Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1163

Archive 1160

Archive 1161

Archive 1162

Archive 1163

Archive 1164

Archive 1165

→

Archive 1170

Sources in another language reason not to be trusted?

I am in a big dilemma. Please help me. Yesterday I wrote the following comment on the article [1] I've been working on so far, quote: "Regarding the two wordpress sources. These have been changed with reliable sources. Regarding the commercial source. This was suppressed, not being necessary anyway, since it is clearly shown that the book mentioned by Borbely was published in France, being an additional reason for notability to announce the future appearance of a book. What I can't understand is something else entirely. This time I ask for your help as a user because I am in a dilemma.Entered the URL address along with the name of the person who reviewed, but also the title of the publication and the page where the review is located, thinking that it is enough. I did this because I understood that it does not matter that the reviews are written in another language. I thought it was easy for anyone to put the review on google translate and find out what is written there. The sources I indicated represent the most important Romanian cultural publications. I don't understand why you put the label with: "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified", once that the sources posted by me are reliable and especially can be very easily verified. Can you show me one source out of many that would not be reliable? The fact that those who have to give a solution do not want to read the sources on the grounds that they are in another language does not mean that the sources are not reliable. Those who wrote the reviews to which there are URLs are the most important literary critics of Romania, recognized as such by Wikipedia. Their reviews are in the most important Romanian publications. What is written in them shows facts that support Cerin's work. Each review clearly and unequivocally shows the book it refers to and claims special things about it. You just had to download them on any google translate and you would have immediately had the review in English. Let me understand that if I entered the titles of the books that the reviews refer to and two or three words about what they say, wouldn't you have translated the reviews to see what was written in them and would you have made the decisions only after some words? If you had translated them, why don't you translate them now and you would have exactly the same result? How can you say that the sources that lead to the reviews are not reliable once you have not even translated to see what is written in those reviews that the sources lead you to? Sorin Cerin is currently the most appreciated writer by the most important literary critics. The reviews about Cerin are not just passing passages, they stretch over pages of literary criticism, showing that Cerin is one of the most important contemporary writers. I wrote all this because Wikipedia asks us to let the reviews about the writers speak for themselves, thus reinforcing the neutral point of view. Once the literary critics write about Cerin's work more than laudatory, how can I show all this? Isn't it better for the reader to access the respective review and make up his own mind?. The dilemma is all the greater as those who write about Cerin have praised him. Asking me to write what exactly these literary critics write about Cerin would mean praising Cerin, even in the two or three words, a fact that goes against Wikipedia and the neutral point of view. Please also give me your opinions on those written by me" end the quote.

Can someone explain to me how to write the few words from the existing reviews about this author, but especially how to place the books that the reviews are talking about? Should I write next to each review the books it refers to, and if several reviews also refer to the same book, should I repeat the title of the respective book? When I mean how to write the few words about the review, I want to know if they can be laudatory as well as the respective review or not? If no, it does not mean that it does not reflect what is written in the review, and if yes, it means that I am breaking Wikipedia's rules regarding the neutral point of view. Thank you for your help.Bineart (talk) 05:10, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Bineart, your first paragraph above is dismayingly long, especially if it's about Draft:Sorin_Cerin, which has very much less text. I therefore haven't bothered to read it. On to your second paragraph. I think that the relevant sections of the article Morris Bishop exemplify a decent way of using specific reviews to describe the books that they're reviewing (which isn't to say that those sections can't be improved). Neutrally summarizing laudatory coverage is neutral. Picking among mixed coverage, summarizing what's laudatory and ignoring the rest is not neutral. -- Hoary (talk) 05:49, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary - Thank you. I took note of what you showed Bineart (talk) 12:26, 29 August 2022 (UTC).

Hello, Bineart. I, too, am having great difficulty understanding much of what you wrote. But I do see you asking whether references to sources not in English are acceptable. The answer is that yes, they are. For some topics, there are plenty of high quality English language sources, and they should be used in such cases. For other topics, the best sources are in other languages, and in these cases, references to non-English sources are perfectly acceptable. I hope that this helps. Cullen328 (talk) 06:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 - It is good news that references in other languages are also valid. Thank you for your message Bineart (talk) 12:26, 29 August 2022 (UTC).

@Bineart: As you have been told above, better keep your posts shorter, it makes them easier to read. However, I have tried to understand what you meant to say, and will reply also:

a) Yes, foreign language sources are allowed, just not preferred (see WP:NOENG). If you believe a Romanian source is WP:RELIABLE, you may use it. However, it is more difficult for most editors to evaluate whether a Romanian source is reliable – this is why Bonadea advised you to convert the bare urls to use Wikipedia:Citation templates (you have done this for some, but not all). This wasn't declined because the sources were in Romanian, but because the reviewer couldn't find out from the article what the sources say. It is your job as author of the article to present the information in a way that a reviewer can easily see what Sorin Cerin did, which leads to:

b) Do write out the "Critical reception" section as prose (see MOS:PROSE)! Write out what the reviews say; if they are indeed mostly praising, that info is not forbidden on Wikipedia. This would also help in understanding whether the subject really is WP:NOTABLE. He seems to have published a lot, but other people also publish many works which are never recognized – a reader should not need to click every single link and use google translate to find out about Sorin Cerin, that is not the idea if an encyclopedia article. (If you can find some review that is more critical of his work, that would also be great; but such "balance" (the WP:NPOV) is another issue, and you can solve it later.)

c) Not a question you had, but another point I want to add: Do you know what "Paco Publishing House" is? I couldn't find information on this publisher, and that might lead others to suspect WP:SELFPUBLISH. But it might be that the information is in Romanian, and I couldn't find it.

I hope that helps, but please ask again if you don't understand something. --LordPeterII (talk) 11:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

@LordPeterII Thank you very much for the message that was really helpful. I will also look for reviews that are critical, not just laudatory. That's why I will delay resending even a few months, because I want things to be perfect. Bonadea is perfectly right when he states that certain descriptions are necessary. Until tomorrow, I will present them to you in small measure here as well. I'm glad that Bonadea is a doctor of philosophy like me. I teach philosophy at the university and I am a scrupulous person, which is why I ask that everything be perfect about this philosopher. The URLs that I posted in draft at Sorin Cerin refer to the most important cultural publications of Romania. The reviewers are the most important literary critics of Romania such as Cistelecan (considered by ro.wikipedia the most important contemporary poetry critic of Romania) Sorohan, Tupan, Borbely, etc., etc., personalities who wrote reviews on many pages about Cerin , as I said in prestigious magazines whose URLs I posted in the draft. The fact that they are prestigious publications also comes from the fact that most of them are also on en.wikipedia, being founded more than a century ago. Here I am referring to the magazines Convorbiri literare or Familia, etc. Regarding the fact that the Paco publishing house could be self-publishing. First of all, this publishing house has not existed for several years, the owner being deceased. Secondly, I read on Wikipedia notabiliy books that if there are important critics who write serious reviews, it doesn't matter what kind of publishing house published the book. Thirdly, Cerin also published in other publishing houses, for example in France, a prestigious publishing house, etc. Fourthly, critics such as Borbely or Cistelecan do not review only one book but refer to the entire work of philosophical poems by Cerin. Other critics like Tupan or Sorohan review several books. Please give me a few days to present the first finished draft, for which I am asking you very much to give your opinion if you think it is acceptable. Afterwards, I will look for critical reviews about Cewrin, not just laudatory ones. I want everything to be balanced. That's why it can take several months. Once again, thank you very much for your help. Bineart (talk) 12:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Paco publishing house was never self-publishing.But even, admitting that it would have been a self-publishing house. If the Paco publishing house had been self-publishing, there would still be no reason not to recognize the large number of critics who wrote about Cerin's books published at Paco. In this case, criterion 1 does it no longer apply to Cerin?, regarding the notability of a book comes into play. When I referred to self-published books, I referred to notability books[2], namely: Self-publication and/or publication by a vanity press do not correlate with notability. Exceptions do exist, such as Robert Gunther's Early Science in Oxford and Edgar Allan Poe's Tamerlane, but both of these books would be considered notable by virtue (for instance) of criterion 1. The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivia ] published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media reprints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.Thank You. Bineart (talk) 14:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

I inquired about the Paco publishing house. I found out that Paco Publishing House was a traditional publishing house. The books were published at the expense of the publishing house. The Paco publishing house published authors who today are in en.wikipedia and who at the time of publication at the Paco publishing house were long deceased, such as Leon Tomsa, Gheorghe Pintilie or Stefan Foris, books published after the death of Gheorghe Apostol, from 2010, the author of some of them, and books from the Paco publishing house are also mentioned in other articles. All this proves that Paco Publishing House was a traditional publishing house and by no means self-publishing.[3] I could give you many other facts about the Paco Publishing House, which prove irrefutably that the Paco Publishing House was a traditional publishing house that published authors with the money of the publishing house and not with the money of the authors, many of them were not even alive when the books they had appeared in Paco, having died tens or hundreds of years ago. I don't think there can be another more eloquent example.Paco publishing house was, at one point, the only traditional publishing house in Romania. All the others demanded money for publication in one way or another. The authors were very carefully selected at the Paco Publishing House, where not just anyone could publish anyway. Only top personalities were usually accepted as authors at Paco Publishing House, such as great politicians, Gheorghe Apostol was prime minister of Romania, great writers, etc. Thank You Bineart (talk) 05:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

I know I have written a lot here, but if you look carefully, each sentence expresses an idea. I studied very carefully the reasons why Cerin was deleted 16 years ago. I don't know who introduced it to Wikipedia then, because it had no serious recognition from any critic. Now he has a lot. I don't know why I have the impression that someone in the shadows wants to keep Cerin deleted by any means. Maybe I'm wrong, but if so? In time I will find out. I know, it is possible to create a diversion through all kinds of manipulations through which the Paco publishing house can be removed as a self-publishing publishing house. Even so, the publishing houses in France or Bulgaria that published Cerin, whose books were reviewed by important critics, can no longer be included in any diversion by any manipulator because there are concrete data about them. To be sure that I am not mistaken, that Cerin is not going to be the subject of any manipulation or diversion to keep it deleted, I want first of all to establish the status of the Paco publishing house. In the event that the Paco publishing house was declared self-publishing by manipulators or diversionists with the aim of keeping Cerin deleted, I would like to find out if the other articles or sources from the English wikipedia that rely on the books of the Paco publishing house will also be deleted. Anyway, I have decided not to work on the Sorin Cerin article from now on, not to write anything at all on this article, until the situation of the Paco publishing house is established as seriously as possible. I think there will be bona fide users who will help me understand what kind of publishing house Paco really is..Bineart (talk) 15:02, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

It took me a few days to research the Paco publishing house, until I can say without any doubt that the Paco publishing house is a traditional publishing house. First of all, he published dozens, hundreds of titles by authors from countries other than Romania, whose works he translated into Romanian. Only a traditional publishing house invests in the translation of some authors and then in their publication. As an example, I choose three authors by chance, translated and published by Paco publishing house such as Michael Gelven, Michalina Wislocka, etc. [4][5][6]Among the authors whose books were published by the Paco publishing house after their death, there would also be these[7][8][9][10]and many others.Only traditional publishers publish authors who are no longer with us, having been dead for years.The examples could go on. All this proves without a doubt that the Paco publishing house is a traditional publishing house.Bineart (talk) 01:48, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Accidentally drafted my sandbox, can't put it back

Hi there! In an attempt to draft an article I was working on in my Sandbox, I accidentally drafted my whole sandbox, including the history for the entire ~8 months I've been using it (link). I tried putting it back, but somehow managed to make an entirely new Sandbox in the process and now I can't just move the original Sandbox back to where it should be. I read Wikipedia:Moving a page and Wikipedia:Requested moves, but I'm a little confused on where to put my request. Would someone be able to point me in the right direction? ItsMackie ( Talk ) 14:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi ItsMackie! What you need is something called a WP:HISTSPLIT, something that takes admin assistance. User:PrimeHunter appears to have undone the page-move, not sure if he's going to do the split also. DMacks (talk) 15:21, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi ItsMackie, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm an administrator and have moved Draft:The Mortuary Assistant back to User:ItsMackie/sandbox. If you are the only contributor to the content then you can create a new draft page with content copied from your sandbox without attributing the source. A history split is possible if you really want the page history of the draft to show your individual edits but it's not necessary. Many users create drafts in named subpages like User:ItsMackie/The Mortuary Assistant. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

All I wanted was for everything to be moved back to where it was! I thought I'd discovered some lovely shortcut to just pasting everything over, obviously that wasn't the result. Thank you so much for taking your time out of your day to do that. And @DMacks, thank you for pointing me toward WP:HISTSPLIT. ItsMackie ( Talk ) 15:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

a question

has anybody here heard of Battle For Circle? Somecoolguy12345 (talk) 02:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Somecoolguy12345: Welcome to the Teahouse! I had not heard of this, but found some information with a quick Google search. I do not see any mention of it in the English Wikipedia. Do you have a question about Wikipedia? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:43, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Battle For Circle is one of my favorite object shows

it has 20 circles and 14 episodes all named circle (BFDI has 63 episodes so far for comparison) Somecoolguy12345 (talk) 15:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Somecoolguy12345, do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? This is a place for folks to ask questions about editing. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:18, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

no not really Somecoolguy12345 (talk) 15:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

How does one start a search for sources?

I'm about to start a search for non-primary sources to rewrite my article for resubmission. How do you go about searching for sources online and/or offline? Mcb mikeb (talk) 06:48, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mcb mikeb: try the resources in {{find sources}}. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 06:54, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mcb mikeb: Welcome to the Teahouse! See also Help:Your first article#Gathering references. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mcb mikeb. I see no evidence whatsoever that Polydina Flynt is a notable person. It is not possible to write an acceptable biography without significant coverage of the person in independent, reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 17:06, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Strange activity by user VickyBenz

I was going to report this at WP:ANI, but figured Teahouse might be a better place first (if I figured wrong and such cases belong to WP:ANI or elsewhere, please let me know).

I spotted by chance a user whose whole activity (I checked ca. 20 edits) is either changing correct grammar and punctuation to incorrect, or making unnecessary wikilinks (often self-referencing an article). My request to stop damaging WP seemed to have effect – there was no response, but this daily activity has stopped so far: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/VickyBenz

There are a couple of points I'd like to raise in this regard.

1. While many of his/her edits were reverted by now, many are still there – not because they are all good, but rather because noone noticed or doesn't care. I think all remaining edits must be reverted (I haven't seen a single good one, recent and first edits included).

2. Doesn't software which WP runs on include a utility which would analyze edits and report suspicious activity to draw attention to them, so a human admin can notice it immediately and cut it short, preventing massive damage as it happened with this user? Cases like spoiling grammar or bad wikilinking (at least self-referencing) are fairly easy to catch, after all, and a good tracker can cover much more than such trivial cases. 188.66.34.125 (talk) 07:29, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place for new editors to ask questions about editing.

Asparagusus (interaction) 13:05, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, so did I seek help in a wrong place? Reverting all edits by a user is easy for an admin, I believe, but not something I can do. To the best of my knowledge, there are no good edits by VickyBenz *at all*; those which remain unreverted must be result of oversight or lack of article maintainers (anyone, feel free to review the edits on your own).

So, can anyone here handle this and revert the rest of edits, or should this issue be reported elsewhere (where?)? I thought reporting it at WP:ANI first, but I'm not sure it belongs there after reading the rule section. Help please. 188.66.34.125 (talk) 13:18, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• I agree that VickyBenz’s contributions seem to be incorrect. However, I see no evidence that they are vandalism (self-linking is a likely newbie mistake, the rest are probably non-native-English-speaker mistakes). As such, you definitely need to talk with the user first before reporting to ANI or any other place about user conduct (WP:AIV for clear vandalism).

ANI would be the place to ask for a mass reversal of all edits from one user. However, I doubt those would be approved in such a case because (1) it’s not really large-scale (I see ~100ish edits and three pages for which it’s still the current version, not really "massive damage" by the standards of what "massive" can be); (2) it’s not a hundred times the same edit with a clear pattern; and (3) the account has not been blocked for vandalism/disruption. Manual review seems both feasible and desirable.

Detecting self-linking could be done by bot, even though to my knowledge it is not done yet. There is a question of what to do about it (revert the whole edit? remove the self-link but leave the rest? notify the editor? etc.). In particular, cases like page moves would need to be accounted for. At any rate, you can definitely ask at WP:BOTREQ. Grammar mistakes are much harder to catch, and highly context-sensitive (for instance, you don’t want to fix grammar from quotes).

There are quite a few bots, tools etc. that try to do general "bad edit" detection. There is mw:ORES which attempts to score an expected quality of edits; it does nothing by itself but reviewers can look at only the "most likely to be bad" edit queue etc. There is also User:ClueBot NG, which does revert vandalism on sight, but is set to be rather conservative (according to the page, it tries to keep the false positive rate under 0.1%, which means it catches about 40% of vandalism). It would be fairly difficult for such tools to identify that wikilinking to the current page is bad (when wikilinking to another page is most often good). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Most of Vicky's edits are tagged as Newcomer Tasks. I'm not sure if the Growth Team has an avenue to report cases like this where the tool leads to undesirable outcomes. @User:Trizek (WMF)? Encouraging newcomers to get involved is not bad, but if they are using a high-volume workflow, how do we gently advise someone that grammar is not their strong suit, and suggest other activities? ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 21:01, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh, I see that 188. has posted to Vicki's talk page and received a reply. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 21:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

I hope User:VickyBenz will read this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Linking#What_generally_should_not_be_linked because this user overlinks too much. Migfab008 (talk) 00:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

I looked at some of their edits, and it seems that articles tagged for "unencyclopedic tone" or "reads like an advertisement" are included in the 'easy' proofread-for-spelling-and-grammar task. The checkbox is labelled "Copyedit (fix spelling, grammar, and tone)" Add links is the other easy task. So if a user doesn't attend to the task instructions, they might add links to an article that needs grammar fixes. And if they don't read the cleanup tag at the top of the article, they might "fix" grammar for an article that needs parts rewritten for tone. To be honest though, cleanup tags often need to taken with a grain of salt anyway. You can see the Suggested Edit feature by visiting Special:Homepage. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 20:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you everyone who took time to address the issue (although, to be honest, I hoped that someone would simply cleanup remaining damage). There's some hope now that the user will do it him/herself, I only fear that it can result in even more mess...

It occurred to me that the best option for such users would be getting a supervisor/mentor; not one merely answering questions, but one "watching" edits of a mentee so as to revert bad ones immediately and provide some guidance, and by doing so prevent massive content damage and teach newbies wanted and effective editing of Wikipedia in a shorter time span than in mentorless mode.

Can anyone here give VickyBenz pointers as to where and how to ask for a mentor, as I've personally never been involved in it and can't really advise on this topic?

Also left a note for Growth Team – I agree with Pelagic they'd better be aware of such cases and it's obvious we need more effective measures to prevent something like this from happening: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Growth_Team_features#Some_newcomers_need_a_lot_more_attention

And a question: I'm thinking of submitting formal proposals at Village Pump for introduction of edit analyzer and supervision for problematic newcomers; any pointers to what I should read first prior to posting there? 188.66.34.204 (talk) 17:59, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Creating an article

Hey, I've been sent here by User:Chris troutman in order to get a Wikipedia editor to create an article for a biography of a living person, to be more specific a tattoo artist. I am not quite experienced with how Wikipedia works but as said I've been guided a little bit by Chris Troutman. I was wondering if you're accepting this kind of service. I'm looking forward hearing from you. PinkWriter99 (talk) 20:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@PinkWriter99: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! I looked at User talk:PinkWriter99 and read the message from Chris troutman.

Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially if you do not have a lot of experience editing existing Wikipedia articles. To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the artist, and determine whether the artist meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article (including writing in your own words), and be prepared for a process that may include waiting for review, rejections, and rewrites, before an article is created. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:12, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

I believe you misunderstood Troutman's recommendation. Hosts at Teahouse provide guidance about how to do stuff but are not here to be article creators or co-creators. If no one mentioned it, WP:TOOSOON addresses fact that for some people or organizations/companies, there may not yet be published content ABOUT the person/biz, so not possible to get an article accepted. David notMD (talk) 22:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

APNG size limit

GIFs can't display over 12.5 million pixels according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images#Consideration_of_image_download_size

What is the limit for APNG? Is it the same? Tallungs (talk) 01:39, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tallungs Welcome to Teahouse! This place is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. If you find a good source, you can add it to APNG. You can ask questions about topics at WP:REFDESK, specifically Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing instead. Happy learning and editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:50, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand. I am asking for a technicality regarding the wikipedia tumbnail system. Not about APNG in general. Tallungs (talk) 01:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tallungs please accept my apologies, and consider WP:trouting me. I didn't find a recent answer, but unclear whether APNG's are widely used on Wikimedia. See for example c:Category:Animated PNG which is rather small. I suspect low browser usage, with various fallbacks make it a non-reliable format for wide browser varieties. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

No worries. It's a very specific question. Apparently the gif size limit has increased to 100 million pixels. While this page indicates that APNG hasn't followed suit: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Animated_GIF_files_exceeding_the_100_MP_limit

I've updated the manual of style. Too bad though, since it'd reduce bandwidth a lot. Tallungs (talk) 03:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

• @Tallungs: It seems you managed to answer your own question. If you have other technical questions in the future, you should probably ask them at WP:VPT. (Nothing wrong with asking at the Teahouse if you did not know that forum existed.) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:29, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tigraan Thank you. I'll make sure to direct future questions to the more proper board. --Tallungs (talk) 23:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Mongolia - Genghis Khan

The spelling for Genghis Khan is Chingghis Khan. Possible to change the spelling? Nunu1499 (talk) 01:42, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Nunu1499, welcome to the Teahouse. The English Wikipedia uses the common name in English sources. Chingghis Khan is rare compared to Genghis Khan and the Mongols didn't use the English/Latin alphabet so we will stick with Genghis Khan. You can suggest mention of alternative spellings in his main article at Talk:Genghis Khan but I suggest you search the archives first. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:21, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Where can I learn how to edit?

Hi everyone I just joined Wikipedia and I would like to know where I can learn how to edit Wikipedia GNAA2022 (talk) 03:02, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse @GNAA2022:! Perhaps WP:FAQ/Editing may be useful. Sarrail (talk) 03:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@GNAA2022: there is the introduction to wikipedia. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 03:10, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @GNAA2022 and welcome to the Teahouse! If you click on your name at the top of the page, you should see a screen with all kinds of help tools. One of those things is a mentor. You can ask them for help. Happy Editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 03:32, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Adding awards in another language

Hi, I work for a PR company and one of our clients in based in China-making them a Chinese company with U.S. operations. We have helped them develop their U.S. wiki page recently and they've asked if we are able to add some of their comapny's Chinese awards to the U.S. page. Is this possible, or am I only able to reference U.S. awards? 2603:8080:2001:EFF:9991:C597:7C79:F62A (talk) 22:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Register an account and disclose FIRST, then we'll talk. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 22:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Can you please tell us what the title of the article is? PICKLEDICAE🥒 22:56, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. From your description, it sounds as if you are engaged in Paid editing, in which case it is mandatory to make a formal declaration of your status, or else you are in breach of Wikipedia's terms of service. It also sounds as if you and your client have a (very common) complete misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is.

First, when you say "their U.S. wiki page", you presumably mean "English Wikipedia's article about them". This article does not belong to them, is not controlled by them, should be written neutrally, and is not for their benefit except incidentally. Neither you nor they should be editing it directly, but should instead make edit requests whcih uninvolved editors may decide whether and how to implement.

On your specific question: if the awards are significant (and not trivial marketing ploys, for example), and there are reliable sources confirming them, then they can be added to the article: the country of origin is irrelevant. Please (once you have made the mandatory declaration), raise edit requests asking for them to be added.

Please note 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) 10:32, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Correction and clarification

Hello! I would like to know if it is correct to use that Template: Family name hatnote especially the All others (A, not B) for the article of a personality with foreign blood (e.g. Sam Milby)? Then my co-editor constantly criticized me for having two accounts and if I did have an account, I rarely logged in because I was too busy with tasks that had nothing to do with the encyclopedia. Now how can I prove that what they are accusing me of is wrong so there are times when I am on hiatus due to being too busy as well as the depression I experienced that started 4 years ago which was made worse by the current pandemic. RenRen070193 (talk) 15:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi RenRen070193, you seem to have got into a bit of a confusion here. (1) So far as I can see, most of your edits aren't using the family name hatnote template, but are using the plain hatnote template which isn't intended for names. The hatnote template, which doesn't mention family names, is used at the top of an article where there is another article with a similar article-name, where the reader might have found themselves at the wrong article. As a result, you are being constantly reverted by other editors. On a few occasions you have taken a valid specific name template such as the Philippine name template at Conrado Estrella III and replaced it with a hatnote (not the family name one) template, which is also unhelpful. I'd suggest you stop doing these edits until you've sorted out how the templates work. It's a good idea to assume that existing articles with name templates are probably mostly correct, rather than assume they're all wrong! (2) You're also clearly in a pickle at the moment with an accusation of editing while logged off, or under another name. Editing while logged off isn't actually necessarily wrong, but doing it in a way that might mislead people (for example writing something when you're logged on, and then supporting your viewpoint when logged off, so you sound like two people agreeing instead of one person) is wrong and will get you in trouble. Overall, to get out of both problems I would suggest (1) telling the world that you will stop editing foreign names and working with name format templates; there are lots of other useful things to do in Wikipedia; and (2) decide on one account and promise to stick to it (or alternatively, decide to edit only as an IP editor and never use an account at all). Generally the community here dislikes disruption, but can be forgiving and look forwards, rather than vengeful and looking backwards, if you can give assurances that you will not create problems. If you do want to carry on editing foreign name templates, I'd suggest strongly that you look at good articles as examples, listen to other editors when they give advice, and experiment in your sand box, and in the current situation it would help your case if you can undertake to do this. I am, though, very sorry that you're finding editing Wikipedia stressful, and I hope you find your niche. Hope this helps! Elemimele (talk) 16:34, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Elemimele I plan to give up my account on March 2020 but my plan was posposed due to pandemic and now I going to sign off permanently on December 2022. Should I retire my account permanently or not? RenRen070193 (talk) 02:47, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Only you can decide; just keep in mind that Wikipedia is nothing more than an encyclopaedia. Lots of people come and go, depending on how they feel about Wikipedia, and what's going on in their lives (being able to walk away from Wikipedia when things are going wrong is a useful life skill that I personally need to improve). But wikipedia is not a great resource for handling social connections. The talk here tends to concentrate on the edit, not on the editor, which is normally practical, but can feel bad when we're in need of human warmth and recognition. There are other, better places for that. In any case, it is best not to let Wikipedia become too important; it's only a heap of information. I hope you find a corner of it to which you enjoy contributing. Elemimele (talk) 07:02, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@Elemimele Thanks for your advice. Now I pursue my decision to say goodbye to my account permanently. Imagine, I wouldn't last 10 years without all of you especially my co-editors, contributor s and most of all, our fellow readers. It's no need to wait for account to be deactivate at the end of this year unless some editors allow me to sign off. Thank you and goodbye! RenRen070193 (talk) 10:41, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Hello, RenRen070193. First of all, please search for help outside Wikipedia if you have depression or similar health problems. You do not have to keep editing Wikipedia (or even give a status update to other editors). Second, I notice from your post here, and a few other contributions, that your English is not easy to understand. I suspect this can lead to misunderstandings with other editors. Consider editing the Wikipedia version corresponding to your native language (I assume that is not English - maybe Tagalog?). (Also, having more than two native languages is already a rarity, yet your userpage states that you are a native speaker of no less than six languages, belonging to four very different linguistic groups; you might want to correct that.)

I will assume that your question is about names for people with multiple plausible nationality / origin backgrounds. I would say the answer depends on the culture to which the name is attached. In general, a hatnote is only needed if the name order would cause surprise to someone reading the article with an assumption of the English/Western name order.

In the case of Sam Milby, it seems to me that his name is clearly American, and therefore there is no need for a family name hatnote. I would be more concerned about mentions of him being "Filipino-American", which usually implies someone lives in the US after either they or their family emigrated from the Philippines. There, it is rather the reverse - he is American-born and emigrated to the Philippines. (The article says he "return[ed] to the Philippines in 2005" but that is a dubious way of saying it if he never lived there before.)

In the case of Ryzza Mae Dizon, you would need to present evidence that this person is most commonly referred to as "de Guzman" in English media. If so, the article should probably be moved, and all references to "Dizon" changed throughout the text, and then add the family hatnote. However, if English sources refer to her as "Dizon", no matter how incorrect that might be in Tagalog, that is what should be kept in the article. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 16:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Humor Pages

Can normal members make humorous pages? Or is it limited to high level members / Wikipedia staff? Not because I'm gonna make one (I can't edit like... at all.) but it would be nice to know. 68.41.231.207 (talk) 03:11, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

i think you mean pages like those in Category:Wikipedia humor. you can make those yourself. also, do note that there is no such thing as "high level" or "normal" members here on wikipedia. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 03:21, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello 68.41.231.207 and welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, you can make a humorous page, just make sure you put the {{humor}} tag on top of the page. Happy Editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 03:26, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

also, you may only put it in projectspace or userspace. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 03:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Using this IP number, you appear to have made only one attempt to edit the encyclopedia. Here it is. I can tell that you have (or anyway had) only a weak idea of categorization. How about putting effort into studying categorization, or of course making constructive, well-referenced edits to articles, before attempting humour? -- Hoary (talk) 04:17, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't saying I would make one. Just curious. 68.41.231.207 (talk) 14:25, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

...by City

Are categories which are sorted "by city" allowed to include towns and other non-city Districts of England?

Or should a new category be created for the towns and other non-city Districts of England?

I find that there's a lot of non-Wikipedia websites and videos which include British places like towns, villages and even neighbourhoods in "British city lists".

And now Wikipedia seems to be doing the same, by confusing already confused mainly non-Brit people, into thinking that those non-cities are actually cities, just like with the county and region of Greater London which is not a city, has never been a city, and never will be a city, contrary to what Wikipedia claims.

I've looked at the following category page before and never noticed that it includes towns, because they've either been recently added, or most likely because I wasn't paying attention

Category:Films set in England by city

Those towns are Blackpool, Hartlepool, Luton, Oldham, Whitby and Windsor.

There's also the town of Brighton category which I was going to rename to the city of Brighton and Hove category, however that wasn't an option, so I redirected it instead expecting all the entries to move too, but they haven't, so could someone fix it so that Category:Films set in Brighton gets merged into Category:Films set in Brighton and Hove? Danstarr69 (talk) 01:56, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

"The Greatest City in the World: What is London famous for?" Well, for one it's "the fourth most expensive city in the world". My point being that "city" can mean any of various things. (By a certain understanding of "city", London isn't one -- and plenty of other cities aren't either, Tokyo being a prime example. Whereas the entire island of Sado -- whose sources of income are farming, fishing, and tourism -- is a "city".) Maybe bring up your question on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject England? -- Hoary (talk) 04:13, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hoary no, there's only one definition of city in the UK for people who know what they're talking about, and those people are a minority like me. There's currently 71 cities in the UK, which will soon be increased to 76 cities.

The Office for National Statistics is the only official source for UK statistics on things like cities. All the other UK city "sources," mainly from countries like the USA, Germany, Ukraine, Anguilla etc talk nonsense.

List of cities in the United Kingdom

Why is it whenever I ask a question on Teahouse, or 3 questions in this case, I always get directed to somewhere else, where my question will no doubt also be ignored, just like my last 5 or 6 questions on here and wherever I was directed to?

I'll be re-asking whatever those questions were, when I can be bothered looking through my talk page at my archived Teahouse threads. Danstarr69 (talk) 04:47, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

I imagine, Danstarr69, that you've been advised to ask elsewhere because the people who direct you believe that the destination is likelier than this "Teahouse" to be read by people who've already given thought to the matter you're asking about. Certainly this is why I have so advised you. Meanwhile, Chambers says: city noun (cities) 1 any large town. 2 in the UK: a town with a royal charter and usually a cathedral. 3 the body of inhabitants of a city. 4 (the City) the business centre of a city, especially London. I think you'll find that educated people in USA, Germany, Ukraine, Anguilla etc are just as able to comprehend the concept of polysemy as are those in Blighty. Your fellow-editors here are also likely to understand the benefit of adhering to a particular definition for certain purposes, as long as you propose this reasonably, sparing them bluster about alternative definitions being "nonsense". -- Hoary (talk) 06:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Furthermore to the above, Danstarr69: if you edit Wikipedia long enough, you will at some point find yourself in disagreement with multiple other editors, in a minority of one, about a point you are dead certain of. That happens. The solution is to step away from the keyboard, (optionally) yell to the wall that all those people are idiots, and drop the matter. It’s ok. Consider going through this without being blocked as a a rite of passage. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 15:24, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Search tools

Hi, I would like to browse a list of top importance stubs. I'm able to find Category:Top-importance articles and also Category:Stub-Class articles but is there a way to search for articles that belong to both categories? Thanks for your help. GuineaPigC77 (talk) 05:55, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, GuineaPig. I believe that PetScan is your friend, though I've never used it myself. ColinFine (talk) 10:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, GuineaPigC77. One problem with your inquiry is that many articles that are categorized as stubs are not actually stubs at all. I have been editing for 14 years and have repeatedly run across articles that are in no way stubs but are categorized as stubs based on a decision made by a single editor 5, 10 or 15 years ago, with no attention paid to the subsequent improvements. I bump these articles up to start class or higher without hesitation but I am not actively looking for these miscatorizations. But they are everywhere. Cullen328 (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you, much appreciated. And yep if it's really start-class that's fine too, but I see why the system isn't perfect. This gets me in the right direction, thank you. GuineaPigC77 (talk) 16:04, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

What to do next?

I submitted an article "Draft:Adly Thoma" and got rejected (npov - Submission is not written in a formal, neutral encyclopedic tone). I got this comment from the reviewer (Purely promotional. See WP:COI.) I reviewed the tone and removed any promotional language, sticked only to sentences stating facts. yet the same rejection came for the second time with this comment (This is still promotional, and you have not responded to the COI query here and on your talk page.)

As far as I understand the COI comes if i have a relation with the person I'm talking about and I don't. I'm not sure what is the COI query mentioned or what is it that i'm supposed to do next.

Zamo icm (talk) 10:40, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Zamo icm Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I think the question has come up because you in essence posted Mr. Thoma's resume and accomplishments, which isn't necessarily what an article is for. An article must summarize independent reliable sources, not simply tell about what the person has done. If you don't know him, how did you come to write about him? If you have no conflict of interest, you simply need to say so on either your user talk page, or the draft talk page. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I just wrote about him because of the impact his company is making. all what I wrote is referenced from the news, media and his public profiles. As for your comment about posting hisresume, I only emitadet the topics from similar personalities here on wikipedia.

In the Draft talk:Adly Thoma page I mentioned that. Is that what you mean or should I do it in a different way? Zamo icm (talk) 10:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Zamo icm That's why you are writing about him, but doesn't answer my question as to how you came to write about him; how did you discover the impact of his company? If you imitated other articles, the ones you are imitating are also problematic. If you want to use other articles as a model, use those classified as good articles. Please read other stuff exists. 331dot (talk) 11:05, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

I got to know about him 1st from the media and attended a panel for him once. I thought he should be highlighted here as less impactful already have articles about them here. Plus I thought it was a good entry point for me to wikipedia Zamo icm (talk) 11:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Zamo icm. You say "referenced from the news, media ahd public profiles". Thatis a good start, but it is not enough. Just looking through your citations, it is obvious that many of them are not independent of Thoma. 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.

One other point: "I thought he should be highlighted here". First, that assumes that a Wikipedia article is for the benefit of its subject: it is not, except perhaps incidentally. Wikipedia is not interested in whether an article benefits, or even hurts the subject, as long as it is a neutrally written summary of the reliable independent sources.

Secondly, in my opinion "he should be highlighted here " is in itself an indication of conflict of interest, whether you know him or not. In my view, we write and edit articles to improve Wikipedia, and if we have even a slight thought of wanting to benefit the subject, that is a conflict of interest. This doesn't mean that we should not do it, but it means we must take extra care to make sure we are writing neutrally. (This is a personal view, and broader than "conflict of interest" generally means on Wikipedia). ColinFine (talk) 11:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

I get your point, however when I said "I thought he should be highlighted here" I didn't mean it to his benefit only, but in my mind Wikipedia mentions everything important and his work is important. So in a way in my mind it was for Wikipedia's benefit to include his work specially the his intellectual property initiative alongside his benefit too.

Anyway I get your point of a broader concept of COI. I want the article to be neutral also and I'm not in favor of being biased but again main main question is what's next? Zamo icm (talk) 11:45, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Zamo icm Declined (now twice), which is not the same as a more severe "Rejected." For "What's next?" I recommend a lot of cutting. Harsh, but I recommend deleting all of "Public Speaking, Panels and Judging" Ref'd or not, that is just useless download of CV content. David notMD (talk) 13:31, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@Zamo icm You have uploaded a photograph of Thoma to Commons, which you apparently obtained from the website of geminiafrica.com, the company of which he is CEO. However, the home page of that website says that it is "Copyright © 2021 All Rights Reserved - Gemini Africa". This means that the photo is also under copyright and cannot be hosted anywhere on Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:24, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Information Removed Problem

Hi Tamzin , Recently I removed an information from a Mallikarjun Kharge page [11]. But the same information has also been removed by another user [12]. Meanwhile, no user had added this information to the page. ( Was it some technical problem or some such problem happens to everyone ) PravinGanechari (talk) 14:37, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

PravinGanechari Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You are welcome to ask your question here, but if you want to communicate with Tamzin directly, you may use their user talk page, User talk:Tamzin(perhaps you meant to?) 331dot (talk) 14:41, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi 331dot , It would not be appropriate to ask this question on the Talk page. This would be a problem with everyone. And the answer to this question can be expected only from senior admin . That's why I pinged Tamzin PravinGanechari (talk) 14:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@PravinGanechari, there are almost no questions that require an admin to answer, and most of the workers here at Teahouse are not admins. Admins aren't necessarily experts at anything. They're just editors who have undergone WP:RfA, which confirms they are trusted by the community to use a few extra tools. There are any number of non-admins who are more knowledgeable about almost any topic you can think of than the average admin. Valereee (talk) 17:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the mistake I made by pinging And I won't make this mistake again. ( Tamzin mam, I'm Sorry For Pinging You ) PravinGanechari (talk) 17:35, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @PravinGanechari, an IP had made these unsourced edits in these two diffs: 1, 2. Kpddg ^(talk) 14:44, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Kpddg , When IP added information. That's when I removed. After that no user has added this information back, yet another user has removed it. [13] PravinGanechari (talk) 14:59, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@PravinGanechari, that is becuase, the IP had added this in many places in the article. First, only a part of it was removed. Then in a following edit, it was completely removed. Kpddg ^(talk) 15:00, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

No technical issue. The content was repeated in two different sections of the article. Slywriter (talk) 15:01, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Slywriter , Yes , i just looked down[14] . the IP had added the same information in two places. I'm sorry for bothering you all. PravinGanechari (talk) 15:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

No worries, somewhere in the archives you will find me having this exact same confusion. In that case it was the prose and the infobox had the same unsourced information. Slywriter (talk) 15:43, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Slywriter , I have had this problem in another page. Now I have removed a source from one place and added it to another place[15]. But it is not showing on the source Porki page. PravinGanechari (talk) 16:25, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

sorry again. just after i updated the app (Google Chrome) the info started showing. PravinGanechari (talk) 16:30, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Renaming an article

Can somebody rename the article Baby Ameya to Ameya Anilkumar. This is the original name of this child actress. For your reference, see Shalini. This actress was credited as Baby Shalini. 2409:4073:416:F257:0:0:1377:D8A5 (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@2409:4073:416:F257:0:0:1377:D8A5: We use the more commonly used name as the article title. See WP:STAGENAME. You should discuss on the Talk:Baby Ameya page. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:11, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

The Roaring Lion

Why do my editing changes get constantly undone! For example, the 'Location' of the Yousuf Karsh photograph of Winston Churchill should be where the image was originally photographed which was the Speaker's Chamber of the Speaker of the House of Commons in Ottawa, NOT in the Fairmont Chateau Laurier in the same city. There are two Wikipedia editors continuously undoing this fact. It seems widely assumed the 'original' of this photograph is located in that hotel. Wrong! The Roaring Lion topic is to discuss the historical facts of its creation. When 'peacock prose' notations are posted, the word or sentence is changed accordingly to the guidelines but for some reason is undone! Winone65 (talk) 05:18, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Stop edit warring immediately, Winone65, and discuss the matter with Mr.weedle, Neveselbert and anyone else. And not here but instead on Talk:The Roaring Lion. (I notice that nobody seems to have made any attempt to discuss there.) -- Hoary (talk) 06:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

I must say by the tone of your message, you and the two editors in question make trying to learn and willingly contribute to Wikipedia a rather unenjoyable and frustrating experience! Winone65 (talk) 06:33, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

I’ve left you a talk page message with some really useful links. Your work is not gone and it’s always available in the page history. You’re most welcome to restore it and add sources. I’ve no concerns with the content you’re adding, nor am I disputing the facts; correct citing and adherence to the Manual of Style is important. Mr.weedle (talk) 06:45, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Winone65, it looks to me that you are trying to insert content into an article about a photograph that may instead belong in the biography of the photographer. Maybe I am wrong but I am not judging the content. When your content is challenged, it is your job to gain consensus for its inclusion on the article talk page which is Talk:The Roaring Lion in this case. Cullen328 (talk) 06:58, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

No, Winone65, see the documentation at {{Infobox artwork/wikidata#Parameters}}: the location parameter should be filled with the Museum that currently houses the artwork, and city / general place in which the artwork is currently located, not where the image was originally photographed. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:17, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

HI, is there anyone who could help me to polish two articles?

They need in particular a more impartial language. I do not think to be able to do that better... Could you, please, help me? Gingeksace (talk) 23:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

It would help if you told us what the articles are!! --Bduke (talk) 23:56, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Please note that Wikipedia is not for promotion: "I think we should concentrate on that and help an author that seems making a honest and strong carrier earning a position." Best regards, User:Gingeksace.--Quisqualis (talk) 00:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I have been reported with alleged W:NOTHERE in admin noticeboard.

Where can I have an independent, constructive discussion about this specifically with a group admins? The current discussion is full of false accusations about me, as well as reports of my behavior as problematic when in reality it was not. Ki999 (talk) 21:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link: WP:ANI#User:Ki999 is WP:NOTHERE, a discussion involving multiple well-versed editors and concluded with an indef-block of this editor. DMacks (talk) 01:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Why is their pornography on the pages?

Why are editors allowed to upload pornography to Wikipedia, Wikipedia is supposed to be a site for everyone to use, Wikipedia isn’t pornhub. MinecraftFan23 (talk) 05:49, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Which specific pages are you talking about, MinecraftFan23? Wikipedia is not censored but content should serve an encyclopedic purpose and should not be gratuitous. You are correct that Wikipedia is not Pornhub but I very much doubt that you will find Pornhub-style content on Wikipedia. Be specific. Cullen328 (talk) 06:06, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

See Help:Options to hide an image and Wikipedia:Content disclaimer. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

OP indef'ed a s sock of NOTHERE user:User:Jurrasic kid Meters (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Izin Hash

Hello, somebody please create an article on Izin Hash. I can't create one. He's an internal model and an actor. Who is the main character in Nizhal (2021 film). There are so many international articles about him online. See,

• UAE: Child actor Izin Hash dreams big on Khaleej Times
• Why this Keralite boy is famous as an ‘Emirati’ in UAE on Gulf News
• For the love of storytelling - on The Indian Express
• The Malayali kid who turned into UAE's favourite poster boy on the Indian Express
• Indian boy surprised to find his photo on UAE textbook cover on Khaleej Times
• Nizhal fame Izin Hash bags Hollywood movie - On Malayala Manorama
• When a 6-year-old Keralite boy grilled Steven Gerrard on Manorama

The article Izin Hash is currently redirected to Nizhal film. 117.230.186.228 (talk) 05:32, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

You can make a new page at Draft:Izin Hash and add references there. If it doesn't get qualified for a mainspace submission, feel free to discuss why. However, you have to be wary articles can get deleted if they feel like they're WP:CRUFT, so please do mention you wanted to find citations, not to support on why your articles need to stay on Wikipedia. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

If your article is voted for deletion, please remain civil and discuss why with the other users. Do not use your point of view to justify why the article should stay (e.g. "It's a good article on an Indian actor, so please keep it.") I know you're not active, but I figured I should say this. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 07:10, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for inactivity, I'll try to not be rude at anonymous users next time

An old thread was archived, so I didn't want to reply again there. @Polyamorph I apologize for being rude a week ago.

P.S. I'll only watch out for ones that definitely are using Wikipedia for anything but factual writing. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:09, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@WannurSyafiqah74 Hello, when writing to a specific user, you may wish to start a new thread on their talk page instead. Thanks, Blanchey (talk) 07:26, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh. Is it okay to archive/remove this then? Whichever works. Will move this too, thanks. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 08:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Don’t worry, you can leave it here and it will be archived automatically at some point, if you want, you can always copy this message over to the talk page and say that you copied it from the teahouse, or just write a new message too.@WannurSyafiqah74 Blanchey (talk) 08:36, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I did that. I might as well leave it here, too. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 08:44, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

P.S. I remembered you can close threads. I forgot people can do that. Is that okay too? Or is leaving it here better? WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 08:45, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Just leave it, this page has a lot of traffic and is archived pretty soon. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Request for unlock

Hello! Is it possible to unlock me in kk-wiki? An illiterate admin blocked me, because I asked him frequently not to input intentionally mistakes in articles and not to be jealous to other users' contribution. Ерден Карсыбеков (talk) 08:48, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Ерден Карсыбеков You will need to make that request on that Wiki. Blanchey (talk) 08:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

What 331dot said. And before you do that you could perhaps think about your actions and if you at any point stepped out of line. If so, you would have to address it and convince the unblocking admin that it wouldn’t happen again. Blanchey (talk) 08:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Ерден Карсыбеков (ec) We cannot help you with issues on another language version of Wikipedia; each version is a separate project. You will need to request unblock there using whatever process exists there to do so. As a tip, insulting the admins here or there isn't likely to help you. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I can't write there at this moment. --Ерден Карсыбеков (talk) 08:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Ерден Карсыбеков As I said, we can't help you with this. If you are saying that you do not have access to your user talk page on that wiki, and they have no off wiki process to request to be unblocked, there's not much that can be done. Maybe a Steward could help(see this page) but I'm not certain. 331dot (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Ерден Карсыбеков You could always email them? Blanchey (talk) 09:37, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you! --Ерден Карсыбеков (talk) 11:01, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

  Happy we were both able to assist you. Blanchey (talk) 11:21, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

how do i create a page?

self-explanatory TigerMax1 (talk) 04:03, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello @TigerMax1 and welcome to the Teahouse! You will want to go to WP:AFC and select "Click here to start a new article". It will guide you through the steps to creating a draft article and which once you are finished with it will be reviewed after a while. Happy Editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 04:21, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Your draft Draft:M. Kai Manchester will not be acceptable as an article unless you can provide references verifying his notability as an artist. This means what people with no connection to him have published stuff about him. His Youtube and Twitter are not not allowed as refs. David notMD (talk) 12:26, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Search by article name

How can I get the full list of the articles that have my search query on their names? If they have it only in content but not in names they should not be on the list. Ki999 (talk) 21:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Note: user blocked as per WP:NOTHERE. (see here) WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 13:00, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Financing of Wikipedia ? Tax-Deductible in UK/ Germany

As above, are financial contributions to Wiki.deductable in UK and Germany? ThirdCVS (talk) 10:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@ThirdCVS I don’t understand what you are trying to ask. Explain in more detail please. Do you mean paid editing? Blanchey (talk) 11:25, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh I see what you mean about what you said above. I don’t think that I will personally be able to assist you on this one although I’m sure someone else will. Also, for future reference, it is a lot more easier for readers if you post your replies/additional comments in the original discussion instead of starting a new one. Thanks! Blanchey (talk) 11:27, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

ThirdCVS. We can't give you legal or financial advice but since Wikipedia is based in the States I think that is unlikely. If you are donating, you might be interested to read about Wikipedia finances. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@ThirdCVS I don't know about Germany but in the UK I think that the relevant policy from HMRC is this helpsheet on Gift Aid. That makes it clear that Gift Aid only applies to donations to charities based in the UK and EU + some minor other places. As the WMF is a US-based organisation, they won't qualify. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

For Germany, I will stick to German: "Spenden an im Ausland ansässige gemeinnützige Organisationen sind nur dann steuerlich absetzbar, wenn der Spendenempfänger die deutschen gemeinnützigkeitsrechtlichen Vorgaben erfüllt und der Spender dies gegenüber dem für ihn zuständigen Finanzamt durch Vorlage geeigneter Belege nachweist." Essentially, it has to fit the German non-profit regulations and has to be certified. German tax law being rather byzantine...this could mean yes or no :). Lectonar (talk) 12:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@ThirdCVS: Germany and the UK are not listed at donate:Tax deductibility but that only applies to the Wikimedia Foundation which runs Wikipedia from the US. The bottom of the page says: "The Wikimedia Foundation supports local independent chapters across the world". See https://donate.wikimedia.org.uk/ for Wikimedia UK and meta:Wikimedia Deutschland#Donations for Germany. They say you can make tax-deductable donations, or something which sounds equivalent for the UK. The chapters have their own budgets and spending. They may focus more on local matters. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

As PrimeHunter says, by donating via the UK link you can use Gift Aid for the purposes of getting UK tax relief. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:28, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Filter edits

How can I see the list of edits made by a specific person on a specific article? Ki999 (talk) 21:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Even though the user is blocked, https://xtools.wmflabs.org/topedits is the tool if anyone else is looking for it as well. 0xDeadbeef 14:03, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Can I use the Wiki logo?

Hello, I am producing a poster and am referencing what I found from Wiki in a search. I cannot copy 'black head and raised arms on white in an open sphere', but it would fit a gap and be appropriate. If I can, can you send a usable logo? ThirdCVS (talk) 09:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@ThirdCVS: Could you be more specific about what you want to achieve? A specific article would help. And I don't know if you want to use a quote of an article from Wikipedia or use an image on Wikipedia. 0xDeadbeef 14:11, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia's own logos are listed, along with their copyright status, at [this page on meta]. No-one will want to send you these logos but you should be able to download the ones you want to your own computer in the standard way, for example from Commons:File:Wikipedia-logo-v2.svg. Note that you need to read and understand the limitations about using these logos which are in notes linked from the file's page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:18, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

General newbie question re images - rules on fair use/ the right policies to look at?

Hi all. I'm sure this question gets asked a lot, and I may be being a bit lazy on posting the question here, but can you point me in the right direction for a basic understanding of Wikimedia policy on the use of images? Always looking for ways to contribute, images wasn't one I have explored as of yet but there are a few minor pages I've been editing or viewing that lack images I have realised I may be able to source. Copyright of course would be a big and understood one, but I'm not super clear beyond that? Many thanks! Equal Inequity (talk) 12:56, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Equal Inequity and welcome to the Teahouse. I suggest you start with Wikipedia:Images. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Right, the moment I posted my question I realised this was hopelessly generic and not much use for more specific advice so let me try to give a few examples of what I'm thinking of. Basically they all surround primary sources, about which some of the generic policies are a bit unclear. In all cases I'm not sure how I best cover bases to demonstrate right of use of images before uploading them to Wikimedia, or other factors I should consider before introducing them to a Wkipedia main page/offering to the community on a talk page.E.g.:

1. My partner used to be a photographer and has a bunch of (un-copyrighted and unused) images that I think could have merit and he'd be more than happy to donate.

2. I personally know a small number of notable people with wikipedia pages where those pages have outdated images/no images. I have never been tempted to edit those pages myself given the conflict of interest, but have an avenue to get better images - either from them directly or from myself with their sign-off for use of their likeness - and offer them to the community.

3. I also have some connections within museums, galleries etc. This one I think could be useful for some scientific pages in particular, again with relevant permissions and descriptions. Equal InequityEqual Inequity (talk) 13:44, 1 September 2022 (UTC) (talk) 13:43, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Equal Inequity. The simplest case is where you (or your partner) have personally taken a photo you are happy to license as CC BY SA 4.0, the default for Wikimedia Commons. See Commons:Licensing for details. For these get the one who took the photo to use the Upload Wizard at Commons:Special:UploadWizard and follow the instructions. The process for cases where you want to do the uploads but the photos were taken by someone else gets a bit more complicated and involves both the upload and a process of confirming to Commons volunteers that the images are being donated with relevant licenses. This is done usng various email templates located at Commons:Email_templates. The usual mistake is for notable people to assume that possession of a photo gives them the right to donate it: that's not in general true as it is the photographer who usually owns the copyright. Thus "selfies" are best! Contact me on my Talk Page if you need more advice: I've assisted several third-parties in uploading files correctly to Commons. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:04, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

That's a huge help, than you @Mike Turnball! And very much appreciate your offer of further help on your talk page - I will use the sources you suggest first but can imagine I may benefit from further advice re specific cases in the future. Equal Inequity (talk) 14:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

How blocking works

Few days back I was not able to edit. A message was displayed saying This IP address is blocked from editing due to vandalism. But yesterday everything was normal. And today it is showing like this. This IP address is currently partially blocked. Can anyone please explain whats going on here. I have done no vandalism. Then why editing from my phone got blocked. Why cant wikipedia admins block those IP users who cause vandalism. That blocking had nothing to do with me. 2409:4073:40E:E2E:0:0:10FF:A0A5 (talk) 04:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, your IP address is currently part of a range-block, even if it's only a partial block that effects just four articles. Although you have not done anything bad, someone else who also gets assigned IP addresses in the range yours is part of has behaved in a disruptive manner. That's collateral damage that can sadly be hard to avoid sometimes when it comes to IP editors. (One of the reasons why it's often recommended, even if not required, to create an account)

The problem is that which IP is assigned to you can change, sometimes frequently. This means that when your IP address changes, there is always a chance the previous user of it has used that IP to commit vandalism or other forms of problematic editing and got blocked to prevent further harm to the wiki. In addition, because IP addresses sometimes change frequently, there are times when it's needed for admins to block (part of) a range of these addresses to ensure the editor's problematic behaviour is actually stopped, instead of just continuing from another IP address (but the same actual person) in the same range.

Unfortunately, in all of these cases, there is a chance that someone else who gets the specific IP address afterwards—or in case of a range-block, someone else who gets assigned an IP in the same range—will also be blocked from editing, even though they aren't the person targetted by the block. However, sometimes the damage done to the wiki by not blocking is more severe than the harm done by collateral damage. Admins do try to keep the collateral damage as minimal as possible, but it can't always be entirely avoided. AddWittyNameHere 05:05, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Basically, people can share the same IP, so a different person was definitely doing vandalism. You can request for getting unblocked on your talk page. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:06, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh I see. WannurSyafiqah74, I dont have that much technical knowledge. So I have one more question to ask. IP address is for a device right? Im editing from my mobile which means my phone will be having an IP address. If this is the case, why cant the admins block that devices alone so collateral damages can be avoided. Correct me if Im wrong. 2409:4073:41C:F221:0:0:25CD:90A5 (talk) 05:44, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

That's not possible - I don't think Wikipedia admins have overcomplicated, specifically coded technology to even detect someone's device. Read WP:UNBLOCK instead, and if you are done, use Template:Unblock on your own talk page, explain why and add your signature. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

If they decline your block, you can easily avoid rangeblocked situations like this in the future by simply creating an account. Just remember that these can happen when IPs are used for long-term abuse. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:55, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

This is both not technically possible and would be forbidden even if it were, as MAC addresses can be considered personally-identifying information. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 06:41, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

That too. I agree, by the way. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 07:11, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia admins do often block individual IP addresses. However a particular device does not have a single permanent IP address. The IP address for a device can change, usually to another address in the same range, which is why range blocks are used. For example, if you look at your (the OP's) IP addresses in this very thread, the IP address your device was using when you made your original post (2409:4073:40E:E2E:0:0:10FF:A0A5) is different than the IP address on your second post (2409:4073:41C:F221:0:0:25CD:90A5). CodeTalker (talk) 14:33, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I think it's important here to mention that the obvious solution to having your IP address blocked is to register as a Wikipedia user. You actually have more privacy that way. HiLo48 (talk) 06:48, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Need help with Pakdam Pakdai edit history

So, I used to watch some of this strange Flash-animated version of Oggy and the Cockroaches, and I suggested someone to add references to characters I don't recall appearing. However, the references were YouTube links and I'm not sure if someone can check to see how they'd handle that.

I've pointed it out in the talk page as well, requesting an "episode note" as its replacement. Thanks! WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 14:08, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@WannurSyafiqah74 you may wish to find an even more reliable source before adding it. Thanks! Blanchey (talk) 14:54, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. P.S. I do know people can delete edits for copyright infringement, but what happens when it's a reference? WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 15:00, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

i'm not quite sure what you're asking, WannurSyafiquah74. We do not, under any circumstances, allow links to copyright infringements, whether in references or anywhere else. However, a link is almost never an essential part of a citation. A citation should consist of the information which will help a reader determine the likely reliability of the source and then give them enough information to locate it: such items as title, author, publisher, date. Even for an intenet resource, this should usually be enough information: a URL is a convenience, not a requirement.

Does this answer your question, or have I misunderstood what you are asking? ColinFine (talk) 15:56, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Film notability

Hi, may i know if this film is notable as per Wikipedia policies. I see some regular sources but can't find anything from big news websites about it. Can someone check and confirm? 123.136.150.173 (talk) 14:50, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

If you can find lots of information and sources about the subject and it meets the notability criteria, then you should be able to create it. Blanchey (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry I didn’t realise what you had said. This seems to be on a different wiki so you should ask the question there. Thanks! Blanchey (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

The link you gave is to our sister project written in "Simple English". It is at simple:The Man & The Angel. I don't see any citations to reliable sources with significant coverage, so I think it would be unlikely to pass the main criteria here for notable films. It would help if you could find a decent review from somewhere like Rotten Tomatoes (not IMDB). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:05, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. The thing that makes writing articles difficult, that takes most of the time and thought, is finding and evaluating the sources. Your "check and confirm" sounds to me as if you're asking "will somebody please do most of the work in creating an article, so that I can do the easier bit afterwards?"

You might get a volunteer willing to do that. But if you think the article is worth writing, you probably need to do that job yourself. If you find some possible sources, people here (or at RSN) will probably be willing to give you their evaluations of the sources. But that's different from what you're asking.

Remember that to count towards notability, each individual source must be all three of reliable, independent, and containing significant coverage of the topic. ColinFine (talk) 16:05, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Source requirements for adding to an article?

Hello all- I am brand new to Wikipedia and I would like to write a wikipedia article about an initiative at my work- however, when I was reading through the Wikipedia notability requirements, I realized it would not be acceptable since there is no secondary literature written about it at this time. My organization has a wikipedia page, so I was thinking of adding it as a paragraph there. Is this possible, or would that also be subject to the requirement for a secondary source? Thank you! Direzione theology (talk) 14:55, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hey @Direzione theology, welcome to the Teahouse. If you work for this organization, you are likely a paid editor, so you should follow the guidelines on that page. Content should only be added if it has reliable sources on the topic (for example, news websites showing significant coverage). Since you have a conflict of interest with the company, you should state the changes you want made on the article's talk page using the {{Edit request}} template. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 14:59, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. To add to what ingenuity said: while it is possible for an article about your organization to cite some non-independent sources such as the organization's own website, this is only allowable in the limited circumstances explained in PRIMARY. In my opinion, listing (or even mentioning) "an initiative" (whatever that might mean) is unlikely to be appropriate unless an independent source has published something about it - and note that an independent source would exclude anythign written or published by your associates, partners or customers, or anything based on a interview or press release. ColinFine (talk) 16:11, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Corporate pages

I work for a company that has a very out-of-date Wikipedia page that I would like to help develop. How do I find an editor that can, without a conflict of interest, update this page?

Thank you, Landis at Bath House (talk)Landis at Bath House Landis at Bath House (talk) 15:37, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Landis at Bath House: Thanks for abiding by the Wikipedia Conflict of Interest guidelines and asking for help here. The recommend way to proceed is to leave sources for the necessary updates at the talk page of the article in question. If you click the "talk" tab while viewing the article, that will bring you to the correct talk page. Then, if you leave links to the relevant sources of information, someone can use them to update the article in question. If you also let me know what the article is, I can take a look at it and see if I can help once you've left links to the relevant sources at the article talk page. --Jayron32 16:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link Neogen. Theroadislong (talk) 16:09, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Landis at Bath House, and welcome to the Teahouse. Since Jayron has said they are willing to help you, then doing it they way they have suggested will work. But generally, the recommendation is to use the edit request mechanism (so that your request gets noticed), and to make your suggestion as specific as possible - not "please update the article according to what this source says", but "Please replace sentence X by sentence Y (citing source Z)". ColinFine (talk) 16:17, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

about WP:1729 and WP:NNUM

I understand that some of the numbers aren't interesting, so that there can't be an article on that. But we already have several articles for round numbers containing a "range section". Such as 4092, a not-so-interesting number, is contained in 4000's range section. As we already have a section about 4092, can we redirect 4092 to 4000 for readers easier to find? Gi (talk) 16:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Ginkos520isthebest I would take a question like this to the articles talk page and see what other editors who focus on that area think. Blanchey (talk) 16:41, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Creating an article

Hey, i am looking for someone who is experienced with Wikipedia. I was wondering if someone can create an article about a tattoo artist since i am not quite sure how to get it started and how thee Wikipedia policy works. Please let me know below about your opinion and if we can get it done asap. I have reliable sources that you may need and for further information, i am here to guide on that. I just need someone experienced on it. Thank you!

PinkWriter99 (talk) 17:27, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

You already asked this several days ago and several people answered. DMacks (talk) 18:03, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Can this citation work?

Hello, I wanted help in understanding if I can use this link for citation - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Sustainable_Economic_Welfare for this page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Sustainable_Economic_Welfare for this part - The calculation of the ISEW in the United States from 1950 to 1986 was done by Cobb and Daly in 1989. Since it is not cited, I feel this link could be added. but I wanted to check if someone can check if it is alright to use as citation. Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 16:10, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ANLgrad. You're asking if you can use a Wikipedia article as a reference? The answer is a resounding No: see WP:Circular. What you can do is to use the sources referenced in that Wikipedia article - but ideally, you should not cite a source unless you've seen it yourself and verified that it supports what it is supposed to be supporting. If the information you want to source isn't itself sourced in the Wikipedia article: that exemplifies exactly why you shouldn't cite the article. ColinFine (talk) 16:22, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine thank you for helping. Yes, I was not sure, and felt I should ask here first because every time I have asked doubts, I have got very insightful replies. Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 17:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@ANLgrad That article is poorly cited but the WP article on the main author of the index, John B. Cobb has much better sourcing, from which it is apparent that the citation should be to his book For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, Environment, and a Sustainable Future, which I found on Google books in the 1994 edition where you can search inside for "index" and find that the key chapters are 3 and 19. This is typical of the sort of sleuthing that needs to be done to track down "missing" citations: we usually have them somewhere if you look carefully. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:59, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull wow that is an amazing find and observation. Great. I have a question here though if you can help with please. Will his book For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, Environment, and a Sustainable Future not have any conflict if we used that? ANLgrad (talk) 17:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@ANLgrad I'm not entirely clear what you want to do. If you are telling our readers who first calculated the ISEW, then it is perfectly OK to quote the book as the WP:PRIMARY source. On the other hand, you may want to show that the index had an impact that made it of wide interest. In that case you need a WP:SECONDARY source that cites the book. The easiest way to find such sources is to use Google Scholar and examine a few those sources that mentioned the book. These are to be found at this URL. There are over 8000 citations, which itself shows the impact the book had. Which one (or more) of these you use depends on what point you want to make. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:23, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull, I think that makes it very clear. My question was more about the impact, but I understood your elaborate explanation about this and the use of WP:SECONDARY. Yes, totally agree, over 8000 citations surely reflects on the impact. Thank you very much. ANLgrad (talk) 19:42, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Mallu Traveler

The sources I've submitted are reliable according to WP:RSS. The reviewer mentioned they do not show significant coverage. The article has in-depth coverage about the subject. Then why? Somebody please explain me much about the reason? 116.68.102.254 (talk) 14:24, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

It could be that it does not meet the notablility criteria. If it is still a draft, you may wish to improve it before resubmitting. Blanchey (talk) 14:51, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I haven't looked at all the sources but I think that the key problem is that they are not WP:INDEPENDENT of him. Most are based on interviews and as a result are biased toward what he wants to say about himself rather than being a cool appraisal of what he's done that's worthy of note. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:55, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Please note 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) 15:57, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

IP 116.68.102.254 edit history shows no editing on Draft:Mallu Traveler. It may be that edits were done earlier today as IP 117.230.19.104. So far, this IP is a one day old, single purpose acount. I have suspicions that the creator of the draft User:Imperfect Boy, indefinitely blocked as a sockpuppet on 30 August, is editing this article as the IP. Current status is declined second time. If either 117 or 116 continue to edit or submit the draft to AfC, I will consider starting a sock puppet investigation. David notMD (talk) 22:06, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Interview sources

Can we consider interviews in multiple independent and reliable national level media as WP:SIGCOV to establish Wikipedia:Notability (people) ? Yeti Dai (talk) 16:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Generally interviews are considered primary sources as it is the subject talking about themselves. Notability requires secondary sources to establish notability. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 17:04, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Yeti Dai, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please remember 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. Interviews by the subject are therefore of little interest or value to Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 17:10, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I see it more as an issue of reliability than notability. If a whole set of sources choose, without pressure and of their own free will, to interview someone, it's probably a sign that the world would like to know about that person: they are notable. But because the person might have given the same wrong information consistently in every interview, we can't write anything reliable about them: so no matter how notable they are, it's still not possible to create an article. Thus we need non-interview sources independent of the subject. The only sort of interview I'd consider safe is the sort conducted by a named investigative journalist (or similar) who writes in a style that indicates that they verified their facts ("Smith spoke of his childhood in Brighton, and indeed I was able to find the blue plaque on the wall of 33 Garden Avenue commemorating his father's gnome manufacturing workshop" etc. etc.). Note also that interviews in the sort of newspaper that's open to paid-for pieces or pieces requested by publicists are utterly useless for all purposes. Elemimele (talk) 22:46, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Strange user

Hello there anyone. I'm a bit weirded out about this one user (you will know if you see the history page) on this page Armpit fetishism. He says that an image was uploaded of his wife but he wants to remove it. I don't for a second believe him as anyone can claim that. And I don't really want to talk to this strange person. But I'm interested to know if the community here thinks there should be a certain thing to do? Should he just be allowed to this? If not, anyone can keep doing weird things like this. Just wondering what you think and if there is something to do? Thanks Danial Bass (talk) 21:53, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Danial Bass maybe you could suggest to the user to email the Wikipedia team if it’s a copyright violation? Blanchey (talk) 22:01, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Do you mean I should revert his edit (he removed the photo) and then tell him that?

I think he is just sour that I reverted his edit since he included so many armpit photos in there which is unencyclopedic and unnecessary. Danial Bass (talk) 22:05, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I went to Commons and found a different photo of a woman with armpit hair removed by shaving. Is that OK with everyone? David notMD (talk) 22:25, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Haha I saw that, good one! Danial Bass (talk) 22:40, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello Danial Bass. You may want to suggest to the editor that this should be addressed at Wikimedia Commons, which is where the photo was uploaded. Beside the photo caption is a little “box” to be clicked. Next click on the blue “More details” button. On the left of the page is a menu to choose from. “Contact us” will go to a page that has a “Problems” link. On the next page can be found “Copyright violations”, as well as “Images of yourself”, that has a request removal link. A message can be left at either of those pages. Perhaps the gentleman could be reminded that everyone he communicates with is a volunteer, who did not upload the photo in question. Being polite to those he wants help from may be to his advantage. Thanks for trying to resolve the difficulty. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:33, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Karen, Blanchey and David for the time it took you to read and respond, appreciate it! Danial Bass (talk) 22:40, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Danial Bass No worries! Feel free to come back here if you have any more questions or even contact me personally ;-) Blanchey (talk) 22:54, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Is Salvz Ayo a notable topic

Is salvz Ayo a notable topic Salvz Ayo (talk) 23:46, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Based on the fact that a Google search for Salvz Ayo in quotation marks only yields five results, the answer appears to be no.

See also WP:GNG - Toast for Teddy (talk) 23:57, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

I'm sorry, but you are not notable for a full wikipedia article. if you're planning to write an autobiography about yourself, don't, these types of articles rarely if ever succeed due to various policies and other difficulties. there are also reasons why you may not want an article in the first place. I suggest helping out elsewhere yourself: what are your specialties? if you are interested in rap and hip hop, you could help out on other rappers' articles through WikiProject Hip hop. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:22, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Flag of Nepal colour scheme formatting problem

Hello,

I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, and I'm having trouble formatting the colour scheme on the Flag on Nepal Wikipedia page. I was trying to make it look like the Flag of Lichtenstein's colour scheme, and simply copied and pasted some of the formatting, adjusting the colours accordingly. However, something clearly went wrong, and I don't see the difference in formatting that's causing this.

Any help with this would be greatly appreciated. - Toast for Teddy (talk) 23:51, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

 Fixed there seems to be a duplicate row with colors below, which doesn't exist in lichtenstein's article and also a duplicate of the above row which already contained the colors. said row is also off by one column (since in the original template that was held up by a column spanning two rows), although if you wanted to retain that you could add a blank column at the start with one pipe and nothing else, or use rowspan on the first column like ! rowspan="2" | Lorem ipsum .... happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:15, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thank you. - Toast for Teddy (talk) 00:30, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Am I still allowed to talk here?

I've had the account for about 3-4 to four months, but rarely used Wikipedia (even rarer to be logged in, only twice) on one to two months. Am I still allowed to ask questions here? Oixyplanet (talk) 03:56, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Oixyplanet, pretty much anyone is welcome to ask questions at the Teahouse, regardless of tenure or activity. Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 04:07, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

I need help adding entries to disappeared lists

Hi, I could really use some help adding entries to disappeared lists as I have my hands full with editing and really could use some help which I would be very thankful for. Davidgoodheart (talk) 17:34, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Please be specific. You already asked this several days ago and several people answered. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:27, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Shantavira: For starters I need Tegan Lee Lane, and George Seitz to the List of solved missing person cases and Tehuel de la Torre to the List of people who disappeared. Davidgoodheart (talk) 19:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Davidgoodheart, and welcome tothe Teahouse. You clearly have a project that is important to you, and you are asking other volunteers to choose to give some of their time to your project. But you haven't given us any reason why we might want to spend out time on that, as opposed to the other things we might choose to work on in Wikipedia. Why do you need to add those names? Why should it be important to us? ColinFine (talk) 19:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Davidgoodheart It sounds like you are taking on more work than you can comfortably handle. It's OK to slow down. There is no deadline. Also, Wikipedia is not news. Cheers. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:17, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Review

Could someone check the first page I made as the first review was declined but I made a lot of changes and the first reviewer seems to 'left' wikipedia. The page is Draft:World Backup Day and it took a lot of work. Looking forward to either feedback or acceptance. SarahBx (talk) 07:11, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

SarahBx Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have resubmitted the draft and it is pending- a reviewer will eventually look at it, please be patient. 331dot (talk) 07:42, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

There are exceptions, but typically, resubmitted drafts are reviewed by reviewed by different reviewers. David notMD (talk) 09:20, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

While waiting for a review, you could improve the last three refs, which are URLs. David notMD (talk) 09:24, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks David, made the changes right away! SarahBx (talk) 12:28, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

'Year' in 'Country' article question

Hello to anyone who reads this 🙂 I have been editing on Wikipedia for a little more than six months now and have made just over 1,000 edits, but I have had a question ever since I joined which I would like a little clarification on, so I thought I would finally ask it.

I have created and worked on multiple 'year in country' articles, in this case 2022 in Vatican City, and there are some events that I would like to add to the article such as the nation being invited by Switzerland and Ukraine to attend a "Ukraine Recovery" conference in Lugano (citation here) but, not to sound dumb, can I include this event because it did not take place 'in' the Vatican? The event directly involves the nation in question, but not taking place inside of the Vatican's borders, can and should this be included in the article? I thought I would ask, thanks! Johnson524 (Talk!) 20:44, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Johnson524: It certainly can be included. 2021 in the United States has many such entries like high-level visits to other countries and American athletes at the Summer Olympics. Whether something should be included is a judgment case. Unless there is something surprising or unusual about being invited, I think the notable event is actually participating in the conference and not the invitation to it. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Thank you for the quick and helpful response! While I am asking this question, do you also think that a major visit by the Pope could also be included? When the Pope visited Canada earlier this year, I decided not to put that in the article because it was still not taking place 'in' the Vatican. But with what you said about high-level visits to other countries, would this be acceptable to include? I find this one particularly tricky because one could argue he was representing the Holy See (Catholic faith) and not Vatican City (the country) by going on this trip. What do you think? Was I correct in not adding this, or is this event too large not to include? Thanks again! Johnson524 (Talk!) 21:44, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I would think it entirely appropriate to add, JOhnson524. ColinFine (talk) 22:21, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Me too. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:08, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine, @PrimeHunter: Thank you both for the feedback! Johnson524 (Talk!) 13:33, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

2018 St.Louis Cardinals (baseball) season, 2021 Baltimore Orioles season adjustments

Hello. Two minor fixes to those two articles:

• 2018 St. Louis Cardinals season; go to regular season, batters, even out Tommy Pham (last batter in table)
• 2021 Baltimore Orioles season, go to Oriole team leaders-pitching; In wins category, put John Means (6) under Matt Harvey in same box.

Saves category, put Cole Susler (8) under Cesar Valdez in same box. Thank you for your help today.Theairportman33531 (talk) 12:43, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@Theairportman33531 – Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! If you are asking for fixes to the articles, Wikipedia encourages you to be bold and fix the problem with your own edit! Just make sure your edit adheres to the relevant policies and guidelines. Other than that, go for it and fix the problem! — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 13:52, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

G47 Nenjiang–Dandong Expressway infobox error with the Chinese language

Hi. I'm trying to write "47", the route's number, in Template:Infobox road's "route" parameter. What this is supposed to do is autogenerate the expressway's full Chinese name, which is "嫩江–丹东高速公路" (Nenjiang-Dandong Expressway). However, since this is a new highway, the template fails to register, and instead, I receive the error message [undefined] Error: {{Lang}}: no text instead. The help page doesn't seem to be of much use, either, since that would entail having to modify the template itself, which I'm nowhere near experienced enough to do.

So what should I do? Dennis Dartman (talk) 00:27, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Nominated for deletion. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Crap. Dennis Dartman (talk) 14:50, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Article length

Hello. Can someone kindly advise on these questions? Thank you.

-Is there an official or unofficial limit on the length that an article may reach, and on the length of additions made by editors, if those additions are all documented and sourced with appropriate citations?

-Does the degree of notability of the subject come into this, e.g. -  an Andy Warhol article can be very long while that of a lesser known artist should not be too long?  What is the appropriate length, roughly speaking, if there is one? It seems that in some cases there is information that could be added on a subject that would in fact increase their level of notability to some meaningful degree. I realize this is somewhat subjective.

-If an editor is aware of good sources regarding a subject who was an artist many years ago, for example, can the editor significantly expand the size of an entry with appropriate, documented information?

-Similarly, is there an official or unofficial limit on the number of images that can be added if the subject of the article is an artist and it’s the artists’ work being added? Of course there is a standard of reasonableness and appropriateness that should be followed, but is there a specific guideline a new editor should be aware of?

-In terms of adding information on a subject, it feels somewhat more complex when the editor is or was in fact related to the subject directly. If the conflict of interest is disclosed with each edit and the added material is documented, is this sufficient to avoid violating any rules of editing on Wikipedia?

Thank you very much for any information or insights! Rwarsager (talk) 13:08, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Article length all depends on how much text one can get from a source, and by extension, how many sources there are. Articles shouldn't be too long for legibility's sake, unless they're on a very notable subject with many sources.

Asparagusus (interaction) 13:28, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Regarding the COI. Don't do it in an edit summary, do it on the article talk page. The full conflict of interest rules are at the following link (WP:COI) - X201 (talk) 14:39, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your reply. This is very helpful. Best regards! Rwarsager (talk) 15:31, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

How long does it take for a file to update on a Wikipedia page

The title is self explanatory; I want to know how long a file takes to update on a Wikipedia Page... Kxeon (talk) 12:48, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

hi @Kxeon and welcome to the teahouse! if you have updated the corresponding file, it should update probably immediately across wikipedia. however if you have viewed the page, you might wanna purge the page first to clear the cache instead of reloading, which clears the cache so the page displays everything up-to-date. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 12:57, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@Kxeon: If you have a specific page and file in mind then please link the page and name the file. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:33, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

My recent edits

Hello, Teahouse hosts…

As I have become estranged with Wikipedia (recent inactivity) I may have lost some knowledge of a few policies and guidelines.

I am sort of concerned with today's edits of mine, and I would like to ask you hosts whether or not any of my recent edits violate a policy or guideline (and cannot be exempted under WP:IAR).

So, I ask you… did my edits violate policy? — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 14:19, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Which edits do you mean specifically? Link them here and either me or another host can check them and tell you if you did anything wrong and how to do it correctly next time. Blanchey (talk) 14:33, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Basically all my edits from 1 September 2022 onwards. — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 14:36, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

So far, you have made 27 edits on Sept 1 and 2. Be more specific! David notMD (talk) 15:04, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

From quick look at your edits, there exists D.K. Pora Shopian, with no references, and Draft:D.K. Pora Shopian, which has been tagged for Speedy deletion. What are your concerns/ David notMD (talk) 15:14, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD – The question predominantly concerns whether or not my review process, tagging, and moving was correct. — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 15:29, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

An Admin acted on the SD, so that appears to have been appropriate. Same admin deleted the article. Places (villages, towns, etc.) usually warrant articles, so you (or the editor who created this originally) may want to consider asking for a restoration of the unreferenced article, so that it can be fixed with references and a lot of editing (it was a mess). David notMD (talk) 15:58, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Need a bit of help finding specific Userboxes

Hi guys,

I was wondering (and searching) if there are any Userboxes I could use for my User page that were made for users who do not like to write, and are bad at it (example: This user is bad at writing.). I haven't found any on my own.

I can fix a thing or two, but I am really not that good at writing. I am more interested in the vector graphics side of things.

Thank you. EnviousBird (talk) 16:14, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@EnviousBird There are several different user boxes to choose from. If you go to WP:UBX there is a search bar at the bottom of the page and if you search a topic. You may be able to find what you want. You can also design your own user box which you may like to know. Blanchey (talk) 16:33, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

My Draft

Hello, this is my draft that I processed tonight so I couldn't finish it, you say there are a lot of music sharing sites but since it's a musical artist... it's completely normal...

It is said that for an instrumentalist to be considered notable, the latter must make releases with a label, which is the case of ZephyrMusic (all his achievements are available on major recognized music platforms)

In addition, his YouTube channel is mentioned as OAC by YouTube and his Audiomack page mentions him as "Authenticated artist" therefore he is indeed a musical artist, who shares public content, he is recognized by major music platforms, otherwise it would not have the mentions described above, they are not distributed to anyone. It is affiliated with large distributors TuneCore and Amuse which are themselves recognized by the biggest music platforms.

If you look into his Instagram, you might get a lot of attention from notable accounts or artists. Knowing that his career started not even 2 months ago... it's a very good start

With all this I think he deserves his place on Wikipedia, of course we can't compare him to David Guetta or Ava Max but he is still an artist who has proven himself.

I worked a lot on the draft so that it was of the best possible quality (presentation, spelling, etc.), and I am aware of the eligibility criteria for an article, otherwise I would not have wasted my time. to recall this article. Elsasux (talk) 08:42, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

You could always start a draft and have it reviewed by people on the AFC comittee? Blanchey (talk) 08:45, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:ZephyrMusic

hi @Elsasux and welcome to the teahouse! the most important thing that you're missing are independent, reliable sources that focus on them. without them, your article is likely not going to pass AfC.

being an OAC doesn't matter (iirc the thing it proves is that it's an official music channel where the releases are official, so youtube doesn't duplicate topic channels and music videos. I don't think it's hard to be one, I know of a person with >500 subs that has the tag), and I don't believe being affiliated with TuneCore or Amuse counts as well (as they're distributors, not record labels), nor being noticed by other popular people, nor being skilled. regardless, you'll still have to get the reliable sources that prove the criteria first and foremost, even if they meet one of the criteria for inclusion.

best of luck with your draft and happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:13, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

WP:TOOSOON and lack of any valid references. David notMD (talk) 09:32, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello Melecie, thank you for your kind message! =) I had read that he only needs to meet one criterion as stated in your eligibility requirements for instrumentalists, he does meet "Has made at least one recording as a lead artist (quoted on the jacket) or three recordings as a member of an ensemble (cited in the booklet), produced by a recognized record label" Elsasux (talk) 17:02, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

cross

What species of wood was Jesus's nail to 175.39.149.70 (talk) 17:03, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello there, and welcome to Wikipedia. I believe that is a question that is best asked at the Reference desk, but in short, it is unknown what type of wood that the cross was made of. There are several church traditions relating to the True Cross, but these are simply traditions that might be untrue. Thus, it is unclear what the species of wood that Jesus' cross was made of. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 17:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Images and details

Hey Guys ! Im a new editor in wikipedia . I want ask is there a problem to add images for tables or not ,cause i didnt see any problem in any tables in wikipedia except for pages like Air force of countries which if you add any image its getting reverted by editor named Fox52 . He said that ,because of the formating issues ,but didnt explain . I want know what issues ? And why only there ?

Also there is problem with details section of tables sometimes . While there is no problem adding more details in some pages in others little bit information like even 1 sentence getting reverted by some editor and i dont see again to make any sense to me . Im talking to them ,but they ussualy dont reply after that ,so i wanted ask here . IR-TheFirstSoldier (talk) 19:33, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy pinging other editor mentioned. @FOX 52:. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:28, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

COVID-19 pandemic

Hey, why was Covid removed from Ongoing on the front page? I don’t care whether it gets added back or not, I’m just wondering. TrevortniDesserpedx (talk) 20:25, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi TrevortniDesserpedx. It was decided in discussions at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#(Closed) Ongoing Removal: COVID-19 and Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#(Removed) Ongoing Removal: COVID-19 pandemic. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:39, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

How To Make Your Article Become Avaliable For Review?

I Want To Make My Article Avaliable For Review But Idk How. How? SpyridisioAnnis (talk) 12:14, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Zone Of Oceania and Draft:Volleyball at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Men's qualification

hi @SpyridisioAnnis and welcome to the teahouse! for Draft:Volleyball at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Men's qualification, it has been reviewed and declined. if you'd like to improve the draft, it's best for you to help with finding reliable sources for this event, although I'm not sure if there would be many of them, seeing as the event will take place two years in the future, so it may be too soon. for Draft:Zone Of Oceania, you don't need to continue this draft, just help expand the existing article on Oceania (which is much easier than starting a new article from scratch). don't forget the reliable sources for your statements! happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 13:04, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

You Got Something Wrong About Draft:Zone Of Oceania Becuase Oceania Also Has What Is About The Economies SpyridisioAnnis (talk) 17:34, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, SpyridisioAnnis, and welcome to the Teahouse. Reading Draft:Zone Of Oceania, I'm afraid that you have misunderstood what Wikipedia is. This reads like an essay - you presenting your knowledge and thoughts about a subject. I'm afraid that Wikipedia is not interested in what you know or think (or what I know or think, or what any random person on the internet knows or thinks). Wikipedia is only interested in what has been written and published in reliable sources. Writing an article begins by finding suitable sources - enough to establish that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Then writing the article consists of summarising what the sources say - that is all. Our own knowledge and expertise comes in extracting what is important and relevant from the sources, and expressing it clearly and succinctly. Our own knowledge should appear in the article only where it coincides with something from the sources; and our own opinions or conclusions have no place in an article. ColinFine (talk) 20:12, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

SpyridisioAnnis, if it were ever appropriate for an article to say "Most people don't know most of the little island countries because they are tiny" (which is hard to imagine), then that's how the article should say it. Not as "Most People Don’t Know Most Of The Little Island Countries Because They Are Tiny" (which I quote from Draft:Zone Of Oceania, with strange capitalization intact). -- Hoary (talk) 21:57, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

misuse of incident, incidence, instance

I think this appropriately falls within the scope of copy editors, but it seems to be confusing enough that quite a few copy editors may not recognize the misuse of these terms.

For background, note that there are the words "incident", "incidence", and "instance". Each of these exists in both singular and plural forms. Generally, "incident" and "incidence" are not interchangeable, but "incident" and "instance" may be.

The biggest confusion regards "incidence" being written in place of "incidents" (as these are homonyms) and then being converted to the plural form "incidences".

Anyway, I would like a suggestion as to how best to draw the attention of the copy editors to this issue. Thank you. Fabrickator (talk) 20:27, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Fabrickator, and welcome! A good place to start would be the talk page of the Copy Editors WikiProject: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 20:41, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Fabrickator, in casual or rapid speech, the /t/ in "incidents" is indeed dropped and the word becomes a homophone of "incidence". But the two words aren't also homographs, and therefore aren't homonyms. Not that this would normally matter much; but if you wish to draw the attention of copyeditors to lexical distinctions, it's probably better to do so fastidiously. -- Hoary (talk) 22:06, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Pages for Congressional Candidates

Hi! One of our candidates running for US Congress in NY's amended District 21, Matt Castelli, does not have a Wikipedia page. I think it would be hard for his campaign staff to write one, but I am unaffiliated with his campaign in any way, but think he should have a Wikipedia page. Where would I start? And, does having won a primary and running for a congressional seat qualify a person for the levels of notability required? If so, I'd like to get started, but notice there are standard formats -- where would I find guidance on how to get started with that? Thanks for your help! Woogawoogawooga (talk) 20:00, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

The first step is research. You need to look for in-depth, non-routine, independent news/scholarly sources about them that are written by identifiable authors and subjected to rigourous fact-checking in order to demonstrate that they are notable. (While we do have alternative notability standards for politicians they do not apply to candidates no matter the level of the election, primary win or otherwise.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:11, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Woogawoogawooga. I have been editing Wikipedia for 13 years and am interested in biographies of politicians. With very rare exceptions, the vast majority of articles about unelected Congressional candidates are deleted or redirected to other articles. Please read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#Candidates for more information. Cullen328 (talk) 22:23, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hey thank you for the guidance! Sounds like any effort in this area would be premature at best. Woogawoogawooga (talk) 23:08, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

redirects and article duplication

I am trying to improve Wikipedia's entries on the history of naval architecture in Great Britain. I am coming up against a quandary relating to the School of Naval Architecture founded 1811 and disbanded in 1837 (it's important to know for background that the school was part of the Royal Naval College and the School for Naval Architecture from 1816).

My quandary is this: because of the school's history, there are essentially two possible pages where information on the school could be added and the search redirects readers to different pages depending on their search term: there is one redirect for searches for the 'School for Naval Architecture' to the 'Royal School of Naval Architecture' page and another redirect for searches for 'Royal Naval College and the School for Naval Architecture' to the 'Royal Naval Academy' page.

The redirects are making it confusing for editors to know which page to update (which could lead to unnecessary duplication of effort and information) and for readers to know where to find information. I believe there are two solutions: 1. the information on the 1811-1837 school of naval architecture should be shifted off the 'Royal School of Naval Architecture' page and onto the 'Royal Naval Academy' page and a redirect notice added to inform readers. 2. a new page for the school of naval architecture 1811-1837 should be created with redirects added to both the 'Royal School of Naval Architecture' page and the 'Royal School of Naval Architecture' page.

I am new to this and so would appreciate some learnèd advice from experienced editors on this specific case. And more broadly is there a policy on duplication? Is there a policy on redirects? what kind of advice is there on creating new pages for institutions/ individuals/ theories etc which are intertwined with information contained on other pages. Caelo2023 (talk) 01:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Changing Title of Chevron House to 30 Raffles Place

Hi there, I am would like to enquiry on how am I able to change the pages title from Chevron House Chevron House to 30 Raffles Place as the buildings owner have changes on 2020.

Newtontio (talk) 01:29, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Discuss on the talk page first. Might be a bit controversial. To move a page, read the instructions on moving a page. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 03:20, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

How to find the pageviews of an article?

Hello, I want to find the specific page views for one day of an article. I placed the {{Annual readership}} parameter on the article's talk page, but I cannot tell what the exact amount of views were on that article. How can I find the exact amount of views on an article?

Thanks! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 ⋅𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔⋅ 03:59, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 if you want a page view for the past 90 days you can go to https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=latest-20&pages=Cat%7CDog. In the Dates section you can click on options from Latest 10 days to Latest 90 days. On the Pages section you can click the X on the default Cat and Dog articles to remove them, and then add the article you are interested. A line graph will appear, showing the page views for each day within the Dates option you chose. I hope this is of help to you. Karenthewriter (talk) 04:28, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

This did help, thank you! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 ⋅𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔⋅ 04:33, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft:FandomWire

Hi guys! Im attempting to get my first sumbition accepted. It's for a website I tend to read quite often adn I was very suprised to see they didn't have one already. I just resubmitted using the tips 331dot gave me. Hopefully someone can take a look, and tell me if it's good, or what it needs? OpticalGMG (talk) 16:41, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, OpticalGMG, and welcome to the Teahouse. I started looking at the references in Draft:FandomWire. 1 and 2: not independent. 3, 5: user generated sites, and so not reliable. 4: I have no idea, but I don't see the name of a reputable publisher, so I don't think it's reliable. 6: a bare mention of FandomWire.

I'm afraid that point I gave up. These first six sources are completely useless for establishing notability. It is possible that some of the later ones would do the job, but you need to present the reviewer with some clearly useful sources, not hide them away amid dross.

A reminder: to establish notability, you require several sources, each of which satisfies all three of these criteria: 1: it's reliably published; 2: it's wholly independent of the subject of the article; and 3: it contains significant coverage of the subject. Unless you can find at least two (preferably three) sources which meet those conditions, there is no point in spending any more time on the draft.

I'm sorry if this seems harsh, but I'm afraid that that is frequently the experience of new editors who plunge straight into the extremely difficult task of creating a new article. It's like having a couple of violin lessons and then giving a public recital: if the critics bothered to notice you at all, they'd tear you to bits.

My suggestion would be to leave this aside and spend a few months making improvements to existing articles, as you learn what Wikipedia is looking for. ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

My submition keeps being denied for "not having notable references." Im confused if the person reviewings is only looking at the first three references? Could somebody check it out and help me with a more detailed response. OpticalGMG (talk) 17:02, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@OpticalGMG Did you read what ColinFine said just above, in the previous section? Among other things, he gave up after checking the first 6 references. His advice is excellent -- don't bury your good sources (if any) among a bunch of poor sources. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:49, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, OpticalGMG. I suggest that you read

this essay and follow its advice. Do not clog up a draft with references to poor quality sources. Quality is vastly more important than quantity. Cullen328 (talk) 17:10, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I will read and update, and dial back when i do OpticalGMG (talk) 17:12, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

I have updated the page, would you be be able to check it out? I made sure to use only notable refernces. OpticalGMG (talk) 17:17, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

OpticalGMG, so, what are your three best sources that devote significant coverage to the topic? I am not seeing it. Cullen328 (talk) 17:23, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry I forgot to save. 3-5 is okay, right? I updated it to 5. The sources I used are all from notable sites that also have their own Wiki's except the Youtube video which has a high number of plays and is directly based to a controversy of the site. OpticalGMG (talk) 17:33, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

^let me know OpticalGMG (talk) 18:28, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

The citations must have in depth content about the FandomWire. 4 out of 5 of your citations are trivial mentions, they write about a movie and then say 'according to FandomWire'. That is coverage of the movie, not FandomWire. Your last citation is a youtube video, which is not a reliable source. MrOllie (talk) 18:33, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

OpticalGMG, I read your five sources. Please read WP:PASSINGMENTION to find why Wikipedia doesn't find them adequate. Four were articles about superhero movies, and one made no mention of Fandom Wire, only mentioning a rumor. This isn't nearly enough material to base an article on, let alone demonstrate notability. Have any reliable sources written about the website? That's what is needed. Unfortunately, some things may be popular, but not notable. Many good journalists for the New York Times might be notable, except nobody writes about them. If Fandom Wire gets covered in depth in the news, you might have an article. --Quisqualis (talk) 18:36, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Two Wikipedia pages need linking. I am not an editor, and I would likely mess it up.

I am asking for anyone who is a regular editor (with skills) to please link two pages that need to be linked. This page: Round-tailed ground squirrel Round-tailed ground squirrel - Wikipedia needs to be linked to this page: List of mammals of Arizona List of mammals of Arizona - Wikipedia Thank you in advance. I'm not an editor, but I do donate $ regularly. 174.18.71.207 (talk) 06:48, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I've made a link to round-tailed ground squirrel on the list, which is what I assume you were asking for. small jars tc 09:02, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

English

Hi my name is Okuhle I want to say that I am new to this app I don't know how @to use this appStrikethrough 41.114.236.101 (talk) 04:53, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! if you would want to test out the editor, please check out the Sandbox, and keep the formatting cheatsheet handy for quick reference. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:37, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi 41.114.236.101 - welcome to Wikipedia. Allow me to send you to my brand-new Beta interactive guide for newcomers.User:Timtempleton/TRIAGE1 ——

How do I add info about me?

So, I saw that some Wikipedians have a "Babel Tower" or something similar, where they put what browser they use, what languages and what level do I talk them etc. I'll appreciate a response. CommanderPicard (talk) 08:39, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@CommanderPicard: {{babel}}. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 08:53, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

in addition, these babel language userboxes are just some of the userboxes you can get, which there's way too many of, you can find more (as well as other ways to arrange them) that link. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:40, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

See WP:UBX for the full list and instructions on their use. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:42, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Copyright policy

under what circumstances we can use copyright content on Wikipedia 2409:4051:2E96:C07F:0:0:28B:FF08 (talk) 09:49, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Take a look at WP:Non-free content. ––FormalDude (talk) 09:52, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Notability for a wikipedia page

Hello. I am currently planning on creating a page for a study association called FAECTOR. FAECTOR is the official study association for econometrics at Erasmus University Rotterdam. It is currently the largest econometrics association in the world. It would be beneficial for anyone interested in the subject of econometrics, regardless of whether they study at Erasmus University Rotterdam. BeillyZhu82 (talk) 10:52, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

There are several larger associations. For example, the American Economic Association has 10 times the membership. I also do not see sufficient sources available to meet WP:GNG, so I do not think you could establish notability. MrOllie (talk) 10:59, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Any sidebar template for Annual 12 months

While working on several "Romania in year xxxx" articles I see some with many events per month. Today, just for fun, I made a simple sidebar template here. There is the existing template {{BD ToC|deaths}} for births & deaths, but none that I can find for Events. Does anyone here at Teahouse know of such a 12-months template? Thought to ask here first before going to WP:VPT. JoeNMLC (talk) 17:45, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi JoeNMLC. Is there a reason for a sidebar instead of the horizontal {{BD ToC}}? I have added some optional parameters to {{TOCMonths}}. Maybe you can use that. {{TOCMonths|title=Events|top=no|primary=false}} produces:

PrimeHunter (talk) 21:05, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done - Thanks PrimeHunter for this solution. That "TOCMonths" is the best - it matches the look-style of Births & Deaths. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 21:14, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

fyi, PrimeHunter, I added first TOCMonths template [16] with wikicode {{TOCMonths|top=no|align=center}}. Dropped the "title" parameter as it was appearing in the top TOC as a second "Events" entry. It now shows default of "Contents" which is okay. JoeNMLC (talk) 21:55, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

The example code also added an "Events" entry in the TOC of this page so I have added |primary=false to the example per Template:TOC top#Usage. I also added it in 2021 in Romania. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@JoeNMLC: I have added an |events option to {{BD ToC}} so now you can just say {{BD ToC|events}} to get the same defaults and options as for {{BD ToC|births}} and {{BD ToC|deaths}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:12, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: I tested a few articles for {{BD ToC}} with |events option. It works ok for article with "short" right column at top. When I added to 2000 Events section, it clears down until bottom of "tall" right column. JoeNMLC (talk) 01:19, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@JoeNMLC: {{BD ToC}} always adds {{clear}} at the end (going back to the creation which used {{-}}). I'm not sure why. It's probably rarely an issue for births and deaths which tend to be further down. We could omit if for events or make an option but first I'm pinging the creator Davykamanzi. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Late yesterday, I found article 2021 that uses {{horizontal TOC|nonum=yes}} positioned at bottom of the lead. This may be a better solution instead of trying to make BD ToC function for "Events". At this point, I've only updated a few articles & holding off on any deployment; open to suggestions/discussion. JoeNMLC (talk) 09:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@JoeNMLC: At the moment, you can test the effect of omitting clear with {{replace|{{BD ToC|events}}|clear:both|}}. It works fine for me if there is room to the left of the right-floating content. If the screen is too narrow then it moves down. It stays nicely to the left if inline-block is also removed: {{replace|{{replace|{{BD ToC|events}}|clear:both|}}|display: inline-block|}}. The {{replace}} code is not for permanent use but just testing. Clear can also affect births and deaths. 1966#Deaths has huge whitespace before the heading. That's currently because somebody added {{clear}} but they probably did because otherwise {{BDToC|deaths}} would have made whitespace in a worse place. (The births section should have fewer or smaller images but that's another discussion). Our discussion could affect many year articles so I have posted a notification at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#Template:Births and deaths TOC. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:15, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Not sure if mods to BDToC is needed for Events. Today I made a plain div box with month section links here. As a test, I put that div box into article 2018 in Romania#Events. And it seems to work correctly, so maybe it can be a Template like "Month links" name. JoeNMLC (talk) 20:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Today I added two more versions of "Month links" here and not sure what to do next? JoeNMLC (talk) 14:34, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

"List of pedophiles"

Why is List of pedophiles protected from creation? Suh a list would be very important for Wikipedia. 2A01:36D:1201:54A:C48A:D7CA:F13E:9EAD (talk) 11:54, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

The reason was left by the admin that issued the protection- quite correctly. It would be a WP:BLP nightmare. 331dot (talk) 11:59, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

We do have categories like Category:People convicted of child pornography offenses and Category:People convicted of child sexual abuse. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:12, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

And the latter category alone contains 372 articles. Lists are redundant if they simply duplicate the categories, as well as being impossible to maintain. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:31, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

The deleted List of pedophiles was three weeks old and only listed five people. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

The log says it has been deleted and salted since 2012. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:19, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I mean it was three weeks old when it was deleted in 2012. Just saying there was nothing established or valuable there. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:36, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thanks. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:53, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse lurker here. How can you tell if a page is salted? Is that the red box at the top? I mean no challenge remotely, just genuinely interested in the more technical side of Wikepedia Equal Inequity (talk) 12:21, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Equal Inequity: Salted means protected from creation. For List of pedophiles it is the second red box. The first is the deletion. See more at Wikipedia:Protection policy#Creation protection (salting). A page name can also be looked up at Special:Log. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:42, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I think lists like this are inherently problematic. Someone's name could be on the list, and surely many people share the same name (and maybe the same DOB) So we need geographical info or something to disambiguate, but some of these people might move, to escape a stigma, or be in jail, and if they get moved to a different jail, how do we keep up with that?

And if someone's name is not on the list but should be, what does that actually mean? It's messy. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:09, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I must say I agree with those against such a list or voicing caution - people having the same name, when do we ever forgive (and I write this as someone who has experienced sexual violence), I’m generally against lynch mobs. CS37MV (talk) 15:55, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I had an article marked as an X11 while not submitted for review

Hello,

So I have a draft article here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Duchess_International_Hospital - and approached the wikipedia help channel (https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.libera.chat/wikipedia-en-help?nick=MagentaZebra90) for an initial review and this contributor +Jeske_Couriano, immediately marked it as an x11. If I wasnt sure, I would have said this person (I really think it was bot, as the conversation was quite aggresive) did this cos the article was 'Nigerian' - and I dont want to think so.

So I'm hoping someone else can provide help on how to go about this; it seems this contributor/admin is obviously just wielding their power. After I had provided feedback on how aggresive and unhelpful this person was in providing actual things to be done, I had gotten this threat - "Keep it up and I will stop this source search right now and leave you in the lurch." Nuel Olatunji (talk) 00:54, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

• Your draft is promotional. Assuming that someone tags it because it's on a Nigerian topic is a bit presumptuous. As for "how to go about this": learn how encyclopedic articles are written, and write it like that. Drmies (talk) 00:56, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

  I guess you strolled off the topic of 'help'.. helper supposedly marks it as X11 before even giving any help on what could be done? Nuel Olatunji (talk) 01:18, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

  For what is is worth, I also Bastard Helper From Hell'd his sources (none of them are/were any good). They took umbrage to my dismissing some of their sources due to their use of role bylines (assuming I did so based on them being Nigerian due to a sarcastic comment I made about role bylines) and refused to believe I was anything but a bot, even when corrected multiple times. I've also looked for sources for the inevitable article rewrite; I was only able to find one usable source (string: "duchess international hospital"). I stopped looking for sources partly because of his hostility and partly because I really wasn't finding anything else.

  @Nuel Olatunji: In the event that we're shown a draft that is blatantly promotional to the point it would need a complete rewrite to be acceptable, we're not going to waste our time or yours trying to get the text as written to work; that is just not a good use of time. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 01:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

  I see you're here.. anyone can read from your responses, where true 'hostility' lies.. I wouldn't have to dump an excerpt of our chat, it's obvious. It doesn't hurt a bit to be human you know.. it was only at the end, you said something close to being helpful when you talked about sources. I will reach out to other helpers when you're offline; very sure I'll make be able headway through this without being emotionally battered. pc (talk) 01:28, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

  I guarantee you the other helpers will just tell you the exact same things I did. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 01:32, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

  Obvious advertising isn't allowed anywhere on Wikipedia, not even as unsubmitted drafts. Such articles are routinely deleted all the time. This isn't anything personal and has nothing to do with nationality, this happens to drafts about businesses from all over the world. MrOllie (talk) 01:32, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

  The issue is the article feels like it was WP:NOTNOTABLE and WP:PROMO. For example, this is what Jéské Couriano was referring to:

  "Duchess International Hospital is a Nigerian business, to try and take care for any and all patients. The hospital is successful in treating all sorts of people. For more info, check out its official website."

  And this is what an article should look like (to the best of my attempts, anyway):

  "The Duchess International Hospital is a Nigerian hospital opened in [X year], founded by [names]. It is a hospital that also treats patients outside of Nigeria."

  This doesn't have to do with the user being Nigerian. Nigerian businesses should have articles if they are notable and aren't promotional. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 06:40, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello Nuel Olatunji. If you go to List of hospitals in Nigeria you will see that there are 14 with Wikipedia articles, so not all Nigerian hospital articles are being declined. Most of those article are rather short, but the best ones seem to be: Lagos University Teaching Hospital and Imo State University Teaching Hospital. You may want to carefully study those articles to see how they are written, and what type of references have been cited.

I see that your article draft is being considered for speedy deletion, so I suggest you go to your draft article, click on the blue box stating “Contest this speedy deletion” and politely write that you are working on rewriting the article so that it does not read like an advertisement, and that you are searching for better references.

Writing a Wikipedia article is hard work, for there is a lot to learn, and it is best to first spend at least several months editing articles to gain experience before attempting a new article. I hope that you are able to improve your draft article. I have no knowledge about writing about a hospital, so I’m not able to help you with specific ways to change what you have written. Best wishes on improving your draft article. Karenthewriter (talk) 05:04, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Nual, I posted something similar earlier and also got the sort of hostile responses evident on the link to you - but for Karenthewriter who I think was very helpful, however, I could not see, “Contest this speedy deletion” - on any blue box - I have written my comments to the person who suggested the speedy deletion. There does seem to be an arrogant sub-strata of nasties out here. Here’s to the Karens :)

And my submission is about someone I don’t know - I am a journalist and author in semi-retirement who is trying to improve posts about Africans: my home continent. I would be grateful if someone in the Wikipedia hierarchy considers what appears to be a problem. I now fear that disagreeing with the powers that be will carry its own penalty - let us see. CS37MV (talk) 16:03, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Carroll O'Connor (Archie Bunker)

He was born in the Bronx not in Manhattan. That's an error on your page. 47.184.220.56 (talk) 14:16, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

If you have a reliable source for that assertion, you can make an WP:Edit request at Talk:Carroll O'Connor. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I added to Talk page that the ref citing Manhattan birth is an interview posted at Youtube, no longer available. So either way, a ref needed. Ref #4 just states born in New York City. David notMD (talk) 16:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata problem with diagrams.net article

Hi, I have been trying for 30 minutes to fix the diagrams.net article where it has Wikidata, which is for some reason inserting dozens and dozens of dates.

I have never worked with Wikidata before and cannot figure it out unfortunately, even after trying to watch some YouTube videos on it.

I tried to use the Adobe Photoshop article’s use of Wikidata as a baseline, but even when I copy-paste the correct Wikidata P’s from that article, there is still a syntax error.

Any help would be greatly appreciated, I sincerely do not have the slightest clue of what to do. Thank you again. Stephenamills (talk) 21:28, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Stephenamills. I have attempted to fix it, but I'm not sure whether what I've done is right or not. The {{wikidata|qualifier|mdy|P348|P577}} was instructing it to grab all the release date (P577) properties, which it was doing. I tried adding |single and that produced just one date, but it was the oldest, which is no use. I have tried |preferred instead - it would make sense if the latest date were the preferred one, but I don't know how "preferred" is determined. It is now correctly producing no date - correctly, because the last three releases in the Wikidata item have no dates stored. Perhaps you could add the date of the last release to the Wikidata item, and see if that gets reflected in the infobox. ColinFine (talk) 22:41, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much ColinFine that helped so much! I added the most recent release versions Wikidata, but they are not getting reflected in the infobox, it’s selecting the preferred one. Stephenamills (talk) 23:50, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Stephenamills and ColinFine: Wikidata items about software should always have their latest version statement marked as preferred and refined with a date qualifier. The preferred rank makes it much simpler and faster for data consumers to fetch the latest version. Dexxor (talk) 13:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying that, Dexxor. I wondered whether that was the way to do it, but thought there might be a different method tailored to properties which are regularly superseded by new values (since anybody adding a new release will need to demote it as well as preferring the new one). I see you have marked the release as Preferred, and the diagrams.net is showing it. Stephenamills. ColinFine (talk) 17:00, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Appropriate cleanup tags?

While trying to help with the backlog of articles needing copyediting, I found Depopulation of Havaru Thinadhoo. I copyedited a little, my edit was reverted, which I understand, the user who reverted my edit copyedited more, and then removed the tag "needs copyedit." The article is better now, but it's still... not a good article? Specifically, there are way too many subheadings (this was a problem long before I saw the article). Given that I'm not an expert on the clearly sensitive topic, I'm hesitant to make these changes myself, so I'd like to tag it somehow so that others with more expertise in either the subject or Wikipedia editing can fix it. However, I don't understand the tag system (I've already attempted to research it, and found myself in hopelessly over my head, although if there's a beginner-friendly guide, I would love to know) so I don't know what tag to use. I don't want to get in an unnecessary disagreement with the other editor by just putting back the same "needs copyedit" tag. I don't even know if that would be the relevant tag anymore! Please advise.

A Panther Incensed (talk) 21:08, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I added the tag back. I may look into the article myself later. Liliana ^(UwU) 21:10, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Newbie feeling bitten over at Repressed memory

I have been trying to improve the page Repressed memory which I believe, based on pretty extensive sourcing at this point, misrepresents the expert consensus on the issue, in part by conflating the concepts of repressed memories/dissociative amnesia more generally with the specific issue of (likely false) memories recovered via recovered-memory therapy. In fact, I was kind of shocked to be told at one point that the page is actually supposed to be about only those memories recovered via fringe therapies. I pointed out that the page doesn't read that way to me, and furthermore that the sources cited, which I have at this point gone over pretty extensively, do not say that either. I also suggested that if that was indeed the intended meaning it might help to remove the content that seemed to be about repressed memories/dissociative amnesia more generally and merge the rest into recovered-memory therapy so as to make that meaning clearer.

A few things I want to point out: First, I'm a noob and I completely admit to making some faux pas. I posted a massive wall of text that my academe-poisoned brain thought would be helpful (abstracts! entire passages quoted!) and clearly had the opposite effect. It's not my best skill, but I am genuinely trying to be more concise. I also think I let my frustration get the best of me, particularly as I began to feel dismissed and condescended to, and at few points was probably... well to be honest a bit b*tchy. Also working on that too .

Finally, and I kind of hate to do this, I swear I'm not trying to pull some credentialism here, but... well, I do have expertise in this area. I am a graduate student in cultural anthropology with a focus on philosophy of science, psychiatry and specifically the analysis of disputes and controversies in psychiatry. I bring this up for two reasons: (1) I may be totally off here, but I've gotten the feeling that the editors active on the page are in the habit of assuming any and all criticism could only possibly be coming from quacks who support fringe therapies. Maybe that usually is the case, I don't know. But that is not my argument and I have relied heavily on peer-review secondary sources. (2) Neither am I trying to do original research. The extensive review of the research literature I've done for this over the past week has convinced me to incorporate it into my thesis. I don't mean this to pull credentialism but rather to say that I have a thesis to do my own original research and synthesis in and a committee of lovely advisors I get to subject to that research. I do not need and am not trying to use Wikipedia as a platform for that research. I am trying to bring it's coverage of these issues into line with expert consensus.

Ugh. I've gotten hit with WP:WALL enough recently that I'm terrified this is too long. I just don't know how else to go over the relevant context. Apologies if I've screwed it up again.

Thanks for any help,

Donna's Cyborg (talk) 15:44, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Donna's Cyborg You short edit to Repressed memory, was reverted, with a suggestion to start a discussion at Talk, where you posted a MASSIVE amount of content (and also tagged the article with a POV template). What with your Talk postings and replies from several editors, it's come to the addition of more than 120,000 bytes! For the love of all things Wikipedian, I suggest starting a new Talk discussion, be concise, and if more than one editor disagrees with you, accept that as consensus, abandon your original edit and remore the POV tag. David notMD (talk) 16:28, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Donna's Cyborg, you must learn to write much more concisely if you are to have any hope of persuading people instead of exasperating them. Learn to make your point with one tenth of the words. Cullen328 (talk) 16:44, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I'll do my best! Like I said, I understand that original wall of text was not helpful. Is it kosher to simply delete it at this point? Donna's Cyborg (talk) 16:54, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Understood! Like I said, trying to work on being more concise. I thought I was being helpful by providing as much info as possible. My concern at this point is that the well has been poisoned and a new, more concise Talk discussion won't get any meaningful engagement. However annoying my verbosity is, I've also really struggled to get responses to the actual critiques I've made, rather than complaints about the verbosity. Donna's Cyborg (talk) 16:58, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Okay, this may also be a bit of a long post.

(1) I'll start with the practical side. Yes, you posted too much. If your concern is that the term Repressed memory isn't used exclusively for the discredited concept, then what you should have done is found two or three good secondary sources using exactly those words in the context you wished to add. You could then add this. If it gets reverted on the grounds that the article is exclusively about the discredited theory, then you can ask the reverting editor where they think your information should have gone? The big question in my mind is whether it matters if all the "good" information about repressed memory is in dissociative amnesia and all the "bad" is in Repressed memory. Repressed memory refers heavily to dissociative amnesia so a reader who knows the "bad" will be made aware of the "good".

(2) On a practical level, you've hit on a really edgy, contentious area for editing, which is always going to be stressful.

(3) And also on a practical level, I'd suggest walking away and editing somewhere else instead. Very early in my Wikipedia career, I blundered into an article on a subject about which I know a fair bit (I teach it) where I was politely reverted by a very rigid editor with a borderline conflict of interest. I still believe I was right, and I could cite any number of sources to support my point of view. But while finding them, I realised that the most cursory of Google searches would take a reader to all the stuff I wanted them to find, and that no one in their right mind would use Wikipedia to learn statistical techniques. I'd suggest go off and edit other things for a bit (you're right, the well is now a bit poisoned), and if you still feel that Repressed memory is important enough to need sorting out, come back quietly in a month or two's time when you've got more experienced in handling Wikipedia discussions, and try again. But keep it short and very well referenced; and don't be afraid to ask the disagreeing editor constructive questions about what can be done - it helps to refocus them on improvement rather than knee-jerk reversion. I do understand that this sort of situation can feel awful. Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 17:01, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! I think this is the most helpful response I've gotten! I'm not quite sure I understand point (1), if you don't mind rephrasing? If you're busy don't worry, I think you might be right that I'm just going to have to work on other edits for the time being, frustrating as that is. My only concern is that at this point most of my interest and expertise is on issues connected to this one. I'd like to think I've learned my lesson re: conciseness, or at least am getting better, but I worry I'll just run into more problems if part of the issue is folks being highly suspicion of edits on these pages in general, if that makes sense? Donna's Cyborg (talk) 17:13, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@Donna's Cyborg: what I meant in (1) was firstly to ask whether your main concern about the article Repressed memory is that the article is talking only about the largely-discredited idea of a psychiatrist being able to draw out memories of sexual abuse etc. that are supposed to have hidden themselves, but you believe the term is also used for repressed memories that are more in line with the article Psychogenic amnesia, which is not about discredited ideas. So you want to remove the blanket definition of Repressed memory as a discredited idea, and feel the article isn't neutral? If this is your concern, read on; otherwise correct me. To deal with this concern, what you need are reliable secondary sources saying things like "Psychogenic amnesia is characterised by repressed memories", or "When discussing patients suffering from psychogenic amnesia, X has referred to those things the patient cannot remember as repressed memory". I.e. you want secondary sources that directly say that the exact term "Repressed memory" is associated with a theory now regarded by mainstream psychologists as credible. What you don't want are reliable secondary sources saying things like "It has been suggested that memories in those suffering from psychogenic amnesia are somehow repressed by psychological trauma" because in this case although the words "memories" and "repressed" are both there, they're used separately, in the context of normal English, and it would require a leap of imagination on the reader's part to create the term "repressed memories" from them. If you've only got the second sort of reference, then you'll get accused of synthesising concepts and going beyond the sources. My point was that if you have sources that definitely associate the exact words repressed memory/ies with something that's not discredited, then you can put it in the article on exactly that subject. Removing the identification of repressed memories as largely-discredited is the sort of thing that will create a knee-jerk revert, so it'd be better to add the cited positive stuff first, and discuss on the talk-page, but keeping it short. Basically all it needed was "X uses exactly this term in the following source, referring to a concept that is mainstream and believed. I think we should include this information in the current article." If someone disagrees, you can then ask them, if this information can't go in the current article, where can it go, and is it sensible to put in some sort of hat-note or see-also to direct the reader to the correct article. I think an approach like that is less likely to create friction. But it's a tricky one. Good luck, anyway! Elemimele (talk) 23:23, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Adding sections and sub-sections

Hello, I am making edits on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwatch and the page has sections for the reports that they publish. Although CCPI report has a page on it’s own, it has a small section also on Germanwatch page. I was thinking to add similar sections to Henley and Partners page adding short information about each report with citations. I was thinking of dividing the Publication and Conferences section into three parts. Part 1 for Publications. In this section, I was thinking to add multiple subsections to expand on the reports and surveys similar to the Germanwatch page. Part 2 for Conferences. In this section, include the one conference that they conduct. Part 3 for CSR. In this section, to mention the awards that the company gives out. My question is 1. Is there a limit on how much we should elaborate about the reports? I was thinking of minimally one line about the reports along with their citations. 2. For the awards, is CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) the right name to the section? If I name the section as Awards, that would be misleading, so CSR seemed correct to me. ANLgrad (talk) 17:28, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ANLgrad. It mostly comes down to sources. Whether it is a separate article or a section in another article, the text should say only what the reliable independent sources say about the report (and little or nothing drawn from what the publishers or writers say about it). If that gives you enough material ofr a separate article, then it could be split into a separate article; if it gives you only a paragraph or two, probably not.

The same for the awards: what independent coverage has there been of the awards (ignoring anything written or published by the people who give out the awards or choose the winners)?

As always, there is some judgment involved. ColinFine (talk) 18:42, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello @ColinFine, that is so informative. Yes, I am only using text from reliable and independent sources. The only thing I change is write the text in my own words. Thank you for your valuable advise. Regarding awards, I still have a doubt, if you can please help me in understanding. For this line in the page "The firm created and gives out the annual Global Citizen Award, which consists of a monetary prize, part of which is donated to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees." it is under the Publication and Conference section. So I was thinking to create a new section called CSR or Awards and put this information under that section. I think CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) will be more apt than Awards since Awards can be misleading as this award is not won by this company, but it is given out by this company. Can you please advise which is a better title to use? Thank you @ColinFine for your help. ANLgrad (talk) 03:37, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Before worrying about what title to use, ANLgrad, I would suggest finding some sources about the award, and about Henley's part in it. A single article about a winner is inadequate to establish that the award is even worth mentioning. And since the article does not even mention Henley, it singularly {{failed verification}}. ColinFine (talk) 16:11, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Sure @ColinFine. I will try finding more third party sources and add it as I do. I also added supporting citations on this page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwatch Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 04:06, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

How to reach IP user(s) who use shared IP addresses

Hello! I have reverted edits made by an IP user because they were a bit destructive. I've assumed good faith and written on their talk page to explain why I reverted the edits. I also invited the user to discuss what they wanted to accomplish before making other edits, because I felt that they were not well aware of the main English Wikipedia guidelines.

Now, I see the edits coming from two different IP addresses and my question is: if this editor uses a shared IP address, will they even notice that I tried to reach them through the talk page of one of the used IPs? Will they receive some notification if they changed their IP address? Thank you! ► LowLevel73 ^(talk) 09:42, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I believe you're trying to talk about dynamic IP adresses, shared IP adresses refers to IP adresses with multiple concurrrent users (in extrreme situations, an entire building). That being said, generally IP editors are notified if someone edits whatever IP user talkpage belongs to their current IP adress (unless they're on mobile), however, the MediaWiki software does not send out any notifications to IP editors that their IP adress has changed, nor that someone edited a previous's IP adress'es user talk page. Talking to IP users with dynamic IP adresses can be difficult, although if the edits are disruptive a rangeblock can be applied. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:15, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, Victor. Yes, I meant dynamic IP addresses, not shared IP addresses. ► LowLevel73 ^(talk) 14:46, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

If an IP is shared then someone else may get the notification. If it's dynamic, then no one might get the notification. Looking at these IPs, I'd guess they're going to change at least every day, maybe hourly. We do have a page about IP hoppers. A combination of edit summaries and (article) talk page discussion is often the best bet. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:36, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions! Since talk pages of IP users seem to me a bit unreliable, I think that I'll start using edit summaries to invite IP users to discuss on the article talk page. ► LowLevel73 ^(talk) 14:50, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I have a dynamic IP address for my home internet, but it only changes about once every 2 months. Your mileage may vary. I need to get an account... 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:09, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Help with Draft:Onn.

hi, i'm having trouble with making the references work right on my page i am making, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Onn. Apple788 (talk) 16:46, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Apple788. Please read Referencing for beginners. You cannot use Walmart's website to establish notability because it is not independent of its own house brand. Cullen328 (talk) 17:24, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Onn..   Maproom (talk) 17:34, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Apple788, and welcome to the Teahouse. Remember 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) 17:50, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok sorry I will fix that. Sorry Apple788 (talk) 18:27, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Here's a tip - you can also check this out: Wikipedia:Reliable sources

I get that you're new, but hey, I wonder if you're ready for some note-taking - gotta keep track of what sites Wikipedia does allow. Hope this helps. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 07:26, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Page creation blockage consensus

Take a look at the following links:
White privilege
Black privilege
They sound very similar, yet one of them is very extensive and the other one has been blocked from being created again. What is the reasoning behind this? What is the current consensus? I cannot find anything regarding this except some small debate about this from 8.5 years ago where the main argument for deletion was probably lack of google search results but this is not the case anymore, and that debate did not cover creation protection. I am not particularly interested with topics covered/to be covered in those articles, just want to improve my understanding how Wikipedia works. Ki999 (talk) 21:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Strange topic to discuss - not sure if black privilege even exists, considering how black people for years have tried to form solidarity and safe spaces from racism and antiblackness. Also, blocked as per WP:NOTHERE. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 15:36, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I am with the original poster, I am South African and trying, in my spare time, to improve postings about those from Africa and getting intense blowback from Wikipedia. One of whom deleted my first attempt at expanding on a poor entry about a black individual despite me being very careful to note endless citations (my background is as an award-winning author, journalist and documentary film maker, so I am accustomed to ethical, bland writing). I teach and am aware of suggestions never to use Wikipedia as a source, even though I teach my students how to do this, so I am interested in improving Wikipedia content because it is a valuable resource.

I queried the deletion and got a nasty response.

I again did the same page, probably missed bits I did the first time because I did not make a print out first time round, and again got a really nasty post suggesting instant deletion. I based the new version on two versions of white veterans in the same industry as this person - except those white famous European veterans have no philanthropic backgrounds, which I’ve mentioned in the African veteran. I’ve protested the suggestion for instant deletion and asked for guidance on proving I have authorization for the pic - no response.

So the issue isn’t just about black vs white, it is also about how those of us from the under-developed world are treated. CS37MV (talk) 15:52, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@CS37MV Heya, newbie. Gotta say, you explained a response to this topic rather well. Even if you are a professional, people gotta learn, learn, learn.

Also... welcome to the Teahouse! But that's another topic we can discuss. This is the last reply I'm saying on this thread, anyways. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 07:31, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

this message pops up when i go it publish my own association please fix this issue

This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: new user adding external links Sadanand Bhimappa Terdal (talk) 11:15, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: Antispam

Sadanand Bhimappa Terdal Yes, we don't want you spamming about your organization. I will shortly post information on your user page about this. 331dot (talk) 11:18, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Life Orientation

advantages and disadvantages of arrive alive 41.115.113.210 (talk) 12:44, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

If you have a question about editing or using Wikipedia, please ask it. -- Hoary (talk) 12:55, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Re: Need help with removing YouTube citations in Pakdam Pakdai's edit history

So, to specify: I told someone to add citations to characters I don't recall in the show, and they added YouTube links to episodes they first appeared in. I do know the article was edited with these citations, but I wonder how these can be removed in the edit history.

I'm not sure about removing revisions in general because those are just YouTube links in citations, which I can just remove and replace with a note, and you can edit previous revisions. Hope this makes sense, thanks! WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 07:24, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

What you're describing is revision deletion. This is a feature only accessible to administrators, and only used in very serious cases. small jars tc 10:43, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

So, do I just edit out links in citations? In multiple revisions, too. Just wondering. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 15:21, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@SmallJarsWithGreenLabels I do know notes exist, but I'm asking this question again because it was archived before. I don't know if it's even a regular thing to do, with replacing potentially-copyright-infringing citations in multiple revisions. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 15:51, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Capital punishment in Ethiopia

Please move Draft:Capital punishment in Ethiopia to Capital punishment in Ethiopia. Technically unable to move due to redirect. Also, admins refused to move at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. The Supermind (talk) 07:04, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Please make sure your article is neutral first, add additional citations, and then the article can be moved. Otherwise, it'll stay as a draft due to its current quality. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 07:21, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@The Supermind: if you wish to sumbit your draft, add {{subst:sumbit}} to the top of the page. however, in it's current state, it is not very neutral in it's prose and is likely to be declined. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 07:38, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello The Supermind... I agree with WannurSyafiqah74. Furthermore, it is simply a draft article. Therefore it has to be submitted in the AfC section and will only be approved if it passes some "tests" such as WP:Notability. Thanks and happy editing... Volten001 ^☎ 07:32, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@WannurSyafiqah74: I improved it previously. Now, the article doesn't look like WP:OR or POV and all contents are depend on sources I added. Please if you don't believe, review by yourself, not AfC to wait long time. The Supermind (talk) 07:44, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

As you have been advised, the article is not written in a neutral tone so it cannot be accepted. It is also full of repetitions and grammatical errors. There is no WP:Deadline so use the time to improve it. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:32, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree. If you want your article submitted, don't pressure yourself into submitting it: basically, check out WP:NEUTRAL and let some sort of grammar checking extension do the job for you. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 15:20, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

When the editors who work on AFC submissions thinks a submission is viable, they can do the move and replace the redirect. No need for you to do anything special. But if AFC (and now others here also) identify specific problems that make the article non-viable, getting it moved to the real article place prematurely is pointless...someone will just move it back to draft, or even push to get it deleted outright. DMacks (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Muhammad Dakhlalla and Jaelyn Young

Id like to change the description of either Muhammad Dakhlalla to "terrorist" or Jaelyn Young to the same description as Muhammad Dakhlalla. They were both charged and found guilty of the same crime yet, Ms Young is the ONLY one described as a TERRORIST. Erika19742003 (talk) 16:03, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

According to one of the sources cited in the article, "Prosecutors Wednesday said they agreed Dakhlalla was less at fault and deserved a lighter sentence than Young, who prosecutors have said prodded Dakhklalla toward joining ISIS and planned the pair’s attempt to travel to Turkey"[17] This seems a pretty strong indication that the court did not consider them to be equally reprehensible. And you are edit-warring to describe him as a terrorist, even though not one of the sources cited does so. According to Wikipedia's Manual of Style, "Value-laden labels – such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist, sexist, terrorist, or freedom fighter, or a sexual practice a perversion – may express contentious opinion and are best avoided unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution." If you want to add such a description, you will need to find and cite several reliable sources which do so, and to attribute the description to them. RolandR (talk) 17:20, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

A question about breathing

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

---

Hi everyone. I joined Wikipedia so I could better find an answer to a question that has been on my mind since June 2020. My understanding of how breathing and speaking works is that a person cannot say “I can’t breathe” unless they have a patent airway. Is this the case, or am I missing something? Gfddn (talk) 00:15, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Gfddn Start with deaths while in police restraint, covered in I can't breathe. Compromising someone's ability to inhale and exhale adequately does not mean the airway has to be completely blocked. In the infamous Burke and Hare murders, Burke lay across the chest of the people they murdered. Many of the cases listed by the NY Times I can't breathe involved facedown compression restraints, with officers sitting or kneeling on a person's back. David notMD (talk) 02:08, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps having three times the lethal amount of fentanyl in one’s system would make it hard to breathe? Gfddn (talk) 03:29, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

It probably would, if that had been the case, which it wasn't.-- Sumanuil. 05:54, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Gfddn Are you asking about one case in particular or the general situation? Clearly, many people have died if handcuffed and face down restrained without any drugs or alcohol in their system, or pre-existing medical condition. David notMD (talk) 10:24, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

References

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

How would you evaluate this admin's idiom

Good day! In kk-wiki one admin used in this discussion (38) very straange phrase: Еріккен сарт енегін уқалайды. Do you find it correct to use in any possible dialogue? Ерден Карсыбеков (talk) 18:02, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi! This is the English Wikipedia Teahouse. We are not equipped to handle matters from other wikis. casualdejekyll 18:15, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Just for example, if the next phrase in our dialogue would be: It's because lazy sarts usually massage their groin; how would you evaluate such answer? --Ерден Карсыбеков (talk) 18:34, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

We are not going to get involved in your block and beef with another admin on another project. PICKLEDICAE🥒 18:36, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Do you have a question about editing the English Wikipedia? I'm sorry that I cannot be of help, but this is out of scope for the Teahouse. casualdejekyll 18:36, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Ерден Карсыбеков. Each language version of Wikipedia is run separately. Here at the Teahouse, our job is to assist with editing the English Wikipedia. We lack knowledge about how the other versions operate. Cullen328 (talk) 18:39, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oh, now I see, have a good tea, or day, au revoir. --Ерден Карсыбеков (talk) 18:44, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Feedback on article about DJ/musician

Hi everyone, I've been working on a Draft article about the House music DJ/Producer L'Etranger and wondered if someone would mind giving me some feedback on my current draft please? Draft:L'Étranger (DJ) Djjdwetherspoon (talk) 14:48, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Djjdwetherspoon, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm you've done what many editors do who try to create an article before they have learnt enough about how Wikipedia works. You've got 40 references, most of which are useless for establishing that L'Etranger meets Wikipedia's criteria for notabililty - which means that a reviewer will have to hunt through these seeing if there are any usable references - ones that are reliably published, independent of L'Etranger, and containing significant coverage of him.

Well done for finding all the sources in archive.org, and for formatting your citations rather than just giving URLs; but unfortunately you've cited them all as published by archive.org, which means that they omit two of the most important parts of any citation: the publisher and the publication date. (See Template:cite web#Using "archive-url" and "archive-date" (and optionally "url-status") for webpages that have been archived for how to handle that). Having said that, I suspect that the majority of these are not reliable sources anyway, so it may not be worth correcting the citation.

My guess is that the best way to proceed is for you to start from the beginning: start by finding these independent sources. 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. If you can't find these, then you'll know that there is no point in spending any more time on this project.

If you have found suitable sources, then you can start writing an article based on what these sources say - not on what you know or what L'Etranger says. ColinFine (talk) 17:44, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice @ColinFine you've been very helpful indeed. Djjdwetherspoon (talk) 19:19, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Need opinions about a few edits

Hi! I have a few edits that need reviewing, and would appreciate a few opinions on whether to post them or not as soon as possible. Topics: Awards / Career content. RWikiED20 (talk) 19:45, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@RWikiED20 welcome to tea house. Communication primarily happens over Wikipedia, so please point to specific content you have created. You can use WP:DRAFT pages for test/in progress edits. Unless you have specific doubts about copyright. But without more information, I cannot tell you whether to post them or not, and that's not the purpose of Teahouse. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:53, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for replying.

I was hoping to get a second opinion about a few of my edits because I wasn't sure whether they conform to Wikipedia's policies.

I thought I shouldn't post in detail and only stated the topics (award and career content) until I found someone willing to review them. Should I post them? RWikiED20 (talk) 20:15, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, RWikiED20. Unspecific questions here are hardly ever useful. Is this about Hyomin? You added material, Nkon21 reverted, and you opened a discussion on Talk:Hyomin: that was exactly the right way to proceed, according to WP:BRD (except that what looks like your attempt to ping Nkon21 was not successful).

However, you then reverted their reversion, which goes against the procedure. Please give them a chance to reply (now I've pinged them here), and see if the two of you can reach consensus. ColinFine (talk) 20:29, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I only reverted the Nkon21 edit once because I didn't think there was a convincing reason for deletion in the first place. I'm not willing to revert it again if Nkon21 reverted mine. However, my questions were not just about Hyomin's page but others. Nkon21 and I had multiple discussions on talk pages but we rarely came to an agreement which is why I thought of taking my edits here to correct any mistakes of mine. It's also worth mentioning that I had disagreements with other users before but we did reach a consensus in the end whether the other user accepted my edits or I was eventually convinced and removed my own edits with no further discussion.

As for the "controversial" content, these are my arguments:

Vlive awards

• A legit service: Vlive is a streaming service made by Naver Corporation that hands outs different every year.
• A notable award: Vlive is one of the biggest Asian streaming services that helped spread the Hallyu wave globally since 2015. (see main article)
• Reliable secondary source: I originally provided a link to Vlive itself for the awards, since a user suggested adding a secondary independent source, I added one confirming Hyomin won all four awards (even has photo proof on it). The sources I provided are included in WP KR/Reliable sources [18]

China Powerstar Awards

• Secondary source: Adding to the primary/website, I provided an independent local source as a reference for the nominations and It is a newspaper and not a blog. [19]
• An additional reliable source: I also provided another source for the awards which is QQ China's official website, an independent news site of Tencent QQ (The largest instant messaging and steaming service in mainland China). [20]
• An additional foreign/reliable source: To support my claims, I even added a Korean source (WP KR/Reliable sources approved website). [21]
• A notable award: In all sources I provided, the award and the research company involved were taken as a metric for popularity in China proving the award's worth.

• I know this is too long and specific but would really appreciate it if my edits are convincing/legit.
• I still have others different sources to back up my claims.

unrelated: is it normal that I never get a notification of the reply I got? RWikiED20 (talk) 21:24, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello again, RWikiED20. I'm not going to address your questions: that's not what the Teahouse is for. If you can't reach consensus with other editors, dispute resolution tells you what steps to take. Alternatively, you might find a suitable WikiProject to ask: maybe WP:WikiProject Musicians.

As for notifications: you don't get automatic notifications except when people post on your own user talk page. But it is customary to ping other editors involved, and then tehy will get a notification. ColinFine (talk) 21:51, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I see...Thank you! RWikiED20 (talk) 22:01, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Help with references?

HI, I am helping a bunch of newbie writers to improve the wikipedia articles for electronic literature, and I wanted to list the notable works as discussed in N. Katherine Hayles work, Electronic Literature, from the University of Notre Dam Press. But I have royally screwed it up so far. Can anyone help me undo my mess? How should I be citing the same work over and over again? Should I be citing a different page each time? I want to note where each description is found. Help? List of electronic literature authors, critics, and works. I tried the citation builder, but not sure it worked well? Thanks LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 23:32, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I noticed you have a bunch of {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help) errors. Removing the 13: seemed to solve it, although I'll leave it to someone else to decide if I did this correctly.

Also, you have a cite web that is missing a title. I added a title. Now all of the cite errors are gone. Weeklyd3 (talk) 23:36, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Am I in an edit war?

At Perejil Island, I reverted an edit that was questionable but forgot to add a msg to the editor's talk page. Editor revised again. I reverted again and then added a message to the user talk page. They asked for more info, but before I could reply, they revised again, and that's where it stands in the article. I then wrote an extended reply at Talk:Perejil Island, with a peace offering of sorts?

I'm not sure if I'm doing any of this right. I was literally "island hopping" and admittedly made some mistakes when first reverting, not realizing that this island was so touchy, not leaving a msg, etc.

• Q 1 = Am I doing this right? What can I do better?
• Q2 = What exactly is supposed to happen next?
• Q3 = Is there a way to like "bat signal" the countervandalism unit or some other group of editors to just flag potential vandalism? (I see vandalism but would rather not be involved in discussions like the one I'm in at all right now, when I'm barely functioning w the interface and wikitext, plus all the policies wow.)

Thanks, Teahouse! Appreciate y'all. – LumonRedacts 01:39, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, LumonRedacts, although I agree with you on the content issue, I think that you are probably on the brink of a slow motion edit war. So, I recommend emphasizing discussion of the issues at Talk:Perejil Island and pursuing Dispute resolution. There are several forms available. Cullen328 (talk) 03:43, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi @LumonRedacts, thanks for posting a question at the teahouse. I think you've done a lot of things correctly while handling the situation. You tried to initiate a discussion after reverting and provided quite a detailed account on why you reverted on the talk page of the article (although you should've done so after first reverting, not when your second revert has been reverted). However, I don't quite agree with the assessment (see User talk:Mvtqui) that the edits are vandalism. I believe it is more of a WP:NPOV issue and not trying to deliberately obstruct the project's purpose. Regarding Q2, discussion, like Cullen suggested, is supposed to happen next, although the editor seems unresponsive... I don't think there is some sort of "bat signal" for counter vandalism, although you can always post a question here. Also I've noticed you've been trying to ping yourself in your sandbox, I'm personally not sure if pinging yourself is possible, though WP:MENTION provides quite good guidance on pinging other people. Justiyaya 03:58, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

LumonRedacts, I agree with Justiyaya that those edits were not vandalism, which has a very specific and narrow definition on Wikipedia, namely, edits with the specific intent of damaging the encyclopedia. The other editor appears likely to be a Spanish nationalist or patriot who truly believes that this little island belongs to Spain and not Morocco. So, please be very careful about the use of the word "vandalism". Cullen328 (talk) 04:13, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you both @Justiyaya and @Cullen328 (and yes, I'm embarrassed to say that I don't know if those pings work...). I appreciate your insights here (and intervention too, even if it means I got a warning--I get it!). I definitely see more clearly the nuance here re vandalism, NPOV, and maybe "disruptive" after all this. Ugh. Not thrilled about this last round of discourse there, but I'll try to disengage as nicely as I can, I guess? Thanks! — LumonRedacts 03:22, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

my article was declined. I give up what should I do!

@Babydollmissy My Article XTRA Channels was declined I give up! What should I do?! I give up! Not an article Worthy of Wikipedia either! UGH! I Gonna Give up! 1bridgemeaty (talk) 14:35, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@1bridgemeaty You're talking about this? There's no content there? Have you forgotten to add some of the content you meant to add? Alyo (chat·edits) 14:38, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm talking about this they deemed it as "Not An Article Worthy of Encyclopedia" Either! 1bridgemeaty (talk) 15:07, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I get that Wikipedia can be frustrating, with situations like this. Please stay calm, make sure to read Wikipedia's essays (as my tip) and rewrite your article to what best fits the site. Resubmit your draft article if you feel as if you're satisfied. I hope this helps! WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 15:24, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I cannot believe this! I hate it when they do this! I Feel Like Giving Up! What Should I Do? 1bridgemeaty (talk) 14:44, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@1bridgemeaty Write the article, then resubmit it. Alyo (chat·edits) 14:46, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

1bridgemeaty, despite your numerous expressions of frustration and dissatisfaction expressed all over the place, the simple fact is that your attempt to write an encyclopedia article was nowhere near close to being acceptable. You need to read and study and read and study Your first article, and any further efforts need to be fully compliant with thise standards. Cullen328 (talk) 04:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

User modules

Are users allowed to have their own Lua modules for their own userpages? Basically, is something like Module:A diehard editor/Something allowed or will it be speedily deleted?

Is there a way for users to have their own Lua modules in userspace like User:A diehard editor/something.lua? A diehard editor (talk | edits) 09:10, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

There are two locations you can use which would match with what others have done. Module:Sandbox/A diehard editor/Something or Module:User:A diehard editor/Something -- WOSlinker (talk) 10:32, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Film Review Info

Recently I created a page[22]. Altogether 5 sources have been added to the page. Four out of 5 are reviews. Two of those reviews are such that appear to be similar information. One of them has been asked to remove the source. And the page has been rejected for review.

• You delete or keep this page. I have no objection.
• In two different source why will one source have to be delete after information have similarity
• When creating page of any film how many soures should there be and how many reviews should there be

PravinGanechari (talk) 09:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, PravinGanechari. Draft:Parichaya has been declined, not rejected. That means that the reviewer thinks that it is possible the draft could be worked on to make it acceptable.

The purpose of a source is to allow a reader to verify the information; and to show that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Often a source is cited more than once in the same article, because it contains a variety of information. But citing two different reviews which are actually the same piece of writing serves no purpose, and is just confusing. It also makes it look as if somebody has added another citation just to get the numbers up.

There is no fixed number of sources, or of reviews. What is required is that there be enough separate, independent, substantial, sources to persuade a reviewer that there is enough material to base and artricle on, and so that the subject meets the criteria for notability. ColinFine (talk) 11:02, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft Article Review

Draft:Anusha Rai is in review from more then a month some one please help Ntkn766 (talk) 11:37, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Ntkn766 Hello and welcome. As noted on your draft, the review "may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,434 pending submissions waiting for review." Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 11:39, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok thank you Ntkn766 (talk) 11:42, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Portland International Jetport (PWM) Reference cleanup

Hello. Go to Portland International Jetport, reference section, Reference #2. I cant seem to clean it up, need help please. Thank you for your time.Theairportman33531 (talk) 15:06, 5 September 2022 (UTC) Theairportman33531 (talk) 15:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

There's a named reference called Airport Statistics. It has been defined numerous times in the article, each one has a different URL. If they all need to be different then you need to change the reference name(s), just adding a number to the end would be enough. - X201 (talk) 15:15, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I want to restart my life

Hello its me arryo. I have used my ip address as a temporary wikipedia to show that i wanted to get a fresh new start due to being a mature person currently. So my username is cyberllamamusic. Then i was blocked back then in 2021 for a year planned before being upgraded to forever due to my insanity at the past. So i will move on to the better future of the most. So i would make a return for a wikiepdia editing activities. So i had make a arbritation committee message about why i should get unblocked in english wikipedia. Please i want to get a parole to disable my permablock on wikiepdia english as cyberllamamusic. I hope this will understand to us. 125.164.20.52 (talk) 14:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

You were blocked indefinitely for a number of reasons. It is clear that you know how to request an unblock, as you have tried several times. That is the only way to have a block removed. Posting from an IP, as you have done here, is block evasion, and will probably lead to the IP address being blocked. ColinFine (talk) 15:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Per User talk:Cyberllamamusic you were originally indef blocked for disruptive editing, subsequently blocked for using other accounts, including more than one IP and also User:Yourairport and User:UrutoramanGuy66. Find another hobby. David notMD (talk) 15:06, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. by Drmies -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:39, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

help

Draft:Johnny Wonder - Wikipedia im lost plz help 2601:582:C47E:9920:CD10:8B98:7AF4:17E1 (talk) 16:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Johnny Wonder. Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a specific question about the draft? Please see the comment left by a reviewer. 331dot (talk) 17:14, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

What is a deleted edit?

Hi. My xtools page mentions deleted edits. Is a deleted edit the same thing as a reverted edit? How do I find which edit it was? -- Doktor Züm (talk) 01:24, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Basically, if a page you edited gets deleted, those edits become deleted edits. Liliana ^(UwU) 01:27, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

How do I find out which page it was? -- Doktor Züm (talk) 01:30, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Unless you're an admin, you can't know, sadly. Liliana ^(UwU) 01:32, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! Doktor Züm (talk) 01:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

There are many reasons why your edit history may show deleted edits. Maybe you properly tagged a page for deletion and it got deleted. Maybe you tried to save an article about a borderline notable topic and the article ended up deleted. I currently have 1457 deleted edits, but I do not worry about them at all, because all of my edits are to improve the encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 08:01, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Doktor Züm (talk) 08:11, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

If you need a copy of a deleted article, there are administrators willing to hand out copies of deleted articles unless the deleted article is a copyvio or contains illegal content. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 09:05, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

No, I was just curious. Thanks for your reply. -- Doktor Züm (talk) 09:24, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Doktor Züm: Your only deleted edit was changing jewlry to jewelry in AVIC VSTOL UAVs. All 38 edits to the page were deleted when the page was deleted. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that! -- Doktor Züm (talk) 18:37, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

About deleting my article

Hello, my article is decline for not adding reliable source. But i am adding all wiki links in my articles. Now I don't understand how or what reliable resource i should add in my article. Can you help me out of this problem? Shaheda01Yesmin (talk) 04:51, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Circular references are not accepted. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 04:54, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Shaheda01Yesmin. Your draft article has six references, all of which are links to other Wikipedia articles. As Jéské Couriano correctly points out, one Wikipedia article is never acceptable as a reference in another Wikipedia article. You need to provide references to independent, reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the topic. That is your challenge and our standards are high. Cullen328 (talk) 05:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Given Shaheda01Yesmin's responces to me via -en-help, I'm of the opinion they shouldn't be editing the English-language Wikipedia and should probably be editing the Wikipedia for their mother tongue instead. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 05:08, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

What kind of sources i have to put in my article. Can you give me an example? Because if i put any news portal link then my account will block by wikipedia. Shaheda01Yesmin (talk) 05:10, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Shaheda01Yesmin, acceptable sources are reliable published independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic. Have you been reading and studying the links to policies and guidelines that other editors have been furnishing to you? Cullen328 (talk) 05:18, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

All of the 'references' are to Wikipedia articles that do not mention Yesmin. Also, if you are Yesmin, then the photograph in the Infobox is not 'Own work' unless you set up a camera with a timer. Who took the photo? David notMD (talk) 06:03, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Image since deleted from Commons and here for copyright issue. David notMD (talk) 16:01, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: It is Draft:Shaheda Yesmin. I did some copyediting only to make it clear that the major failing is lack of any valid references. However, I am not sure this can meet WP:GNG. David notMD (talk) 15:59, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I found nothing online (string: "shaheda yesmin"). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 18:40, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I have found a suspicious user who probably post articles for money. What should I do?

I'm a newbie in Wikipedia, but I have read the basic guidelines and understand that promotion of private companies and persons is strictly regulated and prohibited. This user is called: Timtempleton. I nominated for deletion two of their articles (Bev company and Ragy Thomas) and I got blamed for being hater, persecutor and a sock-puppet farm whatever it is. I thinks this user's behaviour is suspicious, as they try to blame me and spawn conspiracy theories instead of providing links or perfecting their pages. The feeling that this user is on Wikipedia not just for spreading of free knowledge, but for making money and pushing personal not neutral point of view cannot leave me so I'm here asking for some advice or investigation. 多少 战场场场 龙 (talk) 07:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, 多少 战场场场 龙. Timtempleton is an experienced and respected editor with 12 years of positive contributions to the encyclopedia who has never been blocked. You have made grave accusations against this editor with very flimsy evidence. Is this all the evidence that you have? Cullen328 (talk) 07:32, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Repinging 多少 战场 龙. If you want to use Asian characters as your username on English Wikipedia, it is a really bad idea to use similar but different Asian characters as your signature. That is an impediment to communication among editors. Cullen328 (talk) 07:40, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree with your main point, Cullen328, but my inner pedant points out that they're the same Chinese characters, with some repetition (or reduplication, to phrase it hoity-toitily). -- Hoary (talk) 08:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen38: I agree with you that a signature containing an apparent username that slightly differs from the actual username is a bad idea (I would add: even in Latin script with an English-sounding name). As much as it is a bad idea, however, this is allowed. A proposed restriction against it was rejected last year. The only hard requirement is that it should contain an easily identifiable link to the user talk page - this signature definitely complies. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:48, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 is the topic here about Asian characters in my username? 多少 战场 龙 (talk) 11:03, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

多少 战场 龙, you failed to persuade in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bev (company), but your Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ragy Thomas is still under way. Let it run its course, that's what you should do. If a remark made in the AfD seems to demand a response from you, then make the response there. -- Hoary (talk) 08:37, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary it's not about failure. I noticed a strange behaviour on behalf of the experienced user. I just nominated for deletion some poor articles (to my view) but what happened next made me upset. Read the discussion and you will see. I'm not here to delete something, I want to obey Wikipedia guidelines. And I see that someone is not doing the right thing. 多少 战场 龙 (talk) 11:06, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

The decision on Bev (company) was Keep. At Ragy Thomas you started a AfD. In time, a decision will be made about RT. I do see that on your Talk page you were advised to raise a question here at Teahouse, but I see no benefit from you accusing Timtempleton of being a paid editor, nor of Tim having suggested at the AfD that you are a sock. To both of you, please set aside personal attacks. David notMD (talk) 12:32, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD okay. thanks for your comment here! 多少 战场 龙 (talk) 14:58, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Thanks for the ping. SPI opened at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Phoenix man. You can look at 多少 战场 龙's suspicious edit history, but I also spell it out there. This appears to be a Kerala-based group that is very interested in Ragy Thomas and his company Sprinklr. Two years ago a similar group popped up trying to create a POV-fork on a data collection story involving the company, and after merging the info to the article, I was accused of being paid then as well. I opened an earlier SPI. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Electiondata/Archive, which was inconclusive. Now two years later, the group pops up again. We'll see how this SPI plays out. There are more suspicious editors appearing every day. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:06, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Moving page

How to move a page without leaving a redirect? Such as Draft:Example to Example without leaving redirect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.5.230.247 (talk) 20:14, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Only Wikipedia:administrators can do this. Ruslik_Zero 20:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Re: General_Roman_Calendar

Over the last day someone has changed to wiki article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Roman_Calendar and deleted almost the entire source of information. I am concerned...and also the wiki article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Roman_Calendar_of_1960 . Please advise! Bob Tarver (talk) 18:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, BobTarver. The editor who removed that material mentioned WP:NOTADIRECTORY in their edit summary, which is a subsection of the important policy Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. I agree that this removed content is inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 18:41, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

The editor also pointed out that the content was unreferenced, which is also a problem. Cullen328 (talk) 19:08, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

But the article referenced the wiki article on that particular saint or feast day... Bob Tarver (talk) 19:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

WP-articles are not WP:RS. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:34, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok, the editor is NOT going to change the wiki article back to what is was a few days ago? This is been what is was many years in the past (for 10 years). For instance, april 15, in both Calendar, you can look it up and see which feast is going to occur on that day, BUT NOW, you cannot see it... Bob Tarver (talk) 19:25, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

BobTarver, unreferenced challenged content should not be restored until you gain consensus on the article talk page, and provide a reference to a reliable source. In my opinion, this material is better suited to another website. A Wikipedia article is never an acceptable reference for another Wikipedia article, per WP:CIRCULAR. Cullen328 (talk) 19:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

OK, BUT I think is it a mistake, the General Roman Calendar in 1960 as well as the General Roman Calendar both point out the following unsourced wiki articles from January 1 to December 31, so all you do is confuse the reader ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_and_societal_calendars_of_the_Roman_Rite , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_calendars_of_the_Roman_Rite , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_jurisdiction_calendars_of_the_Roman_Rite Bob Tarver (talk) 19:59, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Institutional_and_societal_calendars_of_the_Roman_Rite has 4 references, National_calendars_of_the_Roman_Rite has 19 references, and Personal_jurisdiction_calendars_of_the_Roman_Rite has 2 references, so I don't know what you mean when you call them "unsourced". CodeTalker (talk) 21:18, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

WP:UNCHALLENGED is not a good argument. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:35, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Deletion of Daniel Boifio Junior

The page I created was speedily deleted for G11 and A7 even though I believe by the guidelines stated by the community, the article passes WP:GNG with a simple Google search. I have request to restore Draft:Daniel Boifio Junior to remove any advertising or promotion language used but to no avail. I need an assistance. Thanks Siagoddess (talk) 13:09, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Your entire reasoning is predicated on google search results that prove absolutely nothing and doesn't negate the spammy aspect of this. PICKLEDICAE🥒 13:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Slagoddess and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read notability to understand the minimum sourcing requirements for an article. ColinFine (talk) 13:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Per WP:GNG, what are the 3 best sources you have? A google-search is not a source, as WP sees it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:45, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello ColinFine , Gråbergs Gråa Sång kindly check this sources out:

• Africa.com - https://www.africa.com/eu-ambassador-chooses-dbj-as-personal-manager/
• GhanaWeb - https://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/DBJ-is-Ghana-s-most-influential-youth-talent-manager-1311025
• https://ghanasoccernet.com/daniel-boifio-jr-empire-sports-agency-boss-meets-feyenoord-chief-frank-arnesen
• Valley View University - https://vvu.edu.gh/index.php/stories/blog/186-daniel-boifio-s-winning-story
• Starr FM - https://starrfm.com.gh/2022/02/french-ambassador-chooses-dbj-as-her-personal-manager/

Hello, Siagoddess. I'm afraid that none of those will help.

• Africa.com reports what Gazaaly says about him, and what DBJ says about himself, so not independent.
• GhanaWeb actually says it's a press release. That means it is not independent, and will not contribute to notability.
• Soccernet talks about DBJ meeting somebody (yes, Frank Arnesen is notable, but notability is not inherited). It's a passing mention of DBJ, not significant coverage.
• The VVU university piece is published by his alma mater, so is unlikely to be independent.
• The Starr FM piece at first sight looks the most promising, as it has a considerable amount about DBJ; but on inspection, that section is word for word the same as the GhanaWeb piece, which as we have seen is a press release.

Please remember 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) 21:30, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the enlightenment ColinFine Siagoddess (talk) 22:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

My article "Newer Super Mario Bros Wii" was reverted and i dont know why

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

---

Two users, @Hemiauchenia and @Praxidicae reverted my Newer Super Mario Bros Wii article, even though it has enough sources to become a article. It has sources from Newer team themselves. i wish to have a explaination for this. TheSecondComing10 (talk) 18:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Have you not read WP:GNG or WP:RS ? Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I did, and i believe it followed GNG. and RS. The article has sources from newer team, and secondary sources. TheSecondComing10 (talk) 18:30, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, TheSecondComing10. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes what published independent reliable sources say about the topic. The Newer team is not independent of this topic. Cullen328 (talk) 18:34, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, TheSecondComing10. 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) 21:39, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@TheSecondComing10: Don't engage in an edit war. RudolfRed (talk) 18:36, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

At AfD, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newer Super Mario Bros. Wii. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:36, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

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

Why "Publish changes" doesn't work in this article?

Hello! In this article, I have tried to simplify a wikilink using the pipe trick, but after I click "Publish changes", there is no trace of the edit and nothing appears in the history of edits nor in my list of contributions.

Things work correctly as usual in other articles/pages.

Do you have any idea what would prevent this article from being updated? Thanks! ► LowLevel73 ^(talk) 22:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi LowLevel73. Exactly which change did you try to make? The pipe trick is for ease of typing when you create a link, not for simplifying the saved code for the link. It automatically expands the code when you click "Publish changes". If you for example change the existing [[Milburn (band)|Milburn]] to [[Milburn (band)|]] then it expands back to [[Milburn (band)|Milburn]] when you click "Publish changes". If this was your only change then the code would be identical before and after your edit. That means it would be a null edit which leaves no trace in the page history or anywhere else. Is that what you did with this or another existing link in the article? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello @PrimeHunter, yes, that's exactly what I did. Thank you for the clarification, I didn't read H:PT carefully and I was convinced that the pipe trick was not only to make typing easier, but also to save characters in the saved source code. Thank you! ► LowLevel73 ^(talk) 23:34, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Add rejected-new article content to existing, related article

I wrote a new article on "Consumer Compliance" back in April and it was rejected. I rewrote it and resubmitted it last month and it was rejected again; there was not much feedback as to why it was rejected but an editor is looking into it and said they would provide some feedback soon. Consumer compliance and consumer protection content is important to include on Wikipedia since current coverage of these areas is limited on the site. Would it be possible to add my "Consumer Compliance" article content to the existing "Consumer Protection" page? They are distinct topics but are related enough that combining the two entries might be a reasonable solution. The "Consumer Protection" page warrants expansion and updates. I could start working on that as well. Thanks in advance for your advice. Carchias (talk) 12:39, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

First, the draft was Declined, not Rejected, which is more severe. Second, the second Decline was removed because the reviewer turned out to be a sockpuppet. As it now stands, Draft:Consumer Compliance is a draft awaiting review. As noted, there is a backlog, so this may take time. David notMD (talk) 12:49, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

The lead should make clear that the article pertains to US financial institutions. Many of there are subjects of existing articles, for example Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, so Wikilinks are needed. I am not suggesting this solves all the problems, but worth doing while waiting for a second review. David notMD (talk) 12:57, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I recommend to not attempt to add your content to Consumer protection, as that goes beyond financial regulations and is international in scope. David notMD (talk) 13:01, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your reply. I am glad it was discovered that the resubmission was declined by a sockpuppet and so the draft has another chance. I will update it to make it clear the article pertains to US financial institutions and will add Wikilinks where needed. Thank you again. Carchias (talk) 00:00, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Almost same name

Hi, dear people, i just saw that there is an article on Michelle Jaffe (author) and an article on Michelle Jaffé (artist)... wouldn't it make sense to somehow make the difference evident? One could add the "(author)" in the first article or how else could one make sure that people searching for the one Michelle don't go to the wrong article? Naomi Hennig (talk) 20:07, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Michelle Jaffé (artist) exists. I found Michele Jaffe, but not Michelle Jaffe (author). David notMD (talk) 20:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Naomi Hennig: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! I see that Wikipedia has two articles: Michele Jaffe for the author, and Michelle Jaffé (artist) for the artist. If someone searches for Michelle Jaffe, they are redirected to the article about the author. In case someone searches for the artist but ends up at the author article, I have added a note to the top of the author article stating: "'Michelle Jaffe' redirects here. For the artist, see Michelle Jaffé (artist)." If you think the redirect should be changed or the author article be moved, I suggest you start a discussion at Talk:Michele Jaffe. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, GoingBatty, i just didn't know what to do! Wonderful that you knew! Kind regards, --Naomi Hennig (talk) 00:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

how and where do I start a draft for an article I would later like to submit?

I am asking this because while I thought I was entering a small bio of myself and the "future" article on a military registry I rec'd emails stating It was solicitation and My account was removed. I'd like to write an article for a website I developed and have a wikipedia page for it. there are no veteran registries for the public for which I had developed. Im not trying to solicitate so I will not mention the website. Im just looking for guidance. 24.144.247.150 (talk) 23:58, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi there! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially when you have a conflict of interest (COI). To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the website, and determine whether it meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article, and be prepared for a process that may include waiting for review, rejections, and rewrites, before an article is created. If you are successful, then you could never edit the article directly due to your COI, but could submit edit requests on the article talk page. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:28, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. If your previous account was blocked and the block has not expired, then you are evading your block which is not permitted. Log into your account and request an unblock there. If you continue to evade your block, that will have a very negative impact for a long time to come, so please don't do that. Cullen328 (talk) 01:20, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Wgat did you mean by "and My account was removed." Do you mean that your account was indefinitely blocked, or that the article was Speedy deleted? David notMD (talk) 02:58, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Have you read Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing? If you do get an article about yourself, it won't belong to you, and it can be edited by anyone. There may come a time when something happens in your life that you'd prefer that world not know about, but if someone published the story in a reliable source it can end up in the Wikipedia article about yourself, and you won't be able to prevent it, or delete it. Just something to think about. Karenthewriter (talk) 04:33, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Need helping in publishing a new page

Hello. this draft is rejected multiple times, can you please let me know what needs to be fixed? Thanks MD04A (talk) 09:52, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

MD04A Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft was only declined, not rejected- "rejected" has a specific meaning, that resubmission would not be possible. Since it was only declined, resubmission is possible. The reviewers have left the reasons for their decline on your draft, do you have specific questions about it?

I did notice one issue, you wrote "who is basically from Singapore"; what does that mean? Either she is from Singapore or she isn't. One cannot be "basically" from somewhere. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. "Basically" meant she is born in Singapore and is presently living in India.

Thanks for pointing it out, let me edit that.

Can you help me understand more regarding the recent review comment and point out what is missed in the submitted draft, so that I can modify that as well. MD04A (talk) 11:06, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Problems start with the first sentence, MD04A. Master Dr. Sreedharan Sobhana (born 22 May 1957) is the Master, Spiritual Healer and Aromatherapist, [...] Cut "Master" and "Dr" from the very start. The draft provides no evidence that she has a real doctorate. If she does have a real doctorate, then, of course citing reliable sources, specify the subject area, the university and the year somewhere in the section on her education. I see no reason to write "Master, Spiritual Healer and Aromatherapist", so capitalized: "master, spiritual healer and aromatherapist" wouldn't be quite so bad -- however, what do "master" and "spiritual healer" mean here? ¶ Now let's turn to a single factoid. We read that she got "Honorary Doctor of Letters (D.Litt)" from "California Public University". Where is the reliable source for this assertion? Given that the name "California Public University" might give readers the impression that it's an actual university (whereas it is not), should it perhaps be in quotation marks? -- Hoary (talk) 11:49, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

The "honours and awards" are not notable, one source leads to malware and the other fails verification. Theroadislong (talk) 12:41, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

For a living person, all factual statements must be verified by reliable source references. David notMD (talk) 12:44, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

If the claim for notability rests on her activities as a Buddist, then all mention of fashion, including titles, blah, blah, blah, should be cut. Including images and external links. And as noted, most if not all of the "Honours and awards" are mentions of awards from non-notable organizations (unreferenced), and should be cut. David notMD (talk) 13:45, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary I know someone who has a Ph.D in metaphysics. I forget what esteemed institution of higher learning granted this important honor. He even has a framed certificate on his wall! 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:13, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Metaphysics is just a branch of philosophy. What's so odd about that? Sumanuil. 05:46, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@Sumanuil Well, some of what I read that's related to metaphysics seems kind of woo. Maybe I'm wrong and he has a real degree. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:13, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

When I glanced at it, the draft didn't seem to say anything about any doctorate other than honorary doctorates. (And what was said about these honorary doctorates was, uh, problematic; but let's put that aside for a moment.) There's no general policing of the English language; and if I refer to somebody whose only doctorate is an honorary one as "Dr Somebody", neither she nor I will be bundled into a police van. But she wouldn't normally be referred to as having a doctorate. That was my point. As for "metaphysics", it seems to me to mean either of two very different things: (i) a branch of philosophy (as Sumanui says), or (ii) mere woo (example). -- Hoary (talk) 12:54, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft:FandomWire

Hi guys! I spent a long weekend gathering references for my first Wiki article to be published Draft:FandomWire. Would anyone be able to look it over and let me know if it is finally sufficient? Thank you. OpticalGMG (talk) 22:47, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

None of your new citations have any significant coverage. This is the same problem as was pointed out to you last time you asked this question on this page. MrOllie (talk) 22:51, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

None of them? How is that humanly possible? OpticalGMG (talk) 23:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

From what Im reading under "significant coverage" these articles do mention Fandomwire in key context to the category at hand. What am I missing here. I have more sources, but Im confused on how these aren't reliable. Especially considering I have seen Social Blade used as reference in almost every Wiki associated with something that has a social media account, so Im confused on how absolutley none of the sources are valid. OpticalGMG (talk) 23:12, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

OpticalGMG, at this point you might want to stop trying. In a few years, FandomWire may have gained more coverage (WP:TOOSOON). Sungodtemple (talk) 22:59, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I have asignificant amount of sources. WHat I am not understaning is why these are not meeting criteria. When they are 1. notable sites 2. They all mention FandomWire in direct corrolation to the main topic of the text 3. I made sure each article was written by staff. Obviously I'm not understanding something. OpticalGMG (talk) 23:06, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Mentioning FandomWire is not sufficient. The sources have to discuss FandomWire "in detail" - we should be seeing detailed information about the site itself, not simple mentions of the name or attributions of stories they printed. MrOllie (talk) 23:14, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Okay undertandable, so the refernces have to be about FandomWire as a whole and not their coverage. That being said, in the parts where I mention coverage would it be apporpriate to leave a few of those sources in there? Also I have seen SocialBlade used as a refernce on numerous sites, can you confirm this is a viable reference? OpticalGMG (talk) 23:17, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@MrOllie OpticalGMG (talk) 23:18, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

In theory they could be used to cite various details, but you are not doing the article any favors by stuffing it with trivial mentions before it has been approved for the main article space. Socialblade is similar - it might be a source for a detail but as an indiscriminate directory it does not build the case for notability. MrOllie (talk) 23:21, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Okay understandable. Like I said this is my first time and I'm also learning as I go on. I'll see what edits I can make and come back. Sorry for bringing this topic up repeatedly, im just trying to get it right. OpticalGMG (talk) 23:25, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

[Edit clash] Number of sources is unimportant, OpticalGMG. Quality of sources is important. I don't know what you mean by "notable site": do you mean "site that's a reliable source", or something else? Mentioning Fandomwire in direct correlation [relation?] to what's in the text is insufficient; what matters is: Does the source say what the draft's text implies that it says? When a web page on a somewhat dodgy website is described as written by (unspecified) "staff" or "staff writer", that's a bad sign. Often it means that what we're looking at is no more than recycled PR junk. -- Hoary (talk) 23:21, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry yes, by notable I meant reliable. I dont think any of the sites I have sourced ared "dodgy" though. OpticalGMG (talk) 23:26, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

OpticalGMG, I looked at all of your references and all of them are just passing mentions of FandomWire. Meeting the Notability guideline requires significant coverage. According to the guideline, "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. None of your references meet that standard. They all consists of variations on "According to FandomWire . . ." Cullen328 (talk) 23:27, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Yep, I didnt know that until about 5 min ago, but thank you. I am working to fix that now. OpticalGMG (talk) 23:32, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

For Social Blade, please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 350#Reliability_of_Social_Blade. -- Hoary (talk) 23:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

About 4 people say its reliable and two dont. which do I go with. OpticalGMG (talk) 23:34, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328@Hoary@MrOllie@Sungodtemple I made some changes and I believe everything there directly coorolates to just the site or exaclty the subject of the text. Let me know your thoughts on the updated revisions, and if I should remove the youtube link? It's directly related to the fluctuating reputation so I thought it may be justified , but just let me know. OpticalGMG (talk) 00:19, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328is it the reliability? because all of them pertain to fandomwire or the dubjrct in the text, no? OpticalGMG (talk) 00:32, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

OpticalGMG, reliability may or may not be an issue for many of these sources. The only one whose reliability I have evaluated is the YouTube source, which is obviously unreliable. Instead, I evaluated whether or not the other sources included significant coverage, which they didn't. Cullen328 (talk) 02:32, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

OpticalGMG, None of your sources meet all three standards: reliable and independent and devoting significant coverage to FandomWire. Cullen328 (talk) 00:28, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

My reading, OpticalGMG, is that "Social Blade" seems to be reliable for the numerical information that it provides about some websites, but not for the same kind of information that it provides about others. And that if it provides information (however reliably) about a website, then this does not contribute to indicating that the website is notable. -- Hoary (talk) 00:34, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I believe these requirements match its use in the article OpticalGMG (talk) 00:36, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Then use it, but look elsewhere for the significant coverage that, as Cullen328 has pointed out, the draft needs. You also ask about the Youtube reference. Some fellow using the name "the Lord" or "the Lord's Legion" talks. Not having heard of him, I consulted his channel's "About". This tells us: "Greetings all, as you enter the land of the Lethal Lord. You just simply become one with the New Dead Nation!" And that's all it tells us. So I still know nothing about him. This kind of source isn't usable for Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 00:44, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Social Blade just provides raw statistics. The content is generated by a computer algorithm, not a human author. It contains no prose and is equivalent to a listing in an old telephone book or a Chamber of Commerce directory. It is certainly not significant coverage, because that website provides precisely the same level of coverage to millions of other social media accounts. Cullen328 (talk) 00:55, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Some YouTube channels are reliable sources. For example, if a reliable news media organization maintains a YouTube channel containing journalistic content with normal editorial oversight and fact checking, then YouTube videos that they produce and post are reliable sources. Videos produced by respected museums or cultural institutions or universities may qualify. That probably applies to less than 1% of YouTube videos. When a YouTube producer states Greetings all, as you enter the land of the Lethal Lord. You just simply become one with the New Dead Nation!, that is convincing proof that the video in question is the exact opposite of a reliable source, and should be removed from the draft along with any content cited to it. Cullen328 (talk) 01:09, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Got it thank you, I may have to take your advice and sit on this one for a bit. It's getting harde and harder to find these articles. OpticalGMG (talk) 01:43, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, OpticalGMG. You're right that it's getting harder to find subjects for new articles: with over six million articles, most of the obviously notable topics have already been covered. But my question is, why are you concerned about creating a new article?

And I'm going to try to answer my own question: I remember when I first started editing Wikipedia, 17 years ago, I desperately wanted to "make my mark" by adding an article on a new topic. I didn't find one. In all my editing, I've only ever created a dozen or so articles. But now I know that unless you are lucky enough to stumble on a significant notable topic that hasn't yet been covered (which can happen, but is rare), you can add much much much much much more value to Wikipedia by improving some existing articles - especially by tracking down and adding reliable sources where they are lacking - than by struggling to get a maybe-just-about-notable topic off the starting line. ColinFine (talk) 10:07, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Want to list our company

Hello,

I want list our company details on your site, please let us know the procedure. http://medstarhis.com/index.html 59.93.241.161 (talk) 06:33, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Wikipedia is not a business directory and does not "list" companies. Instead, we have encyclopedia articles about companies that meet the guideline Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) which is strictly enforced. Read and study Your first article. If you want to make the effort, open an account, make the mandatory paid contributions disclosure, and use the Articles for Creation process to have your draft reviewed by experienced editors. This is a very difficult process. Cullen328 (talk) 06:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:06, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

You will also need to see and then follow the Wikipedia's policies on Conflict of Interest WP:COI and, possibly, on Paid Editing WP:PAID. --CiaPan (talk) 12:18, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Discography

I just added a discography section to Peter Buck, and it seems kind of long - is there a rule/rule of thumb regarding spinning off a separate discography article? If this qualifies, how is it done? Would I just start a draft, then cut and paste verbatim, or is there a standard format? Pete Best Beatles (talk) 01:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles: It is long, but it isn't overly long. I think it's fine where it is. If the article gets bigger than 100K, it would be a prime candidate to split out. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:05, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

OK! -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 10:54, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Is the lead too cluttered now; too many specific bands and projects? -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 13:00, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Is there any way to put a timer on a non-free file?

Hello!
I have just uploaded File:Margaret Rope's "Lumen Christi" (1923) - Shrewsbury Museum & Art Gallery 2016.jpg. The artist, Margaret Agnes Rope, will be dead since 70 years by 8 December 2023. Is there a way to put a timer so that when this date comes, the file can be restored in its original resolution and exported to WCommons? Veverve (talk) 12:44, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

No timer that I know of. It would involve an admin restoring the hi-res version and then someone putting it through the move to Commons procedure. It will be less hassle if you upload it to Commons after the date, and slap a speedy delete on the version here. - X201 (talk) 13:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

'Most Popular on Wikipedia' page political bias, please help fix

The wiki page "Wikipedia:Popular pages - Wikipedia"

Contains the following: "Joe Biden debuted on the list on November 12, 2020. Consolation for Donald Trump, he became the first human to reach 200 million views and overall second only after his country. More consolation for him, on January 20, 2021, he surpassed the United States for the all time lead among the ranked pages in what we know as the first change of the leading page. The 2021 storming of the United States Capitol gave him the decisive push. By notable contrast, his predecessor Barack Obama could not reach the US in two terms."

The paragraph is confusing, biased & poorly expressed. The word consolation is misused and the paragraph is written with a political bias. I would try to edit, but it's protected and I've never edited a wiki page before. Can someone help me fix this? Psychelabs (talk) 20:38, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Psychelabs: Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for your interest in improving this page. I suggest you post a specific suggestion for improving the wording in a new section on the talk page: Wikipedia talk:Popular pages. Also include the {{edit semi-protected}} template at the top of your post to gain attention to your request. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:44, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Psychelabs I also made some tweaks (primarily to remove "Consolation"). GoingBatty (talk) 20:48, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Psychelabs. That is not an encyclopedia article. It is a "behind the scenes" internal page that does not necessarily need to comply with the Neutral point of view. You can express your concerns at Wikipedia talk:Popular pages. Cullen328 (talk) 20:49, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Psychelabs: Wikipedia:Popular pages is a "behind the scenes" page because the page name starts with "Wikipedia:". We say that such pages are in the project namespace or just project space. It is not part of the encyclopedia. The project space is used for many things, e.g. Wikipedia policies, deletion discussions and help pages like this very page "Wikipedia:Teahouse". There are some goofy things in project space and most of our article rules don't apply there. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:30, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @GoingBatty

Further to @Cullen328 and @PrimeHunter point about this being a "behind the scenes" page.

I think all the top/trending/popular pages are all "wikipedia:" prefixed. The potential to misuse & misrepresent this data is high. They are also all highly indexed in google & bing.

Separate to the issue of correcting the page, I think we'd need to agree first what the benchmark/standard/policy is for this content?

Is there any way to swap them to be part of the encyclopedia, or meet a higher standard of accuracy/neutrality?

Psychelabs (talk) 01:06, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Psychelabs:, of course all the "top trending" or popular encyclopedia articles are indexed by Google and Bing, as are all of our 6.5 million encyclopedia articles. But they are in the main or article namespace. Material in the "Wikipedia" namespace is intended for use by active Wikipedia editors, not our general readership. There is a long tradition of joking around behind the scenes about most viewed articles, commenting for example on non-existent rivalries for top positions. Nobody should take comments like Nevertheless, those days Biden was not the most popular. He was outviewed by Kamala Harris. Having logged 3.5 million views on November 7 and 6.5 million the next day, she decisively entered the list (at the expense of Che Guevara) to become the second (after Alexander Hamilton) American on the list who is not President. The third became Martin Luther King in March 2022 (at the expense of Osama bin Laden). This watercooler humor is not visible to our readers, unless they search for it quite diligently, drilling quite deep. Transforming this type of "inside baseball" content into an actual encylopedia article would be almost impossible, because it would be necessary to reference it to coverage in independent reliable sources, not Wikipedia's own internal statistics. Cullen328 (talk) 01:45, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Our own search box only searches articles by default. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:13, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Psychelabs: You are correct that the project page Wikipedia:Popular pages can be found in Google's search results. However, all articles (such as the top/trending/popular articles Joe Biden, Donald Trump, and United States) do not contain the prefix "Wikipedia:". The guidelines and policies for the content of pages in the project namespace can be found at Wikipedia:Project namespace and Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines#Not part of the encyclopedia. Hope this is what you're looking for. GoingBatty (talk) 01:37, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Question

Isn't there a rule somewhere that says maintenance tags (such as {notability}) should not be added to articles currently on the main page? Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:20, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@BeanieFan11 I am not aware of such a rule, but almost any article that lands on Main page, is most likely to have been reviewed by a number of editors, including admins who perform the move, so I cannot image such pages would ever need a {{notability}} tag, but if they did seriously need one, I would WP:Ignore all rules and add one, even if there was a rule somewhere saying otherwise. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:23, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Images as sources

Sorry if this has been asked before, but what's the rule on using images(like blueprints or schematics) as sources?

Panther tank#Upgunning to the 8.8cm

Victor939 (talk) 16:26, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Victor939, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's the same as any other source: has it been reliably published?

If it's not been published, then it can't be used, period.

If it's been published (eg put up on the web) by some random person, so that there is no reason to trust them to have checked its authenticity then it can't be used.

If it's been reliably published then it can be cited - but it is likely to be a primary source, which limits how it can be used in an article. ColinFine (talk) 17:03, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

link to an article

Hello, I ve just written the introduction article, I now need to prove that this artist actually existed by including links to pictures in magazines or TV interviews. How do I do, TKS Fleuretabeille 16:48, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Fleuretabeille, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you've begun your article in the wrong place - your User page is for telling a little about you as a Wikipedia editor, not for creating articles. You've also made the classic mistake of inexperienced editors that you've begun writing what you know rather than finding the sources. This is like building a house without surveying the ground first.

Please read your first article.

Personally, I always advise new editors (and you're a new editor, even if you created your account a long time ago) to spend some months learning how Wikipedia works before trying the very challenging task of creating a new article.

Note that "proving that the artist actually existed" is irrelevant to Wikipedia: we have articles on things that don't exist (eg unicorns} as long as they have been written about, but we do not, and will not, have articles on millions of people and things that do exist, if they have not been written about enough to meet Wikipediaq's c criteria for notability. --ColinFine (talk) 17:10, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Per ColinFine, if you intend to persist, use WP:YFA to create a draft, then copy what you have wrongly put on your User page into the draft, and then delete the content at your User page. David notMD (talk) 17:13, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

As for what a draft should contain, see List of contemporary artists for referenced articles that can be considered as models for what you intend. Creating links to pictures of his work is problematic, as all that is probably copyright protected. What is essential is referencing published content about him. David notMD (talk) 17:20, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Requesting some help for the approval of Wikipedia page

User:Onkarsd/sandbox

Above is my wikipedia article on 'Udghosh' which is the annual sports festival of IIT Kanpur. The article has been rejected for the reasons shown below:

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

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Udghosh. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

I've added sufficient references for the information used in the article from renowned news companies such as 'Times of India'. I request your assistance in changing the references and the content in the article to get it accepted. Onkarsd (talk) 12:18, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Onkarsd: I have made some minor improvements. Still, I cannot say whether the subject's notability is established or not. Veverve (talk) 13:29, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Onkarsd: welcome to the Teahouse. It looks like you created Draft:Udghosh by copying and pasting the content of User:Onkarsd/sandbox into the draft page. The draft was declined for the reasons you mention, and you have not edited it since then, so it's not quite clear what you are asking here – you haven't added any references. The draft is also written in a very promotional tone, and would not be appropriate as an encyclopedia article for that reason, even if the sourcing should be found to be sufficient. (That is also true about the sandbox version, even though Veverve has rewritten it a bit and toned down the promotionalism). You should blank your sandbox page or redirect it to the draft, to avoid any confusion around the two versions of the page, and then work on the draft to address the problems pointed out here and in the review. Then you can submit it for review again – but I suspect the first reviewer was right, and there isn't enough sourced information for a standalone article about the sports festival. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 13:40, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Onkarsd, you should also be aware that The Times of India is considered to be a medium-to-low quality source; see WP:TOI. You should look for better sources if possible. CodeTalker (talk) 18:34, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

International sports on North Korean TV: Does it belong on the North Korean sports page?

I have discovered that KCTV (the state broadcaster in North Korea) airs 2 sports segments on their daily program, on the second and seventh broadcasting hour. Very often these are filled by international sports such as volleyball and tennis. (You can see for yourself here, on KCNA watch video archive. Today tennis and the premier league aired) The issue I am having is both that I am uncertain that it is neccessary, and that an archive of raw video footage is not comprehensive enough of a source. I cannot say WHEN these broadcasts started, HOW North Korea broadcasts this (Although it is likely that they might have sub licensed from the Seoul Broadcasting System, as they did for the Olympics) and what if any effects it may be having. Research on the matter is naturally difficult given the nature of the beast. The only additional info I could find on the matter comes from a seedy article by The Sun (KCNA watch is reputable though). This would suggest that this started around 2020, which would make sense as North Korea has taken covid very seriously and may have wanted to provide entertainment for their citizens that they could enjoy at home. But again, we just don't know

So what is the best course of action here? International sports penetrating North Korea, officially no less, is a huge deal and definetly a development that should be mentioned, especially since this has become regular programming on KCTV, and that Kim Jong Un pledged to make Korea a sporting superpower. To make our lives much easier this has already been covered on the KCTV wiki page in some detail regarding these broadcasts. However not one citation was given for their information on the international football broadcasts. I am aware that I may be making a lot out of nothing here but I consider this to be one aspect of an evolving phenomenon of foreign media penetration into the DPRK since the famine of the 90s. With 88% of defectors claiming to have consumed foreign media in North Korea, and 92% of North Koreans believed to be accesing it (see this research paper) it is becoming clear that the North Korean goverment can read between the lines. I would not be surprised if more foreign media found its way onto KCTV, especially since the spread of foreign media is already spreading faster than the state can control it. But conjecture aside in the above mentioned context I think this is important. I just don't know where this information belongs. Spraymate (talk) 17:51, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Spraymate. When you write that this is a huge deal and definetly a development that should be mentioned, then that is your personal opinion, which is a form of original research that is not allowed in Wikipedia articles. The difficulties of covering North Korean topics on Wikipedia are obvious, but presumably there are reliable sources based in South Korea or elsewhere that cover North Korean mass media. Those are the type of sources that you need to find in order to say or imply that this is a huge deal in a Wikipedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 19:24, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

The Sun is generally unreliable per WP:RSP but that article you linked to provides a clue: Martyn Williams, a researcher who monitors North Korean TV. I would search for coverage of Williams's work in actually reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 19:32, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Here is his website, North Korea Tech. Cullen328 (talk) 19:40, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I even called the article seedy. I hold that publication in no esteem. I pointed it out to make the point that good sources are lacking. But in hinsight that was not expressed clearly. Granted that website you posted is super useful. Thanks. Also regarding the huge deal comment that was just justification on why I personally think it is worth discussing. I never intended to write that into an article. My question first and foremost was where this kind of information actually needs to be. But if that point needs to be made for some reason it very easily can be. Sports is an important pillar of North Korean propaganda. Broadcasting international sports that does not play into the propaganda of the state is new, hence significant (As the above article states that is how the regime has historically used sports). But again, I do not think that this point would even be written into anything like this because the premise itself is subjective. Spraymate (talk) 20:39, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

lost draft article

Hi, I started an article on guitarist Peter Thorp and now can't find it. Anyone any ideas on where it is? Chenetian (talk) 20:47, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Some possibilities: Perhaps you neglected to press Publish changes at the bottom, so your content was not saved. Elsewise, I had thought perhaps you had created a draft while not logged in, meaning it would not appear in the history of your contributions but still exist, but I check for Draft:Peter Thorp and that did not show up. There is no mention of a Speedy deletion on your Talk page. The article The Roulettes does confirm that Thorp was a guitarist in the 1960s. David notMD (talk) 21:05, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I didn't press Publish as I hadn't finished it, was that wrong? I'd better start it again and press Publish this time, but I thought that meant it was sent to be approved or does it mean I can carry on adding to it? Chenetian (talk) 21:16, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Chenetian, and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, "Publish" is used to mean two different things. Everything in Wikipedia is publically visible - drafts, sandboxes etc, and so a while ago the lawyers insisted that "Save changes" be altered to say "Publish changes", to emphasise this fact. However drafts and sandboxes are not indexed by search engines, so they are "public" only to those who go and look for them.

Getting an article included in the encyclopaedia (which I don't think is anywhere formally called "publishing it", but that is how people often understand the word) is a matter of placing the article in the main space (without a prefix such as "Draft:" or "User:" or "Wikipedia:"). Any editor who has been here for four days and made ten edits is permitted by the software to create an article directly in mainspace, or move one there; but editors without substantial experience of creating new articles are strongly advised to create Drafts (which they will save by "Publish changes") and then, when they think the draft is ready, to submit it for review. ColinFine (talk) 22:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Request for delete

The subject of the draft page Paul Sinakore request it be deleted immediately if possible. Thank you 72.22.119.177 (talk) 11:31, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

If you represent Mr. Sinakore, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID. The subject does not necessarily have a say as to whether there is an article about them on Wikipedia or not, unless they wish to argue that they do not meet the definition of a notable person. See WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE. However in this case, the page you refer to is just a draft, and will be automatically deleted in six months. Drafts are not indexed by search engines. You may bring this to Miscellany for Deletion. 331dot (talk) 11:33, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

As you are new here, a bit of explanation: Sinakore may be notable enough that an article about him is a valid effort even if he opposes it. Drafts are deleted at six months only if there have been no edits nor a submittal of the draft within that time, i.e., abandoned. Any activity resets the clock. Drafts are not found by outside search engines such as Google. Even within Wikipedia, a search on Paul Sinakore would not find the draft. It would require a search on Draft:Paul Sinakore. From your post, it can be guessed that you either represent Sinakore or have a personal connection. As such, you should refrain from editing the draft because of either PAID or COI. You can leave comments on the Talk page if information is wrong. Starting a MfD is a complicated process for a new editor. David notMD (talk) 12:13, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Merely from the references already used, Sinakore seems to me undoubtably notable, but the draft largely uses them only to list what he has done, not what others have said about him, so does not well demonstrate his notability.

The lede needs to speak in more general terms, not mention too many specific names and titles; the latter details should be relocated to the main body. It should also not decribe him as "well-known" without a citation to a source explicitly saying so, per WP:Synthesis.

I am tempted to improve this draft, but others are better qualified and I do not have the fortitude to work in the face of the subject's opposition.

[Copying these remarks to the Draft's Talk page.] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.73.43 (talk) 23:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

How to add a picture?

I created a page a few months back for a 90s TV movie, and on the page's talk page, it was said that the page would quality for B-class status if it had a cover image for the movie (Talk:When No One Would Listen). I... am no expert in adding such images, and I don't want to mess with copyrighted works. Is there any way or place to request such image uploads from somebody who knows how to upload them appropriately in accordance with copyright law? I'm really an amateur when it comes to uploading images, and the time I tried in the past, it was removed for copyright violations, so I'd rather not try again myself. PetSematary182 (talk) 14:25, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Any image uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons project (see c:Main) is most likely permissibly licensed and can be used in an English Wikipedia article. Uploading your image is definitely much harder, so I appreciate you checking in here. That said, the C/B rating is a bit arbitrary. You can directly change the article to B status if you really want. The ultimate goal is improved quality. See Wikipedia:Content assessment for more. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:21, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@PetSematary182 forgot to ping! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:24, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I'm a little nervous about directly updating the article's rating to B. I do have a movie poster for the film that I can upload, but I don't know how to mark it so that I can establish fair use. PetSematary182 (talk) 15:41, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@PetSematary182 Fair use images (this sounds like a reasonable case) cannot be uploaded to Commons, rather they are uploaded directly on English Wikipedia. Follow the instructions at Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. After you are done, feel free to ping me, or ask for feedback again in Teahouse if you like. As long as you are willing to learn, other editors are likely willing to give your edits/uploads a second pair of eyes. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:53, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I have added an image, as per the instructions, to the page for When No One Would Listen. If there are any problems with it, I can try to fix them. PetSematary182 (talk) 23:05, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Unknown question

• Where is the discussion to review the page?

• To which email should the off-wiki evidence be sent?

PravinGanechari (talk) 09:35, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello. It's not clear what exactly you are asking about. 331dot (talk) 09:43, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi , Where is the discussion about page review like a notice board. I don't want to discuss any page at the moment but I should have information about it. that's why i asked this question PravinGanechari (talk) 10:09, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

That is an "unknown question" indeed, PravinGanechari. Or anyway a remarkably obscure one. What kind of "review", and of which page? -- Hoary (talk) 09:45, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

No, my question is not related to any page. I should have known about it that's why I asked this question PravinGanechari (talk) 10:13, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Is this in connection with Draft:Parichaya? - X201 (talk) 09:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

You have made 2,000 edits and created more than 20 articles since starting an account in March 2022. Surely you can improve the nature of your question. Taking the question on its face value, there is no "discussion to review the page." Each reviewer looks at the backlog of more than 2,300 drafts submitted to AfC and picks what they want to review next. David notMD (talk) 10:12, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi X201, This question of mine is not related to any page. I have asked to delete that page [23] PravinGanechari (talk) 10:22, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

We don't know what you are referencing when you say "the page" and "off wiki evidence". Off wiki evidence of what? 331dot (talk) 10:51, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@PravinGanechari: the draft cannot be deleted at your request unless it's a copyright violation or something equally awful that requires instant removal. You wrote the draft, which would allow you to tag it for deletion at the author's request by adding {{db-g7}} provided no one else had contributed significantly. In this case, the article has been heavily edited by several others. In any case, remember you do not own a draft that you write; anything written here instantly becomes copyright of WP, not the author, and allowing deletion of authors' drafts is merely a courtesy, not an obligation. If you believe it to be a breach of copyright, with text inappropriately taken from outside Wikipedia, you can use {{db-g12|url=URL of source}} but you'll have to give a source from which it was copied. The guide to general deletion is at WP:GD. Basically you can use PROD, proposed deletion, which should only be used for non-controversial deletion, of an article that has never previously been nominated, or AfD for everything else, and if you follow the AfD procedure a discussion page gets created. But don't do this for a draft. Drafts aren't suitable for AfD and rarely even for PROD as they will be deleted after 6 months anyway, if no one is making any effort to get them up to main-space standard. Just walk away from the old draft and it will ultimately go away. Elemimele (talk) 11:20, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Elemimele , Thank you , but I am aware of the information you have given. I intentionally said that there. Because the user who is there is showing interest in the page PravinGanechari (talk) 12:18, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Example : The first question was that the way senior editors discuss on the notice board in the case of Reliable Sources. Do senior editors discuss page reviews in the same way?

• Example : The second question was that there is a case pending in the SPI board. You have evidence for that user. If you want to send these via off-wiki, to which email are they sent?

PravinGanechari (talk) 11:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, PravinGanechari. There aren't any "senior editors": there are just editors, some of whom have more experience and familiarity with the procedures than others. You can find all the noticeboards at Template:noticeboard links and see if any of them meet your need.

For your second question, see WP:OTRS. ColinFine (talk) 12:09, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

As ColinFine has said, there aren't any "senior editors". Of course there are old editors. (Consider my username.) Young and old editors don't "discuss page reviews", because there are no "page reviews". Please consider spending less time asking nebulous questions: it's time that you could instead spend on improving articles, or of course on "real life". -- Hoary (talk) 12:15, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Ah, so your fundamental concern is that DareshMohan worked on the draft that you wrote, and is adding a lot of messages to your talk-page? If you don't want to interact with them, you can ask them not to post on your talk page. You can delete their comments from your talk page of course. But you cannot delete the draft, or prevent them from working on it. If you have serious concerns about their behaviour towards you, you can of course go to ANI, but to be honest I think that would be a bad idea. In any case, I think you will get better answers if you are more clear about what you want. Elemimele (talk) 12:54, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Elemimele , Ever since I joined Wikipedia, he has been guiding me in every way on talk page , then he keeps telling me in every way whether I have contributed well or if I have any mistake. But I did not like the mistake he made on the Parichaya page. The reason for this is that no page should have much interest. PravinGanechari (talk) 16:49, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Misunderstandings are very easy in written communication. If you are becoming unhappy with unwanted advice from DareshMohan on your talk-page and it is making you uncomfortable, I suggest you ask them politely to stop. There is information at WP:KEEPOFF. If you do not wish to stop communicating with them altogether, you will have to explain very clearly what posts on your talk page you consider acceptable, and which you would rather not get. Some notifications and posts are inevitable, especially if you edit in the same areas, but it may be that DareshMohan thought they were being helpful, has been over-enthusiastic in their efforts, and this is merely a misunderstanding that the two of you can clear up. Elemimele (talk) 18:41, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

My language is Kannada , Tulu and Hindi. I have trouble talking to you. So you are misinterpreting it. If DareshMohan will guide me more than before then it is very good for me. Thank you for answering my questions, don't reply now PravinGanechari (talk) 19:36, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

This is an English Wikipedia, so I told PravinGanechari about some basic grammar rules. Now since, Pravin wants the draft deleted (Draft:Parichaya) tell him that him how to delete it. There is no need to keep on discussing this. Pravin said "But I did not like the mistake he made on the Parichaya page. The reason for this is that no page should have much interest". I think the mistake is that I submitted the draft to AfC, and I am sorry. Please end the discussion. DareshMohan (talk) 00:26, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

About the PH Highest Gross Film Article

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_Philippine_films

Please LOCK this website so NOBODY can edit this. They keep on removing and editing Maid in Malacañang part, where it earned over ₱600 million in gross sales. The bashers cannot believe it and they trolled Wikipedia by editing the page.

Kindly do something about it. KuyaMarvs (talk) 02:56, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: List of highest-grossing Philippine films. There appears to be edit warring over whether Maid in Malacañang earned more than 300 million or more than 600 million. Neither claim is referenced. Given the movie is a 2022 release, needs a reference. David notMD (talk) 03:06, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I've semi-protected it for a period. KuyaMarvs, please discuss Maid in Malacañang in Talk:List of highest-grossing Philippine films. -- Hoary (talk) 03:11, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@KuyaMarvs The article can't be protected forever, because someday there will be a new film to add. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:23, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

the irregular at magic highschool selling copies.

Hello. I find this link: {https://www.famitsu.com/news/202112/04243386.html} Is this a realiable source to change the irregular at magic highschool copy numbers from 20 million to 22 million? Wolfp5 (talk) 15:31, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Wolfp5 Welcome to Teahouse. I am not familiar at all with this domain, but based on what I read in Famitsu, seems reputable enough. If someone else disagreed, they could revert your edit and or discuss on the talk page. The more precise claim doesn't seem drastically different anyways ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:55, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

If the "202112" in the URL is a date, then it is more recent than the current citation, so yes. The URL you've given doesn't work for me: I get a 404. ColinFine (talk) 16:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

There is a closing brace inside the url. Try this one. [24] 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:39, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Help Me

Primefac 331dot I want help for editing and want mentor to guide me ? FNNWiki (talk) 18:03, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

This seems to be settled. -- Hoary (talk) 07:03, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

A Believer or Humanist user is needed

I asked before, reverted, i hope here is the right place. I need a believer or humanist user with realist worldview to give me peace and calm. I have been in various projects for around four years, I need to relax so that I can participate better. I would like to mention that i came to EnWiki as a "Refugee". For more, read my userpage. Best Wishes. Ruwaym (talk) 21:23, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Ruwaym. I'm guessing that nobody has answered you for the same reason that I didn't last night: I don't understand what you are asking for, and I doubt whether Wikipedia is the right place to ask for the sort of support you seem to want. I get that you've had a bad experience on other Wikipedias, and I'm sorry (though to be honest, I didn't read the wall of text on your user page carefully). But I don't know what you're asking for here. ColinFine (talk) 08:30, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine Hey Colin. I don't know if Wikipedia recognize it or not, maybe you can find it here. It's simple: I need "words", in English, from the other Wikipedians, to make me feel more peacful here, on EnWiki, as i "escaped" from other Wikipedias that i belive i have been harassed there. Something that worries me is that i see a denial of status from impatient users who only refers to the block log, and they hold more access. It's kinda funny, someone with more access, judges you less than one minute, label you, insists that he is "right" and all those things only to infinite block you. Ruwaym (talk) 11:35, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Help needed with first-time article deletion

I believe this article should be deleted (due to WP:N, WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:Technical). But the process has defeated me.

I have previously put {{subst:Proposed deletion|concern=...}} on the article. This was reverted, then un-reverted, then marked as contested. Fair enough.

So to get discussion, I tried following the procedure here. Following the instructions in the yellow bit, I added {{subst:afd1}} at the top of the article, and the edit summary AfD: Nominated for deletion...

Then I started on the orange bit, Create the article's deletion discussion page. I missed the link for Preloaded debate (whatever that is) and clicked on the deletion discussion page link. And now the instructions just get ridiculous. Really ridiculous. Something about adding an afd2 template, choosing categories, deletion sorting lists, delsort templates, deletion logs, log pages, afd3 templates, afd notice templates on Talk pages, etc.

Concluding that there must be an easier way, I spied the Does this look too complicated? box. (Why, yes, now that you mention it, it effing does.) I activated Twinkle and followed the instructions, but when I submitted the form, it told me I couldn't proceed (something about the page already being tagged for deletion?)

I conclude that the wiki concept of blank pages + text + links has been pushed beyond all reasonable limits, and maybe WP isn't for me. Any suggestions? -- Doktor Züm (talk) 17:41, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Doktor Züm, I've created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Endevor and done the related housekeeping business. AfD is rather a bore, but straightforward enough. Never fully remembering the details, each time I simply follow the recipe at Template:AfD in 3 steps. (I don't use Twinkle or any other ancillary Javascript or whatever.) Now please go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Endevor and say there why the article should be deleted. -- Hoary (talk) 22:09, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Done. -- Doktor Züm (talk) 06:21, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary I entered a !vote and rationale there--would you please see if I did it right? Thanks, I appreciate it. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 11:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Biased articles

Many people have been adding extremely biased articles in the page Religion in Andhra Pradesh that are totally different from the ground realities. They have also citied sources, which is biased. What can be done to remove it? Can you give more information about biasness in Wikipedia editing and how to stop it? Physicallyinorganic (talk) 11:03, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Physicallyinorganic Hello and welcome. Wikipedia does not claim to be free of bias, as all sources have biases. The sources are presented to readers so they can evaluate and judge them for themselves as to bias and other factors. A source being biased does not preclude its use on Wikipedia, unless the source is doing something like making things up out of whole cloth without appropriate fact checking. Please discuss your concerns on the article talk page, to arrive at a consensus as to what the article should say. If discussion fails to resolve the dispute, channels of dispute resolution may be used. If you believe a source is being used that does not perform fact checking and editorial control and wish to challenge its reliability, you may go to the reliable sources noticeboard. 331dot (talk) 11:09, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

You removed a sentence and a ref about underestimating the percentage of people of Christian faith and an editor reverted your edit. You repeated your edit and a different editor reverted it. Repitition is called "edit warring," and can lead to you being temporarily or indefinitely blocked from editing. The only valid option now is to start a discussion on the Talk page of the article, where you challange the validity of the reference in question. If, per what 331dot wrote, consensus is not reached, there are those paths of action. David notMD (talk) 11:46, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

How to... Add your name to the Adopters in the Adopt-A-User list ?

Hi everyone ! I have been using Wikipedia since 2017 (this account was created recently due to the loss of my previous account) and I wanted to add my Username and my Description to this list but I can't figure out how. I used the template { Adopting } on my user page but I do not see myself on the list. Can someone tell me how to add my description pls ? Craffael.09 (talk) 22:39, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Craffael.09: In addition to the userbox, you need to edit Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area/Adopters to add yourself. More info is at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adopter's Area RudolfRed (talk) 00:29, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Hey @Craffael.09. Feel free to adopt me, I am mature enough in my real life but as a Wikipedian, i am around 3years old. Ruwaym (talk) 11:37, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

I almost misread this. I thought there was a toddler here editing Wikipedia. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 12:24, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

How does gallery work

People keep removing my images from Aston Martin DBX gallery. I thought any image could be added to a gallery. Are they right??? - - - -T e r g y t h e u s e r- - - - (SAY SOMETHING TO ME) My creation 13:58, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

The image you added had no encyclopedic merit. The comment left by the editor who removed it was Mediocre quality, unnecessary images. ~~ 3 different people (who happen to be some of the most active wiki photographers, so we know what is needed) have removed these images now. If you are trying to have your images somewhere, make sure to get them of quality (not washed out, reflective etc.) as well as of a good angle, not off-center front/rears. See also Wikipedia:Image dos and don'ts Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:47, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Adding an External link to a Town page

I am looking for "volunteer" to Add an External link (below) to a Šternberk town page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0ternberk

https://www.geni.com/projects/%C5%A0ternberk-Sternberg-Olomouc-Moravia-Czech-republic/4476810

The project Page is of former Šternberk businesses & inhabitants before 1945, is extremely unique, benefitting historians and descendants of the former residents. Rohelp (talk) 14:43, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rohelp, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are sure that that link meets Wikipedia's policy on acceptable external links, then you are welcome to add it to the External Links section of the article Šternberk, unless you are connected with that website, in which case you have a conflict of interest in doing so, and should instead put an edit request on the talk page Talk:Šternberk. My concern would be that it is hard to determine the reliability of the information on that site: it is signed "Author Mgr. Veronika Sovková, historian", but anybody can put a page up on Geni and make any claims they like. ColinFine (talk) 14:58, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

I created the project page. The "signed "Author Mgr. Veronika Sovková, historian" - is only "attribution" for the "paragraph" of the Towns history at the bottom of the page. I will add my request to the Talk:Šternberk page - as you suggest, thanks. Rohelp (talk) 15:12, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

General_Roman_Calendar

Over the last several days, a user (Veverve) has been altering the wiki articles 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Roman_Calendar_of_1954 2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Roman_Calendar_of_1960 3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Roman_Calendar Two people are trying the get the old articles back into order on the 5 and 6 of September. The first, Megalonzerg, says about the General Roman Calendar of 1960 "Undid revision 1108628746 by Veverve (talk) The purpose of this page is to show the 1960 Calendar of Feasts of the Church. Over several days, a "retired" user named Veverve has made a stack of changes, the first of which completely gutted the Calendar, making the page worthless. This same thing seems to have been done to other older Calendars. I am attempting to undo the radical damage. It seems I must do it in steps, starting with the last)", and The second, 7oto, says about the General Roman Calendar "Add a citation of Missale Romanum (ed. typ. tertia, reimpressio emendata) as the main source of the list of celebrations inscribed in the GRC. Change celebration names to names that are used in Roman Missal (English translation from 2011). Add citations of celebration additions and changes. Multiple optional celebrations occurring on a day are listed on separate lines. Canonisation levels (saint/blessed) are not part of links of persons." (Added 32,203 bytes included the January thru December dates) Now, however, Veverve is altering the website again. I DO NOT KNOW if he is a known editor, and it is a legimate user. This is the second time that I ask about this (see "Re: General Roman Calendar") from yesterday. Thanks you for looking in to this! Bob Tarver (talk) 21:52, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Bob Tarver: As mentioned in the replies to your previous question, the removed material may not be suitable for the article. Please discuss it on the article's talk page. If you have trouble reaching consensus with other editors, use the guidance at WP:DR RudolfRed (talk) 21:57, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@BobTarver: fixing ping RudolfRed (talk) 21:58, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your help...but now the user Veverve has changed ALL the wiki articles

1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Roman_Calendar_of_1954

2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Roman_Calendar_of_1960

3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Roman_Calendar_of_1969

4) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Roman_Calendar

ALL OF THE ARTICLES ARE COMPLETELY USELESS!

and now the General Roman Calendar of 1969 has the following comment -

"Louis Bouyer had harsh words concerning this version of the General Roman Calendar:

I prefer to say nothing, or little, about the new calendar, the handiwork of a trio of maniacs who suppressed, with no good reason, Septuagesima and the Octave of Pentecost and who scattered three quarters of the Saints higgledy-piggledy, all based on notions of their own devising! Because these three hotheads obstinately refused to change anything in their work and because the pope wanted to finish up quickly to avoid letting the chaos get out of hand, their project, however insane, was accepted!"

Goes he have something against the Catholic Church? I been known, but I need to complain ... can you in the Teahouse help me out??? Bob Tarver (talk) 23:08, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Louis Bouyer was a Catholic priest, theologian, historian and writer, appointed by the Pope to important positions relating to those fields, so I don't think he "[had] something against the Catholic Church."

No huge and long-lasting organisation can be uniformly "good" and "correct" in all the decisions ever made by its myriad sub-divisions, or be without internal honest disagreements: Bouyer was describing what he thought were mistakes: if others of similar prominence held (or hold) opposing views, Wikipedia can (and should) present them as well, so if you know of such views, provide us with reliable sources. What we will not do is suppress well-sourced material because of one editor's preference.

[Disclaimer: I have no previous involvement in this matter; I am merely explaining established Wikipedia policy.] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.73.43 (talk) 23:42, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

IP, you removed my answer and that of BobTarver... Veverve (talk) 11:15, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh dear! Apologies to you both, Veverve and BobTarver. I certainly did not do so intentionally, and was completely unaware of having done so, or I would have cancelled rather than publishing. I think I may have experienced some connectivity problem and/or edit conflict when posting, which may have somehow led to this happening. Again, my apologies. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.73.43 (talk) 15:34, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

New page

Does anyone have any great tips for writing my first article? Cruzandrew23 (talk) 15:37, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@Cruzandrew23: Hello Cruz and welcome to the Teahouse! First, you should not be making articles purely to promote a company as that is not the purpose of Wikipedia (See WP:NOT). Second, if you really want to make an article (which is not recommended as one of the first things you do due to its difficulty) I suggest you check out WP:YFA which has lots of helpful advice for writing your first article. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:40, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Cruzandrew23, and welcome to the Teahouse. To enlarge on one of the things Blaze Wolf said: my tip is, Don't even try it until you have made several hundred non-trivial improvements to existing articles, and have come to grips with what Wikipedia expects in an article. As well as saving yourself a great deal of frustration and heartache (and possibly a considerable amount of wasted effort) you are likely to have added much much much more value to Wikipedia that way than by embarking on creating a new article before you are equipped to do so. ColinFine (talk) 16:02, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

David Bowie edit request

Hi! I was reading the article about David Bowie a few weeks ago, when I saw something there that I think is not correct for an encyclopedia. I wrote about it on the article Talk page, and only realized later that I probably should have made a formal edit request instead. Now I don't know how to handle this, as I have never edited anything on a Wiki and I was hoping someone with more skills could either help with the editing or at least comment on whether this is a reason for editing or not. My message is at the bottom of the David Bowie article talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:David_Bowie . Thanks for your help! 185.50.245.94 (talk) 13:14, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

And now my message above left before I had added a subject line. Sorry, seems that I'm very clumsy. :( 185.50.245.94 (talk) 13:16, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I've added a heading for you. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:21, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I see that no one has answered your question, perhaps because my comment above looked like an answer on first sight. Sorry about that. The talk page of the David Bowie article is probably quite high traffic as far as talk pages go, but it wouldn't harm to flag this as an edit request. You can do so by editing your comment to add the code {{Edit semi-protected}} (including the curly brackets) at the start. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:52, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

That said, edit requests are most likely to be acted on when they make a precise suggestion for a change, rather than a vaguer one with a request for input into the discussion. I see that discussion is now underway on the talk page, so I wouldn't use the edit request template now. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:33, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Link from the primary website for methodology

Hello, I found a deadlink in the Methodology section of the page Index of Economic Freedom. Link 25 goes to a dead page - https://www.heritage.org/index/book/methodology I researched and found the right page for the explanation of methodology - https://www.heritage.org/index/pdf/2022/book/02_2022_IndexOfEconomicFreedom_METHODOLOGY.pdf Can I insert this new link and replace the old dead link? The reason why I am asking is because this link is from the primary website, so I wanted to make sure this can be used. Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 06:25, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@ANLgrad According to the archives at the reliable sources noticeboard, the Heritage Foundation is generally unreliable as a source. The article nevertheless makes extensive use of it. Given this is the case, I don't see any harm in replacing a broken link with one that works. Long-term, you might want to look for altogether better sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:38, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull thank you. Yes, I agree with you. I wouldn't generally use it, but in this case I found it to be appropriate. But I wanted to get someone's opinion before replacing the dead link. Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 09:24, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Present-to-past bot?

Dear Teahouse, I recently updated two pages from present to past tense, since the projects no longer exist: Grow Heathrow and Forest Cafe. Is there a bot, script, or some other auto-tense-transformation to help in such cases? DougInAMugtalk 15:38, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@Douginamug: Articles are mostly written in the present tense. See MOS:TENSE RudolfRed (talk) 16:33, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Which says use past tense only for past events, for subjects that ... no longer meaningfully exist, so past tense is correct for those articles. However, no bot is capable of changing the tense of an article. Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:17, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Help Improving a Business Article

Hello all! Where can i enlist help with the following submission, it was rejected.

Imperial Dade (talk) 17:51, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@Imperial Dade: You need to do some other things first. First, are you being paid by your company to create a draft? If so you need to declare it per Wikipedia's TOS. Second, you need to change your username to represent you as an individual and not your company. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:02, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Imperial Dade, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Unfortunately, you have a very common misunderstanding of Wikipedia: the idea that it has anything at all to do with telling the world about yourself or your affairs. That is called promotion, and is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia.

If your company meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - most companies do not - then there could be an article about it. The article would not belong to you, would not be controlled by you, and would be based on what people unconnected with your company had published about the company, not on what the company says or wants to say.

If you wish to continue with this project, here is the minimum you must do:

1. Change your username to something that does not imply that it is shared, or that it is editing on behalf of the company. "Joe at Imperial Dade" would be OK.
2. Make the mandatory declaration of your status as a WP:paid editor.
3. Find several pieces where people wholly unconnected with the company, and not prompted or fed information by the company, have chosen to write in some depth about the company. If there are some that are critical or negative about the company, make sure you don't leave those out.
4. Write your draft wholly based on what those independent sources say.

Remember 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) 18:04, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

User has been blocked for having a promotional username and promotional edits. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:09, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Publisher of an online website?

Hi there! I was going to cite Anime News Network on one of its news pieces, and it wanted a publisher for the citation. What would be the publisher in this case? Itself? Link here Realtent (talk) 16:40, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Realtent. I see no evidence that there is another organization behind this website, so just leave the publisher field blank. It is not required. Cullen328 (talk) 16:45, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for that. What is a Ref/Id for anchor and how would I obtain that? thx Realtent (talk) 16:47, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@Realtent. I think you may be looking for the advice at WP:ANCHOR. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:38, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Adding onto that, what would be a suitable ref name/group? Would it be the article name? Sorry for pestering you. Realtent (talk) 16:50, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Realtent, a ref name is a mnemonic so you can remember it for re-use. It could be anything. I would probably use "ANN" but that is just my personal way of doing things. As for "Ref/Id for anchor", I do not recognize that but maybe another host will. Cullen328 (talk) 16:56, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Need help re more neutrality

Hi guys! I'm having issues with a draft submission not getting accepted two times in a row. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Backyard_Brains My second submission was way more neutral (I think) than the first, and yet the explanation is the same. Any clues as to what might have been the problem this time? Thank you! AhimeCrudele (talk) 18:19, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@AhimeCrudele A cursory look at the draft shows that almost everything there, including especially the citations, are from Gregory Gage, so is not WP:INDEPENDENT of the subject. You will need to find reliable sources that have not been fed information by him or his associates and give significant coverage of the company, showing how it is notable in Wikipedia's sense of the word. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:30, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, AhimeCrudele. One thing to realise is that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 21:15, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Multiple articles from one website

If I find multiple articles or pages from one website do I, at a certain point, just say "Its from [website]" or do I have to cite every single article. And if I have too many from one website, will I get marked for over reliance? Marshmallo3535 (talk) 23:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Marshmallo3535 and welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, you will have to cite all of the pages individually. Make sure the article is notable and not from a source such as Facebook. As far as being marked over, you will if you rely primarily on that website. If half of your article is based on that one website, then that's bad. Otherwise you should be good. Happy editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 ⋅𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔⋅ 23:58, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Trouble with a user.

Hey there. I've been recently looking through the recent changes page and reverting vandals. A few minutes ago I noticed that one user (N0tthemilk) was repeatedly vandalizing several pages. And was wondering what would be done to stop them? Thank you so much, I'm still new to this haha. AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 23:58, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello @AdmiralAckbar1977 and welcome to the Teahouse! First, you should give the vandal one final warning by using {{subst:uw-vandalism4}} ~~~~ on their talk page. If the user does any more acts of vandalism, then report it to Wikipedia:Guide to administrator intervention against vandalism. I hope the problem gets solved! Thank you for helping to revert vandals. Happy Editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 ⋅𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔⋅ 00:02, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

User:N0tthemilk now indef blocked for vandalism. David notMD (talk) 01:06, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Olivier Wormser

Hello! Ready this article. Check, please. Thanks Станислав Савченко (talk) 19:48, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Not ready. Do not submit yet. The draft has no useful references. Do more. David notMD (talk) 20:14, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD Great job following the style! 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:02, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

ОК, I will make it your remarks.--Станислав Савченко (talk) 20:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Stanislav, this is a translation of fr:Olivier Wormser. You should have stated this in the summary for your very first edit. You did not, you didn't do so in any subsequent edit summary, and you say nothing in Draft talk:Olivier Wormser. State it in the summary for your next edit to the draft, and (because people might not see it there) also in Draft talk:Olivier Wormser. Please read Help:Translation#License requirements, carefully. -- Hoary (talk) 22:24, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done--Станислав Савченко (talk) 22:34, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done, I did it what I could this article.--Станислав Савченко (talk) 17:17, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD:--Станислав Савченко (talk) 12:10, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

TEATIME

This cup of tea brought to you by A diehard editor.

If I said tea time what would your thought immediate say I was asking about. Babydollmissy (talk) 01:59, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Do you have a Wikipedia question? And yes, I'm thinking about tea. When you say tea time I think of tea. After all, this is a teahouse. But this place is meant for asking questions about Wikipedia. The tea's only role is to give you something to drink while you await an answer from an experienced Wikipedian. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 03:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes I was going to say that but like we are going to drink tea and talk 41.114.236.101 (talk) 04:56, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

English Wikipedia's Teahouse was launched in February 2012. "The name Teahouse is meant to evoke the idea of a comfortable social space for meaningful personal interaction among peers." I suppose 'beer hall' or 'whiskey bar' would not have had the same implied civility. David notMD (talk) 07:37, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

how about a water shed, perhaps? 💜  melecie  talk - 09:45, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@Babydollmissy Wikipedia's Teahouse is for questions from newbies. Yes, people can give tea (with the WikiLove feature) to other users, but this isn't a literal teahouse area. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 15:44, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

It makes me think of a line from the extended remix version of Paranoimia by Art of Noise featuring Max Headroom, @Babydollmissy. AoN:TEA? ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 13:11, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I have placed an image of tea in here. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 09:45, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

I thought it was just WikiLove, but that works too. (Tea time, indeed!) WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:06, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

How to unlink my name from a page.

Hi, my name Steve Wall is linked to the Wiki page about my band The Walls. Since that page was created I have become successful as an actor. A friend recently pointed out to me that there is no Wiki entry for me and she couldn't create one, as my name is linked to The Walls page. Is there any way to unlink this? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. 101watts (talk) 16:19, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

101watts Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. In Wikipedia parlance, Steve Wall redirects to The Walls. The redirect can be changed to an article- but creating a new article is difficult when it isn't about yourself- never mind when it is. Autobiographical articles are highly discouraged- though not forbidden- per the autobiography policy(please review). This is discouraged in part because people naturally write favorably about themselves, when Wikipedia tries to have a neutral point of view. It would be best if you allowed independent editors to take note of your career and choose on their own to write about you. If you have reviewed the special Wikipedia definition of a notable actor or the broader notable person and truly feel that you meet it, and you receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources, an article about you may be drafted at Articles for Creation if you choose. You should read Your First Article if you are going to do that. You should also be aware that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 16:25, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

101watts I just wanted to point out that there's a U.S. photographer named Steve Wall. Though the U.S. photographer doesn't have an article on the English Wikipedia, he does have an article on the German Wikipedia! Though German Wikipedia has its own namespace, there is some likelihood that he'll get his own article on English Wikipedia. One option to consider is for your article to be named "Steve Wall (actor)". This would avoid dealing with the conflict with the existing redirect for Steve Wall and also avoid a potential future conflict with the U.S. photographer. Fabrickator (talk) 17:19, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, 101watts. I noticed that you are also in another successful band The Stunning, that opened for Bob Dylan five nights in London. Therefore, you meet one of the standards in the notability guideline Wikipedia:Notability (music), which says a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles is likely to be eligible for a Wikipedia biography. Coverage in reliable sources about your acting in recent years would only add to your notability. If your friend wants to try drafting an article about you, be sure that she openly discloses the friendship. I would be happy to give her advice about the process. Cullen328 (talk) 17:24, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. I have no interest in writing about myself, but if I can unlink my name from The Walls then anyone else is free to do so. Steve Wall (Actor) is a good idea for a separate page.

I'll give you some background. I am the singer and songwriter in two successful Irish bands The Stunning and The Walls. The Stunning's debut album Paradise in the Picturehouse spent 5 weeks at number one in Ireland upon its release in 1990, followed by a second number one album Once Around the World in 1992 as well as numerous hit singles. The Stunning have opened for the likes of Rory Gallagher (Lark by the Lee, Cork 1992); Bob Dylan (5 nights Hammersmith Odeon London, Feb 1991) and the B52's (UK tour Feb 1991). The Stunning's biggest song is probably Brewing up a Storm which causes thousands of Irish people around the world to go stir crazy:)

The Walls opened for U2 at Slane Castle (Sept 1st 2001); Red Hot Chilli Peppers (Landsdowne Rd. Stadium, Dublin June 25th 2002), Bob Dylan again (Pearse Stadium Galway, July 27 2004); Crowded House (2007 Sydney Entertainment Centre Nov 6 & 7 and Rod Laver Arena Melbourne Nov 8 & 9. The Walls track Drowning Pool is featured over the opening credits of the movie Begin Again starring Mark Ruffalo and Keira Knightley. Their track "To the Bright and Shining Sun" featured on the EA Sports soundtrack for the UEFA Euro 2004 official licensed game. A new The Walls album of rarities and previously unreleased material is due for release later this year.

Steve Wall has since been forging a career as an actor on film and television. He is part of the lead cast on "The English (TV series) starring Emily Blunt and Chaske Spencer for BBC/Amazon Studios, which receives its first broadcast on Nov 10 2022 on BBC2/BBC iPlayer, followed by Amazon Prime Video on November 11 2002. Recent credits include the role of Ambrose in the Ridley Scott series 'Raised by Wolves' S1, (HBO Max); principal cast in 'The South Westerlies', a 6-part Irish comedy-drama (Deadpan Pictures/Acorn Media); 'The Witcher' (S1 Netflix) playing the nasty Boholt; and he can be seen in the lead role of jazz musician 'Chet Baker' in the Dutch art house feature 'My Foolish Heart' about the days leading up to the jazz legend's death in Amsterdam in 1988. Other notable roles include: Vikings (Einar); Tin Star S3 (Sean); Rebellion (RTE); and Uncle Danny in Moone Boy (Sky TV).

His IMDB page for credits etc. is - https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2425811/

A friend pointed out to me that on the Wikipedia page for the new TV series The English, there is no link on my name - The English (TV series) That's what prompted me to get in touch. And upon consideration of your helpful responses, I think it would be better if a third party unknown to me wrote something.

Many thanks, Steve 101watts (talk) 18:31, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@101watts Hello - if you have reliable sources surrounding you as an actor, then you may create a draft of the article in a neutral tone detailing what surrounded you,in those sources. Otherwise, redirects are created to certain things associated with the name. (e.g. with Steve Wall) WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 06:41, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. There is an IMDB page about me here: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2425811/ 101watts (talk) 18:32, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@101watts In WP:Reliable sources, IMDb is user generated so it doesn't count. You may check to see if there are any articles on you without passing mentions. If there are none, I suggest either making a draft or waiting for any independent sources. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:09, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

@101watts IMDB is sadly considered to be unreliable. Please review this page: WP:RSP Roostery123 (talk) 15:17, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

More specifically, WP:IMDB. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:04, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Britannica

Hi, just asking out of sheer curiosity and wanting to genuinely know. But considering that Britannica is a reliable source that's generally written by experts in the field. Is it wrong or not permitted to cite them in Wikipedia? (A rival encyclopaedia) - Maybe it's frowned upon but I really don't see what could be wrong about it. So wanted to ask the experts their take. Thank you. Simpleshooter99 (talk) 05:46, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

@Simpleshooter99 Hi and good question! See WP:BRITANNICA. What is an RS depends on context, it should be fine for lots of simple facts. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:58, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Simpleshooter99. The Encyclopædia Britannica is definitely a reliable source. However, it is a tertiary source, and reliable, independent secondary sources are the backbone of Wikipedia articles. Certain primary and tertiary sources can be used with caution. There is no rivalry. Wikipedia's success may have damaged Brittanica's business model, but that was unintentional. Cullen328 (talk) 06:23, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Cataloging/updating pages for people who spread disinformation

Are there groups or guilds that work on updating pages to catalog when a person in the public eye starts spreading disinformation, anti-vaccine content, etc.? It may be a difficult task in some situations if the person is mostly posting to social media and there isn't much mainstream news coverage. Chucklehammer (talk) 06:17, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Chucklehammer. Groups or guilds? Not that I am aware of, although there are certainly editors who closely follow such topics. If reliable independent sources cover the disinformation, it may be appropriate to add to a Wikipedia biography, as long as the relevant Policies and guidelines are followed. However, a Wikipedia editor should not be scouring people's social media accounts looking for posts that the editor decides to describe as "disinformation". That is the job of journalists writing for reliable sources, and Wikipedia editors simply summarize their published work. No more than that. Cullen328 (talk) 06:33, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

How to cite this

While trying to improve things, I came across this odd citation, and I don't know how to correct it. It was introduced at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Garrett_Hardin&diff=prev&oldid=779132378. I would mark it citiaton needed, but it looks like there is something that could be cited, I've just no idea how. Hajile 00 (talk) 04:08, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

@Hajile 00 I agree it is odd and even if correctly cited it would be a WP:PRIMARY source as it appears to be a statement from Hardin himself. I'd be inclined to remove it and rely on current citation #26 from the newspaper as a secondary source which has all the information used in that section of the biography. Mike Turnbull (talk) 08:13, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Banned user edits for self promotion

Hi! I need some help. I removed a reference in an article that pointed a blog that belongs to an editor that was already banned for promotional links.

Not only is that blog not at all credible, and not only was the edit only promotional in nature, but the very blog post cited is actually a patchwritten summary of the same Wikipedia page! This is a clear license violation and ultimately spam.

But my edits get reverted. Help? Esasura (talk) 07:20, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Esasura As I understand the situation, you have correctly identified User:CitSci05 as being indefinitely blocked for using own blog as a reference. Based on this, you have deleted content and refs from at least eight lizard and snake articles. Most of your deletions have been reverted. When I look at what happened, it appears that you deleted content added by CitSci05 in addition to references. Perhaps a more cautious (and successful) path would be to remove the offending references and if there were no other valid references, put in a citation needed. OR, remove the offending references and add proper references - a more tedious task. David notMD (talk) 09:02, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Creating a fake Wikipedia page.

I want to create a fake Wikipedia page for the sake of alternate history worldbuilding and some people on DeviantArt recommended I use the Sandbox here on Wikipedia to do that. After making the fake page, I intend on saving it to my personal files and then deleting the fake page so as not to use up server space here.

The question I ask to all here is this: can I even save a page to my personal files? If not, is there someplace else I should go in order to do the intention I have described above? Yehiyorash (talk) 21:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Yehiyorash, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that there is nowhere on Wikipedia where a fake Wikipedia page will be tolerated - if you create one, even in your user space, it is likely to be deleted as soon as somebody notices it. ColinFine (talk) 21:16, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Okay, Thank you for giving me an answer before I wasted my time. Yehiyorash (talk) 21:18, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Yehiyorash I have a suggestion: Do what you want, but don't click "Publish changes". Ruwaym (talk) 21:25, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

There are wikis dedicated to alternate history on Fandom, I suggest you check those out. Sungodtemple (talk) 22:08, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

If you do not click Publish changes, the content will not be saved. But you can copy it first to your own computer. Or do as Sungodtemple suggested. David notMD (talk) 23:53, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Yehiyorash: Try a web host that uses the same software as Wikipedia (MediaWiki), like Fandom or Miraheze, or if you're tech-savvy enough, try installing MediaWiki on your local computer. With a MediaWiki web host or your own installation, you get something similar to Wikipedia (a wiki) and you can do whatever you want with it (just don't break the law). A diehard editor (talk | edits) 09:41, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@Yehiyorash Hello! If you prefer to use something like Wikipedia instead of Fandom (Wikia), I recommend using Miraheze. You can also set up a private wiki. MediaWiki is the software Wikipedia uses, but it's more complicated. Hope this helps! WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 09:03, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

By the way, you can make a private wiki only if you want to edit the articles by yourself, and only by yourself. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 09:04, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

regarding publishing your page in wiki

We need to put the everything in one go and publish? or it can be by segments? Sazzadkhan76 (talk) 08:38, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

@Sazzadkhan76, you can start a draft from here: Wikipedia:Drafts#Creating_and_editing_drafts and save/publish the draft as many times as you want. Then you can submit it for approval. Take your time, it is not easy to write an acceptable WP-article without any previous WP-editing experience. Some further info at WP:AUTO WP:GNG, WP:YFA and WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:52, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

To clarify, "Publish changes" basically means "Save." Until a draft is submitted and approved, it exists in Wikipedia but is invisible to searches at outside search such as Google. David notMD (talk) 09:07, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

thank you Sazzadkhan76 (talk) 10:20, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

URL error in book reference

I'm getting the "|access-date=requires | url" error message again, but there's no URL field in the book cite ref. code to delete, so I don't know what to do. (In the past, this has been fixed for me, but I'd like to learn how to do it myself.) The articles are MUD and MUSH, references 32 and 11 respectively. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 07:07, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles You need to delete the access-date parameter. It is only to be used if there is a URL (which might be subject to link rot). Books + ISBN do not "rot" and there is no need to state when you read them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 08:03, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Should have been intuitive. Thanks. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 11:54, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

What does it mean for an Article to be a "dictionary definition"?

My article was rejected because it was basically a dictionary definition. I don't understand what that means nor which parts were basically a dictionary definition. My article is Simplifying (chess). Angerxiety (talk) 01:13, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

@Angerxiety: Welcome to the Teahouse. The reviewer felt that the tactic doesn't warrant its own article because what you've provided is essentially a definition, and you haven't established how it is notable as Wikipedia defines it. It might be appropriate for Wikipedia's sister project Wiktionary, or a page for chess tactics on here (if it exists). I'll also add that the voice being used is inappropriate (see the Manual of style in regards to using the second person). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:19, 8 September 2022 (UTC) (Amended 01:44, 8 September 2022 (UTC))

Hello, Angerxiety. I do not think that MiMi is a reliable source and you have used it twice, so all you have is chess.com. The coverage on that website is instruction manual type content, and Wikipedia is not an instruction manual. Cullen328 (talk) 01:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Also note that the concept is already explained at Glossary of chess#simplification. We do allow some topic-specific glossaries where individual entries are dictionary definitions. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:17, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Well I guess my draft is meaningless now.

Great to know. Angerxiety (talk) 14:18, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

@Angerxiety: Maybe it could be improved to meet article standards but it needs more content and citations to reliable sources. I don't know much chess but the unsourced example appears to contradict the definition which says "trade pieces of equal value". Both lose their queen with the stated moves and a bishop and knight are usually considered of equal value but only black loses a pawn. Also, the article says "gxf6??" which indicates it would be a bad mistake for black to actually take the bishop, but no alternative is mentioned. If black should do something else then it looks even less like the definition. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Also the word "you" should never appear in an article. See WP:YOU. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:08, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

To clarify this response, you can be used in an article, but the article does not directly refer to the reader in the second person. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 11:45, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Significant coverage

Hi! How many resources 'significant coverage' exactly mean? It seems like even 4 are not enough. Dubitoergosum22 (talk) 18:57, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:The Information Strategies Council of Ukraine (SANCTIONS: EE)

It means that the sources discuss the subject of the Wikipedia article at some length, generally a couple paragraphs' worth. Name-drops, quoting the subject (or one of its principals, in this case) or organisation profiles will not be acceptable. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:02, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Dubitoergosum22, welcome to the Teahouse. Put another way, four small mentions in four separate articles is not significant coverage; extensive discussion in one article is significant coverage. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:06, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@Dubitoergosum22, welcome to the Teahouse. Significant coverage here means how much coverage of the topic is in a single source, not how many sources. A mention of the topic is not enough. See WP:SIGCOV, which says Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. Find sources with in-depth information about the topic, not sources that just mention it. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:08, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Significant coverage is not a matter of multiple sources. Significant coverage happens within a source. casualdejekyll 15:30, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Cloudflare - Add categories /w admin protection

I've previously assigned "Far-right terrorism" and "Websites with far-right material" to Cloudflare's page in light of the KiwiFarms controversy. But it was removed by a user for "mischaracterizing." Can an admin look into it and hopefully reinstate the categories because I don't want to edit war with that user? Thanks! 80.198.195.72 (talk) 15:12, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Admins do not settle content disputes; please discuss your concerns on the article talk page, and offer your reasoning and any reliable sources to support your position. Should discussion fail to resolve the dispute, you may use dispute resolution. 331dot (talk) 15:14, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Cloudflare seems to be more of a site host than a web page, and they host sites for all kinds of companies-- they list IBM and other well known companies on their hosting page. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:16, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Just a note: I am against what CloudFlare's doing too (and Kiwi-Farms, yuck), but I necessarily think they're moreso just hosting a site that has advocated far-right terrorism more than the host relating to such topic itself. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:08, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

The categories may seem biased, and accusing cloud flare for the resent controversy instead of kiwifarm's users, I would assume. Ianbambooman (talk) 15:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Use of Proper Map Colours

The article "Russians" shows Russian populations in black and red.

It is common knowledge amongst geographers and map-makers that red is a good way to denote a problem. Occurrences of disease, forest fires, or high-traffic areas are all appropriate places for colour "red" in mapping. In GIS classes our professor gave an example of Floridan political groups denoting Latin populations in red as part of a racist campaign.

Where is the best place to point out this problem and advocate for an appropriate colour? Shoutsofvictory (talk) 22:53, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Shoutsofvictory and welcome to the Teahouse! You will want to put this on the article's talk page, then once you find consensus on what to do or not, you should change it. Happy Editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 ⋅𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔⋅ 00:04, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

hi @Shoutsofvictory! you might want to notify Allice Hunter as well, who created most if not all of the ethnic group maps. it's possible that she drew the map colors with the colors of their home countries or at least colors present in their flag, but it's kinda inconsistent: some maps like American (blue), Chinese (red), Brazil (green), Indian (orange), and Spanish (yellow) follow this pattern, however some have colors that are off like Italian (lime), Irish (cyan), Mexican (turquoise), and Swedish (cyan). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 05:52, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

The colours of all maps are chosen from the colours present in the flag of the diaspora's country of origin. For some colours, I change the brightness or add a little more red, green or blue to the code to improve visualization. For example, some shades of green may not be as easily distinguishable, but the difference becomes noticeable if I add some yellow to the code and make some shades closer to lime. @Shoutsofvictory: Regarding red having a negative connotation, I believe this is not a rule, especially if the map does not use different colours. The example of denoting Latin populations in red only makes sense because other colours were likely used on the map to represent other ethnic groups (they probably used blue or green to represent white people, right?). − Allice Hunter ^(Inbox) 06:10, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't think there are any flags that are all red. Perhaps an easy solution to the problem would be to switch Russians to blue?
The problem with China and using flag colors is that if we can't use red, then we use yellow, and that... also has some unwanted implications. casualdejekyll 15:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Liberal Bias

User blocked. casualdejekyll 15:46, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
why is it that if someone posts something negative about the political right that it is allowed to remain and seemingly even incouraged. But if an article is edited truthfully and it points out the lefts hypocrisy then it is immediately changed and the editor is threatened with banishment? 2600:1003:B856:4698:787B:FF07:6784:97A7 (talk) 11:14, 8 September 2022 (UTC) It is difficult to respond to a general grievance. If you have a specific issue to discuss, please do so- though your reference to "lefts hypocrisy" tells me you don't have much interest in collaborating with others to achieve a consensus as to what an article should say. Wikipedia is about posting what can be verified, not the "truth", since what is true depends on the person. See WP:TRUTH. If you only want to read what you want to hear, this isn't the place for you. 331dot (talk) 11:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC) FYI  – Transcluded IP 2600's link from the top of the Teahouse. https://www.knoxfocus.com/archives/this-weeks-focus/double-standards-and-liberal-hypocrisy/ Explodicator7331 (talk) 13:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC) Your response is exactly the type of thing that I am talking about..the fact is that Wikipedia is not about what is verified because you can include a link to verification and it is still removed. And making the comment that I should not be here because I don't like What is being said is proof that you edit this site to say exactly what YOU like to hear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1003:B856:4698:787B:FF07:6784:97A7 (talk) 11:43, 8 September 2022 (UTC) Being verifiable isn't enough to guarantee that something will be included. See also WP:NPOV and note that where (left or right-wing) opinions are included in articles, they should be attributed to their sources in the text, not stated in Wikipedia's voice. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2022 (UTC) Again, it's hard to respond to you without knowing what your specific grievance is. If it is this edit, adding a link to an opinion piece by a newspaper publisher is not "verification". We are looking for independent reliable sources with a reputation of fact checking and editorial oversight, which an opinion piece does not usually have. No, I don't want to read what I want to hear, I want to read a summary of independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 12:25, 8 September 2022 (UTC) Independent reliable sources have been included in many edits that people have made on Wikipedia. The problem seems to be that Wikipedia does not consider any source that has a conservative view reliable, and the liberal editors are always there to inforce their beliefs instead of respecting the freedom of speech that so many in this country have died for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1003:B856:4698:787B:FF07:6784:97A7 (talk) 13:01, 8 September 2022 (UTC) Wikipedia is global, not just an American website. You misunderstand freedom of speech, see WP:FREESPEECH. Free speech means that the government will not punish you for your speech, not that private entities cannot do so. Just as you can have rules about what is said in your residence, Wikipedia has rules. If those rules are not being followed, please give a specific example. Sources that make things up out of whole cloth are not considered reliable, but being conservative is not a barrier to inclusion as long as it is a reliable source that has a reputation of fact checking. I really want to help you if you are willing to come halfway and collaborate. 331dot (talk) 13:10, 8 September 2022 (UTC) Your edit didn't add sourced material, just an external link to the body of an article, which is against Wikipedia policy regardless of the nature of the link. See WP:ELPOINTS. Re "this country", Wikipedia doesn't serve an audience in just one country. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:11, 8 September 2022 (UTC) Thank you for wanting to help me, as I want to help you to, and I am happy to come halfway to collaborate as I hope you and others of your mindset are as well. Your comment of " You misunderstand freedom of speech, see WP:FREESPEECH. Free speech means that the government will not punish you for your speech, not that private entities cannot do so." Seems to be the problem that I was having....I made the mistake of believing that everyone has the right to post the truth on this site as long as it has reliable sources but as you stated this is a private entitie. I guess my only suggestion would be that perhaps the mission statement should be : About Wikipedia " Free speech means that the government will not punish you for your speech, not that private entities such as Wikipedia cannot do so." INSTEAD OF About Wikipedia " Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing." — Jimmy Wales Obviously the sum of all knowledge that you are giving is slanted to conform to fit your beliefs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1003:B856:4698:787B:FF07:6784:97A7 (talk) 13:31, 8 September 2022 (UTC) To 2600. You started editing as an IP on 8 September, and so far, every one of your edits (all without references) have been reverted, and you have been warned on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 13:39, 8 September 2022 (UTC) To David notMd. What is your point ? All you have done is stated the facts..yes I have been warned and I am sure that I will Will have my IP banned as it has been done before because I insist on telling the truth and not repeating the lies and half truths that this site seems to print. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1003:B856:4698:787B:FF07:6784:97A7 (talk) 13:50, 8 September 2022 (UTC) If you're just interested in telling what you see as the "truth", you are going to have a very difficult time here. This is not a free speech forum; you are free to go and find an encyclopedia project more to your tastes, since you seem to want to stay in your information bubble where you are comfortable, have what you need to justify your views, and free from other viewpoints. As an American that's very sad to hear. I'm happy to see information that I might not want to hear or that challenges my perceptions. Good day. 331dot (talk) 15:11, 8 September 2022 (UTC) Now blocking for block evasion since they say they were blocked before. 331dot (talk) 15:13, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Could you please add Chongyang (Double Ninth) Festival - Seniors Day to the Grandparents Day around the world page?

Dear Editor,

In China, we celebrate Chongyang Festival (Double Ninth Festival) for thousands of years. It has always been dedicated to celebrating the elders, and grandparents in our history. In the 1980s, the festival was set official as Seniors Day by the Chinese government. as a school, we promote it to children for showing their love and appreciation to grandparents and the seniors in our community. it is the oldest Grandparents’ day in the world. It is on the ninth day of the ninth lunar calendar. This year it falls on the 4th of October. We hope society will celebrate the special time for the grandparents and elders just like how we celebrate Mother's Day and Father's Day. Hope you can add China's Grandparents Day - Chongyang Festival (Double Ninth Festival) Seniors Day to the "Grandparents Day around the World page on Wikipedia. Much appreciated.

More information about the festival can be found here: https://wenlinchineseschool.org.uk/chongyang2022.htm

The URL for the page that I refer to is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandparents%27_Day

I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards, Rosa Wang Founder and Headteacher WenLin Chinese School (Redacted) Wiki886699 (talk) 11:07, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, WIki886699, and welcome to the Teahouse. There isn't a "board of editors" who might respond to your request - there are thousands of individual volunteer editors, each of whom chooses what they want to work on. It's possible that somebody might see your request and be fired up to go and look for reliable sources for the festival (your school website does not qualify, I'm afraid), but no guarantees. If you have a reliable source (see the link above for what that means), you could add it to Grandparents' Day yourself, or if you're not confident to do that, you could suggest it on Talk:Grandparents' Day. (I note that most of the entries in that section are about days specifically for grandparents, not for the wider category of senior citizens). Another possibility is to post on WT:WikiProject China, as you might find somebody more intersted in working with you there. ColinFine (talk) 14:44, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your kind reply. Wiki886699 (talk) 16:08, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Make an entry

How do I place a biographical entry on Wiki, please? 88.111.236.134 (talk) 15:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

you are strongly discouraged from making a autobiography, but if you wish to create an article anyway, do read Help:Your first article. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみ, ping me when replying 15:50, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

First make sure you have sources that meets the demands of WP:GNG. If it's a living person, take the time to read WP:BLP. And what lettherebedarklight said. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:08, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

What do to about suspicious editing

Thanks so much for your friendly welcome User:WillKomen. I can't wait to start editing! CupOfSunshine (talk) 19:37, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi - my turn again to ask a question. I have hundreds of articles on my watch list, and every now and then I come across a suspicious edit. Recently, it's been brand new editors who are doing rapid edits, and seem to have a decent understanding of syntax, policies and edit summaries. Of course they are socks, but there's no easily identifiable other known co-sock to bring to SPI. While sometimes disruptive, it's not necessarily clearly vandalism either, but ranges from editors doing multiple rapid Wiki-links (to get autoconfirmed obviously), using Twinkle to bring articles to AfD, or adding controversies in rapid succession, which hints at a more sinister motive, such as potentially trying to charge businesses to remove the controversies. Rather than just pinging editors I know that combat this type of editing, is there a place to report these accounts so they can be checkusered? TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:37, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@Timtempleton Not sure if you already know about this, but I think you may be looking for Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. As long as you remember the original account name and their socks, you're good. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 15:42, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@WannurSyafiqah74: Thanks. I know about SPI, but the process requires you to name other known socks when opening a case, and they aren't always apparent. I see new accounts that are definitely not novice editors, but don't have the tools to match their IP addresses to other suspected socks who are already editing, or who may be simply trying to evade blocks. I want to alert patrollers about these new suspicious accounts so they can be checked. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:53, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: I recognise the situation well, and it can be pretty frustrating. One problem is that suggesting that someone is a sock, without evidence of whose sock it is, is a personal attack (I realise you know that, but some people who read this might not be aware of it). There isn't really a centralised place for this kind of situation. Cautioning and warning suspected UPE socks on their user talk page, and then taking them to the Conflict of Interest noticeboard if they don't respond, might be one avenue. Or posting to the talk page of an admin who is active in countering COI/UPE disruption. When it comes to new accounts adding wikilinks and doing nothing else, that's not actually disruptive as long as they don't go against WP:OVERLINKING on a large scale, and hopefully a caution on their user talk page will work. Thing is, even if the account is just adding wikilinks at a rapid pace there is nothing to show that they are a sock or that they are racking up their edit count; I think wiklinking is one of the things new editors are recommended to do as a "newcomer task". Not sure if this was helpful or just rambling :-) --bonadea contributions talk 11:52, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: It's also worth bearing in mind that some people edit for years as IP editors before finally creating an account, in which case they'll be familiar with all the syntax. They may also wade straight into something controversial because the controversy was the very thing that prompted them to create an account. Any new editor may also be tempted to do a lot of trivial edits quickly, to build up their edit count and "improve" their statistics "better", it's just human nature. But in the end, if a sock is doing bad things, like removing controversies without explanation, adding uncited material, this can be dealt with without addressing the sockiness. Any editor can be warned and ultimately sanctioned for consistently bad editing. The problem area, where I sympathise with you greatly, is when a sock is causing trouble because of their sockiness: where they are impersonating two people to their own benefit, for example by conspiring with themselves to create what looks like a consensus of multiple editors, where they're !voting multiple times in a debate, or supporting their own AfD nominations. There I suppose the only way we can reconcile AGF and the issue of an account that's stomping around on webbed feet and quacking is to hope that anyone who gets involved will recognise that single purpose accounts who only started editing yesterday are less reliable than someone who's been around for ages and commented sensibly on multiple topics. But it's a tricky one. It's a bit like UPE, which is even harder to prove. Elemimele (talk) 20:04, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Elemimele: and @Bonadea: - good tips about a new editor possibly having experience as an IP beforehand, and assuming good faith. In this case, it's very hard. The first editor's first two unreverted edits were to AfD two articles - one I wrote in July 2022 and one in March 2020, that was earlier targeted by a sock farm. With the long time gap between articles, and July 2022 nomination appears to be a smokescreen. The editor 多少 战场 龙 appears to not be a native English speaker, consistent with the group from Kerala that targeted the article before. The second unconnected editor Aliapoh, also a new account, added four controversies 30 minutes apart. I'm keeping an eye on both of them and reverting anything that doesn't look proper. If things get worse, I'll post a warning, and then if that doesn't solve things, I'll go to ANI. Cheers! TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:20, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree - I did basically navigate Tim to the SPI page, but I didn't know 5hings were more complicated. Thanks! WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:06, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

There's also a slight chance that new editors have read classic texts like How Wikipedia Works and MediaWiki: Wikipedia and Beyond, before leaping in enthusiastically. That's how I learnt syntax and basic conventions. -- Doktor Züm (talk) 09:12, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Qualifying for academic notability

Hello,

I have been helping create a Wikipedia page for Dr. Dan Theodorescu, director of Cedars-Sinai Cancer at the Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles. Page link - Dan Theodorescu He is a co-editor of a major journal in his field (Bladder Cancer) as well as various academic accomplishments that should quality him for the Academic Notability designation. Could someone please let me what should be added to the current Wikipedia page?

Thank you very much!

RS RKSatWork (talk) 17:52, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

@RKSatWork all you need is a variety of reliable sources to make sure that the subject passes the notability criteria. Blanchey (talk) 18:39, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

@RKSatWork you should read WP:N to understand our notability policies, and WP:RS to understand our policies about reliable sources. From what I can see, the article as it stands today does not have a single source that contributes to notability of the subject. The first four sources are merely database entries that establish that Dr. Theodorescu exists, which is not sufficient to establish notability. The rest of the sources are all papers that Dr. Theodorescu wrote himself or contributed to, which also contribute nothing towards notability. Your first steps should be to find at least 2-3 reliable sources, independent of the subject, which discuss him in depth.

It's possible that he qualifies for one of the WP:NACADEMICS criteria; it's out of my area of expertise to judge, for example, whether Bladder Cancer is a "major, well-established academic journal" or whether the University of Virginia is a "major institution of higher education and research" in his area of research, but finding independent reliable sources would be ideal. CodeTalker (talk) 19:01, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, RKSatWork. He clearly meets WP:NACADEMIC as an elected member of the National Academy of Medicine. Here is verification. Notable academics do not have to meet the General Notability Guideline. Cullen328 (talk) 22:22, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

As for the University of Virginia, of course it is a major institution of higher education. It was founded over 200 years ago by Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison and James Monroe were original board members. At least 55 Rhodes Scholars have graduated from there. It is classified by the Association of American Universities "R1: Doctoral Universities – Very high research activity". Cullen328 (talk) 22:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)