Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1063

Archive 1060

Archive 1061

Archive 1062

Archive 1063

Archive 1064

Archive 1065

→

Archive 1070

Deleted Article: How to link Japanese language article of the same content to the English article

Deleted article

The article I wrote was deleted due to various reasons mentioned. My article in Japanese was approved and is currently on Wikipedia. I basically translated this article into English and uploaded onto my page. My question is: Can the Japanese version be linked to my English article? Will the publication of the Japanese article be an evidence that the English article is true and respecting all the rules of Wikipedia?

(Oneasia2011 (talk) 10:40, 1 June 2020 (UTC)) Oneasia2011 (talk) 10:40, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: George Kunihiro: (See here) Nick Moyes (talk) 10:54, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Oneasia2011: You've got it wrong. What you need to establish an article on the English Wikipedia is at least three independent reliable sources that provide in-depth coverage of the subject. This will show notability for the subject. Wikipedia (and any site with "Wiki" in the name) is not a reliable source because anyone can edit it.

The usual advice I give is to get at least three professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically and primarily about the subject but not affiliated with or connected to it and summarize those. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:51, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Oneasia2011. See my answer to #Question on AfC two sections above. --ColinFine (talk) 11:06, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Oneasia2011: In addition to what other editors have already said: The article Kunihiro George was deleted as a copyright violation. That means it can't be restored – more information about that here. You have a draft article in your sandbox (it looks like it has been restored a couple of times at your request), which you have not worked on since it was last rejected. Have a look at the comments from the editor who reviewed it then, and work on finding and adding secondary sources, and to remove promotional wording. If you have any connection to the person you are writing about, you will also read this information. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:10, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Infobox for universities

In Catalan Wikipedia most of the universities have already been changed to a wikidata infobox. Don't you think it would be easier to have it this way? This way if someone changes something in another language it would be shown directly instead of having to wait till someone changes it for all the languages? Afernandez.52 (talk) 11:05, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Your edits on the composers you've just put infoboxes on have been reverted. Cassianto^Talk 11:26, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

The use of Wikidata makes vandalism a hell of a lot easier, given how few watchers there are there. Given much of the information there is unsupported or uncited and the "data" it unthinkingly dumps into articles goes against many of the guidelines we have; it also includes the bloody stupid pencil icon at each line. - SchroCat (talk) 11:46, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Problem with Wikidata is that anyone can put whatever unsourced content they want on there, and if we're using Wikidata infoboxes, that unsourced content comes onto here too. Especially as most other language Wikipedias have lower sourcing requirements than English Wikipedia. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:54, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

My unusual centralized article

Hi, everyone. Sorry to bother you all again. I faced an unusual issue recently, which you can literally see my issue at my userpage. My "cntributions to wikipedia" page's words keeps being centralized. I tried to undo this issue, but i can't. (⊙_⊙)？:-) pLZ HELP ME TO RESOLVE MY PROBLEM... and get my article into the way that it shoud be. tHANKS, FELLOW Wikipedians.:) Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 08:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Hypersonic man 11. I haven't looked closely, but as far as I can see you have a

<table style="float: right; background: #FAFAFA; border: solid #003399 3px; padding: 0;" cellspacing="2"><tr><td valign="top">
<div style="background: #003399;text-align: center;

early on your page, and no corresponding </table> to close it. I have no idea what the effect is of mixing Markup tables and HTML tables, (I didn't know you could do it) but I presume that the property which I bolded above lasts to the end of the page. --ColinFine (talk) 09:09, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hypersonic man 11 Also, on the "Contributions to Wikipedia" section, you're using {{Div col}} without specifying a number of columns. So it's defaulting to one column centralised. If you remove the {{Div col}}, then the "Contributions to Wikipedia" section will switch back to left aligned. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:11, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for all your suggestions and comments. So, can you guys help me out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 11:43, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

 Done Your userpage has probably the worst layout I've ever seen, and hardly worth spending ages on. But I've fixed the problem you complained about. Revert if you don't like it. Consider that having a Table of Content half way down the page is, itself, rather daft as, indeed, is having three sets of userboxes. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:39, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Commandment transcriptions

Can anybody transcribe the Hebrew vesion of the Commandments? Also,I'm looking foward to actually writing the Hebrew. Regards. Dandro08 (talk) 12:31, 1 June 2020 (UTC) A kind thanks to all who were willing do transcribe the commandments.May God thy Lord be with you all. Dandro08 (talk) 12:42, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't really understand what you are asking, but you did get an answer to the same question (albeit with different spelling) here. Did that not suffice? Nick Moyes (talk) 12:44, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Dandro08: I should add that Wikipedia collates existing, published sources, rather than doing original research and translations. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

12:14:49, 1 June 2020 review of submission by VidhyadhariK

I want to know why the article submission was declined, can you please help me so that, I can improve my article and resubmit it again.

• VidhyadhariK (talk · contribs)
  • No draft specified!

 VidhyadhariK (talk) 12:14, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Chaithra Rai

Hi, VidhyadhariK, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft clearly has the explanation as to why the draft wasn’t accepted; it does not show how the subject is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article. For that, you will have to find some news reports writing about mainly this person. RedBulbBlueBlood9911|Talk 12:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

References that only describe the plot and characters of roles she has starred do not contribute to her notability as a person. David notMD (talk) 14:07, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

"We Got Next"

I'm requesting assisstance because I have edit several draft of a page and it keeps getting declined. It's a draft about a bachata group's album call "We Got Next" from Xtreme. This album was released in 2003 and there's barely information about it because the album didn't have notoriety at the time. The group never really mentioned a lot about the album because they were later on signed to a record label and then their 2005 album became know as their debut album. I've put in references and extra links to prove that the article is accurate, but it still gets rejected.

How can I make this article accepted to be officially on wikipedia?

This is the link to the draft: Xtreme - We Got Next (Album) DominicanWikiEdit1996 (talk) 08:10, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

A music article I'm requesting assisstance because I have edit several draft of a page and it keeps getting declined. It's a draft about a bachata group's album call "We Got Next" from Xtreme. This album was released in 2003 and there's barely information about it because the album didn't have notoriety at the time. The group never really mentioned a lot about the album because they were later on signed to a record label and then their 2005 album became know as their debut album. I've put in references and extra links to prove that the article is accurate, but it still gets rejected.

How can I make this article fit the qualifications that are accepted by the reviewers?

This is the link to the draft: Xtreme - We Got Next (Album) DominicanWikiEdit1996 (talk) 08:12, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

DominicanWikiEdit1996, welcome to the Teahouse! You say "there's barely information about it because the album didn't have notoriety at the time" which makes it pretty clear that you can't make an acceptable WP-article about this album, see WP:NALBUM. Not enough coverage = no WP-article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

DominicanWikiEdit1996 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If this album does not have significant coverage in independent reliable sources, it would not merit an article at this time. The sources you have offered are not independent reliable sources with significant coverage. No amount of editing can confer notability(what you call "notoriety") on an article subject, it depends on the sources. 331dot (talk) 08:20, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

This draft was declined five times (!) and then DominicanWikiEdit1996 moved it to main space anyway. Rather than redraftify, suggest someone start an AfD. David notMD (talk) 10:48, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@David notMD:  Done - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/We Got Next. GoingBatty (talk) 15:07, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Proper tagging

There is a tag to be used for promotional articles, but is there a tag to be used specifically for articles that seem to have been edited exclusively to give a negative opinion of the subject? RedBulbBlueBlood9911|Talk 12:09, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@RedBulbBlueBlood9911: You're probably thinking of {{POV}}. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:09, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

But doesn’t this template apply also to non-advert style articles which have any neutrality issues, @Tenryuu:? In the case of the article I wish to tag, it has not one, but four controversy sections, while the only possibly neutral section is the lead which also uses disparaging terms. I thought that there would be a template specifying that there is too much emphasis on negative things or something like that. RedBulbBlueBlood9911|Talk 14:28, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@RedBulbBlueBlood9911: I'm going through Category:Article message templates and the ones that seem most relevant are {{False version}}, {{POV}}, {{NPOV language}}, and {{Unbalanced}}. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:37, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu:, Template:Criticism section seems to be the most appropriate template, though it is technically meant to be used with single controversy sections. RedBulbBlueBlood9911|Talk 14:43, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@RedBulbBlueBlood9911: Checking Category:Neutrality templates. You could use {{controversial}}, which goes on the article's talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:08, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand about the notability policy. I would like to write an article about a person. What is criteria that i should check before writting the article about that person?

 Solai Alagappan (talk) 13:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Solai Alagappan: The general notability guidelines can be found here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Solai Alagappan: The notability criteria for people can be found at Wikipedia:Notability (people). I suggest you follow the guidance at Help:Your first article to create a draft, which will be reviewed before it becomes an article. GoingBatty (talk) 15:40, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

can you cite books as sources?

Hello! I am somewhat new to Wikipedia and was curious if you could use books as sources. I have seen books used as sources, but those books are available to read on the internet, and as the book I am looking at citing from doesn't even have a google books page I wanted to make sure whether I could still use it as a source. Can I do that? If you're curious the book is 'Whalebacks: Wrecked, Scrapped, Lost & Forgotten' By Neel Zoss. Bowtiesarecool06 (talk) 14:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bowtiesarecool06: welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, books can be used as sources, and whether they are indexed by Google Books or not is irrelevant. Printed books can be more or less reliable sources, but that is not judged by whether they are available online or not. There is even a specific template, {{Template:Cite book}} that you can use to insert such references. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 14:22, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

It does have a gbook page, but no preview: [1]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Help???

 BorisKhlivski (talk) 16:30, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Need something to contribute to en wp. Please. BorisKhlivski (talk) 16:31, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, BorisKhlivski, and welcome to the Teahouse. I might not be understanding your question correctly—are you asking about what exactly you can contribute, is there a particular topic or article? Could you be more specific with your question?

In any case, I would recommend reading Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia for a quick how-to guide, and then get started editing whatever interests you. Be bold! ComplexRational (talk) 16:37, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm mentally I'll could I get a tutor??? BorisKhlivski (talk) 16:43, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Please add categories

How to add categories to this article [[2]]? DonGuess (talk) 16:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Drafts don't go into article categories, see WP:DRAFTNOCAT. Your draft is almost empty. You need references to demonstrate that the subject satisfies Wikipedia's definition of notability. Please also read the advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Ancient history articles

When editing ancient history articles, are translations of ancient authors (Livy et al) free to insert, or do they come under some editing restriction? Thanks in advance. HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 10:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

HalfdanRagnarsson, to some extent. A WP-article should never be mostly based on sources like Livy directly, though something like "According to 1st century BCE historian Livy..." can have a place. Try to reference modern historians using Livy where possible, to get a sense of relevance. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:42, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: this will be about my reversion here.[3] Could you take a look at these and comment so that Halfdan has a 2nd opinion? Thanks. Doug Weller talk 14:02, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Obviously it would be WP-better with secondary sources, but it seems no worse than the rest of the "The battle" section. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:21, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Can we anyone have two Wiki accounts?

Can a user have two different user names (with the same email-id) on Wikipedia? If yes, are their any advantages? If no, will any disciplinary action be taken? Can one delete the new account? I have read the username policy, but it didn't help me with my issue. Brillianc1 (talk) 11:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Brillianc1: The part you needed to have read was WP:MULTIACCOUNT, which makes it clear it is allowed, but only for certain limited circumstances. If you have a valid reason to have two, you should declare the connection between both of the accounts, and only use the 2nd account for editing under those special circumstances. Failing to do that could have repercussions of it were clear an editor was somehow 'gaming the system' by editing from both accounts at once, whilst appearing to be two different users. Does that help? Nick Moyes (talk) 12:04, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

So can anyone delete my account for me? Actually unknowingly I made two accounts thinking that it may have some advantages. Brillianc1 (talk) 17:14, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Brillianc1: Accounts cannot be deleted. The best thing to do now is stop using the second account and add a note to your user page that you previously edited under the other account. RudolfRed (talk) 17:42, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Automatic DS alerts

Hi, I recently alerted two editors of discretionary sanctions relating to WP:ARBIPA and noticed that Twinkle doesn't seem to include this functionality.

Is there any other semi-automated method which I can use to post these alerts, or must I do so manually? M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 00:42, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

M Imtiaz, the answer is likely no, based on the length of time for which your question has remained unanswered and the fact that no such tool is mentioned at WP:ACDS or {{DS/alert}}. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:57, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

How to Create a Notability Criteria sub-category

I recently had a couple articles for professional field lacrosse players declined because they were not deemed notable enough. There is no specific criteria for field lacrosse, and therefore was being judged under a more broad set of guidelines. Where and how do I go about creating this criteria for field lacrosse athletes. Jschwam (talk) 17:50, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Jschwam: Welcome to Wikipedia. For this, I suggest starting a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(sports). Note that the FAQ says that even if the sport specific notabily is met, it still must also meet the general notabilty guideline. RudolfRed (talk) 18:10, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Chris Cassidy

Hello I am related to Chris Cassidy who is on a current expedition in Space right now. I noticed that his page on him doesn't have his family or children listed. He is married to Peggy Cassidy and they have five children between two of them both from previous marriages. Grace, Chloe, Colin, Mekhi and Martel. He would like to have is family on his page. 2603:300F:4C8:C000:607F:342E:8398:44CC (talk) 17:58, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor! The Wikipedia article on him is not really his page. It's an article that ideally should summarise encyclopedic information about his life and career, information that can be verified from other published secondary, independent, reliable sources. If there is a reliable source for the information, we could probably add his wife's name and how many children he has. But it's unlikely that it will mention the children's name; those names don't really add anything to understanding him and his work, but could pose a privacy risk for the minors (or non-public individuals, even adults). See WP:BLPNAME. The discussion about how to improve the article should take place at Talk:Christopher Cassidy; that's where the editors familiar with and interested in the subject are likely to see it and engage with you. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:31, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Whitewash

 Courtesy link: Luisa Neubauer

I read the media coverage, books etc. considering a lifing person and habe written great parts of an article but there are people deleting and whitewasking the article, what can i do? i really get tired as they dont try to be neutral but whitewash the article by metioning a dubious grandmother etc etc. I am trying to comply but the line is simply total whitewashing. DTilmann (talk) 17:54, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello DTilmann, is this about Luisa Neubauer? I see that someone left you a warning about that article. Did you trying discussing with that editor? Some editors are discussing at the talk page of that article, but you don't seem to have commented there. There are Dispute resolution procedures you can follow about content, you can post to the neutral point of view noticeboard to seek help against whitewashing, you can post at the administrator's noticeboard if you need help with poor editor behaviour/conduct. But all of those avenues, simply must be preceded by a good faith attempt to resolve the matter among the editors in dispute, on the relevant article and user talk pages. You need to start by joining the discussion; reply to the warning that was left on your user talk page; and join the discussion on the article's talk page. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:44, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Next discussion : #Hello, i need help.

Hello Dear Editors i have a question, how uploaded my award posters, design by my company,for our movie awards? Best regard Farid Hamedi Rohina (talk) 16:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Farid Hamedi Rohina: Provided that you get their copyright released to Wikipedia so that anyone can use and manipulate them, you could upload them via Commons. More information is at WP:UPIMAGE. However, an issue is that you appear to be writing about yourself in your user page like an article, which is strongly discouraged. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:24, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Update: User page has been deleted per speedy deletion criterion U5. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:45, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Proposals

Hello, I’m starting to reconsider proposing WikiProject Ontario Politics, but I’m not sure how I can get rid of the proposal. It would be great if someone could tell me how to do so. Thank you in advance. Ma nam is geoffrey (talk) (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ma nam is geoffrey! I have not edited those pages, so I am not speaking from absolute knowledge or experience, but Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals gives a way to close a proposal. Personally, I would simply strike out your proposal and append "I withdraw" and your signature at the end, cross out your username from the support list, and leave it for the experienced editors to handle the proper closing and archiving. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Ma nam is geoffrey (talk) (talk) 18:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft usurped in mainspace

Hi, have received this message today "The draft Draft:Dhoni Kabadi Kuzhu I have created on 21 July 2018‎ is still staying as a draft and you have marked it as a promising draft. But a new page about the same film Dhoni Kabadi Kuzhu that was created on 30 April 2020‎ is online now. Is this the right policy? " I replied that it is not a copy of his article as I did a check but it does seem bad form. Can you please advise me if there is anything that should be done about this? regards Atlantic306 (talk) 19:42, 1 June 2020 (UTC) Atlantic306 (talk) 19:42, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Atlantic306, if it were a copy, histmerge could be done; since it's not, I think the best can be done to credit the draft's author is to log a merge, by adding the merge template to article's talk page, and redirecting the draft to the article as a merger. Editors are supposed to search for drafts before creating an article, and it seems odd that any search wouldn't have found the draft since the title is the same, the page log of the article also has the draftification listed, but there is no policy/rule against creating articles this way. If there were, it would be so much easier handling UPE clones of draftified articles (not that this is one of those). Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 20:01, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks, will do, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 20:07, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

how do i change a page name?

Welcome, and do help yourself to a drink from this lovely Cretan tea pot.

Mytilineos "Holdings" doesnt exist. it has to be changed to Mytilineos "S.A". How do i change the page title? Stefan Zaglis (talk) 19:38, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Stefan Zaglis: welcome to the Teahouse. Pages are renamed by a page move (see Wikipedia:Moving a page), which leaves behind a redirect from the old name to the new one. It might be a good idea to update the history of the company before simply moving the page. The change does seems logical, yet I notice in the company website they still offer a corporate video (see here) which used the Mytilineos Holdings logo. So maybe you should first discuss the suggested move at Talk:Mytilineos Holdings. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Also name changes do not automatically warrant title changes; if the organisation is more commonly known by the old name than by new, it may be advisable to retain the old title for the time being, only mentioning that the company has a new name in the article itself. WP:NAMECHANGES should apply. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 20:09, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello I am so favorite

Good Thanks Sweet Thanks

 105.112.97.214 (talk) 20:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Did you have a question about editing Wikipedia? That is what the Teahouse is for. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:42, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Child Page

How do I add a child page to someones wikipedia Koolkidz999 (talk) 21:51, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, User:Koolkidz999. I'm not sure why you want to create a subpage when you haven't yet created your own user page. But, if you wanted to create a second sandbox page, you'd simply type /sandbox2 after the url address for your userpage, like this: User:Koolkidz999/sandbox2. Then you'd have to add content and click 'Create' to publish the page. Existing (Mainspace) encyclopaedia articles do not have child pages, and you ought not to be attempting to create subpages for other users. If you need further clarification, please explain exactly what it is that you want to do, and where. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:00, 1 June 2020 (UTC)  

Afterthought: Because notability is not inherited, the child of a person who has a Wikipedia article about them must themselves meet our Notability criteria. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:09, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Where to ask about my draft “Arzamas”

Hello, which talk page is the right one to ask for feedback about Draft:Arzamas (website) on? DonGuess (talk) 20:20, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

DonGuess, it would be impossible to give a definitive advice on the draft's notability without an ability to read Russian. So, I am thinking WT:RUSSIA is likely the best place to ask whether the draft is likely to be accepted (one or two regulars of the Teahouse also understand Russian; so you might get an answer here too when luck favours). General content advice is given here, or at the AFC Help Desk or even by individual experienced editors who can find the time. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 21:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Right here is not a bad place to ask. i can't evaluate the sources that are in Russian. But the two in English look pretty good. They include detailed independent coverage. If some of the non-English sources are of comparable quality, or one or two comparable English-language sources could be added, notability looks good, IMO. The article text needs to be fleshed out. There are lots of facts in the already cited sources to use, and there may be more in other sources. Please do continue with this.

One formatting tip. Don 't use |first= and |last= in cites when the name of the actual person who wrote the source is not known, these are only for a person's name. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:59, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! Hmm, I don’t think I used anything like “firs/last”, but I’ll check. Also a general question about sources: would it be right to presume that russian-language sources are partly accessible for those who don’t know the language since you can translate it with, for example, google translator? Regards.--DonGuess (talk) 22:11, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@DonGuess: Could you please expand the Awards section with some translations, so the English-only readers can understand? The "References" should come before the "External links" section per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout. If the draft is approved, then the link to English Wikipedia article and Russian Wikipedia article would be linked at this Wikidata item, so you wouldn't need the link in the "External links" section. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:04, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Back Market/2

In the answer to the Draft:Back Market/2 submission, I received advice to ask for help here. Can you give some tips or ideas?. Thanks in advance. BoldLuis (talk) 02:59, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, BoldLuis, and welcome to the Teahouse. I was expecting to write another variation on a comment I have often written before, on how some of the sources were interviews or otherwise not independent, and others were not in much depth. But on looking at several of the sources, I think perhaps Robert McClenon who does generally high-quality AfC reviews and quite a few of them, has made one of his rare mistakes. Looking and the Forbes, Fast Company, and The Inventory sources in particular, I( think there may be enough to write a valid Wikipedia article here. The WSJ item is behind a paywall, so I can't see enough of it to know if it is more than a passing mention, and the builtinnyc and EU-Startups items read as if they were based on the same Press Release, although they may have some independent reporting too. VentureBeat. is unfortunately known to recycle PR in some of its pieces, so I tend to discount it a bit. Robert McClenon is IMO correct that the tone of the piece needs to be made a bit more neutral. Also the article could be fleshed out a bit more from what is already in the cited sources. But I think this might merit a decline instead of a reject. One more source comparable to the first three and I would be inclined to accept, myself. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:44, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel: I am going to try to find another one. I rewrote the original draft (not written by me) deleting the text I thought was in excess. Thank you a lot!!.BoldLuis (talk) 03:57, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

User:DESiegel, User:BoldLuis - I will explain. I wasn't providing a thorough review, because I was annoyed. It is true that perhaps I was allowing my annoyance to influence my review more than I should have, but I think that my annoyance was entirely justified. The way that the two drafts on Back Market, Draft:Back Market and Draft:Back Market/2, were presented, asking the reviewer to use templates to indicate what portions of the draft were promotional, was asking the reviewer to rewrite the article so that the reviewer would be doing the work for the submitter. I don't know whether the templates were the idea of User:BoldLuis or of User:AlexMegon. I don't consider them to be an appropriate way to shift responsibility from the submitter to the reviewer. It was a game, a way of gaming the system, and I did not intend to play that game; I did not intend to be asked to do the work of writing the article. Reviewers are people too, and do not like to be played with. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:05, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

That is fair enough, Robert McClenon. I overlooked that aspect, simply checking the sources. While a reviewer may choose to give some examples of overly promotional text, asking for substitutes is to make the reviewer an author, which is not a reasonable request. I do think that there is enough here that Back Market is quite probably notable, but a drafter (BoldLuis here I suppose) must still write the draft.I would advise striking the request to use templates to highlight the promotional aspects. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 05:21, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I will add that this particular device, with the template, is new, but various ways of asking the reviewer to propose the language are a common gambit by declared paid editors. They argue that they need this assistance because they are not permitted to edit directly but only to submit for review, and that we are not being fair to them by not giving them this assistance. I will reply that the First Amendment imposes no obligation on us to be fair to them. On the contrary, the First Amendment grants the WMF and the community the right to make community rules about the use of our servers as a quasi-public resource. In this specific case, my opinion is that we should stub the draft on Back Market and accept it, stripped of the promotional material. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:41, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Syncing Muninnbot's Message With Reality: Archiving Not in "a few days" but within "48 hours."

Resolved

 – Time frame for questions before being archived has been relatively more specified on User:Muninnbot/Teahouse archival notification. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

As part of the Teahouse thread archive process, Muninnbot sends me messages under a heading Your thread has been archived. Messages state: "Hi BrettA343! You created a thread called < NAME OF THREAD > at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days". I'm referring to the messages that are being left on Teahouse User's talk pages and the message is a template located at User:Muninnbot/Teahouse archival notification. I suggest one of two approaches:

1. Change the archive process to be initiated after a few days, say 3 or 4 (and change the message to specify how many days).

2. Change Muninnbot's message to say "for 48 hours" or "for at least 48 hours" or "within 3 days" (or whatever).

There's a wrinkle here that those making the change will likely know about that I'm not clear on, and that's the precise wording that should exist. I've given three options for Point 2, and those more knowledgeable than I, will know what's best for wording. "A few days" is too ambiguous to really be useful in some situations - do they mean 3, 5, 7 or what? nbsp;BrettA343 (talk) 16:09, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Hellom BrettA343.

• First of all, this kind of suggestion about how the operation of the Teahouse might be improved should really be made on the talk page of the Teahouse (Wikipedia talk:Teahouse), Raqther than on the main question page, which is for questions about how to edit Wikipedia.
• Secondly, The message is not intended to be exact. Since Muninnbot only runs once per day, and the archive bot also runs only once per day, there can be considerable variation in how long after the last edit to a section it is archived, and how long after that a message is sent.
• Thirdly, the archive timing can be and sometimes is changed depending on the recent traffic levels here. The object is not to allow the page to get so large that it is awkward for users, especially new users, to use or too slow to load. We don't want to change the notice template every ti8me such an adjustment is made. Still the wording could perhaps be improved a bit.

In short, i don't favor trying to achieve the degree of precision you suggest. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:48, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

I did, however, make this change. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:55, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

No worries @DESiegel:, I was just doing what GoingBatty recommended with his suggestion for me re: "a proposal for different wording at User talk:Muninnbot/Teahouse archival notification or a new section here at the Teahouse that isn't buried inside this other discussion." (still at the top of the Teahouse). It seems there are no hard and fast rules where suggestions should be made (I had 3 suggestions for my last point, too), and I won't push this one. Cheers, BrettA343 (talk) 17:11, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@BrettA343: Apologies for pointing you in the wrong direction. I agree with DESiegel about using the talk page for suggestions about the Teahouse. GoingBatty (talk) 18:09, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: I just now caught the change you did make - that's perfect from my POV (I just didn't know what, exactly to write) - thanks! And no problem @GoingBatty:, apologies not necessary... Cheers! BrettA343 (talk) 02:44, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Question on AfC

Resolved

 – Standards on one language Wikipedia do not translate directly to another. English Wikipedia, in particular, has stricter standards. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:02, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

In my sandbox I have drafted an article on an EDM artist called CURBI. I am far from publishing the article ( it has no citations or detail yet) and I would say that the subject meets WP:N but I was wondering in general about notability.

The subject has an article on the German Wikipedia but is no more notable in Germany than anywhere else, which leads me to the question that:

In future, if an article has been created on another language Wikipedia, but is not of special notability in that/those country/countries, does that qualify as notable for creation on the English Wikipedia?

Sorry if this is confusing...

Thanks, Giraffer (talk) 08:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Giraffer, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer is, No, the existence of an article in another Wikipedia does not confer notability in any way: many other-language Wikipedias have less stringent requirements than en-wiki, and even en-wiki has thousands of articles which, if somebody created them today, would get declined or rejected. You need to treat every article as a new project, and establish notability. In my opinion, that is the first thing you should do, before you even create a draft, because if you cannot establish that the subject is notable, then any other work you do on it will be wasted. --ColinFine (talk) 09:02, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks

Giraffer (talk) 11:26, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Username policy:ISU vs PROMONAME

Resolved

 – Differences between "implied shared use" and "promotional names" explained. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:04, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Recently, I came upon the username policies. I saw wp:isu and wpwp:promoname. the examples that they have provided meets both criterion. Can someone please give me some examples of usernames that would meet only ISU or only PROMONAME? Thank you! The creeper2007^Talk! 21:11, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi The creeper2007 A username like BobAndJohn would be one that implies shared use (implies 2 people are using it), but isn't a company name, so not promotional. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:22, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much for helping me understand this! I would also like to know if I someone's username meet both criterion, what should I report them for?The creeper2007^Talk! 21:26, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, The creeper2007. For either or both of those issues, you can report the situation at Usernames for Admin Attention. However that is for violations you think are serious enough that a block without warning is needed. Otherwise, you can simply let the user know, often with {{Uw-username}}, which suggests that the user change his or her usernam,e to one more acceptable. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:39, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

The creeper2007, I assume you are asking for WP:UAA? Sharing issues are declined at UAA. They need to be discussed with the user, and if that fails, individual admins or the admin noticeboard should be alerted. Promotional usernames can be reported if they have made edits within the past two weeks, and their edits are also clearly promoting the same thing that the username promotes. It's best to take it up with the user when in doubt, or when the user is clearly here for the right reasons but only happened to choose a wrong username. Reporting to UAA is for serious violations, especially from users who are WP:NOTHERE to build the encyclopedia. Does this help? I find WP:IU clearer than WP:U when it comes to handling problematic usernames in practice. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 21:46, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you everyone for your help! :) The creeper2007^Talk! 22:00, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Category approval time

Resolved

 – Observed resolution time for category creation is on average a week. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:07, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

How long does it take on average of a category to be created after being suggested? (Oinkers42) (talk) 21:38, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, (Oinkers42). To find out this kind of answer for yourself, you simply need to go back and look at recent archive for the relevant request page, such as Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories/2020-04. Then do a Ctrl-F search for 'Category request' and open a few up and compare the request date to the date it was either accepted or rejected. From my quick sample, I reckon a week is about average, but it can be just a day or so. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank You.(Oinkers42) (talk) 00:59, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Logging in problem

Hi, I am trying to log in to my account but I forgot my password. I entered my email and username correctly, but it didn't send me anything. I tried this yesterday and today and nothing was sent even though I am sure that both my email and username were entered correctly. What should I do about this? 5.30.178.218 (talk) 08:18, 1 June 2020 (UTC) 5.30.178.218 (talk) 08:18, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Are you certain that you associated the email address with your account? 331dot (talk) 08:20, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, I don't know but I know that I put my username and email in the appropriate boxes and I had done this before on the same email so I do not know why it is not working. 5.30.178.218 (talk) 09:39, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

If you are saying that you have successfully reset your password with the same email before, then the only other thing I can think of based on what you have said is that there is a technical problem with the system. 331dot (talk) 09:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry if this is stating the obvious, but have you checked your email spam folder (if any)? -- Mike Marchmont (talk) 09:59, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I have checked my spam folder; it did not get sent there. 5.30.178.218 (talk) 05:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Repeated deletion of NPOV tag by another user without achieving consensus

In Treaty of Trianon i put NPOV Lead tag with detailed description on Talk:Treaty_of_Trianon#Fist sentence. Somebody is repeatedly removing this tag after each his reply without achieving consensus. What to do? Mark5245 (talk) 05:15, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Mark5245: Welcome to the Teahouse. It appears the two of you are still discussing it on the talk page. If you feel like you need external input, you may wish to ask for a third opinion; barring that, you should take the dispute to the dispute resolution noticeboard if it still cannot be resolved. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft For Review

How do I submit my draft for review, and how long will the process take? Thank you for your time. Le Panini (talk) 06:15, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Le Panini: You can submit your draft by adding {{subst:submit}} to the top of your draft. There is a review backlog, and times are estimated to be a couple weeks. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Jill Tracy NPOV

Jill Tracy seems to have many "superlatives" and I think it needs a maintenance hatnote, but I don't know how to do that. T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 05:59, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@T3g5JZ50GLq: I added tone and POV tags with WP:TWINKLE. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:24, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Editing my own information

Hi Jessica

In response to your "email"...I wanted to let you know that the subject of these edits is myself...I am in fact correcting wholly or partially inaccurate information about myself. As I have never done this before, there is a strong chance I have entered info improperly(!) but please know that the edits are precise. I am happy to give you my email address for further questions at any time. Please lmk. Thank you, Best, David Muirfield1966 (talk) 07:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Muirfield1966: What Jessicapierce did was to post a message to your talk page at User talk:Muirfield1966. We generally don't use email here unless there are limited specific reasons (like privacy or security). Discussions are conducted on talk pages, either users' (as I mentioned above) or those of an article if that is the subject (e.g., Talk:David Hunt (actor) is the talk page for discussions about improving the article David Hunt (actor)). Such discussions are public, and available for all members of the community to review and contribute to.

Please see WP:AUTO regarding writing/editing about yourself – this is something that is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia because people have an obvious WP:COI in this regard. If there are changes that need to be made to the article, you should suggest them on the article's talk page, and provide reliable source(s) for the information (a requirement for most anything on Wikipedia) so an impartial editor can verify the information and make the changes. There may be a more specific policy with regard to correcting erroneous info in a WP:BLP like yours' – I'll do a quick search for that and add to this comment if I find it. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:43, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

• Update: The more specific section regarding problems with a page about yourself is just further down the page I already cited, at WP:AUTOPROB. Basically, if you edited the article directly and your changes were reverted, you then follow the "D" (discuss) part of the WP:BRD cycle, and discuss it with the other users on the talk page of the article (Talk:David Hunt (actor)). It's best to ping the user that reverted you by starting your talk page message with, in the most recent case, {{Re|Bonadea}} (this renders as @Bonadea:). I hope this helps. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:58, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Not guilty as charged ;-) I didn't revert Muirfield1966, but I did edit the article just now to remove an unsourced birthdate and a couple of references that were not about the subject. I see that Muirfield1966 has now posted to Jessicapierce's talk page as well. --bonadea contributions talk 08:06, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

removal of profile

removal

I want to disassociate my name from Wikipedia due to Wikipedia being compromised and overrun by people who advocate and mirror subjects and issues that are propaganda and panic spreading. I have removed my email address and want to remove my name and profile completely. Saparonia (talk) 08:35, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Saparonia I'm sorry that you feel that way. Most people here are good editors who just want to improve Wikipedia. Accounts cannot be deleted for both technical and legal reasons, but you can just abandon your account. Courtesy vanishing may also be an option available to you. 331dot (talk) 08:42, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

[empty post] Saparonia (talk) 09:15, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Pointless edist ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Vulkan_(API)&action=history I'm pretty shure that recent changes by Artem S. Tashkinov where pointless can someone more knowledgable confirm ? Spiralfeel (talk) 11:35, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Artem has been editing Vulkan (API) since October 2018. The best place to discuss edits is on the Talk page of the article. You can also ask Artem direcctly. David notMD (talk) 11:49, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

deleting a page - hi, I need support to delete a page that relates to a brand that is inaccurate and should be removed. how do I go about to do this?

 Jacobxpx (talk) 11:29, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

delete a page - how do I delete a page that is inaccurate and should not be on wikipedia

 Jacobxpx (talk) 11:30, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

delete a page: how do I delete this page

 Jacobxpx (talk) 11:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Which page? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 11:46, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Article in question is Triibe. Jacobxpx wants it gone because it no longer exists. And to J - you cannot delete it, but you can nominate it for deletion. David notMD (talk) 13:11, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Posting on the LGBT noticeboard

These is a discussion Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Caitlyn Jenner as asexual posted on the BLP noticeboard, and I think it should be of interest to the LGBT noticeboard, is it proper to notify the LGBT noticeboard that there is a discussion taking place over on the BLP noticeboard? Thanks. Åüñîçńøł (talk) 12:21, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Åüñîçńøł: Per WP:CANVASS, limited, open and neutral notifications on another noticeboard are generally okay (e.g. "This discussion might be also within the scope of this noticeboard" but not "come to this discussion to support this or that"). Regards SoWhy 13:20, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Replacing a photo.

I agree with this note in Talk:Learning to read. The photo is not appropriate.

Conflict with intent of article?[edit]. I think adding this topmost picture is at cross-purposes with the article. Even the caption "Teacher with pupils in a school of the resistance movement PAIGC in the liberated areas of Guinea-Bissau, 1974" does not mention 'reading'. It's a propaganda picture from 45 years ago, and does not put the subject here first. There must be a better picture. Gee, the picture at section Learning_to_read#Novice_reader actually is about reading! Shenme (talk) 06:00, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I would like to replace the photo with one from Wiki Common, that has no politics involved: https://commons.wikimedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=20&offset=20&profile=default&search=reading&advancedSearch-current=%7B%7D&ns0=1&ns6=1&ns12=1&ns14=1&ns100=1&ns106=1#/media/File:Az_girl_reading_a_book._e-citizen.jpg

Can I do this myself if I post my intent on the talk page? Thanks. John (talk) 14:42, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, John, and welcome to the Teahouse. Certainly, you can be bold and do it yourself. There is rarely any requirement to discuss changes on the talk page: if you think a change you want to make might be controversial, then it speeds things up to discuss it on the talk page first (rather than the full "Bold, Revert, Discuss" cycle); but if you don't think it is likely to be controversial, just do it. --ColinFine ([[User

talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 15:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. I do prefer the bold and respectful approach, so I will do it. John (talk) 15:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, i need help.

Previous discussion : #Hello

Blocked

 – User page and draft deleted and user indefinitely blocked for promotional content. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:18, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

My page was created without any problems. 2 days were not deleted. But because of my mistake in adding Twitter, the whole page was deleted by the admin.

First of all, this is not fairو Secondly, I want my page information,The official who deleted my page , does not accept her work and says that she did not delete it Is there anyone here to help me? Farid Hamedi Rohina (talk) 05:55, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Farid Hamedi Rohina, an "article" consisting of the URL of your self-created IMDb page is not an article on Wikipedia. This online encyclopedia project is not a place for self-promotion.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:06, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Farid Hamedi Rohina: Ponyo already told you on your talk page that Wikipedia is not a platform for you to promote yourself. You may ask her for a WP:REFUND, but given the content that was deleted it is unlikely to happen. If you are looking for a place to promote yourself, we have a list of alternative websites that may suit your purposes better over at WP:OUT. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:10, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

i have 2 not ... I'm paralyzed Can anyone fix my page problem? Farid Hamedi Rohina (talk) 09:16, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Please make follow up comments within this section. Please heed the comments above. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Your article about yourself has been moved to Draft:Farid Hamedi Rohina and nominated for Speedy deletion. Reasons given at the draft. You can contest the SD, but as what you wrote is your own wording with no references, very unlikely that the proposed SD will be stopped. You can copy the information to your computer if you act quickly. David notMD (talk) 10:06, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

User removed speedy deletion tag but this was reinstated. The draft has now been deleted, and the user has been indeffed for self-promotion. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:22, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Markus Baer submission

I believe when I submitted the article on Professor Markus Baer for consideration, that I accidentally submitted it twice. I wasn't sure if I had created it in the proper place, thus two submissions. Are there any steps I must take to remedy this? Thank you. Cecelia Myers (talk) 15:50, 2 June 2020 (UTC)Cecelia Myers

@Cecelia Myers: The version at Draft:Markus Baer is awaiting review, and the version in your sandbox has been declined as a duplicate submission, so everything seems to be OK. You can blank your sandbox if you want to use it for something else. If you want to edit the submission further, do it at Draft:Markus Baer. Deor (talk) 16:00, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Newbie wanting to make an edit

Hi, I wanted to make an edit on a wiki page that referred to Bicester as being in Buckinghamshire when it is actually Oxfordshire. Said I needed to put in my citation. I haven't edited before. What exactly do I need to do? 2604:3D09:137B:A00:D1A5:9DA4:C6FA:1DB6 (talk) 16:14, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, you're going to want to consult WP:EASYREFBEGIN. It will teach you how to add citations. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:28, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, SarahMilli: (I'm assuming this is you not logged in). Im sorry that Materialscientist has four times reverted your correction to this piece of vandalism. Bicester is indeed in Oxfordshire and always has been, as many of the references in the article will show. The first one is unfortunately cited to a general reference without a link, so Materialscientist presumably didn't check that, and thought that you were making a change without a citation. In fact, both of you should have gone to the Talk page to discuss it, rather than edit warring; but you are new, and Materialscientist certainly isn't.

I shall go and fix the vandalism now. --ColinFine (talk) 16:38, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Too late: David Biddulph had already done so. --ColinFine (talk) 16:40, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

And pinging SARAHMilli again, with the case of her username corrected. --ColinFine (talk) 16:43, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

A CULT is using Wikipedia to control the narrative on their group and PROMOTE UTTER FALSEHOODS! This is completely UNACCEPTABLE!

Resolved

 – User in question has been blocked indefinitely.

David notMD (talk) 16:45, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

They're called "Falun Gong." The article says it's got "multiple issues," but in its current state it would be better if it it didn't exist. The cult is micromanaging the page, undoing negative edits. Even worse, EVERY SINGLE CITATION is biased toward their movement.

All I'm asking is for someone to get this page to look like Encyclopædia Britannica's, which actually gives an unbiased overview of this group. Additionally, if it's possible, the people responsible for this need to be banned, though I doubt that's going to stop them. For this propaganda to be the first result when searching "Falun Gong" boggles my mind.

Here are the links to the Wikipedia page and much better Encyclopædia Britannica page:

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

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Falun-Gong FukangShat (talk) 13:58, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, FukangShat. If you want, you can join the discussions at Talk:Falun Gong, or start new ones. Try to avoid WRITING IN ALL CAPS but try to be specific. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:41, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

How to be a part of Wikipedia?

 Abu hayat (talk) 16:43, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Abu Hayat Mahmud: welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. If you mean, how can you become an editor, and help us to improve this wonderful resource, then please look at Help:Tutorial.

If you mean, how can there be an article about you, that is more difficult. You are strongly advised not to attempt to write about yourself in Wikipedia: if you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability then eventually somebody will write about you; if you don't then no article about you will ever be accepted, so please don't waste any effort trying. --ColinFine (talk) 16:47, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

How i put my profile and picture and my working video?

FYI

 – Merged with above section. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:52, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

 Abu hayat (talk) 16:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, Abu Hayat Mahmud. As I said above, writing about yourself on Wikipedia is a very bad idea. You may put a limited amount of information about yourself on your user page, but that is primarily for talking about yourself as a Wikipedia editor. Any attempt to use it for advertising or telling the world about yourself will not only fail, because User pages are never indexed by search engines, but will also get deleted, and possibly get your account blocked.

There are no profiles on Wikipedia: not one. It is an encyclopaedia (which contains neutral articles about notable subjects based on independent reliably published sources) not a social media site, and promotion of any kind is forbidden.

As I said, if you wish to join the community of editors and help us improve this wonderful resource, you are very welcome. If all you are here for is to tell the world about yourself, then please find another place to do it. --ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

iPhone 11 Environmental Data

Moved from WT:Teahouse

—Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:12, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, here I am again :) Sooo, I started adding environmental data to iPhones (I signaled all COIs, don‘t create backlinks to our website, et cetera, et cetera. Now I have somebody vandalizing my content (anymous IP user) because he has the oppinion that environmental data such as repairibility (in context of the device) and carbon footprint of a device is not supposed to go into an article. I added following content to the article of the iPhone 11 Pro, please guide me if that‘s a) a COI case b) data that should not be written in the article

For me it‘s appropriate device related data. Excerpt of my edit

Draft content

Environmental Data Carbon Footprint Carbon Footprint of an iPhone 11 Pro in KG CO2 The iPhone 11 Pro continues the trend of increasing carbon footprints of Apple‘s flagship devices: with 80KG CO2e the emissions 10KG more than the preceeding iPhone XS and 25KG more than the iPhone 3G in 2008. 83% of the emissions are caused by the production of the device and primary resources while remaining emissions are caused by transportation and first use. It‘s important to note that with every device Apple increased also the prices of spareparts effective rendering a replacement for example of the display very expensive. Repairability With the iPhone 11 Pro and Pro Max continues the strategy of discoureging customers to seek 3rd party repairs while rendering repairs with Apple more costly: repair with non authentic parts such as batteries or displays can trigger warning messages on the phone instigating the customer to visit a certified technician to replace the respective parts with genuine ones. While the website clearly states that the phone will function properly despite the warning, this information is not passed in the context of the warning. Even if batteries are properly functioning and at full capacity the customers are prompted by a message on the phone to replace the battery. At the same time battery replacement with original spareparts saw a hike in pricing: after initially discounting battery replacements following the Battery Gate Scandal, with the release of the iPhone 11 Pro battery replacement prices for all OLED iPhone models hiked to 69.00US$. Support with Updates Apple has a long history of providing software updates for on average 6 years per device, it‘s assumed that also the iPhone 11 Pro will receive support on that terms. References

thanks Fthobe (talk) 15:06, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Fthobe. Please do not refer to somebody's edits as "vandalism" because they disagree with you. Vandalism is editing with the purpose of damaging Wikipedia. (Also, don't post screeds of material for an article here: it serves no purpose, and may annoy other editors). Disagreement is a necessary part of how we achieve consensus in creating Wikipedia: please see BRD for how to proceed. --ColinFine (talk) 15:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey ColinFine, this user has repeatedly (not only mine) reverted any critics against Apple products, no matter if radiation related, emission related or right to repair related. The first two times he reverted my changes I took it as matter of varying oppinions. After I checked the history of the article I noted that he had previously tried to revert other edits and was always overuled. He seems to be positively biased against Apple products. Fthobe (talk) 17:00, 2 June 2020 (UTC)�

Fthobe. I get that you are frustrated. Wikipedia works by consensus, and the approved procedure is at dispute resolution - which does not include posting your arguments at the Teahouse. If you think that another editor's behaviour is unacceptable, then ANI is the place to report it (but read the top-matter of that page carefully). --ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

What to do about user canvassing on an external site?

Resolved

 – External action that might negatively impact Wikipedia activity best discussed over emails with administrators to avoid WP:OUTING. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

I recently discovered that an editor party to an ongoing dispute on Talk:Space Launch System#SLS Launch Cost had apparently linked to the dispute on an online forum. I'm fairly certain this behavior is in contravention of Wikipedia:Canvassing, but I'm uncertain what my next action should be. What should I do about this? – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 06:58, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

That editor’s actions would be canvassing if some people from the forum did register and voice their opinions. I have seen the discussion and the editor has not explicitly asked people to side with him. However, he/she has asked for help (presumably regarding the disputed information), so I think the best course of action would be to wait and see if any newbies come by and enter the discussion. RedBulbBlueBlood9911|Talk 07:58, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@RedBulbBlueBlood9911: Appreciate the advice! – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 04:15, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Jadebenn: Be very careful trying to connect Wikipedia editors to things you think they're doing outside of Wikipedia, even if your intentions are only the best and you think they might be doing something inappropriate that might impact Wikipedia in some way. WP:OUTING, even when done unintentionally and indirectly, is something you should try to avoid at all times. If you have serious concerns that an editor's activities outside of Wikipedia might somehow negatively affect some ongoing Wikipedia discussion, etc., then your best option is to find an WP:ADMINISTRATOR and ask them if it's OK for you to discuss your concerns with them via email. There are a number of administrators who are Teahouse hosts so perhaps one of them will be willing to help you if you ask for it here, but you can almost certainly find one at WP:AN. Even if the other person is using an alias for their outside Wikipedia activities, there might be something that they've posted on some other occasion that makes it possible figure out who they are out in the real world. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:40, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Got it. I'll keep that in mind in the future. – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 04:47, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

what next after I publish a draft for review?

I have just added a page for review. I plan to keep adding information to the community section. How do I access the page and add information while it is up for review? The article name or draft article name is the William Grant Still Arts Center. Ande Richards (talk) 08:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Ande Richards Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have not yet submitted your draft for review; you need to click the "Submit your draft for review!" button in the notice at the top of your draft. You can continue to edit it just as you have before you submit it, and even afterwards. 331dot (talk) 09:00, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Ande Richards. Draft:William Grant Still Arts Center will eventually be reviewed by an AfC reviewer once you submit it for review; so, please be a bit patient because it can sometimes take awhile for that to happen. You can continue working the draft while you're waiting for it to be reviewed. I suggest you take a look at the following pages because they should help understand the kinds of things that Wikipedia expects from articles like he one you seem to be trying create: Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features)#Buildings and objects, Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause. You might want to also take a look at Help:Your first article, Help:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia:Manual of Style for some general information on how to properly format, etc. an article since there's lots of things in the draft that can be approved that will help make it more readable in Wikipedia way.

Please try and understand that it's really quite hard to write a proper Wikipedia article, especially for new editors not very familiar with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines and the concept of Wikipedia:Notability. Lots of first-time submissions get declined because the reviewer doesn't believe the draft is up-to-Wikipedia's standards. If that happens to your draft, try not to get discouraged because you can always re-submit it for review again. If the reviewer does decline the draft, they should leave a comment explaining why. The important things is going to be to find the type of significant coverage in reliable sources that clearly establish the subject's Wikipedia notability, since that's the main reason why drafts tend to be declined. It makes no difference how well written the draft is or how properly formatted it is if the subject is not one considered to be Wikipedia notable. It's very natural to think that more is going to be better and many people try to add more citations and more content on the belief that it will help get the draft accepted. Sometimes that approach can work, but it's the quality of the content and the citations cited that matter and actually in many cases removing extraneous content and focusing on what the significant coverage in reliable sources is saying often improves the chances of a draft being accepted.

Finally, if by chance you have some connection to the subject matter that goes beyond something casual, please carefully take a look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Depending upon the nature of any connection you may have to the subject, it might not be ideal for you to be the one to try and create an article about the center. You might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Ownership of content if you're assuming that creating an article will give you some sort of control over it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:21, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

The most serious flaw in Draft:William Grant Still Arts Center is that it cites no sources. It lists plenty, but there is no way of telling which source supports which statement made in the draft. If it reaches review, it will be declined for that reason. Ande Richards should read Help:Referencing for beginners.   Maproom (talk) 09:43, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ande Richards: I suggest you also read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. If you have any relationship with the Center (especially if, but not only if, you're being paid to create a draft), you must disclose your conflict on your Wikipedia user page. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 18:57, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Too inexperienced to title

I just created a user name and I know almost nothing about how to get started but before I begin learning I would like to know how to use Wikipedia on my iPhone. Do I access it through safari or chrome or download an app? Formerly I searched on safari for Wikipedia, saved it to “reading list” and that is how I access it now. I look at it everyday to see the day’s featured topic, the top three events in the news and who has died. That’s all I need right now to satisfy my curiosity. I always find some link in those three sections to click on and follow. And then I follow a link from that link and on and on I go. However, on my iPhone, the format of Wikipedia occasionally changes much to my dismay. I once set the format to display only the three sections I listed above but when the format unexpectedly changes I get such sections as “trending”, “did you know” etc. I do not have any interest in those social media type topics and am annoyed at having to scroll way down to get to what I’m interested in. I can’t seem to find how to reset the format back to displaying just the three sections I want. And the reason this question is so long winded is because I am trying to explain myself clearly since I cannot find the info I need by searching Wikipedia due to the problem of Wikipedia thinking I am asking how to edit pages. Thanks to anyone who takes the time to read this. Pointyface (talk) 16:55, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, experienced editor Cullen328 has some great advice here User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing, hope that helps. Theroadislong (talk) 17:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Pointyface The answers we give you probably depend on whether you plan just to read (consume) Wikipedia content, or actively add to it (edit). Because you've taken the trouble to register and to come here with your very sensible question, I assume you want to know how to edit and help improve this encyclopaedia. I do a huge amount of editing from my tiny iPhone5S. I use no app of any kind - just the iOS Safari browser. For simply looking at content, I'm OK using it in the proper 'mobile view'. But whenever I want to edit (which is 99.99% of the time) I switch to 'desktop view' via the tiny link found at the very bottom of every page. I find I can see a lot more of the page, and interact with it better that way, despite my small screen size. I make smaller edits on my phone; anything over half a dozen sentences in one go, and I prefer something with a proper keyboard. But if it was the only device I had access to, I'd be quite OK creating an article from scratch on it (but would want to save my edits pretty regularly!)

You definitely don't need to install an special Wikipedia app for editing. I just use the iPhone default Safari browser, though on my Windows PC (like right now) I normally use Chrome.

Again, you don't need any special app for just reading Wikipedia either, though I believe there are some out there. See List of Wikipedia mobile applications for more details on that.

If you treat Wikipedia like learning to drive, you won't rush in at high speed and try to do things you don't understand. We have lots of 'rules of the road' here, so the best way is to start by looking at articles about topics that interest you, and consider fixing small things like grammar or spelling before moving on to adding extra content and supporting factual statements with citations (references). (We don't accept contents which someone is likely to dispute unless there is a good link to a 'reliable source' to go with it. A very good way to learn the basic is by taking our interactive tour called The Wikipedia Adventure, though I have to warn that that does not always run well on mobiles. So Help:Introduction to Wikipedia is a normal non-interactive page to set you off on your own editing adventure. I hope some of this helps. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Can't find information

FYI

 – Heading added by Tenryuu. 18:39, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Eskiarab

Hello.What I do If I cannot find any information about my article on the internet. How can I improve my article's references section? BioCaliforniauz (talk) 18:06, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello BioCaliforniauz! If you have access to for example books about the place that are not online, you can use those. However, per WP:GEOLAND, the refs you have may be considered sufficient for the article to be accepted. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

A Football Player Profile

Please , how do i create a footballer profile on wikipedia without it being flag Gentlebukan (talk) 18:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Gentlebukan and welcome to the Teahouse.

Creating new articles from a blank start is one of the harder tasks on Wikipedia, perhaps the hardest an inexperienced user is likely to face. In future I urge you to use the Article Wizard to create a draft under the Articles for Creation project. There, an experienced editor will review your draft once you think it is ready. Only when a reviewer approves will the draft be moved to the main article space. This avoids the situation where a deletion is requested soon after the initial version of an article is posted. Note that Wikipedia does not have "profiles" it has neutral articles about notable topics.

Also, please read Wikipedia's Golden Rule and Your First Article, if you have not already done so. The advice there can be very helpful, in my view.

Here are some steps which often lead to success in creating an article:

• First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our specific guideline on the notability of athletes. 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} 19:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

How To Public an Article Succesfully, But About Kowledge Discovered to Recently

 186.143.165.211 (talk) 22:13, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Unregistered editor. Welcome to the Teahouse. Remember, Wikipedia is not the place to publish new things. Wikipedia mreports what reliable sources have already written about something, provided there are enough such sources to make the topiuc notable It is rare that any recent discovery will have enough coverage to qualify, so the answer is "mostly you don't". Please wait until there is significant coverage of this new knowledge in multiple reliable sources that are totally nindependent of the discoverer(s) of this new knowledge, please. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:19, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Election pages

Resolved

 – (1) Short descriptions follow title case. (2) Election articles must have notable verifiable content regardless of similar election articles. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:41, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

I have been doing some editing recently at the Washington House of Representatives elections pages (mostly short descs and infoboxes), but have noticed some inconsistencies. Firstly, other states such as California have pages for elections going back decades (California has dedicated pages from 1864 onward) but other states don't. Notably Washington, which doesn't have any pages for House elections before 2002.

Is creating a page in order to keep consistency like this justifiable? (Subjectively) It may not meet WP:N but when it comes to elections are the criteria different?

Also on an unrelated note: should short descriptions start with a capital letter? I find a real mix of both uppercase and lowercase letters at the beginning of descriptions.

Thanks, Giraffer (talk) 10:06, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Giraffer, it appears it's been a while since you asked, so I hope you don't mind me trying my hand at some imperfect guidance as an alternative to complete silence. Here goes:

To start with the easy one, WP:SHORTDESC says to use sentence case, starting with the capital letter. Now for the hard part:

Of course, the official party line is and always will be WP:N, but the kind of articles you are suggesting are easy to presume notability about, so I don't think they will be asked to meet WP:N at the start, but WP:V will be essential. In other words, it may be acceptable without all the details that some of the modern, especially American elections have, but at least they would need to have well-verified essentials, like who ran and who won. Otherwise, an article for consistency's sake alone would only waste readers' time without providing enough information to show for it. I recommend bringing this up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums which is the place to meet people interested in, and knowledgeable about the notability of election articles, and luckily it seems to be active as well (it has one message from just three days ago). You might be interested in the To do list they maintain as well. I have a hunch election series are incomplete all around the world. Hope this helps! Good luck, and best regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks, I will check those out! Giraffer (talk) 19:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool and Giraffer: I'll note (for other readers) that the elections are not "not covered", but instead are sections in articles like 2000 United States House of Representatives elections#Washington, containing the "essentials". Whether there is enough other information available (and notable) to support a separate article is probably the question. The existence of individual articles in other cases does not mean they should exist (i.e. WP:OSE). This may have been discussed somewhere like the WikiProject. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:45, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Article About Notable Company Was Rejected

Hi! Two months ago, I submitted an article about a company called ShipMonk. ShipMonk is an American 3PL that has been covered outside of Wikipedia by outlets such as Forbes and Inc. It ended up being denied by the person who edited it and I haven't been able to get a response from him when I asked why.

Here is the draft: Draft:ShipMonk (I hope I linked that correctly)

What is confusing me is that another company who specializes in the same thing and is the same size as ShipMonk, ShipBob, has an article on Wikipedia that is not at all dissimilar to the one I posted. I understand that articles on Wikipedia have to be relevant, and I also understand that this is not the place to advertise. However, I stayed away from using shiny adjectives or buzz words. I'm also struggling to understand the threshold for notability, as, like I said, another article exists about a company that is very similar.

Of course, since this is my first time submitting an article, there may have been things that I missed, which is why I would really appreciate your help! Thanks in advance. Beatanese (talk) 16:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Beatanese, your draft really does read like an advertisement; and it's off-putting to even consider the question of notability while the content is deserving of speedy deletion. There is a lot of crap on Wikipedia thats gets through the cracks of quality control, all of which is done by a volunteer community. All you are making a case for, by citing ShipBob is to delete that article, not add yours. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:42, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

ShipBob now up for Speedy deletion. David notMD (talk) 20:14, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Beatanese: You might be interested in reading the essay Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. GoingBatty (talk) 21:22, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Beatanese: and this as well Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Questionable and self-published sources. I only saw a few sources (Sun-Sentinel, Herald) with passable coverage. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

hi

Just saying hi Callumsmth (talk) 20:24, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Callumsmth, Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia, and the Teahouse! Hope you'll stay a while, and learn to love it like the rest of us. Congratulations on your first article; history will forever note your username as the one that created that particular article on Wikipedia. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 20:38, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, hi there, Callumsmth. Great to have you here. Creating a new article on only your second edit is a really good achievement. Superb stuff! As you've used your own photos, I'm guessing you're a keen walker, or maybe even a peak-bagger or climber? If you plan to stick around, you might be interested in adding your name (or at least keep an eye on) one of our themed editing groups. It's Wikipedia:WikiProject British and Irish hills. It isn't hugely active, but I see your new article on Goldenberry Hill is currently number one in the 'Hot Articles' list for having the most edits made to it over the last few days.

One thing that I do feel needs doing to your article is removing the image link, which states: "You can see more photographs in more detail here". This isn't really the right kind of 'voice' in which we write encyclopaedia pages, as we never speak directly to the reader, nor should we link to DropBox directories, either. Links to more recognised sites can either be used as references, or be added to an 'External links' section. If they're images that you took yourself, you are best off moving the good ones to Wikimedia Commons. The other thing to point out on the WikiProject page is the Article Assessment' chart. This lists the number of articles against their respective quality. With over 550 'short 'Stub' articles, there's plenty of opportunity to improve existing pages, too, should you find yourself short of ideas to work on! All the best, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:23, 3 June 2020 (UTC)  

Article under development tag

Question: Greetings, I wanted to ask if it is possible to place some sort of a tag at the top of an article stating that the article is undergoing significant updates ? JoyceGW1 (talk) 07:34, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@JoyceGW1: That would be {{In use}} if it's going to be a short time (an hour or several), and you should remember to remove it when done. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@JoyceGW1: If you're planning on coming back to it, you can also use {{Under construction}}. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:20, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks ! , JoyceGW1 (talk) 02:46, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

An offensive (and potentially disruptive) editor

Resolved

 – User in question has been blocked temporarily. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

I came across this edit summary here: "...Learn sources correct, f*****g s***hole." - June 1

A view of the editor's talk page revealed multiple warnings by other editors. The editor also wrote this on the talk page: "Just a truth you tell you, this account is meant for a joke..." - March 31

The editor's contributions were, well, obscene:

• "f*** off you absolute t**" - May 29
• "f*** you" - May 26
• "The Sweden certification is f*****g gay" - April 21
• "Your gonna get the b**** of applesauce alright" - April 15
• "f*** you you virgin" - March 28

Should I be concerned? Redthreadhx (talk) 10:24, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

It took a little while to find the edits you were talking about, since they are found in the histories of various articles. If you want to report inappropriate behaviour by an editor, the Teahouse is not the best place for it – and it is not all that useful to present censored versions of the offensive summaries with no indication of where they can be found. If you don't want to put offensive language on a talk page yourself (which is understandable) you could add a link to the edit, like this. Anyway, yes, those edit summaries (in their uncensored form) are problematic, most of them, not because they contain swearing but because they attack other editors. ("The Sweden certification is fucking gay" doesn't attack any editor and so it can just be ignored, like it deserves.) If you are reluctant to approach the editor on their talk page, which is understandable with a person who has a history of attacking others, you can ask an administrator for assistance – though I'm sure several administrators will read your post here. --bonadea contributions talk 10:52, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Followup:I posted a strong warning about personal attacks to the user's talk page. We'll see what happens. --bonadea contributions talk 10:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Double followup: the vandal has been blocked indefinitely. RedBulbBlueBlood9911Talk 11:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Indefinitely or for a period of 31 hours, whichever comes first.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Having some arguments with some citation methods

Resolved

 – OP pointed to the {{rp}} template. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm having a bit of trouble with some citation methods. Essentially, I've got some references I want to invoke. And I'd like to invoke them more than once. And I'd like to call a different page number every time. (So far so good. I know this bit.) And this includes the original invocation (I just like the word 'invoke', makes me feel like a wizard) of the reference. (This is the bit I don't know.)

The problem is that every time I try this, the first citation end up looking like this:

(first invocation (insert magic wand and sparkles here)): blah blah blah^[1]

1. ^ a blah blah blah pp.32

and then when I use a citation style like {{r|refname|p=XXX}} afterwards to call a different page number of the same citation, it'll cite the same pp.32 citation, but with a different page number next to that same [1] reference. Essentially meaning that I've got two different page numbers:

(second-onwards invocation): blah blah blah^[1]:89

1. ^ b blah blah blah. Blah. Blah Blah: Blah Blah Publishing Ltd. pp. 32.

It's really annoying. I don't know how to fix it. I've got one article - Geisha - where this is a marked problem, because there's one book cited *23 times* that covers a bunchload of topics and it genuinely *is* that useful and valid, even with other sources in play. Meaning I'm calling a number of different page numbers all over the shop, but the first either has to confuse the reader through what I've outlined above, or it's just left blank.

Which, I have to be honest, I don't like doing, as I really do like to lead the reader to the specific reference - nothing worse than having to dig through a 300-page-long book just to figure out what the author of that bit of that Wikipedia page was talking about. It frustrates me, and if there's something I can do about it, I'd really like to. Any help? Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 00:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ineffablebookkeeper: Why not just remove the page number from the first instance of the refname and give it its page number similar to {{r}}? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ineffablebookkeeper: If this sounds a bit scary, here are some instructions I prepared earlier for a very similar template I like to use to add page numbers after a reference:

• To reuse a reference you first have to give the reference a name, then on subsequent uses you 'call it up' by that name, without having to re-enter all the details again. See WP:REFNAME for a full explanation.
• You can then use the {{rp}} template to add specific page numbers immediately afterwards, like this:

First fact found on page 29 of a book.

Second fact found on page 114 from the same book.

Hope some of this makes sense - just edit this page to see the actual coding you would use. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

References

Thank you so much - this works perfectly, and it's exactly what I was looking for! --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 01:38, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Editing an Template:Infobox owned by WikiProject Musical Instruments

Having used a number of the pages for musical instruments in the past, I thought perhaps the Template:infobox instruments could use a taxonomy much like the scientific classification for organisms. Trouble is, I have no idea where to begin editing a template. Should I request an update via WikiProject Musical Instruments, and how would that be accomplished?

I'd hope to use for a taxonomy using the Hornbostel-Sachs classification, which is up to 13 digits, in the format XXX.XXX.XXX-XXXX

Like that of the organism classification, each level would be a link to the page for that level of instruments, e.g. Euphonium - 423.231.2 4 - Aerophones 2 - Wind Instruments 3 - Labrosones 2 - Chromatic Labrosones 3 - Labrosomes with Valves 1 - Valve Bugles 2 - Wide Bore

This would make it easier for researches to move around the taxonomy to find similar instruments they may not yet know the name of. Atohanie (talk) 01:48, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Atohanie: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to make it better. The template {{Infobox_instrument}} already has a field for the Hornbostel-Sachs number and description. If there is something not working with it, or if you would like to expand it further, then yes, start a discussion on the project's talk page: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Musical_Instruments RudolfRed (talk) 03:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Atohanie and welcome to thje Teahouse. That sort of thing could be done, but it would be a major change to the Template and how it is used. Before even considering how to do it, there really should be some consensus that it is worth doing.

I thin k the analogy to species taxoboxes does not hold up. For species there is a single widely accepted hierarcy, generally agreed for more than 150 years, with many reliable sources to show just where any species fits, and many more to say thsat the place of an organism in that hierarchy is a very significant datum, one that pretty much every encyclopedia article and refernce book about the species is likely to mention. Is there any even faintly comparable agreement that a hierarchy, much less this particular hierarchy, is a good way to classify musical instruments? Because evolutionary descent is a one-way branching tree (every species has a single parent species, although it may have multiple descendants) species fall very naturally into a hierarchy. But A new instrument can be created using aspects of several different previous instruments, and thus falling into multiple categories. In any case, I wouls suggest taking this to the WikiProject Musical Instruments talk page and suggesting the idea, and see if it has any support. Then and only then should there be discussion of how to implement the idea. I suspect that the idea will not get wide support, but I could be mistaken about that. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Blocked

What happens if you get blocked because you have a username against Wikipedia policy and then request to change it and then blocked because your user page supposedly has advertising content and are wrongly accused of being paid to edit. Then you request to be unblocked if you delete the wrongly interpreted user page and try to convince the person that you are a serious editor (which you are). You appeal to both the administrator who blocked you indefinitely (which is unencouraging to a new editor) and also appeal your block. However, no one responds and you are unable to edit for a while due to a misunderstanding. Anyone know what to do? 2601:8A:4102:B3A0:1591:65A5:4692:51E (talk) 03:20, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

What you should not do is evade the block by editing while not logged in or by making another account, even to appeal the block. You can instead post another unblock appeal on your user talk page, pinging an uninvolvbed admin to ask for review, or email arbcom. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

What happens if you get blocked because you have a username against Wikipedia policy and then request to change it and then blocked because your user page supposedly has advertising content and are wrongly accused of being paid to edit. Then you request to be unblocked if you delete the wrongly interpreted user page and try to convince the person that you are a serious editor (which you are). You appeal to both the administrator who blocked you indefinitely (which is unencouraging to a new editor) and also appeal your block. However, no one responds and you are unable to edit for a while due to a misunderstanding. Anyone know what to do?

This was my previous post and I knew that someone would delete it due to sock puppetry. Once again, I am not an advertiser and am just requesting help on the tea house. I have not made a new account and I’ve used this IP to only request some assistance, not make further edits. I would state on my user page that I have an IP address but I can’t even access that. I was blocked indefinitely, so will I never be able to edit Wikipedia again because of a mistake? What can I do? Is there anything? I really need help from those who know how to help. 2600:1002:B115:35C6:54FC:11D5:37A6:44B1 (talk) 04:50, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. If you have access to your user talk page, then submit a new unblock request explaining your future editing intentions in detail. If you do not have access to your user talk page, please follow the procedures at Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System. Also, stop editing logged out. That hurts your efforts. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:58, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Poster, I must agree with Cullen328 here. The Unblock Ticket Request System is the way to go if you do n0ot have talk page access. Please do not post here again until (unless) yo0u are unblocked. Note that no9 one has deleted your post, and that an "indefinate" block need not mean forever -- it just means there is no set end date. it can always be reviewed and changed. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 05:04, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: I think they're just (over-anxiously; at least 5 times in the last two days at least 9 posts to their talk page in a day and a half since the last admin post) trying to get a review of their unblock request, which I'm assuming is User talk:Wjrz nj forecast#Unblock request 4. @Wjrz nj forecast: I'd suggest removing the repeated unblock requests and leaving just one. If a week goes by (i.e. next Saturday) without a response, then go looking for help with a single request for a review at WP:AN. We are all volunteers here and people allocate their time as they see fit. Expecting responses to anything within minutes/hours is unrealistic. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:31, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I’m sorry, but this block was clearly a misunderstanding. I will say, for someone who has been blocked due to a misinterpretation of intentions, waiting more than a week to be able to edit again is very discouraging. This happens on a night of primary elections which is a subject which I focus my edits on. Once again, I’m using this IP address only to gain a little assistance from the tea house and most likely this will be my last edit. I’m sure anyone else would be frustrated if they were blocked by mistake. Wouldn’t a “good faith” action be to post a warning or notice on my talk page to give me a chance to change my edits before I was indefinitely blocked? I even offered at the administrators notice board and to another editor that I would be happy to change my username if it did not follow policy. No one ever inquired that I should change it or that it was against policy. I’m just trying to figure this whole thing out but it’s hard when I don’t have access to my account. There seems to be no other means of assistance for those who have received an indefinite block. 2600:1002:B115:35C6:F817:2852:B039:2419 (talk) 01:45, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

You have been advised how to address the matter, the UTRS system. You have been requested not to keep editing logged out, as that is block evasion and only harms your eventual case. I have now blocked your latest IP address. was somewhat sympathetic to your original post, but not when you refused to follow procedure. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Reason to delete Ishan Pandita

What was wrong in the article Ishan Pandita. The article has been deleted. But I used reliable sources to make that article. I really don't know why it happened. I want to rewrite the article Ishan Pandita. Can you please help me to make the article? Debabrata Sarkar Mejbill (talk) 14:40, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Debabrata Sarkar Mejbill. The discussion at WP:Articles for deletion/Ishan Pandita (3rd nomination) was quite clear that four editors on that occasion (and others previously) were sure that Pandita does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Please see No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Unless you can produce at least three sources where people who had no connection wtih Pandita (or any clubs or associations he is connected to) have written at length about him, and been published in reliable sources|, you will be wasting your own time, as well as that of any editors who review your work. --ColinFine (talk) 14:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Recreation of Ishan Pandita

FYI

 – Section merged. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:37, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay, now what should I do to make the article Ishan Pandita again? I really want to make it again. Debabrata Sarkar Mejbill (talk) 15:11, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Please don't. The article has been deleted three times. He isn't a notable enough footballer. He signed for a Spanish club but never actually played for them- being the first Indian to sign for a Spanish club doesn't make him notable according to Wikipedia's definition of the term notable. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:40, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Debabrata Sarkar Mejbill: Did you not see/understand Colin Fine's response immediately above this subsection (at #Reason to delete Ishan Pandita? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 04:03, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Can someone help me getting my company informations published on Wikipedia ?

 titolatjor 16:19, 2 June 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tito Latjor (talk • contribs)

Tito Latjor Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not a place for businesses to tell the world about themselves. Wikipedia only summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about companies that meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Wikipedia has no interest in what a company wants to say about itself and has no interest in helping your customers or enhancing search results. You will need to read and formally comply with the paid editing policy, as well as conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 16:26, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

If you really want to publish an article about your company on Wikipedia you'll have first to make your company appear on reliable sources of information: Like wellknown and stablished newspapers, online and public data bases, etc. Then you will be only allowed to publish the facts and information that those reliable sources shared about your company, but always writing the links of those articles and publications about your company. You may be able to put a little of context between this facts and information but it haves to be neutral (you can't sell or write about the potential of your company, only about your current achivements if they are "notable" a notable company < [Thanks TitoLatjor]).

You must write the links of the sources at the end of your editing on Wikipedia on the "Sources" section. If you don't do this they won't publish the article about your company due lack of realiable sources of information needed to confirm that this information you want to share about your company it's accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.143.165.211 (talk) 23:10, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

I would respectfully disagree with 186.143.165.211. Rather that listing references in a "Sources" section, you ought to put the reference immediately after the text which it is being used to support. You'll find advice at Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:41, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Tito Latjor: You seem to have posted someone else's response to how to make a suitable Wikipedia article, which is correct in its ideas, if not the actual details. In you own words, what part don't you understand (i.e., what is your question)? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 04:16, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: The material that you thought was from the OP Tito Latjor was in fact from the IP 186.143.165.211 who (in this edit) placed his response in front of Tito Latjor's signature on his original (empty) message. I have now moved the IP's response. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

hI

 14.201.235.210 (talk) 04:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

So you vandalise two pages for no reason, then drop by to say hi? Do you have any questions about editing Wikipedia? RedBulbBlueBlood9911Talk 05:43, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Technical Inquiry: Export full set of edit summaries and-or search

I posed a question related to the subject at Help talk:Edit summary#Export full set of edit summaries and-or search, where it was noted that relatively few eyeballs would pass by; I was referred to the Help Desk, but thought it better to bring here based on the nature of the inquiry. Let me know if there is, in fact, a better place to take this. Thanks. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:55, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Ceyockey, WP:VPT perhaps? Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:57, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Source behind paywall

Hi, The draft for my page AdvantageGo, has been on the basis of notability of sources. I do have a notable, authoritative third party source I can use, however it is behind a paywall. My question is whether it is possible to use this source, even if it is behind a paywall. If so, whether it would be enough to add this source, to my more un-notable sources, to get my page accepted? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apanuccio2020 (talk • contribs) 08:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, you can use a source behind a paywall (see WP:PAYWALL), but obviously verification is easier with a freely available source. If you do use a source behind a paywall, you ought to indicate this with |url-access=subscription (see Template:Cite web#Access indicators for url-holding parameters). --David Biddulph (talk) 08:44, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Auto confirmed user

I have made more than 10 edits and I have had this account for a month. I am not still an auto confirmed user. Why? Leone di samuel (talk) 09:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

You are autoconfirmed; see here. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:38, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Connecting with other accounts

Can you connect wikipedia with Facebook Pages — Preceding unsigned comment added by APOSTLE MARY (talk • contribs) 10:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@APOSTLE MARY: No, Wikipedia is not a social media site. You can connect your account to your email or to other Wikimedia accounts (that should have been done automatically) and that's all. Ian.thomson (talk) 11:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Good wikiprojects to add to a service man who has seen action in 4 wars?

I have written an article about an astonishing individual known as Tiger Sarll (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Captain_Tiger_Sarll). I was wondering If anyone could give me some advice about some good wiki projects to get this article involved in. Thank you all so much. SALVAHOUSE (talk) 10:42, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@SALVAHOUSE: Welcome to the Teahouse. I would worry about getting it approved for the article mainspace first before thinking about which WikiProjects to join. I'll point out that the draft reads like a narrative, so you may want to fix that before submitting it for review. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:11, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@User:Tenryuu Thank you for your advice. ill do my best to make it not read like a narrative, I think it could be like that due to me taking the info largely from a biography written by Godfrey Lias OBE. Do you think this article has a chance of making it? I think the individual is remarkable. --SALVAHOUSE (talk) 22:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@SALVAHOUSE: I'm not much of a references guy; I focus more on copyediting and tone neutralisation. On first glance the references seem reliable and provide significant coverage, but I leave that judgment to other hosts to determine. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@SALVAHOUSE: Your article essentially retells the subject's biography from beginning to end. It's not an encyclopedic article due to being overly long and detailed, and not giving context as to how Sarll's story fits into the times in which he lived, how he was viewed, etc.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Thank you so much for your input. Duely Noted. --SALVAHOUSE (talk) 11:41, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Quisqualis: Very good point, Ill see if i can phrase the context in which Sarll lived more appropriately. Thank you.--SALVAHOUSE (talk) 11:41, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Deleted Article

I wish to edit the following article I stopped editing in 12.11.2013

27 November 2013 (edit) Article Name R Raman Nair

https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sambhu2020&diff=prev&oldid=583610767 Sambhu2020 (talk) 11:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome back to Wikipedia after your 7-year break, Sambhu2020! You appear to have already found the abandoned draft at Draft:R. Raman Nair. I'm surprised it is still there, but you can certainly continue to work on it. Make sure you don't include anything that cannot be supported by an independent reliable source, and that this person is likely to meet our notability criteria. See also: Wikipedia:Notability (people). I should also mention that if you happen to know or be connected to this person, it is a good idea to declare that connection on your userpage. There is advice on how to do this at this Conflict of Interest page. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 12:04, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

What to edit

I'm not sure what to work on at the moment. Any suggestions? Ovinus (talk) 08:45, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Ovinus Real, hello! Welcome to Wikipedia. If you want to help out with some tasks, you could visit the task center for some suggested tasks, such as cleaning up articles, writing new articles, expanding short articles (also called stubs on Wikipedia) and many other things. If your primary interest is reverting vandalism, you could visit the the Counter-Vandalism Unit for training and getting tools to fight vandals. All in all, I wish you best of luck for your time on Wikipedia. Stay safe! JavaHurricane 10:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ovinus Real: spotting from your userpage that you live in Califormia, do also check out Wikipedia:WikiProject California. 'WikiProjects' are miniprojects based around a single theme (California, in this case) with the aim of editors working to improve articles on that topic. It has a rather scary-looking 'Assessment Chart' which is a brilliant way to find stuff you might be interested in. To make the maximum impact for minimum effort, I'd look at the lowest-quality Wikipedia articles (Called 'Stubs') and click the number in the 'Importance' field. There are over 12,000 'low importance' but short articles, and 32 'High Importance' ones you could look at to see if any take your fancy. (see here). They key thing to remember is never add anything about a place you know that is based only on your own personal knowledge. Always go and find suitable supporting references to add alongside any edits you'd like to add. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 12:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Latest reviewed version

Hi, It's been a while since i've posted on the teahouse, but I'm wondering if a system is in place wherein articles can be reviewed for their accuracy, and a link to that version of the article would be placed on top of the page and would guarantee an accurate article. I feel like I've seen something like this on wikipedia before, and if someone could link me to some information on this that'd be really nice. Thanks, JazzClam (talk) 11:42, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@JazzClam:, there are two primary review setups that appear at the top of the article - good articles & Featured Articles. They're both fairly involved (the latter much more so), but I'd certainly encourage you to look into what they involve and go for it if you want. I would note one key point - they only assess the quality at the time of the review. So if you see a GA "plus" on an article reviewed 9 months ago, you won't know from that whether it's up to date. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:38, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Quick Question Here

Hey guys, if I saw an autobiography in progress in a new users user page which category of speedy deletion should it be? Thanks Idan (talk) 13:41, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Idan None. Being an autobiography is not, in and of itself, a legitimate reason to delete a page. If it is an attempt (even a poor one) at a draft for an article, it should be moved to a different page, either as a userspace draft or in Draft space. It might also be a good idea to drop a note on the creator's user talk page, pointing to WP:AUTOBIO and explaining why autobiography is discouraged here. If it is really blatantly promotion, G11 could be used, but please remember not to WP:BITE new editors, and to assume good faith if at all possible. A move to draft space makes it unlikely that such a page will be effective for promotion, even if intended promotionally. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Coronavirus stats stopped updating for my county

Coronavirus stats stopped updating for my county. Why? It has been over a week and Erie county Pennsylvania still says 210 when it’s really 307... in this crazy time of people going back to work, why are you giving false stats?? If you can’t manage all updates, please remove stats.

Link to Wikipedia showing Erie PA with 210: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_Pennsylvania

Link to more reputable source with correct number of cases: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/pennsylvania/

I own a small business and have been relying on your data to go back to work. Please fix this or take it down. Ty. 172.100.135.150 (talk) 13:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP editor. Wikipedia's purpose is not to provide the latest news. There are other places that do that, as you point out. The numbers in the Wikipedia article are presumably correct for the date they mention (17 May, at present)? That is the important thing. --bonadea contributions talk 13:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Also the website you refer to is mirror site (I believe). REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello IP editor. Whilst on the one hand it's great to hear that you have been regarding Wikipedia so highly that you have been basing business and health decisions on its content, that is really not something anyone here would advocate. We are run, edited and updated totally by volunteers. Everyone here does their best to ensure accurate, up-to-date content. But we can never promise it. The references we use to update our pages are a really excellent way of checking that our content here is correct and topical. So if you have access to those sources, or to your own state or government's advice pages, these - to be honest - are the ones you should really be relying on for such life-affecting decisions that affect you, your business and your workers. We would never advocate using Wikipedia as the source of medical information for treatment, nor would we want to suggest that Wikipedia is so good and up-to-date that the figures we show are the best available. There is always a lag here. Whilst it has been ecognised that Wikipedia has been delivering a great service across of the world on the unfolding Coronvirus disaster, I think you would have been better posting your concerns for more up-to-date sources and data on the article's talk page, where an interested editor might see them, rather than in this general help-forum. Best wishes from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:48, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

UPDATE: I have just posted your concerns on the relevant article's talk page for you. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:21, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

How to resubmit a 'Rejected' article for review

Dear team, I have an article that has been rejected (not declined). I wanted to work on it based on guidelines from Teahouse and other review comments and resubmit again. Is there a way how it could be done? Thank you for any help that you could provide. Sohinimoitra84 (talk) 11:47, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Honey Bafna declined three times, then rejected. Comments by reviewers not addressed. Example: no citations for the career accomplishments. The three refs that are in English add nothing to establishing his notability. Interviews do not count, and one of the others is just a mention that co-stars gave him a birthday cake. David notMD (talk) 11:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Sohinimoitra84, the rejection means that reviewers have decided it's a waste of time, theirs and yours, to try and get it to mainspace anytime soon. But it's not a complete ban on working on it. Make absolutely sure you understand the issues and put in enough work to address them before you resubmit it again, and it might be looked at. Resubmitting repeatedly without visible improvements could be seen as disruption though, and the draft may be nominated for deletion, or you may be prohibited from working on the subject. Hope this helps! Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:29, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I really appreciate it. I will work on it more and revisit the notability guidelines. I also had a question on if Wikipedia allows regional language digital information? Also how could one include book/hard copy references for items that may not have had digital information but had an impactful presence? Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sohinimoitra84 (talk • contribs) 08:14, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Sohinimoitra84, yes, regional language sources are acceptable if they are reliable (WP:RS). But, beware that sources could meet WP:V and still fail to meet the requirements of WP:SIGCOV, meaning not all acceptable sources necessarily add to notability. Offline sources are acceptable provided they are published and reliable. Offline sources don't have a url, otherwise, they are cited the same as online sources, ie. by providing the work, title, date, author, publisher, page number, etc., the necessary details that an independent editor would find sufficient for looking for the source to verify the information from, say, a library that hosts that publication. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:26, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Personalized highlighting -- never seen this before

Resolved

 – Feature is Chrome's Link to Word feature. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:52, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

I noticed an interesting feature I've never seen before and I'm curious if it's new or I've just been a poor observer. I googled "Hōkūle‘a 1976" and the first result linked to Wikipedia's Hōkūle‘a page but with some handy highlighting of the information I was looking for. So, which is it, new feature or been-there-for-the-last-5-years-you-dope? Theleot (talk) 08:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Theleot, it seems the url was tailored to highlight the text after opening the article. Changing the "text=" bit changes which text is highlighted. I am thinking changing the article's name and text, one can tailor a url to highlight any text on any given page; more an internet browsing feature than Wikipedia feature. Does this url highlight the lead sentence of the BBC obituary for you? Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:26, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Theleot: This is a feature of Google Chrome and not related to Wikipedia. I also get highlighting with http://primerecords.dk/#:~:text=tables at my own site which is just simple html and does nothing to achieve it. I don't know whether other browsers support it or have similar features. Your link doesn't highlight in Firefox, Internet Explorer or Microsoft Edge. I don't get such url's when I use Google search with Google Chrome so maybe it's a setting. You can ask for more at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool:@PrimeHunter: Very interesting. I was able to find more info once you guys pointed out it was not a Wiki but a Chrome thing. The feature was introduced in 2019. Thanks to both of you for noodling around and figuring it out! :) Theleot (talk) 09:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

why cant i edit pages

Blocked

 – OP blocked indefinitely and talk page access revoked. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:09, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

 Wikiman1233453543 (talk) 12:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

There could be an explanation in this miserable list. -- Hoary (talk) 13:09, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Blocked from editing articles explained on your Talk page. Blocked from editing your own Talk page for what appears to be not telling the truth in your attempt to be unblocked. And reverted/chastised for deleting content here at Teahouse. David notMD (talk) 14:05, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Autoconfirmation?

This is my fourth day on Wikipedia, when will I be autoconfirmed? (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Oinkers42 Sometime more than 96 hours after your accoujnt was created, I should think. I am not sure on just what schedule the automated process runs on. I think that woulds be rather late in the day on 4 June. What would you like to do that lack of autoconfirmed status is hindering? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:46, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Heading

Resolved

 – {{About}} template utilised. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:10, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

How does one go about placing a heading at the top of an article that says something to the effect of: "This article is about 'X', for 'Y' see:" Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 22:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

You are presumable looking for {{about}}? --David Biddulph (talk) 22:29, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

David Biddulph Not really. That uses the phrase: "for other uses". I specifically just need: for 'Y' see: [link] Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 23:32, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Maineartists: Check the documentation for {{about}}. It allows you to make a binary link by adding some extra parameters. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:39, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Maineartists: You also don't need a template. Consistency is nice but to save time you can type out what you want it to say as well. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:43, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

These "headings" are actually hatnotes and there are quite a few varieties of them for use in different circumstances. See the project page linked above, and Template:Hatnote templates which lists available templates for this purpose. IMO there is good reason to use templates for this purpose, because some forms have consensus to use and others do not, and the templates help one to stay within that consensus, as well as aiding consistency. "Heading" most often refers to a section heading, sometimes to a table heading. @Maineartists, David Biddulph, and Timtempleton: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 02:53, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Maineartists: Perhaps you didn't read the template documentation? {{About|Use1|Use2|Article2}} gives "This article is about Use1. For Use2, see Article2.", which was the wording your question asked for. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:36, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, @David Biddulph: It took me a while to figure out what you were directing me to; but once I understood, I was able to apply it correctly. Thanks again! Maineartists (talk) 23:00, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

I've used {{for}}. --ColinFine (talk) 08:11, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Grids

Resolved

 – OP directed to Help:Wikitable for table basics. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

How do you make grids in wikipedia?PNSMurthy (talk) 07:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PNSMurthy (talk • contribs) 07:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi PNSMurthy, you are referring to tables, I guess... have a look over here Help:Introduction_to_tables_with_Wiki_Markup/1 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, CommanderWaterford (talk) 07:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!PNSMurthy (talk) 07:27, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Names in articles

Resolved

 – OP directed to MOS:NAME for name conventions. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:25, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

What are the conventions with surnames and first names in biographical Wikipedia articles? I believe it's appropriate to use surnames only when referring to the person and then use pronouns however I am just willing to check. WDM10 (talk) 07:13, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi WDM10 and welcome to the Teahouse, you will find the answer over here Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biography#Names ... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ CommanderWaterford (talk) 07:20, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. WDM10 (talk) 07:23, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

speedy deletion reason

I worked on an article for 2 weeks following all the wikipedia guidelines , but I receide sppedy deletion what shall I do? Udaiveersharma (talk) 17:37, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

It would be wise for you read the notification which you received at User talk:Udaiveersharma#Speedy deletion of User:171.50.137.38/sandbox. The words in blue are wikilinks to further advice, if you need it. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:14, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Article declined because of missing neutral or relevant sources

Dear All, this is a repost an a question to the reply of a host, (see below, thank you):

I did put in 4 sources: Every source has as main theme the subject I am talking about (Vier5). If interviews are not helpful, I can understand. Even if the source is the California Institute of Arts. I mean, how high and notable can a source be in the design and art world? And an article about documenta. I really do not understand.:)

https://www.documenta-archiv.de/en/documenta/121/14 — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndreasFrutiger (talk • contribs) 17:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

copy: Dear All, I recently did write an article about of group of artists I think it would be interesting for the community. I wrote a short brief and did put in 4 links to reliable sources in the Design and Art world (AIGA, Design Observer, Graphic Hug, CalArts Institute). Then it was declined because sources were missing?

What kind of sources should it be then?

Best, Andreas AndreasFrutiger (talk) 07:31, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Vier5. REALLY short, and sadly, while interviews as sources can be used to provide basic information, do not contribute to notability. In other refs, mention of Vier5 is only a sentence or two. David notMD (talk) 09:32, 22 May 2020 (UTC) AndreasFrutiger (talk) 16:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

I stand by the comment I left at Draft:Vier5 on May 22 (specifically, ref 2 is an interview and refs 3 & 4 are only brief mentions), but what matters is what the reviewer left as reasons for declining the draft: "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article..." David notMD (talk) 19:14, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

My Submission

Did my submission get approved? Cristiano.Wilson73 (talk) 19:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: User:Cristiano.Wilson73/sandbox

Hello, Cristiano.Wilson73 and welcome to teh teahouse. Your sandbox has not been approved, because it has not been submitted for review. I have added a blue button that you can click when you want your draft submit4ed for review. However, I strongly advise you not to do so yet, and I am confident that if reveiwed in its present form, it would be declined. Issues with the current draft include:

• No sources are cited at all. Sourcesa are essential here. Read WP:CITE and referencing for beginners.
• There is a lack of context. It is not made clear what this event is, who held or sponsored it, why it is important or where it was held, or even in what year.
• The text does not in any way establish that the event is notable That is a key hurdle that all Wikipedia articles must get over.
• The closing suggests that this may have been copied from some document, although i don't fin d one in a web search. Wikipedia cannot accept text copied from elsewhere except in very limited cases, and in all of those the source must be properly attributed.

If you have further questions or this is not clear, please ask again here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:48, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:2020 Ghent Stabbings

Resolved

 – Draft has been speedily deleted per criterion G7. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:52, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

• Draft:2020 Ghent Stabbings

Is there any potential in me working on this article, or is it not worth my time? I did work on it awhile ago but did get declined. Should I delete it? Captain Galaxy (talk) 11:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Captain Galaxy. Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for your post. It's a good question, so what you need to ask is "are there any subsequent media stories which show this event has had repercussions and an impact over and above the awful event of a single attack by someone, and the direct impact on their families?" If, as I suspect, the answer is "No", then the reasons for the original rejection still stand, and it would be sensible to either leave the article until it gets automatically deleted after 6 months, or you can place a user request to have it 'speedily deleted'. Let us know if you need help to do that. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:55, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Thank you for the advice. Could you help me with the 'speedily delete' process as I'm not sure how to do it by myself? Captain Galaxy (talk) 16:41, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Captain Galaxy: ok - but rather than me doing it for you, I'll talk you through the process so that you can learn for the future. We have various criteria for 'speedy deletion' listed at WP:CSD. The one relevant here is criterion 'G7' (see WP:G7 - author requests deletion). There you'll see all you have to do is add the following template request to the top of the page: {{db-g7}}. (Just the bits between the curly brackets - none of the nowiki stuff between chevrons, should you be looking at the source code for this post) Publish the changes and you'll see the template appear on the page. If you later change your mind because circumstances around the story have altered, come back and I'll restore the deleted text for you. (If you happened to have Twinkle enabled in your Preferences, there's a drop-down menu in the TW tab at the top of the page which lets you select the relevant deletion criterion. It's the same process, but Twinkle just makes it faster). Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 18:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Thanks again and have a great day! Captain Galaxy (talk) 18:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Issue about COI

 Deferred to WP:3O

 – —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:46, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I translated Chang Yi (Taiwanese director) (a famous Taiwan move director on 1980s) from Chinese Wikipedia zh:張毅 (導演), which is also written by me.

user:Afoot post hoc thinks that I have a close connection (Wikipedia:Conflict of interest) with its subject. His/her reason is that I expanded some paragraphed without adding references.

I think this article is not a good promotion for Chang Yi. He had an affair with the actress Loretta Yang. It was a big news at that time. I added that to the leading paragraphes.

I would like to know what is the criterion about Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Does other Wikipedian also think it is COI? Wolfch (talk) 16:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Wolfch: Welcome to the Teahouse. We do not promote subjects, and how you think this article is not a good promotion for Chang Yi is the wrong mindset to have on here. If you are making claims that any reasonable person has reason to doubt, you must cite it. The details about conflicts of interest are in the page you just linked. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: I think Wolfch is making the point that they are unlikely to have a COI given that they added negative information to the lead. Wolfch, the editor who is saying you have a COI is extremely new, so I wouldn't put too much stock in anything they say. If you'd like someone else to review the page and gauge whether the tag ought to be removed, you could ask at WP:3O. It'll also get some attention if the other editor decides to nominate it for deletion. If it has enough citations to reliable sources, it'll survive the nomination. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:04, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sdkb:, Thank. I will ask at WP:3O to get more opinions--Wolfch (talk) 22:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Rules about promoting own work

Hi all,

I'm currently working on open-source (more specifically, GPL-3.0) software with the purpose of interactive plotting of mathematical functions and equations in the browser. It's a passion project and the intent is purely educational. Would it be unethical for me to, in External Links, link to pages using the software? For example, I created an interactive plot of the gamma function and its critical points, special values and asymptotes. Would putting this be violating some Wikipedia policy?

Sincerely, Ovinus Ovinus (talk) 21:47, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ovinus: Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for your question. I suggest you ask the same question on the article talk page and provide the appropriate link there. Then, independent editors can determine whether it meets the criteria at WP:External links. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:30, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

The reason left was: corp,adv

Somebody left a reason for not accepting my draft, which was

corp, adv

and I do not know what that means and why. Could somebody help? Julian Brasse (talk) 09:25, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

It looks as if User:DGG had a syntax error in his review, but he may have intended to point you at WP:NCORP and WP:NOTADVERTISING. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Julian Brasse: Yes, as David Biddulph noted, there was a minor typo in the review template. I have fixed it so the reasons and explanations show up in Draft:Ifolor. --bonadea contributions talk 09:55, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

I had noticed the error myself, and assumed it came from the template, . I should have followed up. DGG ( talk ) 01:56, 4 June 2020 (UTC)