 00:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

As many people will still know it by its old name, it is probably prudent to simply leave the leave the entry on the disambig page intact . I have changed the link to point at the new title.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   00:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@OdinintheNorth: You could update the dab page so the Jacksonville park entry is similar to the first line on the dab page, such as:

• Confederate Park, a public park in Jacksonville, Florida, now known as Springfield Park

GoingBatty (talk) 03:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Editor reverting and making threats

How do I avoid having an editor continuing to revert my updates on a page, then threaten to have my account blocked simply because he does not agree with the information being presented? The information he continues to delete has been on this page for at least a decade. The theme song has it's own Wikipedia page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Fall_Guy&action=history Snap-OnToolGuy (talk) 02:25, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Snap-OnToolGuy. It seems that you have been adding original research to the article, and when Smuckola warned you on your user page, you deleted the warning. Could you clarify what's going on? CanonNi (talk) 02:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I added information that was previously in the article. He keeps reverting it and threatened to have me blocked. He refused to be civil about it, and appears to be nothing more than a bully and refuses to help a newcomer understand the policies. Look through his contributions, he has a serious attitude and apparently doesn't know how to properly communicate with people. Snap-OnToolGuy (talk) 02:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

"The information you added wasn't previously in the article and is unsourced. Could you provide a revision ID to prove that the information was previously in the article? Further more, he did warn you properly on your user page by saying "I specifically refrained from adding this warning to your talk page on your first violation because I saw your edit history with many WP:RSes, which indicates that you absolutely know better. This edit of yours is WP:OR which is a cardinal violation of what an encyclopedia is, so users can be blocked for that. Your blatant disregard of my link to the WP:OR policy in both of my edit summaries (today and long ago with the original removal), and your obvious misuse of WP:OWN, are triply wrong." CanonNi (talk) 02:43, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

From November, 2023.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Fall_Guy&diff=prev&oldid=1185586572 Snap-OnToolGuy (talk) 02:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

The revision you provided was also unsourced and its information was later removed. CanonNi (talk) 02:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Says it right here, https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2023/11/the-fall-guy-first-look-ryan-gosling-emily-blunt; "The Fall Guy TV series was the brainchild of Battlestar Galactica and Magnum, P.I. creator Glen Larson, and ran for five seasons on CBS from 1981-86. Majors starred as Colt Seavers and Heather Thomas was Jody Banks, a stuntwoman who joins him in tracking down escaped criminals. The pair frequently use their stunt skills to secure their targets. It had one of the more memorable theme songs in TV history, sung by Majors himself, in which he crooned about being “the unknown stuntman, who made Eastwood look so fine.” (Blake Shelton performs a modernized cover version for the film." Snap-OnToolGuy (talk) 02:59, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Why haven't you included the source then? CanonNi (talk) 03:00, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

It's included right here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unknown_Stuntman Snap-OnToolGuy (talk) 03:04, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

That's a different article. Could you include the source on the article you're trying to add information to? WP:PROVEIT has made it very clear. CanonNi (talk) 03:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I did, and what if it gets reverted again?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Fall_Guy&diff=prev&oldid=1215435547 Snap-OnToolGuy (talk) 03:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

It most likely won't. If it does, you can see WP:DISPUTE and try to resolve the issue. CanonNi (talk) 03:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. So another question, why is this allowed but my mine additions wasn't? There are no references to any of this info.

"Home media[edit source]

On June 5, 2007, 20th Century Fox released the first season of The Fall Guy on DVD in Region 1. As with a number of other TV shows of the era released on DVD, the six-disc set contains extensive music substitutions due to copyright reasons (as well as completely editing out the sequences with actor/singer Paul Williams, in the pilot). Due to poor sales, whether the remaining seasons will be released is unknown.[citation needed]

Season one was released on DVD in Region 2 in Germany and the UK. Season two has also been released in Region 2, in Germany on November 28, 2008, and in the UK on February 16, 2009." Snap-OnToolGuy (talk) 03:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

It has a {{citation needed}} tag, and you can help by adding a reliable source. CanonNi (talk) 03:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

So could I have used the "citation needed" tag on the other paragraph that stated, "In season one, the montage of scenes was borrowed from the films Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry, The Stunt Man, Silver Streak, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Hot Rock, Our Man Flint, The Poseidon Adventure, Speedway, and Sky Riders. Exclusively for the season-one opening narration, Singin' in the Rain, The Blue Max, Race with the Devil, and Moving Violation were used. Also included is archival footage from stunt shows made in the 1930s." Snap-OnToolGuy (talk) 03:42, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Snap-OnToolGuy. WP:Verifiability clearly says that Any material lacking an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source, so anybody is entitled to remove unsourced material, and it should not be readded without a source (The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material).

However, there is a lot of unsourced material in Wikipedia, especially in older articles, and a lot of editors are loth to go removing it in quantity. Ideally, when we find unsourced material, we would look for sources and cite them if we can find them, and otherwise remove the material; but we are all volunteers who spend our time how we wish, and most of us do not do that often. However, we are always entitled to remove it.

A half-way house, which is not ideal, but is better than nothing, is to tag it with {{citation needed}}: again, ideally that would not stay there for long before somebody attended to it, but in practice it often does stay there for a very long time. ColinFine (talk) 09:15, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the info, and providing it in a professional and civil manner. This same editor has now deleted a whole article and changed the main article five times since I asked that question. The "citation needed" tag was erased, and there are still no references on that particular paragraph. Definitely has a "do as I say do, and not as I do" attitude. Snap-OnToolGuy (talk) 17:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

On Creating a draft

I've been working today on a draft for a youtuber known as blackpenredpen link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Blackpenredpen and I'm looking for reliable sources. Also if an experienced editor were able to take a look at the article and give me feedback I'd very much appreciated it.

Thanks Geordie.Obrien (talk) 02:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Geordie.Obrien. You can see Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/1 for a beginner's guide on referencing with the visual editor. CanonNi (talk) 02:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Geordie.Obrien, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't want to sound unwelcoming, but to be honest - you're the one who wants to write this article, so it is your job to find the sources, and if you can't, to give up on the article. (That's why finding the sources should be absolutely the first task in creating a new article). You query might stimulate somebody here to help you, but unless it is an interest of theirs, why should they, if you can't find them? That's not a service that Teahouse hosts normally provide. --ColinFine (talk) 09:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Don't worry I fully understand, I'm quite new here so I'm still learning how everything works, thanks for the patience. Geordie.Obrien (talk) 23:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Please help me with Moneyview NPOV

The Moneyview article has been flagged as WP:SOAP and WP:NPOV, even though I have tried to use as many independent sources, and put the content in as unbiased a manner as possible. Could someone else also help edit the article to be more in line with Wikipedia's content policies? Additionally, if someone could point out what I'm doing wrong, that'll help me with other articles in the future as well. Shashwat986 → talk 03:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Shashwal986. The article tells us basically what Moneyview wants the world to know. 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) 09:21, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Shashwat986. Fintech is bullshit business jargon. I know that it isn't technology for cutting the fins off of sharks and has something to do with shuffling money around to make money but it is bad writing in an encyclopedia. Explain to readers what the heck it actually is. currently operates in the space of is more bullshit business jargon for "does business as" or something like that. Moneyview onboarded is another example of bullshit business jargon. What normal human being would actually use "onboarded" in a normal sentence? I hope that it does not resemble waterboarding. The final sentence The objective of this round of funding is to scale the core credit business, and also expand Moneyview's product portfolio with additional services such as digital bank accounts, insurance, and wealth management solutions sounds like something that belongs on the company's website or social media pages, not in a neutrally written encyclopedia article about the company. As for these five words scale the core credit business, that's just more bullshit business jargon. Try writing and editing like a real human being instead of a paid drone. Cullen328 (talk) 10:36, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Shashwat986 You have had an account for more than 10 years, but it appears that this is your first effort at creating an article. If not PAID or COI, then state that on your Talk page, with an explanation as to how you became aware of Moneyview and decided to create this article, and an editor can remove that tag. As to the other tags, the majority of the article as it now exists describes routine financial history and a table of rounds of funding. None of that makes the company notable. I recommend deleting all that, and see what you have left. I agree with Cullen328 about the jargon-y phrasing. Last but very important, it appears that you copied content from Draft:Moneyview, which was created in November 2023, without acknowledgement!!! Explain. David notMD (talk) 11:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, you guys. I think that gives me a lot more perspective. I'll definitely address the points raised above in the article and/or the talk page, but I'll give a brief below:

• I'm not paid to write this article. I was going through other fintech orgs in India, and noticed a distinct lack of articles on digital lending apps. Since I'm a little more familiar with Moneyview, I planned to start here, and go into other popular digital lending apps like KreditBee, EarlySalary, CapitalFloat and others after finishing this article.
• I've been trying to follow the language of other Indian companies like Cred (company) to give me a sense of how to write, but I see that the language is incorrect for an encyclopedia, and I'll take that into account. I also completely missed "scale the core credit business" and other bullshit business jargon, and I'll remove all such stuff.
• I did take content from Draft:Moneyview, but I assumed that would be okay, since it's the same article. The references on that page were a lot less neutral, so I didn't take all the unsourced/biased content available in that draft. I should definitely have mentioned that I'm using the Draft's content, on their talk page, and my not doing that is definitely not okay.

I've really not created an article on WP since 2015, so there's definitely quite a lot for me to improve on. Shashwat986 → talk 17:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

First Article

Hi, Im contributing my first article, i used the sandbox to practice and found a very useful template to add to my artcle when i searched for "football Profile"

Im wrtiing an article about a sports person and when i looked in templates there was a template i added that had fields in it such as Name, Age, Weight, Height, Position, Current Club, Clubs, Appearances, Goals and Assists. But now ive come to write my article i cant find that same template when i search for it...any suggestions? ScouseMouse213 (talk) 03:41, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Are you looking for Template:Infobox football biography? Shashwat986 → talk 03:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes i was!!!!!! Thank you so much ScouseMouse213 (talk) 04:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm unclear on the editor bar for scientific articles with numerous peer-reviewed sources cited.

Hello...my original draft was declined by an editor. It appears the key points to improve were: formal tone, including independent sources (which I had, all my sources are peer-reviewed for claims and statements), and removal of 'peacocking' terms. I've scrubbed and re-worked the article, but I'm not sure if it clears the bar for the three points above. Can someone please let me know if this article now still falls foul of the guidelines? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Differential_Hall_Effect_Metrology_(DHEM) Semiconengineering (talk) 04:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Semiconengineering: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you have resubmitted your draft, so now the yellow box at the top of your draft states "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order." Eventually, someone will review the draft and let you know if the draft is now ready to become an article. You may continue improving the draft while you are waiting, or use your skills to improve other articles. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I guess what I'm trying to convey is that is the 'bar' or 'standard' written down someplace for me to compare and ensure, or is it 'tribal' knowledge? Semiconengineering (talk) 04:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Several relevant standards are WP:TONE, WP:RS, and WP:PEACOCK. I don't know much of anything about this article's topic so I can't comment on the sourcing specifically, but a common mistake among WP editors is thinking that being a peer-reviewed journal article is the qualification for being a reliable source. DMacks (talk) 06:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

There's also the question of independent sources: in order to meet the bar of notability, any subject must have been written about by people unconnected with the subject. When the subject is an academic theory or approach, this means that people unconnected with those who originated or publicised the subject need to have written about it. (I haven't looked at the particular article to see how far that is the case; but it is an additional criterian that DMacks did not mention). ColinFine (talk) 09:25, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

The draft as written presumes a readership with degrees in electical engineering. Large wads of text - up to entire paragraphs - are without references. As a small example " Development of next-generation semiconductor technologies comes with escalated costs due to ever increasing technical challenges and extended development cycles needed to meet such challenges." - is that your thinking or a referenced source? David notMD (talk) 11:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Good point. This is common knowledge within industry that certainly needs to be supported by an independent peer-reviewed reference. The articles on other measurement techniques e.g.: SIMS (Secondary ion mass spectrometry) and Scanning probe microscopy, contain many such industry knowledge statements - I guess when those were published the bar was different. I have made the updates to the draft. Semiconengineering (talk) 05:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate all your input in making the article better. Semiconengineering (talk) 05:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I believe the article clears the notability bar, references are from a wide variety of authors. The references are from high-quality peer-reviewed sources so it would also clear the reliable scholarship bar. Thanks again for the pointers and suggestions. Thanks for making this article better. Semiconengineering (talk) 03:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Changing a bunch of links at once following a page move

The page TACL was recently moved to TACL (programming language) pursuant to a move discussion, with TACL itself being converted into a dab. Pretty much all of the links in mainspace that point to TACL should now be changed to look like [[TACL (programming language)|<previous display text>]]. There aren't that many pages which contain such a link, so it could feasibly be done manually, but would be quite tedious; is there some sort of tool I can use to quickly make all the changes at once? Ideally such a tool would allow me to...

1. change the link such that the display text remains the same (rather than changing it to "TACL (programming language)"), even if the link previously had no explicit display text—so if it looks like [[TACL]]) currently, it should be changed to [[TACL (programming language)|TACL]].
2. scope the changes to mainspace only (or at least let me manually select/deselect specific pages for inclusion).

Brusquedandelion (talk) 05:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Ah, it appears the page mover already did this, and their edit notice indicates they did so using DisamAssist. Leaving this here for posterity; don't require further replies (unless someone believes they have an alternate suggestion that's better than the aforementioned utility). Brusquedandelion (talk) 05:31, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Policy on article titles like "X and Y"

I remember reading a Wikipedia policy or perhaps an essay (it was definitely in WP: space) that contained the suggestion to limit article titles like "X and Y", as they often are signs of WP:NPOV issues or a WP:POVFORK. I am having trouble finding the policy/essay I am thinking of—can anyone point me in the right direction? I think one of the examples it gave was Islam and terrorism vs Islamic terrorism (with the latter being the preferred title for the article and the former as a redirect). Brusquedandelion (talk) 05:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Brusquedandelion. I believe you're looking for WP:AND. CanonNi (talk) 05:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Musical artist notability

Hi everyone. I discovered that an artist I listen to had a single chart for a week on Billboard under Independent Albums. Would this technically satisfy Note #2 of music-related notability listed here? Before I dig for any additional good sources, I want to make sure I'm not wasting my time. Thanks! 30Four (talk) 06:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@30Four: I'd say go for it, but start in draft space. Charting on Billboard crosses a threshold of notability. Such an artist should also have some independent reliable source coverage as well. An unknown artist with no coverage typically wouldn't get on the chart. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Unsure if I have a COI

Hello! I am currently studying librarianship at uni and am volunteering at my local public library system to get experience. I am not employed by the library, it is just volunteering. I noticed that the library does not have a Wikipedia article despite us being on of the biggest in the state, and I am fairly certain there is enough info to write one. However, I am not sure if my volunteering (especially as it's for experience in an area I hope to eventually work in?) creates a conflict of interest. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 08:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, volunteer work is considered paid editing, especially if you intend to use that experience to obtain a paying job later by putting it on your resume. Compensation does not need to be money or anything tangible. 331dot (talk) 08:31, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Notcharizard You have, by my count, created 12 mainspace articles, so you are quite experienced. There is no shame to being a paid editor: the T&C just insist that you declare this and use the WP:AfC process for writing drafts related to your employer. Good luck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

How should Wikipedia treat factoids?

There is a discussion at Talk:1913 European Bandy Championships about a merge and the question has come up about wether the said bandy tournament ever happened. It is mentioned in some sources on sports history and there was actually a centennary celebration arranged in 2014 by the Federation of International Bandy, but apparently no mention of the tournament has been found in any sources from the time when it is supposed to have taken place. How should information like this be treated in Wikipedia? Should it just be erased or should the factoid be described as being a factoid with mentioning of what we actually may know about the historicity of the event?  ; As we see the human society is liquid, we are all just running with the flow (talk) 08:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, As we see etc, and welcome to the Teahouse. As always, it is a matter of following the reliable sources. If several reliable sources talk about it, then it probably meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability even if some of those sources say it never happened!

We do have articles on hoaxes that meet the criteria: I see no prima facie reason why we should have an article on something that may or may not have happened. It should summarise what the sources say, both those that say it did and those that say it didn't.

What would not be acceptable is to say "I've looked for contemporary sources, and there don't seem to be any": that would be original research. But a reliable published source saying that would be acceptable. ColinFine (talk) 10:43, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Kingdom of Aksum oage

The fabrications on this page are appalling. The info is wrong such as an annexation and that Ge’ez was promoted in the 4th century which is also false. It also states that Greek was the official language prior which is false. The sources are poor and therefore the page is cobbled. An agenda driven page should not be allowed. A deliberate attempt to skew someone’s history should not be allowed Habesha212 (talk) 08:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Issues with a particular article should be discussed on its associated talk page, in this case, Talk:Kingdom of Aksum. Articles should be summarizing what independent reliable sources say about the topic. If those sources are in error, you should detail the specific errors on the talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Already discussed it on the talk page and the person is belligerent using he US printing office is not a source! Therefore what is the next step. Surely wikipedia should not be enabling distortions of history. Habesha212 (talk) 09:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the article talk page is much more likely to have subject experts than the Teahouse—I recommend continuing to attempt to establish consensus there, keeping in mind Wikipedia's content policies. Remsense诉 09:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

If sources are distorting history, you need to speak to them, not us. If you have sources to support your claims, please offer them on the talk page, so a consensus can be arrived as to if and how to incorporate them into the article. We can't just take your word here, nor can we just accept your claims. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I have already done so hence my response above. Clearly consensus can not arrive with a belligerent individual who's intent is to dislocate the history. Habesha212 (talk) 10:36, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Habesha212. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and disagreements (which very often occur) should be resolved cooperatively as far as possible: beware of making it a BATTLEGROUND.

If you are unable to reach consensus on the talk page, then dispute resolution will tell you further steps to take. But remember that assume good faith is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia editing, even if you believe another person is completely wrong. ColinFine (talk) 10:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

a number of people have called them up and they are aggressive Habesha212 (talk) 10:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Check Readiness of Draft

Hi, Can an editor review this draft and let me know what more would be needed to be eligible for publishing the page? Link: Draft:Mae Riley Lnvraman (talk) 09:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Lnvraman Hello. To get a review, click the "Submit your draft for review!" button in the box at the top of your draft. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Lnvraman there are so many things wrong with your draft that it is difficult to know where to start! By policy, all biographies of living people must use inline citations for all facts likely to be challenged. Your draft is missing many such citations and the ones it does have are based on unreliable sources like IMDb and interviews. You need to use sources that meet these criteria to demonstrate she is wikinotable, which interviews don't do. And cut the ridiculous number of external links to a minimum. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:56, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for kind reply. This helps. Lnvraman (talk) 15:36, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Slow Visual Editor

Is it just me or is the Visual Editor extremely slow when handling large pages? I was trying to add a link to Geneva in the Switzerland article, and the page was unresponsive for 10 seconds after I clicked edit, and when I clicked link on Geneva the page just stopped responding once and for all. Not the only time this happened Pksois23 (talk) 09:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok I managed to figure out the Switzerland article but it was still very slow Pksois23 (talk) 09:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Pksois23 This usually happen only if your network

suddenly becomes slower during when you opened the editor. So the only solution for such problem, is to exit the editor or refresh the page, then check your network before you proceed again else you will keep getting forever load.

Hope this helps? Feel free to ask if you got more concern.
Thisasia  (Talk) 11:19, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I tried again going into Soviet Union and adding a link (not saving the edit) and it still just loaded forever. I checked my network on speedtest and its at 270 Mbps download/61 Mbps upload which I think is fast enough to avoid any issue? Pksois23 (talk) 12:29, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Pksois23 Neither of those articles is slower than usual for me and I've got a much slower speedtest. It is a disadvantage of the VE that it seems to be slow even if you click to edit just a section of the article. In the source editor, things always seem much faster and by using Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets and checking the "Add an edit link for the lead section of a page" box you can even edit just the lead. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Got it thank you I guess I will stick with the source editor when I can Pksois23 (talk) 23:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Pksois23 sorry for the late reply, since your network isn't the problem then I suggest maybe you should use a different browser, or perhaps clearing your browser data and log in again. Because pretty sure that this is definitely not a Wikipedia site issue.
Thisasia  (Talk) 18:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

How to revive a Wikiproject?

I want to revive a Wikiproject, Wikiproject Assyria, but I don't know how. Any help and thoughts would be greatly appreciated! Surayeproject3 (talk) 15:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Surayeproject3, welcome to the Teahouse. There is guidance here. 57.140.16.57 (talk) 15:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Email as source

Hello, I am just wondering, if I emailed a person about personal info like their birthday, where they went to school, etc. and they responded could I use that as a source? Antny08 (talk) 15:57, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

No. Sources must be published and available to anyone to check. See WP:RS. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Public Parbatia Thakurbari post

Dear Editorial Team,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to submit an application for the creation of a Wikipedia page dedicated to "Parbatia Thakurbari," an important cultural and historical site.

"Parbatia Thakurbari" holds significant cultural and historical value in our region, and its documentation on Wikipedia would serve as a valuable resource for individuals interested in learning about its heritage, architecture, and contributions to the community.

Here are some key points that I believe should be included in the Wikipedia page:

1. Introduction: A brief overview of Parbatia Thakurbari, highlighting its historical significance and cultural relevance.

2. History: Detailed information about the history of Parbatia Thakurbari, including its founding, notable events, and any significant figures associated with it.

3. Architecture: Description of the architectural features of Parbatia Thakurbari, including its design elements, construction materials, and any unique characteristics.

4. Cultural Significance: Exploration of the cultural significance of Parbatia Thakurbari within the local community and its broader impact on the region's cultural landscape.

5. Current Status: Updates on the current status of Parbatia Thakurbari, including any restoration efforts, ongoing activities, or cultural events hosted at the site.

6. References: Citations to reliable sources, including books, articles, and official websites, to ensure the accuracy and verifiability of the information presented on the Wikipedia page.

I am willing to collaborate with other editors and contribute to the development of this page, providing additional information and supporting evidence as needed.

Thank you for considering my application. I believe that creating a Wikipedia page for Parbatia Thakurbari will not only enrich the platform's content but also contribute to the preservation and promotion of our cultural heritage.

Best regards, Uttam Kr. Mahato (Uttam Kumar) Uttam Kr. Mahato (Uttam Kumar) (talk) 16:35, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Please see WP:REQUEST. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Uttam Kumar, and welcome to the Teahouse. Is this different from Jorasanko Thakur Bari? Perhaps you could add to that article. ColinFine (talk) 17:24, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Uttam Kr. Mahato (Uttam Kumar): You have already written Draft:Parbatia Thakurbari and submitted it for review by the Articles for Creation team. The review is pending; please be patient and wait for the comments of a reviewer. Deor (talk) 00:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Relying too much on one source?

Hi, I'm currently trying to update the subsection for Data structure on SEG-Y, and since its a standard, my main source is the document for the standard. Is it ok if that is my only citation for the section? Also, the diagram in that subsection needs to be updated, there's a similar (updated) diagram in the source, can I use that, or should I make my own? Thanks! Variouspotatoes (talk) 16:41, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Variouspotatoes, and welcome to the Teahouse. I think that for internal details like that the primary source would be acceptable. However, I think there is a question of proportion: how much detail should an encyclopaedia article go into about this? I think it should give only an overview of the structure, and refer the reader to the source for more detail. ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Got it, thanks! In my eyes, the current "Data Structure" section reads more like history, so I was planning to move most of it to the History section. Then I was going to add an overview of the standard in the "Data Structure" section. Does that plan make sense? Thanks! Variouspotatoes (talk) 17:48, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Correct redirect category template to use for a slight rewording of a disambiguated title

Suppose there is a page with the title X (Y) because X is an ambiguous term and (Y) is a disambiguating noun. Suppose I create redirects from Y-adj X (where Y-adj is the adjectival form of Y, if needed), X Y, or X (function word) Y to X (Y). What redirect category template should I use for this in conjunction with {{Redirect category shell}}? The closest I can think of that definitely seems appropriate is {{R from modification}}, but I'm not sure if perhaps another category is more appropriate. {{R from alternative punctuation}} seems like it might also be appropriate but I'm not sure if the parentheses used for disambiguated titles are consider punctuation for the purposes of this category? Any advice would be appreciated.

More concrete examples:

1. Bob painter → Bob (painter)
2. Painter Bob → Bob (painter)
3. Bob the painter → Bob (painter)

What might be the correct category in each of these cases? Brusquedandelion (talk) 17:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

You might need Template:R from ambiguous sort name for some of these, or Template:R from name with title. In general I think you're stuck with Template:R from modification, since everything else is more specific. -- asilvering (talk) 06:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

ReCaptcha keeps refreshing

I’m not sure if its a mistake on my part, im trying to publish my changes to Plymouth, Wisconsin but after i filled in the recaptcha and press publish, the recaptcha refreshes so i have to fill in the box again this keeps on repeating for me so I cant actually publish it DouglasGraham01010 (talk) 17:36, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello @DouglasGraham01010 you may have to check if you are filling the recaptcha properly as the recaptcha characters sometimes won't be clear enough to understand immediately. Note that in as much as you fill in an inaccurate recaptcha codd, the page will surely refresh and your changes won't publish. But i suppose the recaptcha will give you an error message?
Thisasia  (Talk) 17:56, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help, turns out the autocapitalisation of my first letter prevented me from publishing. Quite a wee bit of a rookie error, DouglasGraham01010 (talk) 01:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

hello there

I'm new to wikipedia and I need some help I'm looking to add my name and my picture to wikipedia I really need your help I Alsop have articles that have been published that I will like t add Geraldoquinones (talk) 18:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello Geraldoquinones, and welcome to Wikipedia. It sounds like you might be trying to write an article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If you'd like to start working on content that isn't about yourself, then check out Help:Getting Started ---- D'n'B-t -- 19:21, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Help

I installed this: {{subst:iusc|User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js}} on my common.js but it apparently doesn't work. Can anyone help? Thank you very much 14 novembre (talk) 19:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@14 novembre: You're supposed to be pasting the code into your common.js as it appears when viewing User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft, as it deliberately contains markup to prevent substitution from working on the documentation page. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt thanks for your answer, but isn't that what I did? Did I make a mistake? Thank you so much 14 novembre (talk) 19:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Suggestion: You could try using Enterprisey's script installer. Once you have it enabled, you can go back to the script's page and click Install. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Thanks for your answer. I did so, but it still doesn't work. Could you kindly check User:14 novembre/common.js to see what's wrong? Kind regards. 14 novembre (talk) 22:02, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@14 novembre Maybe try deleting lines 2 and 3 of your common.js NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 23:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

+1 I just installed it and I can see the new link right underneath "Move". @14 novembre: What skin are you using? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Problem with a script

I have most certainly installed it, but it doesn't work. Any suggestions? Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 22:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Adding myself to a wiki edu class

I was in a wiki edu class last fall. I am in another this semester, so I cannot figure out how to add myself to the new class using my already established wiki ID WikiTikiTavi63 (talk) 23:02, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@WikiTikiTavi63 If you are currently enrolled in a WikiEdu class and require assistance, it's advisable to reach out to your instructor for guidance. If you're unable to contact them or need further assistance with WikiEdu you can try reaching out to the people involved in Wiki Education Foundation for assistance by clicking on the provided link. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Education_Foundation#People_involved Leoneix _(talk) 07:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Tracking visits to articles?

Hi, is there any way to track visits to a particular article--including those I have edited (like The NEXT Museum - Wikipedia) and those I have not edited? Thank you LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 23:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@LoveElectronicLiterature: I'm not sure what you mean by "track", but if you want to see the number of times a page has been visited over a period of time, go to its history page and click the link "Pageviews" near the top of the page. Deor (talk) 23:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

You can also use things such as XTools and the Traffic Report. I don't know whether most people have access to it or whether it's something I enabled in the preferences, but if you go onto a page and click the "Page" dropdown at the top right of the page then you can go to "Analysis" to see the various tools, including the two I suggested. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 00:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, thank you!!! @CommissarDoggo@Deor LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 01:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

COI templates and edits

Hello, I am new here, but plan to propose edits to the Talk page of an article to which I have a COI. Can you please confirm that the allowances for directly correcting minor hard fact errors like an incorrect date, spelling or grammar mistakes, or updating the organization’s existing link is still acceptable? (I would include an edit summary to any such changes.) Thank you! Oshentree (talk) 23:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Oshentree Since you have a COI, any edits that you want to make to that page have to be done via an edit request, supported by a reliable source. You can use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard for this. Let us know if you have any other questions ‍ Relativity 23:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response Relativity. I was referencing the advice given here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FAQ/Article_subjects that says updating my organization's existing url, or making minor factual edits to spelling or grammar is allowed, despite COI. Is it incorrect then? Thanks again for your time! Oshentree (talk) 00:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Oshentree The FAQ page is correct: there are some things that you can change directly rather than by edit request via the Talk Page. However, note that (at the top) it says you still need to disclose your COI. You can do this in the edit summary or on your own userpage. One of Wikipedia's core principles is to assume good faith but we want editors to be open about any COI. The guidance at WP:COI points out that having a COI is a description of a situation, not a judgment about that person's opinions, integrity, or good faith. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Yes I posted COI disclosure on my userpage shortly after creating an account and prior to the teahouse query. I fully intend to follow all guidelines and protocols to become a trustworthy, successful contributor. I appreciate the clarification and advice regarding the FAQ as I continue to read through guidance documentation. Regards, Oshentree (talk) 19:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

DOB issue - Don Spencer OAM

Hello - there is an ongoing issue with accuracy on my listing and I have been told to write here in the hope you can solve it. My dob has been wrong for a long time and I now, someone on the Wiki team has changed it so it shows I am born between 1936-1937 and my age is between 86-88. My dob is 22 March 1937. I am 87. I have offered to send in a photo of my passport with me holding it to prove it is correct. The last person trying to help didn't know if this would be allowed. Can someone please resolve this as I get interviewed regularly on radio and they also state the wrong information as they take it from Wikipedia. Can you please let me know the simplest method. Thank you ... Don DONALDRSPENCER (talk) 23:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@DONALDRSPENCER, welcome to the Teahouse! Technically, going off of the statistics you provided here, your date of birth is not incorrect in the article, since your actual date of birth is between 1936 and 1937 and your age is between 86 to 88. However, should you wish to fix it, you cannot use your own legal documents to prove it. Wikipedia is based off of reliable, independent sources, and if you want to add a piece of information to that article, you are going to have to provide one of those. If you find a reliable, independent source, please make an edit request on the talk page of the article in question because you have a conflict of interest. It may also help Teahouse hosts if you tell us what article you're talking about, since all of the names listed on Donald Spencer are not born between 1936–1937. Let us know if you have any further questions ‍ Relativity 23:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Never mind about the title of the article— looks like it's Don Spencer ‍ Relativity 00:00, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

• @Relativity: Wouldn't this be acceptable under Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published_or_questionable_sources_as_sources_on_themselves? This discussion is mention at Wikipedia_talk:Reliable_sources#Don_Spencer (permalink) --David Tornheim (talk) 01:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@DONALDRSPENCER@David Tornheim Don, it appears you have a personal website. IMO, the simplest solution is that you add your full DOB on this page:[4]. Or if the DOB already is somewhere on that website, please point us to it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Where can I find the basic area to find articles to help?

I swear that there was a spot I could go to find a bunch o' articles that just needed some help and to be reviewed. Where can I find this page? Thank you so much. Fastpaier (talk) 00:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Is this what you're thinking of? BaduFerreira (talk) 00:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Fastpaier: Or maybe Special:Homepage. Click your username at top to find it or a link to it, depending on settings at the bottom of Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

how many Mexicans are sent back to Mexico when they arrive illegally in the USA?

Please answer this question! 158.222.91.254 (talk) 00:26, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to a page that offers "help with using and editing Wikipedia". Do you have a question about editing or otherwise using Wikipedia? -- Hoary (talk) 01:22, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary: For questions that aren't related to Wikipedia, you could try asking at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. GoingBatty (talk) 04:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Inclusion of Image of Anime Characters Wearing Bloomers in Bloomers article which has a 'Bloomers in Japan' section: Clarification on Non-Free Content Criteria

I've added an image of anime characters wearing bloomers to a gallery under a section about 'Bloomers in Japan' on Wikipedia. However, there's a dispute over whether the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content. The concern raised is related to WP:NFCC#8, regarding "contextual significance." I believe the image adds value by visually representing the cultural phenomenon of bloomers in Japanese media. How can I address this concern and ensure that the image meets the criteria for inclusion? Are there any steps I can take to strengthen its contextual significance within the Bloomers article or more specifically the section called, Bloomers in Japan? TreeElf (talk) 01:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

TreeElf, the image does not visually represent bloomers, bloomers in Japanese media, or (as far as I can guess its meaning) "the cultural phenomenon of bloomers in Japanese media". It's an image of girls wearing knickers, aka panties. As it happens, in Japanese these are called burumā (or buruma), words derived from the English word bloomers. Their commoner referents are not bloomers, and the relevance of these referents to this article are tenuous at best. (It's as if fr:Menu (restauration) were to have a section on menus gourmands with a subsection on the anglophone sphere, illustrated by an obese "gourmand" [in the English sense] perusing a "menu" [ditto].) So its dubious copyright status aside, this picture doesn't belong in the article. -- Hoary (talk) 05:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your guidance. TreeElf (talk) 05:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

My guidance doesn't seem to have been effective, TreeElf, in that the article on bloomers is now illustrated with a picture of a woman who's not wearing bloomers but instead is wearing a garment whose common name (burumā) in Japanese happens to derive from the English word "bloomers". Should the article on Naples be illustrated with a photo of naporitan? -- Hoary (talk) 11:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

How do I avoid taking issues to ANI unless absolutely necessary

I want to be sure I have exhausted all available avenues before going to ANI. In all my years of editing I don't think I've ever had to use it. I have been trying to resolve an AGF issue I'm having with another editor for months (since Aug). The few times we interact it seems like they always end up accusing me of things on article talk pages. I have tried to convince them that we need to use personal talk pages to make personal remarks/warnings and they seem to just ignore me and change the subject, or continue to focus on getting the answer they want while refusing to acknowledge there might be an issue. I've told them that I'm willing to take responsibility as well in order to show I am not trying to put all the blame on them, but they seem to continue ignoring the issue. I tried telling them it's getting to the point where I don't want to participate when they get involved in discussions. I pointed out that instead of criticizing my arguments they tend to criticize me. I have been to their talk page multiple times but nothing I say seems to get through to them. I told them I don't want to take it to ANI because I don't want to waste admins time on something as basic as AGF. What else should I do? DN (talk) 04:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:DROPTHESTICK. Life is too short to do anything else. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

So you don't think I should take it to ANI, and there's nothing else to do but let them keep accusing me of being disruptive? DN (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I didn't mean that in a cynical manner, I'm just trying to get some more clarification and detail. Cheers. DN (talk) 20:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

If this person seems to be impossible to avoid and nearly always gets involved in discussions you're involved in, playing devil's advocate each and every time, making assertions and remarks about you all the while, it's harassment of a user, and constitutes ANI. If this person is avoidable, drop the stick. — Mugtheboss (talk) 21:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. That makes sense. DN (talk) 01:06, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Category where the only member is a subcategory

Hi. I noticed that the Category, Cemeteries in South Yorkshire‎ has no articles but has one subcategory, Cemeteries in Sheffield‎. (there is a similar situation with Cemeteries in Merseyside). It seems unhelpful to have a category with one member so in this case wouldn't it make more sense for one of those levels to go? My feeling is that it would be best to move all the articles up a level, and then delete the more granular category as unnesersary, does that make sense? -- D'n'B-t -- 09:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@DandelionAndBurdock: This often happens with systematic categories. Category:Cemeteries in Sheffield is also a subcategory of Category:Geography of Sheffield. I wouldn't mess with the system. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks PrimeHunter, I wont go pulling on any loose threads. ---- D'n'B-t -- 10:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Publishing an Article

Hi,

I am facing problem in publishing an article on wikipedia.

I have tried many times to publish the article by making changes regarding the instructions given in the wikipedia, even though the article is not published . Can you please help me with this issues why am i facing and suggest me what can i do. Sakshi gilada (talk) 09:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Sakshi gilada and welcome to the Teahouse. Could you specify which article you are referring to? CanonNi (talk) 09:52, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

The article is regarding BBG, its a real state company. I want to write about them Sakshi gilada (talk) 09:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello Sakshi gilada, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Steps you should take:

1. If you are employed or retained in any way with the company you must make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor.
2. Look for several published sources which are wholly unconnected with your company, and which talk in some depth about you company. Nothing written, published, or commissioned, or based on interviews or press releases from your company or any of its staff or associates. Evaluate any sources you find against all three of the criteria in golden rule
3. If you cannot find at least three, give up and devote your time to something more valuable. There cannot be an article.
4. If you can find at least three sources, then forget everything you know about the company, and write a draft based entirely on what those indpendent sources say.

ColinFine (talk) 11:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. If you are referring to Draft:BBG (Building Blocks Group), it was deleted as blatant promotion. Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about the existence of a company and what it does- an article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. The draft mentioned niche industry awards- these do not contribute to notability unless the awards themselves merit articles(like Nobel Peace Prize or Academy Award).

If you work for this company, the Terms of Use require that to be disclosed, please read about how to do this at WP:PAID. You should also read conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

You appear to have taken an image of the founder of the company. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

yes we have taken the picture Sakshi gilada (talk) 10:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Do you work for this company? 331dot (talk) 10:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes Sakshi gilada (talk) 09:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Then you are required by the Wikipedia Terms of Use to disclose that. You should attempt to do this with one of your next edits. Instructions are provided on your user talk page, you may also see WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

okay Sakshi gilada (talk) 09:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I think that WP:BOSS might have the guidance you're looking for. ---- D'n'B-t -- 12:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

On your Talk page you have been repeatedly warned that your account may be indefinitely blocked unless you address your PAID or COI connection to BBG. You must do that before any attempt to again create a draft, either as a draft or in your Sandbox. If there are not valid references then there is no reason to try again. Also, please stop using "we". Each account must be from one person. David notMD (talk) 15:28, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I have NO memory of editing an article about a contentious topic and the recently deceased.

User talk:MisteOsoTruth#Welcome!

I have NO memory of editing an article about a contentious topic of the recently deceased. How recent is recent?

I also have no knowledge of how to bring material facts to the attention of a chief editor. in fact i feel that such facts are being dismissed outright. MisteOsoTruth (talk) 10:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi MisteOsoTruth The note on your talk page actually says living or recently deceased people - I'd imagine it's refering to your edits to on the talk page for Sweet Baby Inc. regarding the inviduals that work for that studio. It's also just a general notice and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. There is no "cheif editor", but you can continue to discuss the article on the article's talk page. ---- D'n'B-t -- 11:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

OOOH ooh. i see.

tjhank you MisteOsoTruth (talk) 14:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, MisteOsoTruth, and welcome to the Teahouse. The large blue notice on your talk page is because you have edited Talk:Sweet Baby Inc., which says at the top that the associated article is a contentious topic. It's not saying that you have done anything wrong, just warning you to take care.

For the specific message about your posting on User talk:Codename Noreste, please remember that one of the foundation policies of Wikipedia is to assume good faith.

I think you might also find it useful to read WP:RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS. ColinFine (talk) 11:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

How to add a photo gallery?

Hello, I am trying to add a photo gallery to the Hanuman page and I cannot figure out how to use the template to do that. Can someone help me? Hemmingweigh (talk) 12:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hemmingweigh See Help:Pictures#Galleries. Note the guidance at the top about checking whether your proposed use is in line with image use policy. You could try out the proposed gallery in your sandbox, where other editors could assist if needed. Ask back here if you get stuck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:38, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hemmingweigh, if you do decide that a gallery is right for that article, then when you use the gallery tag you can just leave out the square brackets - like this:

<gallery>
File:Hanuman Brings the Gandhamardhana Mountain odisha tala patra.jpg|"Hanuman Brings the Mountain of Healing Plants"
File:Punjabi manuscript with illustration of Hanuman.jpg|Punjabi manuscript with illustration of Hanuman.
</gallery>

---- D'n'B-t -- 12:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Deletion process & COI Concerns

Hello,

There is an article for which I have declared a COI on my user page:

Techspressionism

This page has recently been nominated for deletion. I am not very familiar on the deletion process, and was wondering if anyone here could take a look at the discussion for deletion, which has been ongoing and lengthy.

The subject of the article involves a term that I invented years ago (Techspressionism), initially to describe my own work that has since developed into an active artist community that I have had a role in developing.

Since the article's nomination for deletion, I invited some of the other artists in the community to weigh in, as I know the community's deletion from Wikipedia is an issue that would be important for them to learn about.

I have been told that this is considered "canvassing", and that these people are SPA's - the discussion for deletion is here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Techspressionism

Also, I am an artist, and it has been brought to my attention that making any edits on the page about me is a COI so I have declared a COI on my user page for this article as well. Both the page on Techspressionism and on myself were created in collaboration with an editor who is part of the artist community, who offered his assistance - he has also declared a COI for these articles, and revised the sourcing, but the COI templates remain on both articles.

The article is here: Colin_Goldberg

An experienced editor let me know that some of the sources were good, and some are questionable, so I have created a draft in my user sandbox using only the sources they identified as valid and requested a formal request for edit on the article talk page at this editor's suggestion: Talk:Colin_Goldberg

Does this seem like a proper way to move forward? I was directed here to the Teahouse by another editor who weighed in on the discussion for deletion for Techspressionism, and I would appreciate any input, guidance and advice that can be offered with regards to these articles, their sourcing and notability, which appear to be the primary concerns, and the best way for me to proceed, if I should do anything further at all. I would like to remain an active member of the Wikipedia community, but this experience has been quite frustrating, and I have been trying to navigate it as best I can.

Thanks, Scribe1791 (talk) 15:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

The Rape of the Sabine Women

Dr. Suess has a version as well and I don't have enough skill to add him to the wiki page. Is this where I request help? Mjoseff (talk) 15:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Generally, artwork related to a given subject should only be mentioned in an article when there is coverage of the artwork in a reliable source. Remsense诉 15:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I would say that there is, in this case, significant coverage there's many examples at the bottom of this page. ---- D'n'B-t -- 16:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Excellent. I just wanted to specify. Remsense诉 16:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Mjoseff, I'll take a shot at putting it in.---- D'n'B-t -- 16:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I deleted the addition of text, image and ref. Please first make a case for it on the Talk page, as to me it feels too minor compared to the other artists' inclusions. And wouldn't his art still be copyright protected? David notMD (talk) 11:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Absurdity of a page

The first sentence of Wikipedia:Edit lock is blatantly false. Page protection is a software tool which locks an article from editing. I don't know how such obviously false information is allowed to stand, especially in a Wikipedia namespace page that will be viewed by novice editors. Kk.urban (talk) 16:23, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

And in the very next sentence it says "Page protection is never to be used for closing down an article's normal development and community editing." That is the main point. Page protection prevents users below a certain edit count and amount of days on the platform, it doesn't create an outright edit lock for all users.

This is not an insurmountable problem in the majority of cases either, where semi-protection will be used; preventing accounts that are younger than 4 days old with less than 10 edits and IP users. An example of this would be on controversial pages or those with high levels of traffic/editing - see Crocus City Hall attack, which has been under semi-protection for the majority of its short life. These page protections aren't even outright bars to people editing the pages under protection, you can make edit requests if you don't have the necessary user permissions level.

There are no outright edit locks, the page protection system is little more than "You must be this tall to ride". CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:35, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

You seem to be assuming some particular meaning of "edit lock". This is not clear. Page protection creates "an outright edit lock" for some users, not all users. For a typical user, it doesn't matter if page protection was used "for closing down an article's normal development and community editing", or for some other purpose - whatever the case, they can't edit the article. Many of the most visible pages are either semi-protected, or extended-protected. The first sentence needs to be changed. Kk.urban (talk) 16:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Then... Change it. That's the joy of Wikipedia. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I think the confusion is because that page is all about what editors can do if they want to indicate the article is WP:INUSE (which is its shortcut). Viz This page is about templates used while an article is undergoing a major edit. Page protection is something else. You could edit the WP:INUSE page to make this clearer. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:46, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

"lock" on that page means Lock (computer science) but many people don't know this term. Wikipedia uses lock icons for page protection which is something different so there is certainly potential for confusion. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I made some edits to the page which I hope will help clarify things. Cullen328 (talk) 18:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! Kk.urban (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Kk.urban: Just like articles, Wikipedia namespace pages have dedicated talk pages for discussions on how to improve the pages. You may wish to start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Edit lock with your concerns and suggestions. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Legacy Project

I'm having trouble just searching community discussions. I seem to get in a loop of further pages or tutorials. I was interested in something along the lines of a 100 year legacy project within Wikipedia where pages are carried on? I don't see anything on deceased Wikipedians Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians/Guidelines - Wikipedia. I know there are pages on thanatosensitivity (word corrected) and digital creations living on, but specifically within Wikipedia. I'm a retired librarian, so I'm frustrated I can't navigate or search community discussions better. FelixaCulpa (talk) 16:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Would you mind explaining some more about what you're looking for specifically? Are you looking for a discussion on a specific topic or are you looking for an easier way to search for discussions in general? CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:48, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, to both. 1) where is the direct link to community discussions in general? It seems I search & get results that are more tutorial pages on editing/creation/guidelines. 2) Yes, I'm interested in the specific topic, and have been told that there was a 100 year legacy project within wikipedia that had something to do with the idea of content living on. I haven't found anything that sounds like that specifically. Thanks for quick response! FelixaCulpa (talk) 18:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@FelixaCulpa We don't have an article on thanosensitivity but the standard search box allows searches across many namespaces. So this search finds "thanosensitivity" in one place it currently exists: namely, here! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! And I left out part of the word, it's thanatosensitivity, which does have a page, as well as the page on Death & the Internet, Death and the Internet - Wikipedia, both are close, but don't mention anything about a 100 year legacy project within wikipedia. FelixaCulpa (talk) 18:08, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, FelixaCulpa. It's not clear to me whether you are looking for something that you believe already exists called a 100 year legacy project, or whether you are saying you expect there to be one.

If you are looking for one, you could use the advanced search facility to search for that string in the Wikipedia: namespace. If you think there should be one, then WP:VPP might be a place to bring it up. ColinFine (talk) 18:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Maybe the idea of 100 year legacy project for Wikipedia (which has been discussed somewhere or I wouldn't have been asked about it.) It reminds me of LOCKSS, which in the library world preserves data on servers at multiple locations in case of disaster. It's referred to as "dark archive" which isn't really "dark," but just an ingestion & preservation of information. Maybe a 100 year legacy project for Wikipedia would be something like that, a preservation system for keeping entries alive well into the future? I'm not sure I'm asking the right questions, but it was very specific idea supposedly within Wikipedia using words "100 year legacy" FelixaCulpa (talk) 18:26, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@FelixaCulpa: Does the Internet Archive and similar projects perform this activity for websites, including Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 21:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@FelixaCulpa My suggested search (above) can be modified to look for 100+year+legacy and although there are hits, I don't think that any are what you seek. There's nothing on Meta-wiki either, which is the other obvious place to look. Incidentally, Wikipedia welcomes people who want to download the whole database and you could do so with the intention of storing this somewhere for a 100 years! See WP:DOWNLOAD. I don't think that there is any doubt that versions will be available in 2124. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Daquq town not actually being called daquq town

Daquq is apparently a town in kirkuk,but in most sources its called Tavuk Kasabasi(its real name daquq is just the district name) and they mentioned that its majority Shia turkmen with kaka'i kurd minorities (page says kurd and turkmen majority) and its included in the kurds and kurdistan category which is wrong due to the demographics of the town. Kirkukturk3 (talk) 18:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Kirkukturk3, and welcome to the Teahouse. If there is a change you think should be made to a Wikipedia article, please open a discussion on that article's talk page, arguing for the change you want to see, and citing reliable sources for any information you want to add (or to remove, if the information to be removed appears to be supported by citations). ColinFine (talk) 18:20, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I already know that but there is a problem, there is an editor which is very known for their vandalism(altered many city and town pages demographics which is not acceptable) guards it.Who can I ask to check their edit? Thanks. I aslp just now checked that it's not allowed to start a discussion in the talk page for some reason?

Kirkukturk3 (talk) 12:05, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Kirkukturk3 The Talk Page Talk:Daquq currently only contains Project banners and a reminder that this is a contentious topic. There is nothing preventing you starting a discussion there in the normal way by clicking on "Add topic". Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:45, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

How to tell if an IP address is blocked

Hi! I have recently reverted an edit from an IP address that appeared to be an opinion. I went to their talk page to warn them about it. I found the anon block template at the top. However, it seems to have been up for a long time and the edit I reverted was very recent. How can I check to see if the IP editor is actually blocked? QwertyForest (talk) 18:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Check their contributions page, it'll normally show it right at the top. I'm making a rather small assumption that this is who you're on about, so here's their contributions page. Normally it'll show up at the top with a red box for a full block or yellow for a partial block. If it's a partial block, it'll show what pages/areas they're blocked from. That IP user has neither. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 18:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@QwertyForest: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can go to Preferences → Gadgets → Appearance → Strike out usernames that have been blocked and enable that. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Done! QwertyForest (talk) 18:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

That IP has been blocked several times. The most recent was a two year block imposed on April 6, 2017. Cullen328 (talk) 19:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I am trying to create a wikipedia page for my card game

Hi all, I invented a card game and trying to create a wikipedia page for my game. See the game here: https://skypiggames.com/products/products-card-game

Any help would be greatly appreciated! Heienicklea (talk) 23:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

That's awesome. Some things to keep in mind, Wikipedia is not a advertisement site. If the game is popular enough, an article could be created. Hope this is helpful. Cwater1 (talk) 23:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Please see the general notability guidelines, there's a good chance that a newly created card game will unfortunately not meet them. You'll need to wait until enough reliable, secondary sources report on the game to make the page.

For more information, please see your first article and our recommendation to not work backwards. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 23:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Also see WP:MADEUP. CodeTalker (talk) 00:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

You're kind of in a conflict of interest, you know? Writting about your own game? If the game is relevant enough, there'll be sources from reliable third parties about it. It'll be a test of its relevance : other people creating pages about it with multiple sources about it without your influence is a show of a popular game. 142.170.60.247 (talk) 00:06, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Stub

Hi,

Just a quick question, the article Nothorhina is very very short and I am thinking of adding {{beetle-stub}} into it. Category:Beetle stubs says I should add it into a subcategory. I wasn't sure of which category would fit for Nothorhina. Could someone give me a suggestion? Myrealnamm (talk to me) 00:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Myrealnamm Spondylidinae stub seems good, couldn't find any other subcategories I could fit it into. Kline • talk to me! • contribs 01:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

OK. I will add that. Myrealnamm (talk to me) 13:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Image wrapping

Hi, I'm wondering if someone can tell me why text doesn't wrap more closely to images. For example, go to this page and scroll down until you see a black-and-white photo of George Lucas from 1986. There is a chunk of white space below the image, which is clearly enough room for another line of text, but the text doesn't wrap that closely, making the end result visually unappealing. Why does this happen, and is there anything I can do about it? I tried moving the image around in the section, but in every position the same thing happened. Wafflewombat (talk) 05:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Maybe you can look at WP:IMAGE as well as some of the relevant image policies/guidelines? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:07, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Wafflewombat: White space adds to readability, and can be important for WP:ACCESSIBILITY. Ad hoc styling is not recommended.

Separately, I have moved the image to conform with MOS:IMAGELOC and resized it to conform with MOS:IMAGESIZE. Bazza 7 (talk) 09:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Question about Citation reference from an Interview

Hello! Can anyone tell me if we can / we should not use a source content that majorly involves an interview? For example, for a movie article I found the producing director's interview about the movie production. Can I use that for the production section of the movie? Especially for a certain information that only the production team will only know (like the casting process, how many camera were used for the production, etc.) Please guide me for this. Thank you in advance! Shenaall (talk) 06:52, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Shenaall WP:ABOUTSELF is your guidance here. In general, the director is good for basic facts about the movie (we started filming in 2022 yes, it's the best film ever no), but keep the amount of it reasonable, and such a source probably doesn't add to WP:N. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Shenaall. Assuming for the sake of discussion that the notabilty of the film has already been established, then limited use of non-independent sources like an interview with a producer or a director may have some value. But your examples concern me. Every film goes through a casting process which results in the cast list in the article. If the casting process was so unusual as to deserve extra mention in the article, then it will have been discussed by reliable, independent sources. Similarly with regards to the number of cameras. Most films are made with single camera setups although it is not uncommon for three or four cameras to be used especially when filming prolonged conversations among multiple actors. So, when should an encyclopedia comment on such a common element of filmmaking? When a reliable source entirely independent of the producer/director discuss it. Cullen328 (talk) 08:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Photographs

Should I include a photograph of my person when drafting an article in my sandbox? How do I determine if a photo is royalty-free and meets requirements for common licensing? TrevorGlynLocke (talk) 09:56, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi TrevorGlynLocke, a photograph is very unlikely to be royalty free unless the photographer themself says so. If you took the photo yourself then it's up to you if you want to release it to commons. I would not worry too much about including a photograph on a draft article - check WP:FIRST for guidance on getting your article off the ground. ---- D'n'B-t -- 10:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@TrevorGlynLocke The basic assumption is that any random pic you find online does not have a license we can use. For example, this website [5] states "Copyright © Royal Literary Fund 2024" and that is almost always the case. WP, and the sister-site we keep most pics on, Commons, are both very careful about copyright. More at Commons:Licensing.

Now, if "your person" is dead the situation is different, but I don't think this is the case. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, TrevorGlynLocke: in addition to what the other replies have said, note that the presence or absence of a photo will not affect whether the draft is accepted.

I suggest you concentrate on finding reliable independent sources on Leeming, because your article should be based on what they say, not on what you know. ColinFine (talk) 11:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

What to do when a recent article is almost entirely copyvio (since creation)

This new article, HBC (filipino cosmetics retailer), is mostly copyvio: [6]
I'm not sure what to do here, because I'd have to blank the article and ask all revisions to be deleted if I was to use the template.
– 2804:F14:8093:5F01:AD1F:D79E:FFC5:945B (talk) 11:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. The page has been nominated for speedy deletion under G11. If an admin finds the article to meet the criteria for deletion and nobody contests, it will be deleted. CanonNi (talk) 11:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Moving episode synopsis to below lead section per MOS causes issues

On Backrooms (web series), I tried to move the Backrooms (web series)#Episodes section to be right above the lead to coincide with MOS:TVPLOT, however, the table was moved below the infobox creating this giant ugly gap. What would be the best way to solve this issue? I fear changing the width of the table would not work as some desktop users may have a zoomed in view that still causes the gap. (Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 14:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Not0nshoree WP:Manual_of_Style/Television#Parent,_season,_and_episode_article_structure specifically says that when the episode table clashes with the infobox it can be placed lower in the article, so it is probably best where it is/was. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

My apologies, I did not see that, thanks for the response. (Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 15:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Images

I would like to upload some images for the article Draft:Villa Fabbricotti on which I'm working. I did the photographs with a mobile phone. There are no people visible in the images. Can I upload them or is it illegal? Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 15:00, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@14 novembre I'm not sure why you think that uploading your own photos to Commons would be illegal! That's what our sister Project is for. Use the Wizard at Commons:Special:UploadWizard and give the information requested. note that the presence or absence of photos in drafts will not alter the chance of the draft being accepted: they don't help with wikinotability. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Thanks for your answer. I add that the images weren't to establish more notability, but simply to give more information to the reader. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 15:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@14 novembre Actually, there is one legal consideration: see c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Italy#Freedom_of_panorama, which suggests which license to use, if relevant, under Italian freedom-of-panorama rules. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Well, the image I am seeking to upload does not represent any architectural or artistic relevant subject, but only some plants in the park of the villa. Does that still apply?

Thank you so much and kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 15:15, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I'd assumed that an article on the building would have its picture and hence that was what you were asking about. Pictures of the park/plants will be fine but might not be relevant to the topic. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

.... note also Commons:Category:Villa Fabbricotti (Livorno). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Thanks for your answer. The image I wanted to upload was an image of the park quite different from all the existing ones on commons. Anyway, my question is, does an image of the park/plants still go under the legal concerns you previously expressed. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 15:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Ps: most certainly I'll also use some of the images in the category you helpfully indicated. 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 15:31, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

No, that's about art and architecture: see the linked FOP page regarding Italian copyright laws. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Is it possible to bring back an AFD page?

Hello everyone,

I am new to Wikipedia and have just started to learn how things work around here. My motivation for starting to write on Wikipedia was a Wikipedia page called "Keramikou 28" which disappeared out of the blue. I thought of recreating the page as I assumed that the previous creator(s) had deleted it.

However, I recently found out that the page wasn't deleted by the creator(s) but rather via AFD (Articles for Deletion). I have already created the page with some corrections to the previous one and am now waiting for it to be reviewed. Is it possible to bring back an AFD page?

Any further advice is more than welcome! IlEssere (talk) 15:16, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I think it should be under WP:UNDELETE. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 15:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@IlEssere Based on the deletion discussion there were lots of different versions of the article while its future was being debated. Hence I don't think you will find it helpful to retrieve anything but should simply work on your own Draft:Keramikou 28 about the building and how it meets notability requirements. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:36, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your guidance. I'll focus on developing Draft:Keramikou 28 according to the notability requirements. IlEssere (talk) 15:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

recovering deleted page

Hello, I recently created my first page and tried publishing but it was deleted due to copyright issues. Is there a way to recover the deleted page so I can update the text? It took me a long time to create the page and now it seems to be gone? Freshkicksfreshkicks (talk) 15:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)