Wikipedia:Teahouse

jmcgnh, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2–3 days.

Help Wikipedia

How to further edit my page to make it pass

Hey team, the link for the page I set up is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sora_Ventures

I have edited it multiple times but it just doesn't meet the standards. I was wondering what exactly I can do to make it pass, thanks! Since most of the sources I supplied are already secondary and stating facts Leestc (talk) 03:59, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello Leestc. I clicked on your Reference 3 and got "404 page not found." I know nothing about cryptocurrency, so I have no knowledge on what your draft needs to state to show notability. You may want to reach out to people at WikiProject Cryptocurrency and WikiProject Finance & Investment (links are on your draft's talk page) and ask for advice. Best wishes. Karenthewriter (talk) 04:21, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Karenthewriter, thanks for pointing that out! I've edited it. Leestc (talk) 02:55, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Leestc, this draft is strange from the very start. A reference normally backs up the proposition or propositions that it immediately follows, but this draft starts Sora Ventures^[1] is a Venture Capital firm headquartered^[2] in Taipei, Taiwan. Thus the first reference seems to back up the implicit claim that Sora Ventures exists, and the second that it's a venture capital [no need for capitals] firm that's headquartered. But its existence is demonstrated later, and (perhaps with a few exceptions) every firm is headquartered. -- Hoary (talk) 06:44, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Hoary, thanks for the concern. Why I put headquartered is because every venture firm (such as pantera, a16z) have headquarters in a specific city, hence why I put the wording like that. Any suggestions as to how you would phrase it? Leestc (talk) 02:55, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Leestc, I suspect that what you want to show is a reference for the claim that it's headquartered in Taipei. If so, then ... a venture capital firm headquartered in Taipei, Taiwan.^[2] As it is, you're just giving a reference for the claim that the company is "headquartered" (somewhere, somehow) -- an uninteresting fact because, as you say, every venture firm has headquarters in some city or other; whereas the reader might not know, and might want to know, which city. -- Hoary (talk) 05:27, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Hoary, thanks for the clarification, I've edited it. Are there any other suggestions that you have regarding the subject? Leestc (talk) 08:22, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Leestc, and welcome to the Teahouse. When a brand new editor immediately starts by trying to create an article, and works on no other articles, experience shows that the editor very often has a connection with the subject of the draft. Please clarify what connection you have with Sora Ventures. "I have no connection" is a perfectly acceptable answer, but if you are in any way connected with them, please read about editing with a conflict of interest. ColinFine (talk) 10:18, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @ColinFine, I have no connection with the subject of the draft, hence there would be no conflict of interest. But it is my first time creating an article, hence any help or guidance would be greatly appreciated, thanks! Leestc (talk) 02:53, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that, Leestc.

I've just looked at the first few sources. The current first one (Cryptoslate from December) and fourth one (Cryptoslate from this month) are largely based on interviews, so are not independent. The second one does no more than mention Sora. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

Please read Golden rule, and see which of your sources matches all of those criteria. If the answer is None, then Sora is probably not currently notable according to Wikipedia's criteria. ColinFine (talk) 13:22, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @ColinFine, understand your point of view, and I've removed the sources that only mention the subject. Again I have no connection to the subject, but these links that I put as reference are all public on the internet for everyone to see, such as the subject moving headquarters, its a fact and not unindependent. Let me know if its better now and can resubmit, thanks! Leestc (talk) 04:54, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi again, Leestc. I accept that you have no connection with the company.

The fact of the subject moving headquarters may indeed be a verifiable fact, but why is it significant for an encyclopaedia article? Reading your draft, I'm going "Why is any of this of general interest?" Most of the main paragraph is unsubstantiated, vague claims. Who says it is "one of the first digital asset backed funds in Asia that is still actively investing today", and why is that of any significance? Even if it has over 80 portfolio companies, so what?

This is why the recommendation is always to start with the sources - reliable, independent, substantial sources - and write the article based on them. If several commentators have thought it worth the investment of time and effort to research a company, and write about it, then Wikipedia will take note (that's why we use the sometimes problematic word "notable"). But if nobody has, Wikipedia is not interested. ColinFine (talk) 09:55, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @ColinFine, thanks for the response. I've further edited it to sound as neutral as possible. After looking at Pantera Capital's page they also have sentences that are verifiable online, so I will leave the headquarters part in. I'll resubmit and see if its enough to pass as a subject. Leestc (talk) 12:36, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Leestc, I'd remove the Crunchbase source from the draft since it is unreliable and is deprecated per WP:CRUNCHBASE. Thanks! Tails Wx (they/them) ⚧ 02:59, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Tails Wx, understood, edited! Please let me know if there are other suggestions, thanks! Leestc (talk) 08:22, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Abuse of powers by Moderators.

I placed an edit request in India Talk page. I backed up my request with facts and suitable substantiation. But my request was not accepted and that too without any reason being given. My request was to change an error in the info box of the page. Everytime I make a reply reply I change my query status answered from Yes to No as instructed by the info page. Now one of the Mods have now given me warning for doing this and asked me to post my query here and in rfc. How do I report the Moderators and how do I get the India Page's info box corrected. Roaly3 (talk) 05:31, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Roaly. I briefly looked at the conversation over here. My take: I don't think anyone is attacking you personally, and I don't see any abuse of power taking place here. I'd encourage you to refrain from trying to "report" anybody, and instead focus your energies on taking their well-meaning advice by creating an RfC about how the "official languages" are treated on the India page. Pecopteris (talk) 05:58, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

I did that. I added the RFC tag to the post just as I was instructed and it was deleted by another editor. Roaly3 (talk) 05:57, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Notes in the lists of Pokémon by generation (e.g., List of generation I Pokémon)

Hello all,

Question on the notability & sourceability of information in the notes of tables for the lists of Pokémon by generation. These list articles contain extensive notes which are rarely sourced and appear to be predominantly in-universe information, but given the volume of these entries & time that they have been in this status I am unsure if removing these notes except where sourced & notable outside of the game universe is the correct approach.

Example: As of the current revision of List of generation I Pokémon (1), Pidgeot has the following note:

(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=List_of_generation_I_Pok%C3%A9mon&oldid=1171331552

Most trainers choose Pidgeot as their Pokémon due to their striking, beautiful feathers. Pidgeots tend to be very large in size. Its highly decorated plumage is used to intimidate enemies. It races through the skies at Mach-2 speed.

This is not clearly sourced, and appears to be generally not aligned with Wikipedia's policies on notability (since this is in-universe information) and original research.

This entry has been in this state with minor revisions since December 2019 (2), with the first sentance being present with minor revisions since November 2018 (3)...

(2) https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=List_of_generation_I_Pok%C3%A9mon&oldid=929561005

(3) https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=List_of_generation_I_Pok%C3%A9mon&oldid=870930429

Note: On certain list pages (e.g., List of generation II Pokémon there is a header (see below) which explicitly states that in-universe information should not be added, but appears not to have been followed since almost all entries in the list have this type of information.

This article only covers the basics of Pokémon species. For detailed in-universe information, please refer to dedicated wikis on the subject.

Thanks for your advice, Shazback (talk) 15:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Any unsourced content can be removed at any time. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:45, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

I suppose, really, it depends on the information you're removing. In the example of Pidgeot, I'd agree it's mostly fluff and we should just have a physical description. However, this additional info is sometimes useful in demonstrating a Pokemon's abilities or personality. It's really dependent on what information is listed and what information is actually useful for building that image. I'd say it's really case by case per Pokemon, but granted I wouldn't know without going through all 1010+ entries individually. It's a big undertaking.

As an example while looking at one of the lists right now, I'm going to use Ivysaur. The first sentence, describing how its seed has grown into a bud and how it's lost the ability to stand on its hind legs, may be useful as physical description, but needs a rewrite so it's not quoting the Pokedex entry verbatim. The fact it draws in sunlight as energy through said bud may be useful as well. A lot of the other information there is mostly fluff. (Do we need to know that it releases a scent when it's about to evolve? It's not necessary information.)

As for sourcing, if any of this in universe info is useful for a Pokemon in question, it most likely comes from in game Pokedex entries. Many Pokemon articles on Wikipedia cite Pokedex entries in the sources, typically for physical descriptions and the like, so it really comes down to finding said entry and citing it. Again, this is only if the information could be useful as an identifier. Pokelego999 (talk) 16:58, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

My main concern is how to align with WP:VG/CONTENT "[...] it is important not to clutter an article with [...] an excessive amount of non-encyclopedic trivia" and WP:VGSCOPE , in particular item 5 "Excessive fictional details: [...] focus on the real-world elements of a topic, such as creation and reception".

Most (if not all) of the information in the "notes" column appears to be trivia with limited or no link to the real-world elements of the Pokémon series. By nature of there being >100 items on each list page, even minimal trivia on a per-item basis is excessive for the list as a whole.

Pokémons' physical description, abilities, and personality do not seem to have sufficient real-world impact to be included on this basis in my opinion.

Explanations of Pokémon's names ("Its English name is a portmanteau of "ivy" and "dinosaur") and appearances in other games would similarly need to be re-worked significantly (through mutliple sources showing how this is relevant to the creation or reception of the Pokémon series).

For both Pidgeot and Ivysaur as of current revision [1] my WP:BOLD approach would be to remove the entire text in the "Note" column...

I would suggest that most of the information in "Notes" should be copied to a gaming wiki and removed from Wikipedia. Shazback (talk) 19:54, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

I have to disagree. What's the point of a list if the reader has no idea what the heck the subjects are? That's just words on a sheet at that point. I agree it needs a major trimming and rewording, but complete removal? That just seems unhelpful for the article. If you're interested in adding reception and such for the Pokemon on the list, then I'm definitely in agreement that it would be beneficial, but then there also comes the caveat of going through every species of Pokemon for a search for sources. That's an undertaking that's incredibly massive by nature, and it's not something that can be accomplished in one simple edit overnight.

My main suggestion would be to trim the trivia, reword the very blatantly copied information, and properly cite Dex entries they come from as a start. From there, I'd suggest trying to see if you can find some help in a search for sources. From what I know of prior Pokemon source searches, there's definitely at least one or two bits and bobs of reception for most Pokemon in existence, but going through all 1010+ species and their forms by yourself is something that would take months. I'd be willing to lend a hand where possible, given the nature of this whole thing, but I heavily oppose the complete removal of all information related to the Pokemon. It seems detrimental to the reader's understanding of the characters in question. Pokelego999 (talk) 21:17, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, as the one who has tried to do all of this but has been redacted multiple times, I tried my best to NOT make it look like it got copied straight out of the Dex and more of a informative bit to help people understand what it is and about. Have I done it well? Debatable. But I am willing to hear any discussion and so far it seems like we should reword it which I can gladly help with. UB Blacephalon (talk) 05:40, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, apologies if I misconstrued the facts, then. In any case, if we go down the reword path, I'd be happy to help as well. Pokelego999 (talk) 15:41, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I've been overwhelmed by the sheer amount of uncited information in these lists for a long time. I would be a proponent of just removing all uncited information and everything cited to primary sources. It can be hard to find the most basic information about these iconic creatures in sources that would help us understand what is important about them, but we definitely should not quote the Pokédex! ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 06:40, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

isn't that what the pokedex is for though? To cite useful information about pokemon that poleople dont know about? You can cite the Pokedex as is, and Bulbapedia quotes it as well. UB Blacephalon (talk) 13:01, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

The Pokédex is copyrighted material [2] and as such cannot be extensively quoted WP:NFCCEG. Bulbapedia's goals, policies and guidelines are different from Wikipedia so inclusion of information there should not influence our decision to influence it here. However, from a cursory view (without familiarity to their content inclusion guidelines and policy) this seems to be a suitable place to find exhaustive information on the Pokémon universe, including and not limited to physical descriptions, abilities, personalities, name etymology, media appearances and other trivia for every Pokémon. Shazback (talk) 13:28, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I will say, in terms of primary sources, that it is possible to cite Pokemon's Official Website. They have a Pokedex section, though it only contains one entry. Here's an example for Ivysaur. Some articles also cite information related to the Pokemon while discussing it in an unrelated manner. I'm using Ivysaur for consistency here, and though this isn't the best example, this article does cite a physical description that can be used. If every description needs to be cited, this is likely the best way to go without quoting the Pokedex in game, which can be used sparingly, worst comes to worst, so long as it isn't overused in the grand scheme of the article. Method should be "find descriptions in reliable sources" followed by "quote Pokemon.com as a last resort" followed by "quote the actual Pokedex as a backup" unless there's a better way I've missed out there. Pokelego999 (talk) 15:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

You know, instead of the "In game universe" stuff we could just plainly say "All information can be found on Pokemons website and the Pokedex." And then cite it. UB Blacephalon (talk) 16:16, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Or just leave it off entirely. The majority of in-game information is not relevant to the purposes of Wikipedia, unless it is information reported by reliable 3rd-party sources. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:30, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Descriptions of the characters are helpful for the reader's understanding. For instance, there technically isn't a need for plot summary in a fictional character article, nor is there a need to describe personality and characteristics of the character. And yet we do it anyway. This is because to better understand the character in question, the information is necessary for figuring out who they are in the grand scheme of things. How am I meant to know what an Ivysaur is without a description? Sure I could just look it up on Bulbapedia or something, but if our policy is just to redirect users to other sites, then what's the point of having a Wikipedia article? At that point it's just a glorified disambiguation page. Wikipedia readers should be able to understand even just the bare basics of a character just from a quick scroll on this site, not from searches that take you elsewhere. Imagine reading a Pokemon article, getting a redirect for Ivysaur, and it tells you to leave elsewhere. You would then need to go to another site, read about Ivysaur there (And in probably more detail than the casual audience would need) and then head back to Wikipedia to continue reading what you were reading before. That makes no sense and it's just a hassle for anyone reading this.

Again, I agree that there's a lot of fluff we can trim, but a complete removal of information is just detrimental to the articles in question. Pokelego999 (talk) 16:54, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

A description is fine, but it should come from reliable third-party sources when possible. WP:FANCRUFT is not desirable, which means dex entries are out, as are rewrites of such. "Ivysaur is a grass-poison type middle evolution of the grass-starter Bulbasaur." is a perfectly valid description that doesn't stray into fancruft, and could be cited to numerous reliable 3rd-party sources. For hints on how to proceed with what to leave in and what to yeet, read WP:BACKWARD which essentially says "start with the sources that are acceptable, and build the article from there". If you are starting with a bunch of text you want to include, and then go looking for sources, you are failing. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:06, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, my apologies, I misunderstood what you were meaning. I agree with your approach. Pokelego999 (talk) 17:18, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Sure, but if we can cite the Pokedex as a course, we can trim somethings down but there still needs a basic understanding, and that's exactly what the Pokedex is. UB Blacephalon (talk) 17:25, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

on an unrelated note, the plural of "pokémon" is "pokémon", which applies to the individual species

so in that example, seeing the word "pidgeots" felt like the literary equivalent of stubbing my toe on a ceramic vase with enough force to break it

before considering removing fancruft, copyvio and traits that are entirely informed in the pokédex and not shown in the games, someone _{(possibly me)} should at least try to do some-thing about the grammers cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 18:38, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I completely agree. That's actually sometimes why I do it. So I can see a better way of writing it. Also that analogy was hilarious. UB Blacephalon (talk) 19:03, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

in the process of editing it for wording's sake, most of the entries are full of clearly opinionated sentences with no sources, such as "the best thing about machop is that its muscles never get sore"

i don't think i have the skill or time to spot and replace them all with more objective wording, but i'll try

still better than the list of tmnt characters cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 19:12, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah ill still input them in but who knows if I'm allowed to anymore. UB Blacephalon (talk) 21:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Blocked on my mobile phone

Sometimes when I am away from home I am blocked from editing Wikipedia on my phone. This has always seemed to be because of an issue with the WiFi I was using and was always fine when I came home. Now I am blocked on my mobile phone even at home, and on PC I am getting Notices about vandalism at User talk:66.234.206.84. Could someone point me towards help to regain editing access on my phone and make sure my account isn't somehow linked to editing taking place at some public IP address? Thanks for any help Mgp28 (talk) 17:53, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mgp28 - That IP you link isn't blocked..? Regardless, if you sign in to your Wikipedia account, you should be allowed to edit even on blocked IP addresses. The only exception is if the address is hardblocked, which most aren't. If it is hardblocked, you need to be IP-Block exempt to edit logged in, which you can find more information about at WP:IPBE. casualdejekyll 18:00, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mgp28 I just wanted to check you aren't trying to edit on a browser like Opera, or with some other browser with a VPN active? That could well give you a 'blocked' message when you try to edit (it scared my silly the first time I experienced doing that). Nick Moyes (talk) 19:49, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

As much as I love the Opera browser, that VPN feature has gotten me into too much trouble for me to use that feature anymore. I had been actively contributing to physicsforums.com (using the desktop Opera) when suddenly my account was banned for sockpuppetry, apparently because others were posting to the site using the same IP address. It took over a year for me to get unbanned. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:08, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you all for your comments. I didn’t think I had a VPN turned on but I found iCloud was encrypting my IP address. Now I’ve deactivated that everything is back to normal.

(I still have the notifications for that other IP address. The fact that that address isn’t blocked just makes it seem even stranger.) Mgp28 (talk) 20:48, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mgp28 Glad you solved it. The fact that other IP address isn't blocked is that it didn't do enough damage in the handful of edits they made a few days ago, and they have since ceased. Our increasing levels of warning messages often make a user aware that if they continue, they'll be blocked. We rarely block IP addresses for long, as many other people may well be using it - a whole school, for example (some years ago I once found an administrator had blocked the entire mobile phone network that I and half the UK were on!). Blocking is done for preventative reasons, not punitive ones. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:59, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

lost page!!

We have a page called Planet Home, that was started by a member of our community.. how can I locate it, and how can I publish it? 75.80.110.77 (talk) 22:32, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Are you referring to Planet Home, which is currently a redirect to Synkronized? Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 23:07, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. I can't find any evidence that there has ever been an article called Planet Home, other than the redirect that Edward pointed to; or a draft called Draft:Planet Home; or a user sandbox that contains the phrase "Planet Home". Are you perhaps thinking of some other site than Wikipedia?

Note that Wikipedia has encyclopaedia articles, rather than just "pages for". If I'm right in guessing that "Planet Home" is the name of your community, then it would not be appropriate for there to be a Wikipedia article about it unless it meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, (basically that it has been written about in some depth by people entirely unconnected with it). ColinFine (talk) 12:39, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Adding Romanized Chinese

I am used to adding Romanized Korean but made a page containing Chinese text that should be Romanized; Gary Shiu. I am unsure where to ask. if anyone can assist I would very much appreciate it. ₪RicknAsia₪ 04:26, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Rickinasia, WT:CHINA would probably have someone who can help.

You didn't directly ask about this, but one quick thing I observe looking at Gary Shiu is that you begin by writing that he is a Chinese-American theoretical physicist. I'm not sure if this is recorded somewhere as guidance or just general best practice, but if he was not born in China — I avoid beginning articles with someone's ethnic background unless it's particularly relevant to their notability (e.g. if he were an anti-Asian hate activist). We'd never include the ethnic background of someone with e.g. German ancestry in their article, so the same standard should apply for bios of people of color. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:57, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, looks like it's at MOS:ETHNICITY. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:58, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I've added the pinyin and jyutping romanizations into the infobox. bibliomaniac15 06:39, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Wonderful. Thank you so much, I really appreciate it :) ₪RicknAsia₪ 01:07, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Regarding which English to use in any given article

Is there a standard depending on where the article is about, or what is the case? I assume it is American English since I have seen the double quotation marks used in place of the singular ones. It has most likely already been answered somewhere, still, I ask. Monocéfalo (talk) 04:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

It depends on the subject and also what is already being used in the article. See WP:ENGVAR RudolfRed (talk) 04:47, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

For punctuation guidelines, specifically, see MOS:PUNCT, @Monocéfalo. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:12, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

looking for experts at wiki should assist me with articles in my draft or sandbox

looking for "NYC [Fire Department] buffs" who are experts at wiki should assist me with articles in my draft or sandbox

that's one of many i started to create

Draft:New York City Fire chief of department BetterThen ever (talk) 07:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

No, BetterThen ever. If you think that there should be an article on "New York City Fire chief of department" (incidentally, a very strange sounding title), then you get some reliable sources, you summarize what these say (of course avoiding plagiarism) and attribute each part of what you write to the respective source, you take the trouble to get the formatting right; and then, when it will be obvious that you have put effort into your draft, you'll be welcome to ask for help with certain specifics of the draft. The draft will then have a fighting chance of being accepted as an article (though with an amended title). Unlike the version I declined a few minutes ago.

I am alarmed to read of drafts that's one of many i started to create. Please don't. Just work to get one draft into a decent state. Once you've succeeded, you may move on to another draft. -- Hoary (talk) 07:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I had put in allot of effort in few articles I'm collecting the info for it just i am new writing on wiki and don't have experience in layout or how to source so I'm requesting help by those interested in those topics and you won't turn me down thanks anyway that's a nice welcome anyhow thank you trying to help me in your way I'm sure you meant good BetterThen ever (talk) 08:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

btw its not strange at all and don't be alarmed. stay safe BetterThen ever (talk) 08:37, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @BetterThen ever. I think before you start editing and creating articles you should read the following guide, which provides lots of helpful tips: Help:Contents.

Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially for a new Editor, so I would suggest first you improve some articles. You can find some articles that need improving at Special:Homepage. That will guide you through the process.

I would highly recommend not creating multiple poorly formatted and referenced draft articles, as they will all be declined or rejected.

Let us know if you have any specific questions, Qcne (talk) 08:49, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately the considerable effort you have put into this article appears to constitute original research, which is not permitted here. You need to scrap all this and start by finding three reliable sources on the topic and then summarize what they say. Before taking this any further please read Wikipedia:Everything you need to know. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:59, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

how many stars are there?

how many stars are in the sky? 2600:1700:F560:C1E0:C1C8:8460:987B:17DE (talk) 08:36, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP editor. This is a forum for asking questions on how to edit Wikipedia- not for general queries about life, the universe, and everything. Please try using www.google.com to answer your question. Qcne (talk) 08:45, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia in which you can search for the answer to questions such as this. If you read our article on stars, it says in the first paragraph The observable universe contains an estimated 10²² to 10²⁴ stars. Only about 4,000 of these stars are visible to the naked eye. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:49, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Can't edite semiprotected page

Hello, I found an error in one of the pages that were semiprotected so I tried to fix it and although I'm an autoconfirmed account, I couldn't? Noha Mokhtar (talk) 11:38, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@NohaMokhtareg: which page? — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 11:49, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@NohaMokhtareg: You're not autoconfirmed ([3]). Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 12:42, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I found a broken link on the resources section, I've tried to replace it with one that is working but it was removed with a note that it's a spam Noha Mokhtar (talk) 12:50, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

The link you tried to replace wasn't a real source/reference, and spam too. It has also been removed; we need no how tos. Lectonar (talk) 12:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Does this article meet the GNG criteria?

Does the article meet the GNG criteria? Also can you check to see that the article is cited properly. User:Pjanvi1008/sandbox Pjanvi1008 (talk) 13:16, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Pjanvi1008 Welcome to the Teahouse. I realise I'm not addressing your question, but my immediate reaction to the lead paragraph was to ask myself which part of the world this person's position relates to. Is it India, Texas, South London? I have no idea, and I could find no simple answer. I feel you may have assumed the reader already knows lots of things that you understand, whereas that probably isn't the case. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:44, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. There's a lack of WP:CONTEXT. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 13:51, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Individual’s position in the world has been clarified along with some additional info on background and works Pjanvi1008 (talk) 02:11, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Pjanvi1008 Your current references #3 and #4 could be combined into one using named references. However, Wikipedia consensus is that CESNUR is not a reliable source (see WP:RSPS). Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:01, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

revdel

Why were over a hundred revisions of this page revision-deleted? Just curious. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 13:50, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Looks like crypto wallet spam with potentially identifying information and/or harmful links. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 13:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Yikes. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 13:58, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Edward-Woodrow: Just as an FYI, 2 strikes means it was a suppression, not a revision deletion. If it was just a revdel you would have been able to see the summary for said deletion in the logs of the page. – 2804:F14:8083:8C01:BCE8:F242:4596:220C (talk) 14:15, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I've been here a year and I never even noticed double lines vs. Single line. Knitsey (talk) 14:18, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, thank-you. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:19, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Domain Blocked for No Reason

Hello, I don't know why but wikipedia has added my this www.tecnofy.xyz domain in blacklist for no reason how can I add it to whitelist Alltheuser (talk) 14:00, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Alltheuser: Why do you want to remove it from the spam blacklist? Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:03, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, on browsing the site, it looks like spam already. So, I'm not surprised it's on the Spam blacklist. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:05, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:09, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Alltheuser And your only other edit has been to add linkspam, which I have reverted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:13, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Although they've certainly tried elsewhere. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:20, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I have given @Alltheuser an 'only warning' for spamming us with rubbish. My antivirus showed their site as infected and blocked it. Any attempt to add dubious links or personal blogs will result in them being blocked. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:52, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank-you. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 16:13, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Alltheuser, if it is your website, any request you make to remove it from the blacklist will be declined. See here. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:36, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Edward-Woodrow: @Vanderwaalforces: Just to be clear, that site tecnofy.xyz isn't on the blacklist. The entire .xyz TLD is blacklisted. Requests can be made to whitelist specific pages (not domains) at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. Requests from site owners or anyone with a conflict of interest are summarily declined. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@Anachronist oh, right. That makes sense now. Thanks for clearing. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:41, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Should street maps be presented as box drawings (text art)?

For example, this is a box drawing map on the article Sparks Street:

│ │====│ │==== ==│ │===== │ │===   │ │== == │ │=====╰╮  ╰╮ ==╭╯ ╭╯
│ │====│ │====   │ │===== │ │===   │ │      │ │      │   │  │  │
┘ └────┘ └───────┘ └──────┘ └──────┘ └──────┘ └──────┘   ╰--╯ ╭╯
                   Sparks Street                             │ 
┐ ┌────┐ ┌───────┐ ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐ ┌──────────┐  ╭╯
│B│    │L│==     │K│======│B│  === │O│      │M│====      │E │
│a│    │y│==     │e│======│a│  === │C│      │e│====      │l │
│y│    │o│       │n│      │n│      │o│      │t│          │g │
│ │    │n│       │t│      │k│      │n│      │c│          │i │
│ │    │ │       │ │      │ │      │n│      │a│          │n │
│ │    │ │       │ │      │ │      │o│      │l│          │  │
│ │    │ │       │ │      │ │      │r│      │f│          │  │
│ │    │ │       │ │      │ │      │ │      │e│          │  │

Should this be converted to an image or a map similar to the ones typically shown in infoboxes? LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk 15:07, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

There may have been use for graphics like this decades ago, but currently Wikipedia uses a robust automated mapping system Wikipedia:Maplink, which uses the Open Street Map system. I'm not terribly familiar with the system myself, but there's documentation linked from that page on how to use it, and there is also Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop which is a place to request that maps be made for you by someone with more experience. --Jayron32 15:27, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Please. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 16:11, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I never knew Wikipedia had articles on individual Nethack levels. Folly Mox (talk) 00:56, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

A few questions about making an article

Hello. I am planning on making a draft for a record label and I have a few questions. There isn't much about it online yet but I've found some good sources and think it could become an article. I've compiled a discography of almost all the labels 40 or so releases and was thinking it would be good for the article as the information is only available in fragmented form online. The label had a special numbering system running from I think P1. to P 42 with a few extras. Only problem is, I've found no sources for P1 to P9. This means the discography table would be incomplete. Should I still add it in hopes someone adds the rest later? Or would having an incomplete table look bad? The other thing I'm wondering is how do I make a draft? I've made some before but I've forgotten which steps to take now as it's been a while. Sorry for the long question, thanks in advance! Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans (talk) 16:16, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans Welcome to Teahouse!

You can make a draft at AfC. If there are no reliable sources online for P1 to P9, then, as you said, they shouldn't be added because there's nothing to back up the claims. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:19, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointers. It's not that there's no reliable sources, there's not sources at all. I was just thinking a discography table would look weird if nine areas were blank. I have reliable info for the rest of the discs. Not sure if this changes anything. Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans (talk) 16:24, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans Create the draft and AfC reviewers would do their job :) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:45, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Alright thank you! Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans (talk) 16:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

How to do RFC for phrasing

I added the RFC tag to an edit request I made on the India lage which is what I was instructed to do and someone else edited and removed the RFC tag and then a couple of days later the whole edit request is closed with warning to me not to edit the section. I am not savvy with coding and html, kindly help me. Roaly3 (talk) 16:36, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Roaly3 Hi again. If this is about this, then I think you should follow Pecopteris's advise. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:44, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Roaly3, the instructions are at Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Creating an RfC. Adding an RFC tag to your edit request is not the way to go. Read the page I linked and follow the steps. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:54, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Citing a record.

I'm writing a draft and have included a description of the physical appearance of a record. How would I cite the record itself? It's a Columbia Patriotic Series Record from 1914, "Boys in Khaki, Boys in Blue" by Stanley Kirby, Flip side, "Your King and Country Need You" by Harrison Latimer. Here's an image from Discogs of the disc in question, https://www.discogs.com/release/26662835-Harrison-Latimer-Stanley-Kirkby-Your-King-And-Country-Need-You-Boys-In-Khaki-Boys-In-Blue/image/SW1hZ2U6OTMyMDY3ODA=. Do I need to cite both sides of the record or just one side? Thanks in advance! Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans (talk) 17:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Clyde. In general, if you can't cite a secondary source for something, don't mention the something. There are exceptions, but on the whole this is a good rule of thumb for what should go into an article. ColinFine (talk) 18:48, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

My understanding (which could be wrong) is that published items - which include recordings except for self-produced ones, probably - exist in their own right and do not need secondary sources to prove that they exist. I did some of this myself back in 2016 when I created the list of releases Celtic Music (record label) (note also, that there were some potential numbers that I could not trace; my guess at the time was that those had never been released, but the question was open). In earlier articles I gave links (as references/citations) for every recording to external listings like discogs as "sources", but those links got deleted by some enthusiastic editor ("Wikipedia is not a link farm" or similar), hence my understanding that such links are not necessary or are even frowned upon. Regarding your particular question: I would use standard discographical practice; for a single or 78, that would be "Title of side A"/"Title of side B" I think, but you should check some standard discographies; if the artists are not the same on each side; you would cite them individually as well. However please be aware that my knowledge of this subject may be incomplete and others may have more complete or accurate advice on this. Tony 1212 (talk) 19:51, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks so much. Only thing I dont know is the formatting for citing records. Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans (talk) 21:03, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Just look at the source (via edit view) of any page that does this already, in a style you wish to emulate. You should be able to find suitable examples without much difficulty. Tony 1212 (talk) 22:23, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Some more info here: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lists_of_works#Discographies Tony 1212 (talk) 23:32, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

At the risk of confusing you completely - I always thought that, to some degree, you can format discographies to "suit the material" and/or your own editorial preferences. For example, my own "discography" efforts (lists of titles) tend to comprise bulleted lists, see e.g. see Isla Cameron#Discography. I thought this was fine, however now see that another editor has written both "This section needs additional citations for verification" and "This section should be written as a table.". Actually if I could be bothered I might possibly dispute both those statements, however... By contrast, someone else's discography for Robert Johnson at Robert Johnson recordings#Singles does use a table, so that is perhaps a format you might prefer to emulate... Good luck. (As you can see I am just an editor, not an admin or article reviewer :) ) Tony 1212 (talk) 06:28, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Discographies/style#Citations and references, each item in a discography doesn't need a separate citation; a single general citation can cover the whole lot (excepting controversial or surprising notes, which need individual inline citations). Per WP:RSP, Discogs.com has been discussed numerous times, and the general consensus is that, because it is a "user-generated" site, it is mostly unreliable. However, Allmusic.com is probably reliable for its discography information, its material is staff-generated and other than BLP-related information (which is questionable) it should otherwise be fine for discographies. --Jayron32 12:39, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Regarding styling a discography - my advice would be, just get the information/items in there in a format you are happy with; to quote other recent advice on a different topic, "others can restructure, reorganise, or reword them later without your assistance" (thanks Folly Mox). All entered text is available to be further reformatted at some point over its Wikipedia lifetime so its initial format is not something to worry about too much :) Tony 1212 (talk) 20:30, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

How can I prevent opinion sources from influencing bias?

This guideline is a little confusing to me, epecially "reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective"

How does Wikipedia uphold the Neutral Point of View guideline when all claims made must be from sources which largely hold bias in themselves? Is it not inevitable that opinion sources hold some bias in the things they report, such as selectively choosing what to report on to fit their political leanings? Even if you are allowed to cite opinion sources, how do you ensure that the opinion does not leak into the article?

I don't want to choose articles to cite from that may be placing undue weight on certain aspects to fit their leanings so would love some advice on this.

Thanks TenToe (talk) 17:48, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TenToe. That issue is dealt with in the very first sentence of the Wikipedia:Reliable sources guideline, where it says making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered. Sources that are clearly opinion should never be used to verify statements of fact in Wikipedia's voice, but can be used to verify the opinion, attributed such as "Political commentator John Jones said that . . ." or "The editorial board of The Daily News said that . . ." Cullen328 (talk) 18:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Cullen328. Thanks for your response. So where the guideline says "reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective", such sources should only be used when stating opinions held about the article's subject, as opposed to information about the nature of the subject itself? TenToe (talk) 22:01, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

That is not what I said, TenToe. A biased source is not the same as an opinion source. For example, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal are biased in favor of upholding the US Constitution and American values. That does not mean that all of their articles are opinion articles. Similarly, mainstream newspapers in the UK or France may have a bias in favor of their national values. That is natural and to be expected. Not all bias is bad, but summarizing a variety of reliable sources helps mitigate the bias in an article. Cullen328 (talk) 22:11, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I see. Apologies for the misunderstanding. When I said opinion sources, I meant to say biased sources.

So a biased source (such as WSJ and The Times) can be used to state fact, so long as the source is reliable.

However, an opinion source (such as The Guardian's opinion pieces) should be used only to verify opinion, such as in a 'critical reception' section of an article, or can it also be used to verify facts? Like if one of the writers says 'John Jones has done so and so', I can use that to cite that John Jones has done that thing? TenToe (talk) 17:20, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Spiderman 4 fan film

There should be an article that talks about the upcoming Spiderman 4 fan film.[4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CTGBwAL6qw [5]https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9765564/ 190.21.177.42 (talk) 17:49, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. It's very rare for a film - especially a fan film - to receive any coverage in reliable, independent, published secondary sources before it is released. Please see WP:42 to get an idea of what articles are based on. Perhaps once it does get released, there will be critical coverage which can be used as the basis for an article. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:01, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. This fan film would need to meet the same criteria as other films, see WP:NFILM. 331dot (talk) 18:02, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Citing Discogs

Hello. I am using Discogs as a partial source for my discography. I know Discogs is not considered reliable but it does host pictures of the record discs I am researching. Since I am using information from the physical discs themselves, should I cite the discs instead of Discogs? Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans (talk) 18:17, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Please do not cite Discogs, per WP:RSDISCOGS. Please find another source. You may be able to find assistance at Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies. Cullen328 (talk) 18:24, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I provided an answer that is related to this on your previous post under "Citing a record." In a nutshell: I believe that if a record exists, it is "self documenting" (a separate source does not need to be cited to verify its existence). Others welcome to weigh in here, though, if my understanding is wrong. Tony 1212 (talk) 20:00, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Also note, even if Discogs is not acceptable as a secondary source, you can link to material there (within reasonable limits e.g. not too many items!) via an "External Links" section if you believe it provides information a reader would find of value that is not available elsewhere. Tony 1212 (talk) 20:03, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans Cullen328 Tony 1212 Discogs is excellent for one thing imo, and that's for finding real names and aliases.

I update IMDB daily, and on the rare occasions I update a soundtrack (once I've added each individual to the music section first, mainly to get new names on IMDB, so they can be linked in the soundtrack section), songwriters and artists nearly always use their real names for songwriter credits in films and TV shows.

There's at least 3-5 big name music company websites I've stumbled across in the past, when searching to see whether a songwriter/s and the artist/s were the same people, however they're mainly for big name artists.

However Discogs is perfect for finding out the real names or aliases of smaller artists, which you can then use to find better sources elsewhere. Danstarr69 (talk) 12:28, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

No, it REALLY isn't. "The real names or aliases of smaller artists" is square in the middle of WP:BLP territory, and you absolutely shouldn't cite Discogs, a mostly unreliable site, for that information. If you want to use it for your own edification, or to chase down better sources, that's one thing, but basically never cite Discogs in Wikipedia for biographical information. --Jayron32 16:15, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Jayron32 clearly you have trouble reading. Danstarr69 (talk) 20:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes I obviously do. Hi, we haven't met. I'm Jayron32, and I'm a total asshole. Sorry about that. Carry on. --Jayron32 11:58, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

how to put signature

i forgot how to put my signature on something when chatting Ducklan (talk) 18:44, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Ducklan, welcome to the Teahouse!

Use ~~~~ at the end of your message - but as you can see the Reply tool sings your posts automatically NotAGenious (talk) 18:48, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much Ducklan (talk) 18:51, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

why is it necessary to put signature if it gets put in anywat Ducklan (talk) 18:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

anyway, sorry for the misspelling Ducklan (talk) 18:57, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

The bots that sign unsigned posts do not always work correctly, Ducklan. And why would you want other people to think that you are the type of editor who expects bots take care of your personal business? Cullen328 (talk) 19:03, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I believe Cullen328 is referring to User:SineBot, which automatically places signatures for you if you forgot to add them. If you are replying by manually editing the talk page, you need to append ~~~~ to the end of your message.

However, if you use the reply tool, it automatically places your signature in for you, which means that you don't have to append ~~~~ to the end of the message. Ca ^{talk to me!} 00:12, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

editing

how do you switch from source editing to visual editing Ducklan (talk) 18:55, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Ducklan and welcome to the Teahouse! In the toolbar at the top of your screen, there should be a button (it looks like a pencil) to switch. For a visual, please see Help: VisualEditor. You can also change the default editor in your user preferences. Happy editing! Grumpylawnchair (talk) 20:19, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Editing - returning to part at which I started an edit

Place where edit was started was regarding the Chrysler Museum of Art in Norfolk Virginia. I lacked a second name, which I have recovered since. My source is my own eyeballs, but my suggested text addition could be confirmed by the Curators of the glass collection, whose names are given in the sidebar about the Museum. CAN I GO BACK AND ADD SECOND NAME? HOW LONG DOES THE EDIT REMAIN IN SUSPENSION BEFORE CRASHING AND BEING ERASED? Virginia Refugee (talk) 20:20, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Virginia Refugee and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to this edit, please note that you need a published and verifiable reliable source for any information you add to Wikipedia, per Wikipedia's citation policy. Asking or emailing a curator would not be verifiable, as nobody other than you can verify that completely. Your change is archived in the page history for now, and the page history isn't deleted unless the page it belongs to is. You are welcome to add back the second name once you find a reliable/published source that backs it up. Hope this helps. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 20:40, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Yara listen Smith Martinez and Jenny Smith McCarthy

yara Smith Jenny Smith Nicole's Smith Marilyn Smith Marianne Smith 2605:BA00:A208:8BA:99FD:A19:B075:9DDF (talk) 20:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @2605:BA00:A208:8BA:99FD:A19:B075:9DDF and welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Grumpylawnchair (talk) 20:34, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

What is the best way to get a page taken down restored?

A gymnast page was taken down and they definitelt meet the requirements per WP:Gymnast. 2607:FB91:88AC:52F3:AC39:D1F7:7EBF:622F (talk) 20:44, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. It would help to know which article you are referencing in order to be able to give the best answer. 331dot (talk) 20:46, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

If the page was deleted, and you truly believe the subject was notable and the page was well-sourced, etc., then look at Wikipedia:Deletion Review, I suppose. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 20:52, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Per WP:gymnast they are considered notable if they win the all around in the nationals and compete as part of a team in the world championships or Olympics. She won accomplished this in 2022 and has won 5 medals for team usa at the pan am games.

https://members.usagym.org/pages/athletes/nationalTeamRhythmic.html?id=481159 2607:FB91:34F:8A13:AC39:8391:6763:803 (talk) 05:06, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

It was deleted as a result of this discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emily Wilson (gymnast). Deletion review isn't a process to contest the deletion, it isn't "round 2" of a deletion discussion, it's to review whether the closing administrator applied Wikipedia's policies and guidelines correctly in closing the discussion.

You could also ask the closing administrator whether Emily Wilson (gymnast) could be restored to draft space for you to improve and then submit for review. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:20, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Would it be permitted to register an account that is an alternate capitalization of one's username?

I want to register the doppelgänger account Looksquare, even though it's not out of worry for being impersonated or anything like that. Is that still allowed? LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk 22:10, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, LOOKSQUARE, and welcome to the Teahouse! If you intend to ever edit with that account, such a request would be unlikely to be approved as others would likely not easily recognize that the two accounts were not the same. Note that if you just want to be renamed, you can do that - see WP:RENAME for details. Would you mind explaining why you want the other account? With more information I might be able to help further. Tollens (talk) 22:25, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Tollens,

I don't want that as my main account, but just as an alias so it's easier for people to type. Is that allowed? I'm not interested in a rename. LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk 22:26, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure what you mean - pinging for example still wouldn't go through to your main account if they used lowercase. If that's fine, and you just want that account's pages to redirect to your user page and talk page, and never plan on editing using that account, it would probably be approved. You'll have to submit a request at WP:ACC as the signup page won't let you since it will be too similar. Tollens (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk 23:05, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Creating a source

To verify a source for a few edits I've made, I have photos a yearbook which is the only verifiable evidence I have. How do I go about using that as a source? Joerezi (talk) 23:11, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

In most cases, you can't use private yearbooks as a source - it is unpublished to wider public. If you cannot find reliable, published source about something, it's best not to include it. Ca ^{talk to me!} 00:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@Joerezi I'm not 100% sure Ca advice is necessarily quite right in all situations. If the yearbook was a publication produced and sold by the school, and not just a few sheets given to its pupils, then it's likely copies would be available through local libraries, and thus be deemed a proper publication, and available through inter-library loans - and especially so if it had an ISBN number on it (which I think came in around the time you're referring to). The problem with this edit is that you did not cite a source, and thus @User:Tacyarg was quite right to revert it. Putting notes in an edit summary is simply not sufficient - citations need to be in the text of the article, and visible to everyone at all times. I always remove unsubstantiated additions of alumni, but would not do so if a citation to a published school yearbook were included. So, my advice is to reinsert it using a proper citation of title, publisher, year and page number). Nick Moyes (talk) 10:46, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

I found this source which contradicts Joerezi's claim about him going to Cardinal Gibbons high school. I would also note that the high school that was already in the article and that this source says he went to is in a completely different state to the school Joerezi claims. Lavalizard101 (talk) 14:04, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

I have photo evidence that he was at the school I mentioned as a senior, but I can't use a yearbook as a source, so there's nothing I can do at this point anyway Joerezi (talk) 15:27, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

How can a photo prove someone attended a school? It might prove that they were physically present on school grounds, but not that they were a student there. 331dot (talk) 15:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

It's a yearbook there's multiple photos of him in it including his name Joerezi (talk) 15:30, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Joerezi, how can you be sure that it's the same person and not somebody else with the same name? "O'Hurley" is not a particularly exotic surname (we have articles on four different people with it) and "John" is both a very common forename and completely congruent with Irish ancestry. In the US alone there are probably dozens of people named "John O'Hurley". {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 19:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Joerezi, this source verifies that you are correct. O'Hurley attended Cardinal Gibbons High School for his senior year only. You can cite that source. Cullen328 (talk) 20:07, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

notifications when someone replies to me on a page's talk

I'm not subscribed to any page's talk, but I'd like to be notified by email when someone replies to my comment on a page's talk (not my own user page). In my Preferences, is there such a notification? I have selected notifications for "mentions", but sometimes a reply doesn't mention me. Thanks. rootsmusic (talk) 23:19, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

User:rootsmusic, if you go to Special: Preferences, click "Editing", and then turn on "Enable topic subscription" and "Automatically subscribe to topics", this should have the effect you're seeking. Folly Mox (talk) 01:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Folly Mox! rootsmusic (talk) 01:32, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Folly Mox I've just done the same with a couple of article talk pages, and will no doubt subscribe to many more article talk pages, but where are my list of subscriptions located? Danstarr69 (talk) 12:04, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@Danstarr69 They are at Special:TopicSubscriptions. Thanks for your question: it prompted me to discover something I had thought about but not found until now! Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:19, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Michael D. Turnbull how do I get there? Danstarr69 (talk) 15:06, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Michael D. Turnbull I've now found that you get there through preferences (although there's probably another slightly quicker way).

However I've created my own quick link button to it on my user page Danstarr69 (talk) 15:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Wow, thanks @Michael D. Turnbull! No idea that was there. Valereee (talk) 16:19, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

How to use nobold and small at the same time?

Hello,

How would you use these two together to make sure something is not bold and is small?

{ {small | example } } and { {nobold|example} }

Thanks KatoKungLee (talk) 01:26, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @KatoKungLee and welcome to the Teahouse.

It's not necessary to say no bold considering it's not Wikipedia main font.

Just these below are fine:

• {{small|Example}}
• < small > Example < /small >

🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 03:31, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

User:KatoKungLee, I've only ever seen {{nobold}} in infobox headers containing character sets that are never supposed to be bolded or italicised per MOS.

That said, to "double up" on text formatting templates, the syntax is to nest them, like {{small|{{nobold|example text}}}}.

<small> and <big> are no longer supported by all browsers, so using templates is preferable. Folly Mox (talk) 06:59, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

A mistake...

Since I'm italian and I know English enough, I've translated a page and create the draft Russian Tientsin concession, but I noticed that it actually existed. So...

1. Can anybody delete the page pls?
2. When I go in the English page, I don't see the link to the Italian page (better:I see it grey) and same in the Italian page, Can anybody fix this? I don't know how.

Thank you, Bruno Romanin (talk) 05:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@Bruno Romanin: If you want to delete a page you created, tag it with {{db-g7}} to request speedy deletion by the page creator. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:37, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

And for the 2nd thing? Anyway, thank you so much. Bruno Romanin (talk) 06:07, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Fixed Bruno Romanin (talk) 06:15, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@Bruno Romanin: Oops, sorry. I trust you found the "add language" link in the language drop-down? ~Anachronist (talk) 14:00, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Convention/style for city gov'ts in the infobox

In the info box for New York City, under the heading of government there's just the type of government, along with the mayor and the name of the governing body. For San Francisco, there is a list of supervisors, as well as the state legislators. Is there any convention regarding this? Should all cities have larger representatives? And what about for smaller towns, should they have the city manager and the mayor as the two such as in San Mateo, California? Artwhitemaster (talk) 07:21, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Artwhitemaster! The place to find this information would be the template page for the city infobox, {{Infobox settlement}}. There will be documentation there that should explain what best practices are. If the documentation is lacking or unclear, then you can start a discussion on the template talk page (it's a widely used template, so you're fairly likely to be able to get a discussion going). Hope that helps, and feel free to ask if you run into any difficulties! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 15:21, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Almost all cities in the United States are part of larger counties. San Francisco is unique in that it is both a city and a county with the same borders, so it is appropriate to list the members of the county board of supervisors there. New York is unique because it consists of five counties which overlap with its five boroughs. For example, Kings County is geographically the same as Brooklyn. Cullen328 (talk) 17:27, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

As for city managers in places like San Mateo, Artwhitemaster, cities in in California can either be organized with a "strong mayor" form of government, where being mayor is a a full time job with significant powers, or a "weak mayor" form of government, where the role is largely ceremonial, and the day-to-day power is in the hands of a professional city manager. In the second case, listing the city manager in the infobox seems appropriate to me. Cullen328 (talk) 17:35, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Just to further elaborate, cities in the U.S. are a very varied and messy lot, and you're likely to find that what makes sense for one city, or for some subset of all cities, isn't applicable to others. There is no universal standard, and thus the infoboxes for cities may, by necessity, end up looking very different given the very different way that cities are organized across the U.S. (and even moreso around the world). --Jayron32 12:44, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Anywhere I can request assistance in verifying an article?

Is there anywhere I can call attention to helping verify an article?

I was reading Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, specifically the section on the escape of his wife Haya and found some rather worrying issues. Sources were used to support content they made no mention of. I think the section could use attention but I don't have the time to verify it all, there are quite a few references I'd have to read. FossilWave (talk) 11:43, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@FossilWave There are over 270 page watchers for this article. So, if you have concerns, I'd suggest you explain them on the talk page at Talk:Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum and invite some of those editors there to address your concerns. You can always add a {{failed verification}} after a statement of fact that is not supported by the inline citation. If you did that for one or two such statements, your concerns about lack of time would be appreciated in the context that you have, at least, tried to mark some statements for attention. I hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:59, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@User talk:FossilWave - For the article, an assessment may be requested here. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 14:04, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Article for inclusion

Please, I believe that article is appropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia and has now met all the requirements. I used the top sources from the top 5 newspapers in Nigeria and I need an experienced volunteer to review and publish it on wikipedia. Draft:BJ Sam (Singer) Mmmmm90 (talk) 15:48, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mmmmm90 Hi and welcome here. Put the following {{subst:submit}} at the very top of the draft article to submit it to AfC so that reviewers can review it. Hope this helps. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:01, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mmmmm90, are you the person who was operating the blocked accounts Aniekan7777 and Rubiesar? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:14, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

OP has now been blocked (and draft deleted). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:19, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Remove IP address

I accidentally made an edit without realising that I was not signed in to my account. Is there a way to have my IP address from that edit removed or switched so that my account name shows instead? ViveLaSuisse (talk) 16:26, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

ViveLaSuisse Hello and welcome. There is no way to change an edit history so that an edit by an IP is then assigned to your account. If you don't want your IP visible, you can request that it be oversighted. 331dot (talk) 16:28, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

I'll try that. Thank you for your help! ViveLaSuisse (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Duplicate articles

Shingebiss and Shingebis seem to refer to the same myth. My understanding is that duplicate articles should be merged. However:

a) Shingebis has multiple problems

b) I know nothing about this myth (I was just looking it up and found the two articles)

I'm mainly a reader and very new to editing. What would be the best course of action here?

Thanks in advance! Mogtek (talk) 16:58, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mogtek! My suggestion would be to copy from Shingebis to Shingebiss any useful information (along with its references) not already there, and then make Shingebis a redirect to Shingebiss.

I am being lazy in assuming that 'Shingebiss' is the 'better' (more commonly used or more authentic), or at least equally good, spelling. If 'Shingebis' is actually preferable, the opposite though more laborious transfer of information could be done, or one could perform a Page move juggle Others may have better suggestions, though. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 19:54, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Can someone take a look at this

this looks inappropriate Cohere Technologies ? 2607:FB91:34F:8A13:AC39:8391:6763:803 (talk) 17:15, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello. What is inappropriate about it? 331dot (talk) 17:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

The article seems to me to just about demonstrate notability, and is not too promotional. It's very thin, though, and could use a lot more meat on its bones, and perhaps more balance from adding some less-than-entirely-positive content.

Perhaps more non-controversial details like address, number of employees, etc. can be gleaned out of the inevitable puffery on its website, https://www.cohere-tech.com/, and added, though as a non-independent source this of course cannot contribute to its notability. More Reliable sources entirely independent of the subject (and its press releases) might also yield further facts from a more disinterested viewpoint. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 22:46, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Candidate for draftifying, perhaps? It's interesting that the article was written by a new account who seems to know how to write articles. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Well, at least they're not a single purpose account. Perhaps (like me) they've been editing for quite a while, and only recently decided to create an account. (I've been a regular for around 20 years, but have never created an account, though I might decide to do so some time in the future.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 04:04, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

We could slap some tags on it, though...notability seems to be given, but, as has been mentioned, more independent, reliable sources would do some good. Lectonar (talk) 10:31, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Adding links to an article

Trying to add the fossil finds time part to the page 'Rutiotomodon', which I have found seems to require a citation, but one that cannot be easily accessed (visible as a number). How can I make it invisible? I am basing my change off of the page 'Trilophosauridae', but with edits to things such as time and citation. Mangox88 (talk) 18:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mangox88, could you explain a little further (with direct links if possible)? I don't fully follow what you're trying to do. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

I am trying to edit the timeline bar on Rutiotomodon, but it appeared on comparison with other pages that a citation was needed. I tried putting in a citation in the style of trilophosauridae, but it appeared visibly, which is different to Trilophosaurus. Does the fossil range need a citation? Mangox88 (talk) 05:09, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mangox88, ah, okay, I understand a little better, I think. You're trying to avoid the ugliness of having the citation display on a separate line in the infobox. Citations are very important for verifiability, so I wouldn't make it invisible. However, if you move the citation to the body where the same info about its temporal range should be mentioned, you then won't need it in the lead. Hope that helps! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:14, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

User page

What should my user page look like and contain? Wobbler107 (talk) 18:47, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Wobbler107, and welcome to the Teahouse. A user page is completely optional: some longstanding editors choose not to have one. But most editors choose to create one, with some information about themselves as Wikipedia editors. A little information about their lives outside Wikipedia is acceptable, as long as it is not promotional (and younger editors in particular are advised not to reveal anything that identifies them in real life).

See WP:UPYES and WP:UPNO for what you may and may not put on your user page. ColinFine (talk) 18:58, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Ta! Wobbler107 (talk) 19:11, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Is "This Day In Metal" allowed as a source?

I'm fixing up a certain partial block request about a tour date that happened and one source that seems convincing to me but I don't know if it's convincing to others is this. I would like to know if this source is allowed. Thomasthedarkenguine (talk) 18:48, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Thomas and welcome to the Teahouse. The place to ask is WP:RSN - first search the archives for that page to see if it has previously been discussed, and if not, post your question there. I observe that it has a staff of named writers, which is a good sign, but it needs further investigation. ColinFine (talk) 19:01, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

ColinFine, I've asked Thomas to begin here at Teahouse to learn to assess sources, as the folks here are experienced and generally patient at helping users understand the basics. SKDB's response below is what I was hoping he'd get here: no, This Day In Metal doesn't look like it has editorial oversight, so see if you can find something better. This may be an iterative exercise. Valereee (talk) 12:26, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Thomasthedarkenguine, you could ask at WP:RSN for a more definitive answer. But on brief investigation, the staff writers have only their first names, which is basically pseudonymity, so that's not great. The site has no about page that I can find, and the parent site's about page, here, doesn't say much of anything about its editorial standards. So my inclination were I a writer would be to try to find something better, but to use it if there's nothing better, but only for basic noncontroversial details. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:05, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

It's nothing controversial, I'm just wanting to have a show added on The Spicy Meatball Tour. Thomasthedarkenguine (talk) 19:11, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Dr. William Longshaw

Dr. William Longshaw was born in Manchester, England April 26, 1836. I have copies of originals like the the Census of 1841 Manchester, England. Willliam was 5 years old when he travelled to the United States. I do have a copy of the census that I did upload to wikipedia. Toshiye6 (talk) 19:11, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello. What is it that you are referring to? 331dot (talk) 19:12, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

I think he refers to his edits to William Longshaw Jr. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:No original research may be a relevant read. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:17, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

It seems that both his birth date and place of birth are in dispute, according to the note in the infobox. Census records alone are not convincing since it is commonplace for two people to share the same name. Cullen328 (talk) 19:20, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

I have proof of his birth place. It's a 1841 census in Manchester England. How do I upload this document? Toshiye6 (talk) 19:47, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

To reiterate what Cullen328 says above, how do you know it's the same William Longshore? 'William' is a very common name (not in the social sense, of course!); Longshaw is not unusual, and there must be multiple "William Longshaws"s from that era and milieu. The article's references do show that there are contradictory claims about his date and place of birth (unfortunately, there are also multiple "Manchester"s), but you have no proof (so far demonstrated) of a connection between the person in your census record and the subject of the article, it's just one possibility of many. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.15} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 20:08, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

How do you know that it is not a different person named William Longshaw? There is no need to upload a census report, as it is of no value on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 20:15, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

It is Father Is William senior. Mother is Margaret and William junior. This is the Manchester England census 1841. This is from Ancestory .com. Also the ,

Communication and Outreach Division

Naval History and Heritage Command

Have the same facts as me. I have his acceptance letter from the entrance to West Point. (202) 433-7880 142.114.202.157 (talk) 21:46, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

The correspondence of the parental names certainly lends weight to your suppositions, but it is not conclusive proof, and the date and place discrepancies with the published references are unexplained. (My conjecture is that maybe he was born before his parents' wedding, and his date and place of birth were obfusticated in the US records to conceal this, at the time, shameful fact, but my imagining this is of no use whatever). Nontheless, Wikipedia only accepts what published sources say, even when primary documents (such as census entries — see WP:Primary, secondary and tertiary sources) suggest that they are in error (see WP:Verifiability, not truth). Note also that Wikipedia disallows sources with user-contributed information as unreliable (see WP:Reliable sources): this includes Ancestry.com (and of course, Wikipedia itself). A line has to be drawn somewhere, and that's where it is.

A way out of this dilemma might be to more explicitly detail all the contradictory sources and their conflicting information (perhaps in the article's existing Note a.) so that the readers can do their own weighing up, but we can't just decide which one we prefer (even if we could agreed) and suppress the rest.

You and Longshaw, the declared relative who is possessed of all these primary documents (and perhaps some secondary ones, with which we can work) need to discuss these matters further with the dissenting editors on the article's Talk page, which is the preferred venue rather than here, and reach a concensus on a solution. Splitting the discussion over two or more venues is not helping, since we are having to read both to see all the declared evidence. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 23:27, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Here's what you need to do. Write a historical article (not an encyclopedia article) that concisely, lucidly and persuasively makes your point. Of course, this article must satisfy academic standards. Find a historical journal that is reputable -- is not a mere vanity or predatory enterprise, and is peer-reviewed (by academic historians, not monomaniacs or fringey people) -- and specializes in this area. Submit it to the journal. If it is conditionally accepted, rewrite it and resubmit it as required. Wait for its publication. After its publication, on Talk:William Longshaw Jr., point to the publication, and invite an unrelated editor to consider what it says, describing yourself as its author and thus disqualified from writing up the matter in the Wikipedia article. -- Hoary (talk) 22:09, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

What's wrong with my sandbox?

User:LOOKSQUARE/sandbox

every {{big}} template shows up as {{{1}}} LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk 21:47, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@LOOKSQUARE I’m not sure, but when I replaced one of the <span style="color: red;"> tags with a {{red}} transclusion, it showed correctly in the edit preview, so I’m guessing it will have something to do with that. Not sure exactly what though. A smart kitten (talk) 22:01, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Looks like it is because of the equals signs - the parser assumes that everything before the equals sign is a parameter name, so where you have {{Big|<span style="color: red;">SO</span>}}, it is being interpreted as "color: red;">SO</span> being passed as the parameter <span style, which is not the intended result. You can fix this by adding 1= before the <span>, which will make the parser treat all of the code as the first parameter, or by replacing the equals sign with {{=}}, which is a template that will later evaluate to the equals sign. Tollens (talk) 22:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Help in a potential edit war.

Hi, i've got a question here.

I've been editing the Drive 2011 article, and I decided to restore a banned user's edit, as it logically made sense to me. My edit was then reverted by an ip, with zero explanation. I decided to revert his revert, as he provided zero reason, no edit summary and upon checking his contribs he had a history of this behaviour, and was confronted on his talk page about it before. He then proceeds to revert it back to the original state.

I don't want to start an edit war, what should I do in order to peacefully resolve this small conflict. Thank you NotAnInsurgent (talk) 01:48, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, NotAnInsurgent. The answer is simple - scrupulously avoid all edit warring behavior. Edit warring is counterproductive and leads to blocks. In this case, the subject of the disagreement is utterly trivial. Stop trying to restore an edit of a banned user, since both versions have the same meaning. Cullen328 (talk) 01:56, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

I understand, thank you. NotAnInsurgent (talk) 01:59, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

English Variation

Hi, I'm editing Project Zomboid and I was wondering what english variation I should use

The article talks about a game set in the USA, but the development team is British and Canadian

Thanks NotAnInsurgent (talk) 02:15, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@NotAnInsurgent: Since it is an existing article, use the variant already in place. RudolfRed (talk) 03:14, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

NotAnInsurgent, it's about an "upcoming" game, but one whose "latest stable release is Build 41". I am confused. -- Hoary (talk) 04:48, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Understandable.

Project Zomboid is technically in beta, it's been in beta since it's release around a decade ago. NotAnInsurgent (talk) 04:50, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah. Mention of beta status would be a help. -- Hoary (talk) 04:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Good thinking, I'll update it when i have the time. Love the talk page btw NotAnInsurgent (talk) 04:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

NotAnInsurgent, the pattern currently used isn't (or the patterns currently used aren't) obvious to me. That being so, what I'd do in your situation is suggest on the talk page the use of OED spelling. People with more appetite than I have for searching for "ardour", "gaol", "jail", "defense", "pretense", "realise" and the like would be welcome to do so, and/or to argue against me. And if nobody did, I'd go ahead and prescribe and use "Oxford" (OED) spelling. -- Hoary (talk) 07:26, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

I agree, It would make sense to use Oxford, as it's closest to both British and Canadian English. Thank you for your help. NotAnInsurgent (talk) 08:35, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Doreen Virtue

Former new age author from California who converted to fundamentalist Christianity–can someone please check if she meets SIGCOV/GNG?

If not notable for a standalone article, she can get a sourced mention on New Age#Christian perspectives. 118.149.73.154 (talk) 10:02, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP – not without sources, she doesn't, and preferably multiple secondary and reliable ones at that. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:21, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

The only maybe WP:N helpful thing I found was [6]. But she is on Rationalwiki and Fandom:[7][8], and has been published in CT:[9] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:08, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

However, I have hits on JSTOR and ProQuest, there may be sources. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:13, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Article has been deleted three times before see here [10]. Theroadislong (talk) 11:14, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, a challenge! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:38, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Edited draft, Need re-review still pending from more than 2 months

Need re-review for the draft. I'm confused weather the content is sufficient or need any other sources. Can someone help me out of this. Sandy2205 (talk) 12:16, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Sandy2205. It is not clear how Tanneeru meets the strict WP:NPEOPLE criteria. Only people who meet the criteria set out in that links can have a Wikipedia article at this time. Qcne (talk) 12:42, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello Sandy2205,

I am not a professional reviewer, but I am happy to give a couple words:

1. The last source [11] is from Youtube. Please do not use Youtube as a source (see WP:YOUTUBE).
2. The last sentence Nageswara Rao worked as Jaggayyapeta Division Private Schools Association President from 1997 to 2008 is unsourced.

You had external links in the body of your articles, but I saw you removed them. This is great.

Please see other volunteers' words for the issue of notability.

Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 12:50, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Pre-Colombian project

Hello. I mainly edit on the French Wikipedia where I participate in the Pre-Colombian America Project (that is America the continent obviously). On the French Wiki there is only this one project for all Pre-Colombian history. So I searched here and Discovered there was an Inca projet. However this project was inactive. I really only do articles about the Inca, so the Mesoamerica project doesn’t really help. Instead I searched for a Pre-Colombian America project and found nothing.

So now I’m here in order to ask if there is any (actif) project concerning Inca/Pre-colombian Andean history Reman Empire (talk) 13:39, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Reman Empire! Any of the projects listed at Talk:Inca Empire are a possibility; WP:NATIVE might be one. But in general, most projects on English Wikipedia these days are not very active; it's just not how most editors organize. Best wishes with all your work! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 14:05, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Reman Empire Adding to Sdkb has said, if you do find a relevant WikiProject - even a currently inactive one - take some time to find and understand the Article Assessment Tables. These show all the articles which have been assigned to that Project. Then look at the column headings to see what level of importance they are, then to the row headers to see what quality assessment they've been given. High importance, 'stub' or 'start' articles are the best ones to view to see if you can improve them for the greatest return on you time. Click the number in the relevant cell to see a list of those articles.

If you read and coe to understand WP:ASSESSMENT, you may even find that some articles have since been enhanced, yet their quality assessment has not been upgraded, and you could fix that. WP:RATER is a helpful tool for that. These are useful tasks that a lone editor can work on to improve, even if others feel the project is no longer that active. That could well change, of course! Nick Moyes (talk) 14:13, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Sten Philipson

I am Sten Philipson. On the wikipedia page with presentation of my person there is a message: This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. What kind of 'citation for verifications' is needed here? There are valid citations on the page already. Best regards Sten Stenskonto (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Stenskonto:  Courtesy link: Sten Philipson Hi! Wikipedia:Reliable sources describes what we're looking for. For yourself as an academic, the ideal source would be something like a profile in a reputable mainstream newspaper that talks about your life story, research, etc. Reviews of your books in peer-reviewed academic journals are also helpful. I would suggest that you avoid editing the article yourself because of the conflict of interest you have, but you're welcome to give us links to sources that we could use to improve it. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 14:34, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

To add to what @Sdkb has said, @Stenskonto- currently the only source on the article is one that verifies that you're a Swedish ethicist- everything else in the article in unsourced! We therefore have no way of knowing if the listed date of birth, graduation, thesis, publications, and various works are true or not. Wikipedia:Verifiability is a key principal on Wikipedia but as we have millions of articles all written by volunteers, a great many of them are sadly of poor quality.

If you have some published, secondary sources that are from reliable places and are independent from you that backs up all the statements in the article that would be useful. Qcne (talk) 15:04, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Oh, and sources in Swedish are fine. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 15:30, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Stenskonto Even the first external link is now giving a "404" error. For some basic information, Wikipedia does allow primary sources (see WP:ABOUTSELF), so if you have personal webpages at the institutions you have been associated with, please supply the links. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:22, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

For example, the archive of that page at the Wayback Machine could be turned into a valid citation for non-controversial details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:46, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

block quoted stuff

i have seen block quoted content that is italicized and sometimes it is not. which is the better way according to the WP MOS? Iljhgtn (talk) 16:46, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn Normally not italicized unless quoting a foreign language. See {{blockquote}} and MOS:ITALQUOTE for more details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:34, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

so if it is normal english blockquotes, not italics. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:36, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Correct, @Iljhgtn. There's only one small exception in this section, which deals with italics being used to mark a particular usage as a term of art, but obviously this applies to a very short selection within a passage, not the whole thing. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:42, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Where to request draft review?

Hi, I submitted Draft:Cornitos for review. I checked the relevant Wikiproject pages, but was not sure where to ask for help (review request queues don't seem to have activity for 3 years). Please help understand the process. Sabih omar 16:56, 24 August 2023 (UTC) Sabih omar 16:56, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Sabih, and welcome to the Teahouse. What kind of help are you looking for? You have submitted your review, and in time a reviewer will get to it, but there is no way of telling how long that will take.

If there are specific matters you would like help on, you could ask here, or at WP:AFCHD. ColinFine (talk) 17:09, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Sabih omar You only submitted the Draft for review yesterday and currently there is a large backlog of reviews, so it is likely you will have to wait some time. Meanwhile you can continue to improve the draft. The main issue is that companies need to meet the relevant notability guidelines. The citations you have used which are based on interviews don't do that: you need more sources of the type described here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:28, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Rock Hill Mo. Police Dept

How can I incorrect an article without sources except for me. All news about myself as Police Chief in Archives apparently and to old to fine, the article needs to be corrected. Thank you, Terry Good retired Police Chief of Rock Hill Mo. "1997-2004 Hired in 1972. Ginger133 (talk) 17:57, 24 August 2023 (UTC)