Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:THQ)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


Question about sources[edit]

Help - getting my 4months+ submission reviewed[edit]

Hello to all! I have submitted last 1st december my submission on IADS following some works I did on department stores: Draft:International_Association_of_Department_Stores The same day, 1 user made a review and declined the submission, however I carefully followed his comments and significantly reviewed the submission according to his guidelines. I have been patiently waiting for a review until last March, and another reviewer made some comments that I followed. This is my first submission, won't be my last but before moving forward I would appreciate getting a review of this one. I do believe that it is now fit and follows all wikipedia rules. I am not compensated whatsoever for submitting this proposal (just in case). Thank you for your help! --Perchsquirell (talk) 11:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

The submissions are in pool. Some reviewers concentrate om topic areas, others omn oldest, others on news drafts. It is not a queue per se Fiddle Faddle 12:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
thank you Fiddle actually the reason why I am asking is that when I reverted to the first reviewer, he advised me to look for a new one here --Perchsquirell (talk) 13:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
@Perchsquirell they have a point, but, generally, you are at the whim and will of reviewers.You may well prompt/g=have already prompted a review, though Fiddle Faddle 13:40, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
@Perchsquirell: Try reading WP:NPOV for details. ~Wizdzy 12:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
thank you Wiz but actually, I have been reviewing this part a lot according to previous comments. Unless it is a question of command of English, there are no opinions stated in the text (I have removed all parts and all the information provided is backed by references) and I present also limitations on the topic and other opinions. If it is the way it is written that is problematic, can you orientate me or let me know which part is an issue? Thakn you --Perchsquirell (talk) 13:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
@Perchsquirrel: There's nothing wrong with the article in my opinion. I just saw the reasoning. ~Wizdzy 13:03, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
The comment mentioning NPOV does not apply to the current version of the draft, @Wizdzy:. It is the reason why the draft was declined back in December, but it has been substantially rewritten since then. If you want to check the differences between the way the draft read when it was declined and the way it reads today, you can always check the page's history. I agree with you that the draft as currently written is pretty neutrally written. --bonadea contributions talk 07:11, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Improving an Article / Reliable Source help[edit]

Hello. My entry was declined and I am having a difficult time improving it. Here is the link and note I received. Any help is greatly appreciated and I thank you for your time. I have updated the sources but perhaps I need to do more? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Postindustrial_(media) Comment: Sources are all self-published or too close related to the Subject, please see Wikipedia:Notability (media) CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:28, 13 February 2021 Dawnpalmyra (talk) 13:02, 12 April 2021 (UTC) Dawnpalmyra (talk) 13:02, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey Dawnpalmyra, and welcome to the Teahouse. I see a few issues still:
  • There seem to be a few things that are in the lead section but not in the body of the article. You should try to make it so the lead is a summary of the body.
  • In the history section, the sources are used wrongly. The WPR source does not mention Postindustrial at all, so it cannot be used to say something about it. The citation to Postindustrial itself does not actually say what it is cited for; and if you cite the subject of the article, you should always present it as a statement from the subject and not the objective truth.
  • In the content section, the part about the coverage area seems wrong. In the lead it says the coverage area is the rust belt and appalachia, and that is also what Postindustrial says they mean by "Postindustrial America" in the article you cited in the history section.
  • Also in the content section, you use a source in an inappropriate way: the Postindustrial article that you cite is an example of what you're talking about, but what you should cite is an independent source that says Postindustrial writes such articles.
  • Finally, in the last section there is an external link in the text. Either remove it or move the link to the "External links" section where it belongs.
I hope this helps. 86.89.77.70 (talk) 23:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Also note that Dawnpalmyra is one of the principals behind the organization, and therefore has a conflict of interest with respect to the article, which needs to be declared.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:45, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Credible source question[edit]

Why is the Indian Census website or domain .in blocked? It seems like a credible source to put as anyone who knows about credibility only from one class Whatergun110 (talk) 21:22, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

(I added a section title). David notMD (talk) 21:53, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
@Whatergun110: As eviddent from your logs, you tried to add a link to census2011.co.in, which is not published by the indian government, but rather by a private entity, as evident by the url saying .co.in rather than .gov. It will not get unblacklisted, please use this (grabbed from here) instead. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:56, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Just chiming in here, but I took a look at these sites whilst doing some random editing the other week. The problem with the official Indian census site is that it's horrible to use. All the actual data appears to be in Excel files that you have to download and pick through to find the bit you want. The census2011.co.in have done all that, and presented everything in a easy-to-use (and link to) form. So they're not just scraping the official site, they're essentially a secondary source (which is what we're supposed to use, isn't it?). If the Indian government presented their census in an even tolerably accessible way, we could (and should) use their site. But as it stands there's no way to get at the stuff in there without a ton of OR. Chuntuk (talk) 09:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Create spanish article from existing english article[edit]

whats the easiest way to go about creating a spanish version of an already existing english wikipedia article. Keep in mind i cannot speak spanish and im not very tech savy or familiar with the codinging for building these articles 190.58.17.51 (talk) 12:54, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

190.58.17.51, if you don't speak spanish, then please don't. Machine translations are seldomly (almost never) of a good enough quality to be usefull. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:24, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Like what Victor Schmidt says, don't translate if you don't actually speak spanish. While machine translations (i.e Google Translate) have gotten more accurate with languages such as Spanish, it is still not recommended as it may end up becoming Engrish (which is basically where you translate something from a different language and it ends up becoming something that makes no sense). Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:22, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
General guidance is at Translate us, but I agree with Victor. You might like to ask for help at es:WP:Café/Archivo/Ayuda/Actual. I confess I'm wondering why somebody who doesn't speak Spanish wants to create an article in es-wiki, and coming up with promotion as the most likely answer. If that is it, please don't! A Wikipedia article is not for the benefit of the subject. --ColinFine (talk) 15:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I am a Spanish girl with translating experience I am on wikipedia with a "translating mission". If you link the article I would love to work on it.Pupypau (talk) 11:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


Oh— good to know that merely any translator tool of internet is not as precise with regards to accuracyCaleb Jones Safley (talk) 04:21, 16 April 2021 (UTC)Caleb

Brand new to Wikipedia[edit]

All, I'm brand new to the platform, and I jumped in with a few edits, but I have absolutely no idea if they are helpful or not. Is there any sort of feedback system to explain if these changes were useful?

Thank you so much, John NerdOfAllTrades42 (talk) 18:53, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

There isn't necessarily a feedback system besides the thanks button. I will take a look at your recent contributions and let you know if they are helpful! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:56, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
NerdOfAllTrades42 I have taken a look at all of your contributions and they all seem to be very helpful. If you would like to continue copy-editing more articles then you might want to take a look at WP:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:02, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
But if you do copy-edit articles that are tagged as needing copy-editing, please be careful not to add language errors – this edit added multiple errors and looks like it was made using an automated tool for grammar checking, without looking carefully at the suggestions made by the tool. Tools like Grammarly must be used very carefully, since most of the things they flag as possible errors are not errors at at all. --bonadea contributions talk 06:10, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, I really appreciate the feedback!  NerdOfAllTrades42 (talk)

Need to go live with a draft[edit]

Hi, may I please ask for some help moving this page from draft to live? I thought hitting publish would publish it live, but it doesn't seem to work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sensor_Open_Systems_Architecture_(SOSA%E2%84%A2) Shotacoffey (talk) 03:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Shotacoffey: The "publish" button works more like a "save" button, while Draft:Sensor Open Systems Architecture (SOSA™) is like the save location of the content. I've added an actual submission button for you when you're ready for a reviewer to check. However, your article is unlikely to pass review because it is not written in a neutral point of view and the sources do not demonstrate notability of the subject. The prose also needs to be rewritten; its currently too vague and confusing for the common reader. Please read WP:YFA for more information about article creation. Thanks.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 03:37, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
All content in Background needs to be connected to citations. Wikipedia content needs to be verified. David notMD (talk) 09:30, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I just added a new article in the Esperanto Vikipedio.[edit]

I just added a new article in the Esperanto Vikipedio. How do I get it listed in all the other Wikipedias?

The subject is Intertel - the HIGH IQ society. EoGuy (talk) 04:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

EoGuy, assuming that your article is reviewed and accepted at the Esperanto Vikipedio, you will need to translate it into the different languages according to their respective Wikipedias' translation and article creation standards.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:25, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi EoGuy, I have added it to the Wikidata entry for the topic and it will now appear at the other Wikipedias that have an article. You can see it in the list of languages at Intertel. StarryGrandma (talk) 06:33, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Like [1], [2] Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 08:56, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Request edit for COI and changes address issues highlighted in template message.[edit]

Hello,

I have made an edit request on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_Kingdom_(production_company), the changes I believe address the two template messages, one that says 'contains content that is written like an advertisement.' and another that says 'may contain wording that promotes the subject through exaggeration of unnoteworthy facts.' I removed any exaggerated language in the about section and then updated the shows made and awards won using citations in the dedicated section of the page.

I think my mistake was making the changes before disclosing COI and instead of putting in an initial edit request I made edits directly onto the page. I had never edited a page like this before as I am new and have only done copy editing for tone or spelling and grammar. I do believe the changes I have suggested remove the promotional language, exaggeration and unnoteworthy facts - does this still require an edit request? Or is there another way?

Thanks for any guidance or advise! FrancescaAssistantProducer (talk) 09:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Article on worm charming[edit]

The article states: The earliest place to practice worm charming was in London, which is today in the UK. London was always in the same place, it has not moved from its position on the Thames in England. to imply that it has somehow moved is written English at its worst. 2A02:C7F:E819:FF00:F4F0:CBBE:598D:4E5D (talk) 09:30, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The UK has not always existed, which is what that wording is suggesting. However, if you feel that idea can be expressed differently, you are welcome to edit the article, or bring up your concerns on the article talk page, Talk:Worm charming. 331dot (talk) 09:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
A different problem is that there is no reference to validate worm charming originating in London. That means the sentence should be removed from the lead unless a ref is provided. David notMD (talk) 09:44, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
I removed it – I have been trying to find a source for the claim, and have failed. --bonadea contributions talk 09:46, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Biography on Wikipedia[edit]

Hello! I don't understand why I can not have my article about my biography on the Wikipedia. What am I doing wrong? please help me to find the solution!. Thank you. all the best, Helena Helenasul (talk) 12:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Helenasul Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that you have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. It is not a place like social media where people tell the world about themselves. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which has articles about people, typically written by independent editors that take note of a subject in independent reliable sources and choose on their own to write about it. Those articles should summarize what those independent reliable sources say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person(there are also more specific criteria for many fields, such as musicians). Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves, only in what others say about them. It is usually very difficult for someone to write about themselves in the manner required by Wikipedia; in essence you would need to forget everything you know about yourself and only write based on the content of independent sources. Most people cannot do that. People also naturally write favorably about themselves, which is why autobiographical articles are discouraged.
Lastly, a Wikipedia article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. There are good reasons to not want one. 331dot (talk) 12:08, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Helenasul, on your user talk page, you're told that "the page seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic". Another reason for deletion is that the deleted draft was unreferenced. (Compare, say, the article Maurizio Pollini: the reader is provided with references for what is said.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:40, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Review of a page to go live from draft mode[edit]

Colleagues: I sincerely appreciate your review of this page which is in the draft mode so it can go live. THANK YOU! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Neurosurgical_Atlas Acohenmd (talk) 12:45, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Acohenmd Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have submitted the draft for review. As noted on your draft, this could take months, you will need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 13:01, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Acohenmd, am I right in supposing that you are the Dr Cohen who produced this atlas? (Also, perhaps because I never even started on the road to becoming an MD, I'm surprised to learn that neurosurgery is a matter of "unspoken secrets".) -- Hoary (talk) 13:04, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
All refs need fixing. David notMD (talk) 13:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
And I REALLY DOUBT that Dr. Cohen took that photo of Dr. Cohen. David notMD (talk) 13:22, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Acohenmd I would clarify that typically the rights to a photo belong to the photographer, not the subject, unless you have a contract or other legal agreement assigning you the rights to images of you. 331dot (talk) 13:30, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Can you please advise what needs to be fixed in the references? The dates are in the references. Appreciate your help. I have been assigned the rights for this image. Do I need to do anything to move these forward. Thank you

Acohenmd I fixed all the refs (month before year) and turned duplication of refs into repeated uses of those refs. And removed the "unspoken secrets" sentence. Because. David notMD (talk) 15:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Acohenmd I recommend removing the photo of Dr. Cohen from the draft. Mentioning him by name as the founder is sufficient. The topic of the draft is the association, not him. David notMD (talk) 17:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Article rejected[edit]

I am trying to create an article about an important old school in Lebanon. My article is getting rejected with the following message:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

what should I do to have the article accepted? Makatra (talk) 13:21, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Makatra Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft was only declined, not rejected. Rejection would mean the draft cannot be reconsidered. Your draft does little more than tell of the existence of the school. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the school, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. The fact that the draft was only declined means that the reviewer thinks that is at least possible to do. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 13:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your welcome[edit]

I addressed this request to @User:Xezbeth but have had no response? Can you do something about this? Thank you {CAlexander783 (talk) 13:32, 14 April 2021 (UTC)}

CAlexander783, please read WP:BUSY. max20characters 🇺🇸 14:57, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Request to investigate omission please[edit]

Good afternoon @User:Xezbeth I noticed when reading Thandie Newtons Wikipedia article that you were a contributor. I have recently read her cover story in this months Vogue UK, and I noticed the racial bias she had faced in Hollywood from female producers nontheless- one in particular remarked that black actresses did not play University graduates. I deduce from your profile that apart from being a Wikipedia administrator you are also an inclusivist and pro-women. I would like to request you to investigate why the roles that Angelique Rockas [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelique_Rockas ](an artistic inclusivist , and some sort of pioneer) has acted with her own company Internationalist Theatre [5] are not even listed in the main space article, even though there are some production photographs. I noticed that in the Wikipedia article of another actor of South African descent Paul Herzberg , a contributor provided his Spotlight page as a record of his performances . I tracked down Ms Rockas `s Spotlight page [ https://www.spotlight.com/0938-4538-5216 ] and it would be beneficial don`t you think if you as an administrator could find the time to investigate omission and possibly ask someone to complete the page. Thank you . Keep safe {CAlexander783 (talk) 13:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)}

That is a lot of words, and not clear what your request is, nor why posted here at Teahouse (in addition to Xezbeth's Talk page). If you believe content should be added to Angelique Rockas, then either do it or suggest it on the Talk page of that article. P.S. 'Sign' your comments by typing four of ~ at the end. David notMD (talk) 15:10, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

PROBLEM with sorting numbers in charts[edit]

Can you help to SOLVE PROBLEM with wrong sorting numbers in charts.

Problem description:

Chart link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-segment#Sales_figures_in_Europe

If you try to sort numbers by years, smaller numbers (with 3 digits) come first.

Example: If we try to sort 2013. year, Maserati with number 339 come first?! Why? (I understand that 339 is bigger then 107,307 because of "," comma. But why this is not happen in A-segment to D-segment)

Can you solve this problem?

Thank you

P.S.

I place good chart example and problem chart examples in my sandbox (we could talk there if you want):

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:New_Heaven_%26_New_Earth/sandbox&oldid=1017763958 New Heaven & New Earth (talk) 14:19, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

There's a SPACE character between the pipe and the number e.g | 339 Which means the table is sorting by the SPACE, then the 3, because (in computer terms) SPACE is alphabetically before everything that's why (SPACE)339 gets sorted to the top. - X201 (talk) 14:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi New Heaven & New Earth, welcome to the Teahouse. Leading spaces are ignored so the above reply is wrong. 339 didn't come first before, it came last, so I don't quite understand your post. I added data-sort-type=number | in the column header to specify numerical sorting per Help:Sorting#Forcing a column to have a particular data type, so 339 does come first now.[3] I don't know whether VisualEditor can do it. I use the source editor. If no data-sort-type is specified then it depends on circumstances wehther the software chooses numerical sorting. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:05, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you friends for helping, it means a lot to me (I am trying all day to solve this problem with no success).

For X201 in chart: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:New_Heaven_%26_New_Earth/sandbox&oldid=1017763958#F-segment_=_PROBLEM there is no SPACE to make problem, but as you can see any column from 2013 to 2017 does not sort properly.

For PrimeHunter I quote your sentence: "339 didn't come first before, it came last, so I don't quite understand your post." When you click 2013. year in before 339 come first (it should be last not first). So there is a problem. (that is what I see)

But, your solution of added code data-sort-type=number | solve this problem.

Thank you very much

God bless you

New Heaven & New Earth (talk) 18:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@New Heaven & New Earth: I referred to clicking once to sort in increasing order. Maybe you are talking about clicking twice to get decreasing order. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Yes! We understand each other now. And, without your help with adding code data-sort-type=number | other charts cannot proper sort numbers.

I still don't know why A-segment chart can proper sort numbers without adding code, and in other charts like before we must add code data-sort-type=number |.

If we know the cause of problem we can avoid future problems.

I saw the same problem on page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J-segment

I will correct that page in future with your code.

I am very grateful for your help.

May God keep you live, healthy and happy in this time of trouble

New Heaven & New Earth (talk) 20:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@New Heaven & New Earth: Help:Sorting#Configuring the sorting says: "By default, the system tries to guess the data type in each column. It does this by looking at the first five rows and evaluating their contents."
Before the only years with numbers in all the first five rows were 2019 and 2020 so those two years sorted numerically. It's often best to add the wanted data-sort-type= anyway in case something changes later. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:05, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
(e/c) @New Heaven & New Earth: Basically it comes down to the fact that the wiki software can be a bit stupid. The software can either sort entries alphabetically or numerically, and when you make a table the software tries to figure out which method to use. It gets it right most of the time, but occasionally it'll sort a list of numbers alphabetically, in which case it lists all the numbers starting with 1 first, regardless of the number of digits, then all the numbers starting with 2 etc. Sometimes it gets really confused and tries to sort some cells alphabetically and some cells numerically in the same column, which results in the problem you noticed where you get a list that mostly sorts properly but which has a few random numbers that just get added to the start or end out of place (because the software thinks they're text, not numbers). This is particularly a problem with lists that contain things like references or notes, so individual cells contain both numbers and text. data-sort-type=number |. tells the software the data is numbers and should be sorted numerically in ascending order. Help:Sorting contains more information on setting up tables so they sort properly. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:09, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you PrimeHunter and User:86.23.109.101 you are wonderful friends.

Without your explanations I wouldn't be able to understand why Wikipedia software sorts numbers randomly.

Your answers are invaluable and will surely help others who are facing with a similar problem. (these answers should be on the Q&A list)

There is so much to learn and I hope that we will talk again in future.

God bless you friends

New Heaven & New Earth (talk) 22:05, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft tone - Help[edit]

Hello

I hope you're fine. Anyone here with experience to help in this draft. The tone must be formal and encyclopedic.

Thanks Art&football (talk) 15:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

STATUS: Declined four times. David notMD (talk) 17:42, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Jay shah is nagar vania[edit]

 Omkar omkar (talk) 15:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Omkar omkar: What language are you speaking in? This is the English Wikipedia. Google Chrome icon (September 2014).svg Creamepuff 15:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
@Omkar omkar: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to add a claim to a Wikipedia article about a person's caste or ethnicity, you must have independent sources showing that it is information that might be relevant for the person. Caste is a sensitive topic, and deeply personal to many people, and so there are particularly high requirements for reliable sources when it comes to that. In most cases, it is best not to include such information at all, unless it is clearly particularly relevant for the person. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 15:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Appears to have been indef blocked. MEisSCAMMER(talk)(contribs) 16:40, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
For the record, looks like attempted vandalism at Jay Shah (an Indian politician). JavaHurricane 04:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

How to debate RfD result?[edit]

Is there a parallel of WP:Deletion Review with redirects? NotReallySoroka (talk) 15:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@NotReallySoroka: Deletion review applies to any deletion coming from a speedy delete or discussion including Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion RudolfRed (talk) 16:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Are there any tools to check our own PROD stats similar to AFD stats[edit]

I am looking for a tool that can help me know my PROD success. Like we have one for AFD [4]. Does any such tool exists? Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:42, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Nomadicghumakkad: If you've been nominating things for PROD via Twinkle you can set it to track both CSDs and PRODs for you. That would only help going forwards, however. I don't know if there's a script someone has that will assess past stats Nosebagbear (talk) 16:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for this tip. Yes, I use twinkle. Will check how to set this up! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:56, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

WHY WAS THE BELOW REJECTED SINCE REFERENCE WERE SUPPLIED TO SUPPORT THE SUBJECT?[edit]

<Copyright violation removed, please do not hat this in the future but remove immedately, with extreme prejudice, and ask for revdeletion--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)>

 Zanesville320 (talk) 17:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
The left you a note for why it was rejected, specifically to see Help:Referencing for beginners and learn how to do references. Heiro 17:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Your draft User:Zanesville320/sandbox was Declined and then Rejected because the company's own website cannot be used as a reference to establish notability. David notMD (talk) 17:46, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Can you help me. I accidentally put a link instead of a citation in a botulism page. Can you help me remove the link?[edit]

 Psyduckwet (talk) 18:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Done. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:58, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Help me to improve my first draft ever[edit]

I have submitted a Draft and I want to know if there are more ways to improve it. Like I have seen radio links and stuff on other pages. Thank you! Soundsfromwater (talk) 19:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Austen (musician), submitted five days ago. Was Speedy deletion tagged and that was removed. David notMD (talk) 19:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
What matters in whether a draft is accepted or not really comes down to two things: 1) the quality of the references (are they all reliable and containing significant coverage of the subject, and most of them independent of the subject); and 2) the quality of the text: is it neutral, encyclopaedic in tone, and entirely based on what people unconnected with the subject have published about the subject. Anything else (eg lists of tracks, albums, or gigs, and external links, pictures, infoboxes) is a "nice to have" which will not affect whether the draft is accepted or not. --ColinFine (talk) 20:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Who can write an article/page?[edit]

Would an unpaid person who services on the Board of Directors of a non-profit organization be an inappropriate person to write an article about the organization? Russell Moxie (talk) 19:01, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Russell Moxie I would first direct you to the conflict of interest policy as I think it might answer your question. In short, it is not forbidden for someone to write such an article, but there are several pitfalls involved. First, the organization must be shown with sigificant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Independent reliable sources does not include press releases, the organization website, interviews with organization personnel, brief mentions, announcements of routine activities, or other primary sources. If the organization is notable, you would need to set aside everything you know about the organization and only write based on the content of those sources, summarizing them. Most people in what I assume is your position have great difficulty doing that. If you truly feel that you can do these things, you should create and submit a draft at Articles for Creation. I might suggest that you read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial first. 331dot (talk) 19:06, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

 Amarquezwheeler (talk) 19:19, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I need somebody to read two of my recent articles[edit]

Hi everyone! I've been recently active working in two articles on Argentinian towns, which are San Martín de los Andes and Puelches, La Pampa. I'm an experienced editor, so I kinda know my way about editing on wiki. The problem is that I'm not a native English speaker, so I'd appreciate if somebody who knows the language at a very good level could read them and correct them. Grammar, punctuation and such. I came here because I don't wanna overload the Guild of copyeditors (also not planning to take to GA status or such).

I'd apprectiate your help. Many thanks!--Gunt50 (talk) 19:37, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

 Russell Moxie (talk) 19:52, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

i am going to be honest, those are well written and i recommend taking them to featured status162.245.178.141 (talk) 22:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Current ratings are Start-class and Stub-class, respectively. In my opinion, they are already better than that. Perhaps any editor who does a once-over for English will be willing to upgrade. However, I would not take the suggestion of IP editor 162 seriously, as has been editing only five months, and has never participated in a GA or FA. David notMD (talk) 22:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
I was thinking they are better than their current raitings. However I guess it's up to the WikiProject Argentina to judge which is the current class for both of them, as they have their own scale. From my standpoint, they don't meet the criteria for GA or such, having done some myself. Now I need somebody with a better level of English to read them, so I can be sure they're okay.--Gunt50 (talk) 10:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Patera Building article[edit]

The Patera Building article has a proposed deletion notice due to lack of links to other parts of Wikipedia. The building is of historic importance. It is the subject of a listing application to Historic England. The article is work in progress. I intend to edit to include photos and links to Mark Whitby, Tony Hunt Michael Hopkins, 20th Century Society, Historic England London Dockland Development Corporation, Canary Wharf, and others. I am new to this. Please help with positive suggestions. Please let me know how to remove proposed deletion notice - I can't find the wording on the page. Nigel PG Dale (talk) 21:30, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Nigel PG Dale, and welcome to the Teahouse. The lack of links to other Wikipedia articles is not the reason why it has been proposed for deletion: that is a superficial problem, easily remedied. The proposed deletion is because the proposer, DoubleGrazing, claims that it does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability; that is, that there do not exist sufficient independent reliable sources that treat the subject at sufficient length to ground an article. As the Proposed deletion notice says, anybody may remove it, if they disagree. But it will then be open to the proposer, if they wish, to submit the article to the articles for deletion process, which will initiate a discussion. I presume (but have not looked to verify), that DoubleGrazing looked at the sources currently cited, and decided they were insufficient, and looked for other sources, before concluding that the building does not meet the criteria for notability. I have pinged DoubleGrazing here, so they should see this discussion. --ColinFine (talk) 21:49, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I have added to the article, uploaded an image, and added links to various independent sources eg 20th Century Society ( a charity charged with recording and helping conserve important buildings) and Historic England ( a Government agency responsible for the listing process). I can add sources such as Architectural Review, London Festival of Architecture and other published, publicly available references if necessary. Whether or not DoubleGrazing took the time to look at the sources might be open to question.

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: Patera Building @Nigel PG Dale: I saw you deprodded the article, but didn't address the limited sourcing. You only linked terms to other articles. I think you are confusing adding sources with adding wiki-links to other Wikipedia articles. You could add info from this [[5]], and may be able to find more sources. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.) TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:07, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
I created sections. Agree that there are swathes of text with no references. David notMD (talk) 23:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
@ColinFine: thank you for pinging me. @Nigel PG Dale: you are quite right, I did not verify the offline sources, as I do not have access to them. I looked at how these sources were cited: each only once, against basic statements which largely seem to verify that the building exists. That does not imply to me significant coverage sufficient to establish notability. (Meanwhile the great majority of the article was, and remains, unsupported by citations.)
On a separate but related point, it was also not clear to me what the importance or significance of the building is/was; this may of course be perfectly obvious to an expert in the field of architecture or construction engineering, but not necessary to most readers of a general encyclopaedia. For that reason, the lead paragraph should help even an uneducated reader such as I grasp the essential meaning, by setting the context, summarising the key points of the article, and establishing clearly why the subject is important and notable enough to warrant entry in an encyclopaedia.
FWIW, I would argue that work is needed on all these fronts, and were I to come across this article now for the first time, I would probably propose deletion again. Which is to say, I won't, of course, but someone else could. Hope this helps, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
What we have now is an article about a prefabricated steel industrial building which could be bolted together on site, but seemingly never went into widespread construction. Hardly a unique notion. Broad swathes of the article are unreferenced, which is never a good indicator. Either the referencing should be improved to better demonstrate notability, or all unreferenced content should be trimmed away. Would the remaining content be worthy of an encyclopedia article? I am unsure but not optimistic. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your help on this. I will certainly edit the introductory paragraphs to make much more of the project's place in the PopArt and popular culture of the time with links to the imagery of Archigram, Ron Herron, Future Systems, Jan Kaplicky, Buckminster Fuller, Andrew Holmes, Paolo Soleri and others. Also, links can be made to other intended to be mass-produced futuristic designs of the same period: Delorean 'Back to the Future' and Sinclair C5 electric cars. Contemporaneous, these should set the context for the Patera Building's place in history.

Nigel PG Dale No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Articles about a thing - in this instance a pre-fab building - are about the thing, NOT about other stuff. Not Archigram, not Ron Herron, not Jan Kaplický. not Future Systems, etc., etc., etc. Not Nissen hut, not Quonset hut, not Romney hut, not Dymaxion deployment unit. Examples of other pre-fab designs can be mentioned in a See also section, as done at Quonset hut. STAY ON TOPIC. David notMD (talk) 11:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Specifically, your two paragraph addition to the History section of Patera Building, describing post-WWII England as context, has absolutely nothing to do with the topic - a pre-fab building designed in 1982. I removing all of it. And the paragraph mentioning cars. David notMD (talk) 11:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice - I don't mind you removing irrelevant material. This building does have a context though, and as a design is very widely admired as it was innovative and in terms of fabrication, it has never been surpassed.

Uploading Videos[edit]

Hi everyone, I would like to find out how I can upload a long video with a duration of 1hr or more on wikimedia commons. I struggle to do that, as result of this I have to cut the videos and make it shorter to upload on wikimedia commons. I will be glad if the community show or teach me the best way to upload a long video on wikimedia commons. Thanks. Jwale2 (talk) 21:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jwale2, and welcome to the Teahouse. COmmons is a separate project from Wikipedia, and you should really ask there. I suggest starting with C:Commons:Video, and if you can't find the answer there, ask at C:Commons:Village pump. --ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you ColinFine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwale2 (talkcontribs) 22:50, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
You can't do that because a one-hour-long video wouldn't be suited for an article on Wikipedia. 10 minutes is probably the longest you would need for a Wikipedia article. If you really need an hour-long video, I would say that you put it on an online video sharing service. Littleb2009 (talk) 15:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

can you have multiple accounts[edit]

hello i was wondering if it was possible to create a second wiki account for a friend? i suppose i could go over to her house, but with covid-18 corn teens that makes it difficult. basically how can i get her an account so she can edit wikipedia 162.245.178.141 (talk) 22:25, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I don't quite understand what you are asking. Every editor is encouraged (but not required) to create an account, which is personal to them and should not be shared with other editors. They may log in to that account as many times and in as many places as they wish. It is permitted in certain circumstances for an editor to use more than one account (see WP:VALIDALT), but no account should ever be shared by several people.
It occurs to me that you might be thinking, as some people do, that there is some connection between the name of an account and the articles which may be edited by that account: this is not so. With few exceptions, any editor (whether logged in or not) may edit any page.
Does this answer your question? --ColinFine (talk) 22:52, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
In summary, the answer to your question would be a “yes” insofar as you have read WP:LEGITSOCK and are ready to follow the instructions. But the answer to the content of your question is a no, if your friend wants to become an editor here all you need to is to mail her the methods, all of which from start to finish wouldn’t take a quarter of an hour. Celestina007 (talk) 23:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
For security reasons, it is strictly forbidden for any person to share the password of a Wikipedia account with any other person. If any such sharing is discovered, all of the involved accounts will be blocked indefinitely. My wife and I have been married for 39 years and we share everything. But she does not know my Wikipedia password. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

question about suspicious "wikipedia foundation"[edit]

hello friends I saw on the home page that wiki is owned by wikipedia foundation. this is concerning, as I though wikipedia was owned by all of us. I also see a bunch of copycat wikis linked on the main page. can these be deleted as wikipedia is superior? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.245.178.141 (talkcontribs) 22:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Foundation is the body that houses the servers for Wikimedia projects, one of which is Wikipedia. The other wikis you're seeing are either Wikipedias in different languages or a sister Wikimedia project that does not function as an encyclopedia but as something else. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Please read Wikimedia Foundation to learn about the group that provides hosting and software support to Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is not "superior" to other language Wikipedias or other free knowledge projects hosted by the WMF. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:36, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Assuming you refer to Main Page, it says: "Wikipedia is hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization that also hosts a range of other projects". The Wikimedia Foundation does not own the copyright to Wikipedia. The contributions belong to the editors who release them with the license given at MediaWiki:Wikimedia-copyrightwarning. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

New WikiProject[edit]

Can I make my own WikiProject? 64.121.103.144 (talk) 00:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

This should help Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Creating a WikiProject. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:22, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Also you're not supposed to edit Template:WikiProject directly, as it says in the banner at the top, you're supposed to copy it to a new page. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 00:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I've substituted the template onto the page and reverted your edits to the template, please make any further edits to Draft:Wikipedia:WikiProject SpaceX directly. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 00:37, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Publishing articles on Wikipedia[edit]

Who is eligible to publish articles in the Wikipedia? Dbaidoo (talk) 00:34, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Dbaidoo: It's the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Check out WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Editing does not mean adding new articles. I made some attempts to add new articles but failed because they were rejected. Dbaidoo (talk) 00:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
In order to create an article directly, a new editor must be autoconfirmed. That means that the account is at least four days old and has made at least ten edits. Any new article must comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or it will probably be deleted. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Let's start over. Dbaidoo - You established an account in May 2020 and have done hundreds of edits on existing articles. However, per your Talk page, your attempts to create articles were Speedy deleted for various reasons, including copyright violations because you copied content verbatim. So it's not a question of who. You are eligible. If you intend to create a new article, per Tim's note, I recommend WP:YFA. That includes instructions on how to create a draft and submit it for reviewer decision to accept or decline or reject. David notMD (talk) 02:07, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Remember, "anyone can edit" means "anyone can remove what you just did, if it's not genuinely an improvement". DS (talk) 14:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Marshals of the Empire[edit]

 From Burgundian Feudalism (talk) 01:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC) Alert! There might have been an edit war occurring for article, Marshal of the Empire. Please help resolve his issue. From Burgundian Feudalism (talk) 01:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

A user, Marshal Davout III has been reverting good faith edits that genuinely is reasonable. From Burgundian Feudalism (talk)

@Burgundian Feudalism: I have left them a note and invited them to discuss on the talkpage. On a side note, you have like three signatures in this request, which makes it read pretty weird? You only ever need one signature for most things :) CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 03:39, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! But this issue is still going on right now... I really mean it. Someone reversed Marshal Davout III’s edit, and I think the edit conflict will widen. From Burgundian Feudalism (talk) Calm down. Other editors can help. Thegreatsoldiers (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

On Arbitration Amendments[edit]

I know of the seriousness of arbitrations, but how can I ask for a potential amendment to a sanction? NotReallySoroka (talk) 03:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

NotReallySoroka, amendments to arbitration cases are requested at WP:ARCA though it may be worth to discuss said request once with other experienced editors before taking it there. JavaHurricane 04:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Where to do so? NotReallySoroka (talk) 04:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
NotReallySoroka, I would suggest asking at the user talk page of the administrator who imposed the sanction, and at the user talk page of a more experienced editor you've interacted with. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Addendum to my reply: in case you are subject to a sanction imposed under WP:DS, the correct place to appeal/request for changes, etc. is WP:AE. WP:ARCA is used for requesting clarifications and amendments in arbitration cases; AE is used for appeals about sanctions imposed by administrators using DS. JavaHurricane 04:53, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
How about a clarification request? Do I need evidence and/or proof of discussion before I can raise one? For the record, it is that another editor has a topic ban lifted for half a year, and the time period has passed, but WP:AEDR still list the restriction as lifted. I would like to ask about whether a certain past comment of theirs violate the topic ban (if it's still in effect). Sorry for the confusion, NotReallySoroka (talk) 23:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Submitting an article[edit]

Hello Hoary, many thanks for your message! I have edited the collections list only with the ones that can be verified via links in English. I intended to write a very concise article on the artist and list only relevant information that can be verified. I haven't included awards or an excessive list of exhibitions, to allow other users to complete as well, please do let me know if I should edit anything else. I appreciate your help, I'm making my best to follow your notes. Thank you! Melloncita (talk) 08:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Pinging Hoary.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 09:02, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Courtesy: This is in reference to Matilde Marín, which has been accepted as an article after an initial decline. David notMD (talk) 11:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Congratulations on the promotion to article status, Melloncita. Note that it's perfectly OK to provide references that aren't to web pages, and references to material that are in Spanish, French, German, Italian, or any other language. -- Hoary (talk) 12:09, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Publish problem on Tawag ng Tanghalan[edit]

Hi, I am clarifying an edit on Tawag ng Tanghalan and I also added a reference that is error after publishing. After that I fixed the error ref but it doe'snt want me to publish it, see this. A warning will pop-out after you fix it. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 10:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@SeanJ 2007: Welcome to the Teahouse! When creating a new section on a talk page like this, please post at the bottom for maximum visibility.
After I fixed the <ref>...</ref> tags, I received a warning about a protection filter on lessandra.com.ph. I simply removed the URL and saved my edit. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:41, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Greetings and Communications Test[edit]

Greetings. I am writing this message because I have an on-again/off-again relationship with this account and by writing this I hope to test a number of features, including but not limited to asking questions and receiving notification of other users answers or responses. I invite you to respond with your own greeting, questions or links to resources an outsider may find useful. Fundy Yeoman (talk) 11:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm quite confused, but I think(?) that you want to test pings, so @Fundy Yeoman, here you go. — Berrely • TalkContribs 12:06, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. Your confusion is the most interesting contribution because I thought I had been so clear. Thank you for this reflection and test of "pings" but I am also interested to see how I am notified if a user responds to something of mine without a "ping"? Is the signature in the "tilde" considered a "ping"? Fundy Yeoman (talk) 12:13, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Fundy Yeoman, without a “ping”, you won't receive a notification. Some people add a page to their Watchlist to keep track of all edits to it. The signature simply signs of your message, helping users identify who it came from. — Berrely • TalkContribs 12:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
If someone edits something on your talk page, you receive a notification. Sometimes just using their name (for you it would be Fundy Yeoman) gives them a notification. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:04, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Fundy Yeoman: You will only automatically be pinged with responses on your talk page. On other pages, the responding editor will have to ping you. All experienced editors know this, but if you want to ensure everyone pings you, you can include a ping request on whatever comment you make on another page. This is usually only necessary if you are not watching the page on your watchlist. For busy pages, watching may not be feasible or desired. Also, to notify others, you will need to sign your posts with the four tildes, except on their talk pages. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 13:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Timtempleton: @Blaze The Wolf: @Berrely: Thank you, this has been educational.
No problem! Happy to help! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Never thought I'd have to come here again, but....[edit]

How do I make a guestbook? Macadamia of the LeafWings | ROAR!! | Contribs |Sandbox 12:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

User:Macadamia of the LeafWings You just need to make a page somewhere in your userspace (for example User:Macadamia of the LeafWings/Guestbook), set it up however you want with text and images then set up a link to it on your userpage/signature etc. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 12:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you!

Macadamia of the LeafWings | ROAR!! | Contribs |Sandbox 13:09, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

How to Publish 1st Article ?[edit]

How can i make my 1st article live ? Tarn Dhiman (talk) 13:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Tarn Dhiman You have misused your User page by creating an 'article' about yourself there. It will be deleted very soon. Attempts at autobiography, even if created as a proper draft, are frowned upon. Unless you are famous enough that other people are publishing stuff about you, there is no chance that you are notable enough to qualify as the subject of a Wikipedia article. David notMD (talk) 14:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
This is called a conflict of interest. If I were you, I would edit some already existing articles and improve them, to get a feel for Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. You can also try the Wikipedia Adventure or adopt a user program. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!!1!11!! (talk) 16:07, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Can High Honor members of the National Honor Society get a article[edit]

I want my own article but I know your will be deleted if your not notable so does National Honor Society mean you can create a article on yourself — Preceding unsigned comment added by Demons x Nevaeh2003 (talkcontribs) 14:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

  • To be a bit blunt, No, winning a scholarship or the like for the National Honor Society would not be sufficient to qualify for an article on it's own, we don't even have a list type article of winners. The fundamental guideline for inclusion in the encyclopaedia is WP:GNG, which requires you to have been covered in multiple substantial reliable sources that are independent of you, e.g. full length national/regional newspaper articles about you, substantial coverage in reliable published books, or articles on reliable news websites. I would also advise you to read the conflict of interest guidelines at WP:COI and the autobiography guideline at WP:AUTO. It is extremely difficult to write about yourself in a neutral way that is supported by sources (e.g. making sure your birthday is actually in one of the sources you cite), so it is very strongly discouraged. If think that you would qualify for an article and you would still like to write an autobiography you should read the Biographies of living persons guidelines at WP:BLP, especially the sourcing requirements, and use the articles for creation process, which will involve an experienced editor checking your draft before it is added to the encyclopaedia. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:48, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox Usage[edit]

I have encountered a sandbox - I will not here mention the user, as this might not be the proper forum for such identification - which to me has been constructed as an alternative, WP:PROMO-heavy WP:BLP intended as a whitewashed version of the main article. I do not wish to suppress any editors' attempts to learn how to edit or create articles, but a clear end-around of an article the editor does not like (and perhaps has a WP:COI) seems inappropriate. My questions to you: Are there any explicit policies concerning what can, and what can not, be included in a personal sandbox? And secondly, where does one go on-site to have sandboxes evaluated impartially, with a possible result being administrator-mediated page deletion? Thanks. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 14:39, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, there are. If the sandbox is purely promotional content, it may be deleted under criterion WP:G11, Unambiguous advertising or promotion. It's fine to identify the user if you want, as sandboxes aren't private pages. @JoJo AnthraxBerrely • TalkContribs 15:03, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your help, Berrely JoJo Anthrax (talk) 16:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Archive organization on Talk Pages?[edit]

Greetings. Could someone direct me to educational resources about organizing talk pages into Archives? If there are no specific resources, could you please provide a short tutorial? Thank you for your time. Fundy Yeoman (talk) 15:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Do you mean your own Talk page or article Talk pages? David notMD (talk) 15:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Fundy Yeoman, you can set up automatic archiving by following the instructions at Help:Archiving a talk pageBerrely • TalkContribs 15:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
There's actually a bot that can do it for you. I don't remember the exact name of it though so you'll have to wait for another host to give you a courtesy link to the bot. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
As linked above. — Berrely • TalkContribs 15:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I believe it is User:Lowercase sigmabot III. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!!1!11!! (talk) 16:02, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia[edit]

Hello I'm new to Wikipedia how does this how does this app work Eep Crood (talk) 15:31, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome, Eep Crood! The English Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and it is edited and expanded by its users, instead of by an editorial board. If you want to learn more on how to edit, please see WP:HI. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!!1!11!! (talk) 16:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

There's also a training adventure game called TWA (The Wikipedia Adventure). Hope you have fun editing! EditJuice (talk) 18:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

You can make articles too and practice editing or making articles in your sandbox. Be sure to avoid vandalism and be civil. EditJuice (talk) 18:41, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

hi[edit]

 Poshbillionaire2 (talk) 15:39, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Welcome to the Teahouse. Did you have a question? Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Untitled question (which might be about flirting)[edit]

1st: Hi, 2nd: I- is it (maybe secretly?) like against the rules but if kinda acceptable to do so... flirt someplace via wikimedia ("divisions"?) ? Like as in just in general generally regarding speaking with one anotherCaleb Jones Safley (talk) 04:30, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I've now read this question (if it is a question) three times, and it still makes no sense to me. You may wish to rephrase it, Caleb Jones Safley, so that it will be understandable. In the meantime, this website is an encyclopedia. -- Hoary (talk) 12:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Using a bot[edit]

I was curious whether there were any bots or scripts that could be used to remove external links from the body of an article. I'm specifically looking to remove the links from Tiny Desk Concerts and Getting Doug with High, but I don't feel like spending the time going through and manually removing every single link. Any suggestions would be appreciated. TipsyElephant (talk) 15:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Regarding Getting Doug With High, my recommendation would actually be to perform WP:BEFORE and consider nominating the article for deletion, as the best two sources I can find about the podcast (admittedly not a thorough search) are this article from Vulture (which is reliable, independent, and contains quite substantial coverage) and this one from the Los Angeles Times which is an interview. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:36, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@TipsyElephant: In the meantime, though, I whipped up a little user script that will do this: User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/elRemover.js. You can install it by adding the line mw.loader.load("/w/index.php?title=User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/elRemover.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript"); to your common.js page. Once you install it, You should see a new button whenever you're in editing mode on a mainspace article called "remove external links (in the "More" menu, or just as a new button along the top if you're using the Monobook skin). Once you click it, it'll try to detect and replace external links throughout the currently-loaded section, and then give you a popup with how many external links it tried to replace.
A caveat, though: it's doing a relatively simplistic regular expression, so false positives and false negatives are definitely possible. I tried to do a simple check to avoid external links that are part of references, but there's only so much regex can do, so the script is serious when it asks you to check the diff of your changes and make sure the changes are what you want before you save the edit. Remember, ultimately you're still responsible for edits that you make with the assistance of a script or tool. Writ Keeper  17:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Review my Article for Roger Pomerantz[edit]

My first attempt for publication was rejected for WP:Basic, not sufficiently notable. The form and references seem to pass. Does anyone have any advice thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Roger_J._Pomerantz,_M.D.&oldid=1014388783 Kendall Bio (talk) 16:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Kendall Bio, your article reads more like a curriculum vitae than an encyclopedia article, and may indeed be based upon Pomerantz's cv. You need reliable sources which are unconnected to the person, in-depth, published and neutral. Go and find them!--Quisqualis (talk) 17:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm afraid that the references in the draft do not show that the person in question would qualify for an article. WP:GNG, the basic standard for WP:Notability requires that the subject of the article must have been the subject of Multiple, substantial, reliable, independent sources.
  • Substantial means that the source must contain a significant amount of coverage of the person, routine announcements that they've joined/left companies are not substantial sources.
  • Reliable means that the source must have some kind of editorial control. Things like google scholar searches are not reliable
  • Independent means the source must not be connected to the subject. Press releases (from places like PRWeb and PRnewswire) and announcements from the companies he's worked at are not independent.
A source must satisfy all three criteria to count towards establishing notability, and notice that the standard requires Multiple sources. You would be looking for things like newspaper articles on him, coverage in reliable, independent books and coverage on reliable news websites, see WP:Reliable sources for advice on what you would be looking for, and WP:Perennial sources for a list of sources that often turn up and community assessment on their suitability. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 17:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

a[edit]

Localrussan (talk) 17:33, 15 April 2021 (UTC) a

Hi there! Did you have a question? Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Page deletion[edit]

Hi, I've recently requested that the page Sandy Montenegro Littlefield be speedily deleted. She is a client who claims no association with the article creator Littlefieldassistant, understands that she is not notable for a Wikipedia article and does not want an article about herself here. Additionally, I've checked the current sources and her general notability online - I could not find independent and reliable sources, so she clearly doesn't meet WP:GNG.

Her picture was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons without her permission, as well. The article referenced by Littlefieldassistant in the permission section of the picture here does not contain this picture and is not in the public domain by any means.

I am unsure as to which kind of disclosure I should add to the talk page of the article. Please advice if there is another way to go about it. Hillster (talk) 17:34, 15 April 2021 (UTC) Hillster (talk) 17:34, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

HillsterThe article has been tagged with a Proposed deletion. If that is not opposed, it will be deleted at the end of one week. The article creator has not been Wikipedia-active since creating the article in 2009. David notMD (talk) 20:06, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Hillster. While it sounds as if this particular case is drawing towards a satisfactory close, please note that having "no association with the article creator" is the norm: any association between an article creator and the subject is a COI, which immediately raises concerns about neutrality. Equally, I have nominated the photo for deletion, but that is because I don't believe the claimed copyright status, and nothing to do with whether Littlefield gave permission or not.. --ColinFine (talk) 20:50, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Reporting Advertisment[edit]

Where do I report this person? Thanks, AnApple47 (talk) 17:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

WP:ANI Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


Will it backfire aka wind up encouraging negativity if I already clicked the link on the former edit of that persons personal page? Ask because subscribed to their youtube channel so now cold feet though not completely certain it would cause the persons misuse of Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caleb Jones Safley (talkcontribs) 05:06, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Caleb Jones Safley, and welcome to the Teahouse. Does your question relate to the section you put it in (about FalconsRockInstantLunch) or to something else? If it's about something else, it should go in a new section, and you need to say what it does relate to. Either way, I'm afraid I'm not clear what your concern is. But be assured that somebody else's "misuse of Wikipedia", if it happens, is 100% their responsibility, whatever you've done or not done. --ColinFine (talk) 09:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Citation style[edit]

I'm trying to improve and expand the contents of Minjung theology, but to do so I started using a citation style I've never used before because I wanted to be able to cite pages, chapters, and quotes from the same source in multiple different places. I just wanted to ask whether there are any glaring problems with my references so far. I was also curious whether the references section should be ordered in a specific way like alphabetically by the author's last name or by the order in which they appear within the article. TipsyElephant (talk) 17:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

How can I help you with? HoanganhLe1234567890 (talk) 18:09, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello! You don't have to help us with anything. If you want to help answer questions you can, or you can add yourself as a host. However it is recommended that you have some experience with editing Wikipedia and how it works. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Who fits this category? Wikipedians looking for help[edit]

Hi, I just added this to my user talk page, as I am looking for help with citations on the page for Nobel Laureate David Gross. It was immediately removed - what is the meaning of the category? Martine. 18:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Martine This category is used by {{Help me}} to track usage of the template. If you would like to ask for help just copy the template and your question onto a talk page following the instructions on the template page, and it will automatically add you to the category. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Ok, I've done that but to no avail - just monthly messages that there are 192+ jobs ahead of me. thanks anyway! Martine — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartineWhite (talkcontribs) 14:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Can administration be involved in the discussion in the talk page?[edit]

I am currently having a discussion with an editor who claims nonsense and just refuses to understand my point on the talk page in Anti-Korean sentiment. I believe that the discussion would not end if the editor could not comprehend the topic of the discussion. Is there anything that the administrators can do to resolve the dispute? Npovobsessed (talk) 18:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Npovobsessed, and welcome to the Teahouse. WP:DR should tell you everything you need to know; but I will throw in that a conviction that only one of the participants understands the issue is not conducive to achieving consensus. (This is a general comment, not one on the particular dispute, which I haven't looked at). --ColinFine (talk) 20:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
That is exactly what I was looking for. Thank you for your help. Npovobsessed (talk) 21:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Help[edit]

hi there, I created an article about an actress. It is proposed for deletion on 11th April. So, now I improved the article and add reference. So please check this article Sinchana Gowda (Actress). Is there anything I need to add? Please let me know. Mralphan11 (talk) 19:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Mralphan11 As you have added content to the article after the Proposed deletion, you are completely within your rights to remove the Prod tag from the top of the article. You can consider adding to the Talk page a short summary of why the Prod is no longer justified. It would be possible that any editor who considers the article still below standards to start an Articles for Deletion. What is missing are references to significant published content ABOUT her, not just confirming the movies she has appeared in. David notMD (talk) 20:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Mralphan11 Since I have been the one nominating the article for deletion let me say that currently it will be nominated for Articles for Deletion, @David notMD should have stress more the fact of needing significant, independent coverage of herself (which apparently does not exist). CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest - Limited Editing[edit]

I am considering editing the article on Robert Maranto, a relatively minor academic. However, I have a potential Conflict of Interest in that I know him in real life. My understanding is that editing when a potential Conflict of Interest is present is strongly discouraged, but I only intend to update his list of recent books, as the list is nearly eight years out of date and doesn't even include some of the books in the article's lead section. Should I go ahead with this edit or, considering I'm a new user, would it be best to keep away from this fairly discouraged activity? IDontHaveAnAccountYet (talk) 19:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

IDontHaveAnAccountYet The article currently has zero reliable independent sources, rather than adding more publications, it would be preferable to add some sources for the content that already exists. Theroadislong (talk) 19:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Theroadislong, a faculty webpage and highly cited articles are sufficient references for someone who meets WP:NPROF. Hi IDontHaveAnAccountYet and welcome to the Teahouse. There may be problems here. Wikipedia does not have encyclopedia articles about relatively minor academics, only those who have made significant contributions to their field. Maranto is borderline rather than minor. He holds a named professorship. Education is not a highly cited field. Articles should list only a few of the most significant publications; leave out the opinion pieces. Find the book reviews of his best known books and add those as references. One such review is:
Stein, Judith (2014). "President Obama and Education Reform: The Personal and the Political by Robert Maranto and Michael Q. McShane". Journal of School Choice. 8 (1): 146–149. doi:10.1080/15582159.2014.875424. ISSN 1558-2159.
StarryGrandma (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Inactive projects[edit]

Hi, is there any policy/recommended way to see if anybody's interested in restarting an inactive project? I'm looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Images and Media, especially some of the drives. Thanks! EpicPupper 20:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@EpicPupper: Welcome to the Teahouse! See Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Dealing with inactive WikiProjects. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Nominating FL for deletion[edit]

Hi. I have recently nominated a featured list for deletion (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Danish Kaneria) because it badly fails WP:NLIST. Many people there are arguing that because it is a featured list we can't delete it. Is there any such policy/guideline which prohibits deletion of featured content? Are they set in stone (no one can object)? Looking for a thorough reply. Störm (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

WP:NLIST is not definitive. The list may also meet notability requirements through GNG or other criteria. The fact that the list passed Wikipedia:Featured_list_criteria and was found to have met all the criteria required for Wikipedia content would mean that it also passed the notability test. You will likely have a very hard battle ahead if you want to argue that it is now not notable. RudolfRed (talk) 20:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
While there is no policy against listing featured content for deletion, the featured list/article process is generally fairly good at vetting content and it would be extremely unusual for content that should be deleted to pass. Personally I would have started by sending the list to WP:Featured list removal candidates, explaining any concerns about failing notability criteria. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 20:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Störm: I disagree with the comments above in general, as there are a lot of FLs/GAs from a decade ago (or even more recently) where subpar notability/SAL checks were done. I would find it a little bit (not overwhelmingly) surprising if an FL promoted as recently as 2017 was non-notable. However, this should not stop someone from opening an AFD when they believe it is non-notable—an AFD is only a discussion, so not much harm can come of it. I don't agree that an FLRC should be done first (sometimes a page may be appropriate for FL for every reason other than notability, in which case FLRC is not the venue), but discussing any active editors involved in FL promotion and maybe a talk page notice at WT:FLC would be the polite way to go about it. In this case, I see there's some socking behaviour that's a bit over my head, so maybe bypassing that stage is acceptable. — Bilorv (talk) 21:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Company website[edit]

Would a company's website be reliable? I want to know because I've seen a article that has sources of the company's webste. Is this reliable? 🍓⋆JennilyW♡🍧 (talk) 20:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

The companies own website would be a WP:PRIMARY source, which can be used for simple facts and uncontroversial material (e.g. finding who their CEO is). They do not, however, demonstrate that the company is WP:NOTABLE, and should be used in conjunction with reliable secondary sourcing. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 20:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@JennilyW: For more information about what 86.23.109.101 noted, please see WP:ABOUTSELF. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 00:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Lord Mayor[edit]

I've been archiving a lot of local news articles recently which mention actors, rappers and other people born in my city who have appeared in visual productions.

One of those people is a recently retired mayor and councillor, along with the founder and chairman of a famous heritage railway organisation/line (although there's nothing on that Wikipedia article about the railway organisation/line mentioning him for some reason), who was born and raised in the city. He was also a director/chairman/board member/campaigner/spokesman who was involved in other local organisations, which mainly seem to revolve around transport for over 50 years like a bus service operator, at least 2 bus museums, and an estimated 3 railway museums.

He also had an uncredited cameo in a famous drama feature film (featuring the railway), a credit in a 2 part TV documentary series for the BBC (featuring the railway), and no doubt many more documentaries about trains or railways which haven't been added to his IMDB profile yet.

I've not even started archiving the local articles which mention his name yet, as there's a maximum of 933, and an estimated minimum of 405-522, as some of them are from sister newspapers in the city so could be duplicates. Plus there was a league winning footballer in the city with the same name a couple of years before the articles started being published online, who might be the person mentioned instead.

Therefore I'll have no problem finding references to prove he's notable, especially with non-local articles on top.

However as I've never created an article before, I'm not sure which category I should put him in, or where I would find a template for his page.

I'd guess he should go in some political category, seen as though he was a mayor for at least 8 years, but as he is mainly involved in transport related stuff, I'm thinking maybe he should go in some other category. Plus as he will no doubt have been featured in more than the 2 known productions so far (I'll no doubt be the person who finds the rest), maybe some film/TV related category.

Danstarr69 (talk) 20:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Danstarr69 If you've never created an article before I would recommend that you have a read of WP:Your first article, which contains a lot of helpful information and contains a link to the article wizard, which can help you through the process and has standard templates for articles. You could also substitute a copy of Template:Biography onto a sandbox or draft page with {{subst:Biography}} to get an example outline to work from. There's no restrictions on how you categorise articles and you can list a person under a whole range of unrelated categories. Arnold Schwarzenegger for example contains a range of categories related to his bodybuilding, acting and political career. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
86.23.109.101 I don't understand all that sandbox/draft stuff, so when I can be bothered to create the article I'm going to be writiting and publishing it myself without a sandbox/draft.

I know how to add infoboxes, navboxes, categories, external links for websites like IMDB, tables, new sections, references, the same reference more than once etc, practically everything the need to fill in an article.

I've completely revamped countless articles on subjects I'm not even interested in over the last couple of years especially, because they were practically empty, or were largely incorrect.

When I say "category" I'm talking about the things which appear in the infobox at the side.

For example, actors get an actor template which includes an actor infobox.

Which article template would include the most relevant stuff to fill in for a mayor/councillor, and train/bus transport expert?

Danstarr69 (talk) 21:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Danstarr69: Try {{Infobox officeholder}} or {{Infobox person}}. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Danstarr69: Ok, sorry for patronising you, I misunderstood your question.
If someone has been involved in multiple areas and there is more than one infobox that is relevant to them you can embed one infobox inside another to generate a compound infobox with different sections relevant to each of their careers, see the documentation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes/embed. In this case I would probably start with a generic Template:Infobox person and embed a Template:Infobox officeholder inside it, there's an example of this being done here. I don't think we have a standalone infobox for transport experts, but someone else might know of one. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
86.23.109.101 I was just about to post that here as the one I'm going to be using eventually (it's going to be staying in my private Blogger for now until I've looked through all the news articles), as most of the other stuff seems to be USA related, but that bit specifically mentions mayor.

If I find a relevant "transport" related inbobox in the future, could that also be added to the bottom using the "embed = yes" thing?

John Infobox
Born
John Officeholder Person Infobox

(1950-05-05)May 5, 1950
Template City
DiedOctober 10, 2010(2010-10-10) (aged 60)
OccupationActor
Years active1970–1990
Mayor of Wikipedia
In office
1994–1998
Websiteexample.com

Danstarr69 (talk) 21:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Danstarr69: Yes! GoingBatty (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Danstarr69: You can embed any of the templates listed in Category:Biographical templates usable as a module in an infobox person using "embed = yes", and putting them under "module2", "module3" etc parameters, for up to a maximum of six sub-infoboxes (you can also repeat the same infobox multiple times, e.g. if they held multiple political offices). 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Trouble with writing draft[edit]

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: Draft:Derail Valley

I don't know how to write from a neutral point of view, and how to write in an encyclopedic tone. Also, this is my first time doing this so can you give me good advice on good ways to make a good article. Also, I don't understand what they are saying in this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view and this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_better_articles#Tone Apersonthing3000 (talk) 21:03, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Apersonthing3000: Welcome to the Teahouse! The use of the pronoun "you" is not appropriate tone for an encyclopedia - try using "the player" instead. There are a lot of good ideas at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Video games, specifically in the "Gameplay" section. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Apersonthing3000: Welcome to the Teahouse. Another issue a reviewer has noted is that the sources used aren't appropriate for Wikipedia; you may want to read Wikipedia:Reliable sources to understand what references are acceptable for encyclopedic use; tutorial walkthroughs do not fall under that scope. Perhaps you could look for gaming publications that cover the game in significant detail? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:41, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Apersonthing3000: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Video games#Sources and Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources should help you identify reliable sources for this video game. GoingBatty (talk) 21:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Adding a tempate to an existing page[edit]

I have created a template to add a football conference to this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_NAIA_football_season) and populated it with the relevant information.

I do not know how to add it, though.

It would be nice to see the template and page in preview first. Is that possible?

Can you help?

Thank you very much.

Bob Jones 75.164.176.76 (talk) 21:53, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Bob! You haven't created the template with this IP address. What is the name of the template? GoingBatty (talk) 22:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Explosive Reactive Armor - Jet Thrust[edit]

Several years ago I edited in the ERA section. My edit explained how the brisance (Speed of detonation) of explosives related to ERA effectiveness. I have worked with various explosives, both civilian and military. My edit was deleted, which I accepted. Then whomever was monitoring that section took it upon themselves to plagiarize my edit. They had made no reference to brisance prior to my edit. Afterwards, they incorporated brisance in the section, with a poorly written version of my explanation on how it worked to resist shaped charges. A couple days ago I tried my hand at editing once again. This time some bot deleted my edit, saying that my "score" was below that which is acceptable. Both times I gave valid explanations for details which were lacking in the articles. There are a few things in this world in which I'm an expert in. The ability to deal with exclusive clubs is not one of them. Perhaps this is one of the reasons Wikipedia has the poor reputation it has. A clutter of petty fiefdoms doesn't lend itself to credibility. It would be nice if someone, anyone could refute my edit on the merits. My explanation of how inertia makes jet engines function is nowhere else to be found, in terms most of your readers could grasp. Sources - I am the source, the expert. Joseph Darwin James Panamice (talk) 22:47, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Panamice Your addition to Jet engine was utter rubbish, and duly deleted by an automated program. Many editors are experts. None add content on their own say-so of their expertise. (Well, some try, and are reverted.) You are welcome to try again without the rhetorical question, with encyclopedia-tone writing, and with citations. Be aware that editors are strongly advised against citing their own publications as reliable source references. David notMD (talk) 23:12, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Panamice: To add to what David notMD stated, Wikipedia does not break the fourth wall. There are plenty of excellent sources of information that write at the reader, but Wikipedia is not one of those. Please see our Manual of Style's sections on instructional language and editorializing. As David also noted, any statement that could be contested must be verifiable by being cited to reliable, independent sources, as the project does not allow original research. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 00:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

My personal sandbox[edit]

Hello Teahouse! I had one small question about my personal sandbox. Are there any rules as to what I can and can't do in there? HelenDegenerate (talk) 22:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Please DO NOT place promotional, copyrighted, offensive, or libelous content in sandboxes.
For more information on what is a sandbox, see Help:My sandbox. For information and resources on the basics needed to comprehend, comment on, and edit Wikipedia, see Contributing to Wikipedia or our tutorial. If you have questions, you can find help at the Teahouse. You can also use Test Wikipedia.
Please see Wikipedia:Sandbox Heiro 22:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
HelenDegenerate Editors are given a large amount of leeway for what they can do in their sandbox, but the same general rules apply as the rest of the encyclopedia, e.g. you cannot host or link to copyright violations in it, you cannot post advertising and promotion, you cannot host libellous content, etc. Apart from that you can use it for experimenting with and drafting whatever you want. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 23:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi HelenDegenerate. It's your personal sandbox really in name only as explained here which means any content you add to it will still need to comply with Wikipedia:User pages. Generally, other editors will leave you own to experiment or test or work on improvements as long as none of what you're doing is a serious violation of some Wikipedia policy or guideline. Violations of Wikipedia:Copyrights, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not seem to be the ones which will likely will lead to someone (or something) editing your sandbox. Finally, one very important thing to remember is that your sandbox is not private; if you can see it, then the WP:REALWORLD can also see it; moreover, any content you delete or remove from it will still be there for anyone to see. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:12, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
To elaborate on that last, it will not be found by Wikipedia or external searches on content words, but any editor can see all of your contributions, including those in your Sandbox now, and those previously deleted. David notMD (talk) 23:21, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Nature Of AFD's[edit]

In AFD debates, aren't editors supposed to either cast a vote with a reason, or contribute facts/information so we can reach consensus one way or the other? I'm confused by the comment here, and don't understand the nature of it since there was no vote cast or new info. Megtetg34 (talk) 23:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Megtetg34: which particular comment are you referring to - the bottom one (Kvng's)? Nosebagbear (talk) 23:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
No, I was referencing the one from Tlhslobus. Kvng has since replied to it since I posted here, but Tlhslobus has been on Wikipedia for nearly 10 years. I imagine the editor already knew what Kvng commented. I didn't, and since it really didn't have much to do with the topic it didn't make sense to me. Megtetg34 (talk) 00:24, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

BBB links[edit]

Would Big Blue Bubble links be an reliable source? 🍓⋆JennilyW♡🍧 (talk) 23:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi JennilyW. Reliable sourcing is always contextual; without that context it's impossible to say. Can you specify? That being said it might be a reliable source for certain game information, but note that for an article on one of its games, it would be a restricted by our policy on use of primary sources, and would not function as an independent source; it would contribute nothing towards demonstrating notability.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: BBB links has update's about there games. 🍓⋆JennilyW♡🍧 (talk) 01:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey again JennilyW. Well that's already explained in general terms above, but doesn't provide the context needed. The context would be what facts are you wish to verify using BBB as the source (you may just be speaking in shorthand when you say "links", but we provide references using inline citations to sources, directly in relation to the material being verified, and we tell the reader attribution details of the source, not just "links"). Anyway, because these would be primary sources, they could not be used for self-serving material, nor any interpretation or analysis, but only for "straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge", and again, would not assist at all with demonstrating notability. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

What is sockpuppeting on Wikipedia?[edit]

 Epictrex (talk) 00:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Epictrex. See WP:Sockpuppetry. Here's a tip for finding relevant policies, procedures and guidelines, and most anything else you hear mentioned by regular editors, or come across in Wikipedia's interface. Type "WP: (an easier-to-type alias of "Wikipedia:") into the search box, followed by the word or phrase you heard (in this case "sockpuppetry"). Most of the time, this will quickly locate a targeted, behind-the-scenes information/help page, or how-to guide. See more at Help:WP search protocol. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:00, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

What should I do if I am being falsely accused of sock puppetry on Wikipedia? Can I get into legal trouble for anything I do on Wikipedia?[edit]

 Epictrex (talk) 01:20, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I would be more worried about what to do if you are accurately accused of sockpuppetry, if I were you. You "just happened" to log in and check that article a minute after it was vandalized with content similar to things that coincidentally you yourself have posted in other articles. Edits are time stamped. But it's not just that those 2 IPS geolocate to Sparks Nevada, so does the one you used to vandalize Thadeus and my talk page on the 11th. Do you know what the odds are that all of that is a massive coincidence? If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, you know what? It's not a turtle, mate. It's a duck. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Epictrex in an unusual edit war with themselves Heiro 01:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Epictrex. If another editor expresses concern that you are using sockpuppets, then respond accurately and honestly. We cannot provide legal advice. Consult a lawyer where you live if you are in doubt. Avoid any disruptive or dishonest editing and you should be fine. Focus on improving the encyclopedia, and avoid suspicious activity. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)


Kinda imagine that there somehow is some kind of a way to appeal (with assumed use of good judgement etc for with regards of both use of such attempt of appeal & how to go or going about it) and/or explain why both how you understand why the penalty or result has occured and also how you are going to both be helpful as well as avoid voiding/making whatever applicable/said mistake or mistakes it was or are/were etc... however if were in that kind of situation probably would just avoid editing/wiki at least wikipedia for awhile— lest maybe end up possibly it getting ability to be sued — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caleb Jones Safley (talkcontribs) 05:30, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

CJS - not a useful comment. David notMD (talk) 11:39, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Help reverting vandalism[edit]

 2600:1702:7D0:54E0:84CA:B99B:4911:361D (talk) 02:06, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Are you asking for assistance in removing some vandalism you found? If so, please provide more details. However, if you're asking to learn how you can revert vandalism, then reading Wikipedia:Vandalism would be a good place to start. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

there's a book called 'the puzzle ring ' by kate forsyth but no matter how much i search i ton wikipidea ,it shows no content . what should i do ?[edit]

 Cherry red dlf (talk) 02:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Cherry red dlf, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does have an article on Kate Forsyth, but we do not yet have one on The Puzzle Ring. This may simply be because the book does not pass Wikipedia's general notability guidelines for article inclusion or its book-specific notability guidelines, or it may be because nobody has thought about creating such an article yet. If it's the former, then the article cannot be created until such a time as it has enough reliable, independent coverage to meet either of those notability criteria, but if it's the latter, there may well be one someday, and – provided you take the time to learn about Wikipedia's article guidelines – you could be the one to make that happen. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 02:27, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Should I put my former username into my Wiki signature?[edit]

If yes, how? Do I go [[User:NotReallySoroka|NotReallySoroka]] ([[User Talk:NotReallySoroka|talk]]) ~~~~~ (formerly DePlume)? Thanks, NotReallySoroka (talk) 02:51, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@NotReallySoroka: You don't have to have it in your signature, but some choose to do it. A declaration on your userpage, like what you already have, is usually sufficient. If you still want to have your old username in your signature, go to your Preferences at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal and find the "Signature" section. Then, just add (formerly DePlume) to the end of what's already there. Do not add an additional four tildes, like what you have in the code box above. Remember to save your changes. Then, whenever you sign on a talk page with four tildes, it should render the Wikimarkup you put in your Preferences.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 02:59, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @NotReallySoroka: Welcome to the Teahouse! I think the explanation you have on your user page is sufficient. The only time I think the clarification would be helpful is if you were commenting on a conversation as NotReallySoroka where you previously contributed as DePlume, just to prevent any accusations of sockpuppetry. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I am here for quite a long time already - might as well stay until I become an admin or a crat or something - haha. Anyways, I have started quite a few discussions as DP (though most of them are closed), and I decided to still add it - how did I do? NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 03:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@NotReallySoroka: Looks fine to me.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 03:48, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Giving warnings[edit]

Hi Teahouse people! I've been in Recent changes for a few days now and encountered my fair share of probable vandalism, which I've reverted, however I'm not sure if anyone is allowed to warn others or if I should hold off warning others until I get more experience. I know WP:BOLD exists but I don't want to accidentally mislead people (as I have done in the distant past). MelecieDiancie talk! 05:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello SoaPuffball and welcome to the teahouse. You don't have to wait to warn users about vandalism. You can read about the general guidelines and policies at Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings and you can see the templates to use at WP:WARN. It is worth noting the difference between the subtle vandalism warnings and the blatant ones. Thank you for your editing here at the 'pedia. MarnetteD|Talk 05:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Pinging MelecieDiancie.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 06:29, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Hiya Ganbaruby Did you notice that the OP is actually SoaPuffball. For some reason their signature reads [[User:SoaPuffball|MelecieDiancie]]. Now we do have an editor named MelecieDiancie so the situation is a bit odd and may need some untangling. I just didn't want you thinking I pinged the wrong person on purpose. MarnetteD|Talk 06:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Oof I only just found the redirect Ganbaruby. That explains my confusion (facepalm) I don't know if pings work through a redirect so your post was most helpful. MarnetteD|Talk 06:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
MelecieDiancie. You might want to fix your signature so that other editors don't make the same mistake (in this case a copy paste) that I did. MarnetteD|Talk 06:43, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
MarnetteD, I was slightly confused too. Hope they clear this up, since I'm not sure about the pings either.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 07:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 Done and thanks! -Melecie- talk! 07:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
It would be better if it were related to your actual username. Also (on relation to the topic), if you are using Twinkle, on a user's talk page, go the the TW dropdown menu and there will be a warn button which you can press and it'll allow you to give a warning that will fit most situations. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Tutorial?[edit]

Hi everyone, I’m excited to get started but I want to learn more about how to cite things and use talk pages. Is there a tutorial I can use. Thanks Cnuftart (talk) 07:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Cnuftart and welcome to the teahouse. Please see Help:Introduction to get started and thanks for your interest in editing here. MarnetteD|Talk 07:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@Cnuftart: I personally used WP:TWA to get started. Both are great resources to learn from.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 07:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep getting error messages[edit]

Hi, I want to add a new topic to talk page of "traditional Chinese medicine". But everytime I try to add a new topic. I get this error message - (The topic can't be added due to an unknown error). Am new and no idea how to perceive and fix it. Casualfoodie (talk) 07:12, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Casualfoodie: I don't know why that's happening. There is a workaround: just go to "Edit source", which edits the markup of the entire talk page, and scroll to the very bottom. Underneath the last section, create a new line and add section header like so: == Header text goes here ==. Then, create another new line and write whatever you were going to write. Add a signature, write an edit summary, and hit publish.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 07:56, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
https://www.verywellhealth.com/traditional-chinese-medicine-what-you-need-to-know-88936 is on the spam blacklist. While you can technically can circumvent the blacklist as I have done here, doing so is often not a good idea. See WP:RSP#Dotdash for more info. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 07:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Ah I see. I guess I should keep in mind of links like www.verywellhealth.com/traditional-chinese-medicine-what-you-need-to-know-88936 being on the blacklist that can cause errors. I took away that link and no longer have any issues..thank you for your help. Casualfoodie (talk) 08:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@Casualfoodie: I don't know if you're aware, but medical articles on the English Wikipedia have a special set of sourcing requirements, which are described in WP:MEDRS. Basically this means that medical claims in articles must be backed up by references to either peer reviewed medical literature, recognised standard textbooks or guidance from recognised expert bodies. Your edit to the Traditional Chinese medicine removed an intro sourced to a meta-review in one of the most respected scientific journals on the planet, and replaced it with unsourced WP:PROFRINGE content based on your personal opinion. I would advise that medical articles really are not a good place to get started with editing as the requirements on what can be added to articles are extremely strict, but if you do want to edit the article in a way that's going to be allowed to stay you need to find high quality peer reviewed literature backing your claims. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Anonymous IP user - Do you even know how anti-depressants work? Currently all scientists do not even know how even a heavily mass manufactured pill actually works. Just that it empirically works. https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/how-antidepressants-work-is-a-mystery-scientists-still-dont-understand

The thing about traditional Chinese medicine or stuff like Yoga. Is that it's heavily based on empirical trial and error. Currently there's no high quality evidence to suggest that things like meditation, accupuncture, Tai Chi, Astragalus herbs are helpful to us. But that's partly because of lack of research. However there's a vast amount of funding for pharmaceutical industry..but not so much on natural therapies.

It's more accurate to say that modern science hasn't yet been advanced or progressed enough to prove that things like accupuncture is ineffective or not. Just because a certain discipline lacks enough scientific research to understand it completely, doesn't automatically mean that it's definitely garbage.

Btw some research indicates meditation exercises is helpful. And Tai Chi is not useless. And accupuncture releases neuropeptides into the nervous system. "Neuropeptides are proteins produced by neurons in the brain, which play a role in affecting neurobiological responses, including mood regulation." There's clearly something going on but scientists are only beginning to study the physiological basis of acupuncture’s effects. So to definitely rule out the effectiveness of accupuncture in such an extreme manner, is wrong when the reserch is still ongoing and inconclusive. https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/1999/06/04/27924.htm Casualfoodie (talk) 12:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Btw I made just one edit to the article.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1018108246

How can you accuse me of adding unsourced WP:PROFRINGE content based on my personal opinion? My edit was NOT even my opinion and I was simply adding in a proper history intro of TCM in the most neutral possible way so don't make false accusations at me. I also removed a repeating opinion piece that was already mentioned in the critique section. A peer-reviewed journal like nature should still be taken within perspective. The guy has given no evidence that meridian points or accupuncture doesn't work. He clearly didn't even bother to research to find out. However the issue is that the information was already in the critique section. It doesn't need to be the top intro for the entire article especially when it's still just an opinion based on inconclusive evidence. Casualfoodie (talk) 13:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Casualfoodie: You added the content to the lead with the edit summary: "The intro is definitely biased and not appropriate. How can one EVEN know for a fact that herb ginseng or Tai Chi is harmful or yields no benefits? There's no real studies to yet claim that as a solid fact . Just lack of studies to support the benefits but lack of evidence does not really equate to everything about the Field being fraught with useless ideas. Ironically the few studies tend to show benefits of some therapies like Tai Chi, ginger, etc as they are natural and so, can't stereotype". You are making medical claims here but have not provided any acceptable sources to back up your assertions. If you want the article to state that herb ginseng and Tai Chi are harmless and they have health benefits you need to provide a high quality secondary peer reviewed source to back those aspersions. If there genuinely are no studies claiming health benefits then the article should not present it in a manner suggesting there are. If there are peer reviewed secondary studies that show health benefits of "some therapies like Tai Chi, ginger, etc" then put them in the article (or even better bring them to the talk page to discuss their inclusion), don't just hand wave and say they exist.
In your second edit summary you write about the nature source "Giving balanced context that there's currently a lack of research on the field as well as lack of quality evidence https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/1999/06/04/27924.htm and the description given, condemning it as 'having no logical basis" is still from an opinion piece from an author who has done zero research to prove that TCM is ineffective as a fact. Unlike other researchers". An ABC science article from 22 years ago is not an acceptable source for medical claims, we need WP:MEDRS compliant sourcing - scientific literature, standard textbooks and guidance from recognised medical bodies. The claim of it having "having no logical basis" is cited to an article in nature. Again you make the extraordinary claim that the the researcher who wrote the nature article has "done zero research to prove that TCM is ineffective as a fact", but have provided no sources to back up that assersion. Did the journal issue a retraction or correction of the article? Were there any responses published in reliable journals which dispute it's content or conclusion?
In your third attempt at rewriting the lead you write "Not watering it down mate. Read the ABC article https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/1999/06/04/27924.htm it's only recently that more and more research is trying to figure out if there's a physiological basis behind meridian points and accupuncture. We don't even know for a solid fact that it doesn't exist as we don't have enough research and that should be noted and NOT CENSORED". Once again a 22 year old ABC science article is not usable for anything related to medical claims - it most likely will not have been written by an expert in the field and will not have been through a peer review process. WP:NOTCENSORED applies to offensive and objectionable content, it does not mean that we include every viewpoint into an article and that we should be adding poorly sourced fringe content to medical articles, see WP:Due weight. If "more and more research is trying to figure out if there's a physiological basis behind meridian points and accupuncture" then we wait until that research has been published, peer reviewed and included in secondary literature such as a meta-analysis, then it gets added to the article. You also need to include the studies as sources - you can't just hand wave and say they exist. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)


Why don't we take this to the talk page of that article. Regardless my edit summary was CLEARLY a question. There's no solid research stating that it doesn't Work. That's what I am saying and here is one example to show that assertion as true.
This is the first review of reviews that explores acupuncture’s effectiveness in treating components of the TSR. Based on the results of our review, acupuncture has demonstrated benefit for the treatment of headaches; however, safety needs to be more fully documented in order to make any strong recommendations in support of its use in treating headaches. Though more research is needed to determine whether acupuncture is useful in treating anxiety, sleep disturbances, depression and chronic pain, it does seem to be a promising treatment option. Based on our results, acupuncture does not seem to be effective for treating substance abuse, and there needs to be more high quality data before we can determine whether acupuncture is an appropriate intervention for fatigue or cognitive difficulties.

https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2046-4053-1-46

Clearly more research is needed before jumping to a solid conclusion. if research is still needed, it would be closeminded and premature to not make that part clear for the public. If however lots of research concluded solidly that it's ineffective. Then the current intro would be fitting except we are not EVEN there yet and so you should be careful to write off those exotic non western disciplines as useless..show me evidence and studies conclusively stating that they're ineffective? You can't yet you seem more than okay for the intro to go make that sweeping and solody conclusion despite lack of peer reviewed evidence to support that TCM is ineffective. Casualfoodie (talk) 14:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Can someone review my draft?[edit]

Hey. Can someone review my draft (Tarusan)? I just want to hear an opinion about the article. Thanks! Khamer Jun Manalo (chat) 07:25, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Im Zayk: hi, I'm not formally reviewing it, but just some notes:
  • don't cite Wikidata - that is not a reliable source (UGC)
  • if you want to get the draft accepted, you shouldn't have any cleanup tags, including {{citation needed}} - add references or remove the content
  • the infobox is ridiculously long. Infoboxes are meant to be summaries, not huge data dumps. Elli (talk | contribs) 09:34, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
...And the nutshell template should only be used on admin pages, as explained in the template documentation.--Shantavira|feed me 11:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I burst out laughing while reading my mistakes in the draft. Maybe . . . help? Khamer Jun Manalo (chat) 13:56, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@Im Zayk: One (kinda) advice I can give you is try not to make things way too complicated (I'm also referring to the infobox). —hueman1 (talk contributions) 14:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Okay, I'll try not to. Khamer Jun Manalo (chat) 14:44, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
And can someone help me edit those mistakes? Im kinda busy with stuffs around my stepsister's birthday. Khamer Jun Manalo (chat) 14:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Khamer Jun Manalo I've done a little bit of clean-up for you, I've removed the nutshell template, moved the stub template to the bottom of the article, removed some bolding from the article text and the little arrows with the percentages and moved the AFC draft notice to the top. The population numbers and data in the article do need sourcing properly though, drafts shouldn't have citation needed tags, and some of the information in the infobox needs a citation too. Can you remember where you found this information? If so add the sources you used to the article. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:06, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
The only problem is that PhilAtlas is blacklisted, and the sources on PSA.gov is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too deep to uncover. You can just turn it into an invisible comment for the meantime until I excavated the facts under a huge file of census. Khamer Jun Manalo (chat) 15:17, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Now, don't get me wrong about putting false facts on the article. I'm just a lazy bum. Khamer Jun Manalo (chat) 15:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I just need solid proof from tons of trash. Khamer Jun Manalo (chat) 15:19, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Writer[edit]

Hello Guys, Hope you all will be fine, and passing this tough time well. I'm totally new to Wiki, could you please suggest me any resource where I can learn how to write good articles that wiki admins allowed to be published. Abdul Aziz Yousufzai (talk) 09:04, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

You have already been given advice on your user talk page, including not to try to write an autobiography. If you wish to write about a subject which is notable under Wikipedia's definition, you'll find advice at WP:Your first article. David Biddulph (talk) 09:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
??? AAA's User page redirects to his Talk page. Wouldn't it be better to blank his User page and let him start over? David notMD (talk) 12:17, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I mean, that can be useful but it is indeed better to just not have it like that. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Citation styles[edit]

What are the acceptable citation and referencing style on Wikipedia? Temilolub.52021 (talk) 12:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Temilolub.52021. You will want to enclose your references in <ref></ref> tags, and place them after punctuation marks. So let's say that you want to cite this URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/16/world/asia/hong-kong-martin-lee-jimmy-lai.html There are multiple ways to do this, and the first is to cite a bare URL like so.[1] Another way is to include a little information in the citation like this.[2] However, the one I use (and I'm sure many others use as well) is something called a template, which automatically generates a citation when you input some parameters like website and author. This citation uses {{cite web}} templates.[3] Note that you still have to enclose the template in <ref></ref> tags. For more information, see WP:Citing sources. Hope this helped! Sungodtemple a tcg fan!!1!11!! (talk) 13:38, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

References

@Temilolub.52021: Of course, you'd italicize New York Times (or move it to a parameter such as |work= or |website= that automatically italicizes the text). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

Can non-admins post on WP:ANI? I know they can file complaints but I want to know if they can comment. I figured it must be an administrators' noticeboard for a reason, but it seems kind of pointless if non-admins can't post evidence. MEisSCAMMER(talk)(contribs) 12:16, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

MEisSCAMMER Non admins are more than welcome to comment on ANI if they have evidence to add to discussion or helpful comments, the entire point of the noticeboard is for non-admins to get help from administrators. I will warn you that I've seen quite a few newcomers in my time end up in hot water by jumping into ANI and replying to large numbers of threads with well intentioned but unhelpful comments, which tends to be seen as disruptive, so it's best to only comment on stuff you're actually involved in until you have a significant amount of editing experience. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 12:29, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Article declined[edit]

Hi, my article has been declined unfortunately. I am an university student and for my class I am supposed to create one Wikipedia article about a living Media Artist. Since y'all are very busy bees there isn't much left to write about so I chose the person I chose, did research, spent quite some time writing and still it was declined. Could anyone give me any advice on what to fix here? Since for reference I used some definitely approved articles about similar people like Andreas Lutz, Ralf Baecker, Johanna Keimeyer and can't really tell what my article is missing. Paul3047 (talk) 12:17, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Sebastian Wolf is the declined draft. David notMD (talk) 12:19, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
thank you david. as for relevance I chose based on the fact that the guy was already mentioned here: Japan Media Arts Festival#Art_awards
Paul3047 does not self-identify this assignment as being conducted through the Wikipedia:Education program, so my guess is that this is a teacher completely ignorant of the proper process for Wikipedia-related assignments. Can any editor or administrator more knowledgeable of the process explain what should have been done? And I suspect there are classmates of Paul3047 also let loose on Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 12:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Sorry if thats causing trouble, but this class has been going on for years as far as I know <_< But there's not really much I can do about that, I'd just like for my article to be proper and am lost as to how to improve it.
'Sign' your comments by typing four of ~ at the end. Comments left on your Talk page about why the draft declined. David notMD (talk) 12:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi Paul3047. You copied and pasted previously written content about Mr. Wolf into the draft. I've removed that, revision deleted the draft's history and left a notice at your talk page about this with more information. Please don't do that again. You must write in your own words. You can use short quotations under fair use, but only if expliucitly marked as such using quote marks (or more rarely by other methods, e.g, block indenting) and then that content must be immediately attributed to the source of the writing using an inline citation. Otherwise, doing so is not only a copyright violation but plagiarism.

As to the draft's decline, I suggest you look for better sources to use (and attributee them better). You might try some searches in databases that tend to concentrate reliable sources, such as Google Books, e.g. this but with better delimiters to avoid too many false-positives ("Sebastian Wolf" is certainly not an uncommon name). Note that you can use sources in German or other languages, if necessary. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:44, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

P3047, I look at the page, see that WP has a link to the Japanese Media Arts Festival and its awards and to Zebrastraat. What to do? Find "secondary sources", newspapers, arts magazines, whatever mentioning this artist and their work. Has anyone written anything in a "book" about this person. One trouble with using "internet" sources is that they are very ephemeral at times. Long way round: start page on the New Technlogical Art Award (using secondary sources in particular), expand the JMAF page to include more categories of awards including New Faces in the Art Award (you did not mention that the "New Faces" award is within the Art Division). Either that, or quickly do another artist who has more secondaries and awards mentioned in wp. Brunswicknic (talk) 12:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC) ps did not know about the copyvio/write in own voice stuff, strong advice
Thank you guys. I have edited the external links and also hopefully fixed the quotation. As to analog sources, how do I add those? I found some radio and TV interviews and there have been articles in print, however I do not see them listed online Paul3047 (talk) 13:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Paul3047 analog sources don't have be online, but they do have to "reputable", so they may be of help, check out references in help WP and what can and can not be used. Brunswicknic (talk) 13:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC) p.s. 3047, Broadie?
Hello! I don't see why you're required to create a Wikipedia Article for calss since that's kinda hard to do now as a lot of the more known and notable topics already have pages covering them. Something you might wanna check out since that is an assignment for your class though would be WP:Your first article which is very helpful for something like this. Good luck! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Broken navbox?[edit]

I think the article COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines is somewhat broken. I don't know if other users could observe this phenomenon or error, but if you would take a look at the lowermost portion of this article (below {{COVID-19 pandemic}} and {{COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines}}, you would see the template {{Rodrigo Duterte}} not working correctly and only showing a link to it (here's an example: "Template:Rodrigo Duterte"). Now, my theory is that {{Graph:Chart}}, for whatever reason, is behind this error. This might affect navboxes and citations if either are long enough. You can also check out my sandbox (right here: User:HueMan1/sandbox; FYI, I have removed this chart from the article above) where I demonstrated how this error occurs by adding a huge number of citations.

One more thing (somewhat unrelated), I am confused on why the same article above isn't appearing at Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19/Popular pages despite it having an average of 2,139 daily page views. Is this article really broken? —hueman1 (talk contributions) 14:16, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

hueman1 The problem here is that you've gone over the template limit. To avoid DoS attacks on the servers there's a maximum amount of templates that can be used on any one page, to stop people creating pages that become enormous when the templates are expanded. The only real way to fix this is to remove some templates from the page, e.g. remove a navbox or two, manually format the citations or remove the graph. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
It's a common problem for COVID-19 articles. 45 of 56 current articles in Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded have "COVID-19 pandemic" in the title. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
PrimeHunter It's a shame that the parser limits can only be set as a sitewide variable AFAIK, it would be really convenient if there was some kind of whitelist where you could set specific pages to have a higher limit. I doubt 50 pages having an extra 50% template limit would bring the site to it's knees, and these medical articles do require huge numbers of citations. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
It's not the citation templates but the data templates which are the main culprit. {{COVID-19 pandemic data/Philippines medical cases chart}} alone uses half of the 2 MB limit on transclusions. Some articles have moved some of the data to other articles in Category:Statistics of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are far more than 50 articles where the editors would have liked a higher limit but worked to go below limit. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I find it ridiculous and unnecessary to make separate articles for these statistics. Thank you for your comments PrimeHunter and 86.23.109.101 (I can't ping you). —hueman1 (talk contributions) 23:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

How do I do the "This article is a stub" and "This article is still on development, you can help by expanding it"?[edit]

Hello. I decided to make a page for "Engineer Gaming" (Clearly in a serious and unbiased way, just to report on the Internet meme around, not as a way of Shitposting.) (I still have not published the page, obviously, as you can see, the link for "Engineer Gaming" is empty, and the page will not be visible untill I finish a draft.) (I might also publish the draft as " Engineer Gaming (Internet Meme))

however, I don't know how you put those fancy "This article is a stub" and "This article is still on development, you can help by expanding it" squares to show everyone that this is not a finished work and that they give their wrecking ball for deletion of articles for informality a hold.

(I make a pseudo-draft first, to then put quotes and make it a bit formal to make it an actual draft so that THEN it can be peer reviewed by Wikitors [which are not nescesairly IRL or Virtual peers] and if I put the "This article is a stub" and "This article is still on development, you can help by expanding it", I will be able to properly explain that without ruining the actual article text.)

Thank you very much to whoever reads this and also to whoever can answer (or at least try to) my question Sincerely, --Teuf0rt (talk) 15:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC) Teuf0rt (talk) 15:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Teuf0rt: use Template:Stub versacespaceleave a message! 15:04, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Another thing, you might wanna check out WP:Your first article for more help on creating the draft. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

 81.214.246.103 (talk) 15:12, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@[User:VersaceSpace] Thank you!

Can Anyone Help meto Submit a Draft for Review?[edit]

Really appreciate if anyone could help me to submit a draft for review. Draft:NVT Phybridge Randfiskin (talk) 15:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC) Randfiskin (talk) 15:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Randfiskin: It has already been submitted for review (see the very bottom of the article.) Hope that helps. NightWolf1223 (talk) 15:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
And... Declined (wow, that was quick). Creator has since declared PAID. Next step is fix and resubmit. David notMD (talk) 16:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
There is a lot more they need to disclose including a case of sockpuppetry. GSS💬 16:38, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Whether sock or not, {{u|Randfiskin]] is suspected of previously creating articles without declaring PAID for those. David notMD (talk) 16:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Blocking an Individual from making Edits[edit]

We have an individual that makes changes to the Clan Cunningham page, these changes never provide Reference for his edits. Is there a way to block this individual? This is the second time that I have had to delete his changes.

I have asked to be notified when changes have been made, I did not receive any notification that changes had been made to the Clan Cunningham page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CSCunninghamCCI (talkcontribs) 15:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

You do know that Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, yes? -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 15:53, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I think that this could be a case of vandalism. Wikipedia has bots that revert vandalism and if a user continues to vandalize Wikipedia, they will be automatically blocked from making edits for a certain period of time. Read WP:Vandalism for more details. Littleb2009 (talk) 16:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@CSCunninghamCCI: Your username leads me to believe you have an undisclosed conflict of interest in editing this article, as your username appears to be a WP:ORGNAME (CCI: Cunningham Clan International). You do not own this article, nobody is required to notify you about changes made to the article (though you can add it to your watchlist should you so choose), and you cannot determine who does and does not edit the article about your organization. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Protection locks disappearing[edit]

Sometimes I go to articles that are protected. But then, like 1 month later, or more (or specifically 1 year), I go to the article that WAS protected, and now it is not. Like, for example, I went to the article Tunisia about 2 or 3 months ago. I saw that it was extended-confirmed protected. But then, in the middle of February, the protection lock of Tunisia is gone. Why is this happening? Joshua's Number9 (talk) 16:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Joshua's Number9 Pages are only protected for long enough to stop whatever disruption caused the page to be protected in the first place - it is rather rare for a page to be protected indefinitely and should only happen to pages that have been long term targets of disruptive editing. You can see how long a page has been protected for, the reason for the protection and the level of protection by looking in the protection log of the page 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks.  Joshua's Number9 (talk) 16:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Question about blocks[edit]

if someone were to do something bad how bad would it have to be to get banned by a vanguard, im asking for a friend, and school project, its definitely not for me. I promise, i swear its not for me Zitzooo (talk) 16:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Zitzooo: Alright, I have to admit I laughed at you designating yourself a 'wikiterrorist' on your user page. What I will say is that this seems like a case of WP:BEANS, where you want an editor to tell you what bad things you would have to do to get blocked from editing. All I'll say is that you can count this as your warning for vandalism such as the kind you engaged in over at Madison Pettis. If you want to turn over a new leaf and become a reformed, deradicalized 'wikiterrorist', you're welcome to participate in productive editing, for example at WP:TASKS. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I have blocked Zitzoo for violations of the policy on biographies of living people as well as vandalism and self-promotion. They were also lying. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
That's kind of ironic honestly. (you can delete this comment and/or move it to a talk page if you deem it necessary) Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:39, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Table[edit]

Hello,

I am trying to add a new head-to-head poll from Data for Progress to 2021 New York City mayoral election. However, it is not formatting correctly. Can someone go about helping to fix this?

Thank you, Pennsylvania2 (talk) 17:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Just a question ;)[edit]

Just asking, how often are unblock requests accepted (on average)? Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 18:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Thingy-1234 It depends entirely on the content of the unblock request, WP:GAB contains information on what administrators are looking for. If an editor can show that they understand why they've been blocked and explains that they know what to do to avoid repeating the same issues in the future then the chance of being unblocked is fairly good. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I know, I'm just asking for the average rate. ;) Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 18:43, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Thingy-1234 I don't think they publish numbers anywhere (it might be in a database report somewhere) but you can sort the block log by "Unblock" to get an idea of how many unblocks are processed Unblock log. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, I've checked it. Though not all unblocks are ecause of unblock requests... Anyway, I'd say it's about like 15-35%, like some vandals put in an unblock request on their talk page because they want to continue vandalizing Wikipedia and they put in some rubbish excuse ('My hand was on my keyboard it was an accident') or something like that, so it's fairly low (also I've checked some blocked user pages and most of them are declined). The unblock log is helpful though, (you can look at the dates :D) Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 18:52, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

"It was my brother." is a classic faux explanation. Surprisingly, few unblock request blame a sister. David notMD (talk) 22:15, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: The "maleness" of Wikipedia:My little brother did it—and of the suspected identity of vandals after viewing many of them acting out and making unblock request and the like—never struck me before until your post. (My gut tells me, though, its reflecting an underlying truth.) Certainly it would be very difficult to get data, and even moreso, hard data, as opposed to, say, something anecdotal like surveying a statistically significant number of vandals to see how many use male pronouns versus female pronouns to refer to themselves, if at all, but it would be fascinating to compare how often vandals are male versus female. I am betting it's a really high disparity (i.e., significantly higher than the baseline disparity of male versus female editors).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:34, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

How to use SuggestBot?[edit]

Could someone tell me how to make SuggestBot give me suggestions on a regular basis? I don't like continuously asking SuggestBot to give me suggestions. Littleb2009 (talk) 19:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Littleb2009, The instructions for setting it up are at User:SuggestBot/Getting Recommendations Regularly. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 19:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Wondering why my article was not accepted[edit]

I just wrote a draft and it said something about it not having significant coverage if someone can break down what that means for me OfficialMarkets (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello @OfficialMarkets:. In order to qualify for a Wikipedia article people have to demonstrate that they are notable, which means that they have to pass the General notability guideline. This means that the person must have been covered in multiple substantial, reliable, independent sources.
  • Substantial means the source must contain a significant amount of coverage about the subject, think full length news articles, pages of converge in books.
  • Reliable means the source must have some kind of editorial control and have a reputation for fact checking and accuracy
  • Independent means the source must not have any relation to the subject, paid press releases and interviews are not independent sources.
A source must pass all three criteria to count towards establishing notability, and the guideline requires multiple sources. As it stands your draft contains a single source, which is a reprint of a press release from accesswire and therefore is not reliable (as there is no editorial control involved) and not independent of the subject. Your draft also has significant Tone issues, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and is not to be used for Promotion. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 20:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Entering a new biography[edit]

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: User:Honza Giles/sandbox

I am relatively new to Wikipedia editing, although I have recently made some additions to existing biographies which I hope are genuinely helpful. I would like to submit a brief biography of my father which is partly based on a full-length academic biography (hardback book) published a few years ago. I am of course happy to declare my personal relationship to the subject. Before submission, I would like to get an opinion on the aspect of notability and on my use of citations. Is there someone who would look at the draft text which is in my sandbox and comment on it?

My account name is Honza Giles. Honza Giles (talk) 19:56, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Please see WP:PROUD and WP:COI before you continue creating a biography about your father. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Just so you know, it is not necessarily a bad thing, it's just that it would be wise to have another editor do it for you as you have a major conflict of interest. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:12, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Honza Giles, it is perfectly acceptable for an editor with a declared conflict of interest to submit a draft article through the Articles for Creation process. Please study Your first article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:16, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Oh ya that would also be a useful link. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@Honza Giles: Welcome to the Teahouse! Now that you have read WP:COI, please disclose your conflict of interest on your user page - you can use {{UserboxCOI}} for this. I suggest you add a lead section to your draft - see MOS:LEADBIO. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:51, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Honza Giles, you should definitely add that lead section. Also, do make sure that nontrivial assertions are explicitly referenced. Some of those that aren't yet referenced are major, as an example: He published it in Britain as "Without a Shot being Fired", which caused great consternation among Western governments. Presenting evidence for publication of Without a Shot being Fired is trivially easy, but evidence for such consternation doesn't immediately pop up as the result of a Google search. Which is not to say that it doesn't exist (it may very well exist only on paper and microfiche), but it's your job to present it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:39, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Writing and Publishing Articles[edit]

When a contributor authors an article but doesn't have all of the information available on the person or topic, can the article be published anyhow, with additional information to be added later or will the article be kept on "hold" until more information is included? Mtarra (talk) 20:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Mtarra Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You do not need every piece of available information in an article in order to submit it(I would strongly advise using Articles for Creation to submit a draft), but you do need to have multiple independent reliable sources to support the content of the draft. 331dot (talk) 21:00, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@Mtarra: You do need to have enough information to demonstrate how the person or topic meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". For more information, see Help:Your first article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:53, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
To add to this, all articles are works in progress and I would argue that less than 1% of them are "complete" or have "all available information" or meet the standards that we strive for. Nonetheless, articles do have to establish that they meet strict notability criteria, so that we know that this "complete" status can be reached one day. — Bilorv (talk) 22:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
One little thing new editors should know - "Publish changes" means Save, not Publish. The second - reference as you write. David notMD (talk) 22:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Using Twitter as reference for live persons[edit]

I have a question regarding sources and live persons. Could their tweets be used as references on their Wiki pages, especially if preceded by something like "So-and-so has published on Twitter that...." or "According to their Twitter page,..." ? KBijelic11 (talk) 20:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, sometimes, KBijellic11. WP:TWITTER starts "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves". Read that link to get the whole story. --ColinFine (talk) 21:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I would add that for such uses, the tweet would be a primary source, and thus would be restricted by the limitations on their use set out in the linked section of the original research policy. (It's really good that this thread happened, because reading that section of the verifiability policy leads me to the conclusion that it needs tweaking to refer to the additional limitation set out at the main policy defining use of primary sources; that this was glaringly missing there.)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Inserting a horizontal rule line across the *entire* length of an infobox?[edit]

I am currently trying to make a footnote notation on an infobox and trying to draw a horizontal rule line across the width of the *entire* infobox, however nothing I seem to do seems to work - I can only seem to draw a horizontal line across only part of it. It doesn't matter whether I use markup ( four dashes ) or html ( <hr /> ). Can anybody help with this? Please and thank you. QuakerIlK (talk) 21:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi QuakerIlK, welcome to the Teahouse. At which position in which infobox? PrimeHunter (talk) 21:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, QuakerIlK. Whilst you could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes, I've taken a look and really don't think there is anything in our Manual of Style that permits a line to be drawn across an infobox. But if anyone would know, PrimeHunter's your man/woman/neutral entity. Quite why you would want to do that for a footnote is beyond me - these should surely all be at the bottom of the page, even when included in an infobox. You should probably refer to WP:REFGROUP on how to group footnotes together. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Template links to images[edit]

How do templates such as Speciesbox create images in the template when a letter code such as EW is entered into the status field? And where could I view the code to this process so I could learn how it works? I tried viewing the source for Speciesbox and I could not see any code for this process (I presume it's somewhere else). I'm trying to become more fluent in template syntax so your help would be much appreciated. Mad Mismagius (talk) 22:06, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mad Mismagius: on pages you can't edit, you can click "View source" rather than "Edit" to see the source text. Then you need to have an eye for working out which of the text is important (some of it is for something meta, like <noinclude>{{documentation}}</noinclude> generating the documentation when you look at Template:Speciesbox)—no easy task but it gets better the more experience you get. Whatever you enter in the infobox in the "status" field is given to the template in the parameter {{{status|}}}. If you trace it through, by looking at the comment at the top to see that these parameters are sent to Template:Taxobox/core, and look at that code to find the information is then sent to Template:Taxobox/species, you can look at that last template's documentation to finally see the actual images and layout design that generates the conservation status segment of the infobox. However, this took me maybe 10 minutes to work out and I've been here for 7 years, so don't feel stupid about not understanding something. You've stumbled on a template design on the more complicated end, for what it's worth. — Bilorv (talk) 22:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@Bilorv: Thanks so much for your timely and detailed response! :) -Mad Mismagius (talk) 22:28, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Mad Mismagius: The speciesbox template is mostly just a wrapper, all it does is pass the parameters from one template to another to put them in a more human readable form and sort out those that are relevant. Most of the code to actually generate the infobox is in Template:Taxobox/core, but there are several other sub templates and modules (which allow you to use Lua code in templates) involved in producing the output, the one that produces the classification circles is Template:Taxobox/species. I will warn you that this is a monster of a template, and really is not a good example to look at if you want something easy to reverse engineer. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 22:29, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Question about a source[edit]

I'm caught up in some ridiculous dispute about the Quinton Flynn debacle (he's been accused of sexual harassment, but according to some the accusations have been debunked and there are claims circulating that his wife may be involved in attempts to debunk the entire thing and that the primary accuser is actually a malicious ex who has a protection order filed against her by Flynn...) and, upon looking into things a bit more, I do agree that including everything about this should be put on hold until more concrete information comes out. However, it is irrefutable fact that his lines as Kael'thas Sunstrider in World of Warcraft are being removed from the game and replaced by another voice actor's work (reading the same lines). The main source I have for this is Wowhead, a community site that noted these changes on the PTR (testing area for the game) that will be implemented in the next patch. My question is this: is Wowhead good enough of a source? The post isn't from the forums or whatever; it's an official news post from the site admins, and this site has been a trusted source on Warcraft information for well over a decade now. Is it reliable enough for Wikipedia's occasionally higher-than-average standards, however, or should I/we wait for Polygon or whoever to report on this? And if they don't, will the information on his removal and replacement from arguably his most famous role not be on his page? Thanks in advance for your answers, and if you have any further questions, let me know. Pecanurdu (talk) 23:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

YOu should probably take this to WP:RSN, that board deals with this kind of thing specifically. Heiro 23:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Randall Goodden[edit]

I submitted a new article "Randall Goodden" for Review, but I don't know where it is now. How can I view what other Editors have said about it?

A Flaneur (talk) 00:08, 17 April 2021 (UTC) A Flaneur (talk) 00:08, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: It is at Draft:Randall Lee Goodden. It has been submitted three times (3/23, 3/23, 4/2) and Denied each time, also a Speedy deletion nomination on 3/24, then gamed to have the draft appear as never having been Denied. There have been MAJOR problems with this draft, elaborated on your Talk page and elsewhere. The reasons the denying reviewers provided are on your Talk page, along with warnings about copyright. (You added many images that were removed as copyright violations.) You denied being Randall Goodden, yet elsewhere answered a query in first person as being Goodden. The denial appears to have been by your brother, using your account, making the reply literally true, but disingenuous. David notMD (talk) 00:39, 17 April 2021 (UTC)