Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1058

Archive 1055

Archive 1056

Archive 1057

Archive 1058

Archive 1059

Archive 1060

→

Archive 1065

Sourcing images

Hi, I've created several articles about notable wildfires; however, I could not find 'free-to-use' images for them. There are plenty of images in the news articles and journals that I used as sources. Is it a good practice to contact these sources to get the images, if possible? I can send out an email to some of them and see if they respond. Thanks. NawJee (talk) 21:58, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

NawJee, Howdy hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, it can be a good idea. I occasionally reach out to sources to ask permission to use files. You should read the steps at Commons:OTRS, they have some example form emails I believe. Be aware that if a source gives us an image, they must release under a free license, which means that anyone, not just Wikipedia, can re-use the file with attribution. Many organizations don't like that, but please be clear and up front with them. You'll probably get declined or ghosted more than you'll succeed, but in the end it is quite worth it, as images are one of the most important parts of articles. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 22:13, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the welcome and your response. I just found this list of public domain image resources. I'll go through it first, I think that would be a better approach. If that doesn't work, I'll try reaching out to the sources to get images as per the guidelines you shared. NawJee (talk) 22:42, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

@NawJee: If you do decide to contact a source, it would be a good idea to point them to the Wikimedia OTRS release generator. --MrClog (talk) 22:45, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

@MrClog: This is very helpful. I will definitely share this link with the sources if needed. Thank you. NawJee (talk) 22:50, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

• That's a hard road in most cases, NawJee. News organizations are generally for-profit companies. They're going to be very reluctant to share, as releasing an image to us destroys their ability to sell it. On the other hand, if you are talking about the US, photos taken by federal government employees in the course of their work are in public domain and need no release. Perhaps the Forest Service could help. John from Idegon (talk) 00:29, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Understandable. I was thinking of contacting US Forest Department first, in case nothing turns up in the PD. Almost all of the articles I've written have been referenced with a journal publication by USFD. Let's see how it goes. Thanks for the guidance. NawJee (talk) 16:20, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@John from Idegon and MrClog: IF a book published in 1959 is in public domain, can we safely use the images from this book, too? I am expanding a stub article about an artist and I would like to include images of his work, too. NawJee (talk) 17:16, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@Philafrenzy: Hi, I am expanding the stub you created about Ted Kautzky. This book, Ted Kautzky - master of pencil and watercolor, about the subject of the article is in the public domain. Is it safe to use the images in the book for the article? Thank you. NawJee (talk) 21:25, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

He died in 1953 so his works would normally still be in copyright (70 years after death). Why do Hathi etc think they aren't? This possibly? Philafrenzy (talk) 21:41, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@Philafrenzy: It could, quite possibly, be the case. As per this Biblio page it could be that the copyright was never renewed. And according to this Vice article, Hathi trust is probably a good source to find public domain books. What do you suggest I do from here? NawJee (talk) 23:11, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

If you can satisfy yourself by consulting the renewals records that it is not there you can potentially upload material to Commons under the not-renewed licence. Presumably, however, it is the art works that you particularly want to use and I wonder if they are similarly public domain as that book might not be their first publication and there might be a copyright renewal for that first publication? What about the drawings of cityscapes? They seem to pre-date the book. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:04, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

All of them pre-date the book. The artist/architect died 6 years before the first (and as far as I can see, the only) publication of the book. The book was never re-printed or renewed for a copyright license. I think I can make a list of all the pictures, with dates, that were never officially published by Kautzky, but were given to his biographer by Ruth, his wife. That should help us make some head way. We can then check if those pictures have any corresponding copyright licenses or claims. What do you think? NawJee (talk) 02:40, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

vandalism

Resolved

 – Not a Wikipedia issue; problem on Google Knowledge Panel. Name and figure have been removed from Google. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

A false account labeling me a pirate was opened on my name and was captioned my picture. I tried to edit it but did not work. Just FYI, my name is Abdi Garad, I'm doctoral researcher from the University of Birmingham, and I need help. 81.104.254.67 (talk) 22:49, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Multiple different people seem to have that name, and one of them is a Somali pirate Zoozaz1 22:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zoozaz1 (talk • contribs)

Hello, Abdi. The article Abdi Garad was created back in 2009. Is this not simply a case of two people having the same name? (According to Google, I am actually a New Zealand accountant, acquitted of setting light to my ex-wife's wedding dress in my front garden. Whilst those thoughts have occasionally crossed my mind, I am actually a relatively stable person living in the UK with no accountancy experience and, unlike my namesake, have never been charged with arson.) Whilst all three of the citations in the Abdi Garad article appear dead to me, I do find mention in national media of a Somali pirate who has the same name as you both here and here. Whilst this might be embarrassing, would you mind explaining why you feel this article is actually an attack page on you personally, as I do not see that here at all? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:09, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Zoozaz1, a Wikipedia article exists called Abdi Garad, and it is about the pirate. What you are seeing is a "Google Knowledge Panel" which confuses you with the pirate. Below the panel is a link to "claim" the panel. You should click on that link and explain the problem to Google, as they created the panel. You can also click on the "feedback" link and report the mistake. Wikipedia finds this situation regrettable, but, as it is caused by Google, you should notify them about the problem.--Quisqualis (talk) 23:16, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

@Quisqualis: Thank you for pointing us to the Google Knowledge Panel - I didn't think to check that. As you say, this has absolutely nothing to do with Wikipedia whatsoever, but I feel the IP editors anguish, and have just sent Google my own complaint that they have linked the image of an innocent person to one of our articles about a Somali criminal. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:31, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing us to the Google Knowledge Panel - I didn't think to check that. As you say, this has absolutely nothing to do with Wikipedia whatsoever, but I feel the IP editors anguish, and have just sent Google my own complaint that they have linked the image of an innocent person to one of our articles about a Somali criminal. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:31, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

So looking at the page history, what happened is that 81.104.254.67 changed the page to an article about himself very recently. The page was originally about the Somali pirate, but he changed it to be about himself. Since the Somali pirate is what the page was created for and is notable compared with a phd candidate, I have reverted to that version. The specific reason the knowledge graph did not display the updated version is that the Google crawling is not instantaneous; in other words, a page changed on Wikipedia will not be immediately reflected in the knowledge graph because it takes time for Google to crawl the page. Zoozaz1 (talk) 00:27, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Zoozaz1 You did the right thing. But I cannot blame the IP editor for thinking Wikipedia was suggesting they were a Somali pirate, when Google is the one at fault here, not us. Although they received at least three warnings on their page for editing the article, I feel their attempts to change the page about the pirate were somehow done in good faith, in an attempt to protect their reputation. I would not block them if they tried again without first making clear how the misunderstanding caused by Google had occurred. I really feel for them, though there is nothing our editors can do, except maintain the integrity of the page about the Somali pirate. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:18, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

I do understand the predicament, especially since Google pairs an image of the researcher with its are article about the pirate, so I added a note to the pirate article saying Not to be confused with Abdi Garad the PhD candidate for clarification. Zoozaz1 (talk) 01:33, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

@Zoozaz1: I think adding a hatnote to differentiate between an article title and any other non-notable person is not the way to go about things. Thank you for your concerns, though I'm pleased someone else removed the hatnote. Having reported the issue to Google myself - and probably the IP and others did too - I now note that Google Knowledge Panel has now been removed entirely by Google in its search results - so reporting seems to work! Nick Moyes (talk) 12:53, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Am I right in concluding that the PhD candidate hijacked the wikipedia article of the Somali Pirate ? :D Pratap Pandit (talk) 13:01, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Possibly suspicious article with no English-language sources

Hey, I am wondering what to do with Bookocide in Croatia, which I just stumbled upon. It documents what sounds like an interesting and probably very important event, but it has no sources in English nor any language I can read, so I can't easily verify the content. I also can't quickly find non-Wikipedia information on it online from googling the article's main title. What concerns me is that it's about a subject in a famously contentious area (clearly has some connection to the Yugoslav Wars), so it would be good to get some more eyes on it, preferably ones who know the subject matter and can give better citations. Wasn't sure where to post this — doesn't fall cleanly into the Noticeboard categories IMO — but someone suggested here, so here it is. —ajf (talk) 23:14, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

It looks like List of book-burning incidents's section on this might have useful sources actually. —ajf (talk) 23:20, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ajfweb. Here are a few thoughts. English language sources are preferred when readily available but reliable sources in other languages are perfectly acceptable when the topic is poorly covered by English language sources. The fact that you are not easily able to read the current sources does not make them unacceptable. Your difficulty finding sources in English might be related to the word "bookocide" which I do not recognize as an actual English language word. I googled "book burning croatia 1990s" instead, and found several sources, including this academic journal article [1]

"Fahrenheit 96.8: the Cold-blooded Destruction of Books in Croatia in the 1990s". Perhaps that might be a good addition to the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:20, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

cafine diet dr.pepper, where are they???

 2602:306:3334:58B0:99D0:B6CB:54AF:4461 (talk) 03:18, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, we're not a search engine. If you would like to know more about Dr. Pepper, we can help you out with that. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:35, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Nonsensical edits by User:Ea4105483 and users in the 2601:194:300:F3B0::/64 IP range

This user has added some information regarding cartoon film prints without any context over the last few months. This person also tried to intimidate others from editing his/her additions by saying "Do not edit my edits Live it alone" in edit summary [2]. Recently users in the IP range 2601:194:300:F3B0:: have also added similar information without context, as in [3] and [4]. I tried to revert some of these edits, but they kept coming back. Maybe there's some misunderstanding on my side? Tomskyhaha (talk) 03:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Tomskyhaha: Hello. User:Ea4105483 has not edited since January. The IP account you mention has one edit which looks fine. In general though, feel free to deal with vandalism yourself as everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia. Kind regards, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 04:07, 29 April 2020 (UTC).

@Hillelfrei: I guess you are not familiar with IPv6 address prefixes. It's quite possible that the two IP edits I mentioned are made by the same person. If you look closely, the first edit[5] added the sentence:"The PAL Dubbed Print replaces 1942-1955 MWRA theme with the 1938-1941" in the leading paragraph of the article. The second edit [6], made by a user within the same IPv6 subnet changed the year from 1942 to 1941. My suggestion is that we should disable anonymous edits in the subnet and require account registration.Tomskyhaha (talk) 04:16, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Tomskyhaha: It seems like the article is fine now. If the editor persists, I would warn them and explain why their edits are not constructive, and if they persist despite multiple warnings, I would report to AIV. However, if there are clear signs of multiple accounts, you can report to WP:SPI for sockpuppetry which will likely get them blocked and solve the problem. Kind regards, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 04:28, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Hillelfrei: I just found out how to view the contributions associated with a given IPv6 subnet[7]. As one can see, in this edit[8], the user left a summary of "Do not edit this back or I will block you". And interestingly, the user stayed in the same subnet from January to April.Tomskyhaha (talk) 04:33, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Tomskyhaha: Thanks for sharing, I haven't been doing this for that long either and I didn't know this about IPs. This information is actually very useful. Kind regards, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 04:40, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Hillelfrei: Thanks a lot for your timely replies! It's very encouraging for someone like me who have never fight against vandalism before to receive positive comments. I'm also not that familiar with IPv6 either. Experience surely helps. Regards. Tomskyhaha (talk) 04:56, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Tomskyhaha: No problem. By the way, if you're not experienced with vandalism, you should note that even if users are editing in a harmful manner, it is not necessarily called vandalism unless the user is clearly intentionally trying to harm Wikipedia. If they are simply ignorant or have not yet been warned, the term isn't used. The page I linked above is useful to learn about this sort of thing and how to react. Kind regards, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 05:08, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Detailed information about creating a Biography

Hello everyone, i would like to enquire about creating a biography for a living person. Kindly, if you all cna suggest me some of the easiest and quickest way to work on it would be greatly appreciated. PriyankaJani10 (talk) 05:29, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@PriyankaJani10: Creating a new article, and a WP:BLP even more, is one of the hardest tasks you can start on Wikipedia. Some introduction can be found at WP:YFA. Be careful, I see many failed attempts a day. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:43, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

pretty blatant wp:coi

2nd one I've seen today, but still too new to know proper course of action.

On Wilson Security there is an ip doing major edits that resolves back to wilson parking which is on the above page as "see also". The ip is 103.72.211.250 and there is no coi on their talk page. I got my info on the ip from here here.

They've done so much on the page I'm clueless as to a course of action. (I'll probably never run across this again, but any guidance as whether there's a better place to post this would be appreciated. My earlier one resulted in a block.) thanks ToeFungii (talk) 03:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC) ToeFungii (talk) 03:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

This is "resolved" I believe and via help from teahouse users. I'd like to still ask though in case I run across something like this again, is this the best place to ask? (Likely it will be for me because I'm very ignorant of the whole coi and don't trust myself 100% to id someone although this time it was pretty easy. ToeFungii (talk) 04:59, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: If you see something you believe to be undeclared conflict of interest, you can raise the issue over at the conflict of interest noticeboard (COIN). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:24, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

user Awesome Aasim is annoying reverting my edits what can i do ?

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.

---

 User blocked
Its in the article nicotine Westwourd (talk) 22:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

You need to stop edit-warring, and discuss your changes on the article talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:35, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Westwourd. You are repeatedly removing referenced content from Nicotine without explaining why. That behavior is called edit warring which may lead to your account being blocked if you do not stop. The proper place to discuss the changes you want to make is Talk:Nicotine. Please do not try to make the changes without gaining consensus. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:37, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

I explained why

Westwourd, your explanations are unclear and unconvincing. Again, you must gain consensus at Talk:Nicotine when another editor contests your changes. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:41, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

what do you mean unclear and unconvincing, i trimmed primary ref as per WP MEDRS

Westwourd, why do you continue discussing the issue here when I have already told you twice that Talk:Nicotine is the proper place to discuss it? So, this is the third time. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:52, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Westwourd (talk • contribs) 22:56, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Three different editors have reverted the changes you persist in trying to make to the Nicotine article. The only place to have a discussion is on the Talk page of the article. So far, you have not tried that. Go there. David notMD (talk) 10:05, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

• Note: OP was a sock and would have been WP:CIR blocked by now anyway if he wasn't. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:07, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

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

undeletion of my user account

Hi, I would like to ask you why my User Account Ahmed Hassan Karie was deleted? Please undelete my account because that account full of my biography. Thanks Ahmed Ahmed Hassan karie (talk) 05:45, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Ahmed Hassan karie, if the content on your userpage is anything like that of your sandbox, it is because we strongly discourage people from writing about themselves per our WP:AUTO policy and it is usually done to promote, which is strictly not allowed on here. It is incredibly hard for people to write about themselves neutrally, and what they end up writing is more often than not unsuitable as a Wikipedia article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:18, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ahmed Hassan karie. I am an adminstrator here on Wikipedia, and I am afraid I have had to delete your sandbox after you recreated it following an earlier 'speedy deletion' by User:Fastily. I'm afraid we do not permit users to create promotional pages about themselves - see WP:NOTWEBHOST. Drafting an article is permitted, although discouraged if it is about yourself (see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY for why this is a bad idea). Your sandbox looked more like a LinkedIn page, simply promoting you, and that is not acceptable here, sorry. If you are a notable person, I'm sure someone will want to write about you, and to base it upon independent, published sources. I realise this may seem unfair, but we have to apply firm policies to prevent Wikipedia being abused and over-run for self-promotion purposes. If you genuinely feel you are a notable person (see WP:NBIO for what this means as far as Wikipedia is concerned), and therefore worthy of a page here, please supply me with three references which show how the world at large has already taken notice of you and written about you. I will then look at those sources and reconsider undeleting your page so that you can carry on working on it. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:00, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I should have added that your account itself has not been deleted, nor have you been blocked from editing. Only pages with unacceptable content have been deleted, and you may reuse your userpage and your sandbox if you wish, but only for the purposes allowed by our policies (see here for what is permitted). Put simply, if you want to contribute to Wikipedia, try editing articles that have nothing directly to do with you. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:05, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

info box music artist wont show all info

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

​

 MaySundAnd (talk) 12:10, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

You have tried to use parameters which do not exist in the template which you are using. Please read Template:Infobox musical artist, including the note about the possibility of embedding that template within another. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:14, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for quick reply! :))) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaySundAnd (talk • contribs) 12:17, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Editing the Edit Summary

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Sometimes when I have been editing, I press the 'Publish Changes' option and then realise that I have not described the changes. Can this be done retrospectively? Also, when I do describe changes they sometimes contain typos. Can these be fixed retrospectivey after publication? Part of my problem (not all!) is that I never learnt to touch type.BFP1 (talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC) BFP1 (talk) 12:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

See Help:Edit summary#Fixing. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:10, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Thanks for the swift reply.BFP1 (talk) 12:25, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Edits on a company article by an employee

Hi, I work for a company and would like to edit their wikipedia page. I am not specifically being paid to do so. Can you please give me some guidance on how I do this? I want to add basic info like history and services. Thanks Natashavelkovski (talk) 05:24, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Natashavelkovski: hello and welcome to the teahouse. Editing the wikipage of your employer is strongly discouraged by our COI policy. The best thing to do it leave a requested edit message on the talk page of the article.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 05:31, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Natashavelkovski: Please also note that your company's website is a primary source, whereas Wikipedia relies on information taken from third party sources. We have little interest in what a company wants to say about itself, apart from the most basic facts and figures. Readers expect neutral articles written independently of their subject, not corporate profiles written how the subject wishes to be portrayed. If you feel that there are problems and that the article content is not balanced, requesting an edit on the talk page is the proper avenue. If that fails to resolve it to your satisfaction, there are other dispute resolution mechanisms that can be utilized.

I also noticed that at least one of your edits [9] was a copy-and-paste job from your company's website, which is a copyright violation. You cannot post copyrighted material on Wikipedia - even if you are the copyright holder - unless you agree to donate the material through a process that verifies your identity as the copyright holder. In doing so, you would also be agreeing to permanently and irrevocably release it under a Creative Commons license, allowing it to be copied, distributed and adapted for derivative works, even for commercial purposes. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

See that you have now declared paid by the company, which applies even though you are not being specifically paid to edit the Wikipedia article. You should not directly edit the article. Proper process for changes is to create a new section in the article's Talk page and compose there what you want to add, with appropriate references. An editor will look at and decide to add it or not. David notMD (talk) 13:42, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Notability question - Happiness Curriculum

A friend of mine would like to create an article on "Happiness Curriculum" - a program by Government of Delhi and an NGO, which daily 40-minute class that takes place in all state-run schools, focusing on social skills, emotional learning etc. I would like to know if it is notable. It has received good coverage from several sources, but I am not very sure at this point. Kindly help!

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

KCVelaga (talk) 15:18, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

@KCVelaga: Looks very well-covered by reliable sources to me. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:02, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Thanks for your opinion. KCVelaga (talk) 15:03, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Apple Leisure Group

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

 User blocked

• Apple Leisure Group

Hi! I work for Apple Leisure Group. I was tasked last year with updating the page and making it current, A lot has happened to the company and just updating it to reflect our changes. How can I do this without "Conflict of Interest". I have tried three times with three different accounts and they keep blocking me claiming that what I wrote was an advertisement and I am trying to sell something which all that I want to do is update our facts. Help Hjpblue (talk) 15:35, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Apple Leisure Group. David notMD (talk) 15:52, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hjpblue wrote as Edit summary "I work for Apple Leisure Group and was tasked last year with updating the page." but has not declared PAID on User page. Previously editing same article, and indefinitely blocked, as AppleLeisureGroup and Hjpblue3. David notMD (talk) 15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hjpblue: IF (a big if) you are allowed to continue editing, you need to comply with WP:PAID by declaring such on your User page. After that, you are not allowed to edit the article directly. Proper process is to start a new section on the Talk page of the article and enter there the existing content and what you want it changed to. An editor will either do it or reject it. David notMD (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Hjpblue: You can contribute to the article by not directly contributing to it. Please declare your affiliation to Apple Leisure Group on your user page by adding the {{Paid}} template to it. As David notMD mentioned, please see our policy on edit requests as to how to continue contributing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:14, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Consistent unfair refusals by reviewers

Hi, I have been consistently editing an article (https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:The_Lottery_Office) based on reviewers feedback. It started off by one reviewer stating that it is a "notable topic" but please add citation. Then another reviewer came and stated that the article appears to read like an advertisement. I have addressed the citation and advertisement issues. Then, the first reviewer placed a strike-through his comment of "notable". I have now again received another refusal based on "The most recent edits have not addressed the notability concern. "

Seriously guys, we are talking about a huge lottery company where I have personally won thousands of $ with. They have donated so much to our local community and are fully legit company through the Australian Government. Why you would not want to have this added to the Lottery Companies of Australia segment, dumbfounds me! Greg c1988 (talk) 12:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Greg c1988. Your understandable confusion lies in a common misunderstanding about what "notable" means in the context of Wikipedia editing. It isn't the everyday meaning, but rather one that has arisen within our Wikipedia-editing jargon. What it doesn't mean is important, or popular, or well-known, or worthy, etc., etc.

What it does mean is, in summary, "has been written about sufficiently extensively by independent third parties in several unconnected pieces published in reputable, well-edited academic or journalistic organs, providing sufficient information on which a Wikipedia article can be acceptably created." The fuller explanation can be found at Wikipedia:Notable.

Therefore, to be acceptable an article has to be about a subject that has been written about in this way in Reliable sources, and the article has to demonstrate this by citing those sources to support the bulk of its contents.

It sounds to me (as it probably did to the first reviewer you mention) that this Company probably is a notable (i.e. sufficiently publically documented) subject, but the article has to prove that it meets Wikipedia's relevant requirements, in this case those of Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), by including citations to suitable and sufficient third-party sources. Such sources are likely to include independently written pieces (so not PR releases, or interviews with subjects employees) in reputable newspapers, and text in books, etc., produced by established professional publishing companies (not self-published works).

Note that not every fact in an article has to be derived from an independent (of the subject) Reliable source – uncontrovertial facts like business address, name of CEO, number of employees, etc., can even be taken from a company's own website – but notability can only be supported by completely independent sources.

I hope this makes things clearer. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.121.161.127 (talk) 16:45, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello

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.

---

 User blocked
What is this website? 72.15.68.125 (talk) 19:30, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello. This is Wikipedia, a project to write an encyclopedia of human knowledge, in which people from all over the world participate. 331dot (talk) 19:32, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

UPDATE: IP editor has now been blocked for vandalism. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:45, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

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

Goku

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Talk went to user page for assistance.
​​

CAN I EDIT SOME WORDS FOR THE GOKU PAGE BECAUSE I KNOW ALL ABOUT GOKU  ANKHEEE DADDY (talk) 19:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, ANKHEEE DADDY. You may contribute to an article, but not from your own personal knowledge. You MUST base any contributions on what properly published Reliable Sources say about it. Please don't write in capital letters - this is seen as SHOUTING! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:50, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Auto Confirmed users

Resolved

 – Provided links to check user rights. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:14, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there - There is a page that i would like to edit that is semi-protected and only autoconfirmed users can edit it. How would i know if i am an autoconfirmed user or not and if not, what is the criteria? Many thanks and hope everyone is safe! Ukdatageek (talk) 22:46, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ukdatageek, welcome to the Teahouse. Yes you are AUTOCONFIRMED. An edit only needfs to have had an account for four days and have made over ten edits - you're way past that, so am unsure why you think you cannot edit a semi-protected page. I checked your editing rights here. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:02, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@Ukdatageek: If you ever want to quickly check what permissions you have, just click on your Preferences link at the top. It will be under the default tab "User Profile" in the line reading "Member of groups:". —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks to you both, much appreciated, wishing you well! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ukdatageek (talk • contribs) 08:59, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

help me

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.

---

User created a G11 for CSD and subsequently deleted.

 Kafeel awan (talk) 20:27, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Kafeel awan What is it that you would like help with? 331dot (talk) 20:28, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Kafeel awan: Welcome to the Teahouse. Please read Wikipedia:About to appreciate that this is an encyclopaedia of Notable Things. It is not like LinkedIn where you can create a page about yourself. Your user page was doing just that, and has been deleted as it broke our policies on what is acceptable here - sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:32, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

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

Hello!

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

I have two questions!

Firstly, I was looking at the article for Michael J. Todd and noticed an unsourced section. I can see that the sole source was the Daily Mail, which I assume was removed as unreliable. Yet the information remains in the article. I looked for other sources and couldn't find any, so I removed the section. Here I am chatting to myself on the Talk Page → Talk:Michael J. Todd so you can see what I did and the rationale behind it. Now I'm pondering whether that was the right thing to do, or not. Please advise?

Secondly, is there a way to search for the number of times a particular source has been cited, and where? If so, could you point me in the right direction? Thank you! DSQ (talk) 14:01, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@DeltaSnowQueen: Welcome to the Teahouse. To answer your first question: yes, you are encouraged to WP:BEBOLD and remove content that has become unsourced. If for some reason you are reverted, feel free to start a conversation about it at the talk page, which you have preemptively done. Generally you do not need to explain yourself on the article's talk page; giving an informative edit summary is usually more than enough. As for the second question I'll leave that for someone else to answer. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:20, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much! DSQ (talk) 20:31, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – Merged section below. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:33, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Part two.

Trying again as I didn't get an answer first time around............ https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse#Hello!

I have two questions!

Firstly, I was looking at the article for Michael J. Todd and noticed an unsourced section. I can see that the sole source was the Daily Mail, which I assume was removed as unreliable. Yet the information remains in the article. I looked for other sources and couldn't find any, so I removed the section. Here I am chatting to myself on the Talk Page → Talk:Michael J. Todd so you can see what I did and the rationale behind it. Now I'm pondering whether that was the right thing to do, or not. Please advise?

Secondly, is there a way to search for the number of times a particular source has been cited, and where? If so, could you point me in the right direction? Thank you! DSQ (talk) 20:08, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

The previous request was actually at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Hello!, 6 hours earlier. This is the problem with using a one word, generic section title – someone else also created a section called Wikipedia:Teahouse#Hello and the bare URL apparently doesn't include the trailing '!' in the link. Please try to use more descriptive section titles. See WP:LINK for future reference on creating internal and external links.

As to your questions, I need to leave that to someone else who might have the answers. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:23, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@DeltaSnowQueen: I've merged the sections together. Questions are answered on a volunteer basis and stay active for two or three days on here. See my response above for the first question. Courtesy ping for AlanM1. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:33, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both for your help. I appreciate that you are volunteers. Apologies for being overly eager. DSQ (talk) 20:50, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@DeltaSnowQueen: yes, it might have been reasonable to have reposted your question had it gone unanswered for a day or two, but anyone can wait a few hours for a volunteer to reply, surely? To answer your 2nd question: lets take some examples:

• Say you wanted to know if https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/top-police-officer-faces-probe-4187839 has been used on any other article page, you'd paste that url into the Search box, and get this apparent negative return But look closely below the results box and you'll see that the search was made only in the two default sections of Wikipedia that the search function offers you: 'Main', and 'Help'. i.e. the Main part of the encyclopaedia where our articles are, plus our Help pages.
• If you choose to include other sections to look in, say all the 'Talk' pages, you could add that section from the 'Search In:' drop down menu, then click 'Search' once more and you'd get this result instead. Just one result - the link you added very recently on the M J Todd talk page. (Note the count of results in the top right corner of the page (....assuming you're viewing Wikipedia not in mobile view.)
• But say you want to know how many times that all of that website's news articles had been used across just the article space (=Mainspace) of Wikipedia, deselect all other places from the 'search in:' dropdown menu, type in just https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news, click the big blue Search button, and you'd get these 226 results.
• Searching for that address in just the Talk page section of Mainspace yields 271 returns.

So, does that help, and was it worth the wait? BTW: I think you made the right editing choices on that article. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes Nick Moyes that's very helpful, thank you very much. I did apologise above for being overly eager. I am new, so I don't know how long is reasonable to wait. I saw all the questions after me being answered, so I reposted. So, sorry again - I consider myself told. DSQ (talk) 21:17, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

How do I create a page

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Talk went to user page for assistance.
​​​​

 ANKHEEE DADDY (talk) 19:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello everyone 😎😎 CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME OR GUIDE ME TO CREATE A PAGE

I'LL BE REALLY APPRECIATE AND GRATEFULL IF SOMEONE WILL TELL ME

@ANKHEEE DADDY: Please do not type in all capital letters! This is not acceptable, and is seen as SHOUTING, as I said above. Please see Your First Article and understand that we do not accept any article unless it meets certain 'notability' criteria. What would your article be about, and what sources would you base it upon? Nick Moyes (talk) 19:56, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

ANKHEEE DADDY Creating a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. It's a good idea to get experience editing existing articles first, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and to learn what is expected of article content. I would suggest that you first use the new user tutorial and gain experience editing existing articles before attempting to create a new article.

Again, please do not use all capital letters, this is considered yelling and rude. Thanks. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@ANKHEEE DADDY: In addition to what everyone else has said, I have written a short guide that covers the exact steps you need to take to write an article that won't be rejected or deleted. In short, you need three or more professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are not dependent upon, affiliated with, or connected to the article subject but still primarily and specifically about that subject. Then you just summarize and cite them, then paraphrase that summary. This will provide a distilled proof of notability that can be expanded on after it gets approved. Don't waste time on stuff like affiliated sources, formatting, pictures, or other stuff that will do nothing to get the article approved. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

How can I contact the author of an article to ask a question about his/her topic?

 CLillevang (talk) 22:46, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, CLillevang, and welcome to the Teahouse. For most Wikipedia articles there is no such thing as "the author": there are many authors, and you can pick the "History" tab to see all the edits that have been made and who made them. Each of the editors has a "User Talk" page, and if you identify a particular editor or editors in the history who you would like to contact, you can post a question on their user talk page(s); though if their contribution to the article was not recent, it is possible that they are no longer active in Wikipedia. The article will also have a talk page, where you can address questions to anybody who watches the article; but properly, an article's talk page is intended only for discussion about what should or shouldn't go into the article, not for general questions about the subject. --ColinFine (talk) 22:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

about editing biography for a very famous female personality in the regional healthcare sector specially in South East Asia.

Dr. Zareen Delawar Hussain, can i edit and publish her biography? I am not a professional wikipedians.

Thanks and regards.

Muhammad Didarul Islam Anmdic (talk) 01:45, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Anmdic: Welcome to the Teahouse! We're not professional Wikipedians either - we're all volunteers. Presuming you do not have any conflict of interest and she meets Wikipedia's definition of notability for inclusion in this encyclopedia, then you may create an article. However, creating your first article and getting it approved is hard to do. You may want to start slowly by editing existing articles, or visiting The Wikipedia Adventure to learn more about editing here. GoingBatty (talk) 02:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Will do anything to get my daughter help.

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.

---

Will do anything to get my daughter help. No matter what I am a ex meth user but she is going to die. I will do what ever it takes to get her help.... whatever it takes.  24.30.104.28 (talk) 00:49, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

We can't really help you beyond suggesting that you contact the relevant authorities in your jurisdiction. 331dot (talk) 00:51, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

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

Why is there a picture and a reference to the debunked russia collusion hoax posted on the OPM WIKI page? Stupid and kind of implies that the fact that wikipedia is open to edits opens the door to anyone with clear BIAS to add STUPID and irrelevant content in pages.

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

 216.81.94.70 (talk) 14:17, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Our disambiguation page OPM points to fifteen different things that can be referred to as OPM. How can we possibly investigate your point if you don't tell us which article you are referring to? --ColinFine (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Please remember that civility is part of Wikipedia's code of conduct, especially when asking your fellow volunteer editors for help. See Wikipedia:Civility for further information. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:27, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm loving the fact that this post is from an IP editor within America's 'DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY'. Yep, Wikipedia is "open to edits [that] opens the door to anyone with clear BIAS to add STUPID and irrelevant content in pages". We have lot of volunteers who check and quickly remove vandalism and biased editing -though inevitably some stick around longer than others. We'd even let President Trump edit it, if he wished, though, like I say, we do remove edits that have a clear BIAS and are STUPID, so I couldn't guarantee how long they'd remain here. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:28, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Subtle @Nick Moyes: Love it!!!! Galendalia (talk) 09:15, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I don't think Donald Trump would last five minutes as a Wikipedia editor, but him editing would be interesting to see. 09:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

He probably considers WP fake news. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:50, 30 April 2020 (UTC) Like

How do I add a previously used reference number to the main text

 Firework1000 (talk) 10:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Firework1000! Have you seen the WP:REF page? I hope it should be able to answer your question. If it doesn't, please add more details about what you need to achieve. --CiaPan (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Firework1000. If you are asking how you can repeatedly use the same reference, again and again, in different parts of an article, you'll need to ensure it already has a "ref name= " added to it. Usually this is a short memorable word added manually via the 'Cite' button and drop-down template when using WP:Source Editor. Though if references have been added using the equivalent 'Cite' button in Visual Editor, then it will have an automatically assigned and much less intuitive "ref name= " given to it. This is just a sequential number preceded by a colon (:0, :1, :2, etc). There is specific advice in re-using any existing reference at WP:REFNAME. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:06, 30 April 2020 (UTC) 

Rename a person page

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Is it possible to rename a person's page?

This page is about my uncle. His middle name was not "J". He did not use his middle name; almost everywhere you look he was just "Fr James Quinn SJ". The incorrect wikipedia title seems to be the root of many incorrect citations online.

It'd be a great start to rename his page to "James_Quinn_(Jesuit)".

Thanks. 109.153.129.59 (talk) 22:29, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I agree - none of the sources cited uses a middle initial, so I have moved the article to James Quinn (Jesuit). Thanks for pointing this out. --ColinFine (talk) 22:41, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I've also removed the J from the lead of the article itself. --ColinFine (talk) 22:49, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks ColinFine! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.129.59 (talk) 11:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Doing articles for social media influencers

If I'm creating an article for a social media influencer, does their social media count as a reliable source? And also, roughly how many references should a Wikipedia page have? Frogface08 (talk) 11:16, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Frogface08 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A person's social media accounts would be a primary source, which are only acceptable in certain situations. Wikipedia articles should primary summarize what independent reliable sources say about a subject. Often, people using social media naturally write favorably about themselves, and Wikipedia tries to have a neutral point of view. This is partially why independent sources are preferred. I would add that most "social media influencers" rarely meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable person.

In terms of a number of sources, there is no set number, but in general most reviewers and editors look for at least three sources with significant coverage. "Significant coverage" goes beyond brief mentions, press releases, or routine announcements. Primary sources do not establish notability. 331dot (talk) 11:19, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I see that you have attempted to declare a conflict of interest, is your conflict of interest with the subject?(you put your own username in your notice) 331dot (talk) 11:25, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Question about links in article for review

Hi there - hoping you can help

I recently submitted this page https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Contentsquare for review, and it was rejected on the grounds of references not showing significant relevance or coverage. I researched what references should be cited in detail before submission, and compared the ones I had to pages of similar companies in the same industry (including, but not limited to: https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Glassbox, https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Tealeaf, https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Hotjar)

Please can you clarify in detail the links that are considered as non-independent or unreliable, as all of those pages contain citations to the company websites, which I thought was not allowed? And is it a case of having too many citations?

Thanks, and looking forward to your response Klattkins (talk) 16:50, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Klattkins. Non-independent sources (such as the suject's own website) can be cited for very limited kinds of information: see primary sources. The bulk of the information in any article should be taken from sources wholly unconnected with the subject. Sewe third party sources. It is not helpful to compare existing articles, unless you know that they are of high quality (ie Good articles or Featured articles). Among our six million articles are many thousands of sub-standard articles - often they were created a long time ago, before we were as careful as we are now about sources. Ideally somebody would go through those thousands and thousands of articles either bringing them up to standard or deleting them; but that is not a task which many of our volunteer editors seem eager to engage with, for some reason. If you find sub-standard articles, you are welcome to work on them, or even nominate them for deletion if that seems appropriate (but you should be very cautious if you are connected with a company in competition with the subject in question: that would be a conflict of interest.) --ColinFine (talk) 18:55, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, ColinFine for your response, and really appreciate the additional information. What would be really useful if anyone can find time to help, is feedback on which specific sources are deemed unacceptable in this case? All of the links (as far as I can tell from the reference documents) are from reputable sources, so in order to aid this submission, and any others in future, it would be really constructive if I knew exactly where I was going wrong. Really appreciate your help. Thanks --Klattkins (talk) 09:49, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Klattkins, Cremades is an entrepreneur and investor, and it's an interview, looks like a mutually beneficial venture, doesn't add to notability. Forbes piece is based on press releases and direct reporting from Cherki, it's not independent, isn't a significant coverage of contentsquare either. RETAIL TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION HUB seems to be a one-editor source, not reliable, is routine coverage of acquisition, doesn't count. Reuters is another non-independent coverage of acquisition. UK Tech News says the author is Industry Press Release, doesn't count. 7 to 11 are routine coverages that do not include independent SIGCOV, raise capital is what new companies do, the information is not of any use to developing a neutral encyclopedic article. I only see the table of contents in Gartner. Maybe, the Deloitte list is prestigious, maybe it's not, but there are no points for achievements in WP:NCOMPANY, only coverage helps and there is not one sentence in there. The Wired article looks like it contributes to notability, four more like it might be enough. Silicon Canal coverage looks independent, but the organisation doesn't appear to be a reputable media firm, rather a startup just like the companies it has covered; so, it may not count for much; it doesn't help that it doesn't bring anything new not covered by Wired. Binintelligence includes contentsquare in a crowded list, membership to that list may or may not be impressive but it doesn't help either way since NCOMPANY only cares about significant coverage.

The "multiple" WP:SIGCOV criteria is generally understood to mean at least three; I would add Wired+Silicon to between 3/4 to 1 SIGCOV, and that may be being too generous. The rest of the sources, which hardly bring anything new that would be encyclopedic anyway, may be used to source the article once notability is established, but they do not contribute to establishing notability itself. That's my opinion.

See WP:Other stuff exists. Unless you are looking at featured articles, looking at other articles may hinder as much as help. There is a lot of junk in Wikipedia, and too few editors to maintain standards everywhere, and with the rise of spamming and other covert advertising attempts in the platform, the notability criteria have become more strict compared to the early days of Wikipedia boom.

Hope it helps! Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Are deleted pages archived somewhere?

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

I am looking for a page I had bookmarked some time ago. The article I am looking for is List of fictional medicines and drugs. Would this article be archived somewhere? Jaisgossman (talk) 14:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Jaisgossman Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Deleted pages are deleted, not archived. The deleted content is visible to administrators. Some outside websites have copies of pages deleted from Wikipedia itself. 331dot (talk) 14:12, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Jaisgossman, it is in the servers, but only admins can view it. Sometimes, the deleting admin may agree to email a copy to the editor who created it. Deleted articles are sometimes available from websites that mirror Wikipedia's content. There's Category:Fictional medicines and drugs if all you're looking for is an index of Wikipedia articles. Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, Thanks for pointing me there. The article was probably was turned into this index at some point.

Neutral Point of View

I am trying to upload a page for a friend on his business. I am having trouble with writing in a neutral point of view. Does anyone have tips or suggestions on how to do this? I am referencing this wiki page

Sun Basket  Skussmann (talk) 14:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Skussmann Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Since you say you are working for a friend, you must review the conflict of interest policy and make a formal declaration. If your friend is compensating you in any way(doesn't have to be money), you need to comply with the paid editing policy as well. What you are writing is little more than an advertisement for your friend's business. A Wikipedia article on a business should summarize only what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about a business, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable business. Not every business meets the criteria for a Wikipedia article. Many of the sources you offer do not seem to be about the business at all, and the ones that do seem to be routine announcements or press releases, which do not establish notability. You need sources that are independent of the subject and have chosen on their own to give the business significant coverage. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 14:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

My suggestion was rejected. I must have made a mistake. Can I have that and any other mistakes explained to me?

Americn Institute of ManagementNorman Clairmont (talk) 14:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC) Norman Clairmont (talk) 14:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Norman Clairmont The edit filter prevented you from editing because of the information in your post. Please see the message on your user talk page for more information. 331dot (talk) 14:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Bliss Team

Need help editing

I need help with editing the Bliss Team page Marinated Potato (talk) 14:35, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Covid19 Marinated Potato (talk) 14:37, 30 April 2020 (UTC) We can get through this Wikipedia!

Marinated Potato Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your changes to that article were removed because they don't seem to make much sense(you introduced a misspelling to the article, among other things) and appeared to be vandalism. If there are edits you wish to make to that article, please describe what they are on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 14:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft: PLANETISATION

Resolved

Hi. I would like to ask for support regarding my attempt to write an article about the term Draft:planetisation. Can some body please give me an advise how to make the next steps to improve my draft. thanks in advance. Mike 06 (talk) 07:02, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Mike 06, welcome to the Teahouse. You may want to read WP:REFBEGIN to learn how to cite references for Wikipedia articles. Please note that we do not cite Wikipedia as a source, as you did with Noosphere and Globalisation. The references you use should be cited to the sentences using footnotes.

Another question to ask is, aside from providing information on the subject as some of your sources provide, do the sources establish the subject's notability? Wikipedia only accepts articles if the subject has proven to be notable by Wikipedia's definition of WP:NOTABILITY. If you have any questions please get in touch with the reviewer who may be able to explain why they declined your draft. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:25, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Mike 06, Tenryuu is right. Your next steps must be to find some reliable published sources which discuss de Chardin's concept of planetisation. Then you should base your article on what they say, citing those sources. Maproom (talk) 07:12, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Mike 06:, I have found several articles and journal papers to expand the draft and cite proper references. If you do not mind, I would like to work with you directly on the draft, what say you? NawJee (talk) 08:41, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tenryuu, Hi Maproom, thank you both for your fast response and valuable input. Mike 06 (talk) 14:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @NawJee:, thanks so much for your offer to work with me on the draft. thats wonderful. looking forward to it. How shall we proceed. Mike 06 (talk) 14:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Mike 06:, the first step would be to do an extensive research of the topic. Since it is an academic subject, we should be able to find sufficient journal entries and articles about it. A quick Google search shows that are quite a few available on de Chardin's Planetisation, written by other independent scholars and writers. The draft's talk page is the appropriate platform to discuss further matters related to collabortion.

Also, please sign all your posts and comments by adding four tildes (~) at the end. This way everybody can easily identify who wrote what. Thanks. NawJee (talk) 14:54, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @NawJee:, great. i will switch to talk page Mike 06 (talk) 14:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Email

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

How do I email you guys? Marinated Potato (talk) 14:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Marinated Potato and welcome to the Teahouse. Mostly you don't. Some users, including myself, have enabled the "email this user" function, which can be reached from the user mor user talk page for such a user. Many have not. In general, questions about or comment son a Wikipedia article or page should be made on the corresponding talk page, or at a help page such as this one. Questions addressed to a particular editor should be made on that person's user talk page. Use email only where confidentiality is a serious issue, or there is some other good reason not to post on-wiki. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:11, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Marinated Potato: And in a case when the use of email is necessary, you can email any editor at Special:EmailUser. --Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 16:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Not quite any editor, Hillelfrei. Only those editors who have opted in to allow this function can be emailed in that way. In my experience, most admins have opted in, but many editors have not. No policy requires an ordinary editor to opt in. Does that clarify things, Marinated Potato? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:36, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Marinated Potato: Thanks! Just figured it out though😎 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marinated Potato (talk • contribs) 16:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Thanks for the correction. I meant "any" as opposed to going to their user page, you can type in any user who has opted in but my bad wording. Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 16:43, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Climacteric fruit

In this review/article relating to Climacteric fruit (especially tomoato) there are no references to the fundamental research and publications conducted at GCRI (Littlehampton, UK) and other UK organisations. The UK has a leading and important role in understanding the physiological, gentic and biochemical regulation of fruit growth, development and ripening and this should be represented! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c6:bb05:8001:95ef:af27:4477:1f59 (talk • contribs)

You're welcome to add anything you think notable, with proper sourcing. Ideally the best research is reported in reliable sources. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Article titled "Niagara Falls State Park" appears to have the wrong governor signing the Niagara Falls Bill during the wrong year.

According to a Buffalo Evening News article published Thursday, April 30, 1885, the Niagara Falls Park Bill was signed into law by Governor David Hill at noon of the day the article was published.

 Abiquaed (talk) 13:50, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Abiquaed: and Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia allows anyone to edit any article. If you have a reliable source, you can make the change and cite the source (also when you publish the edit, be sure to fill out the edit summary stating what you did). I will post a welcome message to your talk page that will contain many links to help get you started! Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 17:52, 30 April 2020 (UTC) (Update - Added Welcome message to your talk page - Feel free to chat on my page with me if you need any other assistance.)

Free trials and the url-access parameter

I was editing a page that had a citation to the service Westlaw. Westlaw is principally subscription only, but also offers free trials, as described on on the service's page about plans and pricing. Help:Citation Style 1#Registration or subscription required outlines the recognized values for the parameter url-access as subscription, registration, and limited. For long term use, I see "subscription" as the most accurate, but for a single source one could get a free trial through registration and so that seems most accurate. Does there already exist any consensus on what to pass to the url-access parameter in situations like this one? Thanks for the help and please ping me in your reply. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 01:54, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@The Editor's Apprentice: - If the free trial will not bill a users account and automatically terminate I don’t see a reason why you cannot pass the Registration. However, if it will bill or require a credit card then Subscription would be your best choice. I would think it would be better all together if you can find an alternate source that is free that says the same thing. Galendalia (talk) 08:54, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

The Editor's Apprentice, if a given user or email address is limiotd to a single free trial, or only one per year or soem such, i would still list this as "Subscription", perhaps with a note "Free trial available". Galendalia sources that are not free are poerfectly acceptable, although if a free source with the same content and equal or better quality and reliability is available, that is probably a better source to use. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:03, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel - I am aware of that which is why I mentioned it however, I also look at if you have to pay to access information it may not be important enough to have to pay the large fees Westlaw charges ;) That is why I suggested to find a free alternative. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 15:27, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Galendalia Fair enough. I have much more experience with things liker newspaper.com, which charges a much lower fee -- in fact I pay for an annual subscription just for Wikipedia editing. I wouldn't do that with Westlaw. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC) Galendalia DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel and Galendalia: Thank you both much for the feedback. I'm a little confused about DESigel's reply since I can't think of a service that doesn't restrict the availability of free trials for each user and/or email address. In fact, if any service didn't restrict access to free trials it would basically defeat the idea of it being a trial. I'm also unaware of anyway to make a note in citation other than to use <!-- --> comments, which wouldn't be visible to a casual reader. If there is some other way, I would be very interested to learn more about it. In response to Galendalia's reply, on the page describing the details of applying for a free trial it is stated that "[n]o credit card [is] required" and that one can "[c]ancel anytime during the trial period", so in accordance with what Galendalia recommended, it seems that registration would be reasonable to pass. I still hesitate a little bit about passing registration to the url-access though, because the page I linked to is only to request a free trial. After the form gets submitted, it seems that it needs to be manually approved. Despite that though, I still think registration makes the most sense. It really does seem to me to be a sticky situation. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel and The Editor's Apprentice: - What is the link you need to make? My understanding of Thomson Reuters is they do not grant individuals access. You have to be associated to an organization or agency with the need and to even pay for it beyond a trial it expensive, requires them to call you and get all of the information, etc. I remember dealing with this software many years ago in law firm. I would honestly go the route of seeing if the information can be found somewhere else. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 17:40, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Galendalia: I'm not actually trying to work towards accessing the information Westlaw has to offer, I am only trying to figure out what the best way to mark a preexisting citations accessibility. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 17:47, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@The Editor's Apprentice: - I understand that but if it cannot be accessed and since Westlaw is very expensive, I am not sure if that would be a great source to get anything from; basically it is not available to the general public to be honest. I think maybe a reviewer can hop in here and make a comment. I am out of thoughts otherwise! Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 18:08, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Coronavirus

 41.114.12.222 (talk) 18:10, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a question to ask about it? REDMAN 2019 Stay at home:Protect the NHS:Save lives (talk) 18:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

A question

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

Over the past few days, I came across this page: https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/List_of_universities_and_colleges_in_Tigrai. It appears to me that one user is repeatedly adding a piece of promotional content from an unreliable source (one formatted incorrectly as well), the website of the college in question. I'm guessing this person works for the college and is trying to add them to Wikipedia.

What should I do here? I don't want to violate the three-revert rule, but I don't think the content should stay on the page. If I'm wrong, or missed a policy, sorry. Just let me know. Heyoostorm (talk) 17:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Heyoostorm, given you have already asked them on their talk page, I would wait to see if they repeat the additions. If nothing changes, and the edits are readded, you might want to open a thread at the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 18:23, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Help with tag removal

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

hello! I am new to Wikipedia, and I was hoping someone can help me with my article: Paul J. Tesar. I officially declared COI. I have worked with a few editors and have made substantial changes to both the content and tone over the past few months. The COI tag still remains on the page, and it says the article still requires cleanup, particularly neutral point of view. I have made many changes, and I believe the article is now written in a neutral and encyclopedic tone. I have made all the recommended changes from editors. I engaged in a short discussion with other editors about removing the COI tag on the talk page, but the conversation went dormant several weeks ago. I am wondering if someone can review and determine if the COI tag is ready to be removed. If not, can someone please suggest any edits necessary for the COI tag to be removed. Thank you so much for your help! Marissascavuzzo (talk) 15:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

HI @Marissascavuzzo: as a member of the Copy Editors team I will be happy to take a look in a little bit. I will post to your talk page when I start looking at then I will let you know the results. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 17:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Marissascavuzzo: - I also help out with the copy editing team. I just gave the article a quick look and made some minor punctuation changes and replaced the press release sources. It looks pretty good now but let's see what Galendalia thinks. The only area of concern might be listing the research papers. To show they are notable enough to list, some editors want to look them up to see how much they are cited. Otherwise the article veers into CV territory. Good luck. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Marissascavuzzo: - I put it on my to do list for today, May 1, 2020. I am in San Diego So I am UTC -8. I will close this conversation and get the article over to our team.

Question from DaniHart08

I was wondering if anyone knew how to insert a picture in your talk page or in your user page. Does anyone know? Dani Hart (Talk) 19:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

DaniHart08, the same way an image is uploaded to any other article. If the image is already uploaded, either to here or commons, just follow the instructions at Help:Pictures.

For example,

[[File:Squirrel Sandanski.jpg|thumb|example caption]]

example caption

produces the image seen here

If the image isn't already here or at Commons, and you personally took the photo, just upload it via the Commons upload wizard, then follow the steps above.

If it isn't here or at Commons already, and you didn't take it, you probably can't use it. If you have an image in mind that meets this, ask here, as it might be permitted under some circumstances - i.e. if it is quite old.

Thanks,

~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 19:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Personal help

Hey! I’ve been a fairly active editor for the past year, but lately have felt emotionally drained editing and have felt like I’ve come across poorly to fellow Wikipedians. Is there any sort of “support group” or community discussion areas where one can converse positively? I was running through this page and saw how kind all the responses have been despite the confusing and occasionally trying questions. It gave me hope after a bit of feeling pretty down about my involvement for a while and want to be more substantive. If this isn’t the page to ask these questions, I apologize; I’m still getting the hang of the “back-end” pages. Thanks! ~ 05:36, 24 April 2020 (UTC)Pbritti (talk)

@Pbritti: I'm sorry to hear you feel that you're burning out. Wikipedia focuses intensely on improving and creating good articles, so there aren't official spaces (that I'm aware of) where support groups are held. Have you thought about taking a WP:BREAK? Please put your emotional health before editing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:22, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

@Pbritti: I try to stay upbeat on Wikipedia by reading the weekly/monthly "on the bright sides" Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2020-03-29/On the bright side. If you're looking for less formal places to discuss issues, I'd suggest joining the English Wikipedia WP:DISCORD. The conversation is certainly varied, and not structured as a support group, but I find it quite helpful and chat in there a great deal. A good place to ask for instant help/feedback or just share a funny page you saw while editing. Tenryuu is right though, if you're burnt out, sometimes its good to step back for a bit and do something else. Take care of yourself! Smooth sailing, CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 10:31, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu and CaptainEek, thanks for your advice! I'm going to look into the break option, but probably will be taking a look at the "Bright Side" page as well! I'm glad that there are some aspects of community here! ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:56, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

@Pbritti: I believe your comments on the page you and I are on, are constructive and well thought out. These times are emotional for most people, the world is in turmoil. Thank-you, for all your help with wikipedia that I'm aware of, and beyond. GunnisonMarmot (talk) 23:51, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

GunnisonMarmot, thanks for all your editing! You've been the first person I've met outside of a Wikiproject that has constructive and kind in your comments! Best hopes for you! ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:33, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Sometimes when I feel drained from WP, I will work on more mindless tasks like fixing orphan articles. These tasks are unlikely to involve arguing or people reverting me.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 14:31, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Pbritti, I feel for you. This place (not Teahouse, but Wikipedia in general) is driving me nervous (apologies to Alice Cooper). I think the huge infux of people with only passing interest in Wikipedia editing out of boredom due to the "current situation" is very contributory. Unfortunately, even general updates and such are difficult these days. Better days will come, and folks will be less uptight. John from Idegon (talk) 00:51, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

John from Idegon, thanks for your kind words. I'm looking forward to the end of this quarantine; hopefully with that off our collective shoulders stress will be far less heavy. ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:33, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@Pbritti, we're all in this together. The big blue planet, and this little encyclopedia project. You're very kind, too. I count you as a wiki-friend and co-author.GunnisonMarmot (talk) 06:05, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@Pbritti: -  ToDo Relax your mind; Get up every 10 min and walk around; Enjoy life outside of wikipedia; We all have these bad times. I have PTSD and I deal with a lot and I always find solace in just sitting on the floor with my legs crossed and just trying to get my brain to stop and just listening to the sounds around me. I find it helps me a lot. I am not a professional in any means, this is what works for me. Plus I have a needy, needy, needy cat that likes to fart on me when she is sleeping on my stomach (so go figure). - We will be here to chat with you anytime. Not everyone is bad, we just make mistakes. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 18:58, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Galendalia, thanks! Been playing with my dog and spending more time offline. Been nice. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:41, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Pbritti - Post a pic of the dog to my talk page please. I wanna see! Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 20:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Album Cover Art

I’m a fan of an up-and-coming indie rock band and I’d like to create pages for the albums in their discography linking back to their main Wiki page. This includes uploading the cover art image for each page, like every page for an album has on Wikipedia. What licensing option should I select when uploading? (And, obviously, keep it a small-medium resolution image.). Do I need written permission from the band or label? How does this all work? 96.255.57.10 (talk) 20:04, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello editor with IP ending in 57.10, and welcome to the Teahouse. Written permission is neither required nor useful on an album cover image, unless the permission is in the form of a fre license compatible with CC-BY-SA, and permits anyone in the world to reuse the i9mage for any purpose without fee or further permission. The usual method is to upload the image to the english-language Wikipedia (not to wikimedia commons) and use it under a claim of fair use. However, you cannot upload an image here without first registering an account, and being logged in when you upload, and a fair use image can only be displayed on an article, not a draft.

So the first order of business is to make sure that the album is notable and the article about nit is solid. Only then will there be any point in co9nsidering an album cover image.

Note that albums by "up-and-coming indie rock bands" are most often not notable. See WP:NALBUM for the specific criteria that should be met for suh an artivcel to be created and remain on Wikipedia. Note that Wikipedia does not have "pages for" things,l it has articles about things. This is a subtle but important difference. Creating a new article is harder thyan it looks, about the hardest task a new user is likely to tackle here. Here are some steps thjat, when followed, often lead to success:

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

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:01, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Working on a Stub... can it be reviewed?

I am working on what I think will be considered a Stub and would like to make sure it complies with the 'rules' of Wikipedia, which I believe it does. The point of this Stub is to provide encyclopedia-type content about a company. I went through the Wikipedia 'Training Game' and spent a lot of time on Wikipedia guideline pages but seem to see some Wikipedia pages that feature the type of content I wrote for this page and some that have been banned or 'disciplined' for similar content.

How would I go about submitting a sandbox piece for review here, or elsewhere? Do I provide the sandbox url here?

Thank you! Oceanaspen (talk) 19:16, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Oceanaspen: Presuming you don't have any conflict of interest, you could move your User:Oceanaspen/sandbox to Draft:Nimbix, and submit it to the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process. Before you do that, I suggest you add more WP:RS reliable sources to show that Nimbix meets Wikipedia's definition of notability. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:35, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Articles

I want to edit this page, http://en.m.wiki.x.io/?title=Kaylee_Bryant&redirect=no, but am unsure what the best sources to choose from would be. I also don't see much info anywhere on formatting and graphics help. Lessers23! (talk) 21:07, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Lessers23!, You should see our guidance at your first article. You need reliable sources, which is usually things like reputable newspapers, magazines, and news sites, at least when it comes to living people. You'll need at least three very good sources, but having at least five sources is generally good. Such sources need to discuss the subject at some length, at least a few sentences or paragraphs, not just a passing mention. If such sources do not exist, we cannot write about the person. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Lessers23!: Welcome to the Teahouse! I believe the best reliable sources would be interviews with Bryant and critical reviews about her performance. If you haven't done so already, please read the notability discussion at Talk:Kaylee Bryant. You might be interested in Help:Your first article for guidance on creating a draft article, which you could submit for review once you have collected the right sources. You could also invite the people who edited the previous article to help you. Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography have some good info for you. You might also want to copy a well-formatted article about another actor and paste it into your sandbox, then replace things with info about Bryant. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Lessers23 and welcome to the Teahouse. I must disagree with GoingBatty slightly, i8n that interviews with the subject of an article are usually consider notm to be independent and so contribute little or no0thign to n otabili9ty, althoguh they can be good sources for what the subject has said about him- or herself. News stories, whether in print or online, can be good sources. If there exist reputable books about the subject, biographies or the like, those can also be good sources, but beware of the "quickie" biography written to exploit a subject's celebrity with little or no depth of research. Similarly tabloid-style "news" coverage is often best avoided. User-generated forums, fan sites and personal blog posts are almost never reliable sources and should generally be avoided. See our guideline on reliable sources for more details. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:14, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Editing an article about me.

The article name is Lee Mroszak.

It's about me. There are numerous issues with it. Factually, missing information, and hearsay.

My Wikipedia user name is Cabbie333 My identity has been verified by Wikipedia. I've tried to provide the correct information and do simple edits and an (editor named Metric) keeps basically telling me that I'm doing everything wrong.

I've never done anything like this before. I'm a Disabled Veteran in #Isolation at a VA hospital. Covid19 has hit us hard.

I just wanted to get the proper information on the article and facts. I have government documents that provide all the information. I have my college transcripts. Everything

Please help. Cabbie333 (talk) 21:50, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I suggest that anyone taking this on familiarize themself with the almost two-weeks' of discussion on the user's talk page: COI, ownership, OTRS, WP:V, WP:RS, requesting edits, posting personal information all covered, much of it several times. Meters (talk) 22:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Cabbie333. It is not a good idea for you to try to edit the article about you. Please read WP: AUTOBIOGRAPHY for full details. Government documents and college transcripts are of no value on Wikipedia, because we rely on published reliable sources. The best place for you to discuss your concerns is Talk:Lee Mroszak, where you can leave an edit request.

Now, I will read the discussion on your talk page.Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:15, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Cabbie333: Welcome to the Teahouse! I'm sorry you're having a hard time, both in isolation and here on Wikipedia. In order to comply with the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, I suggest you use the article talk page Talk:Lee Mroszak to suggest edits and provide the reliable sources you have. Start small by making one suggestion with the {{request edit}} template, so other editors can help. GoingBatty (talk) 22:16, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Cabbie333. First off, if there's anything in the article about you that is unsourced to reliably published sources (i.e. plain hearsay) you are welcome to remove it. That action accords with our policy on the biographies of living people (shortcut: WP:BLP). We delete everything personal that is not linked to a reliably published source.

Secondly - and this bit might sound unreasonable to you because you know yourself the best - but I'm really sorry: we cannot use stuff like government documents, transcripts, or personal knowledge, to populate a Wikipedia article about you. The reason is that we require anyone, anywhere in the world, to be able to Verify that what has been added is valid and correct. Those sources MUST, I'm afraid, have been properly published. Birth certificates, tax returns, award certificates, personal memories and so forth simply can't be accepted unless they have been reported upon in properly published books or newspapers, with proper editorial control. It's for that same reason that we don't accept either personal websites or social media accounts as sources, nor indeed valuable and original archival content found in national museums unless those archives have been made publicly available. We cannot expect someone in India or Indiana to have to travel half way around the world to visit an individual museum, government office, or your family home to verify a fact on Wikipedia.

The user who has got you so frustrated Meters seems quite right in what they've been trying to tell you. The sad reality is that Wikipedia doesn't set out to make every article factually correct (as you would perceive it) - it tries to collate what has been written about that subject, but in a neutral manner. It puts in the published good stuff and the published bad stuff; even the published wrong stuff. It leaves out all the unpublished stuff.

Look, this is going off-topic a bit for me, but can I give you some earnest advice? I can see you don't want people messing with what you see is 'your' article about the 'facts' about you. But there is a way around that, and that's to register to use a free webservice like Google's Blogger which allows you to create a blog or a website about yourself that only you, or only those you permit, to add content to. I've created a number of websites with it over the years - it's very easy to set up and use. You can add whatever government records, photos taken by friends, tales of your life etc that you want to, and with no comeback. And it will remain there long after you abandon it. By way of example, a Dutch lady I had dealings with some years back (over the subject of birds of prey) had built herself a highly technical and detailed personal website (that she paid for) and also ran a free Blogger account. Sadly, she passed away suddenly in March 2009. Her website content disappeared 6 months later, once her annual contract came to an end, as there was no-one there to renew it. But her blog remains to this day, and is a testament to her fascination with this particular topic. See here). There really is nothing to stop you doing exactly the same about your own personal life, your situation and, indeed, your frustrations and fears at this most difficult of times. There are also ways to submit urls to such websites so that they are permanently archived online, too. I mean no disrespect, but I suggest this might be a much better route for you to follow to achieve your aim. Best wishes from the UK. Take care and stay safe, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:37, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

should dead wp links be kept

i;m coming across a bunch of dead wikipedia links on articles. I try to see if i can find them, but mostly they don't exist. If I ignore ones that are clearly bogus (ie vandals), should these dead wp links be kept. The argument for would be that an article might be created for the item at some point, but the counter is until then it makes the text show up in red. I can't find any guidance that says what to do. ToeFungii (talk) 21:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

ToeFungii, Do you mean red links, such as this? If so, see our guidance at WP:REDLINK. The gist of it is: unless the link is abusive, it should be kept. Usually redlinked things should be created someday, but just haven't yet. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek this is exactly what i was asking. thx for the guidance. i looked but must have read right past it or missed it. ty.ToeFungii (talk) 21:46, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: the Cap'n has given you some correct advice. But I could expand a little by saying that if you encounter articles with a lot of red links that clearly and definitely are never likely to ever merit an article on Wikipedia and - as long as you feel confident in making that judgement - you could remove those redlinks. Thus Joseph Vallot is a valid redlink to have in an article about the Alps, whereas my extraodinarily ordinary wife, Cynthia Moyes, and her equally fictitious business (Cynthia's Dog Shampooing Parlour) probably aren't. So always leave 'em in if you're not confident; take 'em out if there's no doubt! Nick Moyes (talk) 22:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)    

Confusion

 Courtesy link: Draft:Amulet Hotkey page

I have no idea what i'm doing and just want to submit the article I was told to submit for review but can't seem to do it right. SCopeland97 (talk) 19:20, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello SCopeland97. Is the article in your sandbox? An easy way I submit articles is through the Wikipedia:Article wizard. If it is in your sandbox and you are struggling to submit it, maybe open the Wikipedia:Article wizard in a new tab and copy/paste what you wrote into the Article Wizard. That is an easy way to submit the article for review. Hopefully this helps. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:25, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Elijahandskip. I did manage to submit the article but it was immediately rejected because they said it was promotional. In that critique, I was told to specify if I work for the company that asked me to publish the page, which I do, in fact, currently intern for. Once I specified that it was rejected because apparently by disclosing that I can no longer publish the article? If that's how it works, how am I supposed to get this article published and what am I supposed to tell my bosses?? SCopeland97 (talk) 19:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello. So Wikipedia's Article wizard is a good place to get the steps to disclose even if you aren't using it to submit an article. Click the article wizard then click the next button 2 times (You want to be on page 3.) Once you are on page 3, you can choose if you are being paid to edit or just writing about the company you are in. Once you pick, it will tell you the steps to disclose. Once you complete those steps, you should be ok to resubmit the article from your sandbox (Just back button out of Article wizard once the steps are completed.. Hopefully this helps. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:42, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

SCopeland97, I suggest you read up on Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. Wikipedia is much more interested in what secondary sources have to say about the subject; that is, while primary sources are appreciated for filling in information, they are insufficient to produce citations for an article by themselves. Looking at the draft I see only information being cited by the company's website while there are stray references in the References section left unused. To the best of my knowledge it is fine to work on an article while it is a draft (provided it is not promotional), but once it migrates to the main articlespace, your contributions (and contributions from others affiliated with the company) should not be added directly to the article unless they are factual errors that are citable. Most contributions should be vetted through the article's talk page using edit requests. See Talk:Wheely for an example of how a paid contributor is properly collaborating with uninvolved editors. Nick Moyes, AlanM1, is my talk about edit requests accurate enough? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I moved your PAID declaration to your User page. The second Declined was solely because you put PAID in the wrong place. Yes, what you wrote on your first attempt was worthy of Speedy deletion. You can try again. I left some guidance on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 19:58, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

AND, it's gone. You can ask the administrator who did the last delete to send it to you, but reality is that if you really want to try this again, start fresh, in your Sandbox. Then it can be moved to draft and submitted to AfC. The real problem is there may not be enough written about the company. Rehashing of press releases does not convey notability. David notMD (talk) 23:13, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Historic Franklin Millhouse

How to add to an existing information site.

We would like to find out as to include our Historic Franklin Millhouse in Franklin, Ida. Or should we just submit our information on the Millhouse? 2601:681:5801:3810:8480:A229:78D4:9435 (talk) 22:22, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is not a website to "submit information" to. This is an encyclopedia, which has articles about subjects shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Historic structures are usually notable, as long as independent sources have written about them. There is also an additional complication in that it appears that you have a conflict of interest(please review). I would suggest that you designate one of you to create an account(it must be a single individual and that individual may not grant others access to the account). Once the account is created, the user can make the required conflict of interest declaration. You could then use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft article. Be advised that you could only summarize what independent sources state about your building- Wikipedia is not interested in what a subject says about itself, only in what others say about it. Most people in your position have difficulty writing in such a manner, but if you truly feel that you can, that is the path forward in my opinion. 331dot (talk) 22:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse! The Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide states that you cannot add the information yourself, but has lots of good information on how to proceed. GoingBatty (talk) 22:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

There is an article for Franklin, Idaho. On the article's Talk page you could request that a sentence be added to the History section if you can provide with it a reference to a published document identifying the house and mill as historic. Tag that with an edit request. An editor will then review your proposal and either incorporate or not. David notMD (talk) 23:29, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Musical notability criteria

Greetings,

I recently wrote an article but its submission got declined as apparently it didn't appear to indicate which of the musical notability criteria it satisfied. Could you please specify what this criteria is for classical music? I haven't been able to gather it from the musical notability criteria page. Thank you in advance. Here is the link to my article: Draft:Petals (music)

Regards,

--Raeshouse (talk) 22:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Raeshouse Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The criteria for musical groups(regardless of the genre of music) is written at WP:BAND, as you were informed. 331dot (talk) 22:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Raeshouse and 331dot: Since "Petals" is a piece of music (not a music group), Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Recordings is probably more appropriate. GoingBatty (talk) 23:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, please excuse my error. 331dot (talk) 00:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

How do I create a page fast?

 Uonnywitz666 (talk) 00:12, 1 May 2020 (UTC) How do I create a page fast?

Uonnywitz666 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have "pages", it has articles. Unless you already have much experience in article creation, it is extremely unlikely you will be able to "create a page fast", at least successfully. As there are no deadlines on Wikipedia I'm curious as to the reason for the urgency. Successfully creating a new article is the absolute hardest thing to do on Wikipedia. It takes much time and practice. A Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources state about a subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. I usually suggest that new users spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest them first, so they can learn how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 00:17, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

maybe someone can help me with the vandalism question

I'm trying to contact one of the counter vandalism academy trainers to sign up, but they're pretty booked and you all usually are able to give awesome fast answers. For what ever reason, I'm attracted to trying to stop vandalism, I think because it lets me see lots of varied articles. So here's the question: I've read the material and it says to revert vandalism with no comment, but that is so contrary for me probably because having started with real edits. It also says that not feeding the vandals including not posting on their talk page, but that also is hard for me because you can't refer someone to AIV unless they've been warned. This is the page that got me wondering Link. If you check it's history you'll see that it was being hit by 3 vandals at the same time and another user and myself were trying to keep them at bay. After all that, the more specific question I can lay out is: 1) with obvious vandalism is it acceptable to not put any comment>; 2) in obvious vandalism, should a warning be put on their talk page? I differentiate the vandals on this page today from those that I know are AGF and it's usually pretty obvious who's here for good intentions and not, but if I err I err on the side of assuming they are here to be a positive. Anyway, hope that makes sense and I appreciate all feedback in advance. ToeFungii (talk) 01:45, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for being interested in counter-vandalism! You're right to err on the side of AGF. The denying recognition comes into play when it's either a) an obvious sockpuppet (which is a bit deeper into the Wiki-world) or in any normal case, leaving the templates but not adding extra commentary. The templates don't really count as giving them attention, I'd say - that would be more like engaging an obvious troll on a talk page, say, or becoming visibly frustrated in edit summaries. Happy editing, and good luck! -- a lad insane (channel two) 01:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I got bit on one of my first edits just trying to improve a problem sentence (I actually came here for some input), but a user that i've come to learn was coming at me due to WP:Ownership. I was fortunate as a couple very experienced editors came in on the issue and one of them effectively made the change I was trying to do but in a more creative way and it stuck. Have to say that this virus has got me situated to be on wp quite a bit so i'm full on absorption, but for every problem there are 10 fantastic positives, and that includes getting help here. TC ToeFungii (talk) 02:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Impostor editor of a wikipedia page

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.

---

Resolved

 – Account in question blocked for impersonation, WP:UAA mentioned as a more appropriate venue. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Not sure if this is the right place for this, but someone has impersonated Mike Hatton and made edits to the page Draft:Mike_Hatton, which has now been taken down. The user User:Mikehfilms is not Mike.  Caliwolfus (talk) 13:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Caliwolfus and welcome to the Teahouse. The usual place to report such issues is at WP:UAA (Usernames for AAdmin Attentioon) but in this case this report will do. I will look into it. Do you have any public information which suggests that Mikehfilms is not the actor? That user claims to be the actor on his user page. Please do not post any7 private or confidential info -- you my use "email this user" to send any such info to me. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:46, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

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

Question about Adding Additional Citations

Hello there,

I am wondering if an added citation counts as a minor edit that I can do independently or as a major edit that needs to be submitted as an edit request? I have been submitting formal edit requests to add content to the William L. Armstrong page and it's been going well! I'm very happy with my wiki-manager's engagement. However, I'm wondering if I only want to add an additional citation to content that already exists, whether that also has to be an edit request? Hope to hear from you soon! Thank you!2019crisissimus2 (talk) 14:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC) 2019crisissimus2 (talk) 14:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello 2019crisissimus2 and welcome to the Teahouse. That is a question without a clear-cut answer. If the statements are already in the article, if the source i9s fully independent of the article subject, and is clearly reliable, and the statement is very explicitly supported in the source, adding the source probably does not need an edit request. But as a paid contributor you want to err on the side of caution. If the source is an important one, or is supporting statements important to the article, you might want to use an edit request to have the addition reviewed. If there is any possibility that the addi9tion would be viewed as promotional, definitely use an edit request. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:17, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

2019crisissimus2, as DESiegel said, continuing via edit requests is best. I would say to quote the content you want to add the citation to, include the link, and wait for an editor to review it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:28, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I attempted to correct

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Duplicate of next item down.
 JjlPierpoint (talk) 06:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I attempted to correct a page and was vandalized. Please advise

 JjlPierpoint (talk) 06:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

You were not vandalized, JjlPierpoint. You allowed yourself to enter into an WP:EDITWAR with another user. You should go to the article's Talk page and discuss it with the other editor(s), per the linked article.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

creating and editing an article

Hello,

I am new here and apparently already got in trouble with Justdafax. I am trying to Crete e apace and copied a template since I am still learning to navigate. it seems like I have made some mistake and may even have compounded them by fixing them. I believe I am getting closer and wondering if I just need to erase everything and just create a new used. Floridians (talk) 04:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Floridians, No need to erase everything. Don't worry, we are all new once, and it can be a bit confusing to start out. I'm not sure what your userpage had on it or why it was deleted, perhaps @HickoryOughtShirt?4: can give some more guidance, as they deleted it. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Floridians, your user page was deleted because it was used for purposes contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia. If you want to make new user page, first read WP:USERPAGE.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:30, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

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.

---

Closing this as it is a duplicate to the one below it. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 06:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 Floridians (talk) 04:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Floridians, Howdy hello, and welcome to the teahouse! If you have any questions, we'd be happy to answer them. Otherwise, glad to have ya around. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Your user page was deleted because it was used for purposes contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia. If you want to make new user page, first read WP:USERPAGE.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

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

Why can’t I get awnsers from my submission sooner?

Dear teahouse,I am a new user to Wikipedia. One month ago, I submitted an article. I had about given up hope, until today. I received an answer: my submission was declined! I wish it had came sooner so I could’ve just deleted my account. What is your advice? Best of wishes, 0713125012PiperleeCopley. 0713125012PiperleeCopley (talk) 17:29, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@0713125012PiperleeCopley: There is a large backlog of unreviewed articles, and all the reviewers all volunteers, so it can take quite some time for an article to be reviewed. No reason to delete your account, just improve your draft based on the reviewer's feedback. Also read WP:YFA for info on how to create an artcile. RudolfRed (talk) 17:47, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi 0713125012PiperleeCopley. You submitted User:0713125012PiperleeCopley/sandbox six days ago, right after creating your account. It was declined after 90 minutes. That is very fast, and you were immediately notified at User talk:0713125012PiperleeCopley#Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (April 23). Your draft has no chance of being accepted. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:00, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, 0713125012PiperleeCopley. It looks like global lockdown is distorting everyone's perception of time! You actually created an article in your sandbox just six days ago. Its sole contents (apart from some recently added links to Wikipedia) was "Cats are mammals. They have whiskers. They usually are covered in fur, though some species do not have fur.". This comes nowhere close to being anything like a serious, informative encyclopaedia entry, and we have one on Cat already, of course. So, in a sense, you have rather wasted your time. My advice is to read Wikipedia:About and maybe try The Wikipedia Adventure if you really want to contribute. Alternatively something like Google's Blogger is a great way to create your own personal webpages which nobody else can interfere with. Because creating a new Wikipedia article on a subject nobody else has yet written about is the hardest thing anyone can achieve here (and there are over 6 million articles in existence here already), you might be better off focusing on making small corrections and improvement to existing articles, first. There isn't actually any way to delete an account here - simply abandon it and forget the password if you really want to give up at this early stage in your editing career. We all have to start somewhere, but unfortunately you did rather set off on the wrong foot. Regards from lockdown UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey @0713125012PiperleeCopley: - Where you able to get this worked out and have an understanding? I see you did start in the Wikipedia Adventure so that is a great start to get you going! Please do let us know if you need any other help on this topic or not. We look forward to serving you more tea but we are out of biscuits and cookies Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Which edits should be discussed on the talk page, and which should not?

On [[10]], it says, "Before engaging in a major edit, a user should consider discussing proposed changes on the article discussion/talk page." Yet looking at various talk pages, it seems like there isn't a lot of this– or am I looking at articles without a lot of changes? (I would link them but I don't remember which ones they were.) What types of changes need to be discussed on a talk page, and how would you express that you want to make a change? Agdearshah (talk) 21:28, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Agdearshah. Welcome to the Teahouse. Great question and, yes, you're right - not a lot of article talk pages get much activity at all - whereas others are buzzing with discussion and editing arguments. It's almost an impossible question to answer precisely, but once you've been around here a bit you get a sense of how easily other editors might react to something you want to do. So, a plan for a major rearrangement of an article might be well worth raising on the talk page first. Addition or removal of anything you think might be contentious could also be worth raising first - especially if, in your heart or hearts, you know that someone else is likely to take a totally different point of view to you. Whilst you can just 'BEBOLD' and make the change immediately, it can be demoralising to work for hours on end, trying to improve something (at least, as far you see it) only to then have another editor revert all your changes with those four killer words: "Discuss on talk page!". Merging articles or splitting off large parts into a separate article are well-worth raising. Earlier today we had another editor ask whether discussing something on a talk page is worthwhile (see here). It may take a while to get a reply, and if you don't then be bold and go make those changes after a few days to a week. Alternatively, listen to any responses and aim to come to a consensus. 99.999% of editors here want to improve articles, though with over 6 million such articles, that's an awful lot of talk pages and not so many editors. So mostly we simply go ahead and make the edits were are confident will improve Wikipedia, and then discuss if someone objects by reverting us. Does this, admittedly rather waffly, answer help? Nick Moyes (talk) 21:46, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

That was very helpful, thank you! --Agdearshah (talk) 21:56, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Whether you first seek consensus or boldly edit, there's a fair likelihood that somebody will object to your actually excellent proposal/edit. OTOH, there seems to be less likelihood of getting a massive wave of two or three editors supporting your excellent change. Your best bet is just to keep your expectations low. Fabrickator (talk) 07:51, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey @Agdearshah:. I see you completed the introductory course so congratulations! I wanted to see if there is anything else we can help you with on this request? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:54, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

What is meant when "account created automatically"?

For the account here it says it was created "automatically" whereas for the handful i've looked at once i found how to see this there isn't the word automatically. What does that signify? For context, the user is trying to add unsourced info that another user had just tried to do as well which makes me think it's a shill of the other (although the term I guess here is sockpuppet). i've read on what to do for that, but would like to know the significance of that word automatic before taking another step. thanks. ToeFungii (talk) 14:26, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi ToeFungii. It means the account was originally created at another wiki and later created automatically here when the user viewed a page while logged in. Special:CentralAuth/Meow1224233 shows the account was created one minute earlier at the MediaWiki wiki. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:43, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

TY. I think i understand. i was hoping it would give me a strong clue whether it is a shill and don't think it does that. oh well. much appreciated for the assistance. ToeFungii (talk) 14:47, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I think you're onto someting, ToeFungii. I was just behind PrimeHunter in looking at why that account was "created automatically"; but I did wonder why the account was created on mediawiki (but made no edits there), and then immediately came to enwiki, and started re-adding unsourced material to Kelly Oubre Jr., that was previously added by another brand new account. A third new account has repeatedly added different unsourced material to the same article recently. --ColinFine (talk) 15:13, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: I've had accounts created on wikis I've never visited (like slwiki), and have heard of it happening to other users as well. Perhaps there are ways that content from other wikis gets retrieved and displayed on pages here in the context of the logged-in user. Interwiki transclusion doesn't seem to work here, but I wonder if that could cause it and, if so, if Commons supports it. Also, I think I've seen searches show content from other wikis in some cases, like maybe if there are no or few hits here. Maybe the retrieval of the preview of the foreign article can cause it? Speaking of previews, I wonder if it can be caused by mousing over an interwiki link with the default previewing tool (the one that is used if you don't have Navigation Popups enabled; NavPops itself doesn't preview interwiki links). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, AlanM1, I've had messages from other Wikipedias, and indeed it does create you a local account when you go onto another Wiki: Special:CentralAuth/ColinFine shows 225 accounts. But it seems odd that an account would be created on www.mediawiki.org, and then edit only on en-wiki. --ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Your account can be created automatically at a wiki if they import a page you have edited at another wiki. Importing is not enabled at slwiki so it's not the reason AlanM1 was created there. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:16, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Greetins @ToeFungii: - Did the answers help you understand? I actually just asked about this too so I got my answer as well. Tagging @Puddleglum2.0: as a courtesy as she didn’t know either! Please let me know. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

It did. Unfort it didn't help me to figure out if there was a relationship between the two accounts which become moot as a kind admin (Materialscientist) blocked them and protected the page stopping the problem. I never realized, or thought about, all the wiki's being so connected but it works so ya!! thx and tc ToeFungii (talk) 08:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Could someone help translate this source from Persian into English?

Link:[[11]]

I think this source could potentially be valuable but I can't really make use of it because I don't speak Persian and Google Translate just spits out gibberish when I try to copy-paste the text. Would anyone who speaks Persian be willing to help translate it for me? I apologize if I'm in the wrong place or if this is too much to ask. 3 kids in a trenchcoat (talk) 06:45, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse u: 3 kids in a trenchcoat. We actually have a list of people who can help you this. Go to WP:Translators_available and follow the instructions on the page. You should be able to find someone to assist you there. Please let us know if you have any problems or if you got it handled! Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 09:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

How do I get new page reviewer role

I have been a registered active editor for over 90 days, autoconfirmed, extended confirmed, and a record of over 3,000 edits, edited over a hundred articles, and have created a few articles.

Please admins in the house, I need additional roles to keep me motivated to continue editing Wikipedia. Best regards. Ugbedeg (talk) 10:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I assume that you haven't read WP:New pages patrol? --David Biddulph (talk) 11:02, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Ugbedeg, you have already made a request at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/New page reviewer. The admins active at requests for permissions will consider the request there. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 11:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :Welcome to the Teahouse, Ugbedeg. You have already lodged a request for WP:NPP rights just a couple of days ago (diff). Coming here asking how to get that role suggests you may not yet be ready. Have you read the guidance/requirements and worked through the NPP tutorial? Be patient - NPP rights carry a lot of responsibility, and your past editing history and experience will be assessed. Like most things in life - and especially with reliance on a volunteer community - these things take time. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

what way to improve

I have tagged me the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

See note at talk page.

What is another way to improve it  ? User:Mustafdesam

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

North8000 (talk) 13:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC) Mustafdesam (talk) 15:33, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

FYI I did not put the above post here. It was copied to here by S. Gopalakrishnan. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

? It appears that it was posted and signed by Mustafdesam at 2020-04-29T15:33 UTC, here. It is regarding S. Gopalakrishnan (writer). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1, North8000, and Mustafdesam: - I was just checking to see if there is more discussion to be had here or can this request be closed? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:09, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I left suggestions at the talk page of the article prior to the above. Mustafdesam, were you able to view that? Also I'm ready to help further. But from my end I have no open items or issues. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 11:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Article completion questions

Please somebody help me edit and add article "Rats cave" Виктор Пинчук (talk) 09:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Rats Cave Nick Moyes (talk) 11:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Viktor, and welcome to the Teahouse. I think it would have been better to have created a new draft about Eua's National Park, before focussing on a very small geological feature within it. Then you could have listed some of the Park's features with impunity, including the reference to your own travel book. I would certainly remove most of the images, leaving just one map and one cave photo, properly referenced the available sources (see WP:EASYREFBEGIN). After that, I would still be unsure of the feature's lone notability without a good source. Your initial rejection pointed you towards WP:NGEO, but there do seem to be enough sources to just about get this through. Best way is to ensure references are inline, and not added as external links. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:47, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Nick. Do you think, need to do two articles or one (about the National park) and include Rats Cave? Виктор Пинчук (talk) 12:09, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Виктор Пинчук: You will have far more success with just one article on the Eua National Park. It would make a great link from the Eua article, and could contains a 'Features' section, or some-such name mentioning the main characteristics and features of the park. You might get some ideas from pages listed at List of national parks of Panama - which I chose because most are quite short. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 13:22, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Moving a page

Hi, I'm new to wikipedia editing. I tried to move the pager https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Gr%C3%A9gory_Katz to the same name but without an accent in the first name. The page was already taken by a redirect to the page with the accent. I then completed the page "Editing Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests" as follows:

Uncontroversial technical requests

However, the published page shows the following page change request:

Uncontroversial technical requests Microcanthus strigatus → Stripey (redirect to Microcanthus strigatus) (move · discuss) – use common name (where available) to avoid use of genus name for the only species in a monospecific genus Quetzal1964 (talk) 07:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

This looks like an example or something. So I'm not sure if my request has gone through. Could someone help me on this. Thanks. Jkorsunsky (talk) 07:43, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

You want to move the article Grégory Katz to Gregory Katz. This is justified, as the sources cited mostly (I haven't checked all of them) don't use the accent. However, this will be a "move over a redirect", which, as I understand it, can only be done by an admin. In my experience, mentioning the need for such a move here on the Teahouse is likely to cause a helpful admin to do the move. Maproom (talk) 08:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Jkorsunsky. What you have done is, instead of inserting a new request, you have edited the existing sample code to be your request - and, moreover, the sample you have edited is an instruction to editors, inside a comment, and doesn't appear in the page at all. I have undone your edit. You need to edit it again, but this time copy the line {{subst:RMassist| current page title | new page title | reason = reason for move}} to underneath the last entry - currently neatypus obliquus - and edit the copy. (I would have done this for you, but it would have been recorded as my request). --ColinFine (talk) 08:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Colin, I hope I got this right. It's not so simple, I find. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkorsunsky (talk • contribs) 12:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Jkorsunsky: - How did those suggestions work out for you? Were you able to get your desired results or are you still having issues? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Galendalia:. Don't know if I did it right, the page still hasn't been moved to "Gregory Katz" without accent.

Hi, Jkorsunsky. That's because you haven't taken my advise and made the request again. --ColinFine (talk) 14:22, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @ColinFine:. I wanted to declare the fact that I am a paid editor before repeating the request. I just did it now.

Help

I am new here. I made a couple of edits and an admin, Vanamonde93 reverted them all, see this. Please let me know how to make a sentence based on the references cited correctly (and it should still mean what I am trying to convey). Thanks. Venue9 (talk) 14:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Vanamonde explained why in their edit summary:"1) material about persecution belongs at Persecution of Hindus, where it has already been covered; 2) your sources still do not support the content you are adding, and original research is something you can be blocked for; 3) please use only reliable sources. indiafacts.com does not count. " The talk page is really the best place for this, but sentences such as "The English Media houses worldwide have been trying to build a narrative against the culture, festivals, ideas and practices of Hindus" are never going to be acceptable. Your sources don't back the statement and it's simply not true. Doug Weller talk 15:10, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Edit request

I made an edit request here and was asked to establish consensus for it. How do I do that?Venue9 (talk) 15:08, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

There was a discussion just above your request about the same issue. That was just a few days ago. You can join in that and try to change everyone's minds, but please don't suggest other editor's are prejudiced. And EB is not a particularly good source even if our articles do use it. It certainly has nothing like our NPOV policy and many articles give just one perspective. I rarely use it. 15:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Messaging

How do you message another editor about their contribution to a particular page? Random Tyke 15:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Random Tyke 15:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RandomTyke (talk • contribs)

@RandomTyke: You could post on the editor's talk page for a 1-on-1 conversation, or you could post on the article's talk page for a group conversation and use Template:ping to notify them of the conversation (as I did in this note to you). GoingBatty (talk) 15:22, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Uploaded image in my sandbox and would like to have it deleted

Hello Teahouse!

I'm a very new user/contributor and was testing various templates in my sandbox. I was trying to understand the naming criteria in order to upload an image (which I do have permission to use), and was successful. Then I realized that I could not permanently delete the image and it is in the image library.

I have requested deletion on the image file itself using the speedy deletion template.

Was this the best way to go about it &/or how long does this process take?

Any other "pitfalls" I should be aware of using the sandbox?

Thanks so much for your advice & feedback in advance! Radarthanherbs (talk) 07:51, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Radarthanherbs: welcome to Wikipedia, and to the Teahouse. No, deleting images and pages is something that ordinary editors cannot do; but you found the way to do it. The image you uploaded has been deleted from Commons: see https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/upload&user=Radarthanherbs . I'm not sure which "pitfall" you encountered (uploading images is entirely separate from anywhere you might use them). There is a lot of useful information on your user talk page, but if you have specific questions, please ask them here. --ColinFine (talk) 08:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks ColinFine for the quick reply!

I thought the sandbox was a safe zone in that anything I did, I could also undo. It was my own fault for not checking into the ins and outs of uploading images beforehand.

Nice to know that there are so many helpful folks out there - thanks again! Radarthanherbs (talk) 15:32, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Help for newbie

I have drafted my first ever Wikipedia article and submitted it. This was rejected (no problem, I understand why). I now want to gradually edit this and re-submit in the future.

However, article has been moved from my Sandpit to another page with a redirect. When I edit the page I can’t see how to save changes, only how to publish changes which I don’t want to do yet (not until I have finished all my edits).

Please advise.

Philip Walker PJE Walker (talk) 15:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

The button "Save changes" was confusingly renamed as "Publish changes" by dictat of the WMF. It doesn't mean that the changes are published to mainspace, but merely that a new version of the draft is saved. When you've made all your changes the button to submit the draft for AFC review is that labelled "Submit". --David Biddulph (talk) 15:46, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

"Declined" (not "Rejected"). The reason for "Publish" is that drafts are visible to other editors even though not in mainspace and not 'seen' by Google or other search engines. David notMD (talk) 15:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

photo

I am trying to add a photo of Professor Goodson but am having problems - do you have any suggestions? Best wishes Elizabeth Elizabeth fleur briggs (talk) 18:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey Elizabeth fleur briggs and welcome to the Teahouse. You can't insert a picture from your computer directly to a Wikipedia article, like you tried to do at Ivor Goodson. You need to upload it to Wikipedia first. In order to upload the pic, you have to own the copyright and be willing to release it as per the Wikipedia:Image use policy. If the pic is from online, unfortunately you won't be allowed to upload it. Hope this helps, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 18:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Declined Article

Hello House, Am a new user and just got my article declined. Can anyone assist me on the reviewers comments and how best i can edit to suit Wikipedia Standard Below is the url https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Shopnaw Thanks for your assistance Kojo Essel (talk) 18:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kojo Essel and welcome to the Teahouse. First of all, your article reads very much like an advertisement, and for that reason, the editor who declined your article did a good job pointing you towards WP:ARTSPAM, which I suggest you take a look at. You may have a better chance of your article being published if you improve your references. Right now, all your sources are from the website of the organization in question. On Wikipedia, notability is established by the subject of the article being covered by multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. I suggest you search Google News (news.google.com) to get these, because I see several articles about Shopnaw there. Once you add sources, cite them properly (perhaps see WP:EASYREFBEGIN if you need help with that) and then try to make the article read less like an advertisement. At that point, feel free to submit it again. Hope this helps. Regards, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 18:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

What is the Best University for AI

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.

---

Extended content

What is the Best University for AI when talking about the best Univesity for Artificial intelligence program there is few most common technology university which offers the program of admission in Univesity Al NAFI Al NAFI is the best online learning when we talk about the online best website which provides the best international program of computer science the best online opportunities specially designed for software and best online learning engineers and artificial intelligence the most of software engineers from Europe United ComputerTeacher computer teacher reading free online and 2, of course, is also bad for the students of all over the world and is the best opportunities for Pakistan is and all over the world who want to learn and grow their skills to computer teacher program Udemy is the one greeting online computer programming is offer the test was leading computer programming which online computer programming available understand programming and online computer programming physical training table-wise tablewise is the new and most highly professional educational platform which provides online learning opportunities for all over the world students most of the students there and their distance and pastes education system it is online professional educational platform which provides you

Welcome to Wikipedia. It is not clear to me what you're trying to do, but Wikipedia is not for advertising for promotion. See WP:NOT for more info. RudolfRed (talk) 17:52, 1 May 2020 (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.

HELP ME THIS DRAFT

PRODIGY MATH GAMEPLAESE HELP [[12]]

--HISTORIAN (talk) 18:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC) HISTORIAN (talk) 18:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Andrewhistory and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia articles should be about notable topics, a term which Wikipedia uses in a special sense. Wikipedia articles demonstrate the notability of their subject by citing multiple, professionally6 published independent reliable sources, usually at least three sources that discuss the topic in some detail. Other wiokis and fan fora are not considered reliable sources. Please read Your First Article for more information. The draft article Draft:Prodigy_math_game does not (yet) contain sufficient sources to demonstrate the notability of the topic. Note that many topics really exist but are not notable in the Wikipedia sense. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Andrewhistory, your draft is only two sentences, which is most definitely not enough for an article. Second, please find better independent sources that talk about the subject, not Fandom and a listing site. Kindly stop using all caps as it is seen as shouting. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

A question

I was looking at random user pages and came across user:ROXELANA22. Upon further inspection, I found this. Isn’t there a way to ban a users IP adress so they can’t create more accounts? Thanks, Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 19:02, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Rodrigo Valequez There is, and we do, but it is not difficult for someone intent on doing so to change their IP address. 331dot (talk) 19:12, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, there is an IP block, but that may hit more than one user due to dynamic addresses. RudolfRed (talk) 19:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

​ ​ Thanks for the quick replies! Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 19:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Can someone tell me how to hide an edit?

So, I accidentally edited a page without logging in, and I want to hide my IP address. Can someone tell me how to do that? Thanks! Thanoscar21 (talk) 16:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Thanoscar21: See WP:OVERSIGHT for instructions. RudolfRed (talk) 16:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Thanoscar21 (talk) 19:28, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

James H Johnson, Jr (Lieutenant General)

Two questions: (1) The title of my Wikipedia bio is incorrect, as reads, James H. Johnson. It should read, James H. Johnson, Jr. How do I correct it? (2) The photo with my bio is outdated. I have a digital photo to replace it. How do I do that? Thank you. Roselb (JHJ,Jr) Roselb (talk) 19:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Roselb (talk) 19:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Roselb:

1. Someone has already renamed the article.
2. If you would like to submit your own photo (provided that you hold the copyright for it and are willing to waive it for any use), please read WP:IUP. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:36, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

what's the deal with the visual editing?

ok, i've been driving myself crazy this morning trying to figure out why the visual editing change box in the upper right of the edit box appears to appear and disappear randomly. First, not sure if this is the right place to ask, so if it's not please point me. In case this is the right place, at first i think twinkle was causing it so i turned off twinkle, flushed cache, and retried, but that isn't it. I tried to go full screen just out of curiosity and screwed it up such i had to move a mountain to undo that (big bug). So does anyone know why the visual/source editing drop down box doesn't stay home? ty ToeFungii (talk) 19:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: Where do you see it disappear? Visual editing is only available for article pages, not talk pages or other pages. RudolfRed (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Yep it's disappearing on article pages. I've tried different browsers to see if that might be an issue and it might be. I normally use the latest firefox, but i tried opera and for the same page opera showed me the visual edit whereas firefox did not. opera is based on chrome I believe. i've actually noticed this for awhile but it was in trying to edit Now you see me where i needed the visual editor that i actually bit the bullet and took a look. ToeFungii (talk) 20:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: You may want to take this technical question to VPT where they are more suited to help you. Regards, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 20:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thx. I just opened a random article and not via edit button. the article was William D. Skeen House. I'll go to vpt. thx again. ToeFungii (talk) 20:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Chase the Comet

I was wondering if someone could help me with my Article Draft:Chase The Comet. I have been told it will not pass WP:NBAND. which makes no sense to me but I am no expert just a newbie. Any help and or guidance would be greatly appreciated and welcomed. Thanks in advance! Adumbgeek (talk) 20:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Adumbgeek, Well to understand WP:NBAND, one must understand notability. The gist of it is: we don't write about just anything. Topics need to show that they meet our standards for inclusion. For bands, we have a list of 12 criteria that bands can meet. If they meet even just one of the criteria, they can have an article. But if they meet no criteria, they generally can't have an article. If you take a look at NBAND, can you show how the band meets at least one of those criteria? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:08, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek, Thank you, for your explanation and quick response, I really appreciate it. I will get this revised and re-submitted. Thanks Again! Adumbgeek (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2020 (CST)

how to resolve the tag {{COI}}

My question concerns the entry Dr Alan Howard

I want to do the right thing for Wikipedia. I have created three entries so far as well as small edits on others. I don't understand fully the wikipedia processes. Before I wrote the entry for Dr Howard, I contacted an editor and explained my connection which is declared on my page talk. I was told to go ahead and to be careful how I wrote the entry.

I have done my best to write the entry according to the rules for Wikipedia. However, the {{COI}} tag has been applied and I do not know how to resolve this.

Could someone advise please?

thanks for your help. Tom Tomp-uk (talk) 12:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I've changed the template to a link to the template. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 12:08, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Article shortened by 10% and COI tag removed. David notMD (talk) 14:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Under "unintended consequences," article shortened an additional 30% and other tags added. David notMD (talk) 15:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I have trimmed a bit of WP:COATRACKING and WP:FAKEREFS. The sources that remain are almost entirely primary. ~t is not surprising that articles on academics would be almost entirely primary, but it is uncharacteristic for an academic without secondary coverage to have an article beyond a stub. Usedtobecool ☎️

Thank you David notMD and Usedtobecool for the time you have taken on this. It's late now in the UK and I will review the details tomorrow. Tomp-uk (talk) 21:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't know how to insert an image

I do not know how to insert an image when editing a page, please help me. Bobby Neir (talk) 19:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Bobby Neir, first question: is the image copyright-free or non-free (if the latter, does it fit all 10 criteria in WP:NFCCP)? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:28, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey Bobby Neir and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are talking about an image you found online, please answer Tenryuu's question so we can answer your question appropriately. If you are talking about inserting an image of your own, you can upload it through the Upload Wizard, provided you agree to release the photo's copyright as per Wikipedia's Image Use Policy. Once you go through the process of the Upload Wizard, you will be given the code on the final page which you can copy and paste into the article. Hope this helps, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 19:31, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I believe that the image is copyright-free, because it is used on two different web-sites, also it does not have a copyright image (c) on it however I am not certain and would need to look more closely into it. Bobby Neir (talk) 20:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

If the image has been published elsewhere then by default it is copyrighted, unless it has been released under an appropriate licence or it satisfies various other conditions. It does not need a (c) symbol to make it copyrighted. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Submitting a musician entry

I am reading all of the tutorials and still don't think I understand the steps to get an entry for my husband who is a musician. Many other entertainers in the same genre have pages. I also have his discography and other sources/references for articles that have been written about him. Please help. PepperZydeco (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

PepperZydeco Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would first note that if you intend to write about your husband, you should read the conflict of interest policy. Please be aware that Wikipedia has articles, not mere "pages". Those articles summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about a subject, showing how the subject meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. In the case of a musician, Wikipedia has a specific definition of a notable musician. Because meriting an article depends on meeting that definition and having independent reliable sources, not every musician merits an article, even within the same genre of music. If you have reviewed the definition and truly feel that your husband meets that definition, and have the sources to support it, you could attempt to write an article at Articles for Creation- but typically, articles are written when independent editors take note of a subject and choose to write about it.

Also be advised that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one. You cannot lock it to the text that you or your husband might prefer and cannot prevent others from editing it. Any information, good or bad, about your husband can be in an article about him as long as the information appears in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. I realize this is a lot to consider, and feel free to ask any additional questions. 331dot (talk) 19:57, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

In case you missed it, Articles for Creation (above) is the process. read again notable musician. What you want to create is a draft, which will then be reviewed - accepted or declined. Articles about musicians with a similar career to your husband's does not mean his will be accepted. There are thousands and thousands of existing articles that would not meet present-day higher standards. David notMD (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Userbox with image

FYI

 – Heading created by Tenryuu

.

Hello! How do I make an user box with and image in it? I want it to be written "This user is a student of Bangladesh International School, Dammam" with the schools image. Rahbab Chowdhury (talk) 22:04, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

MRC2RULES, if you're looking for someone to help design a userbox for you, go over to Wikipedia:Userboxes/Ideas. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

HELP!!!!!!

Is it possible for me to ban myself? Thanks. User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 21:11, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Shadowblade08 If you think it is necessary, you can be blocked at your request, but is there some reason that you cannot just refrain from editing Wikipedia on your own? 331dot (talk) 21:17, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Since I there are so many people on Wiki that hate me, there is no point in being on Wiki anymore, and on top of that, i've been getting pictures of porn. and seeing pages with the word fuc* a lot on Wiki. No reason to be here. User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 21:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Shadowblade08: We are sorry to see you go, and I assure you that many more people here like you than hate you, but if you insist, you can block yourself from logging in using the enforcer. Alternatively, you can be blocked from editing by requesting an admin to do so, but you will still be able to log in. Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 21:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, i've had too many people saying unmentionable stuff to me. By the way, is there any way I can put up one of those "Retired" signs on my talk page, before I quit? Thanks.User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 21:29, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Shadowblade08: You can put {{Retired}} on your userpage. RudolfRed (talk) 21:30, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 21:31, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

As agreed with this user, I have now blocked their account for an initial period of two months, but for multiple reasons.Nick Moyes (talk) 22:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Michael Price Composer

 Courtesy link: Michael Price (composer)

 2A00:23C7:AE86:7200:6D56:63A4:4867:534F (talk) 21:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP and welcome to the Teahouse. What is your question about Michael Price (composer)? Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 21:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Michael Price Composer (UK)

Please include correct personal information for Michael Price Composer; my name is Zoe and I was Michael’s wife. I was Zoe Moore later becoming Zoe Price. We were married for a number of years.

Should you require further confirmation please contact Michael Price.

I think it impertinent to include this information on his personal link.

Thank you for your kind attention.

With very best wishes,

Zoe Boyden (nee Price) 2A00:23C7:AE86:7200:6D56:63A4:4867:534F (talk) 21:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

If you wish to propose changes to an article, the place to do so is on the article's talk page. You would need to support your proposal with references to published reliable sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Whilst it is not impertinent, we cannot simply add details to an article based on what any user asserts, nor do we contact subjects of articles to 'check' details. Wikipedia simply collates what is out there and published in the public domain by reliable sources. Unsourced statements about living people and their relatives should be deleted from any article, not added. (As an aside, I assume you remarried someone called Boyden, though I cannot see how you can be nee Price. I'm sure you meant nee Moore?) Either way, we cannot take yours or his word, sorry. But what we can take is a photograph you took of him yourself. As creator and copyright owner of any photo, you can create an account and upload an image to Wikimedia Commons for use in his article. It's often images that we are unable to get hold of, as those on most websites are copyright of someone else, which we cannot use without their direct release under a 'Creative Commons' licence. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Project to implement plain-language guidelines?

Hello, I'm curious about whether any Wikipedians have undertaken an effort to widely implement Wikipedia's own plain-language guidelines. Two relevant guidelines I'm aware of are Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section.

This question arises from my own experience as a WP user, in that I've consistently found that articles on scientific and other technical subjects are written at too high a comprehension level for the average user. Even the lead sections often contain terms that are more arcane than the title topic itself. To me this undermines the whole purpose of a public encyclopedia, and represents a missed opportunity to help motivated learners raise their science literacy.

I imagine any broad-based initiative along these lines would be an enormous undertaking, but still just wanted to see what work may already be under way (aside from the oft-ignored guidelines themselves).

Thanks for any help. DaveM92 (talk) 19:02, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

DaveM92, We try to tag pages with "too technical" and "cleanup" tags when possible. But please remember all articles are a work in progress, and they need help from folks like you to make them better. I know that whenever I write or approve articles, I try to ensure that they are easy to read for the average individual. We very much want all articles to be accessible, and we make sure that our best rated articles are. But we have six million articles, most of which are in need of lots of work. If you would like to help out with improving such articles, we'd sure appreciate it. You can always look in Category:Wikipedia articles that are too technical. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 19:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. DaveM92 (talk) 23:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I'm trying to post a bio about a very good person who has touched many lives. It got rejected and Im not sure why. How can I get help

 Thumper1001 (talk) 23:36, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. See the note on your talk page. You had not edited the draft for more than six months, so it was deleted. If you are ready to start working on it again, you can ask for the draft to be restored at WP:REFUND. RudolfRed (talk) 23:38, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

My bad that is a very old note. What is the draft you are currently working on that was declined? RudolfRed (talk) 23:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Thumper1001: I'm afraid we can do no more than point you towards the reply to your post, made earlier today  on this user's page, although, as said above, you were replying to a rejection message left for you six years ago by Anne Delong, back in 2014. The only content relevant to your query seems to be at User talk:Thumper1001/sandbox, which, at this point in time, is wholly unsourced and unsuitable for a Wikipedia article, and is the same content as that deleted in 2014. Looking at that deleted content, two editors at Articles for Creation gave you the following advice:

• Please find and add references to sources not connected with Mr. Wilson, such as news reports, reviews, magazine articles, etc., to confirm the information in this article and to show that he has been written about extensively by journalists and other authors. Left by Anne Delong (January 2014)
• The article also is not written in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. That needs to be corrected as well. Left by Joe Decker (May 2014)

I should also add that the way you have referred to him throughout the article as 'Doug' suggests to me that you might well know this individual. If so, you will have a clear Conflict of Interest which you must declare on your user page. (See WP:COI on how to do this). Nick Moyes (talk) 23:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright for a Google Maps photo?

Greetings! I want to make the article titled Florida State Road 997 better by adding a picture of a road sign taken from Google Maps street view. Would this be a violation of copyright? I want to write about how Krome Ave is notorious for having, unfortunately, a sizable amount of traffic related deaths every year, and the sign I am looking to take from street view is a record of how many deaths there are. It would be a screenshot taken from my browser. Regards Stapmoshun (talk) 17:14, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

yes, adding google map pictures are violating copyright --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 18:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Stapmoshun: and welcome to the Tea House! As a side note if you can find an alternate article that shows the same information you can add that text and cite the page you got the information from. That is usually the best way as a picture of a street sign is not the most informative and I’m pretty sure the street sign doesn’t get updated often. If you need any help, please let me know and I’ll be glad to assist you. Galendalia (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Stapmoshun: - Were you able to figure this out or do you need more assistance, perhaps trying to find a photo you can use or how are you planning on implementing this information into the article? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Galendalia:! You know, there has been this sign a mile or so from my house for the longest time that I've always wanted to photograph. But I don't have a car so I can't drive and pull over and take it myself, and now that we are in quarantine, it is even further out of the question. Can I link you to a screengrab of what I'm talking about, or is even posting a link here a violation of copyright? It wouldn't be in an article.. I think I am going to go ahead and write a new section of the article talking about its notoriety for being dangerous. Although I will have to come up with a more succinct heading, you know. I would love to have some help finding a free photograph of this sign. It has fascinated me ever since I was a kid. Thank you, Stapmoshun (talk) 00:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Privatisation of The West

Are there any significant connection between the current presidency to the privatisation of public structures in and out of the states.

Since it is probable having government change of legal statuses to private by the process of division between ownership and control. Created to maintain power in order to enter new contracts and act or resolve legal or other issues due to its original ownership as business grows through legal binding.

This can be seen in the attempt to merge two automotive companies and space exploration among other. Through this process, directors may have to disclose information in order to act on the "economies of scale" emerging. Is impeachment included on this implementation?

I'm not from the States. Altvypr (talk) 20:22, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Altvypr. The Wikipedia Teahouse is really a place to ask questions about Wikipedia editing or Wikipedia in general; it’s not really intended to be forum for a general discussion such as this. If you’d like to discuss specific ways on how to improve a certain Wikipedia article, then you can try doing so on said article’s corresponding talk page; a more general discussion of something such as this, however, is probably more suited for the Wikipedia Reference Desk than anywhere else on Wikipedia. — Marchjuly (talk) 20:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Altvypr - I would urge against asking questions about American politics at the Reference Desk. American politics has been found to be an area in which encyclopedic editing is difficult because some editors are disruptive, so that any discussions of American politics that are not strictly related to encyclopedic content are undesirable. The Arbitration Committee has had to impose special provisions allowing restrictions on editors in areas that are battlegrounds. So it is best to find an off-wiki virtual community for those discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:29, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Marchjuly User:Robert McClenon Thank you for the feedbacks, I will take your advice.

Humble request for an article review

Hello, I humbly request you to kindly review the draft I created in my sandbox (User:Cuurentarticle/sandbox), and see if it is appropriate to be used as an article here. I would really appreciate your every suggestion regarding how to improve it further. Thanks. Cuurentarticle (talk) 09:21, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Cuurentarticle, I have one minor comment. You have included a link "Tonk district", which, as you'll see if you click on it, is not very useful. It would be better to do the link like this: "Tonk district", so that it goes to the relevant article. Maproom (talk) 09:50, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I will add that the coordinates you've given actually pinpoint to a field in the middle of nowhere. To see where it comes out, click (this link) I suggest you use the following in your infobox: 25.891812, 76.184715 I cannot find this town anywhere nearby on Google maps. I would also like to see each statement that you make to be followed immediately by a supporting reference. And many of your numbers are over-accurate, as well as being unsourced. Don't split hectares down into smaller amounts -at least don't go beyond one decimal point, and note that you have given two different figures for agriculture, yet your only reference doesn't seem to function, so this is unverifiable. See WP:EASYREFBEGIN for a guide on how to add or reuse inline references. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I've incorporated some of the suggestions and trying to do the other, but I wanted to know if the article okay to be used on Wikipedia now. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuurentarticle (talk • contribs) 13:11, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Cuurentarticle, For anyone to do anything, please ensure you have read Your First Article and followed all of the instructions in that article. Once you have completed this, there are instructions for getting it published. Once that happens, please open a new topic here in the Teahouse, and we can help you with the next steps so we can get the article up to a good article status at a minimum. Thanks, Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 06:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC) Courtesy ping @Nick Moyes:

Vandalism

Don't Panic, Captain Mainwaring! I found some cookies and crackers in a stockpile of PPE. Enough for everyone, I'm sure

I see vandalism sometimes on Wikipedia pages. What is best manner to stop vandals? Beobaer (talk) 05:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Beobaer, You might wish to read Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 05:42, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Long read, will try to understand. What tool better: Vandal Fighter, WikiMonitor, Huggle, STiki, Igloo, SWViewer, RC patrol script, Twinkle? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beobaer (talk • contribs) 05:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Beobaer A majority of those folks require certain permissions on your account and since your account is only 3 days old they won’t be granted. If fighting vandalism is what you really want to do I suggest you sign up and take the WP:CVUA. I’ll be glad to assist you as that is what I do a lot of. Welcome to the tea house due to high demand we are out of cookies and crackers. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 06:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I like crackers! I reading all this material you posted. I installed Twinkle, because need experience to levelup for other tools.Beobaer (talk) 06:48, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Georgii Nelepp references:

 Courtesy link: Georgii Nelepp

Someone has edited the references on the Georgii Nelepp article (https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Georgii_Nelepp) from 39 to 16--over half. The deleted ones include links to his performances on Youtube, social media discussions of his KGB work, a list of available primary sources, a link to a group of photos of him, links to Google translations of secondary sources (Russian to English), and links to photos of him.

I can't tell if this was a Wikipedia editor or anonymous reader, or what this (https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Georgii_Nelepp&action=history) means. However, the article was better referenced prior to the deletions as the list of deleted material suggests. What should I do to restore these sources? Opera Snob (talk) 18:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Opera Snob (talk) 18:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Opera Snob: That would be because Youtube links are generally discouraged and social media discussions are not seen as reliable independent sources. I'll ping Voceditenore for more input as they are more involved. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – Merged section below and renamed heading slightly. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Georgii Nelepp references 2nd part:

Iam chiming in agaisn. to note the following: This article was approved by Wikipedia awhile back. The title was written in green when I added a picture recently. Is there no end to this constant insistence on revision, despite the fact of prior Wikipedia approval?. What does does having Wikipedia approval mean? See the history of this article from the beginning: Templates removed when I followed editor requirements. And now you delete over half the references (which were earlier deemed satisfactory). I'm frustrated with Wiki lack of fixed authority whereby given approval means nothing.

Also, my name is not Muhammad. I followed instructions about the tilde signature. Opera Snob (talk) 18:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Opera Snob (talk) 18:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Article is Georgii Nelepp. David notMD (talk) 19:15, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Opera Snob: Just because the article was approved to move from a draft to an article doesn't mean the text is fixed forever. Yes, it's possible that there is no end to possible revisions to the article. From the policy Wikipedia:Ownership of content:

“ Once you have posted it to Wikipedia, you cannot stop anyone from editing text you have written. As each edit page clearly states:

Work submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used, and redistributed—by anyone

Similarly, by submitting your ideas (for article organization, categorization, style, standards, etc.) to Wikipedia, you allow others to challenge and develop them.

”

Looking back at the December 6, 2017 version of the article, you can see a lot of work has been done by you and other volunteer editors working in good faith to improve the article since then. It's OK to disagree with other editors work (as long as it's done civilly). The place for you to start that conversation is the article's talk page: Talk:Georgii Nelepp. Good luck and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Opera Snob, you asked "Is there no end to this constant insistence on revision?" No, there is no end. Look at the article on dog. It was in a perfectly acceptable state 15 years ago, but is still receiving an average of one edit a day, most of them improvements. Maproom (talk) 08:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I was pinged above by Tenryuu and am the editor who recently cleaned up the article. This came about as a request for assistance at WikiProject Opera from another editor, Marchjuly, [13]. He quite rightly had serious concerns about the article's references, external links, and other issues, which were shared by Beetstra, an administrator whom he had also consulted. [14]. As pointed out above, the appropriate place for discussion of the recent changes is Talk:Georgii Nelepp. However, before doing so, Opera Snob, you need to read very carefully Wikipedia's key policies and guidelines on: Verifiability, Reliable sources, No original research, and the Correct use of external links. When I began cleaning up the article, it was in violation of all of them. Voceditenore (talk) 10:09, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

unable to link to existing wiki pages

When try to link to for ex. Fond for Utøvende Kunstnere, which has a wiki page, it still is linked as an external link and says that it is no wiki page for this company yet. Why is that and any way to fix it? Best May MaySundAnd (talk) 18:01, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@MaySundAnd: That URL is for a different language Wikipedia. Is there an article here on the English Wikipedia? RudolfRed (talk) 18:04, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

That article is on the Norwegian Wikipedia. The link {{ill|Fond for utøvende kunstnere|no}} will render as Fond for utøvende kunstnere (including the "no" link to the Norwegian article), see Template:ill. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:07, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Note also that as well as that Bokmål version, another version of the article exists in Nynorsk, at nn:Fond for utøvende kunstnere. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey @MaySundAnd: - Did these suggestions help or do you need more assistance? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey! Thanks and sorry late reply! I havent looked at it properly yet but will get back to you if I cant make it work :)! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaySundAnd (talk • contribs) 12:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Churkendoose

Churkendoose was a children's hardbound picture book published in 1946 written by Ben Ross Berenberg. Subsequently it was made into a record album narrated by Ray Bolger. The only Wikipedia mention of Churkendoose is in the Ray Bolger article, but it doesn't mention the book or the author.

Searching for Churkendoose on google one can find many many copies for sale, testament to the popularity of this book. I was unable to find an article that says, "This book was popular" nor can I find, as I did some years ago, many articles from the conservative political side that blamed this book on the liberal relativistic way of valuing things. "It depends on how you look at things" is the refrain of the book.

THIS BOOK WAS IMPORTANT

Someone should start an article about this book or at least the author. Conscientia (talk) 00:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Conscientia: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can be the someone to start an article! (Presuming you have no conflict of interest, of course.) First, you need to find enough reliable sources to satisfy Wikipedia's definition of notability for books or notability for authors, and then see Help:Your first article to get started. If you're not ready for that, you can list your requests at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Arts and entertainment/Literature. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:13, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello, Conscientia and welcome to the Teahouse.

That a book sold many copies, or even that it was said to be "popular", does not mean that it should have an article about it on Wikipedia. The standard here is that a topic must be notable, a term which Wikipedia uses in a special sense. Here it means that multiple independent reliable sources have taken note of the topic, by writing about it at some length and publishing those writings. We normally want multiple independent professionally published reliable sources. This means things like professional reviews of a book, not fan sites, or user fora, or blogs, or personal sites, or wikis. It could also include published biographies (not autobiographies) of the author, or academic studies in which the work is treated at some length. If you are able to find and present such sources, others might be able to help in writing an article. Sources do not have to be available online, although that makes them easier to access. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I would dd that I do not recommend using Wikipedia:Requested articles to anyone. So few of the requests are ever fulfilled, that it is a better use of one's time and effort to buy a lottery ticket. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:27, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Conscientia! Try to dig up a few more sources like this [15], then see HELP:YFA. A WP-article on any topic is meant to be a summary of the WP:RS references you can find. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

The Churkendoose. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:42, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Can my articles been noticed for speedy review?

dear Users, Kindly note that i have submit 2 articles on April 25th and waiting for review feedbcak, https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Lebanese_Yacht_Club https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Beirut_Yacht_Club and i have been informed that the revire might took between days to month to receive the feedback,

however, the yellow page on the top of each draft indicate that i can do smthg to speed up the review time i.e. this what i mean: "quote: Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, try searching for a relevant WikiProject. For instance, if you wrote about a Kenyan astronomer, you might want to search for "Biography", "Astronomy" or "Kenya" to find WikiProject Biography, WikiProject Astronomy, and WikiProject Kenya. You can then add {{WikiProject TOPIC}} at the top of the talk page of this draft, like this. This will let the WikiProjects know a new draft has been submitted.* Unquote".

Kindly to explain if there is anything i can do to my articles related to what is mentioned on improving odds for a speedy review so that i can do. Your kind reply will be veryyy appreciated and have a lovely weekend all. Princesse Marissa (talk) 14:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)Princesse Marissa Princesse Marissa (talk) 14:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

You could try adding Wikipedia:WikiProject Sailing inside of double curly brackets {{ }} to the Talk page of the draft, but my personal advice is just be patient. The drafts-to-be-reviewed list is shorter than it used to be, and thus likely your two drafts will be reviewed within weeks rather than months. David notMD (talk) 14:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Dear David notMD(talk)

Thank you very much for your quick reply, i will follow yoir advise and will be patient :) Thank you again, much appreciated. Princesse Marissa (talk) 14:22, 2 May 2020 (UTC)Princesse Marissa

Just to warn you one of my submissions took 4 months to be reviewed :) However as David said, the list is not as long as it used to be and its unlikely yours will take that long.
REDMAN 2019 Stay at home:Protect the NHS:Save lives (talk) 15:10, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your reply REDMAN 2019 Stay at home:Protect the NHS:Save lives (talk), Stay Safe Stay Home :)

Princesse Marissa (talk) 15:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)Princesse Marissa

How to improve my article?

Hello tea lovers. I'm new here. Please could you suggest a step or two that I may take to improve my article in progress about the designer Bethan Laura Wood?: wiki/Draft:Bethan_Laura_Wood Thank you! Jim --Jim Rokos (talk) 16:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

More content, fewer lists. See articles at List of contemporary artists for examples of articles about artists. Use only refs that contain at-length content about her, as reviewers dislike refs that are merely name-mentions. David notMD (talk) 16:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jim Rokos: Welcome to the Teahouse! Please review Wikipedia's notability requirements for artists and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. GoingBatty (talk) 16:44, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Help with editing

In the Wikipedia article on Sonia Gandhi, there is a sentence, "After completing her primary education at local schools, she moved for language classes to Cambridge, England, where she met Rajiv Gandhi, and later married him in 1968." I want to add this after that: "Despite marrying Rajiv Gandhi in 1968, she took 16 years to become an Indian citizen and got her Citizenship of India by signing her Citizenship certificate as Antonia Maino Gandhi." Venue9 (talk) 17:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Is it OK or will it get reverted?Venue9 (talk) 17:05, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Venue9: Put it in and see; WP:BEBOLD. If it gets reverted start a discussion on the article's talk page (in fact, this entire question is more suited for the article's talk page). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Revising article

My wife and I are working on some revisions to this article, which we did not post initially. We're also completely new at this, but have read with varying understanding some of the how-to articles. Our broad question is: Do we append revisions to the original article, or start a new one? Thanks. https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/David_Hittner Procdm (talk) 17:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Procdm: You may make revisions in the appropriate section of the original article, or post your suggestions for improvement at the article's talk page: Talk:David Hittner. Be sure to provide reliable sources for your revisions. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:42, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Procdm, and welcome to the Teahouse. You should definitely not create a new article on the same topic as an existing one. Most often one edits an existing article by making changes in existing p0arts of the article. These can be as small as correcting the spelling of a single word, or as large as adding multiple paragraphs of text, or linking images or both. One may also add new section(s) when adding sub-topic(s) not previously covered. These are put in an appropriate place in the existing article, which will not usually be at the end, so one adds to the article, but does not strictly append to the article.

You mention My wife and I. A Wikipedia account should be strictly for a single person. If both you and your wife intend to edit, each of you should have a separate account, and should not know each other's password, although of course you may discuss your edits and agree on the best way to improve an article. My wife has a Wikipedia account separate from mine, albeit she is far less active.

Also, in future please link to an article when discussing it her or on another talk page, rather than using its URL. In this case one would type [[David Hittner]], which would render as David Hittner. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorting out a red link

Hi I am new to this and was updating Bauer Radio Limited (The Breeze Network) and put a Breeze station that people thought Nation Broadcasting had but Bauer Radio has it and it gave me a red link so what do i do Phil8482 (talk) 16:43, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Phil8482. The red merely means that there is no article (yet) with that name on Wikipedia to which the link can go. This might be because:

(a) an article does exist, but with a sufficiently different title that the software didn't recognise your link (and what you've tried to link is implausibly long for a Wikipedia article title), or

(b) there is no such article because no-one has written it yet.

To address the possibility of (a), you might check that your supposed station name is correct, and/or look for an article with a different but appropriate title (such as the same three areas but in a different order).

To address (b), you might yourself create a new article about this particular station (though successfully writing an article is harder than it might seem to a newcomer). Once an article (not merely a Draft) exists with the name you tried to link, the linked name in Bauer Radio will turn blue.

If none of the above answer the problem, don't worry! We sometimes leave redlinks as a signal that someone thinks an article on that subject is desirable. Since the other six Breeze Network stations listed do indeed already have articles (which is why their links are blue), it would certainly make sense to have an article on the seventh, so perhaps another editor with an interest in the subject will see the redlink and decide to create it. (As you may know, all Wikipedia editors are unpaid volunteers, so no-one can be tasked to do anything.)

I hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.121.161.127 (talk) 17:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Phil8482: Further information can be found at WP:REDLINK --Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 17:11, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Phil8482. You inseted a link to The Breeze (East Hampshire, South West Surrey & North West Sussex), which doesn't exist, so it is red. Did you mean The Breeze (East Hampshire & South West Surrey)?: (I am far from sure that the sources in that article establish that it is notable.) By the way, I see you have been inserting information without citing sources. It is hugely preferably to cite any information you add. --ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

How do i put in where i found my information and The Breeze (East Hampshire & South West Surrey) takes me/you to The Breeze owned by Nation Broadcasting who only have the radio licence for Southampton, Portsmouth and Winchester which Nation Broadcasting call The Breeze (South) where as The Breeze (East Hampshire & South West Surrey) is Bauer owned.Phil8482 (talk) 19:39, 29 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil8482 (talk • contribs) 17:34, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Phil8482:

• To learn how to cite sources, consult WP:REFBEGIN.
• To link to the correct jurisdiction, use the correct disambiugator in parentheses. Please don't use run-on sentences as it makes it hard to understand what you are trying to say. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:26, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Phil8482: - I hope things are going well. I was wondering if you were able to read through the comments and figure it out or do you need more help as I’d be glad to help you out with this as there are certain criteria for red links. Please let us know! We eagerly await your presence. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

How would I sort out The Breeze (East Hampshire & South West Surrey) from the Nation Broadcasting one and put it under Bauer Radio Phil8482 (talk) 10:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Phil8482, Bauer Radio already exists. Did you want to WP:MERGE the content? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:55, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tenryuu.I know Bauer Radio exists already.All i want to do is put the information for The Breeze East Hampshire & South West Surrey under Bauer Radio and leave Portsmouth,Southampton & Winchester as The Breeze South which falls under Nation BroadcastingPhil8482 (talk) 18:05, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

The spelling of the heading of an article on a person and his name throughout the artcle

Resolved

 – Referred to the article's talk page for further discussion. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Syama Prasad Mukherjee He used to spell his name as SYAMA PRASAD MOOKERJEE. So did his father Sir Asutosh Mookerjee. His signature of his full name at the bottom of the infobox may kindly be seen. These changes ought to be made right through the article. AnilaDebesh (talk) 13:41, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I have initiated a discussion at Talk:Syama Prasad Mukherjee#Name. Please join the discussion. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Guidelines on mentioning sexual assault accusations

Could anyone pinpoint me to a guideline or best practice on how to weigh the worthiness of mentioning a particular allegation of wrongdoing - sexual assaults in particular - in a biography of a living actor? I understand the general rule that these should be described as allegations instead of being treated as outright true, unless/until they are proven in court or by indisputable evidence. But even the mere mention of accusations (however unfounded) on a page is not to be taken lightly. So I'm wondering, what is the best way to go about it? Charmanderblue (talk) 23:09, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

That is a really excellent question, and well-worth asking, Charmanderblue. Welcome to the Teahouse, by the way. We have a policy designed to protect people's privacy and reputation against the promotion of false allegations. See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, and in particular  the section entitled Presumption in favor of privacy, which states "If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out." So, use your judgement and err on the side of caution. Ask yourself, is this a public figure with genuine and public allegations made against them by more than one serious and reliable news source, or just a bit of smoke puffed up by some two-bit news outlet to undermine an innocent person. Note also the sentence later in the polciy which states: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced and not related to making content choices should be removed, deleted, or oversighted, as appropriate.". So, when in doubt, leave it out! Does this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 00:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the swift reply and the warm welcome! Helpful indeed, but let me elaborate a bit on the example of Timothy Hutton. Buzzfeed News broke the story in March 2020 that he had sexually assaulted a child in 1983. At what point did this become appropriate for inclusion, and at what point will it be considered for removal should the accusations be tossed out by the investigators? Now I understand that readers are expected to remain unbiased until more facts are present. Though it troubles me that, there might not be a lot of information to give given how long ago this incident had allegedly taken place. Which begs another question: should this case remain pending with no notable advancement, is the sexual offender label going to simply hang around Hutton's article? Charmanderblue (talk) 00:28, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Charmanderblue, I do not believe BuzzFeed is considered a newsworthy source due to the fact they are considered leftwing, which essentially makes them biased. I encourage you to read BuzzFeed. If you can find other, more reliable sources, then it could be added provided that there is enough coverage of it. One article mentioning it is not considered notable enough for inclusion. If you need any help in finding anything, please let us know. Courtesy ping @Nick Moyes: Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 05:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Galendalia, thanks for the answer. Should I assume by your message that the sexual assault section on Timothy Hutton's article is subject to removal based on the fact that the accusations are based off of BuzzFeed News reporting? Or is it still considered admissible as other reliable sources have retold the same story based on BuzzFeed's original reporting? I guess what I'm trying to ask here is, if a non-newsworthy source breaks a sexual assault story that wouldn't merit inclusion in its own right, does the right of inclusion arise if other reliable, secondary sources pick this up from said non-newsworthy source? Charmanderblue (talk) 07:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

​ I am looking more into this and it appears it originated with Buzzfeed and all of the other sources that have picked it up are also not exactly news sites. It would also appear that this accusation just surfaced of something that happened in 1983. Of the links you mentioned, none are reliable that I can see, including the National Post as they basically copied/paste most of what has been said on other articles. Maybe @Nick Moyes: and @GoingBatty: can chime in on this as well? My recommendation is to remove that particular statement. --Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:33, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Galendalia and Charmanderblue: Looks like there's a difference between Buzzfeed and Buzzfeed News, and that this story is from Buzzfeed News. Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources says that "Editors find the quality of BuzzFeed articles to be highly inconsistent." and "There is consensus that BuzzFeed News is generally reliable." Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Public_figures states "In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out." Maybe the question of how long to keep an allegation on a BLP should be asked at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons? Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 15:12, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@GoingBatty:You're right in your observation that BuzzFeed News and BuzzFeed are two different entities with a varying degree of reliability. The "multiple reliable third-party sources" is also an interesting observation and I wonder if the lack of any such sources allows for that particular statement on Timothy Hutton's article to be challenged? Charmanderblue (talk) 15:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Update: I have followed the suggestions here and opened a ticket at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons as to attract the attention of more seasoned editors on this. Charmanderblue (talk) 19:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

How should I write an article on this confusing subject.

Hi there, I am Koridas and I was going to write an article about the song Feeling Good On A Wednesday, from the South Park episode The Cissy. The reason this is confusing is because it is actually sung by Sia, who performed the song in South Park, acting as Randy Marsh, who, in the show, is actually Lorde. If I actually write the article, who would I put the song to be by? Kori (@) 20:26, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Koridas, and welcome to the Teahouse. The song is by whoever actually wrote it, whether that person (or people) ever performed i9t or not. Any article should say that. Then it could say "The song was performed by X, acting in the role of Y, on Program Z" This should all be explained in prose, it is too complex for a table or infobox, in my view.

But before yo0u worry about how to write the article, make sure that the song is notable. Please read our guideline for the notability of songs. Make sure that you have sufficient independent published reliable sources that each discuss the song in some detail -- usually at least several paragraphs in each source. Many songs are not notable, even when the writer or performer is clearly notable. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Koridas: You might want to start by expanding the song information in "The Cissy" article first. If you find enough reliable sources for the song that it meets Wikipedia's notability for songs, you could break it out into a separate article. I created a redirect from "Feeling Good on a Wednesday" to "The Cissy". GoingBatty (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Article Contains Instructions for Poaching Endangered Species

This article contains detailed instructions of how to prepare an endangered species for use after poaching: https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Neobalanocarpus. I believe this content should be deleted but I do not know what the appropriate procedure to ensure it is not re-posted. Note that the species is now considered Endangered by the IUCN rather than vulnerable: https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/32314/2813845. Cryptobranchidae (talk) 22:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Cryptobranchidae, there are no "instructions for poaching", whatever that might be, in that article. WP:NOTCENSORED and WP:RGW apply. There are no policy based reasons to delete the article. John from Idegon (talk) 22:59, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Cryptobranchidae: whilst John from Idegon is quite right, there is, however, undue emphasis in trivial detail about processing the timber, and not enough about the species itself. I have removed some clear copyright violations that were added in 2013, and some of the tabular information is available on the external link, and seems quite unnecessary in the article itself. Thanks for your concern. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)  

@Cryptobranchidae: as other say above, we generally do not censor information is it is true. I did add the IUCN endagnered states to the lede of the article, and you are welcome to add a section about its status as well. WP:BEBOLD and jump in. Be sure to include sources.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Cryptobranchidae: The article talk page - Talk:Neobalanocarpus - would be a wonderful place to share your concerns and suggestions about the article. GoingBatty (talk) 23:30, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Have a dilemma and trying to avoid 3rr

Resolved

 – User in question blocked. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:54, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok, got a dilemma. A user has tried 5x to change info on a blp article to something different than a 2019 WP:RSP says (it's not contentious/libel/defaming, just a difference in # of records sold). 4 users (including myself) have reverted the change. If they change it again, I can't fix it without 3rr. I was the first editor to mention what the cite said, and this other user got two sources that are over a decade old which would obviously have fewer record sales.

Would I meet the WP:3RRNO based on exemption #7 because they are using a decade old outdated source? In case it helps, the article is Gloria Estefan and it's 114.141.54.139 (talk · contribs) that is trying to put in this bad info. They've also been reverted on 5 other blp articles.

Also, I think the person is a not acting in good faith, because they seem to be trying to put the #75 on 4 articles. What makes it odd is that for Estefan's page the cite they offered had the #70 and not the 75 they put into the article. So I think they're just trying to insert 75 into articles.

Thanks ToeFungii (talk) 10:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: It appears they have been blocked already. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I see that now having gotten some sleep. fortunately. ToeFungii (talk) 17:23, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

use my own images from one account to other account

Dear Wikipedia Members and editors

I uploaded my work images and my picture from one account which was Shahkars Architecture and used it in my other account which is Shahkarshah and I got deletion of page what should I do to fix it, kindly help me Shahkarshah (talk) 08:35, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Shahkarshah, you have been repeatedly told on your talk page that Wikipedia is not a place to promote yourself. Why is that so difficult to understand? M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 08:45, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

As well as that, it is important to know that Wikipedia is not just a place to host your images. Unless you plan to use an image for a valid reason, you cannot just put an image on Wikipedia like it is a place to put photos for your CV. Websites like [Imgur.com Irgur] are made for that. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 08:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

I am in a fix about 3RR

If I revert the 6 unsourced pending edits (till this edit) made on this article, will I be blocked for violating WP:3RR?— Vaibhavafro ^💬 10:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Vaibhavafro, no, it would be a single revert. Guy (help!) 11:03, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Resolved

 – — Vaibhavafro ^💬 12:16, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Need administeator attention

There are many biased editor who are continuously vandalising the pageShakir Ali Noori ,needs an uegei administrator attention to Shakir Ali Noori Maizbhandariya (talk) 14:21, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Maizbhandariya: Welcome to the Teahouse! Removing puffery, confirming that the article matches the sources, and being concerned about a conflict of interest is neither vandalism nor bias. If you have a conflict of interest, please stop editing the article and use the talk page to make suggestions and declare your conflict. If you don't have a conflict, then please consider the "bold, revert, discuss" method: If you boldly make an edit, and someone else reverts it, then discuss it on the article talk page, such as why you think the {{COI}} template should be removed. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Adding new texts on a subject?

Dear editors. I have just published the following book: 'The Lives And Extraordinary Adventures Of Fifteen Tramp Writers From The Golden Age Of Vagabondage'-- ISBN: 978-1627310840. Yes, I'm the author and so there is a conflict of interest, but the book introduces dozens of books by 15 tramps who wrote from first hand experience and only one of these (Bart Kennedy), is referenced on your page titled "Tramp". A page on Wiki' for "Vagabond" only brings up the TV series. I don't want to be accused of self-promotion, so do you have an editor with an interest in this area of knowledge who is able to provide a neutral update for the benefit of readers who might be interested in the subject?

Kind regards, and stay safe from the pestilence.

Ian Cutler

P.S. my Wiki' user name is TrampLiterature but I'm not happy about trying to add info myself. TrampLiterature (talk) 14:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@TrampLiterature: Welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse! Congratulations on the book, and thank you for recognizing your conflict of interest (COI). I'm sure you did a lot of research for your book, and your knowledge would be helpful in improving Wikipedia. It's fine that you don't want to update articles yourself. One thing you could do is discuss the topic with other knowledgeable editors on the article talk pages, such as Talk:Tramp and Talk:Vagrancy. I suggest you start small (don't spend the time writing sweeping changes to the established articles), and disclose your COI if you are recommending your book as a reliable source. Thanks for your interest in improving Wikipedia! GoingBatty (talk) 14:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

tracing source of quote

Problem of induction has footnotes 18 & 19 referring to 2 quotes. I can't trace either note to a page in a volume with a title. Please help. Thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 12:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC) TBR-qed (talk) 12:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

The quote for ref 18 is on page 38 at isbn 978-0-19-825060-9. Ref 19 doesn't refer to a quote. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:27, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @TBR-qed: - Did this answer help you or do you need more assistance? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for asking. David's answer did the trick.TBR-qed (talk) 14:54, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Seeking clarification on Nikola Tesla’s Background

 Julieribar (talk) 14:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Julieribar: Welcome to the Teahouse! If the Nikola Tesla article doesn't have the clarification you're looking for, you can follow the links in the References/Further reading/External links at the bottom of the article, or post a question at Talk:Nikola Tesla which might help improve the article, or submit a question to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 14:54, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – Merging sections together. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Nikola Tesla Backgound History Discrepancy

Hello,

It appears that Nikola Tesla had a serious illness, which interrupted his studies, while in in high school in Karlovac, which is in present day Croatia. His Wikipedia page indicates it was cholera, but his high school’s Wikipedia page indicates in was malaria. Could someone please provide some clarification?

The Nikola Tesla Wikipedia page: http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

The Gymnasium Karlovac Wikipedia page: http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Gymnasium_Karlovac

Thank you!

 Julieribar (talk) 15:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Julieribar: You have a great eye for detail! This would be an excellent point for you to ask at Talk:Nikola Tesla. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 15:23, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Altering my references

I recently noticed that an editor, following on from me, has been altering my references. Everytime {{cite xxx}} was mentioned he capitalized it I.E.{{cite xxx}}. Why? How does this help my code? What benefit is there? Broichmore (talk) 08:51, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Broichmore, I'll assume that you mean the author has been capitalising the "C" in cite. All templates, regardless of what you name them, start with a capital letter. If you were to transclude a template that didn't start with a capital letter, it will automatically redirect to the one that does. So really, this simplified matters. Generally, citation templates aren't capitalised, so I find it confusing as to why the editor was doing this, but really, it doesn't make a difference to the code. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 09:06, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

BerrelyThat's exactly what I mean. I just noticed that you cleverly worked out what I was saying, I had not noticed before, that, (in this case) on the edit page a capital C is displayed on the article pane as c; -- I.E. I encoded Cite xxx, but on the top page (here) it looks like cite xxx. However your incorrect, when you say, all templates, regardless of what you name them, start with a capital letter. In the editing box they pull down on the tab as small case, and when you create the reference the template inserts the code in small case as {{cite xxx}}. When I grew up and learned to write code the style for coding was small case as was the internet... Your point on transclusion is interesting, I didn't know that, but does it apply here? The citation in the story text pushes the user to right cite in the references section whether it's capitalized or not. Hope that makes sense, this is stretching my command of English. In summary it looks like a waste of time on his part as well as being incorrect; or have I missed something here? Broichmore (talk) 09:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Broichmore, generally no damage has been done, though I would recommend probably leaving a message on the talk page of the user saying these edits are unnecessary. About my capitalisation point, I mean that, even if I were to link {{smiley}} it would link to {{Smiley}}, as templates have to start with a capital letter in the template space. If this is confusing feel free to ask about what confuses you. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 10:05, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Broichmore: All templates do start with a capital letter (assuming they start with a letter at all). By this we mean the actual template name, e.g. shown at Category:Citation Style 1 templates. When you call a template it's optional whether to start with a capital. The same capitalized template is called in either case. It's not limited to templates. All Wikipedia page names start with a capital letter but it's optional in links. For example, Cat and cat make the same link to the article at https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Cat. {{lowercase title}} can display the name with lowercase at top of the page, e.g. at iPad, but the real page name is still "IPad". {{cite xxx}} and {{Cite xxx}} both call Template:Cite xxx, a template which happens to display its own name. A template does not know whether it was called with upper or lowercase so it always does exactly the same in both cases. We usually display code by placing it inside <nowiki>...</nowiki> as I did before. Sometimes we also add <code>...</code> to make it stand out from other text. Please post an example of the changes to your edits. I looked at many of your recent edits without finding it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:17, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Broichmore: In other words, {{Cite xxx}} is a peculiar (and confusing) case that is used for documentation, transcluding the wiki code {{[[Wikipedia:Citation templates#Examples|cite xxx]]}}. While it's probably not helpful to make an edit to a page just to "correct" the first letter of template transclusions to capital letters, it may be done automatically by some tools while being used to make other changes/corrections. Don't let it bother you – remember that none of us WP:OWNs the articles we work on – they are a collaborative effort, and an article of any reasonable size and value may have edits by hundreds or even thousands of editors over time. Some people do the hard work of finding sources and writing about them, while others (often called wikignomes) prefer to do the still necessary work of cleaning up typography and other minor issues. It's one big, ostensibly happy, ecosystem. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Complicated situation

Some days ago, User:Jaycharan Khandey turned Ghasidas from an article into a redirect to Guru Ghasidas. Guru Ghasidas page was previously a redirect to Ghasidas, where the main article was stored. Was this appropriate from a technical point of view? Seems like a cut and paste move to me. I think the article should stay at Ghasidas, since most academic works don't call him Guru Ghasidas, only his followers do. If the move was indeed inappropriate, can someone please fix it? TryKid (talk) 05:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

TryKid, honestly, they shouldn't have done that without some sort of consensus, though, both articles were effectively the same page, so I think the editor was simply bold and went ahead with the edit, albeit without an edit summary. Comparing this revision of Ghasidas with the current one of Guru Ghasidas shows that one of the pages had been completely copy-pasted from the other, so the redirect was sutiable. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 08:56, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, TryKid, and welcome to the4 Teahouse. Berrely is quite correct that this shouldf have been done by a regular move, not a copy&paste move. Since the target had some history, an admin or a page mover would have been needed to perform the move, and might well have insisted on a discussion first. I have opened a discussion at Talk:Ghasidas#Copy and paste move and loss of history and I would urge you to join the discussion there. Iam, willing to do a history merge once there is consensus on which name to use for the article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Deleted page entry

An entry was made to a page that concerns us, and was deleted by the writer a day later. Is there a way of finding that entry to read again? 2A02:C7F:147D:6900:907D:AC19:301D:A5D6 (talk) 16:58, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey IP and welcome to the Teahouse. You can see a page's history by pressing "view history" on the top right. Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 16:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

DIEUDONNE NAHIMANA

My article Dieudonne Nahimana has been moved to draftplace, and I want to remove it from there. What should I do? Ppt2003 (talk) 09:36, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ppt2003. The draft Draft:Dieudonné Nahimana was declined today for lack of reliable independent sources. You immediately resubmitted it without (at first) making any changes.

Please read up on notability and citing sources. In order for Wikipedia to accept an article about Nahimana, you will need to find several places where people who have no connection with him have chosen to write at some length about him - articles based on interviews (such as the Guardian and Iwacu articles) are not regarded as independent, and cannot contribute to notability. Note that candidates for office are not usually regarded as notable simply by virtue of that candidature: see POLOUTCOMES.

I see that, after re-submitting it, you did make a change; but your change was to replace a blog (an unreliable resource) by a Google-translation of a probably reliable but not independent source that was already cited. This does not improve the draft's notability (and Google translate is itself not regarded as reliable - sources in other languages are acceptable if they are reliably published)

I must warn you that if a reviewer happens to pick the draft up before you have made substantial improvements to it, they are likely to regard your resubmission as disruptive editing.

Please step back and pause, read the links above, and then spend time looking for substantial, reliable, and independent sources about Nahimana - and if you can't find any, conclude that it is TOOSOON, and give up. I am guessing that you are trying to get this draft accepted quickly because of the 2020 Burundian general election. But Wikipedia has no deadline, Wikipedia may not be used for promotion of any kind, and any attempt to get your draft accepted in a rush is likely to irritate reviewers.

While I have been writing this response, the draft has been declined a second time, and you have resubmitted it, again without making further changes. You are now definitely in the area of disruptive editing, and likely to get your account blocked if you continue. --ColinFine (talk) 10:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Declined twice, and then Rejected, which is more severe. The comment by the last reviewer is that candidates for office are rarely notable, and to not resubmit unless he wins the election. David notMD (talk) 17:12, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Can you change the name of a file uploaded on Wikipedia and not commons?

Hello! I uploaded a cover art for an album here and I wonder if there is a way to change the name of the file, since I accidentally wrote it wrong (and it bothers me quite a bit). Do I have to upload it again or can you ask for it to be renamed in some way? Thank you in advance. DariuZzandor 15:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

It'll need an admin or file mover; see WP:MOF. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

David Biddulph, Thank you for the quick answer, seems like it is already fixed. DariuZzandor 15:45, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done Yep _ saw the post and sorted it. Had it been on Commons (which it isn't) one would use the MORE>MOVE tab and dropdown to request a change by a Commons admin. But I've now fixed this as it was on Wikipedia. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, Thank you very much! Regarding uploading cover arts on Commons, should I do that instead? I think some more experienced editors wrote somewhere that it should only be uploaded on Wikipedia since it isn't free to use. Is that correct? DariuZzandor 16:01, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@DariuZzandor: My apologies - I didn't mean to mislead you. You did absolutely the right thing with a cover picture. In my mind I was referring to any Creative Commons image that you needed to get moved. Sorry for sowing any seeds of doubt through my failure to be clear. See WP:NFCI for the advice on non-free image use. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, No problem at all, thank you for clarifying! DariuZzandor 17:12, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

editing or adding new information to existing WIKIPEDIA entries

A wikipedia reviewer rejected an article I submitted but he suggested to edit other already existing because it may belong to that one. How I do this? Thank you DrDelaTorre (talk) 16:05, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, DrDelaTorre. What they mean is that instead of trying to promote the term you coined in a new article at Draft:The Cosmic Gorilla Effect, you instead attempt to expand content in a neutral and non-promotional manner at The Invisible Gorilla. I assume they are related? If so, we do ask you, please, to make a transparent declaration of any Conflict of Interest by noting this on your user page. See the guidelines at WP:COI for help with this. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@DrDelaTorre: Looking into it a little further, I see there are various news stories like this which refers to the 'Cosmic Gorilla Effect'. I still think expanding the existing article is probably the way forward. At this point in time, one of our redirects could be created to send anyone searching for one term to the alternate-named page. Would you find that a sensible thing for us to do for you, as well? They are very easy to create, and immensely helpful. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:23, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your reply Nick! Yes the paper had a major impact in media and news. I have 3 questions regarding your answer: 1) do you have any template for COI? 2) Who does the redirect? I do it myself or WP does? 3) I do not have a user page, so I guess I have to create that first right? here I put information about myself? Thank you very much. Sorry to bother with questions. Nick Moyes — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrDelaTorre (talk • contribs) 18:17, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@DrDelaTorre: Some suggestions:

1. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI
2. You can create the redirect, or ask for assistance here. We would need to know what exact phrase (e.g. "The Cosmic Gorilla Effect", "Cosmic Gorilla Effect", and "Cosmic gorilla effect") you would want to redirect to which article (e.g. The Invisible Gorilla)
3. In general, a user does not need to create a user page at before they start editing articles, but you should add your COI to User:DrDelaTorre before editing any related articles.

Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 18:45, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

My user page sandbox data was deleted

I am new to using Wikipedia pages, i created userpage and wrote my info to sandbox. afterthat was the DATA was deleted and received warning email to delete all the page if i try to create like that data. I dont know how to use wiki. Please advice me step by step. thanks Ahmed 85.76.112.244 (talk) 14:22, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ahmed - welcome to the Teahouse! What was the user ID you were using to create the userpage in your sandbox? GoingBatty (talk) 14:39, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Ahmed, if the content in your sandbox contained personal information, it may have been speedily deleted for being promotional, which is against Wikipedia policy. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi

Summary

 – OP indefinitely blocked as a sock puppet. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I spent a long time editing and adding detail to the Augustus article, and then somebody came and deleted it all. It discouraged me from contributing to Wikipedia and it feels like I just wasted lots of my time writing it out and having it deleted. JuliusCaesar16 (talk) 23:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

JuliusCaesar16 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It is discouraging to have one's work reverted by another editor, and it happens to everyone. However, it is not permanently lost, it is still in the article edit history. The other editor invited you to the article talk page to explain what your intentions are with your edits. The other editor was concerned that you were making such a large and extensive change to a featured article, and would just like to hear more about it from you. 331dot (talk) 00:02, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@JuliusCaesar16: While expanding articles is great, in this edit you added a lot of unsourced material. Wikipedia does is cite, summarize, and paraphrase professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources, without addition, nor commentary. I'll leave a summary of some relevant points on your talk page. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Checking facts of author in article

 Triumph Banjo (talk) 18:41, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Triumph Banjo: Welcome to the Teahouse. Did you have a question about verifying the subject of an article? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Triumph Banjo: Welcome to the Teahouse! Are you referring to the Jack Wong Sue article? If so, it appears you removed some text, and your edit was reverted. This is normal as part of the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. You boldly made a change in good faith, and another editor reverted the change because they didn't understand. Your next step is to create a new section at the article talk page - Talk:Jack Wong Sue - where you can discuss your concerns in more detail. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 18:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Triumph Banjo: Also, if you have any conflict of interest, please be sure to disclose that in your talk page discussion. GoingBatty (talk) 19:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – Merged section below. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:28, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

How to check/verify the decisions by Wikipedia of the authenticity of facts accepted for publishing

Article name (Jack Wong Sue) I'm new here so please excuse me for my ignorance in this whole process. Question. How do I check the information source of the article written below by Lynette Silver? Or.Where is the proof of this article by Lynette Silver? Where can I review the steps taken by Wikipedia to check Silver's information? The article says that official archives prove that he "lied" but I can't see the proof of this, am I able to source the proof Wikipedia used to publish the writings below? Again sorry for my ignorance. Below is the article in question.

In 2010, Australian military historian Lynette Silver disputed claims made by Wong Sue in his memoirs and said that official archives prove that he "lied". In particular, she questioned Wong Sue's claims that he:

Single-handedly killed a group of Japanese soldiers at Terusan, Borneo in May 1945, thereby saving the life of Lieutenant Don Harlem, as there were no enemy personnel in the area at the time; Took part in a raid on the Japanese garrison at Pitas on 13 June 1945, as he is not named in records of the action, and; Witnessed the last Sandakan Death March as he was in hospital when it occurred and was elsewhere when the other marches took place.[7] Triumph Banjo (talk) 19:12, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Triumph Banjo, if you click the small number at the end of the sentence, it will take you to the citation (that is, where the information came from), in this case here. If it's a web link (as it is in this case) you can then click on that; otherwise, it will tell you which book the information came from and the page number. ‑ Iridescent 19:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

(adding) It looks like the link has changed since that article was written, which may have led to the confusion; the source in question is here (I've fixed it in the article as well). ‑ Iridescent 19:18, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Triumph Banjo and Iridescent: I updated the dates in the reference as well. GoingBatty (talk) 19:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Triumph Banjo: I updated a few other references as well. Would you happen to have the details for Reference #11 (e.g. article title, page number)? GoingBatty (talk) 19:46, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

how do I either tag or edit an article that shows bias and is not impartial?

How do I either tag or edit an article that shows bias and is not impartial? My question is in regard to the article Macrobiotic diet which presumes that only Western medical theory is correct and ignores the validity of other systems, in this case Oriental Medicine, otherwise known as Traditional Chinese Medicine, upon which the macrobiotic diet is based (and not on Zen Buddhism as the article states). The article uses language like "fad diet" and "quackery" applied to the macrobiotic diet. This presents a negative image of this diet and is misleading and one-sided.

https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Macrobiotic_diet Jasper good (talk) 19:48, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

If you look at the article's talk page, Talk:Macrobiotic diet, you will see that there has been exhaustive discussion of the term "fad diet" and there is a solid consensus that that term is well-sourced and belongs in the article. If you have good reliable sources supporting the claim that the diet is more rooted in TCM than in Zen buddhism, feel free to start a discussion about that on the talk page. As the changes you want to see are not uncontroversial, you will need to discuss them and make sure that you have a consensus in favour of them before you edit the article itself. --bonadea contributions talk 19:57, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

uploading a poster

Can you help me how to upload a poster in an article? We are the Great (talk) 20:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

We are the Great, Like a movie poster? There are special restrictions for uploading material like that which is copyrighted. It must meet the Non free content criteria. For movie posters, that means using it only on a single article, and using the lowest resolution image feasible. For uploading help, see Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup/2. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Question About improving a article.

I want to ask about improving a article.I want to improve Shah Sulaimān Nūri and want to give more detail about the person.but whenever i add some information,some user undo my contribution although i add reliable and 3rd party source and citation Saadulhassan2 (talk) 17:36, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Saadulhassan2, You did not provide appropriate sources, much of it appeared unsourced. Also, your additions were not neutral and in an encyclopedic tone, nor did they follow our manual of style. Our pages are for writing factual and succint accounts of our subjects, not long winding hagiographies or devotionals. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:28, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek, Ok I get it but what if the article's basic things cant be added in article and biography article become incomplete without these details?what should i do then? User:Saadulhassan2

@Saadulhassan2: Look for professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources about the subject, and then summarize the relevant parts and then paraphrase that summary (to avoid copyright violations). This guide I wrote has a section on finding sources. Also, write in a plain and simple way that even someone who hates the subject has to agree with what you wrote. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Ian.thomson.Thank you very much.I want to ask one more question. the source which I cite on a article should be available online or I can also cite a source which is not available on internet? User:Saadulhassan2
Greetings @Saadulhassan2: - To answer your question about the sources they need to able to be accessed on the internet (preferably free websites if you can) however free registration and membership sites are ok, however, my POV is they are not very conducive to a user reading an article to have to sign up or pay for anything. You can have a look at WP:Cite and WP:BLP as well as in the article Ian linked in his response. On your user page, you should have a welcome page from someone (if not go to my talk page and let me know and I will happily put one up for you) that will have a link to the Wikipedia Adventure which will help you get very well acquainted with WP. Please do let us know if you need any further help or if you are ok now. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:33, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Galendalia thank you very much for your support.I have welcome page.One more thing i want to know is what happen if the sources given are in some local national langauge i.e Urdu.In this case ,will my source be considered as reliable source or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saadulhassan2 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Saadulhassan2: Sources in a foreign language are fine. It's polite to indicate what the language is, and even more polite to provide a translation of the title as well as original title; if you are using citation templates, they have parameters for both (language=, trans-title=). If there are also English-language sources for some of the information you are adding, it's best to add those as well for reader convenience, but we try to use the best sources we can, and that means sometimes using foreign-language sources. On offline sources, I have to politely disagree with Galendalia: not everything is online, so offline sources are fine, but the citation needs to include enough information for a reader to find it in a library: full title, author name, year and other publication info for a book (ideally also the ISBN if the book is recent enough) or name of periodical and date for a newspaper or magazine, page number for a book and if possible also for a periodical. (There are some very talented searchers here, and people with subscriptions to heavy-duty databases, who can sometimes track something down online with enough of the information, but the important thing is that a reader could theoretically access it.) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Saadulhassan2: - Hi I never said anything about offline resources. I was mentioning about restricted sites in which the user would need to pay a membership fee to access; for example, I was just copy editing an article and a few of the links point to a membership page, but yet perusing that same website, I found the exact same information, so I changed the source. I hope this helps clear things up. Thanks Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 20:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Galendalia: You said To answer your question about the sources they need to able to be accessed on the internet (preferably free websites if you can) however free registration and membership sites are ok, however my POV is they are not very conducive to a user reading an article to have to sign up or pay for anything. Emphasis added. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Saadulhassan2: You are allowed to use offline sources, as long as they are reliable and independent from the subject and they are cited properly as Yngvadottir said. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry that was my fault, I misread the end of the statement. I have stricken that out. Thanks for pointing it out~ Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 21:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much User:Tenryuu and User:Galendalia for your support and help. Now i am clear with my questions.Thank you very much again. User:Saadulhassan2 —Preceding undated comment added 21:57, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Fulfilling the criteria for artist notable contributions

I recently posted a wikipedia draft about an artist whose work I follow, Irene Clouthier. She has shown in Art Pulse New York, Pulse Miami, Scope Miami, Scope New York in the US as well as Art Salamaca in Spain, Art Paris, Paris Photo in France and, Art Toronto International in Canada. Similarly, she has been represented by a number of galleries (including galleries in the US, France, Mexico, and Spain). She has been interviewed for articles about her work and has recently been featured on Mexican Cable series, Univision, and instagram meet the artist interviews. She has held solo shows consistently since 1998 in 4 countries.

In addition to her notable artistic highlights, she is part of a very political family and is well known throughout Mexico. Many of her family members are featured on Wikipedia.

I commented on these elements in my draft and am unclear why this would not be considered independent or notable resources.

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance. Lvaughan7 (talk) 22:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Lvaughan7 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, that this person has well known family members that merit articles is irrelevant to whether she does or not. See WP:NOTINHERITED. If the claim to notability is that she is an artist, then she would need to meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable artist, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. The sources you have currently seem to just cite specific facts and not establish notability. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 22:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Why are Extreme views of liberal politicians removed?

Recently, manny leftist politicians have made extreme statements and their views covered up by editors. For example, a San Francisco supervisor bans SFPD from wearing thin blue line masks to support police during COVID-19 in an effort to support Black Lives Matter, a radical group calling for violence against and the murder of police officers. Your editors remove edits referencing these facts as unproductive. Why does wikipedia have a political agenda? 107.77.211.216 (talk) 01:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

If you have independent reliable sources to support these claims, please offer them. Wikipedia only summarizes what independent reliable sources state. Wikipedia has no political agenda, but sources can and do. However, that is up to the reader to determine for themselves. 331dot (talk) 01:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. San Francisco supervisors are elected officials analogous to city council members and an individual supervisor has no authority at all over the police department. The decision to ban officers from wearing the "thin blue line" facemasks was made instead by the chief of police who is the professional manager responsible for maintaining police discipline. He instructed the officers to wear neutral, non political facemasks instead, according to this article in the San Francisco Chronicle. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

As a general note, Wikipedia is neutral. If you feel an article is not neutral, you are welcome to take it up on the article's talk page, which can be found at the top left of every article. This will allow you to come to a solution. If, at the small chance the editor refuses to have a discussion, and they continue removing your reliably sourced and neutral entry without a sufficient edit summary, and again refuse to discuss their reverts, it is quite possible that the specific editor has a political agenda. This in fact does not represent what you refer to as "your editors", it is against Wikipedia policy, and you can involve an administrator at that point. However, it is unlikely it will come to this as most Wikipedia editors understand it's Neutral Point of View policy, so they will probably be more than happy to discuss your concerns. If you would like any further clarification on this matter in general, feel free to ask. Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 01:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of my article

Deletion of my article

I found that my article has been removed from wikipedia, I have followed all the guidelines and I do not know the actual reason behind the removal!, it is about an Egyptian living female actor (Miral Mahilian) that has been mentioned in many different news articles, Egyptian movies and tv shows while submitting valid references! She has been mentioned in a wikipedia article before but in Arabic language, I wrote this article because people are mistaken between her and another actor, and that there is many wrong informations about her. to MMflython (talk) 01:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC) MMflython

@MMflython: Welcome to the Teahouse! It appears your draft is at User:MMflython/sandbox. You can keep working on it and submit it to WP:Articles for creation when it's complete. See Help:Your first article for lots of suggestions. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@MMflython: Also be sure that she meets Wikipedia's standards for inclusion: Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Entertainers. Based on her IMDb page, she may not have reached that level in her career yet. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:49, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Edicion en wikimedia commons

 CHEZTER457 (talk) 01:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – Merged section below. — GoingBatty (talk) 02:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

 CHEZTER457 (talk) 01:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I made a mistake in the source and author when uploading photos on wikimedia commons. How do I solve? Can I delete the photos and upload them again with the correct data, or can I edit the data without deleting the photos?

@CHEZTER457: Welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, you can edit the data. For example, go to Commons:File:IAA-101.jpg, click "Edit", make your changes, and click [Publish changes]. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Muchas gracias GoingBatty! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CHEZTER457 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

why wouldn't an article in the Simple English Wikipedia also appear in Wikipedia

My header pretty well sums up my question. It's prompted by finding Heather Heyer in the Simple English Wikipedia but not in Wikipedia. Cheers! Tarkiwi25 (talk) 01:04, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Tarkiwi25: Welcome to Wikipedia. Each Wikipedia i a seperate project and articles are created by volunteers. Also, each Wikipedia has its own rules and guidelines for what may be an article. So either no one at this Wikipedia has taken an interest in creating that article, or the subject of that article is not Notable under the guidelines here. RudolfRed (talk) 01:43, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I found that Heather Heyer exists as a redirect to part of another article. Is that what you are looking for?

Forgot to sign. Isn't signbot supposed to catch that? RudolfRed (talk) 01:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

By default, Sinebot won't sign for experienced editors. You can opt in as described at User:Sinebot#Opting back in for experienced editors. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Tarkiwi25, RudolfRed, and David Biddulph: I tried to connect Heather Heyer at Wikidata, but I receive a message stating "Could not save due to an error. The save has failed." Any clue how to resolve the error? GoingBatty (talk) 03:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: That sounds like a question to ask at Wikidata rather than here. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:15, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Of course you're right. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 12:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

By the way, the answer was that the error was generated because Heather Heyer is a redirect on the English Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 02:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Arrgh. I wrote a response but it got lost--and now I'm going batty--because Going Batty got in before I managed to publish it. Thanks, y'all.Tarkiwi25 (talk) 03:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

And the answer for English Wikipedia would be that people who are only known because of one event e.g. victims of an attack, are usually not notable enough for a separate article about them. Which is why Heather Heyer has a section about her on Charlottesville car attack, but she would not be notable enough for a separate article. Relevant guideline is WP:BLP1E. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:43, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

How to become auto confirmed user

Resolved

 – OP linked to Special:UserRights to check autoconfirmed status. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:02, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

How to become auto confirmed user

Your help is appreciated. Thank you. 666himself (talk) 02:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@666himself: Welcome to the Teahouse! According to Wikipedia:User access levels#Autoconfirmed users, most accounts must be at least 4 days old, and have made at least 10 edits. GoingBatty (talk) 02:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@666himself: ...and Special:UserRights shows that you are an autoconfirmed user. GoingBatty (talk) 02:54, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you  :) GoingBatty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 666himself (talk • contribs) 03:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Headline with artist name

Hey again and thanks for all the help I have gotten here so far!

currently working in my sandbox. Will the headline appear when i send the article for review. Like this:

Peter Lodwick (right font) __________________________________________________________________________ From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Best May MaySundAnd (talk) 12:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@MaySundAnd: The text "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" currently appears on User:MaySundAnd/sandbox, and will appear when you move it to the draft space (as you can see on any other draft, like Draft:Beirut Yacht Club). However, the page name should be Draft:Peter Lodwick. Once it becomes an article, the page name will be simply Peter Lodwick. Keep working to add the reliable sources, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, MaySundAnd, and welcoe back to the Teahouse. Your draft User:MaySundAnd/sandbox has a button at the top that says "Submit your draft for review". When you think it is ready for review pick that button, and it will go on the list of drafts waiting for review. Review might take days to months, since we are all volunteers here, and work on what we choose. If a reviewer decides that your draft is suitable for Wikipedia, they will move it to main article space, and it will be named as an article.

However, I'm afraid that if you submit it in its present state, I am confident that it will quickly be declined. This is for several reasons, but the main one is that, as far as I can see, the draft does not cite a single independent source. This is a problem because Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything said or published by the subject or their associates, employers, or clients. All Wikipedia articles should be almost entirely based on material that has been reliably published about the subject by people who have no connection with the subject - for an artist, this most often means reviews in major publications (provided the reviews talk about the artist, not just about the works), or books from reputable publishers which contain substantial material about the subject.

This leads to the more fundamental point: Wikipedia accepts articles only about subjects which are notable in Wikipedia's special sense of the word - which normally means exactly what I have said above - that there are sufficient reliably published independent sources about the subject. Not every artist meets this criterion, but if the subject does not, then an article about them is not possible. Since your sources are not independent, at present your draft does nothing to establish that Lodwick is notable, and the draft will not be accepted.

There are some lesser problems with the draft as well. One is that even the sources which are cited are not cited in a useful way. Ideally each sentence, or at least each paragraph, should be cited to a source (and a place in the source) which supports the specific information in that sentence or paragraph: without this, a reader has no way of checking whether the information in the article is correct. (Even if it was initially correct, somebody may have changed it since - this is the encyclopaedia which anybody can edit). I don't think a reviewer would decline a draft just because a few statements were not sourced, but I think they would decline one with no inline citations. Also, there is far too much detail in the draft. This is an encyclopaedia, not the artist's website.

The amount of detail makes me wonder if you are associated with Lodwick in some way. If you are, please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's recommendations on editing with a conflict of interest. If further, you are doing this in any way in a paid capacity (eg if you are employed by one of the companies or theatres mentioned), you are required to disclose this - see paid editing. --ColinFine (talk) 15:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFinefor the reply!

Hi again, after looking at this again I am confused about why this article cannot be published as there are so many other detailed wiki articles out there that also seem not to have independent sources but similar sources like the ones listed in this article. There are also aricles about musicions who have done almost nothing but still are recond as "notable". The artist im writing about has been active for years and done a lot internationally and in Norway, so why shouldnt he be "notable"?

The references are not done yet, but shouldnt the links provided counts as independent sources? Althoug they are not from a magazine or newspaper. Or else it will be very hard to find any links at all.

Best May — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaySundAnd (talk • contribs) 13:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@MaySundAnd: Just because there are many articles that need to be improved doesn't change the criteria for creating a new article - see the essay Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. Your help in improving the other articles (or marking them for a notability check or deletion) would be appreciated! Regarding your draft at User:MaySundAnd/sandbox, some of the references may be independent sources. The six generic links after the official home page should be removed, as they don't specifically mention Lodwick. If would be helpful if you used inline citations in the draft - see Wikipedia:Inline citation for instructions on how to do this. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:10, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Need assistance with a user

Hi. I would like a neutral person to please assist with another editor who has continued to make me feel uneasy. I am a new editor. I have been trying to be helpful. Also, if you would please read the section called "pneumothorax" on my talk page. That is the problem I am having. I have asked this user to refrain from further comments in that section. They have not done so. I feel this is harassment. Any assistance would be appreciated. Wikipedia is supposed to be friendly space. Thank you! Battykin (talk) 20:53, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Battykin: Added Template:Closed to the talk page section to emphasize that you want the conversation to be over. Unfortunately, everyone's passion to improve articles (combined with communicating without verbal tone and body language) can lead to heated discussion sometimes. There are 6 million other articles we can work on. From one "batty" to another! GoingBatty (talk) 21:10, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for reply, but you have deleted the first section on my Talk page which I did not want removed. Also, I did not want to archive that section. I simply wanted the user to respect my request of ending the discussion there. I still want that on my talk page in case it happens again. I don't want to archive it.Battykin (talk) 21:20, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Battykin: Oops! I tried to look at your archive, but accidentally archive your first section. Sorry about that! I have restored it for you. GoingBatty (talk) 21:26, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Me thinks GoingBatty has finally gone batty and is talking to their alto ego! Fly batty, fly away! Lol Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 09:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Galendalia: I should have changed my name to WentBatty a long time ago. :-) GoingBatty (talk) 02:57, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: lol Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 03:27, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

glost house

 223.204.64.78 (talk) 04:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Did you have a question about editing on Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Need help with an edit

Hi, I need help with including a 'refn' footnote with citation in this article: Drones in wildfire management. I tried reusing reference number 34 in Note 1, but it appears as reference 35, with the same citation appearing again in the reference list. I tried to follow the Refn guide and miserably failed at it. If somebody can please fix this, I can see the diff and figure it out for later use. Thank you! NawJee (talk) 04:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@NawJee: I fixed it for you. As you were using the ref HTML tags, you did not give reference 34 the "name" attribute to be referred to for later use. If you ever want to recall the same reference that you have, for example, given the name value "foo", just type <ref name="foo" /> at the spot where you want the reference to appear again. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Tenryuu:, thank you for the edit and the explanation. I just checked the diff to see what you did. This was a bit tricky to figure out, but now I see how easy it actually was. Again, thanks. NawJee (talk) 05:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@NawJee: You're welcome! I consider it a minor achievement in helping people in a subject that I am still a beginner at. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: As you should. Also, just checked your user page and noticed that there is a Guild of Copy Editors. I've signed up for it - hopefully, I'll be able to make useful contributions and learn along the way. Thanks! NawJee (talk) 06:10, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Uploading a photo & copyright

Hi - I'm starting to work on the Michael J. Todd article & I'd like to include a photo if possible. I am reading through the info on Copyright (Yikes), but then I found that Wikinews have a photo already. Can I use that on Wikipedia or not? If so, how do I go about it? Thank you --DSQ (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC) DSQ (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, DeltaSnowQueen. That photo is locally hosted locally on Wikinews which has its own image use policy. Because the photo is copyrighted and used under a vague release from the police department, it is highly unlikely that it would be accepted for use on English Wikipedia or on Wikimedia Commons. An acceptable Creative Commons license or other acceptable free license would be required. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Ah that's a shame. I'll carry on reading and see if I can figure out where I can get a suitable picture from. Thank you very much for your help and your quick response. --DSQ (talk) 02:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, DeltaSnowQueen. I thought about your issue a bit more and then remembered that Todd has died. According to Wikipedia:Non-free content #10, it may well be possible to use that photo, but only in a low resolution version and only in his Wikipedia biography. Follow that policy carefully. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello again Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it. Thank you for your further thoughts & guidance. To be honest this is clearly an area which I know nothing about and it seems more complex than I initially considered. I will read through the info you've provided and make sure I am fully clued up about copyright before I even consider uploading anything. I'm assuming that the picture used on Wikinews was his official photo from the GMP site; I can't even find it in their archives now, or anywhere else for that matter. The rationale used on Wikinews is just the standard text used by numerous UK Police forces within their website Terns & Conditions, for example . I'm not sure I would've interpreted that in the same way. So, I'll stick to expanding the article until I actually know what I'm doing! Thanks again --DSQ (talk) 08:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Adding Photos To Galleries

Hello. I'm a local photographer based in San Antonio, TX. I would like to add my photos of some of the landmarks here to some of the articles. Is this possible or allowed?

Thank you,

Michael Collazo Mcollazo1969 (talk) 08:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Mcollazo1969 and welcome to Wikipedia. Good question, thanks for asking. Yes... to some extent. Take a look at [16]. If that seems ok to you, start uploading. HOWEVER. I see no general problem with you adding images to articles that have none of whatever, but we don't want you to start flooding WP with your own work either, like exchanging good images with your own, then "we" will start crying stuff like WP:COI and WP:PROMO. So, start carefully, and when in doubt what is "right" try asking on the article's talkpage. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:56, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Also, take the time to read Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Adding_images_to_articles. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

How do i make a custom signature?

Hello! I want to edit my signature into something more interesting. Could you tell me how? Rahbab Chowdhury (talk) 09:43, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello MRC2RULES! See WP:CUSTOMSIG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Need help understanding what this user did

Can someone help me understand why this user seems to have inserted spaces in infobox's but they don't show up.
diff1 diff2 thx ToeFungii (talk) 05:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: The software trims white space, so you can space out code and text like this and it will still appear normally spaced (jump to source code to see what I mean). Spacing may be done to make code easier to read as a convention. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Maybe it's social distancing? David notMD (talk) 10:43, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Where can I anyhow edit?

 Toh Yu Heng (talk) 10:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Toh Yu Heng! I'm not sure I understand your question, but if you want a place to practise editing without messing with articles, you can create a personal sandbox, WP:ABOUTSAND has easy info how. WP:TWA could be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Toh Yu Heng, Howdy hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! You can edit in all sorts of areas. What sort of topics are you interested in? Also, as GGS says above, you should probably take The Wikipedia Adventure to introduce you to editing. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 11:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

What can I do when someone vandalised a page?

 Toh Yu Heng (talk) 13:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Toh Yu Heng and welcome to the Teahouse. If you spot vandalism, just remove it. If the vandal persists, you can try to communicate with them and perhaps warn them to stop vandalizing. If they refuse to stop vandalizing despite multiple attempts at communicating with them, report it at WP:AIV and the editor will likely get blocked. See Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism for more information, and feel free to ask if something isn't clear. Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 13:29, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Toh Yu Heng, the first step (and most important) would be to first check if there is any chance that the edit was not vandalism, because in some rare cases, perfectly good edits may look like vandalism (obvious vandalism is when someone adds bad words or nonsense or blanks parts of a page or does anything a sane, well-mannered person would not do to Wikipedia). After this, you should check which was the last proper version of the article, and enter that, then click on edit and then publish it (this is how I reverted vandalism before enabling Twinkle) if the vandal has made multiple bad edits. If it’s just one bad edit, then you can go with clicking on undo right next to the bad version of the article. RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 13:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Toh Yu Heng: For vandalism, you can undo the edits as you did on Omaha Beach. I saw you posted a notice about your reversion on Talk:Omaha Beach. Posting on the article talk page would be good if you thought the edit was done in good faith and a conversation would be helpful to gain consensus to improve the article. However, for straight up vandalism it would be better to post on the user's talk page instead, so there's a documented history of warnings, which is needed if it's necessary to block a vandal. There are are series of user warning templates that you can use on the user talk pages if you like. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Sources

I was wondering, just curios, why Wikipedia values secondary sources more than primary ones . . . I mean, secondary sources obviously rely on primary ones? 17u9e (talk) 10:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello 17u9e! The WP-philosophy is that Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources. Sometimes primary sources can be interpreted in very different ways, and in those cases we avoid leaving the interpreting to the editors. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

17u9e, Its about context, and the danger of original research. Reliable secondary sources are written and edited by professionals, who are generally better than us Wikipedians at things. A professor of history is always going to be able to provide a more context filled discussion of a historical event based off of the primary sources than Wikipedia editors could. And anyway, such conclusions on the part of a Wikipedia editor would probably be original research. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 10:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

17u9e, another reason we rely on secondary sources is that the author of the source is the subject matter expert. That means Wikipedia editors do not need to be subject matter experts to edit articles.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 12:27, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

17u9e, the definition of an encyclopedia includes tertiary. We don't write about the subject of the article, we write about what others have written about the subject of the article in reliable secondary sources. That's just what an encyclopedia is. There are actually places we prefer primary sources. Straight data without analysis is best sourced to an official source, which many times is primary. Secondary sources allow us to determine if what the edit is about is significant to the understanding of the subject. John from Idegon (talk) 13:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft article / Draft:Mohammad Reza Mesbah

• I write an article draft:Mohammad Reza Mesbah, he is an Iranian film producer. I ask wikipedia administrators to help me for change the Draft:Mohammad Reza Mesbah to an wikipedia article Mohammad Reza Mesbah. thanks.

Keyhan narimannia (talk) 11:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps you haven't read what it says in the submission box on your draft: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,643 pending submissions waiting for review."? --David Biddulph (talk) 12:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Keyhan narimannia: I made some layout updates to your draft. You can continue working on it while you're waiting by inserting additional reliable sources. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

David Biddulph yes of course, thank you. Keyhan narimannia (talk) 12:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

GoingBatty thank you for edit.Keyhan narimannia (talk) 12:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Quite a number of the Wikilinks in the article point to articles in the Persian Wikipedia, making then all-but-useless in an English Wikipedia article. Is this standard practice?--Quisqualis (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Quisqualis yes, it's possible. the links are who use Persian wikipedia, are a movie or an director who are have just Persian wikipedia. we can use their or not use. however they are just some of links. Even WP:RS in other languages can be used, see WP:NOENG. Keyhan narimannia (talk) 07:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Keyhan narimannia, I think Quisqualis was asking the other hosts. I don't believe it is standard practice, and they should be removed. Neither en.wiki or Persian wiki are reliable sources and the standards for sources and wikilinks are not the same. John from Idegon (talk) 13:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Notability of election promise related articles

I’ve copied the Nyuntam Aay Yojana article to my sandbox so as to help improve it, but having never seen or found any articles about election promises that could not be executed because the party that created it lost, I don’t know what information is suitable and what isn’t for the article (not to mention the fact that two-thirds of the article is the party’s prime ministerial candidate, an economist and a newspaper explaining why they think this promise is good or bad).
So, is this topic notable enough? And if yes, then what information should be added and what should be removed?
Regards,
RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 11:49, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Copying an entire article to your Sandbox is considered extreme. A more cautious approach would be to work on one section at a time, or in this instance one paragraph at a time. Look at the Talk of the article to learn if changes you are considering have already been proposed and dismissed. All added content should be referenced. for content you delete, state your reasons in the Edit summary. David notMD (talk) 13:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Was this a political party platform for a 2019 election that it lost? If so, change entire article to past tense? David notMD (talk) 13:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi David notMD and thanks for your advice. I’ll be noting it down. However, I noticed that on the talk page, there was a discussion between the article’s main contributor and creator (Ms Sarah Welch) and another person (Club-sandwich), who highlighted the poor formatting and two other issues (which I think were minor, if they were even present). The article creator then picked the two minor issues and called them baseless, and the discussion ended with both editors accusing each other of bias, making vague allegations etc. So considering how the last (and only) discussion for article improvement ended, I think It’d be best for me to just edit the article alone, since it just needs rearrangement and trimming. By the way, I’d like to know if there is any guideline or general opinion on what to not add to such articles. And FYI, I copy articles to my sandbox only because sometimes I have to leave edits halfway through (especially if it takes more than a hour, because I’m a slow editor). RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 14:02, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Understood. The 'don't work on the entire article all at once' caution came from watching a disaster unroll when an editor decided to copy the entire Grateful Dead article to own Sandbox, massively revise, and then replace the existing version. Luckily, he was indefinitely blocked (for other causes) before initiating that debacle. David notMD (talk) 14:40, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

How to verify whether it is a reliable source or not

Hello, A number of times I come across many website links that I've never heard of before. How can I know whether these are genuine reliable sources or mere spam/promotion? Lightbluerain (talk) 17:08, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Lightbluerain: You can try to look for the publisher of the website, and see if there is any relationship between the publisher and the subject of the article. You may also find the information and editors at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard to be helpful. GoingBatty (talk) 17:24, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

You can find clues on Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Ruslik_Zero 17:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Lightbluerain: In addition to the pages above, you can try WP:RSPSOURCES, which is a subpage of Wikipedia:Reliable sources that tabulates frequently discussed sources and see if the one you're looking for is listed on there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:41, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks for all these links, I'll read them all. And, @GoingBatty: I'm not sure if looking for the publisher will help. Can you please explain how knowing the publisher can let me determine if the source is a spam or not? Lightbluerain (talk) 09:10, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Lightbluerain: For example, if the website publisher is a record label and the article is about a musician who is signed to the record label, then the website is not considered an independent reliable source. GoingBatty (talk) 13:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay. Got it. Lightbluerain (talk) 16:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

New here!!

Disregard

 – User blocked for sockpuppetry. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi! So, I was wondering, how do I make a Wiki page? I've been looking at pages in the editor, and I noticed that there is code. I would really appreciate it if someone could explain it to me. Thanks! Kookie Cookie Knows What's Up (talk) 00:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Kookie Cookie Knows What's Up, what is your relationship to the recently blocked account Kookie Cookie Knows What's Best? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Marinated Potato: Ha! Busted! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.193.28.135 (talk) 17:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

a few questions about Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of names

I could not find DOB of Kay Dickersin, however the article has full detail. should i remove it ? can i update full name if it is found on anywhere in university & journal profile page ? Leela52452 (talk) 17:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Leela52452 and welcome to the Teahopuse. I have trimmed the DOB to the year on Kay Dickersin. If you can find and cite a source for her full name, it can be included in the lead sentence of the article. But the exact DOB should not be included for living people unless it has either been widely published, or published with the clear consent of the subject, such as on the subject's own web page. In either case a citation should be provided. Otherwise the year is enough. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

IMO birthyear should have a decent ref as well, per spirit of WP:BLP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

A source is surely desirable, but a self-published source or a primary source is normally sufficient if the year is not controversial, and an unsourced year does not require prompt removal, IMO. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:21, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

A good SPS would work, but WP:BLPPRIMARY? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hegemony

@Nick Moyes: - @Galendalia: - @Maproom: Request for help from you and all others since as; I am still digging into the article Ehsan Sehgal to reach the bad faith and personal motives for spoiling that. I do not know if I am in the right place for honest, fair, and neutral editors who can execute Wiki rules with its essence to break the bad faith users' illegitimate hegemony. Thanks. 2001:1C00:1604:BB00:459B:2CED:129E:AAB0 (talk) 21:23, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi and welcome. First off please start a discussion on the articles talk page and be sure to tag the appropriate parties. Typically you can get a resolution that way and civilly. If that does not work then there are other options. After looking at the pages and seeing what Storm has done and how long that editor has been here and they are a page reviewer, I’m sure they will have no issue in a discussion. Please stop with edit warring though as I see a lot of reversals of other editors works (and not just yours). To help you out, you should create a username to help out with the discussion. I hope this helps. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 21:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

How to be an administrator?

 Toh Yu Heng (talk) 12:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Toh Yu Heng In short, you spend years developing a good edit history that shows you understand Wikipedia policies, have good judgement, a good temperament, and have a need for the administrator toolset. A nomination is then made at WP:RFA where the community decides if the user merits the tools. Administrators have no special status and are like any other editor, they simply have tools that would be irresponsible for the entire community to have. You can do probably 95% of tasks on Wikipedia without being an administrator. 331dot (talk) 12:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Toh Yu Heng, note that future administrators actually make constructive edits, rather than non-stop vandalism. Their edits are rarely reverted. Also, they are not known for creating sockpuppets.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

NOTE: Does not appear that a sockpuppet investigation has been initiated. Suspect because of similarity of your name (Toh Yu Heng) and the editor you reverted (Cutie Toh). If this just coincidence, then state on your Talk page that you are not also Cutie Toh. David notMD (talk) 22:21, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

How to Delete a Wikipedia Page

I work with the Bridgeton House on the Delaware on their marketing. This article "Bridgeton House" https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Bridgeton_House, appears in the Google Knowledge Graph for "Bridgeton House" and "Bridgeton House on the Delaware" searches, instead of the official Google My Business listing for the property. Is there a way to delete this article so that no longer happens? Thank you! 2601:281:C600:1FD0:D930:2C36:54C9:D42A (talk) 22:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

No. You will need to report to Google that it is showing the wrong page in the search. RudolfRed (talk) 22:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

 151.255.186.254 (talk) 23:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC) −

The Google map still appears next to the Wikipedia lede in the Knowledge Graph, so people can click on that and find your information. I noticed the website was missing from the article's infobox, and so I added it for you. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Options to switch among different regions of Chinese versions.

What happened to the options of switching among different regions of Chinese versions? As a translator, I've been using wikipedia a lot in terms of finding common translations of proper names, etc for different Chinese spoken regions, but today I noticed the options to switch to different regions is are gone. Just wondering if anyone know how to bring that back. 142.255.108.254 (talk) 00:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Could you explain further? For example, I went to Cat and clicked on 中文 in the languages sidebar. When the page loaded up a blue banner popped up at the top which directed me to different Chinese versions. Is that what you're referring to? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) If this is about the WP:content translation tool, I'm unfamiliar with how it works, but you might be better off asking on that article's talk page. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Replying to a comment on my page

Wabends (talk) 03:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)A tag has been put on top of my page that my biography reads as if someon has been paid to edit th epage. That is false because I have not paid anyone to do so. How do I respond to the original message placed on my page? Thanks in advance for your help. Wabends (talk) 03:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wabends: If you are referring to the Daniel Asua Wubah article, and you are actually Daniel Asua Wubah, then you shouldn't be editing the article, per Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline. If that is the case, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI. GoingBatty (talk) 04:05, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to @Newslinger:. GoingBatty (talk) 04:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

So, undisclosed paid is wrong, because you created the article about yourself? That is now the least of your worries, as the article has been proposed for deletion. Per Proposed deletions, "You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason. Although not required, you are encouraged to explain why you object to the deletion, either in your edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, do not replace it." David notMD (talk) 11:49, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion tag removed by an article-independent editor, and undisclosed paid tag removed. Wabends should declare on User page the COI of creating an article about self. David notMD (talk) 13:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Wabends, as GoingBatty mentioned earlier, Wikipedia works best when articles are written by editors who don't have a conflict of interest. If you are Daniel Asua Wubah, then you wouldn't be considered a paid editor, although we strongly recommend that you follow the plain and simple conflict of interest guide. — Newslinger talk 13:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wabends: I have add a {{Connected contributor}} to the article's talk page so that anyone who is going to edit the article knows of your affiliation with it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Outside help

How do I easily access outside help for dispute resolution on a page? Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 22:21, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Wjrz nj forecast See dispute resolution. 331dot (talk) 22:28, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Should I click dispute resolution notice board because that is not working for me. Thank you Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 22:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Wjrz nj forecast Specifically(since you want outside help) click WP:CONTENTDISPUTE. 331dot (talk) 22:41, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

I try clicking request dispute resolution but nothing happens. Do you know why? Thank you! Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 23:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Wjrz nj forecast That requires a javascript to run. 331dot (talk) 01:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Does that mean I can’t request outside help? Is there another way to do it? Thanks! Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 02:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Wjrz nj forecast Try WP:3O. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much 331dot! Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 02:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Recurring issues with an article and its subject recurring again - not sure what to do

A few months back I filed a sockpuppetry investigation to do with the pages Fiona Graham and Geisha#Non-Japanese geisha.

A number of editors had been repeatedly adding and removing content seemingly with a link to Fiona Graham, and this is a pattern that's continued for essentially a decade.

I thought a sockpuppetry investigation might finally stop the vandalism, edit warring and continued COI edits on these two articles, but evidently I'm too hopeful in my expectations, as an editor - user Truthisthebestpolicy (wish that name was a joke) - has recently retrod the old edits of removing details on a court case Graham was involved in, changing details on exactly what status of residence you need to work as a geisha in Japan, and under what circumstances Graham first left her original training.

My first question is if it's possible to undo or restore edits to previous versions of an article on mobile, because I haven't figured that out yet.

I think I'm in the right that they need reverting, but I don't entirely know, and I might simply be getting jumpy over the fact that this has happened so many times before. I'd appreciate some input.

My second question was, is it possible to lock just one section of an article? I know Fiona Graham has been extended protected before, but I don't know if it's possible to apply that to a certain section of an article or not.

If it is - it would be immensely helpful. Non-Japanese geisha are at times a contentious topic, and the article on geisha on the whole isn't the best at the minute. I've been trying to do whatever I can with it, but it really does impede process to have to deal with this first.

Again, I'd appreciate feedback on both issues wherever possible. Thank you! Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 17:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ineffablebookkeeper and welcome to the Teahouse. As you can see in Wikipedia:Protection policy, protection is not available for only part of a page, and it is rare for any page to be indefinitely protected except for recurring vandalism. (High-risk templates are a special case.) I do not see a justification for any protection on Fiona Graham at this time.

The recent edits by Truthisthebestpolicy to Fiona Graham seem on quick inspection to be reasonable and in line with previous discussions on Talk:Fiona Graham. I urge you to start a new discussion on the article talk page, explaining why you believe that specific edits are incorrect or unwise. It is possible to revert edits. There are several ways to do this, a simple one is to use the history tab to display a previous version, then edit that version and make a small change, or even a trivial one such as adding a space, and save. (See WP:REVERT) Please be sure the edit summary indicates this is a revert and why. Please follow the Bold, revert, discuss cycle and do thot edit war. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi guys, this is truthisbestpolicy. I did small changes yesterday on the page non-japanese geisha and Fiona Graham page. I personally know Fiona Graham and she asked me to change couple things on her wiki page as she is not able to do it by herself. I believe all changes I made are fair for both sides. I am trying to stay independent even I know her personally and I am trying to make my own opinion on all of this. She would like to delete whole section "wanaka gym" but I made it just little bit shorter and I left all sourced information in there. She also asked me to change non-japanase geisha site to make sure that there is an informnation who can become a geisha. Couple non-japanese ladies declare themselfs as a geishas without any permission recently and this could prevent such an action in the future. And there is a clear evidence that Sayuki was the first foreign geisha in Japan so I would leave her on the first place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthisthebestpolicy (talk • contribs) 02:09, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Truthisthebestpolicy. If you're editing on behalf on Graham, then you're also going to be considered to have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and should avoid directly editing the article about Graham or any content related to her yourself as much as possible.Since you're a friend of Graham, you might also want to let her know about WP:BLPSELF and WP:BLPCOI, etc. There are ways for her to try and address any issues she has with content about her on Wikipedia, and advise her that privately asking others to make proxy edits for her is not really a good idea and will likely only lead to more problems than it resolves. You both should follow WP:COIADVICE and WP:PSCOI#Steps for engagement instead as well as WP:DECLARECOI to avoid a misunderstandings by other editors. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

pls find the images of a wellpapet in the world

 105.112.183.40 (talk) 00:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure what a wellpapet is, but if there's an article, you can post your request on the article's talk page. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:18, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

As a wild guess, it might be a mis-type for "wallpaper", but even if it is the request seems incoherent. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.81.243 (talk) 02:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

hello

I just wanted to say hi Ihiiiiii (talk) 04:24, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ihiiiiii: Hello there Hillelfrei ^talk 04:48, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – Merged section below --Hillelfrei ^talk 04:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

how do you delete your account? Ihiiiiii (talk) 04:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Ihiiiiii, Users are currently not able to delete accounts. I recommend simply logging out and no longer using your account. Hillelfrei ^talk 04:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Quickly Flagging Questionable Pro-Industrial Content (i.e., Advertising or Promotion of Sector with supporting evidence)

I previously recall seeing pages that flagged in some manner to alert interested, responsible parties that the content may require relatively substantial revisions by an individual with some subject matter expertise. I have searched some of the help and tutorial pages at Wikipedia, and haven't located an option other than indicating something to be blatant advertising for an individual or company - that is not a suitable indication of the problem I frequently encounter, most recently today. Topics discussing the environmental and energy sectors can read excessively biased in favor of a specific technology, to an extent that the text reads like promotional material for an entire industry.

I don't have enough expertise to edit the article without research, but it would be beneficial to alert individuals - such as a casual browser from the web - that the article needs some work. Is there a way to alert a moderator to articles like this, to be reviewed and flagged if the moderator shares the visitor's evaluation of the status?

To demonstrate, below I've summarized some text from the article discussing Photovolatics (https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Photovoltaics), an article to which Google will refer users that search for "Solar PV", a topic often discussed in energy articles. Currently, within the first four paragraphs of the page, only the first reads relatively objectively and relevant to a description of the technology - it discusses the physics. The following three short paragraphs feature, include or mention:

"PV has become the cheapest source of electrical power in regions with a high potential" (potential is not explained - it has a link to an apparent solar industry group), "price bids as low as", "[panel] prices have dropped [by a] factor of 10 within a decade", "[this] competitiveness opens the paths to [...]", "the situation is urgent", "generates no pollution and no greenhouse gas emissions", and also "simple scalability", with a single citation for the "as low as [price]" up to that point. There is a brief interjection of information about connection to power grids, then back to "[photovoltaic] systems have long been used in specialized applications", [Industrial Association mentioned], "advances in technology", "increased manufacturing scale", "[reduced cost]", "[increased reliability]", and "[increased efficiency]", "financial incentives", such as preferential feed-in tariffs", "[more] than 100 countries now use solar PV.", with several more citations now included.

So, this can't be indicated to be blatant advertising per the rule set I reviewed, but the first half page of content is loaded with keywords suggesting a call to action, pricing and other financial incentives, performance jargon (competitiveness, simple scalability) either unqualified in context, or unqualifiable ("no pollution" - probably not true unless it evaporates at the end of the product's lifecycle), and an industrial association link. This reads like an industry association or environmental advocacy brochure, and very unlike a typical photoelectric cell article (https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Photoelectric_effect).

 Dasinmd (talk) 03:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Dasinmd: Welcome! Thank you for seeing insight on how to handle these types of issues. There are numerous ways in which these can be flagged. One thing we strive to do is maintain neutrality and factual content. I direct you to https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Template:Citation_needed for more information. Thanks Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 05:15, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Dasinmd: You are correct - articles should be written in a neutral tone, per Wikipedia's WP:NPOV policy. The previous answerer gave you a template to add a note for a specific sentence which requires a citation. If you feel that the entire article, or a section of an article is not neutral, templates can be found here here to alert editors of the issue. If you would like further clarification, feel free to ask. Hillelfrei ^talk 05:23, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Just curious why featured article is not protected every day

I'm just curious, as i'm getting more involved in fighting vandalism/disruptive edits, I've noticed that for the past 3 and maybe 4 days that the featured article gets blasted with at least a ton of disruptive edits if not outright vandalism. Has WP ever thought about protecting the page up front as I think the prior 3 days ended up being protected. It would only need 24 hours and it would stop the drive-by vandals. I realize it would hamper brand-new users, but i've not seen on these 3 days a brand new user that's made changes that have stuck. Realize there's give and take, but just curious. ToeFungii (talk) 03:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC) ToeFungii (talk) 03:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

ToeFungii, thank you for fighting vandalism. In the top right corner to a page, you may see a padlock indicating that the page is protected in some form. You can read the protection policy here (WP:PP). If you think that an article does need protection, you can request for page protection here (WP:RFPP).

Since you are a vandal fighter, I recommend you looking into twinkle. It is a multi-purpose tool that can help you fight vandalism. You can even request page protection with it. {{replyto}} Can I Log In's (talk) page 04:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: It's great to see an editor like you who has so many insights and questions about Wikipedia. I recommend being adopted by an experienced editor to whom you can direct all your questions, carry on a dialogue, and receive guidance about contributing in general. Hillelfrei ^talk 04:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Umm Hillelfrei, you aren't replying to me. Please indent correctly. {{replyto}} Can I Log In's (talk) page 04:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

ToeFungii's question was, "Has WP ever thought about protecting the [main] page?"--Quisqualis (talk) 05:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Because every time that has been proposed, there has been a consensus against it. It is thought to be more important that everyone can edit than to protect the article from casual vandals, and vandalism to TFA tends to be quickly reverted. More info in the list of perennial proposals. --bonadea contributions talk 05:10, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks all. Good to know that WP has at least considered it. Consensus is great, in a perfect life, but I'll have to read some of the counter arguments, and my noticing it for 3-4 days is a VERY small sample, so I do trust that masses weighed in with good points. ToeFungii (talk) 05:30, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

academic_advisors or doctoral_advisor ?

at the bottom "Acknowledgements" given as supervisor at PhD Research, which is appropriate ? Leela52452 (talk) 17:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Leela52452. Which Wikipedia article are you asking about? (If you're not asking about a Wikipedia article, then I'm afraid your question doesn't fit here: this is a page for assistance in editing Wikipedia, nothing else). --ColinFine (talk) 18:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

normally until now i found only advisors [ doctoral ] for a thesis. however, it has been given as advisors in abstract. my question is to treat both of them as academic_advisors if abstract does not specifically say as doctoral advisors or advisors  ? Leela52452 (talk) 01:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

extremely sorry provided incorrect hyperlink intially, now updated correct hyperlink Leela52452 (talk) 01:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Leela52452: You still didn't provide a wikilink to the article to which you are referring, which may help us understand your question. Please also indent your responses appropriately (I did so above for you). Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: i am talking about Hayley Fowler i will look into intending Leela52452 (talk) 05:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Leela52452: The external link you provided is to a page entitled "PhD Research", and is apparently solely about that. At the bottom, it says:

Acknowledgements

This PhD was funded by EPSRC and the Environment Agency in a CASE studentship award.

Supervised by Mr. Chris Kilsby and Prof. P. Enda O'Connell.

It seems these are her doctoral thesis advisors. The {{Infobox academic}} parameter should be:

| doctoral_advisor = {{Ubl|Chris Kilsby|P. Enda O'Connell}}

—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:09, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: that was quick, thank you, "supervised by" thrown me into confusion. Leela52452 (talk) 06:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done Leela52452 (talk) 06:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

should infobox contain hard linebr?

Based on Help:Line-break_handling#Lists am i correct that an infobox should not contain a hard linebreak? The hard line break is the one with "less than sign,br,greater than sign". ToeFungii (talk) 20:54, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: It depends. The list templates should be used to separate items that form a list. br tags may be used to force a line break in the middle of a longer value in a place different than the typical browser. E.g., use a {{Ubl}} template for listing multiple parents, marriages, battles, etc., while you might use a br tag if you had an image caption like "This is a slightly too long image caption" and you wanted it to break more evenly or logically, like "This is a slightly too long<br />image caption" —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm confused, I had bytes removed after making edit

I'm a bit baffled. I made an edit in the Mandie book series page and had bytes removed afterwards. I made some edits in the list of books in series, because there was a break in the middle of the list, and the original author or a later editor seemingly used two different methods of numbering the list. I changed it so that the list was all formatted the same way, and went on my way. I didn't make any changes in the text when I did that edit. I expanded a few sentences, but those were separate edits. Now in my contributions the edit is listed, and the page shows it, but 74 bytes were removed, and a reason was not given for why the bytes were renoved. I'm not upset the bytes were removed, but I do want to know why this happened, so I can avoid making the same mistake in the future. Lives4Christ (talk) 21:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Lives4Christ, Spaces count as bytes. I looked at the edit you made and the negative byte count is from when you removed the 2nd column and combined it into 1 column. Hopefully this answered your question. Have a good day. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:49, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I think so, maybe I don't understand what bytes are. Are they not like a editor point systen?Lives4Christ (talk) 21:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Lives4Christ: A page's size is measured in (kilo)bytes. I'm guessing it also has to do with replacing the manual number system with the software's numbering scheme. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:54, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

In your case, you deleted some spaces. Think of bytes like a log. If I change a "i" to a "I" the Bytes would be 0. If I fix "I llove you" to "I love you", the bytes would be -1 as I removed an extra "l". If I fix "I lov you" to "I love you", the bytes would shoe a +1. The bytes add and subtract also in the same edit. If I fix "I llove u" to "I love you", the bytes would show +1, because the extra "l" is -1, but the "yo" is +2. Hopefully this helps. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Lives4Christ: Another way of looking at it is that there is an ASCII table used to represent all the letters and punctuation used by computers. It turns out the code for a blank space is 32. So in order to render a space, the code has to record the number 32. If you expand the decimal number 32 to binary numbers in hexadecimal code (base 16), 32 = 00100000 (2 to the 5th power). So every time you remove a space, you're removing the string 00100000 from the code. As an example - removing two spaces shows a reduction of 2,520 bytes. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

More simply, Lives4Christ: No, bytes are nothing to do with an editor point system. They are simply a measure of the amount of material in the article. Reducing the byte count doesn't mean you've done anything wrong: It just means you've removed material (letters or spacing). --ColinFine (talk) 23:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh, ok, thank you. I understand now. It looked like something bad because it was red. But now I get it Lives4Christ (talk) 23:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Uh – removing two spaces removes 2 bytes. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:15, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I would like to see this article posted on events leading up to the bombing of Pearl Harbor. It is much more factual and relevant than the one you have.

Hi I would like to see an article of Robert Higgs How U.S. Economic Warfare Provoked Japan’s Attack on Pearl Harbor  By Robert Higgs  |  May 1, 2006 Also published in The Freeman It has been posted on many different places on the web and it is so much better that the present one WiKipedia has on the events leading up to Pearl Harbor. How do I do this???? -- Jmarielloyd (talk) 07:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Jmarielloyd! I see you brought this up at Talk:Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor/Archive_17#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_2_April_2019 a year ago, and got some, not a lot, of response.

Assuming you want to use this article as a source in one or more WP-articles, the WP-context here is WP:DUE, basically what weight should we give to Robert Higgs [17] in our articles? Personally I have no idea. You could try to ask for more input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history or perhaps WP:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. If, like you were told last year, Higgs is a fringe view on this, WP will give him zero or very little space. According to WP he seems to be writing in his area of expertise, so it may be reasonable to include something about his view at Events leading to the attack on Pearl Harbor or Pearl Harbor advance-knowledge conspiracy theory. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Create article (draft) Linda Thompson

 Courtesy link: Draft:Linda J. Thompson

Hello, thank you to MurielMary and Robert McClenon for help with my first article. I've only ever made corrections before, and not familiar with source code. I have reorganised the page and fixed up links/references. Would appreciate any further advice you may have to get the article accepted.

Draft:Linda J. Thompson

Also, not entirely sure what I need to do about Disambiguation page.

Many thanks! Manamanash (talk) 06:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Manamanash: Welcome to the Teahouse, and congratulations on almost getting your draft published. I've tweaked the section headings to follow the Manual of Style with sentence case rather than title case. My personal suggestion is to give the external URLs descriptive names. If you're using the VisualEditor, click on the external link, click "Change text" in the box that pops up, then add text that accurately describes the site the reader would be sent to. If you're editing by source code, add the descriptive name after the URL within the square brackets (Example: [https://www.example.com Example site]).

As far as your disambiguation question goes, I think Robert McClenon is saying that if the draft is accepted into mainspace, he wants you to add an {{About}} tag at the top of the page that leads to the disambiguation page that he linked. After that, go to the disambiguation page and add Linda J. Thompson to the list that's already there and give her a suitable description like the other entries. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Manamanash, there are just a few parts to tweak before it's good to go.

1. You might want to format the discography section according to Robert's advice.
2. Typos and other issues, like 2 full stops together ("..") or 2 spaces together (" ").
3. Please don't remove the AFC decline tag as you did here. These are kept as a record and for our convenience. Previous declines won't "count against" the draft; as long as you heed the advice of reviewers, the draft will probably be accepted.

Thanks for creating this draft, and stay safe! Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 09:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Who blocked me?

Hello editors. Yesterday (May 3, 2020 IST), I was been blocked by a user on the charge of advertising. But there is no evidence that I have advertised anything or any brand. This has happened twice now. Can anyone tell me how search for that user? Excellenc1 (talk) 11:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: Aparently that was an WP:AUTOBLOCK caused by someone on the same IP range. Are you by any chance editing from an instituion network? To clear autoblocks, please see Template:Autoblock. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

No, I am not from any institution network. Thanks for your suggestion. I will surely visit this page. Excellenc1 (talk) 10:13, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Autofest City

I would like to make improvements on the details that appear on this page, including inserting photographs and improving links. https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Autofest_City 2405:204:5119:A0D4:B81F:A7DF:6671:943F (talk) 11:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

You don't need anyone's permission to edit an article, but to upload images you will need to have an account. If you have an association with this organization, you will need to review conflict of interest and how to make edit requests. 331dot (talk) 11:23, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

What should I do when somebody is rude to me on wikipedia?

 Tomdejohn (talk) 10:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

You should tell the person to stop,if this persist,you should call an administrator. Toh Yu Heng (talk) 10:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Tomdejohn: Who is the user in question? Ed6767 (talk) 10:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Issue resolved - warned user for biting newcomers. Ed6767 (talk) 10:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

ItheBestin reprimanded me and Toh Yu Heng rudely. Tomdejohn (talk) 11:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I neither deny nor confess about any ongoing Tomdejohn said.I didn't write anything like that to him.ItheBestin (talk) 11:31, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to Declined Article

Hello Team, my article Draft:Shopnaw was declined when submitted. Based on the the reviewer's comment and the support of the house I have edited the article and improved on the referencing.

Below is the link to the updated article. kindly review for me if it's ok for re-submission https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Shopnaw Kojo Essel (talk) 11:31, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

If you want the draft reviewing again, use the blue "Resubmit" button. One minor point is that words such as Restaurants, Supermarket, Grocery, Pharmaceuticals, Electronics, Local Markets, Beauty, and Fashion are not proper nouns, so they should not start with capital letters; you'll find advice at MOS:CAPS. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I want to create a page for an artist I know

Hi all!

I want to create a page for an artist I know - Am I not allowed to create a page for him because I know him? I work with the Gallery also who sells his work which may work against me in this.

Any help would be great as I feel like it's a simple thing I want to do but goes against guidelines.

Thanks Loisspencertracey (talk) 18:56, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Loisspencertracey, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is no rule or policy against you creating an article about a person you know. However, this probably means that you have a conflict of interest, and you should declare that as described on that policy page. (See WP:DISCLOSE for details.) It is strongly advised that editors create articles where they have a COI through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process instead of directly.

If you are expected to help publicize this artist as part of your job, or if you are being in any way compensated for making such edits, your must follow the rules at WP:PAID and declare yourself as a paid editor. Failure to do so is grounds for a person being blocked from editing. If in doubt, disclose. See WP:UPE for details on how to disclose.

Also, be sure that the artist is notable before starting an article. See our guideline on notability of artists. Tryingto create an article about a non-notable topic usually leads to wasted time and no article.

I hope this is helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Loisspencertracey: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest you work on improving existing articles before jumping in to create a new article, as creating a new article can be challenging.. Then read Wikipedia:Notability (people) and be sure the artist meets Wikipedia's notability criteria for inclusion in this encyclopedia. Then assemble multiple independent reliable sources that discuss the artist in detail. Then I suggest you follow the guidance at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. GoingBatty (talk) 19:21, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Loisspencertracey, I strongly agree with GoingBatty. Trying to start by creating a new article is likely to create frustration. Think of it like running. If you decided to take up running, would you start with a marathon? That what it is like trying to create a new article with no editing experience. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for all your help. I will have a look to see if the artist is seen as one that can be added to Wiki. I have done editing on Wiki before as I have worked with celebrities who have profiles already created. Loisspencertracey (talk) 11:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Loisspencertracey Your account is only two days old. Did you make your edits with another account or while logged out? Please also note that there is not a single "profile" on Wikipedia, that is a social media term. Wikipedia has articles. If you are working for these celebrities, you need to declare as a paid editor. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Two days old? That can't be right - I was working on this artist page for the last few weeks... Maybe because I only submitted it two days ago, that is what you are seeing? I will change my account to a paid one for future ref. Loisspencertracey (talk) 11:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Loisspencertracey Sorry, I see that you created the account four years ago but only edited recently, I was going by the contribution history of your account. You don't need to have separate accounts for paid and unpaid editing, you just need to declare for whom you are making paid edits and who is paying you. 331dot (talk) 11:56, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

OK many thanks, I will do this on my page to declare it. Loisspencertracey (talk) 12:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Updating dead links

 Krusty1979 (talk) 10:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Krusty1979, generally, if the same page is now under a new url, update it. But don't remove sources just because they are dead. The website could return, or someone could find an archived copy. For this reason, you can tag dead links with {{dead link}}, which informs others to have a look for it. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 12:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Wrong info or misleading info provided in a protected/locked article on wikipedia

a article on wikipedia naming North east delhi riots have information to the riots that happened in the Delhi. The article only shows the muslim side being the victim in the whole article whereas the reality of the riots that came later changed after slingshots found at the AAP party's member and also on a muslim school roof. Several stones petrol bombs and acid packets were shown in news in the rooftop of muslims. Several Videos went viral how the muslim people were throwing petrol bombs how they were throwing bodies in drain near the area. I know all the muslims are not bad. But dont change the information or modify on the side of one religion. How much more attention does they want ?? Leakyleaks (talk) 12:21, 5 May 2020 (UTC) Leakyleaks

Leakyleaks I think you meant to link to 2020 Delhi riots Wikipedia summarizes what appears in independent reliable sources. If you have specific suggestions for changes to the article and can support them with independent reliable sources, please offer your suggested changes on the article talk page as an edit request, on Talk:2020 Delhi riots. The subject is a contentious one, with strong passions on each side based in ancient religions, so it is important to be civil with other contributors regardless of their views(not saying you have been otherwise, just letting you know). 331dot (talk) 12:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

request for contact

Hi, can i have your email so that i am reach out to you and talk directly. Technology1987 (talk) 12:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

That's not the way it works. If you have a question about editing Wikipedia, ask it here. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Technology1987 I'm not sure if you are addressing a specific user, but you should not ask for email addresses in this public forum. You may communicate with other users on their user talk page, usually linked to in the signature of the user, or in a page's edit history. Some users have email from others enabled, if you go to their user talk page or user page, there will be a link of the left of the screen(if using a computer) called "email this user". As noted, if you just want to ask the Teahouse community a question, just ask it on this page. 331dot (talk) 12:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Renaming a category

I created today Category:African-American college graduates before 1865. After starting to populate it, I realized it needs to be broadened: some attended college without graduating, some got the equivalent through tutoring; graduation as such was not the big deal it became later. So I want to change it to Category:African Americans who obtained higher education before 1865.

I cannot move it myself. Requested Moves will not accept it and directs me to Categories for discussion. However, since I just created it today and no one else has looked at it, I don't see that as appropriate either.

I am aware I have to manually change every link to the category, although I understand there is a bot to do this, which I know nothing of. }} deisenbe (talk) 11:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Deisenbe, I'd just create your new category, move all articles to the new one, and then nominate it for speedy deletion under WP:G7. I see that you already moved it to a new title; now you'll need to manually move all articles to the new category, but deletion isn't necessary. I don't think 12 articles require bot assistance. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Quick question

but for real What is sock puppetry because I heard of it, but have no clue what it is. Clockworkv (talk) 13:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

It is explained at WP:Sock puppetry. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:03, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockworkv (talk • contribs) 13:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Another IMPORTANT question

So for a button Can we please make a button to favorite an article and put it on your list? PLEASE??? I would LOOOOOOOOOVVVVVE that so much? Please and thank you! Clockworkv (talk) 13:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Clockworkv Every user has a watchlist where you are able to do as you describe. Every article has a white star at the top(if you are using a computer), if you click it to turn it blue, it will add that article to your watchlist. 331dot (talk) 13:10, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello again, Clockworkv. Wikipedia doesn't really have "favorites" in the way that some web sites do. However There is a link to place an article on your Watchlist. This is an empty (or white) five-pointed star just to the right of the "View History" link in the setup that I use. When clicked it becomes a light blue, and the page is added to yoru watcvhlist. This lets ytou easily see recent changes to the page, if any have been made. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Moderation on Wikipedia

Hello everyone, I am currently looking for ways to improve my community moderation experiences and have been reading Wikipedia for a while now, yet I just decided to become a member/editor. I am finding it fun so far, but I am greatly interested in community moderation. To become an administrator, do you all have any specific tips for me to pursue this path, such as how long I should be a Wikipedia member, around how many edits I should have, and what kinds of things I should participate in for the next year or so to prepare my Wikipedia resume for an admin vote? Also, is it possible to become an admin if you enjoy participating in small copy-editing only such as grammatical fixes or adding hyperlinks? Thanks! ExemplaryScholar (talk) 23:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

The minimum requirements to become a Wikipedia admin is:

1. Have an account 30 days.

2. Have 500 edits (not reverted).

I would also recommend joining a WikiProject. Hopefully this helps. Elijahandskip (talk) 23:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip: No, that's Extended Autoconfirmed status, not adminship. "The English Wikipedia has no official requirements to become an administrator." Ian.thomson (talk) 23:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @ExemplaryScholar: As I explain in this guide I wrote: If you have to ask, you're not ready to be an admin. If you're absolutely positive that you're ready to nominate yourself to be an admin, oh God no, you're not. You're probably only ready for WP:Requests for adminship when you know damn well why you shouldn't be an admin but other people insist you'd do a good job for some reason.

Small copy-editing stuff is an ideal start to the road for adminship. The RfA crowd generally also wants you to have written (or completely rewritten) a few articles to show you understand the various policies involved in that. Beyond that, developing a reputation for fighting vandalism, helping at the WP:Help Desk or here at the Teahouse, and resolving conflicts elsewhere -- those help tremendously. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@ExemplaryScholar: There is some more information here: Wikipedia:Guide_to_requests_for_adminship. Don't start with the goal of becoming an admin. Just do what you can to improve and add to the encyclopedia. RudolfRed (talk) 23:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

ExemplaryScholar (ec) While it is true that the above are technically the minimum requirements, if you self-nominate once you hit those benchmarks, your chances of success are close to zero. It generally takes years of edits; I believe many participants at the nominations page look for at least a year if not more. Discussion participants often also look for edit counts in the thousands. Both of these things help to show your contributions to the encyclopedia and demonstrate a good understanding of Wikipedia policies, good judgement, and a good temperament- but discussion participants look for many different things- including a need for the admin toolset. You won't be given it as a feather in your cap for your Wikipedia work- there needs to be a reason to give you the tools(such as you participating in a lot of deletion discussions, or vandalism fighting, etc.) I would suggest reading WP:RFAADVICE. 331dot (talk) 23:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I would concur with RudolfRed in that it's best to not have the goal of becoming an administrator. That was not my goal when I began to participate here, my goal was just to help out where I could. I gradually moved into different areas and other users noticed my work and thought I would do well to have the admin toolset. While self-nominations are possible, it carries much more weight in my opinion to have others nominate you. Keep in mind that you can do probably 95% of tasks on Wikipedia without being an administrator. Just concentrate on what you can do to help. 331dot (talk) 23:54, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

331dotZ and others, I appreciate it. I also enjoy editing a lot, and administration is only one of my goals as it is another thing that I enjoy. Thanks for the help. ExemplaryScholar (talk) 23:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

ExemplaryScholar Thank you for your understanding, and don't worry, the question is asked by many newcomers who mistakenly believe adminship is a trophy. You are not alone. If you have any other questions about editing, feel free to ask. Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 00:12, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@ExemplaryScholar: One thing that wasn't mentioned above and isn't emphasized enough in the guides is the absolute requirement (among those who will examine you) of significant participation in WP:AFD. It also seems to be largely about temperament, as perceived by your contributions in talk pages, edit summaries, etc. I can't imagine someone being fully-versed in the policy questions that will come up without having a year or two of experience and thousands of edits. (I am not an admin, but have some familiarity with the subject.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

To become an admin, you must first go through a week-long public vetting process where dozens of people will examine all your edits to Wikipedia, and ask you questions about your experiences as an editor, about your knowledge of Wikipedia rules and customs, and about what you would do under various hypothetical circumstances. Then they vote on whether they think you're ready and have a suitable temperament (two very different things). Note that individual votes can be struck down if there's reason to think they're illegitimate. DS (talk) 14:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Biography

Sir Iam new here and and I want to create someone's biography page. Please help me with that. Thank you. NewProfiles (talk) 15:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

NewProfiles Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have "biography pages" or "profiles". Wikipedia has articles. Those articles should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about a person, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person(there are also definitions for specific fields, like musicians or athletes).

As you have already found out, successfully creating a new article is the absolute hardest thing to do on Wikipedia. New users are much more successful when they first spend much time(months if not years) editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Using the new user tutorial is also a good thing to do, as is reading Your first article. You've already figured out how to submit drafts for review, it appears, so I would suggest you at least use the tutorial and read the links I have placed in this post.

If you are associated with the subjects you want to write about, you should read conflict of interest. If you are being paid to edit, you must comply with the paid editing policy(a Terms of Use requirement). 331dot (talk) 15:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, NewProfiles If this is the biography User:NewProfiles/sandbox, please don’t. Wikipedia doesn’t encourage people writing autobiographies, if you are notable somebody unconnected with you will write one eventually, but most of us are not notable enough to warrant an article here. Theroadislong (talk) 15:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

(ec)Hello NewProfiles and welcome to Wikipedia! To get some hang on how editing works, you can try WP:TWA. On creating a biography: Take the time to read WP:BLP and WP:BASIC. If you conclude "yes, I have those sources, no problem!" move on to HELP:YFA. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Please a favor

So can a ask for someones help on making any type of list involving popular culture or urban legends? I can not do an article on here because it is hard to put in all those references. Could you help me get a better understanding on this? Thank you! Clockworkv (talk) 12:58, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Clockworkv: Provided your list follows Wikipedia's list criteria, you can find instructions at Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists. Please keep in mind that content will need to be sourced, even on a list, so your desire to creates a list as opposed to an article because you don't need to add sources to lists is not entirely true. You mention that you find it hard to cite references - don't be intimidated, it is not as hard as it looks in the Wikitext, and you can find a basic tutorial here. Feel free to follow up with further questions. Hillelfrei ^talk 15:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

You can also try Help:Introduction for how to reference. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

a few porn actor pages I want to nominate for deletion.

I started creating a biography for Carlo Masi, during the process I saw that many gay porn actors bios do not fulfill anymore wikipedia guidelines neither for WP:BIO nor for WP:GNG the majority of these pages show hardly any sources and those which are shown are most often unreliable. The reason behind it is that when these bios were created the guideline on wikipedia were much different.

So, I started cleaning up those bios, I looked on wayback machione if I could find the link not anymore online, I looked on the web for further reliable sources and I added the templates "Notability" and "Refimprove". After that, I started nominating for deletion (WP:AFD) those which look hopeless to me. Sometime I will make mistakes evaluating the bios to be nominated but so far most of the bio I have nominated have been actually delete. As someone rose doubts about my WP:GF, before nominating other bios I added a message on their talk page to see if someone has a reason for not nominating it.

It follows the list of the pages I believe should be nominated:

Michael Brandon (pornographic actor)

Bobby Blake

Billy Brandt

Randy Cochran

R. J. Danvers

Chad Knight

Jeff Palmer

Will Wikle

I believe it would be fair to wait a week after the messages were posted on their talk pages beforse tarting the nomination process. I will treasure any piece of advic you want to give me. thank you.

Ps. I am not working on bios of dead porn actors as I don't know yet how I feel about deleting the bio of someone who is not with us anymore.

--AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 15:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, AlejandroLeloirRey, and welcome back to the Teahouse. The post on your talk page that I saw did not in any way question your good faith. It said: I think that 11 Articles for Deletion nominations in three days in the same subject area is too many. In a narrow topic area like porn actor bios, there are probably only a few editors mwho could helpfully comment on AfDs or could attempt to improve articles so that they need notm be deleted. Those few editors can only work on so many articles at a time. As you know, such research is time consuming. The suggestion was that you nominate in smaller groups, perhaps, only 3 nor 4 in any given week, so that those who might want to respond have a chance to do so. This does not mean that you need to stop nominations totally, just limit the pace, please. It does not mean that anyone doubts your good faith in making these nominations,, or the WP:BEFORE work you have done on the articles. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

hi @DESiegel: actually I wasn't talking about that message, as a metter of fact that user has helped me a lot in the past and he only gives me good advice. I was talking of the last message here: https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2020_May_1#Van_Darkholme . it is from a non registered user which uses a colorful language. I will do exactly the way you suggested. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 15:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Is information emailed to the contributor a reliable source?

My first Wikipedia article was published a few days ago: https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Max_Balchowsky It is an article about a race car driver and builder from the 1950s and 1960s. I notified the owner of the one of Balchowsky's race cars -- Ernie Nagamatsu -- to let him know that I had an article about Balchowsky published by Wikipedia. I cited Nagamatsu's website as an external link in the article. Nagamatsu was a very close friend of Balchowsky and his wife. Balchowsky shared many stories with him and gave him many documents, pictures, race trophies, and car parts. In his letter of appreciation he gave me information about Balchowsky that is not included on Nagamatsu's website or published elsewhere (that I can find).

At first glance I feel that the emailed information is not a "reliable source" according to Wikipedia policy and should not be added to the article; and yet it seems a shame not to publish an eyewitness account which will not be available once the eyewitness passes.

Thanks in advance for your comments. InfoArchivist (talk) 21:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, InfoArchivist. I'm afraid that this doesn't get even as far as the question of reliability: sources must be published. Unpublished memoirs, whether from the subject or anybody else, may not be used as sources, as a reader has no way of checking the accuracy of content based only on unpublished sources. See no original research. --ColinFine (talk) 22:19, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, InfoArchivist. Although ColinFine's advice above is entirely correct, I agree with you that it would be a shame for such information to be lost to posterity. Since you have established a relationship with Ernie Nagamatsu, perhaps you could suggest to him that he go beyond posting (some of) it on his own website, and collaborate with a motor racing magazine or book publisher to produce published articles or a book that could include this material (which Wikipedia could then use as a reliable source).

I see from a brief web search that several articles about/interviews with Dr Nagamatsu, some mentioning his friendship with Max Balchowsky, are already online, and actually I wonder if Dr Nagamatsu himself might be notable enough for a Wikipedia article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.81.243 (talk) 14:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, ColinFine. Thanks for your concise clear explanation.

Hi, {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.81.243 Thanks for your helpful suggestions.

InfoArchivist (talk) 16:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Sources

How do we decide if a new source is a "mainstream" journalistic source? Ihaveadreamagain (talk) 16:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Ihaveadreamagain Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure "mainstream" is the right word- Wikipedia uses reliable sources. In short, reliable sources are sources that have a reputation for fact checking and editorial control. If you have difficulty determining if a source is reliable, you can visit the reliable sources noticeboard. You may also want to peruse the list of perennial reliable sources to get an idea of what is and is not acceptable as a source, and why. 331dot (talk) 16:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

is it mandatory to use {{DEFAULTSORT}} on every article page ?

i did ask same question on es wiki, it seems they are not using it much. every wiki is unique. until today i did not find a single which did not use it. after reading on Template:DEFAULTSORT

In the case of multiple default sort key tags, the last DEFAULTSORT on the final rendering of a page applies for all categories, regardless of the position of the category tags. This also means that a DEFAULTSORT tag included from a template is not effective if another DEFAULTSORT tag occurs later on the page, even if the later DEFAULTSORT tag is also "hidden" (included by another template).

, i have come to conclusion that it is not mandatory to use it. however, are there any exceptions ? is it ok to remove it on article pages [ ex : Patricia D'Amore ] ? Leela52452 (talk) 13:10, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

It would be wrong to remove the default sort from that page, as without it the article's entry in each category would be sorted under P rather than D. An article doesn't need the DEFAULTSORT if it ought to be sorted in the alphabetical order of the article's title. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Leela52452, as far as I know, it is not a must to use it. However, on biographies, Wikipedia uses this to sort people names by last name, not first name. This means that for biographies (like the one you mentioned) the DEFAULTSORT tag (template) shouldn't be removed. Eumat114 formerly TLOM (Message) 13:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It is not necessary to use DEFAULTSORT at all if the article or page should be alphabetized according to its title (true for most articles). should be used if an article should be sorted by some other key than the actual article title. Particularly when the key word for sorting is not the first word in the title. This is common for Biographical articles, where the article title often starts with a personal or "first" name, but should be sorted by the family or "last" name. It is also common for List articles, where "List of X" should be sorted by X, not under L. Many articles sort under their unmodified titles. In such cases, DEFAULTSORT is not useful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:24, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Leela52452: The reason it may not be used much on some other wikis is that other language wikis (like ruwiki) may, by convention, name their biographical articles with Surname, Forename, so they would sort correctly in categories already (without a DEFAULTSORT key, since it would be the same as the title).

It's not a question of mandatory or not; use it when needed, don't use it when its value would match the title anyway. It's unnecessary to edit an article solely to remove an unnecessary DEFAULTSORT, but if you want to remove it while doing some other work, go ahead.

As mentioned above, common usage on enwiki include articles named for people (which are usually titled with Forename Surname and so need {{DEFAULTSORT:Surname, Forename}}), or newspapers or films that have titles starting with "The", like The New York Sun (which needs {{DEFAULTSORT:New York Sun, The}}). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:34, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Info on Canimals

Hi

I Seem to have problems finding info for the tv show Canimals, Is there anyone who could help me? 2600:1004:B01E:280B:DD23:6623:E67B:B523 (talk) 17:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, try asking this at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Article is Canimals Hillelfrei ^talk 17:24, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes.2600:1004:B01E:280B:DD23:6623:E67B:B523 (talk) 17:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok, were you just "having problems finding info" as in you just couldn't find the Wikipedia article? Do you mean "having problems finding info" as in you can't find information or sources to add to the article? Hillelfrei ^talk 17:33, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

The latter.2600:1004:B01E:280B:DD23:6623:E67B:B523 (talk) 17:35, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

First of all, I recommend looking at the relevant MOS if you plan on significantly adding to the article. You can find information from Google as long as it is a reliable source and you cite it. If you meant that there is a lack of information online, we can't really help you there because we don't have any connection to the availability of sources on a given topic. If you really can't find info, feel free to contribute to another TV-related article with more available info. Feel free to follow up with further questions. Hillelfrei ^talk 17:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

About watchlists

Hi, I read somewhere that it is possible to set your watchlist as the home page when you log in. Is it possible? If yes, can you please tell how to do it? Can't seem to find an option for it in the preferences tab. Thanks. NawJee (talk) 12:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC) NawJee (talk) 12:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@NawJee: I don't think it's an option within Wikipedia, but you should be able to change your home screen or add a bookmark to a specific URL in your browser's settings, and you can make the URL your watchlist. Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 13:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Hillelfrei: All right, thanks. I was taking the Wikipediholic test for fun and it asked if I have set my watchlist as the homepage. So, got me thinking. Anyways, thank you. NawJee (talk) 13:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@NawJee:, I think most browsers will let you designate more than one Web page to open when you launch the browser. I have my watchlist as one of six Wikipedia pages that open when I launch Chrome. You might look in your browser's settings for that option. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:47, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Teblick: Oh, yeah. Figured it out the same way. Thank you. NawJee (talk) 18:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Please help me add photo of my grandfather to the article

Could someone please explain me how I can add the photo of my grandfather Coy Pereira to the article Coy Pereira? Debbie Nair-Pereira (talk) 18:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Debbi Nair-Pereira: Welcome to the Teahouse. Do you hold the copyright to the photo or someone else? Wikipedia would like the copyright holder to know that in most cases, the image must be free of copyright; if it has a copyright, it must be waived, meaning that anyone, even those outside of Wikipedia, can use it for their own purposes. If you understand that, consult WP:CONSENT to read on how to waive the file's copyright, and WP:UPI for our image policy. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:59, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Do you know what Dazza means?

I came across some vandalism on this newly created page Dazza. It took some searching and found that it's supposed to be a nickname for Darren for Australians based on Urban Dictionary, but that's the only place I can find it stated as such. I'd guess I'd assume that it's correct because I see a bunch of hits for people named like "Darren Dazza", but I'm just curious whether it really warrants a page. Can I get some opinions? Thx, ToeFungii (talk) 02:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC) Here's the page history in case you can't get to the actual page because of the redirect Dazza History].ToeFungii (talk) 02:15, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

It's certainly consistent with other similarly formed nicknames used in Australia and England. I've previously encountered "Bazza" for Barry, "Gazza" for Gary, and "Jazza" for Jack (McCreary, a character in The Archers) sufficiently often that I would have assumed Dazza was a variant of Darren without being told. I can't see that it merits an article of its own, but a redirect to Darren (with a brief mention of it there if an RS can be found) seems warranted. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.81.243 (talk) 02:35, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I found Dazza at Wiktionary and as short for Darren/Darryl, but with no cites. I was able to find Bazza at Wiktionary with cites. Gazza and Jazza are there also, but not short for Gary and Jack. I guess if there was some source other than urban dictionary I'd feel better about it. ToeFungii (talk) 03:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

The problem is that, since these are informal usages which would rarely be used in written work (other than in modern-set fiction), there aren't likely to be many reliable sources discussing them, unless one or more linguists have decided to study the phenomenon and have published articles in academic linguistics journals. You could try searching, or asking at, some of the organs listed in that article's External links section. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.81.243 (talk) 19:15, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

A question

Is there a maximum length a user page can be? Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 20:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC) Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 20:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Policywise there is none. However it should not be so long and so complex that people with weak computers and slow internet cannot load it. Ruslik_Zero 20:55, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

​Well, how many bytes is the absolute limit? Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 21:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

It is extremely high. COVID-19 pandemic is above 300k bytes. In all fairness, a user page probably should go above 100k bytes. But to answer the question, it is extremely high, but I do not know the exact limit. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Have we conflated User page length with Article length? David notMD (talk) 21:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

​​How many bytes would it take for my page to get deleted? Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 22:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I doubt there is a hard rule, but there are guidelines for what does and does not belong in a User page, and many editors have been kicked out of Wikipedia for spending an inordinately large amount of effort of their User page while neglecting to edit articles. For starters, I suggest you delete the Contributions section of your User page. Some editors list only articles they created; others don't even bother with that. Also, delete the Shortcuts section. David notMD (talk) 22:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

​I’ve been preparing a better user page and that’s partially the reason of my inactivity. I usually contribute to articles on my computer and it’s not doing so good at the moment, I’m repairing it. Also, I don’t have a “contributions” section in my new user page I’m working on. Could I have a 100 byte user page is what I’ve been trying to ask. Thanks, Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 22:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC) I use the shortcuts section, is their a reason for me to delete it? Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 22:37, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

IMO, those shortcuts can be in your Sandbox. Did you mean 100,000 bytes for a User page?!!! Most are under 5,000. David notMD (talk) 01:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with the (short) list of shortcuts – mine is much longer (and in need of pruning), and it's an accepted and widely-practiced use for user pages. Sandboxes are for testing/practicing/temporary work space, not things you want to be permanent and use repeatedly. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:53, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

​ I’m not planning to create a 100 byte user pager, I’m just saying it might be 20 bytes or more. Is that acceptable? Thanks, Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 13:23, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Again, are you asking 20 bytes or 20,000? David notMD (talk) 13:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

​Why I meant 20,000 bytes. Sorry for not being clear. Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 20:31, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Help request

I am very new to wikipedia. Apperrantly, I cannot manage to make something that I made myself. Could you seem to help me? KRII Randy (talk) 20:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – Merging section below. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

help me plzz

I cannot make my own article. Could you seem to help me? :( KRII Randy (talk) 20:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Creating a new article is not an easy task for new users. There is guidance and a wizard for creating a draft at WP:YFA. The usual advice is to start by working on improving existing articles instead. RudolfRed (talk) 20:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)