From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Grant's death date in Mudcat Grant article is being constantly changed by unregistered users, what should I do?[edit]

Hello. 3 unregistered users keep changing the death date on Mudcat Grant. The sources agree that Grant's death was announced on Saturday (6/12/2021), but the first one claimed to be his grandson and changes the date to 6/11/2021. I reverted the edit, but, shortly after, other unregistered user changed it back. To avoid an edit war, instead of reverting again, I sent him a message, which he didn't answer. Then, a registered user reverted the edits, but a third unregistered user changed one of the dates back. Using Geolocate, I concluded that the three IP adresses are located almost at the same place, near Los Angeles, California. I believe that these users will keep checking the page and put back the date if they were reverted. What should I do? Should I do nothing, or should I tell administrators to protect the page? ObserveOwl (talk) 19:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@ObserveOwl These users may be socks, in which case you should add the sock template to their talk pages. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 19:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Try Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 19:54, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
@ObserveOwl: Request that the page be semi-protected at WP:RFPP. This will stop unregistered account and new editors from editing the page. RudolfRed (talk) 20:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
@ObserveOwl @RudolfRed I don't think it's worth protecting the page if just one account/sockpuppeteer is vandalizing the article. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 20:41, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
@ObserveOwl I have created a Sockpuppet investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2603:8000:CC01:2FB4:81B6:4C53:1C84:F682. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 20:33, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
@Qwerfjkl and RudolfRed: Thank you very much. ObserveOwl (talk) 20:51, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
@ObserveOwl The result is available at Wikipedia:Help desk#Deleted SPI case question through RudolfRed's enquiries. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 20:09, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
just as a comment, a rather sad situation can arise where someone clearly died on Sunday, but they were not discovered until Monday. I believe that in the US, under these circumstances the police are obliged to report their death has having occurred on Monday, even though everyone knows it (almost certainly) happened earlier. This situation can, of course, be quite distressing for relatives, who may have a strong desire that the public record reflect what really happened. I have absolutely no idea of the situation with Mudcat Grant, and of course Wikipedia must reflect what the papers say. But it's not easy, and we should probably be as gentle as we can in explaining the situation to potential relatives. Elemimele (talk) 15:04, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Photo author privacy concern[edit]

I uploaded a photo released into the public domain by its author, permission given through email. However, I did not know the author's name would be made public and I have good reason to believe they would not want that information public. How can I have this information taken down? Is there any way to have the photo stay up but the author's name removed? SanLeone (talk) 20:23, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@SanLeone: We can't just take your word for it that you have an email granting permission. See Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission, the author will need to email Wikipedia the permission directly. If the permission does not require attribution, then I think that the name could be omitted, but I am not sure. RudolfRed (talk) 20:43, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
If this file is the issue, it appears that it will be deleted in the next few days anyway unless further permissions are supplied. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:44, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your responses SanLeone (talk) 01:53, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

  • @SanLeone: The "author name" field can be a pseudonym (there are a few diagrams under my pseudonym "Tigraan" on Wikimedia Commons).
However, I do not think the person who gave you the scan is the "author" for our purposes. I assume that person scanned the newspaper clip, they did not take the photograph back in 1936 or maybe 1937. (One, an internet search for the "author name" gives a plausible hit for someone who based on their university attendance dates should be born in the 1980s or 1990s; two, assuming the photographer was at least 15 was the photograph was taken, they would be 100 now, hence unlikely to be alive and answer email.)
As detailed in WP:SCAN, scanning a newspaper clip does not give you authority to release its copyrights. Furthermore, being the subject of a photograph does not make you the copyright holder. Generally the photographer is the copyright holder.
If I believe the table at WP:COPYEXP, in the (very likely) case that it was taken from a US newspaper with a proper notice of copyright, the copyright term is not expired yet (1936 + 95 years after publication = 2031). What you should do if you want to use the photograph on Wikipedia is to track down the photographer or their heirs. That is of course near impossible after so much time, but it is the law. if it seems stupid to you, write to your representative. TigraanClick here to contact me 08:21, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
  • @Tigraan: Thank you for your helpful response. Yes, the "author" I listed was a descendent of one of the subjects in the photo. I will wait for the photo to be taken down as he was not the photographer. To my knowledge, the one who sent me the photograph is in his early 70s, but alas still not the photographer.SanLeone (talk) 01:15, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Why no reply[edit]

Why the suggestions that I gave here and here are being ignored. If my suggestion is not helpful or not technically possible then please tell me. Are the suggestions so bad that they are being treated like WP:DENY. This is very frustrating. I should have received a small reply, but I received none...Why...WHy...WHY ? -- Parnaval (talk) 08:57, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Parnaval That you have not gotten replies does not necessarily mean that you are being ignored- simply that no one has replied yet. It's only been a couple days. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello @Parnaval, it's one of those disadvantages of being a completely volunteer community. If nobody wants to comment, nobody will. Incidentally, one of my first questions to the Teahouse was also asking why no one else had participated in a discussion I had started and what to do about it. One thing that you can do about it, is notify relevant places that you think will be watched by editors who may be interested in the topic. For example, for the first one, WT:PP would be one of those places. But to be realistic, I don't see anyone being interested on that one, unless you have actual data that most recent deaths articles end up being semiprotected, or at least have a ton of disruptive edits. Even then, the template talk page seems like the wrong place to discuss this. WT:PP or WP:VPP may be better. And, you would only be trying to get a general sense of how the community feels. To make it actually actionable, you would need an WP:RFC advertised at WP:CENT. I reckon that's why everyone's ignored that one; or no one who'd want to discuss it has been online or seen it. It doesn't seem likely to succeed, and even if a few users agreed, it couldn't be implemented without a formal RFC anyway. As to the second one, it's not immediately obvious to me, why that would be a bad idea. Only problem with it is we can not implement it by ourselves. It would need to be implemented by the WMF developers. But it's at the right place. If sufficient people like the idea and want to see it happen, they will comment and let you know. I would wait for responses on that one. Two days is not really all that much on Wikipedia. There are very few editors who are interested in those kinds of discussions, and they may not all have been online or have had the time to get involved in that discussion. Hope this answers your question. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:30, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Parnaval: this is not a place to express your emotions. I know you're frustrated but it is better to ask it there it self. And you didn't even ping anyone so that it notifies them and they may reply you. Many Wikipedians over there didn't got a reply. So be calm, you will definetly get a reply when its worthy. Happy editing!Siddartha897 (talk) 09:33, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@331dot and Usedtobecool: At template talk, I asked more than month ago. I asked there as it is related only to that template. At Idea lab, I asked 2 days ago. That page receives on an average 7 edits daily but after me only bot came to archive old discussions :( .@Siddartha897: I expressed my feelings here as I get friendly replies here. -- Parnaval (talk) 10:47, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Parnaval, Others have provided some useful advice but I will gently suggest you have unrealistic expectations. Your posting in the teahouse which is one of the more active places on Wikipedia, and it would be unusual for a question to go unanswered for hours.
You are asking about the talk page for a template. With rare exceptions, discussions on talk pages for templates proceed at a glacial pace. I see you figured out how to look up historical activity. That page only got four edits in the last year. If you glance at the post two above yours it's from 2018. That means only to new posts in the last three years. While idea lab is a little more active, sometimes it takes time and sometimes it might require rewording to be more clear. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:49, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Thoughts regarding Hadith references in Islamic articles[edit]

Basically, hadith referencing seems to be an issue because various publishers and authenticators will use different numbering and different order of the chapters (For example, one might use Sahih Muslim xyz and another might use abc but abc will typically be a number close to xyz.) which will lead to the current references being invalid if someone uses one source instead of the other. So, while one can find the hadith by making an effort, it is very time consuming. Also, even though there are standards for hadith identification but again, because of the issue mentioned before, finding a hadith can become a hassle especially if the cited webpage where the hadith was supposed to be is now dead. However, this issue may be avoided by changing the style of the references. Basically, even though the overall hadith number may vary, the relative number typically doesn't - as in, the hadith will still have the same serial of the same chapter. Therefore, if we use the name of the chapter and the serial number of the hadith in that chapter - then the hadith will be the easiest to find even if the overall number and the order of the chapters and thus, the chapter number varies. Should/can this be implemented? - Sultan.abdullah.hindi (talk) 16:56, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Sultan.abdullah.hindi, I think you have a better chance for a decent answer at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:58, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Appreciate the tip, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. Peace. - Sultan.abdullah.hindi (talk) 06:04, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Contributor[edit]

How can I be a Wikipedia contributor? I really want to write for Wikipedia, not only editing. Decarter (talk) 18:15, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Decarter: Welcome! We're glad to have new editors join our ranks. If you haven't already, consider completing the Wikipedia Adventure to get a grasp of Wikipedia's policies and expectations regarding editors. Then, if you don't know what to work on, check out the Wikipedia:Task Center, which lays out the different things that editors around here work on. Feel free to drop by here if there's anything you don't understand.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 18:33, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Decarter, Can you clarify what you mean when you say "I really want to write for Wikipedia, not only editing"? Virtually all content in Wikipedia is created by editing, so you are attempting to make a distinction that may not exist. Do you mean create new articles instead of editing existing ones? If so that's a worthy goal but you really ought to have more experience first. Over 99% of brand-new editors who start by creating a new article fail and that's got to be discouraging. If you meant something else, please explain. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:52, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Sources in print[edit]

Hi, if a subject has multiple articles in print media, what's the best way to create a source for it? I have the scans for each article, so I can upload them to an internet archive and link them to a manually created citation if that works. Hillster (talk) 19:37, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Hillster: See Wikipedia:Offline sources. In short, you don't have to scan it, but provide as much bibliographic data so that other editors can find the same source and verify your information.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 19:45, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
By "has" do you mean written by the subject or about the subject? Wikipedia requires refs about people to establish notability. David notMD (talk) 20:30, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Expanding on David notMD's answer, multiple articles covering the subject are wanted as secondary sources are the backbone of Wikipedia articles. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:41, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ganbaruby: Thank you, this was helpful.
@David notMD: The articles are about the subject. There are quite a few online references, as well. But, he has been covered extensively by print magazines. Thank you!
@Tenryuu: I understand - which is why I want to include both online and print articles about the subject. I know how to reference online sources, but was slightly confused about the best way to cite articles in print magazines/newspapers. Thank you! Hillster (talk) 22:06, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Hillster:, there is a Template:Cite news that is commonly used for newspapers / magazines that don't have an associated URL. There is no need for a citation to have an archival link, since in principle readers can verify the information in a library. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

How do I Say?[edit]

Please Call me. KamranBhatti4013 (talk) 21:22, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@KamranBhatti4013: If you have a question about how to use or edit Wikipedia, please post it here. No one will call you. RudolfRed (talk) 21:44, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@KamranBhatti4013: Give me your number. Oh wait! Just kidding, whatever the problem is just tell here. Or else you can place {{Help me}} in your talk page(talk) so that someone can help you there. Be Bold!Siddartha897 (talk) 09:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

User talk:[edit]

Hi, this message is for Hydrogen. I recently made changes to the Wikipedia entry for Brian Stock (historian) and then received a message (the number/ref code is in the subject line). I'd like to clarify that I made these changes at the request of Prof Stock. He sent me a copy of his CV and asked for these changes to be entered on his Wikipedia page. Because his CV is not online or in a published source, it cannot be referenced. I can send you his CV or a copy of the email that he sent to me if you need verification. Could you suggest a way that I could post the summary about him so that it stays? In his view the current summary is disorganized and needs to be changed. Thanks for your help, SP (talk) 22:05, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. If you have a message for Hydrogenation, please leave it at User talk:Hydrogenation, where they'll be notified. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:08, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Unpublished content, including a CV, cannot be a reference. Verification has to be published content. David notMD (talk) 22:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Children and grandchildren should not be named unless they are subjects of existing articles themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talkcontribs) 00:41, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, IP user. I'm afraid you and Professor Stock have several misunderstandings about Wikipedia. First, that code is nothing to do with the message: it is simply the IP address from which you were editing: since you have not logged into an account (which is perfectly fine, by the way) the only way that Wikipedia has to identify you is by the IP address of the device you were editing from. Note that if you edit from a different device, or possibly even from the same one, you won't necessarily get the same IP address: they are allocated by your ISP, not by Wikipedia.
Now, as to the article Brian Stock (historian). Please understand that this article does not belong to Stock, and he does not decide what is or should be in it, though he is welcome to suggest edit requests to it (or you can do so on his behalf). But Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. Unless the information to be added has been reliably published somewhere, it will not be added in any case; and with few exceptions, all material in the article should be derived from what has been published entirely independently of him. --ColinFine (talk) 11:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Manual of Style, Video Games[edit]

Hello i have a problem, on the Wikipedia Manual of Style, Video Games.. it states released as PAL But as countries using PAL has already converted or in the process of converting, should something get changed here? thankyou! EzeeWiki (talk) 02:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, EzeeWiki, and welcome to the Teahouse. Like almost everything in Wikipedia, the contents of the MOS are subject to consensus, and may be updated or changed. If you think that your suggestion will be uncontroversial, you can just go ahead and edit the MOS page; if you think there's any chance of people disagreeing, it would be better to discuss it first on its talk page. If you start a discussion there, then it might be an idea to drop a note on WT:WikiProject Video games asking people to join the discussion. --ColinFine (talk) 11:23, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

time at beginning and end[edit]

Shouldn't a.m. or p.m. be at the beginning and end of a time period? Thanks! (talk) 03:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Can you give an example of what you mean? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:17, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Sure, if you look at Virginia Tech shooting, the format in the infobox used to be c. 7:15 a.m. - 9:51 a.m. I received a warning that my edits constitute vandalism, and if you look at the vandalism page I believe the edits do not constitute vandalism and that word should be avoided for someone trying to improve Wikipedia. The edits in question were up for a week or two weeks at least from what I remember. There was a suggestion to go to the Teahouse as I am reluctant to make edits since I am threatened with the loss of editing privileges. (talk) 03:32, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Love of Corey: How was this vandalism? I would agree with the IP here. time-end has "p.m.", why shouldn't time-begin too? Leijurv (talk) 04:16, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Per the consensus reached on the shooting article talk page. Love of Corey (talk) 04:17, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Alright then. It really doesn't take much time to type "per talk page", would have saved the confusion. :) Leijurv (talk) 04:28, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Wait, where would I type that? You mean in the edit summary? Love of Corey (talk) 05:17, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
That would be the most sensible place for it, yes. AngryHarpytalk 08:22, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

There is no vandalism though and there is ambiguity over the start of the shooting. (talk) 05:04, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

There is absolutely no ambiguity at all. Read the talk page discussion that I linked. Love of Corey (talk) 05:17, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
That being said, edits like that wouldn't constitute as vandalism, as it was clearly made in good faith to improve the article. Refusal to accept consensus and possibly considered disruptive editing? Sure. Vandalism? Definitely not. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
I didn't have a better template to use. Love of Corey (talk) 21:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

I believe there is ambiguity over the start time of the shooting as the time is approximate. The point is also on the talk page linked to this discussion. Nevertheless, as mentioned above, making edits to improve Wikipedia or edits that are in good-faith, are not vandalism. (talk) 14:46, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Participating in the talk page is also good faith, so keep participating and don't just disregard consensus. Love of Corey (talk) 21:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Content without sources[edit]

FYI – Heading added by Tenryuu.

Why can wikipedia content without sources get deleted even though it is true information? Osvaldo2007 (talk) 03:12, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Osvaldo2007: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia requires information to be verifiable. In order to do that, editors have to draw from reliable sources. The question to ask is "how can one prove it's true information?" —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:16, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Osvaldo2007, Has a reader in Buffalo, Bandjul, or Bangkok tomorrow, next month, or next year, any way of verifying the information? If not, it is unreliable and useless, and does not belong in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 11:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Referencing and notability[edit]

Hi all. I'm currently trying to clear out old U-BLP templates and I'm constantly coming across a referencing problem. It's usually an academic who's published a lot of papers and is regarded as eminent in his or her field but has not been covered in reliable, third-party sources that can be found via G-searches.

I've sent some of these articles to AFD and have been told I should check more thoroughly (WP:BEFORE). I do check and translate non-English sources when possible but still these are sometimes not useful and there are only so many hours in each day. I'll sometimes get a comment saying the subject passes WP:PROF or some other obscure guideline but I can't confirm the subject's notability via G-searches. Maybe the sources are off-line but why aren't they in the articles? So should I a) use anything I can find; b) continue to send U-BLPs to AFD and put up with the brickbats; or c) give up and leave the unsourceable articles in the backlog? I don't want to waste people's time. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:25, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

(Also on your talk page since I read this at the before you moved the question.) Notable academics are not covered in the press the way politicians, sports people, and movie stars are. So coverage doesn't turn up in Google searches. Wikipedia:Notability (academics) spells out how we find the reliable independent in-depth coverage. To meet any of the 8 criteria means that reliable people or institutions independent of the person have assessed that person's contributions to their field and found it significant. StarryGrandma (talk) 03:39, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Baffle gab1978, please read and study Wikipedia:Notability (academics) until you understand it and accept it fully. That guideline is not at all "obscure" but instead enjoys wide consensus among experienced editors. It is every bit as valid as the General notability guideline, which does not exist as a separate page but rather as a section of Wikipedia:Notability, which makes it clear that the GNG exists alongside the special notability guidelines which have equal validity. So, please accept the consensus. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Cullen:; so academics get a free pass on WP:BLP and WP:VERIFY, and {{Unreferenced BLP}} tags can remain on those articles indefinitely. I'll try to remember that now. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:25, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
I don't think I agree with that reading of the WP:NPROF guideline, but that's me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Baffle gab1978, what "free pass" are you talking about? They must still verifiably meet the relevant notability guideline. It is just that the community decided, a long time ago, that notability for academics is determined in different ways than for other BLPs. WP:NACADEMIC is not an easy guideline to meet. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:12, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

User page question[edit]

Hello! When I created my user page a few months ago, I stumbled on these small boxes one can add to their page that say things such as "This user can contribute at an intermediate level of French" or "This user remembers using a rotary telephone." I don't remember what these are called or how to find them again. Can you help? Aredbee (talk) 05:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Aredbee Please see Wikipedia:Userboxes. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 06:08, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Qwerfjkl Thank YOU! Aredbee (talk) 06:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hung while editing[edit]

I'm in the middle of a massive edit reformatting a ton of references in one go, and my editing window is hung. (The citation pop-up is acting like it's working but it won't close and I can't save because it won't close.) I know sometimes my browser restores edits for me when it crashes. Is there any way I can ensure that my edit is saved, or find where it might be temporarily stored? I hate to close out of the tab and potentially lose a ton of work. Thanks!! Calliopejen1 (talk) 07:11, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Calliopejen1, copy-paste, also, if it is similar to the article popups, you can just hover over it, click reset, and click reset popups! Good luck! Heart (talk) 07:14, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
HeartGlow30797, I'm in the visual editor and the citation popup wouldn't let me copy-paste. I couldn't close the popup. I typed in a URL that I predicted would be the equivalent of switching to source editor but that ended up losing all my work. Boo. :( Calliopejen1 (talk) 07:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

How do I get Pending changes reviewer rights[edit]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by N Jeevan (talkcontribs) 08:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. See Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes § Becoming a reviewer. Kleinpecan (talk) 08:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

I have read the guidelines to become a Pending changes reviewer but I'm confused how to add the request to become a Pending changes reviewer.N Jeevan(talk)

It seems you figured it out. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:04, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

A question on lists.[edit]

1. Do list articles have to be lists of Wikipedia articles, or can they be lists of offsite links to the products themselves? WhenYouWiki (A person) (Talk) 08:50, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

The first one, in general. Per WP:EL we avoid putting EL:s outside an External links section. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
hi and welcome to the Teahouse WhenYouWiki! adding onto the above, list articles preferably would be lists of wikipedia articles, or fail the notability criteria but otherwise are reliably sourced (which is likely better placed in a parent article instead of a standalone article). see WP:Stand-alone lists for more information. happy editing!  | melecie | t 09:07, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

About Notable Coverage[edit]

My recent AfS has been rejected for not showing significant coverage, while the references added are of Government websites talking solely about the subject; in details. While other publications are there supporting other content of the page, top coverage added are independent in nature. Need guidance on the same. Udaysm (talk) 10:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Shyam Steel. Declined twice. David notMD (talk) 11:12, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Why my new article not 'seen' by Google?[edit]

I had created Birendra Prasad Singh article here on wikipedia but it is not available on google search. What is the problem? it has been reviewed but no related article appear on bottom of article as well! what is the problem? Curious boy np (talk) 10:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

(added a section title). David notMD (talk) 11:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Courtesy: Birendra Prasad Singh. Created 14 June, bypassing the AfC process. David notMD (talk) 11:24, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Curious boy np: The article Birendra Prasad Singh you have created won't appear in the google search right now as it is a new one. Google index gives priority to those websites which are mostly visited. Generally it takes time for your new article to get views, you can check that at ( So in future you might see it. I had the same experience with Malavika Sharma earlier. Be Calm, Happy editing.Siddartha897 (talk) 11:33, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
New articles on Wikipedia are no indexed (i.e. won't appear on search engines) until either they are 90 days old, or have been reviewed by a new page patroller. This was done specifically to stop search engine optimisation. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:38, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Joseph2302: What you say is true, but the article concerned has been reviewed & is not NOINDEXed. It is waiting for Google to take action. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:26, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Anons blindly changing mentions of Macedonia(n) to North Macedonia(n)[edit]

I was reading Ezgjan Alioski and saw in his Personal life section that he spoke 'North Macedonian'. After checking Macedonian language, I saw that the language however wasn't renamed. Just the country name. So I changed it to just Macedonian and an IP changed it again. And since it's an IP I could check where it's from and I wasn't surprised. Anyhow, I don't feel like starting a revert war, so I wanted to notify anyone who could deal with it. Teysz Kamieński (talk) 12:21, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Looks like another anon reverted it again. So the page is fine now. Teysz Kamieński (talk) 12:26, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Teysz Kamieński: Disputes such as these are unfortunately common. I'm not an expert, and you may already know of these options, but other avenues for coming to an agreement are the talk pages, such as of Ezgjan and the Macedonian language, and maybe relevant wikiprojects such as Wikipedia:WikiProject North Macedonia. (You might also try leaving messages on the user talk pages of people who might know more, such as the listed members of Wikiproject North Macedonia, though it might be difficult to get a reply.) Knowing this to be a persistent international dispute, I tried searching for "WP:Macedonia" and found Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia), which outlines current Wikipedia consensus. There's a mention of a WP:1RR (one-revert rule) restriction on contentious edits regarding North Macedonian naming, and I am not an expert in such matters but I would assume the reasonable place for escalation to be Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, or for persistent disruptive editing from anonymous editors, Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. If such problems arise again I hope this is useful. --Anon423 (talk) 22:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

New Article[edit]

Hi ! I need to know how to publish an article about new company/brand/organization. Thanks Raza Sethraza1 (talk) 14:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

A "new" subject may well not have achieved sufficient coverage in published reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's requirement for notability. If it does satisfy those requirements, then you'll find advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:10, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Sethraza1. Because this is an encyclopaedia of 'Notable Things' (and not of every single thing that exists), we require new subjects to meet our 'Notability Criteria' which you should read about here for businesses and oprganisations. In essence, you will need three in detail and in depth sources which demonstrate that the world at large has taken note of that company. You might also wish to read this guidance on creating your first article. Finally, if you are connected in any way with the company, you must declare this on your userpage before starting work on any draft. We do not accept WP:PROMOTION, an all sources relating to a company must be independent of it and its press releases and any trade newspapers. Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick Moyes (talkcontribs)

Link Wikipedia articles between Languages[edit]

The page does not link the German version of Metric, which is this page, ie. it redirects to, because the article is included in that one. How do I link to this article correctly? Or could anyone more experienced please link it? TheFibonacciEffect (talk) 14:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, TheFibonacciEffect, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a tricky one, because interlanguage links are now normally done through Wikidata, but there's a problem when the articles in the different languages have different scope (this is known as the "Bonnie and Clyde problem"). What I have done is to add an old-fashioned local link (not using Wikidata) to de:Metrik (Mathematik). I considered linking to de:Metrische Raum directly, but decided that if I link to the redirect then if at some point the redirect is developed into a stand-alone article, it will be pointing to the right place.  Done --ColinFine (talk) 16:36, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
ColinFine Thank you very much, it was bothering me the whole semester :D TheFibonacciEffect (talk) 16:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Renaming a page[edit]

Hi, I am an employee of Espinosa Cigars. We have a wiki page that someone must have created years ago.

I have been updating it but I would like to change the name of the page, we are no longer EO Premium 601 Serie. Is there anyway I can do that?

v/r Hector Alfonso HJA1966 (talk) 14:45, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Per the explanation left on your Talk page, you must first declare your paid relationship with Espinosa on your User page. Second, as paid, you are not allowed to edit the article directly. For this and other reasons, all of your edits were reverted. Instead, you must create a section on the Talk page of the article, describe specific changes you want (as in replace ____ with ____), provide references for those changes, and then submit a request, so that a non-connected editor can decide to implement or not. Start with just the name change - with ref(s) confirming the name change - so that an editor can more the article to the new name. Learn how to do refs properly, because what you tried (all reverted) was wrong. David notMD (talk) 14:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Actually User:HJA1966, you can edit the page, but it is strongly advised not to, as your edits will likely be reverted, as mentioned above. Sungodtemple (talk) 15:52, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@HJA1966: The article (not Wiki page) was about a brand of cigars, not the company. I changed the name of the company in the lead but that's all that was necessary for now, since there's no indication the brand name changed also. Without looking too much into it, it appears the company may be more deserving of an article than the since renamed brand, but I haven't done an in-depth sourcing search yet. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 21:49, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

What happens if i use a image from flickr[edit]

Hi, Can i use images from flickr? What happens if i use from flickr? Will i get that copyright message? Someone also blocked me from wikipedia commons! Will i ever get unblocked again? When will i get unblocked? Please help🥺 Badassboy 63637 (talk) 15:07, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Commons is a separate project, so if you want to discuss a Commons block, you need to do it there, not here. Your Commons user talk page gives you a link to the block log there which tells you the duration of your current block. I see that this is your second block for the same reason; if you were to offend again your next block could be expected to be longer, and perhaps indefinite. You can use images from Flickr only if the copyright has been released; if you can't see evidence that it has been released, don't use it. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:23, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Badassboy 63637: regarding your commons block, please familarisize yourself with COM:L and the other policies regarding image uplaods. A couple notes (without having loooked at the deleted images, I can't see them):
  • Most every image you find on the internet is copyrighted, see also COM:NETCOPYVIO
  • If an image does not carry any copyright information, it is assumed to be copyrighted
  • Taking a screenshot, or picturing sth. with a camera, does not give you the copyright of the original image, but rather creates a Derivate work.
Your current block is set to expire on the 29th June. Please use the two weeks until that to familarisize yourself with the upload policies, and use the Upload Wizard. If you are unsure wether we can use an image, please ask. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:45, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
In addition to these answers, you need to make sure in future to ask for clarification as soon as you are given a warning that you do not understand, rather than carrying on the same behaviour. These warnings are being sent by real people like you who must have some reason for giving them. It is rude to ignore a person trying to communicate you and insist on doing the same thing repeatedly. I would recommend that you do not make any further attempts to upload images, as it's a very tricky process and it's very important for legal reasons that we get it right. As Victor Schmidt says, the default situation is that an image is copyrighted and cannot be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons or used on Wikipedia. — Bilorv (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Badassboy 63637, Flickr is one of the few photo hosting websites that allows users to license their photos in various different ways. Several of these licenses are compatible with the standards at Wikimedia Commons. Read Wikipedia:Upload/Flickr very carefully. Images with the Flikr licenses highlighted in green are OK for uploading to Commons but do not upload any Flikr images that lack a proper license. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:37, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

How to choose good sources[edit]

How can you find good sources that are reliable? I don't know how to find out is a source is reliable and you can't use wikipedia sources. Raaganjali (talk) 15:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Puppies are so cute. Like many issues like this, if you type WP: followed by the item you want advice on into the search box you should find something useful. So WP:reliable sources is a starting point. There is a shortcut to a list of well-established sources at WP:RSPS. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Puppies are so cute: If you can't find it over at WP:RSPS, you can go to the reliable sources noticeboard and see if someone has asked there before. If they haven't, you can start a new discussion so that other editors can chime in. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Possibility of viewing tooltips on mobile[edit]

Is it possible to view tooltips in articles (the ones indicated by dotted underlining) while viewing Wikipedia on mobile? Although the underlining appears, when that is touched the tooltip doesn't appear. This is the same even when using Desktop view in mobile. NS-Merni (talk) 15:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@NS-Merni: Tooltips have never worked for me on mobile. They do show up on desktop when I'm hovering over them as a little box underneath the tooltip. The more technical-minded folks are over at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), so you could ask a question there. I will say that I never use tooltips while writing because they don't work on every device; instead, I always try to integrate whatever extra stuff in the prose, and if absolutely necessary, I use {{efn}} to create footnotes at the bottom of the article.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, I will probably ask there then. NS-Merni (talk) 06:11, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

How do I use a copyright image?[edit]

There are some images I require for my draft but they have a notice which says "This logo is the graphic representation of a registered trademark subject to trademark law". One such image is this one. It's use is restricted to French Wikipedia, within which it is restricted for articles related to the image. What do I do? I require this image. Excellenc1 (talk) 15:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Here in the English Wikipedia, the guidelines are at WP:Logos. Note that in certain cicumstances, non-free images may be used in articles, but they are not allowed in drafts. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Error in uploading photo in Wikipedia.[edit]

In page (SadGranth Sahib) , when i started uploading photo, after filling the categories when I clicked (save) , it shows me an error written as (An automatic filter has identified this edit as potentially...) . Please help me how could I upload an image and to deal with the error. Baba Thanos (talk) 16:51, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Baba Thanos, and welcome to the Tahouse. The filter log says "Refspam detection", which I think means that your edit included a link to a site which has been barred as being spam. How were you uploading the picture? And where is it from? (if it is the source of the picture that is the "refspam", then you won't be able to post the link here either, but you could tell us in words.) --ColinFine (talk) 17:31, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Meh. Book covers are protected by copyright in 99% of the cases, which means they can only be uploaded locally, using our upload wizard, under fair use. @ColinFine: The image attempts can be found in the commonswiki abuse log, its one of their more common filters Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:32, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

New To Wiki and need help for inclusion on Wikipedia!![edit]

I've been up working on a new article, yay! I will publish my first article, are there any experienced editor(s) willing to review it for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Waveg0ddd (talk) 17:51, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Waveg0ddd: Welcome to the Teahouse. I suggest putting it through the Articles for Creation process, where you submit your article as a draft and reviewers will take a look at it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:01, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Waveg0ddd:(edit conflict) I have removed the boldface formatting from your above post, its both unnesesary and might come over as agressive. As for your article, I was unable to locate it. Therefore, I would suggest that you make a draft on Wikipedia's servers for now and come back when you feel like we should have a look. Keep in mind though, not all Teahouse respondees are interested in reviwining drafts, and using the Teahouse in an effort to get something quickly to the main encyclopedia usally does not work (Wikipedia does not operate on deadlines, so we have plenty of time). Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Please read the advice at WP:Your first article. If you submit a draft for AFC review, it will be reviewed (probably within 3 months or so). - David Biddulph (talk) 18:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Courtesy: User:Waveg0ddd/sandbox appears to be the draft in question. David notMD (talk) 23:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

New user asking something[edit]

Editor Blablubbs recommended the teahouse to ask questions. At Tim Lucas, it says he won a Saturn Award for a book he wrote, which is cited, but then it also mentions a second Saturn:

"Lucas is also twice a recipient of The Saturn Award: in 2008 he received the Award for Special Achievement for Mario Bava: All the Colors of the Dark,[46] and in 2018 Kino Lorber's release of Alfred Hitchcock's Lifeboat - featuring Lucas' audio commentary - was honored as the year's Best Classic Film DVD Release."

I see at that Lifeboat won for Best DVD/BD Classic Film Release. Tim Lucas was one of two people who did commentary (the other being Film Professor Drew Casper I can't find anything saying that Tim Lucas and Drew Casper won awards. Doesn't the company that put out the DVD Kino Lorber win the award? Maybe it'd be better to say "Kino Lorber's release of Alfred Hitchcock's Lifeboat, which includes commentary by Lucas and film professor Drew Casper, won the 2018 Saturn Award for Best DVD/BD Classic Film Release." Or should we remove that part? TheHorror TheHorror (talk) 18:24, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@TheHorror TheHorror, I understand your concerns, but after thinking about it a bit myself, you probably know the answer better than I do. If you believe you should change it (based on reliable sources as always, especially for WP:Biographies of living persons), go ahead and do so; a common guideline is WP:Be bold. If you really want other opinions, I'm not a subject expert but I personally think your replacement might be more accurate. You can also solicit other editors' opinions on article talk pages, or at the talk pages of relevant Wikiprojects such as WP:WikiProject Biography, WP:WikiProject Science Fiction, or WikiProject Film's awards task force, or even on the talk pages of users active in the area. – Anon423 (talk) 01:44, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@TheHorror TheHorror, On another note, the statement about Lifeboat is currently unreferenced, so don't forget to add a citation, such as to the article you linked, and maybe also to establish that Lucas contributed commentary. – Anon423 (talk) 01:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Odd response to edit...odd page...not sure what to do[edit]

Hi, I edited Patrick Treacy. Someone with an IP then undid my edit in a way that didn't made grammatical sense and which took out some of the verbatim account from the reference I had included. So, I reverted, which I thought was the right thing to do (but maybe it wasn't: maybe I should just have edited the grammar problem). Then someone with a different IP undid my reversion and made an unusual (and almost entirely wrong) allegation against me: it is here I don't want to get into a fight, so I'm happy to leave it (and, to be clear the edit I originally added is still there and in its shortened format it's fine). But the nature of the allegation against me (aside from being wrong) is concerning to me and also makes clear that the person who is doing the editing seems to have a peculiar degree of knowledge about the subject of the article, the history of the page and his adversaries...! I then saw there was a strong sockpuppet history and recurring edits, more recently almost always from IPs and always adding more material to the article that bolsters the reputation of the subject. When an editor tried to fix it three years ago after some obvious sockpuppetry, "someone" made exactly the same accusation of malice in quite similar terms, before the material was largely put back in. So, I wonder about the page as whole (see the talk page) and wonder if someone more experienced than I am had any thoughts or could do something. Fermanaghabu (talk) 18:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry, you seem to be in the clear. It looks like User:CodeTalker already got to it and reverted it back to your version, which seems fine to me from a brief look at the source you cited. (I'm not an expert on the reliability of, though I notice no red flags.) It's fairly common on articles such as these for conflicts of interest and motivated editing to crop up. --Anon423 (talk) 21:01, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Fermanaghabu: I've also gone ahead and removed a bit of the puffery in the article. Wikipedia, as you may know, is intended to have a Neutral point of view and in particular MOS:PUFFERY should be reined in to just state the facts, which may include various awards and laudatory statements attributed to public sources. You're right to have described the page as odd – it still reads with a somewhat promotional tone. As long as you're familiar with the Wikipedia:Five pillars and the policies and guidelines that follow, I encourage you to fight back against the spammers, advertisers, and promoters in service of building an encyclopedia. Let us know if you have any other questions. --Anon423 (talk)

Wikipedia Experts[edit]

Dear Friends, As I am working through several issues to have my page published, I have received emails from individuals indicating that they are Wikipedia experts and can help me through the Wikipedia system. While I am not inclined to take advantage of these offers, I find the Wikipedia learning curve to be quite steep. For example, James York ( has emailed to offer a free consultancy on my article. Do you see any problem if I contact him for assistance? Or, is there someone else that you could recommend? Thank you so much for your response. Frank S. Weaver (talk) 18:45, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Frank S. Weaver Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not endorse or advocate for paid editing services, though it is permitted as long as the editor declares that they are being paid and who is paying them. Paid editors- despite what they claim- can make no guarantees(such as writing an article that will not be deleted). If you choose to avail yourself of such services, that is up to you, but I would strongly advise you to not hand over one penny until you see the end result.
It is true that creating a Wikipedia article is challenging. I'm assuming you want to see a Wikipedia article created about yourself. Typically, articles are created by independent editors who take note of a subject in independent reliable sources and choose on their own to write about it. Trying to force the issue has varying degrees of success. Wikipedia's sole interest is in summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Any other goal, such as improving your internet presence or enhancing search results for you, are side benefits, not our primary goal. Please see why a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 19:08, 15 June 2021 (UTC) seems consist of one page of poorly written copy, which the owner evidently hasn't even spellchecked. Clearly a scam.--Shantavira|feed me 19:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia is written and maintained by volunteers. Anyone who tells you they can assure a certain outcome (e.g. creation of a page) is lying. I would strongly advise against paying anyone to edit Wikipedia on your behalf or give any assistance. It harms our community significantly and you are not guaranteed to get a result that you are happy with (for instance, we may include unflattering information about a subject that the paid editor chose to omit; or we may decide to delete the article after the paid editor has walked away with your money). — Bilorv (talk) 21:25, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Appears you have been working on Draft:Stephen Fichter since mid-November. You have denied a paid connection on your Talk, but I will ask again if you have any type of personal connection to Fichter. That would need to be declared as a conflict of interest on your User page. The declining reviewer gave some guidance. I am not Catholic, but I get no sense from the Draft that Fichter has accomplished anything extraordinary within the Church, and so may not meet Wikipedia's idea of notability. David notMD (talk) 23:10, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Need help to post[edit]

Hi I thought I was adding a short bit of information, but I don't see it anywhere. I am not good with this sort of stuff. I do want what I tried to publish to be published but I don't understand how to do this. If anyone can help me, please advise. It will be very much appreciated. Whiteline22 (talk) 18:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Whiteline22: Your edit to Sparks (band) was reverted by another editor, with the edit summary "Reverted good faith edits by Whiteline22: needs a citation". When you add factual information to an article, you must cite a reliable published source that supports the addition. Deor (talk) 19:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

I am the reliable source. I don't know how to do this. Please help. What exactly do I need to type? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whiteline22 (talkcontribs) 19:42, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

You presumably didn't read what User:Deor said. He said that you needed a "reliable published source"; follow the link provided. Your personal knowledge, if unpublished, is of no use to Wikipedia. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Whiteline22: You are not a reliable source for the purposes of Wikipedia, since we cannot know who you are and whatever you personally know is considered original research. Only published sources can be cited for facts in articles. Deor (talk) 20:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended Confirmed Protected Page Edit Help[edit]

Hello, I want to add the information (my sandbox) to a page that's Extended Confirmed Protected. Can someone have a look and apply the possible changes? GONvsKillua (talk) 18:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Use Template:Edit extended-protected on the article's talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:51, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@GONvsKillua: You'll find further advice at Wikipedia:Edit requests. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:05, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Brand New - Wanting to check before writing[edit]

It was suggested that I check here for notability before I bother to write an article. My article would be on Theodora Cope Stanwell-Fletcher (1906-2000). She was an American naturalist and nature writer. Her first book, Driftwood Valley, won the 1948 John Burroughs Medal. She is also listed on a list of missing pages.

For main sources for the article, I would be using:
--Marcia Meyers Bonta, “Theodora Cope Stanwell-Fletcher”, (1996) In Elder, J. (ed.) American nature writers. Charles Scribner's Sons. Volume 2. pp 847-860.
--Information from the family archives: Woodbourne Orchards and family of Francis R. Cope Jr. (HC.MC.1230) Quaker and Special Collections, Haverford College, Haverford, PA.
--Cambridge Guide to Women's Writing in English, 1999, 9780511074110
--Chose, Lauri. Uncharted Arctic Wilderness: Rediscovering the Literary Works of Lois Crisler, Margaret Murie, and Theodora Stanwell-Fletcher, 2007. (Dissertation)

Please let me know whether I should continue down this path, or instead just enjoy a re-read of her work. Thank you. StickOrSnake (talk) 19:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@StickOrSnake: I'd say that the Bonta chapter and the Cambridge Guide are certainly reliable sources that go a long way toward establishing Stanwell-Fletcher's notability. The archives at Haverford College, insofar as they are unpublished documents, are unusable, since the sources cited in an article must be published works. The dissertation (assuming that it's for a completed Ph.D.) is a bit problematic—see the third bulleted item at WP:SCHOLARSHIP—but might be usable for facts unlikely to be challenged; more importantly, it should cite sources dealing with Stanwell-Fletcher that you yourself could investigate and cite. If you can find one or two more published reliable sources, your article would almost certainly not be deletable for lacking evidence of notability. Deor (talk) 19:46, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Logo/Copyright Question[edit]

Hello! I'm currently working on a draft Draft:Photograph magazine, and am trying to include a logo image, but am a bit confused by copyrights and definitely don't want to infringe on anything. The logo itself is just text, and on Wikipedia:Logos is states that a logo of just typeface is uncopyrightable, so I'm wondering what sort of approval process it may require. Thank you so much!! nutellab Nutellab (talk) 19:21, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Nutellab: I took a look at the magazine's website and can confirm that it's public domain because it's just a typeface. To answer your question, since the magazine is in the United States, Wikimedia Commons will take them. Just put {{Pd-textlogo}} in the file discription, similar to these logos: Sony, FedEx, Calvin Klein. However, your article is still a draft, so I'd worry about completing the prose of that article and having it approved through Articles for Creation before dealing with the logo, since if the draft is not approved, your logo is useless anyways. Having a logo in the draft will not improve your draft's chances of approval.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 19:37, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Nutellab, note Wikipedia style: not "Notable Featured Artists/Contributors" but instead "Notable featured artists/contributors"; though actually I'd have "Notable contributors", as contribution of photographs is contribution and "featured" is pretty meaningless. And where did they contribute? Specify at least one issue of the magazine for each of these notables. -- Hoary (talk) 02:26, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 Ganbaruby!  Thank you so much! Will make that clarification, but of course content takes precedence.
Hoary Gotcha, will make that change, good point. It's all still in progress, thank you for your help!

Trying to transfer account[edit]

I got a new email account recently, and I kinda want to transfer my wikipedia account to that email. (I'm The great Jay btw) Is it possible? And if so, how can I do it? (talk) 21:13, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

If you still have access to your account, you can log in and then under preferences (Special:Preferences) you can set your email address. If you don't have access to your account or your old email, then you will need to create a new Wikipedia account. RudolfRed (talk) 21:33, 15 June 2021 (UTC) Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Log in to your account and go to this page (your preferences). Scroll down until you see something that looks like this (not very close but the text sould be the same) in your preferences under the "User profile" section:

Click the button and the rest should be explained by the software. --littleb2009 (she/her) (talkcontribs) 21:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

German Music Wikiproject and German Teahouse[edit]


Can anyone help me find the Wikiproject for Music and German Musician or something? I am trying to get help for my Draft. Also, is there a help section on German Wikipedia where I can ask the admins to help me? I believe Weiss is notable. He has won a significant International German Award and published many books and Spatial audio arts, he is a pioneer in sound-branding. Has done a Europe Tour too. Now he is not a singer, and it's getting difficult to prove his notability as a musician. WP:ARTIST: "The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique."

Thanks! Jiskofor (talk) 21:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jiskofor: The German Wikipedia "Teahouse" is at [1]. It is not clear why you want a German admin to help with your English draft. RudolfRed (talk) 21:27, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jiskofor: Additionally, for English Wikipedia, you can go here to look for projects such as music etc Wikipedia:WikiProject#Finding_a_project. The equivilant German page is [2] RudolfRed (talk) 21:31, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
(I think Jiskofor doesn't mean "admin", a really small set of volunteers who have technical abilities but no additional powers over article content, but instead is trying to say "experienced editor".) The German Wikipedia is an entirely different community to ours, and have different standards as to what they consider "notable" enough to have an article. If you ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians then you might get some help. If I was reviewing the draft, my eyes would glaze over—the review process is really backlogged so reviewers have very little time to assess very complicated things. It helps if you can highlight the three best sources or the biggest claims to notability, for instance in a comment at the top of the page (like some of the reviewers have left). — Bilorv (talk) 21:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Jiskofor. Do you mean German Wikipdedia's versions of these pages or do you mean German-language versions of these English Wikipedia pages? I don't think there are official German versions of English Wikipedia pages per se, but there might be some German translations of English Wikipedia pages that can be found on German Wikipedia. Generally, one way to try and find these is to go to left side bar and look for "German" (or "Deutsch") under "Languages". The "Languages" contains links to corresponding pages on other language Wikipedia. In some cases, the links might not be very accurate, but they're probably OK for major Wikipedia policy or guideline pages. The German Wikipedia page for its Teahouse equivalent appears to be de:Wikipedia:Fragen von Neulingen and the German Wikipedia equivalent for Wikipedia:WikiProject music appears to be de:Wikipedia:Redaktion Musik. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:33, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Need help from experienced editors[edit]

Please contribute to the Requested Edits on the above page. GONvsKillua (talk) 21:37, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@GONvsKillua: I put in the newer infobox but there are too many awards. You should pick maybe the most notable 4-5, along with their sources. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
I have responded in detail on the article's talk page. Number 57 22:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

A problem in editing[edit]

Look i want to to add a birth date to the births of October the 10th, like it's an emergency even if you want to remove it, remove it after a day or two so just keep it, why you keep removing it? I need that Youuung goth (talk) 21:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Youuung goth Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Date articles only include those with existing articles. What is the nature of the emergency? 331dot (talk) 22:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Youuung goth: (edit conflict) see the note on the page October 10: "Please do not add yourself or people without Wikipedia articles to this list." If your friend does not have an article, you cannot list her there. Do not engage in an edit war. RudolfRed (talk) 22:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Youuung goth. Maybe the person whose name you're trying to add to that article is someone you know? Maybe you're trying to do something nice for them? Maybe you don't know them, but you're trying to add the name for some other reason? Whatever your answers are to those questions, you need to understand Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not because unlike social media sites, online forums, etc., Wikipedia is generally not a place to give someone a shoutout per WP:Namechecking, even if you only want the information to be visible for a day or two. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:37, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Romanising an article title[edit]

Romanising an article title Right now I'm writing an article about a fish, but the only common name appears to be in the Cyrillic alphabet. I know that article titles must be Romanised, and I read through the help pages for Romanising, but they were not helpful because this name was in the Turkish language and there was no tutorial for it. The name is Kızılırmak toothcarp. Should I Romanise the name, or simply title the article after the scientific name? Helen (let’s talk) 23:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC) 

User:HelenDegenerate - I am not the expert, but my opinion is that if there is no common name that is written in the Roman alphabet, then the scientific name is most nearly common Roman name, and scientific names are of course always written in the Roman alphabet because they are either Latin or Latinized. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:17, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

How does Wikipedia influence Google rankings (and does it matter)?[edit]

I hope that this isn't a stupid question from an experienced editor. Is there an explanatory essay that tells how Wikipedia articles and titles influence Google search results, and why it should matter to entities of marginal notability, such as entertainers, businessmen, corporations, etc? That is, how (without opening any cans of beans) is Wikipedia being used and misused for Search Engine Optimization (and what can reviewers and admins do to maintain the integrity of Wikipedia)? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Robert McClenon. This is not a stupid question. It is well known that a well-written Wikipedia article about a discrete topic will usually show up as #1 in Google's search results, unless the article has a hidden noindex tag. All articles created by less experienced editors are noindexed until reviewed by a new page patroller, or until 90 days passes. If the article is created by an experienced editor with the autopatrolled user right (which includes all administators), then Google will index the new article rapidly, sometimes within minutes. I have seen an article I have just added to main space show up as the #1 Google search result within three minutes. There are complications though. For example, for ambiguous topics such as several notable people sharing the same or similar names, and another complication is when the Wikipedia article lacks an image and Google's algorithms will sometimes extract a description of Jack Smith A from Wikipedia and insert a photo of different Jack Smith B from some other website into its Google Knowledge Graph which is kind of like an infobox created by a bot not human editors. The bottom line is that your marginally notable "entertainers, businessmen, corporations" will get a genuine boost in their online visibility if there is an acceptable Wikipedia article about them that "sticks". Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:14, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Robert McClenon, I'm not aware of anything so specific, but there are essays about SEO efforts on Wikipedia, dealing with these Wikibombing attempts, and a generic reference about what pages are indexed. – Anon423 (talk) 01:16, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Where can I find some help to improve an article with paragraphs copied "word for word" from a book and tons of unnecessary details that make its size totally crazy and the article unreadable?[edit]

Please read Étienne de Perier and Talk:Étienne de Perier... Your comments are welcome. Thanks --Belyny (talk) 02:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Savary34 increased the length of the article by 5X, and you then reduced it by 1/3. You both are participating in a discussion on the Talk page of the article. There are still LARGE sections of text without citations, and lengthy content in quotations that are poorly attributed. David notMD (talk) 03:11, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi David notMD, Belyny will be blocked for total disrespect of point of view neutrality. See this report--Savary34 (talk) 17:54, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

move the page from the Sandbox to Wiki[edit]

Hello, I am ready to move the page i created from my sandbox to Wiki , but can not find this this option on my Wiki screen . Thank you for your help. Elzaratyr (talk) 03:02, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey Elzaratyr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Are you referring to this article? If so, it might need a little more work before its ready for inclusion on Wikipedia - I'd recommend taking a look at the article wizard, which not only will help you write your first article, but will also let you create a draft which another editor can review and move for you. Good luck! Face-smile.svg - TNT 😺 03:08, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Can't figure out if this is vandalism[edit]

This editor User_talk: keeps adding OAM after people's names in articles. I can't figure out if it's vandalism or if it's some abbreviation that is familiar to other people. Benevolent human (talk) 05:19, 16 June 2021 (UTC) Benevolent human (talk) 05:19, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@Benevolent human: OAM apparently stands for Order of Australia. No idea if they're generally appended to the end of a name, though. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:23, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Tenryuu: If the post-nominal were added, it would normally be by the use of Template:Post-nominals/AUS. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:59, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

First Reverting Then Restoring[edit]

In the article Pi, my edit was first reverted but then was again restored. Was my edit right and if yes then why was it reverted first? ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 05:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: perhaps @D.Lazard: misclicked in Twinkle or simply changed their mind. RudolfRed (talk) 05:54, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, ExclusiveEditor. I am not a skilled mathematician but this doesn't seem to be that complex. At least in part, your edit contested the assertion that the Basel problem was a "famous" challenge for mathematicians of the era. That problem took 84 years to solve and the solution brought fame to Leonhard Euler, one of the greatest mathematicians of his era, who was a major contributor to the understanding of pi. So, why do you think this problem that took 84 years to solve was not famous among mathematicians, then and now? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: It may be famous for you, it may be famous for me, but it may not be famous for the third person reading, this is what WP:NPOV says, and I just followed that. ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 07:25, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

The fact that the problem was famous is attested by many sources and the fact that it received a name that is still in use, centuries after being solved. So "famous" is a useful information for readers who ignore the problem and for which it is not famous.
So, my self revert was an error: Just after my first revert, I remarked that the term "Basel problem" appears 6 times in the article and 3 times in the section where it is qualified as "famous". So, I got the impression that "famous" were misplaced, and my revert was just the preparation of a move of "famous" to another place. At that moment, I was too tired for being sure of the right place, and I left the article in a non-controversial state. Nevertheless, I would support restoring "famous". D.Lazard (talk) 07:36, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
I've restored it. ExclusiveEditor, words like that do not contravene NPOV provided they're factual and sourced. Bishonen | tålk 08:55, 16 June 2021 (UTC).

Page Deletion[edit]

Hello, should this page should be deleted or not:

Should I add references? Or I shouldn't care because it will get deleted anyway. HeyitsmeFellen (talk) 05:44, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@HeyitsmeFellen: The entire point of the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Brian_Graham_(actor) is to answer the question "should the article be deleted or not". If you can find references, then that might save the article from deletion. If no sources can be found that show notability, then it will likely be deleted. RudolfRed (talk) 05:57, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, HeyitsmeFellen. The current version of the article is unreferenced and makes many unverifiable assertions. It reads like it was written by someone with a personal relationship with Graham. So, in its current form, it should be deleted. But perhaps reliable sources have devoted significant coverage to Graham. If so, those sources can be added to the article as references, and the article can be saved by being improved. I have saved quite a few articles that way, and it can be satisfying. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:59, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Created in 2911 without inline references, and has been that way ever since. David notMD (talk) 10:28, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Averages two pageviews a day. Find something else to rescue. David notMD (talk) 10:31, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Prepping a translated article for re-review[edit]

I've had to significantly beef up citations on this draft of an article about Brazilian artist Antonio Peticov that I'm translating from the PT Wikipedia original. I've gotten some help here last week (cut a lot of unsourced stuff out compared to the original, cleaned up some flowery language that works in Portuguese and not in English), but I want to make sure that, after a potential 5 month wait, it won't just get immediately rejected again. Any suggestions for improvement would be greatly appreciated. Actionactioncut (talk) 06:05, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Actionactioncut. Your draft is filled with promotional, non-neutral language in Wikipedia's voice, and reads like something that might appear on his own website instead of in a neutral encyclopedia. Please read about the Neutral point of view - you may need to read it several times to fully understand it. Then rewrite your draft radically, eliminating all praise and positive assessments, unless you can attribute that praise to professional art critics. Praise in Wikipedia's voice is simply not allowed unless it is summarizing a strong consensus of coverage in many reliable sources without any significant dissent. Has any critic ever written a negative review of his work? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:17, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Additionally, there's a fair amount of what appears to be mere trivia. Example: "Upon arrival he met Gilberto Gil, and rented a flat near the singer's residence." And thanks to meeting him, or to renting a flat there, what? If either the meeting or the location demonstrably had a major impact, then say so (citing good sources, of course); if not, then cut this sentence. -- Hoary (talk) 07:02, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Undisclosed payments[edit]

Some one please have a look at Renu Raj. A user named GermanKity tagged 'undisclosed payments tag'. But I don't have any connection or financial benefits from the subject.

Have a look at this too. She is a very famous civil servant from Kerala, India. Idhachu (talk) 07:03, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

courtesy pinging GermanKity  | melecie | t 07:18, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi MelecieDiancie, Thank You for letting me know. It looks like covert advertising. I would also like to ping to MER-C in this case. GermanKity (talk) 07:26, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Similar articles are here, T. V. Anupama, Sriram Venkitaraman, Ajay Prakash Sawhney etc. I just followed the same. The issue is, I want to know why he tagged undisclosed payments tag. I don't have any such things. Idhachu (talk) 09:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Graphic images[edit]

What would be an acceptable reason to delete a graphic image like the one on the article, Sexual violence against Tamils in Sri Lanka? The content of the image placed in the article is too graphic and is potentially disturbing to other readers. It's really inappropriate. As mentioned in Wikipedia's types of controversial images: Images depicting death/violence/sexual content, would it be possible to take it down? If so, how? If not, what are the guidelines beside that WP is obviously not censored. Bekkadn (talk) 08:23, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

The page you've linked to is marked as historical, so does not apply. Other than WP:NOTCENSORED, the main guideline that's relevant is Wikipedia:Offensive material, and there's also WP:ASTONISH. I see you've started a discussion—if it doesn't get a reply then you could remove the images yourself boldly, and discuss with anyone who re-adds them, or you could ask for input in the discussion from a relevant WikiProject. Thanks! — Bilorv (talk) 09:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Can we use a Youtube video as a source.[edit]

Especially in the articles of WP:BLP. I had a problem with sources in Anikha.Siddartha897 (talk) 09:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC) Siddartha897 (talk) 09:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

hi & welcome to the teahouse Siddartha897! due to being self-published, you may not use youtube videos as sources, with the exception of videos from a reliable source's official youtube channel. feel free to check WP:RSPYT for more information regarding this. happy editing!  | melecie | t 10:19, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Siddartha897, depends, it's a bit like asking "can we use the internet as source", much on it is crap from the WP-perspective. See WP:RSPYT. For example, a youtube video by and uploaded by CNN is as WP:RS as Anonymously uploaded stuff can't be used, often it's also a copyvio. Some stuff may fall under WP:ABOUTSELF. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
{re|Gråbergs Gråa Sång|Gråbergs Gråa Sång}} and  | melecie | t You are correct and i can understand WP's policies. But without a reliable source even true info is not accepted here. Siddartha897 (talk) 10:49, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång and Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Oops! the typo i made. Siddartha897 (talk) 10:51, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Correct, and that goes double for WP:BLP:s. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:53, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Copyright-free images[edit]

Hello, how can I find copyright-free images for the article Niki and Gabi since it has no pictures?. Gabriella Grande (talk) 10:17, 16 June 2021 (UTC) Note: fixed header  | melecie | t 10:19, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Gabriella Grande, very likely you can't, WP:s rules here are strict. If a fan has taken an image of them, they can upload it at Commons and then it can be used on WP. Niki and Gabi can also upload selfies there themselves if they think it's a good idea. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:31, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Is a screenshot from a YouTube video free? if it is, how can I let someone upload the picture because I'm blocked from Commons. Gabriella Grande (talk) 10:45, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Gabriella Grande: Yes if the Youtube video has a CC license(see You can upload it thorough a fellow Wikipedian. P.s you can filter the youtube videos under creative commons to get req video. Siddartha897 (talk) 11:05, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Siddartha897: How can I find a Wikipedian to upload the picture? Gabriella Grande (talk) 20:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Gabriella Grande: It's simple as I mentioned above you can your wikifriend at their talk page (or) ask help here at Teahouse or at WP:HELPDESK. As most of the wikipedians here are volunteers they will be ready to help you if the help you are asking is legit. That's it. Siddartha897 (talk) 05:49, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

How to successfully submitted a artist biography?[edit]

would like to expand the database of Malaysian artist in wikipedia, but I've tried a few times, it's doesn't seem to get approve by the review team.. how should I do to improve my articles? Icecream2021 (talk) 11:15, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

I can see only only submission for review. Draft:Eng Hwee Chu was submitted less than an hour ago and has already been declined, so I can't see any undue delay. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:45, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

(talk)Thank you so much for your replied. I'll try to re-write the article and send here for comment before submit the article.. is that alright?

would like some non-involved parties to review a name change request[edit]

This is in reference to the page under talk:

I would like some other parties to help me with a Search engine test, as it relates to finding relevant information from non Wiki or Wikilike sources. I am also posting here to invite others to offer their opinion on the topic since in 2 weeks and only 1 person has said anything in the talk. Support or Oppose, I'm interested in moving the discussion forward so that action can be taken. I have made it quite clear ,i think, however I would like some fresh eyes on the subject to help insure I'm not mental. Please read the whole discussion if you have time and replay there, and engage me here. If I make an edit to the page, it will be changed the same day, and my attempts at the Socratic method have failed as well.

I'd also like a bit of clarification, I'm new around here, as to the nature of Conflict-of-interest editing with regards to religions. Example: Were I a Christion, would it be a COI to involve myself in any topic related to Christianity? Does that same COI extend to any religious scholar, or the field of Comparative religion as a whole. The wiki info on COI doesn't make it clear in regards to ones religious identity causing an inherent COI.

Ram Muni Rammuni BadaUdasin (talk) 11:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

No. If you were the minister/vicar of a church that had an article, you would have a conflict of interest, but otherwise, just being a Christian does not mean you have a conflict of interest. --Bduke (talk) 11:39, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@Bduke: not sure if I did this reply correct, but thanks for your answer. For a Bit more clarity in the context of the article mentioned, I am in fact a disciple "novice" within the Udasin Tradition. Perhaps a better comparison would be that of any Buddhist monk in relation to the "Buddhism" wiki page. Would there be an inherent COI in such instance? The Udasin as a Whole has many schools of taught, and 3 Major schools and countless minor schools. Just as Buddhism has a few major schools and countless minor school. Yet I am an ordained novice/Chela in the " Udasin Bada Akhada " aka the large Udasin community. As the article is not focused on any one institution, or a single school of thought but the tradition as a whole, there should exist no COI yes? example: any ordained Buddhist monk and the general "Buddhism" article. Thanks again for your reply!! --Rammuni BadaUdasin (talk) 12:15, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Inappropriate Images on Wikipedia.[edit]

Iam talking about graphic, sexual and sensitive images in articles like Sexual violence against Tamils in Sri Lanka, Sexual intercourse, and many other articles . The images are not the problem here but there is no warning or anything like sensitive content ahead like in other websites such as instagram. So I think there should be a warning in every article that contains inappropriate content and the image shouldn't be displayed before. Siddartha897 (talk) 11:29, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

This has been discussed many times before. We're not censored. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:25, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
WP is doing the right thing. Siddartha897 (talk) 12:56, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Publish a biography of someone else[edit]

Please, anyone to help me out by on how to publish a biography of an upcoming Artist??please.. Aywonda (talk) 11:32, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Aywonda when you say "upcoming Artist" it sounds as if it probably too soon for them to have an article - please read Wikipedia:Up and coming next big thing - Arjayay (talk) 11:38, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Sock filter[edit]

Hello i was just going through a random user's filter log and find out that he had triggered a filter called "persistent Sockpuppetry" (i wont link that user) but can i get some information on this filter becausei cant find anything on this filter on web,thanks, also where can i report such teigger of filter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:49, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Information about filters is available at WP:Edit filter. In many cases the detail is hidden, as publication might make it easier for culprits to evade the filter. Triggers are logged at Special:AbuseLog, so you don't need to report it. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:56, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Theres nothing about this filter there and that filter was triggered months ago thus no one noticed it anyway this is the filter im talking about : "triggered an edit filter, performing the action "edit" on X. Actions taken: none; Filter description: Persistent sockpuppetry (diff)" this filter doesn't have a number. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

This filter does have a number, it just isn't shown, because that particular filter is hidden from public view. Its #643. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you but is this filter true how does it work? And where can i report its triggerers.— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:00, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Edit filters work by looking for edits that match specific patterns, the workings of this particular filter are private and are not available for the public to view. the only editors who can see what this filter is doing are administrators and users with Edit filter managers rights. You don't need to report the triggers anywhere as they're tracked automatically, and you wouldn't be able to see when the filter triggers anyway. (talk) 13:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello mr, Is emailing a edit filter manager a good idea when i see this trigger — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

You can't see when the filter has been triggered - that information is mostly hidden from the public filter logs. The people who set up these filters already get information on when it's been triggered so there's no need to email them as well. This filter is deliberately private because they don't want people looking at it. (talk) 13:50, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

How to erase an article[edit]

I´m trying to translate an spanish article, Antonio Cuadri, to english, but the entry in english has the same name and i can´t translate it. The person who create the english article is from the team of Antonio, they ask me for help with this. Therealandy (talk) 12:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@Therealandy: Meh. The spanish Wikipedia article () fails the sourcing reqirements for living people by a lot. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
There is not, and apparently never has been, an English Wikipedia article entitled Antonio Cuadri. Your draft has no references, so obviously can't become an article in its current state. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:55, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Aha! There does exist Draft:Antonio Cuadri, which has been declined three times this week. David notMD (talk) 16:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
A suggestion: Go to List of Spanish films of the 2010s. Open any year and it will show directors who are the subjects of articles. Model the revision of the Cuadri draft on those. This includes learning how to create references. Good luck. David notMD (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Does Wikipedia have a double standard?[edit]

On 28 April, @Wojciech Nowakowski '91: asked if it would be possible to publish an article about Sii Poland, the company whose Wikipedia page had previously been removed on account of "the lack of notability and that it was a blatant piece of advertising". In response, @Hoary: and @Fuhghettaboutit: suggested that the article is not suitable for publication and the user "should focus his efforts elsewhere". Although Sii Poland provided multiple references about the company from the largest and reliable media in the country, the article has been removed. Meanwhile, there are articles about smaller or similar scale companies that provide their own website or their own blog as sources (which are not considered good sources) or have virtually no sources that would confirm their notability. For example: Can anyone explain on what basis these articles were approved? Regards Wikifan2077 (talk) 12:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikifan2077, a premise of your question is that these three articles were approved. There's no reason to assume that an article has been approved, and indeed I see no evidence that any of the three was approved. I sorry to learn that the three cite unreliable sources, but right now am too sleepy to want to confirm this. You are of course most welcome either to improve one or all of these three articles or, if you think that it/they should be deleted, to move to have it/them deleted. Incidentally, I note that the comment immediately above is your very first edit here; allow me to complement you on your precocity in mastering templates, etc! -- Hoary (talk) 12:52, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Wikifan2077: Thanks for pointing out those other poorly sourced articles. I marked them as needing better references so other volunteers can look for more sources. If there are none, they might be removed as well. See WP:OTHERSTUFF. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 15:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

njedeh anthony[edit]

i am asked by njedeh anthony to create/write on him by it is rejected by wiki. i put all basic data and info. references too Shahzad ameen (talk) 12:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Shahzad ameen, welcome to the teahouse, you may have a conflict of interest problem by making an article about someone who asked you to write an article about them depending on the type of relationship you have with the subject. I have looked at your article and I think the article doesn't have 2 reliable sources that provide significant coverage (WP:GNG), and the citations that are placed not as inline citations (WP:Inline citation). Justiyaya (talk) 13:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)


 Mavix de badess (talk) 12:52, 16 June 2021 (UTC) What cames that if I write anything to Wikisource it can not not be display on Google

@Mavix de badess: What do you mean? Can you elaborate. Siddartha897 (talk) 13:01, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Mavix de badess:, if you have any questions regarding Wikisource, you can ask at that project's help page Scriptorium. Lightbluerain (Talk | contribs) 13:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Mavix de badess, if this has anything to do with your search for a manager/promoter for your music career, you have come to the wrong place. Wikipedia is not for promotion.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:14, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

CCBY License and Wikipedia compatibility for text and images[edit]

Is CCBY license compatible with Wikipedia for text and images ? I am aware that CCBY SA 3.0 is the preferred version. What about the CCBY SA 4.0 version? Are therre any restrictions that apply for CCBY license and using text or images Kindlyguide.--NandanYardi (talk) 14:58, 16 June 2021 (UTC) NandanYardi (talk) 14:58, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

NandanYardi, This: Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright#Licenses contains a wealth of information. Unfortunately, look at the table near the top of the page and you will see that CC BY-SA 4.0 is NOT acceptable. Sorry. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Contacting Editors[edit]

Hi Everyone. I am working on a story about Wikipedia editors in Appalachia. Is there a way to contact Appalachia Wiki editors to potentially interview them for the story? Writerinappalachia (talk) 15:14, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes. Post an invitation on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Appalachia. ϢereSpielChequers 15:18, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Writerinappalachia, welcome to the Teahouse! You can try asking at talkpages like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Appalachia, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States, Talk:Appalachia, etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Which is the better reference: German or WayBackMachine? And any hints?[edit]

Hi, I've been adding a few bits to Ludwig Hupfeld. I found from German Wikipedia a link to a defunct web-page of Siegfried's Musikkabinett, a German museum containing a Hupfeld instrument, which sadly is about as good as it's possible to get as a reference. This page was in English, and is available on Waybackmachine. But I've since found the new site of the same museum, which contains the same information (and more), but only on their German pages. Which is the better reference for English WP, an archived page, or a modern link in the 'wrong' language? I can't see much point in including both, as they're basically the same organisation saying the same thing. Related to this, does anyone have a crib-list of formats for referencing? I've read the (helpful) WP 'Learn to edit' section on referencing, but it was still a bit of a struggle to work out how to cite waybackmachine in a reference, and I'm not sure I did it correctly. Many thanks for any help. Elemimele (talk) 15:18, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Elemimele Per WP:NOENG I'd go with the English one. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: thanks! Elemimele (talk) 20:38, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Elemimele, you may be interested in the how-to guide at Wikipedia:Citation templates. There is an entire set of standardized templates such as {{Cite news}}, which I almost always use. I believe the {{Cite web}} template in particular is built into the usual Visual Editor, though I prefer to use the source code editor ("edit source") where the ProveIt gadget handles citations quite well; the gadget's fillable form includes a place for archive links. – Anon423 (talk) 11:54, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

How to get editor review in talkpage before actually sending the article for review?[edit]

Is there a way I can call on few editors to look at my newly created page/article before actually submitting it to review? Sir Ubaid Ur Rehman (talk) 16:25, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

You could provide a link here to your unsubmitted review and see if anyone at Teahouse is willing to comment. It appears you are being paid to create an article. The hard-working, volunteer, Teahouse hosts are less inclined to help paid editors do the work they are being paid to do. David notMD (talk) 17:01, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
If this is about User:Sir_Ubaid_Ur_Rehman/MTFX_Group, it's a long way below the standard required of a Wikipedia article. It uses promotional language, and cites no independent sources. Maproom (talk) 20:43, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

DataXoom Page Restoration[edit]

Hello! We recently realized that our DataXoom company wikipedia page had been deleted, and we are unsure as to why. I already requested a restoration, and it came back saying the page was taken down due to blatant advertisement under section G11 of the deletion criteria. Our page was factual for our company and did not have any advertisements on it when we last edited it in Fall of 2020. Would anyone know how we can go about getting our page back up, or maybe at least if we can get the last version so that we can edit it? Thanks! Dataxoom2020 (talk) 16:28, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Dataxoom2020, a few things:
  1. Your username is a violation of our username policy. It's quite likely you'll be blocked soon until you change your username via Special:GlobalRenameRequest
  2. The article about your company was deleted in 2015 as part of a large-scale operation of preventing undisclosed paid editing. The article about your company had been created by a user who participated in such activities, and hense it was deleted.
I recommend recreating your article as a draft (via the article wizard) and then submitting it for review.
Hope this helps! — Berrely • TalkContribs 16:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Please bear in mind, Dataxoom2020, that if you (or anybody else) succeed in getting an article about DataXoom accepted into Wikipedia, that article will not belong to you, will not be for your benefit, will not be controlled by you, will not necessarily say what you would like it to say, and should be based almost 100% on what people who have no connection with you may have chosen to publish about you in reliable place, not on what you say or want to say. See WP:PROUD. --ColinFine (talk) 17:32, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

About Good Article nominations[edit]

Can you please tell me how to nominate an article for 'Good article' , also what is the benefit after given a tag of (Good article).... I want to nominate a city Hajipur for good article tag!!! help me for this!! ItsSkV08 (talk) 16:58, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@ItsSkV08: Getting an article to good article status is one of the more difficult things to do on Wikipedia. If you're still at the stage of your Wikipedia career where you need to ask for help finding the criteria, you may find it quite difficult. That said, if you're willing to put in the work, your GA reviewer will be able to help you get the article in shape. Just be prepared that it's going to be quite a lot of work. Anyways, to answer your question directly, information about nominating GAs is available at WP:GAN. Please be sure you've reviewed the criteria and made a thorough effort to get the article to meet them before proceeding. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 17:08, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Only about 0.5% of English language articles are GA. David notMD (talk) 17:12, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Deleted article[edit]

FYI – Heading added by Tenryuu.

why my articles are deleted . i have copyrights the owner himself asked me to write on it so what is the problem there Shahzad ameen (talk) 18:03, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Shahzad ameen, Which page exactly do you refer to? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 18:18, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Shahzad ameen, there are three main problems here. The most obvious is that you have a clear conflict of interest as you shouldn't be writing articles about an author or their books if you've been personally asked to by the author in question (whether you're getting paid or just doing him a favour if you're a friend of his.) The second problem is that all of the books' plots that you included in the articles were clear copyright violations from the author's website. To use them, you will need to show that these few paragraphs have been released under a license compatible with Wikipedia's and just saying "I know the author and he tells me it's ok" won't be sufficient. Finally, there is no sign that these books are sufficiently notable to have an article on Wikipedia. You can check out the requirements here. Best, Pichpich (talk) 19:03, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Shahzad ameen. The thing to realise is that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. What the author says or wants to say about his books is completely irrelevant to Wikipedia, and articles about him or his books are not for his benefit. --ColinFine (talk) 20:46, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Pending Changes Rights[edit]

FYI – Qwerfjkl moved section header to the body of section

Can a user get pending changes reviewer rights if he had joined Wikipedia 3 months ago and have a measurable track record of editing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by N Jeevan (talkcontribs)

@N Jeevan: You received an answer here. --bonadea contributions talk 20:38, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Can I edit someone else’s draft?[edit]

Can I edit someone else’s draft? I found a draft, Draft:Jason G. Ballard, that has a lot of problems with it. I really want to help this user by removing the promotional language, maybe even add in section headers and infoboxes. Will I get in trouble if I edit this person’s draft? Helen (let’s talk) 18:47, 16 June 2021 (UTC) Helen (let’s talk) 18:47, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

HelenDegenerate hello again. Actually, you can! Anything in the draft namespace can be edited by anyone and the person who made the draft will likely appreciate your help. Be bold! --littleb2009 (she/her) (talkcontribs) 19:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
HelenDegenerate, nobody has ownership of an article so you should feel free to edit a draft started by somebody else. In the present case, however, the article was started today by a new editor Tsbky (talk · contribs) (his sole 3 edits are to the draft) so he may expect others to leave the draft alone. So my advice is to leave a message on their talk page explaining that you want to help fix the draft before you actually start to work on it. Pichpich (talk) 19:15, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Agree, in cases like this it's polite to ask first. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:49, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
That draft badly needs some work. Promotional language, promotional direct external link, no sources cited, misformatted section headers .... Maproom (talk) 21:15, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
There's even a direct external link to the marketing agency that made such a pig's ear of writing the draft! Maproom (talk) 21:19, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
"Needs some work" is perhaps a delicate way to say "needs deletion". But Maproom, a little humility, please. Because, let's admit it: neither you nor I could hope to achieve such professional photographic standards. -- Hoary (talk) 21:45, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Sadly, I have that feeling that the draft belongs at WP:MfD. --littleb2009 (she/her) (talkcontribs) 22:11, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, interesting that for photos dating as far back as 1991, the creating editor claims as "own work". David notMD (talk) 22:08, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@Littleb2009: @Pichpich: @Maproom: @Hoary: @David notMD: Well... I went for it. I tried removing their promotional stuff and cleaning up the article for them. Only to find out that they just got blocked for not disclosing their paid contributions. Had to say I tried. 😥 Helen (let’s talk) 23:17, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
HelenDegenerate, if you tried to improve it, then I infer that you thought it was worth improving. If it was worth improving then, it's worth improving now. Anybody is welcome to improve it, regardless of the status of the user who was, will be, or won't be paid for doing so. -- Hoary (talk) 02:16, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Citing myself[edit]

I want to cite a work of my own. There are at least two problems: (1) it's by me, and (2) it's on Blogspot.

One response to problem (1) is that the work is directly relevant, and there's no substitute for it. And one response to (2) is that it's basically a book, even though it's on Blogspot.

Can someone advise me? Thanks very much.

Imagebeau (talk) 19:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@Imagebeau: welcome to the Teahouse! For problem 1, you can see WP:CITESELF for the policy on citing sources that you wrote. In general, citing self-published sources may be considered a conflict of interest and it is well advised to use the {{Request edit}} template to request that others review your edit first. Keep in mind, though, you may have to wait.
As for problem 2, user-generated content, including Blogspot, is generally unacceptable. --littleb2009 (she/her) (talkcontribs) 19:45, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, littleb2009. I will request an edit. Imagebeau (talk) 19:56, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Which citation template to use for an administrative report?[edit]

I have a document which is an administrative report produced by an association of municipalities. What would be the best citation template be? Both "book" and "journal" seem possible, but neither seems entirely appropriate. Loris Bennett (talk) 20:11, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Loris Bennett, I think {{Cite report}} is what you're looking for. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 20:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

removing sentences on a talk page[edit]

My understanding was I can remove talk page messages if my question was already answered. Is that true? (talk) 22:17, 16 June 2021 (UTC) 

On your own talkpage, yes. Not on pages like this one or article talkpages. See WP:REDACT/Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Personal_talk_page_cleanup. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:38, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

The question was already answered in an above paragraph on the talk page, so the last post is not needed. I do not know if that was clear or not. (talk) 23:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

WaT DOES m[edit] (talk) 23:43, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you please clarify your question? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:24, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Create a Translated Page in English Wikipedia[edit]

Hello Wikipedians, So thiss time my question is how to create a Translated Page from a foreign language to English Wikipedia. Please do let me have the links or let me know how this process happens. Thanks in Advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 00:14, 17 June 2021 (UTC) Jocelin Andrea (talk) 00:14, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

You'll find advice at WP:Translation. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:17, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you @David Biddulph, but I would like to know how to submit an article from other Language for Translation into Wikipedia. Jocelin Andrea (talk) 00:23, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Which part of the advice at WP:Translation do you not understand? - David Biddulph (talk) 00:30, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi @David Biddulph, being only an Auto-confirmed User, how can I submit translation of articles? Because I can't find how to submit a Japanese article into English. Jocelin Andrea (talk) 00:34, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
The page I told you about has a link to Help:Your first article, which tells you how to create a draft and how to submit a draft for review. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:43, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your help @David Biddulph, but I know how to create an article and have got an article approved from my side. The thing I need to know is that I have read an article in Japanese Wikipedia, which I would like to be in English Wikipedia; So, I would like to know the process in which the article from Japanese gets Translated or how to get it into English Wikipedia. Thanks, Jocelin Andrea (talk) 00:48, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Try reading Wikipedia:Translation#Requesting a translation from a foreign language to English. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:50, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you @David Biddulph, now I have found an User Paul Richard who is a Translator and Native in Japanese-English. So, my next question is, What does he do next? Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:18, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Jocelin Andrea. As David mentioned above, the information you're looking for is basically covered in Help:Your first article, but you can find out some more in Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and perhaps even at Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Be advised though that each Wikipedia project has its own policies and guidelines and for an article to be accepted on English Wikipedia it's subject will need to be considered to be Wikipedia notable. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:33, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks @Marchjuly, I thought that there are ways to convert a Wikipedia Page from Foreign Language to English directly or through Translators. But did you mean that I need to create a new article on English Wikipedia with the translated content used with the same citations? Jocelin Andrea (talk) 02:29, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
I don't think there's any tool or software that directly translates an article found on some other language Wikipedia and then adds it to English Wikipedia. I think that you will need to create a new article from scratch on English Wikipedia in accordance with the guidance given in WP:TRANSLATE. Whatever you end up creating, however, will need to be in accordance with relevant English Wikipedia policies and guidelines in order for it to avoid being tagged or otherwise nominated for deletion. This means meeting things like WP:N, WP:RS, WP:V and pretty much anything mentioned everything else mentioned in WP:42. Be advised that other language Wikipedia's might have similar policies and guidelines to English Wikipedia, but they might not be applied as rigorously. So, you're shouldn't just assume that an article on another language Wikipedia is automatically OK for English Wikipedia and vice versa. One thing about translating other language Wikipedia articles is that you be fairly competent in the other language (whatever it may be). Machine translations are really frowned upon per WP:MACHINETRANSLATION and you sould be able to at least read the sources cited in the original article so that you can assess not only their reliability but also their context. Wikipedia articles are pretty much never considered to be a reliable source for any purpose per WP:WPNOTRS; so, you will still need to cite reliable sources in support of whatever article you try to create. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:15, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft for review[edit]

!help Hey can anyone help me i have wrtitten an article on Richa Jain can someone review it  Ezeekel654 (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

I have submitted your draft for review. Note that there are currently 4,484 pending submissions, so it might take some time before it gets reviewed. Kleinpecan (talk) 00:31, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Question about a reverted edit[edit]

Hello, and thank you for the opportunity to ask a question here. I'm still new to WP and just learning how it all works. My question is, if I make an edit and have citations/references to back up my edit, but then my edit is changed/reverted by a user who (I feel) is making an incorrect edit, and is not providing citations/references to back up their edit, is it enough for me to simply address the issue on the talk page? What if the talk page entry is ignored? Or, is it better to directly message the user who made the revert? I don't want to get into an edit war and I also don't want to get into an argument with someone who doesn't provide citations to back up their edits. Should I make a "semi-protected edit request" so that an independent third party can decide which edit has more merit? Thank you for your time and I apologize if I'm not asking the question correctly, in the correct format or on the correct page. Below is a copy of my talk page entry. Cheers :)

Tua was named Dolphins' starter in 2020, not 2021[edit]

The article states, "Tagovailoa shared playing time with Ryan Fitzpatrick during his rookie season before being named the fulltime starter in 2021."

This is inaccurate for a couple of reasons;

Tagovailoa was the starter beginning in 2020, not in 2021 as the Wikipedia article currently states. Fitzpatrick was the official starter for the first six games of the 2020 season. Afterward, Tagovailoa was named the official starter of the Dolphins in Week 8 of the 2020 season and Fitzpatrick was named the backup for the rest of the 2020 season. This Sport Illustrated online article clearly states Tagovailoa became the starter in 2020 and Fitzpatrick became the backup.

As to the future 2021 season, Tagovailoa has not officially been named the starter. The starting lineup has not been determined by head coach Flores.

Below is the change I made to the page to reflect the correct situation, but it was reverted by another user to incorrect information.

"Tagovailoa shared playing time with Ryan Fitzpatrick during his rookie season. Tua was named the Dolphins' starter as of Week 8 of the 2020 season. [1]

I provided citations to corroborate my edit. I do not see citations for the current, incorrect statement. Thanks :) Gridiron Steamroller (talk) 21:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)


  1. ^ Benjamin, Cody. "Dolphins name Tua Tagovailoa starter: Here's why Miami made the right call to replace Ryan Fitzpatrick". Retrieved 16 June 2021.
@Gridiron Steamroller: Welcome to Wikipedia. If you have suggestions to improve an article, please start a discussion on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 01:06, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
I think this was edited while I was posting, so my answer now does not make sense. Ugh! RudolfRed (talk) 01:07, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@RudolfRed:Thank you for your response. If I understand correctly, you're saying to always start a talk page entry before making any edit? I think I read somewhere on WP, "to be bold" when making edits, but okay, I can do that. What about my other questions; "What if the talk page entry is ignored? Or, is it better to directly message the user who made the revert? I don't want to get into an edit war and I also don't want to get into an argument with someone who doesn't provide citations to back up their edits. Should I make a "semi-protected edit request" so that an independent third party can decide which edit has more merit?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gridiron Steamroller (talkcontribs)
You can ignore my first answer. It was based on a reading of your question that changed after I posted. Since you have already started a discussion on the talk page (if I understand correctly now), and your edit has been reverted (?), continue to discuss on the talk page, per the guidance at WP:BRD (you were bold, you got reverted, now discuss). If you can't get a consensus there, then follow the steps at WP:DR. Hope this helps and sorry for the confusion. RudolfRed (talk) 01:27, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@RudolfRed:Okay, that makes sense. I'll follow the protocol on the pages you provided. Thank you :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gridiron Steamroller (talkcontribs)

How do you start a Draft?[edit]

How do you start a Draft? ItsJustdancefan (talk) 01:58, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi ItsJustdancefan. You'll find more information on this at Wikipedia:Drafts, Help:Userspace drafts, Wikipedia:Articles for creation and Help:Your first article, but basically what is done is to create a new page in the draft or the user namespace, which you can then for the most part edit just like you would edit any other Wikipedia page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:14, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
ItsJustdancefan (talk) Read lots of Wikipedia articles on similar subjects, to see how to arrange your information. Before starting to write, do your research to make sure you can find enough published articles or book sections that report on what you want to write about. Don't cut and paste long passages from what other people have written, but use your own words to tell what you learned from your sources. Make sure you list references for all your facts.
You need to use a neutral tone, which means you can't give your opinion on whether your subject is good or bad. If writing about a person you can say that the person won an important award, or give a short direct quote of another person stating something positive about the person, but most of what you write needs to be just basic facts, and everything you write has to come from a published source that's not directly connected to who (or what) you're writing about.
When writing for an encyclopedia you need to use a rather "bland" style, but if your subject is both important and notable (plenty of published information available for references) your draft will be interesting to read. Best wishes. Karenthewriter (talk) 03:35, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Reasons for Misinformation About Vandalism ?[edit]

Again, I hope that this is not a stupid question. Is there a good-faith reason, perhaps having to do with how new users become acculturated to Wikipedia, why some inexperienced users have seriously wrong and harmful ideas about what vandalism is and how to deal with it? The policy on vandalism states that vandalism has a very specific meaning in Wikipedia, which is a deliberate attempt to damage the encyclopedia or reduce its effectiveness. However, it is too common for an editor to try to "win" a content dispute by yelling vandalism. My question is: Is there a reason why inexperienced users or good-faith single-purpose accounts (and, yes, many single-purpose accounts are good-faith, and sometimes useful contributors) would think that vandalism is all editing with which they disagree? Also, is there a reason having to do with how editors learn how to edit Wikipedia why an editor would know that WP:VD is a shorthand for vandalism, without knowing that the allegation of vandalism is a personal attack, and without knowing that there is a vandalism noticeboard? Is there a reason why editors think that the way to deal with content disputes is just to keep on yelling vandalism?

This question mostly arises from a particular recent content dispute, but also from many content disputes in which one or both editors kept on saying that edits were vandalism. Is there some gap in the process by which editors introduce themselves to Wikipedia editing so that they misunderstand what vandalism is? Or is the Wikipedia definition of vandalism well known but incorrectly understood outside Wikipedia, so that editors come in already with the wrong idea? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:51, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm unfamiliar with "vandalism" being used in the Real World in any sense much different from Wikipedia's – destructive damage deliberately or uncaringly carried out – but others may know of dialectical variations. My supposition is that invalid complaints of vandalism are usually motivated by (a) a naïve attempt to pull the wool over our eyes, or (b) a Dunning–Kruger assumption that the complainant is obviously right (as always), so any one who disagrees must be doing so through malevolent contrarianism. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 03:19, 17 June 2021 (UTC)


Is Amazon's citation a reliable source? Ken Tony Shall we discuss? 03:53, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ken Tony. Amazon is a reliable source for the claim that Amazon is trying to sell something, but that is of little significance because Amazon tries to sell almost everything under the sun. Amazon is not an independent source because it exists only to sell things, and only sources that are both reliable and independent are useful for establishing notability. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:06, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Oh, thanks buddy. Ken Tony Shall we discuss? 05:00, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Is my article subject notable enough?[edit]

I'm writing my first article on a writer/scholar who has written a few very important books over the past three decades dealing with native Americans, settler colonialism and imperialism. He holds a distinguished chair at Cornell University and is widely cited in his field. I've already started an wikipedia article on him and I'm not sure how to go from the sandbox stage to the published page? Thank for any help... B3McG1 (talk) 04:41, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: User:B3McG1/sandbox. the subject is Eric Cheyfitz.  | melecie | t 05:10, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Right now, your draft has hyperlinks in the text and no references. See WP:Referencing for beginners to learn how to use the information you have into properly formated references. The ref inserted in the text automatically appears, numbered, in the text and the References list. David notMD (talk) 11:02, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Can i upload an Image of a building[edit]

Hi, as i am creating an article for a residential complex, I have a question. As there is no image available on wikipedia about that residential complex, can i upload mine image. Means can I click my own image of the residential complex (As i live near that complex) and upload it on wikipedia commons? Will it be considered as copyright even though I am taking that image from my own smartphone? The article is about Godrej Anandam, it is the tallest building in Nagpur, India and well notable here. Badassboy 63637 (talk) 05:03, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Badassboy 63637. Although Wikipedia is a worldwide project, it is hosted in the United States, and therefore US copyright law applies to photos of buildings. Please read Wikipedia:Freedom of panorama which says Basically, we accept images of buildings and structures taken anywhere in the world, but not images of sculptures or other works of art. Whether the image should be uploaded to to Wikimedia Commons or English Wikipedia is a slightly more complex issue that depends on the copyright laws of India in this case. But photos of buildings thst you take and you freely license are OK on English Wikipedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:14, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
This building is in India. According to this page, freedom of panorama does apply to buildings in India. Additionally according to that page, you may also take photographs of the interior of the building, so long as you remain in publicly accessible areas.
So, you can feel free to take such a photo, upload it to Wikimedia Commons, and add it to that article. Leijurv (talk) 07:21, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Karnataka for GA[edit]

I was looking if this page is of GA(Or FA) standard or not. I Tried to ask the people in the community but none answered. Please Look through the page and give me feedback on if it is of GA standard. I have helped quite alot in this page.

Also The page was of Former FA status but then was removed so I was just wondering if that could make the page ineligable for GA. The page was removed from FA status due to it having issues but most of them have been resolved EpicSnek Talk to me here 06:28, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft Article[edit]

Hi wikipedians) I have two questions. 1. Can I start a discussion about an article to see whether other editors are willing to contribute? 2. Is it possible to create a draft article? Specifically, can I create it first in my Sandbox and then ask from more experienced editors to see whether it worth it to publish it? Antonis Theofanous (talk) 06:58, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Antonis Theofanous, you can do those things. But if you want people to contribute to or advise on a draft or sandbox page, you'll have to tell them where it is. Maproom (talk) 09:26, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Talk page archive[edit]

Hello hosts, I need help with archiving my talk page. I was initially using the one click archiver but recently added the bot archiver. The bot did It's first archiving today and for some reason it made a new archive page starting at 23. I need help rectifying this. Thank you! Princess of Ara(talk) 07:20, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Princess of Ara: This is because you set the |counter= to 23. It is supposed to be "the current number of the last archive", which in your case seems to be 2. Kleinpecan (talk) 07:51, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! You are far too kind! I stupidly copied the code off someone else's talk page without understanding what it meant. So am I meant to manually change the counter or just leave it to the bot? Princess of Ara(talk) 08:03, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
The bot will update it automatically, yeah. Kleinpecan (talk) 08:19, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Sun and Moon123[edit]

Fix typo, anti-vandalism, correct page (fix move page), and reviewing for pending change.  Sun and Moon | Ping it! 10:24, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

I made your statement its own section. Is there a question? David notMD (talk) 11:10, 17 June 2021 (UTC)


How to consider someone who is notable as composer or not. Is IMDb credit is enough for the article creation Urwisher (talk) 10:31, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Urwisher Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The Wikipedia definition of a notable composer is written at WP:COMPOSER. The existence of an IMDB page is not relevant, as IMDB is user-editable. 331dot (talk) 10:33, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Non-free media[edit]

How do you upload Non-free media files to Wikipedia like this one here? Peter Ormond 💬 11:01, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Peter Ormond. You should find all you need to know about this issue at Wikipedia:Non-free content. I hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:23, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

My self on Wikipedia[edit]

How do I get .myself and history on Wikipedia that anyone can search to read about me.  Jibril Na`inna (talk) 11:38, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Jibril Na`inna Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The short answer is- you don't, because that's not what Wikipedia is for. If you want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media or a personal website. A Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person- not what people want to say about themselves. Also please understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one. If you actually do meet the definition of a notable person(there are also more specific definitions for particular fields, like musicians), others will eventually take note of your career and choose to write about you. 331dot (talk) 11:42, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jibril Na`inna:(edit conflict) You have edited your userpage, which is not article space. Please be aware that autobiographys are strongely discouraged, that Wikipedia is not a social network, and that there are good reasons why one would rather not want to have a Wikipedia article about oneselves.

Stub question by Arno Jacobs[edit]

Dear all, I have edit two stub with new references, these are Chen Dong (Song Dynasty) and An Jincang. I was thinking about these two stub and was wandering or a stub does getting delete if the time of 6 month of not editing has past? Or does a stub live forever? I like to keep these two stub and like to see them approved in the Wikipedia area. Kind regards, Arno Arno Jacobs (talk) 11:40, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Arno Jacobs. A WP:STUB is pretty much like any article in that it can be tagged, prodded or nominated for deletion at any time by any editor if they sincerely feel it doesn't meet the basic qualifications for being an acceptable Wikipedia article. So, a stub is not simply deleted because it has been a stub for any specific amount of time or it hasn't been edited for so many months. Ideally, an article that starts out as a stub should be gradually expanded over time, but there's real no time limit on how long that should take. If you have specific questions about these two articles, trying asking for feedback at WT:CHINA since that's where you may find someone familiar with the subject matter. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:58, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Not every Olympian is notable[edit]

Not every Olympian is notable Many people who represented their country at the Summer and Winter Olympics only have one sentence written about them.

Let me just say: Not every Olympian is notable.

In my opinion for an Olympian to be notable, they have to:

  • Be the flagbearer of their country
  • Win at least one medal Ireadbooks12 (talk) 11:59, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ireadbooks12:, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia's notability policy states that Athletes from any sport are presumed notable if they have competed at the modern Olympic Games, including the Summer Olympics (since 1896) or the Winter Olympics (since 1924), or have won a medal at the Paralympic Games. In other words, carrying the flag or winning a medal is not required for notability, according to Wikipedia's definition of the term. --bonadea contributions talk 12:06, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hello, Ireadbooks12. Whilst I tend to agree with you - and feel similar about many national team members of other sports who get only a single one line entry- the consensus of the Wikipedia community has to be followed, as outlined at WP:NSPORTS. It is in your power not to write about someone, but not to decide what is and isn't notable. If you did wish to change consensus over our criteria, the best place to raise those issues would be at Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports) or, better still, discuss it first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Olympics. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:09, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Ireadbooks12 It's certainly your right to think that one must win an Olympic medal to be notable- although personally I take the opposite view since an infintessemal number of the world population as a whole, and even athletes in general, get to compete in the Olympics, the top global competetion in the world- but it doesn't matter what you or I think. As noted, the current notability criteria state that merely appearing in the Olympics is notable, so if you want to work to change that, you are free to do so. 331dot (talk) 12:37, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
In my experience, most Olympians do have coverage about them, though it may be hard to find, and often won't be in English-language sources. There's only been a few Olympic articles where there's almost no coverage of them anywhere. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:30, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Almost all Olympic athletes will have received significant coverage in their home town newspapers and in specialist publications covering their sport. These sources may well not be available online, but an hour or two of research in the library in their home town would be productive. It is a big deal when someone is selected for an Olympic team. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:10, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Lost history[edit]

A while ago I read an article about a French inventor who invented the J stove in the late 1700s. Recently I had cause to verify some facts about it but the entire article appears to have been deleted and apparently it has now been invented in 1984 by an American. You cannot change history to suit yourself and make everything American (talk) 12:25, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It's difficult to specifically help you unless you give more information, such as which article or articles you are talking about, but in general if an article was changed incorrectly, you should bring it up on the associated article talk page. 331dot (talk) 12:33, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
These topics are discussed in the articles Rocket stove and Argand lamp and Ami Argand. Nothing has been deleted and nobody is trying to change history. Argand is credited as the originator of the concept of the rocket stove, sometimes called a J stove. 16:28, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Category changes[edit]

Is there a way to "watch" category changes? By this I mean is there a way to see when a page is added to or removed from a certain category? For at least a year, an IP range has been removing Category:Number-one singles in Scotland without a valid reason, and I want to stay on top of things so I can handle these disruptive edits without them being ignored. Thank you. ResPM (T🔈 🎵C) 12:36, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@ResPM: If you add a category to your watchlist, you will be able to see pages being added or removed as long as you disable "Hide categorization of pages" in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-watchlist. If you'd like to see additions and removals on the category page itself, you may be interested in this user script: User:Nardog/CatChangesViewer. DanCherek (talk) 13:14, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@DanCherek: Life. Saver. Thank you very much! ResPM (T🔈 🎵C) 13:25, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Correction needed but conflict of interest[edit]

Hello friends,

I need to make an edit to an article but can't due to conflict of interest. The article is Yana Peel

It says she "She stepped down as CEO in June 2019 as a consequence of the attention paid to her co-ownership of NSO Group”, and references an old Guardian article.

However the Guardian have published a redaction, which says "The Guardian accepts that Mrs Peel is not, and was not, involved in the management, operations or control of NSO, an Israeli cyber intelligence company." Ref:

Can someone help me update this or can I do it myself? Could it be changed to: "She stepped down as CEO in June 2019." Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 13:21, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Occasionalpedestrian Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I've fixed your link to a proper internal link, the whole URL is not necessary to link to another Wikipedia article. You are welcome to make an edit request(click for instructions) on Talk:Yana Peel, detailing this change. As it is a WP:BLP issue, someone here may also see this and do it for you. 331dot (talk) 13:28, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Occasionalpedestrian I read the original source and the retraction, and think your edit request overly simplifies the situation by removing the reason for her resignation. I’ll comment more if you put in an edit request on the talk page as suggested above. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 13:41, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Timtempleton, I see what you mean, it does simply it somewhat. I've added the request on Talk:Yana Peel. Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 13:49, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Undelete my article[edit]

Why my article on speedy deletion? I have collect this my sources. I have a proof all information. Please published my article asap. Thank you for your help. Ayatul Maksud (talk) 13:37, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Ayatul Maksud Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, and has no interest in helping your fans, enhancing search results for you, or in aiding your career. Autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged per the autobiography policy. If you truly meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician, someone will eventually take note of your career and choose to write about you. Please note that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 13:42, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict)@Ayatul Maksud: Writing about yourself is discouraged. Please see the comments left on your talk page. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 13:43, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

On how information can be changed or how does new information get added to the current information[edit] (talk) 13:54, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@ I can't understand your question . If you want to add or edit info to a article, just click Edit at the top right corner. Then you can add or change info. If you are asking about anything other, Ask in detail. Siddartha897 (talk) 14:08, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Tom Crean (explorer) article[edit]

As the author of a self-published biography about Tom Crean there would be a conflict of interest if I were to apply revisions to the article entry for the subject and as such I'm relying on the input of editors to determine a case for including a self-published book as a reference for the changes recently applied. I've outlined why there is a strong case for referencing a self-published book in the Talk Section of the article. This can be read in the Talk section titled 'Royal Irish Academy confirm revisions to the article entry for Tom Crean in Dictionary of Irish Biography.' I would appreciate any assistance on how these changes can be applied? I do hope I've utilised the correct forum for assistance on this matter - Thank you. Timfoley50 (talk) 15:01, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: Talk:Tom Crean (explorer)

Biography Article creation[edit]

please i recently did submitted a draft biography of someone popular in a district area Nigeria, but it was declined , please i need help on to write it correctly that it will be approved. please can someone help me out please. Tommygogd (talk) 15:15, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Tommygogd, you need a few reliable, secondary sources to back up the article, and ensure notability. See WP:GNG. In addition, the article has inappropriate external links, promotional content, and does not follow the manual of style. See Help:Your first article for information on how to make your first article.Sungodtemple (talk) 17:26, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

How do I file a CoI incident?[edit]

I have some trouble dealing with a page called Bella Poarch. Some person with a strikingly same name of the article edited the page so it might be an "editing your own article" or might be a conflict-of-interest.

How do I file a COI incident? User:Ahthga YramTalk with me! I want to change my name! 15:40, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Ahthga Yram, see WP:COICOIN for guidance. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:23, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Please fix it to the East Sea[edit]

Hello, I am a citizen of Korea and a user of this site. I thought I should tell you what to fix for this site, which is used by many people.

I searched the sea of ​​japan through the google site, but this site is found. When translating through Korean translation, there was a phrase that I wanted to use the name of the East Sea, but in English it appears as sea of ​​japan.

How about changing the sea of ​​japan to the East Sea?

Please I need your strength for a correct history. Thank you for reading.

Discuss it on the talk page, and please do yourself a favour and leave the worthless nationalistic arguments at home. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 16:06, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Wecome to the Teahouse. The English Wikipedia uses the name commonly used in English sources. You may be interested in reading Sea of Japan naming dispute. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:25, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
See also "Frequently asked questions (FAQ)" at Talk:Sea of Japan. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:26, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Cambridge Press Question[edit]

Do I have to pay to have access to the Cambridge Press? I've seen that some people have access to it through Wikipedia, but I'm unsure of whether or not I should get access. Point being - Do I have to pay to get access to the Cambridge Press through Wikipedia? If so, how much does it cost and what are the benefits if I do get access? Acryptex (talk) 16:09, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Acryptex; Wikipedians get access to certain resources through the Wikipedia Library, after they reach a certain threshold of edits (500+ edits, 6+ months editing, 10+ edits in the last month and no active blocks) to help them find sources for content. If you want to request a source for a Wikipedia article, then it's best to do so at the resource exchange. Wikipedians get the resources for free, but please note this is intended for helping find sources for articles. I strongly discourage you from making many edits just with the goal of gaining access to these resources. — Berrely • TalkContribs 16:17, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@Berrely Thank you! Acryptex (talk) 16:46, 17 June 2021 (UTC)