From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:TEAHOUSE)
Jump to: navigation, search

Question forum »Host profiles »Guest profiles » Welcome to the Teahouse! A friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia.


WP teahouse logo.png

New article - 'Torah Project'. Review for publication[edit]

Hi everyone. I created a page called the Torah Project. I received a message that it may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines.

A user said the following "What would specifically help is major independent news and all additional ones." This is not very constructive help. Can someone please give me some practical and actionable advise in order for me to improve the quality of my article and retain it on Wikipedia.

Thank you in advanced.— Preceding unsigned comment added by michaelnw11 (talkcontribs) 10:05, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

michaelnw11: if you can't find suitable articles to cite in major news media, it's not really surprising, it seems that the "Torah Project" has only just been published (if that's the right word for such a limited edition). I suggest you wait for a few weeks, more news articles may appear. Maproom (talk) 13:09, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, michaelnw11. I have done some copy editing of the article and another editor is working on it as well. More references would be useful and since the commentaries in the book are published in four languages, please be aware that references in other languages besides English are acceptable. I see on the website for the book a copy of a major article in an Italian newspaper published a few days ago. That article can also be used as a reference if you read Italian or can have it translated. I suspect that publications in Argentina may have also covered the book. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:13, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Cullen. Thank you so much for helping to improve the copy of the article. Really appreciate it a lot. I have used all of the news articles that are available. There are not even many articles which I can use which are in Spanish or Italian. There is something recent which has come up in Italy which I want to add. But it would be good to sort out the current issues with my article. There is still an error message on the top of the page saying "This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy.". Please can you let me know how I can modify the article so that it is acceptable to be present on this site. Thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelnw11 (talkcontribs) 18:06, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

For clarification[edit]

For clarification, the sandbox is a place for drafts of our own writing correct? And the talk page is mostly for discussing topics or concerns with other users? Thank you!Marielyguevara (talk) 19:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

You can use a sandbox of your own user space for many things, but drafts is probably the most common use. The talk page of an article should be used for discussing the content of that article with other users. Maproom (talk) 19:42, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
(ec) Welcome to the Teahouse, and thanks for the question. My quick, amateur response would be this: The sandbox is your personal play spot to test out formatting, compose items not quite ready for the spotlight (*also a good use of the Draft area*), etc. If something goes wrong, you can easily wipe it and start over. As far as talk pages, there are two responses for that. Your /personal/ talk page is for other members to discuss things with you, as you stated. Talk pages on articles, however, are used as common grounds for discussion on the article it's related to -- possible edits to the article, gaining a consensus on a potential change, etc. Hope that helped, at least a little bit. - NsTaGaTr (Talk) 19:45, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your help... I will make a note to use Wikipedia instead of wiki. :) Lillycakes23 (talk) 17:44, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Leaving Wiki[edit]

I am a rare and minor contributor. If I choose to delete my account, is there any way of doing that? I could just log out and not return but I was wondering if accounts can be wound up? Thank you. RayCee1 (talk) 20:04, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

You can't delete your account. The closest you can come is logging off and scrambling your password. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 20:06, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello RayCee1. You may find this article helpful: Wikipedia:Retiring. All the best, Mduvekot (talk) 20:11, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
I also forgot to mention that there are a few admins (not many) who will entertain the idea of blocking your account if you asked them --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 20:19, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt replies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RayCee1 (talkcontribs) 20:38, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

composing the lead section[edit]

I have been writing an article on Margaret Manion and would like some advice please on how to improve the lead section. I made some changes tonight.Pergameno (talk) 11:59, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

You can read MOS:LEAD. Lil Johnny (talk) 16:39, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Pergameno, welcome to the Teahouse. It looks as if you've improved the lead section substantially since it was tagged. I'm a bit rushed at the moment but will try to look in more depth later. Maybe someone else will get there first. The article is live at Margaret Manion. RivertorchFIREWATER 16:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

biography of a living person[edit]

At what stage of a persons sports (figure skating) career can you write about them on Wiki? Lillycakes23 (talk) 16:26, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Lillycakes23. Welcome to the Teahouse. If, by "write about", you mean write an article on, the relevant guideline is Wikipedia:Notability (sports)#Figure_skating. Notability for sports figures can be a bit complex. If you're still unsure after reading what I linked, please come back to the Teahouse and someone will be glad to help. RivertorchFIREWATER 16:41, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Lillycakes23. In addition to the subject-specific notability guideline above, you can check if any topic meets the general notability guideline, and thus whether an article is warranted, by looking for the existence of multiple, reliable, independent, secondary and independent sources that write about a given topic in substantive detail. If they do, a verifiable article can be written.

The best way to write any article is to forget anything you "know" about the topic; gather good sources; decide to write only if right kind exist and would allow an article of sufficient depth to be written based on the information they contain, and, of course, write based on what they verify and nothing else; use your own words but cite the sources transparently as you go.

You can try to locate such reliable source through targeted searches that tend to concentrate reliable sources, such as through Google Books; through the newspaper resources listed at Wikipedia:Free English newspaper sources (shortcut: WP:FENS); if you have access, through such sites as JSTOR,, etc. By the way, this site is called Wikipedia, not wiki. A wiki is any website using wiki software; there are thousands of them. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:20, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Have completed article in my user sandbox - now what?[edit]

Hello - I've completed an article in my user sandbox and I'm stuck as to getting it reviewed and submitted. Corazon70Corazon70 (talk) 17:04, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

I see that after you made this request, User:Corazon70/sandbox was submitted for review. Maproom (talk) 18:06, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I figured it out finally. I got stuck because I forgot to move it to draft before I tried to submit it. So I went ahead and submitted it anyway and someone has moved it to draft now, and started the process for review and hopefully approval. Thank you for getting back though.Corazon70 (talk) 20:01, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

The time at top right of all pages here[edit]

I can't figure out where I should ask my question, so trying here. The clock time at top right of all pages is UTC. It would be more logical and useful if it showed the present time where I am, IMO. If that isn't possible or desirable, it should say "UTC" after it. (I have specified my time zone in "Preferences".) Thank you, Hordaland (talk) 17:56, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't see the time at the top of any Wikipedia pages. (I do see it at the bottom right of my computer screen, in my local time, the way I've asked my OS to display it.) Maproom (talk) 20:21, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Most likely in Special:Preferences on the Gadget tab in the Appearance section you have the 2nd checkbox marked. That clock shows in UTC. ~ GB fan a "frantic, furious ball of anger" 21:04, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
~ GB fan, you're right. It is apparently something I've added myself, however many years ago, and you knew about the possibility! (Still, it could end in "UTC".) Good job, and thanks. Hordaland (talk) 22:57, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
UTC, which is the equivalent of the old Greenwich Mean Time, is the standard time for Wikipedia, which is a worldwide project. We need a standard time and UTC is it. Any individual user can change how time is displayed as they see fit. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:06, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I made changes to an article. I would like to fully validate them with my reference sources, but I don't know how.[edit]

Hello. I made changes to an article, and would like to follow up by giving Wikipedia my reference sources for the files.How do I do that?ReithBBC (talk) 19:42, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

What kind of sources do you have? Books? Ruslik_Zero 20:17, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, ReithBBC. Please read Referencing for beginners which should help you. Please feel free to to ask other questions here at the Teahouse. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Re: uploading photographs[edit]

Can you upload another photographers work for open source when you have their permission? If so, what are the protocols? Laurenshap (talk) 21:25, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Laurenshap, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not quite sure what you mean by open-source, But if you want to upload another photographers work ( and they are still the copyright holder, which is not always the case as they may have signed the copyright over to someone else) you need to arrange to have them provide a permission statement. It is slightly easier if they upload the photos themselves. At the following page:
See the blue bar with the words "try our new interactive release generator"
If they are not uploading them but you are than the copyright holder needs to file a permission statement with OTRS. The desired wording is in the next section below the blue bar at the same link.
Caution, unfortunately the OTRS permission backlog is approximately two months. --S Philbrick(Talk) 23:00, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

asking about how to submit first article[edit]

Hi, I'm writing my first article ever about an expert at the University where I work. Ive been practicing in Sandbox and writing sentences and noting the sources under References. When I'm all ready to submit it, where do I go to do that, please? Thank you.SharonSBlake (talk) 23:49, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, SharonSBlake. Start by familiarizing yourself with our notability guideline for academics. Please follow the advice given at Your first article, and use the Articles for creation process when your draft is completed. If you have more specific questions, please visit the Teahouse at any time. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:49, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. I'm going to go back and find international news articles about this person's accomplishments to replace the DOJ releases.I'm still confused about my next step. Do I write the article with all the citations inserted in my Sandbox FIRST? SharonSBlake (talk) 16:40, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
SharonSBlake, You could start in your sandbox, but you would in my view do better to start with a page in Draft: space. The article wizard will do this for you. That is probably the easiest route for you to take. DES (talk) 03:56, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Need help updating a page[edit]

Please note I have repeatedly tried to edit a page that contains erroneous information but someone keeps changing my edits back to the original page which is incorrect. The page is about a company. This company no longer exists under the name Fushi Copperweld nor it is owned by the Chinese. The correct name is Copperweld Bimetallics LLC. This can be verified if whoever keeps reverting the edits would only check the company's website — Preceding unsigned comment added by No more fushi (talkcontribs) 03:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, No more fushi. It is up to you to add a reference to a reliable source backing up any changes you want to make. Please read Referencing for beginners for instructions. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:00, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

File moving from en to commons[edit]

Hi! I am an Active Tamil user! I would like to use all files related with Wikiproject Scout in my wikipedia. So Please move all files to commons which are in Scouting category. Such as logos of Scout association and etc shold be moved. Hope you'll reply. Thank you.--Shriheeran (talk) 06:21, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, Shriheeran. Only files which are public domain or released under a licence such as CC-BY-SA may be hosted on Commons: Logos are nearly always copyright protected, and can only be hosted on individual Wikipedias, not commons. (I haven't checked those particular ones, but I would be surprised if itwere any different). What I suggest you do is look at the file descriptions in English Wikipedia, and you will probably find URLs showing where they were uploaded from - then you can upload them to tawiki (assuming tawiki's rules on Non-free content are satisfied). --ColinFine (talk) 08:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Question about pages with in pending litigation[edit]

A few years ago I thought I saw a category/page on Wikipedia that listed pages that were unable to be edited or removed altogether because they were involved in legal cases or something alone those lines. Does anyone know what page I can find that if it still exists?Dog123123 (talk) 07:23, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Dog123123. I think you might be looking for WP:OFFICELIST. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:18, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


please ressurect my account User: Caradoc29105 with a new password link.

Advice on how to have your long-term block lifted has been given on your talk page. What would you do if you had your account back? Please read the advice and present a good argument if your behaviour has changed. Dbfirs 07:35, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


please ressurect my account User: Caradoc29105 with a new password link.CJ Wolf (talk) 07:28, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Are you admitting that you are a WP:Sockpuppet of the account you wish to have back? Dbfirs 07:40, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Ian.thomson has given you some excellent advice on your talk page. Please follow it. Dbfirs 15:33, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


how to correct this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suryaembryo (talkcontribs) 08:02, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

This must be about User:Suryaembryo/sandbox.
You should start by adding references, to establish that the subject is notable. If you cannot do this, it will never be accepted as an article, and any other work you do will be wasted.
You will then need to start by saying why the test is performed, and what results it can give. The formatting also needs improvement. Maproom (talk) 08:13, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I need an administrator to delete a redirect ASAP[edit]

Delete Henrique Capriles to make way for move. The speedy delete template doesn't put the article in any category, so how are you supposed to know a speedy delete request exists? Holy Goo (talk) 14:15, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Articles that are tagged db-move are added to the hidden categories Candidates for speedy deletion and Candidates for uncontroversial speedy deletion. An administrator will see it. Mduvekot (talk) 14:30, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Holy Goo I've requested the move at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. That tends to be the quickest way to get the move done. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:41, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Well, thanks. I never imagined the speedy deletion in the english Wikipedia would be so slow. In the portuguese Wikipedia it is in fact speedy. Holy Goo (talk) 14:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Vote Stacking[edit]

I initiated an Afd (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaise Jose (3rd nomination)) which is at the risk of ending up as a No Consensus WP:NPASR like last time. The first nomination was by an admin and had a delete vote by a seasoned user which ended with the deletion of the page. I strongly believe that the page is a work of paid editing (rationale in discussion). Would it be seen as vote stacking if I asked for the opinions of the admin and the user involved in the 1st nomination (knowing that they voted delete). The main reason why I believe people are not voting on the discussion is the proliferation of regional language reliable and non reliable sources added as references (even when proper Malayalam actors generally face no dearth of English language sources), mainly to swindle editors, as the creator is a seasoned editor who knows his way around. I for one can read them and realise that they don't go beyond mentioning him as a cast member. In case asking for their opinion would be seen as vote-stacking, where can I find editors who can read the Malayalam references and assert that the claims for notability are bogus (without that being considered as canvassing). Jupitus Smart 14:44, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Jupitus Smart, you could ping everyone who was involved in the previous discussion, but to aleert only users who favored deletion previously sounds like improper canvassing to me. DES (talk) 03:47, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
DESiegel, I should probably have been more clearer. There were 2 voters (besides the nominator) in the 1st discussion. 1 was the creator who voted keep and who I notified when I nominated the article for deletion this time. The nominator in the 1st discussion and the other voter voted delete. My query was, since I know that these people supported deleting last time, would be it correct on my part to invite their opinions or would it be seen as canvassing. Jupitus Smart 03:55, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Jupitus Smart, to notify ALL of those who participated in a previous discussion of the topic that a new discussion is in progress is generally not considered improper canvassing. The notification should be neutrally worded, just a note that the page is up for deletion again and that because they participated previously they might want to be included. Best would be to notify all who participated in either the first or the 2nd AfD discussion. DES (talk) 04:02, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you DESiegel. Jupitus Smart 04:08, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
For future reference, Jupitus Smart, the Template:Please see works pretty well in cases like this. You can also add a notification to the talk pages of any relevant WikiProjects, usually those listed on the article's talk page. Many WikiProjects are notified by WP:DELSORT tags, but those tags are not always added and not all WikiProjects have a tag for their respective project. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice Marchjuly. I was looking for something like Template:Please see, but had to make do with a written reason. Jupitus Smart 10:50, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Rajput Barsar clan deleted why ???[edit]

Hello bro , i created my clan page Rajput Barsar but it has been deleted one week ago. Please tell me why this is happen. I am from punjab and Rajput Barsar is a forward caste there . So please help me . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rao jesh (talkcontribs) 15:50, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

The deletion log shows that Rajput Barsar was deleted twice, not a week ago but in January. The second deletion was after the discussion at WP:Articles for deletion/Rajput Barsar. Rajput barsar has also been deleted twice. There is no record of any article being created by your current account, but it has been noted, for example at User talk:Badal Singh Barsar, that a number of accounts have been making similar edits on subjects in this area, giving rise to suspicion of sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:12, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Rajput Barsar is a clan in punjab . Yes it was not created by me but my family and so many other people are belong to this clan of rajputs. I visited this page once but now it is not appears why ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rao jesh (talkcontribs) 06:55, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Article on Aurangzeb[edit]

I am new here. I observed that in the article on Hinduism in Wikipedia, a sentence, "destroyed Hindu temples and persecuted non-Muslims", with a link to, "Persecution of Hindus" is mentioned. I want someone to add that same sentence (or better still, it could be, "persecuted Hindus", with the link to "Persecution of Hindus") to the article on Aurangzeb, using the same references 476, 478 and note 33 in the lead/introduction. Please help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by IvankaTr (talkcontribs) 17:00, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Eating my questions[edit]

This is my fifth attempt to post at Teahouse today, but the first time it has worked. See talk page. RM2KX (talk) 17:17, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

My original question: User box creation[edit]

How do I center text vertically in a user box? User:Rm2KX/Presidential Also, do I need to do anything to make it available to others? I did not use a template so I want to make sure it is right. RM2KX (talk) 17:22, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello RM2KX to center text in a userbox, you can use
|info-a = center
Mduvekot (talk) 19:17, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Doesn't that centre horizontally, rather than vertically? --David Biddulph (talk) 19:48, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
It does both; by default the table data cell element that contains the info is styled to use
vertical-align: middle;
. If you wanted to override that, you could use something like
| info-op = vertical-align:bottom;
Mduvekot (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks so much! I had it horizontally centered with the <center></center> labels already. That did both and easier. RM2KX (talk) 20:32, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I have moved the page from User:Rm2KX/Presidential to User:RM2KX/Presidential, as previously it was a subpage from a non-existent user. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:52, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! I noticed that but wasn't going to fix until I had my other answer. Good catch. RM2KX (talk) 20:32, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Why does this look like this[edit]

Is this my PC or for everyone? it didn't look like that a week ago. Lil Johnny (talk) 23:48, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

They don't look like that for me. Have you tried clicking "Refresh" in your browser? or using a different browser? Maproom (talk) 08:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Advice Requested - On Multiple Non-Neutral Articles[edit]

I am not entirely sure where I should be asking this. I don’t want to take a good-faith editor who is violating Wikipedia policy with good intentions directly to a drama board. User:AngelicBeaver has created multiple articles in article space, one on each of the principles of the Black Lives Matter movement. They have put the following comment on each of the talk pages: "I am a part of a group of two people attempting to create articles for each of the guiding principles, defining how the guiding principle is understood within the context of Black Lives Matter, as well as how it is or is not implemented within the movement. Edits or suggestions are welcome to improve the article." I have replied on their talk page that this appears to be a violation of Wikipedia is not a web host, and of neutral point of view. My thinking is that the articles should be replaced by redirects to Black Lives Matter, and that an article on each principle is of course fine on the movement’s own web site, and the Wikipedia article can and should link to the web site. However, I am not comfortable just arbitrarily changing articles to redirects. Should I nominate the articles for Articles for Deletion, not on notability grounds, but as incapable of being made neutral in their current form? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:55, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

This should definitely be brought up on WP:ENI, it's a course project issue. – Train2104 (t • c) 03:16, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon:; also pinging @Seraphimblade: who G11'ed everything created by one of their classmates. – Train2104 (t • c) 03:27, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Looks like these need to go too. Either G11, or AfD, or if they would be plausible redirects (which I kind of don't think they would), we could do that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:56, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
I contacted the article author and they've agreed to deletion, so they can now be done under G7. But given this issue, and a similar recent issue I was involved with, I think we need to very carefully consider how we engage educational organizations. I don't want students and instructors to end up having an experience like this. Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:43, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
One of the three articles had been deleted by G7 (author request). There were still three remaining, for which I have submitted a bundled AFD. In my view, they aren't candidates for any of the speedy deletion criteria. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
This is a matter that should be discussed with the Wiki Education Foundation. I know a couple of their staffers and they are good people who take these issues very seriously. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:05, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
These issues seem to pop up al the time when it comes to school projects and have been discussed before at WP:ENB. Basically, students are working on their drafts with what looks like very little input from their instructors. Most of the feedback they get seems to come from other students in the same class. Lots of these drafts are then directly moved to the article namespace without any sort of formal review, which in turn means that many end up being tagged/nominated for deletion for one reason or another. I understand the principle of allowing anyone to create an article at anytime, but I feel there might be some merit in encouraging students to not move their creations to the article namespace themselves until they can be approriately reviewed. The student's grade should not depend on whether what they create is in the draft namespace or the article namespace. If the draft has merit, it will eventually be moved; if not, it will still be there for the instructor to evaluate before it's eventually be deleted. Just my two cents on this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:26, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
I agree that these issues are now happening more often with educational projects than they should, and they don't do anyone any good, not the instructor, not the students, not WMF, not the community. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of my other account[edit]

Is it possible to delete my other account WIZRADICAL and transfer the copyright to the current account.FORCE RADICAL (talk) 11:27, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

You could try requesting a usurpation, but I don't know if it's possible in a case like that. Your best bet is to just link the two accounts. Just put a note on your user page stating that the old account was operated by you, and then everyone will know the contributions from the old account were also yours. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:44, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

How do I know if I am blocked?[edit]

I am making revisions to the Edmond Charlot page. Every time I try to add even a tiny bit of text I am told my content is not accepted. I am a loss to know why but looking at logs it appears I am considered a long-term abuser of Wikipedia, which if so I most certainly contest. Who do I speak to to resolve this? I wonder if I am being confused with someone else as I have done very little in Wikipedia and certainly not anything contentious. Danthony1 (talk) 11:32, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@Danthony1: If you were blocked you wouldn't be able to edit this page, so don't worry about that. Your edit was blocked by an automated edit filter which is designed to stop abuse to the Wikipedia. In this case it was blocked by Filter 58, which is designed to stop certain phrases being added to articles because 99% of the time they are being added by abusive users. It took me a while to find it but in this case your edit was disallowed because you used the phrase "this page has been", which is often used by one or more vandals. I have copied the content of your attempted edit to User:Danthony1/sandbox2 so that you haven't lost it entirely. This is evidently a well researched article; thank you for your effort writing it! It will require a little cleanup before becoming a Wikipedia article, however. In particular, your citation style is not the preferred one for Wikipedia articles. Please have a read of WP:REFBEGIN, which outlines how to cite references on Wikipedia. You should also remove the meta-level comments in the page (such as "this section was informed by..." and references to the French language Wikipedia article); the article should stand alone with just the information on the subject, not information on how the article was written or what it was based on (beyond citing references). Let me know if you have any further questions. Best, Sam Walton (talk) 11:52, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Test question[edit]

Test question added with button —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 20:11, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

This is more of a statement than a question. ;) - NsTaGaTr (Talk) 20:13, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
It is, i'm testing the teahouse gadget, something is off and i'm fixing it. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 20:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
/sits back/sips tea/ - NsTaGaTr (Talk) 20:33, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
It seems that the "Join the discussion" links cannot handle there being anything but level 2 headers on this page. My god, this script is so old ... It really needs some major work. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 20:39, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Right, at least the sections are ok again.. I'm not sure what the original intent of this join discussion links was. And if they are supposed to be duplicate with editsource etc.. Does anyone remember ? —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 21:57, 24 April 2017 (UTC)


asfjasl —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 20:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Test question2[edit]

another test —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 20:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
test reply 3 —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 21:55, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

New member question on page creation[edit]

I just became a member of the wiki community and tried to do my first page creation. The name of the page is Chickapig. II published the page and it had a high risk of deletion message pop up in red. Could you help guide me on what I need to do to make sure that the content will stay viewable? Thank you, bboyd85 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bboyd85 (talkcontribs) 20:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Bboyd85, and welcome to the teahouse, and to Wikipedia. You have started by attempting one of the most difficult tasks in Wikipedia. You might like to read WP:Your first article, and look for some WP:Reliable sources for your article. It might also be helpful to look at the layout of some similar articles. It is often a good idea to create new articles in draft space (Draft:Chickapig) so that you have time to edit and improve before the threat of deletion.Dbfirs 20:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello and thank you. Yes, this is definitely tougher than it looks and I don't even know how I am typing to you now. You may or may not get this message, but if you could guide me to what type of reliable sources to post with it. For example, do I need to post the website orthe or third party articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bboyd85 (talkcontribs) 21:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
The website would be OK as an external link, but is not an independent source. I'm struggling to find independent sources that are not just promotion or mentions. If they do not exist yet, because the game is too new, then perhaps it is too early to have a Wikipedia article. The game must have been written about (not just promoted) in independent reliable sources before it can have a Wikipedia article. Dbfirs 21:33, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
The types of reliable sources which you need are shown at WP:SOURCES. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:49, 24 April 2017 (UTC)


How's my editing so far is it ok, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Judahgreg (talkcontribs) 22:14, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Judahgreg. In a number of edits you have added content without adding a space after the prior content (and are also missing some needed spaces in the content you added). You are sometimes capitalizing non-proper nouns in running text, as well as not capitalizing proper nouns. You have added content in the middle of templates that have broken their output (as you did here) (it might help if you previewed your edits before committing with a save). But by far the most important thing I think you should understand is that every edit you make that adds new content should be accompanied by citation to a reliable sources that verifies your edits. We do not just add what we know off the top of our head. You have also inserted content into articles in a location that already has a citation, but where that existing citation does not verify your addition. That is something you should carefully avoid doing.
For example, in this edit:
  • there should be a space before 'The story focuses..."; and
  • "(Female Lead) should be "(female lead)" (if that addition belongs).
and in this edit:
  • "the win the" should be "to win the";
  • same issue with the lack of a space prior to your addition;
  • the last part of your edit adds new content without citing a reliable source;
  • the way that part is added, just before an existing source, falsely gives the impression that that content is verified by that source, when it is not; and
  • "Smackdown Live" is a proper noun and should be capitalized.
Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:02, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Cleaning alerts \ Solving problems[edit]

I am the official biographer for All information provided is 100% correct. I would be extremely grateful if you could kindly let me know how to solve any doubt\alarm in order to finalise a clean page. Many thanks for the kind cooperation in advance. Maoelarivoluzione Maoelarivoluzione (talk) 22:17, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@Maoelarivoluzione: In order to answer your question as correctly as possible, I must ask you one: Are you being paid to edit the article? If so, by whom? Gestrid (talk) 23:14, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Never mind that question. I saw this in your talk page history, which answers my question.
Anyway, because you are paid, you must read and follow what WP:PAID says. This is required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use. While you have already declared a conflict of interest, there are additional requirements if you are being paid by anyone to edit or create the article. Gestrid (talk) 00:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Actually I am NOT paid, but I am his official biographer. The biography I added was deleted but was 100% true. Is there a way to re-add it? Many thanks. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:17, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Maoelarivoluzione even if you are not being paid, being someone's official biographer still means that you almost surely have a conflict of interest (COI) with respect to the subject. Although COI editing is not something expressly prohibited by Wikipedia, it is something highly discouraged because it can lead to other more serious problems. So, I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and familiarize yourself with the kind of things the Wikipedia community expects from COI editors. You might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Ownership of content, Wikipedia's Law of Unintended Consequesnces and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:37, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Marchjuly, is there a way to provide a signed official biography by the person whose the page is about? Thanks (talk)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Maoelarivoluzione (talkcontribs) 15:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC+9) (UTC)
@Maoelarivoluzione: I'm not sure what you mean by "signed official biography", so I'll give you a general answer instead. Generally, only those subjects which satisfy Wikipedia's notability guideline are considered suitable for a stand-alone article. What you will need to establish is that Mao satisfies WP:MUSICBIO or WP:BIO and the best way to do such a thing is by showing that he has received significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Wikipedia articles about individuals are not really official biographies per se; rather, they just reflect information written about the subject in independent reliable sources. The information needs to be written in your own words and be supported by citations for verification purposes. In addition, all the article content must be in compliance with Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons since you want to write about a living person. If you feel you are able to do all of that and feel you can address the reasons why Mao (singer) has been nominated for deletion, then you can request in the deletion discussion that the article be moved to the draft namespace where you can continue to work on improving it and fixing any problems associated with it. When you believe the article is ready to upgradeded to article status again, you should request that it be reviewed per Wikipedia:Articles for creation, so that more experienced editors can assess it and offer advice on how to further improve it.
Finally, please try to sign your talk page posts as explained in WP:TILDE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Update of Wikiproject Banner[edit]

Hi there, I am actually working on developing the WP:BATS and I would like to update the banners of the parent wikiproject WP:MAM, in order to identify more easily the article to be improved. I am changing Template:WikiProject_Mammals, including the documentation in order to add the bats category, unfortunately nothing happened when I try to classify the page Common Noctule as part of the task force...I know that the template is semi-protected, however I should have the possibility of changing it following the criteria. Anyone got an idea? Many thanks in advance! Fulup56 (talk) 15:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Photos from other language wikis[edit]

How do I use a photo from Russian wikipedia on an English page? The photo I want to use is here but I can't get it to work on English wiki.:,_%D0%A2%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8C%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%9D%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B0#/media/File:Tanya_Savicheva_Masha_Putilovsaya.jpg If I search with any of those terms on Wikimedia I just get a blank. Thanks in advance. Mramoeba (talk) 23:34, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@Mramoeba: The photo needs to be either on the this Wikipedia or on Commons. You can't link the one on the Russian Wikipedia directly. I can't read the licencing information on the photo, but if it is freely licenced, then it can be uploaded to Commons. If it is not, then it must meet WP:NFCC criteria to upload here. RudolfRed (talk) 01:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Content creation[edit]

I have noticed that a lot of users go around suggesting pages for deletion because in the users opinions, the page is not noteworthy. Since that is subjective, how do you defend yourself against page deletion for your hard work? CRAuser (talk) 23:57, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi CRAuser. "Noteworthy" is actually not that subjective on Wikipedia. We have a main notability guideline that we all refer to as well as specialized notability guidelines like WP:BIO and WP:NBOOK. Show your article meets those guidelines and you'll be okay. --NeilN talk to me 00:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi CRAuser. You might find the information in WP:AFD#Contributing to AfD discussions helpful. You might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, in particular WP:PLEASEDONT. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:30, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
@Marchjuly That's very helpful! It's amazing how complicated Wikipedia is CRAuser (talk) 06:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Experienced editors[edit]

Do experienced editors have more power than beginners? If an experienced editor created a page, and a beginner editor marked it for deletion, would the page be deleted? CRAuser (talk) 23:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@CRAuser: Experienced editors have more knowledge of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, enabling them to write articles that meet those guidelines. Still, I've seen articles written by the most experienced editors deleted. It doesn't matter who tagged the article for deletion. What matters is that they provided a reason rooted in Wikipedia's policies and guidelines why the article should be deleted. --NeilN talk to me 00:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
And who gets the final say and decides if the article is deleted? CRAuser (talk) 00:31, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
A closer, often an admin, assesses the arguments and evidence put forward, and determines the conclusion of the discussion. But the closer is supposed to decide on the basis of who had the stronger policy-based arguments, not who yelled loudest, nor on his or her personal opinion. The closer should be someone who did not participate in the discussion. The closer will mark the discussion closed, and indicate the result. If the result is 'delete" the closer will usually do the actual deletion. If the result is not to delete, the closer will include a record of the result on the talk page of the article. If someone thinks that a closer acted improperly, not in accord with the arguments presented or not in accord with Wikipedia policy, the close can be reviewed at deletion review, but most closes are upheld there. Not all, by any means, however. Deletion review is mainly for procedural errors, not differences of opinion. DES (talk) 00:50, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
@CRAuser: Also see WP:!VOTE. Gestrid (talk) 01:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Also, also, I believe you're talking about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mao (singer), right? Gestrid (talk) 01:11, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
I was just speaking about articles in general. But that article was what made me curious, yes. CRAuser (talk) 03:11, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
That particular article is a very clear case for deletion. Its actual text is only one sentence, and it provides no evidence that its subject is notable. Who wrote it, and who proposed it for deletion, are irrelevant. Maproom (talk) 06:37, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

New Article Search Engine Indexing[edit]

Hello, I hope this indexing question is appropriate for this forum.

I recently participated in the creation of a Wiki article on Gryphon Investors and it was accepted for publication as a Start Class article. However, several weeks have passed and I can only find the Talk page in search engines. Does that have anything to do with the way it was contented or the process for approval? Thank you. Arsenl2017 (talk) 02:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Arsenl2017, the page Gryphon Investors is present on Wikipedia. We have no control over how search engines decide to index our articles. There are some tags that can be put on a page that ask search engines to bypass a page, but I don't see any of them on that page. DES (talk) 02:27, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
@DESiegel: The article does have a NOINDEX tag, which is now normal for newly created articles. A previous version of the article did get patrolled through the new page patrol process, which would remove the noindex tag, but subsequently the article was deleted and recreated so the noindex tag will have been reapplied and the article is in the long queue for new page patrol again. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:03, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Thnaks, I didn't know that. DES (talk) 04:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Does wikipedia generally do page for individual species?[edit]

I study a rather obscure group of insects. The page about their genus is just a stub, and no wikipedia pages exist for any of the 600+ species. I was thinking of making pages for at least some of them. So my question is...are species level pages generally made in wikipedia? Or are they not encouraged for non-notable groups? Zportman (talk) 02:03, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

You might be talking about Macrotera. Luckily we have some people who know about insects. You might consider asking User:Blythwood for advice, since he or she has already made some improvements to the Macrotera article that you created. Take a look at Category:Andrenidae to judge the level of detail that is provided in our current articles. If you are a specialist you will probably find people here who are eager to collaborate with you. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 02:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
You can also try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Insects. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

How to ask for reverse the decision of deletion[edit]

Hi, There is one page called KartRocket[[1]] which is got deleted due to lack of sufficient evidence of notability. Now, this article (brand) got significant coverage by independent reliable sources. What to do to get the page back. Raghavhere (talk) 05:57, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Raghavhere. I suggest you first discuss this with Darkwind who is the administrator who deleted the article per WP:CLOSECHALLENGE. It would probably be helpful if you could add a list of the sources you have found to your user sandbox and explain how they show the subject is now Wikipedia notable. Darkwind should be able to tell you whether a formal Wikipedia:Deletion review is needed of whether you can simply recreate the article using the new information you have found. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Marchjuly for your prompt reply. I will contact DarkWind and ask him to review the references. Raghavhere (talk) 07:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

How to create article for your organization[edit]

I wanted to create a new article for our organization but if I do it then it will violate the guidelines and can result in a conflict of interest. Someone, please help how can I get help from the community to create a page for our brand. We have coverage from news and it is about the funding, top management, and business model. Raghavhere (talk) 07:15, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Raghavhere. The fact that you are trying so hard to get your brand and organisation into Wikipedia indicates that you are here to promote it. Please understand that we are here to build an encyclopaedia, not to promote anything. There is no deadline. Have reliable sources unconnected with your organisation commented in depth about your funding, top management, and business model? If not, then those do not belong in an article. If reputable newspapers have covered you in depth, then you might meet our criteria for WP:notability; but as has been made clear to you, your conflict of interest makes it very hard for you to write an acceptable article. (Note also that if you are in any way paid to publcise Krafty, then you are violating Wikipedia's terms of service by not declaring this).
Wikipedia has little interest in what your organisation has said about itself, and even less interest in what you want to say about yourself. Any article must be based almost entirely on what independent sources have published about it. --ColinFine (talk) 11:22, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Bad positioning of notes, in Agritourism[edit]

Hiya. could some kind editor take a look at the positioning of notes, in Agritourism?

You'll spot a couple of notes that appear after the usual end of an article.

If you correct it, I'll see how you did it, so I learn.

Thanks in advance, Trafford09 (talk) 10:15, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Your problem was that you had included references (within ref tags) after the references section with its {{reflist}} template. I have turned those references into separate external links in this edit, but I haven't assessed whether they are appropriate external links. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:27, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

What can I publish about my ads at Roadside Rescue[edit]

Hi I am the owner operator at Ac Pro Jumpstart how do I fit into your guidelines for? (RonnieWoods (talk) 11:33, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi RonnieWoods. Just... don't. You are very welcome to help out on Wikipedia by editing, but using Wikipedia for advertising is not allowed. In fact, if you work for Ac Pro Jumpstart you should avoid writing about them here at all. Edit articles about your hobbies or interests by all means, but if you try and use Wikipedia as a free source of advertising, your account will be blocked. Yunshui  11:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)


Still learning how to edit and create pages. Have just created EdenTree. Hope it's right? I'd like to upload the logo for EdenTree and Allchurches Trust How do I go about uploading the logo in infobox? Seems really fiddly process. Is there a page on this somewhere? Can someone talk me through ... Thanks for your time. Joelionheart (talk) 12:54, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Invalid nofitications[edit]

I got these nonsense notifications (nothing has been linked):

Notifications inside, collapsed for readability by TigraanClick here to contact me 15:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

What is going on? Also, am I posting in the right place? --David Hedlund SWE (Talk) 13:20, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi David Hedlund, welcome to the Teahouse. Your post has been moved to Wikipedia:Teahouse. You must have "Page link" enabled at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo. The notifications are a delayed reaction to edits to {{Hallucinogens}}. It's the first article edits after the links were added to a template displayed by the articles. The job queue may not have updated the link tables for the articles after the template edit, so the software first registered the "new" links when the articles were edited. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Page link was enabled.
In this case I didn't find ‪Solanaceae‬ on the 25iP-NBOMe article. I still don't get it. Can you please explain more? David Hedlund SWE (Talk) 14:45, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

How to capitalize all characters on an article[edit]

Hello! I've been researching and seem to have run in to a dead end. Musical group LOCASH has an article that has incorrect page title capitalization. They are listed as "LoCash" which is not correct. It is always stylized uppercase. I attempted to use but it returns a warning: "Warning: Display title "LOCASH" was ignored since it is not equivalent to the page's actual title." But it does seem to be equivalent to me. Thank you in advance for your help. Here is the page: Peterstormer (talk) 16:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Is there a way to know how many articles there are on Wikipedia?[edit]

Is there a counter or something? The Verified Cactus 100% 16:17, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Try the WP:Magic words {{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}, which gives 5,393,113. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Another Search Indexing Question[edit]

Hello, this is a follow up to an earlier question I asked about search indexing. I'd like to know if there is a setting preventing the Gryphon Investors article page from showing up in search engines even though the related Talk page does.

I recently participated in the creation of the Gryphon Investors page and it was accepted for publication a few weeks ago as Start Class. On Page Information, it shows "Indexing by Robots: Allowed". Within the page code I see <meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow"/>.

The last time an update was made to this page was today.

Any advise would be appreciated. Thank you. Arsenl2017 (talk) 16:28, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Arsenl2017: The page will have the noindex tag which prevents indexing until it has been patrolled (a special software feature) or is 30 days old. The feature to automatically noindex new pages is relatively new and has not been coordinated with the claim on "Page information" which only checks other ways to control indexing. I think the 30 days started 11 April where the article was moved from a draft. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:43, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

user_talk section[edit]

Are we allowed to erase old user_talk posts/replies in our user_talk page? Songuitar333 (talk) 18:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Hello, Songuitar333. Yes (except unblock requests regarding a current block), but you might prefer to archive them instead. This can be done automagically by placing a notice and letting a bot do the dirty work, see the link I gave. TigraanClick here to contact me 18:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC) Thank you so much for your help!! Tigraan Songuitar333 (talk) 18:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)