Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
<!-- Questions go here. Please post new questions at the BOTTOM of the page --> |
<!-- Questions go here. Please post new questions at the BOTTOM of the page --> |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
== Getting some off-wiki help for a team of editors == |
== Getting some off-wiki help for a team of editors == |
||
Line 583: | Line 580: | ||
[[User:Infinitepeace|Infinitepeace]] ([[User talk:Infinitepeace|talk]]) 06:57, 22 March 2021 (UTC) |
[[User:Infinitepeace|Infinitepeace]] ([[User talk:Infinitepeace|talk]]) 06:57, 22 March 2021 (UTC) |
||
:{{yo|Infinitepeace}} welcome back to the Teahouse. No, an RfC is not publicised on the article page, neither in a standalone template, nor in a Multiple issues template. --''[[User:Bonadea|bonadea]]'' <small>[[Special:Contributions/Bonadea|contributions]] [[User talk:Bonadea|talk]]</small> 07:51, 22 March 2021 (UTC) |
:{{yo|Infinitepeace}} welcome back to the Teahouse. No, an RfC is not publicised on the article page, neither in a standalone template, nor in a Multiple issues template. --''[[User:Bonadea|bonadea]]'' <small>[[Special:Contributions/Bonadea|contributions]] [[User talk:Bonadea|talk]]</small> 07:51, 22 March 2021 (UTC) |
||
Line 623: | Line 621: | ||
My first Article Declined Please help Me to verify my article [[User:Nabyl8899|Nabyl8899]] ([[User talk:Nabyl8899|talk]]) 11:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC) |
My first Article Declined Please help Me to verify my article [[User:Nabyl8899|Nabyl8899]] ([[User talk:Nabyl8899|talk]]) 11:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC) |
||
:{{u|Nabyl8899}} could you tell me which article was declined? [[User:Lovin'Politics|Lovin'Politics]] ([[User talk:Lovin'Politics|talk]]) 11:25, 22 March 2021 (UTC) |
:{{u|Nabyl8899}} could you tell me which article was declined? [[User:Lovin'Politics|Lovin'Politics]] ([[User talk:Lovin'Politics|talk]]) 11:25, 22 March 2021 (UTC) |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ |
Revision as of 11:44, 22 March 2021
つがる, a Teahouse host
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2–3 days.
Getting some off-wiki help for a team of editors
Hello Everyone!!
I'm Rafi from Bangladesh. I mostly work in Bangla Wikipedia but thinking of starting my journey in English Wikipedia too. I have a team of 20/25 members who are currently active in bnwiki. The interesting fact is we're all from the same educational institution. We worked together to make our college article a "featured article" in bnwiki. We're also leading the "Wikiproject Notre Dame College" there. We want to start with the same spirit here. (Actually working with this type of motivation helps a lot in learning) The fact is these freshers are more comfortable in social media like facebook messenger and mail. So we'll need some amazing people to train these guys using social media or mail. Can I get some help? Mrb Rafi (talk) 11:57, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
- Mrb Rafi first of all, thanks for all your contributions, but this isn't a place to ask for people to help you, we are supposed to help you technical-ish problems. but you could always ask for help in return for barnstars ig. Lovin'Politics (talk) 12:23, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Mrb Rafi: welcome to the Teahouse! It is perfectly fine to ask for help here at the Teahouse, it's why it is here (and you do not have to do anything in particular to reward anybody who helps you out – Lovin'Politics was not being serious.) However, the Teahouse volunteers are not necessarily prepared to go outside Wikipedia; if your friends are prepared to use IRC, there is some information about the Wikipedia IRC channels here, and there is also a Discord server, which you find out more about here. As you probably already know, it is always a good idea to use the article talk page, in this case Talk:Notre Dame College, Dhaka, to communicate with other editors especially if you are planning a major rewrite/restructuring. Good luck with your project! --bonadea contributions talk 13:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
- Mrb Rafi, people who study or studied at a particular school would have a conflict of interest when writing about that school. Please read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and observe what it says. -- Hoary (talk) 13:00, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hoary Going to a college and editing about it (provided it's not part of any internship within the college, but just as a regular student) is as much a conflict of interest in Wikipedia terms as writing about the city you live in. VAXIDICAE💉 18:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, Mrb Rafi! Even though IRC and mailing lists have been around since the beginning, I feel that the culture at English Wikipedia is strongly oriented towards communicating on-wiki, so that discussions happen in the open and are preserved for long-term reference. (This often puts us in conflict with the Wikimedia Foundation which develops policy in Facebook, Slack, Google Docs, and face-to-face meetings.) Apart from some activist groups that organise off-wiki, a lot of us distrust social media companies like Facebook and WeChat, so it might be challenging to find people to do outreach via social media. Have you looked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladesh? Perhaps your group could form a sub-project there for discussions that aren’t directly related to the article about Notre Dame College, Dhaka. — Pelagic ( messages ) – (04:40 Sat 20, AEDT) 17:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Lovin'Politics:@Bonadea:@Hoary:@Pelagic: Thanks to you all for your cooperation. bonadea, discord is a good place, of course, I'll try to bring them together there. Irc may seem a lil bit uncomfortable for new editors, the talk page too. At the very first we face the problem of making new people comfortable with wiki markups. We've seen that most of the people leave wiki just because they find these markups tough and feels as "they don't belong here 'cause they're not that much smart!" I've heard it from some of my junior brothers while introducing them to Wikipedia for the first time. At this point, social media can give them a more "tangible" idea of what they're doing. They can communicate with the same people there whom they may talk onwiki. For the same reason, I've seen our local wmf chapter also focuses on using social media for new editors. And "Conflict of interest" topic was also raised while we were working on bnwiki. We were able to convince the whole bnwiki community that we're following the rules strictly. Some of the most experienced bnwiki editors also observed our workers for the whole time. We got this privilege because I was able to make a whole team of 20/25 completely new editors where I was totally alone at first. Hope you understand. And thanks again for all of your cooperation. Take love! -Mrb Rafi (talk) 18:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Mrb Rafi, DiscussionTools is now available on English Wikipedia! (@Whatamidoing (WMF) posted that their team expectected to have it turned on last Tuesday, but it wasn’t until yesterday that I checked my Beta Preferences.) What this means is that if your group members tick the box, they will be able to post comments using a visual editor instead of wikitext. (It does also have a Source mode that your colleagues can use as they start to get more comfortable with markup. For now, you'll need to use the desktop site, not mobile.) As I understand it, a big reason the Foundation invested in developing this was for exactly your use case: editors from regions with a high use of social media who may find wiki talk pages counter to their expectations, or feel wiki-markup is a barrier to participating. Of course you can still make use of other channels, but I hope this will help your junior brothers to communicate with people like me who don’t use IRC, Discord, Facebook, etc. Have you encountered DT on Bangla Wikipedia? I don't know if it’s deployed there yet. Please do give it a try: I imagine WAID and PPelberg would be very interested in your experience using this with a mid-sized group. — Best wishes from Australia, Pelagic ( messages ) – (10:19 Sun 21, AEDT) 23:19, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Lovin'Politics:@Bonadea:@Hoary:@Pelagic: Thanks to you all for your cooperation. bonadea, discord is a good place, of course, I'll try to bring them together there. Irc may seem a lil bit uncomfortable for new editors, the talk page too. At the very first we face the problem of making new people comfortable with wiki markups. We've seen that most of the people leave wiki just because they find these markups tough and feels as "they don't belong here 'cause they're not that much smart!" I've heard it from some of my junior brothers while introducing them to Wikipedia for the first time. At this point, social media can give them a more "tangible" idea of what they're doing. They can communicate with the same people there whom they may talk onwiki. For the same reason, I've seen our local wmf chapter also focuses on using social media for new editors. And "Conflict of interest" topic was also raised while we were working on bnwiki. We were able to convince the whole bnwiki community that we're following the rules strictly. Some of the most experienced bnwiki editors also observed our workers for the whole time. We got this privilege because I was able to make a whole team of 20/25 completely new editors where I was totally alone at first. Hope you understand. And thanks again for all of your cooperation. Take love! -Mrb Rafi (talk) 18:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Poetry/short story collections - Should we list their tables of contents/create articles for this purpose?
Hello, This requires a bit of explanation, so bear with me!
Something that I think would be very useful for researchers and people interested in poetry is having a place where we list the contents of each collection, so that if they are searching for which collection a specific poem was originally published, they can actually find it (this is surprisingly difficult to do on the internet, I would usually have to call a librarian or two until one of them can look up the book and send me the table of contents).
For cases such as Robert Frost's first book, A Boy's Will, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Boy%27s_Will) the contents are listed, which is very helpful in identifying which poems of his come from his earliest published collection.
However for most poets, when I look them up on wikipedia, I often see a list of poetry collections they wrote, but the collections often do not have their own articles, likely due to the works being out of print and/or not meeting notability requirements. Even looking at Robert Frost's poetry collections, many do not have their own articles since they are not his more notable collections.
My question is this: is it appropriate to create an article for a collection of poetry just so that I can list the table of contents? I would not have much other information to add beyond the publication info and contents, but I think it would be very helpful for many people to have this information somewhere. This would, however, create potentially many short articles that are essentially lists of poems and a publishing date, so I'm not sure if that would be appropriate. Is Wikipedia the right place for this?
Thank you for your time! -A new user 24.55.162.1 (talk) 16:02, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello. In order for a book such as a poetry collection to be eligible for a Wikipedia article, it must comply with Wikipedia:Notability (books). An article consisting only of a date and a list of poems is not acceptable, because Wikipedia is not a directory. Articles about books should have prose describing the book, including summaries of critical commentary. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:44, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
- The other approach we have is List of poems by Robert Frost. But I imagine we would only do that for particularly famous and prolific authors? (It could be modelled in Wikidata, e.g Birches (Q16385136) part of (P361) Mountain Interval (Q6925009); that’s a whole other discussion.) Pelagic ( messages ) – (05:33 Sat 20, AEDT) 18:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- I think you may have missed the point being made by the OP, possibly in part due to misunderstandings in what may be valuable and notable for inclusion in an article about a book of poetry (or a poet's work more broadly). My understanding is that the OP want consideration of including additional types on information for books on poetry (lets assume for argument's sake that it is a book that meets notability requirements). The 'implication' would be broad - that this change ought be made, or become part of the standard layout, for any article on a book - but it is one that makes some sense. This suggestion was that an article on a book of poetry ought include the basic Table of Contents of that book, or even just a list of the poems that would be found within it. This seems to me something that already should be standard practice. Expanding from there to books (again, lets stick to assuming notable books are in question), we run into some problems but nothing that can't be helped. A basic chapter list, for example, could be provided with any relevant titles. While Google Books is working on doing this, and the 'look inside' feature on Amazon allows for this on most books, it is decentralized and not part of any general knowledge, encyclopedic article. On that, I think listing the poems in a notable work should be appropriate. I'd also argue that it would be appropriate to have a list of poems for each book listed as being written by a notable poet. Wikipedia can provide this type of information without becoming a 'directory' (it already is a directory, technically, de facto - just in a much broader way)
My biggest concern here relates to something common across Wikipedia (and one reason I've stopped editing for years at a time): there is very little consideration given to what experts on a particular field consider to be notable, significant, of primary concern. A layperson who is good at biographies may work on Emily Dickinson's without considering what a poet, or an expert on English Literature, would want to know or would consider most important. Neither are wrong, but neither are correct alone. Without allowing experts to say 'hey, this is something me and my peers are frustrated by - why doesn't wikipedia articles on X contain Y and Z? Y and Z are of central importance to X in most academic work currently being conducted. We know it may seem a bit trivial to a layperson, but anyone who studies X intensively will be interested in Y and Z!' --- there is a tendency towards dogma that creates unnecessary restrictions in terms of identifying and providing information that is relevant, timely and useful... Sorry for the (likely inappropriately placed - but serious!) rant.
RememberToForget (talk) 15:14, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Mobile Editing
I've noticed that when I'm editing on my phone that it's impossible to use the visual editor for categories when the title of the article is too long. The button to publish comes after the title and instead of wrapping around once it reaches the end of my phone screen it just goes right off the end and it's impossible to tap. I was wondering where I should mention this for someone to look into fixing. I know I can just type the category, but I thought I'd mention it anyway. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, TipsyElephant. You may want to consider using the fully functional desktop site, which works perfectly well on mobile devices, and does not suffer from the numerous bugs that affect the mobile site and the visual editor. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:38, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Cullen328: How do I change to the desktop version? TipsyElephant (talk) 16:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- TipsyElephant, while in mobile mode, scroll to the very bottom of the page. You will see a link to click to enter desktop mode. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:47, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Cullen328: How do I change to the desktop version? TipsyElephant (talk) 16:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- TipsyElephant Hi , welcome to Teahouse. It's simple to do that. After typing category just hold your phone horizontal on landscape . You will see button. Research Voltas (talk) 18:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Research Voltas: Turning my phone sideways does absolutely nothing (it just stays vertical), and even if it did I'm guessing that really long title would still go off the screen because whoever programmed it didn't account for long titles. I was originally wondering if there is someone who deals with the backend who would be able to fix the problem that I should get into contact with. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:24, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- I rethreaded the conversation above, hope that's okay. Pelagic ( messages ) – (06:33 Sat 20, AEDT) 19:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- TipsyElephant, when I go into mobile VE, I just have the toolbar buttons with Publish Changes across the top, no page title. Are you talking about the "Add pagename to new categories" screen? We could file a ticket on Phab:. User:Whatamidoing (WMF) might be able to advise who looks after the mobile categories feature, though she’s fairly busy with the talk pages project at the moment. Pelagic ( messages ) – (06:33 Sat 20, AEDT) 19:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping, Pelagic. The mw:Mobile visual editor belongs to the Editing team, and I'd be happy to file a Phab ticket (unless someone else gets there first).
- @TipsyElephant, can you give me a link to the article where you encountered it, an example of a category that's too long, and some idea of what your phone/screen size is? They'll want to be able to see the problem for themselves, so that they can figure out whether their solution actually solves the problem. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Whatamidoing (WMF): so the problem isn't that any category is too long. The problem is that when a title of an article is too long it pushes the publish button off the right side of the screen. For instance, really long article names like The Carl Donnelly and Chris Martin Comedy Podcast make it impossible to add a category. I've found that article titles that are about 25 characters long render the button useless. I can just barely add categories to The Dead Authors Podcast, but I'm unable to add categories to The Anthropocene Reviewed. I'm currently using Android on a Moto G7 Power and as I've previously mentioned turning my phone sideways does not change the view, but even if it did I'm guessing the text still doesn't wrap around for really long titles. It's also worth mentioning that even medium length titles result in the publish button being only partially visible. For instance, titles around 17 or 19 characters cause the right side of the button to be pushed off the end of the screen. When adding a category to The Daily (podcast) the letter "h" at the end of publish is not visible. TipsyElephant (talk) 02:06, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
permission revoked?
Hi - I have just tried to edit Jay Inslee and I wasn't able to edit without pending reviews and I am an extended confirmed user Lovin'Politics (talk) 01:11, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Lovin'Politics: Welcome to the Teahouse! Click the lock at the top of the article, and you'll see the article is under pending changes protection. Scroll up and you'll see a table at Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Types_of_protection that show the differences between protection levels, and that all edits are reviewed when a page is under pending changes protection. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- GoingBatty but I am extended confirmed, I should be able to edit the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lovin'Politics (talk • contribs) 01:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Lovin'Politics: Please study the table at Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Types_of_protection. While extended confirmed editors can perform normal editing for articles with Semi-protection and Extended-confirmed protection, the instructions for Pending changes protection state "all users can edit. However, once an unregistered or new editor makes an edit, that edit and any subsequent edits by anyone will remain hidden from "readers" (users not logged in) until the edit made by the unregistered or new editor is reviewed by a pending changes reviewer or admin." GoingBatty (talk) 01:49, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- But shouldn't that only apply to unregistered users or non-autoconfirmed? This person is extended confirmed, so they should be able to bypass pending changes protection. I think it's some sort of bug perhaps? Snowmanonahoe (talk) 01:02, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Lovin'Politics: Please study the table at Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Types_of_protection. While extended confirmed editors can perform normal editing for articles with Semi-protection and Extended-confirmed protection, the instructions for Pending changes protection state "all users can edit. However, once an unregistered or new editor makes an edit, that edit and any subsequent edits by anyone will remain hidden from "readers" (users not logged in) until the edit made by the unregistered or new editor is reviewed by a pending changes reviewer or admin." GoingBatty (talk) 01:49, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- GoingBatty but I am extended confirmed, I should be able to edit the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lovin'Politics (talk • contribs) 01:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
What to do when a lot of incorrect "facts" are found in an article?
Make a bunch of individual edits throughout the page? Write a separate section on that page in which I express the alternate interpretations of an expert or two and provide links to their books, etc? Create (or 'correct" already existing) articles on those expert heroes of mine in which I write about their views on the aforementioned issues? Gasp ... Bring it to the attention of a moderator on a special page set up for that sort of thing? Thanks. (PS Am I supposed to sign with tildes here??? -- Kisevalter ... Was ... Nash) Kisevalter Was Nash (talk) 06:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Correct or remove it. Remember to cite an WP:RS. Firestar464 (talk) 06:43, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Kisevalter Was Nash. It's difficult to answer a general question like this, becuase so much may depend on the particular circumstances of that article. It sounds to me as if you're talking about a case where there are significantly different views of the subject in different publications. Wikipedia expects that all significant views in reliable sources will be summarised in an article, but whether differences of opinion should be mentioned throughout the article or collected in one section will depend on many things. If one of the interpretations is a fringe view, then it should get at most a short paragraph, and often no more than a mention. If (as sounds probable here) there is likely to be controversy from Wikipedia editors about the different views, then you shouldl certainly discuss is on the article's talk page before making any edits. See WP:BRD --ColinFine (talk) 12:25, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- I agree that more contextual information is needed to provide better advice, but there is a real problem with this - especially on topics, figures, places, etc that are more 'niche'; 'expert'; 'professional'; etc.
- It also is a real problem on many articles regarding foreign countries and individuals, especially countries that don't speak European languages and/or which are developing, poor and largely ignored in global politics. Yet, even for more mainstream figures it can be a problem - propaganda, poor translations, etc. are often injected and UNLESS you've trained eyes looking at it, it can be hard to discern what is and is not legitimate. This is something that can plague entire groups of articles - as individuals (and sometimes countries - quite literally) edit regularly in ways that tow a specific party line. This creates a real problem regarding how trustworthy certain types of articles are. I've come across articles that are on significant subjects but which read like a college course's final essay on one particular theory about the topic. How to fix these is an important question because it is daunting, and most people are just going to walk away and let it stand. North Korea, Turkmenistan, Myanmar - just some authoritarian states that actively edit articles related to their cultures, economies, demographics, etc.
- Just as an Example, the current article on King Vajiralongkorn of Thailand - the world's richest monarch and, increasingly, one of the world's most powerful monarchs - is protected in his home country by lese majeste; nothing even remotely critical can be reported or said about him without the very real threat of imprisonment for years. Reporting can be sketchy at times because of this, but it exists... yet, when you read that biographical article the first half sounds like... some corporate biography meant to show that the King is a man of the people. It reeks of propaganda. Controversies do come in later, but they are noticeably diminished and missing some major issues. There is a lot of misleading and incorrect information about him. Yet, it goes deeper - get into the Privy Council, the Prime Minister, the Princesses, etc. and more and more glaring omissions are obvious, as is a pattern of overly positive (yet often totally irrelevant) information.
- Now, I recognize this may not be what the OP is referencing - in fact, the OP saying 'heroes of mine' immediately makes one a bit suspicious of motives and the specific topic being discussed. The general notion of no original research likely is relevant.
- So to get back to the core of the OP's question: is this information to which you refer factually misleading? Incorrect? Made up? Do you have citations? Does the article as it stands have citations? Is it an article about theories? Or a biography? Or a place? It sort of sounds like you ran into an article that could include a lot of original research rather than encyclopedic information in which case it ought be scrapped and redone - but if your goal is to 'make an argument' then I strongly suggest Reddit (not tongue in cheek either: seriously, post encyclopedic information on X here then go debate X on Reddit) (Disclaimer - I haven't been active in editing on Wikipedia in a couple years so please forgive me for any violations of rules I may have made RememberToForget (talk) 15:38, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Kisevalter Was Nash, what you have described is a situation which calls for a discussion on the article's talk page (every article has one). Just start the discussion with a post similar to your post above, but with specifics. That's the closest thing to article moderation you will find on Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:14, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Draft delete
How to delete a draft by a non author of the draft page? I only know Db-g7, which is used by authors only. ProudMallu (📨│📝) 09:30, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- ProudMallu You may use any of the relevant speedy deletion criteria. If you just want to delete it just because, it's not necessary as drafts are deleted after six months of inactivity. If you feel that there is a reason to delete it that is not one of the speedy deletion criteria, you may start a discussion at Miscellany for deletion. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi ProudMallu. The Criteria for speedy deletion are generally strictly construed, and require some study to see whether they apply (I say this because it happens a lot: don't just read the summaries but the criteria themselves, setting out the actual coverage details). Generally speaking, for drafts, the criteria that might apply would be CSD G11 (blatant advertising, requiring fundamental rewrite); CSD G12 (unambiguous copyright violation, with no prior version to revert to [you might check out this guide]) and of course CSD G13, referred to in the post above, which only applies after six months of inactivity.
There are a few other criteria that could potentially be applicable (e.g., G3, G5 and G10), but they're not nearly as common. As to MfD, it is rare that using up community resources on discussion of a draft that meets no CSD is warranted, where they are going to be deleted under G13 in the normal course anyway. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 10:53, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi ProudMallu. The Criteria for speedy deletion are generally strictly construed, and require some study to see whether they apply (I say this because it happens a lot: don't just read the summaries but the criteria themselves, setting out the actual coverage details). Generally speaking, for drafts, the criteria that might apply would be CSD G11 (blatant advertising, requiring fundamental rewrite); CSD G12 (unambiguous copyright violation, with no prior version to revert to [you might check out this guide]) and of course CSD G13, referred to in the post above, which only applies after six months of inactivity.
Hi, how can I delete a draft page? I'm am not the creator of that draft. But the creator is not edited the page after July 2020. Like Db-g7, is there is any templete to delete the draft ? ProudMallu (📨│📝) 12:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Why does its existence concern you, ProudMallu? -- Hoary (talk) 12:44, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Moved up in the page, ProudMallu, because there's no reason to start a second thread on the same subject. -- Hoary (talk) 12:46, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Fuhghettaboutit: Fixed your piped link for CSD G12 above. GoingBatty (talk) 20:05, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Talk for "Sachsenhausen concentration camp" page
I am looking to improve the page on Sachsenhausen concentration camp, which currently has little information about the development of the camp in the pre-War and early War years. In preparation, I have tried to find the "Talk" about the article. The first Talk archive (Talk:Sachsenhausen_concentration_camp/Archive_1) covers the years 2006 to 2009. Changing the address to Archive_2 or _3 finds nothing. The current Talk page is rather unhelpful, consisting mainly of a long piece, which may or may not be a response to an earlier post, and that is dated August 2018. A possibly related aspect is that the List of prisoners of Sachsenhausen was separated out of the main page in August 2018. Is there any way of accessing the Talk posts of 2009 to 2018?
The page on KZ Sachsenhausen in German Wikipedia gives more extensive coverage to the earlier years of the camp and is better structured than the English page. While much of the material that I would add will be taken from primary sources (hopefully to allow the "Needs references" flag to be removed!), it may be helpful to take information from the German page. Are there any guidelines on the etiquette of "borrowing" material from corresponding Wikipedia pages in another language? Douglian30 (talk) 14:12, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, Douglian30! You can copy Wikipedia between languages. Make sure to check out Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia to find out how to give proper credit where credit is due (it is required). Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 14:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Douglian30, and welcome to the Teahouse. Actually, Talk:Sachsenhausen concentration camp/Archive 1 goes up to 2016: for some reason the 2009 posting Talk:Sachsenhausen concentration camp/Archive 1#Were there gas chambers at Sachsenhausen? was missed when the archive was first created in 2018, and the bot added it on the end in 2020. All the 2017 posts were manually removed in this edit, with the edit summary "delete anonymous discussion breaching Talk policy"; but like everything else that has ever been on the talk page, they are accessible in its history.
- I see that Talk archiving is documented at Help:Archiving_a_talk_page. --Douglian30 (talk) 09:45, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- For translating a portion from the German: as EDG says, you can do that as long as you attribute it. WP:Translation is helpful. Note that you cannot cite a Wikipedia article as a source, but you can cite the sources cited in the German article (as long as they meet English Wikipedia's criteria for reliable sources) - foreign language sources are acceptable if there is no good English source. Your reference to "primary sources" is a little concerning: you may mean something different from what Wikipedia means by primary sources; but if not, be aware that such sources can only be cited sparingly. --ColinFine (talk) 16:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Many thanks, both. The archival Talk confirms the risks associated with the Sachsenhausen page, but we owe it to those who suffered to record the facts as best we can. Using "primary source", I was referring to published eyewitness accounts, equating these to journal articles (the primary literature), followed by abstracts (secondary services) and reviews (tertiary literature). These definitions probably vary by subject area and context (food composition took the biscuit here, inverting the national food composition tables to be the primary source and the source of their data to be the secondary source!), but published descriptions of events might be considered a preferred source, as thereafter selection and subjectivity intrude (as indeed they do in writing a Wikipedia page, which is why collaborative editing is important). Douglian30 (talk) 18:05, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
A user is harassing me
Hi , a user from India. harrassing me, asking questions, writing on my talk page. Anothor user from same area nominating my articles for deletion just to harass me. And asking questions, If you're from America, Why your editing articles about India.WP is global website. How can they question me ,why I'm editing about this. I just warn him once because he's using Malyalam language on WP. Because it is Eng project. From that point he's coming on my talk page and asking and writing questions.The user is User :AARYA SAJAYAN and User: kashmorwiki. He's vandalizing. They're doing editing war.Research Voltas (talk) 14:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC) Research Voltas (talk) 14:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Two users from India trolling me. Because I warned one of them for increasing his edits by wrong means. And other one is disrupting new article Nahata college by pasting Speedy deletion temple. The article have sources but they're trolling and harassing me. I want to delete their messages from my talk page and block them from editing my talk page. Research Voltas (talk) 15:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- You can remove any message from your talk page. Ruslik_Zero 15:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- The Kahata College article was nominated for deletion at AfD, not Speedy Deletion. You improperly removed the AfD template and it was restored. You can participate at AfD, and also attempt to improve the article. David notMD (talk) 15:35, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- I think Research Voltas, do not know what is vandalism. The user is simply accusing me for vandalism. Moreover, I am a rollbacker who fights vandalism. It would be better, if someone teach this user what vandalism is. Regards. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 15:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- The Kahata College article was nominated for deletion at AfD, not Speedy Deletion. You improperly removed the AfD template and it was restored. You can participate at AfD, and also attempt to improve the article. David notMD (talk) 15:35, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- AARYA SAJAYAN, she doesn't obey Wikipedia rules. Admin need to block her. That's for sure. And you, Research Voltas is not from the United States. Firstly, your English proves that. Secondly, this one, you stated there you wishes to visit England as well as United States. Shame on you. Kichu is doing his duties very well. 223.228.158.168 (talk) 15:53, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- @223.228.158.168:, someone not having as good a grasp of the English language as others doesn't at all mean that they aren't from the US. That doesn't even make sense. And the "incriminating" evidence you provided states that he wishes to go to New York, a single state, not the country as a whole. I live in the US, but, believe it or not, I have never visited New York, either. These attacks need to stop, regardless of what is going on. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 17:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- AARYA SAJAYAN was blocked once. But Me and Oshwah talked about our policies and guidelines to her, and was given a second chance by Oshwah itself. She is doing well after that Kichu🐘 Need any help? 16:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- 223.228.158.168 your language is so offensive. WP don't allow use of foul language against our editors. I suggest experienced admin to block all these editors. Some of them today threat me because I warned him not use Malyalam from since he and he's friend. Started writhing on my talk page. I suggest strong actions against them Research Voltas (talk) 16:14, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- [1] is this what you call vandalism. A user apologising to you for being uncivil in your talk page? And Aarya has been never warned by any user for vandalism. Same in my case also. I have nothing more to say. I am assuming good faith here and I would like to thankyou for wasting my time. I have other works to do here. Regards. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 16:54, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- For the benefit of those reading along, Research Voltas has been blocked as a duck of Kundan Ravindra Dhayade. As an uninvolved passerby, RV's reaction to AS seems out of proportion to their interactions. Me takes deep breath before climbing onto soapbox... loose allegations of "harassment", "trolling" and "vandalism" hurt the project by distracting from actual harassment. Pelagic ( messages ) – (12:37 Sat 20, AEDT) 01:37, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
As I'm new to these issues and problems, I was really worried what was happening. I am not used to these types of issues and I have never been referred to be offensive to anyone. Again I'm repeating that I am very sorry and I'm regretful about hurting anyones feelings in this platform. And a big Thanks for all sincere editors here who supported me. I'm also very sorry for Research Voltas if I have hurt his feelings, I truly did never mean to.....ThanksAARYA SAJAYAN (talk) 09:55, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Shouldn't this be discussed at WP:AN/I? There is a harassment section there.--Filmomusico (talk) 19:04, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Article Enquiry
Let me know the reason for the deletion of Tanmay Bakshi and how can I get the Deletion discussion? Thanks in advance WikiShakeshere (talk) 05:11, 20 March 2021 (UTC) WikiShakeshere (talk) 05:11, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- WikiShakeshere, welcome to the Teahouse. You can find the discussion here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:17, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Tenryuu BTW, have a look at this, I'm I able to create an article on him now? Does it pass GNG? Tanmay is an author of 4 Books, AI expert for IBM, TEDx Speaker, Keynote speaker etc. WikiShakeshere (talk) 05:21, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi WikiShakeshere. If you look at the WP:CLOSE for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tanmay Bakshi, you'll see that the administrator who deleted the article did so as a WP:SOFTDELETE. This means that the administrator mainly did so for procedural reasons based upon the statement made by the editor nominating statement made the for deletion, and not because there was an overwhelming WP:CONSENSUS in favor of deletion. If you wish the recreate the article, then my suggestion would be to either (1) post a request on the user talk page of killiondude and ask them to restore the article or (2) post a request at WP:REFUND asking for the same thing; however, before doing so, it might be better for you to by find at least two or three strong examples of WP:SIGCOV in WP:RELIABLESOURCES which clearly shows Bakshi now meets WP:BIO. The CNBC source has a lot of potential, but it would be a good idea to show that it's not a case of just one writer writing a profile piece about Bakshi, but rather a case where a number of reliable sources are now significantly covering him in detail. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Tenryuu BTW, have a look at this, I'm I able to create an article on him now? Does it pass GNG? Tanmay is an author of 4 Books, AI expert for IBM, TEDx Speaker, Keynote speaker etc. WikiShakeshere (talk) 05:21, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
article merge
How can I merge an article to another? Did I need to nominate the article for AFD? ProudMallu (📨│📝) 06:40, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- ProudMallu, see Wikipedia:Merging. Twinkle can help with the process; merge proposals are under the "tag" option in the menu. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:44, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
How best to seek permission for photos use
Hello house, this is my first time here. I am still trying to find my way around the community. I will like to know how best to seek copyright permissions to use photos generally on Wikipedia and in particular, this new page I created: Sarah Friar, how can I get a photo to the page without copyrights infringements? It would be most appreciated if I get a broad answer for future purposes, rather than just for the aforementioned article. Thank you. MesutOzula (talk) 08:55, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, check out these thorough steps for seeking permission from author of a photo. The link goes to separate but related Wikimedia Commons project: commons:Commons:Permission Shushugah (talk) 09:20, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MesutOzula (talk • contribs) 09:42, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Is that the right link, Shushugah? It goes to a disambiguation page. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:45, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- A better link for something like this would probably be either c:Commons:OTRS/Consent or c:Commons:Email templates. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- My understanding was that MesutOzula is looking for advice on how to find a photo that can be used, rather than how to provide evidence of permission. Is that right, MesutOzula? Cordless Larry (talk) 11:38, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Cordless Larry I'd love to know the processes involved adding photos to new articles. I have had my files deleted in the past. This has been my most difficult part of editing here. How do I declare that a photo was given to me by the copyright owner without appearing to have COI? The photos of the subject of my article are all over the internet, but how do I upload the file without having it deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MesutOzula (talk • contribs)
- My understanding was that MesutOzula is looking for advice on how to find a photo that can be used, rather than how to provide evidence of permission. Is that right, MesutOzula? Cordless Larry (talk) 11:38, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- A better link for something like this would probably be either c:Commons:OTRS/Consent or c:Commons:Email templates. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Is that the right link, Shushugah? It goes to a disambiguation page. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:45, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MesutOzula (talk • contribs) 09:42, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Please sign your statements by typing ~~~~ and in case that c:Commons:OTRS/Consent is what you are looking for. Shushugah (talk) 12:33, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Even if someone gives you a photograph, MesutOzula that does NOT mean they have given you the copyright. Indeed, they may not even own the copyright, which for photographs lies with the photographer, not the subject of the photo (unless it was a selfie!). You may only upload photographs which you personally have taken, or for which a special process has been followed in which the copyright holder donates the material to Wikipedia (see Commons links as above). Many people deliberately don't license photos of themselves in ways suitable for Wikipedia, despite being "all over the internet". Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:53, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Michael D. Turnbull thank you for this explanation. So I have to look at the photographers not the subjects of the photographs.MesutOzula (talk) 17:22, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Even if someone gives you a photograph, MesutOzula that does NOT mean they have given you the copyright. Indeed, they may not even own the copyright, which for photographs lies with the photographer, not the subject of the photo (unless it was a selfie!). You may only upload photographs which you personally have taken, or for which a special process has been followed in which the copyright holder donates the material to Wikipedia (see Commons links as above). Many people deliberately don't license photos of themselves in ways suitable for Wikipedia, despite being "all over the internet". Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:53, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Please sign your statements by typing ~~~~ and in case that c:Commons:OTRS/Consent is what you are looking for. Shushugah (talk) 12:33, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Template: Skyscraper in Malaysia
Wikipedians from Malaysia, or in Malaysia, If you are interested in this new program, please inform me ASAP.
This is a Template: Skyscraper in Malaysia project. As you see, I found some shortcoming and mislead information in the template, not some, but generally a lot. Muar Trade Centre, if, it is qualified as a skyscraper, then, to its height, which is at least 100 metres to be featured on the list (it is obviously not), tens of thousand of condominiums, high-rises, apartments and offices, should be listed to date (which obviously, some should be and some shouldn't be). Those malls and residences, aren't particularly skyscraper. If you, just ask, Malaysians or local people, Muar, Skyscraper? They would laugh off the guts. Plaza Shell etc., skyscraper, not in a thousand years.
If you would like to help, well reform the template, leave a note, tqsm.
Regards, H. M. 11
- Feel free to leave a discussion note, if you disagree. Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 11:54, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Hypersonic man 11. I guess you mean Template:Skyscrapers in Malaysia. Muar Trade Centre (11 floors) and Plaza Shell (14 floors [2]) does sound low for a skyscraper. A navigation template isn't really something we make a project about. We have more than 100,000. Just edit it. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:25, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Not just this, but all. You see, this term, can cover thousands of building across all states. It's not just one, but a lot. Hence, can I just launch an attention? Would you lend a hand? Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 12:44, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Hypersonic man 11: I'm not helping but I have tagged Template talk:Skyscrapers in Malaysia with two WikiProjects. You could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Skyscrapers or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Malaysia but they have low activity. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:43, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, but to anyone that wants to lend a hand, please notify me ASAP. Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 07:03, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Hypersonic man 11: I'm not helping but I have tagged Template talk:Skyscrapers in Malaysia with two WikiProjects. You could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Skyscrapers or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Malaysia but they have low activity. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:43, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Not just this, but all. You see, this term, can cover thousands of building across all states. It's not just one, but a lot. Hence, can I just launch an attention? Would you lend a hand? Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 12:44, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Looking for feedback on my draft
I recently created the draft Draft:Jeannie Vanasco. I believe that Vanasco qualifies for notability because her latest book has been covered in multiple news sources (New York Times, NPR, Esquire, TIME) and because it has been described as adding something new to the MeToo conversation. This is my first time creating an article. I tried to use a reliable source for each fact included in the entry. Thank you for any help you can provide! I'd like to create more entries for 21st-century women memoirists. :)
Contributor1920 (talk) 12:05, 20 March 2021 (UTC) Contributor1920 (talk) 12:05, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- For one thing, don't just give the URL for a reference; instead, provide the author(s) (if stated), the title of the web page, the name of the website, and any other useful information. Also, if her book has been "covered" in these publications, then a reviewer for each will presumably have said something about it; you're free to summarize this. Happy editing! -- Hoary (talk) 12:48, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
How do I insert a new "reference" into someone else's edited-by-me article?
How do I insert a new "reference" into someone else's edited-by-me article, and then cite it in different places therein? Kisevalter Was Nash (talk) 12:26, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- I don't know what you mean by "someone else's edited-by-me article"; but no matter, because the way you add a new reference to any article is: (i) make sure that the reference is to a reliable, independent, published source; (ii) make sure that a reference to it would be helpful (that what you want to reference isn't adequately referenced already); (iii) at any one of these places (preferably the first), add <ref name="XYZ">content of reference</ref> (where XYZ is any string not used elsewhere for the same purpose); (iv) at each of the others, add <ref name="XYZ" />. -- Hoary (talk) 12:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Kisevalter Was Nash: Independent sources are needed to establish Wikipedia:Notability but not all sources have to be independent. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:08, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
" ... add <ref name="XYZ">content of reference</ref> (where XYZ is any string not used elsewhere for the same purpose); (iv) at each of the others, add <ref name="XYZ" /> "
Huh?
Kisevalter Was Nash (talk) 14:21, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Read WP:CITE carefully and come back if you are still puzzled, Kisevalter Was Nash. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Kisevalter Was Nash: Please see Help:Footnotes#Footnotes: using a source more than once - this expands on what Hoary said above. Nthep (talk) 14:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Independent sources are needed to establish Wikipedia:Notability but not all sources have to be independent. PrimeHunter (talk)
Thanks, but I'm not trying to establish the notability of the person, I'm trying to point out how there have been a lot of misconceptions floating around, for several years now, about him, and about the good and the bad people he dealt with, and about the situations they acted in, in general. The reputable book (published by Yale University Press) I'm trying to insert as a reference is the most accurate one on the KGB-versus-CIA wars of the Cold War I know of, and it tends to back me up on the edits I'm making in someone else's slightly misleading (imho) article. Kisevalter Was Nash (talk) 14:47, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Was Nash Kisevalter: That link to Help:Footnotes describes how to do it in wikitext. I'll just add for completeness that if you're using the "classic" 2010 editor, see Help:Footnotes#RefToolbar for a way to generate the markup by filling out a form. (Visual Editor and its brother 2017 NWE have a similar facility, but you don’t get to choose the name, it generates one of the form ":2". Mobile source editor doesn’t have a cite tool IIRC.) Some articles use different referencing styles such as list-defined references; the built-in tools cover the basic use case with inline references and {{cite book}}. Hope that helps, Pelagic ( messages ) – (11:33 Sun 21, AEDT) 00:33, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Photo of the wrong person.
When I google "George Kisevalter," up pops the link to the Wikipedia article on him, but the photo of the man in or near that link is of CIA officer William Hood, not George Kisevalter.
How to delete that photo and insert a correct one? Kisevalter Was Nash (talk) 12:32, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- If you're saying that there's a mistake in the Wikipedia article, then you're free to correct it. If OTOH you're saying that the Wikipedia article gets it right but Google makes a mistake, then this is a matter you're free to take up with Google. -- Hoary (talk) 12:36, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Kisevalter Was Nash: welcome to the Teahouse. That is a pretty common thing to happen with the Google "knowledge panel" – Google's algorithms combine information and pictures about different people quite incorrectly. Usually it is different people by the same name, but sometimes there is no understanding how the robots reasoned... Anyway, this is an issue with Google and Wikipedia cannot do anything to fix it, but my experience is that if you submit a report to Google, they often fix it fairly quickly. There is a link called "Feedback" below the panel and if you click it, you'll be taken to a form to report the error. --bonadea contributions talk 12:42, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hi Kisevalter Was Nash. There are no images of any kind currently being used in the article George Kisevalter. I'm not sure where the photo that shows up in Google is coming from (I can see it too), but (as Hoary and Bonadea posted above) that's an issue with Google not Wikipedia. Finally, Just curious about your choice of username. Do you by chance have any connection to George Kisevalter? -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:46, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Actually, I did figure out where the Google photo is coming from: it's from Georgy Kiesewalter. My guess is that this is just a mix-up due to the similarity of the names that has nothing to do with Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Kisevalter Was Nash: George Kisevalter has no photo. My Google search shows the photo in Georgy Kiesewalter, an unrelated person. That article mentions "Kisevalter" as a wrong anglicized form and calls him "George Kiesewalter" in a link to his offical site which uses that spelling, so I can understand Google's error. Google's "Feedback" link is your best chance to remove the wrong image. If you can find a free photo and add it to George Kisevalter then Google may use it but we have no control over that. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:59, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- FWIW, I added hatnotes cross-referencing the two. Doesn’t fix Google, but it may help our readers.
;)
— Pelagic ( messages ) – (12:38 Sun 21, AEDT) 01:38, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Help Resources for Social Issue Entries
Can we add in help resources in posts that addresses social issues, so that victims and allies have more access to the help and education they need? Achingtaurus (talk) 12:56, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Achingtaurus Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is not an uncommon proposal, and it is usually rejected because those sorts of things are outside of our mission to build an encyclopedia. If a person has access to Wikipedia, they also have access to search engines where they can easily find such things. 331dot (talk) 13:00, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Problem regarding the semi-protection of Talk:Main Page
WP:ERRORS states that "[a]ny other Main Page errors" should be stated in the General discussion section of Talk:Main Page. As this is a newly created account, and Talk:Main Page is semi-protected, I am not able to post my suggestion there. The suggestion i wish to make is (at least in my opinion) not a controversial one, simply that "Norsk Bokmål" should be changed to "Norsk bokmål" in the list at the very bottom of the Main Page. What should i do? Odelslova (talk) 13:11, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Odelslova, welcome to the Teahouse. The languages are added by Template:Wikipedia languages. Suggestions belong at Template talk:Wikipedia languages which everybody can edit. "Norsk Bokmål" is specified in Template:Wikipedia languages/core. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:52, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- The fact that the list of other-language wikis on the left of the Main Page uses the version with the lower-case bokmål, suggests that the OP may have a point. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:41, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for replying! I will leave a suggestion at Template talk:Wikipedia languages. Odelslova (talk) 15:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- The fact that the list of other-language wikis on the left of the Main Page uses the version with the lower-case bokmål, suggests that the OP may have a point. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:41, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
DhoLuo
Would you permit for DHOLUO translation Project of the projects as its a major language spoken in Uganda,Tanzania and Uganda. Combijah (talk) 13:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Combijah. I've read your question a few times. I understand that you're asking something about a project with respect to translating to or from Dholuo, but nothing more. Can you expand a bit about the issue that brought you here? If it's possibly helpful, please see Wikipedia:Translation and Wikipedia:Translate us. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:01, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Combijah If you are requesting the creation of a Dholuo Wikipedia, this is not the concern of the English Wikipedia. Please see meta:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Dholuo.--Shantavira|feed me 17:00, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Combijah, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are asking about the possibility of a Wikipedia in Dholuo, there is a Wikipedia in Luo under test: see incubator:Wp/luo. --ColinFine (talk) 17:04, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
url-access on paywalled articles that can be accessed freely
When referencing a paywalled article which can also be accessed freely on archive.today, should I still set url-access
to subscription
? Kleinpecan (talk) 15:53, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, Kleinpecan. Please do so. Same for
registration
andlimited
TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:11, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Can one use archived copies of deleted tweets as references?
I have noticed bots removing Wayback-archived versions of deleted tweets. Is there a Wikipolicy against using removed Twitter posts? Thanks. Cloudbearer (talk) 16:42, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Cloudbearer: See WP:RSPTWITTER, from which I take the short answer to be "yes don't use twitter at all" and the slightly longer answer to be "only use it in very limited and special cases." Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:56, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Help with paraphrasing
May I have some help with paraphrasing Isla, Espinosa, and Iantanos when they say: "the Baker River activated capturing the drainage of both basins towards the Pacific Ocean. The deactivation of the Pinturas and Deseado systems caused the lowering of progressive younger fluvial terraces, a record of hanging tidal flats at the inlet"?[1] I understand what it means, but the wording and technical language is so dense that I don't really know how to best, or how to, unpack it for the reader without using similar verbiage. Thanks! Tyrone Madera (talk) 16:55, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
References
- ^ Isla, Federico Ignacio; Espinosa, Marcela; Iantanos, Nerina (2015-03-01). "Evolution of the Eastern flank of the North Patagonian Ice Field: The deactivation of the Deseado River (Argentina) and the activation of the Baker River (Chile)". Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie. 59 (1): 119–131. doi:10.1127/0372-8854/2014/0149. ISSN 0372-8854. In "New Findings from Department of Geology in Geomorphology Provides New Insights [Evolution of the Eastern flank of the North Patagonian Ice Field: The deactivation of the Deseado River (Argentina) and the activation of the Baker River (Chile)]." Science Letter. NewsRX LLC. 1 May 2015. p. 936. Retrieved via Gale Academic OneFile.
I am guessing that this in relation to your adding a History section to Cueva de las Manos with the abovementioned quote from Isla et al. I recommend being less detailed and not quoting. From the article, I think that you could write: The Pinturas and Deseado Rivers drained to the Atlantic Ocean, and in doing so provided water for herds of guanacos, making the area attractive to paleoindians. As the glacial ice fields melted, the Baker River captured the drainage of the eastward flowing rivers and redirected the flow to the Pacific Ocean. This led to a progressive abandonment of the Las Manos site.
This way, you can leave out the fluvial terraces and hanging tidal flats, and still convey what happened. David notMD (talk) 18:28, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- David notMD, thanks for your help! Yeah, it's related to the Cueva de las Manos history section. Should I credit you in the paraphrase, or is that redundant or unnecessary? Tyrone Madera (talk) 19:16, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- I am very much a behind the scenes sort of person. No need to acknowledge me in the article's Talk David notMD (talk) 00:14, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
New Page
Greetings! I recently submitted a draft page for review, and I haven't heard anything about it being accepted. It does not show up on the search, so I assume it's still pending. When can I expect my page to be added to the Wikipedia library? Thanks for any information you can provide. Here's the page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sam_Byrd --Rkwbyrd (talk) 17:20, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- You didn't submit it for review (you have to click a button to do it). Also, I don't want to discourage you but I'm afraid it won't be accepted in its current form because it doesn't have any references. Kleinpecan (talk) 17:36, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Rkwbyrd, and welcome to the Teahouse. I've added a header to Draft:Sam Byrd with a button that you can pick when you think that the draft is ready for review. However, at present it is nowhere near ready. Like many inexperienced editors you have plunged into the extremely difficult task of creating an article without understanding what is important and what is less so. Absolutely the most important part of any article are the references to reliable sources, wholly unconnected with the subject, because Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. None of the external links in your draft is in any way relevant to grounding an article about Byrd.
- Furthermore, judging by your user name, I guess you have a connection with Byrd. If so, you have a conflict of interest in writing about him - please read that link. If Byrd meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then somebody unconnected will in time get round to writing an article about him. If he doesn't, then any time and effort spent by you or anybody else on an article about him will be time wasted. --ColinFine (talk) 17:37, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- See WP:TOOSOON for why not try to create an article too early in a person's career. David notMD (talk) 18:35, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Creating an Article in Main Space
Hello. First, I would like to thank the bot who welcomed me here. Second, I would like to know why I am being redirected to either sandbox or Article Wizard, upon creating an article? My contributions will show that I managed to create not one, but four articles yesterday by using a redirect, since I was unable to create them without it.:(--Filmomusico (talk) 18:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Filmomusico: You stumbled upon a shortcut for new article creating, and that is overwriting redirects. Doing it that way does not flag the new page patrol editors, as it would if you used the wizard, but people who are monitoring large changes to existing articles will see them. In your case, the articles look like they are being restored as redirects because the albums do not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines. See WP:NALBUM. I recommend you start a discussion on the band’s talk page. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 19:33, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Filmomusico: you can always modify the URL in your browser adress bar to directly create an article in mainspace. the format you are looking for is
https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Your article name goes here&action=edit&redlink=1
. Alternatively, you can use this nice box:
- However, please be aware that articles created directly in mainspace are required to be at least a valid stub, and conform to the most content policies. If you are not sure, use the Draft namespace. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:37, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Victor Schmidt: But it sends me back to Article Wizard. I have some very good sources for couple of articles on film. To be honest with you, only 2 were restored. The rest were fixed and remained.--Filmomusico (talk) 19:43, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- This is exactly why I don't do the Article Wizard:
This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order.
--Filmomusico (talk) 19:48, 20 March 2021 (UTC)- Filmomusico, in three days you will be autoconfirmed, and able to create articles directly in main space. I always advise editors in your position not to do so, because unless you can create an article well enough in one attempt, it will probably get deleted or draftified quickly; but if you have a 50% record of articles remaining already, perhaps you'll be able to make it work. I will say, though, what's your hurry? --ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @ColinFine: No hurry at all, I just wasn't aware that it takes 3 days to become autoconfirmed. I thought it's within 24 hours.:)--Filmomusico (talk) 02:25, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Filmomusico, in three days you will be autoconfirmed, and able to create articles directly in main space. I always advise editors in your position not to do so, because unless you can create an article well enough in one attempt, it will probably get deleted or draftified quickly; but if you have a 50% record of articles remaining already, perhaps you'll be able to make it work. I will say, though, what's your hurry? --ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Notable enough?
It was recommended to me that an article be created for cement alternatives. While some new materials are admixtures of cement and additives (air, hemp), others are new materials which are desirable for their lower carbon cost in manufacture and use. The article would talk about these two types of alternatives. The new material, Ferrock and Carbicrete have won development grants of some millions of dollars and been published in the journal of the University of Arizona. The idea was presented by someone who is developing a cement alternative. I am a climate activist.
Is this article notable enough for inclusion?
-Edit to say I do have references, it's in my draft. Not sure where to put the draft or who to show it to- Thank you Nellas Galadhon (talk) 20:25, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Nellas Galadhon: Whether this topic meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion - called "notability" - depends on the quality of your independent reliable sources, and whether you have a conflict of interest. The instructions at Help:Your first article will help you make a draft. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:55, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Nellas Galadhon, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please look at notability - as long as you have several reliable sources wholly unconnected with the inventors then you may be able to establish it is notable, but if the only sources are from them, their institution, their funders etc, then those will not count towards notability and an article will not be accepted. When you write your draft, remember that Wikipedia is basically not interested in what the inventors say or want to say: the article must be almost 100% based on what people who have no connection with them have published about the materialt it may be TOOSOON. In any case, please see your first article for how to go about making your draft. --ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Linking to a picture in Google Street View
Dear Sir/Madam, I am trying to use an image from Google Street View. Google's policy indicates that I can link to the image, but can't save it as a picture and upload it. Under these circumstances how can I use a link to a street view image in my article?
Thank you! Hlaskoart (talk) 21:31, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Hlaskoart, and welcome to the Teahouse. The policy for where and when external links are permitted is very restrictive: please see WP:External links. --ColinFine (talk) 21:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Hlaskoart: Welcome to the Teahouse! You might want to consider if Template:External media would meet your needs. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your help! Hlaskoart — Preceding undated comment added 22:18, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Past or Present Tense
When writing a list of events in a timeline which tense do you use? For example,Would it be January 9 – The 2010 South Korean Figure Skating Championships are held in Seoul on January 10 or January 9 – The 2010 South Korean Figure Skating Championships were held in Seoul on January 10? Looking through similar articles I have found a amjority are in present tense. Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 22:00, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Gandalf the Groovy: I suggest using the past tense for previous events per MOS:TENSE. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:02, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Gandalf the Groovy: On the other hand, present tense is used in featured content such as Timeline of chemistry and Timeline of the Manhattan Project. I've never been able to find explicit WP guidelines on this topic, but many other WP timelines use present tense, as do most non-WP timelines. (See also the close of Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive 142#Request for comment regarding tense for past events.) Deor (talk) 17:33, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Relevance of topic within article Stacey Plaskett
In the article on Stacey Plaskett, section Personal life, the second paragraph about the actions of her former staffers seems inappropriate and irrelevant. I propose to delete the paragraph and the associated citations. The third paragraph seems out of place but I don't know where to put it. Comments, please? CMtemCA (talk) 23:47, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- In my opinion. delete both paragraphs. State clearly in your Edit summary that you deleted referenced content that in your opinion was not relevant to her personal life. You may also want to make an entry on the Talk page of the article, stating the same. That way, if reverted, you have already started a discussion that you can direct the reverting editor to. David notMD (talk) 00:23, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- OK - done. Thanks! CMtemCA (talk) 20:23, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Username change
Hello, my name is Rafael A. Reese, and I am requesting that my user name be changed to rafaelreese38. I was rushing and I didn't go through the page carefully before picking the user name. rafaelreese38 is the user name I use for everything; my new user name is always in small case. I would appreciate it very much if you can please help me change my old user name to my requested new one before I continue writing my page. Thank you very much for helping me with this !!!!!! Rafael A. Reese (talk) 00:01, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Rafael A. Reese Hello. You may make a request to change your username at Special:GlobalRenameRequest. Technical limitations prevent the first letter from being lower case, but you can add a signature to display lower case. See WP:SIGNATURE. 331dot (talk) 00:07, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, my name is Rafael A. Reese, and I am requesting that my username be changed to RafaelReese38. I was rushing and I didn't go through the page carefully before picking the username. RafaelReese38 is the new username I would like to use. I would appreciate it very much if you can please help me change my old username to my requested new one before I continue writing my page. Thank you very much for helping me with this!!!!!! This is the only Username I want to use. Rafael A. Reese (talk) 01:33, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- you just asked this. see answer above RudolfRed (talk) 01:44, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Rafael, see the answer above. Pelagic ( messages ) – (13:00 Sun 21, AEDT) 02:00, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, my name is Rafael A. Reese, and I am requesting that my username be changed to RafaelReese38. I was rushing and I didn't go through the page carefully before picking the username. RafaelReese38 is the new username I would like to use. I would appreciate it very much if you can please help me change my old username to my requested new one before I continue writing my page. Thank you very much for helping me with this!!!!!! This is the only Username I want to use. Rafael A. Reese (talk) 01:57, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Log out of "Rafael A. Reese". Register, and log in, and edit, as "RafaelReese38". Forget about "Rafael A. Reese". (You could ask to be renamed, but you haven't made any substantial contributions, so nobody would benefit, while somebody would have to spend their time doing the renaming.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:28, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Rafael A. Reese, your question has been comprehensively answered; please don't ask it yet again. -- Hoary (talk) 02:39, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Asked seven times now, in various places. I have provided the user with a link to this thread so he can find it again. Meters (talk) 03:43, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Cuban food tax question
Cuban food tax Fidelcastro2 (talk) 00:06, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Fidelcastro2, come again? Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 00:22, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Draft:Cuban Food Tax has no references. What is/are your question(s). David notMD (talk) 00:53, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Unconstructiveness
well recently my changes were reverted for "unconstructiveness" i dont understand this. please state why.(less go) Zzinedd (talk) 00:24, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Your edits to Dababa were clearly vandalism, and you were warned. David notMD (talk) 00:32, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Zzinedd, I think you know exactly why your edits were reverted, friend. [3] and [4]. Filling the page with nonsense about "da baba is the island of dababy (less go)" and then randomly placing more "less goes" is considered vandalism. Please refrain from doing so ever again or you risk being blocked from editing. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 00:35, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Aaaand ... they are now blocked for WP:NOTHERE after abusing other editors on their talk page. (more go) — Pelagic ( messages ) – (13:48 Sun 21, AEDT) 02:48, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Small bug that needs fixing
Citations #26 and #27 are the same on this page. Is there a way to change this? I only need one citation but for some reason it's not letting me erase the duplicate. TrevortniDesserpedx (talk) 00:43, 21 March 2021 (UTC) TrevortniDesserpedx (talk) 00:43, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- EDG did it. David notMD (talk) 00:51, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Trevortnidesserped, I have remedied the issue for you, friend. Have a nice day! Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 00:52, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Created a page by mistake
Hello. I meant to start a draft page for an article but published an actual page instead: Ballet Florida. Would someone please help me revert it somehow to a draft? Sorry for the trouble!! Remando (talk) 01:07, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Remando, no trouble at all, friend! I have moved it to Draft:Ballet Florida for you. Take care now! Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 01:13, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- @EDG 543, bless you! Remando (talk) 01:16, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Where to look to see how a more experienced members are formatting their references in articles?
When, for example, I click "edit source" on the "References" part of the Yuri Nosenko article, all I see below the big symbols box is something that creates this (template?):
==References==
{{reflist |30em | refs =
}}
Question: Is there anything I can do to see, for learning purposes only, how other members are formatting their references? Was Kisevalter Nash? (talk) 01:48, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, WKN, if you edit the page in source mode, you'll see what code they have used. You can then cancel the edit without making any changes. The most common form is like
<ref name="blah">{{cite book| title=... |authorlast=...}}</ref>
Usually it's in the text where the footnote marker is shown, and the References section only has{{Reflist}}
. — Pelagic ( messages ) – (13:11 Sun 21, AEDT) 02:11, 21 March 2021 (UTC)- Hello, Was Kisevalter Nash?. Almost all Wikipedia articles use inline references. The wikicode that generates each reference is added to the source code directly after the sentence or paragraph that it supports. The reflist template then gathers up all of those references and displays them properly in the References section. Please read Referencing for beginners for all the details. To see "best practices" by very experienced editors, take a look at some Featured articles, which have gone through rigorous peer review. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:34, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, Jim, you explained that better than I did. Pelagic ( messages ) – (13:52 Sun 21, AEDT) 02:52, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Was Kisevalter Nash?. Almost all Wikipedia articles use inline references. The wikicode that generates each reference is added to the source code directly after the sentence or paragraph that it supports. The reflist template then gathers up all of those references and displays them properly in the References section. Please read Referencing for beginners for all the details. To see "best practices" by very experienced editors, take a look at some Featured articles, which have gone through rigorous peer review. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:34, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry WKN, I understand the question better now. Try edit source on the section where the reference is introduced, rather than on the References section. (Edit source on the full page will also work, but it could be overwhelming on a long page.) There can also be entries listed inside
{{Reflist |refs= ...}}
(WP:LDN), the software handles both, so you may have to look in both locations. Pelagic ( messages ) – (13:29 Sun 21, AEDT) 02:29, 21 March 2021 (UTC) - Just going to point out it is possible to add the formatted citations to the "References" section of an article and then add links to these citations inline near the text they support as explained in Help:Shortened footnotes, but this style isn't as common as the one described above by Cullen328 and it's also a bit trickier to use. I'm only bringing it up because you will find some WP:FAs and WP:GAs which use this citation style when you go looking for examples of how to format citations. Some other important things about citations are explained in WP:CITESTYLE and MOS:DATEUNIFY. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
What to do about articles that are beyond repair
What to do about articles that are beyond repair and would be easy to just write from the scratch rather than trying to fix it? For example Datacard Group. It is promotional & lot of sources that don't fulfil our standards. WP:TNT applies for such cases? Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:57, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- In my opinion an article that has been in existence for ten years and has had dozens of editors work on it should not be TNT'd. Instead, delete crap, replace bad references, and then build it up. In my experience revising dietary supplement articles, there was always a core of valid information that was worth saving. (Although for Tocotrienol it took cutting from 60,000 to 20,000 bytes to unearth it.) David notMD (talk) 11:18, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- A problem with this article is that it overlaps with Entrust. If I understand history, Datacard Group bought Entrust, and then later renamed itself Entrust (Wah!). David notMD (talk) 11:40, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
I want sandbox
The sentenced one (talk) 08:24, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi The sentenced one and welcome to the Teahouse. There should be a link to your sandbox near the top right of any Wikipedia page. After you click it just type what you like in the text box and publish it to save it.--Shantavira|feed me 08:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Am I being targeted by this editor?
Hello house, I have the feeling that an editor has deliberately decided to limit my progress here. I have endured accusations and insults, pulling down my works and tagging my articles with issues, moving my articles to draft and so on. I registered to edit Wikipedia one year ago, had a few edits. I changed countries and found myself with enough free time this year and I decided to dedicate this time towards contributing to the development of articles on Wikipedia. I decided to join the Wikipedia:project women in red and and business project. Though I am still finding it difficult to get used to the rules here, I have always improved my edits. I created an article with the title Nengi Rebecca Hamson and I was told that same article had been created and was deleted. An editor queried my choice of editing that particular article and requested that I give my reasons before I continued to edit. I explained myself and I got a reply from Fiddle Faddle, in his words: Thank you for your full and open declaration. It is precisely the declaration needed. It is necessary sometimes to ask these questions, and to have them answered. There is no stain on your character. Please enjoy editing Wikipedia. I have strived to be a better editor and ALL my choice of articles are from the list of women in red project, [5], under US, but a certain editor has reversed one of my recent articles created, Sarah Friar and moved the article to draft, [6], asking me to explain my decision to create that article. In his words, Would you be so kind as to explain your choice of article creations? That is, how do you select & decide what articles to write about? You are Nigerian and often create articles on non notable foreign entrepreneurs and I’m a tad bit puzzled by this. Is there a competition going on or something? Of course no policy prevents nor restricts you from creating any article of your choice but I really do want to know, how do you decide on what article to create? Furthermore, you might want to learn policy on the optimization of files prior using them else you risk getting indef blocked for multiple image copyvio's. I do not have files on that article, why am I being threatened with indef block? Let me also add that the same article about Sarah Friar was edited by Theroadislong who assisted me to make some corrections on the article. I will be pleased if other editors go through my edit summary/contributions and my articles and give me a second opinion. I have NEVER contested any of the reverse edits and I do not plan to do so now either. I just want to avoid communication with the editor because his comments are way too harsh. Once I notice any message from him about my articles having one issue or the other, I just move on with my life, because communication with the editor is not personally pleasing to me. I want to learn more, I am opened to learning, but I feel like I am being bullied. The same editor has called me useless and stupid for forgetting to sign my comment on his talk page. Please I need help. Thank you. MesutOzula (talk) 08:27, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- MesutOzula, Wikipedia is not always a sweet and gentle place, but your experience is not typical. Regardless of any underlying issues which may or may not be present (I have accepted your declaration on your talk page) all of us have a duty to remain civil and to assume good faith in our dealings with others.
- I am concerned that you report that this is not happening.
- Generally, a dispute such as this can be resolved by avoiding the other editor. This is not always possible. So asking for help is the correct thing to do. The question for you is, what type of outcome would you like to see?
- Before you answer that, I'd like to draw your attention very clearly to one important fact about moving to any form of dispute resolution here. Fair or unfair, you need to read and read a second time WP:BOOMERANG. Once a dispute resolution process starts the outcome can be surprising. The dealings of all parties are examined, and verdicts by the community can boomerang on the person asking for help. Be clear: I am not making any accusation of any description, I am simply saying what happens, and asking you to consider this with care before you start a process running.
- The first piece of advice was to avoid the other editor. The second is to seek to ignore them. If that does not work the third is to ask them stop interacting with you. I suggest that only then do you consider dispute resolution. Fiddle Faddle 08:55, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- MesutOzula, if your purpose is to help improve Wikipedia, there are many easier, more rewarding, more constructive, and less frustrating ways than trying to create articles about living people of doubtful notability. Maproom (talk) 09:42, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- I doubt that ignoring the other Editor will help in this case after all what I have read in the last couple of minutes. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:47, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Courtesy so others do not have to search like me - the editor refers obviously (among other) to User_talk:Celestina007#Thank_you_for_the_advice CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:47, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Timtrent, thank you for the advice. To answer your question on what type of outcome I would like to see; I believe that this is a faceless forum of intellectuals. I do not know the editor and never plan to, therefore, it pays me nothing to want to pick up a fight with them, considering their standing and profile here, I couldn't possible go up against them in a dispute, I would most probably lose. Again, even if I could match them, I do not want to engage them at all. I just want to edit Wikipedia. But if there are laid down community sanctions to that end, then I will fully corporate with whatever process involved.
- It is enough that I am still trying to get used to the technical challenges that come with editing Wikipedia as a new editor, it just does not seem fair for those challenges to be compounded by deliberate attempts by an experienced editor. Let me add that I am not bothered by the corrections. Like I mentioned earlier, I am opened to corrections and Chastisement where necessary. I am just not okay with being stalked and bullied to bow out. Thank you. MesutOzula (talk) 09:55, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- MesutOzula, I think that, looking at the sound advice from Maproom to avoid living people of doubtful notability, you are following a reasonable quest to add people from Nigeria to Wikipedia. May I join their advice in suggesting that you start with those of obvious notability, learning the ways of this place, before moving to see if you are able to establish and verify notability for those less deserving.
- It might be a good idea to start by enhancing other articles before going back to creating new ones
- In all probability this will mean you and the other editor are less likely to coincide in a combative scenario. Note, though, that they specialise in the part of the world you are editing in and that they are strongly protective of Wikipedia. Indeed we all are. Fiddle Faddle 10:17, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- It is enough that I am still trying to get used to the technical challenges that come with editing Wikipedia as a new editor, it just does not seem fair for those challenges to be compounded by deliberate attempts by an experienced editor. Let me add that I am not bothered by the corrections. Like I mentioned earlier, I am opened to corrections and Chastisement where necessary. I am just not okay with being stalked and bullied to bow out. Thank you. MesutOzula (talk) 09:55, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- First of all, @MesutOzula, I am a she/her & no one has called you useless or stupid so quit with the gaslighting and feel free to provide diffs to the contrary.
- My comments to you have always been factual and policy based. You have thus far created numerous articles on subjects with dubious notability. In fact, you first drew my attention when @Timtrent made this edit where they moved an article you created back to draftspace, that very article has been edited severally by the Nigerian UPE ring who have six times now unsuccessfully tried to move the article into mainspace so naturally I took a look at your history and what I observed was you creating biographical articles of dubious notability. I gave you a piece of advice, you said you understood, but what did you do? You proceeded to create more articles on individuals with dubious notability & other editors also had to drafitfy your articles, see here & also had an article you created G12 speedy deleted see here so the comments pertaining to your image copyright violation weren’t based on the Draft:Sarah Friar article, rather I was speaking generally, you have thus far violated both general article copyvio's & image copyvio's and a look at your talkpage would compel any concerned editor to tell you the same. No one is targeting you but if you have more than three editors telling you the same thing, chances are it is you who is in the wrong & it’s behoove of you to study imperative policies before attempting to create any more articles, let alone biographical articles on living persons which requires extra care. You literally could have bypassed all this drama had you just answered the question. Lastly if you keep violating our policy on copyrights you would get blocked, it’s literally a factual statement and not a threat. Celestina007 (talk) 18:10, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- @MesutOzula You have just been given a final warning by a sysop which invariably means another copyright vio from you would result in a block. I don’t see why you would refuse to adhere to our policy on copyvio’s but choose the WP:IDHT route which is just disruptive editing at this point. Celestina007 (talk) 00:36, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- Celestina007, The editor that passed the warning said everything that needed to be said, there was actually no need for you to repeat the same message here. It is not as if I recently created the said page. It was my FIRST article on Wikipedia more than one year ago. Anyways, that is not the point. I wish to humbly plead you do not contact me nor communicate with me anymore, unless you are, moving my page, tagging or carrying out official communique, please, do not communicate with me anymore. I have done all I could to avoid you. If I violate a rule and you have to take action, the summary of the action would do, no need for personal messages anymore, please.MesutOzula (talk) 07:49, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @MesutOzula You have just been given a final warning by a sysop which invariably means another copyright vio from you would result in a block. I don’t see why you would refuse to adhere to our policy on copyvio’s but choose the WP:IDHT route which is just disruptive editing at this point. Celestina007 (talk) 00:36, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Why cannot Wikipedia cite itself, from say another page or language?
Why cannot Wikipedia cite itself, from say another page or language? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crocusfleur (talk • contribs) 11:21, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- A simple answer is that as anyone can edit Wikipedia, the Wikipedia articles are not considered verified. The solution: if there is information in a Wikipedia article that you want to use, copy the content AND the references supporting that content (remembering to acknowledge in the Edit summary where the information was copied from). Or, copy the refs and paraphrase the content, again acknowledging source for the references. As for other languages, Wikipedia English has different standards for what are considered reliable source references, so referenced content in a non-English Wikipedia may not be valid in English Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 11:50, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- To add to that answer, this would essentially be a circular reference, i.e. "This is right because I say it's right". Circular references are basically useless when it comes to verifiability. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 20:09, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Writing stupid things
If Wikipedia is to help people why do you let peeps write stupid things on your subjects? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hdhhdhbd (talk • contribs) 12:48, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Questioner is blocked. -- Hoary (talk) 13:11, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Worthy books that are not widely reviewed
While I agree that some books are probably not worth being included in Wikipedia, I think Wikipedia's goal of collecting all the worthwhile knowledge of civilization requires that we include some books that didn't sell well enough to be widely reviewed. How can I demonstrate that a book I want to add to Wikipedia is worthy, despite there being few references available? Peter Jedicke (talk) 13:58, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Pjedicke: Well references are how you prove that a subject is notable. If no references exist, then it doesn't fit the guidelines. Also, WP:BK has specific instructions for books, but it still requires coverage in most cases. βӪᑸᙥӴ • Talk • Contribs 14:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Pjedicke: "widely reviewed" isn't really necessary, two reviews from reliable sources should suffice. If there isn't significant coverage in reliable sources, how could you write a well-sourced article? If you can, then it's probably not an issue. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:40, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Agreed. Just make sure you don't use primary sources where you don't need to. I can tell you from experience that if you can only find primary sources it's going to be deleted. βӪᑸᙥӴ • Talk • Contribs 15:43, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Indeed, secondary sources are necessary - though primary sources can be used for the plot, within reason. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Agreed. Just make sure you don't use primary sources where you don't need to. I can tell you from experience that if you can only find primary sources it's going to be deleted. βӪᑸᙥӴ • Talk • Contribs 15:43, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Not "some" books; the vast majority of books don't merit articles, imho. Of the minority, "articles" (stubs) could be written about a lot, but I've no reason to think that they'd be beneficial. Although a copy of Laurie Bauer's Morphological Productivity sits on my shelf and I don't at all regret the purchase (quite the contrary), I'm not convinced that the article is worthwhile: better, I think, to have integrated what Bauer and his critics have said into the material here about the phenomenon of morphological productivity. Anyway, I don't suppose the book has sold more than a few hundred copies; and yet it does have reviews, because people interested in its subject-matter (a minority taste, to be sure) would want to know about it. Yet the same logic would probably say that a book about the history of such-and-such a defunct brand of motorcycle, car, camera or espresso-maker also merits an article. Do you want that stuff too? (Who'd maintain it?) As for "all the worthwhile knowledge of civilization", you need civilization for mass transit, and I find knowledge of the timetable of my local rail services immensely worthwhile and can present reliable sources for it, but it has no place in Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 00:48, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
The answer to my question, then, is that some folks don't see Wikipedia the same way I do. I think the Morphological Productivity book deserves an article -- even if I confess I certainly never would have stumbled upon it myself. The article I wrote that was rejected, which motivated me to pose this question, contained about as much information as the Morphological Productivity article, so I like to think that applying the same criteria to both books would get my article re-instated. Perhaps I'll be able to find a few more references to the book I wrote about. I like to think that a book is worthy if a responsible volunteer contributor is motivated to share that book with Wikipedia users. Anyway, thanks for giving me something to think about. Peter Jedicke (talk) 06:43, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Moving article from English page to Portuguese
I've written an article in Portuguese and it ended up in the English Wikipedia page by accident. Is it possible to move it to the Portuguese page? Or will I have to start a new one? Megkawauchi (talk) 15:06, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- You could copy-paste the article to the Portuguese Wikipedia and request deletion of the one on the English Wikipedia per WP:G7, or tag the English article with
{{Not English}}
and list it at WP:NOTENGLISH. βӪᑸᙥӴ • Talk • Contribs 15:40, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Will do that! Thanks for your help! Megkawauchi (talk) 16:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Can I add a reddit community (sub) link in the "See also" or "External links" section?
Hello, I am not sure of the policy of putting reddit community links in "See also" or "External links" section of an article. Can I add the reddit link if it is published in a secondary reliable source? To be specific, I would like to add https://www.reddit.com/r/exbahai to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_former_Baháʼís. Thank you. Serv181920 (talk) 16:43, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Serv181920. No this cannot be linked to for multiple reasons. See the external links content guideline. As a line in the sand, pages like this inevitably have material of questionable copyright status; see WP:ELNEVER. More generally this is simply not "neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject", and is within the ambit of WP:LINKSTOAVOID, such as WP:NOSOCIAL. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:06, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Got it. Thanks.Serv181920 (talk) 17:09, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
About Yorkshire Terriers - In The British Isles Today
Hi I contributed a piece on the above subject. This piece was original in Our Dogs under Traditional Yorkshire Terriers Are Great. It was removed by someone called cavalryman or similar. WHY please? Classicyorks (talk) 17:30, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Classicyorks. You did not provide enough information about the source you cited for anyone to verify the content, or whether or not it is actually a reliable source. Please see Referencing for beginners. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:36, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Creating a page
Hi, can someone do me a favour? Can you please create a page named ‘Central Scotland Young Labour’ and put an info box with the following titles : Chair Vice Chair Secretary Membership and Campaigns Officer Women’s Officer Mother party Website
you can just leave all the information inside them as ‘TBC’ thank you! Sylperson (talk) 20:02, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Not a chance. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 20:10, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Scottish Young Labour, which you have been editing (probably with an undeclared conflict of interest), exists, as a marginal article, with unreferenced content. Creating a Wikipedia accepted article for Central Scottish Young Labour extremely unlikely. David notMD (talk) 20:32, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Sylperson, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks as if you have a very common misconception: that Wikipedia has anything at all to to with telling the world about your organisation (aka promotion). It does not. An article about your organisation does not belong to your organisation, will not necessarily say what your organisation wants it to say, and should be based almost entirely on what people who have no connection with your organisation have chosen to publish about it, not on what the organisation says or wants to say about itself. It follows that if there is little independent material about the organisation published in reliable sources, then there is literally nothing that can go in an article about it, and Wikipedia will not accept any article about it: the jargon for this is that the subject is or isn't notable. Finally, you have a conflict of interest (guessing from your username) and shouldn't be editing such an article directly anyway. --ColinFine (talk) 20:50, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Clearing history
Is it possible to clear WP history without me having to completely clear the browsing data on my computer? Thank you, Lettlerhello • contribs 20:59, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Lettler If you are referring to your edit history logged here on Wikipedia, there is no way to remove it. If you are referring to Wikipedia browsing data on your computer, you would need to go into the settings of your browser and delete the files related to Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 21:03, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- 331dot, I mean my view history, not my edit history. Lettlerhello • contribs 21:04, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Merging in
Need help on merging in Karu-Sil information into the Karu-Sil Draft. Lady Orthodoxy (talk) 21:54, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Lady Orthodoxy, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid I don't understand what you're asking: what information? What do you mean by merging? But what I will say is that at present Draft:Karu-Sil has no independent sources at all, and therefore does not establish that Karu-Sil meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Unless you or somebody adds to the draft citations to several places where people who have no connection with DC or Van Scriver have chosen to write at some length specifically about Karu-Sil, and been published in reliable sources, then the draft has no chance of being accepted as a Wikipedia article, and all time that you spend or have spent on the draft will be wasted. --ColinFine (talk) 22:06, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Article request
Someone at wikipedia needs to create an article about Marion Miley. Kentucky U.S. Women’s amateur golf player who was murdered a during robbery at her home on September 28, 1941. Tuktoyyuktuk (talk) 00:50, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- That's an excellent suggestion, Tuktoyyuktuk. Anyone can create it, so maybe you? At any rate, I've relayed your suggestion to Women in Red, a group of editors who focus on woman biographies. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:58, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hi Tuktoyyuktuk. Please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:Notability (people) and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a blog, web hosting service, social networking service, or memorial site for some more details, but basically anyone wanting to create a Wikipedia:Article about Miley is going to need to establish that she has received significant coverage in reliable sources. Since she was killed so many years ago, it might be hard for to track down such sources. If there are any books, magazine articles, newspaper articles written about her that go beyond the fact that she was murdered (e.g. maybe she received press coverage for her exploits as a golfer or for some other reasons), then an article might be possible. If you can find such sources, then you can start a WP:DRAFT yourself and submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review when you think it's ready. Yu can find out more about writing articles in Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners. The important thing though is going to be to establish that Miley is Wikipedia notable for an article to be written about her: otherwise, any attempt to create such an article is unlikely to be approved regardless of who tries to write it or how beautifully it's written. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:08, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- There is plenty of reliable source coverage of Marion Miley, who was one of the most famous woman golfers of the late 1930s and early 1940s. There was a front page story in the New York Times when she was murdered. A 2020 book published by the University of Kentucky Press is devoted to her life and the murder. A lengthy 2020 article in the Palm Beach Post has plenty of biographical details. A book was published in 1993 about the warden who presided over the execution of the three men convicted of her murder, and according to a review published in the Chicago Tribune, it discusses this murder in great detail. An hour long documentary film about her life and the murder was broadcast on some PBS stations in 2016, and shown again in 2020. An annual women's golf tournament in her memory has been played for 75 years. She's notable. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:36, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- There you go Tuktoyyuktuk. I admit I didn't dig for sources before answering your question like Finnusertop and Cullen328 did and just was trying to give you some general advice. However, since Miley does appear to be Wikipedia notable, you can be bold and try and create an article about her yourself if you want. I still think it would probably be a good idea to start with a draft, but that's not required. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:52, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Time and date
I've noticed that sometimes while adding sources using the visual editor it adds tomorrow as the URL Access Date. What time zone is the visual editor running on and when it does that should I change it to the day I'm experiencing or is it such a small detail that it doesn't matter? TipsyElephant (talk) 01:57, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @TipsyElephant: I'm guessing the VE uses the same time zone as Wikipedia, which is UTC. RudolfRed (talk) 02:43, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- TipsyElephant, Wikipedia operates on Coordinated Universal Time and UTC is the acronym based on the name in French. It is the successor to Greenwich Mean Time. It is equivalent to the time zone that includes Iceland, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Portugal and numerous West African countries. Think of it as the master time zone or coordinated central clock for the whole world. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:03, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Translated Sources
If I'm using a source written in a different language should I use a transliteration or simply the characters of the language for the metadata of the citation. For instance, is it better to have a transliterated name for the author of the article? TipsyElephant (talk) 02:01, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- If you use a citation template (e.g {{citebook}}), then there are parameters such as
|script-title=
,|title=
,|trans-title=
and|language=
which can be used for a non-English source. The "script-title" parameter would be used for the original language (for example, Chinese), the "title" parameter would be a transliteration of the original title, the "trans-title" parameter would be for an English translation of the title, and the "language" parameter would be for the original language. If you decided to format the citation manually (i.e. without using a template), you could basically do the same thing if you just formatted the citation as it would look if you used the template, or you could follow a variation used in one of the major style guides listed in WP:CITESTYLE. The advantage of using a citation template is that consistency is pretty much guaranteed as long as you enter the parameters the same way. For author names, a transliterated name probably is better if possible, but you probably could use the original script-name instead. Names though can be a bit tricky if using a citation template because the template will tend to format the|first=
and|last=
parameters in the same order regardless of whether the original language follows that last-first name order (i.e. family name-given name order). There might also be different ways to romanize or transliterate the name depending upon the language. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:48, 22 March 2021 (UTC) - @TipsyElephant: I deal with Chinese language sources very often and usually leave the title and author as is; that is, not romanizing it or translating it. People may have different ways of romanizing their own names or go by a different English name, so I usually don’t try to alter that at all. I’m concerned about giving an inaccurate translation of the title, and romanizing that is basically useless, so I leave that alone as well. However, if an English name or subtitle is given, I put the English one. Similarly, if the source/news agency/publisher has a English name, I use that one. I only use the
|author=
field because Chinese names make no sense with a comma. It’s important to fill out the|language=
field every time. ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 03:50, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Request for specific comments to edit the article
I have submitted article for review. Read feedback about citation , references. most references are links which I have provided near each section of information to prove its correctness of content, sperately for journals and for sites. I don't know why it is not being accepted by Noah the robot? .. can someone specifically help with this query of how I have done citations & references in my article? And what is erroneous? Prachi.chopade (talk) 02:55, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Prachi.chopade. For the convenience of other editors, the draft in question is Draft:Prabhakar B. Bhagwat. First of all, User:-noah- is not a robot. User:-noah- is a human being. Your draft article contains promotional language praising the subject, which violates the Neutral point of view, and that is a core content policy. Remove all of that praise. There are several errors in the formatting of your references, which are generating red error messages in your reference list. These errors in the wikicode should be corrected. Referencing for beginners is an essay that should help you debug your wikicode. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:22, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- Additionally, Prachi.chopade, there's trivia. We read that he was "Member; Selection Committee for Selection of Architect"? Whose committee, and selection of an architect for what purpose? But no, please don't answer: his membership of any such committee would be unimportant; so just cut it. Also, the section on LEAF (as one example) is sourced to (i) LEAF itself, whereas we want independent sources, and to (ii) "'FOREST FOR THE TREES; TREES FOR THE FOREST' – THE MONOGRAPH": a monograph written by whom, published by whom? -- Hoary (talk) 04:34, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Is this a great article WQHS-DT
Is this a great article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WQHS-DT SparklesonApple (talk) 03:14, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- The referencing is abysmal. Writing not bad.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:47, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Where do I ask about a possible interfacing problem?
Hello,
I would like to know the correct place to ask about an issue I might be having with my device in the editing interface. I am using a niche browser with imported elements of Firefox, running in a customized virtual framework within a Linux OS configured to support dynamic routing protocols. However, there seems to be a problem with HTML on page reloading in the source editing interface. Has anyone else had this problem before? I’ve tried reconfiguring my custom browser settings but this doesn’t seem to be helping. Thanks. Krillzyx (talk) 05:23, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- Krillzyx perhaps Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) would be another place to post? Elli (talk | contribs) 05:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia Approval
I have studied thoroughly and learnt the usage and writing style of Wikipedia. I just want to know how long does it take for the wikipedia content to get approved ? Does it automatically move to the livespace after it is approved ? Nirju1998 (talk) 06:33, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- You should submit your draft for review by adding
{{subst:submit}}
to the top of the article. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. Kleinpecan (talk) 06:42, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
1 questions about Multiple issues template
I just ***love**** this page, you guys help me out so much! For a BARNSTAR, can you please help me?
RE:
- {{Multiple issues|
- {{citation style|date=May 2019}}
- {{Advert| date=March 2021}}
- {{Primary sources|date=March 2021}}
- {{COI|date=March 2021}}
- }}
(1) can I notify readers in the Multiple issues template that there is currently RFC on the talk page?
(2) How do i add:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion WP:PROMO Answer: {{Advert|date=March 2021}}
Thank you!
Infinitepeace (talk) 06:57, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Infinitepeace: welcome back to the Teahouse. No, an RfC is not publicised on the article page, neither in a standalone template, nor in a Multiple issues template. --bonadea contributions talk 07:51, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia
How do you talk to your host on wikipedia?? Ima Jewels (talk) 08:23, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
How do you talk to your host on wikipedia?? Ima Jewels (talk) 08:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- I'd try to answer your question, if I knew what you meant by "host". (I'm not aware that Wikipedia has "hosts".) -- Hoary (talk) 08:30, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- Or, Ima Jewels, do you mean Teahouse host? If so, just ask a question (about editing or using Wikipedia) on this page. And somebody, very likely a "host", will respond. -- Hoary (talk) 08:52, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Gympie Pyramid
hi, somebody is sabotaging my recent rewritten article 'Gympie Pyramid', leaving nasty comments with his changes. This text was edited by Doug Weller and he considered it as ready to be published. How can I report someone to be deleted? Wikigetsme123 (talk) 08:32, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- A quick (perhaps too quick) look doesn't show me sabotage or nasty comments, but it does suggest disagreement between you and InedibleHulk. The two of you should discuss this at Talk:Gympie Pyramid. -- Hoary (talk) 08:39, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- No way. This guy's crazy. Give him what he wants, I'll pretend I saw nothing. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:04, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Ajoy Hijam
Ajoy Hijam (talk) 09:09, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- Ajoy Hijam, do you have a question? If it's about creating a page about yourself, then simply, please don't attempt to create one. -- Hoary (talk) 09:16, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia
How do you edit your wikipedia page Ima Jewels (talk) 10:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- Ima Jewels If you mean that there is a Wikipedia article about you that you wish to edit, you should not do so directly, but you may make a formal edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page. If you mean that you wish to edit your user page, User:Ima Jewels, you appear to have already done so. 331dot (talk) 10:14, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Meet
Vishuvc007 (talk) 10:22, 22 March 2021 (UTC) Vishuvc007 (talk) 10:22, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- Vishuvc007 Since starting your account a week ago, all your edits have been reverted. Do you have a question? David notMD (talk) 11:17, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Article Declined
My first Article Declined Please help Me to verify my article Nabyl8899 (talk) 11:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- Nabyl8899 could you tell me which article was declined? Lovin'Politics (talk) 11:25, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:European_Clinic_Maldives this one i think this was not declined it is not accepted at this time. can you help me to get the article better. Lovin'Politics