Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1143

Archive 1140

Archive 1141

Archive 1142

Archive 1143

Archive 1144

Archive 1145

→

Archive 1150

How to edit

in this page most https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samata_Party information are wrong I have all references , kindly plz change according to it AhmdAsjad (talk) 09:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

The place to discuss potential improvements to an article is on its talk page Talk:Samata Party. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

You and User:समता1988 have an ongoing dispute at Talk:Samata Party, with that editor calling for you to be blocked, and being proponant of N.A. Khoan. What I find most interesting, but completely unable to understand, is that you have each posted an "official" website of the Samata Party that do not match. One states that N.A. Khoan is Secretary General (samataparty.co.in) and the other that Uday Kumar Mandal is the Secretary General (samataparty.org). I think this is beyond the scope of Teahouse help. David notMD (talk) 13:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Table of contents number is wrapping

Anyone else notice the last number of the table of contents is wrapping across two rows? TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:59, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Before today, I was noticing the number in the Teahouse table of contents was wrapping across two rows if the section title was also wrapping across two rows. However, today it looks like the number is no longer wrapping. GoingBatty (talk) 14:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Sorry - replied here before reading the section below states that it's been fixed. GoingBatty (talk) 14:06, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

How to deal with an abusive user?

After realizing that Justanother2 was harassing multiple users and not contributing anything useful, Bluerules suggested to me that I file a report at WP:ANI. I did that here, but it doesn't look like any administrators are going to do anything about it and I'm wondering if I filed that report at the wrong place. Can anyone look at it and tell me if there's a more appropriate place for this type of report? Back Bay Barry (talk) 14:14, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I think you have reported it in the right place, have patience(Anybody is free to disagree). Vial of Power (talk) 14:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Recover Deleted Article

Hello, How can I recover a deleted article, I will like to re-write it> I was on vacation when a user brought up n issue regarding the reference. Olaintel (talk) 14:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Olaintel! Check out WP:REFUND. casualdejekyll 14:21, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

You can't recover a deleted article, @Olaintel. You can however rewrite it as a draft, but make sure you do not repeat the errors, or give reason for deletion. Please also follow all criteria while rewriting, and happy editing! Vial of Power (talk) 14:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

looks like I was wrong, Sorry for that! Vial of Power (talk) 14:26, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Which article is this about? The odds and procedure of getting a deleted article back depend on the method used to delete it. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 15:34, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

The article is titled "Akindotun Merino" Olaintel (talk) 09:58, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt mobil The article is titled "Akindotun Merino" Olaintel (talk) 09:58, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

AJ Johnson is listed as living she passed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrienne-Joi_Johnson Msantiking0309 (talk) 02:57, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

When? If true, her death not mentioned in any item from a search. Must have a reference to cite. David notMD (talk) 03:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

@Msantiking0309: Are you confusing her with Anthony Johnson (actor), also known as AJ Johnson, who died last year? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:55, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

how can i edit it

This page is semi-protected so that only autoconfirmed users can edit it. If you need help getting started with editing, please visit the Teahouse. how can i edit it... plz help AhmdAsjad (talk) 15:59, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@AhmdAsjad: Hello Ahmd! You shouldn't have to worry about the page being semi-protected as your account is auto-confirmed meaning you are able to make edits to id. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

You have been editing the article as recently as yesterday. The issue is not whether you can edit it, but can you and other editors reach consensus on the Talk page before you return to editing it. See my comment earlier today at "How to edit." David notMD (talk) 16:12, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Possibly inappropriately closed merge discussion

Hello! While looking through recent changes, I encountered this edit. The user merged the article saying it was per a merge discussion. However I took a look at the merge discussion and I'm not seeing any clear support for the merge. Where would the appropriate place to request a re-evaluation of a merge discussion be? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Blaze Wolf, talk page of closer is usually the first step.Slywriter (talk) 16:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Alright sounds good. I'll ask them. Where would I go after that (if they don't respond at all)? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:34, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Closing_discussions says WP:AN would be next stop since we don't have a forum dedicated to merge review.Slywriter (talk) 16:36, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Alright sounds good. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:37, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Newbie

Can i find a pen friend who will guide me more into Wikipedia editing? Ziggypelle (talk) 17:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ziggypelle: Hello, Ziggypelle, and welcome to the teahouse. There is a project called Adopt-A-User, maybe that could work for you? --The Tips of Apmh 17:18, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Wiki pages non-english

Hello, i want to create an english article from this Amharic Wikipedia article https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%8A%A3%E1%89%A0%E1%88%AB_%E1%88%9E%E1%88%8B can i just go ahead? Can i also use the pic there, on English wikipedia? YonasJH (talk) 18:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

If you speak the language well enough, and you think you could translate the article, I would suggest reading Help:Translation for a guide on how to translate. ― Levi_OP^Talk 18:37, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Along with the above, avoid using machine translations like Google Translate or deepL. While deepL is more accurate than Translate (from my experience), it still isn't as accurate as having someone who speaks both the language it's being translated from and the language it's being translated into (in this case English) translate it. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:48, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: YonasJH —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

To answer your question about the image, it looks as if the image on the Amharic Wikipedia article is hosted there, and not on Wikimedia Commons. To use an image in a BLP on the English Wikipedia the image would need to be on Wikimedia Commons (and therefore released under an appropriate licence). A non free use rationale is not acceptable for living people, and an image hosted locally on another language's Wikipedia can not be used here on enwiki. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:23, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: missing a not in that sentence? Mathglot (talk) 09:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Indeed. "Not" added now. Thanks for pointing it out. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:11, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank u all for your guidance! YonasJH (talk) 17:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Is looking for sources to add to un-/under-sourced articles confirmation bias?

If I come across an article that is lacking sources and I go and try to find sources that support the existing claims, would that be confirmation bias? The claims aren't necessarily my own, but it kinda feels a little wrong for me to intentionally search for evidence for specific claims, any claims, and just use those sources to support the claim. I suppose in looking for sources if I come across opposing sources, I could add (and source) the opposing evidence as well, or just not add a source to the original claim, but I'm not sure what would be the best thing to do. Rourensu (talk) 16:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Rourensu: Hello Rour! I don't think looking for a source for things that are lacking a source would be confirmation bias (In fact, that's the entire reason why tags like {{cn}} exist, to indicate what needs a source so editors can find one). However if you find reliable, secondary sources that go against the claim you are trying to source, then it would be wise to adjust the statement so that it matches what sources are saying. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:05, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Thank you. I will keep that in mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rourensu (talk • contribs) 18:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Rourensu: in most cases, as Blaze Wolf says, this is fine. Someone thought it was true when they wrote it, and may have seen a reliable source but just not included it. There are a small number of cases where I might be cautious here, such as scientific claims ("X has been proven to ...") or opinion claims ("the majority of reviews were negative"), but you can still include anything you find. Just use attribution where necessary ("One 2014 study found that ..."; "The New York Times wrote ..."). — Bilorv (talk) 16:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Bilorv: Alright. I will do that. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rourensu (talk • contribs) 18:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Rourensu: you ask a good question showing good intuition of what some of the subtler issues around verifying content may be, and there is one thing that could apply here, and it involves the policy called "WP:DUE WEIGHT". To some extent, it depends on how you search, and especially on whether this is a fairly minor point of fact that will only be covered in a limited number of sources, or whether it's something major, with hundreds of published sources about it. If the latter is the case, the policy of WP:DUE WEIGHT comes more into play, and confirmation bias could be an issue. One example I recall regarding issues of confirmation bias in sourcing was about whether the American Revolution was one of the major causes of the French Revolution (spoiler: it wasn't). But because the French Revolution has had thousands of volumes published about it, it's not too hard to find a bunch of sources that go against the grain of the majority of sources about the Revolution, and if you search for and pick just those sources and cite them, it would give a skewed vision to the article that goes against WP:NPOV, one of Wikipedia's core policies. Usually the way this happens, is by a well-intentioned, but poorly-worded query: that is, if you search for the thing you are trying to prove, then it's much more likley you will find it, even if it is only 2% of the prevailing opinion of reliable sources, and not find the 98% of sources that say the opposite.

The principle of DUE WEIGHT says that we must " fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources", and that "the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all". As long as you are careful with your queries, and don't word them in a way that is likely to turn up results in a biased way that tend to support the assertion your are seeking to cite, you should be fine. I hope this helps you with your question about confirmation bias. Mathglot (talk) 19:50, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mathglot: Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rourensu (talk • contribs) 18:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Criteria for Quote Attribution

So I'm new here, and I started on a somewhat controversial talk page Talk:American_exceptionalism#Moral_Basis_of_Idea_is_Ignored which may have been a mistake, but review it and see what's going on. My question is, I brought up the lack of an important quote purportedly wrongfully attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville. It turns out the first mention of the quote is in a 1922 letter written to a magazine in which someone details a church service where the pastor made this quote: "I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers—and it was not there. . . . . in her fertile fields and boundless forests—and it was not there. . . . .in her rich mines and her vast world commerce—and it was not there. . . . in her democratic Congress and her matchless Constitution—and it was not there. Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great." The pastor in 1922 attributed the quote to de Tocqueville. However, this quote doesn't appear in any of his writings. Does a quote have to appear in writing in order to be "attributed" to the person? Or is this secondary source enough? He could have said it in a famous (at the time) speech not recorded anywhere in surviving texts. (Pure conjecture) I'm new to this, so please tell me the standards for attribution, thanks! Lincoln1809 (talk) 17:58, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Lincoln1809! For stuff like this, we try to go with what the experts believe, since anything more than that is original research, which is not allowed. So the way to frame your question is, what do the most respected de Tocqueville experts believe about the veracity of this quote? If they think he said it, we can include it verbatim (assuming it's relevant enough to the article). If they think maybe, we could say "some scholars believe...". If it's too disputed, leave it out and perhaps save it for Wikiquote, where the dispute can be noted. You can open a discussion at Talk:Alexis de Tocqueville if the answer isn't clear. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:06, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Creating a wiki page for my company

 Courtesy link: Draft:APTN lumi

Hi there!

I have been tasked with setting up a wiki page for one of my companies products, it was just declined because it sounded like too much of a advertisement and there were not enough secondary sources which is fair, Any tips on fixing this without much media coverage? the sister company already has a pretty detailed page, but for this we do not have that much to say or things to link to.

Thanks, O Owenpantos (talk) 17:09, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Owenpantos: Hello Owen! Are you being paid by your company to make the page? If so you are required to disclose it, and then follow the instructions at WP:COI and WP:PAID. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Owenpantos: First, your draft clearly reads like an advertisement and uses puffery words like "inspiring", "enlightening", "entertaining", "enjoy", etc. This is not acceptable on Wikipedia. Secondly, you seem to be doing this paid, which is also not allowed. Third, you only have 9 edits and you are trying to make an article. We reccomend doing minor edits to articles before trying to create an article. Thanks, The Tips of Apmh 17:37, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

There is no Wikipedia policy expressly forbidding paid or unpaid editing, however it is strongly discouraged. I wanted to clear that up so @Owenpantos doesn't think they are violating policy. They are, however, required to disclose such information. Failure to do so is a violation of policy. --ARoseWolf 17:49, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Everyone! still learning about all of this thank you, everyone, for your feedback, not sure how to direct these comments to you Blaze Wolf and Arose, but this all makes sense and I appreciate it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Owenpantos (talk • contribs) 18:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Owenpantos: No problem! Glad I could help. Please make sure you follow the instructions at WP:PAID for disclosing that you're being paid. I don't want you to get blocked just because you hadn't disclosed that you're being paid. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:39, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Owenpantos, please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 18:56, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Can someone upload some files

The reason i cant do it on my own because the copyright system on commons suck really bad (and i quit uploading there because i "violated" copyright laws that arent real), so i will send you the image if you just leave a message on the talk page TzarN64 (talk) 19:14, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@TzarN64! Welcome back to the Teahouse!
The copyright system on Commons is incredibly simple! You can only upload a file to Commons if it is freely usable everywhere. That one sentence describes Commons entire licensing policy. What is the image, anyway? (If it's copyrighted, don't send it. See WP:NFCC.) casualdejekyll 19:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Is English not your first language? For a long time now you've been struggling with using the English Wikipedia - you should check to see if there is a Wikipedia in your first language. casualdejekyll 19:42, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

References

page

I was wondering when I could publish pages again and also how to delete pages that are not allowed? Garry23112 (talk) 19:09, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Garry23112, could you clarify what you mean by "again"? Articles are deleted through the articles for deletion process, whereas other types of pages have separate processes. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Don't try to publish articles like this [1] though. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:23, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Garry23112: I looked through your edit history and it appears you are misinterpreting what Wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is not a social media website and not a blog where you "post" about yourself like you did on User:Garry23112. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia where people collect well-sourced information about notable subjects unrelated to them. Anton.bersh (talk) 19:58, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Adding my Book Series to Wikipedia

Hello,

I have written a book series that has dozens of reviews by reputable sources and has won several awards. However, I am not good at writing Wiki entries. Is there someone that could create the page for me? I tried last year, but was rejected over and over again.

Thank you, Mojarra69 (talk) 20:34, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mojarra69, it looks like the article you're trying to create is Draft:The Search For Synergy. That draft has been firmly rejected because you have not provided citations to the reputable sources reviewing it. Could you share the URLs to the three best of those sources here? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:41, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mojarra69: I can help you write the article draft, if you can provide at least three good sources (see comment above for criteria). Right now, the article has no usable sources. Anton.bersh (talk) 20:58, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Titanokorys cladogram help

Hi, I am trying to get the Titanokorys article ready for a GAN, So I made a cladogram. it looks good, but there are some things that could be fixed. Here is the article were I was trying to replicate https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.210664. If anyone could help that would be great!. Fossiladder13 (talk) 15:43, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Fossiladder13: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest you post your request for assistance at the article's talk page: Talk:Titanokorys, with details of what needs to be fixed. If you don't receive any response after a few days, you could reach out to the WikiProjects listed on the talk page, and invite them to join the discussion at Talk:Titanokorys. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Friendly Help

Hello, I Wanted to bring this up. I am have an article about me at Mario Cerrito. It was put up for deletion on February 3rd and was put into the "keep" status. After 5 days it was reopened and again put up for deletion discussion. I left a note on the nominators wall to no avail that read like this. Hello, this is Mario Cerrito. I am a little upset about what just happened. As a working artist and businessman your name means a lot. I am currently casting for a new movie and was just informed this morning by an actors agent after he "googled me" that my wikipedia is facing deletion. He asked me why. As embarrassing as it was when he asked me, I didn't know how to respond. What is irritating me the worst is after researching the history on the article it was JUST nominated for deletion and passed as "keep." As much as I don't know about wikipedia I started doing some research/reading and found under (Wikipedia: Renominating for Deletion) it states : If the XfD discussion was closed as “keep”, generally do not renominate the page for at least six months, unless there is something new to say, and even so, usually wait a few months. After checking it has literally been a matter of 5 days and a page about me has the deletion tag again and it is not right. I can read above that Tamzin seems to have the problem and upon looking at the just passed deletion discussion she forgot to mention it looks to be 5 Keep votes including Alanshohn, Eddy, Roman Spinner, Lamona and Saisykat. I see that a few were crossed out for whatever reasons but I am going off of what I am reading. You have to understand that as a working artist and individual something like a deletion tag on the first website that pops up when people "google you" is very demeaning. I am in the process of casting a film and people do research of who they are working with. To point out something else under (Wikipedia : Renominating for deletion) it also states "If you wish to renominate the page, hoping to achieve a different outcome, then slow down. You and the other participants may be overly involved with a particular perspective. Relisting immediately may come across as combative. Immediate second round participants are less likely to listen, and are more likely to dig in their heels. You may be right, but the audience won’t be receptive. The other participants very likely will be thinking that you have not been listening to them." I feel this has been handled unfairly and wished to express my concerns with you since you were the username who "kept" and then relisted." I wouldn't normall do something like this but felt I should since it's my name and livelihood. Thank you. Mario CerritoItalic text

I am writing to see if anyone can help. One editor seems to keep targeting the page and I do not think it has been handled fairly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarioCerrito (talk • contribs) 18:12, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I've addressed this in the deletion discussion page. The article needs to be updated with less of a resume tone. Lincoln1809 (talk) 18:36, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I see that the article Mario Cerrito was created eight weeks ago by Penandpencil2021, an account that was created only a week earlier and has recently been blocked from editing. The agent may have wondered if you had paid someone to create an article about you, and the creator had breached Wikipedia terms by failing to declare that they were a paid editor. If I were in your position, I'd tell the truth (whatever it is) to the agent. Penandpencil2021's failing should not reflect on you. Maproom (talk) 19:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

OP is being discussed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MikePlant1. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:20, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

...and now blocked. --Blablubbs (talk) 21:46, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@MarioCerrito: I understand your frustration and am sorry that Wikipedia bureaucracy is inconvenient for you. Unfortunately, this due process is necessary to maintain quality of Wikipedia content and, ultimately, its reputation. I would be glad to help you if you are willing to follow Wikipedia rules (especially, WP:COI). By the way, the bureaucratic nightmare that you are going through is largely caused by involvement of so many unscrupulous accounts. In fact, I rarely see so many sock puppet accounts in one place and never saw AfD being reopened.

I see a lot of links in references, but after I checked a few at random, none appeared reliable, independent, and in-depth. In other words, the sources I checked do not count for the purposes of notability. Could you list three strongest sources which you believe support your argument the best? If you like I can check all sources myself, but that would take some time.

Anton.bersh (talk) 21:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Testing to see if I can replicate the TOC number wrapping issue. It appears to be because the question was very long, so I'll make this question long so it wraps too.

Dummy question to test TOC number wrapping TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:03, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Is this a known issue? It happens with Safari, Chrome and Edge, and the wrapping affects all double digit page numbers if I narrow the viewing window enough. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:07, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Can confirm it hits Firefox as well. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 01:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Fixed by @Dreamy Jazz -- lomrjyo ^{(✉ • 📝)} 02:42, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Dreamy Jazz! TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Copyright of Korean Image of Atomic Clock

I am working on the article for atomic clock and would like to use some images at kriss time keeping site. Is there a way to use these articles or is the copyright an issue? ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:00, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I would also like to use an image at https://www.bipm.org/en/-/2021-12-21-record-tai ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi ScientistBuilder. There're copyright notices at the bottoms of the websites you've linked to above which means you're likely going to need to get the WP:CONSENT (or c:COM:CONSENT) of the copyright holders of any images found on them to avoid them being deleted from Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. It's not impossible to upload photos without copyright holder consent locally to Wikipedia, but there are quite a lot of restrictions on the use of such images. Commons, however, only will accept 100% freely licensed or public domain content as explained here and here. If you want to try and contact the copyright holders (i.e. the website) and see if they are OK with giving their consent, you can find some information on how to do so here and here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

What are Wikimedia Commons images licensed under? The copyright page at https://www.bipm.org/en/copyright is Creative Commons — Attribution 3.0 IGO — CC BY 3.0 IGO. ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:20, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

For some BIPM's contact webmaster is hidden by javascript and I can't find the email address. ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

ScientistBuilder, Wikimedia Commons accepts a variety of licenses, but they must meet some pretty stringent standards. In general, newer licenses are better than older licenses, which may have minor defects in their legal language. The basic principle is that the license must permit free use by anyone, anywhere, for any purpose including commercial use. The only restrictions allowed are the requirement for attribution, and that subsequent re-use must follow the same terms. Licenses allowing "Wikipedia use only" are not acceptable. Licenses allowing "non-commercial use only" are not acceptable. Cullen328 (talk) 03:50, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

ScientistBuilder, is my response to your slightly earlier "Can't find date of image" unpersuasive? -- Hoary (talk) 05:23, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

What is your argument that you are asking about? ScientistBuilder (talk) 17:50, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

If I understand your argument correctly, you are saying that copyright questions should be asked at Wikimedia commons? ScientistBuilder (talk) 17:50, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

ScientistBuilder, if an image is suitable for use in Wikipedia and there'll be no claim of "fair use", then it should be uploaded to Commons. If there's a copyright or other question about it, then Commons is where this should be asked. -- Hoary (talk) 22:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Editing freely

Why cant i post a page that people can edit freely? Spencertheidiot (talk) 17:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Spencertheidiot - Welcome to the Teahouse!

You must be autoconfirmed to create pages on your own. Check out Wikipedia:Article wizard for creating articles as a new user. casualdejekyll 17:33, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Spencertheidiot: ALong with the above reason, Wikipedia doesn't really have any place where users can edit freely without any chance of being reverted. The closest thing to that is WP:SANDBOX and even then there are still some restrictions on what you can do there. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:37, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Relevant reading for @Spencertheidiot and @Blaze Wolf - Wikipedia Art casualdejekyll 17:41, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Spencertheidiot: If you were interested in having a page where you could start creating a draft for a Wikipedia article, you could use your user sandbox. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

FYI: Your sandbox will not be found by anyone using an external search such as Google, or a search within Wikipedia. It is a semi-private space. And, Wikipedia does not have 'pages,' it has articles of encyclopedia quality, with references validating all information. David notMD (talk) 21:59, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD: Wikipedia has millions of pages that are not encyclopedia articles, such as talk pages, category pages, file pages, help pages, and user pages such as the user sandbox I mentioned. GoingBatty (talk) 22:21, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia javascript Extensions

What are Wikipedia javascript extensions and how do I use them? For example, what are the benefits of User:Evad37/rater. ScientistBuilder (talk) 17:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder
You can use Javascript extensions by adding them to your common.js (Special:myPage/common.js), although you can use a gadget called Script Installer to make it easier. As for rater, I don't use it, but one js extension that I do use often here at the Teahouse is Writ Keeper's Teahouse Utility, which gives a one-click button for teahouse invitations and talkbacks. (Also: Under the hood, Twinkle is a Javascript extension, but it's a Gadget now, too.) casualdejekyll 17:53, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

How do javascript extensions work and how do you program one? ScientistBuilder (talk) 19:10, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Are there any risks associated with javascript extensions? I don't want any unwanted changes from a javascript extension. happening ScientistBuilder (talk) 19:11, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

There are definitely risks involved. If Javascript extensions are used by many people then that is a sign that there may be nothing to worry about. But remember that you are responsible for any script mishaps. I haven't had any issue yet - you can see what scripts I have at user:casualdejekyll/common.js. @ScientistBuilder casualdejekyll 19:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I didn't actually know that COI helper and Edit Request helper were 2 different things and didn't work with each other. I thought edit request helper helped with any type of edit request, but clearly I'm wrong! ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes! It annoys me quite a bit. I've done a little bit of work to try and make them more compatible, but they'll probably be seperate tools for a long while yet. casualdejekyll 19:21, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Is there a Wikipedia explanation video on how to javascript extensions? ScientistBuilder (talk) 22:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Standard Steps & Timeline for Requesting Edits?

I posted suggested updates to the Change.org talk pages in December (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change.org) and was wondering what the appropriate next steps are and standard timelines. Is this something you might be able to help me with or advise on? I'm unclear as to whom would actually review my proposal and make the adjustments. Should I pull them through directly and just include all the required citations and disclosers regarding my affiliation or should I just wait for someone to voluntarily assess and apply the edits? I want to ensure I fully follow and respect Wikipedia editing guidelines and welcome any guidance you can offer. ElleLinElle (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@ElleLinElle: Hello Elle! On the talk page you have attempted to disclose that you are being paid by Change.org to make edits (as an employee of Change.org), however you haven't disclosed it on your userpage yet. I highly suggest you read WP:PAID and follow the instructions to do it properly. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

There is a massive backlog on COI edit requests.. It could take anywhere from a few days to a few months. Sorry. casualdejekyll 18:40, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@ElleLinElle: I added {{edit request}} to Talk:Change.org#Updates to General Overview Box & Introductory Overview for you, to add your request to the backlog. GoingBatty (talk) 21:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you all for the responses! I will update my userpage accordingly and thank you so much GoingBatty for adding me to the backlog! I will use that tag in the future! ElleLinElle (talk) 22:57, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Why special pages cannot be edited?

2603:8000:F400:FCEA:1577:560D:84C3:D9D5 Mailbox  00:10, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Because special pages are generated on demand by the MediaWiki software which powers Wikipedia. Their structure is written into the software. But many special pages include some English text which can be edited by administrators. Is there something specific you would like? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:23, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I need to resolve a problem trying to log in after a prolonged absence

I am a long-time user and contributor with the WP user name Bruin2. Although my user name still seems to be acceptable on your system, my old password is not. I have made multiple attempts to create a new password using the "forgot password" directions, each time I have received a reply saying that there is already another password associated with this user name. I don't want to create a new account with a new user name, because for historical continuity, I want to keep my existing identity. Can someone help me resolve this issue? Right now my new edits can only appear using an IP number. Thanks.2601:648:8202:D080:F8DE:FA6F:37C6:89AC (talk) 21:58, 17 February 2022 (UTC) 2601:648:8202:D080:F8DE:FA6F:37C6:89AC (talk) 21:58, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Have you enabled any password recovery mechanisms? For example, have you added a recovery email or included committed identity at any point in your editing history? Anton.bersh (talk) 22:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

User:Bruin2 has stored an email address but we cannot see it for privacy reasons. What exactly happens when you enter Bruin2 but no email address at Special:PasswordReset? Your description does not sound familiar to me. Where do you see the reply you refer to? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Please fix the infobox

User:२ तकर पेप्सी/Sandbox making a article ready for a actor but getting error in the infobox section. Any editor who has experience fixing it kindly fix it. ... २ तकरपेप्सी _talk 00:31, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

also @Liz: tried[2] but she can't get it fixed. Someone please look at this.... २ तकरपेप्सी _talk 00:55, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I would suggest instead asking at WP:VPT. I find it strange how when previewing the edit, it says the infobox has a bunch of unknown parameters when those parameters are used normally. I've found that edit previews are just generally buggy. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:57, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@२ तकर पेप्सी: The page had a lot of non-breaking spaces instead of normal spaces. Between a parameter name and equals sign, non-breaking spaces are interpreted as part of the parameter name. This doesn't match the parameter name expected by templates. I see you fixed much of it. I have changed the remaining non-breaking spaces to normal spaces, also outside template calls.[3] If we actually want a non-breaking space in the output then we write   or call a template like {{spaces}}, so editors can see in the source what is happening. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:14, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I never would've caught that. I didn't see any non-breaking spaces that I"m used to so I assumed something was wrong. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:17, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

26 minutes is probably too fast to refer a user to WP:VPT. Somebody else may come along here. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I had referred them to WP:VPT because I saw that as a more appropriate place for a question like this because there they would be asking the question to editors who might be able to figure it out easier than editors here. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:32, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Thankyou for fixing it. This maybe happened as I copied the whole article from Liz's email. Btw thanks again. ... २ तकरपेप्सी _talk 01:22, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't see how copying it from Liz's email to you would've cause those non-breaking spaces to appear... ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:26, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I used my smartphone to copy the full article and I guess it created some extra space as previously there was np. ... २ तकरपेप्सी _talk 01:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@२ तकर पेप्सी: Various software can insert non-breaking spaces in a sometimes misguided attempt to preserve layout. In HTML, MediaWiki and many other places, consecutive normal spaces render as a single space. It's not a rare issue in Wikipedia. Some templates are coded to specifically detect and warn about non-breaking spaces but the code to detect unknown template parameters doesn't do it. Maybe it should. There is a subtle hint in the preview warning for [4] where the quoted parameter names include visible spaces before the ending quotation mark. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:41, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I feel like instead the preview warning should say that there may be non-breaking spaces in the parameter name. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Changes can be suggested at Module talk:Check for unknown parameters. The mentioned subtle hint is not deliberate but simply the result of displaying the used parameter name in quotation marks. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:54, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Nominating International System of Units for Featured Article Status

I would like to nominate International System of Units eventually for Featured Article. I think it is ready, but I don't want to have WP:Snowball occur or have the request rejected. What are some thoughts on nominating the article? ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:40, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Take a look through WP:WIAFA it has what will be looked for in a featured article prospect. If you feel it meets those criteria nominate it. If the reviewer disagrees they will generally post what the issues are so the article can be fixed and renominated when those concerns have been addressed. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 01:50, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

International System of Units is the third time you have made a few minor edits to an article and then proposed to submit for an upgrade. Your previous two were GA nominations that were reverted rather than a review being started. This time, a GA article you want to nom for FA. You have mentioned on the article's talk page your intent, which is a right step. Wait awhile to see if you get responders. Given you have not done any GAs, my opinion is a FA is a bridge too far. David notMD (talk) 03:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Also, ScientistBuilder, your FA-directed edits can be strange. An edit of yours to the SI article changed an item from something of which I have a slight (if insufficient) understanding -- that "the relative uncertainty of the Boltzmann constant" must be "better than one part in 10⁻⁶" -- to: "The definition of the Kelvin measured with a relative uncertainty of the Boltzmann constant derived from two fundamentally different methods such as acoustic gas thermometry and dielectric constant gas thermometry be better than one part in 10⁻⁶ and that these values be corroborated by other measurements." As I try to parse this, I infer that it's the definition that must be "better than one part in 10⁻⁶". Is this really so? It's hard for me to grasp, and very puzzling. However, I realize that my understanding of physics never surpassed secondary school level and since then has suffered long and serious attrition, and so I refrain from editing this kind of article (other than to correct obvious vandalism and the like). This in turn makes me wonder: Are you certain that you understand this area? -- Hoary (talk) 05:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

The tense was from 2016 being current and I was trying to change the tense to be in the past. ScientistBuilder (talk) 17:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I understand what you were trying to do, ScientistBuilder. No objection to that. I suspect, however, that you mangled the original. I'm not at all certain that you have a sufficient grasp of physics. If you indeed do not, I urge you not to edit in this area. -- Hoary (talk) 21:58, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I want to help make the article reach Featured Article status. ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:00, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mcmatter@David notMDI have made a request for suggestions for improvements on the talk page because I think the article is good and should be a Featured Article and don't know what to improve in the article. ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:17, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Math Formatting in Efn Template

Is there a way to use math formatting in an efn template? I tried <math> and {{{1}}} but the option to add math didn't appear. I think this is because nested templates are not allowed. Is there a way to resolve this? ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:11, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

My edit attempt is at International System of Units. I was able to add a URL citation with but I would like to figure out how to use the automatic citation tool in the efn template for citing my tooltip. ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:14, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I know it's definitely not because nested templates aren't allowed. If you check the efns I have in the table on Euro Truck Simulator 2, there are references using references templates in them. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 02:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Is there a way to use the Visual editor for adding references quickly in the template Visual Editor? ScientistBuilder (talk) 03:02, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I think so? There should be a button in the top toolbar that looks like this: “Cite. If you press that button and then insert the link you are wanting to use, if you press a button most of the time it will automatically generate the citation with the correct template with all the info filled out. I say most of the time because sometimes it will fail to do so. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 03:07, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Nested templates are allowed but there is a technical limit on them. I don't think that's what's happening here, however - 2 templates is much less then 20.. <math> isn't even a template??? casualdejekyll 03:39, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

References

Annual passenger traffic at DCA, 1991-present cleanup

Hello. Go to Washington Reagan Airport article, scroll down to Annual passenger traffic, 1991-present table. Please clean up table, having difficulty placing and adding 2021 pax total to table. Thank you for your time.

I repaired table from this request, is all ready for future annual inputs. 2601:581:8402:6620:35FD:6653:FCC2:A80C (talk) 04:31, 18 February 2022 (UTC) 2601:581:8402:6620:35FD:6653:FCC2:A80C (talk) 04:31, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Query about major revision required to page List_of_RISC_OS_bundled_applications

This page's content is more than ten years old. In that time new distributions of the OS have appeared with significant applications and games bundled. I have started constructing replacement tables in my sandbox, but want to be reassured that I can simply replace almost all the existing content with the newly formatted, but up to date, lists. Would an editor want to check my new material? If so, how? Bernardboase 23:55, 13 February 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bernardboase (talk • contribs)

I think WP:FIXIT applies. You've found a problem, you're doing the work to fix it... go for it! If someone wants to argue with you, they're free to do so, once you've done the work. If you feel like being more cautious, you could propose what you're going to do on the article's talk page, suggesting a date a week or so out, on which you propose to make the change if nobody disagrees; that gives anyone who has the page in their watch-list plenty of time to chime in. Alternatively, you could preserve highlights of the old content in a "historical" section, or by creating a table which indicates when each piece of software was bundled, and when bundling was discontinued. That sounds interesting, but like a lot of work. Bill Woodcock (talk) 14:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Bill. All good advice. In fact the page content is so old and unmaintained that I'm pretty sure no one is watching it, and I am thinking that the "historical" aspects are not that important in this case due to their irrelevance today. The new data has already been collected for the RISC OS magazine Archive (a possible Reference) so reformatting it into Wikipedia tables is the only additional work. I will use its Talk page to point to my sandbox for comment. Bernardboase 17:46, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

On reflection, the likely chief objection to my proposed revamp of the page is that, by including two paid-for distros in my comparison tables, it may look like advertising even though the intention is only to show what functionality is covered by the distros. Is there guidance on this aspect? Bernardboase 16:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

There are plenty of lists of things that include both commercial and noncommercial items. Here's one I care about, for instance... the criterion for inclusion there (since there are thousands of smaller ones that only a handful of people each care about) wound up being "is it notable enough to warrant a wikipedia article of its own?" Probably not the criterion you'd use, but I think you'll find that people don't see something being commercial as a reason why it shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. As long as you disclose any conflicts-of-interest you may have, and don't give undue or unbalanced attention to any one of a set of things, you should be fine. Bill Woodcock (talk) 14:38, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Lists like this are notoriously hard to be kept up to date, Bernardboase. Do we really need it at all? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 11:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, again. You make a good point about such a page being hard to keep up to date, so I am now looking at an alternative location: a Mediawiki powered site that is specifically for RISC OS information at riscos.info. Its readers are much more likely to care about it enough to help with update! And its content won't be seen as advertising. I can put a reference link to it into the Wikipedia pages. Unless you want to add anything here, I'm very satisfied with this exchange and thank you for all your advice. Bernardboase 15:54, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Glad I could help! 73.127.147.187 (talk) 04:41, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up to Questions about improving The Principia page.

Hello, I've gone through The Principia page, fixed links and added references for many of the alumni. Are there any other steps to take before the notice at the top can be removed about appropriate citations? Thanks Archivingperson (talk) 05:12, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Archivingperson, hi! Well according to the notice, if you want it to be removed, you must find more sources that are not made by the Principa themselves. Of course, only cite sources you think has relevant information to include in the article. GeraldWL 05:17, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

As a tip: currently your combination of closely related and independent sources is 50/50, around 13 for each. I'd say add at least 6 more independent sources, and if I was the tagger I would remove it after that. Of course, different editors have different mindsets, but the point is you should have more independent sources than primary sources. GeraldWL 05:23, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

How to demonstrate the WP:THREE best sources which demonstrate notability

Hi all, and thank you for the editor feedback :@Liance:, it was actually a lot easier to understand and interpret than I had anticipated (as a Wikipedia editing newb). In reference to Paywith.glass, just to make sure that I have indeed understood this correctly, the challenge with our sources is that they only mention the subject and are not directly written about the subject, somewhat like the subject is just a supporting cast member and not the start.

You may note that for many of the cited articles, the terms used are 'led by' in references to the subject. Additionally, the subject matter in this draft is the financial services infrastructure/technology which is critical for the leading subjects that are mentioned in the cited public sources to be cited themselves or for the cited articles to even exist in the first place.

Unfortunately, in the banking industry, it's not the tech infrastructure that is usually perceived as the star of the show (it's either considered boring or too complicated) but the organizations that rely on it instead. Until someone does a direct editorial on the specific technology infrastructure used in the initiative that will be officially launched in April 2022, I am uncertain of how to cite sources which more clearly illustrate that the infrastructure itself is critical to the mentioned citations even being there in the first place.

I would like a bit of guidance or some recommendations on what to look for specifically in the cited materials in order to meet the criteria pointed out in the feedback.

Thank you for your time and help in advance. Hatter.glass (talk) 08:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

References

This must be about Draft:Paywith.glass. (I've read the lead twice, but have no idea what this product is or does.) Maproom (talk) 09:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

hi @Maproom:, thank you for the feedback. This is good to know. So it is essentially digital currency infrastructure that let's nation states issue, manage and distribute their CBDCs on one side with automatic cross-border interoperability, then on the other side, it allows banks, fintechs, mobile money operators, e-Commerce service providers and aggregators support the acceptance and use of these CBDCs for their customers (business and consumer) for regular financial transactions. So it is similar to China's DC/EP infrastructure for the Digital renminbi except it's not limited to one country's CBDC. So if it's not clear for you, it will also not be clear to others. So my question to you if you don't mind is, how can we better communicate this in the draft?Hatter.glass (talk) 12:34, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Hatter.glass:, I've now had time to look at the three sources you list above. I don't think any of them helps to establish that the subject is notable: the first seems to be a press release, Bloomberg doesn't format their own content like that; the second has just a brief mention of the subject; and the third reports what Jhanji has said, and so is not independent (it also describes it as a pilot scheme, and expresses the view that the scheme will never be realised). As for making the draft more comprehensible: you need to start at the beginning, and explain whether the thing is hardware, software, a protocol, or just pie-in-the-sky. And avoid unexplained terms like "CBDC". Maproom (talk) 12:44, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Maproom:, thank you for this. I think I understand a bit more clearly now. The solution is certainly not pie in the sky but we are likely going to have to wait a few months to attempt to publish this since the independent sources that will establish notability won't likely have much else to say about the subject until after the pilots have begun and have been running for a bit. This will also give us time to rework the draft making it more comprehensible. The solution is software primarily but infrastructure not an app. The best analogy I can use here would be, if Revolut's, Monzo's or PayPal's apps are each cars on the road, the subject of this draft would be a fresh new road network they would all be driven on. It is the actual interconnecting infrastructure. My fear is that in trying to explain what makes it different or relevant and why it is such a big deal for the industry, the draft content may begin to sound like advertising. Unlike the fragmented payments landscape of today, it is a single solution for any type of payment or financial transaction type but it has been designed specifically for the digital currency age. It has taken into account issues of financial inclusion, economic stability implications, competition and innovation concerns (and how to foster/encourage them both for the benefit of all), policy and regulatory concerns, compliance and privacy concerns and in a quite unusual move for an infrastructure play, even the user experience and user journey mapping of the customers of network participants. As you can already see, there is a lot to introduce and to explain and this is objectively very revolutionary. It was also one of the primary drivers behind the need to publish the Green Paper referenced by the press. In the words spoken behind closed doors of an official at a major European central bank - "The last time such a comprehensive transformation was seen in the payments space was at the invention of bitcoin and the last time the traditional finance world has seen such disruption was at the invention of the first electronic debit/credit card network." Hatter.glass (talk) 07:32, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Merge articles?

Recently, an article I was working on was rejected from mainspace. In the time between when I submitted and the declining of it, a mainspace article was created. Should I just move over any non existing content over to the mainspace article, albeit fixing my mistakes (note I just adopted a abondonded edit, really I'm out of my league I'm just a copy editor) LuNaCy (talk) 05:49, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

LuNaCy, hI! I think you don't need to worry about it, all "Wikipedia-worthy" stuff I can see in your draft seems to be already in the mainspace. Also as a suggestion, we generally refer to people using their last name (Walsh) unless there's a patronymic or similar. We also put full stops first, then citations. But nevertheless, happy editing! :) GeraldWL 07:50, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I need help because I am not a professional (Aviation topic)

So let me tell you a story. One day I clicked "Random Article" then after several clicks more, I stumbled upon the article Airborne Internet. Now when I saw it, I thought to myself to skip it but somehow by fate, I decided to edit it. I edited it so much it has been expanded and I am worrying if I might put wrong info. Note that I do not know anything about engineering. I am not a professional researcher. I am still a student that is not even in college. Heck I literally have nothing to offer to contribute in that article. I literally don't know anything about Airborne, or Internet, or Airborne Internet beforehand. I don't know anything about the history of it. Can anyone help me in confirming whatever I typed in? Likhasik (talk) 05:50, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Likhasik, hi! If I notice well, you have expanded the article (thank you) but have not added any WP:SOURCES as required. No, you don't need to be a "professional", whatever that word means. I am just a random high schooler too. All you need in Wikipedia is the will to find sources--that is, reliable ones. I'd like to note that you cite Blogspot and CDN which are unreliable, suggest you change them. After that, if you're still unsure on whether your information is relevant, you can always ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation or Engineering. Happy editing :) GeraldWL 07:57, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Spontaneous Osteonecrosis of the Knee, known as SONK

Wikipedia has helpful information, but nothing under 'treatment'of SONK. I have the condition and had surgery in South Africa Nov. of 2021. I have interesting information about what the orthopaedic surgeon did to fix it, including micro-fracturing, and what my recovery has been like. I am totally new to Wikipedia, but would like to see add insight without too much complication.

2001:569:7C58:B400:D8FA:E7E0:6B79:D5C9 (talk) 04:56, 18 February 2022 (UTC) 2001:569:7C58:B400:D8FA:E7E0:6B79:D5C9 (talk) 04:56, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi – personal information is discouraged. Everything here has to be verified with an independent third-party source. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 05:05, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Medical/health article references are held to a high standard described at WP:MEDRS. Not only are personal experiences not allowed, but even published case study results in peer-reviewed sci journals not allowed. Review articles are required. David notMD (talk) 10:25, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

You are correct, however, in noting that the article Spontaneous osteonecrosis of the knee had an empty Treatment section. I added text with a review ref. That review did not mention microfracturing. The microfracture surgery article does not mention being used as a treatment for SONK. David notMD (talk) 10:28, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

References

 Courtesy link: Draft:Priyanka chahar choudhary

hey can someone please check that references are now reliable or not Akb bhatia (talk) 11:55, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Akb bhatiaThis article has been repeatedly created after two separate Articles for Deletion discussions. This draft is substantially the same as the deleted article, and has now also been deleted. You have not helped this person ever having a Wikipedia page about her as the disruption caused by these repeated attempts now means that only an administrator may create it. See WP:TOOSOON and WP:NACTOR. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:33, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

User:Nick Moyes it means thai i cannot create this page ever? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akb bhatia (talk • contribs) 12:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Not in the foreseeable future. If the subject ever becomes notable yes, but until that time, any attempt at continuing this is wasted effort (cf. WP:DEADHORSE). Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 12:58, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Continuing to try to create this article after AfD (and Speedy deletion after you skipped AfC and created the article) will lead to you being indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 13:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up to Citing Sources

I am not sure how to do the process of changing the URL when I click on Mises En Pratique Definition for the Second at BIPM Mises En Pratique the pdf automatically downloads and when I open it the address is on my local drive. ScientistBuilder (talk) 19:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder, it looks like the URLs for those files include a "download=true" in them. Just change it to "download=false" and it'll open in your browser instead, resulting in a better URL to cite. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:37, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I go to the link https://www.bipm.org/en/publications/mises-en-pratique

I am in Chrome and go to site settings and change automatic downloads settings to Block.

I click on Ampere Mises En pratique.

The article is downloaded to my computer.

How can I stop the article from downloading? ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:38, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

If you'd've done what Sdkb said to do, @ScientistBuilder, you'd find that you do it by changing "download=true" in the link to "download=false" casualdejekyll 03:42, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I was able to do it through Chrome developer tools. ScientistBuilder (talk) 14:06, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I open the developer tools part of Chrome, find the redirect, copy the HTML element, paste the element into a Google doc, and change the state to false. ScientistBuilder (talk) 14:06, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• @ScientistBuilder: Are you asking about preventing the file from downloading on your computer, or how find the URL to cite in the Wikipedia article? For the latter, in most browsers you can do a right-click on any hyperlink and have a "copy link" option. I would think a link to the direct download is acceptable in a {{cite web}} or {{cite book}} citation. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:14, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Featured Article Subjects

I have a question about most Featured Articles. When I go to the English Wikipedia home page and see what the Featured Article is, I often wonder to myself, "How did this become a featured article?" I am not questioning the idea of a Featured Article, it is just that a lot of Featured Articles seem to be niche culturally specific articles that I've never heard of. I guess the explanation for this is people edit what they are interested in and that's what articles get edits. ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:04, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

See WP:Featured article criteria. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 01:08, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

And Wikipedia:Today's featured article on Main Page is picked from existing articles which have gained featured article status due to their quality, not importance. It's sometimes an article with relevance to the day but often it's fairly random. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Unless it's April Fools. Then it's a bit different (I recall last year the TFA on April Fools was Groundhog Day (film) and consisted of one phrase repeating, which is the entire premise of the film). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:23, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

ScientistBuilder, Featured articles are not "articles about important topics". Instead, they are thoroughly researched and well written articles about any topic that editors who specialize in this type of article find interesting and engaging. You can find a complete categorized list of those articles at WP:FA. They are only about one tenth of one percent of all articles. As for "How did this become a featured article?", it underwent a very comprehensive and detailed peer review, details of which can be found on the article talk page. Cullen328 (talk) 02:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm going to get to work on making more technology and science Featured Articles. ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

That's a very noble ambition, ScientistBuilder but you might like to know that for science articles the FA status is a real challenge. Take a look at WP:Featured article candidates/Nonmetal/archive4 for nonmetal, for example and you'll see the sort of debate that can occur. Getting articles to WP:GA status is more realistic but still takes a lot of work, for example see Talk:Biotin#GA Review. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:00, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I think its good that anyone can write a very good article about a subject they're very interested in. ScientistBuilder (talk) 14:25, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

adding source to an article

Dear Wikipedia Experts!

I have a problem on the Hungarian wikipedia site and would like to ask for your help here if possible. A few months ago I found that someone copied content from my website (my laptop service website with useful areticles on differnt laptop parts)one by one to the wikipedia "laptop" site. I asked the local editors about it and we agreed that once I have the knowledge I edit the site with relevant information and rewrite a bit so that it is not full copy of my website. Once this was done, I marked the source (the relevant sites of my website) with web-cite. All was ok for a good while, but in the past weeks some editors keep deleting my site as source and put there different one which are obviously not the source... Some editors change it back to my source and this keeps going on. Is there a way to get justice on this?

Thanks for help! Doctorhouselaptop (talk) 15:03, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Doctorhouselaptop, Hello! English WP has no power over Hungarian WP, the separate projects handle their own disputes. Perhaps you can get some guidance at Wikipédia:Kocsmafal (kezdőknek). On en-WP, your website may be a problematic source per WP:SPS and WP:SELFCITE, and it's quite possible hu-WP has a similar "rule". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:09, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Question from Ramaesh.hemraj

My article which is a Biography of =====Sara she is just like==== you was declined..because the reversioner felt there are no reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. However article in Reliable Newspaper of Indian Express published by Home Ministry is submitted as a wiki link..

[̺[Newspaper:]] https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3A260122_IE_MUMBAI.pdf&page=20 Page 20 last page

Moreover the videos link submitted [[Media:]] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B32NVYk-6bA&t=5s are themselves the proof that eminent People Like Grandson of Mahatma Gandhi has attended Sara's Talk show and is a secondary source of reliable proof that this article is worth being published on wiki..

Please give suggestions what other references I can add such that this page can be accepted by Wiki..? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramesh.hemraj (talk • contribs) 2022-02-18T14:04:47 (UTC)

Hello, Ramesh.hemraj, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have removed some extraneous markup from your question above (including an unclosed HTML comment, which was preventing most of the question from being displayed) and added a header.

This is about User:Ramesh.hemraj/sandbox. yes? It is difficult to determine whether your sources meet Wikipedia's requirements, because you haven't cited them in an acceptable manner. In particular, you have uploaded a scan of a newspaper to Commons, claiming it as your own work: this is a violation of the newspaper's copyright, and I have nominated that scan for deletion in Commons. It is not necessary (as well as being usually forbidden) to scan a newspaper in order to cite it. You can cite a source by giving the usual bibilographic information, such as title, date, page number, author (if known), publication; a URL is a convenient addition if available but sources do not have to be available online, as long as they have been reliably published. Templates such as {{cite news}} make this easier - - please see [WP:REFB|]].

Looking at the scan - since you didn't give a title for the article, I haven't found it, and I am not going to wade through pages of a PDF looking (I can't search, presumably because the PDF contains images of the pages, not text). It's possible that it will contribute to notability, but I doubt it, because I get the impression that it is from her, rather than an independent artilce about her. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 15:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

How to cite a group, organization, corporation, governmental body, or institution

I have cited NIST and the BIPM several in editing the Atomic Clock article. I am wondering how to cite institutions manually as opposed to a person with a specific name. There is not a field for organization, or group and I am wondering if there is a way to resolve this. ScientistBuilder (talk) 14:23, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ScientistBuilder. I'm afraid I don't understand what your problem is: if the author for a source is given as "NIST", then that's what you supply as the author's name. Can you give a specific example where that's a problem? --ColinFine (talk) 15:25, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Submission declined due to advertising concerns

Hello! I drafted a new Wikipedia page here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Large_Urology_Group_Practice_Association) and wanted to know if someone could point out which portions of the submission need altering to be accepted. Eishajpa (talk) 15:06, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Eishajpa: Hello, Eishajpa. The reason for the submission's decline is because it reads like an advertisement. You will need to make it more encyclopedic and neutral. It also should have some wikilinks and the first mention of "LUGPA" should be bold.--The Tips of Apmh 15:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@The Tips of Apmh: Thank you! Is there any specific wording that you think reads like an advertisement? I just want to get a sense of which areas to focus on when editing. Eishajpa (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Eishajpa: Sentences like "only nonprofit trade association" and "efficient, cost-effective, and clinically superior care for patients" should probably be changed. The declining reviewer is Pbrks, you can ask them questions also. --The Tips of Apmh 15:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• • Eishajpa, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, we are glad to have you, hey, did you read WP:YFA thoroughly prior creating the article? The problem is you article reads like an WP:ADVERT. What you want to do is talk about the subject or object of your article but do so in a neutral manner, you should avoid promotional wordings, and use good neutral synonyms to replace the promotional ones. If you have fixed this, please do let me know or reply this, affirming that you have read and corrected the problem & I’d be willing to have a second look. Celestina007 (talk) 15:28, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Eishajpa, and welcome to the Teahosue. The entire draft, and especially the Advocacy section, reads as telling the reader what LUGPA wants them to know (and is entirely based upon sources written or published by LUGPA). Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

I'm not a reviewer, but if I had reviewed it I would have declined it for the complete lack of independent sources, which means that the draft does nothing to demonstrate that LUGPA meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. I suggest you throw away everything you've done, and start again by finding independent sources, and summarising what they say about LUGPA. --ColinFine (talk) 15:45, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Library Citation Rejected

I am working on editing European Union as an emerging superpower. I working on adding a source https://eds.p.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=90eaeac7-516a-468a-a9c6-46cf8a9ec3d7%40redis&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=edshol.hein.journals.jcmks56.148&db=edshol. also available at https://wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?auth=production&url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edshol&AN=edshol.hein.journals.jcmks56.148&site=eds-live&scope=site The edit is not going through because of an ebsco login block or something. How can I make this happen? ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

The error message:

Warning: An automated filter has identified that your edit includes a link or reference running through a local proxy – typically, the links include '.proxy.', '.gate.', 'ebsco', 'oclc' or similar in the domain. Such links only work inside the institution that is providing the proxy (sometimes even only in your current login session). The link is (often completely) useless for anyone who does not have access to the proxy of the institution that you are in.

NOTE: you will NOT be able to save this edit if you do not resolve the issue with the proxy link that you added in your edit.

Please replace the proxy links with direct links that do not use a proxy. Thanks!

typical proxy links and how to repair

aa.bb.cc.proxy.xx.yy.zz - a local proxy appended to the domain-name of the original publisher:

'https://www.oxfordartonline.com.proxy.lib.duke.edu/<path>' should be replaced by 'http://www.oxfordartonline.com/<path>'

aa-bb-cc-dd.xx.yy.oclc.org - oclc.org proxy, where the dots in the original domainname are replaced with a dash:

'https://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ucsf.idm.oclc.org/<path>' should be replaced by 'www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/<path>'

ebscohost, e.g. https://eds.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?...., https://web.a.ebscohost.com/abstract?.....

You can link to https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?AN=<access number> (the ebsco 'permanent link' to the reco ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:45, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

You can request someone to take a look at the edit and perform the edit for you by following the instructions at WP:EF/FP. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 03:09, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

That is VERY MUCH not what that page is for..... Though I guess there's no better place for it, since filter 892 explicitly allows admins and bots, which is effectively fully protection but with bots. Me being bad at reading acronyms strikes yet again. For some ungodly reason I thought you were sending them to WP:RFPP/E casualdejekyll 03:49, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh lol. Ya I may make some mistakes but I definitely would not send them something like this to RfPP. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:38, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Sectioning articles

As an example, I recently created the article for Fredrick Arthur Willius. I want to include a section about his wife and family, but because I have separated his life into two distinct parts, Early Life and Education, then Medical Career, I'm not sure where to put the marriage and family section, since he married after his medical career started, but it seems stupid to shove it in after introducing his career already. Maybe change the first section to Early Life, Education, and First Years at Mayo? Then marriage and family, then Further career? Any advice on style would be greatly appreciated. Evansknight (talk) 16:01, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello Evansknight. If you have a good amount of content to create a new 'Personal life' section, it can be done. But if not, then maybe you could just change the section from 'Early life and Education' to 'Personal life and education'. Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:06, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Evansknight: I agree with Kpddg, I would change "Early life and education" to "Personal life" and add a wife/family subsection there. --The Tips of Apmh 16:13, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kpddg and The Tips of Apmh even if the marriage takes place chronologically after the career that the next section covers? -Evansknight (talk) 16:22, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Articles don't neccesarily have to be chronological. If you really do want it to be, you can have a "Life" section, with "Early life", "Career", and "Family" subsections within it. --The Tips of Apmh 16:36, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! -Evansknight (talk) 16:39, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Evansknight: You're welcome :-) --The Tips of Apmh 16:55, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Size of the logo on the company's page

Hi dear Wiki editors! Pls can you help me to understand how I can adjust the dimensions of the logo in order to let it be displayed fully when it is displayed as a featured page on another wiki page? Fairy Bliss (talk) 10:45, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Fairy Bliss:. Could you provide example where logo is displayed incorrectly (or where you want to use it)? I might be able to help you if I can see the problem and verify that my fix actually fixes it. Also, just to check: are you in any way affiliated with Silk Way West Airlines? Anton.bersh (talk) 11:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Dear Anton, thanks for your prompt response. Yes, I'm a Digital Marketing Specialist at SWWA. I'm trying to create a wiki page for the CEO of the company and when I add the wiki page of the company on his page, its preview with the logo is cut and logo is not shown fully. That is the page with logo Silk Way West Airlines Regarding affiliation, I have received a message stating that this is not allowed. I did not know this, as I'm new on Wiki. I guess, I just have to add a signature showing that I'm a paid editor, right? Thank you for your support. Fairy Bliss (talk) 12:10, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Dear @Fairy Bliss:, I missed your response and saw it just now. In future, you can summon me or any other editor with {{ping}} template (I will receive a notification). Since you are paid by the article subject, you will need to declare WP:COI on every related article and follow edit request procedure to avoid future blocks. I can help you by reviewing your edit requests. Let's take this discussion to Talk:Silk Way West Airlines Anton.bersh (talk) 17:34, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Fairy Bliss Please read WP:PAID for information on how to disclose. Wikipedia has articles, not "wiki pages". 331dot (talk) 12:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Reverting a GA nomination?

Is it ever valid to revert a GA nomination? Coughs and sneezes spread diseases was created in 2020. It is currently rated Start. The creating editor recently nominated it for GA without having done any additional work since 2020. Any thoughts? David notMD (talk) 14:02, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD: I'm not familiar with any instances of users reverting GANs in the past, but I believe folks are able to quick-fail (QF) one, which I suppose is the closest you can get to "reverting" a nomination - see the GA criteria. I'll add that it is not necessary for nominators to have significantly contributed to the relevant article to nominate it for GA, only that it would be preferred if possible. "Anyone may nominate an article to be reviewed for GA, although it is preferable that nominators have contributed significantly to the article and are familiar with its subject and its cited sources," says WP:GAN/I#N1. So I wouldn't say that's enough basis for doing a GAN "revert."

On the other hand, reviewers may QF a nominated article if they feel as though it needs a lot more work to meet any of the six criteria. Per WP:GAFAIL, "An article can, but by no means must, be failed without further review (known as a quick fail) if, prior to the review, [i]t is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria." Thus, if any editor sees the article and judges "Coughs and sneezes spread diseases" as being a long way to meeting GA criteria, then yeah, they may immediately fail the nomination. Hope this answer gives you some insight! ‍ ‍ elias. 🧣 ‍ ‍ ^{💬reach out to me}
_{📝see my work} 14:22, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for reply. I will leave all that up to the GA Reviewer. David notMD (talk) 17:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

CAPTCHA with every edit

In trying to edit the wiki from IP every edit no matter how good and without links of any kind, there's a captcha? Is there a reason for this as it slows down editing and is just a general inconvenience. Kznnzdi CAbrzrA (talk) 14:36, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Kznnzdi CAbrzrA I believe that is by design, as it slows down vandals and spammers. If you wish to avoid this, you should make edits with your account. 331dot (talk) 14:39, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kznnzdi CAbrzrA and 331dot: This is due to the emergency CAPTCHA being enabled—it is a temporary measure -- TNT (talk • she/her) 14:55, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

(this should no longer be occurring) -- TNT (talk • she/her) 16:24, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

You will need to do a CAPTCHA as it prevents bots breaking the site. It is also made to protect articles. If you log in again, you won’t need a CAPTCHA. It is also probable that Wikipedia initially launched with it. Oscarhumpage (talk) 17:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Citing Articles from EBSCO and other Wikipedia Libraries

Can someone please tell me...if I've found a corroborating article in EBSCO or one of the other Wikipedia libraries, and the library doesn't provide a link to the original piece, and I can't find the same article anywhere else (after an hour of searching), how do I cite it? LJA123 (talk) 17:37, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi @LJA123, and apologies you had to spend all that time searching. The template you're looking for is {{EBSCOhost}}, which you can use with CS1 citations (the default citation method) like this: |id={{EBSCOhost|129997295}}. You're not the only one who has been struggling with this, so I'll ping @Samwalton9 (WMF), who helps run the library, to this discussion. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hmmm. 'Didn't work. It says I need a valid URL...--LJA123 (talk) 19:56, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@LJA123, could you link to the specific article you're trying to cite and place you're trying to cite it? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:58, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

That's what I've spent all this time looking for--a Rolling Stone article from 2001. You'd think it would be easy to find...not. That's OK, for now, I've cited it without a link. Thanks.--LJA123 (talk) 20:07, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@LJA123, I meant the link to the EBSCO search result or wherever else you came across the article, even if you can't access the full thing. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:11, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh! lol. Yes, I have the full article on the EBSCO site. I already tried using that link as a citation. Wikipedia accepted it. But when I clicked on it, as the reader would, it just took me to Ebsco.com--the home page. So that link is of no use to the reader.--LJA123 (talk) 20:46, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@LJA123, yes, that's what can happen. I have access to the Wikipedia Library, too, so if you tell me the name of the article or give me the name of the search, I can bring it up myself on EBSCO and help pull out the identifier, which is what we need to get a persistent link. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

OK it's Rolling Stone. 03/01/2001, Issue 863, p27. 4/5p. Edwards, Gavin. 'New Faces' ISSN 0035-791X Accession Number 4138696 Thanks--LJA123 (talk) 21:39, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

LJA123, the accession number was what we needed to plug into the template. {{EBSCOhost|4138696}} produces EBSCOhost 4138696. I've added that and fixed up your citations for you here. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:57, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh that's great, thanks. I did enter that, under URL. Maybe I should have put it in the Website box? Dunno. Hopefully, I can figure it out next time. Cheers.--LJA123 (talk) 23:47, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi again. That didn't work either--the reader has to be able to log into EBSCO to read the referenced article. Maybe EBSCO will figure out a way to provide links. (Similarly, Vanderbilt University has the archive of all Rolling Stones issues to 2001, but you have to be affiliated with the university to access them.)--LJA123 (talk) 16:40, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@LJA123: Yes, there's unfortunately nothing we can or should do about that—it's a paywalled source, and there's no free legal alternative. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:36, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

ok--LJA123 (talk) 18:16, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

While it's useful to include a link to EBSCO for readers who have access, LJA123, not every citation needs to have a URL. You could just reference the print source - i.e. the details of the article you spelled out above (unless it's a condition of using the Wikipedia Library that a link to the source is provided?). Cordless Larry (talk) 18:23, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: Best practice is to WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:26, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Will do, thanks.--LJA123 (talk) 18:34, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

How to make an edit request for a protected page, when the talk page is also protected?

Question in heading Koashva (talk) 18:45, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Koashva: You're welcome to make the request here, and one of us can handle it for you. Give the name of the page you'd like changed and the specific change you'd like to see in X to Y format. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:45, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Try WP:RFPP/E if the page is fully protected or for some other reason we can't handle it here. casualdejekyll 20:04, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Update company logo and image

I am the Director of Communications for San Francisco University High School and have been asked by the head of school to update the school seal, log and image as they are sorely out off date. The logo was redesigned in 2018 and is NOT reflected on the page. I have permission to update - but receive this error when doing so: We could not determine whether this file is suitable for Wikimedia Commons. Please only upload photos that you took yourself with your camera, or see what else is acceptable. See the guide to make sure the file is acceptable and learn how to upload it on Wikimedia Commons. Jenhart27 (talk) 17:07, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Jenhart27 First, you must make a required paid editing declaration on your user page, please read WP:PAID for instructions. Logos cannot be uploaded to Commons as they are not "free" images(in terms of copyright). As new users cannot upload images directly to Wikipedia, you may visit Files For Upload to work on uploading the logo. 331dot (talk) 17:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Jenhart27, and welcome to the Teahouse. Most images on Wikipedia, and all materials on Commons, must be licensed in such a way that anybody may reuse or alter them for any purpose, commercial or not, without payment or requiring permissions. As Director of Communications, you probably have the legal power to license the logo etc in that way; but I doubt if you actually want to. For logos, there is another alternative: English Wikipedia (like some, but not all, language Wikipedias) allows non-free images if certain conditions are met. Logos of organisations (used in an article about the organisation) usually do meet those, so the way to handle this is to upload a new version of the logo to Wikipedia not Commons, as non-free media. See Logos for more information.

However, before you do that, you must make the mandatory declaration of your status as a paid editor. Thereafter you should not edit the article about your school directly, but should make edit requests on the article's talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 17:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Jenhart27. As for the logo, it includes original artwork and is therefore protected by copyright. It cannot be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, because they only accept freely licensed or copyright free images. The old logo is hosted here on English Wikipedia and the file is File:Sfuhslogo.jpg. If you go to the "File history" section, you will see a blue link that says "Upload a new version of this file" and that is what you should do. You can upload a new photo to Commons if you took the photo yourself and are willing to freely license it. Please also read about editing with a conflict of interest. Cullen328 (talk) 17:23, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I now see that you do not have the required experience to upload files so 331dot's advice is best in your specific situation. Cullen328 (talk) 17:26, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I added the disclaimer to my account page, still wont allow me to replace the logo with the actual real and current logo.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenhart27 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Jenhart27, thank you for disclosing your status but you will still not be able to upload the logo. In this case 331dot gave you the correct information in telling you that you will have to make a request on Files For Upload. I was going to say you could make a request on the article talk page but I see you already did that unsuccessfully back on Jan 4. I see based on the article history that you have resumed editing the article. While this is not expressly forbidden, it is very much strongly advised not to edit the article. You have a conflict of interest with the subject of the article being a paid employee. You are encouraged to use the article talk page to suggest changes you see need to be made to the article. --ARoseWolf 20:43, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft submission

Can somebody tell that this draft is submitted for review or not?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mel_Maryns If not then please do submit it---- Sweeto dweeto (talk) 20:42, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Sweeto dweeto: It is not. Add {{subst:submit}} to it. Looks like someone tried to add that but made a typo. RudolfRed (talk) 20:52, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I've fixed the template, however it will most likely be declined since a lot of the references are either unreliable (such as IMDB) or primary sources (soundcloud and spotify) which do not demonstrate the subjects notability. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:58, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

New user /Need help

How to write articles? HeeraDrishti (talk) 05:42, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

You can start from here: Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Some more info can be found at Help:Your first article. Feel free to come back to ask any particular questions once you have. 94rain ^Talk 05:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm unable to edit the page Pallab Bhattacharyya. Why? HeeraDrishti (talk) 05:48, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Do you have other accounts? --94rain ^Talk 06:00, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

No, sir. HeeraDrishti (talk) 06:13, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

OK. Did you come here from some forum to edit that article? You can post the sources/citations you want to add at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pallab Bhattacharyya. If the sources can demostrate notability, you can prevent the article from getting deleted. --94rain ^Talk 06:15, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Negative, sir. HeeraDrishti (talk) 06:18, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Ok, sir HeeraDrishti (talk) 06:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

OP blocked as a sock of GeezGod. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:11, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia a programming language like JavaScript?

Is Wikipedia formatting a language like TeX, JavaScript,Wolfram Language, or LaTeX? I am curious based on learning on my question about javascript extensions above. Or maybe it would be more accurate to ask is Media Wiki a language? ScientistBuilder (talk) 19:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

MediaWiki formatting is its own beast. It is not a programming language like JavaScript, it is a markup language, like HTML.

EDIT: Sorry @ScientistBuilder, I keep forgetting to ping you! casualdejekyll 19:23, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: To clarify the above: Wikipedia articles use a custom markup language (like HTML, TeX/LaTeX), not a programming language (like JavaScript, Wolfram Language). I recommend you to clear up the distinction before going further. Also, MediaWiki is a piece of software which powers Wikipedia (and other encyclopedias). Anton.bersh (talk) 19:54, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

However, Wikipedia does incorporate a programming language called CSS (apologies if that's also not a programming language, I'm not a programmer) which helps make certain stylistic things work. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:56, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

CSS is a style sheet language, which is closer to a programming language then the MediaWiki markup, but still isn't. casualdejekyll 20:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: In MediaWiki you can make templates which have some programming features like conditional expressions and function calls with variables, but not loops. Since 2013, Wikipedia's MediaWiki installation includes mediawikiwiki:Extension:Scribunto which supports Lua, a full programming language. See Wikipedia:Lua. There is a limited number of editors who know Lua and the code has to be on separate pages called modules so it's limited what we use it for, but it's a powerful language. Wikipedia also has user scripts and Wikipedia:Gadgets written in JavaScript and/or CSS, but saved articles cannot call scripts. They run in the user's browser and can help with editing. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:56, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Has there been any cases of malicious scripts? How trustworthy are scripts created by Wikipedia users? ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: From experience, almost no user scripts are malicious (I've never seen any). ― Qwerfjkltalk 21:28, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Are there user scripts that intend to do something good but go into overdrive and remove something that was not meant to be removed? ScientistBuilder (talk) 22:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Shortcuts that are not shortcuts

Why are there redirects like Wikipedia:COPYRIGHTS and Wikipedia:SANDBOX which are marked as "shortcuts", but are just capitalized versions of the pages title? Zuata (talk) 22:15, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Zuata2, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I agree with you, but if you take a closer look, let’s say for example see WP:COPYRIGHT & now, see WP:Copyrights, the former doesn’t contain the letters “S” but the latter does thus aren’t necessarily the “same thing but just in caps” I however do agree with you in the hidden premise of this question, perhaps arbitrary, but that isn’t so much of a problem. Celestina007 (talk) 23:07, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia.

Hi, I have had my article constantly declined with the reason that the submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. The article is 5irechain and I will love the guidance of more experienced editors on how best to rectify this challenge and get my article approved. LambarGuru (talk) 00:57, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

LambarGuru, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, this basically means the article doesn’t conform with our policy on WP:NPOV and is accordance with WP:PROMO which falls under what Wikipedia is WP:NOT, this means you must re-write the article and ensure all words or statements are neutrally worded. Celestina007 (talk) 01:07, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

LambarGuru, your writing does not come anywhere near to what is expected for a neutral encyclopedia article. Your lead sentences are 5ire is an open-source platform to build smart contracts and decentralized blockchain applications, with consensus achieved using proof of stake. It focuses on sustainanble practices of individuals and organizations and can facilitate peer-to-peer transactions with its internal cryptocurrency, 5irechain. In addition to smart contracts, the 5ire project provides open-source software for authentication, adata storage and replication. That is highly promotional language packed with promotional blockchain/cryptocurrency/NFT jargon and typogrphical errors. It belongs in a company brochure, not in an encyclopedia article. Who, other than the company, says those contacts are "smart"? Who, other than the company, says that those practices are "sustainanble" (sic)? An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes what reliable sources that are entirely independent of the topic (5ire) say about the topic (5ire). Recapitulating the company's marketing materials is unacceptable. Cullen328 (talk) 02:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Cullen328 and Celestina007 thank you both for the swift responses. I have rewritten the opening paragraph now, hopefully, that'd be fine. I initially used most content as seen in the article, Stacks blockchain because stacks has a similar mode of operation as 5ire and I thought that was okay. Now I know better. If you may take a look again I will greatly appreciate that, thanks. LambarGuru (talk) 03:06, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

LambarGuru, it looks to me that all of your references are to company sources or coverage in sources generated by company press releases or its public relations activities. Can you please point to significant coverage in reliable sources that are entirely independent of the company and its promotional activities? Cullen328 (talk) 03:27, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Your comment is mostly valid, but FYI smart contract is a term of the art, not marketing-speak. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:18, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Cullen328 and Tigraan, I have pointed out three sources that I believe are independent and reliable on the draft's talk page. Would any of you kindly take a look? LambarGuru (talk) 23:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

"Unreliable sources"

 Courtesy link: Draft:Mary Susan James

My draft keeps getting rejected for "unreliable sources." The sources are the Jesse James museum. My subject is his daughter, Mary Susan James Barr&nbsp. RebelRauser (talk) 19:05, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@RebelRauser: Your draft is declined because it has no inline citations. You will need to add inline citations or convert your external links to inline citations so that the facts in your article can be attributed to a source. --The Tips of Apmh 19:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Even if you do that, this draft has no potential to become an article. To be Wikipedia-notable, a person has bebe written about and referenced for their own actions. Notability is not inherited. Being the daughter of Jesse James does not make her notabile. David notMD (talk) 22:43, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• RebelRauser, hello snd welcome to the Teahouse, let’s talk about unreliable sources, although it goes more in-depth than this as you would soon find out if you become a dedicated editor here, but for now, the blanket response to what constitutes an unreliable source is they have no editorial oversight nor do they have a reputation for fact checking, you can see more of this in WP:RS. Celestina007 (talk) 23:23, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

How to request page creation

How to request a page creation? Oscarhumpage (talk) 17:49, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Oscarhumpage: Wikipedia:Requested articles. --The Tips of Apmh 17:52, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Oscarhumpage: That is the correct place to request an article, but the backlog there is severe, and your request may not be acted on for some time, if ever. For what reason do you want to request an article? 331dot (talk) 17:59, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Oscarhumpage, hello, my colleague 331dot, is apt, if there isn’t a COI, if you so desire you may create it yourself, that is, if you have read WP:YFA, this isn’t necessarily for editors who are seeking to create their first article, as even experienced editors read up on it every now and again. Celestina007 (talk) 23:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Proving musical notability

Hi all,

I am trying to set a separate page up for a member of a band that has its own wikipedia page. By all accounts I did not originally fulfil the musical notability criteria. As a novice, I suspect that part of the problem was that I copy and pasted much of the original wikipedia entry, not through malice, more through naivety. I have since rewritten (read:hacked) and submitted the article, with new hyperlinks to Irish national newspapers.

The url is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Enda_Mulloy

I now note that I get a warning saying that my submission redirects to the band. Can anyone help? Each day, I discover that I am less intelligent that I thought.

Many thanks in advance of a reply. 94.118.100.188 (talk) 10:50, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

You see that warning because Enda Mulloy is a redirect to The BibleCode Sundays (you can see it here). You do not need to do anything about that because your draft reviewer will override the redirect during article publication. However, I looked at your draft and I think it is not ready yet for publication/review. It might pass, but I think chances are still less than 50/50, I would recommend adding more in-depth reliable independent sources. Anton.bersh (talk) 12:04, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

It is essential that you address the concerns mentioned in the first review. As far as I can see, the current draft is actually smaller than the one already declined, so there is no chance of it being accepted and you are wasting the time of the reviewers. In addition, all the facts stated in the "Background" section must be capable of being verified by readers. It is a strict policy for biographies of living people that all facts be verifiable and that there be no original research (by which is meant information possibly known by the author of the article but not stated in reliable sources) . Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Michael and Anton. I appreciate the responses. The current draft is indeed smaller than the original. I originally thought that the first draft was refused because the new article borrowed (verbatum) too much from his band's wikipedia entry. I did try to ensure that everything in the second draft is verifiable, to that end, it is sourced from newspaper websites that I referenced/hyperlinked to. When, for example, I say that he has two boys, that is mentioned in a hyperlink printed further up the page. Other parts of the biography, such as mention of his father's band link to a separate wikipedia entry. If a newspaper website article mentions 5 facts that I repeat throughout the article, do I need to reference the website each time? I have no problem with doing that, I just thought it may look suspicious if I had loads of hyperlinks to the same newspaper article. Off the top of my head, the only "fact" that I have not provided a hyperlink to is the fact that he is a full time teacher, I will edit the entry to link to the institute's website. Once again, thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imaginarynumber (talk • contribs) 11:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

@Imaginarynumber: First of all, you should verify that Enda Mulloy actually qualifies for a Wikipedia article. To do this, please go to WP:NM and find at least one criteria point which he meets. If there is none, then it might be simply too soon for an article. In that case, perhaps, his work could be described in another article. Secondly, if you are using the same source multiple times, you should reference it each time by adding a name attribute to one reference and then using that name, see WP:CITE for details. Anton.bersh (talk) 00:06, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Is imagemap illegal in userboxes?

Is imagemap illegal in userboxes? NB4RSITYT (talk) 18:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi @NB4RSITYT! Welcome to the Teahouse!
Illegal? Well, we're not allowed to give legal advice here, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to get you in jail or anything. I also found no policy stating that it's not allowed on Wikipedia, but do make sure you're not falling afoul of accessibility guidelines. casualdejekyll 20:01, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

User has been blocked as a sock of AlfredoEditor Delicious!― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:13, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Create Wikipedia Page

I am looking for someone to create a page for me. I will PAY!!! Jerry Moore (talk) 16:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Jemomusic Wikipedia does not have "pages". It has articles. Those articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the subject in any way. Wikipedia has no interest in enhancing search results for you or in helping your knowledge panel or in your internet presence. Our only interest is in summarizing independent reliable sources. If you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person, someone will eventually take note of your career or life in reliable sources and choose on their own to write about you. Trying to force the issue by writing it yourself or paying someone to does not usually end well.

You should not solicit for a paid editor on Wikipedia. Be advised that if you seek one out, they have varying degrees of reputability and despite what they tell you can make no guarantees(such as writing an article that will not be deleted)

Also be advised that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 16:36, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Jemomusic: Welcome to the Teahouse. What page specifically do you want to be created? By the way I agree with 331dot that you should not pay for anyone to create an article for you. --The Tips of Apmh 16:50, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, but this just came to mind:

Don't pay the wikiman -
Don't even fix a price -
Don't pay the wikiman,
until he get's it to the GA style...

Hoping, I didn't break any rules by posting this... --Maresa63 ^Talk 17:15, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I have a feeling that's a reference I'm not getting― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:43, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Don't Pay the Ferryman RudolfRed (talk) 18:24, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Yep I definitely missed out on that reference.― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:32, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

No - I loved it. Even hummed along to CdB as I read it. I can see a Chris de Burgh wiki-theme developing:

• Patricia the Scriptwriter
• An Admin Came Travelling
• Say GA to It All
• What About ANI?

I'll stop now...... Nick Moyes (talk) 01:01, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Protect Talk Page

Well a user named "Alfredokudai" has been blocked for adding false information to articles, well recently he has been using several IPs to post a bunch of random and unreferenced information to the Google Street View Coverage talk page, I was wondering if someone could protect the talk page, I have seen that the Among Us talk page has been protected and I wonder if someone could protect the Google Street View article talk page and remove all content that does not contribute to the improvement of the article. Seb { 💬 Talk + 📝 Edits } 01:01, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@JSeb05: You can request protection at WP:RFPP. RudolfRed (talk) 01:13, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@JSeb05: You can request the talk page to be protected at WP:RfPP. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:13, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Creating a New Mathematics Article on Matrices that are easier to understand as an introduction

I want to create an Introduction to article for several key linear algebra concepts:

1. Matrix
2. System of Linear Equations
3. Methods for Solving Systems of Linear Equations (LU Decomposition, Row Reduction, Gaussian Elimination)
4. Vectors
5. Eigensystems (Eigenvectors, Eigenvalues, Eigenspaces, Eigenbasis)
6. Determinants
7. Vector Spaces
8. Applications of Linear Algebra

I am going go to post this message on Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics as well. I do not want to have an issue with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Make_technical_articles_understandable's Introduction to Article's guidelines. I am wondering if there is a piece of advice anyway has. ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: There is already an article at Matrix_(mathematics). If you think it can be improved, start a discussion on that article's talk page, and invite members of the Math Project to comment on it. RudolfRed (talk) 01:16, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I.. uh.. would recommend reading their entire question before answering it. Though I'm not entirely sure if an Introduction to article is entirely necessary here. (They're rare for a reason.) casualdejekyll 01:21, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I think the Matrix article is good and there doesn't need to be an introduction. ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:33, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I think there is too much abstract theoretical material on math pages. ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:34, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Systems of linear equations is simple enough for middle school math classes, at least where I'm from, so I really don't think it's necessary to Introduction it. Just plain old vectors are also relatively simple, and if the article is too technical it should be improved. I think of all your list, Eigensystems is probably the best candidate for an Introduction article. Of course, I'm not an expert here and WikiProject Mathematics is probably the best place to make the decision as to whether it's neccesary. casualdejekyll 01:39, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Reference trouble

Help, please. On the surface, it looks like I added a reference correctly to an article (Ref. 5, Hugo Haas}, but when I click on it I get an error message that reads "This XML file does not apprear to have any style information associated with it." Also, now that I've added the reference, I don't know how to bring up the template again to see what I entered. Pete Best Beatles (talk) 06:15, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles: You got the wrong link my friend. Is this the link that you are looking for https://www.academia.edu/5575347/Hugo_Haas_Hollywoods_Independent_Pioneer. BTW I have already fixed it. --Likhasik (talk) 06:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I cited the journal because that was the ultimate source of the information I used. Now I see "Downloaded from Academia.edu" at the start of the article, but I wouldn't have understood it's significance. I can see a scenario where I tried to cite Google Scholar somehow, because that's where I found the article. Now I realize that after the search results came up in Google Scholar, I had to hit a link to "[PDF] academia.edu" but it's confusing, because it didn't download anything, the article was right there waiting to be read. I hope the correct source to site the next time is clear... -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 03:06, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Check draft

Can somebody please check this draft and let me know is it fine n worthy to be submitted or some corrections are needed. I have done a few after suggestion from an editor. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mel_Maryns 02:31, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Mel_Maryns is already submitted for review. Just be patient. RudolfRed (talk) 04:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Citing is hard

I know that content should be supported with reliable sources, But the hardest part of citing evidence is the entering the date. Thats because an error will occur when you type it in and it would say "Check value dates in." Why does it do that? 2603:8000:F400:FCEA:DA:5313:91CD:37AD (talk) 01:30, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Can you tell us where you're encountering this error? Also, if you register a Wikipedia account it becomes much easier to help you, however you don't have to if you don't want to. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:33, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! You'll see that error when you try to enter an improperly formatted date into a date parameter in a template such as {{cite web}}. There is a lot of helpful information at Help:CS1 errors in the "Check date values in: |<param1>=, |<param2>=, ..." section. What date are you trying to enter? GoingBatty (talk) 01:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Note that you are not obliged to use citation templates, we don't have a standardised citation method on Wikipedia. The most important thing is to get the reference in the article by some means. You can use plain text if you can't get the citation template to work (and they can sometimes be difficult). The formatting can always be fixed later by others. Some editors create articles without citation templates at all. This is a perfectly valid method of citation, although you should always endeavour to use the citation style that has already been established in the article. SpinningSpark 11:41, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi there

 Muratcan63477 (talk) 12:14, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome @Muratcan63477. Do you have any specific query? Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:59, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Major Movement of Sections Mirror

I am going to start working on reorganizing Atomic clock for greater clarity. I am wondering how to create an entirely new and different copy of the article that is not the main article that I work on moving sections around and not worry about messing up the main article. I think there's a way to create a user subpage or a sandbox to do this. ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:58, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ScientistBuilder,

Reorganizing an article? You should probably discuss this first on the article talk page. Just pasting in your "new and improved" article might otherwise see some substantial resistance and your edit could be reverted by editors who are watching this page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:49, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Your creation of \Atomic Clock was Speedy deleted. You can have more than one Sandbox. Once created, sections from the existing article can be copied, revised, and then inserted into the existing article. David notMD (talk) 03:53, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I meant to do /Atomic Clock. I make mistakes! ScientistBuilder (talk) 14:23, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Liz See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Atomic_clock#Quantum_Mechanics_Science_Physics_Section for consensus on reorganizing atomic clock ScientistBuilder (talk) 14:25, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Verify Truth

Am I Allowed To Post Questions Here? 2600:8807:C40:1D00:8165:DD1A:F539:E24D (talk) 08:28, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes? Do you have any further questions about editing Wikipedia? – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 08:31, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, but if it's about "verifying Truth" you’re not likely to be satisfied with the answer. Mathglot (talk) 08:34, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Your questions have been thoroughly answered here. In summary; Wikipiedia is not free webhosting for you to post your music videos or add non-notable names to the "List of composers" page. Further time-wasting efforts will result in a longer block. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:52, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

How to cite things

I’m not that new to Wikipedia but I only ever edit grammar and I do not know how to cite something I write WarInTheDesert (talk) 07:19, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@WarInTheDesert: Do this:

The earth is round.<ref>example.com</ref>

Which produces:

The earth is round.

See this page. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 07:22, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Also see Help:Referencing for beginners which has templates for various types of references. For example, the website template provides places to enter the https and title and other stuff, and creates the ref for you. David notMD (talk) 13:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@WarInTheDesert: You might also be interested in the video at WP:EASYREFBEGIN. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:26, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Citation of fluctuating figures

How to cite a figure that keeps fluctuating e.g the number of countries in which a particular singer is heard as by radio keeps fluctuating . If have added a figure in my article but when i checked the website again the figure was different. Can somebody tell? I am worried that my article will be rejected because of this. 2407:AA80:116:5EC6:D4D:933E:BB0D:16F1 (talk) 10:24, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

What is the title of the article? It's impossible to know for certain "the number of countries in which a particular singer is heard as by radio" (radio waves don't respect borders) so I suggest you omit that, or just say "many countries" or "few countries" as appropriate.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:39, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Without commenting on whether this is a good idea or not for your particular example, the usual way of dealing with time sensitive statistics is as follows. In the article text say "as of February 2022..." or something similar giving a date. In the citation give the access date you looked at the website to get the information. Make sure that the website gets archived (using the Wayback Machine is most popular) on the same date you accessed it so that other editors are able to verify this in the future. SpinningSpark 10:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I can't see how such a statistic can possibly be encyclopaedic, unless it has been reported on by an independent source, which will normally be dated. --ColinFine (talk) 16:36, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Get in touch with author of a wikipedia page

Hi. Regarding the wiki page: https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%94%D7%95%D7%95%D7%A2%D7%93%D7%94_%D7%9C%D7%A9%D7%91%D7%99%D7%9C%D7%99_%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%9C#/media/%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%91%D7%A5:%D7%A9%D7%91%D7%99%D7%9C_%D7%94%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%9B%D7%94_%D7%A8%D7%92%D7%99%D7%9C.png

the blue stripe in the picture is not an accurate shade of blue (it should be a dark blue and not the light blue as shown). How do I reach the person who posted that picture to ask him to change the shade of blue in that picture and the other similar pictures he has posted to a more accurate shade of blue? The owner's name on wiki is "David_Robin_1".

Sincerely, Yitzchakm2 (talk) 14:08, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Yitzchakm2, that's actually on the Hebrew Wikipedia. But it was uploaded by User:David Robin 1. SN54129 14:21, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

This is the English language Wikipedia, where that user is not active. Every Wikipedia is separate. You will need to ping him on the Hebrew laguage Wikipedia.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:19, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Shantavira, How do I ping him? (That his name is in red apparently means that he has no page). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yitchakm2 (talk • contribs)

@Yitzchakm2: this is his talk page on he-wiki, and ready for you to edit  :) SN54129 14:59, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Shantavira, Thank you very much. I sent him a message.

Yitzchakm2 (talk) 17:34, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Question about moving an article

FYI

 – Added section header. GoingBatty (talk) 22:32, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey! Would it be appropriate to move this article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messor_pergandei) to a new page (titled Veromessor pergandei)? It's now referred to more commonly by that Latin name, whereas at that time it was not. Cerambycidfreak (talk) 22:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cerambycidfreak: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest you ask on the article's talk page: Talk:Messor pergandei. GoingBatty (talk) 22:34, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Cerambycidfreak, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, my colleague GoingBatty is very much apt, what you want to do is seek consensus at the talk page of that article, you also need to notify editors who have made significant edits to the article, if you find that the approach isn’t yielding the desired results due to lack of sufficient participants in the talk page you may need to go to WP:RM & list the article there. Unilaterally moving articles to a new namespace isn’t necessarily wrong but it is usually reserved to a group of editors known as page movers who are familiar with policy and can determine when a unilateral page move wouldn’t be considered controversial or harmful to the collaborative project. Celestina007 (talk) 22:55, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I've posted a message on the article's talk page... just kinda waiting for someone to respond. Can I try and move it if both of your ideas don't work? Cerambycidfreak (talk) 18:03, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

It actually looks as if it was moved. Thanks for the advice! Cerambycidfreak (talk) 18:06, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Rangamini Werawatta

RANGAMINI WERAWATTA

Como hago para que mi artículo acerca de la biografía de esta persona viva sea aceptada en la comunidad por tratarse de alguien que da un aporte al mundo en asuntos de ciencia y tecnología. La misma debe ser en inglés porque esta dirigida a personas en Asia y Europa. Caperucitabohemia (talk) 16:35, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

This Teahouse is for helping with editing the English Wikipedia. If you have questions regarding the Spanish Wikipedia you need to ask there. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:49, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

It looks as if you have tried to submit an article in English to the Spanish Wikipedia. An article in English needs to be here at enwiki, but before you write a draft here you need to read the advice at WP:Your first article. The draft would need references to published reliable sources independent of the subject to demonstrate that the subject meets our criteria of notability. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Unrelated but, WOW, the speedy deletion criteria on eswiki are BRUTAL. Speedy deletion based off of WP:NOT??? Wow. casualdejekyll 19:05, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

How to suggest possible error/correction

Can I, and if so how, suggest changes to a posted Wikipedia entry? (“Impedance Analogy”) Reasonably sure I’m right and not wasting anyone’s time. Thx. Bldg36nites (talk) 00:06, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

That page is not protected, and therefore anyone can edit it. @Bldg36nites - Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit! Just click the "edit" button at the top of the page. casualdejekyll 00:14, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. You may submit an edit request, for suggesting edits, for more information, please read WP:EDITREQ. Severestorm28 00:14, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

The page in question is not protected, so an edit request is not needed. (Unless they'd like to wait a million years for someone to finally get around to the COI backlog.) casualdejekyll 00:15, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, just in case if this editor runs into trouble into some page-protected article. Severestorm28 00:18, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Bldg36nites: I'm not sure what you mean by your question. No such article called "Impedance Analogy" exists on Wikipedia. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:15, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes it does??? See Impedance analogy??? casualdejekyll 00:16, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh. I sometimes forget that when linking articles it's case sensitive. My bad. I was typing it exactly as they had put it. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:28, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Bldg36nites I'm really glad you asked your question here - thank you. I also spotted that you did then manage to edit the article on Impedance analogy. I'm afraid it did get removed by another editor, but that was because it was more of a commentary or observation, and did not add or correct any factual content in the article itself. However, please don't let this put off, but instead maybe try expressing your concerns on the article's talk page, and link to any supporting sources, if that would help you present a rationale argument for disagreeing with any content there. We really do welcome people with expertise in a subject if they can help improve encyclopaedic content, but it can take a few goes to understand how things work here. I realise it's never nice having one's contributions immediately removed, so I thought I'd drop by and explain to you why this was necessary in this instance. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:50, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

The direct answer to this user's question should have been to point them to the article talk page. They did not ask how to edit the page, they asked how to suggest a change. The user is clearly not 100% sure they are right (which they aren't) so shouldn't have been encouraged to edit the page directly. Talking about protected pages and edit requests is likely to just add confusion. The user doesn't need lessons in our arcane procedures, they just need to discuss their issue with someone. SpinningSpark 10:14, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

That's what I was thinking, @Spinningspark, which is why I was so confused when Severestorm answered the way they did? However, I didn't catch on that the user in question already knew how to edit and wanted to ask first if their edit was appropriate. Learning opportunity for me, it looks like. casualdejekyll 19:14, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Wigwamiella article references

I want to know if these two references are able to be used for an article I'll be making about a possible trilobozoan. The sources are https://www.gbif.org/species/8532800 which I'll use for the author of the species, and https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsfs.2019.0100 which I'll use for the actual information. Another source I found was https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Biostratinomy-of-frondose-organisms-in-the-Ediacara-Member-a-Aspidella-the-holdfast_fig1_342132470 but was just the diagram from the previous site. Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 16:26, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Rugoconites Tenuirugosus No, please don't. Wigwamiella is evidently a taphomorph of Aspidella, not an actual taxon. A WP:REDIRECT to that article and an expansion there might be appropriate, but not an article, as far as I can ascertain at a quick skim through. As I advised you previously, you need to be sure you're talking about genuine species not form taxa, and really, really understand the subject. The sources you cited are reliable for many things, but your interpretation of them does not appear to be so sound. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:29, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Then Why is wigwamiella represented as a seperate creature in the photo for the trilobozoa article? (the blue dome-shaped thing with a foot). Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 16:26, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia is not a reliable and up-to-date source of information. The drawing (not photo) was created in 2006, the article Droser1 et al. was published in 2020. Aleksey (Alnagov (talk) 18:05, 19 February 2022 (UTC))

@Rugoconites Tenuirugosus I agree with @Alnagov. That picture was created by another keen amateur, like yourself, and the editor who made it also published it on deviantart - hardly a scientific source. If I had my way, I would delete it. But it has already been used in many language wikis and I’m prepared to overlook that for now, but no more with the scratting around trying to extract obscure articles about things beyond your understanding. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:32, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Bebras Competition Creation

Hey everybody,

I am new to Wikipedia and want to create an article about the Bebras Competition, a CS competition with close to 3 million annual participants worldwide. I created a Draft for it with links to the website of the international umbrella organization of the 54 member countries, maintained by the University of Vilnius. I also linked the UK competition website, which is maintained by its national organizer, the University of Oxford and the US website which is maintained by the local Bebras organization.

Unfortunately, my draft was declined because I did not provide any outside sources. As this is a competition for middle and high schoolers, I am not entirely sure how outside info on the tournament is of any relevance, as this is not some hotly debated research topic, but an academic competition. Furthermore, the sources cited aren't some shady organizations with interest in gaining PR off of some Wikipedia article but reputable non profit bodies maintained be the likes of the oldest university in the Baltic states, namely Vilnius University, and the oldest English speaking institute of higher learning, the University of Oxford. (!).

Please give me advice on what to do. Here is the link to the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bebras_Computing_Competition

UPDATE: As I unfortunately couldn't figure out how to respond to other users comments yet, I will just put this here. I have reworked the draft and included a news article from a UK newspaper hosted on Yahoo News, an article from the MIT Admissons Blog and two independent studies about the competition. I hope this will get it approved! Thanks for the advice! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hashfrank (talk • contribs) 20:22, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks in advance Hashfrank (talk) 13:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Hashfrank: If there are no reliable outside (secondary) sources, an article cannot be made. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 13:48, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Bebras clearly exists as an international organization. What is absolutely necessary for a draft about Bebras to succeed is to have references that are independent from Bebras websites, as those are all considered primary. Wikipedia cares not for what an organization (or company) publishes about itself. SeeWP:NORG. As AGW replied, unless there are reliable source references about Bebras, independent from Bebras, not going to happen. David notMD (talk) 14:02, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Hashfrank: I concur with my colleagues above about sourcing, but I wouldn't despair too much about the possibility of finding them. For a competition that big, I'd expect there to be something, even if it's only a student newspaper writing about it happening at their school. Something like an article about the competition in a math educators journal would be ideal. If you come any possible sources you'd like to run by us, feel free to link them here. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:43, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Hashfrank: I'm not familiar with the Digital Careers website, so I don't know how notable it is, but here is an online source that may be of help to you: https://digitalcareers.csiro.au/en/Bebras. Also, if you search for "Bebras Competition" at Google Books (books.google.com) there are previews of several published sources (references) to use in your draft article that are independent of Bebras Competition. Best wishes on getting your draft article accepted. Karenthewriter (talk) 20:14, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanking

FYI

 – Added section header. GoingBatty (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

How do I thank Royal Autumn Crest for the welcome? Mamestraconfigurata (talk) 17:51, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mamestraconfigurata: Welcome to the Teahouse! On your talk page, click "Edit source". Underneath the welcome message, you can type:

:{{ping|Royal Autumn Crest}} Thank you! ~~~~

and then click the Publish changes button. The colon will indent your reply. The {{ping}} template will notify the user that you provided a response. For more information, see Help:Introduction to talk pages. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 18:01, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Maemstraconfigurata: Hey there, just chiming in with another way to do this. You can go to the revision history of your talk page and there will be a little 'thank' button located next to RAC's name. Click on that. I hope this helps :D Helen(💬📖) 19:18, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@HelenDegenerate and Mamestraconfigurata: If you want to go even further, you can click the "Wikilove" button on the top-right, and send them a barnstar. Quick Quokka ^[talk] 21:40, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

UFO sightings

 Rudolph wisc (talk) 22:28, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rudolph wisc. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Cullen328 (talk)

Press release citation

Can I add press release as a reference for citing a singer best---- work? Sweeto dweeto (talk) 20:37, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

No. See WP:PRSOURCE. casualdejekyll 21:05, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• • Sweeto dweeto, press releases aren’t good but aren’t necessarily bad, since it’s based on the publication of the subject it would be treated like a WP:PRIMARY source thus wouldn’t count to or be considered when ascertaining the notability status of a given article. Thus you are discouraged from optimizing them. Celestina007 (talk) 23:14, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
    • Sweeto dweeto, if the topic is already established as notable, then a press release can be used for non-controversial things. An example is a corporation announcing a new CEO. A press release should never be used for an evaluative claim that something is the "best". Cullen328 (talk) 22:52, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

hey

Can I rename my username please? --ThisWikiIsEditedByIrresponsibleJerks (talk) 07:40, 19 February 2022 (UTC) ThisWikiIsEditedByIrresponsibleJerks (talk) 07:40, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@ThisWikiIsEditedByIrresponsibleJerks: To rename your account, read WP:RENAME then go to this section and follow the link which says Simple renames (confirmed email address required). --Jack Frost (talk) 07:45, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Requested, can you check? --ThisWikiIsEditedByIrresponsibleJerks (talk) 07:52, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Please wait for some time; a user who has the rights to rename will respond shortly. Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:58, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I saw your contributions, but you have not seemed to put a request yet? Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:59, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Change in heart? – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 08:30, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

No, user has now been renamed to Vqd123. Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:38, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I’m blocked on Simple Wikipedia for this, thanks for helping me rename. --Vqd123 (talk) 17:34, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Update: And now your blocked here, too! Just one of many proven sockpuppets of User:DontSpreadMisinformationGuys. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:09, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: They pretty much said they would create more sockpuppets here. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 00:26, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Nothing we can do to prevent them. Yes we can disable their ability to create accounts, however they somehow still manage to create an account. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf Well, providing it doesn't take me too much effort, I, for one, am quite happy to delete any pages created by a blocked editor or revert any edits made since they were first blocked. Sometimes that's the only way to show a repeat offender that, once found out, their time and effort here since evading that block will have been in vain. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:51, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

blocked due to open proxy now closed / want to practice by filling in random needs reference / safety questions

First, thank you for taking the time to help me, I am new. I have been blocked because I use a VPN, VPN now off, how do I get unblocked? Second, someplace there is a option to be sent/shown random needs reference articles, happy to do that, but I cannot find the link. Where is it? Third, I am nervous nervous about having my proxy address revealed. As a Jewish scholar, I am writing Jewish articles and I understand that gets antisemitic responses, some virulent. Do you have any suggestions on what I can do to insure my safety since VPNs aren't allowed? Thank you; Wikisigh (talk) 23:15, 19 February 2022 (UTC) Wikisigh (talk) 23:15, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wikisigh: You are not blocked. If you want to use a VPN, go request an exemption. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 23:17, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Just further clarifying: the IP of the VPN is blocked, not your account. Being on a blocked IP also means that you cannot edit from your account. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 23:18, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wikisigh: You might want to look at Wikipedia:On privacy, confidentiality and discretion and Wikipedia:Personal security practices, which also link to other relevant pages. If you are logged in, then no one will know your IP address (although there's a limited number of trusted and regulated users (checkusers) who could look it up if there was good reason). Generally speaking an IP address, especially a VPN address, is not the weakest link in any personal threat model. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

May I have or where is the link to volunteer to fill in references on random articles that need them? Wikisigh (talk) 23:34, 19 February 2022 (UTC) Wikisigh (talk) 23:34, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wikisigh: Welcome to the Teahouse! See the links at Category:Articles lacking sources and Category:Articles needing additional references. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:43, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wikisigh If you're interested, English Wikipedia is at the moment rolling out a new Homepage feature for new editors like you who are using desktops to edit (but not mobiles). Right now, only 25% of new accounts get the Homepage tab enabled by default - it's right next to your Userpage tab. (If you can't see it, just go to Special:Preferences and, right at the bottom of that page, tick Display newcomer homepage and save the setting.

You will now have a new Homepage tab in which you are offered a set of articles to begin editing on, and which have been tagged for some form of improvement being needed. You can select which main subject areas you are offered to work on, as well as Easy, Medium, or Hard tasks to do. You even get randomly assigned a 'mentor' who has volunteered to answer any question you might have. Good luck with your very own Wikipedia Adventure! Nick Moyes (talk) 01:00, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Help with Improvements

Hello Fellow Teahouse Members I was Wondering if Some Improvements could be Done with List of Planetary Nebulas, I Noticed A Few Names Missing. Kuhn Alexander --2022-- DemonymsPlayer (talk) 11:43, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@DemonymsPlayer: Add it yourself. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 11:50, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Googling "Kuhn Alexander nebula" produces no results. If you add it to the list you will be expected to provide a reliable source.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:03, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I doubt very much that the user was suggesting that that is the name of a planetary nebula. SpinningSpark 12:44, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@DemonymsPlayer Welcome to the Teahouse. Further to @AssumeGoodWraith's very curt response to you: if you aren't confident with your own skills in English, but would still like to see changes made, then feel free to post at the List Article's talk page and suggest what those changes ought to be, and why you feel they are needed. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:04, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Alexander Kuhn is my real name I was not recommended for Naming a Nebulae that.DemonymsPlayer (talk) 02:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Please I need help my article keeps getting declined

 Oti (talk) 22:32, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Otiroyal. Your draft needs inline citations. Please read Referencing for beginners. Cullen328 (talk) 22:37, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

At Draft:Daniel Chimezie Okeke, none of those https at the end count as references. All references are to be in the text, to verify facts in the text. David notMD (talk) 02:33, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Lawrence O'Bryan Branch

I believe I have Mr. Branch's Bowie knife but to be sure i need photos,is this something you can help me with? Thank you, Carol Seamans 74.221.75.125 (talk) 02:30, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Carol, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm really sorry, but this is not something we can help you with. The Teahouse is a forum to guide new users how to edit Wikipedia. It sounds like a Google search and an antiques expert are needed - not us. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Question

I was wondering if the articles of creation desk would allow any Nebulae that haven't been Added and i would be happy to add one --Alex-- DemonymsPlayer (talk) 02:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Lists of nebulae lists nebulae (Doh!). Are there nebulae without articles? David notMD (talk) 02:42, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@DemonymsPlayer Not all astronomical objects are deemed notable, and thus would be worthy of a Wikipedia page. The criteria for this can be found at Wikipedia:Notability (astronomical objects). I'm afraid the AfC team can't suggest noteworthy articles for you to add.

However, you can find a list of 'required articles' at WP:WikiProject Astronomy, and here, too. Beware that just because somebody has suggested creating a particular article, doesn't necessarily mean it would be deemed 'notable'. It's up to you to find suitable sources with enough detail to merit creation of a new article. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:42, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Talk response

I was trying to make my user page recently and accidentally tried to make it an article, user:TimTrent denied it and told me that I shouldn't do that. I was wondering how I could apologize properly, I'm afraid that I'll do it wrong and annoy someone else Commadore Cundo (talk) 05:27, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Commadore Cundo, you have already made it. It's at Commadore Cundo. -- Hoary (talk) 05:30, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

That was when I tried it again the right way after the article got denied, I was moreover asking about how to respond or relay messages. Is this right by the way? Commadore Cundo (talk) 05:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I misread your question. You didn't make an article; you made a draft: User:Commadore Cundo/sandbox/User:Commadore Cundo. Yes, creating it was a mistake. An apology is not necessary. It's polite to reply in some way to regular messages; however, the message you got was a reviewer's comment on a draft, and it's normal to respond to these comments by doing something or other, and not by replying to them. Just forget all about the matter, and six months from now it will be automatically deleted. But if you'd prefer to accelerate its deletion, set out to edit it, delete all its content, and save it with an edit summary such as "Blanking a draft that I created by mistake". This will result in a fairly quick deletion. -- Hoary (talk) 05:42, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Or just add {{db-g7}} to the top. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 06:00, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Commadore Cundo. Or indeed just say here, simply and clearly, that you want it deleted. (No apology needed!) -- Hoary (talk) 06:08, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! Commadore Cundo (talk) 06:20, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Editorial Guidance

I've recently joined and started publishing on Wikipedia, although I'm not sure of the actual process of becoming a senior editor. Can anyone help me out with the process or any specific guide? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AustinMcCarthy001 (talk • contribs) 08:08, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi AustinMcCarthy001. There is no heirarchy of editors on Wikipedia and no official promotion system. Everyone is free to work on whatever they wish. But you can, if you want, find the most appropriate award at Wikipedia:Service awards and put it on your user page yourself. SpinningSpark 08:23, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, AustinMcCarthy001. Wikipedia is does not have a hierarchy of editors although there are rights to do stuff (such as edit articles that have restrictions placed on them usually owing to vandalism) which come after you have a certain number of contributions. This is explained at WP:UAL. You can also ask for access to the Wikipedia library to assist your Wiki-related research once you lave made 500 edits and been around for 6 months at least. Mike Turnbull (talk) 08:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Good faith

What is good faith? 2603:8000:F400:FCEA:A01B:3072:D880:3FB8 (talk) 03:16, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi there! Good faith is when someone does something wrong, but you don't assume bad intentions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.83.124.250 (talk) 03:19, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Good faith is the intention of doing good things, whether or not it was actually good. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 04:33, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

See WP:Assume good faith. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:50, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Also see Wikipedia:Competence is required --David notMD (talk) 08:52, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Is it possible to schedule when to move a page, and then for it to be done automatically on that date?

Telenor Bulgaria needs to be moved to Yettel Bulgaria exactly on 00:00, 2022-03-01. Quick Quokka ^[talk] 21:36, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

No??? Not that I know of, at least. Why does it need to be moved at exactly that time? We'd only use the new name if reliable sources are talking about it - see how Turkey hasn't been moved to Turkiye, for example. casualdejekyll 21:38, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll: Turkey isn't yet officially Türkiye. It plans to change its name in the near future, but it is still oficially "The Republic of Turkey", according to the UN.

Telenor will officially become "Yettel" on 00:00 2022-03-01. Quick Quokka ^[talk] 21:51, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

We follow what Reliable Sources have called a subject, not what it calls itself. I suspect we would take that approach with countries just as we would with people who decide one day in the bathroom that they want to be called 'Ye' from now on. However, once a name is in established use (i.e. after some time), then an article name change would be OK.

However, providing there are reliable sources to confirm a future name change will happen, there is nothing to stop that new name being mentioned within an article, and also for a WP:REDIRECT to be created to take users searching for the future name to the relevant article. Hope this makes sense. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:14, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

QuickQuokka, the notion thst an article must be moved at a specific moment in time indicates that you have a misunderstanding of how Wikipedia works. We do not time the renaming of company articles to the wishes or whims of the corporation. Instead, we move such articles based on coverage of the new name in reliable sources that are independent of the corporation. Please read Wikipedia:There is no deadline. Cullen328 (talk) 06:19, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Thanks! I didn't know that, I'll keep it in mind for next time! QuickQuokka ^[talk] 09:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Blur image in article

Hello, I have a question. I have uploaded some high quality images in Wikipedia. Before adding these photos in any article, they are fine. But after adding in any infobox, the images are getting blur or of lower quality. Why does Wikipedia reduce quality of images after adding in infobox? How can I prevent this from happening? GoldenHayato (talk) 10:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@GoldenHayato Can you give a couple of examples of articles where this happened? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:33, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thank you for replying. You can see it in pages like Viacom18 and Vodafone Idea Limited. The logos have became little bit blur or of lower quality. Please check them. GoldenHayato (talk) 11:04, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Afaict by the File: pages, the logos are as you uploaded them, not auto shrinking by bot, so I don't know what the problem may be. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:13, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

How to remove boxes with requests for citations etc after you have made the edits required

Hi, I'm working on the Rankin photographer wiki page, and there are 3 banner boxes with requests for changes in them - the changes were made ages ago but the requests still remain, you are supposed to be able to remove them but when I go in to edit them I don't see how - can anyone advise please? CujoJnr (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

You can open source editing mode and just remove {{more citations needed}} and {{BLP unsourced section}}. However, you need to make sure the problems are indeed resolved before removing these templates. Anton.bersh (talk) 11:32, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Rankin (photographer).--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:31, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Article Title / Lemma Otto Fried vs. Otto Fried (Artist)

Hi everybody! I have a problem with an article title that I can't seem to wrap my head around. There's this new article I helped move about the contemporary german-american artist Otto Fried (Artist). The only reason I had to add the parenthesis was, that there is an already existing article title Otto Fried, which weirdly enough and without any detectable reason redirects to the article Otto Fries. Is there anything I'm missing here? In my opinion it would be probably the best to get rid of that redirect and move the contemporary artist to the parenthesisless article name. In the german wikipedia where I'm mostly active I'd need to speedy delete the article Otto Fried before I can move the artist content there. Any suggestions or opinions here to this case? --Grizma (talk) 10:11, 20 February 2022 (UTC) Grizma (talk) 10:11, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Grizma, my guess is that @Lugnuts created the redirect in 2007 because it could be helpful as a common misspelling. However, now I see no reason why your article shouldn't "have" it. I think you need an admin to do the deed correctly. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:08, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Thanks for the ping. I've moved the redirect and moved the Otto Fried (Artist) page to Otto Fried. @Grizma: Hope that's OK! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 11:13, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Perfect you two, thanks a lot! Grizma (talk) 11:49, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

fed wup with ads

hey guys i just put this here bcos i cant seem to edit th main page. iused to use this site alot but i think iom goin g to have to stop using it now bcos of all the ads especiallythe really inappropriate onest bh. like im just browsing this site which i jnow by eleve year old son sometimes browses as well when hes at mty house and whenever i go onto a page i get like halg a dozebn pop up ads for porn completely blockngf my whole page and when i try to close them dsometimes thy just spawn even more! now i know ur run by voulenteers and i really really really appreciate that as uer creati g a really great free servcw for us an d i always loved this site and so did myson so money must be tight as i saw u asking for adonations before but pls pls pls plspls think about what ur doing!!! rthis is a site that kids use as well so its really no appropriate for porn adfs to pop up and completelt cover ur sceeen whenever ur on this iwki. hope wheover reads this has been thining what im thinking a its really not aceptanble idk if this is something the dmins decided on an d deceided to bn all discussion about LOL but im sure oyher ppl will h`ve thought its inappropriate too! peace and love x FedUpWithAds (talk) 03:58, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

wy is no one respondiong FedUpWithAds (talk) 04:26, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@FedUpWithAds: Wikipedia does not have ads. Check your computer for malware. RudolfRed (talk) 04:50, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

FedUpWithAds, you have twice added your complaint about ads to the article Ptolemaic Kingdom (second occasion), which seems about as strange as your claim to have seen porn ads. But then you have also said: i trie to asdd a new section on tourism and tourist advie but someone deleted it hbcs i think bcos i didnt really add any content as TBH i had a few drinks. Sobriety is a key to the use of Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 07:14, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Would also explain the poor spelling and grammar! Username142857 (talk) 16:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Just noting this user has been blocked. --Jack Frost (talk) 07:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Google news

Is google news a good source for referencing?---- Sweeto dweeto (talk) 17:19, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Sweeto dweeto Hello and welcome. Google News is an aggregator of sources, not a source itself. You can certainly use it to help find sources, but when writing a reference you should use the source itself, not Google News. 331dot (talk) 17:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Sweeto dweeto. Google News is not a source. It is a search tool you help you find sources. It is up to you to verify whether or not the specific publication is a reliable source. For example, Google News may display articles from the Wall Steeet Journal, a generally reliable source, and it may also display articles from the Daily Mail, which is not a reliable source. You must use your own editorial judgment. Cullen328 (talk) 17:29, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Is this subject notable?

I have a question regarding the notability of a subject. There is a company called SiberX. It isn't mentioned in any well-known places and I just wanted to make sure the company isn't notable enough to have an article created for it. Here is the company: https://www.siberx.org AAR007 (talk) 19:11, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@AAR007: Welcome to the Teahouse! The test that Wikipedia uses to decide whether or not to write an article goes like this: a subject is considered notable enough for an article if it has received significant coverage (so not just passing mentions-- we're talking large sections of prose) in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. I hope this answers your question. If not, hop on my talk page and we'll sort it out. Have a wonderful day (or night), Helen(💬📖) 19:53, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

How to send warning to editors after reversion

After I revert any edit how to let them know and warn the user?... २ तकरपेप्सी _talk 20:42, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

In general, you should leave edit comment explaining your reason for revert. If you need to leave a warning, you can use any of existing templates, here are a few to choose from. Anton.bersh (talk) 20:56, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Along with Anton.bersh, you should try Twinkle, as a faster way to revert, and to send out warnings/notices. Severestorm28 23:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

You could also try RW. ― Qwerfjkltalk 21:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@२ तकर पेप्सी Besides using anti-vandal tools, you can place {{subst:uw-vandalism1}} on the vandal's talk page under a month heading. So the vandal's talk page would have a section called February 2022 with a vandalism warning under it. I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 20:49, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

So it would look like this. I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 20:51, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Help with tables

Can you help me with Masked Singer Season 7? I'm not good at making tables yet. Can you show me the ropes? Agent K-Nova (talk) 14:48, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Agent K-Nova: for the technical aspect of making a table, you may want to look at Help:Table. I also find it helpful to look at other tables and copy their formatting- for example, the tables in The Masked Singer (American season 6) may be a useful reference.

I will add, however, that it looks like SecondLooneyaccount reverted your edit partially because the table wasn't done properly, but also because he thought it was unnecessary. Per Bold, revert, discuss, the recommended next step would be to discuss with him on the talk page of the article, rather than just re-adding the table. Aerin17 (t • c) 21:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Significant News Coverage

So I'm a bit confused here. My article draft has been rejected because it doesn't have significant news coverage even though I'm pretty sure it does. Can an admin or someone explain to me what I'm missing here? Thanks. Ibuprofenunlocked (talk) 22:24, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ibuprofenunlocked, is this about Draft:Scrabdackle? Four of the five references are published by the game author, so they are not significant independent coverage. While the Kotaku article looks like an independent source, it does not actually talk about the game much. It is very uncommon for unreleased indie games to generate enough coverage for an article on Wikipedia. —Kusma (talk) 22:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Lawrence Devereaux recommended I reach out: Want to remove Templates

Dear Wikipedia,

Lawrence Devereaux recommended I reach out to ask about removing these 2 "templates": 1. This article...has been extensively edited by...someone connected to the subject... 2. This biographical article is written like a résumé. Please help improve it by revising it to be neutral and encyclopedic. (August 2021)

I've tried to revise it to be neutral and encyclopedic and add references, but it seems I've not done enough. Can someone please provide further guidance?

Thank you,

Gibson Armstrong GibsonArmstrong (talk) 22:13, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello Gibson Armstrong. Assuming you're talking about the article Gibson C. Armstrong, the main advice I will give you is to stop editing the article. As long as you are editing it, the first notice, at least, should definitely stay. Please confine your involvement in that article to making edit requests in the talk page, as recommended at WP:AUTO#IFEXIST, so that an uninvolved editor can decide whether or not to apply the change you are requesting.

I also don't think the second notice should be removed at present either. I have removed the paragraph about appearing on a TV show saying something about a shooting: I don't see how that is encyclopaedic even if the reference cited mentioned this appearance, which it doesn't. I haven't looked any further. --ColinFine (talk) 23:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Bonnie Wright

I have a interview of her on You Tube where she says she had Irish Roman Catholic heritage but is on You Tube how do I out reference on her Wikipedia article? 78.152.205.167 (talk) 16:10, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm afraid YouTube is not useful as a reference, If you can find something that is not user created (ie in mainstream media) then that will be very useful. Reading Help:Referencing for beginners will be of use to you then Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 16:13, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

It depends on the YT-video, see WP:RSPYT, can you link it? If it's an anonymously uploaded WP:COPYVIO we can't use it, but if it's say CNN:s YT-channel it may very well be usable per WP:ABOUTSELF. You can use Template:Cite AV media. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: Bonnie Wright. Unless her grandmother is a Wikipedia-notable person, there is no value in adding such information. Parents, yes. Naming siblings, grandparents, children, no.David notMD (talk) 21:13, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Added by User:Rkunreal93 and reverted. David notMD (talk) 23:26, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Editing advice

I have written a major update to the entry for the National Centre for Australian Children's Literature. The previous entry is out of date as there has been significant structural changes to the organisaion as well as new events and information about services such as databases. Now I have never had any experience of writing for or dealing with Wikipedia previously and I have found it a very frusrating experience. When I look for or read any of the help or procedure pages I find the language/terminology used confusing and unhelpful. I have tried to find someone who has experience to help but without success. I transferred what I had written to a sandbox and with fearfully hit the publish page button. An editor has gotten back to me to, very unhelpfully imply that what I have written is not objective or balanced, that there is a problem with my user name and, that as I work for the organisation (as a volunteer I might add) I shouldn't be writing it. I wasn't actually given examples of what the issues were with the entry, or told what was wrong with my user name and how to correct it or how anyone not involved with an organisation could write about it.

So how about some genuinely helpful editing advice? Ruth Nitschke (talk) 22:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC) Ruth Nitschke (talk) 22:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Fine, then. CliffsNotes for you:

• You have a conflict of interest because you volunteer for the NCACL. At best your goals (Improving the exposure of the NCACL) and ours (a neutrally-written encyclopaedia project) dovetail.
• Because you have a conflict of interest, your view of what is neutral is skewed in favour of NCACL, and this shows in what you have written.
• Wikipedia has a lot of jargon, which I'll take the opportunity to try and explain as I go on.
• Your draft/userpage, as it is presently written, is promotional (i.e. it is written to "pretty up" or otherwise promote the organisation).
• We do not include visions, objectives, mission statements, or any other bloviating crap the company defines itself with, as content like this is always going to be both promotional in tone and unencyclopaedic on its face. We are an encyclopaedia project, not a billboard.
• Your footnotes are all nonfunctional, which gives the impression you copy-pasted this from somewhere (likely a now-deleted Wikipedia draft, since the copyvio check comes back clean). See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to actually cite your sources and WP:Reliable sources for what sort of sources we deem to be acceptable. (If you would rather a summary of the latter, we're looking for newspaper/news magazine/trade industry articles or scholarly books that (1) haven't been written or commissioned by the subject or their surrogates, (2) have been fact-checked or published by an outlet with an editor-in-chief and established fact-checking and corrections policies, (3) are not routine coverage of the organisation, and (4) discusses the organisation at some length in the source itself.)
• The "Collections" section is promotional in tone and would almost certainly need to be heavily edited or (more likely) removed outright. (As an aside, you create sections by using equals signs, i.e. ==(title)==. 2 is standard, more means subsections.)
• The "Artworks" section has the exact same issues as the section immediately above - it's unambiguously promotional. The remedy is the exact same - rewrite it wholesale or remove it entirely. The same applies to the "Accessing and Sharing the Collection", "Exhibitions and Seminars", "Publications", and "Access" sections.
• The "Funding" section needs removed outright. As a rule, funding is generally not considered to be a particularly noteworthy part of any organisation's article, being dispensed with in a sentence or two if at all, and any news with regards to funding is considered routine. There are exceptions, but they generally do not apply here (i.e. being funded by laundered money or being the charity arm of a for-profit organisation, cf. Ronald McDonald House Charities before their divorce from McDonald's).
• The "Volunteers" section needs removed outright as irrelevant.

For further information, I suggest having a look at WP:PSCOI. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 23:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Add to this that you have put your draft on your User page, which is exactly a wrong place. Expect it to be Speedy deleted very soon. If you can get to it in time, cut from there and park at your Sandbox. Your refs are not refs, i.e., superscripting a number does not create a ref. David notMD (talk) 23:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

FYI: The existing article is at National Centre for Australian Children's Literature. David notMD (talk) 23:42, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft Approval

Hi, I have been working on a Wikipedia page draft and would like to ask if it would be approved if submitted. The draft has been rejected once before and the advice provided was as follows:

Comment: Most information isn't sourced with inline citations, and therefore the information cannot be verified. Some parts aren't written with a neutral point of view. Clearfrienda 💬 23:51, 24 July 2021 (UTC) Comment: Fix close rephrasing [1] TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 02:55, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I have corrected these issues as best I can and would like someone to have a look over the draft to see if the issues have been fixed properly. If there are still problems, could you please let me know what I need to change specifically? Here is the link to the draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Australian_Leadership_Index

Thank you. Leadership scholar (talk) 23:31, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Leadership scholar I have left a comment on the draft. What you have done is not just WP:CITEKILL, but WP:BOMBARD. You seem have a misunderstanding about referencing so need to read WP:REFB

I hope you find the comment helpful

Please feel free to submit for a further review when ready. I have been unable to see past the state it is in at present Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:36, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your reply. While I am here editing and fixing that up, is there anything else that requires adjusting? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leadership scholar (talk • contribs) 23:53, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Leadership scholar As I said, I could not see past the state you left it in. Once you have corrected it then we wil be able to see what is truly present. You are engaged in an iterative process.

As an aside, please use more care when replying to messages. I had to disentangle your message from my own. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 00:03, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, sorry I am not very familiar with using this platform for replying etc. I understand, I have finished editing now so if you could please have a look over the current version that would be great. Thank you for your help.Leadership scholar (talk) 00:06, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Leadership scholar if you submit it for review (if you have not done so already) another reviewer will look at it in due course. It is a very rare thing for me to review a draft more than once. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 00:28, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

OK, I have not submitted it for review yet. If it is rejected again will it get deleted? I was a bit hesitant to submit because I wanted to make sure that I avoid deletion as much as possible. Leadership scholar (talk) 00:32, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Leadership scholar The review process is iterative. Your draft has not been rejected, but it has been declined. The difference seems subtle, but is real. Rejection is as near final as it gets, but is a thing to be used rarely by a reviewer. Being declined means it has been pushed back to you for further work. Note that you may ask a reviewer who reviews your draft to explain their review if you find it awkward to understand.

There is no real limit to the number of times a draft may be submitted. It does need to show improvement between submissions, though. Reviewers are human! Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 00:39, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Change image from non-free to free

Hello, I have seen some images, in which it is written that this image is of fair use. But some of those are actually in the public domain because they are too simple. How can I change those images from non-free to free (fair use to public domain)? Should I re-upload those images? Thank you. GoldenHayato (talk) 03:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

If the files don't exceed the threshold of originality, you can move them to the Wikimedia Commons instead rather than keeping them hosted here on the English Wikipedia. More information on moving files there is available at WP:MTC. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 04:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi GoldenHayato. It's sometimes a good idea to be careful with this kind of thing because the concept of threshold of originality (i.e. being "too simple for copyright protection") can vary quite a bit from country to country as explained in c:Commons:Threshold of originality. Some countries (like the UK, for example) have quite a low threshold of originality in comparison to others. Since Commons doesn't accept any type of fair use content as explainedin c:Commons:Fair use, logo files (in particular) often end up being deleted from Commons when an administrator feels the logo is too complex to be public domain and there's no way to verify that copyright holder of the logo has otherwise released it under a free license that Commons accepts. It might be a good idea for you to ask at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright about any logos you think are too simple before moving them to Commons just to see what some others might think. Lots of files that are moved to Commons with the best of intentions do eventually end up being deleted because they're not considered acceptable for Commons for one reason or another. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

reliable and independent sources = example

 Courtesy link: Draft:Priyanka chahar choudhary

hey i made a submission but it declined and it says not notable .can someone please give me example of reliable and independent references please .thank you in advance Akb bhatia (talk) 16:58, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources which says The Times of India is considered to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable. Theroadislong (talk) 17:11, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Akb bhatia: All 3 sources are from The Times of India, which is generally considered unreliable. See WP:TOI. You will need more reliable sources to show they are notable. --The Tips of Apmh 17:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

You will also need to explain how it is different from the version that was deleted here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priyanka Choudhary. Theroadislong (talk) 17:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Theroadislong hey can you please tell that India today source is reliable or not

@Akb bhatia: India Today is mixed in its reliability, they seem to have a history of not fact-checking their information. --The Tips of Apmh 18:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Theroadislong and pinkvilla , india forum ,tellychakkar any one of these — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akb bhatia (talk • contribs) 07:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Permission needed. Can I work on the subject? I am a movie addict. Hope I can work with Wiki rules if I get permission to do so.--Priya Ragini (talk) 03:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Priya Ragini: You don't need permission to improve a draft. However, you could post at Draft talk:Priyanka chahar choudhary or User talk:Akb bhatia if you want to discuss your ideas for improving the draft. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:02, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

How does a registered user become an administrator?

How does a user that is logged in become a administrator? Are there any possible ways for them? 2603:8000:F400:FCEA:813F:2FE7:825D:2582 (talk) 19:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi there @2603:8000:F400:FCEA:813F:2FE7:825D:2582:, welcome to the Teahouse. Nominations for adminship are made at RFA, where the community votes to decide whether the nominee should be given the administrator tools. If this was clear as mud, feel free to pop me a message on my talk page and I'll try to explain it better. Happy editing! Helen(💬📖) 19:39, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

You may want to read Becoming an Administrator in Wikipedia:Administrators. Karenthewriter (talk) 19:45, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Be advised that you can do the vast majority of things on Wikipedia without being an adminstrator(you can do many without even having an account as well, though not as much) and that administrators have no more authority than any other editor. 331dot (talk) 20:45, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

They just have mandatory chores. David notMD (talk) 21:10, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD: What activities are "mandatory chores" for an administrator? GoingBatty (talk) 05:10, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

What to do after a level 4 warning is given

This is hypothetical, but if someone gets 4 vandalism warnings in a month, and vandalizes again, what happens to that user? I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 20:56, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Assuming level 4 warning was justified (and not given on a personal whim of another user), the receiving user is considered "sufficiently warned". When another user spots further vandalism, that user can report this vandalism to admins who then evaluate the actions of the vandal. Then most of the time vandal gets banned. Anton.bersh (talk) 21:00, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Related article: Banning policy. Also, note that some bans are temporary (have a set time duration), some are indefinite (have no set end time, but can be appealed) and only some bans are truly permanent. Unfortunately, that's all I know, since I never was involved in ban enforcement, most of the time I managed to convince vandals to stop by engaging with them on Talk pages. Anton.bersh (talk) 21:10, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Anton.bersh: Please see WP:BANBLOCKDIFF. Plain old vandalism will almost always end with a block, rather than a ban. If you see someone vandalising past their 4th warning, you can report them to WP:AIV. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:00, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Establishing notability for a biography (BLP)

Hi everyone! Wanted to know if these sources establish the notability of this singer. [5] [6] Toofllab (talk) 23:18, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Toofllab you are starting at the wrong place. Instead of presenting possible references and asking of they are useful, you need to understand what is required for a living person's referencing.

For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

Please compare the references you have found with the tough criteria we need them to meet. I could give you a direct answer, but you will benefit from working this out for yourself. If you need more guidance please ask. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:45, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

In answer to Toofllab's question: no, they don't. To establish notability, you'll need multiple (three or more) reliable independent sources that discuss the subject. The sources you list are based on what he said, and so aren't independent. Maproom (talk) 09:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Short descriptions of more than 40 characters and featured article criteria

When a set of featured articles are part of a series of articles (for example, articles that talk about championship matches), the short description vary greatly from article to article. Per the "championship matches" examples, the short description of the first article is "Final of Scottish championship tournament held in 2010", the second article has the short description of "Association football match", and the third article sums it as "football match between X and Y", not to mention all three being either Featured Articles or FAC articles. When someone needs to edit the short descriptions of other articles (FA or not) to ensure parity with the featured articles, that editor has three choices corresponding to the three FA/FAC articles mentioned, and if all three were to be chosen across several other non-FA articles that will end up becoming FA articles, we might have a "short description disuniformity" problem that might turn off some editors who want to edit short descriptions. The solution to the "short description disuniformity" problem might be to unify all three choices and make short descriptions that are "coherent" with the original three choices, and this leads to questions about the resulting lengths of such short descriptions. Unifying these three short descriptions (each of them approx. 40 characters per WP:SDSHORT) could become short descriptions with upwards of 100 characters. Right now, as I have observed on the Wikipedia mobile app, short descriptions can go up to the hard limit of 250 characters. Can these articles with short descriptions of such detail (primarily short descriptions with upwards of 100 characters) become Featured Articles per WP:FACRITERIA?

If not, we might need to do an WP:RFC about this. LunafreyaLaphicet (talk) 03:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, LunafreyaLaphicet. The most important thing to keep in mind about short descriptions is that they are unimportant. I have been editing here for over 13 years and have been deeply involved with writing or major editing of hundreds of articles. I have never given more than five seconds of consideration to the short description of any of those articles. The goal of "ensuring parity" is a fool's errand, in my opinion, since editors have far more important things to work on than short descriptions, and especially parity between articles on unimportant elements . The most important thing once you get past their unimportance, is that short descriptions should be short. Therefore, in your example, "Association football match" is the best since it is the shortest and most direct. Keep it short and do not pay too much attention to it, because it is unimportant. See Wikipedia:Short description for details. Cullen328 (talk) 06:57, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

But does that mean short descriptions of upwards of 100 characters might become an WP:FAC obstacle? LunafreyaLaphicet (talk) 08:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

If it is a problem, then it will get fixed. Just do it right first time and as per Cullen328, keep short descriptions short. - X201 (talk) 09:03, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

OK. Appreciate it. LunafreyaLaphicet (talk) 09:50, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Publishing new wiki page

Hello, I recently created a new page called "Center for AI and Digital Policy." I am trying to understand how long it will be before the page is visible on the main wiki site. Looking forward to hearing back from this community. Thank you Rachel Rcs119 (talk) 20:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Center for AI and Digital Policy Anton.bersh (talk) 20:40, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Rcs119 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added the appropriate information to allow you to submit your draft for a review; this must occur before it can be formally placed in the encyclopedia as an article(not a "page"). However- and I don't mean to disappoint you- if you were to submit it now, it would be rejected quickly, as it has no independent reliable sources to support its content. A Wikipedia article is not for merely telling about a subject. An article about an organization must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. "Significant coverage" goes beyond the mere reporting of the activites of the organization or other brief mentions, and coverage must be independent- not written by the organization or based on its materials(like press releases). Please see Your First Article.

If you are associated with this organization, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 20:41, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Rcs119: Based on your page, I assume you are affiliated with the subject. I'm glad that you are upfront about it, you just need to formally declare it. Also, are you paid by the subject? Anton.bersh (talk) 20:48, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Rcs119: The article starts with "The Center for AI and Digital Policy’s (CAIDP) mission is..." This is an example of MOS:PUFFERY, being against the rule of Neutral point of view, one of the core policies of Wikipedia. It is also often an indication of Conflict of interest. When I read an encyclopedia article about some office, company, association, social movement, person or anything, I need it to tell me WHAT the subject is and WHY it is important to me and to the rest of the world, but not how wonderful the subject thinks it is. Wikipedia is not a place for expressions like "as an independent corporation", "significant publications", "more than 100 experts", "provides recommendations to national governments and international organizations", "well-informed policy", "cutting-edge research", "high-quality resources", "is a cornerstone for the development"—unless they are actually a common description of the entity; and if that is the case, it must be confirmed by references to multiple and independent sources. Otherwise it is just a blatant promotion, which is one of things which Wikipedia is not. --CiaPan (talk) 11:25, 21 February 2022 (UTC) (re-signed to re-ping)

Is there a template for returning a user's edit count?

I tried searching but couldn't find any. I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 22:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Only for certain admins, for example Template:Adminstats/Kusma can be used to display that I have 57586 edits. —Kusma (talk) 22:13, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

You can click on preferences (upper right, the sandbox and the beta-link), and it will give you an approximative number of your edits so far. Lectonar (talk) 11:36, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia mobile

Is there something wrong with wiki mobile? I can usually remove the .m. in the url to see the desktop of view Wikipedia, which makes it way easier to edit on mobile. But now when I remove the .m. it still shows the mobile view and puts back in the .m. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 15:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb12: You should be able to scroll to the bottom of the page and there should be an option to use desktop version. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 16:02, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 13:47, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Question from Username142857

I submitted my sandbox for review to become an article on accident. Is there a way to revert this? Username142857 (talk) 13:21, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Username142857: Yes, you can remove the afd submission template. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 15:31, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh, ok! Username142857 (talk) 15:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

User has been blocked for WP:NOTHERE. Also, for future reference Kaleeb18 it would be the AFC template and not the AFD template. AFC is Articles for Creation while AFD is Articles for Deletion. Both complete opposites of each other. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 03:42, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Blaze Wolf my bad, that was a bad typo to make. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 13:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: It's alright. Doesn't matter now that the user has been blocked for WP:NOTHERE. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:54, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Help on article which is appears an advertisement

Hi All, My first submission (National Green Front) was not accepted because it appears to read more like an advertisement. Could you someone please help me on here to identify those sentences. Thanks ChinthakaGK (talk) 03:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

courtesy link: Draft:National Green Front Karenthewriter (talk) 03:29, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Right from the start, I'd say "joined hands" is more what you'd see in an advertisement than an informative encyclopedia. Overall, just keep in mind that the goal of an article is not to tell a story to persuade someone to like a group, but rather to provide neutral information and facts. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 04:07, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@ChinthakaGK: Welcome to the Teahouse! I think "extraordinarily surpassed" is another phrase that reads like an advertisement. Most of the text in the "Formation" section and the entire "Financial Vision" section is unreferenced. Your goal in creating a draft should be to gather independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the organization, and then summarize/paraphrase what they state. Please read Help:Your first article if you haven't done so. You can also use {{Infobox organization}} instead of the table at the top of the draft. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:43, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@ChinthakaGK: How did you acquire the image of Dr. Pathum Sankalpa Kerner? GoingBatty (talk) 05:47, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi @GoingBatty: Thank you for your kindness and reply, I noted your point and the answer to your question - I found Dr. Pathum's Image below the online paper article and cropped the background. https://www.sundayobserver.lk/2020/08/02/opinion/green-politics-and-system-change-aim-%E2%80%93-dr-pathum-sankalpana-kerner. May I remove the image or add a citation? and May I remove the "Financial Vision" section and rewrite the article?

@ChinthakaGK: Another editor has already removed the image, as you may not upload a copyrighted photo (altered or not) to Wikimedia Commons as your "Own work". Another editor has already removed the "Financial Vision" section. You may continue rewriting the draft and resubmit when you're ready. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 14:19, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Link to other Wikipedia pages

Please help. What is the Wikitext to link a word eg. Johannesburg to another Wikipedia page which describes Johannesburg in detail? 102.132.134.49 (talk) 12:22, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

To link to another Wikipedia page, place the name of the page in double brackets like this: [[Joe Biden]], which appears as Joe Biden. 331dot (talk) 12:24, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Additionaly, the code [[Joe Biden|Example]] will produce Example, with 'Example' linking to Joe Biden. Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

For more information, see WP:Wikilinks. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:27, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Linking to another Wikipedia article

Please help. What is the Wikitext to link a word eg Johannesburg to another Wikipedia page which describes the word Johannesburg in detail? Mysky2blue1 (talk) 12:25, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Answered above. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:28, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Mysky2blue1 In your draft Draft:Vivian Granger you need to remove all the nowiki to make the Wikilinks work. All of the content needs to be referenced. See Help:Referencing for beginners for guidance. David notMD (talk) 14:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

Hello, I have a question about reliable sources. The article (Draft:Philipp Hochmair) was declined twice because the submission was not adequately supported by reliable sources. I have added the filmography and a few newspaper articles, but I don't know if that is enough. It would be a great pity if the article is declined a third time. Thank you very much for the support.Emmy1707 (talk) 10:08, 21 February 2022 (UTC) Emmy1707 (talk) 10:08, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Emmy1707: Welcome to the Teahouse! I made some tweaks and then declined it, as the "Early life" section has no references. GoingBatty (talk) 14:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Where to put reasons for edits

I made an edit. It was changed back and I was told I needed to explain the edit. I am not sure where or how to do that.

Thank you. Albetha2!98 (talk) 16:14, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Albetha2!98: Hello Albetha! You should always explain your edit using a edit summary. The page I linked provides an explanation as to what it's for and how to use it. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:17, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

A hatnote to a section

Could someone please help me with the formatting of hatnote that points to a section within an article. In particular, I would like to add a hatnote to D. Napier & Son to distinguish it from D. Napier & Sons. However, that latter company exists as a section within a larger article on Duncan Napier. Is it possible for the hatnote to link to the section rather than the whole article? I hope this makes sense. Mike Marchmont (talk) 17:33, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mike Marchmont. You can accomplish this with the following wikicode:

[[Duncan Napier#D. Napier & Sons|D. Napier & Sons]]

The # character takes the link to a section of the article and the | character displays what follows that character. The output is D. Napier & Sons. Cullen328 (talk) 17:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt reply, Cullen328. I tried your suggestion, but unfortunately it didn't work. I used this syntax:

{{For|the Scottish herbalist|Duncan Napier#D. Napier & Sons|D. Napier & Sons}}

which rendered like this:

For the Scottish herbalist, see Duncan Napier § D. Napier & Sons, and D. Napier & Sons.

I understand the use of # in a Wikilink in the body of an article, but it doesn't appear to work within a hatnote. Any further help would be appreciated. Mike Marchmont (talk) 09:18, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mike Marchmont: I have updated the article with the hatnote. The last pipe symbol has to be "escaped" (see code and Template:!). 108.52.196.8 (talk) 11:24, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

That's perfect. Many thanks, @108.52.196.8:. I didn't know about the escape character. I will now add that information to my personal knowledge base. Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:21, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Linking to another Wikipedia article

In my draft Draft:Vivian Granger someone mentioned that I need to remove all the nowiki to make the Wikilinks work. Please could someone look at this draft quickly and tell me where I have gone wrong. I used the wikitext as follows: Link .. this should make the words go blue for a link to drill through to it's wiki page Mysky2blue (talk) 15:12, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mysky2blue: Hello mysky! I've removed all the nowiki tags from your article and replaced some of the info with an infobox (only the info you have for the infobox), however your article will most likely be declined since it is completely unreference. See WP:Referencing for Beginners for help in adding refs. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:26, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Draft:Vivian Granger has two references, but no footnotes. GoingBatty (talk) 16:11, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I saw those supposed "references" but I have no clue what they are for or what the reference even is. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:19, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mysky2blue. Draft:Vivian Granger was made with VisualEditor which works differently from the source editor. See Help:VisualEditor#Editing links. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:27, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much everyone - I really appreciate all the help and I will be working on the references Mysky2blue1 (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

help with article that has been turned down 3 times

my article has been turned down three times and I need help please :-) I have tried three times to get an article published. Each time it has been denied, I would revise it according to what was suggested by the editor who rejected it. Then the next editor denies it for something else which I then fix and resubmit. This last rejection is very similar to the original reason it was denied entry which I thought I had already addressed. The person I am trying to add is a TV celebrity (Breegan Jane) whose peers are included in Wikipedia. I cannot imagine why she shouldn't be. Any help is very much appreciated. I am about to give up and that's not usually what I do. I have put so much work into this. Jeanne Pritt Sheridan (talk) 15:02, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Breegan Jane Karenthewriter (talk) 15:25, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Jeanne Pritt Sheridan It seems the draft does have some reliable sources, but there are still some sources that are not. There is also a lot of unverified information. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 15:52, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Also if you if you are related or know the person you are writing an article about, it is highly suggested that you do not do that as that would be a conflict of interest (COI). You need to declare on your userpage that you are a relative or know who Breegan Jane is. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 15:59, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Karenthewriter: @Jeanne Pritt Sheridan: Instead of the list of "Media features", I suggest you use those articles as references for information about her. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:03, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: I think you meant to ping Jeanne Pritt Sheridan. Karenthewriter is the one who gave the courtesy link. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 16:32, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: Whoops! Thanks for catching my mistake! @Jeanne Pritt Sheridan and Karenthewriter: Sorry for the incorrect ping! GoingBatty (talk) 17:00, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

To link or not link in Block Quotations

I looked at Wikipedia:Manual of Style and MoS:L and am I not sure if it good practice to insert wiki links in a block quote. ScientistBuilder (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ScientistBuilder. Per WP:MOS#Linking, the recommendation is to be "conservative" about wikilinking within quotations. Personally, I never do it. Cullen328 (talk) 17:20, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: I’m with Cullen328 I never do it, but might rarely put a link in a regular quote. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 17:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I gave an explanation for my edit - Mo Pinel

I deleted the reference to me and my mother because Mo Pinel abandoned me and my mother as a child, he stole and disowned me. He wanted nothing to with us and we wanted nothing to do with him. Given this, I am removing the references from his Wikipedia page. I explained this in the most recent edit, as I was required to do. Yet, I have once again been told I did not provide an explanation.

I am uncertain what else I need to do here.

Thank you. Albetha2!98 (talk) 16:32, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Albetha2!98: Providing an explanation doesn't make you immune from being reverted. Your reasoning of him abandoning you has nothing to do with the removal of the reference. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Maybe not, Blaze Wolf, but it should prompt us to consider whether the information belongs in an article. ColinFine (talk) 17:02, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I was told that I didn't provide an explanation for the most recent edit in the edit summary. My point was that I did provide an explanation in the edit summary. Whether or not Wikipedia chooses to "allow" the edit or accept the reason for the proposed change is different than saying that I didn't provide an explanation in the edit summary. That was the point to my question. A variation of my most recent edit was made by an editor, and while my mother would prefer that her name be removed, the current edit is acceptable. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albetha2!98 (talk • contribs) 16:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Naming spouses is normal procedure, but naming children (or their education, or their profession) is not, unless they themselves are subjects of articles. I removed that information. I also removed the ref, as it was to a 1995 newspaper article (which was behind a paywall), and so guessing it had nothing to do with Pinel's first marriage and child. David notMD (talk) 16:48, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Ah. I didn't look at the history and see you'd done that, David notMD. I found a paragraph cited to a source which confirmed none of the information in the paragraph, so I removed the paragraph. ColinFine (talk) 18:11, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Albetha2!98: I'm fairly sure the warning says you didn't provide an accurate edit summary. Correct me if I'm wrong though. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I understand now. Apologies. This is not something I do often. I understand what is necessary in the future. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albetha2!98 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I need guidance and help

I have trouble creating an article Hello . I made a draft entitled Seyyed Mahmoud Razavi, but my draft was disqualified and not approved due to lack of resources and invalid resources. The person for whom I was going to write an article, Seyed Mahmoud Razavi, is one of the top producers of Iranian cinema and the producer of great movies such as The Midday Story and The Midday Story: Blood Trail and films such as: Lottery - Atrium - Cyanide and many more. Other movies. Due to my inexperience in English Wikipedia, I could not get more resources and now I am asking if anyone can help me to complete the draft: Seyed Mahmoud Razavi and publish it so that both I can learn and I have written an article and helped to spread Wikipedia. Let me know if anyone can help me. Thank you Ahmad1387 (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ahmad1387: Welcome to the Teahouse! While the folks here would be willing to help you understand the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia, or help you with the technical nature of wikicode, it's unlikely that anyone here will have the ability and desire to search for independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of this person. I added some WikiProjects to Draft talk:Seyyed Mahmoud Razavi, and maybe someone from WP:WikiProject Iran will be inspired to help you. Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. However, there are thousands of articles that you could help improve. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 18:19, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

new , how can i see if approved≈

hi, im really new at this, didnt understand if i did it right, but for now i didnt see that my contribution was approved??? Yanivd28 (talk) 18:57, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Yanivd28: Welcome to the Teahouse! There is not an approval process for most articles, such as Lead, so once you make an edit like this one, it is live for everyone to see. However, Certes reverted your edit a few hours later in this edit, and kindly explained why in the edit summary. If you're new to editing, you could view Help:Introduction and The Wikipedia Adventure to learn how to edit. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:02, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Yanivd28: Unfortunately I had to remove the new entry from Lead's See also section, which lists related articles that aren't linked in the text above. We don't have an article about Vitalki, so there's nowhere to send the reader. (There is a draft, but it doesn't yet establish the artist's notability.) The album cover also plays a less critical part in the study of lead than, say, the inventor of the fuel enhancer. I never enjoy undoing someone's first edit, and I hope you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia. Certes (talk) 19:32, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

What is this "unhelpful" log about?

Hi, I was looking through my user logs, and I noticed one particular log that just reads "unhelpful", which seems rather vague and non-descriptive compared to the rest of the logs. I was wondering if anybody might know what this log was about? LikeLakers2 (talk) 16:04, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi LikeLakers2. It's probably from Wikipedia:Article Feedback Tool. It left behind a lot of partial logs when it was discontinued in 2014. Just ignore it. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for letting me know! LikeLakers2 (talk) 16:18, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

The log doesn't give a lot of information, so it seems pretty unhelpful to me. :-) GoingBatty (talk) 16:18, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@LikeLakers2: I checked the HTML and it's from Article Feedback Tool Version 5. The log is in your name so I guess it was you who called some feedback unhelpful and not somebody who said it about you. The user and page is gone from the remaining log and I think all actual feedback was deleted. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:21, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: To be fair, I wouldn't be too surprised now-a-days if someone called me unhelpful 11 years ago, haha. But jokes aside, since these logs no longer appear useful, perhaps they could be deleted? I'm not sure where to suggest that sort of action though.LikeLakers2 (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@LikeLakers2: phab:T115303 from 2015 is "Expunge old AFTv5 log entries on WMF wikis". Some things move slowly. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:12, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

"Sedum Adolphi"'s article notability?

Hi, I just wanted to ask a question about the notability of plant species Sedum Adolphi. I'm planning to create an article about it (of course in my sandbox first). —Remember, I'murmate — I'ma editor2022 ^{(🗣️💬 |📖📚)} 18:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@I'ma editor2022: Welcome to the Teahouse! WP:NSPECIES tells us "Species that have a correct name (botany) or valid name (zoology) are generally kept. Their names and at least a brief description must have been published in a reliable academic publication to be recognized as correct or valid." Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 18:56, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

However - @GoingBatty, @I'ma editor2022 - there is already an article on this topic at Sedum nussbaumerianum, therefore any duplicate articles would be speedy deleted under A10. I recommend that instead of putting your effort into creating a duplicate article, you try to improve the already existing article. casualdejekyll 19:08, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll: Thanks! I created Sedum adolphi as a redirect to Sedum nussbaumerianum to make it easier to find. GoingBatty (talk) 19:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll and @GoingBatty:

Thank you for telling me and adding redirect! —Remember, I'murmate — I'ma editor2022 ^{(🗣️💬 |📖📚)} 20:53, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Where to get valid references

Hi, I wonder how to add the right references on significant rally racing team (they have been repeatedly in the top 5 on Dakar) when the most reliable source is their website or Facebook groups. I can find number of articles about them too but they are all in Czech. I am not sure if that is valid? Thank you! KaterinaSturmova (talk) 21:00, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@KaterinaSturmova: Hello Katerina! The language of the source does not matter. As long as it qualifies as a reliable source and can be used to establish the subjects notability. Facebook and their website are not good sources because they are not independent of the subject. I usually just use Google for finding sources for the subject, however you can also use WP:RSSE which is a programmable search engine that will only show results from sources that have been determined to be reliable. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:03, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@KaterinaSturmova: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia:WikiProject_Motorsport has some suggestions for reliable published sources. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:08, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Complex Page/Content Creation - Whistleblowing The Tax Club, Accounting Fulfillment Services, DBA 1-800Accountant

This is a complicated, multi-page creation need. Basically, an online only accounting/bookkeeping and tax preparation firm has been scamming people for decades now under different names. The most famous of which is <a href="https://legalnewsline.com/stories/510517784-the-tax-club-agrees-to-255m-settlement-with-states-feds">The Tax Club</a> which ended up being sued by multiple states attorney general and settled for just under $300M. The company, with same leadership, still does business today as "Accounting Fulfillment Services". Better known by their DBA <a href="https://1800accountant.com">1-800Accountant</a>. Their CEO and Former CEO, <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cases/2013/01/130117taxclubcmpt.pdf">Brendon A. Pack and Michael Savage</a>, respectively, continue to manage the company and retain much of the same shady tactics. I am a current employee - so am able to serve as a reference. And in addition to the complexity of the pages needed to explain this shady business, I am too close to the subject to objectively write these articles.

Finally, my question: Is some kind soul (or souls) willing to help get this information out to the public? I will assist in whatever way makes sense.

Thanks Digitalsavvy (talk) 20:56, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Digitalsavvy: Hello Digital! Thanks for not attempting to create an article yourself, due to your WP:COI. Unfortunately, if the company isn't notable then they don't get to have an article on Wikipedia. You can't be used a source either since that would technically be WP:OR. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:05, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Hi Blaze Wolf! I understand. Outside of the lawsuits, and there are several, there is no sustained coverage on any of these entities. They did once use Ben Stein as a spokesperson and ran national TV commercials, but that is still probably sub-standard. In any event, I appreciate your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitalsavvy (talk • contribs) 21:29, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Digitalsavvy: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia is not the appropriate place to get information out to the public - see WP:PROMO. Wikipedia articles should be built based on independent published reliable sources that are already available to the public. Note that Wikipedia doesn't use HTML - we'd format external links like this: "The Tax Club". GoingBatty (talk) 22:05, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Actually, Wikipedia does use SOME HTML. But not a lot. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 22:06, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Digitalsavvy: No problem! Glad I could help! ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 22:05, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Digitalsavvy: Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not the correct place for this kind of information. Please see WP:TRUTH. Anton.bersh (talk) 22:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: ::@Anton.bersh: Noted. I appreciate the response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitalsavvy (talk • contribs) 22:20, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

What makes an article "promotional"?

I've had 2 reviewers both say that my article is too promotional, but I'm still not sure why. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:AOZ_Studio What could I do to make it less "promotional", and more worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia? Ising4jesus (talk) 17:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ising4jesus Start again in a brand new draft. Write only what others say unbidden about the org in multiple independent reliable sources, using your own words. Do not write what you want to say.

Are you associated with the subject of the draft? Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:27, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Timtrent they have already declared their COI. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 17:31, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18 Ah, so they have. @Ising4jesus please read WP:PAID. Working part time there means you are, broadly construed, paid Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:36, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Well Ising4jesus, the little words like this one in the lead high-level would be considered promotional. I would suggest reading WP:WORDS and WP:NPOV. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 17:29, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Ising4jesus. Let's take a look at the first sentence of your draft: AOZ Studio (also known as AOZ BASIC or just AOZ) is a high-level computer language, well suited for games and multimedia, as well as general purpose applications. That is not neutral language; it is evaluative language. What reliable source independent of AOZ calls the language "well suited" for anything? That's promotional language, not encyclopedic language. Vast swaths of your draft are entirely unreferenced and therefore must originate with the company. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes what published reliable sources entirely independent of the company say about the company. Otherwise, a Wikipedia article about a company turns into a sales brochure for the company, and that simply is not permitted in a neutrally written encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 17:34, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

"High-level" is a technical term, not a promotional term. It indicates the type of computer language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-level_programming_language.
I do agree however, that "well suited" is evaluative language. Perhaps something like: "AOZ Studio (also known as AOZ BASIC or just AOZ) is a general purpose, high-level computer language, with heavy emphasis on graphics, audio, and video commands." That is a matter of fact statement rather than "evaluative". Would this language be more acceptable?
Ising4jesus (talk) 20:05, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

That does sound better, Ising4jesus. But the question to ask is, which of the independent sources talks about its emphasis on graphics? If at least one does, that's fair enough. But if that's only the company's, or you own, evaluation, then it doesn't belong in the article. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 22:47, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

My first article was marked for deletion?

I recently wrote an article about one Mr. Andrew Zellgert who writes science fiction. I interviewed Mr. Zellgert in December about his work and I felt inspired to write a Wikipedia article about him. No sooner did I publish this article did someone announce it had to be deleted due to 'insufficient information.' I would like to know what is considered a sufficient source of information? I have links to all of Mr. Zellgert's platforms, his book listings on various notable websites, and my interview notes. What do I do? ~Draftabillman Draftabillman (talk) 20:01, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Draftabillman The key question is "Does Zellgert pass WP:NAUTHOR. If he does, can you edit the article to prove that.

All you need is to show that he passes, and you can do that by showing how he does at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Zellgert. This is a place where you may make policy based arguments for retention.

A word of caution. Please do not be tempted to answer every single point that anyone makes. Take your time, create your best argument, and post that there, if he passes. Then walk away and treat your post as a Fire-and-forget missile. Less truly is more. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 20:08, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello again, I am unsure how to go about this. I clicked the link to the author requirements and I am not sure where to begin. My problem is most of my information is coming from the interview or his biography. How does one go about answering a deletion request? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Draftabillman (talk • contribs) 20:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Draftabillman It may be, then, that he does not, yet, pass WP:NAUTHOR. If he does not then the article cannot be salvaged.

One answers a deletion request quietly, calmly and says one's piece. For example, I have made a comment at this one. Wait and watch what others say. There is no rush, although I do see that you have suggested that the article be "closed". That may be interpreted as that the author requests deletion and has been the sole substantive editor. If so then the discussion goes away.

Next time please use Wikipedia:Articles for creation where reviewers can and will guide oyu Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 20:21, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Draftabillman: Hi there! You may answer the deletion request the same way you posted your response here. Wikipedia articles should be based on independent published reliable sources to ensure verifiability. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 21:59, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Draftabillman. I'm sorry, I know it's frustrating to have your work discounted; but what you've done is the equivalent of starting to build a house without checking whether the local planning regulations allow that house to be built. The main issue here is that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. However fine an interviewer you are, all your information comes from the subject, and so, while a small amount of purely factual information may be taken from your interview, it cannot form the basis for a Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk) 22:59, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Are reviews an appropriate editorial source for a hotel article?

I've been assigned to write a Wikipedia entry for a hotel in Boston, but so far have not been able to find independent editorial articles/sources where it is mentioned, except for independent review sites (ex: Travelociy). They are independent, but aren't "articles" per se. Are they enough to qualify the hotel as 'notable'? Thank You 2603:8001:6400:9300:91FF:8AAA:C078:FFA1 (talk) 20:25, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi @2603:8001:6400:9300:91FF:8AAA:C078:FFA1:! What is the subject you are trying to write about? What do you mean when you say that you were "assigned to write a Wikipedia entry"? For reference, Wikipedia does not have "entries", it has encyclopedic articles. Also, as far as I understand, Travelocity contains user-generated reviews which are not considered reliable. In other words, no, that kind of content would be suitable for an encyclopedia, and definitely does not demonstrate notability. Anton.bersh (talk) 20:34, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@2603:8001:6400:9300:91FF:8AAA:C078:FFA1 it may help you to read What Wikipedia is not and share it with the person who assigned you the task of writing an article about a Boston hotel. Some people incorrectly believe that Wikipedia is a form of social media, to be used for promotional purposes. If you haven't already done so, you should read Your first article.

Writing a neutral (no promotion or opinions) online article, with good references for everything stated, is a difficult task, and I hope you don't face difficulties with the person who assigned the article if you aren't able to get it published. Karenthewriter (talk) 23:28, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

How to deal with conflict and potential racism issues

I am very confused about how to approach racially sensitive topics. It seems like mentioning racism is an easy way to get banned and I am not trying to get banned. It is hard for me to know what to do when approaching articles such as Orania, Northern Cape, which is an open white nationalist settlement. I have been openly accused of "anti-white" racism, which seems much more problematic than mentioning racism and systemic bias more generally. It seems clear to me that the article downplays the white nationalist elements in a variety of ways, most obvious being the focus on "Afrikaner" identity. Should I submit a request for comment?

I also feel as though one or two users tend to follow me around and WP:HOUND me. I do not want to get banned for reporting them, what is the best way to approach this issue?

I personally feel that I have been engaging in good faith and trying to create consensus wherever possible. What am I supposed to do when my edits are reverted without consensus? It is incredibly frustrating when I am told to find consensus to restore the WP:STATUSQUO.

I understand debate and arguments are part of Wikipedia but constant opposition to every edit I make is incredibly stressful :/ Desertambition (talk) 23:52, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Desertambition, looking at the edit history of Orania, Northern Cape, I see that other editors generally share your view (as I do). So, as you find the opposition stressful, my advice is, walk away, and let others continue the fight. Devote your efforts to other issues (in Wikipedia or elsewhere), you'll achieve more that way, and it'll be better for your health. Maproom (talk) 10:10, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Desertambition, while I'm sure that Maproom means well, their advice may look like "If you're being hounded, just give up, in the hope that others will achieve what you'd hoped in vain to achieve." I don't suppose that it was meant that way (and certainly I hope that it wasn't). Actually Maproom doesn't seem to have addressed the issue of hounding. I'm not doing so either: not because it doesn't merit being addressed (it does merit this), but because the demands of "real life" mean that I can't devote as much time to looking into this as I probably should. This "Tearoom" page is frequented by a number of editors who are highly experienced yet not ossified into blandness but on the contrary demonstrably willing to deal forcefully with misbehavior. I hope that one or more of them will step in. In the meantime, I have addressed two narrower (but important) issues: the curious reluctance to say that this town is widely described as "whites-only", and the accusation that you're an "anti-white" racist. The former has already had (very minor) effect. The latter has been moved elsewhere but otherwise not yet responded to. I'm staying tuned. -- Hoary (talk) 23:54, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hoary Thank you for the advice. I am trying to deal with this appropriately. There are still users (I would say 3) who are following me around on pages that aren't Orania just to oppose my edits. Just to be clear, I believe WP:HOUNDING is happening but I do not want to report it because I do not want to be banned. These users have frequently threatened to get me blocked or banned. I think that looking through my contributions, while not perfect, show that I have engaged in good faith and I frequently have the same editors following me article to article often making the same debunked arguments ad nauseam. I also find it strange that your comment was removed from the page because it was inappropriate but somehow the "anti-white racist" comment wasn't. Desertambition (talk) 00:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Desertambition,the advice I gave you was what I would give to a friend. I was putting your health ahead of the interests of Wikipedia. Hoary is right to describe me as "ossified into blandness". You will not be banned for pursuing this issue; those who assign bans aren't stupid, they will agree with you and Hoary (and me). Maproom (talk) 00:44, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Maproom Thank you for the advice as well. I appreciate this immensely. I will try to compile a good list of diffs so that I have some solid ground to stand on. Your point about stepping away was definitely heard and I did take some time away to clear my head. Desertambition (talk) 00:50, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Er . . . except that I didn't have Maproom in mind when so describing. Otherwise, yes, Desertambition, your health should come first; but the charge of hounding should be dealt with. (And I agree with Maproom on the non-risk of being banned.) In "RL", I'm doing my taxes now; perhaps one or more among 331dot, Bonadea, Cullen328, GoingBatty, and Nick Moyes would be available to consider this matter. -- Hoary (talk) 01:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Brining Up Bates.

Why Was Bringing Up Bates Cancelled By Up TV. Egrenert (talk) 00:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Egrenert: Hello welcome to the Teahouse. If you asking why your edits were reverted by Woodroar, the reason is because there were no reliable sources, verifying the information you put in. Hope this helps! ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 00:52, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Egrenert: This is not a question for the Teahouse. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Question How can I Edit Without Reliable Sources. Egrenert (talk) 01:04, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Egrenert: Unless it's something that's a minor copy-edit or a few other things, the majority of information on Wikipedia must be backed up by realiable secondary sources. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

"Selected works" formatting style

Hello, I recently came across Emi Nakamura#Selected works. The formatting looks quite ugly and it feels strange to include this much detail about each paper, but I do not know the correct way it should be formatted. Is there a guideline or an example article with a similar section that is formatted a bit better? Thanks. Endwise (talk) 01:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Endwise: Hello Endwise! While I may not know if that much detail should be included, it should definitely not be formatted like a list. I can't find any policy regarding this at the moment but it's widely agreed that things like this should not be presented in a list form but should rather be written in prose. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:21, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Help improve the article

For now some time I've been trying to improve the draft Tommy Egan with no luck, so I'm seeking help with improving the draft article of a fictional character from Power, and spin-offs, Book II and Book IV. Neoinsession (talk) 22:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Neoinsession, are you having trouble finding additional information to add to the article, or are you stuck in some other way? If you can't find enough information to expand it beyond a stub, that's a strong sign that it may not be a good idea to have a separate article on this character, and that it should instead redirect to a broader article where it can be covered concisely. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Sdkb, not really there's a lot to refer from but recently my articles have been tagged with notability and unreliable sources and I want it to be as neutral as possible since it's a fictional character and a lot of people can relate to the subject. Neoinsession (talk) 00:33, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Neoinsession, if your draft can't demonstrate notability, or if the sources it cites are unreliable, then careful attention to neutrality (although commendable) won't be enough to salvage the draft. -- Hoary (talk) 01:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hoary, the thing is I have produced multiple articles, some are not tagged (i.e Mall of the North & Reason) and some are tagged (i.e Moneoa & Judy Jay). I have studied the guidelines for some time now and I guess I still cannot figure it out what is it that I do wrong because sometimes the sources (website) I cite get replaced with a {{unreliable source?}} and {{citation needed}} but the very same editor would cite the website as their source in their article(s), so I'm having trouble figuring what's what. I thought maybe it was because of lack of prose but it wasn't the case on Reason, then I end up tagging the articles I produce as stubs for assistance. Neoinsession (talk) 01:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

My very first article

Thanks wiki! hey, first of all I am glad that I got an opportunity to write here. My question is that I have written my first article, which is a draft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Husayn_ibn_Muhsin_al_Ansari) I would like to know when can it be finally published so that everyone who searches can find it? when can it pe removed from draft and get published? Please publish it as soon as possible... Syed Abdullah Ibn Umar (talk) 04:15, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

You'll want to add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article so someone helping out with WP:AFC will review it at some point. However, keep in mind there are almost 3,000 articles in this queue so it may take some time. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 04:20, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Syed Abdullah Ibn Umar: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you were to submit the draft in its current state, it would most likely be declined. Every Wikipedia article needs a lead section to summarize the article and explain how the subject meets Wikipedia's requirements for inclusion, called "notability". For help structuring this lead section, see MOS:LEADBIO. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:53, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Did it for you. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 06:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@AssumeGoodWraith No, you perhaps didn't. I submitted it now. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 06:38, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Itcouldbepossible I didn't submit it because it is going to be declined. I added the unsubmitted template. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 06:42, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@AssumeGoodWraith Ok, but atleast he would be happy that we are taking an initiative to make his draft into an article. He will soon understand why his draft won't be accepted. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 06:43, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

It has been submitted. The drafts waiting for a reviewer are not a queue, so it may be reviewed in days, weeks, or sadly, months. During that time, you can work to improve the draft. The Lead needs a few sentences summarizing the information you believe makes him notable. More refs are needed. If Declined (likely), that means that you can continue working to improve the draft before resubmitting. Last - after a draft is accepted and becomes an article, there is a delay of up to three months before it will be found by using a search such as Google. David notMD (talk) 08:57, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

thank you to everyone, for helping me out. I need some editor who can do this article for me, I literally have no experience of writing here on wiki. But I got all the sources needed. I want someone to just help me with editing and publishing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syed Abdullah Ibn Umar (talk • contribs) 04:37, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Update: The draft was declined, reasons and comments are available on the page. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 23:22, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Taiwan is a province of PRC

Not asking a real question about editing Wikipedia.

Why is Taiwan a country? Firstly, it isn't recognized by any of the permanent U.N. states. Moreover, there are many sovereign states out there but do you know how many had recognized Taiwan (and how many detached from Taiwan to support PRC diplomatically). Overall, it is a breakoff province of PRC under an ongoing cold civil conflict. Ultimately, Wikipedia will likely crush any of these thoughts and treat them as Chinese-backed propaganda and deliberate measures to confuse the Internet with cyberwarfare, but this is a fact. Taiwan's recognition in recent years continue to drop drastically amid the rising dragon, and the great shift is taunting every Western media out there. In my opinion, if a sovereign state is not recognized by any of the permanent U.N. states, nor does it receive widespread officialized international support, it should be treated with a term different from the term "country". Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 14:11, 21 February 2022 (UTC) @Hypersonic man 11 Welcome to the Teahouse. Your question cannot be answered here at this help forum, as it is purely for solving practical Wikipedia editing problems. Have you stopped to carefully read the article on Taiwan and Political status of Taiwan? Wikipedia follows what reliable sources say about a subject, not what certain individuals or groups wish to hear. Serious concerns over accuracy - rather than one political viewpoint or claim can be discussed on the relevant talk pages of those articles. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:31, 21 February 2022 (UTC) The article has 4 references supporting the claim that Taiwan is a country so it might be hard to dispute that (unfortunately that means China will refuse diplomatic relations with us because of that)― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC) Wait, wait, wait! Wikipedia had diplomatic relations? Is there a flag? Passport? Currency? Clearly, Wikipedia's population of registered editors is larger than most countries, so maybe country status is overdue. David notMD (talk) 14:55, 21 February 2022 (UTC) Time to turn the this blue...Lectonar (talk) 15:19, 21 February 2022 (UTC) All UN members are permanent and 13 of them recognize Taiwan. If you refer to the five permanent members of the Security Council then that's a tiny sample which shouldn't decide what a country is. And lots of UN members have some relations with Taiwan and treat it as a country in many respects but choose to not officially recognize it because it antagonizes China. See also Country. The "Joke" by Blaze Wolf is partially right. Wikipedia is banned in China, partially because they dislike that we have uncensored information about Taiwan (and many other things like human rights in China). PrimeHunter (talk) 15:22, 21 February 2022 (UTC) I was just making a joke! I didn't know China actually banned Wikipedia! ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:27, 21 February 2022 (UTC) Blaze Wolf, see Great Firewall. --ColinFine (talk) 16:38, 21 February 2022 (UTC) I know about that, but I didn't know Wikipedia was on it ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:41, 21 February 2022 (UTC) You can't use the term "some". Neither can you state that quite "some" states have "some" relations with the runaway province since it is not officialized? The five permanent members of the Security Council is the main direction to determine whether Taiwan has its sovereignty or is it just a break off a chunk of PRC amid the civil conflict. By the way, the fraction of 13 out of all permanent U.N. states are ridiculously small and negligible, let alone the 180 STATES that don't recognize the country. Recognition and official diplomatic ties are the keys here, not even the USA recognize Taiwan, and the proofs aren't solid enough. Moreover, there are many organizations out there claiming Taiwan as a part of China. Ultimately, the fraction of U.N. members recognizing Taiwan is way too small let alone those who have officialized diplomatic ties with the province, and hence it is safe to say that Taiwan is a province and it deserves a provincial status. p/s change it Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 04:59, 22 February 2022 (UTC) You can't use the 13 states as a reason anymore, let alone the "some"... Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 05:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Is this RS for a BLP or is it WP:PRIMARY

Pepe Escobar, previously an investigative reporter on Eurasia energy issues, is a living person. Is it OK to use this State Dep't report as RS for his recent history of publications in Russia-linked outlets? HouseOfChange (talk) 04:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC) HouseOfChange (talk) 04:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

HouseOfChange, I would consider the US Dept of State a reliable source, but do note that primary sources and reliable sources are not mutually exclusive (a reliable source can also be a primary source). The references for a biography of a living person must adhere to the outlined policies, and while primary sources are not strictly disallowed, a secondary source is almost always preferred. -Liance^{talk/contribs} 05:10, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Rename Alt

Hello! So just now I had a thought about renaming my alt account and I wonder, would I be permitted to do so, despite my alt having 0 edits? I would assume I would have to make the request from my alt account to do so, but would this be something that is permitted? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Blaze Wolf as long as your alternative account is being used for a legitimate reason I don't see why not, there doesn't appear to be any threshold an account must pass for edit counts or limitations for alt accounts at WP:RENAME. Of course, your new account name should comply with all relevant policies. -Liance^{talk/contribs} 05:16, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Help me with my TWA userboxes

I'm doing basic structuring of my userpage. I'm quite happy with the current userboxes but I would like to fix the formatting of the TWA badges - I'm open for design suggestions. I know the badges aren't meant for the userbox although I think this may be the best place for them. Any ideas of improvents? Feel free to change it on my userpage directly first and then discuss with me here GavriilaDmitriev (talk) 06:38, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi GavriilaDmitriev, maybe this userbox? {{User:Vukky/Userboxes/All TWA Badges}} Justiyaya 07:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick reply! I still would like to have the all shown separately. When I have made more progress it would make sense to group them but not yet. Any idea how to put them neatly together? GavriilaDmitriev (talk) 07:37, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@GavriilaDmitriev: I'm sure I saw it shown separately somewhere but don't exactly know where... Hopefully some other host here knows Justiyaya 07:47, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

E-waste or e-waste?

In the Electronic waste article, I noticed an editor recently changed every instance of 'e-waste' to 'E-waste', not just when it begins a sentence, but throughout. This looks jarring to me and it's not anything I have encountered before. (Back when "email" was often hyphenated, as "e-mail", it was never written this way: 'E-mail' - unless starting a sentence. Is there a WP policy or MOS guidance on this? I did try MOS:ABBR and elsewhere, but could find nothing specific. My own dictionary does not show it with a capital. Could you direct me to the right policy, if there is one, or tell me what the usual practice is, please? Thanks for any advice. AukusRuckus (talk) 13:06, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@AukusRuckus I agree with you, though the better place to have raised it would be on the article talk page itself if you were unsure. I would simply revert their edits all in one go. If you look back through the article it's clear that e-waste has been used throughout over many, many years. It's not a proper noun, so a capital E is not appropriate. Compare with how lower case e- has been used throughout Electronic cigarette. This simply one editor preferring to insert their desired formatting, and you are free to revert it with a clear edit summary. Just about getting into an edit war if they try again - that's the time when posting on the talk page of the article makes sense. MOS:CAPS gives general guidance on most forms of capitalisation, though a quick skim didn't reveal an example for your situation. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes Thank you, I appreciate you letting me know your thoughts. Please forgive me asking here before raising on the talk page, as I wanted to get my facts straight in advance. This is because a) I wanted to know as a general guide for any article, into the future; and b) No wish to go in to Talk only partly informed, to be batted down. (This might just be me, but I find opening talk pages discussions very frequently results in either: crickets - 'chirp, chirp', or, commonly, editors whose changes you gently enquire about replying with firmly entrenched positions, sometimes with a side of snide.) Now I am equipped with at least one other opinion, I feel safe to make the change and drop a note on the talk page. Many thanks. AukusRuckus (talk) 08:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Another editor got there first! Result! Still glad to have had the benefit of your helpful response. Best, AukusRuckus (talk) 09:01, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

You’re most welcome. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:27, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

How to Find Reliable Sources

Hello I am new here. Can you guide me how to find reliable source. Which can full fill the user persona. Because in the past i have used some of the reference link which are related to the citation. But has been remove due to correct source issue. So, i wanna how we get a perfect citation, so i can make sure that references should be come from correct websites.

Thanks Pwtragedy (talk) 09:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Pwtragedy Take the time to read WP:RS and Help:Find sources. Blogs and wikis are almost never reliable sources. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

How to change an image

Hello!

I've found a page for a certain medical therapy which has an image of a very outdated device on it.

I'd like to change the image to a newer example of that technology but can't seem to work out how.

Sorry if it's a stupid question, did a bit of digging but can't figure it out! Jaymeskelleh (talk) 10:36, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Jaymeskelleh, welcome to the Teahouse! No, it's an excellent question. Now, WP is very (very) strict about copyright, so the default assumption is that any random pic you find online can't be used because copyright. It's possible for a publisher to mark a picture with a copyright license that's acceptable to WP, but this is rare. More at Help:Pictures.

But, if you can take a new picture of the technology with your own camera, then you can "donate" it if you like. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:48, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Possible hacked account. I am getting messages saying that I have made changes to articles that I have never read or visited. How do I remedy this?

 49.182.9.202 (talk) 04:54, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

49.182.9.202, since you are accessing Wikipedia from an IP it appears that other people on your network might be making those edits. Logging in or creating an account would stop these messages, or you can just ignore them completely. -Liance^{talk/contribs} 05:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

49.182.9.202, the message on your talk page is dated August 2021, when most likely this IP was not yours. Many IPs are dynamic, and may be reassigned between different customers of an ISP at varying intervals for various reasons. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.130.191 (talk) 11:09, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Would now be a good time to mention the benefits of WP:REGISTER? - X201 (talk) 11:23, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Robert Rennaker

Hello!

I was wondering if anyone would be interested in reviewing a draft I've made for Dr. Draft:Robert Rennaker, a researcher at The University of Texas at Dallas. I have a bad feeling some of the information will need to be scrapped due to a lack of independent sourcing, but I'm willing to accept any commentary and critique needed to get this article approved. Any and all comments are appreciated, and I wish you the best! Jonknox12 (talk) 21:35, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I suggest you to go at Wikipedia:Articles for creation where reviewers can and will guide you. ... २ तकरपेप्सी _talk 21:39, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Jonknox12: While you're waiting for a reviewer, you may continue improving the draft. For example, you could add a |work= or |publisher= parameter to each reference to make it easier to determine where the references came from. If you have any conflict of interest with Rennaker or Draft:Texas Biomedical Device Center or Denise C. Park or Draft:Dallas Lifespan Brain Study or any other topic, you must declare it on your user page. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 22:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I added those article names to his User page. Yes, I know putting stuff on editors' User pages considered a no-no. David notMD (talk) 11:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Tea for formatting

Help for formatting and why do people use generic block reasons?

Also, if block happens, don't let them feet the IP as I'm at a hotel. It's all about making this company Happy and in tears... So let's make DreamWorks go Blue! 02:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 11:52, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Young company article

 Courtesy link: Draft:TRES OTC DMCC

Is it possible to submit the article which describe young but outstanding company with short biography like this? Also I am interested in your comments about sources. What of them are not sufficient or have to be withdrawn at your opinion? XXX-Rays (talk) 12:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Consider asking for input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cryptocurrency. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:10, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

As stated in the review comments, the company being discussed does not look notable. Moreover, you should look for some reliable sources following guidelines before resubmitting the draft again.

Remove Large Space in Atomic Clock

I am working on Atomic Clock and I can't remove a large space between two paragraphs in the history section. ScientistBuilder (talk) 13:24, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder, which two paragraphs are you referring to? The article is looking fine for me. Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:34, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

I was able to fix it. The block quotes were the issue ScientistBuilder (talk) 13:40, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Bias

 Ddjjo (talk) 12:59, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, i'm feeling quite bullied on wikipedia! I've written an article that is far better cited than other articles and well researched. An editor just removed it because he said there was not significant coverage but there are several profile pieces on the subject. Why is wikipedia really biased against some people?

Hello Ddjjo Wikipedia is not bias we just have some "rules". In order to creat an article about anything, it must pass the general nobility guideline (see WP:GNG). There could be a million sources talking about that person, but Wikipedia must back information with reliable sources (see WP:RS). We are not bias against you we just have some policies an article needs to meet before being made. Happy editing! ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 13:51, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I am going to start with "Wow." You created Andrea Ferran as an article. An editor was of the opinion that it was not ready for mainspace and moved it to draft. At no point was it "removed." You moved it back to mainspace, left a note on that editor's Talk page (appropriate) and left a note on that editor's User page (very inappropriate). David notMD (talk) 14:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Ddjjo: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia has some existing articles that are poorly cited. You're welcome to improve them or nominate them for deletion, but comparing your work to them is not a winning strategy - see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:34, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I have concerns about the quality of the references. Numbers 2, 3, 5 and 6 cannot be viewed, as not online, but the nature of the citation information you gave does not make clear how those are about Ferran. Numbers 4, 7 and 9 appear to be mentions of her name and an event, but cannot be considered the type of 'at-length' content needed to support Wikipedia notability. That leaves the non-English refs, which are beyond my ken. David notMD (talk) 14:52, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Ddjjo I apologise if I have just added to that sense of 'bullying' you describe. That was certainly not my intention but, as an administrator here, I have left notes on both your talk page and that of TeatroEnEspana expressing concerns about possible multiple accounts or off-wiki coordination being used to create this article, and the need to declare any Conflict of Interest that any editor might have with their subject. You might wish to address those on that page. These are all normal things for other editors to bring to the attention of new users. With over 6.4 million articles here on this hugely popular site, we see a considerable number of attempts to use us to promote particular individuals or businesses. These all need to meet either the criteria laid out at WP:NBIO or WP:NCORP, where we need detailed, in-depth coverage of a subject, not just short mentions. Should another editor feel a new page has been created a bit too soon, they may simply move it to Draft to allow further development. This is not bullying, but it is certainly often better than that same editor deciding to nominate a new page for an Articles for Deletion discussion. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:20, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

OP blocked for sockpuppetry - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ddjjo. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

identification of unreliable sources and coverage

Courtesy link: Draft:Stormind Games

Hi! I'm new to Wikipedia and in my first post I got the message that the "submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article". I have edited the draft with new, more specific references, but it didn't seem to work as the draft got rejected again. Can someone please help me identify the exact problematic sources so I can replace them with more valuable links?
EneaCirce (talk) 11:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC) EneaCirce (talk) 11:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, EneaCirce, and welcome to the Teahouse. There are three separate requirements on sources, all three of which must be met in order for a source to contribute to notability, (and hence for elegibility to be the subject of a Wikipedia article). First, sources must be reliably published, that is, published by somebody with a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control: examples are major newspapers and reputable published. RSNP is a list of sources which have frequently been asked about, with their consensus rating for reliability. Secondly, independence from the the subject: Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything that the subject, or associates of the subject, say or want to say about the subject, in any media. Third, sources must have significant coverage of the subject.

Not every source cited in an article needs to have all three of these, but the bulk of the article must be based on sources which do meet all three, so if there are not several sources which meet all three, then no article is possible. Adding more sources which do not meet the requirements (especially unreliable sources such as wikis, blogs, forums, fan-sites, and most of YouTube) makes a draft less likely to be accepted (see WP:REFBOMB). ColinFine (talk) 14:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Also, the submissions were Declined, not Rejected. The latter is more severe, with the reviewer indicating that the opinion is that the draft has no potential for becoming an article. David notMD (talk) 15:40, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Not an absolute requirement, but refs should not be just HTMLs. See Help:Referencing for beginners. David notMD (talk) 15:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@EneaCirce: I've cleaned out the refs which are unreliable or not needed. Have a look at WP:VG/S, it lists sources that the Video games Wikiproject have reviewed and deemed as reliable. Use sources from there. - X201 (talk) 15:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Citing a source

I had recently made an edit to the boca high athletics page as i had noticed there was a lack of rivalry detail for the school baseball team. Who had clearly outlined their rival a year ago as "dem haters" It was taken down for not citing my source correctly. I was wondering how i am supposed to go about this? Xx Joey xX KC (talk) 15:08, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Within Boca Raton Community High School there are no references for the sentence at the beginning of the Athletics section. If no refs. deleted the sentence. If refs available, rivalries should be identified as names of other schools, not "dem haters." David notMD (talk) 15:50, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Is it fair?

check this a IP tagged the userpage for deletion as it's not notable. (Aslo previously when it was in it's draft form a ip tagged the page for deletion). No other experienced users have problem expect some particular IP. Any suggestion or advice from experienced users? ... २ तकरपेप्सी _talk 19:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@२ तकर पेप्सी: I've undid their edit since that criteria does not apply to user sandboxes (and also Drafts) and left them with a warning on their talk page stating that only the general criteria apply to user sandboxes. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:28, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

If this weren't true, then no it would not be fair since then someone could just tag the page for deletion before someone would have a chance to prove that it's notable. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:34, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Well, criteria U1, U2, and U5 would technically still apply there (I don't think U5 applies to sandbox drafts), but none of them apply. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:29, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

While it is true that A7 doesn't apply in draftspace or userspace, the IP doesn't deserve a warning for tagging a draft about a non-notable person who has been spamming Wikipedia relentlessly. They were mistaken, not disruptive. --bonadea contributions talk 19:34, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Bonadea: what's your suggestion? As a IP has recently blocked from my userpage for doing unnecessary edits on my talk userpage. Aslo want to know your views on this page? ... २ तकरपेप्सी _talk 19:41, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I'd argue that mistaken and disruptive are not mutually exclusive - see WP:CIR, although this case doesn't really come anywhere near that. I'd think some sort of level 1-warning equivalent message would be appropriate. casualdejekyll 19:43, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

aggree with @Casualdejekyll: ... २ तकरपेप्सी _talk 19:48, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I was simply attempting to warn them for adding speedy deletion criteria to a place that doesn't apply, and I simply just used the warning I gave them since there were no other warnings that would be appropriate. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

One could actually write a message without using templates; this can of course include a warning of some kind. Lectonar (talk) 09:36, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

I know that. However I find it much easier to use templates and append a message to the end of them, rather than simply just typing out a short and less professional seeming message. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Templated messages just makes you adapt the question/problem to the template, and not the other way round. Form isn't everything, content is; there is no wonder we have Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars, and even Wikipedia:Don't template anyone... but that's just my opinion. Lectonar (talk) 15:53, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Generation Jones

On the page for Generation Jones, there's no mention of Live Aid or Hands Across America, two big, influential fundraisers that gave the generation hope. Can you add that content? 206.213.209.32 (talk) 16:23, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

If you have suggestions to improve the article, you can start a discussion on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 16:30, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Be bold or start a discussion on the talk page. Fijipedia (talk) 17:08, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

When to mark as link rot

I was looking at the link rot page to see what scenarios i should tag something as rot, and i noticed a lot of talk about references and citations, but what if its an external link at the end of the article thats dead? Should i remove it, leave it untouched, or mark it as dead? (Ive already checked for an archive and found none) Aidan9382 _(talk) 10:00, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Aidan9382, welcome to the Teahouse! You can either leave it untouched or mark it as dead. We don't remove links just because they're dead links. Hope that helps. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk💬 Contribs✏️) 17:57, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Wiktionary not logging in with Wikipedia log in

When I log into Wikipedia it no longer automatically logs me into Wiktionary, though it logs me into the other language Wikis such as the French and German Wikis. How do I set it to automatically log me also into Wiktionary as I both edit it and have a difference Appearance set up? Thanks Nobbo69 (talk) 09:59, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Can you please elaborate it on what kind of problem you're asking Lightbluerain❄ (Talk💬 Contribs✏️) 18:12, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello and thank you, @Lightbluerain. My problem is that in the past when I logged on to (English) Wikipedia, Wiktionary (the English version, I have not checked any other languages) would also log on. Sometimes this would not immediately happen from my browser bookmark, but when I refreshed it would show as logged on. Now it does not do this, I must log on separately. But other pages, such as the French and German Wikis, all show as logged on. I have looked to see if some "global" connection has been broken in relation to Wiktionary, but could not see anything like that. It seems odd that this has changed when other Wikis have not, and like Garth, I fear change...! :D I try to do my fair share of editting and I also have Wiktionary and a load of different Wikipedias set up with a less eyeball-burning colour scheme. Not sure I can elaborate any deeper than that as it is not a major problem, but I am always keen to find out why things are changing when I have done nothing as far as I know to cause it. Thanks again!

Nobbo69 (talk) 19:10, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Resubmission of IntFOLD page

I am trying to resubmit the IntFOLD draft wiki page after it was previously denied. May I please ask if my wiki page has any error or it is absolutely OK for resubmission? The link of the draft page is this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:IntFOLD

Thank you

Bsalehe Bsalehe (talk) 17:55, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello Bsalehe, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not expert in this area, and I haven't looked at most of the sources, but it looks to me as if the first 7 references are by the team who developed the system (and so not independent, and the rest are reports of work using the system, but do not say much about it. Where are the independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject without which it will not meed Wikipedia's criteria for notability?

It also seems to me that the text is entirely promotional (which does not have to be commercial, in Wikipedia terms). It reads like "We want to tell you, the potential customer, how wonderful our product is". That is not the job of an encyclopaedia. The article should be an account (based almost 100% on independent sources) of how it came to be developed - where, when, why, who by, who funded by - and how it has fared (there is an appropriate link to the website for those interested in technical details). Of course some of the ways in which it is used are part of that story, but only part. --ColinFine (talk) 19:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Indiana Territory Legislature within Infobox officeholder

Hello, I am using the {{Infobox officeholder}} for General Washington Johnston. He was a territorial and state legislator, and it doesn't seem to allow for territorial legislatures. If using the parameter "state_assembly" and then the value of "Indiana Territory" what appears in the Infobox is a red link to Territory Legislature State Assembly.

It seems cludgy, but I could make a redirect from the red link to Indiana Territory#Legislature. I wondered, first, if I just may be missing how to present that information correctly. Any ideas? Or, is that a good workaround?

Thank's so much! (I know this is a site for beginners, so I'll respond to a question or two that have been posted in exchange for your help.) –CaroleHenson (talk) 19:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson - I switched the "state_assembly" parameter over to a "state_legislature" paramater, which makes it go to Indiana Territory Legislature, a much more proper redirect then the ambigous and confusing "Territory Legislature State Assembly", which manages to squeeze three contradictions in four words casualdejekyll 19:59, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

casualdejekyll (love the user name!), Thanks so much, that looks much better!–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:02, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

comment on Henry Howard Houston 's House "Druim Moir"

It was not converted into condominiums. They are 3 sepaI know because I was the one wh rate houses. I know because I was the one who did it. I am a great grand daughter.

 73.16.124.197 (talk) 17:55, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi! Welcome to the Teahouse!

Can you provide reliable sources (by the Wikipedia definition) that support that claim? Additionally, your language is not very comprehensible. If English is not your first language, you should check out the list of Wikipedias and contribute to the Wikipedia in your language. casualdejekyll 18:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Where are the reliable sources that it is used as a condominium? Put yourself in the position of someone that might be a family member and not familiar with Wikipedia policy and comes here to ask for help. We would probably only want the information to be corrected. While I would normally respond and tell them that Wikipedia doesn't control what reliable sources say about a subject we can't say that in this instance because there are no sources, reliable or otherwise, for the claims made in the article. Maybe a citation needed template could be useful but the article already has a template added asking for additional sources. I've searched for a source to verify the claim in the article for either the house (linked to an article on the historic district) or the school (which does not say it is located on the property but is in the vicinity). I have not been able to find a source for either. I would encourage the IP to start a discussion at Talk:Henry H. Houston. If you need help with that please feel free to ask here or on my talk page. --ARoseWolf 19:23, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

To be fair, casualdejekyll, that is one of many claims in Henry H. Houston which is unsupported by any reference. I considered removing it, but I don't know what to substitute, so I have marked it as {{citation needed}}. Original poster, it would be even better if you could find a published source for the information you wish to include, and post an edit request with that source on the talk page Talk:Henry H. Houston. We do not accept information that is not in a published source. ColinFine (talk) 19:24, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

See this. Fijipedia (talk) 19:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

I found a source that stated that Druim Moir was divided into "multiple residential units" and updated the Henry H. Houston article here with the source.–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:57, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

I found an obituary in the Philadelphia Inquirer for James Kise, the husband of Sarah Smith Kise, great grand daughter of Henry Houston [7], in which it verifies what was said in the book source provided by CaroleHenson. The house was made into a residential community. In fact, according to the source there were new houses built on the grounds. The roadway connecting this community became known as Druim Moir Ct. That was a fun little adventure. --ARoseWolf 21:02, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Trying to find an administrator

 Batonzabergja (talk) 21:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Batonzabergja: I'm one. What's up? --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:46, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

From your contributions, it looks like the most likely issue is that you want to ask about the deletion of your user page. That was done by User:Oshwah. You can ask about it at their talk page, here: User talk:Oshwah. If it's something else, feel free to ask here. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Help - Citations and References? Did I do this correctly?

I am working on this page: Barbara Krupp

I did my best to add correct it; re-did all the citations and references. Please tell me if this is working better!

(I'm not clear what is difference between Citations and References, even though I have researched the terms.)

Thank you!!! I appreciate the help I got in the Teahouse. Sue-zin (talk) 02:24, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Not a host comment

Sue-zin, please use the "Automatic" button when citing sources (if manual is not working for you) or click the "Convert" on your cites. Don't space your citations, keep them close together. Do Not use Wikipedia as a reference as it will only create a circle, rather mention/link the page. Thank You. Neoinsession (talk) 02:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Sue-zin. In the Wikipedia context, there are three items: the superscript number in the text; the bibliographic information it points to, usually lower down the page; and the external source that that identifies. If we need to distinguish them, I'd call them the citation, the reference, and the source respectively; but the words are often used loosely, and I don't think there's much harm in this. So "citation" often refers to either of the first two, and "reference" often refers to any of them. ColinFine (talk) 13:59, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Sue-zin: Welcome to the Teahouse! In the "Publications" section, you properly use <ref>...</ref> and {{cite web}} - that's great! Please do the same for the "Gallery Shows and Exhibitions" before resubmitting. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:12, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Israelairplay singlechart broken

Working on recovering a bunch of dead links on Hotline Bling, when I noticed that the ref for its chart performance in Israel is dead. This seems to be using the single chart template, calling something I can't see, which yields this link. However, there seem to have been some changes with mediaforest, and I don't know how to access historical data from them in their website's current form; instead, it redirects to their new home page. More importantly, the template/wikidata/whatever points to the old URL on every page it's used on. See Category:Singlechart usages for Israelairplay. How should I fix this? None of the requisite info seems accessible via the Wayback Machine, as, even if the page is archived (it is in the relevant date for Hotline Bling), the archived page doesn't seem to be able to load the relevant information.

Hope that explanation was somewhat clear. Not sure what I should do for the Hotline Bling article. Lkb335 (talk) 21:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Lkb335: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest you bring up this issue on Template talk:Single chart, so the template can be fixed, which will automatically fix Hotline Bling and all the other articles in Category:Singlechart usages for Israelairplay. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:29, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Lkb335 (talk) 22:40, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Uploading non-free file for draft article

I am trying to use the file upload wizard to upload a logo for this draft.

But when I put "Draft:Elenco Electronics" in the "This file will be used in the following article:" box, it pops this up:

 WikipediaNeko (talk) 22:48, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

WikipediaNeko, Need draft accepted first. Non-free files can only be used in main space articles. Haven't looked at draft, but worry about prose. Pictures will do nothing for the acceptance of the article.Slywriter (talk) 22:53, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Okay. WikipediaNeko (talk) 22:54, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Problem with Interlanguage link template

If the English article name is the same as an already existing one (in this case a disambiguation), the template doesn't work.

Ex: I'm writing an article about an series, one of the actresses is Zhang Nan, there's other people on Wikipedia with that name so there's a disambiguation page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhang_Nan), I can't write Zhang Nan because then the template wouldn't work. Megutim (talk) 10:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Megutim. I don't quite understand what your problem is, but does Template:Ill#Displaying different text solve it? I think the example in that section may be somethign like what you are talking about. ColinFine (talk) 13:19, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

It doesn't work either. The actress part is exactly what I want to omit for it to be just 'Zhang Nan' but Zhang Nan is the disambiguation page for people with that name. Megutim (talk) 13:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Megutim, please explain exactly what you want - how it should appear, and what it should link to. ColinFine (talk) 16:58, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

https://imgur.com/a/uiA2jYc

I was writing it like this but since the disambiguation page is called Zhang Nan, I'm not able to use the template.

I want to be able to write 'Zhang Nan' without it linking to the disambiguation page automatically. Megutim (talk) 17:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't see you had answered, as you didn't ping me. Doesn't {{ill|Nan Zhang (actress)|text=Zhang Nan|zh|张楠 (演员)}} do it? That displays as Nan Zhang (actress). But I think I must still be misundertanding you, because there's no point in using {{ill}} when there is an English article. ColinFine (talk) 23:50, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

New here

hiii, i am new here what's up? 107.1.219.55 (talk) 13:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

If you are looking for a way to improve Wikipedia, I recommend Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory which has a list of WikiProjects. ScientistBuilder (talk) 14:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi! Welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have any specific questions about using Wikipedia? casualdejekyll 14:01, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

• Hello and welcome to the Teahouse we are glad to have you. Do please take the WP:ADVENTURE and the WP:TUTORIAL in your leisure time and always remember to come and talk to us, at anytime, we are here to support you. If you so desire you can official register to have a proper account with a nane that is not necessarily your real name any nickname would suffice. Having an account comes with a plethora of benefits. Please See WP:ACCOUNT. Celestina007 (talk) 15:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

You might want to register for an account so you are less likely to be blocked and can interact with other Wikipedia editors. There is also a good reference Wikipedia:Editor's index to Wikipedia. ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:52, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Paraphrasing

I'm working hard on atomic clock, but there's something that I want to figure out. I have found some journal articles that are very helpful and publications by National Institute of Standards and Technology and International Bureau of Weights and Measures but I am getting bogged down in paraphrasing them and want to focus more on adding content than dealing with plagiarism, rewording, paraphrasing, close paraphrasing, and quoting. ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:49, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ScientistBuilder. NIST is an agency of the U.S. federal government and their publications are copyright free. Therefore, you can use attributed direct quotes liberally without any copyright or plagiarism concerns. You will have to investigate the copyright status of the second agency's publications on your own. Accurately summarizing and properly paraphrasing are among the most important skills of a productive Wikipedia editor, so please work on that. Cullen328 (talk) 02:31, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Katie Sturino

Hi there! I created a page for author Katie Sturino, which has been moved to draft space by wikipedia users. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Katie_Sturino(2). Sturino has written two books, founded a national company, and hosts a podcast. I believe these things make her notable. Hoping you can help. Saramannheimer (talk) 17:04, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Saramannheimer, your page is not yet submitted - there is a blue button at the top of your draft's page which you can use to submit your draft if you are ready, where it will then be made available for review by other editors at Articles for Creation. -Liance^{talk/contribs} 17:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Katie Sturino(2) now submitted. May take as long as a month before a Reviewer decides to review. David notMD (talk) 02:32, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Deleting an article

I want to delete an article because the TV show in question simply does not exist. How does one go about deleting a Wikipedia article? GameShowWikiGuy (talk) 03:05, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@GameShowWikiGuy: Hello Guy! See my response to #How do you challenge a page? above which describes how one would go about this. If you are completely sure that the article is a complete hoax then you can bypass the AFD process entirely and request it be deleted under the appropriate WP:CSD criteria. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 03:10, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

How do you challenge a page?

I just need to know how to challenge a page because I found a page I want to challenge. EBotsEle^ẞotstalks 01:11, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@EBoters Electron: Welcome to Wikipedia. If you have suggestions to improve an article, start a discussion on that article's talk page. Otherwise, you will need to clarify what you mean by "challenge". RudolfRed (talk) 01:14, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@EBoters Electron: Hello EBoters! If you mean nominate an article for deletion you can follow the process listed at WP:AFD but make sure to follow the process listed at WP:BEFORE or else the AFD will probably fail. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:15, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for helping @Blaze Wolf. I needed to know how. EBotsEle^ẞotstalks 01:47, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

you started Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KAT Hospital. David notMD (talk) 03:19, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Duplicated reference with AutoWikiBrowser

I just started using the Auto Wiki Browser and I am trying to fix my duplicated reference for my Draft:NGC 549 page. Does anyone know how to fix duplicated references on the AutoWikiBrowser? Thanks. `~HelpingWorld~` ^(👻👻) 01:26, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@HelpingWorld: Hi there! AWB's general fixes to combine duplicate unnamed references won't run in this case, because to do so "The article must already have at least one named reference (to avoid a 'change in citation style' in the article per WP:CITEVAR). This means at least one named ref in short format (<ref name=a/>) as a full named ref by itself does not cause any references to display as combined." Even if your draft did have a named ref, many general fixes that run for articles do NOT run for drafts. I combined the references manually in AWB for you - see this edit. (I'll leave it to you to fix the |last=IPAC|first1=NASA part of the reference.) For assistance with AWB in the future, there's Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:12, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Randy Bass MLB statstics addition

Randy Bass MLB statistics additions in infobox: I am trying to add Randy Bass MLB statistics in the infobox. If you click the edit button, in my edit attempt the data is in the abstract but not in the infobox in the original article. Can you please add it please over the NPB statistics. Thank you.2601:581:8402:6620:844F:852A:61F1:4446 (talk) 02:57, 23 February 2022 (UTC) 2601:581:8402:6620:844F:852A:61F1:4446 (talk) 02:57, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! When I went to the Randy Bass article and clicked the "Edit source" button, I received a lot of errors about the infobox parameters. Therefore, I clicked on the link to Template:Infobox baseball biography, studied the example in the "All parameters" section, and then updated the article with this edit. I hope that was the fix you were looking for. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:22, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

A need for a Ctenacanth cladogram

Hi, I am editing my article on Dracopristis, I am thinking of adding a cladogram, but I can't seem to find one. If someone can link me to one that would be great. Or if anyone can help me add the cladogram would also be nice. Fossiladder13 (talk) 05:09, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@Fossiladder13 Such a specialized request would be better served by WP:WikiProject Paleontology, it's a bit esoteric for the Teahouse. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:11, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Deletion of 11 highly specific templates based on a single website

I accidentally found those templates: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:SA_Rugby_union_templates. Probably the usual article rules for deletion don't apply. I would naively start an Wikipedia:Articles for deletion but it's not an article. Maybe this is very important and I'm just out of my expertise. But it seems to have 11 templates based on a single website of this sort might be unqualified. I have the following questions:

1. Should it be removed?
2. How is be the process for non-articles on Wikipedia?
3. How to find the answers to this topic by myself? I tend to struggle to find the right help articles on Wikipedia
4. What would be the right Project/Community/TaskForce taking care for those template/category topics?
5. I struggled to enter this >> Category:SA_Rugby_union_templates << (see source) internal wikipedia link to this category. How is that done?

GavriilaDmitriev (talk) 01:46, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@GavriilaDmitriev: The place to put templates up for deletion is WP:TFD. Can't really help much more since that's also out of my area of expertise. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 02:15, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@GavriilaDmitriev: To anser your question 5, by putting [[Category:SA_Rugby_union_templates]] in your question you placed this Teahouse page into that category, rather than linking to the category page. I have added a colon before the category name in your question to remove this Teahouse page from the category and display the link as you intended. See Help:Colon trick and WP:LINK#Links to Wikipedia's categories. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:39, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Meena Empire

Can I write an article on Meena Empire? -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 05:58, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello! As I can see on your user talk page is that you are not new to Wikipedia. I still would recommend you this help article to read: Help:Your first article

This should help you having the necessary knowledge to be able to write an article on the Meena Empire. Please be aware of the criticism which was already stated on your user talk page. You maybe want to develop your draft article Draft:Charan Singh Meena first before starting a new draft. GavriilaDmitriev (talk) 06:09, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

If you plan on going ahead with this article, do verify that it is not related to Meena article or Matsya Kingdom. Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:51, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@Karsan Chanda: I don't see how you can, as there don't seem to be any reliable sources for such an empire. Doug Weller talk 08:22, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kpddg:

References

Searching for pages with {{infobox book}}

I would like to search for all uses of {{infobox book}} which do not have the "wikisource" parameter filled out (so that I can add it in). Ideally, I would also like to search for all instances of the template which are 1) foreign-language texts, and 2) lacking the "native_wikisource" parameter. Would anybody know if this is possible? Shells-shells (talk) 23:30, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Shells-shells: For books without |wikisource=, you could try Special:Search/hastemplate:"infobox book" -incategory:"Articles that link to Wikisource". There are quite a lot of them! Foreign texts without |native_wikisource= are a bit more complex. A rough search is [8]. Certes (talk) 00:22, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@Certes: It occurs to me belatedly that this search should also be limited to texts in the US public domain, as these are the only ones which would have Wikisource pages. While there doesn't seem to be any dedicated category for public domain books, would it be possible to limit the search only to texts published before 1927 (perhaps with Category:Books by year)? Shells-shells (talk) 02:17, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@Shells-shells: Books are usually in subcategories such as Category:1992 non-fiction books but checking the pub_date parameter cuts the searches down a lot: [9] and [10]. (You won't be able to tweak the second one in the search bar, which is limited to 300 characters.) Certes (talk) 07:38, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@Certes: Thank you very much for your prompt assistance and searching chops! These will be a very helpful starting point :D Shells-shells (talk) 08:29, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Removal of the photo

I am here to request that the photo of Huzoor Tajushariya Alaihir Rahmah on this Page must be removed. It was requested before also by some people. He never liked photography then what is wrong with you people and why are you not removing it? NotFair652 (talk) 08:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

NotFair652 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please raise any concerns about an article or its content on the associated article talk page, Talk:Akhtar Raza Khan. As you seem to be aware, that has been discussed before, without any arguments based in Wikipedia policy to support its removal. A subject's personal beliefs regarding photography are not relevant. 331dot (talk) 08:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@NotFair652, consider Help:Options to hide an image. See also WP:DISC. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

• @NotFair652: Having looked at the talk page of the article, there is a question we can answer. The question is: why do we not remove a picture when it offends lots of people? ("Picture" because it is not restricted to photography - the obvious example is depiction of Muhammad, who died long before photography was a thing.)

The short answer, which you already know, is that we have a policy against that, but of course it does not tell much about why that policy exists. It does say Attempting to ensure that articles and images will be acceptable to all readers, or will adhere to general social or religious norms, is incompatible with the purposes of an encyclopedia, but that is not really an explanation (what is the purpose of an encyclopedia, anyway?).

The problem that I see is that catering to any one group’s sensibilities is a slippery slope:

some examples

Millions (potentially billions) of Muslims object to any depiction of Muhammad (and other prophets), but such depictions are a relatively important part of old Persian art. Millions of people consider that their preferred theory for the legitimacy of political power is the only one, and that alternative theories should be censored to avoid corrupting the masses. For instance, the political systems of Saudi Arabia and Iran are predicated on divine approval for their regimes (I am not sure what the Muslim equivalent of divine right of kings is), while the Chinese ruling class pushes some weird mix of Mandate of Heaven and meritocracy. In all three countries a good fraction of the population agrees and views the theory of consent of the governed as a risk to the stability of the state. That theory is therefore censored with more or less vigor; yet it is fundamental to understand vast swaths of history (for instance, the European revolutions of 1848, or anti-colonialism movements in the 19th-20th century). Millions of people object to pornography as immoral, and want to censor pornographic material wherever possible. The existence of pornography is still an important aspect of contemporary society; a generalist encyclopedia should have articles about that (as well as articles about theft, murder etc. - it does not mean we condone it); articles about pornography will necessarily include descriptions and images. Thousands, probably millions of people (I assume mostly religious) object to any depiction of sexual organs, which they view as pornography regardless of context. Some of those images are absolutely necessary to the teaching and practice of medicine. Many subjects of biographies object to their own Wikipedia biography because it paints them in an unflattering light, even when such articles are entirely accurate and representative of the reliable sources available.

Where do you draw the line? Wikipedia’s answer is "right from the start". Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:58, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Regex editor

I am a mobile user, and I used scripts also and one way to used them is to change my skin to desktop view (vector). I just notice, when I am editing an article earlier, I noticed that there is a script installed in the left side called Regex editor, what is it? I never noticed and never used it before, is it dafault gadget? —Ctrlwiki (talk) 11:09, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Without knowing what this specific regex editor from wikipedia is I can tell you in layman terms what regex is. With regex you can filter and search for words. The usage of it is very complicated and probably it's a tool to edit regexes easier. So I guess you will not need it when you aren't working with regexes. GavriilaDmitriev (talk) 13:05, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Are unattributed verbatim quotes okay, even when permitted by the original source?

I'm curious what others think. One of today's "did you know's" is Potamophylax_coronavirus. The article contains a statement at the top of the references that "This article incorporates text from this source, which is by .... available under the CC BY 4.0 license". There is no attempt to state what text was derived from the article. This alarms me greatly, but I can't quite put my finger on why. (1) It paves the way for WP to become a mere mirror-site, copying great chunks of whatever anyone can find on cc-by-4.0 licenses. To my mind, we don't write in our own words merely to evade copyright, but because we're summarising and combining sources, and presenting an overall picture. Once people start copy-pasting, much of the thought underlying that summarising-process has gone. We're not synthesising, but WP writes in its own voice, it doesn't just echo others. (2) At the very least, it creates a bias, where authors who release their work on a cc-by-4.0 licence are likely to see their own words mirrored here, and creates a risk of very lazy self-citation, where unscrupulous authors can simply plaster chunks of their text into WP articles, which is harder to see and deal with than mere excessive external references/links. (3) And because of the lack of any link between the licence-statement and the text, it's not always going to be apparent what text is covered by the licence, unless you go to the trouble of doing a side-by-side comparison of the WP article and the original. This means our readers don't know when they're reading Wikipedia, and when they're reading, in this case, the Biodiversity Data Journal through a mirror. (4) There's also, weirdly, a copyright problem. If, subsequently, someone comes along and edits the text that's been nicked verbatim, so it's no longer a verbatim copy, then we're misrepresenting what the original author said; the cc-by-4.0 licence gives us a right to requote provided the source is attributed, but I think it comes with an obligation to indicate where changes have been made. Since it's not obvious what text in Potamophylax coronavirus is quoted, it means if anyone edits this article, they are quite possibly breaking the original copyright agreement, and we won't know. The normal copyright tools won't help, because they're designed to look for similarities, not differences, and the editor will have no idea what they've done. This makes me very uncomfortable. Elemimele (talk) 07:08, 22 February 2022 (UTC) Elemimele (talk) 07:08, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Elemimele. I think you're mistaken in saying "There is no attempt to state what text was derived from the article." Reference 1 immediately below the statement is obviously sourced to that article, and is cited in 7 different places (superscipted a, b, c, d, e, f and g). I haven't performed a side-by-side comparison between the 7 cited parts of our article and the pennsoft.net article, but it seems not unlikely that the language used there was already well formulated, so would be disimproved by paraphrasing.

If some text is quoted verbatim, then I'd agree that it might be appropriate to indicate this with quotation marks, or otherwise. I see that you have already stated your concerns in several edit summaries: perhaps you should move to engaging with the relevant article editors, such as Leomk0403, on their Talk pages. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195}~

• @Elemimele: I think you see a problem where I see none. I realize there is a question of philosophy about attribution/reuse at the bottom of this, so I doubt I can convince you, but I will at least try to present the opposite view.

I view (1) as a feature rather than a problem. The whole point of having Wikipedia under a (relatively) permissive license is that others can copy-paste and reuse our content elsewhere; conversely, reusing stuff from elsewhere if allowed is a good thing. If the text is not good Wikipedia content for other reasons (NPOV, V, etc.), that can be dealt with by standard editing, just the same as if the text had been written from scratch.

(2) is not directly a problem either. If the text is good, it’s great that we can use it! The only problems come from WP:REFSPAM, but adding a chunk of text with citation is clearly easier to detect that adding a barely-relevant citation.

(3) I agree that what part was copied should be apparent; it usually is in the edit history. (But as the article evolves, no close tracking is really feasible.) That being said, whether the content is Wikipedia’s original content or a repackage is IMO irrelevant (assuming the quality is ok, see point 1). It is a basic tenet of Wikipedia as a project that what counts is verifiability ("it has a matching cite to a serious biomedical journal"), not origin brand ("it was written on Wikipedia, it must be true").

(4) is incorrect. In the case at hand, [11] is under CC-BY 4.0. That license only requires acknowledgement of the source and whether changes were made, but not the detailed list of the changes. You might be thinking of ND licenses (no derivatives) where no changes whatsoever can be done (even if mentioned). I cannot find the page right now, but I am pretty sure we cannot reuse ND (or NC, non-commercial) works in Wikipedia, precisely because articles are bound to be modified and the license would not permit it. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:23, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

• @Tigraan:, yes, I might be over-panicking. But I do think it's important that our readers know when we're quoting; I think we should make that clear with quotation marks.
• Yes, our edit-summaries would be a track of changes, but there are scenarios where having a "foreign" cc-by-4.0 licence hanging over a WP article might be a real problem. Here's an example: Professors Smith and Jones publish a ground-breaking new method, about which we write an article, quoting from their cc-by-4.0 publication. Later, Prof. Cadwallader publishes a second article in which he modifies Smith and Jones' original method, and we add text accordingly. Smith, who believes every change to his method is a perversion of the True Cause, and Fundamentally Wrong, now complains that the article says something that he didn't say. Under the cc-by-4.0 license, he has no right to stop us, but he does have an explicit right to have his name removed from the material that he made available to us by cc-by-4.0. That's part of the license (3(a)(3)). He can also have the url linking to his paper removed, and also even the copyright statement and cc-by-4.0 link removed, if he wishes! (off-topic: This last gives me the heebie-jeebies, because if he removes his own copyright statement, how can he justify that he had the right to have it removed? It's the legal equivalent of sawing off the branch on which you're sitting). On-topic: so we now have an article in which we cannot cite the most important source, because the author won't let us. Or alternatively, we can only cite the source we want to, if we agree to give Smith a veto over what we write. Because the quoted parts were never demarcated as quotes, the original author's cc-by-4.0 license permeates the entire article, and Smith can object to any change, on the grounds that it's being applied to a modified version of his original text. In fact, in the course of the argument, Professor Smith, being a bloody-minded old curmudgeon, decides to look up the full terms of cc-by-4.0 and cause as much havoc as possible, and indeed demands that the cc-by-4.0 link and copyright statement are removed, as well as his name. Jones now complains that the article is a breach of his right to be attributed, and demands that the copyright statement be reinserted, because otherwise even if we acknowledge him, our own readers are only obliged to acknowledge Wikipedia, not Jones, as is his right under the original cc-by-4.0 (that we're not allowed to show)...

This sort of fiasco ought never to happen, but in an encyclopaedia as large and visible as Wikipedia, it will, sooner or later. The only way out would be to delete the entire article, make it quite clear it's deleted, and rewrite from scratch, maintaining a scrupulous trail to indicate that not a word has been taken from Smith's writings, and therefore WP's own cc-by-4.0 applies, not Smith's. To avoid such silly disputes, I think we should avoid speaking directly with the words of our sources, and when we do so, we should do so in quotation marks, or in some similar way indicate the extent of the text that's been taken verbatim/modified-verbatim, and therefore know which parts of our material are covered by our agreement, and which by the original source's. Elemimele (talk) 14:09, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Or just paraphrase his work. One can not prevent the use of their work as a source. Your scenario over-complicates matters as it assumes the work has to be used verbatim.Slywriter (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter:, yes, I agree completely, we should paraphrase. I don't think we should use verbatim, in which case there's no need to indicate that the article contains text derived from the source under a cc-by-4.0 license. But I'll shut up at this point because I think you're also correct that I'm complexifying things unnecessarily. It's a bad habit! Many thanks! Elemimele (talk) 22:02, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

• @Elemimele: I believe you are confusing two things: reusing (copy-pasting) some text, and citing a source as a ref. Let us imagine a scenario where Smith publishes a research paper under CC-BY-4.0 that says Foobars are usually blue after undergoing the frobication process [ref1] [ref2]. However, red foobars are a theoretical possibility. In this paper we propose a possible process for the synthesis of red foobars. (For the example I use short and simple sentences, but assume there are actually entire paragraphs, so that plagiarism and copyright considerations apply for sure.)

Because the paper is CC-BY, we can legally copy-paste the part about blue foobars into Wikipedia if we provide attribution. If Smith complains, we can remove the attribution. However, regardless of whether Smith complains, we should not do such a copy-paste unless the resulting product satisfies Wikipedia’s guidelines - in the case given here, WP:V is OK due to the presence of ref1 and ref2.

However,the part about red foobars is Smith’s original research. It would not be good Wikipedia practice, due to WP:V, to write it in Wikipedia’s voice if there is controversy on the subject. We can, however, write something like according to Smith, red foobars can be made using a modified frobication process [ref]; according to Cadwallader, the process described by Smith would violate fundamental laws of physics [ref]. We do not care if Smith agrees that this sentence is an accurate representation of the controversy, and they cannot prevent us from citing them. They might require us to remove their attribution from the blue foobar part out of spite of our treatment of the red foobar part, but they cannot request that we remove the red foobar part.

The point is that the two uses of the Smith paper (as raw text, and as a cited source) are dissociated, so there is no problem of Smith having a veto over the red foobar part.

All that being said, it might be true that people who actually copy-paste CC-BY sources rarely pay too much attention that the resulting text complies with WP:V. But that is a very different problem with very different solutions. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:08, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@Tigraan:, yes, I just think we should make that dissociation as clear as possible. In the article that triggered all this, I really see no need to diverge from normal referencing or quote verbatim. But that article's a bit of a special case because there isn't a body of reliable viewpoints to summarise. There's only one expert source because it's a description of a new species (accepted species = notable, even if only one source). Off-topic, I think I was suffering from a burst of grumpiness anyway, because of the naming of this unfortunate caddis-fly; it's completely ridiculous to name a fly "coronavirus", a name that says nothing about the fly itself, its biology or anything. It looks like a cheap way to stir up some publicity for what would otherwise have been just another fly. But that's not WP's business! It put me in fault-finding mode, unfairly. Elemimele (talk) 13:13, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

How do I get a Wikipedian ID?

Hi

I'm a newbie. I was wondering if anyone could tell me how I can get an ID? I can't go to persons or institutions to ask for information to add to Wikipedia without it.

Thank you! C.S.U Un'stopableZed (talk). 13:56, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@Un'stopableZed There is no such thing. Everything you do here is entirely in your personal capacity as a private individual. Being a Wikipedian is a hobby, not a job. In any case you cannot use information that you ask people for, only published sources are acceptable. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:02, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

How do I get a Wiki page?

I have been on TV for 34 years and was the first woman to be a main sports anchor on a local Los Angeles TV station. I would like a Wiki page. 208.125.72.99 (talk) 13:38, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have "wiki pages". It has articles. If there is significant coverage of you in independent reliable sources, you may merit an article, but it is strongly advised that you not be the one to write it, see WP:AUTO. Articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the topic. Also be advised that an article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 14:05, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Have any newspapers or magazines ever written articles about you? Without independently published sources an article is not possible. See WP:NBIO for the basic guidelines. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:07, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

What are the 3-5 best sources you know that are at the same time reliably published (WP:RS), independent of you and about you in some detail? The "rule" is WP:BASIC. See also WP:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:08, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Multiple source pages in visual editing

I want to cite individual pages from the same exact source in Visual Editing but I can't figure out how to do it. Is it possible in Visual Editing or do you have to do it using text-editing? 155.4.96.9 (talk) 10:45, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, it is possible to do this using the VisualEditor - see this edit to Julius Arigi, where I added {{sfn}}. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:13, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Help needed at Sanjiv Kumar (soldier) page

Regardless of his seniority, the Indian Army personnel killed in action. Proper citations are there. But Onel5969 is using WP:PROD without checking the refs. Such pages should not be removed TOOSOON. In-depth does not mean to cover a person as an essay, neither too citation are needed. In my opinion, the death solider passes the Wiki notability. Further, I request to leave such pages to expand, not to delete. --Wichan The Lost Guy (talk) 08:16, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Wichan The Lost Guy, when you say "the death solider passes the Wiki notability", do you mean (i) any dead soldier satisfies Wikipedia:Notability (people), or (ii) this dead soldier satisfies Wikipedia:Notability (people), or (iii) something else? If you mean (i), no, sorry, you're wrong. If you mean (ii), please explain how he satisfies this. If it's (iii), please say what you mean. -- Hoary (talk) 09:33, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Hoary - proper citations are there. 1- He was not just a solider, but a JCO, 2- Coverage is there for his sacrifice and notability, 3- I meant to not to dishonour such of any country who laid down their life for their life. --Wichan The Lost Guy (talk) 09:41, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Wichan The Lost Guy You added to the article and then removed the Proposed Deletion, which cannot be proposed again. Unless there is an Articles for Deletion started, the article stays. You and others are welcome to improve the article. David notMD (talk) 10:55, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

User is blocked for WP:NOTHERE ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:15, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Deleting notification

How to delete notification Kitsotshipa23 (talk) 13:31, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kitsotshipa23: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you're referring to messages on User talk:Kitsotshipa23, you can click the "Edit source" tab and delete the message, and then click "Publish changes" (which indicates that you have read the message). You can also choose to archive the messages on your talk page. See WP:OWNTALK for more information.

However, if you're referring to the alerts and notices at the top right of each page, I don't think there's a way to delete those. However, you can change your preferences to decide what types of notifications you receive and how you receive them. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:21, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Block

The user involved in the discussion- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Blue_Square_Thing&diff=prev&oldid=1068643667 should be blocked as per wiki norms. It is not only a slur of our state or our country but an insult of the whole Wikipedia Community. Calling for the user in question to be blocked, at least for a week as a punishment for the kind of language he used in the discussion. Also for the same reason, same punishment should be bestowed on the anonymous user. Michri michri (talk) 12:39, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Michri michri: This is probably an ANI thing. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 13:12, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

AssumeGoodWraith I know that and mildly warned the concerned user about reporting at there, but at first give me your opinion regarding this matter--- about whether the two users should be blocked or not.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michri michri (talk • contribs) 13:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Michri michri and welcome to the Teahouse. I am so sorry that you experienced uncivil behavior here on Wikipedia. I wish I could say it was not the norm but it happens far too often. Wikipedia editors, IP or registered, are human and sometimes our passions get in the way of our best attempt to build a better encyclopedia through civil collaboration. In this case it may have been a simple troll or it could be something more. Comments such as those left on Blue Square Thing's talk page are unacceptable and inexcusable, regardless. But the edit summary left by @Blue Square Thing when it was reverted was uncivil, as well, and singled out editors from a particular part of the world and stated their goal as being to cause disruption in doing things to make editors from that part of the world upset. That shouldn't be anyone's goal here. It's going to happen but it shouldn't be our goal. We are called to act in good faith towards all editors and remain civil in our interactions with others. That isn't just a request but a requirement in order to maintain the level of collaboration needed to constantly improve and build the encyclopedia based on community consensus. This type of incident is a good opportunity for us all to self-evaluate our interactions here and make sure it falls in line with the goals of Wikipedia. It's not just about you or me but us, collectively. I've temporarily watchlisted Blue Square Thing's talk page so if further disruption and vandalism continues it can be documented and addressed. If it does continue you can always seek admin assistance at the administrators noticeboard. --ARoseWolf 13:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Michri michri, also remember to sign your posts on talk pages and the Teahouse using four tildes (~~~~) . Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:35, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

ARoseWolf, thank you . I must acknowledge that the user concerned is quite amiable but at the same time the fact is undeniable that he has some indistinct vague against the users from our state. Also, I was not biased towards the anonymous user, which is palpable in your writing, I want punishment of both of them. There is another instance where the user described Kolkata Knight Riders as a 'crappy' franchise.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michri michri (talk • contribs) 13:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

I was very surprised by errors you made at Pat Cummins article and you referring to User:Jaspreetsingh6 as 'some idiot'. Out of curiosity, I looked through your contributions and I have to say I was disappointed and somewhat offended to see [1] this response to IP editor who insulted you. I am from Kolkata myself, although I have lived and worked in England for eleven years, and I cannot excuse you saying that you like to 'to piss of sad little biys from west bengal' (sic). I am, I hope, wise enough and experienced enough to realise that you wrote this in heat of the moment after name-calling on your own talk page, but some people in today's climate might construe your comment as racism. This is especially so when I also see two edit summaries at Pat Cummins article where you describe Kolkata Knight Riders as a 'crappy' franchise and you deride a valid shorthand term like IPL 2015 (which is used by this site for redirection) as something that 'no one outside India has the foggiest about'. Again, comments like these could be construed as prejudicial. Even if you are badly provoked, you should follow advice we are given in NHS to say nothing, end discussion and report incident (and, naturally, remove offending post).— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michri michri (talk • contribs) 13:59, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

This is the actual piece of writing written by an anonymous user in BST's talk page, from which I have known the matter. Sorry but I can't sign again as I'm editing in mobile, where I don't know why the option does not come.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michri michri (talk • contribs) 14:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Then just type out four tildes ~~~~ like that. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:16, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Just to add a couple of things: (1) Wikipedia doesn't tend to block people as "punishment", but it does block people for not-being-here-to-write-an-encyclopaedia. People who are here to push some particular viewpoint, particularly if it's a racist one, tend to get blocked very quickly to stop the disruption. Also informing the IP that the police have been involved is getting uncomfortably close to making legal threats (though it's not quite there), another quick way to get blocked (the reasoning being that you can either argue with someone at WP using WP's dispute resolution systems, or you can do it through the courts, but you can't do both at once). I'm sorry you've bumped into this sort of shenanigans. (2) If you don't want to go to the administrator's noticeboard with stuff like this, because it's too likely to turn into a big drama of hurling insults, at the top of the page for administrator's noticeboard (incidents) you will find a helpful link to recently-active admins. You can always contact one of them on their talk-page and they are likely to deal with the issue quietly and with common-sense. Elemimele (talk) 22:15, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Ok, thank you all for responding me. I can't understand one thing why the concerned user is remaining completely silent during the discussion of the issue raised against him, wherever it may be--- here or his talk page. He was pinged earlier. I must acknowledge that earlier I was a votary of BST, he has helped me a lot, even I wanted aid from him before going through the discussion between him and the anonymous user through his talk page; really shame on him.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michri michri (talk • contribs) 02:34, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm not here to shame anyone. We all have bad days and make mistakes. We don't know all the circumstances and likely never will. The Teahouse is a place to get questions answered about editing Wikipedia and be a help for editors trying to navigate the various policies that can be confusing at times. I wish nothing but the best for everyone involved. Thank you for coming to the Teahouse. Please come back if you have further questions. =) --ARoseWolf 14:50, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

The one who attacked me can come back

when i was on the ip adress user page of the person who attacked me, it was a ip of a At&t service which means if he comes back to his home wifi he can do this toxic stuff again TzarN64 (talk) 18:57, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@TzarN64: Please read WP:DENY. Also, just because they can doesn't mean they will. Once a troll is blocked they usually just give up. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:59, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

References

Draft:Dipali Nag

I am unable to Publish Changes to this page that I am creating. I think I took care of all the issues I was advised about earlier,but now I can't even save the changes anymore. Please help Mbanerjib (talk) 08:30, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Mbanerjib Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. To help you, we need to know the message you get when you click "Publish Changes". 331dot (talk) 08:34, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mbanerjib: I see that you have made edits to the draft this morning, but that you still have no inline citations. The feedback on the draft has (at least 3 times) given you a link to Help:Referencing for beginners. Please read that, & improve the draft accordingly before trying to resubmit the draft for review. Further to that, your recent edits have messed up the section headings; please read the WP:Manual of Style. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:06, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

I created proper sections, but the references need work. The to get this done quickly, or else the next reviewer will decline the draft. David notMD (talk) 11:05, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

UNRESOLVED: You claim that the three images in the draft (Dipali Nag young, Dipali Nag old, and cover of the book she wrote) as your own work. The first clearly not (is is from a ref) and the other two very likely not. Also, a lot of content was deleted because it was a copyright infringement, and I suspect you restored much of that. David notMD (talk) 11:24, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

I have declined the draft and sent it for speedy deletion as copied and pasted from [raagparichay.in/en/vidushi-dipali-nag-of-agra-gharana] and [itcsra.org/Celebrity.aspx?Celebrityid=19]. Theroadislong (talk) 11:41, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

I have speedy-deleted the draft as a G12. Lectonar (talk) 12:50, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

I went ahead and nominated all commons uploads for speedy deletion, they all appeared elsewhere on the internet without a free license. Mbanerjib, please don't copy material from elsewhere onto Wikipedia unless it is evidently compatibly licensed or evidently Public domain. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:41, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft restored without the copyright content. Photos are in process of being deleted at Commons. David notMD (talk) 19:30, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Add documentation to article

I am a beginner and have no experience at this. Should I attempt to add something to a page or leave it to an experienced person?. I have a copy of The Collinsworth-Craddock Family Feud record that started in Oct 1906 and want to add it to the Family Feud page. I am an at-home genealogist. The documentation was typewritten but never published by the author. I have no experience with this. Should I even consider it?  2600:1700:2D20:2710:3463:9D3C:98D9:6353 (talk) 18:42, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia requires published references. Can you find any? David notMD (talk) 19:07, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and thanks for stopping by and for your desire to contribute! Wikipedia does not allow original research, which is what you seem to be describing. If any books or news outlets or other secondary sources publish the information, you could add citations to those. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:39, 23 February 2022 (UTC)