Wikipedia:Teahouse

Tigraan, 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

What if the news media is just 100% wrong about a subject matter?

I'm not sure if I am in the right place but does the accuracy of Wikipedia matter? I am an environmental investigator and nine times out of ten, the media tends to print random and arbitrary things about toxic waste sites, oil spills, etc. This creates an echo chamber which causes more and more media outlets to pick up the same false information. A good example of this is the Porter Ranch natural gas spill. An activist went on TV and said that it was "the worst spill since Deep Water Horizon" but it wasn't. This statement was picked up by about 500 media outlets and now, in the history books, encyclopedias, this is what is printed, even though the original statement has no basis or sourcing. In the end, this false narrative is branded as fact. Fifty years later, it's history, even though it was never true. Does only sourcing matter and not facts, in these articles? Rightventracleleft (talk) 13:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Rightventracleleft, one of Wikipedia's core content policies is verifiability, which is distinct from our individual interpretations of the truth. Understandably you consider your opinion on the subject to be fact (who doesn't? 🙂), but if everyone were to begin writing Wikipedia articles based solely on what they knew, it would become quite an unmanageable mess.

Note also that Wikipedia is not here to right great wrongs that may have occurred in history. As an encyclopedia, we seek to simply summarize what is present in existing sources, even if we find it personally unfair.

Hope this helps, M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 14:41, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Mathematically speaking, the Porter Ranch spill was measured in tens of thousands of pounds. Methane in the atmosphere is measured in the hundreds of millions of metric tons. The plume of methane over Four Corners region is one-hundred million metric tons. Those are not my opinions. Someone in authority made a statement they were being paid to say, it was sourced by hundreds of media outlets and now it's "fact." It would be nice if scientific fact would have more weight than a news reporter who was barely paying attention that day and scraping for content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rightventracleleft (talk • contribs) 14:58, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Rightventracleleft You are speaking to larger issues that are beyond the control of Wikipedia. If you wish to assert that a specific source should not be considered to be a reliable source, you may visit the reliable sources noticeboard, but you can't do that with the news in general. If you have sources that offer what you consider to be accurate information for a subject, you are welcome to offer them. 331dot (talk) 15:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

I could post the personal e-mails from a media outlet's journalists, to me, that show a pattern of deceptive reporting, but is Wikipedia going to no longer allow the Washington Post as a source? Just making a point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rightventracleleft (talk • contribs) 16:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Rightventracleleft, unpublished sources are explicitly disallowed per WP:V. Trying to use such emails would also generally be in violation of WP:NOR.

I'd encourage you to click on the blue links in this message and my previous one: they answer several of the questions that you have with regards to Wikipedia. Also, please remember to sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~. M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 16:12, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Rightventracleleft Given the rules under which we operate, the solution in such cases is to find other reliable sources that discuss the problem with the statement. We/you can then write about the discrepancy in the article, and cite the source. Unfortunately, if nobody has bothered to debunk a bad story, we can't do anything, since we are (intentionally) a tertiary source that writes about what others have written. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

A good example of this would be Harvey Weinstien or Cosby, who had the power to suppress media. During those years that those voices were suppressed, the editor of the New York Times refused to tell the stories of those woman. Later, that editor left NYT and started his own media outlet, ProPublica, that - with no sense of irony, whatsoever - then stood up as the champions of the very women's stories that he suppressed. It's crazy to me that our media is broken and there truly is no source for facts. In that way, Wikipedia is broken. Often, the only solution for getting around a disreputable editor is to create your own media outlet. One then prints actual facts and gets told that it's not credible enough for Wikipedia as media outlets like Washington Post, New York Times, and ProPublica are trusted sources. What a convoluted world. And remember, it's only popular opinion that those are trusted news sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rightventracleleft (talk • contribs) 10:34, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

user:Rightventracleleft, it may be easier to understand if you think of Wikipedia as an aggregator service. Ultimately, we don't engage in any form of original research, and our only role is to summarise what's already been said in existing sources. (The usual example to illustrate this is that, had Wikipedia existed in Galileo's day, we'd have said unequivocally that the sun circled the earth, regardless of our own personal doubts.) Editing Wikipedia on current issues is surprisingly difficult and not something we generally recommend unless you're confident you can write in accordance with sources rather than with your personal beliefs even if you strongly disagree with the sources. It's usually easier to begin with writing about historic topics, where the consensus has settled and it's possible to work from published books and academic papers, rather than from (inherently unreliable and unstable) newspapers and websites. ‑ Iridescent 20:39, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Then, bascially, nothing printed on Wikipdia has any credibility. What is the point of a website that only prints popular opinion and skews history? Ironically, I own a small newspaper that passes Wikipedia, so I am free to re-write history to fit scientific fact. That makes me laugh. Rightventracleleft (talk) 10:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Rightventracleleft, Wikipedia is a tertiary source, not a secondary one. If you wish to bolster your secondary source, go for it, but Wikipedia has to make do with what sources are given to it (with said sources' reliability being discussed and agreed upon). Everything is gameable if you try hard enough. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Some argue that there is a point anyway. Whether you agree with any of it is up to you.

• Wikipedia Is the Last Best Place on the Internet
• We Need the Wisdom of Wikipedia
• The Good Internet Lives On
• How Wikipedia’s volunteers became the web’s best weapon against misinformation
• How Wikipedia Prevents the Spread of Coronavirus Misinformation
• Using Wikipedia: Crash Course Navigating Digital Information #5 (one of my favorites) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
• Threatin: Moderators Flagged and Deleted Wikipedia Page Months Ago for False Claims [Transcript Available!] Adding this because it's funny. The article got recreated later, so there's an argument that the guy "won". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

You may also want to check WP:General disclaimer. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:23, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Rightventracleleft: I am definitely sympathetic to your viewpoint. We would all rather have factual information here. Here's the problem – everyone considers their 'facts' the correct ones. In this case, yours may very well be true. But if Wikipedia just let anyone post what they believed to be factual we would be just as reliable as your uncle's wacky Facebook feed or Conservopedia. Therefore there has to be rules about sourcing - even if they're not 100% perfect. Do you have a source for a credible scientist stating that the Porter Ranch spill wasnt "the worst spill since Deep Water Horizon." If you do, then that's a valid citation for an argument. The rules here certainly aren't perfect but they're much better than having no rules at all. – Chrisvacc (talk) 04:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thought I'd throw in my 2 cents for whatever reason, seems like I have a personal disagreement with the application of WP:RGW but as a newcomer don't know how "set in stone" these rules are. Reporting accurrately is hard work and basing wiki content on pre-determined "verified sources" is something that I think is a problem, a bigger problem is the lack of media coverage on situations such as the one mentioned by Rightventracleleft is the product of a profit-driven media which are notoriously covering mostly subjects that get ratings up and avoiding most if not all content critical of their methods. In the end Wikipedia does act as an aggregator and is not capable of being the place to right wrongs. Hard work has to be put in to research this stuff and unfortunately that means most of these wrongs will never be righted.Rightverntracleleft, as an "environmental investigator" I think you would be a credible author should you choose to research and write academically on these issues of media coverage of your field. This is of course a big task and I'm sure you're very busy (just a thought:) and regardless I'm glad you brought this to my attention. Also im pretty sure if there's literally any reported proof of the claim being untrue that should be cause to remove that part (regardless of the prestige of the media that parroted it). Thankful for the wikipedia contributors as it is a magnificent and highly useful creation, unfortuantely true changes in public perception have to be made through rigorous, principled journalism and research before the truth arrives here :/ Gromte (talk) 10:45, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

"The Media" is widely misunderstood. "Fernwood 2 Night" TV at the local Dayton Broadcasting Co. is mistakenly conflated with the NYT/WSJ/WAPO. Local TV stations tend to attract State beauty queen contestants and the like (recall that Sarah Palin was briefly a "reporter"), where they work for a few years, before going into residential real estate sales (or whatever) where they can make "real money." This is where people tend to get their idea of "The Media."

Contrast this with reporters at national print outlets: Getting a job there is like getting into Harvard or Yale, and yes, probably at least half of them are Ivy Leaguers (with all bias and shortcomings associated with that group). These large, dog-eat-dog newsrooms are a bit like science, in that among its prime motives is self-correction: Reporter "Billy" reports X. If Reporter "Sally" can blow "X" out of the water with a new story, she wins the Award "Y." Each reporter gets edited multiple times by a group of tremendously fastidious "nerds," half of whom went to Harvard, but who tend to suffer from social difficulties that make them ill-suited to investment banking.

2600:1702:39A0:3720:5580:2676:8231:5698 (talk) 14:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of file

How do I delete a file, it has been moved to the commons. File to be deleted: [Charge! Network Logo] PhoenixStarlight (talk) 05:06, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@PhoenixStarlight: To clarify, do you want it deleted because it has been moved to the Commons? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Charge! network logo.png gives you a link to CSD F8. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Yes, I think it should be deleted, because I checked the two and the description (details) and the format matches. --[[User:PhoenixStarlight|PhoenixStarlight]

Mount Everest

In Mount Everest, quote " Tenzing, a Nepali Sherpa who was a citizen of India" Is this true? Was Tenzing Norgay, climbing pair of Edmund Hillary a citizen of India? Roshanghimre59 (talk) 07:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Roshanghimre59. You might have more luck asking about this at the Wikipedia Reference Desk since the Teahouse is more of a place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia than it is for asking whether the content in a Wikipedia article is correct. If, however, you think that an error has been made about Norgay's nationality in the article about Mount Everest or the article about him and you are able to provide links to reliable sources which support your claim, then you should discuss your concerns at Talk:Mount Everest or Talk:Tenzing Norgay and see what some others editors think. The article about Norgay describes him as being "Nepali-Indian" but the article about Mount Everest describes him as only "Nepali" in addition to being a "citizen of India". That might be something worth discussing on the talk pages of both those articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:54, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Roshanghimre59:, I checked online, and it seems that he was granted Indian citizenship after the Mt. Everest expedition, and was born a Nepali (he held dual citizenship if my understanding is correct). In my opinion, the “who was a citizen of India” should be removed because he became a citizen of India after the expedition. RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 09:01, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

delete revision history’s

Hello Can you delete the 4 edit history from 14 And 16 September 2017 in Denmark in the Eurovision Song Contest 2010: Revision history because those are embarrassing edits and i wanted them deleted Amazon111 (talk) 08:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Amazon111 You should contact an oversighter; WP:OVERSIGHT has the instructions on how to do so. 331dot (talk) 09:04, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: At Denmark in the Eurovision Song Contest 2010 appears that back in 2017 there was a prolonged edit war about removing/keeping content. The editors were mostly IPs. Amazon111 is a brand new account, so hard to see how years old edits can be embarrassing. David notMD (talk) 09:10, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Article declined due to tone of language

Hi, I have created a draft for someone who I have been acquainted with but do not personally know or associated with. The draft is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Faizal_Kottikollon I have made several changes based on the feedback that it looks like a promotional article. However, despite the changes, it says the language used is "puffery". Could you please help me with some specific direction in terms of what needs to be changed with some examples? Thanks so much. Vathsalak (talk) 09:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

If I had to remove the promotion and puffery from Draft:Faizal_Kottikollon, I'd delete the whole lot and start again, basing what I wrote on entirely what I found in reliable independent sources. Maproom (talk) 10:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

For example "Feted by the Indian business community for contribution to education" is puffery sourced to a press release and none of the "Honors seem to be notable? Theroadislong (talk) 10:55, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much Maproom and Theroadislong. I did look at different press releases and publicly available articles. Are those considered to be reliable, independent sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vathsalak (talk • contribs) 11:03, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Vathsalak: My general advice for tone is to write in such a way that even someone who hates the subject can agree with the bare statement of facts.

Articles are a neutral summary of mainstream academic or journalistic sources. You can find a step-by-step guide to writing articles that won't be rejected or deleted here. Ian.thomson (talk) 11:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

In addition to press releases, interviews with the subject of the article are also not considered reliable sources. David notMD (talk) 14:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

That is not correct, David notMD. Interviews are p0erfectly reliable sources if published in a venue where editorial control is present, just like any other sort of article. However, most interviews consit of short, general questions by the interviewer, with relatively long answers by the subject. That means that most of the significant words are those of the subject, and so the interview is not an independent source this means that it will not contribute to notability, should not be used to source facts about people other than the subject, and should not be used to source controversial statements. But once a topic has been established as notable by other sources, interviews may be used as primary sources to support specific facts, and particularly to establish what a subject's own views and claims are.In short the same limitations apply to it as tom a statement on the subject's personal web page, see Self-published sources and WP:ABOUTSELF. Note that a few interviews contain extensive comment by the interviewer/reporter. Such interviews may serve as independent sources and contribute to notability. This is a judgement call. Press releases, like most interviews, are normally not independent, Vathsalak. They may or may not be reliable, and if they are, may be used to support specific facts in a Wikipedia article, but they do not help in establishing notability, as a rule. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:04, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Is Pending Changes Protection appropriate for copyvios that happen about twice a month?

I am currently watching (and improving when I have the time) 29 articles relating to Nokia’s Android smartphones (thank goodness edits are not very common in those articles). But I’ve noticed that three editors, all of whom have a history of uploading copyrighted stuff as “Own Work” (I checked on nokia.com and all their images are copyrighted by HMD Global, which runs the mobile phone business) have uploaded a total of 7 copyrighted images (some without any modifications, some with a white background) in the last two months. The first two editors’ images have been deleted, but given how often random people are adding copyrighted images, I’d like to know if there is a way to stop people from adding images to the article, without interfering with other editors’ work (especially since almost no one else has been causing any trouble on these articles). If there is no way, does this disruptive editing (or vandalism, if deliberate copyvios count as vandalism) warrant putting the pages under the pending changes review system? RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 10:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

RedBulbBlueBlood9911, deliberate copyvios are not vandalism, which is defined at Wikipedia:Vandalism as "editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose". And the base problem is that these editors are uploading copyrighted images, either to en:WP or to Commons; a solution should deal with that, regardless of whether the images are then added to particular articles. (I'm curious as to why someone wanting a picture of a particular smartphone doesn't just take a photo of one – but that's irrelevant.) Maproom (talk) 10:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Maproom, ignore my question about whether there is a way to automatically revert media addition (I realised now only that if someone tries to add their own picture of a phone, they’d have issues 🤔) would putting the affected articles under Pending Changes Protection be appropriate? RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 11:15, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

(ec)Persistent addition of copyvios after warnings are ground for blocking, which are not then easily lifted. That should be the way to go here. Warn them for each instance of copyrighted addition and if they persist, report them. If you can identify the problem editors, deal with the editors. Page protection is for when, in general, some kind of editors are causing problems, such as IPs or new ones. And there isn't an option to "allow edits except adding images". Pending changes is for hiding edits from the general public (not logged in) until an experienced editor approves them. I don't see how stopping a section of our readers from seeing those images would help anyone. It doesn't make it less of a copyright, nor does it reduce work for other editors. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:17, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: Without commenting on the specific merits of this case, "It doesn't make it less of a copyright" is a weird thing to say. The copyvio is definitely less severe if only a small group sees it. In addition, beyond the legal status, it is morally also better to hide copyvios from as many people as possible. --MrClog (talk) 11:21, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

MrClog, guess I was thinking only in terms of the amount of editor work needed and the legal liability Wikimedia might face. We'll still have to remove them (same amount of editor work) and I reckon someone who wants to sue, won't change their mind just because we had pending changes enabled to reduce exposure. The actual liability does not depend on the amount of exposure because the individual editors are responsible for their copyvios not Wikimedia. Suppose there's case though to be made that less people who are likely to sue may be logged in at any given time.

So, do you think pending changes will-be/are implemented on the basis that copyrighted images are being added and need to be hidden from as many people as possible? Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: Besides the likelihood to suit, the seriousness of the infringement (and thus the injury suffered by the copyright holder) are limited with PC. However, in this case, warnings/blocks are a better solutiont than PC protection. MrClog (talk) 11:47, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Okay, so I’ve decided to just warn and watch anyone who uploads and adds copyrighted images to the articles I’m watching. Consider this issue resolved. And by the way Usedtobecool, WP:PC says that it may be used against copyright violations in the last line of the lead. RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 11:51, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Save Draft

Hi! I'm working on a new topic which will take time for final submission to publish. I searched a lot " how to save draft" but no luck. pls guide me for the same.

Thanks, Shekhar Shekhar in (talk) 12:51, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Shekhar in To save your draft, click "publish changes". This does not mean "publish my draft to the encyclopedia", it simply means "save changes". It used to say "save changes" but it was changed to emphasize that anything saved is visible to the public, even if not formally part of the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 12:56, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

how can i edit a wikipedia entry?

 2600:1003:B46A:C155:CDA7:FF83:DF99:EA71 (talk) 13:25, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can learn about editing by going to Help:Editing, though essentially you look for the 'Edit' or 'Edit source' tab at the top of the page (assuming you aren't trying to edit on a mobile device.) Note, however, that new editors cannot edit certain 'semi-protected' pages until their account has reached a a certain age and made a minimum number of edits (usually 4 days and 10 edits). Non-registered users cannot edit them at all. Semi-protected pages have a little padlock icon on the top right of the screen. I would also point out that your individual IP address has been specifically blocked from editing Harvard Extension School until the end of May as you appear to have been editing on that page in a disruptive manner - possibly by edit warring. If you need further explanation on anything, let us know. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Correction to Karl Friedrich Schinkel

Italic text 142.129.114.219 (talk) 13:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! If you have a suggestion for making a correction to the Karl Friedrich Schinkel article, you can go to the article's talk page - Talk:Karl Friedrich Schinkel - and add your suggestion there. Please include a reliable source for the correction, so editors can confirm your correction. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

connemara marble

I would like to write an article about connemara marble, but currently that article is a redirect to "verds antiques", how should I go about this? thanks in advance! --Licks-rocks (talk) 15:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Licks-rocks (talk) 15:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I recommend that you create Draft:Connemara marble, and once you've got it into a state such that it's acceptable as an article, you submit it for review. If the reviewer accepts it, it'll be their job to replace the existing redirect. Maproom (talk) 16:11, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Licks-rocks: Welcome to Wikipedia, and to the Teahouse. While it is technically possible to edit redirect into an article, I would always advised inexperienced users to use the articles for creation mechanism, whereby you create and work on a draft, and when you think it is ready for publication as part of the main encyclopaedia, you submit it for review. If the reviewer doesn't think it is ready, then they will give you some pointers to what needs changing; once a reviewer accepts it, they will sort out any issues of existing redirects, or disambiguation needed.

Having said that, I also advise new editors to spend some time (weeks at least, and probably months) improving existing articles, while they learn how Wikipedia works, before embarking on the very very difficult task of creating an acceptable new article. (I sometimes liken plunging straight in on a new article as trying to play a piano concerto at your first music lesson).

I'm guessing that you don't agree that "Connemara marble" is simply another name for Verd antique? Even so, please consider whether it calls for a separate article, rather than a new section in that article (or somewhere else).

Whenever you decide to go ahead with it, please make sure you start by reading your first article, and WP:referencing for beginners. Happy editing! --ColinFine (talk) 16:13, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I do indeed not agree. some quick research has led me to the conclusion that, unlike the other entries, it is not a serpentine breccia or opicalcite. it is in fact a "true" marble. The reason I want to write this entry is because I was trying to do some research on the topic and the verts antiques article was... less than helpful. --Licks-rocks (talk) 16:23, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

These web sites 1 2 persuade me that Connemara marble is generally formed of serpentine, not marble. Maproom (talk) 17:06, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI: both of those lead to a 404 error. --Licks-rocks (talk) 18:15, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

There was a minor formatting error in the links – they work now. --bonadea contributions talk 18:24, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

EDIT: got both of your links working. Both refer to the marble as being abundant in serpentine minerals, rather than it actually being [serpentinite]. A subtle difference, but an important one.--Licks-rocks (talk) 18:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Licks-rocks: The way of linking to a Wikipedia article is [[serpentinite]], which renders as serpentinite, rather than using a full URL like [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpentinite serpentinite]]. You'll find more information at WP:Wikilinks. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:36, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

thank you! I'm new to the english wiki, so everything works ever so subtly different to what I am used to,—Just enough to throw me off.Licks-rocks (talk) 18:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Licks-rocks: Hi, I've seen this by chance; I happen to have done some work on the verde antica article and I too thought the Connemara marble seemed rather out of place! (I hadn't heard of it before.) I support the creation of a new article for the Irish stone, since the verd antique generally refers to products of one or two ancient Graeco-Roman quarry workings in Greece and Connemara is visibly different from them. "Serpentino" seems a fairly loose category for green stones like these in art history and archaeology and the often used label of "serpentine" doesn't seem to correspond between geology's understanding of the subject - I for one would like to know more about this area! GPinkerton (talk) 18:51, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @GPinkerton:! I'm glad to see such an encouraging response! I've begun writing a draft yesterday, but it may take me a while before it starts resembling something publishable.Licks-rocks (talk) 20:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Update: draft submitted for revieuw, thanks for the help, everyone! It didn't end up being a very long article, and I'm not entirely happy with it yet, but it looks like an actual article now. Licks-rocks (talk) 18:51, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Wrong Interwikilink for en:Meloneras, how to correct?

Hi guys, en:Meloneras (which is a beach avenue in Gran Canaria) has an Interwiki Link to es:Bryonia_dioica which is a plant, so totally wrong... can someone delete this? I have no idea how to do this. Thanks! CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@CommanderWaterford: The error probably comes from es:Meloneras being a redirect to es:Bryonia dioica. --CiaPan (talk) 16:52, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@CommanderWaterford: Well, after checking the enwiki article I must say I didn't find any interwiki links in it. --CiaPan (talk) 17:09, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@CiaPan: yes, of course, because I cannot link it to the correct spanish article... but I already asked the spanish sysops to correct the forwarding lemma, thanks so far for your help CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:13, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

To which page on the Spanish Wikipedia are you trying to link the enwiki article? es:Maspalomas has a redlink to es:Meloneras_(Maspalomas). --David Biddulph (talk) 17:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @CommanderWaterford: An interwiki link usually means a link under "Languages" in the left pane of an article. Meloneras has no interwiki link. Interwiki links should not be affected by redirects at other wikis. I don't know Spanish. Where is the Spanish article about the place? If the problem is that you are trying to create a Spanish article then you can do so at the redirect or any other title. See Wikipedia:Redirect#How to edit a redirect or convert it into an article. Wikipedia languages are edited independently and often don't have the same articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks! CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Spotted Hyenas

I've added some info on the spotted hyena from Hyena Project. I wonder if this info will be useful, since Hyena Project are a reliable source? Redstoneprime (talk) 16:43, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Redstoneprime: hello, this may be better discussed on the talk page for the article. Jcoolbro (talk) (c) 16:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jcoolbro: I've added that to the articles talk page yesterday letting people know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redstoneprime (talk • contribs) 16:51, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Can we create articles for subjects if there are no reliable sources for them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redstoneprime (talk • contribs) 17:08, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

No. See WP:Notability and WP:Verifiability. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:33, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I imagine subjects with no reliable sources would be those that aren't well-known, anyway? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redstoneprime (talk • contribs) 17:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Redstoneprime: Exactly. They aren't notable enough to be in an encyclopedia. Hillelfrei ^talk 17:42, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

That's true. For the first article I made (which is still pending review), I made sure to cite all my sources (such as news articles from CNN). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redstoneprime (talk • contribs) 17:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Redstoneprime: Just to clarify, something can be "well-known" and still not be Wikipedia notable (e.g., neologisms, new companies, and breaking news). (Please also take note of WP:INDENT and WP:SIGN with regard to discussion pages. Thanks.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

FYI

 – Added heading Hillelfrei ^talk 18:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

 66.169.103.20 (talk) 17:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP. Did you have a question? Hillelfrei ^talk 18:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Can WikiProjects be based on associates?

Hi, so I have been on Wikipedia for a while. Given the current state of affairs in the world, friends of mine were going to join it as the summer months start to have something to work on. I am familiar with WikiProjects but those are usually based on common goals (Like history) and not preexisting connections. What is Wikipedia´s policy on this? 22mikpau (talk) 18:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@22mikpau: From reading Wikipedia:WikiProject and Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide, it appears that WikiProjects are based on common interests or goals, not based on pre-existing conditions. However, you could all work together on improving articles. GoingBatty (talk) 18:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Further, 22mikpau, it seems to me perfectly legitimate for you to create a page in your user space, say User:22mikpau/collaboration2020, and you and your friends use it and/or its talk page to organise your collaboration. You could even model it on a WikiProject page if that was helpful. --ColinFine (talk) 20:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

issues with the way certain characters are displayed in google chrome

As visible in this screenshot, it seems certain characters are not displayed properly in chrome: https://i.imgur.com/5NR13kE.png

The plus sign is visible in some locations and in other locations the plus sign is partially poorly visible. I was wondering why this is. I'm viewing the page in google chrome at the default zoom level. Zooming in resolves the issue, but I reckon the page should look ok at the default zoom level. 85.148.91.183 (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Have you tried changing the way the Math extension renders? Under your Preferences, go to Appearance, scroll down to the Math section, and pick a different radio button. After saving, see if that fixes the problem. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:33, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of using any Math extension. Surely you don't need any extensions to view mathematical expressions on wikipedia? In the chrome Appearance settings I don't see any math section. I'm on a windows 10 computer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.148.91.183 (talk) 00:08, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

By the way, in firefox, it looks better, though it's still curious that some plus signs are rendered crisp while others are rendered fuzzy (again at the default zoom level).

https://i.imgur.com/4x8qvLG.png

I am referring to the preferences for Wikipedia. Mediawiki uses the Math extension (which incorporates LaTeX) to create the appropriate subscripts, superscripts, and other formatting. You'll notice that the font type for equations differs from that of prose. You could try rendering them as .pngs to see if that fixes your problem. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

At Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering, under "Math", I have selected "MathML with SVG or PNG fallback" and the page Geometric progression renders fine for me in FFox. You need to create an account in order to set the preferences. If I go to that page in Chrome, while not logged in, it is also rendered fine though. Make sure are not changing the magnification (press control-zero), though that doesn't break the rendering for me either. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 04:18, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't have an account at wikipedia, but I reckon the math should also render ok for people who are just casually consulting wikipedia without having an account. I did pay attention to the zoom settings to ensure they are at 100% since I know that bigger or smaller zoomlevels can create issues with properly displaying the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.148.91.183 (talk) 09:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

'Wuhan CDC' in 'COVID-19 pandemic in mainland China'

Paragraph 1 of this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_mainland_China

Could someone link 'Wuhan CDC' as it's unclear what this is referencing? Is this part of the US CDC or a Chinese national office not connected to the US CDC? Clarification somehow would be most welcome. Thanks for the fantastic article by the way. Regards Peter Edit Now logged-in to Wikipedia  86.153.108.143 (talk) 19:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC) @86.153.108.143: It is probably mentioning the chinese CDC. Since the chinese CDC isn't mentioned prior in the artcle, I linked it. Jcoolbro (talk) (c) 19:55, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. The best place to raise this issue is Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in mainland China because that is where editors working on that particular article discuss its content. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for linking and explaining - much appreciated. Regards Peter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pavessey (talk • contribs) 20:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Visual editor gone

Visual editor access

I was using the visual editor but now it is not appearing on article pages. Only source editing. 76.120.101.53 (talk) 19:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello 76...! I only just now tried editing as an IP, so I can't speak on what it's usually like. But, right now, I am getting one "Edit" button which when I click takes me to source editing and no option for switching to visual is immediately apparent. I tried changing the last part of the url of the editing page from "&action=edit" to "&veaction=edit" and it did switch to visual editing. So, perhaps try that workaround for the time being? I am getting both options as a logged in editor. According to one discussion at www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Feedback, visual editor is not available to IPs on desktop; so I am wondering if you used to edit logged in until recently. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 21:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, I actually encountered a similar problem that got resolved at this discussion here. Can you try switching skins and see if that works? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:54, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

mixed up my formatting - help please

Hi, dear people, I need help, i did mix up my user page on Thomas Kellner, and i don't understand what i did wrong. I do have sections "Life", "Photographic technique", "Works in Collections (Selection)", "Solo Exhibitions (Selection)", "Group Exhibitions (Selection)", "References" and "Further reading" and "External links" - and most of it already formatted, but when i look at "show preview" it shows this: "In 2010 he designed a photo project together with pupils of the Gesamtschule Gießen-Ost, which theme was the Telecommunications bunker in Gießen. The project was financially supported by the city of Giessen as part of the competition Stadt der jungen Forscher (City of young researchers). Rochester, New York, United States

   Museum of Fine Arts, Houston,[10] Houston, Texas, United States
   Sammlung Schupmann. Fotografie in Deutschland nach 1945,[11] Bad Hersfeld, Germany
   Art Institute of Chicago: Collection of Photography,[12] Chicago, Illinois, United States
   Worcester Art Museum,[13]Worcester, Massachusetts, United States
   Fox Talbot Museum, Lacock Abbey,[14] Lacock, England
   Library of Congress,[15] Washington D.C., United States

I just don't understand what i did wrong, could someone help me please, i don't want to have to do all the formatting over and over again, i'm stuck. PLEASE... --Gyanda (talk) 20:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, Gyanda, I don't understand what the problem is with User:Gyanda/Thomas Kellner, but if you got something wrong in your last edit, it's very easy to undo it: pick "History", and then "Undo" next to the last edit. --ColinFine (talk) 20:56, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

There must be something in the way of my text. I did undo, but it didn't undo the problem. Up to here is my text: "In 2010 he designed a photo project together with pupils of the Gesamtschule Gießen-Ost, which theme was the Telecommunications bunker in Gießen. The project was financially supported by the city of Giessen as part of the competition Stadt der jungen Forscher (City of young researchers)." - and then suddenly the works in collections come in, and i just don't get why, i'm so desperate now, i just don't know, how to fix this.. oh my god, this is terrible... --Gyanda (talk) 21:03, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Wow, did you do this? It's all there again? Was the mistake really that i had forgotten to put the "/" at <ref> - wow, i'm so thankful, i thought i would have to do all the work again. Oh, what a relief. THANKS! --Gyanda (talk) 21:13, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, yes, and yes. Glad everything worked out. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:17, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Dear Gyanda, I noticed one ref-formatting error in your sandbox and I've fixed that. You had used (( before Cite while {{ is used. Best. Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 19:13, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Dear AaqubAnjum, thank you very much, yes i got pretty mixed up yesterday, but today i understood it better :-). It's quite a job to keep all the formatting right. Thanks for your help! Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 19:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Question on Formatting

Hi, kind people, now all is okay again with the formatting of the article. But now i have another difficult question. I have a formatting in German:

• <ref>{{Literatur |Autor=Anja Mohr |Titel=Mit Kunst Geschichte entdecken. Ein Fernmeldebunker im Blickfeld außerschulischen Lernens |Hrsg=Justus-Liebig-Universität Giessen |Sammelwerk=Spiegel der Wissenschaft |Nummer=28 (2011) | Ort=Gießen |Datum=2011-05-04 |Seiten=57-65 |Fundstelle=S.57}}</ref>

and i try to transform it into the English formatting:

• <ref>{{cite journal |last=Mohr |first=Anja |date=2011-05-04 |title=Mit Kunst Geschichte entdecken. Ein Fernmeldebunker im Blickfeld außerschulischen Lernens |trans-title=Discover history with art. A telecommunications bunker in the field of extracurricular learning |url= http://geb.uni-giessen.de/geb/volltexte/2011/8121/pdf/SdF_2011_01_56_65.pdf |journal=Spiegel der Wissenschaft |language=German |volume=28 |page=57 |access-date=2020-05-10}}<ref>

would this be correct? I find it quite complicated to use the right formatting in different languages, sorry for causing you work. Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 21:24, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Gyanda, I don't know German. What I can tell is the closing ref is missing the slash. "page=57" should probably be "pages=57–65", and I usually add "format=pdf" when the url ends with ".pdf". That should work. Why not try it in the sandbox and see what it does? Usually, when you hit the "Preview" button, it generates a bunch of errors if there is something wrong with the citation template; that could help too. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 21:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: Since the URL ends in .pdf, you don't need to add |format=pdf per Help:Citation Style 1#External links:

{{cite journal|title=Title|journal=Journal|url= http://geb.uni-giessen.de/geb/volltexte/2011/8121/pdf/SdF_2011_01_56_65.pdf |format=pdf}} → "Title" (pdf). Journal.

{{cite journal|title=Title|journal=Journal|url= http://geb.uni-giessen.de/geb/volltexte/2011/8121/pdf/SdF_2011_01_56_65.pdf}} → "Title" (PDF). Journal.

GoingBatty (talk) 22:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

One could argue that it is more "future-proof" to include the |format=PDF for when someone changes the URL because of a site re-organization, the new URL doesn't end in PDF, and the updating editor (or bot) doesn't notice to add the format parm. Not a big deal, but the issue has been discussed in the past somewhere, IIRC. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:06, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your answers. I could add the "pdf" - this is not complicated. page 57 refers to the quotation, it's not the whole article i'm referring to, just this one quotation and it is on page 57. I do not really understand what is meant with "sandbox" - i tried the preview on my page, it looked okay, but i just felt unsecure, whether the formatting is all correct. So much to learn still... i wished i was smarter and wouldn't have to bother you all. Very kind of you all to answer me so quickly. Thanks! --Gyanda (talk) 23:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Gyanda: When you are referencing a source, you have to mention all the pages it is found in the journal. If you want to specify which page it is from, you can use a template like {{Rp}} or {{Sfn}} to do so. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:06, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu, some while ago i asked specifically on this and i was told that in the english wikipedia they don't mention all the pages, but only the referencepage of the quote... i store all info i get here in my "vademecum" for formatting and so i thought, i do it the right way as it was told me so. So now i start again

@Gyanda: Journals are different in that an issue has many articles per publication. To help readers find the specific article its page range is required. You can see a breakdown of what a journal citation looks like here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu you are mistaken. The documentation for {{cite Journal}} says: page: The number of a single page in the source that supports the content. Use either} If a 40-page journal article (pp 120-160) is being cited for a single fact, which appears on the 15th page of the article (p 135) the citation should include "page=135" not "pages=120-160". The point is to tell the reader exactly where in the article the fact is supported. If the reader must check the entire article, there is little point i8n providing any page numbers, and the citation is of limited value,l if any. That is no different for a journal than for any other paginated text source. @Gyanda: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:15, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: The earliest examples given provide the entirety of the articles in journals. The section of the documentation you're referring to is in the section labelled "in-source locations". {{Sfn}} or {{rp}} work. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:14, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

• Tenryuu "in-source locations" is the standard term for metadata that tells one where in the soured the information being cited is located. It includes the page parameter for a book por a printed newspaper, for example, and the time parameter for a video. It is in no way limited to the use of {{Sfn}} or {{rp}} . Those are most often used when there are multiple citations to different locations in the same source work. If there isw only a single citation to a given source in an article, there is surely no reason to use RP, but every reason to specify exactly where in the source the supporting information can be found. However, I think I should take this to a page about {{cite journal}}, not in this Teahouse thread. I will pink you there. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 12:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC) @Tenryuu: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 12:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

• ref>{{cite journal |last=Mohr |first=Anja |date=2011-05-04 |title=Mit Kunst Geschichte entdecken. Ein Fernmeldebunker im Blickfeld außerschulischen Lernens |trans-title=Discover history with art. A telecommunications bunker in the field of extracurricular learning |url= http://geb.uni-giessen.de/geb/volltexte/2011/8121/pdf/SdF_2011_01_56_65.pdf |journal=Spiegel der Wissenschaft |language=German |volume=28 |pages=57-65 |p=57 |format=PDF|access-date=2020-05-10}}<ref>

would that be okay? Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 00:53, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

• Aside from the unclosed <ref> tag at the beginning, you aren't closing the reference itself with </ref> (you are missing a forward slash). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, i corrected this! --Gyanda (talk) 11:15, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu, i tried to insert this as above and it says " More than one of |pages= and |p= specified (help)<ref>" as this is getting way too complicated for me to understand, i will now follow DES' advice and only name the page of the specific quote. Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk)

I agree with DES – the more specific page(s) are better. I don't see a benefit from knowing that the article covers pages 120–160 when only page 135 is being cited. {{Rp}} citations can be confusing^[12]:3[4] for readers to parse (though they serve a purpose when necessary). It seems analogous to a magazine or newspaper article, where we don't cite all the pages of the article either. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Dear people, i'm very thankful that you all have taken the time to answer me and show me the different aspects, which have to be taken into account. This was very kind of you. Now i know, how to format it right and will put this in my vademecum so that i hopefully will never make it wrong again. Thank you very much! Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 11:15, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

There is no "right" or "wrong" answer to this question. Both styles (individual pages and page ranges) are well accepted standards in WP, and even giving both at the same time can be useful. We are, just now, trying to establish a good notation how to specify both types of pages at the same time and also introduce new parameters into the citation template framework to make it easier for the users to specify the desired information and use the templates reliably:

• Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#citing_different_pages_of_the_same_book
• Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#number_of_pages
• Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#Question_about_page_parameter_in_Template:Cite_journal
• Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#Proposal:_page-range

--Matthiaspaul (talk) 10:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

A related discussion takes place here: Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#Use_of_Pages_in_Cite_Journal --Matthiaspaul (talk) 10:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Chichester High School page

Hello I hope someone can help. Chichester High School for Boys and Chichester High School for Girls have had Wikipedia pages for many years.

The two schools merged in 2016 and became Chichester High School. They had to take one of the DfE numbers and decided to take the CHSG number.

I had tried to set a new Chichester High School page but I have limited knowledge on how to do this.

I have recently noticed that someone has converted the Chichester High School for Girls page into a Chichester High School one - wiping out all the history of Chichester High School for Girls which is really sad.

Can anyone help with this?

Ideally, both CHSG and CHSB pages should have been suspended?? and a new CHS page created.

Thank you TJW713 (talk) 21:10, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@TJW713: I'm glad you posted on the article talk page at Talk:Chichester High School, because that's the best place to discuss the edits to this article. You can still see all the history by going to Chichester High School and clicking "View history". If you think a previous version of the article had better wording than the current version, you can edit the article (presuming you do not have a conflict of interest) or make specific suggestions at the talk page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Notability

I am wondering if I can write an article on the subject of Poetic Apologetics as an emerging form of religious apologetics? My hesitation is that it is a very new form of apologetics. My main source would be from this website: https://poeticapologetics.com/ As well as some other articles about apologetics in general terms, as well as poetry in general terms. Cdrauscher (talk) 22:12, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Cdrauscher, this sounds like a neologism, which is normally to be avoided, especially if you have any connection to that site. Guy (help!) 22:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Cdrauscher: The guideline Wikipedia:Notability has the answers you're looking for. "Information on Wikipedia must be verifiable; if no reliable, independent sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article." and "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article." Since it's very new, it might be too soon to have an article here - see the essay Wikipedia:Too soon. GoingBatty (talk) 22:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Creating a new page

I am trying to create a page for a friend of mine. His name currently exists as a red line entry (Craig Blackwell). I selected his name to begin creation, but I have a feeling I did it incorrectly.

The page is currently in my sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User:Rentonrc/sandbox&oldid=955998633

What do I need to do to publish it under his name? Rentonrc (talk) 00:25, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Rentonrc Hello. I have put an important message on your user talk page, please review it. 331dot (talk) 00:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Rentonrc blocked (not by me) for undisclosed paid editing - please see WP:PAID for how to disclose paid edits. dibbydib ^boop or _snoop 04:58, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Table Elements Math

Perform Excel-like math operations on groups of existing tabular columns (or rows), and record values into additional tabular columns (or rows). I found "https://tools.wmflabs.org/excel2wiki/index.php", which would seem to do the hardwired coding (thank you - very handy and useful!), but there is no visible mechanism for the underlying math interdependence of columns (as could be pointed to in an Excel sheet. Hardwired, yes, but no tabular element is addressable for further operations. I suspect a solution might be a dedicated Template, but I can't find succinct rules for build such, or even a simple (for) example, like: multiply column A by column B, then add column C and write in column D, then write column A divided by column B and write into column E. (I found a very specific Template where a row by another row division was performed - but offered no extensible logic to other ops.) Is there a comprehensive "how to" document for creating and modifying Wikipedia articles and their diverse contents? Dan Arthur Gross (talk) 01:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Dan Arthur Gross: Is this for an existing article? Can you provide some more detail on what the columns are and what calculation you want to do? I say this because, if you found an example of a template being used to do division, you already have the general concept, so I need to understand more specifically what you need to do in order to know where to point you. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Dan Arthur Gross: Perhaps it's about {{COVID-19 pandemic data/United States medical cases by state}}? If so, the issue may be more complicated than the technical calculation. Maybe discuss it at Template talk:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States medical cases by state#New columns that add in each jurisdiction's cases per 100,000 people? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

i wanna make a page but...

I really want to make a page for Kienan Robert, aka Poofesure, but there are no sources for him besides his twitter and his YouTube wiki, of which I have been told are "unreliable sources" even though he himself wrote them. He is pretty famous... hes got around 1.5 million subscribers on YouTube and has about 100 000 on Twitch.

Draft:Poofesure

here's the draft I made.

this document probably didnt work and im gonna get banned but, whatever. Nolanisntfunny (talk) 02:32, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Nolanisntfunny: Welcome to the Teahouse! People who are popular on social media do not necessarily meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion, called "notability". The guideline for people is at Wikipedia:Notability (people). Wikipedia articles summarize what independent sources say about the person, so if there are no independent sources, maybe it's just too soon to create an article. GoingBatty (talk) 02:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Nolanisntfunny: "Even though he himself wrote them" is exactly what's wrong. That's called a primary source and cannot be used for anything except to cite the most mundane facts – things about which the subject/writer would not be expected to fabricate or embellish. They do not contribute to the notability requirement at all. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:38, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Nolanisntfunny: If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list. dibbydib ^boop or _snoop

aight, i think im gonna wait a little while until he's a bit more famous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nolanisntfunny (talk • contribs) 16:23, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Longshaw

Previous discussion: Wikipedia:Teahouse#William Longshaw Jr

I have two uploads that I have of my cousin's birth. He is my 4th cousin, 4 times removed. His name is Dr. William Longshaw. He was born in Russell Street, Manchester, Lancashire England on April 1836 and emigrated to the United States of America with his parents (William and Margaret from the Port of Liverpool, Lancashire England to New work arriving March 31, 1842 on board the ship 'Siberia) see Census England, Passenger List Arrival at New York March 31 1842, 1850 and 1860. U.S. Federal Census and U.S. State Census for Lowell,Massachusetts. I have photocopies of the census from Manchester, England 1841. William senior was 30 years old, Margaret 25 years old. William was 5 year old.

I do have written proof of Dr. William Longshaw place of birth. Manchester, England How do I upload this proof. Longshaw (talk) 04:13, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Longshaw: Please see the response you were given earlier at Wikipedia:Teahouse#William Longshaw Jr and discuss this at Talk:William Longshaw Jr.. GoingBatty (talk) 04:21, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

New skin care cosmetic brand and their botulinum ingredient.

Yes frankly I'm an employee. I realized how reckless my attempt to list was with my first article whether I declared conflict of interest or not. Thanks for everyone reviewed and gave comments.

I've been thinking scientific or patent documents about this new cosmetic ingredient derived from Botulinum Toxin are too difficult to understand. (Methionyl r-Clostridium Polypeptide-1 Hexapeptide-40)

So, simply thought explaining about ingredient development back ground, process and results would be helpful to understand as well as spreading knowledge of Gene recombinant protein.

I made a mistake to approach telling the company and brand which using this ingredient with my first article.

Can anyone advice me whether this subject is appropriate for Wikipedia, and the good way to deal with this topic.

Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joonki7 (talk • contribs) 04:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Joonki7: Welcome to the Teahouse! It sounds like you're aware of the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. The answer to your question is at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria. Someone writing a good draft will find what the independent reliable sources have to say about the company/brand and then summarize it in boring encyclopedic terms. GoingBatty (talk) 04:38, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

You appear to be asking if it is possible to write an article about the ingredient (topically applied botulinum-derived polypeptide) as a skin wrinkle treatment without naming the one company in the world that is making and selling the ingredient. Is there science literature, i.e., review article(s) about multiple clinical trials? — Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs) 11:14, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Frustrated

user:Robert McClenon suggested I discuss my frustrations here. I’m very disappointed and depressed with all the users trying to redirect all the articles I have created and spent days researching... Oh well... whatever... never mind... DarklyShadows (talk) 05:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC) DarklyShadows (talk) 05:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Comments on One of the Debates

This is a type of dispute that is common in the music area. In some of the general areas, there are said to inclusionist and deletionist editors. In music, there are inclusionist and redirectionist editors. Inclusionists take an expansive view of how many articles the encyclopedia should have. In other areas, deletionists favor deleting articles that they do not consider to be notable or encyclopedic. In the music area, the restrictive view is that of redirectionists, who prefer to redirect songs to albums, and sometimes to redirect albums to artists. Disputes also arise concerning performers known as members of a particular group or band, and inclusionists support separate articles, while redirectionists prefer to redirect to the articles on the group or band. The basic issue is usually one of different philosophies of the encyclopedia with regard to how fine a level of granularity is in order for articles as opposed to redirect entries.

Often the interaction between inclusionists and either deletionists or redirectionists can be productive. Sometimes it becomes unpleasant and disruptive.

Some editors like to rely almost entirely on the general notability guideline. Other editors, typically inclusionists, prefer to rely primarily on special notability guidelines, and to write the special notability guidelines broadly to permit as much coverage as possible. There are also questions as to whether the special notability guidelines should be interpreted expansively to call for inclusion or only permissively to allow inclusion. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:58, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

More Comments

That is what I commented in an AFD discussion. As noted, I think that the interaction between different viewpoints can be productive as long as it is civil, and it is unfortunate that it sometimes becomes heated. User:DarklyShadows is an enthusiastic inclusionist who contributes a great deal of information about songs, which is sometimes kept and sometimes merged. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:58, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Rejected article for unclear reason [Draft:Vibease]

Draft:Vibease Hi there, My recent draft was rejected by User_talk:Sulfurboy because the article accused to be an advertisement. The article just stated the basic facts about the company. Please let me know which section does it look like an advertisement? It's frustrating to see other pages blatant advertising their product and get away with it. i.e. MysteryVibe lovense Thank you Paul Handri (talk) 05:44, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

(Paul Handri) I see, I am very sorry for any inconvenience I will review your request again. --Victoria & Landmarks (talk) 05:54, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 

@Victoria & Landmarks: Kindly do not pretend to be a reviewer who has reviewed the draft. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Paul - other stuff exists is not a valid argument (it often leads to the examples raised being deleted!). Each article has to stand on its own merits. Older articles especially were created under at-that-time lower standards. David notMD (talk) 11:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I have cleaned up MysteryVibe. I am assuming its notability was checked when it was reviewed by WP:NPP. I also trimmed out the product listing from lovense. Please note WP:Otherstuffexists though. Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:22, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Paul Handri: On Draft:Vibease, I don't see any references for the first paragraph in the Background section or for most of the items in the Products section. While writing the draft, you should be summarizing what the independent reliable sources state. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 15:15, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi all, :@Tenryuu: :@Usedtobecool:  :@David notMD: :@GoingBatty: Thanks for all your feedback. I'm new and I learn a lot.

@GoingBatty: I have added references as suggested.

Infobox after the lead paragraph on mobile

Hello! I was wondering how I can put the Infobox after the lead paragraph on mobile devices without changing the way it looks on the desktop version. Any help is appreciated. Thanks! Lara Vichnezka (talk) 06:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Also asked at the Help Desk. Lara Vichnezka, please don't post the same question in multiple places.--ColinFine (talk) 08:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Removed content from the page Arctic

Hello Guys,

I am new here trying to make some contributions where I can. I noticed that at the top of Arctic page someone added "Georgia is on google! Yay! The Arctic is an amazing place. It’s surrounded by countries such as Afghanistan and Russia". It did not seem relevant content to me so I edited it out, but then I got negative points. do you think it was a mistake? Should I avoid it in future?

Any learnings and suggestions are welcome.

additional info: also received this warning like message after this removal -

https://i.imgur.com/OYWQMGT.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Globalnitish (talk • contribs) 06:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks in advance!

Regards, Nitish Globalnitish (talk) 06:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Globalnitish: Welcome to the Teahouse and thanks for removing that bit of vandalism. The negative count that you see is the change in article size (measured in bytes). If you remove content it is negative; if you add content it is positive. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:54, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Globalnitish: It appears you were the one who blanked the page and inserted that bit. Kindly follow Nyook's demand and refrain from vandalism. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:02, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: I don't understand how you get to that :( Here is a list of all my contributions so far: https://i.imgur.com/2V4wQra.png, at #3 you can see a removal not any addition — Preceding unsigned comment added by Globalnitish (talk • contribs) 07:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Globalnitish:, This [1] is your edit, it removed the lead-section. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:28, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Globalnitish:, to clarify Gråbergs Gråa Sång's diff, not only did you remove the lead, but you also added the nonsense bit as shown on the right. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: I am sorry something is messed up. Look at this clearly this user materialscientist is the one doing this nasty thing and somehow I am getting blamed even though I was the one trying to correct it: His contributions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2001:8004:1241:671B:9C02:8CCA:6ED8:DFF3 The page where he added the content I removed: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Arctic&oldid=956026888 how can you blame me for this? nonsense. Sorry I was trying to do something in free time but I guess this is not the place for me. very disappointed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Globalnitish (talk • contribs) 08:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Globalnitish: At 2020-05-11T06:39:14 UTC, as shown in your contributions list, you published this edit, which replaced the entire lead paragraph of Arctic and several images with "Georgia is on google! Yay! The Arctic is an amazing place. It’s surrounded by countries such as Afghanistan and Russia.", a net removal of 2709 bytes.

Earlier, at 2020-05-11T03:47:28 UTC, and then again at 03:50:14, a logged-out user with the now-blocked Victoria IP address 2001:8004:1241:671B:9C02:8CCA:6ED8:DFF3 made an almost identical edit (and their vandalism was quickly reverted both times by other editors). You need to understand that everything is logged here, including IP addresses of logged-in users, accessible to a small number of special administrators for the purpose of protecting the project from those who are not here to help build an encyclopedia. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: thanks for clarifying, I see what I did there, somehow I posted the same thing back again instead of cutting it out..or maybe it happened because I was trying to edit it at the same time when it was being reverted. I'm a novice at this probably I should take some time to learn before doing any edits again. Thanks for taking time to clarify things. Please know it wasn't intentional and that's why it made me angry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Globalnitish (talk • contribs) 09:15, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Globalnitish: One thing that is useful is the "Show preview" button – that gives you a chance to see what the page will look like after you have clicked "Publish changes". ("Show changes" will show exactly how the code will change with your edit. Don't be afraid to click those two "Show" buttons to see what happens, because they don't save any changes you've made. That also means that you have to remember to click "Publish" as well, if you do want to save the changes you've previewed.) I don't always remember to use Preview though I try to do so, and from time to time I realise I made an error I would have caught if I'd used it! That always feels a little silly. Another good habit to get into is to look at the page after you have edited it and published your changes. (Again, something I don't always remember to do...) --bonadea contributions talk 10:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Basic questions - remove draft from page title.

Hello,

I am a new wiki user - I have created this page but I am unsure if it is published or still a draft. Is it possible to remove the draft reference or have I created it incorrectly?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Future_Ticketing

Please and thanks :) Annmarieguinan (talk) 09:18, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Annmarieguinan Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. New users cannot directly create articles immediately, they must submit them for review using Articles for Creation. As successfully creating a new article is the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia, it is a good idea to submit drafts even if you technically are able to create new articles, at least until you are very experienced in article creation. In your case, your draft was rejected because it has no independent reliable sources to support its content. A Wikipedia article should only summarize what such sources say about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability, in this case, the definition of a notable company. Please review Your First Article for more information.

If you work for this company, you need to review and formally comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Trouble with sandbox

Hello,

When I click edit source on my sandbox it shows the article contains more content than when the sandbox article is published. For my specific article I have a section on Voters, Parties and politicians and Examples of valence issues when you view the being edited. yet when it is published the section on Parties and politicians and Examples of valence issues is removed and there is only a shorted section on voters, why is that and how do I fix it?

ThanksWikiNicholasUvA (talk) 09:47, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi WikiNicholasUvA, welcome to the Teahouse. A starting <ref> must be ended with </ref>. Fixed in [2]. There was an error message Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> at the first occurrence. If you fixed that and previewed then an eror message for the next showed up. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much PrimeHunter, I'll keep track of that now, it's for a university project so I thought my work had vanished.WikiNicholasUvA (talk) 10:05, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @WikiNicholasUvA:. Looking at User:WikiNicholasUvA/sandbox I can also see that you have reinserted the almost identical reference time and time again. That is perhaps another reason it appears to be bloated when you use WP:Source Editor. If you look at the published sandbox page you can see those references at the bottom, many by Donald Stokes looking almost exactly the same except for different page numbers. This is very inelegant, but there is a very elegant way around this, whereby you give an easy-to-remember name to each reference, and then 'call it up' on all subsequent occasions. So, for example, your first use of the reference by Stokes could be named <ref name = Stokes> followed by the citation details (except page number). The next need for it is simply written like this <ref name = Stokes/>. Note the closing slash "/" character, and leave out all the rest of the citation detail. That command calls up the detail from the full reference, meaning your reference section now only has one entry for the Stokes publication, but many ticks by it to show home many times it is cited in the page, and where. Then simply use the reference page template( {{rp}}) to add the page number(s) immediately after the reference, like this reference{{rp|370–71}} and then maybe this: reference{{rp|372}}. For more guidance read WP:REFNAME, and let us know if this has helped ... or confused you! Nick Moyes (talk) 10:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – added <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags to stop page from breaking GoingBatty (talk) 17:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Help with announcing I am a paid contributor

Hi,

I hope you are all well. I have made amendments to announce that I paid contributor for a client on my user page and talk page. Is there anything I am missing? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

Loisspencertracey (talk) 11:37, 11 May 2020 (UTC) Loisspencertracey (talk) 11:37, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Loisspencertracey, no, not it all. On your userpage, please use the {{Paid}} template to disclose employer, client and affected article for each such article you edit, as instructed at WP:PAID. Please review the documentation at Template:Paid for how to do it right. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Loisspencertracey: I should also add that for each person whose article you attempt to edit, you should include their individual names in your declaration, not just the name of any intermediate agency. I'm sure you know that only content sourced to independent, reliably published sources may be added, and no attempt should be made to remove properly sourced content that you or your client happens not to like (unless, of course, it contravenes our WP:BLP policy). As a general principle we expect anyone undertaking paid editing here to invest the time and effort themselves to learn how we operate, rather than expect our volunteers to hand-hold and guide them through every step of the editing. I'm sure you can appreciate why, though you have approached this in the best way - thank you. Do, of course, read WP:NARTIST to satisfy yourself that Lhouette (Ciaron Robinson) is likely to meet our notability criteria, or you could simply be wasting your time and his money in trying to promote him here. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:32, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! ☎️

I have amended my talk and user pages again - Can you let me know if it is correct - I just want it to be right before I start my new page.

Many thanks!

Loisspencertracey (talk) 13:17, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Nick! I will have a look at the Nartist page and also add in Lhouette into my declaration. I appreciate the help. Loisspencertracey (talk) 13:50, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Loisspencertracey: I guess that will do for now, though once you start your draft, please include a wikilink to it from that declaration. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Moving pictures from Wikimedia to a Wikipedia page

Have a cup of tea and enjoy seeing Commons images on Wikipedia

Does anyone know how I move a file from Wikimedia to a Wikipedia article? Redstoneprime (talk) 12:02, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Redstoneprime: Actually, you don't move any image from Wikimedia Commons to Wikipedia (though the other way around is occasionally be done). Instead, you simply insert a link to the image that exists on Commons into the relevant Wikipedia page. Here is an explanation for you:

I am assuming you have already found an image image you want to use on Wikimedia Commons? If not, go to this main page and type a keyword in the search box (it's at the top right in desktop view). If you find an image you like, but it's not quite the right one, you could click one or more of the "Categories" listed at the very bottom of the page. This helps keep related images together and helps you find others.

It could be like this one of a cup of tea that you want to use. Using an exisiting one is easier that a brand new image of your own that you would first have to upload from scratch. So, click on the link in the previous sentence, or click the photograph you see here - you're taken to the same place - and look just above the picture, and beneath the filename where you'll see a line of five small links. Look for the link with the tiny Wikipedia 'W' logo and the words "Use this file". Click that link and select the text offered to "Use this file on a Wiki as a Thumbnail". (The convention is always to add an image as a thumbnail, no matter how much you'd love to make it larger.) Copy the link to your clipboard and then go to the Wikipedia page you want to add it to (let's assume we want to add it to the page we're on now). Edit the page (ie click the tab labelled Edit Source). Scroll down to the section you'd like to add it to, and paste in the text you copied at the very top of that section. By default, this adds the thumbnail picture and its caption on the right hand side of the page, as you see here. To change the caption text, just edit the text to the right of the vertical bar - or 'pipe'. Don't change the filename.jpg text itself or the image link will be broken. There are some useful links on this help page: Wikipedia:Images with further guidance and tweaks, or detailed layout possibilities at Wikipedia:Picture tutorial.

Of course, if you are using the alternative Visual Editor (which is a bit more WYSIWYG), the process is slightly different. You once again navigate to the section where the image is needed, then, in the editing toolbar, click Insert > Media. At the search bar in the popup that then appears, type the keyword to search for certain image types, or just type in the filename of your image you've already chosen from Wikimedia Commons. Select the image and then click 'Use this image'. Before inserting it you'll be prompted to add a caption. Captions can include hyperlinks, but that's probably best left for another time. I hope this helps.

If you need advice on actually uploading your own image first, that requires a slightly different answer and a mention of copyright issues. Let us know if you need further help on that. Regards from the UK. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Handling alternative spellings

Good Afternoon,

I am writing an article which mentions a High Sheriff of Somerset - A Robert Fitzpain (no article on Wikipedia - yet). Some sources spell his surname that way but many others spell it as Fitzpaine and even Fitzpayne. Even primary sources spell it in many different ways. Should I just pick a variation and stick with it, or should I mention there are a number of ways of spelling his name (which I would really like to do)? I would really appreciate some advice on the best way to go.

Thank you very much for any advice, Richard (I am sorry if I chose the wrong place for help - I am still quite new and I promise I did look at the help pages! Gricharduk (talk) 12:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Gricharduk, welcome! And this is a good place to ask. I think I prefer what you prefer, either as an ordinary parenthesis or like in David (with a so-called Template:Efn). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Perfect - I love the use of the end footnote as well! Thank you so much for the advice (and the welcome) Gråbergs Gråa Sång and for replying so quickly. You are a star! Have a great day. Gricharduk (talk) 13:18, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Question

I want to add fewline with draft name Lakhahi Raj Preetikasingh (talk) 13:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Your question isn't clear. If you are trying to check whether you have resubmitted your draft for another review, the answer is yes, as indicated by the brown box at the foot of the draft. As it says there: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 8 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,346 pending submissions waiting for review.". --David Biddulph (talk) 14:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

First kindly tell that reference for draft are sufficient or not Second I want to rename the draft Lakhahi Raj as Lakhahi Raj (Lakhahi Estate) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Preetikasingh (talk • contribs) 14:29, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, Preetikasingh. The cited sources in Draft:Lakhahi Raj are currently far from sufficient.

1. The first goes to a search page. Cited sources should go to a specific source, not a place where a user can search for sources
2. the second, https://www.jagran.com/lite/home.html is currently not working.
3. The third, https://www.thehouseoflakhahi.blogspot.com/ is apparently a blog. Blogs are normally not reliable sources in addition, my browser reports some sort of security threat at this site.

Moreover, the section "GENEALOGY" is just a list of people, presumably rulers. It does not give their dates, nor any information on how they are related to each other, so there is no actual Geneology provided. Also section titles should not be in all caps. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

And the last one — Preceding unsigned comment added by Preetikasingh (talk • contribs) 14:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Adding one more unpublished reference and resubmitting for yet another review is liable to be regarded as tendentious editing, continuation of which could be liable to get the draft rejected, rather than merely declined, and could get you blocked from editing. You have been given links to the page: WP:reliable sources; it would be wise for you to read it. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:51, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Creation of new Article

I am a new autoconfirm user at Wikipedia and an engineering student from India. I wish to submit my first article of creation, on Diamond Industry which is witnessing an enormous change and evolution. I came across several references who are engaged in this change so wanted to ask if I Can create an article on the company which has done notable work in this field? P D Agrawal (talk) 13:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, P D Agrawa, and welcome to the Teahouse. If the company is itself notable, as defined by WP:NCORP, Wikipedia can have an article on it. (note that just becausew a company is working in an important and expanding field does not automatically make it individually notable.) As an autoconfirmed user, you may create such an article directly, but I would strongly urge you to create and refine it in Draft fist, and to strongly consider asking for a review through the narticles for Creation process. This will take some time, but make it less likely that the article will be deleted soon after its creation, and may improve the eventual article.

Also, if you have any connection to the company, you should declare it as described in WP:COI before doing any work on such an article. If you are being, or expect to be compensated in any way for creating the article, or if it is part of your job function, you must declare as described in WP:PAID. In either of these cases use of a draft and of AfC becomes much more strongly advised. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so DESiegel let me submit a draft to AFC and go that route. Appreciate the help --P D Agrawal (talk) 20:20, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

---

Definition of Civility and personal attacks on fellow editors

Non-mobile link: Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Hizbul Mujahideen

I want a clarification. Does calling a fellow editor "trout OP" and speculating about them/accusing them of something by making false claims using alphabets in their username amount to personal attack ? I am attaching below some comments made by a fellow editor against me on dispute Resolution forum. The comments are signed by username Kashmiri and can be found under the Heading 'Hizbul Mujahideen'. Please help!!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Hizbul_Mujahideen AnadiDoD — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnadiDoD (talk • contribs) 15:02, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

@AnadiDoD: You misunderstand the situation, and I am surprised you have come here from a dispute resolution noticeboard to discuss civility. What they actually said is "trout the OP" - this is not uncivil, but suggests only that you, as the OP (original poster) acted sufficiently incorrectly that someone ought to slap you around the head (albeit playfully, but still unpleasantly) with a wet fish (see WP:TROUT). I think the rationale behind it is that you acted unreasonably swiftly in going from a talk page dispute, to a dispute resolution noticeboard. I comment not on whether that is correct. You are free to defend whether or not you acted rashly at that forum, but I see NO real incivility in the suggestion that you take one on the chin. Have another one from me, my friend! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

You are welcome to give me a trout, too, as I omitted to include the word "NO" in my original answer to you, which did, unfortunately, rather give entirely the wrong meaning in my answer. I have made the correction, and now stand by and await your fishy slap with appropriate humility and a good sense of humour! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes thanks for your informative and whacky response friend but I think you missed the part about insinuating something from my Username alphabets and presenting it in the forum do discredit a fellow editor? What could be the "rationale" behind it ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnadiDoD (talk • contribs) 15:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

AnadiDoD we often get users whose username says or suggests that the user is affiliated in some way with a particular organization. This may mean that such users have a conflict of interest when writing about that organization or its actions. It is not unusual nor considered uncivil to ask if a username does or does not indicate such an affiliation. After all if the user did not mean to make the association public, s/he would presumably not have included it in the username, which is very public. Thus such an inquiry is not into anything which is plausibly private. As a string of characters can have many different meanings, particularly when multiple languages are involved, it is better to ask than to make assumptions, which may be wildly incorrect. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:08, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @AnadiDoD: Sorry - as you didn't "attach below" any diff of those comments, I overlooked that bit. The other editor wrote "By the way, I wonder whether DoD in AnadiDoD stand for the Indian Department of Defence?" That was not making false claims, nor outing, nor incivility. It was just some rather cheeky speculation on the origins of your username which is, admittedly, an unusual format. You are free to declare a connection with the Indian Department of Defence, or reject any suggestion that you work at the Indian DoD, or ignore the comment entirely. I am assuming good faith that you have not been editing in areas where you may have a conflict of interest, or are PAID to edit. So it's up to you to choose how or whether to respond. However you edit, do so transparently please, assume good faith, and declare any COI that you might have on any subject. Regards from the UK. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

But DoD in my Username was added because the part before it was not available as a user name. Rather than clearing it up ,this was used to insinuate on a forum that I belong to a particular organisation just discredit me in what sense is that civil and fair ? (pinging DES, Nick Moyes) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnadiDoD (talk • contribs) 16:25, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

According to me it would have been civil if he/she just asked me on the talk page discussion which we were having. I would have changed it there and then as I have no such malicious intent. But if you guys think that I am the one involved in some conflict of interest debacle, I will Change my username(if possible).Nick Moyes — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnadiDoD (talk • contribs) 16:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Please help me on how to remove DoD from the Username so that i can prove that my editing remains unbiased and in line with the words i wrote on my userpage AnadiDoD (talk • contribs)

(pinging Nick Moyes) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnadiDoD (talk • contribs) 16:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@AnadiDoD: First off, before you go any further, please could you sign all future posts here, and elsewhere, with four keyboard tilde characters? Your failure to sign not only confuses people, it fails to send a notification to the other person that you are actually trying to communicate with them. So you simply get overlooked. See WP:PING if you don't understand this. Secondly, don't take offence so easily. Like I said, I don't think the question was uncivil, though it might have been unfairly presented to undermine you after the trout was thrown. You just have to stand up to such things and explain that the other person is not correct in their suggestion, if that is the case. You sdaid But DoD in my Username was added because the part before it was not available as a user name., but I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean. Look, DoD stands for innumerable things. (see here for a list of 66 of them). Thirdly, if you are going to take offence, simply go to your userpage and explain what your username does mean or, at least, what it does not. Fourthly, if you want to change your username you can do so. Advice on this can be found at Wikipedia:Changing username. Finally, I am not accusing you of a ""COI debacle", I am merely saying that if you are then there's a route for you to follow. If you're not, you need do nothing. Hope this helps and (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.). Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:28, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 

Thanks Nick Moyes for explaining and clearing my apprehensions. I apologize for continuously pinging you and I am grateful for the efforts you have put in. I have given a request for my name change. And the signature issue arose because I though it had auto signing but I'll remember it. Please close the discussion as my apprehensions have been cleared out. Thanks again. AnM1924 01:56, 12 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnadiDoD (talk • contribs)

Submitting a new article: thoroughly confused

Hello. I am new contributor to Wikipedia, not yet confirmed.

A couple of weeks ago, I submitted a new article ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lockdown_(novel) ). I followed the steps in the Article Wizard, and finished by clicking the "Publish" button at the foot of the page. I understand that it could take several weeks for the article to be approved. That's fine.

However, every time I go back to the article, I see a message at the top of the page:

Draft article not currently submitted for review.

This is a draft Articles for creation (AfC) submission. It is not currently pending review.

So I click the blue "Submit your draft for review" button. This takes me to an editing page, headed "(new section)". The edit box is pre-filled with some text, including:

Just press the "Publish changes" button below without changing anything! Doing so will submit your article submission for review. Once you have saved this page you will find a new yellow 'Review waiting' box at the BOTTOM of your submission page.

This is followed by a lot of lines containing down-pointing arrows. When I follow the instructions and click "Publish changes", this just takes me back to where I was before. I don't see any yellow "Review waiting" box.

If someone can tell me where I am going wrong, I would be most grateful. In particular, is the page currently waiting for review, or is it not?

Thanks in advance. Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

That's strange. I don't know why that didn't work for you, but I pressed the "Submit" button, then "Publish changes", and the yellow box showed up as expected. – Uanfala (talk) 16:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

...and I've now accepted the draft: that's not in my subject area, but there appear to be quite a few reviews published so far, so the the book seems to meet the notability requirements. Thank you for contributing this article! – Uanfala (talk) 17:06, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Mike Marchmont: That usually happens when you don't include an edit summary. For future reference, once you click the 'Publish' button, you should be directed to a source editing window. There is an editable bar on this page where you are required to add an edit summary, I usually write 'Submitting for review'. Once you've included an edit summary, go ahead and click the 'Publish changes' button. Doing this should do the trick. Hope this helps. NawJee (talk) 19:17, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

It worked for me even though I didn't use an edit summary [3]. – Uanfala (talk) 02:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Uanfala:, many thanks for accepting the article. You have encouraged me to contribute more articles. And thanks also to @NawJee: for pointing out the "edit summary" box. I don't remember seeing that box, but I will pay more attention next time.Mike Marchmont (talk) 12:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Information sought about how to submit a new article to Wikipedia

Hi. I have been working with an author to develop a new article for Wikipedia. The article is about the hunting of a famous stag in Scotland, 'The Muckle Hart of Benmore', in 1833. It is interesting, well written and I think it conforms to the Wikipedia 'notability' requirement. It is also well referenced using authenticated sources. I am an editor of long standing (almost 35 years) and have thoroughly edited the article, in accordance with the requirements set out in the Wikipedia Manual of Style. I now wish to submit the article for publication but am unsure exactly how to go about this. In particular, do I need to insert coding or is there someone who could do this for me? Coding is something of which I have very little experience and I don't know whether the author will want to pay me for the considerable period of time this would be likely to take me. Any suggestions regarding how to proceed from this point would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Sbrnmb (talk) 17:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC) Sbrnmb (talk) 17:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sbrnmb, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. If you saved your draft to Wikipedia in any way, you didn't do it using this account. I presume that you have written it off-line, using some word processor on your local computer or device. In that case the thing to do is to create the page Draft:The Muckle Hart of Benmore, by clicking on the red link I just left, and paste the text you have written into it, and click "Publish changes". This saves the draft page, but it does not publish it to the main encyclopedia. (The somewhat confusing name of the button is because it does "publish" in the sense that anyone can see the content, as is true for every page on Wikipedia, draft or article or behind-the-scenes page.)

(I am leaving it to y9ou to create the page so it will be logged as your creation.)

Once you have done that, please return here and post a note in this same section (by editing it and adding text at the end) saying that you have done so. I, or another experienced Wikipedia editor, will add needed code and handle the matter. Or you can use the article wizard, which you may want to do for any future submissions of new draft articles. Once we can see the text, we may have questions or requests, depending on how well you managed to match Wikipedia's style guidelines -- few people get that entirely right the first time. (I didn't). — Preceding unsigned comment added by DESiegel (talk • contribs) 17:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Sbrnmb: First of all, there's not real coding involved in creating articles here. Don't worry! We have two editing tools Source Editor and Visual Editor, and you can switch between them at any time. The former is a bit like using Wordstar (you sound to be old enough to possibly remember that software from the pre MS-Works/Wordperfect days), whilst the latter is more WISYWYG. Both editing tools each have their own Tools menu from which you can simply select a template into which you insert your reference details.In the example that follows I simply pasted in the url, clicked the 'lookup' magnifying glass symbol, added an access date, and clicked 'Insert: The second example was a reference from Google books. Normally I would take more time and manually add author name and page number - but, again, I got this far with no effort or coding at all. Adding citations might sound difficult, but can soon be mastered by anyone. I've written a little guide for beginners to help them, so do check out WP:EASYREFBEGIN.

I am a little unsure if the tale of the hunting of one massively-sized red deer is actually going to meet our notability guidelines, but I'll reserve judgement until I see your draft. It does sound from what you say that you might potentially be receiving payment for editing an article for someone else. If so, we have a simple, transparent and mandatory policy for declaring if we are receiving remuneration for our editing. See WP:PAID for more guidance on this. Good luck. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:10, 11 May 2020 (UTC).

References

Thanks very much for the very useful advice. I have followed the suggestion of DESiegel and published a draft of the article. There may be a few small changes to the references to come at a later date when the author is able to visit a library but essentially the article is in finished form with regard to the content.

How to get a page back from draft to article.

I was watching the TV show Maddysten on Danish TV. When I tried to look it and the hosts up on Wikipedia I noticed there were no pages about them. So I created some on the Danish Wiki and have also created a page on the English for Gorm Wisweh. But now it has been moved to a draft Draft:Gorm Wisweh. On other drafts I have done, there has been a submit button, but I can't find it here.
What is the process to get the draft back as a page?
Also: What can I do to avoid this happening again? Did I do anything wrong??
I think the problem might be that I have done some paid editing on other articles, but I have tried my best to declare it as stated in the rules.
This page is, however not paid work. I assume I'm still allowed to do voluntary work? I haven't found anywhere it says I'm not allowed. Anders Kaas Petersen (talk) 17:23, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I've added the template to give you the "submit" button. You may wish to declare on the draft's talk page that it is unpaid work. -- --David Biddulph (talk) 17:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I thought it was only paid editing that should be declared. But if that can solve the problem, that's fine. I'll try it. Anders Kaas Petersen (talk) 17:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Normally, Anders Kaas Petersen it is only paid editing (and other COI editing) that must be declared, But when there is reason for other editors to believe that editing is paid editing, declaring that it is not can be helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Anders Kaas Petersen. If you look at the history of Draft:Gorm Wisweh, you'll see that GSS moved it to Draft, with the summary "GSS moved page Gorm Wisweh to Draft:Gorm Wisweh without leaving a redirect: Under and possible UPE. Vet though AfC". This is admittedly a little cryptic, but UPE is certainly undeclared paid editing. I'm not sure about "Under" (and WP:Under is not relevant!) but I'm guessing they mean "there's not yet enough of it for an article", but I don't know. I'm a little surprised they didn't notify you on your talk page to tell you they had done it. --ColinFine (talk) 18:25, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Need help referencing!!!

Ok, I am trying to reference and cite but I keep getting a message that I didn't do it right. This is how I did it: </ref><ref name="{{reflist|name=web}}" group="{{reflist|group=web}}">{{cite web |last1=/series/unfamiliar |first1=Tapas.io |title=Unfamiliar |url=https://tapas.io/series/unfamiliar |website=Tapas.io |publisher=Tapas.io |accessdate=11 May 2020 |ref=Tapas.io}}</ref> What is wrong with it? Please help!!!!

Dani Hart (Talk) 17

33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – combining sections from same editor with same question GoingBatty (talk) 17:51, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello DaniHart08, and welcome to the Teahouse. I am not sure how you got that wiki-code, but it is very much not correct. The {{reflist}} template is to indicate where the lsit of references should appear, usually in a "Notes" or "References" section. It should not, normally, be used more than once in an article. the "group=" parameter is for the special and very unusual case of having more than one group of notes that are to be labeled or numbered separately. reflist should not appear inside ma <ref>...</ref> tag.

See Referencing for Beginners for more detail. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:53, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh goodness

(About the question above that I asked) It wont even show up because the referencing is wrong.....

This is how I did it. A message will probably show up because I did it wrong. '''((((((((((</ref><ref name="{{reflist|name=web}}" group="{{reflist|group=web}}">{{cite web |last1=/series/unfamiliar |first1=Tapas.io |title=Unfamiliar |url=https://tapas.io/series/unfamiliar |website=Tapas.io |publisher=Tapas.io |accessdate=11 May 2020 |ref=Tapas.io}}</ref>))))))))))))))))))))))))''' I really need help!!! (As you can see) Dani Hart (Talk) 17:37, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

See my reply in Need help referencing!!!|the section above. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:53, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @DaniHart08: Try this: <ref>{{cite web |title=Unfamiliar |url=https://tapas.io/series/unfamiliar |website=Tapas.io |accessdate=11 May 2020}}</ref>

The {{reflist}} template goes at the end of the article in the References section.

Note that you won't use the <code>...</code> and <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags that you will see if you edit this page. I just added those to help display the code here without actually creating a reference.

For more information about creating references, see Help:Referencing for beginners. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Is this what you wanted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs) 18:13, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Reliable Resource query

Hi, I have been reviewing the Wikipedia guidelines for reliable resources for an article I am writing. I have come across theminoritymindset.com and am unsure if it si considered reliable or not. Could an experienced editor please give me a yes/no answer?--HK2267 (talk) 18:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC) HK2267 (talk) 18:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@HK2267: https://theminoritymindset.com looks very iffy to me, with no obvious editorial panel. It looks rather like a one-man band website to me, with shiny graphics and little substance to anything - and a large section for merchandise. I'd suggest staying well clear, and looking for content from proper news outlets. Whenever in doubt, you can always ask at WP:RSN. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

The website has a section for a blog, press releases, and on-demand interviews. The news sections doesn't look like it is vetted or edited by expert editors, either. It is probably a paid-to-publish website. I agree with Nick Moyes on staying away from this source and other similar platforms. NawJee (talk) 18:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Are research groups considered a reliable source?

I've been told that Hyena-Project.com isn't a reliable source, despite them researching the animals. This has me thinking whether or not research groups are considered as "reliable sources". Or does the subject need to be studied by more than one research group? Redstoneprime (talk) 18:38, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOR is probably the most relevant. Praxidicae (talk) 18:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

So, it's a case of: if you want to include the information, make sure it has been researched more than once? Redstoneprime (talk) 18:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

A research group isn't really a source in the sense that that term is understood on Wikipedia, Redstoneprime. A paper published by the group would be a source. If that paper was published in a reputable journal, for instance, then it would be considered reliable. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Redstoneprime: Research articles/journals may be used as a reliable source if they are not the primary source of information, not directly connected to the subject of the article, or if they themselves are not the subject of an article. Ideally, it would be useful if somebody has written about the research, as well. The reliability of the journal(s) in which the research is published must also be considered here. The Hyena Project is a part of the Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research in Berlin , and I believe it is a reliable source of information. I would be wary about sourcing information from their blog, but properly sourced content from their research on articles about hyenas shouldn't be a problem. Hope this helps. NawJee (talk) 19:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@NawJee: some other users also seem to be quite "skeptical" of Hyena-Project. (Not sure why they would be skeptical, considering Hyena-Project studies the animals). Redstoneprime (talk) 06:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

How to create a Wikipedia page through red links?

I want to create a Wikipedia page through a red link. Whenever I click on that, I am not redirected to the edit box. What shall I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meet Jagtap (talk • contribs) 20:21, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Meet Jagtap: Instead of creating a new article that way, I suggest you follow the advice at Help:Your first article. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 20:24, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Meet Jagtap Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Without knowing what link you are attempting to use, it sounds like the article(not just a "page") you want to create may be what we call "salted", or protected from creation. If that's the case, you can use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft article for review. Even if you could directly create the article, it's a good idea to submit a draft anyway, as successfully creating a new article is the absolute hardest thing to do on Wikipedia, so it's good to get advice before anything you write is formally placed in the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 20:25, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Meet Jagtap: If you could please provide the name of the redlinked page, we could give you a more accurate answer. GoingBatty (talk) 20:38, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: You advice worked. Thanks for your kind help.

Cite personal information

Hello everyone! I was writing an article about a scientific researcher, I have cited all my info from published interviews, journals etc. However, I decided to ask some personal facts about his individual. He emailed me some of his hobbies and his most relevant influencers during his career. How can I cite those facts?. I heard that if he posts those facts on his university profile or somewhere like that, I could use that link to cite it, but he has no access no the university page. Is there another way to do it or should I just remove the info?

Thanks LJimenez2004 (talk) 20:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@LJimenez2004: Welcome to the Teahouse. Everything in the article should be based on what is printed in independent reliable sources. You should not be performing any original research, such as conducting interviews. Please also refer to WP:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 20:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, LJimenez2004 and welcome to the Teahouse. Unpublished sources or personal communications cannot be used as sources on Wikipedia, and so information derived only from such communications should not be included. However, if the subject cares to post such info on a personal web page, that can be cited. under WP:ABOUTSELF such sources cannot be sued for controversial statements, or statements about another person, but the sort of routine info you mention can be sourced in that way. GoingBatty, not all sources need to be independent, although there must be enough independent sources to establish notability. Basic facts about a company are routinely cited to the company web page, for example. Nor isa there anythign wrong with talking to the subject of an article to get background and identify sources. However, such an 'interview", unless separately published, should not be cited as a source, even a non-independent source, here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@LJimenez2004: Of course DESiegel is correct. I should have said that I suggest you focus on summarizing what is printed in independent reliable sources to demonstrate his notability for inclusion into Wikipedia, instead of trivia such as his hobbies. Good luck with your article! GoingBatty (talk) 21:05, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I fully agree with that comment. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel Aren't self-published sources, even for trivial information, frowned upon? I have seen editors removing self-published sources or company websites from references for things such as the date of formation of a company. NawJee (talk) 22:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

No they are not, NawJee read the page WP:ABOUTSELF where it says that Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as: ... followed by a list of five criteria that must apply. I(n some cases a self-published source (SPS) is the best possible source for certain information. Of course, there are cases where a self-published source is not appropriate, or where it might be acceptable but a better independent source is available. Without looking at the specific edits I cannot comment on those edits, but if the editors removed the sources simply because they were SPSs, then they were mistaken. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

How many thanks given and received?

Hi, is there any way to get a counter script or anything similar which display on my user page how many thanks I gave and how many thanks I have received? Just being curious. Thanks in advance and take good care of you, CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey CommanderWaterford, I'm unaware of an automatic script to display thanks statistics. You can do it automatically by posting the number from your statistics and updating it every once in a while. Alternatively, you can post {{UserStatistics|CommanderWaterford}} on your userpage and it will display a link to your statistics where your thanks statistics can be found. Hillelfrei ^talk 21:18, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Rejection of post (3 years ago) and rebuke by a wiki volunteer. I didn't understand and was put off. Now I'd like to add something to another article but am fearful of same rejection

 NMdeuce (talk) 21:10, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@NMdeuce: Hey there, it looks like your edit in the past was an example of original research. While that observation might be more suited for a blog or a status on social media, it's not really in line with content one might expect from an encyclopedia. If you'd like to add something to another article, you'll want to make sure it's not a personal observation, but something that you can back up using reliable sources, like a book from an established publisher or an article from a news agency. If it's something you can reference, be bold and add it in! If you're still not sure, maybe you can describe what you'd like to add here in this thread and we can give you some advice about it. bibliomaniac15 21:17, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@NMdeuce: Another option is to use the article talk page to share your suggestion. That would give you the opportunity to discuss it with other interested editors and come to a consensus. GoingBatty (talk) 22:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Cannot add pages to a wikiproject

Hello, I tried to add Bloomberg Commodity Index to Wikipedia:WikiProject Finance & Investment by putting the wikiproject tags in the talk page of the article. The banners display correctly in the talk page, but I can't find the page at all from the wikiproject page. Do I need to do anything else to have the page included in the wikiproject or do I need some sort of privilege? Eric.c.zhang (talk) 21:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Eric.c.zhang, and welcome to the Teahouse. The article lists under "Finance & Investment articles by quality and importance" (and similar lists for other projects) are supposed to be updated regularly by an automated process, aka a "bot" (short for robot). However, according to Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index#Bot_not_updating that particular bot is not doing those updates at the moment. Once this is fixed, all articles with proper banners should be added to the proper lists. In the mean time, the banner will serve most of the useful purpose in any case. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:08, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Eric.c.zhang: While you're waiting for the WikiProject list to be updated, you will be able to see the page listed in Category:WikiProject Finance & Investment articles. GoingBatty (talk) 22:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I uploaded a logo today to a sandbox for the org. that I work for. When will someone add it to the Wiki page for American Himalayan Foundation?

 KrisKimBell (talk) 01:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I uploaded the image to the page. However, note that the copyright has to be correct, and if it is really your own work you have to release it using a creative commons licence or something similar. Zoozaz1 (talk) 01:39, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@KrisKimBell and Zoozaz1: I moved the image inside the infobox on American Himalayan Foundation. GoingBatty (talk) 01:50, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Trying to add a file/scan of receipt

I'm new here and having trouble editing, I've been trying to add a file/scan to SS Himalaya it's a copy of a receipt but i'm not sure if i did it correctly??????Can anyone explain it simply please Triumph Banjo (talk) 02:36, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Triumph Banjo: I can see you uploaded File:Passage receipt paid on Board Ship to Captain of Himalaya by Stow-away in 1974.pdf. GoingBatty (talk) 03:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Centering Photo in Info Box

Hello. I've linked a photo to the info box of actor Chris Kerson's page. The photo sits in the box right of center. How may this be adjusted? Thank you! Major Major 26 (talk) 03:25, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Major Major 26:  Fixed the Chris Kerson article by removing "thumb". GoingBatty (talk) 03:47, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Major Major 26 (talk • contribs) 11:13, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Owned Image targeted for deletion

Hello! I uploaded a personally owned image and it has been targeted for deletion. I thought I made the necessary copyright claims on the image's file page. Apparently I didn't do enough. It is File:General H.H. Arnold High School Crest.png. I appreciate any guidance. Thank you! Major Major 26 (talk) 03:32, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Major Major 26: On File:General H.H. Arnold High School Crest.png, in the red box it says "Reason for the nomination: COM:DW of tile mosaic". It's common for Wikipedians to add links with cryptic abbreviations. Click that link and it will explain that the photo was nominated for being a derivative work. GoingBatty (talk) 03:55, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Major Major 26: When you use the "Ask a question" button on this page, you don't need to do anything to sign it – it's automatic. If you edit an existing section, simply end your post with ~~~~ (don't type your name after or before). It's a good idea to use the Preview function to see what your post looks like before publishing it. Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. How/where do we refute an image being a derivative work? The object in the image is U.S. government property, owned by the tax payer (public). It was a permanent fixture in a public/us government building, in the floor, which people walked on for more than 50 years. The building was completely demolished in 2015 and this former section of floor was not buried in a land fill only after enough concerned alumni argued that it be spared. Now the former piece of floor resides on permanent display in the new federal government building as a piece of the Department of Defense School's history, not a copyrighted work of art. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Major Major 26 (talk • contribs) 11:11, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

My article was declined

my article on the topic angel samuda was declined. I would love to get necessary information why it was deleted so It would help me improve on next content Kingmichael22 (talk) 03:54, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Kingmichael22: There is a note on your talk page and on User:Kingmichael22/sandbox in a gray box explaining why is was declined (not deleted): "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people)." Each one of those blue links will take you to another page that explains the concepts in further detail. For your draft, reference #2 appears to be self-published, and the other references are not from major news sources. GoingBatty (talk) 04:04, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

how to write

how to write in centre,left and right on page, please told me so i can design page as i want KhanQadriRazvi (talk) 04:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC) KhanQadriRazvi (talk) 04:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@KhanQadriRazvi: The Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout shows that most text in an article is on the left side of the page, although you can use tables when needed - see Help:Introduction to tables with Wiki Markup. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 05:25, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

You have a very large amount of content on your User page - table, logos, etc. What is the purpose? Is this content for an article or details about your career? David notMD (talk) 09:05, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Rewrite of page?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Belle_Retouch I kept it as unbiased and neutral as I could. I also put on article page and my user page that it was COI. Is there anything I can do to improve? I am new here and have no idea what I am doing. I am very overwhelmed haha. BelleRetouch (talk) 05:51, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

What information CAN I add without looking like I am promoting. Thats the last thing I am trying to do here. I have a lot of clients and I believe it is time for a Wikipedia page for my business as I have seen other retouchers do on here. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by BelleRetouch (talk • contribs) 05:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

You can't really add any information without it looking like you are trying to promote your business, because you are clearly trying to promote your business, whether you think you are or not. At the end of the day, both your draft and your comments above show that your purpose here is not to improve the encyclopedia but to make sure that an article about your business is included. I will be frank; I have done a few moments research and it appears that your company does not come anywhere near meeting Wikipedia's inclusion requirements, so we do not need an article about it. You should also be aware that your username is a violation of our username policy.

If you would like to contribute to Wikipedia on toics unrelated to your business, then you should request a new username and feel free to continue editing. However, if your reason for being here is, as I suspecte, to try and ensure that an article about Belle Retouch is included in Wikipedia, then you are going to be disappointed, and should consider looking elsewhere. Yunshui ^雲_水 06:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@BelleRetouch: To add on to what Yunshui, it is noticeably very hard to write an article neutrally about yourself (WP:AUTO goes into this further). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Adding a down loaded file as a citation SS Himalaya

New here forgive me but I've apparently successfully up loaded a file as i was requested for (citation required) SS Himalaya I have no idea where it went or if its on the SS Himalaya page? I can't see it anywhere??HELP Triumph Banjo (talk) 07:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Triumph Banjo: and welcome back to the TeaHouse! I looked at your logs and it appears you are attempting to upload a receipt to use as a citation. I was able to find it on MediaWiki and you can access it here. [[File:Passage_receipt_paid_on_Board_Ship_to_Captain_of_Himalaya_by_Stow-away_in_1974.pdf]]. I hope this helps. Have a great day! Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 07:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC).

(edit conflict) @Triumph Banjo: Welcome to the Teahouse. From what I can see from your logs, your file is titled File:Passage receipt paid on Board Ship to Captain of Himalaya by Stow-away in 1974.pdf. It does not appear to be on SS Himalaya (1948). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )

You didn't get the syntax right for displaying the file in the article, but in any case the relevant paragraph of the text has been removed by a subsequent editor. You will see the edits in the article's history. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:56, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

But for future reference, Triumph Banjo, you cannot use an unpublished document as a source for a citation, ever. All Wikipedia articles must be entirely based on reliably published sources. You can upload a receipt, as you did, to use as an illustration in an article (assuming this does not violate any copyrights), but you cannot treat it as a source, even a primary source. If a picture of the receipt appeared in a book from a reputable publisher, it is possible you could cite it from there. --ColinFine (talk) 10:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Confused about infobox which shows more info than exists in the code

Hi all. On the Esperanto language page about Lesotho, the country infobox shows information like capital city, official languages, etc., but when you view the code, the only fields filled out for the country infobox ("informkesto lando") is Name in local language ("nomenlokalingvo") and Esperanto name ("eonomo").

I'm confused about how this works... where is the infobox getting the data from? Gaodifan (talk) 09:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

This Teahouse is for asking questions about the English language Wikipedia. If you have questions about the Esperanto Wikipedia you need to ask there. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:49, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

... but at a guess, Gaodifan, that information is taken from the Wikidata entry d:Q1013, which is available to all Wikipedias and other Wikimedia projects. --ColinFine (talk) 10:25, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Gaodifan: David and Colin are both right. Another guess is that the main Infobox there would include other templates (indicated by double curly brackets - {{}}) which themselves contain content which is then being displayed within the Infobox. This means content that we might wish to see displayed in multiple articles needs only to be maintained in one place. This is a neat solution, and often applies to really major topics like countries and politics. I hope one of these guesses might get you closer to you understanding what's going on. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Gaodifan: If you edit the page with English as interface language in preferences then near the bottom of the window says "Wikidata entities used in this page" after a triangle. If the triangle points right then click it to expand a list saying:

Lesotho: Other (Statements), Sitelink, Statement: P935, Statement: P225, Title, Statement: P41, Statement: P94, Statement: P85, Statement: P36, Statement: P37, Statement: P2936, Statement: P1082, Statement: P421, Statement: P78, Statement: P298, Statement: P474, Statement: P610, Statement: P1589, Statement: P122, Statement: P35, Statement: P6, Statement: P38

You can also preview part of a page to see only things used in that part. All Wikidata is from the infobox. The P property numbers are not displayed on Lesotho (Q1013) but your browser may display them in url's when you hover over links on the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I see. Thank you ColinFine Nick Moyes PrimeHunter!! --Gaodifan (talk) 16:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

can i have a frined

 Thewikipidideditking (talk) 10:54, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't a social network. If you want to find friends, try Facebook. Yunshui ^雲_水 11:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

New article Notability

Hello! Apologies in advance if this is the wrong place for this, feel free to redirect. I've been collecting sources for a new article I'd like to write, and I'd like a second opinion on whether they establish notability before I start. I've looked through WP:CORP and feel like I'm close, but I'm second guessing a bit. The topic is Citizens trust Bank, a black-owned bank in Atlanta. Here are my sources:

• New Georgia Encyclopedia This one seems solid
• Business History Review a journal article about the founder and his impact on black business of the time. It's reputable, but it's not directly about the bank
• Encyclopedia of African American Business another bio of the founder
• Encyclopedia of African American Business bio of the president in the 70s/80s also speaks to the standing of the bank in the community
• AJC a recent write up in the paper; I've read that things like this based on interviews may not be good enough, but there's also some background in there
• Atl Buisness chronicle similar to above

I think those are the main ones. I think the things that make it notable are largely early in its history; one of the first black-owned banks in the city, first black-owned bank to join the FDIC, etc. But I'm not sure if these sources bear that out yet. Maybe I'd be better off starting with an article about the founder. Any feedback appreciated. ThunderBacon (talk) 11:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, ThunderBacon and welcome to the Teahouse. I think you will be OK. Of those sources:

• I agree that the New Georgia Encyclopedia article is sold and contributes well to notability
• The Business History Review article is behind a paywall, and i can see only a 1 page preview. That has only a one-sentence passing mention ofm the bank, Unless there is significantly more in the part I can't see, this is not worth including.
• The Encyclopedia of African American Business seems to have some useful content, although the articles are much more about the founder and the later president than about the Bank.
• The AJC article is not just an interview, it has lots of comment in the paper's voice, and should fully count for notability
• The Atl Buisness Chronicle article similarly has more than just an interview, and should count towards notability.

I would advise that you go ahead. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello DESiegel, Thanks for your help! The second article actually does have a fair amount of material further in, but does the paywall make it a bad source for Wikipedia? ThunderBacon (talk) 14:20, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

No, ThunderBacon policy explicitly permits sources that are not free of charge, it just makes reviewing a bit harder. See WP:PAYWALL. Please use |url-access= to indicate that a subscription is required, and consider using |quote= to reproduce the most relevant quote from the article. That helps. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @ThunderBacon: JSTOR being behind a paywall does not make it a bad source for Wikipedia. People can get access through their local library or at Wikipedia:JSTOR. You can also format the reference so readers could find the original journal as well. GoingBatty (talk) 15:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Can referencing Spotify Album Information matter?

Hello, I'm trying to add discography information on Draft:Hello Ga-Young#Collaborations. One of the songs "For to be Strangers" had a name change to "Estranged" when it was re-released in 2015. However, the only website that is accessible right now is only a album description page on spotify. I guess the website is a neither secondary nor independent sources. Is it okay to use that website as a reference? Thank you in advance! 지금행복한가영 (talk)(Contributions) 13:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I've just learned from WP:AFFILIATE that citing music-streaming sites just to confirm the album's title or length is permitted. The question seems okay to be closed! Thank You! 지금행복한가영 (talk) (contributions) 12:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Verify Sources

Can someone please tell me how to edit a page in plain simple terms. I have been asked by Paul Thompson of the band Roxy Music to edit his Wikipedia page. I do the band's website www.VivaRoxyMusic.com (which is already on the links on Paul's Wikipedia page.) The information regarding Paul's military career is on the website, a reliable source and whose web master (myself) is employed by the band as a historian and credited on record sleeves and other projects.

Can someone help me before I get blocked for doing something completely above board and accurate.John O'Brien 1965 (talk) 13:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC) John O'Brien 1965 (talk) 13:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@John O'Brien 1965: well, we're probbably start of with WP:PAID, which is a Terms of Use requirement. Secondly, I unfortunally have to inform you that the subject's own website is never a reliable source, see WP:SELFCITE. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:32, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Hello, John O'Brien 1965. The first thing is you are celarly a paid editor here, so you must before you start editing make a disclosure in accodance with the policy WP:PAID. I strongly suggest that you do this with the template {{paid}}. You must write your changes in strict accord with WP:NPOV and be particularly careful with your sourcing, avoid sourcing much of anything to, the band, its members, its web site, or the publishers or sellers of its music. Present your changes as edit requests on the talk page of the existing article, using the {{request edit}} template. Please express yo0ur suggested changes clearly in "From X to Y" format, and please provide reliable sources that support the request, preferably ones available online. Please understand that well-sourced content will not be removed jsut because the band dislikes it, and poorly source content will not be addewd. Please do not edit mthe article directly except to fix obvious vandalism. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:30, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

By the way it is not the case that the subject's own website is never a reliable source. Se indeed WP:SELFCITE. (which says: Using material you have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant, conforms to the content policies, including WP:SELFPUB, and is not excessive), but more significantly WP:ABOUTSELF which says: Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as: .... followed by a list of criteria which must be adhered to when using such sources. However an article must not be solely or largely supported by such sores, and they are not appropriate for controversial claims. @John O'Brien 1965 and Victor Schmidt:

I have a question....or two.....or maybe three heh heh

Question #1. Ok, I know that I need more reliable sources and things like that but what else is wrong with Unfamiliar by Haley Mewsome?? Question #2. Can you suggest someone to be a Host? *This is not me* (I know this is a silly question but I had to ask) Question 3. Is a sandbox private, or can anyone see it??

Thanks, Dani Hart (Talk) 13:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

hello again, DaniHart08

1. The main problem at present is with sources. Of your three currently cited sources, the first is to the comic itself and so not Independent. The TV Tropes article is independent, but does not give much depth of coverage. And goodreads is generally a combination of author/publisher provided blurbs, and user-provided content, and so is not considered reliable, and should not be used at all. Related to this, the description is currently very brief, mostly plot, but then there is no more to be gotten out of those sources. Some independent reviews by noted or professional reviewers would be nice.
2. I am willing to work with yo9u, but if you don't want me, no doubt others will.
3. A sandbox, like every page on Wikipedia, can be seen by anyone in the world. By convention, others will not change it unless you request it or at least give permission, but they cqn and will edit it in case it causes problems, and it is surely not private. Anything you want kept private should not be saved to any Wikipedia article, draft, sandbox, or other page.

I hope that helps. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:42, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Adding to that, do not copy content from a website and paste it into an article. Wikipedia does not allow copyright violations (copyright meaning that somebody or some company owns alls that stuff you see on the internet). Same applies to photographs you find on internet. Wikipedia Commons has a huge collection of images that are copyright-free. But like others who have offered to guide you, I also advise learning how to edit existing articles before attempting to create a new article. I've been here ten years and have yet to create an article. Instead, I work to improve existing articles. David notMD (talk) 13:50, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

editing

how do you change the font of the text Sumdogg3492 (talk) 14:36, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Sumdogg3492: Welcome to the Teahouse. I am assuming that you are referring to changing text by emboldening or italicising it. You can find more information about it here, though I will caution you that there are restrictions as to when to use them, which are also listed on that page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:03, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I have another question

I don't want to keep working on Unfamiliar by Haley Mewsome. I do want my sandbox back because I like to experiment in there. I am not allowed to move the page back, but I want to have a sandbox! Does anyone know how to help me?? Thanks and happy editing, Dani Hart (Talk) 15:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC) Dani Hart (Talk) 15:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Your sandbox is here User:DaniHart08/sandbox. Theroadislong (talk) 15:13, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

and in future if you have done something in your sandbox about "Topic" and want to save it in another page but it is not ready for the main article space, you can create User:DaniHart08/Topic or Draft:Topic and copy the text there, or move the content there, and then edit the sandbox to remove the redirect that the move will have created, DaniHart08. You may also start work on a possible article in such a draft or userspace draft page without using the sandbox, if you so choose. The difference is that putting content in a draft implicitly invites anyone to help work on it, where a userspace draft does not, or not as much. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Orphaning

FYI

 – Heading made by Tenryuu.

I am getting a orphan message at the beginning of an article but I don't know how to fix it and the pages that explain deorphaning are a bit confusing. Here is the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Walls_(Artists_Forum)

The page has a number of links to other pages so I am not sure what else to do. Patrick Killoran (talk) 15:39, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Patrick Killoran: Welcome to the Teahouse. When an article is orphaned, it means that no other articles link to it. In other words, you would have to link Four Walls (Artists Forum) in other articles. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Patrick Killoran: I've questioned the title at Talk:Four Walls (Artists Forum)#Title. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Uploading/Viewing Files

FYI

 – Moved from top. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:56, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello! I was trying to create a userbox template the other day, and needed to upload a small image for it. But I realized I didn't know the site's policy on uploading files. So, I have two questions- One, what are the specifics/restrictions for file sources? Should I only use files/images from WikiCommons? And two, am I even allowed to upload files for this kind of thing? I don't want to get into any trouble. Frostedchicharrones (talk) 15:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Frostedchicharrones, and welcome to the Teahouse. Images (and other files) which are in the public domain, or have been released under a free license such as CC-BY or CC-BY-SA should normally be uploaded to commons, not to en.Wikipedia, so that people can use them on any Wikimedia site. Folow commons policy on that -- commons does not accept "fair use" or other unfree files. Wikipedia articles can use unfree images under a claim of fair use, if the proper criteria are all met. But templates, such as user boxes, and anything to be displayed in user space or anywhere but in an article, cannot use fair use images, so use oinly PD or freely licensed images, preferably from commons. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:16, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Ah, okay! That makes sense. Thanks for all the help! Frostedchicharrones (talk) 16:20, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Translating biography to English

Hello, I have translated an biography from Serbian to English, and published it. I would like to know how long it will take to get it approved. Thank you. Elserbio00 (talk) 16:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I assume that you are talking about Draft:Branislav Nedimović? Don't forget that you need to provide attribution, see WP:Translation. You haven't yet submitted it for AFC review; to do so you need to add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I have edited it now, could you please check if everything is okay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elserbio00 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Elserbio00: I see you submitted the draft for review. While you're waiting for the review, you can continue working on the draft to make sure everything is supported by a reference. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Citations

I have a list of questions concerning citations, but any help would be appreciated. I have mostly used the visual editor and the website template, but I've done a little bit with the source editor and I'm open to using it.

1. When including the title of the source should the title ever be altered for formatting purposes. For instance, if the website I'm citing uses a stylized font where everything is capitalized (i.e. THE TITLE OF AN ARTICLE) can I use standard capitalization instead (i.e. The Title of an Article).

2. When including authors of the article and the author's full name is not available what should be done? For instance, if only the first name is available or only the last name? What if the author used a moniker/pseudonym either with a full name or without (Should I add the moniker in quotes after the first name like it's a middle name)?

3. I was working on a person's wikipedia page and they had a preferred name and I couldn't find a information field in the infobox for preferred names. Is there a procedure for dealing with preferred names?

4. When including the source date and only part of the date can be found (I've found sources that only include the month and day and I've also found sources that only include the year) what should I do? Also, what if the source gives a season instead of a month and day? I understand that if there is already a date format being used on a page that you should continue using that format, but what if there is a page that has a random mix of formatting (i.e. 2020-05-12; May 12, 2020; 12 May 2020)?

5. When including an archive URL, which archive is preferable and which available link is preferable. For instance, should I use the wayback machine, archive.today, or Time Travel? I've mostly used the wayback machine and most references have multiple archived dates. Is there a preferred archive date? For instance, should I choose the oldest available archive or the newest?

6. When including a URL access date, if I am improving an old citation and the original citation didn't include the access date should I simply use the day that I improved the citation despite the fact that the person who originally cited the page accessed it long before me?

Thank you to anyone who takes the time to answer these questions. TipsyElephant (talk) 17:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: hello! Hope you're well.

1. Yes...with the caveat that I base my answer on an old peer review (Wikipedia:Peer review/Outlaw Star/archive1), and the style guidelines may have changed since then.
2. Whatever helps the reader find the source most easily. I would check the template documentation (for example, {{cite web}}'s is Template:Cite web) to see if the author parameter is deprecated.
3. How applicable is the infobox for George Sand?
4. If only the year, put the year. If only the month and day, one should be able to chase down the year. Due to northern and southern hemispheres having different seasons during different months, stick to the year, unless you find something more precise. Find a {{Use dmy dates}} or {{Use mdy dates}} template at the top in source mode, then go from there. Double-check the [[MOS:|Manual of Style]].
5. Wayback Machine and WebCite. I've heard talk that Archive.Today is not reliable but cannot find it at the moment. Choose whichever date has the info that supports the article text.
6. You could try using WikiBlame tool to find when the citation was added, but it's probably faster to just put the date you accessed it. All the readers want to know is when did someone see the info at that reference?

Hope that helped, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Rotideypoc41352: Thank you for answering! In the case of a preferred name are you suggesting that I make the article name the preferred name? The original instance that I ran into this issue was an article for a hip hop artist with a moniker or stage name that I used for the article name, but he additionally had a birth name and a preferred name.

@TipsyElephant: no. The infobox at Draft:Emay (rapper) works. I would leave titling the article appropriately to the AfC (Articles for Creation) reviewer. (Pings only work when you sign your comment.) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

For clarity, I've numbered the questions in the OP's post to match Rotideypoc41352's responses. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

ANOTHER question (I feel like i'm over using the TeaHouse)

I want to make my signature different colors like Deepfriedokra but I am having trouble doing it. This is what I have: User:Da niHart08|< s pan style="color:00FFFF">Da ni< span style ="color:0 0FF 7F">Hart</sp an>08 </ span >]] [[User_talk:DaniHart08& #124;(Talk) It keeps saying that the HTML is wrong, but I don't know whats wrong with it. Can someone help???? Or can someone just tell me how to do it??? P.S. I know there are some spaces where there shouldn't be any, but I had to make sure you could see what I tried to) DaniHart08 (talk) 17:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC) DaniHart08 (talk) 17:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@DaniHart08: If you want to use code without making it show up as code in the appearance, use <nowiki>. Also if you want to learn how to make a custom signature, I would suggest you read WP:SIGTUT. That page will provide you with a tutorial on how to make your own signature. Also please read the signature policy to make sure that your signature follows the rules. Thank you -Examknow^talk 17:38, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

There are many errors and I'm not sure whether you are trying to make italics or bold. Is this what you want: DaniHart08📔 (Talk). PrimeHunter (talk) 17:42, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @DaniHart08:, a few things:

1. There is a stray </b> tag that isn't closing anything.
2. If you're using hexadecimal values, you need to add # before the 6 digits.
3. The links aren't closed with [[ at the front and ]] at the back respectively.
4. You need to use a | to separate the link between the link and the text that you want to link with.

With all that said, please review MOS:COLOR, as colours that blend into the white background are discouraged. PS: If you need to display code, you can wrap your code in <pre> HTML tags, which will stop it from rendering. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you all! I figured it out now! I really love the Teahouse, I don't know what I would do without it!!

DaniHart08 (Talk) 17:50, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Great! I am glad we could help. And by the way, nice signature :) -Examknow^talk 18:04, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@DaniHart08: With regard to the current color scheme above, I'm afraid it has insufficient contrast to be compliant with MOS:COLOR. According to this tool, the contrast ratio for cyan on white is only 1.25, failing the WCAG2 standards. BTW, one more little trick to save some of those few precious characters available for sigs is that you can use three hex digits for colors if you're willing to limit yourself to 4,096 colors. E.g.: #6f3 is the equivalent of #66ff33; #def is the equivalent of #ddeeff. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok, is this good: DaniHart08 (Talk). 14:56, 13 May 2020 (UTC)? If so, yay, because I really like it.

DaniHart08 (Talk). 14:56, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

A question

FYI

 – Heading added by Tenryuu, indenting added by Berrely.

what is this for 2600:1700:F660:4430:D2E:C53A:7F04:2118 (talk) 17:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

It's for questions about editing Wikipedia. Hillelfrei ^talk 18:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

why is this called teahouse 2600:1700:F660:4430:D2E:C53A:7F04:2118 (talk) 17:46, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

A Teahouse is a friendly and chill place in real life, so too on Wikipedia. Hillelfrei ^talk 18:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

what happened if someone vandalized this page 2600:1700:F660:4430:D2E:C53A:7F04:2118 (talk) 17:48, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

It would get noticed almost immediately and reverted. Hillelfrei ^talk 18:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Answering Questions

Can only Hosts answer questions? Obviously, even if this was the case you'd need some prior knowledge (and sometimes sources) to answer them, and being new I probably wouldn't be able to answer many if it wasn't exclusive to Teahouse Hosts, but I was just curious. ~ Frostedchicharrones 💬 19:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Frostedchicharrones, and welcome to the Teahouse! Anyone can answer a question, as long as they have sufficient knowledge and can provide a well thought out answer. Satisfy my curiosity though: have you been editing Wikipedia before, perhaps from a different account? You seem to have caught in pretty quickly, find the GOCE, and gotten a fancy customized signature very quick. Stay safe and all the best, -- puddleglum^2.0 19:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

That makes sense- I didn't think it would be host only, but it's always best to ask. As for your question, no, I have not. However, I have been on several other wikis, mostly about video games and other content. Since those sites had similar coding/formatting, I was able to pick up editing and basic coding for things like color and other text customization on Wikipedia relatively easily, although I do prefer using the visual editor in general. Thanks for asking! ~ Frostedchicharrones 💬 19:46, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Frostedchicharrones Why does your name link to Wikipedia:Editor assistance rather than your User page? And for your current color choices, I find the name very hard to see on the screen because it is too pale. David notMD (talk) 21:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello David! Yeah, I see the issue, and I know why it happened. Basically, in the tutorial for signatures, (although I'm not sure why), it replaced some of the username links with WP:EA. I just went along with it, but then realized it was incorrect. I forgot to change it because some outside matters came up. I've fixed it now. As for the color, yeah, I see what you mean. I changed it just now- does the color now have an adequate amount of contrast? ~ Frostedchicharrones 💬 22:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Frostedchicharrones to my eyes, that is little better as far as the color goes. A light grey or a light yellow on a white background, neither has very good contrast. Once upon a time i might not have had a problem with it, but my eyes aren't 20 any more, nor 20/20. In the edit view where it is light black or dark grey on white, no problem. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:04, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Frostedchicharrones You can use this tool to calculate the contrast. Per MOS:COLOR, you should get a "YES" in at least "WCAG 2 AA compliant". —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, AlanM1- that made things a lot easier. I've upped the contrast to levels that are adequate. I'm glad David brought it up- I hadn't really considered how other people's vision would affect the way they saw it. ~ Frostedchicharrones 💬 13:27, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

how can I send a private message to user when no links appear to do so?

• NOTE: Some postings in this thread are not in chronological order and therefore may not be responding to those above them. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

My name is Mark Graham. I manage the Wayback Machine at the Internet Archive. My email is mark@archive.org.

Please feel free to email me (what is your name and email address?)

You wrote "they are not crawling." - We add, on average, more than 1 billion URLs/day to the Wayback Machine. (this is not what I am seeing, the saved website are saved under "Alexis Crawls", but they stopped a few years ago. I actually went and clicked on top saved website and each one yields error 500 which says we are busy right now. I read the Forbes Article about the Wayback Machine. I have researched the Wayback site. Sure CNN is often saved, but I am talking about less popular webpages, they are no longer saved. I understand Alexis which is part of Amazon was doing the crawling, but now Alexis is unlinked from Wayback. I don't know why but I read that years ago) Ty78ejui (talk) 17:42, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

You also wrote: "I noticed Wayback sends Cookies to people's computers. This is done to sell information to third party companies." - We do not do that.

If a Web archive is excluded from the Wayback Machine there will be a clear "excluded" notice and this is done when we get a legitimate request, under the law, by a rights holder.

- Mark — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:C102:7B25:EC48:71DE:24D7:F67C (talk) 22:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I can answer that question. I looked at all the cookies in my computer and I noticed some from The Wayback Machine in my cache of cookies. This is not to say, they are third party cookies, but they are cookies, even if I am not logged into Wayback and I don't have an account with Wayback which I do not have. I don't see why we have to exchange private emails at this point when everything is already out in the open. Ty78ejui (talk) 01:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I want to send a private message to a user who is a "paid person" to ask him an embarrassing question without shaming him by posted it publicly, but he has disabled the link for that. I feel he is biased. Is it possible that it is not possible to send a private message to some users? Wikipedia is hardly bias free due to him having to disclose his paid status, I can see that this is a vector for corruption. Ty78ejui (talk) 19:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)  Ty78ejui (talk) 19:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ty78ejui, and welcome to the Teahouse. Basically, you can't. The feature allowing one to email a user is strictly opt-in by the recipient, and Wikipedeia does not have any internal "private message" function. All on-wiki actions are publicly visible except for a very few processes limited to admins or to functionaries. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:02, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ty78ejui: If you want to leave a message for a user who has decided to not provide their email address, do it on their talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:13, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Adding to the points above, there's an entire Wikipedia page about Conflict of Interest (which includes people being paid to edit articles, among other things). You might have read it, but if you haven't, I strongly suggest you do. It explains both the procedures you should go through when dealing with it (which includes a link to the COI Noticeboard), and how having a COI and being biased are two completely different things. ~ Frostedchicharrones 💬 20:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

He is a corrupt person who goes around changing my links away from Archive Today to the Wayback Machine and he gets paid by the Wayback Machine. If my links are changed to Wayback Machine, all the person needs to do to delete an link they don't like is excluded it from the Wayback Machine. I work hard to create a back up to Archive Today and each time, he a paid user ruins my links. Ty78ejui (talk) 21:33, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ty78ejui: Kindly stop casting aspersions on other users, even if they are bots. I am assuming you are referring to GreenC bot, which is an automated account that converts Archive Today links to the Wayback Machine as some pages cannot be archived with Archive Today. This was discussed in this Phabricator ticket and talked about in WP:ARCHIVETODAY. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

This is why I wanted to send a private message as a corrupt person will naturally refuse to discuss any issue in private and then scream that he is being maligned if any public mention is made of the situation. It is very cleaver way to avoid criticize while being undemocratic and breaking the rule of good faith. If he is in good faith he would allow a private message. Ty78ejui (talk) 21:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Furthermore, this is completely untrue. Everything can be added to Archive Today. The Wayback Machine is the one that in which many things can be excluded. Your use of the word "Kindly" I find to be offensive as if I had done something wrong by speaking up for myself. I was in the past occasioning throwing Wayback a bone by sometimes saving pages on both Archive Today and Wayback, but I will stop doing so as the paid people are now in charge of saving Wayback Links. I also contacted the Wayback Machine to ask why they had stopped crawling and got no reply from them. I will be deleting my Wayback Book Mark and I will not go there anymore. I noticed Wayback sends Cookies to people's computers. This is done to sell information to third party companies. Wayback is so poor that if I find a Wayback Link I have to save it in Archive Today to make sure it is still saved and won't be removed late. I found that Wayback was useful back when they were crawling, but now they are not crawling. (talk) 22:06, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

This is a technical issue that is known but the fix is not deployed yet. Hopefully it will be deployed in the next day or two. Ty78ejui I assume this is not on Enwiki where you are seeing it? (for the record it is a bug in InternetArchiveBot not GreenC bot) -- GreenC 22:07, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Speaking up for yourself does not include accusing someone without evidence. An issue was detected and a fix is in the works. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Please explain this technical issue, so I may fully understand it. What does InternetArchiveBot do? The fair solution would be to save the links to both sites, if that was possible. Ty78ejui (talk) 01:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

If the link is archive.vn or .md or .ph the bot does not recognize it as an archive and converts to Wayback by default. You can avoid the problem by using archive.today which is what they recommend we use on Wikipedia. But the problem should be fixed soon. -- GreenC 02:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I see, so I could improve my links by not using .vn is what you are saying? I found that the older .ph .fo all stopped working after a while. This appears to be a natural process. From time to time the extension changes because many sites set up blockers to block Archive Today, but they want to get away with posting horrible things online, but they don't want anyone to save these things and later be held responsible. Anyone who wants a site removed can have it removed and some of the sites I am indexing all removed themselves from Wayback. When Alexis was crawling many sites were saved many times on Wayback, but since Alexis Crawls no longer saves sites on Wayback, I don't think there are any crawlers at work. You say they are, but each time I go to a site, I never see recent saves from pages, unless I was to personally save them myself. I can not estimate the date in which Alexis Crawls stopped working, but I am thinking around 2011? It would be super great if I could count on everything being saved by a crawler which could have saved a number of things that were deleted that I was interested in. I save things as much as I can but I am only person and my saves can only help in a small way. I will accept a private message if you send one on wikipedia. Ty78ejui (talk) 17:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Uploading a Photographer's Picture I Have Permission To Use

I have written permission from the photographer to upload one of her original photographs as the display image for the Wikipedia main article for a band. She wishes to retain full copyright, but she has given me written permission to use the image for the purposes of the image display for the Wikipedia article of this band: The Buttertones

How should I upload the image (resolution/size dimensions??) and under what licensing etc. options should I select?

Cheers CascatheBrash (talk) 20:06, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Wikipedia only licenses are not acceptable. You can find which licenses are acceptable on Commons:Commons:Licensing. Ruslik_Zero 20:20, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello CascatheBrash, and welcome to the Teahouse. Basically, you don't. Wikipedia only accepts a grant of permission when it mis a free licence such as CC-BY-SA, permitting anyone in the world to use or modify the image, subject only to giving proper attribution or credit. Otherwise, unless the image fits the very limited criteria for using a non-free image under a claim of fair use, Wikipedia cannot use the image. "Permission to use on Wikipedia" is of no value at all unless it includes a full, permanent free license. Some image creators are willing to release a low-resolution version of an image. Some are not. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

College board is for profit change my mind!

 Courtesy link: College Board

College board is for profit change my mind!

If you look at the GAINED REVENUE that college board EARNED in 2017, it is CLEAR that college board is a FOR-profit company. I hate college board CollegeboardL (talk) 20:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@CollegeboardL: Please bring your objections to the relevant article's talk page and provide sourced arguments. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:11, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Being a non-profit means that there's no owner that gets to take the profits home at the end of the year. It's possible for a non-profit to have high revenue, just like it's possible for a for-profit organization to have no profits. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Incineroar

FYI

 – Heading added by Tenryuu.

Critique Draft:Incineroar JTZegers (talk) 21:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

It has been declined five times. That is more than adequate critiquing. It now redirects to a list of Pokeman characters. David notMD (talk) 21:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

The United Kingdom of China and Taiwan's talk page redirect

I noticed this talk page User talk:The United Kingdom of China and Taiwan from the user named in the subject just redirects right back to the user page. This is slightly concerning. (I didn't revert or warn about anything from this user yet.) What should we do about this? Is this allowed? Randompointofview (talk) 21:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC) Pinging @The United Kingdom of China and Taiwan: before I forget. Randompointofview (talk) 21:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Redirect has been removed by Nick Moyes. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:24, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Randompointofview, for reporting this. It's an interesting username, just on the fringes of attracting a softblock for breaching our username policy (WP:USERNAME) by referencing a controversial topic which some might find offensive (bullet 1 of WP:DISRUPTNAME) and also for suggesting a multiple user account (WP:SHAREDACCOUNT) - about 1.4 billion potential users (according to this page!). I will, however, keep an eye on it. (@331dot, Cullen328, and Yunshui: - any thoughts on this?) Nick Moyes (talk) 22:12, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry to be slow to respond, Nick Moyes, but I have been traveling today. I agree that this username is problematic for the reasons you stated. Unity between China and Taiwan is highly controversial, the notion of a united Chinese kingdom is both controversial and probably fringe, and the name implies shared use. The name may be so fringe that nobody can take the notion seriously. When I Google the exact phrase "United Kingdom of China and Taiwan", I get zero hits except for this Wikipedia account. So, that leads me to believe that there is no such organized group, and that this account most likely represents an individual with grand ideas. So, I recommend continuing to monitor the user's contributions and considering administrative action if disruptive behavior occurs. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Cullen328, I've now left them a note, asking about their username, and will monitor. Nick Moyes (talk) 06:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

How to add citations to an article.

FYI

 – Section heading formatted by Tenryuu.

I was told I must include citations in an article I've been trying to submit to Wikipedia. I can't figure out how to add citations to names and subjects in my article. My article is about well known guitarist/composer/orchestrator and member of the Wrecking Crew group of studio musicians, Don Peake. Ekkie101 (talk) 21:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ekkie101: Please refer to WP:REFBEGIN to learn how to add citations in Wikipedia's style. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

If you find the article on 'Referencing for Beginners' rather complex, I can offer an alternative guide I have prepared (see WP:EASYREFBEGIN). I have not looked at Draft:Don Peake in detail, but please be aware that individual members of a notable band rarely merit a page of their own unless they have reached 'notability' on their own as a musician, per WP:NMUSICIAN. It was only very recently that Jungkook (from BTS) merited a separate page after their individual chart success. Be aware that, as a mate of the article's subject, you do have a strong Conflict of Interest. Thank you for mentioning that on your userpage, but do remember that we can only accept content based upon reliable, independent published sources. We care not a jot about what the subject wants to add about themselves, even if they ask you to. So, by way of example, if there's nothing published in the public domain that allows anyone to verify that he "earned a United States Coast Guard 100 ton Captains License for mechanical and sail in 1983", then please remove it. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

(I'm sure that Nick means that it has to be published so the general public can read it. He doesn't mean that it has to be in the public domain, which is about copyright law.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Creating a Sidebar for "History of the Humanities"

Is there anyone who is willing and able to help me create a sidebar for the topic "History of the Humanities", or the "History of the Western Humanities"? This field of study is on history from a cultural perspective. It differs from the usual perspective on history from the political or economic view. The History of the Humanities includes the history of religion, philosophy, and law, their writings, and history of the arts: literature, architecture, sculpture, painting, music, and the minor arts. It is a class offered in most liberal arts colleges. Many WP articles on this vast array of topics could benefit from a recognition of its different more 'human' perspective on history, but more importantly, the connection to other articles under the same category that a sidebar would offer would, imo, genuinely enhance the encyclopedia experience. (I looked and didn't find an existing template, but if someone else knows of one already made, please tell me as I need to use it!) Otherwise, someone, please help me make one. I've never done one and would like to know how. Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:11, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Jenhawk777, it's not technically all that hard. Have you found a similar one that you want to copy? Once you've found a good model ({{Psychology sidebar}} is a big one), you pretty much copy the content to a new template page, and swap in the names and links that you want to have. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:48, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay so you're having faith that I can figure it out huh? Aw-ight then! I'll give it a go! Jenhawk777 (talk) 02:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

WhatamIdoing So as it turns out, it seems your faith is misplaced. I copied the psych sidebar into my sandbox. I attempted to substitute the appropriate other topics. I attempted to preview and submit, and it comes up blank. Nothing is there. Nada. Zilch. I am probably missing some slash or dot in the right place or some such programming rule from Hell designed to annoy and frustrate all the rest of the world that is not a programmer. I got nothing man, and that was actually a good bit of work with nothing to show for it. Please feel free to go to my sandbox [4] and take a look--edit at will. Please. I'll be in your debt. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:52, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777: Hi, I decided to step in and fiddle with your sandbox. Some links were improperly closed and I have switched to <onlyinclude> tags to make it visible on the page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:08, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

May all the blessings of all the gods of all the universes fall upon your head! Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu The above is for you! I got all the red out, added a perfect photo, and I absolutely love it!! Thank you again. Now I need to know how to get it out there so people will use it. Can I make one of those quick and easy templates for it? Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777: Once you have the template finalised, you can. If you follow the format of ____ sidebar that'd be great. By the way, you're using the wrong brackets to notify me and WhatamIdoing; use curly brackets, not square ones. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu Sorry! And thanx again! Do I just add that to the top of the rest or what? And thanx again! Jenhawk777 (talk) 06:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Me again. Can a page have more than one sidebar? Jenhawk777 (talk) 06:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777: Can a page have more than one sidebar? To the best of my knowledge usually only one sidebar is used in an article. You could also use navboxes, which are essentially horizontal sidebars, and place them at the bottom of articles. That too can be made a template. You may want to read WP:NAVBOX (WP:SIDEBAR leads to the same section) to get an idea of what a good sidebar/navbox has. Even further reading: WP:NAV.

Do I just add that to the top of the rest or what? Copy and paste the template code (and the documentation) over to the new template page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:58, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I read it before coming here to ask. I just didn't understand it. So many of the instructions on WP use what seems to me like special terms that I don't know the meaning of--after I've muddled through it, I understand what they meant, but before? "Copy and paste the template code--I guess that is the tag syntax thing above?--and what documentation?--to the new template page??? What is the template page? Jenhawk777 (talk) 07:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Template code refers to everything within and including the <onlyinclude> and <noinclude> tags. You would have to create your own documentation; you can take a look at Template:Psychology sidebar/doc for ideas. The template page would be Template:____ sidebar where you fill in the blank; documentation would go in Template:____ sidebar/doc. I need to get some sleep; another editor will be able to clarify things for you. Have a good night. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:27, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining things. Good night. :-) Jenhawk777 (talk) 09:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

COI, NPOV and sources

My first attempt to write an article Draft:New Ideas Chamber Orchestra has been declined twice because of non-neutral writing style and insufficient sources. I do have a conflict of interest writing about this subject, but if I understand correctly, as long as the COI is not visible in the article, everything is fine, true?

Now I think I've done my best to 'neutralise' the language, and remove content that is unsupported or irrelevant, but before I submit again, could someone look through the article and tell me if it's ok or if there's more to be done? It would be really helpful! ChamberContemp (talk) 23:06, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, ChamberContemp, and welcome to teh Teahouse. There are still formatting issues, and possible sourcing issues. The list of "famous people they have performed with" is perilously close to name-dropping, which is a form of p0romotionm, even if the statements are all accurate. Some professional reviews of the work of NICO, properly cited, would help significantly.

Oh, don't linmke more than once to the same article, as you did to the founder's article. Refer to people, such as the founder, by surname alone after the first mention,, unless there mare multiple, people with the same or very similar names, so that confusion is likely. I hope that helps a bit. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Update: I have left a {{Connected contributor}} template on the talk page to show that ChamberContemp has declared their conflict of interest. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:58, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I guess I'll have to put in some more work, I'll try to find some reviews. I don't think there are reviews in English though - would it be ok if I used reviews in Russian or Lithuanian languages and translated the content that I need from the reviews myself? I am qualified to do that, but I won't have the way to prove that my translation is correct. Another problem with reviews is that they are often full of metaphors and all that, so it's hard to imagine it as content for Wikipedia. is there a common way to solve this? As for the "list of famous people NICO has played with", as well as "famous festivals and venues in which they performed" - I know it sounds like advertising. But when talking about music ensembles - they're pretty much the most important things in the ensemble's history and one cannot simply leave those out. Of course, the statements must have their sources, but in this article's case - they do. Or am I getting something wrong? ChamberContemp (talk) 07:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Lauren_London_photo.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lauren_London_photo.jpg I need help setting this photo for Lauren London on her Wikipedia page Ahshion1 (talk) 23:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ahshion1, and welcome to the Teahouse. That file is about tom be deleted as a copyright infringement, so adding it toi any article would be unwise and pointless. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ahshion1: Replied at Talk:Lauren London#Mistake. GoingBatty (talk) 01:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

How old is everyone on Wikipedia?

--Hoi mate (talk) 23:54, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Hoi mate: Hard to answer, it varies greatly. Wikipedia:Who writes Wikipedia? does include age statistics. Hillelfrei ^talk 00:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedians indicates that about six out of every seven editors are adults. More recent research says that the most active editors are young and middle-aged adults. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing Yes, That is correct, With the education teachers provide with technology makes our students SMARTER therefor middle aged adults or 8-13^ year olds are sharing what their knowledge that has been taught to them :) --Western Heights College (talk) 01:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Parameters for citing newspaper articles

Is a newspaper's location no longer desired when its articles are cited? I refer to the May 12, 2020, revision of Robert Warwick in which cities were removed from citations. I am also curious about the change of "work" to "newspaper", since the "cite news" template still has "work". In future citations of newspaper articles, should I omit the city and manually change "work" to "newspaper"? Eddie Blick (talk) 01:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Teblick: When I'm citing The New York Times, I don't add that the location is New York or that it's published by the New York Times Company, as I think that just bloats the reference section. However, if it's a newspaper with a common name or a less popular newspaper, the location could be important to help the reader understand the source of the newspaper (see Template:Cite news#Publisher). Also, |newspaper= is an alias for |work=, so changing from one to the other doesn't impact the way the reference is presented to the reader (see Template:Cite news#Periodical). Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 01:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

GoingBatty Thanks, I appreciate the feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teblick (talk • contribs) 01:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

i feel like an idiot asking this

Stupid question

I want to add something to Ian Curtis' page, about his first seizure, as to quote Bernard Sumner. Problem is, it's in the 2007 documentary Joy Division. How do I source a documentary? Nolanisntfunny (talk) 02:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Nolanisntfunny. You should be able to use the template {{cite AV media}} per WP:SAYWHERE. However, before you add something such as that to the article, you might want to take a look at WP:SPS, WP:PRIMARY and WP:INTERVIEW, and also perhaps consider discussing this at Talk:Ian Curtis just to see what some others might think. Even though Curtis is dead, Sumner isn't and WP:BLP would still apply to any content about him (directly or indirecly); moreover, things which might have been said during a interview as part of a documentary are likely going to be considered WP:BLPSPS type of source depending up who said them and who they are about. If Sumner's comment is about himself, then it might be OK; if, however, he's talking about others then it might not. Because things might be a little more complicated here than they seem, it might be better to be WP:CAUTIOUS. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

how can I view the main page from 10 may 2020?

How can I retreive the main page content from 10 may 2020? There is a person I want more information on. 69.148.173.121 (talk) 02:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Main Page history/2020 May 10. If you ever want to see a previous day's Main Page, see WP:MPH. bibliomaniac15 02:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

The Wayback Machine started archiving it regularly in June 2004. It currently does it dozens of times per day. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:41, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Confusion around a reversion of my edit

After working to resolve the listed issues with this article: Miguel Gutierrez (choreographer), the edits were immediately rolled back. There was only one citation in the article, and much of it was copied directly from other sources. Is there something different I should have done here? TravisAmiel (talk) 04:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@TravisAmiel: I don't know why Materialscientist reverted your edit, but I see a message on your talk page claiming your edit "did not appear constructive". As part of the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, I hope the two of you will discuss improvements to the article at Talk:Miguel Gutierrez (choreographer). GoingBatty (talk) 05:08, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@TravisAmiel: The reversion has been undone. Keep up the good work to improve this article! GoingBatty (talk) 13:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Adding another page in my name, one for demonstrations in education.

How can I add another page in my user name. I want to set up a page so that I can put a demonstration on there for students. Can someone please direct me on how to do this and what guidelines I must follow? Thanks --Carrolquadrio (talk) 06:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Carrolquadrio (talk) 06:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Carrolquadrio. You can set up any number of additional user pages with the format of User:Carrolquadrio/anything, substituting any word or phrase for the "anything" in my example. This is fine as long as your goal is to assist in improving the encyclopedia. Please read Wikipedia:School and university projects for more information that will be useful to you as an educator. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you User:Cullen328 that is definitely my goal, I appreciate the assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carrolquadrio (talk • contribs) 06:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Carrolquadrio: Just to forewarn you: our on-site notification system has a major flaw in that it does not function on user subpages. So you'll probably be best advised to ensure you add each new sub-page you make to your watchlist and ensure you have email notifications enabled. That way, you're more likely to be alerted whenever one of your students makes an edit there. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 07:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes that is a great tip thank you. I am will need all the luck I can get. One task I have set myself is to get students to think about how (and when)they upload images. So I might use the subpage more as a space that only educates, they can go back and do the activity in the learning forum. Just sorting it out in my head. Too many students to let them loose editing on my sub page I think, but maybe I will build to this. Thanks for the engagement--Carrolquadrio (talk) 07:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Carrolquadrio: One approach you could consider is to create some content on one of your own subpages, and get them each to follow a set of instructions which will involve them copying that content over to each of their own pages and then editing and working on it there. (You could even go so far as to help them do this by treating your page as a template and getting them to substitute your content onto one of their subpages. eg with a command like {{subst:User:Carrolquadrio/demo}}). I hope this helps, and don't forget to remind them that we're here if they get stuck and need help. (By the way, I love your photo on your userpage, so I'm pinging Clovermoss at 'The Signpost' who I'm sure will find it one of those things that really 'makes her happy'.) Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes Love the idea that you are sharing my dogs to make someone happy, what a lovely gesture for both of us. I like your idea also of having my page as a template, especially in the early days when students are overwhelmed by all the new concepts and tasks. We ask them to put the "I'm a Newbie" template on their user page, this could be one such thing that would be easier to just move over to be honest. Good tips Nick, thanks for taking the time.--Carrolquadrio (talk) 23:52, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome! Nick Moyes (talk) 23:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Review of improvement, Danfoss

I hope this is the right place to ask? I have been doing some improvements on Danfoss. I had some issues with being too much like an advertisement and not encyclopedic. I think it's better now, but still not perfect. I tried to remove the templates myself, as far as I understand from Help:Maintenance_template_removal#When_to_remove, that should be OK, even if I'm the one who made the improvements. However, that was reverted with a suggestion to let some else review the changes.
So: Can I get someone else to take a look at the page and tell me if the templates can be removed, please? Anders Kaas Petersen (talk) 06:27, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Anders Kaas Petersen: Welcome to the Teahouse. After taking a quick glance at the article, I think it's the sentence structure being used that is making some editors feel that it is too promotional and lacks an encyclopedic tone. Some things:

• Comma usage. Linking fragments together creates run-on sentences that don't look great on an encyclopedia. Other times they shouldn't be there (for example, The company also expanded its activities into hydraulics; the first hydraulic component was produced in the factory in Nordborg in 1964. My suggested corrections in red).
• Headings. They don't sound neutral, like "Expansion to the world".
• Relevance of some sections. I'm not sure if "Ownership" and "Executive leadership" are big enough topics to warrant their own sections.
• Citations. Some citations in the "Activities" section would be preferred.

I hope that helps somewhat. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Tenryuu:, and thanks for the advice. Commas have never been my strong side, but I will try to pay more attention to them. This will help me to improve the page, I think. --Anders Kaas Petersen (talk) 07:58, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

HELP: Unjust deletion from user:GSS, draft:vibease

I've been working on my page for a few days. I'm new and I'm trying to learn to meet all requirements. I'm an employee of the company. I feel user:GSS is unreasonable for invoking speed deletion, while I'm still a discussion with other wiki admins to improve my article.

user:GSS at first rejected my draft due to insufficient coverage. After I added more reference, All my references are from top media, Wired, Forbes, Fast Company, TechCrunch.

user:GSS then said I'm doing promotion and ask for speedy deletion.

Vibease deserved a page in the Wikipedia, because vibease produce the first vibrator that can be controlled by smartphone. The earliest article to proof was Feb 2012. Please see all the other references. It's not self-boasting. Paul Handri (talk) 07:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

You "must" stop accusing me everywhere you post your comment and I take your comment "Perhaps user:GSS has an personal issue with a vibrator" as a personal attack which you repeated for the third time. Also, you are not being honest in regard to your paid editing status and I have off-wiki evidence to support my claim. GSS ^💬 07:32, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

GSS, with all due respect, please SHHH. Just forward it via email to an admin. And Paul Handri, you might want to read the essay on my userpage. The community allows paid editing. It tolerates it in the absence of a better solution. If you expect it to be easy, you'll need to adjust your expectations. I know of no member of the Wikipedia community that approves of paid editing. And the content of the encyclopedia is controlled by the community. You need to stop the personal attacks now. It certainly won't serve to further your goals, and what you are doing doesn't further Wikipedia's goals. Think we'll tolerate both very long? You only have control over one, and you need to exercise that control now. John from Idegon (talk) 07:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

(ec) @Paul Handri: Discuss content, not contributors. Your comment above that GSS objects to is inappropriate and will probably get you blocked if you continue. @GSS:The user said above that they are an employee of the company and their user page has declared their paid status since 2020-05-11T06:01:52Z. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:58, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@GSS: :@John from Idegon:

I'm sorry. I was frustrated. I will remove all my personal comments. If that's allowed. How do you keep saying I'm paid contributor? Yes, in the past the company paid someone from Upwork to do an article. WHich the article got removed. The company didn't know they can create the page themselves. Thus I decided to create this page. For someone who got paid, I dont' think he/she will be so persistent. I have spent 3 days for this article. I'm willing to send you KYC if you need to prove my identity. Video call is welcome.

@GSS: :@John from Idegon: if you want to verify my identity, please cc the email to dema [at] vibease [dot] com. YOu can talk directly to the founder of the company to verify my identity.

@AlanM1: my bad. sorry.

If because I received a salary from the company and this categorized as "Paid", then I'm ok. My impression of Paid, someone outside the company, received payment to create an article

Sign your posts. It isn't optional. If you are tasked as part of your job to edit Wikipedia on behalf of another person or legal entity, then you are a PAID editor, irregardless of whether your relationship with the entity is contractual or employee/employer. John from Idegon (talk) 08:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Noted. While there is no formal request from my boss. He asked why can't vibease in the Wikipedia. Thus I write this page. I don't get additional pay for creating this page. I'm happy to provide any information to prove I'm working for vibease. Like I mentioned, last year, the company paid someone from Upwork to create vibease page. Because we thought wiki can only be created by the admins. I just learned about signpost. Paul Handri (talk) 08:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Paul, the fact that you work for the company is not a point in your favor. So do you assemble dildos or test them? Because if you work in marketing, promotion or advertising (or any other job that involves communication for them), you are a paid editor. If you simply work for them, you have a WP:COI. When your boss asked why your company didn't have an article on Wikipedia, you responded by creating one. Perhaps this all would have gone smoother if you would have instead found out what it takes to get an article on Wikipedia. You clearly haven't a clue still. The answers lie here and here. Your not helping your cause by the way you aee acting. No entity is "entitled" an article here. This isn't social media or a business directory. And we (every Wikipedian except paid editors) are volunteering to edit Wikipedia. A very small number of us also volunteer to help new editors. I won't waste my time helping people like you who are here to promote something. Expecting that on your part is at best ignorant, in the middle rude, and at the extreme immoral and tantamount to theft. Do I come barging into your model railroad club or birdwatching society and demand that you stop what you do for fun to help me make money? That's what you are doing. John from Idegon (talk) 09:08, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: What do you mean by "So do you assemble dildos or test them?" You are getting personal. Even though you are an editor, it does not entitle you to make fun of me. I was frustrated, I apologized for my mistakes. But it seems you want to continue in this path. You called me "extreme immoral and tantamount to theft" because I'm making a smart vibrator?

Perhaps you want to read this https://www.fastcompany.com/3029634/the-difficulties-of-running-a-sex-inspired-startup Probably we are not the noble company. Wikipedia is for public knowledge. I'm not claiming I'm entitled. I just stating the facts because the company made significant contribution in the vibrator industry. I'm not here try to sell my products. There are other companies who claimed they first one to create the first smart vibrator. Paul Handri (talk) 09:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey!! I suggest everyone sit back and have a cup of tea. Appears that Paul (finally) gets that being employed by a company counts as PAID and has declared so on user page. Perhaps that and who owns or does not own a vibrator can be set aside. David notMD (talk) 10:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

The draft has been declined twice, and appears that Paul is continuing to try to address those comments. I suggest the Speedy be taken off and he be allowed the time to work on the article. My own opinion is that all of this information should be removed ["In 2012, together with his co-founders Steven Kik and Hermione Way, they launched a crowdfunding campaign to mass-produce the Vibease. The initial campaign was rejected by Kickstarter due to adult product restrictions.[5] [6] Eventually, in 2013, they had a successful crowdfunding campaign through Indiegogo platform.[7][8] In order to learn more about building a succesful startup, in 2012 the team joined startup accelerator The Founder Institute.[9] In 2013, they joined HAX Accelerator to learn about manufacturing in Shenzhen. [10]"] and the article go forward as a Stub. My thinking is that how a start-up got funded is not relevant. David notMD (talk) 10:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi :@David notMD: thanks for looking into this. I'm willing to remove the kickstarted comment. Actually I added this because one of editors suggested that. I'm afraid if I remove most it. there is nothing else to tell. I have removed the product list. Paul Handri (talk) 10:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Bilby: @John from Idegon: @GSS: We are still in discussion and someone deleted the page. Paul Handri (talk) 12:30, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Can I re-create the page? Paul Handri (talk) 12:30, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Paul Handri:Deleting editor was User:Jimfbleak. Make your case on his Talk page. (Be diplomatic.) Based on what I see on his Talk page, he will respond on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 13:03, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Paul Handri If you wok for a company (including as an unpaid intern) and it is any part of yo0ur job responsibility to promote or market the company or its products, or you are assigned or requested by your boss or other company officials to write a Wikipedia article, you are a PAID editor here, even if you receive no extra money specifically for writing the article. All the restrictions of WP:PAID then apply.

If an article or draft is essentially promotional, as the recently deleted draft was, it may be deleted by any admin at any time, whether it is being discussed or not. A purely factual draft, not emphasizing the company's mission or vision, and supported largely by cites to independent published reliable sources might well be acceptable. I rather suspect that the company is in fact notable. It would be best if someone other than you were to write such a draft, however. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:04, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel: Paul has declared PAID. David notMD (talk) 13:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: the page has been deleted. Can I send you the draft for your review?Paul Handri (talk) 13:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Paul Handri As an admin, I can see deleted pages, and I reviewed the draft briefly after it had been deleted and before making the above comments. I am not sure if I would have deleted it when it was deleted, but if the deletion were challenged as improper I would endorse it as perfectly proper. That is why I wote above If an article or draft is essentially promotional, as the recently deleted draft was .... You should address the deleting admin, Jimfbleak at [[[User talk:Jimfbleak]], if you want the page restored, but it might well be that it would be better if the draft were restarted from scratch, and if it were done by someone other than you. You may quote my comment that the company looks possibly notable if you wish. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks ::DESiegel! am I allowed to recreate the draft? I don't want to get blocked. I have talked with Jimfbleak I just found some of the suggestions I received from other editors are subjective and can be conflicting. But the biggest issues are the references I gave are deemed not independent / possibly paid. Which is subjective. Paul Handri (talk) 14:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC) How can I defend myself on this? The media that wrote about our product not 2nd tier media. Forbes will be required to put "advertorial" if they wrote a paid content. Since my product is tech-related, it is obvious it was covered by tech media. Because it's a vibrator. Not many traditional newspapers or media can write about vibease.

How do I get someone to write about it? If I'm not allowed to pay someone and the person has no benefit from writing it? Paul Handri (talk) 14:18, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I looked at Jimbleak's comments on your Talk page. He did not block you from going forward, suggested what to add, and even made suggestions as to what types of basic information can be sourced from the company's own website. If Vibrase decided to pay someone who is not an employee, that person would have to declare PAID and COI as you did, so no gain there. So again, I suggest you ask Jimbleak to reinstate the draft with a commitment to avoid any promotional sounding information and to continue to search and add reliable source, independent refs. I know I recommended deleting the funding information, mostly because that stuff tends to be rehashes of company press releases. Lastly, I also advise against any attack on other Wikipedia articles about smart vibrators. David notMD (talk) 19:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Noted. Thanks :@David notMD: About the funding, Jimfbleak actually suggesting putting sales number. I'm confused.

My impression resubmitting a deleted article can be deemed as spam and can get block. Thus I need to check with Jimfbleak. Are you able to reinstate my draft? Or should I create a new draft? Also I want to ask a genuine question with respect, can I hire one of the editors from here? I'm not sure if we hire another random guy from Upwork. it can make things more complicated. Paul Handri (talk) 07:26, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Paul Handri, declaring your COI gives you a degree of protection from blocking as long as you are seen to be trying to follow our rules. Paying an editor here would just put them in the same Paid editor position. What I could do is post you your infobox and (unchecked) references without the text, let me know Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:45, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak: If you can put it back. That will be great. I can start edit again. I will get more feedback from other editors. Thanks!

again sorry for my unprofessional comments. Paul Handri (talk) 09:06, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

wiki page creation

help for wiki page creation

I have tried to create wikipage multiple times but it get deleted. can any one me out. Techniees109 (talk) 07:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

In the message on your user talk page the words in blue are wikilinks to further guidance. Is there something in that guidance which you don't understand? --David Biddulph (talk) 08:30, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Techniees109, A few issues here. For one, your subject lacks any sourcing. For two, you have tried to create it multiple times, which isn't actually helpful, instead it just means that folks are chasing multiple versions of your article around instead of being able to help you on just one. Third, the article as written is just promotional and doesn't establish how the company is notable. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 08:47, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to Akshay KumarAlia Bhatt wikipedia

I was reading Alia Bhatt,s wiki yesterday and first line is written as(Alia Bhat is an actor and singer of Indian origin with British citizenship). I have a objection on it as citizenship is not a big achievment by anybody specially a person like Alia Bhatt who is recognised in India as top actress.Why someone written in the first line?I fixed and removed then I got warning from a person who written that.She born in India works in India so why we have to be proud of her being British?Is that person degrading India?Also she is not a class singer.Should,nt mention that as well.However rest paragraphs about her acting is ok. Aligulla (talk) 09:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Aligulla Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you disagree with the placement or inclusion of any information, you should discuss the matter on the article talk page. When you do, please just focus on the content, and do not accuse other editors of undesirable motivations. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Aligulla, Wikipedia's articles about people routinely state their nationality in the first sentence. Why should Alia Bhatt be an exception? Maproom (talk) 16:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Also, Aligulla, no Wikipedia article about anyone should include information in order to demonstrate an "achievement" or "make us [who?] feel proud." This would constitute Promotion, which is explicitly forbidden on Wikipedia. Articles are supposed only to state facts about (in this context) people which are corroborated by citations to Reliable sources, and should do so in a neutral manner without making any judgement as to whether those facts are 'good' or 'bad'. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.24.23 (talk) 20:13, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

About Alia Bhatt wiki

I got few responses as I talked about first paragraph of Alia Bhatt,s wiki.Comments saying its allowed to write someone,s nationality(as Alia Bhatts citizen ship is written British)as I felt somebody tried to make it as her big achievment.I have a question to those who tried to justfy why British or Canadian nationality is being mentioned and not Indian for those who got Indian citizenship?Show me other actors wiki where is written in the first line (any actor) got Indian citizenship.It definitely shows mentality of some people who degrade their own country.....well done and carry on. Aligulla (talk) 10:28, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Aligulla. The place to discuss this is Talk:Alia Bhatt, which you have not so far done. Articles about people usually name their nationality in the first line of the lede. --ColinFine (talk) 10:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

1. Not all editors here are Indian. There are also some people who write about things not related to their country (like me), so your "shows mentality of some people who degrade their own country" statement makes no sense.
2. It is a common practice to write a person’s nationality and occupation (or what they’re known for) in the first sentence. Not just in Wikipedia, but even in other reputable encyclopaedias like Encyclopædia Britannica.
3. If the first sentence was legally required to have only the major achievements a person had achieved, we wouldn’t have to write a person’s nationality anywhere. What did Franklin D Roosevelt do to be born an American? What did Narendra D Modi do to be born an Indian?
4. Since Indians can not hold dual citizenship, it would be incorrect to call her a British Indian actress or vice versa.
5. The article’s first sentence is "Alia Bhatt (/ˈɑːliːɑː ˈbət/; born 15 March 1993) is an actress and singer of Indian origin and British citizenship, who works in Hindi films". It clearly says that she is of Indian origin.
6. Please name a non-Indian actor who got Indian citizenship before you ask us to "Show me other actors wiki where is written in the first line (any actor) got Indian citizenship."

And by the way, you’re using a comma instead of an apostrophe.

RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 10:53, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

"I got few responses . . . ." Aligulla, you got three responses to your previous query (#94 in the current contents list of this desk). All of them addressed the mistaken concerns you raised there, but instead of responding to them there you have completely ignored them and raised the same mistaken concerns again, which RedBulbBlueBlood9911 has patiently and extensively addressed again. There seems little point in the volunteers here responding to you further if you ignore or fail to understand clearly stated replies that correctly explain basic Wikipedia policies and practices. Such behaviour may be deemed to fall under Wikipedia:Disruptive editing#Failure or refusal to "get the point" if you persist with it.

In any case, as ColinFine has advised you, the appropriate place to pursue such concerns is at the Talk page of the article. Regarding the article, I note (for the benefit of other users) that you have already received a 48-hour block for edit warring there, but have yet to make any use of its Talk page. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.24.23 (talk) 18:30, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

The previous thread, with its answers, is at #Follow-up to Akshay KumarAlia Bhatt wikipedia. David Biddulph (talk) 18:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

About Alia Bhatt wiki

What about second line?Highest paid actress of 2019.Does all sources say?I could,nt find in forbes and many others as some of saying Deepka and Kangna.It should be written as (one of highest paid actress of india). I read your previous comments and agree we can write someone,s nationality or origine but my piont was not in the first line. I do not trust people who write in wiki and if some one change and they give warning and have write to block.This thing will take off people,s trust on wiki. Aligulla (talk) 20:53, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Aligulla: Please discuss any issues or suggestions about the article on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 20:58, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Don't keep starting new sections. I have merged the 3 sections on the same subject. Now please read the multiple answers which you have received. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:04, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

List of YouTubers - Addition

Can of the moderators of List of YouTubers add one more notable YouTube personality? Please add MSK to this page. MSK creates informational travel videos and shares his knowledge on how to travel, mostly for bikers. He rides across the country and shares his experience, educates on how to ride safely. He also makes motivational and review videos. User - Mohammed Salim Khan. Country - India. Channel - MSK Bling.a.ding (talk) 09:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Bling.a.ding, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have several misunderstandings here. There are no "moderators of List of YouTubers" -- any editor may add or remove information, adding it if it is properly sourced and relevant to the purpose of that list. removing it if it is not. As it says near the top of Talk:List of YouTubers This article should only contain notable YouTube personalities who have been discussed in reliable sources and already have their own Wikipedia article. Entries without a Wikipedia article will be removed. So the first thing to do for someone to be included on that list is that there must be a separate article about that person. Please read Your First Article and our general notability guideline to better understand what that implies. There must be multiple independent professionally published reliable sources, each of which discusses the person in some detail, before an article can be validly created. Most Youtubers, even ones with large numbers of viewers, will not qualify.

I hope this helps clarify matters. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 12:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarity, got it! :) DES Bling.a.ding (talk) 16:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

How to add an image to an article?

Please anyone help me with the steps to insert an image in an article. - Meet Jagtap (talk) 11:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Meet Jagtap and welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to add an image to an infobox, you can go to the image parameter in the infobox and type the image name without the File: prefix. Otherwise, you can click the image button on the toolbar and you can add an image in that way as well. Interstellarity (talk) 12:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

how do you make people pay attention on you

 Solby wolby (talk) 12:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Solby wolby: I'm not sure what you are asking about. Can you please rephrase your question so we can be clear on what you're asking? Thank you, Interstellarity (talk) 12:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Solby wolby: In case it wasn't clear from the messages on your talk page, I believe you have misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia, like Encyclopædia Britannica, World Book, or Encarta. It is not a social media platform or a place to promote anything or anyone. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:32, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Revert, Block, Ignore

I don't understand the point of the essay at WP:Revert, block, ignore. It says you should revert the user and then block them without comment. I thought you were required to leave at least one warning, or at least tell them why they are blocked? If so, then this page is very misleading.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 13:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC) —Naddruf

Hello Naddruf and welcome to the Teahouse. Most of time, when administrators block users, they provide the reason why they were blocked on the user's talk page. However, an example of revert, block, ignore in action is if a user vandalizes Wikipedia over a period of time under multiple names, then not notifying them of the block denies recognition to the user. I hope I explained correctly and others are welcome to correct my answer if anything is wrong with it. Interstellarity (talk) 13:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia charts

Greetings hosts, I know there are lot of ways to include graphs in Wikipedia. I have certainly used some of them. Some times ago, I have came across a line chart where the data for the chart is taken from a separate commons file with extension .tab (I think). Obviously this chart uses lots of data, that's why it's created that way. Now, I am in need to use this kind of graph for an article. If someone can point me in the direction to find any of this type of charts. It will be very helpful. I know this is a vague question. But still, I am looking for an answer. - Timbaa -> ping me 13:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Timbaaa. You are looking for Template:Graph:Lines. Instructions for creating the data at Commans is given at mw:Help:Tabular Data. StarryGrandma (talk) 15:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

StarryGrandma, Thankyou very much. You are awesome - Timbaa -> ping me 16:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Conflict of interest question

Hello! I'm working part-time for the company TCO Development and they have assigned me the task of translating the page about TCO Certified on Swedish Wikipedia to English and then adding it to English Wikipedia. I know there's a conflict of interest and I want to make sure I don't waste my time by translating the article only to have the article be rejected. What are my options? If anyone would like to be my mentor in this and help me be objective, I'd be incredibly thankful. Ellasoderberg (talk) 13:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ellasoderberg The first thing you need to do is to declare yourself as a paid editor, as described in WP:PAID. The second thing is to do the translation into a draft page, not into the article mainspace. The third thing is to make sure that the source is attrributed as described in Wikipedia:Translation. The fourth thing is to understand that rules, standards, and practices are different on the different Wikipedia e3ditions, and that having an article on one does not guarantee it on another. Here all articles mus be neutral and must be about notable topics. Avoid promotional language. Read our guideline on the notability of companies for more detail. Notability must be demonstrated as a rule by citing multiple independent[ published reliable sources, each of which discusses the company in some depth and detail. If you have further questions after that, feel free to ask here again. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you DESiegel! Ellasoderberg (talk) 14:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Problem with publishing a corporate company's profile page. Thank you

Dear Friends and Community! Please help. I am trying to send for editing and publish the article about ASGC Construction company. This company has been operating since 1989 and is very stable and developing. It is my first article and I'll be very grateful for your help. I already read the articles here about how to start the page and about the references and tried to follow them but my page has been deleted. Thank you very much. Maria ASGC (talk) 14:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Maria ASGC. There is an explanation on your User talk page, with many blue wikilinks to pages which explain what is going on. But, in short, most companies in the world - including some which have been around far more than thirty years - do not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article about any of those companies will be accepted. Notability is not about what the company is or does, but about who has written about it, and where. If several people who have no connection with your company have chosen to publish substantial material about your company (and not simply repeating material from your company such as interviews and press releases, but writing from their research), and have been published in reliable places such as books from reputable publishers, or major newspapers; then there can be an article about your company. It will not be your article, you will not have control over its contents, and it may contain things you don't want to be there. It should be close to 100% based on what those independent people have published: Wikipedia is not interested in what your company wants to say about itself. That it why the already extremely difficult task of writing an acceptable Wikipedia article is even harder when you have a conflict of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 15:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Maria ASGC: To add on this, there is not a single "company profile" on Wikipedia. Wikipedia has articles about companies, not "company profiles". This applies to other entinities too. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Sort of an idiotic question

I think I know the answer, but can you use the same Wikipedia account on a different computer if you sign in? I might move, and I was wondering if I could use my account on a different computer. Thanks, DaniHart08 (Talk). 15:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@DaniHart08: Yes it's like any sort of online account just go to the website from any computer and you can log in. Hillelfrei ^talk 15:13, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. That's what I thought. DaniHart08 (Talk). 15:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@DaniHart08: And there's no idiotic questions, feel free to hit us up with any uncertainties you have. Hillelfrei ^talk 16:13, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! DaniHart08 (Talk). 17:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

HTTPS link transformer bot

I've seen many URLs in Wikipedia that point to HTTP version of websites that redirect to the HTTPS version or even worse: serve the same content regardless of the protocol. So I was thinking on doing a Wikipedia bot to update every link if possible. To do that, comparing that the content is the same in the HTTP and the HTTPS version would be enough. However, most of the sites I visit have some dynamic fields that change every time (ids, file hashes, dates, visitor counters...), so I was thinking on doing something like this:

1. Download the original URL twice. Then, apply diff alignment over both results to keep only the static content. If less than a fixed percentage (99%?) is fixed, keep all of the content of the first request, just in case.
2. Then, download the URL replacing HTTP with HTTPS. Again, apply the previous processing to keep only the static content, if possible.
3. If both contents are the same, rewrite the URL in Wikipedia from HTTP to HTTPS.

This would help to have a safer web. Obviously this won't update pages that make a heavy use of JavaScript unless we use some browser automation such as Selenium.

What do you think? Is there anything similar already in use? Juancroldan (talk) 15:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

As long as the http versions are still working, there is no point in wasting the memory for a full edit yust to update this link. AFAIK ther is no such bot, and there will probbably never be, as every edit is saved in a new datebase entry and it's therefore inefficient to change it. If there is a mayor rewrite of the page, this could be updated, but otherwise it's probbably better to simply keep it. You might also want to review WP:SLOP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Juancroldan: You may want to start a discussion at WP:VPI, the Wikipedia Idea Lab, where you can get some input on if this is a good idea or not. Bots are not supposed to make cosmetic edits, and I think this may fall into that category if there is no difference between the two links. If the http link stops working, then it should be updated to https. RudolfRed (talk) 17:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Juancroldan, Victor Schmidt, and RudolfRed: - User:Bender the Bot already makes these updates for some websites. GoingBatty (talk) 19:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thanks for that info! RudolfRed (talk) 20:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Juancroldan: As GoingBatty mentioned, I have a bot running doing something similar to what you suggest. So far this is being done on a per-URL basis, so whenever I came across website that verifiably delivers the same content over HTTPS as over HTTP, a bot run converts all particular external links throughout Wikipedia. I have done so for Google Books, Wayback Machine, YouTube, and lots of other websites. An (almost) complete list is on User:Bender the Bot. If you have additional suggestions, please me know. --bender235 (talk) 21:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Good edits vs. Okay edits

Hi, I have read in multiple discussions that it is better to have a few good edits rather than many okay edits. How do we categorically define a good edit? Thanks NawJee (talk) 17:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC) NawJee (talk) 17:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello NawJee! There isn't an exact categorical way to define a 'good' edit, but I think the best way I could define the statement to make it more clear is this- it's better to make a few longer, more precise and generally 'better' edits than several smaller, 'lower quality' ones. Unless you can't fix something with a single edit, try and do it in just one. Of course, that's only one context for it- the discussions might also be referring to the point that it's better to edit fewer articles with these longer/better edits, than to edit many with these okay/worse ones. ~ Frostedchicharrones 💬 17:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@NawJee: I slightly disagree with Frostedchicharrones in regards to the fact that smaller edits are associated with lower quality; for me, edit length is tangentially associated to edit quality, and how long edits should be is contextual, usually on an article-by-article basis. It is less frustrating to make quick, short (but precise) edits in sections than to do an entire overhaul of an article, submit it, and find out that in the time spent editing someone had also made an edit, generating an edit conflict (as I commonly get here at the Teahouse). You can usually get away with long edits on stable (i.e., has not been frequently edited recently) articles, and other editors generally respect {{In use}} and {{Under construction}} tags placed at the top. It's a balancing act: do make sufficiently short edits to prevent edit conflicts from arising and frustrating yourself, but also do make sufficiently long edits so that diffs are less frustrating for others to sift through. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

what bits are not constructive of what i mentioned?

what bits are not constructive of what i mentioned? They refer to Italy

scott Medolla (talk) 17:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Medolla: - Welcome to the TeaHouse! It appears pizza is the article you are talking about. If that is the case, your edits were removed as Wikipedia:Or which is not allowed on Wikipedia. I encourage you to find some reliable sources that state what you are looking to add to the article and use those. Wikipedia does maintain a list at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources that you can use, but please make sure to read any comments in the notes column. I hope this helps and if you need anything else, please let us know! Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 17:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Teahouse Host

Actually, what happened here is that you edited other editors comments at Talk:Pizza. We don't do that. You are welcome to edit articles such as Pizza or add your own comments at Talk:Pizza. You might also get reversed at Pizza. The next step there is to start a discussion at Talk:Pizza rather than repeating your edit to the article. David notMD (talk) 19:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Question

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I recently came across this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/PvtHudson_Backup_2.5). It contains the edits of one user, who appears to be making major edits to many Wikipedia pages. Could someone take a look at it? I'm not sure if it's vandalism, and I don't want to mess up the pages if the information is indeed correct. Heyoostorm (talk) 17:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Edit: It appears the user was blocked. Were the pages fixed? Heyoostorm (talk) 17:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Heyoostorm! Yes, the user was blocked. The pages seem to be normal, and in their history, Pvt's edits have been removed. I'm guessing they were a vandal, but you'd need to ask someone else to know what exactly they did. Either way, the issue seems to have been resolved. ~ Frostedchicharrones 💬 17:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

When my article (currently posted as a draft) would be published

These words of mine do not intend to offend or complain about anyone. I am new to Wikipedia and recently I had an article of mine in Portuguese properly published (after being reviewed by an editor). I am an academic and the subject is serious and important. However, I did an article on the same topic, but in English, since there are a huge number of researchers who do not speak or read Portuguese, but who are interested in the topic. I requested publication (by pressing the "publish" button) and hoped to get feedback from an editor (at the same time that I would make corrections or add sources to the text). However, my article appeared classified as "draft", which I I thought it was temporary. However, it has been classified as a "draft" for some time and no communication has been made with me so far. I would like to know what the next step is. After the article is published, corrections are much simpler to make (such as, for example, indexing a word with another Wikipedia article, but in another language). I will be grateful to receive an answer. Fabio (Mweloading) MewloadingMewloading (talk) 18:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Mewloading (talk) 18:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Adding link for other hosts: Draft:Mamma_Angola#Negotiated_Independence_of_Angola,_Cold_War_and_Fratricidal_StruggleGalendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 18:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Teahouse Host

• Hi User:Mewloading and welcome to the Teahouse!- As the volunteers at the articles for review pages are swamped, it may take some time to get used to it. Creating a new article from nothing is one of the hardest tasks to perform on Wikipedia and the rules differ from one Wikipedia to another. I did look at the article and you do have way overuse of links in the English Wikipedia. I recommend you read Manual of Style which will be of great assistance to you. If you need anything else, please let us know. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 18:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Teahouse Host

• Hello, Mewloading. I just looked over, well skimmed over, the draft. As Galendalia told you, rules and practifces are different on each language edition of Wikipedia. As I understand it, this article is about a book dealing with "the society and economy of Angola" and also discussing the theories advanced in that book. I will say this is significantly longer than Wikipedia articles usually are on scholarly or other non-fiction books. Compere On the Origin of Species about a very significant and famous book indeed, or A Brief History of Time which is a very well-known book, or perhaps On Growth and Form, not quite so well-known. There should be sources about the book itself and its reception in the draft, as well as sources for the theories advanced in it. Also, section 1.4 "Book content" of the current draft seems to be essentially a ToC for the book, but with no detail. It seems to me that this should be filled out with detail on what is in the book , perhaps in place of and using some of the text from the current 1.3 Book Summery, or else it should be removed. An em,poty skeleton ofm the book does not seem to add much. I also note that section 1.3 seems rather sparsely sourced.

Drafts here on en.Wikipedia can get to mainspace in either of two ways. An editor in good standing can simply move them to mainspace, or they can go through the AfC process. In the first case, there is the risk that some other editor might add a maintenance tag or even nominate the article for deletion promptly. In the second a review might take quite a while, particularly with so many citations to check (I see over 40). A middle route is that some one experienced editor agrees to work with you on the draft, serving the function of an AfC reviewer, and would move or indicate that you should move the draft to mainspace when you and s/he agree that it is ready. I have done this with several drafts in the past, particularly Holocaust Wall Hangings. Are you interested in that sort of collaboration? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Your draft has not been submitted for review. VERY large amounts of it, are completely unsourced, it is not clear what the different sections refer to? Do they refer to parts of the book or are they a broader look at the subject in general? There are an extraordinary number of red links, many of them pointless like random dates. Comments like " has since become a hit" and "offers a rare opportunity to connect with the historical and present reality of Angola" " in its suffering process of evolution" are not suitable for an encyclopedia. Theroadislong (talk) 19:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Article for self advertising/trolling

FYI

 – Heading formatted by Frostedchicharrones 💬

I edited the article Lev Vygotsky on Wikipedia, but my edits have been reverted by a user. As an expert in cultural studies, I can see that the article is not neutral, it is used by the user "Yasya" (who reverted my changes) for self-advertising purposes. Moreover, the article includes traces of trolling, particularly the links to the page on the Russian social media site "V kontakte" (VK) "vygo_bubble" (https://vk.com/vygo_bubble ) filled with obscenities and offensives in Vygotsky's address. I wonder how to stop this trolling. Palisandria (talk) 18:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Palisandria, I've looked at your edit. I think you were trying to do too much at once. I think you should go in smaller steps that you can clearly justify. Then, if someone undoes it, you can give your reasoning on the talk page of the article, and if your reasoning is sound, you should be able to gain consensus and re-instate the edit. It seems the conflict of interest is already being discussed on the talk page. I hope this helps. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 21:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I am doing the marketing on an upcoming film.. I would like to amend the wiki. entry with current information.

I am working on the marketing for a film and would like to change the wiki page to reflect current information. Is that allowed? Valerievg (talk) 18:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC) ````

Hi @Valerievg: and welcome to the Teahouse. You would be considered that there is a conflict of interest and we highly discourage that here on Wikipedia. I recommend you follow Wikipedia:CoI and follow the instructions on there. As a COI, you can post changes on the talk page of the article to have another editor vet it and put it into the article, with that please make sure to include citable, reliable sources. On the flip side, if you are looking to promote the film in any way, those changes are not allowed and could lead to an immediate ban on Wikipedia. This is the policy on promotion Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. If you have any other questions, please feel free to let us know. We are open 24/7 here at the Teahouse. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 18:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Teahouse Host

In fact, Valerievg, since you say that you are doing the marketing on an upcoming film you count as a paid editor, and the first thing you must do is make a declaration as dewscribed min WP:PAID. After that, please follow Galendalia's advice, and also read our guideline on promotion. It means more than overt advertising here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

correction of historical fact

Since when is the word Italt not a fact!?? How do I correct factual errors in wikipedia? Medolla (talk) 19:19, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Medolla. Because this is an encyclopaedia which should only include 'facts' obtained from reliably published sources, you need to avoid appearing to be adding anything based upon your own personal knowledge. Unless statements you make are supported by a 'citation' that another person halfway around the world is able to verify, your contribution will be rejected as I believe it was at History of pizza. I hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Medolla. I believe you meant above to write "Italy" rather than "Italt." Having looked at the article's page history, you actually made three additions to the article in one edit, which user ZimZalaBim reverted as a single action.

The removal of "(Italy)" following Naples was justifiable because it had already been used in the Lede of the article, so didn't need to be repeated. The other two additions were both information which was unsupported by any citation to a published Reliable source. Both are very likely true and well known to you personally, but this does not justify their uncited inclusion: all facts in Wikipedia articles must be properly cited so that readers can, at least in principle, confirm that some reliable source has really stated them. What you (or ZimZalaBim, or I, or anybody) personally knows is not sufficient. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.24.23 (talk) 20:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

References vs. Works Cited vs. Bibliography?

How do references differ between citing sources in a Works Cited section or making a bibliography? Or are all of these terms corresponding? Why does Wikipedia choose to use the "references" system? Blacksmith210 (talk) 20:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Blacksmith210. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout#Notes and references for an explanation of Wikipedia's style of doing this. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Blacksmith210 and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia allows any of several different systems of providing citation, Ultimately the only essential thing is that a reader is shown what source supports what statement in the article, and has the chance to find and verify the source, or read further in it.

• The most common method is probably the use of <ref>...</ref> tags with a citation template in each. Also common nis use of <ref>...</ref> tags with manually formatted citations in each. Either of these leads to a single list of citations for each reference, often in a section entitled "References" or sometimes "Notes". See Help:Footnotes for details.
• Not uncommon is the Harvard citation system using {{harv}} and {{sfn}} which produce a list of "Works cited" and shortened footnotes in teh form of (author, year) referencing works in teh list.
• Other consistant systems are less common but may be used. See WP:CITEVAR
• Bibliographies appear in a "Further Reading" section as a rule, or if they are of the works of the subject of the article, in a section such as "Selected publications" and may be produced by any of various methods and in any of various formats. However constancy within a given article is desired.

I hope that clarifies things a bit. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

How to cite source with no url

I have a source that is a physical magazine, which is great, but the online version has been taken off the website. The physical copy exists though. It Here is the page I'm working on. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Asian_Access).

Here's my citation that needs help. Palguta, Mary Kay (2012). [www.missionexus.org "NEW DAWN IN THE LAND OF THE RISING SUN A2/SIM Strategic Partnership for Japan"] Check Ahkennedy10 (talk) 21:19, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ahkennedy10: Just cite the physical version. There is no requirment that sources be online. You can use the template {{Cite_magazine}} RudolfRed (talk) 21:30, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Searching Articles within 2 or 3 categories

Hi guys, is there a way to search for articles which are categorized by category XYZ *AND* category ABC ?! So, for example all 1920births + living people ?! Thanks in advance! CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC) CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi CommanderWaterford. You can enter this in the search box: incategory:"1920 births" incategory:"Living people". See also Wikipedia:PetScan. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much PrimeHunter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Robert Virchow Lecture

 RandallPaulRuble (talk) 21:41, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a question about using and editing Wikipedia? --David Biddulph (talk) 21:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Picture Upload Issues

I have made several attempts to try and upload a picture. However, I'm having issues.. Are you able to assist?  Ladym1106 (talk) 22:03, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ladym1106. It's hard to know whether we can assist when you give us no hint of what the issues are you are having. You have successfully uploaded File:Malcolm Adams.jpg to Commons. --ColinFine (talk) 22:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Ladym1106. Can you provide a WP:WIKILINK to either the picture you were trying to upload or a Wikilink to article or page that you were trying to add the picture to? There's no record in Special:Contributions/Ladym1106 or you editing any Wikipedia pages other than the Wikipedia Teahouse and the Wikipedia Help Desk; so, it's hard to try and help you without knowing more specific details. -- ~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marchjuly (talk • contribs) 22:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't own copyrights to the photo however permission was granted to me from the individual..What else can I do? Ladym1106 (talk) 22:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Here's the link: https:/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Malcolm_Adams.jpg Ladym1106 (talk) 22:56, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Please don't rush to create new threads. Continue existing threads, where these are relevant. -- Hoary (talk) 23:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Please (in this thread, not elsewhere) specify the problem(s) that you are facing. -- Hoary (talk) 23:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Incidentally, you stated when uploading the photo that it was your "own work", but here you say that you "don't own copyrights to the photo". I don't understand how both can be true. Could it be that only one of them is true? -- Hoary (talk) 23:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi again Ladym1106. If you're not the copyright holder of the photo, you cannot really upload it to Wikimedia Commons without the copyright holder's explicit consent to do so. Moreover, any permission the copyright holder may have given you personally is not sufficient for Wikimedia Commons. What the copyright holder will need to do is given their WP:CONSENT to not only you, but to anyone anywhere in the world who might want to use the photo for any purpose, not just for use on Wikipedia. There are a couple of ways for the copyright holder to do this, but the most common is for them to email Wikimedia OTRS as explained in c:Commons:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder for verification purposes. Just for reference in case you didn't all ready know, the copyright holder of a photo is generally considered to be the photographer who takes the photo, not the person being photographed; so, you will need to ask the person who took the photo to email Wikimedia OTRS. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:28, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

relationship of RFK to Bates College

Interested in relationship of RFK to Bates College. It has been a while but my pervious corrections to this oversight was reversed. Erroneously, most persons assume that "alumnna" refer to graduation, whereas in reaity it simply refers to "a graduate or former student" - previous changes I made (I was a prodigious contributor prior to my life becomieng more complicated and Wikipedia accounts being inexpleciably altered) were reversed. These oversifghts deserve attention and correction.

 The Fly~metawiki (talk) 22:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

If you'd like to argue for a change to Bates College, then please do so at Talk:Bates College. -- Hoary (talk) 00:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Categories

Resolved

 – Add categories to articles to populate them. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I’ve noticed that whenever I try to edit a category, the wiki text is nearly blank. How do items get added to categories? Anything helps. Regards. Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(My profile | My contribs | speak to me)} 22:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Total Eclipse 2017. Pages are added to categories by naming the category on the page, thus [[Category:Wikipedia Teahouse]]. These could come anywhere in an article, but are usually collected at the bottom. See WP:Categories. --ColinFine (talk) 22:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: *facepalm* I should’ve just looked up that link... thanks for the help! Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(My profile | My contribs | speak to me)} 22:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Article in submissions waiting for review. Other editing options than edit source.

Draft:Jules Franck Mondoloni My article needs more editing, but I am unable to do that in Edit source. I only understand the sandbox format. I am 77 years old. Reknil43 (talk) 22:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Reknil43: Welcome to the Teahouse. Are you asking if there are other editors to use besides source editing? In that case, you may be interested in the VisualEditor. You can enable it by clicking here, and navigating to the Editing tab and uncheck the "Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta" option. After that just click "Edit" at the top of the article you want to edit. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft to Wikipedia

Hello! I wrote an article about a heritage Tunisian singer Saliha (singer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Saliha_(singer) and other articles still in Draft. Can I submit it on wikipedia or am I waiting? if an article on draft and I am self-confirmed can I submit it or not? Thank You MagieRouge (talk) 00:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@MagieRouge: Your draft is currently in the review backlog. You are welcome to continue working on it while waiting. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:04, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Someone please decide whether audio of her songs and text of lyrics allowed. David notMD (talk) 01:21, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Saliha_-_Mil_ghourba_fnani.ogg for example: MagieRouge, clearly this is neither a photographic work nor "official texts of legislative, administrative or legal nature and their official translations"; is it (A) "an anonymous work or pseudonymous work", or (B) a work whose last surviving author died over 50 years ago? -- Hoary (talk) 02:48, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary: It falls under this bullet point: "It is another kind of work, and 50 years have passed since the year of death of the author (or last surviving author)". The singer died in 1958 so 62 years ago. Moumou82 (talk) 18:53, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

But Moumou82, the person singing (in front of an orchestra) words written by one or more people to a melody written by one or more people is not the sole author of the song. -- Hoary (talk) 21:57, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Policy dispute

Are you supposed to Semi-retire when you disagree with Wikipedia policy?  Eschoryii (talk) 03:10, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

No. You are free to discuss it on the relevant Talk page.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:28, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Looking for a page

Hello, I am looking for a page where there are known errors listed for edit. Is there such a page? TheRandomWikipedian (talk) 03:12, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@TheRandomWikipedian: The community portal is a good place to look for articles that require maintenance.

Shameless plug: If you would like to correct spelling and grammar, the Guild of Copy Editors may be what you're looking for. We currently have a drive to clear as much of the copyedit backlog as possible. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

References - Citing Pages in a Multi-Page Document vs. Only Including Said Pages in a Subset Document

I have an instance where an outside source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promessa_Organic) has suggested including a cover letter and only certain pages (Page 77 and 79) in a .pdf file documenting a 'Proof of Concept' test relating to promession (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promession), and I am questioning the validity of that approach, as opposed to citing those pages in the reference in the (existing) WP article, but including the whole document in a .pdf. The whole document is currently of undetermined length (I just haven't asked how long it is) and was written by an external company to the outside source. The .pdf document (whether the 3-pager or the whole thing) would be stored by Promessa and referenced by a URL in the WP article. The problems with their approach, as I see it, include:

• The pages in the current short .pdf document mainly contain images of a test result, but that doesn't preclude the possibility of other images that may give conflicting test results.

• WP users wanting to validate information relating to the test can't see any (unknown) context around the test that may or may not be in Pages 1-76, 78 and 80-end.

Basically, I think the whole document - currently only in paper form as I understand it - should be converted to a .pdf and included by Promessa. BrettA343 (talk) 04:04, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi BrettA343. Your question seems to be a mix of multiple questions involving various policies and guidelines, so I'm not sure what you're trying to ask or where to start. Sources cited in Wikipedia articles need to meet WP:RS and not be WP:UNDUE. If a source is deemed reliable for Wikipedia's purposes, all that it needs to be is published and accessible so that anyone who wants to verify the accuracy of the source can do so. The source doesn't need to be readily available online and it can even be behind a WP:PAYWALL or otherwise cost a fee to see as long as it can be verified by someone who wants to do so; so, there's no need to upload an entire document or link to an entire document for verification purposes as long as it's possible to verify in other ways as explained in WP:SAYWHERE. Being available online and in its entirety certainly makes a source easier to assess, but it's not something that's required. Finally, official documents, etc. often fall under WP:PRIMARY and although they can sometimes be cited, there are limitations to how they can be used. So, the first thing you might need to do is assess the reliability of the source itself and determine whether it's a PRIMARY or WP:SECONDARY source based on the the way its being used. The place to discuss such a thing would be on the relevant article's talk page or at WP:RSN. Once it's be determined whether the source is reliable, then perhaps the next thing to figure out would be to how best cite it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Adding a Reference / Citation to the 'Superman Returns' Article

May I add a reference / citation to the Superman Returns article where it is stated that "Singer and screenwriters Michael Dougherty and Dan Harris came up with the idea of publishing a prequel limited series, spanning four comic book issues." ? Nickkoshy (talk) 04:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Nickkoshy: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you have a reliable source, you can add it to an article. If you are unsure if the source is reliable or have any other concerns, you can discuss them at the article talk page: Talk:Superman Returns. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Nickkoshy: Looking at your particular example, reference #44 already supports that sentence. GoingBatty (talk) 04:49, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thank you for the reply! I am trying to get the hang of editing on Wikipedia. I had looked at reference #44 in the Superman Returns page, and yes, it supports the sentence. The reference I am thinking of adding has an additional bit of information for the previous sentence. Please advise.

Hello, Nickkoshy. If the source in question is reliable, and you think the extra information is encyclopaedic, then you can edit the article to add the information and the new source. If anybody disagrees and undoes your edit, you can discuss the matter, according to WP:BRD. --ColinFine (talk) 09:16, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Thank you for letting me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickkoshy (talk • contribs) 09:32, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Why was my edit "not constructive"

My edit was removed by "I dream of horses" without reason

Hi, I am trying to do good and fix a simple error on the President (card game) page. there is a missing "not" in the sentence:

In any event, the players who receive cards from the bottom positions always hand back an equal number of any "junk" cards they do not want. They are obliged to pass back their lowest cards.

There is an obvious error here: passing back "junk" cards which they do not want means that they are not obligated to pass their lowest cards, as they may choose to keep two-threes and pass back a four and a five, since a pair of threes (although lowest cards) can be an advantage over a single four / single five cards.

Who is "I dream of horses"? did he/she not have the time of day to read the edit? 104.174.241.226 (talk) 06:17, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Pinging @I dream of horses: so she sees this.

Howdy hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Sorry your edit got undone, I know that never feels good. It was likely undone because you didn't provide a reliable source for you edit, and it had a pretty serious change of meaning. In the future, make sure all edits are backed up by a source. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 06:23, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. I suggest creating a discussion on the article's talk page and pinging I dream of horses with {{Re|I dream of horses}} there to ask them why they reverted. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

No source is cited for the rules. But the OP's preferred text has the merit of being consistent, unlike I dream of horses's. When I have played President, there has always been a free choice of which cards to hand back. You can even include one that you were passed, though this is very rarely good. A flaw in this account of the game is that it mixes rules "hand back an equal number if cards" with advice on skilful play "hand back 'junk' cards they do not want", without distinguishing the rules from the advice. This flaw is very common in accounts of card games written by amateurs, and tends to render such accounts worthless. Maproom (talk) 07:32, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Separate from comments on the game: If you disagree with another editor, focus on the content. Do not disparage the editor. Your comment asking if IDOH "...not have the time of day to read the edit?" was not constructive. David notMD (talk) 09:03, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Editing a draft/unpublished article

I'm currently writing my first article. I left and tried to reenter but now the article is missing the box which contains the buttons on linking at the top of the page and citing articles on the bottom of the page. Wyntontia (talk) 06:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Wyntontia, are you using the source or visual editor? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Wyntontia, I had no trouble editing the page, but I do not use the "visual editor". BY the way, I moved your COI declaraiton to your user page, which is where it belongs.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 06:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

I just got back to where I wanted to be. Thankyou both very much for responding so quickly. Thanks also for moving the COI. Is it obviously I'm very new? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wyntontia (talk • contribs) 06:49, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

We were all new once!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 06:51, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

my post

i have posted a article in wikipedia about my compiler language i created 2 years adn improving now. i have been editting article and sending 10 times but it was declined. i have given 6 referances but still some problem is there in it i cant understand why Barath kumar basker126 (talk) 07:35, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Barath kumar basker126, and welcome to the Teahouse. I went through your article (courtesy link: Draft:BA programming Language and cltator) and these are the issues:

• All six sources are classified as primary (directly related to the subject). Wikipedia needs secondary and tertiary sources (like articles in the news that clearly write about the subject).
• Since you are the creator of the programming language in the draft, you have to declare a Conflict of Interest (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest).
• You haven’t established the notability of the subject. You need to collect a few articles from newspapers and reputed programming-related websites that write about your creation.
• Wikipedia articles won’t usually have information on where to get a programming language (Which you’ve added) or information on commands in a language (unless the language is popular like Python).

RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 08:05, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

editing in Wikipedia

will i get paid for editing in Wikipedia Shark shengu (talk) 07:36, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

No. Wikipedia is a not-for-profit organization almost exclusively created and supported by volunteers who edit for any of the following reasons:

• They’re fans or experts in some topic
• They have free time and happen to like editing Wikipedia

If you ever receive a message saying that someone wants to pay you to do something on Wikipedia, remember that it is most likely a scam, and it also goes against Wikipedia’s policies.

RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 07:53, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

• Shark shengu Wikipedia will not pay you to edit Wikipedia. It is theoretically possible that you could offer your services as a Wikipedia editor as a business at your own place and on your own time so that others pay you, but while technically permitted, this is very difficult for people to do. Please review the paid editing policy and conflict of interest. The vast majority of people are here because they care about this project for some reason, not because they want to be paid. 331dot (talk) 10:16, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

How do I edit the width of an existing graph chart?

I'm trying to update data for Covid-19 in San Marino. I was adding additional daily cases from 9th May to 13th May. I put in all of the figures correctly and followed the template in the graph fine. But when I published it, the graph came out distorted because the coloured bars are now too wide for the data. I can't work out how to make the bars proportionally smaller. I've tried to copy other articles with countries with bigger Covid-19 cases but didn't see anything in them either.

Here is the article which I've recently edited. All of the data is correct, just need help with the display of the bars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_San_Marino

Thanks in advance Davidtunderthesea (talk) 08:15, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

It scales automatically but you had the divisor parameter set manually, which was over-riding the automatic scaling. I removed it in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:30, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Did You Know? section

Hi! I'm pretty new and I have done some minor editing here and there, I saw something i thought might be a good "Did you know" section bit but I learned that it only takes facts from recently destubbed/created articles, unsure as to whether this includes edits made within 7 days. Thought this was kind of odd as there's some intersting stuff you can find that isn't so recently added. Not sure how set in stone the front page stuff is but i think there should at least be maybe a seperate "did you know" or one thats half and half new and old so engangement in new articles still happens. For reference the thing i thought would be interesting is that a guy got a brain surgery to correct a fetish for safety pins, probably not appropriate for the front page but i think this applies accross the board. 208.114.129.7 (talk) 10:03, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

The purpose of DYK is to acknowledge articles (and editors) that have improved Wikipedia. Hence the criteria: new article, substantially lengthened existing article, and achieved Good Article status. With these limits, there are always enough submitted to fill the main page every day. David notMD (talk) 10:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

How to make your article online in Wikipedia

My article stays as Draft and not appears on wikipedia. How can I make it online? DDemberel (talk) 12:26, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

You haven't yet submitted the draft for AFC review, but there is no point in doing so in its current state. Your starting point is to ascertain whether the subject satisfies Wikipedia's definition of notability, which requires significant coverage in multiple published reliable sources independent of the subject. If so, you could then look at the advice in WP:Your first article. Your draft is malformatted so you need to look at the Manual of Style, and when you have references you can find how to include them by looking at Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft articles

Hi all, hope you’re staying safe. Just wanted some feedback on my draft articles and see if they require any improvement. All of them are on my user page. Any feedback or advice as a response will be greatly appreciated! Thanks. Sincerely, Kaito Nakamura (talk) 12:29, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Kaito Nakamura: Welcome to the Teahouse! Nice job with the drafts. Here are some of my thoughts, with helpful links:

• It's too soon for articles on these future films
• Italics should be used for the titles of novels and films.
• Some references have the author's name listed twice. (This is a problem I see on other articles. Are you using a semi-automated tool to format the references? If so, which one? Have you reported a bug?)
• Draft:'Salem’s Lot (film) and Draft:The Tommyknockers (film) could each use a hatnote to help readers looking for the previous film adaptations.
• I hope the notes stating "It is unknown what number installment this will be in the franchise" are just reminders for you, which you would fix before submitting the drafts
• External links should each have a bullet. The section header should be "External links", where "links" is not capitalized.
• Some drafts use infobox film with deprecated parameters.
• Untitled Momo film should not be italicized
• The authors in Draft:Aquaman: King of Atlantis (miniseries) reference #2 are not formatted properly (another tool bug?)
• Remove duplicate wikilinks within a section of an article
• When formatting dates, there is no comma between the month and year
• It doesn't seem like you have enough information on Draft:Darragh Ennis to warrant his own article. This information could be placed in an article about the show (if it's not already there).
• Draft:List of American films of 2028 - way too early
• Draft:Steve Coulter (actor) needs independent reliable sources as references

Keep up the good work! GoingBatty (talk) 13:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Just a few points. Yes those notes are just reminders for myself and other editors. I will fix up the references. I will take every bit of feedback into consideration. Thanks heaps, really appreciate it. Stay safe. Kaito Nakamura (talk) 22:50, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Publishing an article

Hello ! I am just wondering how long does it take for an article to get published? I says Draft on my article. AM I doing something wrong? sorry I am just new to this. Many thanks. Maha92o (talk) 12:59, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Maha920 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have not formally submitted your drafts for review; I will shortly add the appropriate information so you can do so. 331dot (talk) 13:01, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Maha920 I would add that if you are associated with the subjects, you must read and formally comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies first. The latter is a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory if applicable. 331dot (talk) 13:04, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Newcomer question about improving a company page

Hello, thank you for the plethora of newcomer information on the forum. I have perused several articles and want to determine the most efficient avenue for desired edits of a company page. I have a close connection with this company and do not wish to hire a paid disclosed editor at this time. What is the process for submitting proper improvements for others to review? The Talk pages are correlative, but I do not know if they are the best locations to request for volunteers. The Article is SPX_Corporation - I would like to improve it based on business information obtained from its public website. Thank you. DanLuke11 (talk) 14:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC) DanLuke11 (talk) 14:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

You are welcome to make suggestions on the article's talk page. I have trimmed the article's promotional content, in the past an assortment of conflicted editors has added promotional material, mostly unsourced, but some of it sourced to the company website, we require secondary, independent reliable sources for most content likely to be contested. Theroadislong (talk) 15:08, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, DanLuke11, and welcome to the teahousae. Please use {{request edit}} on the article talk page (here Talk:SPX_Corporation ) to request a specific change. Please give the proposed change is a specific "Change X to Y" format, and cite a reliable source for the suggested changes.

Since you say that you ... have a close connection with this company... you yourself have a Conflict of interest and should declare, that as specified in WP:COI. If yoiu work for the company (whether as an employee, contractor, or as an intern) or have a significant ownership interest or other financial interest in the company, you are considered a paid editor, and must disclose this as described in WP:PAID. This is not optional. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

To add to DES's points above, DanLuke11: your first priority after the necessary declarations is providing sufficient independent reliable sources to establish that the company meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. At present the article has not a single independent source, and so does nothing to establish notability. Once you start asking for changes, it is likely that somebody will examine it, and if they cannot find such sources, nominate it for deletion. I suggest that it would be a waste of time doing anything to the article until its notability has been established: which requires citation of at least two or three places where people who have no connection with the company have chosen to publish substantial material about the company. Wikipedia has very little interst in what the subject of an article say about themselves, and even less in what they wish to be said about themselves. --ColinFine (talk) 15:32, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

I fully agree with ColinFine's comments above, DanLuke11. I did not realize the sourcing was so slight when I wrote my comment above. By all means supply independent sources before suggesting any other changes, please. Any editor could nominate the current article for deletion, and as it stands it might well be deleted unless additional independent sources were found to meet WP:NCORP. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! I will be sure to comply with WP:COI DanLuke11 (talk) 15:54, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Trying to use NextDoor but cannot login or create a signin without immediately getting a 494 error

 2600:1700:8160:3530:FD1B:C163:A48:E3CF (talk) 15:30, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

What is your question about editing Wikipedia? (That is the only thing this page is for). --ColinFine (talk) 15:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

I have no idea what the NextDoor is, but I suspect the error is 404, rather than 494. --CiaPan (talk) 16:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

There's a question on the Microsoft forums about a 494 error. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:52, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Ahhh... I suppose if I were interested in Nextdoor and its possible problems I would make some search and give a more appropriate answer. :) --CiaPan (talk) 16:57, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Help with flagged article

Hello, I posted my first Wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_US-China_Arts_Exchange) but it was flagged for:

• The neutrality of this article is disputed. • This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations.

I had the writers of the article to redraft the text but not sure if it still passes the threshold for neutrality. Also, I added inline citations but had challenges with the formatting.

I'd be greatly appreciative if someone can help guide me to address the flagged items. Sumin Chou (talk) 17:52, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

In the tags on the article, the words in blue are wikilinks to further advice. You don't have inline citations but you do have misplaced external links which you need to remove. You can find how to add references at Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:39, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Reporting harassment from another editor

I hope you can help me. Another editor by the name of Andrzejbanas has been harassing me on wikipedia. He follows me every day from article to article and deletes all my additions, then writes threatening messages on to my talk page, saying that I am intentionally vandalizing wikipedia and things like "you have been warned before", etc. almost to the point where I am so disgusted, I feel that any contributions I make are in vain. All my work gets erased the next day, and then he fills up my talk page with warnings and threats implying that I am going to be banned from editing. I have told this stalker to report me to wikipedia if he feels I am intentionally vandalizing the site, but I told him to stop posting his nasty notices on my talk page, as I simply don't want to hear his overbearing nonsense any more. It's obvious he is just setting me up to get me banned from editing, and I don't know why he's chosen me to stalk. Is there a way you can tell this editor to stop harassing me every day and stop writing things on my talk page? I feel I have made a lot of worthwhile contributions to the site, but if he keeps erasing all my work every day and threatening me, I will just have to quit editing. The agrravation is unbearable. Thanks for whatever help you can offer.FrankensteinsDad (talk) 19:01, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

To clarify, I have been removing edits from this user as they are a) stating information that is not in their sources or using sites that can not be clarified if they are following WP:RS. I have tried explaining this to the user, but I feel like it has not been getting through to them that their edits have been against basic rules. I think a brisk view of our edit histories will clarify this.Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link to one disputed article for interested editors. Universal Classic Monsters. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:39, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Is there a way to have the linked reference number not appear as a subscript?

Suppose that an article uses footnote-style referencing, so that references appear as bracketed numbers in superscript, like this. This is achieved e.g. using the following markup: <ref name="Doe 2020">{{cite journal |last1=Doe |first1=J. |date=2020 |title=An important article. |journal=J. Big Results |volume=21 |pages=234–235 }}</ref>. (It can also be achieved using the refn template.)

It would be nice to be able to refer to this reference directly, e.g. like this:

As explained in Ref. 1, …

But this ‘1’ in ‘Ref. 1’ should have the following two properties:

• It should be generated automatically, from the supplied the reference name in the wiki markup (i.e. the engine should know how to convert the name "Doe 2020" to the appropriate number);
• It should link to the correct entry in the list of citations.

It would also be acceptable if the reference number is enclosed in brackets (like this: Ref. [1]).

Is there any way to do this? Even after much googling, I haven't been able to find anything.

I do know that there are often workarounds. In the particular example I used above, one could write

As explained by Doe, …

Be that as it may, it would still be nice to know if it is possible to use ‘Ref. 1’.

Citations

 Reuqr (talk) 19:15, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Question re: impact of edit to one of my music album credits

My name is Vin D'Onofrio and I edited my credit as the guitarist and soloist for Carly Simon's Moonlight Serenade release, for which there is a Wiki page titled Moonlight Serenade. Once I opened a Wikipedia account and made the edit, my name was highlighted and linked to a page that says I have no article in my name. I do not plan on writing an article for myself at this time. If the link to my name on the Moonlight Serenade page can bring up only the accurate musical credits I have on other Wikipedia pages ( Rod Stewart-Stardust and Chie Ayado-Goodbye Pork Pie Hat) I am fine with viewers being able to click on my name on the Moonlight Serenade page to see my other credits. If not, then I prefer to not have a link. Currently some of the references listed on the link to my name are not accurate.

For the record, I am not the actor with the same first and last name, we have different middle names.My middle initial is the letter "S". Thank you for your help.

Vin D'Onofrio Vin D'Onofrio (talk) 19:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Mr. D'Onofrio, and welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse! There's a link for your name in that edit because of the double square brackets surrounding it (like this: [[Vin D'Onofrio]]). That is the wikitext code format for a wikilink; when the page is rendered, the text within the square brackets will be rendered as a link to the wikipage with that title. Since there is no wikipage to link to, it shows up as a red link, which leads to a nonexistent page. The link can be removed by simply removing the square brackets, and in fact, I've already gone and done this for you here: [5]. If you go to the current version of the Moonlight Serenade article, you'll see that the link is now gone. There's more detailed information on the ins and outs of wikitext on the wikitext help page, if you're curious. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

art galleries and notability

Dear people, concerning the notability-criteria - is a gallery only notable when all the artists, who are presented by it, have a wikipedia-article? I tried to read through the "business-section" of the notability-criteria, but they aren't very specific on art. Is here perhaps an admin who is busy with art and could help me to understand what it would need to write an article on a gallery? Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 21:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

This is an excellent question, Gyanda. There have been lengthy discussions about this. Here is one. Bus stop (talk) 21:32, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh my god, this is lengthy. Poeh... you guys are really busy with this, very interesting to read though! Thanks for the link! LG, --Gyanda (talk) 23:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Gyanda: You can read the summary to the right of that long discussion, but the gist is that consensus leans towards having more coverage than just of various notable exhibits, in order to demonstrate a gallery is notable. So even if the exhibitors have articles, that's not usually enough for the exhibiting gallery to meet notability guidelines. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:15, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that's what i got from reading. Nothing is easy on Wikipedia... Thanks for your answer! Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 00:32, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Great work you've done, Gyanda. I very much like all of the articles you've worked on or created, or at least the ones that I have looked at. I hope you keep up the excellent work. Please contact me if I can be of any help concerning the English Wikipedia. I may know very little about the English Wikipedia, but I will try. Bus stop (talk) 01:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Citing press release agencies

While adding references to Krampouz, I cited a press release hosted on a third party press release agency [6], then I later found the same press release hosted on the original publisher's website [7]. Is it OK to link to Business Wire and other press release agencies when citing a press release? If so, is it better to link to the same press release on the publisher's site? codl (talk) 22:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Codl: You don't want to ever use a press release as a source, no matter where they sit. Companies pay to release them, with no editorial oversight, so the info is not always reliable. Please see WP:RS for better sourcing. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:10, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Ah. Then, why does {{cite press release}} exist? codl (talk) 23:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

That is not Correct, Timtempleton. Press releases can be cited under the limits of WP:ABOUTSELF. They cannot, however, be used to establish notability and no article should be entirely or largely based on such sources.

Codl y0ou can use |agency= to indicate the agency through which a PR has been distributed. There is no particular advantage in going directly to the version on the company's own site, unless the content is different, which is unusual, Press releases can be used to cite specific facts about the company, but not to support the whole article nor to establish notability, nor for controversial or clearly self-serving statements. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC) Codl DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:42, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

I see, that makes sense. Thanks! codl (talk) 00:05, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Need Help Meeting Notability Guidelines

Hello! I am a new Wikipedia user and am trying to get my first article approved. My first attempt was declined because it failed to meet notability guidelines. I was wondering if someone with more experience could take a look at the article (Draft:Adam Schleifer) and try to let me know where it came up short of meeting the guidelines and if it worth continuing to pursue this article. Thanks! Sshallam (talk) 22:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Sshallam Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It seems that Mr. Schleifer does not meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable politician, as merely seeking public office is insufficient. If he wins the election, he would merit an article as a member of a national legislature(the House). He also does not seem to meet the more general definition of a notable person. If he does, you need independent reliable sources with significant coverage of him.

Some of your sources seem to be interviews with Mr. Schleifer, those would be a primary source and not acceptable for establishing notability. Wikipedia articles should only summarize what others say about him. I'd also suggest that discussing Montel Williams is unnecessary, as he was only a paid spokesperson for the company Mr. Schleifer worked against. That's called coatracking. 331dot (talk) 22:20, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Sshallam: I made some minor formatting edits, but it is still WP:TOOSOON. There may be more, but the only unelected candidate I've seen on Wikipedia with an article is Gina Ortiz Jones, but she lost and is running again - and the additional coverage she garnered barely meets the threshold, per consensus. Your best bet is to not resubmit unless he wins the election, or has a similar level of additional coverage as Ms. Jones. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:36, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

How to edit

FYI

 – Heading created by Tenryuu.

How do I edit Wikipedia articles? 47.18.47.43 (talk) 22:45, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. You can edit pages by clicking on the edit/edit source links at the top of articles. If you're new to editing, perhaps you would like to try WP:TWA, an interactive tutorial to learning how to use the site. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:06, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Check out Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:07, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Submission is about a company or organization not yet shown to meet notability guidelines

Deleted

 – Draft has been deleted for being promotional and user has been blocked for their name. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:39, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Bus Coach Drivers

Hi

I recently added an article about our Association and had the headline supplied as the reason for denial, I could really do with some assistance as a community organisation it would be advantageous to be able to be found and verified BACDAI (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

hello, BACDAI. I presume this is about Draft:Bus Coach Drivers Wikipedia articles are not for an organization to be ble to be found and verified. Wikipedia has articles about notable topics, including organizations. See our guideline on the notability of organizations. Notability is normally demonstrated by citing multiple independent published reliable sources The draft currently does not cite any independent sources. You should have at least three or four, different from each other, each ofm which discuses the organization nin some detail. Directory entries will not do, nor, will blogs or other personal sites. Nor will one-sentence mentions in news stories.

Also the current draft is quite promotional. and that will not do. Phrases such as seven drivers who had become so disillusioned with traditional union support decided the could do no worse. sound like an organizational flyer. A Wikipedia article must be neutral stating verifiable facts but not praising or attacking the group.

Also if you are associated with the group, yo0u have a conflict of interest and should declare it. If you are being paid in any way to write the article, or are expected to do as as part,of your job, you are a paid editor and must disclose this as described at that page, DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:57, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @BACDAI: Welcome to the Teahouse. Aside from the layout (which is the least of your worries right now), are there any other sources not connected to your organisation that you can cite? You also say it would be advantageous to be able to be found and verified. You should know that Wikipedia is not a site for promotion (and will most likely get your account blocked) and that other venues like Instagram may better suit your needs. Also, you must declare your conflict of interest in regards to the subject. You may do so by following the steps shown here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Fair Use of a Newspaper front

Hi friends, I am pretty new to editing Wikipedia. I have started to fix up and fill in all the history of The Daily Collegian a student newspaper I work for. The thumbnail image for our paper is a super old front page from 2008. It has our incorrect logo as well as a completely different style than we publish with today.

I uploaded a new front and it is tagged for deletion, which is fair. But I was reading through the Non-free_use_rationale_guideline and felt like a front page could be use as fair use? Please let me know if I am wrong but here are some of the reasons why I think it may fit the exception.

What proportion of the copyrighted work is used and to what degree does it compete with the copyright holder's usage? For example, if the image is a photograph or logo, the entire work is likely being used. A screenshot that reveals the most important discovery of a documentary or the ending of a movie, for example, though a very small portion of the work, may disproportionately compete with the copyright holder's use. In the case of a music sample, the length should be no longer than 10 percent of the song's original length or 30 seconds, whichever is shorter.

• This is just a snip of the front page, not the entire copy of the paper. We publish all of our copies for free online so I don't see it competing with the copyright holder.

If applicable, has the resolution been reduced from the original? In the case of music samples, has the quality been reduced from the original? What purpose does the image serve in the article? If applicable: Is the image a logo, photograph, or box art for the main subject of the article? Is the image being used as the primary means of visual identification of the subject or topic? (e.g., a corporate logo or the box art of a DVD)

• Visual identification of the subject or topic.

Does it illustrate the topic of the article? (e.g., a screen shot from a movie) Is it used for commentary on a particular topic? How?

• Yes, it is a better representation of what the actual product looks like than what is currently housed there.

Why the subject can't be adequately conveyed by properly sourced text or using free content media. If, for example, an image is a screenshot of a movie that is used for an article about the movie, or a corporate logo, there is obviously no such thing as a "free" version of it – all of the resources in the world could not produce one. If, on the other hand, the image is a photograph, the image is more easily replaced, even if Wikipedians may lack the resources to create a replacement.

• There is obviously no such thing as a "free" version of it – all of the resources in the world could not produce one.

Any other information necessary to assist others in determining whether the use of this copyrighted work qualifies for fair use.

• It's being used in an educational way?

Thanks for the help! NoahRiffe (talk) 00:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

What level of separation do you need for acceptable sources?

Hello, I am trying to refurbish the Balboa (dance) page, since 90% of its content has been removed for not having sources. However, most of the information I've found online and in books seems to be published by Balboa dance instructors, dancers, or festival organizers. Where is the line on the "independent of the subject" in this case, since people with the most knowledge and research about a dance generally tend to be those that are involved with the dance in some way? For example, could these things be acceptable references:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=FQjS91tFgh4C&vq=balboa&dq=balboa+swing&lr=&source=gbs_navlinks_s A book about swing dancing authored by dance studio owners.

https://swungover.wordpress.com/ A blog run by a professional Balboa dance instructor.

https://www.retrorhythm.com/balboa A swing-dance history page created by Balboa dance instructors, which sometimes reference the above blog.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=lS076v-E-dYC&dq=balboa+salsa&source=gbs_navlinks_s A book written by a dance instructor, which includes some references to websites written by other dance instructors. Eric.c.zhang (talk) 01:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

https://books.google.ca/books?id=lS076v-E-dYC&dq=balboa+salsa&source=gbs_navlinks_s That covers your question. For anything else contact me on my talk page! EWale18 (talk) 06:42 15 May 2020 (UTC)Wale18 (talk) 01:42, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Nude Photos on Wikipedia

So when editing the Sexual Intercourse Page can you put pictures of nude people having Sex "Fake Sex" or illustrated pictures? Can you put nude photos on Wikipedia, for pages that go with it? Wale18 (talk) 01:39, 15 May 2020 (UTC)