Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1080

Archive 1075

←

Archive 1078

Archive 1079

Archive 1080

Archive 1081

Archive 1082

→

Archive 1085

how to pose a question on a sentence that is part of a published post

How do I make a comment for other Wikipedia users to see if I have a question about a sentence that has been published in a Wikipedia post? Example: The below statement appears in the Wikipedia entry for Downton Abbey: "The casting of Gary Carr drew critical accusations of political correctness in the media." NO information is provided as to exactly what the critical accusations are. Was it because people did not like Carr, a British actor, playing an American musician? Or did people not like the storyline of Jack Ross becoming involved with Lady Rose, a white aristocrat? Edisonwato (talk) 04:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Edisonwato, the best place to discuss this matter is Talk: Downton Abbey. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

You should also read references #77 and #78, which support that content. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:52, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Please review my drafts

Hello, I wonder if someone can review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Saath_Nibhaana_Saathiya_2 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ghum_Hai_Kisikey_Pyaar_Mein let me know your feedback on what's missing, how to improve it and more. Thank you. Unknownnreasonn (talk)—Preceding undated comment added 12:47, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

draft review

I'm have a draft I'm writing, each time I publish it doesn't seems to submit as a draft but as a final work. Is there a code to place on top of my draft article to indicate that it a draft and not final work? Patrick 08068897507 (talk) 00:04, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

See answer in below section about creating a draft for review instead of writing it on your user page. See WP:USER for what your user page should or should not contain. RudolfRed (talk) 01:16, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Its like I started my draft in my main page instead of sandbox, any problem with that?

Its like I started my draft in my main page instead of sandbox, any problem with that? Patrick 08068897507 (talk) 00:22, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

@Patrick 08068897507: your user page should not look like an article. I suggest using the wizard at WP:YFA, which will help you create an article draft, which you can continue to work on until you are ready to submit it for review. RudolfRed (talk) 01:15, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

You now have a draft at Draft:Patrick Obot. Therefore, you should cut everything on your User page that looks like a draft and paste it into your draft. David notMD (talk) 01:51, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

That said, Wikipedia STRONGLY advises people not to try to create an article about themselves. See WP:AUTO. I see nothing in your out-of-place draft that suggests you meet Wikipedia's definition of notability My advice is clear your User page and request that your draft be deleted. David notMD (talk) 01:54, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Pat: how do I submit my draft

How do I submit my draft for review? Patrick 08068897507 (talk) 01:36, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Patrick 08068897507. I assume you are referring to your user page. If submitted as a draft article, it would be declined rapidly. There is no evidence that this person (presumably you) is a notable person. Read and study Your first article and WP: AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:55, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Comment: This user probably has no idea how much leeway they have been given, bearing in mind 'accidental' sockpuppetry and misuse of their userpage. I have blanked the latter and pasted it in to their sandbox. From there they can paste elements in to Draft:Patrick Obot if they wish (minus all the innapropriate bold test) Nick Moyes (talk) 03:42, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes & Cullen328, coupled with the fact that they included their private phone number in their username, they definitely do not know what they are doing. Celestina007 (talk) 07:33, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I, Carumbus

Hello, could someone move Draft:I, Carumbus to the main namespace? Thanks a lot! Patriccck (talk) 08:15, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Patriccck, if you want your draft to get moved to mainspace, I suggest that you go through Articles for Creation. I have added the appropriate template, so an AfC reviewer should take a look soon and determine whether it should be an article or not. Regards, Giraffer ^munch 10:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Question about user categories and adding them to/with new userboxes

I just created two new userbox templates for Wikipedians studying public health (here) or working in the field (here), and was thinking about creating the relevant user categorization along with them (as in "Wikipedian public health students" and "Wikipedians working in public health"). Despite reading Wikipedia:User categories, Wikipedia:Categorization#Categorizing_user_pages and Help:Category and looking at the source code of another UBX template that does exactly that (Template:User medical student), I have three open questions about the process:

1. Is it okay to just create new user categories as long as they are compliant with the guidelines in WP:User Categories?

2. Would just adding

| usercategory  = new category

to the userbox template automatically create the new category?

3. How would the new category become a subcategory of the right category (i.e. Category:Wikipedian students or Category:Wikipedians by profession in my case)?

While my account already exists for a while, I'm not incredibly experienced with editing so far, so if I'm going about something completely wrong here, please tell me. I'll definitely appreciate the help!

Thanks in advance! :) Peter Ambos (talk) 20:12, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@Peter Ambos:

1. Yes, that's perfectly fine. In your case it's probably at Category:Wikipedian public health students; I'm not sure what you call someone working in public health though.
2. No, the usercategory parameter only puts the userpage in that cateogry. Notice how it's a red link above? The cateogry page must be created first; refer to the source code of Category:Wikipedian medical students for help.
3. Categorizing subcategories work the same way as categorizing articles. See WP:SUBCAT.

Hope this helps! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: It does indeed! Thank you very much! - Peter Ambos (talk) 10:36, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Citing Research When Internet Can't Help

Hi everyone! I'm currently on a mission to document the history of ordinary people from Charlotte, NC and am asking friends to give me more information on people that isn't currently on the internet!! I'm wondering if anyone has any advice on how to create profiles of people when there's little information on them out there on the internet right now! I want our history to be more inclusive of everyday people because their histories are often ignored! Please let me know what advice anyone has for this mission I'm on. Anonomoushelix (talk) 18:18, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Im afraid that Wikipedia may not be the right outlet for you. If there are other written sources, such as books or printed newspapers, we might still have an article here, but otherwise I'am afraid that you need to look for a different outlet. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:30, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Anonomoushelix: welcome to Wikipedia, and to the Teahouse! Sources do not have to exist on the Internet, but there can't be a Wikipedia article about a person who is not notable according to Wikipedia's definition of notability. This means that multiple reliable sources that are not connected to the person have written about them – and those sources can be books or scholarly articles that have not been published online, but the sources have to exist. Wikipedia does not have "profiles", and it is not a place to collect information about people who are not already notable. There are other websites that do that – maybe Everybodywiki might be an alternative? (I know absolutely nothing of that website but have seen other Teahouse hosts mention it as a website that welcomes biographies of people who don't meet Wikipedia's notability criteria.) Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 18:33, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia biographies are articles, not "profiles." Your first attempt Draft:Lee Brading is about a person who does not meet Wikipedia's definition of notability. David notMD (talk) 11:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Indian Academy of Entrepreneurship

Note:CSDed and sockblocked. Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:58, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Extended content

I want to write an artice on Indian Academy of Entrepreneurship (IAEGlocal). It is a non-government institution in India working to create job opportunity, and provides resources for entrepreneurship and employability. The owner (Vijay kumar Srivastava) got award from Sri Lankan institution for his work. It not only works on Indian ground but international also. It helps students and new ventures to start their business in abroad and expand it. Can I write ? Last time I wrote but got deleted. Any tips. I do not have any publicity purpose but to sprade the information for help. Gannusahab (talk) 07:27, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Hello, Gannusahab, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that "spread the information" is precisely what Wikipedia means by promotion, whether it is "for help" or for any other purpose. Nonetheless, it may be possible to create an article about the Academy, if it meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - broadly, that several people who have no connection with the academy, and have not been prompted or given information on behalf of the academy, have chosen to write significant coverage about it, and been published in reliable sources. Any article should not be based on what the Academy says or wants to say, but almost exclusively on what these independent sources say about it. If you would like to try the difficult task of creating an article about it, please start by reading your first article, as well as the other links I have given above. --ColinFine (talk) 08:31, 11 October 2020 (UTC) @Gannusahab: Please take careful note that the sources used to demonstrate notability must clearly be independent. Since entrepeneurship involves self-promotion, I've no doubt that the Academy will have done a fair amount of promotion to "get its name out there", none of which can be used here. Sources cited will be carefully scrutinized for puffery, marketing-speak, or anything that looks like it came from the Academy or someone intent on promoting it. We need to see that multiple independent journalists have found the Academy to be worth spending their time and resources to write about. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:41, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Indian Academy of Enterpreneurship (IAEGlocal) Needs suggestions  Gannusahab (talk) 07:35, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Gannusahab, do you have a question for us? Giraffer munch 07:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Need Suggestions hey there! I want to write my first article on Indian Academy of Entrepreneurship (IAEGlocal). I checked it is not there in wekipedia. I have to create. I know the procedure but last time it got deleted. Reason: Publicity purpose. But my intention is not at all publicity of an institution. Indian Academy of Entrepreneurship is an institution operating in India, working to create employment opportunity for people through entrepreneurship and employability. The owner (vijay Kumar Srivastava) got an award in Sri Lanka for his notable work. this institution has its collaborations with various international companies and hence operating in different countries also. please help me to publish my first draft in one go. Let me know the fine tips that will help me while writin. Gannusahab (talk) 07:50, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Gannusahab, there's some advice at WP:Your first article. If your draft was previously declined because it was judged to be promotional, then you should focus on writing in an encyclopedic style free of puffery or other issues. You can send us a link to your draft and we can provide suggestions. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 08:49, 11 October 2020 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Indian_Academy_of_Entrepreneurship_(IAEGlocal) please check the draft and suggest me corrections. Please check citetion part. My only intenstion is to publish it in one go. Please do the needful — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gannusahab (talk • contribs) 12:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Sample sentence: IAEGlocal has its very well defined and transparent institutional structure, which offers smooth functioning and sustainable development of the idea of Entrepreneurship (e-ship) & Employability (e-ability). Which reliable, independent, published source says that its institutional structure is well defined and transparent, or that this structure offers smooth functioning (of itself?) or sustainable development (of an idea, or of entrepreneurship or employability?)? -- Hoary (talk) 12:54, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Hello again, Gannusahab. I'm afraid that your wish to "publish it in one go" is a fantasy. Creating a Wikipedia article is difficult, and trying to do so before you have several weeks or months of solid experience improving existing articles is likely to be a slow and frustrating experience. Your hurry again underlines that, whatever you may say, you are clearly here to promote the Academy. Like most inexperienced editors, you have gone about it the wrong way. As far as I can see, not one of your sources is both independent of the Academy, and containing significant coverage of it: most of them do not mention the academy at all. In consequence hardly any of the information you have put in the draft comes from an independent source, and so most of it does not belong in the article. Creating an article starts with finding solid, reliably-published, independent sources that contain a significant amount of material about the subject: that way, if there are not enough such sources, one can save a lot of wasted effort by abandoning the project then. Have a look at WP:CSMN. Problems of lesser significance are that "See also" is supposed to contain links to other Wikipedia articles, not external links; and external links are not allowed in the text. In fact, the whole "See also" section should be deleted, because the article gives no hint of what relevance these companies have. If you were to submit your draft for review now, I am sure it would be declined. On another subject, the logo is likely to get deleted from Commons very soon, as it does not have an acceptable copyright status. "Permission" to use it is not adequate, even if you had a way to prove that permission had been given; Commons requires that material uploaded there be licensed in such a way that anybody may reuse or alter it for any purpose, commercial or not: see donating copyright materials. Logos are in fact often uploaded as fair use without permission (see Logos, but images uploaded in that way are not permitted in drafts, only in published articles. --ColinFine (talk) 12:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Article on The Fatih Mosque

Hello Everyone I would like to make and article on The Fatih Mosque In Enez which is a former Byzantine church but I can’t do it alone. The Fatih Mosque in Enez is also a very interesting piece of architecture in the Byzantine time it was called Hagia Sophia of Enez. I noticed that all Hagia Sophias have articles the one in Iznik Istanbul Vize and Trabzon so I would like to get help on making this article Thanks. Carthago814 (talk) 14:36, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Replied at talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:04, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Help

 174.255.67.195 (talk) 16:03, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Specify what kinda help u require

SHISHIR DUA 16:24, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed user

How to become Autoconfirmed user? Antogun (talk) 16:10, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Antogun, see WP:AUTOCONFIRM. Or in short, make at least a couple of more edits and wait 4 days. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:24, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

What if no-one has answered my question?!

No one has answered my question 'Primary Source in a public archive' posted in the Tearoom a couple of days ago... does this mean it's a silly question, or that no-one knows the answer, or that everyone is very busy and it takes a few days to answer questions?! Wiki newbie Ruthhenrietta (talk) 10:11, 9 October 2020 (UTC) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 10:11, 9 October 2020 (UTC) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 10:12, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Probably any and all of these reasons! I personally was confused because you added several thoughts and signed/timestamped each one: I (mistakenly) assumed that the later ones were people answering the question. I'm no expert on sources but I think that if you can find a reference like this [1] then you can certainly put it in the article to say "There was an ancient lease from the corporation to Thomas Daniel and John Haythorne". I've no idea what the Silver tokens were but if you can find that somewhere else an archive, that's fine. The point is that references are there to allow anyone to verify the facts in an article. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 10:57, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

In my case, Ruthhenrietta, I didn't answer #Primary Source in a public archive because I thought there would be somebody who could answer with more certainty than me. But according to my understanding, if you do not have a reliably published source for him winning the award then the article should not mention him doing so, or even mention the idea or possibility of him doing so. --ColinFine (talk) 10:59, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Archived.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:24, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Ruthhenrietta, I had noticed it then, but I thought I'd give it a couple days for someone else who is certain they understand the issue to answer. I just got back today, and might have tried answering it but it just got archived. So, I'll add here what my attempt at answering that would have been:

If I understand correctly, you have an unpublished research from someone else which has the claim that you want to add but the claim is not elsewhere in the published sources. You believe that the claim is available in some document at the Bristol archives but you haven't seen it yourself. First of all, you can use the unpublished research that you have to guide you but you can't cite it on Wikipedia. Secondly, you can't cite the Bristol archives unless you've seen the archives yourself. You can't cite other published sources for the claim if the sources don't support it. You can't draw your own conclusions that something is true based on bits and pieces from published sources and add it in the hopes that others will draw the same conclusion. That would be WP:SYNTH, a type of WP:OR. Finally, you could cite the document from the Bristol archives if you actually saw it and confirmed that it says that Mr. Daniel had it. Depending on what the document is, you might need to provide additional details to make sure we WP:ATTRIBUTE the claim to the source in case it does not meet the required standards to support the mention of that fact in Wikipedia's voice.

Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:43, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks User:Usedtobecool perfect answer - not what I wanted to hear, but very clear Ruthhenrietta (talk) 17:42, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool still learning how to tag someone. See thanks adove!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruthhenrietta (talk • contribs)

Thank you, @Ruthhenrietta:, glad to know I've been of help. BTW, your first mention worked fine, the second one did not. There are many ways to ping, but you have to sign the post in the same edit for it to work. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 01:48, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

User:Usedtobecool so much to learn Ruthhenrietta (talk) 17:57, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation Pages

Does everything included in a disambiguation article, need to link to a Wikipedia article?

I added 18 places which exist in the UK according to Ordnance Survey, with solely the name Robin Hood, or starting with the name Robin Hood, to the Robin Hood disambiguation page. They included: Hamlets, Villages, unspecified Settlements, Fields, Bays, Woods/Forests, Hills/Mountains, and Islands.

As most of them don't have Wikipedia articles created for them yet, have places with identical or similar names, or are near to other places with identical or similar names, I made sure I specified exactly where they are, with the town/city and/or county where they are located linked in the disambiguation page next to them.

All my additions and minor corrections, were reverted by a guy who seems to spend most of his time reverting additions to disambiguation pages, as shown by his contributions, and his huge list of talk pages full of people annoyed at his reverts.

I've seen countless disambiguation pages on Wikipedia over the years, which contain subjects that don't exist on Wikipedia yet, so where is the problem now? Having as many entries as possible on disambiguation pages, whether they have Wikipedia articles or not, is surely better, as it could help stop people unfamiliar with a place, adding it to an unrelated article, because there's a place nearby with a similar/identical name, or there's a place elsewhere with an identical name. Then once someone creates Wikipedia articles for them, the Wikipedia article links can replace the unlinked entries on the disambiguation pages. Danstarr69 (talk) 14:39, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Danstarr69, welcome to the Teahouse. MOS:DABRED would be the applicable policy for this. The primary purpose of a dab page is navigation: the linked content solves the ambiguity. Consider creating the articles before adding the links, or at minimum find a target article that mentions the topic. Zindor (talk) 15:01, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

@Danstarr69: I agree. l would have reverted this edit too. My approach is to remove any entry that does not link to an existing article, unless it can be linked to an article that mentions that entry, or which contains a redlink and a very good citation to support it is likely to meet our WP:GNG criteria. Trying to add every possible mention in the world of any particular term would bloat our DAB pages to a point that would render them utterly useless. So, whilst clearly well-intentioned, please don't try that again. Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:20, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Controversial information on page not cited

On the below page, there is a statement in the lead section stating "It was founded in South Carolina in 1965 to legitimize segregation academies.[1]" The current cite does not have anything of that nature and the original cite was a dead link.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Carolina_Independent_School_Association

I removed the sentence and was then sent the below comment to my talk page

"Continuing whitewashing / pov editing Your behavior is not acceptable or welcome. I strongly suggest you re-read the COI notice and linked information that was left on this page in June; otherwise, you are likely to be blocked if you continue in this way. You should also read WP:CANVASS. --JBL (talk) 20:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)"

What would have been my appropriate action?

I am not an employee of the organization or any of their affiliated schools. I was a student at one of the schools 30 years ago but certainly want to bring a NPOV to anything I edit.

Thank you for your help, Fritzsmith20 (talk) 22:07, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

The cite there at the moment states from Tom Turnipseed (whoever that is) I was the first executive director of the S.C. Independent School Association, formed in 1965 by seven private schools that wanted to share resources, establish more private schools and avoid public-school desegregation. My job was to help local groups of white parents organize private schools so their children would not attend schools desegregated by federal courts. I was a grassroots organizer and helped establish 30 private, segregated academies from 1965 to 1967, mostly in the area now known as the Corridor of Shame. So, yeah, seems pretty cut and dry. Koncorde (talk) 22:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I think Tom Turnipseed may be Tom Turnipseed. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:24, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

@Fritzsmith20:After a COI warning you posted "My name is Fritz Smith and I have been a part of Lee Academy for years."[2] and then "We are new to editing on Wikipedia... we are simply trying to give the world correct and up to date information" [3]. Since you state above that you are not an employee please explain how you are part of the academy. And who is we? Wikipedia accounts are for individuals. Meters (talk) 23:04, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

accessing past articles by dates

Articles are edited on a regular basis. Is there a way to access an article from the past? 24.235.62.249 (talk) 00:04, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, if you go to the history page, you can see the list of all the edits and the dates. You can click on one to see what the article looked like at the time of any edit. RudolfRed (talk) 00:11, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Is my page live and if not what do I do?

I have just produced (I think) my first Wikipedia page, link below. However, it is not showing up on searches and I am wondering if it really has got no further than my sandbox. I am new to this so help and feedback welcome. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Owen_(Reverend)_1802-1854 Brightwell64 (talk) 15:31, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to The Teahouse, I have moved it to draft space as it clearly wasn't ready for main space, once you have added more sources, you can submit it for review. Theroadislong (talk) 15:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: now at Draft:Francis Owen (Reverend) 1802-1854 and not yet submitted for review. David notMD (talk) 00:56, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism

What is editing vandalism? I apparently did it without noticing. Could you explain what it means? Procyon 2.0 (talk) 17:01, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

@Procyon 2.0: see WP:Vandalism. I have took a look at your edits, and they are not vandalism, but you still failed to cite a reliable source so the information can be verified. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

The possible vandalism tag was by ClueBot - an automated program. As noted on your Talk page, content that may be true will be reverted if not supported at the same time as added by a reference. David notMD (talk) 00:59, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Query on Notability

I shall be trying to create an Wikipedia Page for a writer who has many publications in printed & digital forms. Writer name: Sayantani Putatunda.

Since this is my first effort, I need help on the below --> (a) how do I ensure the required notability and (b) How do I create an error-free content for publishing (I have no programming or html editing experience) Arijitwiki2020 (talk) 03:31, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Arijitwiki2020: See WP:Your first article. To help ensure no errors, use the preview button. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:35, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Arijitwiki2020. You can't really ensure or create Wikipedia:Notability so to speak; either the subject is considered Wikipedia notable or they're not. In this case, the relevant notability guideline is going to be Wikipedia:Notability (people). If you can establish that the person you want to create an article about has received significant coverage in reliable sources or otherwise meets the criteria in WP:AUTHOR, then perhaps an article can be written about them. As for your second question, you can find some ideas on how to write a Wikipedia article in Help:Your first article and how to cite sources in Help:Referencing for beginners. You shouldn't, however, worry to much about creating "error-free content" because any mistakes you make can probably be fixed by other editors; moreover, writing an error-free article will make no difference if the subject isn't considered Wikipedia notable. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:44, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

When are sports people notable enough for Wikipedia?

I see so many articles on Wikipedia about people in the sports world and some of the articles are very small, and have very few details that appear to make the person notable. I recently googled this basketball player Xavier Legette and was trying to figure out if he would warrant a wiki. How do I really know? Thanks so much for the advice for a newbie! Shootin Starz (talk) 05:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

• Hi, Shootin Starz and welcome to the Teahouse. The notability criteria for sports persons are listed on WP:NSPORT and the ones, specifically, for basketball players are listed on WP:NBASKETBALL.--SirEdimon ^Dimmi!!! 05:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you!! Shootin Starz (talk) 05:58, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Stale non declared drafts in userspace

Hi Teahouse, hope that you're well :). I have a question about draft-type things in user space and I wasn't sure where to get this information. I'm working on some templates at the moment and can see that some are in user space with what looks like copies of articles (probably for the very good reason that those editors can work on the articles). However they have remained unedited for quite some time. I'm looking at User:SnuBru44/Hyperandrogenism and User:Jbrooks2020/Tertiary hyperparathyroidism. I was just wondering what guideline covers this situation? (by which I mean - should I nominate these for deletion because they are stale drafts or just unedited copies of articles, or should I leave them?). Thanks --Tom (LT) (talk) 04:40, 10 October 2020 (UTC) Tom (LT) (talk) 04:40, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Another: User:SnuBru44/Carnitine palmitoyltransferase II deficiency. All appear to be student projects where the Users created these by copying existing articles into User space instead of into their Sandboxes. Neither SnuBru44 nor Jbrooks2020 appear to be active editors anymore. David notMD (talk) 11:53, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Tom (LT) and David notMD, WP:FAKEARTICLE is what covers them (see also WP:STALEDRAFT). I'd just blank and leave them alone but if you want them deleted and they do not meet any of the WP:CSD criteria, then WP:MFD is the way. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:07, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, much obliged. I have blanked two and will leave the third (which is only unedited since May). --Tom (LT) (talk) 06:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Help regarding locking of page

Hallo, I am new, but here are a lot of users who are continually adding redirects to the article created by me. Can someone please help me? Thank you! Infohub356 (talk) 05:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Infohub356: I have just added some information to your user talk page about edit warring. You need to stop reverting back (four different editors including myself just now have restored the redirect that you removed, and you have reverted at least six times within the last 24 hours.) Reverting more than three times in the same article within a day is normally grounds for a block. I'll post this now so you'll hopefully see it before you go and revert again, and then discuss why your proposed text violates a couple of Wikipedia policies. --bonadea contributions talk 06:04, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

If that article had been newly created it would have been eligible for speedy deletion as pure promotion. The text is basically an advert for the person, and every single sentence would need to be completely rewritten for it to be suitable for an encyclopedia. Parts of it are in fact taken straight from the promotional sources, so there is also a copyrights problem there. But even if the text was rewritten in a neutral style, the person would still not be notable according to Wikipedia's definition of notability. What is your own connection to Banerjee? --bonadea contributions talk 06:19, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Is bloomberg a reliable source?

Please tell me if I can use this site for referencing. Editingwork8 (talk) 05:38, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

• Hi Editingwork8 and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, Bloomberg publications are considered WP:RS per WP:RSP.--SirEdimon ^Dimmi!!! 05:59, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@SirEdimon ^{Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 06:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)}

gary larson cartoons

does anyone know the caption to a cartoon of gary larson,which shows a indian or aztec running through the desert holding a spear whilstwearing headphones attatched to a radio on his waist,his footprins are in the sand and he seems to be following what look like hoofprints? Caution123?* (talk) 18:24, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

This is not the proper forum for this question. This page is for asking for help editing Wikipedia. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 18:25, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

@Caution123?*: The Help Desk is for asking questions about how to use Wikipedia. Try WP:RDE for general questions like yours. RudolfRed (talk) 18:27, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Additionally, see the previous answers above when you asked this question a short while ago. Don't post same question multiple times. RudolfRed (talk) 18:54, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

@Caution123?*: Your previous question and answers are at #Cartoon query. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:28, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Archived.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:57, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Requested articles

Can I create articles on the pages given in the link? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_India/Requested_articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 06:29, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Editingwork8! Anyone can add to that list, so there is no guarantee that a topic you pick from there is likely to be notable. You still have to conduct your own research to check whether a given topic meets the Notability guidelines. Many a time, editors looking to promote something add the topic to the Requested articles if they don't have the skills to create one themselves or fail when trying to do so. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:40, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@ Usedtobecool There are some red listings in the same page. Can I create articles on those? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 06:47, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Editingwork8. If you determine that the topic is notable, and you follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, then you can write an article. Appearing on a list like that is not evidence of notability. It is up to you to do the homework. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

A red link simply means that an article about the subject doesn't exist; it's doesn't automatically mean that an article about the subject should exist. Ideally, all red links should be limited to subjects who meet WP:REDYES, but unfortunately they often seem to be added more randomly than not. So, bascially, you need to start from scratch and just treat the subject like you would any other subject that isn't a red link; look for WP:SIGCOV that would show that the subject is Wikipedia:Notable and assess whether one can be written. You should try and follow a guide like the one Ian.thomson made here. If you can find enough sources to support an stand-alone article, then be WP:BOLD and create an article. You shouldn't, however, just try and create article just to create though if it's only going to end up tagged, prodded or otherwise nominated for deletion, but rather you should try and create an article that will survive and be something that can be improved upon by others. In other words, don't create these types of articles.

Finally, there are currently over six million articles, many of which need some type of improvement; so, maybe it might be better for you do some of that for a while and then move on to try and create articles when you're a little more experienced and have a better feel for what such a thing involves. You don't get any extra posts for creating articles, and creating lots of "poor" articles might actually reflect badly on you or make others think less of you as an editor. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:05, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Image Question

Hi there are photos of a politician whos photo is missing from the lists of the former western Australia's premiers the only photo I have found are pictures of him long after his premiership ended that are on the abc (an Australian public broadcaster) I also can't find a citation from who actually took the photo is there a section of Wikipedia that explains what is an acceptable source and what is an acceptable citation Hopetounblunder (talk) 03:03, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind I think I solved it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopetounblunder (talk • contribs) 05:07, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't think you did, Hopetounblunder. File:Brian burke.jpg claims on its description page to be licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0, but the copyright statement it links to does not contain such a statement: it gives permission for reuse excepting commercial use, which makes it unacceptable for Wikimedia projects, and it will shortly get deleted. See Image use policy --ColinFine (talk) 09:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I am so sorry I misunderstood the document thank you for correcting me I was just looking for something — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopetounblunder (talk • contribs) 09:24, 12 October 2020 (UTC) sorry if you don't care but I decided too check the source of the previous pictures because that seems to make sense — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopetounblunder (talk • contribs) 10:48, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Please help

Hi, I was not satified with the previous responses where two users tried to help me with suggestions on creating a second page. I wasn't able to find the said article in WP: Article and according to the second user, I do not wish to replace the previous article. I would be really glad if someone could be more clear or explain the process in a step-by-step way. Pasting the responses below, so that the new responses are elaborate. Regards.

How do I create second article? Hi, I wish to create another article, but I am not sure if I use the sandbox it won't delete the previous page created by me. Kindly suggest.Thanks 51moont (talk) 14:26, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

@51moont:Hello! You can always create another article without deleting what's in your sandbox. Type in WP:FIRST in the search bar, and an article will explain how to do it all. Le Panini (talk) 14:48, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, for reference, click on your username (which is currently red) and it will allow you to create a user page, for a bio and a personal talk page.

If you go to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:51moont/sandbox&redirect=no you can blank the page, or edit it to replace with new content. David Biddulph (talk) 15:59, 6 October 2020 (UTC) 51moont (talk) 10:44, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@51moont: I'm confused. What do you mean by a "second page"? What does this page do? Do you mean a subpage? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 11:36, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

No, sorry I was unclear, I meant second article/new article. I have created one. I want to create another. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51moont (talk • contribs) 11:52, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

51moont, what is the name of the article you would like to create? Zindor (talk) 12:38, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

51moont, after an article has been published, it can not be harmed by editing the page that it was moved from. So, you can write your new article on your sandbox that you used for your first article. I have just edited your sandbox to show just that. You can remove what I wrote and start writing your new article there, at User:51moont/sandbox. Or you could create new pages in your userspace such as User:51moont/sandbox2, User:51moont/sandbox3, and so on., or create drafts such as Draft:51Moont's second article. So, to elaborate, you can just click any one of the red or blue links in my comment (except the first one which is your username) and start writing your new article on the page that opens. Good luck! Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:46, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata statement reference

I'm working on a band article in my sandbox. I began it in 2018, and have recently been able to resume work on it. URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:K3n51mm/sandbox

I've done much more indepth research this time, and as I work through learning about and fixing things like template usage, external links and references, my question has to do with adding an 'official website' statement to the Wikidata on this band so I can use the official website template.

In my first draft, I used hard external link syntax, which I now understand is not the preferred method. Hence my attempt to update the Wikidata, since I found the existing 'Q' entry for the band.

This band has a Spanish language Wikipedia page that is outdated and incomplete, created by fans in Mexico back in 2013 or so. My goal is to create an updated standards-compliant English version from which a translation can be made in the future if requested.

So, I added a statement with the P856 property 'official website'. However, the data entity is not being retrieved when I use the official website template syntax. The error being returned can be seen by viewing the page at the URL included above.

Any guidance is appreciated. K3n51mm (talk) 01:51, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@K3n51mm: {{Official website}} won't work in your userspace because that page is not tied to the Wikidata item at Wikidata:Q6396598 (and should not be as it isn't an article). The link should work when the draft gets moved into the mainspace. Alternatively, the template will accept a manually-entered URL if the error message is bothering you too much. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!)

[Edit conflict] That's an impressive-looking draft. But as for Wikidata, you've got the wrong end of the stick. In your Wikipedia article, you don't link to Wikidata. Instead, once your draft has become an article, you link to it from Wikidata. I infer that you have no experience of Wikidata. Either familiarizing oneself with it is quite a task or I am thick; however, linking from an entry there to a Wikipedia entry is a procedure that's easy both to understand and to carry out. (However, Ganbaruby's response is so utterly different from mine that I fear I may have misunderstood you.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:23, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary: I think K3 is talking about the red error message at the external links section. Nevertheless, what you said is true. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:26, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh, the "official website" stuff. I thought it was the matter of links among the Spanish-, English- and any-other-language Wikipedia pages about this band. -- Hoary (talk) 02:29, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that Ganbaruby has the right idea; I was hoping it was something like that. I'll just use a menually-entered URL to keep the red text out of the way for now. Thanks all for the input. K3n51mm (talk) 12:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Problem with invitation template

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § Problem with invitation template

 – Seems more relevant to hold discussion there. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:16, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

Hi there everyone

I have submitted an article for the first time and it was declined.

I have been reading and trying to figure out how do I disclose myself as a paid editor? if my employer is the person who I am writing about is below the correct way to insert onto my article?

{{Connected contributor (paid)}} Zodwam (talk) 14:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Zodwam: Not exactly. You still have to replace "insert name" witht he actual information. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:06, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Zodwam: I've never had to do it, but if I were employed by a PR firm to create and/or edit a page about the famous and highly notable Acme Welding Corporation, I would expect to place the following on that article's talk page:

{{Connected contributor (paid)|User1=Nick Moyes|U1-employer=Smith Public Relations|U1-client=Acme Welding Company|U1-otherlinks=}}

(Should you view this in editing mode, you will see extraneous markup like 'code' and 'nowiki' in chevron brackets - you must remove these so that the proper template is displayed.) It only works on talk pages; you would use a different template on your own userpage. Does that help? Nick Moyes (talk) 15:16, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

will to create wikipedia for artists

 Annanya Joshi (talk) 13:43, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, what is your question? Mr. Heart ^(talk) 13:47, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Probably something similar to the long history of people here asking whether they could make a wiki for an artist for promotion. Just saying. GeraldWL 14:00, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Let me try to answer this question based on what's given. To create an article, read up on how to create one by clicking on this hyperlink > Help:Your first article. Another way is by making a draft in your sandbox, by clicking "sandbox" in the top right corner, and we'll help you post it for review once you get to that point. As Gerald Waldo said above, however, articles for self-promotion that don't meet the notability requirements will not get approved. It's difficult writing an article. Good luck! Le Panini (talk) 14:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hold your horses, folks! That might be totally the wrong interpretation. Just in case this editor (Annanya Joshi) is planning to make a bequest in their will of some of their assets to the Wikimedia Foundation in order to support artist-related activities (like this galleries, libraries and museums project) then their solicitor would need to ensure the will contains an appropriate clause. Details of making Legacy Gifts can be found on this Wikimedia Foundation page. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:26, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedia close to bankruptcy ?

Hello,

I'm fed up! Fed up with all these headbands that I assimilate to advertising, and whose campaigns are lasting more and more. Fed up with this WikiMedia organization that is unable (or unwilling) to answer a simple question: History since 2010 of the foundation's membership.

I was answered by sending me a link with 40 documents of 20 pages or more each. Yet the question was simple and the answer a little less transparent.

But where does all that money you receive from people like Bill Gates and other sponsors go? For which balance sheet, which new features created? We don't know. A little more transparency?

The mantra of these seekers: Wikipedia needs you to stay free! Well, spend less and better, like the time I started contributing.

Excuse these outrageous remarks, but there is a lot of people who are fed up with campaigns that last more than a week. I'm willing to suffer (that's the best word I've found to describe my bristles) one day, but no more.

And it's a Wikipedia user who has been registered for a long time, who knows what he owes you, who has contributed a little, who tells you so..., and who won't repeat his donations of 30€ / year, at least not until his questions have been answered.

Thank you for reading me to the end, and for answering me at least once, with the information I ask for. Thank you Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version from french) French user : Pablo31100

SO, my question is quite simple : Could-you give me History since 2010 of the foundation's staff, (and their costs) ? 78.119.195.39 (talk) 17:15, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place to ask questions about using Wikipedia. If you have questions about the Foundation's finances or practices, you will need to communicate with them using this contact information. 331dot (talk) 17:32, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

You might be looking for https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/financial-reports/. Ed talk! 17:48, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, the WMF is quite transparent already regarding where their money goes, you just have to know where to look. Ed talk! 17:50, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks EdPablo31100 (talk) 16:20, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Nosecone6133 asks

Should the https://tfwiki.net/wiki/Main_Page be added to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wikis. It's a major website. Nosecone6133 (talk) 16:10, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Nosecone6133, and welcome! The inclusion criteria for that list is that the wiki should have a Wikipedia article about it first (WP:WTAF). Please review the notability guidelines at WP:N (special guidelines for websites at WP:NWEBSITE as well), and then if you can find reliable sources to demonstrate that the wiki meets those guidelines, you may create an article (see Your first article) about it. When such an article exists, only then is it appropriate to add its entry to that list. Answers respectfully, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:49, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

How is it that Rachel Vanderthorne is listed in multiple articles and in general history and Wikipedia will not reference any data of these news articles and historical data?

Why does Wikipedia fail to include any historical data of Rachel Vanderthorne while nearly 2 decades of information is available on different sites and Google? This includes State of Oregon, Lincoln County and Clackamas County court records. These are not false documents and are recorded by legal means. What is missing to make this information available as it is on Google? Who is making these decisions and what are they based on? How can the corrections to Wikipedia be made so it is actually factual and complete to date information. At present, it is not.Rachel Vanderthorne (talk) Rachel Vanderthorne (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Rachel Vanderthorne. Wikipedia is not a social media website like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. It is not a tool for self-promotion. Please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Any autobiographical content will be subject to intense scrutiny, and editors who self-promote may be blocked. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rachel Vanderthorne. Just going by your username, I curious as to why you're referring to yourself in the third-person in your original post above. If you're Rachel Vanderthorne, then you should read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest to get some understanding as to why it's generally not a good idea to try and create or add content about yourself to Wikipedia. If you're not Rachel Vanderthorne, then you probably should take a look at Wikipedia:Username Policy#Real names because you shouldn't be using a username implying you're someone you're trying to create or add content about to Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rachel Vanderthorne. In reply to your question of what notability decisions are based on, see WP:NBIO—particularly WP:NPOL in your case. Being mentioned in court records or on Google does not make one notable. —teb728 t c 09:15, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Nor does running for an elected office. David notMD (talk) 18:43, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Fancy Signatures

How do I decorate my signature? What I mean is that, some people who sign with the four tildes (Le Panini (talk) 17:03, 12 October 2020 (UTC)) have their name colored or in a colored box or in a fancy font. How do I do that, without having to copy and paste all the stuff? Is it with signatures in preferences? Le Panini (talk) 17:03, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Le Panini, go to preferences and scroll down to signatures. You can then customize it with colors, highlighting, font, etc. Before doing so please read WP:CUSTOMSIG to familiarize yourself with the relevant guidelines surrounding signatures (to make sure they are not too intrusive, too ornate, etc.). Then edit your signature in the place listed above, and test it out in your sandbox until you are happy with it! Giraffer ^munch 17:11, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Le Panini, yes, you put in the code that you want used for your signature when you sign with tildes. See WP:CUSTOMSIG; WP:SIGTUT for more practical knowledge. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Le Panini: (ec) Yes, but it's mostly done with HTML. If you're familiar with that, you'll easily see how to do it by looking at other people's posts' source code in source editor. If you're not familiar with HTML, you're likely to break your signature, so please don't. WP:CUSTOMSIG may have some use. I'm sorry there is no "easy" way to do this. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:17, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Giraffer Okay, almost done with mine. Can I put my signature into a different font? I really like work sans. Le Panini (talk) 17:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Fonts can be achieved in text using <font face="Work Sans"> Text Goes here </font> without the nowiki tags. Example:

 Le Panini (talk) 

Did that help? -GoatLordServant (Talk) 18:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Well yes, but actually no. Work Sans in google docs looks totally different than what's displayed here. Is it not in the Wikipedia database, so it defaulted to this font instead? Is there a list of fonts on Wikipedia that are viable? Le Panini (talk) 18:28, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

There will be somewhere, i know there's a list of the hexcodes for colors that can be displayed on Wikipedia. Zindor (talk) 18:33, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I already know the hexcode page, I'm wondering if there is one for fonts. Le Panini (talk) 18:35, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Le Panini, check out the 'available fonts' section at Wikipedia:Typography. Zindor (talk) 18:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I think FreeSans is closest to what I wanted. I tried to put this into my code, but it defaulted to the other font. How can I implement this font? Here's my code:

[[User:Le Panini|<span style="font-family: FreeSans ;color: #ff4500">Le Panini</span>]] <small>[[User talk:Le Panini|<span style="color: blue">''^{(Talk to}_me?)''</span>]]</small>

Which turns to:

< style="font-family:FreeSans;color:#ff4500">Le Panini ^{(Talk to}_me?)

Perhaps it's something to do with the global CSS. The page at Wikipedia:Typography has the styling within a table, so maybe there's a class and related styling being defined there behind the scenes. I'll check back on this later. Regards, Zindor (talk) 19:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I'll just keep it as this for now. Thanks for the help! Le Panini ^{(Talk to}_me?) 19:18, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Review

'Articles for Creation' process flow chart for Reviewers (click to enlarge)

I would like to know how the review process work ? Skoobydoo95 (talk) 18:47, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Skoobydoo95. It's hard to answer simply because there are various types of 'Reviewing' that go on here. See Wikipedia:Reviewing, but the most common ones are new article reviewing - you can read more about the process at WP:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Reviewing_instructions, or click the workflow image I've included with this response. Then, once an article get through that process it goes through a second 'New Page Review' process before we allow Google to index it. See Wikipedia:New pages patrol for more details. If you're wondering why Draft:Dada Shyam was rejected at first review - the answer lies in the rejection notice at the top of that page. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:46, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Viewing the history of wikipedia pages I've gone to

When I use the Wikipedia mobile app I can easily view my history. I find that very useful at times. When I'm on wikipedia website using my laptop browser I don't see a way to do that. Is there a way to do that in Chrome for Windows 10 that I'm not se kt10056 Kt10056 (talk) 18:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

if you go your history and search en.wikipedia.org it should work Firestar9990 (talk) 19:17, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Kt10056: I use Chrome for Windows 10. Whilst there's no method I'm aware of within Wikipedia to show me which pages I have recently viewed, I can click the three vertical dots on the top right of the Chrome browser which opens up its menu and go to History (Shortcut: Ctrl+H). As Firestar tried to explain, you can filter the names of pages visited in the History search window. Thus chrome://history/?q=Wikipedia filters out  non-wikipedia pages. But if I happen to remember a critical word within a page title I know I've visited, I can type that in Chrome's History search box, and stand a good chance of funding it. Results display in chronological order - most recent first. If you do find articles you might be interested in revisiting later, you can always add them to your WATCHLIST, if logged in. That tools list of watched pages can then serve as a reminder of pages you might want to look at again. Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 20:09, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Deprecated three incoming wikilink or article deletion policy?

Did there used to be a policy that an article had to have three incoming wikilinks or it would be deleted? I remember such a policy from perhaps a decade ago, but cannot find any mention of it now. Jaredroach (talk) 21:29, 12 October 2020 (UTC) Jaredroach (talk) 21:31, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

That's not the policy now, don't know if or when it changed. You can read about how to fix orphans at WP:ORPHAN. RudolfRed (talk) 21:37, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Jaredroach: fixing ping RudolfRed (talk) 21:37, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Question 2 from me

Why we can't link blogger website in Wikipedia? Wpedia User (talk) 17:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Short answer, they aren't a verifiable, trustworthy source. Wikipedia strives to be as reliable as possible, so it requires trustworthy, third party sources for citation. A blog is just an opinion, in shortening the short answer. Le Panini (talk) 17:31, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

under certain rare circumstances, you can. See WP:SPS. Jaredroach (talk) 21:34, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Wpedia User: WP:RS explains what a reliable source is and why we require them. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:18, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Tired?

I was just wondering this because I saw that User:David notMD had to answer quite a few questions, but do the hosts (especially the ones who are most active, like David or User:Nick Moyes) start to feel any fatigue from answering so many questions? Like, does answering so many questions kind of burn you guys out? TheKingCartii (talk) 19:33, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm not gonna answer that because... zz zzzz zzzzzz zzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Nick Moyes (talk) 19:38, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm in the same time zone as Nick and my head is slowly falling into my cup of tea. Zindor (talk) 19:46, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Great question. You have the urge to go and do stuff on Wikipedia, and then you go and do it for a LONG time. Then after you've been doing it for hours you suddenly get tired, but keep editing anyways. Le Panini ^{(Talk to}_me?) 20:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Mostly, I alternate from my day jobs (semi-retired expert science consultant, newspaper columnist) to pushing Wikipedia articles to Good Article status. Thus, dropping in on Teahouse is a break from intense concentration, sort of like doing a few games of solitaire. David notMD (talk) 00:57, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Codrus

For the page on Poseidon, can someone more technologically savvy than me add Codrus to the list of offspring? My source is the biographical note on Plato in Great Books of the Western World.--Mr. 123453334 (talk) 00:12, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

On looking up the actual Diogenes Laertius quote it should actually be Melanthus (different from Melantho which is already there).--Mr. 123453334 (talk) 01:53, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! The article says that the father of Melanthus is Andropompus. Codrus is the son of Melanthus. So I don't think either should be added. Mr. Heart ^(talk) 02:41, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, sorry about that. The biography note was a bit vague and on reading the Laertius quote, he says they are "descendants" of Poseidon. Thanks for answering though.--Mr. 123453334 (talk) 03:09, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Blue edit history

Why is their blue shade over some edits for some pages edit history? Thanks! DonkeyPunchResin (talk) 20:56, 10 October 2020 (UTC) DonkeyPunchResin (talk) 20:56, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@DonkeyPunchResin: welcome to the Teahouse. I think what you're referring to is the edit history of articles with "pending changes" protection. When a user who can't edit such an article directly makes an edit, it has to be accepted by an editor who has that particular right. Edits that were accepted get a pale blue tint in the edit history. --bonadea contributions talk 21:26, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

This is one example of an article with pending changes protection. Is that what you meant? Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 21:27, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Yep that’s it. So all edits in blue are pending?DonkeyPunchResin (talk) 21:33, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I’m confused as to why random edits here and there on this article are are not blue https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demagogue&action=history or does the blue not change even after the edit is accepted?DonkeyPunchResin (talk) 21:36, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

The blue edits are accepted, not pending. I mistyped in my first reply, sorry if you saw that before I corrected myself. --bonadea contributions talk 23:36, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!DonkeyPunchResin (talk) 04:11, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

I would like to translate an article from English to another language (my first language). May I ask for help to avoid usual pitfalls (e.g. can I use the references from English et cetera)

I would like to translate the below mentioned article from English to German (my first language). Michael_Morton_(criminal_justice) While I have lived in the past 15 years in the U.S. I still speak German every day with my spouse who is German as well.

May I ask for help or a short mentioning of usual pitfalls (e.g. a question would be if I can use the references from the English language wikipedia article et cetera). What are the most important things to not get rejected, what should I look out for? Should I contact somebody from the German wikipedia beforehand? Is it just: DO IT, transmit it - done?

Thank you Steffencs (talk) 04:41, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Steffencs: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to expand it. See the guidance at WP:TRANSLATEUS. Note that each language Wikipedia has its own rules for articles, so what is acceptable on one may not be on the other. You will want to ask the the help desk for the Wikipedia you are planning to add the article to for guidance for this part and also if english references are OK, as references in native language may be preferred if they are available. RudolfRed (talk) 04:49, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Image permission

I would like to request permission to use an image of Hackney Road, Bethnal Green It was the corner of the street, now demolished I once lived in., and would like it to be included in my book that is subject to publication. My book is basically social history of the East End. All profits from the book are being donated to the British Heart Foundation & for Cancer Research.

I look forward to your reply.

Thank yu 2A02:C7D:780C:A600:FC17:ABF8:231C:CE1 (talk) 06:13, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Derek Houghton2A02:C7D:780C:A600:FC17:ABF8:231C:CE1 (talk) 06:13, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

You actually do not need to seek permission - the image is in the public domain. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 06:36, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Need some editing.

Look at the Indian historical masters, for your kind information ,I want to tell you that Sushrut made many medicines and also wrote cures for many disease even before birth of Greek philosophers, this is just one example, Indian contributions are unsung,just look at history. Monnagaur99299 (talk) Monnagaur99299 (talk) 06:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Monnagaur99299: This page is for asking questions about the process of editing Wikipedia. Do you have such a question? If you choose to edit the corresponding Wikipedia articles, be sure to provide a reliable source. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:49, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Monnagaur99299: The article on Hippocrates says he is the "father of medicine" because reliable sources say he was: that is the standard for inclusion in Wikipedia. Your unsourced edit to the article was reverted because it was not constructive. Wikipedia has an article on Sushruta, which says he was one of several people regarded as the "father of surgery." —teb728 t c 08:07, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Read the question

Hi there,

Are users like myself with no special privileges allowed to give warnings to people who vandalise?

Thanks, Hockeycatcat (talk) 08:12, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

For some reason, a new section wasn't created when I asked my question. Read it above. Hockeycatcat (talk) 08:15, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hockeycatcat You don't need to have special privileges to issue a warning. 331dot (talk) 08:20, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

331dot Alright, cheers for that, mate. Hockeycatcat (talk) 08:38, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Using edit, how do I remove/change a photo in a Wikipedia article?

I was looking at an article the other day, and the photo was wrong, the wrong person was shown. How do I remove the photo and replace it with something more accurate? Thanks Muso2020 (talk) 12:07, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Muso2020, I see you posted at the article's talkpage, that is the right place to ask, give it a couple of days and see if there's any discussion. Per [4] it looks like it could be him, but who knows. See Help:Pictures. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:50, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Muso2020, that's a great-looking photo that you uploaded (commons:file:Angus-Julia-Stone.jpg), but you can’t copy material from other web sites unless it’s clearly licensed in a way that we can use it. Thanks for trying to help, I trust that you mean well.

If you are the photographer or know them, then tell us here, or on Commons, and someone should be able to advise the process you need to go through to license the image. If not, it's been automatically flagged for review and will probably be deleted soon.

commons:Category:Angus & Julia Stone doesn’t have many shots of them both together, so if you do find something we can use we'd love to have it!

(Also, for future reference, changing the main photo for an article isn’t considered a minor edit, so best to leave that box unticked.)

Best wishes, Pelagic ( messages ) – (21:06 Tue 13, AEST) 11:06, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

P.S. I've reverted the article and left a note on Muso's talk page. Pelagic ( messages ) – (21:31 Tue 13, AEST) 11:31, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Andhra Pradesh in wikipedia - list of sanctuaries lack Telineelapuram and Telukunchi Bird Sanctuaries

Sir Andhra Pradesh article in Wikipedia, list of sanctuaries lack Telineelapuram and Telukunchi Bird Sanctuaries. May I edit and include it or I request the editors to go through and include. thanks Dr. M. Rama Murty --Bmantha (talk) 12:49, 13 October 2020 (UTC) Bmantha (talk) 12:49, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

The term "anyone can edit" means, well, anyone can edit! If you find something that's factual and has the proper citation, you can always click [edit source] and put it in yourself. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 12:57, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Bmantha: Sure! If you find something to be changed, be bold and change it! You are extended confirmed, so you should be able to edit Andhra Pradesh. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:59, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Review my article

Hello! I am hoping to find someone(s) willing to look over my very first Wikipedia article. I am reviewing one of my very favorite singers who has never gotten the recognition she deserved. It's Draft:Josie James.

Thanks!! Earlgrey20 (talk) 05:40, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Earlgrey20, may I ask what your relationship is with the subject? Are you being paid to write this draft, or is it part of your job, or are you doing it as a favour to a friend or family, or is it something else? Please review WP:COI and make necessary disclosures whatever they may be. Failure to do so makes other editors disinclined to help you, if nothing else. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:40, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link Draft:Josie James TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 06:44, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Good question! I could see why it gives off that impression, but she was one of my grandfather's favorite artists, and I have developed a fascination with her over time, collecting articles. My grandfather has been helping me as well. How do I make the page look less like I am a friend?? :( Because I was already aware that it might look like I have a COI, as I am familiar with the rules, but I figured I would be safe since there is not a COI. I have tried to model the article after James' coworker, Lynn Davis (singer), which seems like an extremely biased account and I didn't want to do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Earlgrey20 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Earlgrey20, I'm not an experienced article reviewer, so take everything I say with a grain of salt (or maybe a big handful). The draft doesn’t seem promotional to me and is quite well-developed. I've left some suggestions for tweaks at Draft talk:Josie James. When you feel ready, there is a template you can add to the page to mark it for an AFC reviewer to look at, but be aware that can take a while. Thanks for your work on the article, I hope you've enjoyed the process so far. — Pelagic ( messages ) – (23:14 Tue 13, AEST) 13:14, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

What to do if sources don't work

Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia, and I love the idea of Wikipedia, but I hate it when something doesn't work, and I noticed on one of the Wikipedia articles I was reading, at least two of the sources took you nowhere, and I wanted to help fix this, but I have no idea where to start, can anyone help? Devin Curley (talk) 17:05, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Devin Curley. Please take a look at Preventing and repairing dead links for advice. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Devin Curley: (ec) WP:LINKROT is a common problem. Websites re-organize, change hands, or go away completely, and there is no automated way in which links/references to them get updated (not just on Wikipedia, but any web page). WP:ERB explains the basics of citing references and WP:LINKROT explains how to try to fix them. BTW, if you post the details of which articles and which references are problematic, we can offer a more specific solution. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:23, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

You can search for the dead URL in the Internet Archive Pelagic ( messages ) – (23:26 Tue 13, AEST) 13:26, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Which is of course mentioned in Cullen's advice, I'm just suggesting IA as one of the first resources to try. Pelagic ( messages ) – (23:28 Tue 13, AEST) 13:28, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

request for permission to create article on List of butterflies in Andhra Pradesh in Wiki article 'List of butterflies of India' per state lists.

Sir, I would like to contribute the list of butterflies of Andhra Pradesh in Wiki article List of butterflies of India. When I selected the Andhra Pradesh under per state lists, page does not exist. I put a message to Kateshortforbob in his talk page, no response till now. It seems Kateshortforbob might have deleted the page due to some problem (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://bcshyd.com/articles/butterfly-checklists/40-andhra-pradesh/55-andhra-pradesh-checklist). I am also a new to this wikiworld and slowly learning how to create and edit articles. I am also new to the terminology also but confident and gradually learning. please guide me in this regard whether I can start a page on the List of butterflies of Andhra Pradesh under already existing article List of butterflies of India. thanking you, Dr. M. Rama Murty --Bmantha (talk) 13:01, 13 October 2020 (UTC) Bmantha (talk) 13:01, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Bmantha: It seems like Kateshortforbob has not been editing very actively recently and may not answer soon. The deletion happened in 2010 and I'd say it's safe to give it another go. I'd suggest you to go through the articles for creation process and follow the tips at WP:YFA. Remember, the verifiability policy still applies to lists, so be sure to provide reliable sources backing up your claims. We have a manual of style for lists, so I also advise you to give that a read to understand how to do formatting. Good luck! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:16, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Bmantha: If you plan to create a 'List of' page, based upon a published and sound butterfly checklist or similar academic publication, I'd say that would be a worthy project, especially if you make it a sortable table, where you can arrange entries alphabetically either by Common or Scientific Name, as well as by Conservation Status, and have the unsorted base table in systematic order. Anything else that simply comprises a random and tiny selection of species you happen to come across would just become a vanity project and an utter waste of time, serving more to mislead than it informs. I would not recommend such an undertaking to a complete novice unless they had the staying power to see it through to completion, and the biological skills to base it upon the best sources. I would also suggest creating it in an Excel spreadsheet before attempting converting into a table or list here. If you are not able to base it on a proper, academic source, then do make sure you make it clear that any such page is just a random agglomeration of species names, and should not be interpreted by users as anything more than that. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 13:36, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Article Creation

Hello, I just created my first article here, how long will it take to be approved or how can I fast track it?. Thank you Davdotfam (talk) 15:21, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Davdotfam If you are referring to Draft:Oluwafemi Ogunsanya, you have submitted it for review. As noted in the submission notice, "This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,629 pending submissions waiting for review"; this is because reviews are done by volunteers who do what they can when they can. Reviews are done in no particular order; it could be in five minutes, or six weeks from now, there is no way to know and no way to "fast track" it, you will need to be patient. For what reason do you need it "fast tracked"? 331dot (talk) 15:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Lucky day! it's done. Also removed copyright violations from the only article Davdotfam has edited, and requested WP:REVDEL. Added user talk page templates for WP:UPE and WP:COPYVIO. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

More like unlucky day - tagged with Speedy deletion and Rejected (rather than Declined). David notMD (talk) 16:35, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool & David notMD, why did I find this exchange very amusing? Also, yes! the tale signs of UPE are all present. Celestina007 (talk) 17:33, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Celestina007 Not the first time that a Teahouse query has resulted in unintended consequences, nor the last. David notMD (talk) 17:36, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

David notMD, indeed! There's another from me a few sections up (or in the closest archive), the one that was collapsed after the draft was deleted and the sock that created it indeffed. I think the lesson is "Don't mistake our politeness for naivety." Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:58, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Question 3 from me

How to enable and use twinkle gadget and how to use it? I have heard about it but haven't used it yet. Wpedia User (talk) 16:05, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Wpedia User, Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! Go to Preferences > Gadgets > Browsing > Click "Twinkle" > Save changes! I can help you with Twinkle, I just need to know what specifically you want to do with it. Happy editing! Mr. Heart ^(talk) 16:10, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Why is wikipedia armenian?

Can someone from the team explain wtf are you protecting and supporting agressor and terrorsit people of armenia? Why are you sharing wrong information and articles about there fauls history and activitites? Why are you missleading people and young generations? You should be ashamed of your self!!! Whaiting for your reply... 81.21.86.39 (talk) 10:34, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm confused on your question. Are you saying there is misleading information in the Armenia article? If so, what issues are there specifically, so if you're right we can take steps to fix it. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 12:00, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a neutral point of view policy to represent fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. However, if you find specific information which is factually inaccurate, then please do tell us or discuss on the talk page of the article in question so this can be fixed.Polyamorph (talk) 12:16, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

I guess that this relates to Nagorno-Karabakh conflict --ColinFine (talk) 16:11, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Atlantic hurricane season

Added heading Pelagic ( messages ) – (06:11 Wed 14, AEST) 20:11, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

I Need help on the timeline of the 2020 Atlantic Hurricane Season. I Added Omar (August) and 8 Days Of September! TD 15 (Omar) August, September And So Far October? Hurricanestudier123 (talk) 19:52, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Nationality query

I am currently working on Stefania Berlinerblau's bio. So, she was born in Russia and immigrated to the United States. But she is also Jewish. How do I best describe her: Russian-American or Jewish-American? Thanks! Darwin Naz (talk) 23:02, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Darwin Naz. If Berlinerblau became an American citizen, then her nationality is American. Her ethnicity is a different matter. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Cullen³²⁸. The information goes in the first sentence of the lede. So she should just be called American? Darwin Naz (talk) 23:19, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, Darwin Naz, the first sentence should include citizenship and reason for notability. That would include the ethnicity only if the ethnicity was central to notability, for example, as a rabbi or as an activist for African-American rights. She was a physician, which is not ethnic. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:28, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Cullen328 The ethnicity is part of her notability. Sources have described her as a Russian revolutionary and also the first Jewish woman to practice surgery in the US. Darwin Naz (talk) 23:36, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Darwin Naz, you asked for an opinion and I gave you mine. I do not think that her ethnicity belongs in the first sentence although it should obviously be discussed elsewhere in the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:45, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok, Cullen328. Thanks for your input. Darwin Naz (talk) 20:38, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Sidebar?

I am working on a page in my sandbox just to figure out formatting before attempting to publish anything. Everything seems really simple, except I can't seem to figure out what I can only call the "sidebar." It's the space to the right of most pages in a vertical rectangular box, usually with a logo at the top (if a company page), and then quick information like "founded" - "website" - "number of employees" etc. There's usually an image at the top as well. I figured this would be under the "insert" drop down, but I'm not seeing anything that looks to be the right thing. But it has to be pretty simply since nearly every page has one. Help when you can. Thanks! Jthorp72 (talk) 19:29, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Jon, we call them infoboxes (help page, manual of style, search) and there is a vast range of them to cater for different subject areas. Each has its own template.

Once you've worked out which to use, you could create one from scratch in in the Visual Editor via Insert – Template. But due to the large number of fields, you’ll probably find it vastly easier to use source editing mode and copy the code from a similar article or from the template's documentation.

I don’t see anything in your sandbox, do you have an alternate account?

— Pelagic ( messages ) – (06:09 Wed 14, AEST) 20:09, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi,Pelagic, I do have it in my sandbox currently - and only have one account - but I'm assuming I need to hit "publish" before anyone else can see it? Or is there another way to save it? I'm not ready to try to truly publish this page as I want to review it thoroughly before trying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jthorp72 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Jthorp72: The "Publish changes" button actually just saves your changes to your sandbox (which anyone can see if he or she knows where to look). Actually moving your sandbox to the main article space ("truly publishing" it) involves a different process. Deor (talk) 21:09, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Pelagic: Ok - I've hit publish so this is at least saved and viewable internally. Still working on uploading logos, images and putting the right documentation to indicate my affiliation with this company. Not completely clear on that process yet, but working through the help materials.

Increasing

Hi Teahouse! I'm new here using Wikipedia and i'd like to ask "How can i make my Articles become better and famous? Helder9090 (talk) 20:14, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Helder9090! I give you Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. See also Wikipedia:How to write a great article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:36, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Moving (to rename) a page

Hi I would like to rename the draft for an article I've been writing. Another editor suggested I use the "Move" command which apparently is to be found in the top right corner of my screen under the "More" menu but I can neither find the "More" menu or the "Move" command anywhere on my screen. Can someone help? Thanks. AlbusHaversham

AlbusHaversham (talk) 12:11, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi AlbusHaversham. I don’t think your account is old enough to be able to WP:MOVE pages yet; I believe only WP:AUTOCONFIRMED accounts can do that. So, you can either wait a bit more or post the names of the Draft you want to move and the title you want to move it to here so that another editor can do it for you. — Marchjuly (talk) 12:18, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks I have a draft article called Draft:Feline urethral obstruction. It is still a work-in-progress (I need to add references to it for example) so it has not been submitted yet. But in the meantime, I would like to rename the article to Draft:Feline urethral obstruction (blocked cat) whilst I work on it. Can an editor with appropriate permissions do this for me please?

Thanks.

AlbusHaversham (talk) 12:32, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@AlbusHaversham: I don't think a move here is necessary. On Wikipedia, words in parenthesis are known as disambiguation to distinguish between words that have multiple meanings. As neither Feline urethral obstruction or Blocked cat have articles written, you should choose the most commonly recognizable name as the article title, and have both words in the first sentence (as you've done). ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:03, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Once the article is in mainspace a WP:REDIRECT can take care of the alternative title. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:30, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: @Dodger67: The issue here is which audience you are talking about. A technical audience familiar with cats will know the topic to be feline urethral obstruction but a lay audience would never use or even know this is the "proper" term and if looking for the topic will look up blocked cat. Since both terms are used and Wikipedia caters for both audiences, I think both should be in the title. Or are you saying brackets can only be use for disambiguation and nothing else? Or in this case is the redirect the right option?

AlbusHaversham (talk) 14:56, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

An article should only have one title. Pick what you judge to be the WP:COMMONNAME as title, then start with something like "Feline urethral obstruction or blocked cat is..." and make the other one a redirect. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:41, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@AlbusHaversham: Yes, parenthesis in Wikipedia titles is almost always used for disambiguation. The reason you have to choose one is that people will search for "feline urethral obstruction" or "blocked cat" but never "Feline urethral obstruction (blocked cat)". Please don't make "feline urethral obstruction" and "blocked cat" both redirect to "Feline urethral obstruction (blocked cat)". ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 15:51, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you all for your help. I am new here so I am not sure of some of the rules so this is very useful. The background is my own cat died of a blockage. When he was sick I was desperate to get some understanding of it but I couldn't locate a credible source and under CoVid it was very hard to access vets easily. This has motivated me to improve Wikipedia's pages on cat health as they really are pretty basic or non-existent so other pet owners are well-informed and don't make the same mistakes as me. It is a niche interest admittedly but it has big repercussions if you are in this kind of emergency. I will keep the page as Feline Urethral Obstruction and then have a redirect from Blocked Cat.

AlbusHaversham (talk) 16:19, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi again AlbusHaversham. I think everyone who posted above would truly think that you’re intentions are the best after reading your last post; however, I also think that many if not all my feel (even a little) that there might be a chance that Wikipedia may not be a good fit for what you seem to be interested in doing.

Wikipedia has quite a few articles about health related matters (mostly human related but possibly pet related as well), but Wikipedia articles aren’t intended to be online directories or online MD type of pages where concerned persons can find out the latest information on such matters. In general, Wikipedia articles should reflect only what reliable (mainly secondary) sources should say about such a thing in a neutral point of view, but this is even more the case when it comes to health related subjects and such articles tend to be highly scrutinized by other editors to ensure they’re in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. The same also applies to the sources cited in such articles. I’d imagine the scrutiny is just as great for pet health related articles. Wikipedia, therefore, might not be the best way for you to accomplish what you might be trying to achieve.

You won’t have any real editorial control over any such article, and even something a basic as the tittle of the article could be changed at anytime if there’s a Wikipedia policy based reason to do so. You won’t be able to lock others out of editing the article per se and anyone will be able to edit it. When there are disagreements, things are going to be expected to be resolved through Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

It might turn out over time that a fairly good Wikipedia article ends up being written, but this could also be something that’s different from how you think things should be. I’m not trying to discourage you from trying to create this article, but just let you know about an aspect of Wikipedia editing that you might not be aware of.

Any article you try to create is going to need to be based on what reliable sources as defined by Wikipedia have said on the matter. Every claim or statement is going to need to be supported by a citation to such sources. Everything that is known to be true is going to need to be verifiable. Personal interpretations and research aren’t going to be allowed. Moreover, the sourcing, etc. is going to need to be strong enough and sufficiently show the subject matter meets Wikipedia:Notability for any such article to survive a deletion challenge. The purpose of such an article isn’t really, in my opinion, to make it and Wikipedia a credible source of information on the subject, but just to summarize perhaps what credible sources of information have said about the subject in a manner that complies with Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines. — Marchjuly (talk) 21:15, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

That said, based on [5] there's probably good sources to base an article on. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Uploading/Using a Company Logo

I'm working to create a Wikipedia article about a client. They provided me with their logo to use. The logo is trademarked, and they provided it to me to use for this purpose, so I'm not sure if this is a free use or non-free use. Would I just use the Wikipedia Commons upload form to make this image available for the company page or is there another process that needs to be used? Otherwise, they provided me with some non-copyright images to use for other page photos. I imagine these can just be uploaded using the commons process?

FYI - I did add the disclosure to my profile page about this being a paid effort. Though as a marketing agency we are doing this gratis for the client (to gain experience), I'm paid by the agency, so I believe that disclosure is still warranted.

Thanks! Jthorp72 (talk) 21:37, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Jthorp72. Thank you for being open about your status as a paid editor. I would urge you to replace "establish a company page for a client" by "create a Wikipedia article about my client" in your thinking: a Wikipedia article is not for the benefit of its subject, and as it in no way represents them, "setting up" or "establishing" is not an appropriate phrase. As for the logo: permission is irrelevant, unless your client is willing to license the logo in such a way that anybody may reuse or alter it for any purpose, commercial or otherwise, (which is unlikely). Logos are normally treated as non-free and uploaded directly to Wikipedia (Commons does not accept non-free content). One of the non-free content criteria is that such content may be used only in articles, not in drafts, so please wait until your draft has been accepted as an article before you upload it. --ColinFine (talk) 21:47, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, Wikipedia articles are warts-and-all, so if something happens that negatively reflects on the subject and it hits the news media, you will not be able to demand it be removed. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 23:38, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Signpost

Can two people write signpost draft? Tbiw (talk) 16:42, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Tbiw! Anyone can write and submit a draft to The Signpost. See the about page for information on contributing and the submissions desk where you can submit a draft. There can definitely be co-authors. However, there is no guarantee that the piece will be published just because you've written it. You may want to reach out to Smallbones, the Editor-in-Chief with a proposal. Best, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:56, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Tbiw:. Thanks for the question. My first response to getting this question at the Teahouse was to see how long you've been editing. It would be difficult to report on Wikipedia IMHO, if you'd only been editing for a month or so - but there may be some exceptions to that general rule based on your other experience and what you want to write about. It looks like you've been editing for almost a year so I don't see any problem. If two people want to work together that's fine too - if you work well together! I'd need to know which of the two to communicate with about any needed changes. If you have further questions, please email me HERE or via the "email user" link on my user page. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 00:14, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Pronunciation

I suggest that every article includes the IPA pronunciation of the person or place the article is about. Seamus Moores (talk) 00:07, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Seamus Moores. That sounds like a suggestion that goes beyond the scope of what's comnonly handled here at the Teahouse. You might want to try posting about this at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) to see what others think. It's also quite possible that someone else came up with the same idea before; so, maybe first checking Wikipedia:Perennial proposals would be a good idea as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:11, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Why did you change womxn back to women

The event's name is Womxn's March on Seattle, not Women's March on Seattle. It was not vandalism. 24.198.164.225 (talk) 03:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Not sure what you are referring to. As your link shows, the article is titled with Womxn not Women. RudolfRed (talk) 03:40, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

I see now you are referring to an edit to Womyn which was incorrectly reverted and is now fixed. RudolfRed (talk) 03:44, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Photo Competition Submission Question

Hello and thank you for taking the time to read my question.

Perhaps I'm uploading photos improperly to the commons.

I have been submitting photos for the October, photo competition. Sometimes I use the "Open Street Maps" (https://wlm-maps.toolforge.org/#19/49.29116/-122.84386) tool in order to upload the photos. After uploading the photos I see my contributions (https://guc.toolforge.org/?by=date&user=JJGTCA), on this page. From what I understand the green, monument tag on the "Open Street Maps" is supposed to turn red, after a photo is submitted. It seems like non of the monument photos that I have taken and submitted have turned the tags from red to green.

For example, - On this list (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_historic_places_in_the_Greater_Vancouver_Regional_District) monument 2586 appears to not have a picture. This absence is confirmed on the "Open Street Maps" (https://wlm-maps.toolforge.org/#19/49.29116/-122.84386). - But I have uploaded a picture (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GRO2_JJGTCA.jpg) of monument 2586.

Is it possible that I'm not uploading files properly, or I'm being impatient?

Thank you for your consideration.

JJGTCA JJGTCA (talk) 05:00, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi JJGTCA. Wikipedia and Commons are sister projects, but they each have their own policies and guidelines as well as their own community of editors; so, if you cannot find the answer to your question in c:Commons:Photo challenge (I think that's what you're asking about), then perhaps you should try asking at c:Commons:Help desk. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:31, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. It looks like the issue has been resolved. JJGTCA (talk) 06:32, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Citations

Hi Community, It's nice to be part of this beautiful place. I want to know if I have citations which are like physical documents. How do I incorporate them to Wikipedia? Fibrointech (talk) 01:35, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Fibrointech. All citations are expected to be to reliable sources as defined by Wikipedia. Part of this definition is that a reliable source needs to be published and accessible so as to allow proper verfication and assessment. Sources aren't required to be available online and can still be cited as explained in WP:SAYWHERE as long as they're considered reliable. In other words, there's no need to upload a copy of a document to Wikipedia and in fact doing so might actually create more problems than it solves. In addition, documents (personal or otherwise) are generally considered to be WP:PRIMARY (or WP:BLPPRIMARY) types of sources, and there are lots of restrictions placed on how they can be used even when they are deemed to be reliable. For the most part, Wikipedia tends to prefer WP:SECONDARY reliable sources whenever such are available. Bascially, I've just given you a very general answer because your question lacked specifics. If you can provide more information about what kind of document you want to cite and for what type of information you want to cite it for (even the name of the article you want to cite it in), then perhaps another Teahouse host will be able to give you a more specific answer. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:07, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Fibrointech, you can cite physical documents as long as they have been "published" according to our definition. Documents that are in a publicly accessible archive usually meet that definition. To actually cite them, you can use one of our citation templates. For things like books or magazines, you can use {{Cite book}} or {{Cite magazine}} just without the website related stuff. If the document is in an archive, you can use the {{Cite archive}} template. When filling out the citation, you should provide as much information as you have, but at least enough that someone else could find it themselves. Let me know here or on my talk page if you need help with citing a specific document. — Wug·a·po·des​ 06:02, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

8x8

 69.72.125.98 (talk) 21:13, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

64. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:37, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, honestly I don’t think we should be answering questions that are obvious trolling. Removing the entry entirely would be a better route to follow as we wouldn’t want to be feeding the trolls. Celestina007 (talk) 22:29, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Celestina007 That works too, though from where I'm sitting this isn't obvious trolling, it could be an incomplete question or something like that about 8x8. At this level, I consider it harmless, and my reply Teahouse-friendly. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:07, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Huffpost, a reliable source?

Please let me know if I can add references from this site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 06:55, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@Editingwork8: there does not appear to be a current consensus for or against HuffPost. Therefore, individual discussions are likely needed. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:04, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@ Victor Schmidt mobil Okay, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 08:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Editingwork8, you can look at WP:HUFFPO, which says essentially the same thing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:12, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@ Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 08:15, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Audio

Which type of device should i use to record audiofor pronunciation Alvin kipchumba (talk) 09:01, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

​You can for example use your phone, the quality of mobile phone recordings is usually good enough. The audio doesn't need to be perfect to be helpful to readers. The only thing you need to have in mind is that you need to convert your file to an .OGG file since Commons doesn't allow regular users to upload MP3s. – Thjarkur (talk) 09:54, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

How can I convert an audio file to an .OGGAlvin kipchumba (talk) 10:06, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Alvin kipchumba: see WP:Audio, --ColinFine (talk) 10:19, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

​There are some good online tools to do that if you Google "mp3 to ogg online converter" – Thjarkur (talk) 10:21, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

ThanksAlvin kipchumba (talk) 10:24, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Self publish

If one who is notable, but does not have many articles on websites or newspapers what he/she can do? can they self-publish their articles? and If yes what type of self-publish article is considered as reliable sources? Please explain it briefly. Wpedia User (talk) 10:06, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Wpedia User. Wikipedia uses its own meaning of the word notable, which is mostly about significant coverage in independent reliably-published sources; though there are alternative criteria for particular classes of subject. If not many people have published significant material about you (without being an associate of yours, or primed with information from you) then you are probably not notable in Wikipedia's sense, however well-known you may be. Self-published sources never contribute to Wikipedia-notability. A Wikipedia article should be based close to 100% on what people with no connection to the subject have published about them: if there is little such material, then there is literally nothing which can go into the article. Note that promotion of any kind is not permitted in Wikipedia, and that a Wikipedia article is not for the benefit of its subject. --10:26, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Editing question

How to edit semi-protected page? Krishna 050493 (talk) 10:39, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Krishna 050493, per WP:SEMI you should be able to. What semi-protected page can't you edit? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:46, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

About your edit to Vishwakarma (caste), see your talkpage. You changed the article from this [6] to this [7], don't do that. WP isn't written as per any religion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:04, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

• Vishwakarma (caste) [Changed by AlanM1 from an external referral link to a proper wikilink. @Krishna 050493: Please don't add links like that. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:59, 14 October 2020 (UTC)]

How do i edit this page? I have collected relevant information with sources/references — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krishna 050493 (talk • contribs) 11:31, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1 I would like to contribute to Vishwakarma (caste) page. How do i edit this page?

Assuming you mean the WP-article Vishwakarma (caste), you have edited that page. On how to include references etc, see WP:TUTORIAL. WP:BRD may also be of use. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:51, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

AirBnb

Is Airbnb a reliable source? Editingwork8 (talk) 04:18, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Editingwork8. Do you mean this Airbnb? If that's the same AirBnb you're referring to, then I'm not sure not how a "vacation rental online marketplace" would meet WP:RS in general, but it might be in some cases depending upon the context. What article and what type of information do you want cite this as a source for? -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:31, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@ Marchjuly For referencing a location — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 04:37, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand why you would need to cite a company like Airbnb for something like that since there would seem to be better more reliable ways to do such a thing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:07, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@ Marchjuly That's why I'm asking for suggestions I guess — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 06:59, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@Editingwork8: Almost surely no. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:33, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@ Sdkb Okay, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Given that they have been shown to advertise properites that don't exist, I would say not. They are a marketplace with property information provided by random sellers, not a property directory.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:30, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@ Shantavira Thanks for guiding

@Editingwork8: To reference a location, citing Google or Bing Maps, or any other maps would suffice. GeraldWL 13:40, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Gerald I've tried it Wikipedia isn't accepting Google maps. Thanks for suggesting me!

Hi Editingwork8. Perhaps you could be specific and state here what the location is you are trying to cite. For example, if you can name it as a settlement, I'd be suprised if there wasn't already an article for the place, or one nearby. Giving full geolocation data would be an alternative way to get us to help you. If you look at the Infobox for even a tiny place or landmark (see article for Tengenenge for an example), there's a way to pinpoint locations on a map. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 14:14, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

No feedback from talk page

Good afternoon all,

I've been having an issue lately with a few pages I'd like to edit. I know that WP encourages being bold with edits, but I have come across a few pages that I want to change but they aren't topics that I usually work with. My real issue is I have tried commenting on both the page's talk page AND the main project page and I've gotten no replies (or one reply saying we need other people to reply).

So I guess my question is, where do I go next to ask for consensus if the talk page and project page yield nothing?

For example, here is my comment on Roald Dahl's talk page:

• I am wondering why the “reputed antisemitism” section is placed in the Post War Life section of the article. Would it not make more sense to have a “controversy” section OR to have the antisemitism part in the “Legacy” section, since most of the discussion of his Anti-Semitic comments has occurred after his death? I don’t want to debate about whether or not he was anti-Semitic, just asking about formatting. Feel free to link me to whichever wikipedia policy is being followed for this if I am simply unaware of the rule here.

I only received one reply, although I checked and there are 300+ people watching the page. I then commented on the children's literature project's article discussion page and did not receive a reply at all. I honestly don't feel confident enough to make an edit without further advice from others. I've had a similar issue with a food related page, a cartoon related page, etc.

So where do I go to next to receive advice? It seems wrong to take every specific edit question to the teahouse (although you guys are always very nice and helpful!). Apathyash (talk) 16:39, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Apathyash: You made your case and asked for feedback, so if there's no opposition to your proposal, then the next step is to boldly make the edits you proposed! A lot of people watch articles but don't pay attention to talk pages, so making the edit brings it to the attention of more people who can give you feedback. Consensus can be built through editing too, so if people want to make further improvements they can. Wikis work best through editing, and it's why WP:Be bold is one of our oldest policies. — Wug·a·po·des​ 06:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes and read the stuff at WP:BRD. basically, once you've added material to an article it may well get reverted quite quickly by someone else. That should certainly trigger the discuss phase, usually on the article's talk page. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 14:26, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Article tagged for speedy deletion

Regina Hing Yue Tsang has been created recently. It has sufficient references. Can someone help remove the speedy deletion tag? SWP13 (talk) 15:32, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, Hkmdb and IMDb are not reliable sources as they are user edited, images are not usually acceptable sources either I'm afraid. Theroadislong (talk) 15:40, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@SWP13: Do note that it's perfectly acceptable to cite Chinese sources as well, as long as it meets WP:RS. Just remember to specify the language of the source in the reference; if you're using a citation template, you can do so with the language parameter, like so: |language = Chinese. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 15:56, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Response>>Thanks. Speedy delete tag was removed by User:Atlantic306. My issue is resolved. :) SWP13 (talk) 14:32, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Occupation error

If an occupation has an incorrectly form of demonym, whats the way to change that? Pimentagbuenogross (talk) 04:56, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Pimentagbuenogross, can you be more specific? What article are you talking about? Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:50, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Pimentagpuenogross, welcome to the Teahouse. It's hard to give you any answer without specifics, but I'm guessing that your question relates to some sort of conflict between ethnic groups. Wikipedia does its best to stay neutral in such cases, but takes such things as names from the bulk of the reliable sources which cover the conflict: this often leads people who support one side or the other to claim that Wikipedia is biased against their side. Please look at the talk page of the article in question to see whether this matter has already been discussed (you may need to search the archives of the talk page), and read those discussions. If it has not been discussed, or you think there is more information that is relevant to the discussion, then please open a new discussion on the talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 09:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Or just make the change and see if an editor reverts it. You raised this question on the Talk page of an article ( "Somali economist", not "Somalian economist"), with no reply, so just go ahead with editing to what you think is correct. David notMD (talk) 11:09, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@Pimentagpuenogross: The point you brought up at Talk:Bashir Isse is not about a spelling in the article itself, though, but about the name of one of the categories the article is in. Changing that is a little more complicated – it can't be done by editing the article. It is possible to change the name of a category, but there are more than 200 categories with "Somalian" in the name, so it's not an isolated spelling error, and it is in fact not uncomplicated. There is an old discussion here about moving some categories from titles with "Somalian" to equivalents with "Somali", and there it was pointed out that the two words are not in fact synonyms. --bonadea contributions talk 14:52, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Using the "status" parameter in an infobox

I'm currently in a discussion with another editor about the use of the "status" parameter in infoboxes, particularly as it pertains to government officials in an acting capacity. I typically just do a line break with the acting in parenthesis, as is common practice and that's how I had changed that editor's formatting, to conform with like-minded infoboxes. He now says I should self-revert because as it pertains to that article, it should remain and it doesn't pertain to how other articles are formatted, as per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS I can't find anything that relates specifically to the use of the status parameter and so I came here to find out where to find guidance on how to format an infobox and particularly when to use the "status" parameter. Thanks! Snickers2686 (talk) 21:07, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Snickers2686. Many infobox templates have a corresponding documentation page where you can find information on how the template should be used; so, perhaps try checking there. Sometimes, you may also find relevant discussion on a template's talk page or its talk page's archives; so, that can be a good place to check as well. Other than that, you or the other person may need to start a discussion about this on either the article's talk page (if you're just interested in how this should be done for that one particular article) or the template's talk page (if you're more broadly interested in how it should be done for all articles where the template is used). Unless there's a technical reason why one way should be preferred over the other, this probably should be treated as a content dispute where both you and the other editor try to resolve things per Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and avoid anything resembling edit warring.

As for "OTHERSTUFFEXISTS" or WP:OTHERCONTENT, that is a relevant point to bring up; at the same time, there's also some value in being consistent when using things like infobox templates. Which should be valued more is probably something that's best resolved through discussion. FWIW, {{Infobox officeholder}} looks like it's being used in lots and lots of articles; so, even a very small change is likely to have a huge ripple effect. I would be very WP:CAUTIOUS and try to get as many editors involved from relevant WikiProjects before tyring to tweak or otherwise change that template. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:54, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Tagging KidAd. Just wanted you to see the reply. Snickers2686 (talk) 15:02, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Notability of Moor's Head (Distillation Tool)

I was reading through the Category: Alchemical Tools and noticed an item I'm familiar with is not noted. Looking it up I noticed there wasn't even a page on it, a 'Moor's Head' Distillation tool. I was interested in making a page for it but the Guidelines stress notability, and I'm not sure if it matters enough to be published (after all, it had limited use in a very niche subject; the Alchemical Tools Category only has 11 linked pages.) I also have limited sources (one or two). Is it worth writing/ would it be approved even though it's of somewhat limited notability? InquisitiveMook (talk) 16:50, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@InquisitiveMook: I see quite a number of sources that discuss it in Google Books.[8] I expect that the subject would satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements. I would recommend, however, that you cite at least two, and ideally at least three, good sources when writing the article (potentially including some of those at the Google Books link). If there appears to be good coverage in a book listed at Google Books, but view limitations make it so you can't access the book, you can include that book in a further reading section. Good luck! Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:02, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

The many Backyard Photographs

Will the editors of this Wiki please acknowledge the WC testimony of Marina Oswald that she took only ONE of the two photographs presented to her?

She insisted multiple times that she clicked the camera button ONLY ONCE.

She was browbeaten by a stubborn WC attorney to reluctantly concede that she "must have" taken two photos, simply because there were two photos presented to her.

Subsequent history has revealed FOUR different versions of the Backyard Photograph with four different poses.

Marina confessed to taking ONLY ONE of them. This remains an open question. Please don't neglect these historical facts. Petrejo (talk) 14:48, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Petrejo. I have no idea what you are talking about, but the answer is the same as the one I gave to the previous question above: if there is something in a Wikipedia article that you think is wrong, and you have reliable published sources supporting your view, start a discussion (or see if there is already a discussion on the matter) on the article's Talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 15:21, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

I believe the user is referring to Marina Oswald Porter, Lee Harvey Oswalds widow. WC refers to the Warren Commission. There is a famous photo of Oswald posing with a rifle that I assume is the one being referred to here, and maybe there were others which his widow denied but then admitted, but then there were four.

Unclear on what page the info exists to be corrected and what the correction is meant to be. Koncorde (talk) 15:35, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Petrejo, It looks like you made your desired edit already.[9] This is how Wikipedia works -- if an editor sees an issue with an article, s/he changes it. If others disagree with your change, they will undo it. You can learn more about this process at WP:BRD. Best, Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:13, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Gordon Harrington

 Carole MacDonald (talk) 16:58, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

I have edited the submission for Gordon Harrington. I find the process terribly confusing and I think I have edited it properly and added needed references, I don't know if it is finished or how to post it. Carole MacDonald (talk) 17:00, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@Carole MacDonald: Other than your help requests, this account hasn't made any edits in months. And our article on Gordon Harrington hasn't been edited since 2019. Do you have another account you were using? What page were you editing? Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:07, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:TUTORIAL may help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:25, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Robert Christgau & Village Voice

Hello everybody,

I’ve recently gotten into editing material on Wikipedia, usually correcting grammatical mistakes and the like, specifically on music pages. I often see that sometimes a review left by Robert Christgau is attributed to his company (I think) Village Voice, and other times it is attributed to him. However, I often see that he does most of the criticism whether it is labeled as Village Voice or Robert Christgau. I suspect that it varies based on whether the review was in a book or not and whether it was just a freelance review he did for a new (at the time) album. Are there certain requirements to which is used, and how can I differentiate between them?

 X Strikes Again! (talk) 17:29, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello ReboredX. Whether to attribute a music review to the publication or to the author (or to both) in the text is a judgment call. In the case of Robert Christgau, he is such a prominent figure in music criticism of the last half century plus, that I recommend attributing him in the text. If the critic is a relative newcomer with no Wikipedia biography, I would attribute the publication instead. Both should be included in the reference, along with the title, publication date, URL if available, and so on. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:41, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

How long after leaving a company until page edits no longer considered COI?

I used to work at Nuance Communications but it's been a year since I held employment or any stake with them. My role went into a spinoff to a separate public company Cerence, which has yet to receive its own article and awaits an author in my Request for Article entry.

If I mention the spinoff in a simple one line addition, and provide the reference, is this COI to add to an existing article (not creating a new Cerence article)?

If the answer to the above is "yes it's COI", how about another angle. At what point may I make other types of edits to the Nuance Communications page as a private person, if I have anything neutral to contribute with references, or even to perform reverts to defacement by others, without risking a COI? I'm trying to find the bright line and stay on the good side of it. Frazierjason (talk) 19:54, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

References

Without speaking to these specific cases, the general answer is that as long as you have anything that would impact your impartiality, you are a conflicted editor. If you have friends who work for the company, if you have significant financial dependence on the company, etc. those can all make it very hard to edit with a neutral point of view indefinitely. To this day I prefer to avoid making "significant" edits to things like my high school alma mater because I know I'm not impartial. That said, I will do things like update information but I am very careful to make sure my tone is very neutral and my sources are rock-solid. If there is anything that would be long enough that my "writing style" would show through, I'll probably put it on the talk page with an {{Request edit}} template. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:29, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the clear direction and example on how to handle contributions safely as a COI editor (via Talk page request). Frazierjason (talk) 20:50, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Help for deleted article

Hello, i was about to edit an article( Sayak Chakraborty ) and I saw it got deleted several times. And I could not understand is it got salted or not so can anyone please tell me the article is salted or not. And please tell me can I edit this article on my draft or not. Thanks Myslfsbhijit (talk) 15:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@Myslfsbhijit: It doesn't seem like it. If you can type text here, then it means you're able to create the article. However, I'd advise you to familiarize yourself with WP:YFA and create a draft through the articles for creation process so that other editors can check your draft before moving it to the mainspace. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 15:46, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ganbaruby thanks for your reply. It's really helpful

Your draft exists Draft:Sayak Chakraborty. I will add that the article you propose does not need seven references to confirm that he is an actor. Suggest you delete six. If you want to use any of those elsewhere as the draft gets longer, use there. David notMD (talk) 18:42, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Update: Draft deleted and editor Myslf indef blocked for suspected sock. David notMD (talk) 21:31, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Why do some edits are highlighted yellow?

Why do some edits are highlighted yellow? thanks, SmallPotato ^talk 23:22, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi SmallPotatoHeh333, welcome to the Teahouse. I believe you may be referring to pending changes. Those edits appear yellow in the history tab until someone reviews the revision. Regards, Zindor (talk) 23:39, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Someone is threatening me of blocking my account.

Hello. As you can see from my take page, someone is threatening me that I have done vandalism. Rather, this is not the case and I believe that they are suspects of vandalism. Please help me. Islam=peace and love (talk) 15:20, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@Islam=peace and love: has reached out to me on my talk page, as I was the one who sent him a warning. I have provided a response, please take a look on my talk page. Transcendental36 (talk) 15:30, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

You said about a senator named Fraser Anning that "He is famous for his racist, Islamophobic, and white-supremacist beliefs". I don't know whether that is true or false. What I do know, is that if this is true, you need to provide a strong source for that, preferably one of his books where he makes racist, Islamophobic and white-supremacist stances. As this is a very serious accusation to a living person. I don't believe you had bad intentions, but please, take a look and consider how this can easily come across as vandalism to other users - adding very serious accusations to a living person with no strong source to back it up. Your other comment about Buchal Kalan is positive, but unsourced. On Wikipedia, every information you add has to be backed by a source, and every information you remove has to be so because of a lack of source or more contradictory sources that need to be represented on equal grounds. LordRogalDorn (talk) 22:59, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

I'd add that citing a reliable secondary source that analyses Anning's publications would be appropriate. Contrast that with directly citing an author's work to support an assertion about the person, which would be original research. Zindor (talk) 00:09, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Fixing Dead Links

How do I fix dead links? The tutorials are kinda unclear for me. CodingCyclone (talk) 21:06, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Start by seeing if the Wayback Machine has the page. Go to http://web.archive.org/, and ask it for the URL. If you're lucky, it will have copied the page at various times. If it did, find a version that actually says what the Wikipedia article says that it says. If this doesn't work, then google/duckduckgo/whatever for the page, using its author, title or other identifying information. The website may have moved it, or changed domain name, or similar. (Redirects are cheap, but this doesn't mean that corporate or other websites like to use them.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:27, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Sources

How do I add sources that I used for an infobox? IPOokap (talk) 21:24, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi IPOokap. You can add citations to infoboxes in a similar way as you would the body of an article, just insert them after the parameter value. However it's often the case that data in infoboxes is supported by references in the main body of text, so consider using named references, which are concise way of placing multiple citations to the same source. Zindor (talk) 00:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Gita Jayanti

Gita jayanti is on the Kartika Shukla Ekadashi, which is also called the Prabodhini Ekadashi. Parbodhini means making one understand. Lord Krishna gave the Gita lessons to Arjuna to make him spiritually elightened to understand that he must fight the war, according to Kshatrita dharma, as the war became inevitable due to Duryodhana rejecting all the peace offers. Further the oldest Krishna Iemple in India in Guruvayuram in Kerala, has been observing the Gita - Jayanti day, as the Prabodhini Ekadashi, for five thousand (5,000) years. Some people have falsely claimed that Gita jayanti was in the Margashirsha Shukla Ekadashi day, due to their fertile imagination and without any basis. 107.3.130.114 (talk) 01:16, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:26, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Award significance

Hello all. I recently submitted an article at articles for creation but it was declined due to notability concerns. I also wrote a message on the draft's talk page saying I believed that the draft passed WP:ANYBIO because the person had won a Daytime Emmy Award which, I believe, satisfies criteria 1: The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times. The reviewer either ignored the message, didn't see or didn't think the award was significant enough. He didn't seem to talk about my message in his comment and only seemed focused on WP:NACTOR. Is a Daytime Emmy Award not well-known or significant? If it isn't, could you please point me to an award that is? Thanks. Pamzeis (talk) 02:12, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Pamzeis, perhaps the reviewer didn't see your message. Did you try reaching out to Robert McClenon? It's Draft:Isaac Kragten, right? Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:37, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the ping, User:Usedtobecool. Hmmm. It appears that I did make a mistake in not looking at the draft talk page. I apologize, User:Pamzeis. Go ahead and resubmit the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:50, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Request for an admin

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

This is being discussed on Lima Bean Farmer's user talk page and any one interested in commenting should do so there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:53, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Could an administrator please take a look at my unblock request? Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 00:14, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Lima Bean Farmer This is not the place for such a request. Your unblock request is open and visible to administrators. We are volunteers just like any other editor; you will need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 00:17, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

331dot, well yes, because I have addressed everything you asked me too and you still won’t unblock me. It’s been 10 days since I posted the second unblock request. I understand this is not the right place but can you see why I’m desperate at this point? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 00:25, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Lima Bean Farmer Your desperation is not going to lead to you getting unblocked any faster. There are over six million other articles you can edit while you are waiting to be unblocked from the one you can't. 331dot (talk) 00:28, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

331dot, I’m aware. If you’d like, you can check my history for the past month and a half, I have been editing a lot of other pages. However, I have addressed all of the concerns for this one in particular and believe I should be unblocked from it. If you’d like, we can talk about this further on my talk page. If not, I understand. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 00:39, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

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

HELP TO EDIT

Please I need assistance in editing this. I need someone to view if all is alright or can help do little editing on it for me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Biography Kojo Shaddy (talk) 02:50, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Content now at Draft:Shadrack Inusah. Zindor (talk) 03:04, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Kojo Shaddy. What you seem to be trying to do is create an article about someone, but trying to do so on a template page which is not where it should be done; so, please don't try to do that again. Before you go any further, please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:Notability (people). Then, if you still want to press ahead, I suggest you create a draft for an article. Once you feel the draft is ready for publication, I suggest you submit it for review to Wikipedia:Articles for creation.

Some other pages you might also want to look are Help:Your first article, Help:Referencing for beginners, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. I realize that's a lot of pages to read, but Wikipedia has many policies and guidelines and I think those pages will help understand some of the more important ones. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:05, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Should I make this article/series of articles?

If you check out my sandbox9, you’ll see my article for the 2003 Rubiks Cube World Championship. Currently there is only an article for the 1982 championship and I believe there should be an article for each world championship. Maybe also an article for each US championship. I’m not sure if these articles would be considered notable enough, so feel free to leave me your opinion on the matter. Jack Ryan Morris (talk) 03:40, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Jack Ryan Morris. The three references in your draft look very weak to me. The third is a user created wiki, and therefore not a reliable source for use in a Wikipedia article. For the same reason, you cannot use a Wikipedia article as a reference in another Wikipedia article. The first two references appear to be blogs or fan sites that are simply providing a directory of standardized championship results. Neither devotes significant coverage to this specific event. Unless you can find better sources, this topic does not appear notable to me. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:55, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Linking to multiple versions of the same page

I went to the Per Capita page, and saw that the "Board of directors" and "Fellows" sections were outdated, so I decided to try updating them. When I was adding a reference (https://percapita.org.au/about/), I noticed that there was already a reference to an older, archived version of the about page. The archived version had information about the origins of Per Capita that the current version doesn't. Is it okay to have a reference both to the current version of a webpage and to an archived version of the same webpage? 111.220.135.144 (talk) 02:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

That's perfectly fine, just make sure to not name the two references the same thing (WP:NAMEDREF). One reference should contain a link to the archive, while the other shouldn't. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 04:19, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

How do I make a citation and reference & related stuff

I found some information useful for a certain topic but I need to move the thing of the references and stuff, can anyone help me?  TijuanaHelper22 (talk) 04:37, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@TijuanaHelper22: What exactly do you mean by "move the thing of the references"? If you could give us the link to the article you're trying to edit, we can take a look at it and see what's wrong. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 04:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

It's this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_system

About the metric system, the thing is I don't wan't to disorder the small numbers of the links (I don't know the real name) because the edit is in the first paragraph.— Preceding unsigned comment added by TijuanaHelper22 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@TijuanaHelper22: The small numbers that look like this^[1] are known as footnote markers, and their numbering depends on what order the reference comes in the article, meaning that they change all the time! They'll automatically renumber themselves whenever someone adds a new reference to the article, so don't worry about it. See Help:Referencing for beginners if you're still unsure about how to add references. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:23, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Is ESPN a reliable source?

Can ESPN be used for referencing sports-persons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 06:00, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 06:11, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@ A little blue Bori Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 07:59, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Making a page

What to know when creating a new page, How to ask for help for improving it? Kommune12 (talk) 07:21, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Kommune12: I assume you meant to ask "What do I need to know to create a new article on Wikipedia?". Well, thats a though question. First of all, sucessfully creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks one can undertake on Wikipedia. It requires a good understanding of Notability, the sourcing requirements, what a reliable source is (frequently discussed sources) and the syntax. Depending on the topic, additional criteria may apply, for instance, for living persons. Because of this, there exist a handfull of guides that can help you. You may want to follow thee steps:

• First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our general notability guideline (GNG). Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
• Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
• Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
• Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
• Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
• Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
• Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request at the Teahouse or the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:05, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Is PeoplePill a reliable source?

Please tell if peoplepill website can be used for citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 07:11, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Editingwork8: no, because it apepars to be largely user-generated. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:09, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt mobil Ok, thank you.

Is Independent site reliable?

Can it be used for referencing sportspersons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 08:03, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Editingwork8: I assume you meant to ask "Is The Independent a reliable source?" yes it is. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@ Victor Schmidt mobil Yes, exactly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 08:14, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft:United Kingdom internal market

I am creating an article Draft:United Kingdom internal market, but I am waiting for the Internal Market Bill has passed before publishing it and need a second opinion to ensure my article meets Wikipedia’s WP:NPOV & WP:SIGCOV.

I would also like someone external to help edit the page, as having input from a variety of editors other than me will help to improve and expand the article and fill in areas that I may have missed. ChefBear01 (talk))

ChefBear01, I'd ask Britishfinance to take a look, but they seem to have disappeared for now. You can try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Economics. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:06, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

ChefBear01 Please note, we had an article called “United Kingdom Internal Market Bill” and the name was changed to Internal Market Bill on 4 October. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 08:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

ChefBear01, I wish you the best of luck, I'll give it a look soon!. Benjamin Borg (talk)

Requested articles

I want to request pages. Trndsettr4fire (talk) 02:06, 15 October 2020 (UTC) Trndsettr4fire (talk) 02:06, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Trndsettr4fire: You can make a request at WP:RA. RudolfRed (talk) 02:20, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

You created Draft:Victor Hornbein but put very little content in it before submitting it for review, so it was declined. I suggest you learn more about creating articles before resubmitting. As RudolfRed noted, you can request that an editor create an article about a topic that interests you, but there are so many requests and so few editors that undertake other peoples' pet project ideas, so that is likely to not be useful. Lastly, please ask for help in only one place. David notMD (talk) 11:46, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

See the links provided below at HELP TO EDIT David notMD (talk) 11:47, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Problematic groups given status of religion on wikipedia?

Was trying to edit Jammu, so tought of having a discussion first at talk page. The foundational teachings via translations of Old testament, New testament and Quran are problematic since they inform GOD forgives. This raises a big problem.

The act of forgiving ignorant people do as they don't realize which choice is perfect. Thereby in ignorance they choose a choice that is wrong. To forgive at first a person has to be wrongfully angry or resentful about someone. Without which a morally valid reason to forgive does not arise. It is the ignorant who wrong, and they eventually find a morally valid reason to forgive.

GOD is perfect. Without doing a wrong, the need to forgive does not arise. So, how will GOD who's perfect, all knowing (even knows past, present and future), and pious be able to forgive without at first doing a wrong? The situation for GOD to be able to forgive while being perfect, all knowing, and pious is perhaps impossible, since at that time he wouldn't wrong?

While such is the case, how can old testament, new testament, or Quran be a valid teaching by GOD? Without they being valid teaching, how do they be considered as a religion itself?

If not a religion, isn't it a moral duty of every human on earth to remove these teachings? Highlighting certain topics on the page Jammu is Undue?

If correct, how appropriately highlight the same at Jammu talk and clean the page? Gub Sub Dub (talk) 09:03, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Jammu is about a city, not sure how the above applies. WP:RNPOV and WP:RSPSCRIPTURE may be of some help concerning how WP approaches the topic of faith/religion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:15, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

​Our article on Jammu contains no discussion of theology, so I can't say I see what you're referring to. In general though, we just summarize what reliable scholarly theological sources say. – Thjarkur (talk) 09:18, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Looking at your contributions, I see no evidence that you have edited any article. Are you asking about a different article, and perhaps were editing while not logged in? David notMD (talk) 11:15, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

​"I see no evidence that you have edited any article." I don't wish to have edit wars. So, am preparing. Is that a problem at wiki? I wish to take time and understand policies by senior editors here at wiki before editing the articles. Why waste other's time? So, thought why not at first learn wiki fully by reading/asking etc. Fully in the sense, fully with regards to the context in concern. Gub Sub Dub (talk) 11:30, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

​"so I can't say I see what you're referring to" wiki is listing certain groups under religion. The word religion comes from religare, which is close to word yoga, which comes from the root word yuj. Yuj means union. Which means a follower has to be 100% in union with GOD's will. While the groups follow teachings with above problem, how list them under religion? Gub Sub Dub (talk) 11:37, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

What have what you consider GOD's will to do with the WP-article Jammu? You seem to be on a WP:Original research road. The WP-article Jammu is meant to be a summary of WP:RS about Jammu. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:57, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Gub Sub Dub Yes, that is a problem at wiki. You started by writing that you were trying to edit Jammu. But you didn't. Then, you started expressing your thoughts on religion here at Teahouse. This is a place to post questions on how to work on Wikipedia articles. David notMD (talk) 12:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

In their defense, Jammu is WP:BLUELOCKed, so "Was trying to edit" is quite plausible. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:38, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

David notMD "You started by writing that you were trying to edit Jammu. But you didn't." to edit without edit wars a discussion is better? How didn't? Having a discussion wrt editing is trying to edit. Gråbergs Gråa Sång "You seem to be on a WP:Original research road." that's common sense? How can someone who's considered perfect do wrong? Without choosing a wrong choice how can GOD give up what he already decided to do? Without giving up what's decided, how can GOD actually do the act of forgiving? A teaching that is wrong cannot be considered religious? Followers not following religious teachings are not religious? Where does OR come here? It is common sense? WP:COMMON???

I can understand you all have lot of work to do. So, I will try and co-operate and not argue. Kindly let me know what I should do in here if you all have understood my problem. I have highlighted the background wrt why I find the article Jammu problematic with regards to demographics. Gub Sub Dub (talk) 02:39, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

To me most of what you write seems wildely off-topic from the question "What should be included on the WP-article Jammu." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:47, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång while I find certain groups problematic under demographics section under religion using WP:COMMON, how as per you I should start at the talk page? How without giving the background information make readers realize the problem?Gub Sub Dub (talk) 11:34, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

If you have WP:RS about Jammu that states/indicates/whatever that groups under demographics (in the article) should not be there, then you make a post at Talk:Jammu like "I propose this change to this section based on these WP:RS." Take the time to read WP:Edit requests. If you don't have any WP:RS about Jammu to support your position, you are wasting your and other peoples time with such a proposal.

Fwiw, I see 4 religions mentioned at the section in question, and I am strongly convinced that you will not be able to get other editors to agree that excluding any of those is WP:COMMONSENSE, so I suggest that you don't try. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:17, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, is there a way on wikipedia whereby one can suggest why concerned articles need editing apart from reaching the talk page? This may help knowledgeable editors to edit the main article based on the background information that one gives?Gub Sub Dub (talk) 02:52, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Yep, plenty, however Talk:Jammu is the place to start if that's the article you want to discuss. For example, article talkpages often includes links to WP:WikiProjects at the top, you can try their talkpages. Or, for questions like "Should this source be used in this article in this way?" there's WP:RSN. More options at WP:Noticeboards. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:43, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Help

hello, i would like you to en light me more on how to cite sources correctly using footnotes Sunday William Akiiki (talk) 12:16, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Sunday William Akiiki, hello! See WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:26, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Sunday William Akiiki. You might also wish to visit WP:REFBEGIN for further guidance on inserting references. Our two editing tools have a very obvious 'Cite' button which you will be using. For information on the type of citations to use, see This page. Good luck. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:23, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

How to cite?

how do i cite Tubalover17 (talk) 14:17, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Tubalover17, See Help:Referencing_for_beginners S Philbrick(Talk) 14:18, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Cleaning up the old sandbox

Please, I´m trying to use again my sandbox. I created an article and now there is a redirection. How can I clean up my sandbox? Please let me know the proper template to use. Thanks a lot --DamAzul (talk) 11:04, 15 October 2020 (UTC) DamAzul (talk) 11:04, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, DamAzul. When you go to your sandbox and it redirects you, you will see a link at the top saying "Redirected from User:DamAzul/sandbox. If you pick on that link it will take you back to the sandbox, and you can Edit it in the normal way. I don't know what you mean about "the proper template". --ColinFine (talk) 12:10, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

ColinFine,

My supposition is they think some template is needed to request removal of the redirect but if they follow your advice the. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:23, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

How i can answer edit requests

How i can answer edit requests if someone ask to edit requests on semi protected pages. Adsmohali (talk) 14:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Adsmohali: As long as you are autoconfirmed, you may answer semi-protected edit requests. See WP:ERREQ on how to do so. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 14:38, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

why my edited pages won't get approved

 Sivasaamy (talk) 10:09, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sivasaamy. If you are talking about the files that you have been illegally uploading to Commons, you have been asked twice at your user talk page to stop doing so. If you are talking about something else, you will need to explain what. --ColinFine (talk) 12:08, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

This editor has since been blocked on Wikimedia Commons for repeatedly uploading improperly licenced images. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:17, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

WW2

I would enjoy some help on the Topic "Nazi, Germany and its Branches although I could do it alone I want a extra set of hands to help. Panzer Vll (talk) 18:13, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Panzer Vll: Wikipedia has quite a large number of articles on Nazi Germany and the second world war, and probably a lot of people who are maintaining those articles; if you want to edit any of them (or indeed any Wikipedia article), remember to always support your additions with reliable sources. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 18:19, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Article Correction, Specifically Eisenhower_Tunnel

I'm a First Timer. How does one have an article corrected, anonymously? The Eisenhower_Tunnel article is very informative but does contain some factual errors.

Specifically Note [5] "Another feature of the retrofit monitors truck weight—a safe speed for each truck on the 7% grades and curves just outside the tunnel is calculated and displayed for each driver.[5]" has not been correct for about 10 years.

The line just needs to be deleted. I would prefer to avoid any politics state or trucking lobby by being anonymous.

Thanks for direction! MtnManiac11kft (talk) 16:27, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@MtnManiac11kft: If you are not comfortable making the change yourself, then start a discussion on the article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 16:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

If your User name is not your true name (and I doubt your parents named you MtnManiac11kft), then you are in effect anonymous. David notMD (talk) 18:57, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Eisenhower Tunnel. Usual advice is not change or remove text if there is a reference. In this case the reference (not dated, archived at Wayback in 2008) states that such a system exists. Unless you can find a newer ref that it has since been removed, do not make the change, even if you have personal knowledge that the signage is gone. David notMD (talk) 19:09, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Pictures/Images

Hello - How do I create a new article and then add pictures to it? JZsparkle (talk) 16:06, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@JZsparkle: See Help:Your first article and Wikipedia:Images. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 16:47, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@JZsparkle, Coupled with the optimistic response Ganbaruby already gave you, you basically may need to understand prerequisites of creating an article. The reply above may give you the impression that it’s an easy task, which although true is only easy when a few prerequisites are understood sufficiently.

It’s a tad bit complex in the sense that you need to understand a couple of policies/rules/guidelines before creating an article, examples are as follows; you need to understand how to determine notability, how to identify reliable sources, how to read these sources summarize them & put them in your own words when creating the article, how to use neutral wordings, basic understanding of WP:MOS, & a host of other policies.

It’s not an easy task but isn’t necessarily hard either. Like they already told you, you first want to begin by clicking on this link. Celestina007 (talk) 17:06, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@JZsparkle: Two small, but important things for you to try to remember: Don't mark your edits as minor edits unless they are genuinely just tiny changes to fix spelling, grammar or punctuation. And please leave a short 'WP:EDITSUMMARY to explain what changes you've added. This for example, was definitely not a minor edit. It also had no edit summary to explain the change, nor did you include a reference to support your addition. These are all things we learn when we start out. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 19:19, 15 October 2020 (UTC)  

My own article

How can I build a profile in wikipedia Miguelo A. Sanchez (talk) 16:05, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Miguelo A. Sanchez, hello & welcome. Wikipedia does not encourage the act of writing an autobiography (see WP:AUTO) because it would be difficult for you to write about yourself in a neutral non promotional manner. You may read WP:NPOV to see the detailed explanation there. Wikipedia also has a very high bar set for notability, note that notability and fame/popularity are not synonymous hence one can be famous but not notable & on Wikipedia we allow only biographical articles on notable persons, we consider someone notable when at the very least multiple reliable media discusses the person significantly. See WP:GOLDENRULE for a summarized explanation. Celestina007 (talk) 16:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Miguelo A. Sanchez, to put that a little differently, Wikipedia is not the kind of website that encourages people to build profiles about themselves. Indeed, Wikipedia does not have "profiles" at all, but rather encyclopedic articles about notable subjects. And Wikipedia strongly discourages people from writing about themselves. —teb728 t c 20:06, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

New editor subject Liana Mendoza

hi, i got a private message from one of you and would love the help from an experienced editor to publish my first 2605:E000:1F01:922E:78C1:C786:70F2:2833 (talk) 20:01, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

You'll probably have more luck if you start the article yourself. But first make sure the subject is notable. See WP:NOTABILITY. Then, visit WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE and Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure. And create an account. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:06, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Help with edits

Hi,

I'm helping a friend to update his wikipedia page. However, it does not let me save a lot of the information without references. This information is coming straight from him about his life, so it is a little frustrating we can't correct the information on his wikipedia page. How do we change this? Sda808 (talk) 19:56, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sda808: It can be frustrating, but we have to use published sources as the basis for information, not hearsay. Otherwise anyone could change anything and say they were told that info. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:03, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

The requirement for published sources is because we've been burnt on unreferenced biographical claims before. That's precisely why we have stricter standards for it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 20:10, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Self-Directed Learning

I studied with a student of Malcolm Knowles who first used this term decades ago. On Wikipedia it redirects to Autodidact which is entirely different. Google the two terms you'll see what I mean.

I tried to bring this to the attention of Wikipedia by posting a suggested article. Here's my question: would I have had better luck starting here? Yes, I have a bit of a bias. Another question comes to mind, doesn't nearly everyone who posts on Wikipedia have a bit of a bias if they are taking the time to share in an article? How much bias is too much?

Thanks for any help you can give me. I should have asked years ago. Hurry I'm 73, running out of runway. :-) JohnSWren (talk) 19:12, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@JohnSWren: You might be better off adding this self-directed learning info as a section to Malcolm Knowles. I see you're not a new user - why not try to write it yourself? If you're not comfortable with that, you can also propose changes on the Talk:Malcolm Knowles page. Then you could put a redirect at the top of Autodidacticism to that new section. There are already three redirect hatnotes at the top of the Autodidacticism page now. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:14, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

BNYS

Why BNYS page on wikipedia is removed ?? There were so many informations on the BNYS page, but suddenly I found that page was missing, no trace about that. Please reUpload the information page of BNYS. Thanks Sumit845401 (talk) 13:57, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Sumit845401, If you are talking about:

Bachelor of Naturopathy and Yogic Science

There was an article that it was deleted as G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) on 21 August 2020 S Philbrick(Talk) 14:21, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Sumit845401 Wikipedia does not have "information pages" that merely provide information. Wikipedia has articles that summarize what independent reliable sources state about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 14:24, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, from my experience, anyone claiming they're just "providing information" is trying to use Wikipedia to advertise. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 20:16, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

New Business and SEO

Hello!

So I have been running a business for a couple a years myself as a side job. Now I am looking to register my business and create a legitimate website and appearance on the internet itself. At the moment if one googles "Suspenceful Recordings" it doesn't even recognize the query and only shows results for "Suspenseful Recordings" (with two s's in 'suspenseful'). I'm assuming that having a Wikipedia page would help with my issue, as I have also begun the process of adding my business to Google Maps and registering a Google Business Profile.

The issue with creating a Wikipedia page is that I'm not sure hot "notable" my page would be. My only sources would be my own website which is basically a portfolio of music and contact information. Also my business has Social Media accounts, but quoting from the wizard page: "The topic of an article must already be covered in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. These include academic journals, books, newspapers, magazines, and websites with a reputation for fact checking. Social media, press releases or corporate/professional profiles do not qualify."

Am I just not able to create a page because it's not "notable" enough by lack of sources? Suspenceful Recordings (talk) 19:55, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Suspenceful Recordings: You hit it on the head. Without media coverage of your business, it will be impossible for anyone to write a successful article. You're better off focusing on social media sites where you control the content. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:09, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Furthermore, Suspenceful Recordings, SEO is one form of promotion, and promotion of all kinds is forbidden in Wikipedia. A Wikipedia article is not for the benefit of its subject. --ColinFine (talk) 21:18, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Changing the "Hanguk" redirect

Hanguk redirects here to the Korea article, but it should redirect to the Korean language article. Can anyone help in managing that change? --Kent Dominic·(talk) 08:20, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Kent Dominic: The term Hanguk seems to refer to Korea as a whole (Names of Korea), not the language, which seems to be hanguk-eo (Korean language#Names). ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 08:57, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

You beat me to it, see also Korea#Etymology. I'm not saying WP is necessarily right on these, but I'd try to discuss it at Talk:Korea with a "discussion at" notice at Talk:Korean language. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:01, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: and @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Both of you are somewhat right from a transliteral POV. "Hanguk" is a root word that relates to Korea in a terminological sense, not "as a whole." E.g. Hanguk-eo refers to the Korean language (lit. "Korean term(s)"); hanguk-saram refers to Korean people, hanguk-chukku refers to Korean soccer, etc. From a semantics standpoint, hanguk is not a stand-alone morpheme as used in the Korean language; it must be compounded as indicated above. In pedagogical usage, however, hanguk regularly functions as a shorthand for hanguk-eo in reference to spoken Korean language/terms. So, pedagogically speaking, hanguk typically is used when contrasting Hangul, which relates solely to the featural alphabet of the Korean language. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 10:49, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

You may very well be right. My advice still stands. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:39, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

It sounds to me like it should either be a dab page with entries for the various compounds (the more complete solution) or redirect to Korean language (might be what more people are searching for with that term). I'd prefer the former. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:24, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

How I can make request to remove protection of protected pages

How I can make request to remove protection of protected pages. Adsmohali (talk) 14:35, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Adsmohali: You may file a request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection under the "Current requests for reduction in protection level" header. Be prepared to have a very good rationale, however, as most pages are blocked for a reason. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 14:40, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Adsmohali, protected pages can be edited by extended-confirned users, meaning registered users who have made 500 edits whose accounts are at least 30 days old. If you are not yet extended-confirmed, you should make edit requests on the article's Talk page.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:56, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Article improvement suggestion - Draft:Certified Professional Coder

I am trying to create an article for this professional certification Draft:Certified_Professional_Coder and I have tried template search for certification, exam and credentials and not able to locate any related/relevant template.

Need suggestions (not review on this page) on what exactly I should do to improve it further. Jamesinhere (talk) 21:30, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Jamesinhere, Wikipedia does not have templates for writing specific types of articles. Usually an editor can simply follow the structure of a similar type of article when writing a new article.

The most important thing to be aware of is that Wikipedia has a very strong stance against plagiarism. This means that you cannot copy material into a Wikipedia article without rewriting it in your own words. By looking at various information sources on your topic, you may develop a sense of how the same thing may be said in different ways.

Also note that Wikipedia is not a how-to manual. Be sure to include subtopics such as history, development and current issues in your article, where relevant.--Quisqualis (talk) 00:19, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Afc Decline - Draft:Hanan Friedman - Please guide to solve this issues in it.

Afc Draft Draft:Hanan Friedman is declined, I have tried hard to understand the reason given by the reviewer but I am not able to find any specific reason. Therefore, I need help to figure out the problem and solution in this draft. I am open to remove/modify in it. Vsp.manu (talk) 08:01, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

The specific reason is given by SL93: your biographee does not appear to satify WP:Notability (people). The draft has five sources. One is the biographee's company and one is a PR service; neither of these is reliable. I took a quick look at the other three. The Bloomberg one has a total of zero (0) sentences about him. The Globes one is trivial. By contrast to any of the other four, the Haaretz one is a good start. Got any others that go comparably deep? Incidentally, I'm most intrigued by your list of contributions. How is Hanan Friedman related to your other interests? -- Hoary (talk) 12:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

An even simpler approach. Quick question: there are literally hundreds of thousands of Bank CEOs across the world. What makes Hanan Friedman notable for inclusion at WP? Simply being a CEO of a bank is not notable enough. What you have written is a biography; a resume for Friedman. Not a notable inclusion for an encyclopedia. Finding sources that mention his name does not make him notable. Establishing a notable connection found at WP:Notability (people) will then give you the reason to find the associative sources to back the claims for notable inclusion. Maineartists (talk) 13:13, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

User:Vsp.manu - I'm interested in how you decided to work on this particular bank CEO, since you aren't the original author of the draft. Did you read a news article about him and then look in Wikipedia to see if there was an article and find a declined draft? Did you go searching through draft space for declined drafts that needed improvement (just as some reviewers go searching through draft space to look for declined drafts that need reviewing)? Or did Friedman's secretary call you? What got you interested in a draft that you didn't start? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:20, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Dead links

I was wanting to check out maps of the final battle lines for WWI. The main page lists 2 animated maps, but when clicking on them the website hosting the links says the pages no longer exist. Since the page is semi-protected I'm not sure if I have authorization to remove them. So now what? JoeWiki1969 (talk) 14:10, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

JoeWiki1969, can you provide a link to the article in question? I think there are a number of articles about WWI S Philbrick(Talk) 14:19, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

It's the main page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I#Animated_maps — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeWiki1969 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Contact us

 – {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:06, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I contacted a seasoned editor who referred me to you. Something happened to the page between last night and today in the character background section that makes no sense and removed and altered a lot of content. There’s no edit in the history of the page that indicates how this happened. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 15:30, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Samurai Kung fu Cowboy, better? Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

How does Wikipedia keep certain article properties up to date?

For example the Alexa rank in an infobox: is it manually updated, kept daily up to date by a bot, updated every X days etc? I'm wondering which things are specifically updated by editors, and for which things there are bots that do it? QuantumWasp (talk) 04:29, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

IMO thats manually updated from time to time, but you coul also write a bot for it. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:06, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

QuantumWasp, the Alexa example is actually a fairly complicated one; see the discussion we're currently having at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#RfC:_Alexa_Rankings_in_Infoboxes, which will likely result in the Alexa rankings being removed.

To address your question more broadly, it's a mix, and many things that could be potentially be done by bots are not yet done by bots, but more and more is becoming automated over time. Wikipedia:Bots#Examples lists some things that bots do. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 08:30, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

about a website

Just wanted to ask if anybody could answer, if the site hypebeast.com is a reliable site since i've seen a few articles in wiki that use it. EraKook (talk) 18:00, 15 October 2020 (UTC) EraKook (talk) 18:00, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello EraKook! Never heard of it, but it seems to be popular for citing. Per their aboutpage [10] I'd say this site is for selling clothes, and not a very good source. I suggest you ask this question at WP:RSN. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:36, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Yes I've actually seen 2 or 3 articles that have been using this site as a source but whenever I check it seems promotional. I read that Wikipedia does not approve of promotional sites. I wanted to confirm because when I'll be adding sources myself I want to make sure they are reliable, therefore I asked this. Thank you for the suggestion. -EraKook (talk) 09:46, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

EraKook FWIW - I used it once as a source and linked to its article, but noticed that its article was recently deleted and salted when my link turned red. See Hypebeast for the full troubled history. It is a somewhat promotional site, so it depends on what you're sourcing. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:05, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Thats great to know thank you very much! Ill go look into that -EraKook (talk) 09:47, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

How to write a good reception section for video games

I'm unclear on how to write a good reception, whether just being writing a paragraph or the entire section. From what I know right now, its a summary of what the critics are saying, and if multiple sources come to a consensus, its notable to include if cited correctly. I'm writing on Super Mario Bros. 35, and this is what I want to add:

Major complaints from critics come from the repetition of early levels. Players only start of with level 1-1 unlocked, and unlock more throughout gameplay, causing many players being forced to play through the beginning levels. Zachary Cuevas from iMore states how unlocking new levels is unclear, with Chris Carter from Destructoid writing how not enough players are choosing different levels before a match, which leads to unbalanced repetition.[2] Chris button from GameSpot claims how the repetition creates a lack of pacing and little intensity, but Special Battle is a good competitive alternative.[3]

Could someone review this or give me some pointers on a good reception? Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 14:44, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Le Panini, I'd recommend asking this question at WT:VG. (Others here are definitely welcome to chime in as well, but I think your odds of getting a helpful reply there are higher.) Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:03, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Le Panini, I made some copy edits to the paragraph you added here. Using past tense was one issue; see MOS:PAST.

I don't know enough about the game to be sure of this, but I also worry a bit about excessive detail—saying critics felt the early levels were repetitive, as is done in the paragraph above it, might be sufficient, without explaining exactly how and including the same sentiment from multiple critics (we don't want to be repetitive ourselves haha). {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 08:57, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Agh, past-tense. didn't even THINK about that. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 11:39, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

References saying something else and articles saying something else

Hello, I have been trying to edit three semi protected pages for some days but I am not able to do this because I am not an AutoConfirmand user and participate on articles talk page but didn't get any response,that's why I need some help

Recently I saw some wrong information on the page about my clan(Banaphar) and the heroes belongs to the clan (Alha and Udal of mahoba).The article said that Banaphar is of mixed background through giving a reference of Alf Hiltebeitel book but let me tell everyone that Alf Hiltebeitel clearly said that Banaphar (banafar)is a Rajput tribe and please check the link of his book:-https://books.google.co.in/books?id=MMFdosx0PokC&pg=PA304&dq=banaphar+ralput&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwibtaTUurjsAhV4zTgGHe0kCvwQ6AEwAXoECAMQAg#v=onepage&q=banaphar%20ralput&f=false and https://books.google.co.in/books?id=MMFdosx0PokC&pg=PA238&dq=banafar+rajput&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiDt87mu7jsAhVoyTgGHUZfDHUQ6AEwAHoECAMQAg#v=onepage&q=banafar%20rajput&f=false Is And I'm saying all this because I'm myself a Banaphar Rajput.And this same take is in Alha saying that he is from mixed descent and And if I get them in the mixed background, then why is it written below that 'Describes Ahir Braveray in Medieval Period'?and without any citation, Isn't it was biased or not fair. So I kindly request please correct this on all pages. Sumit banaphar (talk) 06:38, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

You say that you didn't get any response. The only mention I see of Hiltebeitel on the talk page dates from 2011. Later questions (which don't mention Hiltebeitel) have got responses. You also say "I'm saying all this because I'm myself a Banaphar Rajput." This or a similar assertion is likely to reduce people's interest in whatever else you have to say. -- Hoary (talk) 08:24, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand what you want to say but still I think you say why people didn't see it before. What does that matter,I just say that the reference kept saying something else and the article kept saying something else.So please fix it or either allow me to edit it.Sumit banaphar (talk) 09:13, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

You say you have "participate[d] on articles talk page but didn't get any response". I don't see "Sumit banaphar" there. Are you perhaps confusing "Sumit banaphar" with "Liger1203"? I ask because "Liger1203" did ask a similar question. Aha! I see that both names appear at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ultimate survi. -- Hoary (talk) 09:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sumit banaphar: You might want to take a look at page 163 of your book. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 10:01, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sumit banaphar. Is this about your request at Talk:Udal of Mahoba? It was declined because the other user did not understand what change you wanted. You should request something specific like change "xxxxx" to "yyyyy" or insert "yyyyy" after "zzzzz". —teb728 t c 10:08, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Ganbaruby!,Yes, I see and they are talking about their mother who was Ahir but her father was a Rajput, ,but the article has made the entire clan of mixed background, isn't it stupid. And he clearly said that Banaphar is a rajput tribe see here[11]and yes teb728 i did it but after that I didn't get any response so that's why I came here. And yeah sir I am part of that sock puppetry investigation but I didn't found not guilty So please don't taunt me.

@Sumit banaphar: The book literally says "Udal (and the rest of the Banaphars)". The page before also mentions "mixed-caste Ksatriya-Ahir identity of the Banaphars". Do not continue to argue here; file an edit request at the respective talk page, or alternatively, see if anyone at at Wikipedia:WikiProject India can help. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:07, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

When does a page become live?

Hi I've started a new page, Gerad KIte, today but when will it be available to view as when I search Gerad Kite it shows no results? I have clicked 'publish'

Thanks Gerad Kite (talk) 12:50, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Gerad Kite Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You edited your user page, which is not article space and not searchable by search engines. It is meant as a place for you to tell the Wikipedia community about yourself in the context of your Wikipedia editing or use. It is not a place for you to tell anything and everything about yourself.

In general, Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. That's what social media is for. Please review the autobiography policy. If you truly feel that you meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person and receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources, an independent editor will eventually take note of your career and choose to write about you. 331dot (talk) 13:04, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

"Publish changes" should be understood to mean simply "save changes ", it does not mean "publish this to the encyclopedia". 331dot (talk) 13:06, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I did write a list, but there was an edit conflict. The above summed it up, but I would like to add that you should look at Wikipedia:Your First Article to learn how to properly site and reference. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:12, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

And might I add, was the article just deleted? Is there a courtesy link? Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:14, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Le Panini: 331dot has deleted User:Gerad Kite after typing his response. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:41, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

...and I have just deleted Category:Published articles also as 'unambiguous promotion/advertising'. This editor would benefit from learning how and why Wikipedia works before trying to promote themselves here, as this is not what we volunteer our time for. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:46, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Is it illegal to add informative links on wikipedia?

I don't know why the admins always remove my external link which I add on any specific page which is totally relevant to the topic of that page. Is it called spamming to add informative and relevant links to Wikipedia? If yes, then the whole Wikipedia is a spam. They always say that I am advertising with the links...Did I run ads on your page without your permission? Okay, I got you...you don't want that a couple of users are derived from wikipedia to any other site...GREAT! You guys should remove the option of external links then. Keep up the good work of removing relevant and informative links from wiki pages. Yogesh1497 (talk) 12:25, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

There's always a reason for something being removed. What is the link that was removed? We could tell you what the reason is instead of jumping to conclusions. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 12:51, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Courtesy link: GEMS Education. Yogesh1497, the external link you provided is not relevant to the topic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but GEMS Education is a system of schools; 9 GEMS is a educational philosophy used by GIIS. GIIS does not seem to be part of GEMS education as it's not listed on its website. Even if relevant, we want to keep external link sections to a minimum, and often an official website is enough. You may want to review our external links guideline and see if your link still qualifies. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:55, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

The user would probably find that Global Indian International School is the article they are looking for adding information to. But given the article starts with a warning about it being an "Advertisement" this may mean that there is a concerted effort to add more relatively unimportant self promoting content. Koncorde (talk) 13:00, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

There have been comments that the article Global Indian International School is promotional at least as far back as 2012. -- Hoary (talk) 13:34, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay, what about the editing done by me on this page List of schools in Japan? Is GIIS not an international school that you don't want to be in the list of International schools (not certified by Japanese Government) & what about the external link added by me on Elementary schools in Japan. Most of the pages have a couple of external links which looks like advertisement why don't you remove them all? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_school#External_links External links Don't you guys think the external link included here [| International School Information] is advertising? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yogesh1497 (talk • contribs) 15:24, 13 October 2020 (UTC) --Yogesh1497 (talk) 15:31, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

What about your editing, you ask, Yogesh1497. Well, since you ask, it suggests to me that your objective here is advertising. Why don't we/I remove everything that looks like advertising? Because there are only so many hours in the day (and of course there are more enjoyable ways of spending them than removing advertisements). -- Hoary (talk) 22:10, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Sad to hear that there are Wikipedia moderators like Hoary who give more importance to enjoying their time rather than removing all spam links from pages. I can smell corruption on this digital platform already...LOL! Keep up the good work and enjoy your hours.--Yogesh1497 (talk) 10:07, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia works because volunteers apply rules which protect the quality of the encyclopedia. Volunteers in their own unpaid time. So if you see a link that is spam, then please remove it. Spam is when links promote specific businesess or products - which has been the general problem with your additions. Links to business sites that are not the central topic of articles. The external links at International_school#External_links are not spam because they do not promote a specific business. Instead they are external sites not pushing a particular business where people can get further information on the topic.OsFish (talk) 06:43, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't have a phone, and I enjoy popping in an out. Just like how people spend so much time on social media, for now, this is my social media. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:52, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

why my edited pages won't get approved

 Sivasaamy (talk) 10:09, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Because many of the files you uploaded at Commons are not public domain. And today you did the same, under the sock name User:Messi leo00010. Coldcreation (talk) 12:04, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Both user accounts have been blocked on Commons - the second for sockpuppetry. I have indeffed the sockpuppet account here, and given a 1 month block to Sivasaamy. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:00, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

photo upload and copyright confusion

Hey there! I'm working for a semi-public figure and have been asked to upload a new photo of them to their page. However, the photo we have was taken by a professional photographer. This photographer did not give direct copyright transfer over to the person or to our team, hence we cannot upload the photo (as I understand). However, this photographer did confirm through emails that the public figure I work for can use these images for his own promotional and publicity purposes. Does this make him the owner of the photos now? Copyright is confusing and I want to make sure I'm following the rules. It'd be easy enough to send the photographer a release form or ask for him to send us one, but I don't want to make my team have to do that if not necessary.

Any advice or will we have to email the photographer? Thanks! Wrenhawke (talk) 08:58, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Wrenhawke Since Aaron Devor is a living person, Wikipedia will not use a photo of him unless the copyright owner (i.e. the photographer) licenses it for reuse by anyone for anything (including commercial use and derivative works). If this photographer does not want to grant that, how about if you take a photo of him; then you could license it. —teb728 t c 09:13, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

BTW Wrenhawke, since you are working for him, you need to read and comply with WP:COI and WP:PAID. —teb728 t c 09:24, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Copyright is indeed confusing. The simplest solution I know is that either you take a picture yourself, or the subject takes a selfie, and then you/they upload it here: [12]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:24, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Ed Gold hopes to write an article soon for Signpost illustrating the frustrations, and eventual success, in getting a decent photo into the article about him. Meanwhile, chill out with his other stunning photos, including these [13] on Commons. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 15:06, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

ccpo

Do you know what end headache — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngutyana Sisipho (talk • contribs) 05:48, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

You're asking in the wrong place. This place is for asking about using Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 05:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

ibuprofen will help. The amount of tablets you take depends on your body weight (being 1-4), so look up a chart online. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:16, 16 October 2020 (UTC) _{If you believed this, don't listen to it. It's a mere joke.}

Oh - I thought this was an editing question! To stop headaches, one simply turns off one's computer so one can't keep on editing Wikipedia. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:31, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Le Panini: I know you're trying to be helpful, but we really try to stick to the purpose of the Teahouse, which is to help people with editing and using Wikipedia. Also, very specifically, Wikipedia does not give medical advice. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:11, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

How old?

How old can you use wikipedia WikiTime45 (talk) 23:39, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

WikiTime45 Does Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors help? Or are you asking if there is an upper age limit? David notMD (talk) 01:47, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Technically, you can be at any age. However, you need to be mature on Wikipedia, if you are immature or act rudely towards others you may get banned or blocked on certain pages. Hope this helps! :) Toad62 (talk) 19:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

And if by "use" you mean "read" — which, after all is why most people come here, then the answer is clearly "as soon as you can". Adding to existing articles and, especially, creating new ones is much harder and should be approached, slowly, as soon as you feel confident to do so. By-and-large new editors are welcomed if they come with the intention of improving Wikipedia — and especially so if they are female. There is a huge imbalance at present towards contributors being male. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 14:03, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with the above on two counts: nobody has any idea of what the gender balance is like – and we definitely shouldn't be encouraging people to read Wikipedia until they are old enough to understand source criticism. --bonadea contributions talk 14:14, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Fair points but I'm pretty sure I read about the gender imbalance in a Signpost article, although I appreciate these aren't WP:RS, just opinions. Given that WikiTime45 has managed to set up a account and worked out how to post here, I don't think we need to make "understand source criticism" a further barrier. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 15:47, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Not so much a barrier as a minimum requirement. Obviously impossible to enforce, but it would be irresponsible not to work towards it. --bonadea contributions talk 06:37, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Bonadea I found my source for my assertion, which doesn't make it true but does mean it is shared by others: Wikipedia:Systemic_bias#Women_are_underrepresented Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 14:58, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I have read that before. That changes nothing – we still don't know. But that kind of patronising crap (the article text, not your post) really makes me sad. --bonadea contributions talk 15:05, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

You can pretty much read it once you can. For editing, as long as you research your edits and remain mature, there shouldn't be any problems. Benjamin Borg (Talk) 17:30, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

New to Wiki

Can anyone give me a walk-through of a page creation? 148.77.75.154 (talk) 18:02, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:Your first article, WP:The Wikipedia Adventure and WP:AFC (do that one last) are all highly recommended for newcomers. Giraffer ^munch 18:09, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

You also asked at the Help Desk. Please only ask in one place. RudolfRed (talk) 18:19, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Editing hidden category?

Hello -- I'm trying to edit a page which has had a template applied for 'advertorial' and part of it is in 6 hidden categories. Can I edit that bit? I have changed my user prefs, but nothing's happened. I still can't edit it. CSpe4ke (talk) 17:19, 16 October 2020 (UTC) CSpe4ke (talk) 17:19, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, CSpe4ke. Are you talking about removing the advert tag at the Lucy Newlyn article? Zindor (talk) 17:46, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I would like to update the article by taking out the broken links, links which seem promotional and correcting the tone where necessary. The first reference is broken as Lucy Newlyn has retired from Oxford University. I would like to put in a link to her emeritus page at St Edmund Hall which is factual. https://www.seh.ox.ac.uk/people/lucy-newlyn

I have made a couple of changes but I can't edit the references as they are hidden. I have changed my user prefs to show hidden categories. But I see there was previously some mischief/vandalism on her page so maybe that explains the extra security.

I won't take the tag down until a more experienced editor judges that page conforms to Wikipedia's guidelines. CSpe4ke (talk) 17:56, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

CSpe4ke, the advert template itself places that page into at least two hidden categories, one being Category:Articles with a promotional tone. The only way to remove the page from those categories is to discard the template. The other templates on the page might also be populating categories. In short, the categories aren't directly written into the page's source code, that's why you're unable to edit them.

That's a good decision not to remove the tag, and I'm sure an experienced editor will remove it when it is no longer necessary.

I'll take a look at the page and see how I can help you. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 18:10, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Zindor, thanks so much <3 I can and have edited the page. I hope my changes are an improvement. I've tried to explain my thinking at each change. The only bit I can't edit is the references. There are some broken and outdated links there. Ah -- I think a penny has just dropped. If I delete the reference number, the reference will be automatically deleted? Is that right? I will give it a go! CSpe4ke (talk) 18:20, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh, CSpe4ke, you are using the visual editor? The references appear at the bottom of the page through technical wizardry, they don't exist there. You are correct that the references exist where the numbers are, but usually in order to edit the references you must access the pages source code. I don't use the visual editor, but I'll look into it and find an answer for you. Hopefully another host here is more familiar with it. Zindor (talk) 18:30, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Zindor, no I'm using the source code. I just forgot that I would have to delete the reference by deleting the surtext number where it appears in the text. I have done that now and it is all good, or at least better (I hope).

I would very much value your opinion on the changes I have made.

One of my problems is that Lucy Newlyn is a world renowned authority on Romanticism (esp Wordsworth and Coleridge). Her books have been cited over 1200 times (Google Scholar) and she edited the Cambridge Companion to Coleridge. It seems to me that any biography of her should reflect that status. But perhaps I am wrong here? CSpe4ke (talk) 18:49, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

The issue i see with your recent edits is that you removed a reference with linkrot (the debretts one) which has left prose unsupported, and you've deleted a couple of archive links which are usually quite handy. If the debretts source can't be found on any archive sites, and you can't find a reliable source to replace it with, then i would either restore the reference or remove the prose it was supporting. As you may know, editing a page with which you have a COI is strongly discouraged and it throws up problems, such as where a neutral version of the article might not meet the expectations of someone who knows the subject.

You've done an alright job so far, and have removed some promo tone, but I would strongly encourage from now on you instead make edit suggestions on the talk page, and practise your editing on articles with which you don't have a conflict of interest. Regards, Zindor (talk) 19:25, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Picvdo

I am trying to publish my first draft but after publishing its showing that i am violating rule. But i am creating it for someone else who is actually need an recognition in convid time

Because of it customer service Picvdo (talk) 21:16, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Picvdo, and welcome to the Teahouse. "Recognition" is not one of the functions of Wikipedia. Please read What Wikipedia is not carefully. According to WP:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk#21:10:26, 15 October 2020 review of submission by Picvdo your draft was deleted as "blatant promotion". Wikipedia has very little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with them have chosen to publish about them in reliably published places. --ColinFine (talk) 21:26, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

is there a courtesy link? I want to see so I can give my opinion. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 02:10, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

To what, Le Panini? The draft has been deleted, so only admins can see it. --ColinFine (talk) 19:08, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Whoever talked before me deleted their messages. Nevermind. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 19:29, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Remove

Hi, I'm Sumit i want some help,the second line of this article[14] said that this clan is of mixed origin but in the seventh line,it is supporting a community without any citation. So please remove the word or the line which is baisly support a community.This same mistake is in the third line of this article [15] Sumit banaphar (talk) 14:59, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sumit banaphar. You posted this here nearly three hours after Ganbaruby told you "Do not continue to argue here; file an edit request at the respective talk page, or alternatively, see if anyone at at Wikipedia:WikiProject India can help" (in #References saying something else and articles saying something else five sections above this.) Please do what Ganbaruby says, or your questions may be seen as disruptive. --ColinFine (talk) 19:37, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Sadas - Company description with new references

New Company page Sadas dB

Hello, after several feedback related to references, I am trying to find different sources to respect to Wikipedia Guidelines ( I am currently searching for others). Btw I would like to have some first feedback about my changed sandbox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Giuseppe_Ardolino/sandbox#cite_note-5) with new references totally independent of the company. I hope to be on the right track. Thank you Giuseppe Ardolino (talk) 16:07, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Giuseppe Ardolino: I can't read Italian, but don't translate the titles of your sources to English. Foreign language sources are completely okay! I would also recommend you to use Wikipedia's citation templates. VisualEditor will automatically do this for you, or you can manually key in fields yourself. If you're in source editing mode, look for the top toolbar and go to Cite -> Cite web (or news) and enter in that form. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 16:16, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Giuseppe Ardolino: When using the templates for citations, it actually can be helpful if you provide both the original title (in the |title= parameter) and the translated English title in |trans-title=. The translated title is rendered in square brackets after the native title. E.g., the cite you mentioned above would look like:

<ref>{{cite web |title=L'Innovazione che c’è. Best Practices: un concorso dedicato ai progetti innovativi delle PMI italiane |trans-title=The innovation that exists. Best Practices: a competition dedicated to innovative projects of Italian SMEs |url=https://wcap.tim.it/en/node/3386 |website=TIM WCAP |publisher=[[Telecom Italia]] |accessdate=16 October 2020 |language=it |date=10 December 2009}}</ref>

which renders as:

"L'Innovazione che c'è. Best Practices: un concorso dedicato ai progetti innovativi delle PMI italiane" [The innovation that exists. Best Practices: a competition dedicated to innovative projects of Italian SMEs]. TIM WCAP (in Italian). Telecom Italia. 10 December 2009. Retrieved 16 October 2020.

—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:14, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Is it possible to change the file name (or create a second copy with a new file name) of an existing photo used in an Infobox?

I have been trying to chance the text (not the picture) of the Mount Damavand mountain in the Infobox on the English Mount Damavand page. The photo description for an Infobox picture seems to be embedded in the name of the picture's file. In this case, there is both a Persian and an English test describing the picture. The Persian text (presumably original) says "Mount Damavand covered with snow from Kamradasht" the English text says "Almighty Damavand." It seems better these two texts are saying the same thing. Since I don't intend to change the picture itself, one would think this is an easy change to do, but I just cannot figure out how to rename the existing, already uploaded, photo. Any help appreciated. Thanks, Herr Foo (talk) 20:37, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link Mount Damavand. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:14, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Almighty Damavand دماوند پوشیده ازبرف ازدوراهی معدن کمردشت - panoramio.jpg is the file in question that needs to be renamed. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:24, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Herr Foo: I'm not seeing what needs to be changed if you are only concerned about what people see when they read the article. People viewing the page cannot see the actual filename unless they edit the page or open the picture to look at it. The file, File:Almighty Damavand دماوند پوشیده ازبرف ازدوراهی معدن کمردشت - panoramio.jpg, is on the Wikimedia Commons. It has been there for years. People outside of Wikimedia/Wikipedia projects may be using the image and relying on the filename to not change. You might be able to claim that it should be renamed under criteria 3, To correct obvious errors in filenames, including misspelled proper nouns, incorrect dates, and misidentified objects or organisms., from commons:Commons:File renaming. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:12, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Responding on My Talk Page & Disclosing Employer

Hello. I had a comment on my talk page that on one article I wrote, I need to disclose it is my employer. I tried to use the code they gave me, but it is not working well. The draft page is J. J. Keller & Associates. It is important to know that all articles I have edited have nothing to do with an employer. Just that one draft article, and I was not aware of the rule. So ... trying to add the line as required. Help would be appreciated. I am also trying to reply to the individual on my talk page. I did so by editing his comment to add my reply below, but I am sure that is not the best way. Thank you! Sbaranc (talk) 21:53, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sbaranc, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for trying your best to be open about potential conflicts of interest or paid editing. I think I've fixed it for you now. Firstly, I've added what I think you wanted to put on your userpage. Then I deleted the wrong template in your draft article (Draft:J. J. Keller & Associates), and put the correct one in the Talk page of that draft. It can be a bit of a maze following our instructions. Should you feel you might, in future, have a Conflict of Interest about a subject or person (but aren't actually in receipt of any payment or other remuneration as an employee or company owner), you can always add {{UserboxCOI}} to your userpage, too. Thus, you might be best buddies with both Elton John and J. K. Rowling, but not be in receipt of any money to add content about either of them. But you would be conflicted, so transparecny is always best. Thus, you would want to add the following code to your userpage: {{UserboxCOI|1=Elton John|2=J K Rowling}} which renders as below:

This user has publicly declared that they have a conflict of interest regarding these Wikipedia articles:

• Elton John
• J K Rowling

I hope this makes sense! Nick Moyes (talk) 23:15, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

You did well. (I think that your draft reads like something put out by the company, and it certainly needs more referencing -- but this is by the way.) As for your last point, I am hereby replying to your comment by writing this below it; but note that I am prefacing my reply with a colon (which you'll see if you edit "source"), thereby indenting it a little. This business of indenting replies is a convention on Wikipedia talk pages. -- Hoary (talk) 23:16, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

email address

How do you change your email address? I've logged in and have not found my account information. The address for my user is very out of date. My account name is Dave44000. My email address is (redacted). it needs to be updated. Dave44000 (talk) 00:18, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Dave44000. Please do not post your email address here. Go to your preferences and you will be able to change your email address there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:25, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

How to add categories to an article?

Hey all, I wanted to ask how can I add categories to an article properly? I read this section https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FAQ/Categorization#How_do_I_add_an_article_to_a_category? which says that I just have to edit the article and add Category:Surname When I do so, e.g Category:1952 births and then click on publish changes the system doesn't show the link to births 1952 it literally shows Category:Surname. Anyone could help me out with this one, please? Enciclopedista100 (talk) 03:24, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Enciclopedista100, welcome to the Teahouse. I removed the nowiki tags at Reiner Braun (Activist), they were disabling the category links. Hopefully that fixes everything for you. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 03:43, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Enciclopedista100: On a talk page, when you want to write about a category and provide a link (as you did above), you need to put a ":" (colon) between the opening brackets and "Category" to keep from placing the talk page on which you are writing into the category. I.e., instead of [[Category:1952 births]], write [[:Category:1952 births]]. I've fixed the three instances above. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:27, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Getting a Page Published

So I am working on building a Knowledge Graph for my site to increase the semantic relevance for search and users. Being part of linked open data is important and I want to create a Wikipedia page for my agency's entity. I tried to create a unbias, neutral article but I was declined because "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." I honestly was to create a good article for the purpose of building my brands entity in the knowledge graph. I want to do it correctly and even sited neutral sources. How can improve my article so that it meets Wikipedia standards? Thanks! RyanCShelley (talk) 02:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, RyanCShelley, but "building [your] brands entity in the knowledge graph" is not one of the purposes of Wikipedia. In fact, that is what Wikipedia strives not to be doing. See WP:NOT.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:25, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello RyanCShelley. You wrote "Shelley Media Arts, LLC (aka SMA Marketing)is a data-driven search marketing agency and startup founded in 2009 and based in Melbourne, Florida. The company is experts in technical SEO and has worked to advocate for and advance the use of Schema.org Structured Data in the SEO community."

What if I wrote "Cullen Media Arts is a search marketing agency that ignores data, and a startup founded in 1887 and based in American Canyon, California. The company lacks expertise in online search and rejects the premise of technical SEO and has worked to oppose the use of Schema.org Structured Data and repudiates the SEO community" ? Do you think that is acceptable language for an encyclopedia? If not, why is your overtly promotional language acceptable? Let's discuss it Let's discuss it 06:49, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I get your example. I actually used a few other Wikipedia agency entries to model mine, but obviously missed the mark. I am curious if you have resources on how to write better Encyclopedic content. Open to suggestions and ways to get better.

IRL Investigative Journo seeks help on complicated page, full disclosure herein. Thanks to everyone on wiki for the thankless work ya do everyday!

Hey y'all!

I am a wholly inexperienced wiki editor who had been banging my head against the wall trying to figure out the how to best use this incredibly important platform. I remember my high school teacher saying "Wikipedia is not a source." How horribly backwards thinking of her!

I'm looking for some much needed help on the only sandbox page on my profile.

• • • • • FULL DISCLOSURE*****

I am the investigative journalist [EDIT: Independent, i.e., not affiliated/paid by any publication] who wrote the original 2017 story on Promontory Landfill that was published as a Sunday front page feature story in the Salt Lake Tribute. I am completely unable to be objective on any editing of this article whatsoever. The reason I am asking for help is because I would like for this encyclopedia to contain objective information on Promontory Landfill, and I do not have the requisite impartiality or technical skills to finish this project. It's one that's important to the public interest. To be completely frank here: I would like for this article to be up and running by the time the Utah Legislature starts back in session in January so Utahns have an accurate, objective source for information on this subject. I don't know how best to do this, and I don't want to make the time-sensitive nature of my motivation influence any of the editing I do here at all. Not getting paid for this at all, and unfortunately, didn't get paid much to begin with as the original journo. But I'm passionate about providing ppl in my state with an accurate, objective wiki article on this subject, and I would like to help make that happen in any way I can.

Plz lemme know if there's anything else you'd like to know!

Any help would be everlastingly appreciated. There's no way I can get down the editing standards for where they need to be, and as always, I need an objective editor -- because clearly, I am not a very happy camper about this 385 million ton landfill being located near my hometown.

Problems you'll encounter here are many, including but not limited to:

- first-sourced documents (such as files from local entities that are not published by authoritative sources, i.e. original research)
- extraneous information that isn't particularly relevant to the article
- failure to adhere to any semblance of wiki guidelines
- messy attributions throughout
- etc., etc., etc.

I would like an experienced editor who enjoys a real challenge to please help me at your leisure to take a look to see what can be done. I'm much too close to this article to be objective whatsoever, and I would like this to be done at some point, if ever. The people of Utah deserve an authoritative online source to understand the objective points of what is, I believe, a matter of great public importance.

Please also note that I have only the best intentions in trying to be as open as possible about my motivations here, and the type of help I'm requesting. There are many reputable sources linked throughout, but I am not used to this platform and so I'm terrible at efficiently using it and making sure I'm as clear about my conflicts of interest at every step. But I've definitely failed at that so far after doing more research about what standards/practices are necessary to push an article to final publication. I would never want to put anything out there on wiki that isn't qualitatively proper.

Into the depths we go.

Best, B. I. Empey GarbageCollector12 (talk) 03:13, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: User:GarbageCollector12/sandboxlandfill. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 04:29, 17 October 2020 (UTC

GarbageCollector12, your situation presents Wikipedia with a very sticky wicket:

1. According to the WP policy WP:DEADLINE, Wikipedia does not add articles as part of an author's strategy, no matter how noble.
2. You have a tremendous conflict of interest with respect to your article topic, as the author of some of your sources. An article such as you want in Wikipedia would serve your own purposes as well as, most likely, the plaintiffs', with whom you may have a connection.
3. As you have noted, many of your sources are unpublished, making them unqualified as reliable sources. You must source your Wikipedia article from published, unconnected reliable sources only.

As a non-Administrator, I can only give you these points of advice. Other Teahouse hosts will be commenting here as well, particularly if you have further questions regarding the three points above or any other aspects of your situation.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I have just taken a look at User:GarbageCollector12/sandboxlandfill, and it's not an encyclopedia article, it's more of an exposé or a short story in length. On the basis of WP:Righting great wrongs, I seriously doubt that Wikipedia can stay within its stated mission while hosting the article you want to publish. Social media or some other crowdsourced online encyclopedia might be the better path for you.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:30, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

You could write an article about the matter before the Utah Legislature, if it becomes law, but it would have to be short and encyclopedic.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:51, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

False Rape/Harassment cases

I have noticed that false rape/harassment cases filed by malicious women are not SO mentioned. In such cases, Wikipedia says "allegedly". When the case is false, why don't you just say it is false? As much as there is violence against women, there are tens of thousands of false cases, even lakhs filed by women. 106.51.240.130 (talk) 11:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not make judgments, but reports what reliable sources say. If the sources say an allegation was false, Wikipedia will say so; if they describe an claim as "alleged", Wikipedia should say that. If there is a particular article you are concerned about, and you have a reliable source saying something different from the article, then discuss it on the article's talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 11:19, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

On the contrary, I've seen confirmed rape cases cited as "alleged."--Mr. 123453334 (talk) 19:21, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

You don't seem to have understood what ColinFine said. This encyclopedia is required to say what the sources state. If the source cited says "allegedly" then we are required to write "allegedly", unless other sources are cited that state something else. If you have found a source, you can summarize what the source says, and then cite your source. Also sources cited must be WP:Reliable sources. See also WP:V. If you read those links, they contain extremely helpful information about the requirements for sourcing in this encyclopedia. -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Crimes are generally alleged before they're confirmed, so if a confirmed cases says 'alleged' that simply means it's out-of-date and should be changed (with a reliable source cited, of course). --Paul ❬talk❭ 09:38, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Citing existence

How would i cite the existence of something? I added a new song to a list of songs made by a band, and was told i needed to cite it. Would i link the song? Hey tim, for launch party (talk) 02:25, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

What was probably meant was that you need to cite an authoritative source, partly in order to show that the list isn't just somebody's fantasy. (If this comment doesn't help, please link to the article in question.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

If notability has already been established through third party sources (for a band that's likely to be reviews, interviews etc) then a primary source such as the band's official website would be adequate for something like a track listing. --Paul ❬talk❭ 10:16, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

When templates not work...

Hello!

I just noticed that the interactive map Template:Administrative Divisions of Eswatini Image Map, just doesn't work. The interactive map is probably supposed to be clickable. Is there a help page where I can report this error?

Or are there any template-experts in the teahouse?

Best regards, Koreanovsky (talk) 10:36, 16 October 2020 (UTC) Koreanovsky (talk) 10:36, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Koreanovsky: The image was changed but the user didn't bother updating the coordinates of the links. It should work now; let me know if it doesn't. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 11:52, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Thank you! But it seems like it only works when you click on the names of the country, better than nothing, hehe! Thanks again! :-) --Koreanovsky (talk) 10:56, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikiwand

Do we know how much traffic is going through Wikiwand rather than Wikipedia directly? Charles Juvon (talk) 01:34, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Charles Juvon: Wikiwand is developed by a private company not associated with Wikipedia. You will need to contact them to see if that data is public. RudolfRed (talk) 03:11, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikiwand would use the Wikimedia API so presumably Wikimedia would be able to see how many requests are coming through, not that they'd share it either. But presumably contents is cached more often than not so it'd (hopefully) be a much lower figure than the amount of pageviews wikiwand gets. As for unique visitors, I would speculate that it pales in comparison with people accessing wikipedia directly through the web or even through the official wikipedia phone apps. In short, not much. --Paul ❬talk❭ 11:16, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

The African Cinema Contest

Please, I have enrolled in the African cinema contest, and I don't know what to do. I want to create a new article, so that I will be able to submit my work. Please, help me and give me a wiki wiki answer on how to create an article. Thanks, my helpful, fellow editors. Prince (talk) 10:51, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Nikola Tesla edit. I'm afraid you can't create articles for the first few days after joining. But you can create a Draft. Just go to Articles for creation and click where it says "click here to start a new article" that will take you through the whole process including, when you're ready, turning your Draft into an Article. --Paul ❬talk❭ 11:01, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern. I am really grateful,Paul. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikola Tesla edit (talk • contribs) 11:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Guide me please

Hi,A few days ago I participated on the talk page of Udal of Mahoba but I did not find any reply, so please tell me if i had done any mistake and if yes then how to correct it. Please guide me Sumit banaphar (talk) 08:41, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Sumit banaphar Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. When you make an edit request, you need to specify the exact change to the article you think needs to happen, in a "change X to Y" format. In your recent request, you asked that something be corrected but what it is you wanted done was not clear to the user who responded to your request. It helps if you specify the passage of the article you want changed and the specific change you feel needs to be made to it. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Sir i did what you say please check once[16]and thanks for helping — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumit banaphar (talk • contribs) 10:23, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I have added a {{edit semi-protected}} tag to your request. —teb728 t c 10:49, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

teb728 I hope that works, thanks for helping — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumit banaphar (talk • contribs) 13:02, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

How Do you block people that are misbehaving?

How do you block someone for a period of time from wiki if it’s a vandal etc?  User:WikiFlame50

@WikiFlame50: You may file a report at WP:AIV. Be sure to provide the links to the article that was vandalized and a short rationale. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:55, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

A User do not have rights to create article in mainspace?

Is a user do not have right to publish article in mainspace if not then why Wikipedia giving option to publish article in mainspace for new user? I just created an article Coforge and Umakant Bhalerao moved this article in to draft. Please also suggest, Am i not eligible to publish an article?  CBDDG (talk) 12:10, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Pinging Umakant Bhalerao. -- Hoary (talk) 12:41, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with the draftification and moved the article back to mainspace. Its a publicly traded company with $2B (USD) market cap and a reasonably written article. Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:54, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry @Calliopejen1:, the point here is not whether the organization is notable or not. This user was previously asked to disclose his/her COI which user has not till now. I also noticed the user blanked the talk page two days before the creation of this page to hide the COI warning.--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 13:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Umakant Bhalerao, I understand but I don't believe the appropriate remedy for COI editing is draftification, so long as the content being posted is reasonably good (as this was). Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:01, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank You Sir Calliopejen1. CBDDG (talk) 15:04, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

Who is the Tallest person in the whole world Habeeb Bello (talk) 14:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Welcome to the Teahouse. As of 17 October 2020, the tallest person on earth is Sultan Kösen! (Side note: Next time please refrain from posting questions that can easily be answered. The teahouse is there to help beginner editors and you asking easy-to-google questions may impede that. Benjamin Borg (Talk) 15:05, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Non-wikipedia questions can be asked at the Reference Desk WP:RD RudolfRed (talk) 15:23, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Justin Picard

I don't mean to be a pain and I realise that there's a heavy backlog at CAT:PEND, but would there by any reviewers willing to take a look at Draft:Justin Picard? It's been over 2 months since it was submitted. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 14:28, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Davykamanzi As noted on your draft, "This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,706 pending submissions waiting for review." There are unfortunately a limited number of reviewers, and as volunteers who do what they can when they can, things take time. Asking to in essence "jump the line" is not usually effective; you will need to continue to be patient. You are welcome to work on other drafts ot existing articles if you wish. 331dot (talk) 15:25, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Help

One Article named 'Kolathur, Chennai' for creation was accepted as article Kolathur, Chennai from Draft:Kolathur Chennai with a note mentioned with "multiple issues of overly detailed and Citation style". After that I added tags of Template and edit the draft, unaware of the issues to be created without clearing the mentioned issues. So, the article is retained in the draft space. Please suggest me some technical issues or the edits to be made for the article to be in the main space. Thanks. --Helppublic (talk) 16:00, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Helppublic: I'm sorry, but I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Kolathur, Chennai is currently in the mainspace, while Draft:Kolathur, Chennai redirects to it since the draft was accepted. Could you rephrase your question? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 16:20, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Helppublic:, Dear friend, there are citation issues. I made a little edit and fixed a page number parameter, the URLs to books are incomplete there. You should add complete link of the book available on Google Books. Thank you. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 16:22, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Main or Draft

My question is: Would it be better to create a new article in main space or in draft space? Wpedia User (talk) 12:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Wpedia User, what is the article you plan to create, and what are the three best sources you plan to use? Calliopejen1, (talk) 13:01, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Calliopejen1: I am asking this question because all the time i am creating articles They are getting deleted.

Wpedia User (talk) 13:08, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Wpedia User. If every article you're creating in the mainspace is being deleted, then that's not a real good sign. For that reason alone, it might be a good idea to start with WP:DRAFTS and submit them to WP:AFC for review when you think they're ready. This will give an experience AFC reviewer the chance to look over your work and offer suggestions about things that need to be improved. Once you've had a few articles created via AFC and have a better understanding how and why some drafts are approved and some aren't, you can try creating things in the mainspace again.

You've been a Wikipedia for less than a month, and creating a proper article can be a pretty hard thing to do even for editors who've been Wikipedians for years. Many one things for you to try would be to try and find ways to improve already existing articles. There are over six million articles and many have issues that need addressing. Improving existing articles can be a good way to learn how Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines are applied, which in turn will help you when you try to create articles yourself. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:38, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

This is probably about Sree Leela, which just got tagged for CSD and is not deleted yet. Also pinging Umakant Bhalerao. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:46, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

The CSD criteria listed was WP:G4, but the former version was draftified at Draft:Sree Leela (actress) was created by a different user and is not similar at all. I've removed the CSD tag but put up a PROD instead. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind I'm big dumb dumb, notability is still an issue. CSD. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Never mind, it happens to the best of us.--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 16:35, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

creating an article on pregnancy and epilepsy

An article has been published in a medical journal on EPILEPSY AND PREGNANCY by an elite international group under CCBYSA3.0 licence and is important enough to be on wikipedia as a separate article because it has many issues related to the topic for doctors ,nurses, paramedical staff and persons with eilepsy and their familes. How best can we create the article without copyviolation? Does it have to be completely paraphrased and cited to this main article or parts of itfrom the article written as paraphrased short sections and cited to original citations in this article?--NandanYardi (talk) 02:32, 16 October 2020 (UTC) NandanYardi (talk) 02:32, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

The issue here is that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a medical journal. It's very likely we could use some of the content (as Wikipedia also uses CC-By-SA 3.0) but the tone would likely not be acceptable. Another thing to bear in mind is our policy on sourcing for medical claims. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 02:38, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello NandanYardi. As Jéské Couriano pointed out, Wikipedia has quite stringent standards for reliable sources for medical topics. Here is a quote that summarizes that guideline: "Ideal sources for biomedical information include: review articles (especially systematic reviews) published in reputable medical journals; academic and professional books written by experts in the relevant fields and from respected publishers; and guidelines or position statements from national or international expert bodies. Primary sources should generally not be used for medical content – as such sources often include unreliable or preliminary information, for example early lab results which don't hold in later clinical trials."

Personally, I believe that a Wikipedia article about epilepsy and pregnancy can be written. However, there is no way under the sun that such an article should be based on a single medical journal article, but should instead be based on the full range of the published reliable sources on the topic that comply with WP:MEDRS. The fact that this particular article was published under CC BY SA 3.0 is of little relevance. It is the reliability of the journal and the specific article that is all-important, not its licensing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:15, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Consider instead adding a section on pregnancy to the Epilepsy article. That article is rated Good Article and gets more than 2,000 visits a day. Existing satellite articles about epilepsy and operating motor vehicles, and epilepsy in children get less than 100/day. David notMD (talk) 11:01, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

This is an authoritative consensus document with excellent citations from previously published literature from reputed journals and has been published by a reputed journal,from a globlly represented experts task force in the field and has taken years of review of current and past literature on the subject.It is likely to have far reaching impact in patient management globally.How can a few parts with public helath messages to doctors, paramedical staff and general redership, be included for benefit at people at large who access Wikipedia?Thanks for your helpNandanYardi (talk) 13:22, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Would help if you stop lauding it and provide a PMID number, journal name, volume and issue, etc. And again, Wikipedia is not a place to replicate a lot of content from any article. A section or sub-section with a concise summary of the article placed in the Epilepsy and Pregnancy articles - with a reference to the journal article - will be sufficient. David notMD (talk) 15:49, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

By the way Harden CL, et al, published several articles in 2009 providing practice guidelines on epilepsy and pregnancy. One or more of these could also be incorporated into the Epilepsy and the Pregnancy articles. David notMD (talk) 15:51, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, NandanYardi, please notice that "public health messages" are not among the purposes of Wikipedia. Wikipedia reports what the reliable sources say: it doesn't warn, advocate, or advise. When a reliable source contains something that might reasonably be called a "public health message", Wikipedia can report that the source said so, but the accurate reporting is Wikipedia's purpose, not the public impact of the message. --ColinFine (talk) 19:17, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks,i will surely proceed to do so--NandanYardi (talk) 17:08, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank,you are correct,Harden CL, etal, have published it a few years agoand understanding has changed since then but these are new findings which we will write up as per your guidance and add a subsection to the existig Epielpsy article and to include a consensus review --NandanYardi (talk) 17:08, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidanceColinFinE, will do so--NandanYardi (talk) 17:25, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Creating a redirect

All I want to do is create a redirect to my article Archives of Venice, but I don't know how to do that without having to have the article reviewed, which seems like a big waste. Truth is King^TALK 23:04, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Just wait till you're able to create articles directly, whereupon you'll be able to create redirects directly. -- Hoary (talk) 23:13, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

In the meantime, Truth Is King 24, perhaps you could work more on Archives of Venice, which now appears to be a worthwhile stub -- but only a stub. As examples: (i) Which "former Franciscan convent"? (ii) The physical description that you supply is one that you attribute to somebody who died in 1883; has the layout really remained unchanged for 137 or more years? (iii) What's the name in Italian for whatever's in this former Franciscan convent, and which institution is (institutions are) responsible for its/their upkeep? (iv) Are there concerns about the physical security (defences against flooding, etc) of the archive(s)? -- Hoary (talk) 00:16, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Hoary Good ideas, thank you. One other question though (which I may post separately, but thought I'd ask you) how do I get to the point where I can create my own articles. I wrote on on the book Absolute Monarchs and it was reviewed and accepted, but I guess that was not enough. How will I know? Will there then be a "create article" tab for me to click on?Truth is King^TALK 17:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Vandalization

Re Wikipedia page Terry Keith Ashwin Please can some one help me with a disgruntled ex employer making incorrect changes and deletions on my Wikipedia page, It can be clearly seen by his IP address, I fixed some of the changes but he again today repeated same and made more. The page was fine for over 2 years now until his misconduct. Thanking you in advanceTerryashwin (talk) 16:41, 17 October 2020 (UTC) Terryashwin (talk) 16:41, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Terryashwin: Hi there, you can request page protection here. Bear in mind that the page will only be protected if the vandalism is clear and obvious. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 16:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

You should not make edits on an article about yourself. Please read about conflict of interest, & make change proposals on the article talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:49, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

hi

hello guys] Habeeb Bello (talk) 14:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Habeeb Bello: Do you need help? Thus far, your contributions have consisted of saying 'hello' on ridiculous pages. This is disruptive. Try to edit constructively in future, please. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Question from User:Dennymaleane

Hie I'm Denny Maleane from Mumbai, India. I am currently working as a Social Media Handler/Assistant to George Joseph who has a wiki page. I want to make it official as in lock it from anyone editing. So please help me through it. Thanks! Dennymaleane (talk) 15:54, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Dennymaleane, Dear friend this is not a valid reason to protect any article from editing by all editors. Articles are protected only in certain circumstances like continuous edit warring, vandalism etc. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 16:28, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Dennymaleane: A central concept to Wikipedia is that anyone can edit its articles, meaning that Wikipedia does not reserve editing rights to certain people. Usually we only protect pages from editing ("locking") if there's evidence of disruptive editing on that article (see Wikipedia:Protection policy). Since I don't see much disruption on that page, I don't think protection is necessary here. On a separate note, as someone employed by George Joseph, you have a conflict of interest with the subject, meaning that it's hard for you to stay neutral. Please read WP:COI carefully and make a paid-contribution disclosure to make your relationship clear. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 16:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Dennymaleane: I'm afraid that your statement make it official as in lock it from anyone editing shows a fundamental misunderstanding of Wikipedia's purpose as an encyclopedia, not a social media platform or personal website. George Joseph is Wikipedia's article about the subject. It does not belong to George Joseph and is not here for his benefit. It is to summarize what independent reliable sources have published about him. It is specifically to be independent of what he says or wants to say about himself. I hope this helps to clarify the misunderstanding. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:24, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi

When I can edit (improve) semi protected pages? Govindsinghlayn (talk) 17:24, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

See WP:SEMI. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:26, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Govindsinghlayn: Until then, you are welcome to make an {{edit request}} on the article's talk page, which may also have previous discussion about the changes you want to make. Which article did you want to edit? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:30, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikiwand

I have not gone beyond viewing the website, but it would appear that Wikiwand violates the "free" content of WP by monetizing it. I have contributed to WP for over 14 years on the assumption that this would never be allowed. WriterArtistDC (talk) 03:17, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@WriterArtistDC: The Creative Commons license used by Wikipedia (that you agreed to) allows reuse for any purpose, as long as attribution is given. See Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License. RudolfRed (talk) 03:36, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I assumed it was a Creative Commons NonCommercial license. It should be.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 04:17, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikiwand stated that it would kick back 30% to WP. Are they?--WriterArtistDC (talk) 04:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry, WriterArtistDC, but your assumption about the licensing was incorrect. Every time you prepare to hit the blue "Publish changes" button, the following notice is visible directly above:

"By publishing changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license."

CC BY-SA 3.0 explicitly allows commercial re-use, and Wikipedia rejects all written content that restricts commecial re-use. We allow stringently limited use of non-free images in a few cases but not non-free text. Our goal is to provide educational content for free to the whole world, which can be re-used by anyone anywhere for any purpose whatsoever, including attempts to make some money off of it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:40, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Once again I am a victim of my own avoidance of reading the fine print. I will be taking a break while I consider whether I will continue to volunteer my efforts to an enterprise that includes usage by a for-profit business.

I have an additional question regarding the use on WP of non-free images based upon a fair use rationale. Since there is a separate rationale for each article on WP, I would also assume that such fair use does not "travel" to be part of another publication, particularly one with ads. I made such an argument (with opposition) when I placed "File:Benefits Supervisor Sleeping.jpg" in the article Nude (art)#Contemporary.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 05:05, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@WriterArtistDC: You are correct that Wikipedia fair use rationales apply only to use on Wikipedia. This hampers the reuse of articles with non-free content, which is one reason why Wikipedia does not allow non-free use if a free substitute exists or could be created. —teb728 t c 07:20, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm guessing now, but it seems possible that (similar) fair use rationales used by WP could on occasion be used in other places, like wikis etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:04, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia coverage of contemporary topics would be severely limited if it could not make fair-use rationales for non-free images. In the case of the painting Benefits Supervisor Sleeping, its image appears on the WP article on the painting itself, the artist Lucien Freud, and the article mentioned above on the genre. I am not a lawyer, but very familiar with the principle of fair use as an academic and an artist. A key part of the rationale is that the use is for educational, non-commercial purposes only, in this case by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation. All three articles with this image are now also on Wikiwand. If the process of mirroring all of WP on Wikiwand copies all of the non-free images also, this is a significant issue. The Lucien Freud article alone has three additional copyrighted images of his paintings. The message at the bottom of the Wikiwand page states "Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses." When an art book is published, there is a list of illustration credits specifying the copyright owner. I do not think that attributing the image to a prior fair use on WP would be sufficient.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 13:17, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

It sounds to me as if you are right, WriterArtistDC: those uses may well infringe the copyright in the paintings; on the other hand, if Wikipedia uses certain images under "fair use", there doesn't seem to be any reason why another site should not do so. In any case, the holders of the copyright are the only people who could take action against them: Wikipedia cannot. (In fact, if you thought that they were infringing your copyright in some text you had submitted to Wikipedia - for example, by failing to attribute it - you could take action against them, but Wikipedia could not.) --ColinFine (talk) 19:24, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

There seems to be a misunderstanding of copyrights; the owner of an image or text may grant "fair use" to non-profits for educational purposes. For any commercial use, there must be both specific agreement that the use is approved, and payment for each use; e.g. not placed in a context that misrepresents it. The internet understands this, it pays for pageviews. Attribution is not payment, and the copyright owner could legally expect pageview payments from Wikiwand; to share in the monetization of their creations. As a creative artist, I would.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 21:26, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Why are we using material that is not entirely in the public domain? (This is a question, not a comment involving opinion - of which I have none.)Charles Juvon (talk) 23:13, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Charles Juvon, we would lose a lot of completeness and descriptive ability if we only used fully free material. For example, all four of the images on the Spider-Man article that depict Spider-Man are non-free and to the best of my knowledge, all images of Spider-Man are copyrighted. If we could not include a picture of the topic of the article, it would be a much less complete encyclopedia entry and would arguably harm our goal of presenting a complete description of the article subject to our readers. Our articles about people and places might not change much, but you can imagine all the articles about fiction would be affected a lot. Alyo (chat·edits) 23:39, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

That's a great answer. I looked at Spiderman and saw that it was uploaded by a user using a pseudonym. How do we know they had the right to upload the image? Also, I see Wikiwand now has a Spiderman article with the same image. Have they violated the Spiderman image copyright? Charles Juvon (talk) 23:52, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Charles Juvon, so that question goes to a legal doctrine that WriterArtistDC referenced above called "fair use". This means that although the users who uploaded the photos probably did not have the copyright, as you correctly point out, there is a legal justification to use copyrighted material for certain limited purposes. In the case of the first Spider-Man photo, you can see the justification provided right under the photo on the file page. Because there is no free alternative photo of Spider-Man, we can use a lower-resolution photo here "for identification purposes in conjunction with discussion of the topic of the article." Although the fair use doctrine frowns upon using non-free content for commercial use, it's also not barred, so I cannot speak to Wikiwand's use of that photo (apart from noting that they have the same ability to claim fair use as anyone else). Alyo (chat·edits) 00:22, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Comment: This is an interesting discussion, but perhaps it's now moved beyond the scope of the Teahouse and should be continued on some other talk page (perhaps WT:COPY, WT:IUP or WT:NFCC?). This can be done by using the templates {{Moved discussion to}} and {{Moved discussion from}}. Wikipedia editors, however, can't really give specific legal advice and can really even say for 100% certainty whether something is a copyright violation per WP:LD. Maybe the best thing to do is to contact the WMF per Wikipedia:Contact us/Licensing and see what they have to say since that's where the WMF lawyers are. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:28, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Marchjuly I agree this should be moved to where the lawyers live. You seem to be very well informed, so can you make the move? Charles Juvon (talk) 16:11, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree with the move to wherever it will get appropriate attention. For myself, I have made a decision regarding Wikiwand which I have posted on my talk page, and would welcome comments.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 19:19, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

OMG. I implore other Users to go to User:WriterArtistDC and read what he/she has just written. To Hell with Wikiwand and the Google plugin.Charles Juvon (talk) 21:59, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Help???

I don't know where do begin ???? BynumAliu28 (talk) 21:54, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@BynumAliu28: Welcome. Try the WP:TUTORIAL or the interactive learning game WP:ADVENTURE. RudolfRed (talk) 22:07, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Is there...

Is there any project/helpdesk to check reference quality? I checked WP:Reference desk and it looked like a social media chat forum with no clue of why the forum exists. Something that's a bit better would be highly helpful. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 17:30, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Aditya Kabir, try the reliable sources noticeboard. Regards, Zindor (talk) 17:41, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 17:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Aditya Kabir, you're welcome. Just on a further note, if the reference is of concern only to one article, first try the talk page of the article in question if you haven't already, or the noticeboard of a relevant WikiProject; links to which you'll find on the article's talk page. Zindor (talk) 17:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

You also might find your source listed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Zindor (talk) 17:55, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Errr... I have been editing WP for 14+ years. Do I really need guidance to find links to Wikiprojects on article talk pages? Perhaps I do. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 17:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Aditya Kabir, there's often an assumption that editors who ask questions at the Teahouse are new, so I'd take the suggestion in that light. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:38, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Understood. Is there a place for experienced editors to ask questions? The Village Pump and the Reference Desk are quite useless. Or is it assumed that experienced editors should know everything anyways? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 00:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Aditya Kabir, although the primary purpose of the Teahouse is helping newer editors, more experienced editors are welcome to ask questions as well. There is also the Help desk. The Reference Desk is not for the purpose of asking questions about editing Wikipedia, but rather for general information. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:38, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 00:48, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Kin Lane

I would appreciate another review from the community on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kin_Lane (previous archived review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1079#Please_review_my_draft). Thank you. GoodNickBB (talk) 00:43, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

GoodNickBB, I don't think the article subject meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:30, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Calliopejen1Thanks for the review. Can you please elaborate a bit more? The US supreme court and EU commission are independent sources.

Moving Categories

Hello. I created two categories, Category:Rabbis that died in the Holocaust and Category:Rabbis that survived the Holocaust. I wanted to change the word "that" in the title to "who", however the the More/Move option did not appear next to the "View History" as it usually does. Can someone else please move those categories? Thank you, Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 02:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Charlie Smith FDTB: You can request the move by following the steps at WP:CFDS. There's a template you can add to the category page. RudolfRed (talk) 04:34, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Problem with the way a page is displayed since recent edit

The following section of the page on The Baroque Cycle by Neal Stephenson, is not displayed correctly since the latest edit.

Thanks for your attention.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Baroque_Cycle#Characters 2001:16B8:A57D:4E00:45A1:1326:B9AA:8BD8 (talk) 06:05, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done fixed. The page was missing a {{col end}} template. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:33, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Politics in Isfahan

Pahlevun believes list of police stations should not be here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Politics_in_Isfahan&diff=983848138&oldid=983671927 Baratiiman (talk) 07:44, 18 October 2020 (UTC) Baratiiman (talk) 07:44, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please consider creating a separate article with the list. Benjamin Borg (Talk) 08:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Pahlevun is right. Indeed, Politics in Isfahan is a hodge-podge of random information about the city, and should probably be deleted, or merged into Isfahan. Maproom (talk) 08:20, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

My content was denied and the email I received was a one way email

Hi there, my daughter is a musician and had a song with a band that was released as a single in March 2017, the band is quite well known and the song is their biggest to date with over 13 million streams. I edited the page and the details were taken down and i was unable to reply to the email and prove the content is correct by pointing to articles etc on line.

I not great at this stuff but it took me a long time and I'm not willing to do it all again if gets taken down.

Please help and advise.

The band is Slumberjack the song is "Afraid Unafraid" featuring Sydnee Carte, released as a single in March 2017 by One Love records Carter10047 (talk) 07:49, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Carter10047,

Wikipedia sends you emails to let you know that a message has been left on your talk page. If you want to reply to the message then you can do so there, or on the talk page of the person who sent you the message. It looks like JalenFolf reverted your edit back in March because you did not provide a source to go with the information that you added but that said, if you do have a conflict of interest then you should seriously think twice about directly editing that article in the first place.

--Paul ❬talk❭ 08:30, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Slumberjack.   Maproom (talk) 08:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Slumberjack did in fact release a single "Afraid Unafraid" in 2017 with Sydnee Carter. As noted above, the reference you provided that this song charted in Australia made no mention of it. If there are articles confirming the single and its charting, you can edit the article again with those references, or make a case on the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 08:46, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Regarding the Page

I have provided all available information to this page, I request you to consider because all the 04 books published by Reputed Publishers like Routledge and Palgrave Macmillan includes my details as an Editor. creation of this page will help me a lot for the academic growth 2409:4071:200D:EA4D:45E5:8731:B78F:F070 (talk) 08:14, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Is this about Draft:Rajendra Baikady? If it is, please read Wikipedia's policy on notability.   Maproom (talk) 08:29, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Baikadyrajendra Being an editor of one book does not meet Wikipedia's notion of academic notability. Wikipedia also discourages attempts at autobiography WP:AUTO. David notMD (talk) 08:53, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

i need help please Habeeb Bello (talk) 08:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I see that you've been creating File Talk pages with no associated File pages, and they've been deleted. If we understood what you're trying to do, we might be able to help. Maproom (talk)

08:33, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, you may ask questions here or at the official Wikipedia help desk.. Benjamin Borg (Talk) 08:35, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

But please do not ask the same question at both places. David notMD (talk) 08:57, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Subpages

Hello My question is how to create subpages i want to create templates in my subpages. Wpedia User (talk) 10:36, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to create a Sub-page, you probably want to visit the Official Wikipedia Article for Sub-pages. Benjamin Borg (Talk) 10:47, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

can I write my autobiography

 107.72.178.17 (talk) 07:08, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Almost certainly no, see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:10, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Although you writing your autobiography is forbidden on the mainspace, you can probably write some information about you on your userpage. (here) You also might want to log in before you do so. Benjamin Borg (Talk) 08:27, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

To expand what Benjamin Borg has said: in order to have a user page, you need to create an account. You can share some information about yourself on your user page, but it is primarily for sharing about you as a Wikipedia editor. It should not be made to look like an encyclopaedia article, and it will not get indexed by search engines. See Userpages. --ColinFine (talk) 11:45, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Help with finding a draft with a conflict of interest.

I have a conflict of interest on one of the page I was about to create. Draft: Green Canvas. Now I cannot access the draft or the page at all. Please help. Green Canvas (talk) 10:54, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Green Canvas: Im afraid you dont appear to have ever saved a Draft with that name. Please note that "Publish" Should be understood as "Publish this to others can look at it", not "Publish this to the encyclopedia". Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:46, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikilinks are linked to wrong Wiki article

Hi, I noticed that on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marko_Dimitrijevi%C4%87 when you look at "What links here" you get a list of pages, not all of them about the subject of this article. The first five pages listed under "What links here" are supposed to be going to an article about someone else named Marko Dimitrijević, who is a businessman, and who had an article on Wikipedia which was deleted in 2007. The Marko Dimitrijević this page is about is a basketball coach. The question is how best to fix the incorrect links. The four deletion pages (also the deletion page for Everest Capital should not be linked to the basketball coach) all say "Please do not modify it". The fifth page "Usertalk:Hedgie1" I suppose would be easy to just remove the Wikilink. But maybe a better solution would be to more simply change the name of the article to "Marko Dimitrijević (basketball coach)". Please advise, and I will follow your instructions. Thanks. Passiflorida (talk) 09:02, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I can see that there was previously some content about Dimitrijević the businessman, but that has since been deleted. I can't see any live articles linking to Dimitrijević that aren't basketball related, can you point one out? I don't think it would be a good idea to change the name of the article if the basketball coach is the only one on wikipedia - consider the reader who just wants to get straight to the article in question. --Paul ❬talk❭ 09:21, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Passiflorida. I'm not sure it's necessary to "fix" the links on those other pages. Normally when multiple articles have the same title, Wikipedia uses something called disambiguation to differentiate between them. In this case, however, there is only one article titled Marko Dimitrijević, which is about the basketball player/coach; the other one about the business man no longer exists so it's unlikely going to create any problems with any internal linking between pages. There might be a way for an administrator to "fix" this, but I wouldn't suggest go removing links from other pages or adding disambiguation by moving pages just yet since this doesn't seem like a "problem" requiring immediate action. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:26, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I guess I am a little confused. If you are on any one of those five pages, the four deletion pages and the one user/talk page, and you click on the link to Marko Dimitrijević, it takes you to the wrong person's article. Isn't that a problem? I understand you might not want to change the name of the article, and a disambiguation page is not needed since there is only one article now on Wikipedia with that exact name, but the links are misleading, literally. I think it would be a good idea, to preserve the accuracy of Wikipedia, to have this problem fixed. Unless what I am not understanding is that the deletion pages are not considered "live articles" as User talk:Paul Carpenter said above, and I am worried about nothing.Passiflorida (talk) 09:39, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I forgot to point out one more thing: the Talk page says that the page has been deleted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Marko_Dimitrijevi%C4%87 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Passiflorida (talk • contribs) 09:42, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, AfD pages are kept purely as a historical record, for internal reference. They're kind of inherently out of date as soon as the deletion has been done, so it wouldn't make sense to "fix" them. Famously, nothing in this AfD makes sense any more. Good point about the talk page though, I've edited that to clear it up. --Paul ❬talk❭ 12:41, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Lucy Newlyn -- template message

Hello, I'm new here. I apologise in advance for all the mistakes I will doubtless make. I have read the 5 principles and worked through the tutorial which I hope is a good start but which I suspect is not enough to stop me tripping over rules.

My question is about the template message on the wiki page for the poet Lucy Newlyn [Newlyn]. I tried a few weeks ago to remove the template message because it seemed a little unfair to me. I read a few other poets' pages and Newlyn's does not seem out of line with theirs, except for the ISBN links. Are these the problem? I assume they were put in to make it easy for people to find the books in libraries should they wish to. If I take them out, will that fix the perceived problem? CSpe4ke CSpe4ke (talk) 15:46, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Lucy Newlyn. David notMD (talk) 16:05, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@CSpe4ke: It's not the worst I've seen, but the wording in the article does look slightly promotional. Take this sentence for example: "She is an expert on Wordsworth and Coleridge, and has published extensively in the field of English Romantic literature, including four books with Oxford University Press and the Cambridge Companion to Coleridge." The words "expert" and "extensively" here are non-neutral and the books phrase is a little boastful. I would change it to "Newlyn's writing mainly concerns English Romantic literature with an emphasis on the works of William Wordsworth and Samuel Coleridge." The article ultimately reads like a resume or a book dust jacket rather than a biography, so I would trim down a lot of that and turn it into a list format under the heading "Awards". Neutrality is held to a very high standard on Wikipedia. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 16:08, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for this. I will request the edit. CSpe4ke (talk) 16:22, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

One more question (sorry) but Lucy (who I do know, full disclosure, which is why I'll be requesting the edits) does appear to be a world expert on Wordsworth and Coleridge. I don't know her scholarship at all but I looked her up and three of her books have, together, been cited over 650 times -- I haven't added up all the citations on her many articles bc who has the time? Surely her high standing as an academic is important to her biography? I'm confused. CSpe4ke (talk) 16:40, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, CSpe4ke. If you can find a reliably published source wholly unconnected with Newlyn that refers to her as an expert on Wordsworth and Coleridge, then that phrase can be quoted directly in the article, and cited to its source. But if nobody has used that description in a suitable published source - or if only her colleagues and publishers have said it - then the description is original research, and doesn't belong in any Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk) 19:42, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

References

In my opinion, promotional tone now gone, so removed tag. David notMD (talk) 20:01, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

It's actually a pretty good article now. Out of the articles about living academics I've seen, it's one of the better ones. --Paul ❬talk❭ 13:07, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Issue with Pornographic image

Hello! As I was innocently googling “pearl necklace” for shopping purposes, a Wikipedia image of a woman’s neck covered with drops of semen popped up right at the top of my Search page. I have children who probably Google things all the time, and this is absolutely inappropriate. I went to the page to report it (obviously not a Wikipedia contributor myself) it looked like it was protected and also linked to multiple other sexual definitions. Why is this open to any public search for a pearl necklace? I’ve been a supporter of Wikipedia and now I am more than disappointed. Any ideas? Thanks. 71.121.162.79 (talk) 13:00, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, welcome. This policy page will answer the concerns you have. Your question has been asked by many people throughout Wikipedia's history. But to simply put it out: Wikipedia is explicit in information because it is an encyclopedia meant to share information no matter the information's distress, unless the image is illegal, like child porn or copyright infringers. Wikipedia is not made for children because, again, it is an encyclopedia. I've heard that you can set so that distressing images won't be displayed on your device unless you click on it, correct me editors. Have a nice day! GeraldWL 13:08, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

About your children concerns-- I'm not a parent, but if I were you, I would say to them that that is not what they're looking for, and if they ever seen similar pictures, just skip it; I don't think they'll think much about it. I'm not the best fan of watching their every search either. Feel free to express any concerns here if you have one. GeraldWL 13:12, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

• You can suppress the display of images, but that requires having an account. See WP:NOIMAGE. There are also things you can do to your web browser on your end to suppress images. As noted, Wikipedia is not censored for any reason. Parents should supervise and monitor their children's internet use. 331dot (talk) 13:20, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Your issue also seems to be with Google's algorithms; you could contact them, but it would be hard to weed that image out. 331dot (talk) 13:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Wouldn't Google's SafeSearch filter out explicit images such as this, and isn't it opt-out rather than opt-in? —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 13:34, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Are we allowed to remake a NPOV Noticeboard request when the ressult is inconclusive?

Are we allowed to remake a NPOV Noticeboard request when the ressult is inconclusive?

Concerning the Article - History of Transylvania [[17]], I had a concern that Antun Vrančić's quote is presented in a POV way [[18]]. Specifically this part - while in Hungarian interpretations, it is noted that the proper translation of the first part of the sentence would be: "...I should also add the Romanians who – even though they easily equal any of the others in number". - as the wording "it is noted" implies that this interpretation is objectively correct, which is not NPOV.

Another user objected this, arguing that its NPOV as it is, as such, I made a NPOV Noticeboard request here: [[19]]. Needless to say, the request was a complete failure. There was a lot of discussion with the other user I disagreed with, most people understandably could not be bothered to read such a long text and had a hard time understanding what the request is about. The ressult was inconclusive, the request died without any non-involved user express any pro or against thoughts about it. As one user eloquently puts it at the end, "I think this discussion should be closed. Nobody is willing to read lengthy texts".

Which is why I would like to remake the NPOV Noticeboard request, be as brief as possible, and don't engage in a long discussion with the other user this time. Is that allowed?

In case it is allowed, I would like to remake the NPOV request like this:

Concerning the Article - History of Transylvania [[20]], I have a concern that Antun Vrančić's quote is presented in a POV way [[21]]. Specifically this part - while in Hungarian interpretations, it is noted that the proper translation of the first part of the sentence would be: "...I should also add the Romanians who – even though they easily equal any of the others in number". - as the wording "it is noted" implies that this interpretation is objectively correct, which is not NPOV.

This is the current version of the article:

According to the Romanian interpretations, Antun Vrančić wrote that Transylvania "is inhabited by three nations – Székelys, Hungarians and Saxons; I should also add the Romanians who – even though they easily equal the others in number – have no liberties, no nobility and no rights of their own, except for a small number living in the District of Hátszeg, where it is believed that the capital of Decebalus lay, and who were made nobles during the time of John Hunyadi, a native of that place, because they always took part tirelessly in the battles against the Turks", while in Hungarian interpretations, it is noted that the proper translation of the first part of the sentence would be that "...I should also add the Romanians who – even though they easily equal any of the others in number...".

These is the change I would like to make:

According to the Romanian interpretations, Antun Vrančić wrote that Transylvania "is inhabited by three nations – Székelys, Hungarians and Saxons; I should also add the Romanians who – even though they easily equal the others in number – have no liberties, no nobility and no rights of their own, except for a small number living in the District of Hátszeg, where it is believed that the capital of Decebalus lay, and who were made nobles during the time of John Hunyadi, a native of that place, because they always took part tirelessly in the battles against the Turks", while according to Hungarian interpretations, the proper translation of the first part of the sentence would be that "...I should also add the Romanians who – even though they easily equal any of the others in number.".

I am partially responsable for the mess the other NPOV Noticeboard request became. I did not wish to avoid the concerns raised by the other user to not make it appear as if I'm evading them. I realise now that this was silly, it only served to agglomerate the page and make it more confusing for other people to understand the issue. It did not contribute to the discussion or Wikipedia as a whole, I should have been brief in my response to the other user to make my opposite stance known, but not engage in a long discussion. Let other users share their thoughts. LordRogalDorn (talk) 09:12, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I see that the two of you are pretty close to agreeing on the wording. That's good! The only difference is that the current version has "According to the Romanian interpretations ... while in Hungarian interpretations", and you prefer "According to the Romanian interpretations ... while according to Hungarian interpretations". NPoV suggests treating both nationalities equally: "According to Romanian interpretations ... while according to Hungarian interpretations". (And I'm curious – what were Vrančić's words? I'd like to judge for myself what he wrote.) Maproom (talk) 09:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

His original works is in Latin, I only have this part: "Natio eam triplex incolit: Siculi, Hungari, Saxones, adiungam tamen et Valacchos, qui quamlibet harum facile magnitudine aequant". In the contested part, the word for word translation is as following: qui = who or whom, quamlibet = however, harum = these, facile = easily, magnitudine = size, aequant = match. Romanian translation: "who even though they easily equal the others in number". Hungarian translation: "who even though they easily equal any of the others in number". As the Hungarian translation argues that "quamlibet" also means "any" in this context. LordRogalDorn (talk) 11:21, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

The other user I had the dispute with made a reply here [[22]] and I replied to him here [[23]]. Since you undertand what the issue is about, I would appreciate if you would share your opinion on the NPOV Noticeboard request [[24]]. I would remove the whole wall of text we had previously and just replace it with what I wrote here, but I'm not sure whether I'm allowed to do that. LordRogalDorn (talk) 12:08, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping Maproom. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:14, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikitia

Is there anything that can be done about Wikitia copying a draft article and publishing it wholesale and incomplete - ie is there a way to get them to remove it? Silly soul (talk) 10:49, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Silly soul. The licence under which almost all material in Wikipedia is released specifically allows it to be reused for any purpose, commercial or not, as long as the use complies with the conditions of the licence. See WP:Forks and mirrors. Surprisingly, Wikitia is not listed at WP:Mirrors and forks/VWXYZ. --ColinFine (talk) 11:54, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Silly soul, I'd consider adding {{draft article}} and/or {{workpage}} to the top of your article so that if it gets mirrored, it will at least be highlighted to any reader as incomplete. --Paul ❬talk❭ 12:54, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay ColinFine thanks for your advice. I will add {{draft article}} and/or {{workpage}} although as its already been copied from an older draft then perhaps its too late. Should Wikitia be added to WP:Forks and mirrors? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silly soul (talk • contribs)

Fixing ping to ColinFine. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Creating a page for my new newspaper

I am creating a page for my new newspaper, Liberty Life, which is kinda like a local version of Stars and Stripes (newspaper).

I can write the content but I am not sure where to start? Do I create a page separate from my own personal page? Signals 1 (talk) 12:59, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Signals 1, just saying that Wikipedia is not a place for promotion. If you want to make a page because having a WP page of your newspaper will make it seem great, Wikipedia is also not a greatness validator. GeraldWL 13:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Signals 1, and welcome to the Teahouse. If there has been significant independent material published about your newspaper, in reliable sources, then Wikipedia wants to have an article about it, based on that independent coverage, not on what you say or want to say. If there has not, then it does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and Wikipedia does not want to have an article about it. --ColinFine (talk) 15:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

As to "where", see Help:Your first article on how to create and then submit a draft. Your "personal page" is only for describing your intentions and accomplishments as a Wikipedia editor. David notMD (talk) 15:32, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Look at the Emiway Bantai

The title is protected by Emiway Bantai administrators. So I made a draft titled Draft:Emiway Bantai (rapper). But later I came to know that this article title is also protected. Don't know why the reviewer or administrator doesn't see it. I request you to review the draft: Emiway Bantai (rapper) or publish its correct title in Emiway Bantai. 223.189.134.213 (talk) 14:38, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse Hosts are not necessarily Administrators. As evident at Emiway Bantai, multiple attempts to create an article about this person have been deleted and the topic 'salted', hence is protected from creation, so only administrators can create it. I suggest you leave a message on the Talk page of one of the Administrators involved in the block. David notMD (talk) 15:41, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

David notMD, Thanks, I got satisfaction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.238.132.228 (talk) 18:04, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

how do I know my article is ready?

wow, this place is awesome! just got invited and reading up on threads :) I have a question, I am currently working on my first page, and I wanted to get some advice. How do I know when it's ready? how much (or how little) content does it need to be ready to submit? Donnakekka (talk) 18:14, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Donnakekka: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to add to it. WP:YFA will give you some guidance on this. RudolfRed (talk) 18:20, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

thank you for the suggestions! have read through it, and wanted to also ask: if I dont find all the info I need from reputable sources, what if I am interview the person/the subject of the page directly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnakekka (talk • contribs) 19:14, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Donnakekka, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that an interview with the subject is not of much use: it counts as a primary source, and only very limited information from it can be used. Wikipedia is basically not very interested in what any subject says or wants to say about themselves: almost the whole of every article should be based on what people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about them (in reliable sources). Apart from uncontroversial factual information like dates and places, if you have information only from the subject, it should not go in the article. --ColinFine (talk) 19:48, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

thank you Colin, that makes sense. yes, I did look at the 'primary sources' page, however I cannot find anywhere online the subject date and place of birth, as well as the Theatre school she studied at, so I wanted to ask her directly if possible. but I didnt want to bother unless I can publish that information :) not sure I am making sense! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnakekka (talk • contribs) 19:53, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Not only is interviewing the subject directly not acceptable as a reference, but published interviews are not accepted as support for information the interviewee says about themself. Just because a person describes themself as a 'stable genius' does not make it so. David notMD (talk) 20:08, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Donnakekka, I disagree somewhat with what David notMD said above. Our core content policy Verifiability has a section that can be reached at the shortcut WP:ABOUTSELF. Here is a quote:

"Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as: the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim; it does not involve claims about third parties; it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source; there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; and the article is not based primarily on such sources.This policy also applies to material published by the subject on social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, LinkedIn, Reddit, and Facebook."

As an example, if a physician says in an interview that they were born in city A in a certain year and graduated from medical school B in a certain year 25 years later, then that is plausible, not self-serving, and can be included in the Wikipedia biography unless the person is known to fabricate information. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:59, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

David notMD Cullen328 

Ok first thing: I am not sure I am doing the tagging to your names correctly, so apologies if I am not :) Next: Cullen, you are spot on! yes, I am currently looking at magazines/newspapers interviews as I am trying to cross check with multiple sources. for example: the subject's business is often describe as 'the leading burlesque agency in the UK', but I will not include that as I feel it might be a tad speculative. although there arent many burlesque agencies in the UK to begin with. however, if I find the name of the school at which she studied or the year she started her business, on at least two articles, then I feel like it can be included. Am I doing this right then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnakekka (talk • contribs)

Courtesy ping David notMD and Cullen328. Donnakekka, please remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~, which is below the escape key at the top left corner of the keyboard) that get automatically converted to your signature and timestamp when you hit publish. This lets people know who wrote the message and when, is essential for proper functioning of bots that manage discussion pages and is necessary for the system that notifies people that you've mentioned them to work. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:11, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Usedtobecool! really appreciate the help :) 80.1.74.69 (talk) 18:18, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Art Deco article

Hello dear editors. I have an issue with Art Deco article and I have raised the issue on the talk page of said article. I would like to have an experienced editor take a look at it and give his opinion. It is an article edited by a handful of editors consistently, there are smaller edits made by others but any significant change comes from couple of editors. Please take a look at it and recommend further action and if possible make more editors involved. I can only edit from time to time due to my work, and that is article that requires attention. That is all, thank you. AnnMariette (talk) 16:06, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, AnnMariette, and welcome to the Teahouse. You are having a content dispute with Coldcreation: this is a normal part of creating a collaborative project like Wikipedia. You've done the right thing by starting a discussion on the talk page; Dispute resolution tells you how to proceed if you cannot reach consensus. WP:3O might be a way to proceed, or posting on WikiProject Visual arts, pointing to the discussion and asking others to contribute to it. --ColinFine (talk) 20:10, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

How to deal with Admin misbehaviour

I registered an account after i saw an admin using the talk page of a political article as his personal political blog and violating WP:NOTFORUM in a clearly indisputable form. I did remove his blog posts and it got accepted and i noticed him on his Talk page. There is no objection of removing those blog posts. He then proceeded to call me an alt account (with no reasoning) and ultimately ended up closing the discussion on his talk page with the note that i should come back with my real account and cherry picked and deleted specific messages that i wrote that he disliked.

He threatened to have an Admin with checkuser permission check if i am an alt, and i assumed this happened, i even openly said that im ok with that if this helps him feel more comfortable (interestingly, he removed the part of my message where i said that). Nevertheless he continued with his baseless allegation. However, the allegation that i am an alt account, even implying that i am from an blocked alt (?) seems pretty offensive to me and i want this removed from his talk page. Im aware about Assuming Good Faith and try my best, but it seems like he just keeps that allegation there and removes my message where i say that im not and that a checkuser can look into it solely because he wants to shut it down.

Honestly, that whole thing is really disappointing and shattered my view of Wikimedia as a whole. The person in question is Admin for 15 years now. How hard would it be to say: "OK, that was WP:NOTFORUM, thanks for the reminder" instead of starting to throw allegations around? I don't know wikipedias policy about alts, but how does that even matter?--Judahclipt (talk) 19:30, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Judahclipt User conduct issues are handled at WP:ANI, but I would think very carefully before going there, as your own conduct will be examined as well. This will include your edit warring to keep your post on another user's talk page(users are allowed to remove posts from their own user talk page). My suggestion, if you are a new user, would be to let this go. But that's up to you. 331dot (talk) 19:39, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

User is now blocked. 331dot (talk) 20:21, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Where is the Wikipedia Donate Link?

The donation button seems to have disappeared from https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Wikimedia_Foundation as compared to https://wikimediafoundation.org/ Charles Juvon (talk) 17:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Charles Juvon. That Wikiwand page is a mirror of the Wikipedia article about the Wikimedia Foundation, whereas https://wikimediafoundation.org/ is the website of the Wikimedia Foundation. An encylcopedic article, even about the WMF, wouldn't usually include a donate button. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:55, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I was trying to suggest that these are monetary damages that should be addressed by the Wikimedia Board of Trustees. Charles Juvon (talk) 18:07, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Charles Juvon, The wiki wand article is the counterpart of this article in Wikipedia:

Wikimedia_Foundation

Not this site.

The Wikipedia article doesn't have the donate button.

The foundation landing site does have a donate button, but I don't believe wikiwand has a counterpart to that page. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:06, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is licensed under CC-BY-SA that allows copying for any purpose without any payment. No monetary damages here. From what I see, Wikiwand is providing attribution, and that is all that is required by the license. RudolfRed (talk) 20:50, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Wrong info

I corrected spelling on Nyon olive … I live here. It is Nyons olive, which has it’s own page under the Tanche olive. Wiki rejected it. Current reference is totally wrong. How do I correct it? ChezProvence (talk) 20:06, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

The info in a table about olives refers to a world famous olive as the Nyon olive. That is wrong. It is Nyons. I live here. I know that is true. It ebpven has irs own page, referring to the Tanche olive. But my edit was rejected, keeping in place the rather incompetent definition including the misspelling. Frustrated about how to make a simple edit on Wiki. ChezProvence (talk) 20:13, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

ChezProvence Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry to hear about your frustration. The issue with your edit is that you changed an external reference to a reference to another Wikipedia article- such circular referencing is not permitted, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Wikipedia articles cannot reference other Wikipedia articles as sources. If you have an external reliable source that says what you are trying to add, that would be acceptable. 331dot (talk) 20:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I will add that it is not enough for you to say that you know something is true- Wikipedia is based on verifiability, not truth. We can't accept your personal word of something no matter how true it is. It needs to be in a published source that can be verified. 331dot (talk) 20:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

ChezProvence, I have just completed a Google search, and roughly half of the reliable English language sources spell it "Nyon" and roughly half spell it "Nyons". It appears that there are two accepted spellings, so you are not correct to say this is a misspelling. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:25, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

ChezProvence Rather than trying to use Tanche as a reference, better to use the "Nyons" reference in that article = https://www.frenchfeast.com/products.htm Then, the variety name could be shown as Nyon (also Nyons), with two references. That would be preferred to replacing Nyon with Nyons and removing one ref for the other. David notMD (talk) 20:50, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Making edits under an IP address only

Is it proper for a user to make edits to articles under his or her IP address only and not under a username? If no username is used, then there is no opportunity to leave messages on a talk page of the editor regarding the revisions. This seems an attempt to short-circuit dialogue about the changes; in that case the only place to converse is on the talk page of the article itself. I'd appreciate knowing if there is a rule or policy addressing this. Thanks. Ballinacurra Weston (talk) 00:06, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

IP users have talk pages, though generally discussion about an article should take place on the article talk page. It is not required to have an account to edit or participate here. 331dot (talk) 00:11, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I have seen that over time (weeks?) an IP editor's IP address change and then change again, even though from the partial number match it is evidence that it is the same editor. Best perhaps to leave a comment at the article's talk page, only resorting to the IP's talk page it there is a very recent edit. David notMD (talk) 01:26, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both. Ballinacurra Weston (talk) 01:45, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

The problem is that IPs don't receive notifications and don't have watchlists, so the only way they'll see a message on the article's talk page is if they happen to look there for some reason. I'd suggest leaving a note on the IP's talk page pointing to the article talk page section in addition. I believe they will get notification (at least in the desktop view) when they have new content on their own IP talk page. (Disclaimer: Some of the previous may be wrong – I can't find the answers at the moment). I always try to suggest that IP editors who want to make more than just drive-by corrections should WP:REGISTER, for reasons of communication, configurable features and gadgets, and enhanced privacy (since their IP address becomes hidden from all but a few admins). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:57, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Can we add any new wording?

How to add a new wording or phenomenon in wikipedia? Preethanuj Preethalayam (talk) 06:54, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Preethanuj Preethalayam, Hello! It depends on many things, like what WP:Reliable sources covering these new wording or phenomenon can you cite, guidance like WP:PROPORTION etc. If this is about chemistry, you can try to ask for advice at WT:CHEMISTRY. Be specific, as in "I'd like to add this text in this article, based on these WP:RS." WP:TUTORIAL may be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:09, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Preethanuj Preethalayam: Without details, it's hard to tell, but please also see WP:NEOLOGISM if it applies. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:01, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Extended confirm user

Hello i have made more than 500 edits and my account is 30 Days old but still i didn't became Extended confirm user. 😭 Wpedia User (talk) 11:57, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Wpedia User: It looks like your account was created almost 30 days ago – if I interpret the time stamps correctly, there's still a few hours left. Very few articles require extended confirmed permissions, though, so having the permission will make almost no difference in what you can edit. --bonadea contributions talk 12:24, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

FWIW, Wpedia User became extended-confirmed at 2020-10-18T16:49:55Z, about 5 hours after their post above and about 90 minutes after exactly 30 days (720 hours) had passed since their account was created (2020-09-18T15:16:35Z). Another user I just checked, who asked a similar question in the hours leading up to their 30-day anniversary, was added to the group about 45 minutes after the 30 days had passed. I can surmise from this that there is a process that runs maybe bi-hourly or so to find accounts that have aged at least 30 days and modifies their group as needed. It would be good if people would wait until a day after 30 days have passed before assuming there is something wrong and posting here (there can always be temporary failures and backlogs too). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:48, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Well it's like, ya know, when a kid turns 21 at midnight and is then legal to drink. You don't seriously expect them to miss their first night of intoxication just because some bot is lazy? EEng 23:36, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

• @AlanM1: thank you so much sir I am very happy because i became Extended confirm user. ❤️

Conlangs

I started writing an article on a conlang I made here but I also noticed that you cant advertise or self promote and have independent sources and I was wondering if posting an article like this would be considered self promotion or not and how I could incorporate independent sources. Osric the Brash (talk) 23:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Osric the Brash. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes what published, independent reliable sources say about a topic. If, for example, three prestigious linguistics journals have written about the language you created, then it may also be possible to write a Wikipedia article about it. So, have independent sources covered your language? Lacking such coverage, then your efforts are self promotional and not appropriate for Wikipedia. Please read the guideline about editing with a conflict of interest. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

(ec) @Osric the Brash: I expect it would be difficult for you to write a neutral article on this topic, as it is something you created yourself. But, if you have independent reliable sources establishing notability, and if you disclose the WP:COI, then you can submit your draft for review via WP:AFC, and a non-involved editor can review it. RudolfRed (talk) 00:36, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Geneology

I downloaded a graphic showing "Henry VIII of England is 32 degrees from Albrecht der Kelner" but it got lost and I can't find it again. Any suggestions? Used it for a familhy tree. 192.81.86.192 (talk) 00:24, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I have removed your email address from your comment. -- Hoary (talk) 01:56, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Are you sure you have spelled "Albrecht der Kelner" correctly? That name does not appear anywhere on English Wikipedia (other than this thread). You might also try asking at the Reference Desk, which can be more useful for this type of question. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:27, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I would like to know how to add some custom status like other people

Some people add stuff like, This is has a nintendo switch and a photo beside it. I would be glad if you told me how Wikipidean's Creed (talk) 08:02, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Wikipidean's Creed. Are you referring to userboxes? Anarchyte (talk • work) 08:29, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure what they are named but most likely yes

Wikipidean's Creed, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so please consider improving articles before you worry about how your user page appears. -- Hoary (talk) 09:04, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hoary, Sure I am working on that but I like to brighten people up when they see a funny or happy user page not some boring random

Actually, many new editors put in time on creating an interesting User page before going on to participating in improving Wikipedia articles. Only those who work on their User page to the exclusion of doing any encyclopedia work are at risk for being blocked for not being here to work on the encyclopedia. Wikipedia:Userboxes explains about User boxes (including making a new one), and Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries has lists of existing Userboxes that can be copied. David notMD (talk) 09:28, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Uploading small images

I have not been able to upload a small image (section of a page written in Microsoft Word, created by the snipping tool) because of AbuseFilter/153 as I am a new user. The above information was given to me by Jeff G., but I could not reply back. Something went wrong or something I did wrong (or you have made everything too complicated here). So, what do I do in order to be able to upload small images (the image in question is 89,418 bytes or 1,168 x 628 = 733,504 pixels). Thank you! Dimitrios Trimijopulos (talk) 12:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Dimitrios Trimijopulos: Use the Commons.wikimedia.org upload Wizard directly. The question I have, why do you need to upload screenshots of MS Word documents? Unpublished sources are not acceptable anyway. 12:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Dimitrios. Before going any further please read WP:NOR.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:36, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

So does it make any difference

I participated in an article talk page a few days ago and the members of Teahouse helped me to do it well and after that they want reliable sources for the changes i want but before I do it somebody else do it for the similar changes,so does it make any difference? or only i can provide sources for changes i want to make? You can see here[25] Sumit banaphar (talk) 05:38, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sumit banaphar: generally, the WP:BURDEN to bring sources in´s on the editor that makes (or wants to make) the change. Unsourced changes that arent obvivious can be reverted. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:49, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

The question you pose above is hard to understand. (As an example, so does what make any difference?) And therefore I clicked on the link you provide. What I see is hard to understand. If you want to make an edit request, you should post a message pointing to the problematic text within the article, and specifying the exact text you want it replaced with. Read and reread your text for accuracy and style before you post it. Do not complicate this request with rhetorical questions, complaints about the unfairness of the process, descriptions of how your ethnic background or whatever makes you well qualified to judge, or other stuff. If you do add such unnecessary material and are lucky, people will merely ignore it. If you're less lucky, then it will lead them to dismiss you as a time-waster. Provide clear evidence for your suggested text. If this is a paragraph (or more) that has various stages and depends on various sources, then provide a source for each stage. -- Hoary (talk) 07:51, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

This is an example of an edit request that was carried out. It's clear and concise, it provides a reason and a source. Please study it and learn from it. -- Hoary (talk) 12:58, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Obel Award

I would like to make an article on The Obel Award. A new international architecture award presented by the Henrik Frode Obel Foundation. I am unsure on the notability since I am new to editing wikipedia.

There are plenty of articles and mentions on the internet from well established sources:

https://www.wallpaper.com/architecture/obel-award-2019-junya-ishigami

https://aasarchitecture.com/2020/06/obel-award-2019-water-garden-by-junya-ishigami-associates.html/

https://utzoncenter.dk/da/nyhed/ny-international-arkitekturpris-uddeles-paa-utzon-center-8941

https://www.aedes-arc.de/cms/aedes/de/programm?id=19510817

https://www.architecture-exhibitions.com/aedes-architekturforum/obel-award-2019

https://www.world-architects.com/en/architecture-news/headlines/inaugural-obel-award-to-junya-ishigamis-water-garden

http://www.designcurial.com/news/brief-encounters-the-obel-award-7610698/

https://de51gn.com/tag/obel-award-2019/

https://www.archdaily.com/927003/art-biotop-water-garden-recognized-with-inaugural-obel-award?ad_medium=gallery

https://worldarchitecture.org/article-links/eehzg/junya-ishigami-s-art-biotop-water-garden-in-japan-awarded-the-2019-obel-award.html

https://www.artforum.com/news/junya-ishigami-wins-inaugural-obel-award-for-architecture-81109

https://www.dezeen.com/2019/10/24/junya-ishigami-art-biotop-water-garden-obel-award/

https://www.scalemag.online/tag/obel-award/

The list goes on. Are any of these links considered "notable"?

Thank you in advance Anca1661 (talk) 12:57, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

hello, Anca1661, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for asking your question - doing that can save a lot of wasted effort and heartache sometimes. Although nobody would doubt the accuracy of all those stories you linked to, they are all, unfortunately, really just 'insider business journals. It would need articles in mainstream media like national newspapers to make me feel this award meets our Notability Criteria. There are so many awards of this type that evidence from within that particular sector's own news outlets just wouldn't be enough. It may also be WP:TOOSOON, and perhaps in the future there will be better sources available. But even then, I feel that mention of any award probably ought to be a part of a page about the award-giving body or Foundation - at least in the first instance. But I see there is not one, either here or on Danish Wikipedia. That might be the first subject to look out for sources about. A similar sort of example of a notable award that springs to mind (mainly because I received an award for 'Imaginative Education Work' from it back in the 1990s!) is the Gulbenkian Prize. There you will see a number of mainstream media references, plus internal wikilinks to the award-giving foundation. I'm not going to say give up on this, but I am not convinced your award scheme has been established long enough to have become 'notable' in the sense that Wikipedia uses that word. See WP:GNG and WP:N for two shortcuts to these topics. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)        

General reliability and/or quality of sources expected in alumni sections of colleges and universities (St. Xavier's College, Kolkata#Notable alumni)

Hi, I'm trying to improve (work on) the St. Xavier's College, Kolkata article. The #Notable Alumni section of the article has a notice asking users to

improve this article by removing names that do not have independent reliable sources 
showing they merit inclusion in this article AND alumni, or by incorporating the relevant
publications into the body of the article through appropriate citations.

However, on trying to look for sources on Google most of the sources that actually talks about them being from Xaviers are either tweets, self-published articles and/or company profiles and/or interviews which aren't considered independent and reliable. I'm pretty sure most of the people listed there are notable enough to be there but there just doesn't seem to be any reliable sources talking from which college they graduated. Any help on this regard would be greatly appreciated :) Sohom Datta (talk) 06:47, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

P.S: How do you quote text in comments? I can't seem to be able to get my comment quote to format properly. Sohom Datta (talk) 07:00, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I'd delete all that aren't well sourced. "What you call a reliable source doesn't exist, so I'm forced to use sources that you happen not to like" doesn't cut it. Neither does "But this is what their articles say." Or "Everyone knows that it's true." Or "He told me himself", or whatever. Unfortunately, a lot of editors seem to want to boost certain universities by adding to the lists of their alumni, so you are going to hurt some people's feelings. Well, tough. ¶ You also ask:

How do you quote text in comments? [...]

I think that the method I've just used is effective for most cases. It's certainly easy to implement. Put one additional colon at the start, and italicize the whole thing (which in turn will deitalicize what was in italics). Easier done than said. -- Hoary (talk) 07:37, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Cool, I'll try my best to keep only those that I find reliable sources for. Also, thanks for showing how to quote stuff in comments :) Sohom Datta (talk) 14:10, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Revert older edits

How to revert an older edit? And what is the difference between revert and manual revert. Eroberar (talk) 14:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Eroberar: For every edit, you can try hitting the "undo" button next to it in the article's history page. However, if it's older, you may not be able to directly undo, in which case you will have to manually change the text. If A makes an edit and B undoes that edit with no edits between A and B, B's edit is known as a "revert". If B did not hit the "undo" button but instead manually changed the text, that's known as a "manual revert". ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 15:05, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia "adoption"

I read the adoption article but I'm not sure I can attend that much and by much I mean a lot! so is it ok if i put the {{adoptme}} in my user page? Wikipidean's Creed (talk) 15:38, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Wikipidean's Creed: Yes, you can do that, but Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user advises that it is best to contact a potential adopter directly. RudolfRed (talk) 15:43, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Wikipidean's Creed: Welcome to the Teahouse. Whilst in once sense RudolfRed was quite correct in their answer, the reality is actually quite different. Because you only joined Wikipedia today, you are far better off asking here at the Teahouse for help with specific questions. You will get help much quicker, too. The Adopt-a-user process requires a lot of commitment from both parties, and nowadays adoption better suits relatively inexperienced users who have already learned some of the basics but can show dedication to wanting to go on to understand things in greater depth. I'm afraid you are most unlikely to get an adopter looking at your contributions and thinking, "yes, this person is committed. I'd be happy to give lots of my time to help them." Later on, they might well be willing to do that, once they've seen what kind of edits you're making and the range of your interest and commitment here. But right now it would not work for you, sorry. Equally, no Adopter really looks out for the 'adopt-me' templates or responds to them - it requires the new user to go and make that initial approach once they feel they're ready to be 'adopted'. So stick with asking for help here, for now, then see how you go. You might pick things up dead easily, especially if you take the time to read any guidance or policy pages you encounter! Do have a go at our interactive tour: The Wikipedia Adventure - there are 15 different badges you can collect as you progress. All the best, and come back soon! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)    

Difference between a draft and a stub article

What's the difference between a draft, and an article that needs improvement? I've got a draft right now (Draft:Candleman), and right now its at stub status. Do I have to wait before I can submit it for approval, or can I submit it now, and if it gets approved, continue to work on it? Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 15:47, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Le Panini:, Draft means anything that is in the draftspace, and not in the mainspace. Stub is a content based assessment of any article/draft that how much information it has. A little but meaningful article/draft would be stub, then start, then C, then B, and then GA (and GA status is given to any article after a due review) and so on. A detailed information is at WP:ASSESS. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 16:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

If your draft article meets the notability criteria at the GNG or the SNG criteria, you're free to move it to mainspace. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 16:35, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Lengthy ANI discussion archived without a resolution

Good day.

Is it possible to bring back an archived discussion in WP:ANI? It is not yet closed since there was no resolution yet on the proposed topic ban. It is such a waste for a lengthy discussion to go like this.

It is located at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1049#Uncivil_behavior_and_removal_of_references_in_Imelda_Marcos.

Thanks. HiwilmsTalk 09:24, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

It would appear that the discussion was archived automatically which happens after 72 hours of inactivity. Am I to understand that the issue is still ongoing? It looks like it started a whole month ago, if it's still happening then I'd say that's not really an "incident" anymore - it's more a long term issue. I would consider that the main noticeboard is the correct forum. But take a look at WP:CONDUCTDISPUTE to see what all of the options are. Best of luck solving your dispute. --Paul ❬talk❭ 10:10, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

FTR, WP:ANI is the board for urgent issues as well as chronic ones (about editor behaviour) that haven't been resolved. WP:AN is for issues that may be of interest to administrators in general. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:00, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

It's actually at the end-stage already. Editors are already weighing in on the two proposals (topic ban) when the thread was archived. HiwilmsTalk 12:24, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Maybe just unarchive it, I'm sure that couldn't do much harm. --Paul ❬talk❭ 08:04, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

• I'll unarchive. EEng 14:27, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@EEng: Thanks a lot. Pinging Chieharumachi:. HiwilmsTalk 14:36, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

All of which is fine, but is there any way to ensure that the bot only archives complete threads (i.e. level two headers) and not subsections of threads (level three headers and below)? Mjroots (talk) 14:44, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Mjroots, if it did that, it's probably a bug, because I can't see any such option in the bot's documentation. Just out of curiosity, do you have the diff of where that happened? Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:56, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool This is the edit in question actually, this is it - a level two header and a level three subsection were archived, but there were other level three subsections in that thread active at the time that were not archived. Mjroots (talk) 16:16, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Pinging Σ, the bot's owner. Mjroots (talk) 16:19, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Mjroots, what I see in that diff is, five level-2 sections were archived, none of them had subsections. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool that'll teach me to pay attention to dates, as well as times. I've amended that post with the correct diff, Mjroots (talk) 17:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Mjroots, I don't see anything wrong with that diff either. If this is about the Imelda Marcos thread, perhaps the source of confusion is the edits that were made to the archive itself [26]? Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:55, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

That's it exactly; for the record, see [27]. And the bot absolutely, positively operates only on complete ==-level threads. EEng 18:00, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Getting started!

Hi Everyone, i am new to editing in Wikipedia but want to contribute! How can I easily seach for articles that need corrections in grammar etc ?

Thank you 8Directions (talk) 18:32, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@8Directions: Welcome, and thanks for wanting to help! Check out the Typo Team at WP:TYPO for tips on how to find an fix typos. Also on that page are links to other cleanup projects such as Wikipedia:WikiProject_Grammar and WP:CLEANUP. RudolfRed (talk) 18:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Thamk you so much for the fast asnwer! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8Directions (talk • contribs) 18:56, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

User box isnt working

I'm not sure what am I doing wrong but when I copy and paste the userbox link it doesn't show the user box it shows just a link Wikipidean's Creed (talk) 10:49, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Works if without the nowiki and with curly double brackets {{ }}. Try copying what is below to your User page. David notMD (talk) 10:54, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

This user only needs 4 more Wumpa fruit for an extra life.

I see that you have mastered adding Userboxes to your page. Great. David notMD (talk) 19:02, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Helpful, Disruptive, Neither?

I am (slowly) working my way through Category:Pages using Infobox person with deprecated parameter home town (this does not let me wikilink for some reason, so I apologize for the 'external link' to...wikipedia) and the category has a lot of Draft pages in it, such as this one: Draft:4K Gaming Nepal - should I pass over things like that, or go ahead and tidy it up by removing home_town from the infobox? I don't want to be disruptive, but I also don't want to do a bunch of edits that aren't worthwhile/don't improve the encyclopedia. Cheers! sootikins ^{(gaze/palaver)} 17:44, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi sootikins, welcome to the Teahouse. To wikilink to categories, place a comma colon inside the square brackets but before the name; like so Category:Pages using Infobox person with deprecated parameter home town. If the drafts are in draftspace, rather than userspace, then you should be fine making those edits; just be sure to use clear edit summaries. To make your edits worthwhile, perhaps be selective about which ones you edit, choosing only pages likely to be published in the main article space.

There does however exist an automated tool called Auto Wiki Browser (AWB), which I believe can perform the kind of edits you are performing but a lot faster. I don't think you have enough edits yet to qualify for access to the tool, but try asking at the AWB task page to see whether it would be feasible, and maybe someone would consider helping you out on this. Zindor (talk) 18:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Note: For "place a comma inside the square brackets" in the post above, read "place a colon inside the square brackets". (Just so no new editors get confused.) Deor (talk) 18:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for catching that. I've now struck through and amended it. Zindor (talk) 18:26, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

<edit conflict> Hi sootikins. In order to link to a category and avoid the need to place an external link as in your question above, place a colon before after the doubled brackets, e.g., [[:category:NAME]]. I think on balance it's helpful (if it was, rather, clearly mistaken, I still wouldn't describe it as "disruptive"—as obviously done in good faith). Per WP:DRAFTNOCAT: "Drafts, no matter whether in the draft namespace or your userspace, are not articles, and thus do not belong in content categories...". So not only does fixing these address the quoted issue, but if these drafts eventually go live, the category will be correct in them. But that is not done by removing the hometown (which has the detriment of removing information, that would be somewhat burdensome to return). I suggest instead that you don't remove the town entirely, but simply comment it out from the drafts' infoboxes, e.g., <!-- Name of Town --> , which has the benefit of leaving the information in, which can be easily made live by removing the comment-out markup when a draft is moved to the mainspace. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:18, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Firstly, thank you all for the tip about the colon! Secondly, Should I do that (comment out, but don't remove) even though the parameter itself is deprecated? It feels like I'd just be adding even more clutter with the commenting out. Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding! I will happily revert myself where I have already removed the parameters that had a hometown listed, I think I've done maybe 50 at most and the majority are still the current edit, the last I looked. sootikins ^{(gaze/palaver)} 18:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I misunderstood sorry--I somehow interpreted as the category being somehow separate, and not that placing hometowns in infoboxes itself is deprecated. Just ignore me:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:04, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Ha, no worries, it's not a straightforward question! Thank you for your input, it does make me lean towards going ahead and cleaning up the Drafts I run across. sootikins ^{(gaze/palaver)} 20:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Why is my page still in draft? (LoadUp Technologies)

Hi there! I have been trying to get my draft of LoadUp Technologies published, and am not sure why it hasn't been approved. I originally wrote a much longer article, but after the review came back that there weren't enough citations and it sounded a little like advertising copy, I shortened it and removed any copy that wasn't written in the proper encyclopedia voice. Since then, it's been sitting in drafts. How do I get another review? I am a little unsure why the original wasn't approved, as I used referenced the already-approved 800-GOT-JUNK Wiki (they are also a junk removal company like LoadUp Technologies is) to make sure that I was including things that had been previously approved for a similar type of entry. Just not sure exactly what is so different between what I originally submitted and what was approved for 800-GOT-JUNK.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated! Maggieminton88 (talk) 18:15, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Maggieminton88 I have added the submission template to allow you to submit it for a review, but if you were to do so, it would almost certainly be rejected again. This is because it does little more than tell of the existence of the company and what it does, and is sourced to nothing but press release-type sources or announcements of routine business, neither of which establishes that this company meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable company.

Wikipedia articles must do more than tell about a company. They must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's definition of a notable company. "Significant coverage" goes beyond brief mentions, name drops, press releases, announcements of routine business transactions, staff interviews, or other primary sources. See Your First Article for more information.

If you have some association with this company, please review conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 18:31, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link Draft:LoadUp Technologies. I agree with the assessment - this will not become an article until better sourcing is found. A quick Google search doesn't turn up anything. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:27, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

still building Gosset Experiment Design

Since I am still building a wikipedia page for Gosset Experiment Design,and this is my first attempt building a new page, I have much to learn. 1. I started in a sandbox. A wiki person nicely placed it in a more appropriate location.

2. I built two valid citations before I had a paragraph to attach them to, so the citations dangle near the beginning. I must learn to relocate them.

3. The author/creator placed the program in the public domain in 2017. So I have been building the wiki page from his intro and user's guide. Less than an hour ago, I followed the wiki instructions to send the author specific procedures so that he can grant wikipedia the required permissions. It may take over a day for him to respond.

4. I have been communicating with the author/creator for over a decade. He was enthusiastic when I informed him two weeks ago that I was building a wikipedia page.

I would like to continue building and saving the page, avoiding having it deleted before I am finished building. From one wiki comment, it sounded like I only have one more chance to complete the page up to wikipedia standards.

5. At the moment, every small addition I make appears to become a major item for inspection. That is okay with me, as long as I have more iterations to improve the article.

Thank you,Henkuoui (talk) 19:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC) Henkuoui (talk) 19:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Gosset Experiment Design exists and is not being threatened with deletion. You made some not unusual beginner's mistakes, such as pasting in copyright protected content. The Declining reviewer pointed out the critical need for references created in the body of the draft. IMPORTANT: "Publish changes" does not mean you have submitted the draft for a second review. All it means is that you have saved changes. You can work on the draft until you think it is worth submitting again. David notMD (talk) 19:29, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

But another common beginner's mistake, Henkuoui, is assuming that what the subject of the article says, or what people closely associated with the subject say, is of much relevance to the article. An article about a language by Hardin and Sloane might well refer to some papers by Hardin and Sloane, and link to them in an "External Links" section, but it should probably not cite them as references, certainly not as the main source. The article should be mostly based on information published by people unconnected with Hardin and Sloane. If they are the only source for information about the language (as opposed to people who have applied it) it may not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability.. Please see Notability and Citing sources. --ColinFine (talk) 20:26, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

(ec) @Henkuoui: As long as you edit the draft at least once every six months, and avoid doing things that are disruptive or unlawful (like adding copyrighted text or images), the draft will remain.

Keep in mind that the creator of GED is considered to be a primary source with regard to this subject, so things they say or even publish are of limited use as references.

If you want to alert other editors that you are making changes incrementally over a few hours, you can add the template {{In use}} or, if over several days, add {{Under construction}}, to the top of the page. This should keep others from working on it until you've removed the template.

Happy editing! —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:32, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Adding A Photo

I am trying to add a photo. The photo is mine, I took it with my own camera. Yet Wikipedia is rejecting it. What else can I do to post my pic? Gshistorian (talk) 18:58, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Gshistorian Hello and welcome. You cannot upload images to Wikipedia unless you are autoconfirmed, meaning that your account is four days old with 10 edits. You haven't yet met either criteria. 331dot (talk) 19:00, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Gshistorian and 331dot: I assume you refer to Our central Media Project Wikimedia Commons. If they are truely your photos, please use the Upload Wizard there directly. For the two sucessfull uploads, transcluding them works like this (check the source code) Note to 331dot: When dealing with photos or other media that fails to upload, it is almost always a good idea to look into The commons Edit filter log. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:32, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Gshistorian: Hello, Eric. I am a little worried that, despite you being the photographer (and were presumably an employee or were contracted by CBS at the time?) you probably do not really have the rights to give away for commercial re-use the image of Fields on his own in front of the microphone. Whilst we really want to welcome photographers like you with open arms who have had access to celebrities and who are willing to make their work available here, the EXIF information for that image clearly states "MANDATORY CREDIT; NO ARCHIVE; NO SALES; NORTH AMERICA USE ONLY. MANDATORY CREDIT; NO SALES; NO ARCHIVE; NORTH AMERICAN USE ONLY" and "CBS©2008 CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved." I'm afraid keeping the image on Wikimedia Commons would result in it breaching CBS' legal rights. For that reason, I fear we will need to ask Commons to remove it. However, I don't see the same issue with the other image. Maybe you took it in your lunch period, who knows? (the other chap could either be cropped out, or the image description on Commons updated to identify him if he's someone well-known. I think the problem might also have been that you added information from your own personal knowledge to the article (along with the image) and the lack of supporting citations probably made another editor feel that full reversion of your edits was for the best. If you could make sure you only add content, written in an encyclopaedic tone of voice and with references to allow it to be verified, that would be a lot better. (by 'voice' I mean using words like 'Ironically' sounds too much like personal opinions rather than non-neutral statements for an encyclopaedia). Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:39, 19 October 2020 (UTC) 

@Victor Schmidt: I have un-trancluded the images (commented them out, so as not to change the display of the text of your post), based on the details in my following post, indicating that though currently existing at the Commons, these are likely non-free images, ripe for deletion there, that cannot be used on Wikipedia.

<edit conflict> Hi Gshistorian. I see you changed the existing free image in the article from File:B_Hilton1.jpg, to the image you uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons, File:Rich Fields.jpg, in this edit. Your edits (collectively) were reverted by a bot, which made a mistake in identifying them as possible vandalism. See this revision, with its edit summary. (We reserve "vandalism" to describe edits that are intended to harm the encyclopedia, obviously misplaced here, though I do think some of the language you tried to add was misplaced in its content and tone by employing unencyclopedic commentary/opinion/colloquialisms/résumé-like language – "enjoys a..."; "hold down"; "For his efforts..."; "Ironically"]). Please understand also that the information added in nearly all edits should be verified by citing a reliable source.

Anyway, back to the focus: assuming the new image is free—more on that below—why is it better than the existing image? In other words, why should it replace it, all things being equal? But things don't appear equal because there is a good reason, at least currently, to not include the new photo and to retain the existing one. It is that your upload to the Commons includes details that would certainly support a request to delete that image as not actually free (files uploaded to the Commons must properly be either released into the public domain, or granted a suitably free and compatible copyright license).

Predominantly, you have provided text accompanying the upload that attempts to reserve non-free copyright: "Photo: [__Omitted Name__/CBS©2008 CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved." We don't use images here that are non-free and ripe for deletion as improperly uploaded to the Commons. It might be useful to read about how releases are done, but you have already indicated that CBS at least co-owns the copyright, so quite a formal process would be needed to demonstrate such a release for this image, and based on its details, the other you uploaded as well—that is, if you have the legal authority over CBS-owned content, and were willing to donate the image under the requisite free copyright license (that allows reuse even for commercial purposes). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:49, 19 October 2020 (UTC)