Wikipedia:Teahouse

Bonadea, 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

Turning URLs blue!

Hello - I'm very new to Wiki and learning slowly. I've edited a page, and added new footnotes for the page on John Pinney. One of the existing URLs (note 12) in the References list is in blue, but the ones I've added aren't, and I can't work out why. Can someone tell me? Ruthhenrietta (talk) 12:14, 28 September 2020 (UTC) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 12:14, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ruthhenrietta: The blue text that you see are links to the citations, you might find Wikipedia:Citing sources helpful, additionally I'm including a link to the page Template:Cite book which has the script you would need to cite books. I've adjusted two of your sources for you to give you a head start, and use for an example. I hope this helps. Coryphantha Talk 12:40, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi Ruthhenrietta. You need to provide a url for a source if you want it to appear blue in the "References" section. It looks like you've cited some sources, but haven't didn't provided any links to where they can be viewed online; this is perfectly OK to do per WP:SAYWHERE because sources aren't required to be available online as long as they're reliable. The reason John Pinney#cite_note-12 is blue is because a link for the source has been provided; the reason John Pinney#cite_note-4, John Pinney#cite_note-10, and John Pinney#cite_note-11 aren't blue is because no url has been provided for those sources. The principle works essentially the same as that for internal links (i.e. WP:WIKILINKS); if I simply type "John Pinney" without providing a link to the page, all you get is "John Pinney"; if, however, I provide a link for "John Pinney", it will be in blue as "John Pinney". -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:43, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @Coryphantha @Marchjuly - I'm beginning to realise that getting the citations right is about 100 times more difficult than writing the article itself.. and I can't remember how to tag you in my reply - apologies Ruthhenrietta (talk) 14:16, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Have you tried using the VisualEditor to insert references? See here, if you have a URL it can automatically create a linked citation for you. And if you're linking to a book on Google Books, this tool can automatically convert them to a citation for you. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:48, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ruthhenrietta: You can find further help on adding references at WP:REFBEGIN or at WP:ERB. (The second is a help page I wrote myself. Both have videos to help you) We have two options of editing tools - both have a helpful 'Cite' button, and both allow you to paste in a url and automatically get it to 'autofill' as much as it can. You'll probably still need to add a few details manually. I will be frank: adding references using Visual Editor is not as easy as doing it using WP:Source Editor, especially when you want to add in additional field. Good luck, and stick with it! Nick Moyes (talk) 20:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: and @Þjarkur: thank you both - those are REALLY good tips and much much easier than trying to do it all manually. I've spent 10 minutes working out how to tag/ping you in my reply - hope this is right. In my original question I actually meant that the hyperlinks I'd added were fine, but didn't look blue in colour... still haven't cracked that, but I've learnt much easier ways to add references.Ruthhenrietta (talk) 15:56, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ruthhenrietta: Yes, you pinged me just perfectly! Well done. I remember being in your shoes when I started out, too. For the first few months I would copy a reference from other articles and manually modify each to fit my needs as I also didn't know there were easier ways to do things. We have all been there and, providing you are willing to ask questions and read (=wade) through some of our guidance pages, there's no reason why you shouldn't enjoy contributing to this amazing encyclopaedia. We are always here at the Teahouse to answer questions quickly, 24/7/365. But if you do decide to stick around (and contribute to Bristol/Slavery-related topics) and need more of a helping hand, I'd be happy to offer more direct support in due course. We have a scheme called Adopt-a-User which suits those who have been around sufficiently long to clearly be committed, but not long enough to fully understand how some of the more subtle or complex things work. Mentoring is a great way to help new but committed editors, especially as we don't have as many female editor as we would wish, despite the efforts of the Te Women in Red WikiProject to encourage women to write about women. Finally, you might find this project of some interest, as it encompasses slavery issues: WP:HUMAN_RIGHTS. All the best, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:16, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I would LOVE to have a mentor... I hope I'm going to stick with this, as I do feel passionately that it's the best way to get accurate information in the public realm (though since I've been looking more carefully at Wiki, I realise how many pages have been cobbled together from information on slightly dodgy websites)... I'll keep asking the Teahouse for the moment, but if I'm still 'here' in a month or so's time, I'll definitely take you up on your offer. Meanwhile I'll follow you on Twitter! Ruthhenrietta (talk) 15:17, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

My article is for deletion and I am said as UPE

I have created a few articles recently. One of this is Jahan Geneve which I created two weeks back. Suddenly I found that to be deleted today for speedy deletion as promotional. I tried to address the issue and recreate the article after removing all the promotional parts. But it was again nominated for speedy deletion in same category. I have been going through the notibility policy and other policies thoughly before creating all my articles. I think the brand is notable as have some historic value while based in switzerland, so decided to write about it. I found some editor said I am an UPE. I have felt devastated and decided to nominate my own article for deletion. I truly believe there are lot of editors there who can judge and decide if the article is worthy of being retained in wikipedia. I am fine with any outcome out of it. But it was very shocking the way I was alleged of being paid editor persistently. I would request any help and I think this will help me with my future activities in wikipedia better. The deletion discussion is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jahan_Geneve --Chiro725 (talk) 20:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC) Chiro725 (talk) 20:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC) Chiro725 (talk) 20:43, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Chiro725, hello & welcome, an article, no matter how notable the subject matter is, can still be deleted as being too promotional, it’s unfortunate you are saddened by your current predicament but UPE is a serious transgression and editors here try to combat it to the best of their ability, if you are accused of UPE, there’s probably a valid reason for it. Paid editing as long as it is in tune with what has been outlined in WP:PAID is legal but not disclosing it is very much a serious violation that may get you blocked from editing altogether. Celestina007 (talk) 21:29, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Celestina007, Thank you very much for your comment. At least someone talked nicely to me. I have understood that there was some problem with my initial article as it has some promotion. At the time of recreating it, I saw the notice which said if I could improve the article only then I should proceed which I followed. Also, I think all are here working to make this resource of enormous value to modern world better and better and better. I did not think that writing about a commercial entity will make me face this. I just want the right thing to happen. I have complete trust on the editors who have spent a lot of time here, but I don't think they are right with the allegation with me. I do not have any wish to say in favor of any article or any edit if that violates our policies. But I am seriously feeling something is not happening right. I have come to know that a lot of people gets blocked here but I don't have any wish to get blocked ever, so I try to always red policies before I do something unfamiliar. I request you further, please forgive me if I am asking too much, but can you please remark what you think about the article? I wish to see something just happen to my article. I agree any article can get deleted, but I think that must happen in proper way. I thank you so much for your taking time and addressing my concern. I am really feeling a lot better. Thank you --Chiro725 (talk) 21:48, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Chiro725, I know that receiving these warnings is quite uncomfortable. The thing about Wikipedia is that we have almost no information about who the other editors are and therefore many things are just based on trying to find patterns. We have seen a lot of paid editors that have a similar editing pattern to yours, so using the best available information it's normal that someone would ask you if you are a paid editor. If you're not, then you can just ignore it and continue writing articles about notable topics. Regarding your article on Jahan Geneve, it appears that the only coverage that they have are press releases and similar, there's little independent coverage to be found. – Thjarkur (talk) 09:50, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Þjarkur, ignoring it isn’t the right move, rather they ought to respond to the editor who has placed the tag & explain to them that they aren’t receiving financial rewards for their edits before proceeding to continue regular editing, asides that i think all you have told them is good. Celestina007 (talk) 16:28, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Thjarkur thank you for your comments and help. I don't have a bad feeling now anymore. The article got deleted and most of the senior editors said it was not worthy to keep as the brand is not notable. I though having some historical value it might be notable, but I was wrong. I just wanted to cross check the fact that if the article was only promotional or it was non notable too. I got my answer. I think these discussions have made my understanding matured in some fold about notability. I like to thank Celestina007 for their guidance again. --Chiro725 (talk) 11:41, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Chiro725, you are welcome, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page when in doubt or need guidance. Celestina007 (talk) 12:44, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I will definitely ask for your help when I need. --Chiro725 (talk) 20:15, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

In a request for closure, are edits pre-request for comment and private thanks post-request for comment allowed to be mentioned?

In This request for closure of an expired request for comments, I go into detail about edits from the dispute that caused the request for comments, as none of the other three users in the dispute ever commented on it (with one being inactive for most of it). In fact, all of the votes for the RFC were to keep the content on the page, but there were only 4 votes (including mine), so I felt the need to mention the other three users in the dispute. Additionally, I mention the advice from one of the opposing users that the page needed secondary sources, and then link to an image showing a private thanks from him for me adding said secondary sources. Are these details allowed or not for a request for closure? Considering how low the participation was for the RFC, I felt the need to mention the other users in the dispute due to them not commenting on the RFC, but now I’m having second thoughts that said details aren’t allowed. Unnamed anon (talk) 05:53, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Unnamed anon, welcome! What you say here in this post seems fine and also enough for any potential closer. What you've said there doesn't seem neutral and is therefore likely not fine. If the closer should be aware of other discussions, list them in proper order and if you must provide further information, do it like you've done here (I mean neutrally; I don't mean without diffs).

I am answering only because I noticed that this post was somewhat neglected, so please consider my response an opinion and not an answer. Whenever I am at WP:ANRFC, it looks to me like Redrose64 is tending to it. And I have also noticed Rosguill (apologies for pinging you this, the third time in as many days) helping out there. If either of them have any advice, you'll probably receive it too, now that I've pinged them. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:38, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Usedtobecool, at AN/RFC you make slightly too much of an actual argument. Since we're on the topic of RfC closures Unnamed anon, I want to point out that I corrected some mistakes in your filing of the close of a discussion at Nikolai Lukashenko. Your comment at the actual discussion could also have been better written; it reads more like you're taking the side of the consensus rather than summarizing it, you forgot to sign the discussion and you didn't invoke WP:SNOW. That having been said, given the one-sidedness of the discussion I don't think anyone will object, but generally speaking I would maybe avoid closing discussions, and particularly ones where the close is out of process, until you have a bit more experience participating in them. Even if your assessments of consensus are accurate, editors are more likely to object to your close than they would a more experienced editor. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:10, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

films

sir why my page of K. B. pathak was deleted from the sandbox it was send for pubilcation we are new to this page so please help me out K B Pathak (talk) 06:06, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

K B Pathak, if you are referring to your sandbox, the deletion log says that you requested deletion. See WP:REFUND if you wish to get it back. I see you got blocked temporarily for unsourced content, if you wish to continue editing read WP:CITE and then request for an unblock. Heart ^(talk) 06:12, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

See Kader Khan for an example of an article about a person active in the India movie industry. Your draft is just a list of movies for which K B Pathak did the screenplay. David notMD (talk) 09:57, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

K B Pathak, your topic of choice seems notable but you seem to be having problems writing a draft that will get accepted. Perhaps someone might help you if you asked nicely at WT:INDIA? Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:12, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Renaming/Moving a category

Hi,

I want to rename the Category:Indian summiters of Mount Everest as the spelling of "summiteers" is wrong, but I cant find any move option and also no help in Help:Category. How do I rename/move this category which reflects the appropriate changes in the 55 articles listed in it without manually labouring on all 55 articles. The articles using the correct spelling like Indian summiteers of Mount Everest show red links. Is in such circumstances tools like AWB appropriate for automated editing? Thanks. Roller26 (talk) 07:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

The spelling isn't wrong it can be spelt either way, there are hundreds of catgeories that use the spelling "summiter" here Category:Summiters of Mount Everest. Theroadislong (talk) 08:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Theroadislong, thanks. It so happens that when I was trying to clear this confusion earlier on google, I was misspelling the single e version with a single m and hence was not getting any relevant results, leading me to assume that spelling to be incorrect. Anyways want about future cases of category moves/renaming. Roller26 (talk) 08:40, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Roller26. The name of a category is on every page that is in that category, so they would all need to be edited. I've no doubt there is a bot that can do this, though I know little about bots; but it would need to be done. --ColinFine (talk) 08:54, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Roller26, ColinFine the process for renaming categories is at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion and spelling mistakes can be corrected by Speedy renaming. If renaming is agreed then the administrator who processes it will use a bot to update all the affected articles. TSventon (talk) 12:00, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

ColinFine, TSventon Thanks. Roller26 (talk) 13:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Roller26: As has been said, though, this is not a "spelling mistake". Though neither Merriam nor the OED has the word "summiter", it does seem to be in use both here and the web at large, interchangeably with "summiteer" (which is pronounced differently, rhyming with "year"; i.e., it's a different word). Whether we should be using the word should probably be researched. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1, can you find it in any dictionaries?This must be a really new word, but we didn't invent it, it seems, as I find a few results from before 2001. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Help to write a page about Cafetran Espresso

Hello,

Background: Cafetran Espresso is a Computer-Aided Translation software tool. It has a sizable amount of users, in particular - but not only - under Linux (Indeed, it is totally cross-platform, and one of the few professional tools under Linux.) It is sufficiently notable to be offered as incentive with the premium membership of ProZ.com (a large community of translators). A couple of years ago, I discovered it was not even listed on the CAT tool comparison page. The reason being that it did not have its own WP page. So I created one. Several people contributed. The page grew organically, some mistakes were made. At the end, its submission was declined then rejected.

I decided to start afresh. I stripped it to the core to remain factual. Now I am trying to add references. And here, I bump into a wall. Primary sources are forbidden, which precludes all references to user-groups, technical documentations, etc. As secondary source, Youtube videos are not accepted, which remove all courses, presentations at conferences., etc. Blogs are not accepted, so that removes all software tool comparisons, description of features, case-studies, etc. It is not a tool develop in academia So there is no published research article (then, it would be easy. After 25 years in academia, I know that we can write a paper about any script, and then create a page on WP. Nobody blinks).

What would be considered a reliable source? Would a blog post coming from a blog regularly posting on CAT tools and comparing them be acceptable? Are-they not the XXI century equivalents of "magazines"?

A large amount of mentions and references is presented on Draft_talk:Cafetran_Espresso. That should definitively settle the notability issue (which still baffles all of us to be honest). Now the problem is which one to include without falling into the trap of "trying to sell the software". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lenov (talk • contribs) 16:24, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Disclaimer: I have absolutely no involvement with Cafetran Espresso development or trade. I am just a user. As are all the other people who tried to contribute to the page as far as I know. Nicolas Gambardella (talk) 16:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Lenov. Wikipedia-notability can be frustrating, particular for certain kinds of topic (eg some software, You-tubers, film editors) because they don't get written about much. But consider this: because Wikipedia can be edited by anybody, then even if information in an article started out accurate, it can easily have been altered by mistake, or to advance a point of view, or maliciously. The reader - anywhere, any time - needs to be able to verify it, and so every single piece of information needs to have been published (and, ideally, the source cited). But information in self-published sources (including most blogs) is pretty worthless: anybody can write any old tripe and publish it on the web, or even in a book. So we require sources published by somebody with a reputation for fact-checking and editorial contgrol. Blogs by somebody recognised as an expert in the relevant field may sometimes be regarded as reliable, but most are not. Next, consider how valuable is information from the subject of the article, or from people closely connected with the subject: for some kinds of information (eg places, dates) this is usually regarded as reliable; but anything that might be contentious - and in particular, anything about the virtues of the subject, or the shortcomings of rivals - cannot safely be taken from connected sources; which is why we strongly prefer Independent sources. (Primary sources explains when non-independent sources may be used). But if there are essentially no independent reliable sources, then there is basically nothing can go in the article. --ColinFine (talk) 17:06, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

At the momentr, Lenov, the draft (not the talk page the draft itself) cites 7 sources of these, the first is from the company's site, so it is not independent. The second is an academic [a[er, which is often good, but it is not online, so I cannot judge how significant the coverage of CTE is. The third is a similar paper, but an abstract is available. CTE is not mentioned at all in the abstract. The fourth is a comparison listing, which is independent, but does not contain significant coverage, being only brief mention. The fifth is a book. It looks reliable, but is not available online. do I cannot judge if the discussion of CYE is extensive or is less than a single sentence. Thew last two are from github, and list file formats that the software covers, and other documentation. but these are supplied by the developers, apparently, or else are user-generated content. in either case, they do not count for notability. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

The second cite (Yapa; Ariyaratne) is now expanded with a free-to-read link. The product is mentioned once in a list of translators, so it does nothing for notability (or much else). Also, for future reference, the publisher (Research and Scientific Innovation Society) may be one of the paid journal mills with limited or no peer review. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:24, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice, I'll keep digging in all the sources. Computing science research is unfortunately mostly published in journals with paywalls. However, using SciHub, one can access some papers. And few books are online available for all. This is basically the catch-22 situation. Either we have "reliable sources", but they have to be bought, or we have free resources but deemed unreliable. What we failed to understand is why many other CAT tools, with lower notabilities are allowed to have pages. Look at the references: Across Language Server, Pootle, Gtanslator, MetaTexis, Open_Language_Tools. Even some of the main players have lists of references that would be deemed unsuitable according to the rules, see Smartcat, Déjà_Vu_(software) Nicolas Gambardella (talk) 07:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

So, I think this one is good, right? Academic, published, conference in London, PDF available, figure showing clear notability (I was actually surprise to see CTE in 3rd position!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lenov (talk • contribs) 07:54, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

No, it's not good. It is another trivial mention. These sources need to discuss Cafetran in some depth. All that source does is include it in a list of survey results. - MrOllie (talk) 12:08, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that is its aim. The citation is put after the mention of surveys. I am trying to match statements and references. Some references for usage, some references for the supported file formats, etc. I think a user survey showing Cafetran as 3rd after SDL Trados and MemoQ, in front of Across, Wordfast, and Déjà Vu is pretty strong (all having already Wikipedia pages). Let's be clear, there are no articles describing Cafetran in depth. What would be the point? Who would write that? The only people would be the developers. And those sources would therefore be ineligible. And which journal would accept them? This kind of detailed description belong to user-manual (ineligible) and blogs (ineligible). There is nothing specific to Cafetran Espresso here. This is the case of the many productivity software. Millions of users would bot change that. Nicolas Gambardella (talk) 13:37, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

If there are no in-depth sources, the topic is not notable and you're probably wasting your time working on the draft. You need to start with 2-3 in-depth, reliable sources and summarize them. - MrOllie (talk) 14:18, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Publishing a translated article

I have translated a short article from German Wikipedia, which I created myself, into English. Apparently, only more experienced editors than I are allowed to publish translated articles on en.wikipedia, so I placed the translation into my own userspace. I created a "talk" page, whatever exactly that amounts to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bernhard_Ritter

Naturally, I would like to have the translated article checked and published. It is a page on Maria von Herbert, a correspondent of philosopher Immanuel Kant. It is not clear to me what I am supposed to do next. I am not in a hurry and will check back tomorrow. Bernhard Ritter (talk) 00:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bernhard Ritter. I'm not sure what you mean by Apparently, only more experienced editors than I are allowed to publish translated articles on en.wikipedia, unless you mean you're not being allowed to create an article for some technical reason. Anyway, you can create a draft for the article and submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review if you like.

Some other things for you to consider are Wikipedia:Translation, Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia#Translating from other language Wikimedia projects, and Wikipedia:Notability (people). The first two pages are mainly about what you need to do to ensure that the content you've translated isn't a WP:COPYVIO. Wikipedia's licensing pretty much allows the content found in its articles to be freely re-used for any purpose, but it does require that proper attribution be given. So, even though you might've have been the main or primary contributor to the German Wikipedia article, it's still probably best for you to properly attribute the original article to avoid any problems. The last page has to do with the concept of Wikipedia notability. Each Wikipedia project has its own policies and guidelines and English Wikipedia's tend to be more rigorously applied than perhaps those for some other language Wikipedias. So, just because an article exists on German Wikipedia that doesn't automatically mean it should exist on English Wikipedia; in other words, you're going to have to establish that Herbert meets relevant English Wikipedia notability guidelines in order for such an article to survive a deletion nomination. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:08, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: It looks like the OP does not have enough edits yet to be autoconfirmed here at en wiki. RudolfRed (talk) 01:28, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Appears the draft was created and then deleted by Bernhard Ritter at User:Bernhard Ritter/Maria von Herbert-2 Even if not autoconfirmed, the instructions about for creating a draft and once satisfied with the content, submitting to AfC, apply. David notMD (talk) 01:55, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly. Thank you for your detailed reply. I will submit the translated article as a draft to Wikipedia:Articles for creation including "proper attribution" and a hyperlink to the original page. My phrase Apparently, only more experienced editors than I are allowed to publish translated articles on en.wikipedia was worded after a message displayed on the page in explanation why I cannot publish the page myself. As RudolfRed notes, it must have to do with the fact that the OP does not have enough edits. I understand that I will have to argue that Maria von Herbert meets the relevant notability guidelines when submitting the draft.

@David notMD: I deleted only a copy, or a version "2", of the draft. I was referring to User:Bernhard Ritter/Maria von Herbert instead. Thanks for confirming that the instructions in Wikipedia:Articles for creation apply to my case. -- Bernhard Ritter (talk) 11:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Good luck with the draftBernhard Ritter. In case you didn't know, you can cite non-English sources as long as they otherwise meet English Wikipedia's definition of reliable sources. You also can use sources that aren't available online as long as they have been published and reasonably accessible. Finally, the "References" section generally comes before the "External links" section in English Wikipedia articles per WP:ORDER. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:06, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Marchjuly, I moved the "External Links" section to where it belongs. All the information provided in the article has already been published and referenced otherwise. Bernhard Ritter (talk) 12:34, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Mikenicholson.com

Hi, I have been told l need to pay a status tax to get on wikipedia. Is this so? I am a film maker since 1976, and was a Director of DW Thorpe book publishers. Both my Mother, Joyce Thorpe Nicholson, and brother, Peter Nicholson cartoonist are in it. www.mikenicholson.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael John Nicholson (talk • contribs) 04:13, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Mike, Getting into Wikipedia wasn’t easy, had to send $1000 “status tax” to Canberra authorities. But think of the status connected with belonging to the Thorpe / Nicholson publishing empire. Nigel. 03:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)~ 2001:8003:58D6:AC00:212F:805E:1C38:8649 (talk) 03:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

No payment is necessary to get an article on Wikipedia. RudolfRed (talk) 04:40, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

• Could you be so kind as to tell us who told you such? Or where you got such information from? It probably may be internet scam artists trying to swindle you, as you do not need to pay a dime to obtain a biographical article on Wikipedia.Celestina007 (talk) 05:04, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Michael John Nicholson. Are you aware that Wikipedia is not the place to tell the world about yourself?--Quisqualis (talk) 04:49, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

So how do l get started? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael John Nicholson (talk • contribs) 07:01, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@Michael John Nicholson: To "get on Wikipedia" as an editor is easy. In fact you have done it already by posting here and by registering for a free account. Just follow Help:Introduction or try out The Wikipedia Adventure to learn more about the basics of editing, and of the importance of adding references (See WP:REFBEGIN for that). You could then say a few (non-promotional) things on your userpage about yourself and your interests in editing Wikipedia - but avoid using it as if it were a LinkedIn page to promote yourself or your website (such pages get quickly removed). Like driving a car for the first time, make small. careful edits at first - perhaps fixing typos, improving grammar, adding references etc to articles that interest you. (See the Help Out' section at  Wikipedia:Community portal for a list of ideas to get you started. Never add stuff you happen to know - only ever add content that can be verified by referring to the citations that you will add alongside them.)

However, if by "get on Wikipedia" you mean how do you get an article about yourself in this encyclopaedia, the simple answer is that you don't. Unless you have been written about in detail and in depth by various independent mainstream sources you join the remaining 7,000,000 human beings, and millions of businesses who simply do not meet our Notability Criteria - which is the essential bar for allowing a page here. Does that help? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 07:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)    

Please also see the answers you received at the help desk back in March, Michael John Nicholson, now archived at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2020 March 22#Michael John Nicholson. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Apropos of payments, I hope that you didn't pay any money to "Jaan.raadik", who created a draft about you in January 2016 (subsequently deleted) or to "RashillGopee", who did the same three years later. Each time, an editor appeared merely in order to create such a draft (a curious editing pattern); and each time, submission of the draft got the response "Declining submission: bio - Submission is about a person not yet shown to meet notability guidelines." -- Hoary (talk) 07:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, why can you say l did nothing of 'notibility'? I set up 'Rubbery Figures' [political puppets like Spitting Image] with my brother and they were run for 6 years on Aust national tv? I did scripts, filming, animation, editing and sound. And then there are all my other films l made that were shown on Aust tv, and my books and art exhibitions. And was director of D.W. Thorpe Pty Ltd, publishers. You can see all my work on my website, www.mikenicholson.com so why would you not have me on it? I dont understand this, I seem to be getting mixed messages from a lot of different people at Wikipedia. - Mike. Michael John Nicholson (talk) 08:36, 30 September 2020 (UTC) Michael John Nicholson (talk) 08:36, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Notability, as that term is used on Wikipedia, is judged not by what you've done, Michael John Nicholson, but by whether people independent of you have written about you in reliable, published sources. See WP:GOLDENRULE for a simple explanation. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:43, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Mike, I don't see any mixed messages coming from the registered editors here. As was said above, whoever suggested paying a status tax to get an article published here was scamming you, and the first response from the IP address 2001...8649 was at best a poor attempt at a joke by an anonymous poster.

As was written above and on your talk page this time and six months ago, the word notable has a specific meaning here, with specific criteria. If you can provide at least three in-depth, independent, reliable sources (all three criteria must be satisfied as described at notable), please provide links to them. If so, we can then discuss how to get an article written.

Note none of this has anything to do with the quality or volume of your work – we don't make value judgements. It's all about those sources having written about you so we can summarize what they said, since that's what we do here as an encyclopedia, a tertiary source.

There are likely many thousands of creative people with man-decades of work who just don't meet the notability criteria and therefore don't qualify for an article. (We acknowledge that there are many such articles that were put here illegitimately in the past; they are slowly being removed if found to be so by this all-volunteer team.)

It's unfortunate that there's this idea out there, especially in the creative world, that not having an article about you on Wikipedia makes one "less-than" or illegitimate. We volunteers do what we can, every day, to try to explain that just isn't so. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

The best point you raised appears to be your involvement in Rubbery figures. However, that article has no references (putting it at risk for deletion), and also, the sentence "The Rubbery Figures programs were made in the Melbourne film studio of Peter Nicholson, who also made the puppets themselves." gives all the credit to your brother, Peter Nicholson (cartoonist). If you were truly equally involved, you may consider adding references to that article, including references that mention you, and then add a description of your contributions to the text of the article. As a general note, millions of people are successful in doing creative things (film, books, art exhibitions, publishing), but unless those people are written about by others who have no personal connection to the subject, do not meet Wikipedia's encyclopaedic definition of notability. David notMD (talk) 11:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Michael John Nicholson AND, under unintended consequences, Rubbery figures is now nominated for deletion for no references in support of notability. If you choose to add references, you should declare on your User page your relationship to the article. David notMD (talk) 22:11, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

A slightly more positive unintended consequence: the article Rubbery Figures has now been improved somewhat and saved from deletion. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:51, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

using the file: Датотека:TelekomSrbija-logo.svg in my article

Hello, can you help for me how can I use this picture in my article. When I download this link i resive the mail that this file uncorrect and will be deleted. thanks a lot for your answer Marija W Marinkovic (talk) 11:40, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

The file which you have named in the section header is presumably in another language's Wikipedia, and can't be used here on enwiki. I see that you have uploaded various logo files both to enwiki and to Wikimedia Commons, & declared them to be licenced under creative commons 4.0, but stated that the owner is Telekom Srbija. It isn't, however, clear that you are authorised to give that licence release on behalf of Telekom Srbija. If the company wishes to release copyright, it should follow the process at WP:Donating copyrighted material. What is more usual for company logos is for them to be used under a fair-use exemption, see WP:Logos. It is also not entirely clear why you are creating a new draft article in your user sandbox, rather than updating the existing article at Mts (Telekom Srbija). --David Biddulph (talk) 12:01, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Swahili Wiktionary

Hey, though my question wont be relevant to english wikipedia it was the only place to ask, in swahili wiktionary under swahili wikipedia there is no special way to delete words that are not necessary i was wondering how to remove the words that are not relevant to swahili as there are many. Alvin kipchumba (talk) 12:44, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Alvin kipchumba Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid we can only help you with questions regarding the English Wikipedia; that said, if by 'deleting words' you mean deleting an article, you will need to use whatever process that version of Wikipedia has for doing so. 331dot (talk) 12:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

ThanksAlvin kipchumba (talk) 12:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@Alvin kipchumba: I don't think it was the only place to ask is correct. Each project has it's own help and support facilities, with volunteers interested in and knowledgeable about the project. You should be able to find it from the main page. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:09, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Eagles lifespan

 79.120.177.234 (talk) 12:45, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place to ask questions about using Wikipedia; general questions may be asked at the Reference Desk; we do have a good article on Eagles that may have the information you are looking for. 331dot (talk) 12:46, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Reference

Hi.

How do you add this as a reference?

youtu.be/rJQTqcV12ik?t=9m4s

on YouTube appears failing.Kacziey (talk) 13:20, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Firstly, immediately above where you placed your question, it says: "Please post new questions at the BOTTOM of the page", so I have moved it here.

Secondly, in {{youtube}} it says: "This is not a citation template. Use {{cite AV media}} to provide bibliographic citations in footnotes".

David Biddulph (talk) 13:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks and sorry. Still new here.Kacziey (talk) 13:34, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Same soruce, different number

How do I make that two separate statements sourced by the same source have the same number superscript? 1+1=yes (talk) 13:32, 30 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1+1=yes (talk • contribs)

Instead of the usual <ref>content</ref>, give it a name the first time you use it, like <ref name="myName">content</ref>. For every subsequent use, you can simply put <ref name="myName"/>. Note the extra slash! See WP:REFNAME for more details. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:56, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Failed ping to 1+1=yes. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:59, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok, understood 1+1=yes (talk) 14:00, 30 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1+1=yes (talk • contribs)

Why is this tiny 1+1=yes (talk) 14:04, 30 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1+1=yes (talk • contribs)

@1+1=yes: It's not anymore, I had a misplaced slash myself that I corrected. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 14:36, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

:)

Delete my User:MirahezeGuy/sandbox/1 and a stub template I recently made, they're unnecessary now --MirahezeGuy (talk) 14:17, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@MirahezeGuy: I see you've already request speedy deletion of the page under G7, so it will get deleted in the near future. FYI, you can delete pages under your own userspace (any page that begins with User:MirahezeGuy/...) under U1 as well. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 14:29, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done See WP:REFUND if you ever change your mind, or get in touch. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:09, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Fair use question

Hey! I am working on an article for my company's software. My COI is declared on my user page, and a draft of the article is in my sandbox. I got some good help here last time, so now I'm back for round two. Question: I am trying to upload a logo for the infobox. This is the least detailed one I could find. Can this image be uploaded with the fair use rational that it consists only of simple geometric shapes? If not, do I have a chance of getting it in under some other fair use rational? The image I really wanted to use was this one, but from what I'm seeing there may be little or no chance of getting my preferred image into the article without issuing a license. Thanks in advance for your help. Sam at Megaputer (talk) 14:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sam at Megaputer, welcome back! Fair use applies to logos, I know from WP:FAIRUSE. There is also WP:LOGOS, a whole page about using logos on Wikipedia, that I haven't read but you might want to. WP:MCQ is a venue where you may be able to get help with the difficult questions about using media that you may not always get as well at the Teahouse. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sam at Megaputer. Logos are often uploaded as non-free images in articles about the thing they are the logo for. But non-free content may only be used in articles, not drafts, so you need to wait until your draft has been accepted before you upload it. --ColinFine (talk) 15:37, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

These have been very helpful responses. I'll get the rest of what I need from WP:MCQ. Thanks a lot! Sam at Megaputer (talk) 15:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

A question from Conor

Hello, My name is Conor. I'm doing my first article about a Youtuber named Dream who is known for his Minecraft Skill and his Minecraft Manhunt. I worked about two weeks to get this done, but the previous person who reviewed my article said "Needs more external news sources, not its own website and videos. Do not cite fandom wikia". Dream has little to no news sources who talk about him, in fact most of information came from this fandom wikia which is where most of his information I could found. I only found one news sources that talks about Dream Minecraft Manhunt, And this isn't a few thousand subscribers channel. Dream has over 10 million subscribers on his youtube channel is a well-known across youtube. If you have anything to say to me about this question, please contact me. Thanks and have a nice day. Kingconor62 (talk) 14:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Kingconor62! Per WP:GNG, if there's no independent WP:RS to base a WP-article on, then the topic will not have a WP-article, that's how this place works, and is meant to work. More at Wikipedia:WikiProject YouTube/Notability. But the internet is bigger than WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Kingconor62, Wikipedia needs sources. It does not matter how many subscribers there are if there are no sources. In theory, after you have some sources to support the article and if you have one of them verifying that the subject has X number of subscribers, you ought to be able to argue that Wikipedia should have an article on the subject per WP:ENT which says a person may be Wikipedia notable if they have a large fan base. But even this argument is known almost never to work on discussions about youtubers. Generally, not only need you have sources, but you need to have multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources as described at WP:SIGCOV for such an article to be accepted to Wikipedia. From what you say, I would say the subject is not going to get an article on Wikipedia unless they receive a ton of additional news coverage about their channel first. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:43, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Oki Muraza

I am making an article on Oki Muraza, a world class professor who secured 18 million SAR in a project on chemical engineering. He wrote journals in Indonesian news and currently is teaching at KFUPM. I need help in getting this article draft approved.

Thank you very much... Fikry Muraza (talk) 14:59, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

[edit] He secured a total of $4.8 million USD in research.

References I used are from the University, Indonesian News, and Google scholar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fikry Muraza (talk • contribs) 15:33, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Fikry Muraza, if you read the note left by DGG, you can see they told you that the article needs to pass one of Wikipedia's notability guidelines, WP:PROF. They also told you that, for the draft to pass said guideline, the subject's papers' should be heavily cited by external sources and other research papers. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:12, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Fikry Muraza, yes I was trying to provide a guideline for fixing the article. It had earlier been rejected by another reviewer ,David.moreno72 probably on the basis of the obvious COI. But this is a case where notability is quite likely present nonetheless, and the coi had been properly declared. But the references are not sufficient to show it , either by GNG or WP:PROF. The advice I gave is not the only way to show notability by WP:PROF, but its the usual way, and would be sufficient if the citations are hgih enough. They probably are, so add them. Size of grants, and uncited or vague claims to excellence, are irrelevant. DGG ( talk ) 00:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

My question

Can you add translations? I am bilingual and I would like to help. BaaBaaTheSheep (talk) 16:06, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

BaaBaaTheSheep, Yes you can! Either go to Special:ContentTranslation, or go to your desired page, hover over the contributions link in the toolbar and click Translations. Hope this helps! — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:09, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

But please read Translation first, BaaBaaTheSheep. Translating articles between Wikipedia editions is not always as straightforward as it might appear, because editions have different requirements for sourcing, (and en-wiki has thousands of sub-standard articles which would not be accepted today). When translating into English, I would always advise a translator to treat it the same as any other new article, and use WP:AFC. When translating from English, the standards of the destination edition are important. --ColinFine (talk) 16:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

hello

hi uh Ireallydontcareugh (talk) 16:16, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Ireallydontcareugh, do you have a question? If so feel free to ask. :-) — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:17, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

upload

Im writing about a cartoon how do i upload pictures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foodboy1 (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Foodboy1. You may only upload images which you have taken yourself (and not simply found somewhere the internet). All images are copyright unless there is a very clear and explicit licence statement accompanying them, indicating they are freely re-usable for non-commercial and' commercial use. I would imagine that all images related to cartoons would be copyright and not useable except in very special circumstances known as WP:FAIRUSE. Please tell us what cartoon you hope to write about and link to the image you are desirous of uploading. See Wikipedia:Images for a pageload of other links which might help you find the answers to various image-related questions (including Wikipedia:Uploading images). Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Notability Of Sources

Hello, I wrote a page that was not accepted due to a lack of notability in the sources. I have since added more sources that I think are within Wikipedias guidelines and demonstrate the notability of the subject. I am hoping someone can take a look at these before I submit them for review. If they are not acceptable it would be very helpful to know why.

Here is the page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fundera ClaySmithWiki (talk) 16:38, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@ClaySmithWiki: Would you mind linking here to the additional sources, so as to save others the task of working out which are old and which are new? Thanks. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:53, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hey @Nick Moyes: here are the sources that were added:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaySmithWiki (talk • contribs) 20:20, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much ClaySmithWiki, that did make it a lot easier to assess. Bearing in mind that I have not reviewed the entire article and its sources, but my comment on the four additional ones you've listed in order to meet WP:NCORP is that taken alone or together, they simply don't do it for me. I'm afraid these are really just passing mentions, in one or two sentences, if that - in one case. As a set of four they don't convince me of helping to achieve our notability criteria. That's not to denigrate the work of your business, just that Fundera doesn't appear to have been written about in detail and in depth by non-insider sources - just like so many millions of other companies, I'm afraid. We tend to point people towards this essay on when or if notability might be achieved: WP:TOOSOON. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:34, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

References

Teahouse questions

Wikipedia - relax and enjoy the learning experience with a nice cup of tea, served by one of your friendly Teahouse hosts.

These questions aren't about an article, but the Teahouse itself (unless the Teahouse can be considered an article).

1. Who came up with the name for the Teahouse?

2. Who is the most well known Teahouse user?

3. Can too many questions cause the Teahouse to crash or temporarily shut down?

4. Can someone be banned (temporarily or permanently) from the Teahouse?

It might seem like I'm asking a lot here, but my curiosity tends to get the better of me at times. TheKingCartii (talk) 17:42, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse TheKingCartii. Those are interesting questions. Here are my answers to them:

1. You can read more about the evolution of the Teahouse here
2. I think that Cullen328 is probably the most well known and longest-serving of our hosts.
3. No, too many questions wouldn't cause the Teahouse to crash. That would take a sophisticated and sustained DoS attack. If one person persistently and constantly asked disruptive and frivolous questions we might take take action against them, but that's not something you need worry about.
4. Yes, an editor can have their editing rights withdrawn by an administrator, either across the whole of English Wikipedia, or blocked from just specific parts of it. I can only think of one such time in the last three years that we came close to specifically requiring one editor to stop attempting to answer questions because they had the wrong approach to other users, and were quite blunt and rude in their responses. But anyone can be blocked for a whole range of reasons, including WP:NOTHERE and WP:CIR. Equally, we welcome any editor answering questions (providing they answer in a friendly and helpful manner) - there is no requirement to be a 'Host' in order to help other editors. I hope this slakes your thirst for Teahouse-related knowledge! Nick Moyes (talk) 18:10, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Archivística

¿Trabajan archivistas en Wikipedia? Pelu Digital (talk) 17:53, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Pelu Digital, Hola. Si quieres, preguntas en espanol están permitidos en Wikipedia Espanol. En Wikipedia ingles, usar ingles, por favor. Gracias, WikiMacaroons^Cinnamon? 18:06, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Pelu Digital Si tienes dudas en español mejor dirígete al Café en la Wikipedia en español. Por responder a tu pregunta; no, en Wikipedia no trabaja nadie directamente. Estoy seguro de que hay archivistas que colaboran pero lo hacen de forma voluntaria como todos los demás. No confundas Wikipedia con la Fundación Wikimedia que sí tiene empleados.

Pelu Digital If you have any questions in spanish I suggest you head over to Café at spanish Wikipedia. Now onto your question; no, nobody is employed directly by Wikipedia. While I'm sure archivists collaborate here they do so voluntarily just as everyone else. Wikipedia is not to be confused with the Wikimedia Foundation which does employ people. josecurioso ❯❯❯ Talk to me! 18:29, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@Pelu Digital: But please see Wikipedia:GLAM - which is a collaboration between Wikipedia and Galleries, Libraries, Archives & Museums (hence GLAM). Nick Moyes (talk) 18:56, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Can I use any referencing style or just AMA referencing style?

 AEMA2050 (talk) 18:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello AEMA2050. Many referencing styles are acceptable, but consistency of style should be maintained within an article. Wikipedia:Citing sources discusses this in detail. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:47, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Jello, AEMA2050, and welcome to the Teahouse. In summary, a new article may use any citation stile that provides sufficient information for a reader to verify the source. Basics are the title of the article or work being cited, and the name of the publication in which it appears. Highly desirable are the author of the work (when known), its publication date, the name of the publisher when this adds context, any any relevant identifiers such as an ISBN or a DOI, page number and the language of publication if that is not English.

In an existing article, the existing style should be retained unless three is consensus to make a change, see WP:CITEVAR.

Wikipedia's citation templates output a style known as CS1 or CS2. which is native to Wikipedia, but somewhat similar to Chicago style.

There was recently a decision to deprecate a pure parenthetical style where "(Smith 2012)" without limnls was the sole inline reference text, and bare URLs without details are disfavored and should be corrected.

AMA style is neither required nor prohibited. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:10, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

"fixed bare ref" ?

I just had someone edit a reference that I added. He said he "fixed bare ref". He added a bunch of details - website, language, title, stuff like that. Is that required? So far I just put the "ref" tag on either side of a URL because I thought that was fine, but I guess someone "fixed" my "bare ref" so I wanted to know if I should be doing it that way. Wes sideman (talk) 18:33, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

For advice about dealng with bare URLs, see WP:Bare URLs. David Biddulph (talk) 18:35, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you David! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wes sideman (talk • contribs) 18:40, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Wes sideman The page David linked too might seem a bit heavy-going. But, yes please, always try and make your references as good and as complete as possible. This is especially helpful when a website owner changes their site's layout and page titling. It may look like a dead link, but a simple Google search on the article title (assuming it was given) often allows one to find an up-to-date, functional version. The 'Cite' button in either of our our editing tools gives you some really easy-to-use templates for main types of citations (books, news, journals and websites, though there are plenty of others). To become a great Wikipedian you really need to know how to add good references as these are the hidden, but highly valuable gems inside every article. So take a look at either of these two introductory pages - WP:REFBEGIN or WP:ERB - for some really simple instructions. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:04, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@Wes sideman: The URL is actually among the least important parts of a good citation because of search engines. Many citations, especially older ones, are to print sources that are not online at all. The exact parameters to use vary depending on the type of cite: author (first and last name), title, date, and publisher are the key points; if it's online, add the URL and use website instead of publisher unless they are different; journals or print newspapers, add the volume and issue number (and ISSN if available); books, add the ISBN (prefer the 13-digit version); etc. The cite tool lets you retrieve a lot of the information automatically for URL, doi, and ISBN (with the magnifying glass icons, as shown in Nick's WP:ERB), but beware that it can often be wrong or incomplete, so please be sure you verify/supplement the results if you use that feature. Thanks for caring! —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:20, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Gotcha. I have started using the "templates" drop-down menu thanks to the links Nick Moyes provided - very helpful. Wes sideman (talk) 11:55, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

I am new to wikipedia. How can I help contribute to Wikipedia?

I want to make a article, but I'd like to learn more about utilizing Wikipedia's resources before I do so. How can I help edit articles without accidentally impeding on the current progress being made by other more experienced users? Ngblue (talk) 18:47, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ngblue: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for wanting to make it better. To start, try the interactive learning game at WP:ADVENTURE. It will teach you some of the basics to help get you started. RudolfRed (talk) 19:10, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ngblue: The 'Help Out' section at Wikipedia:Community portal is then worth visiting for suggestions of different types of editing. Just like driving a car for the first time, take it slowly and gently at first to avoid accidents. Simple fixes of spelling, grammar, or adding citations are all great ways to start improving articles. Remember, never add anything from your own personal knowledge - always base it on reliable, published sources so that someone else can verify what you add. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:25, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Which UW to use?

Which user warning should I use when an editor continues to use unreliable sources after a reversal? Shadowrvn728 (talk) 21:49, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi,Shadowrvn728. There is a list of templates at Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace. Bear in mind you don't have to use templates; if none of them fit the bill just use your own words.

I don't have a specific template recommendation for you, but WP:BRD and WP:3RR are useful pages to read and share. BRD isn't a policy but it is a useful practice. Regards, Zindor (talk) 23:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

If the dispute becomes an edit war, you can post at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Remember that starting a discussion on the article's talk page, and seeking a third opinion, can help prevent edit warring. Hope that helps, Zindor (talk) 23:28, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Mt. Lyell and 5 subpeaks - History and Proposed change of direction

Mt. Lyell has 5 subpeaks, 3 of which have their own articles L5, L4 and L3. I tried to create another article (for L2) and was told I should write it up as a part of the Mt. Lyell article. I suggest making the Mt. Lyell text only for L2 as part of Mt. Lyell would be silly, without rewriting/'dearticalizing' L5, L4 and L3 as well. My issue is that it's a lot more work to re-do all 4 articles and I'd hate to do that, only to have some other WP authority who likes the fact that each subpeak has its own article and asks that I change it back from one article to 5 (or technically, 4, since L1 doesn't yet have a presence in WP).

So, can I get a second (or more) opinion on this proposed direction of 1 article each for the Peak and all 5 subpeaks to just 1 article, please? BrettA343 (talk) 22:59, 30 September 2020 (UTC) BrettA343 (talk) 22:59, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, BrettA343, welcome to the Teahouse.

The peaks are prominent, and distinct from each other, so it's understandable why they've ended up on separate pages. However there's barely any content in these articles, and there aren't any strong claims made for independent significance.

There's a pretty low bar when it comes to the notability criteria for named geographic features, but it would be a disservice to our readers to have this small amount of information spread over several pages. I'm of the opinion that the content of the sub-peak articles should all be merged into Mount_Lyell_(Canada), and those pages turned into redirects. Regards, Zindor (talk) 00:09, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

I'd be interested to hear other opinions on this too. Although I note that perhaps we should move to the article's talk page if this does venture into a discussion. Zindor (talk) 00:15, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks muchly Zindor. I'll wait to see if we get more opinions, but I'm thinking just one article is a good direction as long as people can search on the 3 or 4 subpeaks. BrettA343 (talk) 06:53, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Help. New editor being harassed while trying to learn how to positively contribute.

I am a new editor and am working on making positive grammar improvements to pages. I am an aspiring editor professionally. In searching for pages related to my interests in artificial intelligence I found a page of a biography of Joanne Pransky. The page's notability had been challenged multiple times by another editor. I attempted to strengthen the page's notability, The page was obscure and had an average of 5 visitors a day. After my edits were erased, I placed a discussion on the talk page if the page should be questioned for factual information. Immediately, I was attacked and now threatened with being blocked and informed my grammar contributions to pages are a waste of time.

Perhaps, I am not a cultural fit for Wiki? I thought asking questions and posting on talk pages was the correct way to conduct myself. Will veteran editors look at my contribution page and talk page and let me know what I am doing wrong or if I am being unfairly attacked by two other editors? I appreciate the help and feedback.

I put down the stick on the Joanne Pransky page because I was threatened to be blocked. I read the best action is to back away and I have run away from the page.

RobotDaneellives (talk) 00:04, 1 October 2020 (UTC) RobotDaneellives (talk) 00:04, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello RobotDaneellives. You asked for opinions and so I will give you mine. You say that your main goal is to make "positive grammar improvements to pages". However, when I review your contributions, I see a two week campaign to belittle and chip away at the reputation of Joanne Pransky. Over and over and over again, you make contentious edits about Pransky with lengthy repetitive edit summaries that make it clear to me that you are negatively obsessed with Pransky for some strange reason. So, this has nothing to do with "grammar". You say that you have dropped the stick and I hope that you are telling the truth because otherwise you are on a glide path toward a block. On another matter, you say "I am an aspiring editor professionally". Well, I think you need to do a lot of work on your spelling in particular, but more generally on your ability to express yourself concisely and clearly. Your edit summaries are really quite strange to me. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:54, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Pinging David notMD, who will know more about this. In the meantime, one little question for you, RobotDaneellives. In one of your edit summaries, you write "we are having a difficult time editing the page even with the help of some great help from an editor on this page who we have thanked". Why "we" rather than "I"? -- Hoary (talk) 01:56, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both for your feedback. David notMD informed that working with others support is fine but bad form to saw we on Wiki editing. I am a university student and we were assigned to edit pages and show that we improved the validity, reliability, and grammar of multiple pages. In retrospect, it appears I pulled the short straw getting this page. I was assigned to seek truth and fact and to journal how I experienced support and success in improving the Wiki project by being a positive contributor. Based on the feedback, I have much to improve and will work on improving. I am the only editor and have a group of critical friends in the class who discuss my edits and assess the feedback I receive from other editors. I know that using the term we is not good form and I stopped using this term in my edits. Hoary I hope this answers your question and thank you for your patience. I tried based on the feedback to contribute a webpage of this individual as a positive contribution as the father of robotics is quoted on the site praising her greatness. This is my last edit of the page. I surrender! I hope my last contribution is a positive entry. I also included it on the talk page.

--RobotDaneellives (talk) 07:39, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Early on in these exchanges, I had advised RobotDaneellives to cease with the "we" and that the function of Edit summaries was to provide a SHORT description of what was edited. Success on the first, not so much the second. I continue to believe that R's edits were in good faith, not vandalism, and not edit warring, but also believe that there was a focus, verging on obsession, with attacking the Joanne Pransky article and all mentions of her at various lists, over whether she can be described as "expert." Hence my monitoring R's contributions. David notMD (talk) 08:02, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Comment. I believe that RobotDaneellives has indeed pulled a short straw here. It must be hard to improve an article on a self-proclaimed expert while not noticing that her reputation is unwarranted. Maproom (talk) 08:14, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

RobotDaneellives If you are still reading...One way to enrich and improve an article is to read the sources already provided. There appears to be additional information in TechRepublic which is not reflected in the article, and TR seems to be the best source for the article. Adding this (positive, “supportive”) information would be a benefit. Hope this helps, for future editing. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 22:23, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Maproom Our comments (or at least mine) were too late, blocked at 20:42, 1 October 2020 (UTC). Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 06:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

article editing question

Hi. I wanted to edit the Wikipedia article on Acoustic droplet ejection (ADE). The references listed are not very complete. I know that there was a special issue of the journal, Journal of Laboratory Automation, that focused on acoustic droplet ejection that explained in much greater depth how ADE works, providing equations, graphs, etc. that would be too much for Wikipedia. I wanted to add a single sentence mentioning the issue and link it to a reference.

Jerm felt that it was too much of a soapbox for the journal. Here is where you can see what Jerm said:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:GiuseppeAlexander. I really just want to make the article better. I do not want to stand on a soapbox for the journal. And the issue covers instruments from both companies that made ADE systems.

Am I completely out of line or do I just need to reformulate my text to add this useful citation?

Here is the citation I wanted to add: Special issue: Advancing Scientific Innovation with Acoustic Droplet Ejection. Journal of Laboratory Automation 21.1 (2016):1-216. https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/jlac/21/1 .

Thanks GiuseppeAlexander (talk) 00:45, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Added header to the question to separate it. RudolfRed (talk) 00:54, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@GiuseppeAlexander: Sounds like a perfect use for an external link. Just add an "External links" section after the References section:

== External links ==
* {{Cite journal |...}}

—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:59, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Nigeria's Independence day

Hello, please how do I put or nominate this article Independence Day or just inform the administrators that today is Nigeria's Independence day and it should be featured on the column 'On this day' on Wikipedia's homepage? Thanks Josedimaria237 (talk) 01:15, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237: Place a request at Wikipedia_talk:Selected_anniversaries/October_1. If its not selected for this year, see Wikipedia:Selected_anniversaries#Steps_for_suggesting_new_listings to suggest it for next time. RudolfRed (talk) 01:27, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Baseless accusations of sockpuppetry

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

This is now being discussed at WP:ANI#Baseless accusations of sockpuppetry from User:Albertheditor and that's where any further comments should be added since that's where it's going to need to be resolved. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:28, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

---

User:Albertheditor is claiming that two other users are my sockpuppets. What should be done in this situation, should it be taken to WP:ANI? SevenSpheresCelestia (talk) 02:01, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Not really, I didn't mention 'sockpuppet' at any time. I just had the founded suspicion that you were using 2 accounts, which, as I later added, it's allowed by Wikipedia: Anyone who uses multiple accounts in good faith is not violating any policies, shall face no action— Preceding unsigned comment added by Albertheditor (talk • contribs) 02:06, 1 October 2020 (UTC+9) (UTC)

So let me rephrase then, you're baselessly claiming that I'm using multiple accounts. SevenSpheresCelestia (talk) 02:11, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

What the... he's just reported me on four admin talk pages?? SevenSpheresCelestia (talk) 02:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Nope. I asked them to review your article after you reversed the edit I made without reaching consensus in the TalkPage. Cheers.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Albertheditor (talk • contribs) 03:03, 1 October 2020 (UTC+9) (UTC)

You claimed that I am ConnallES, which is not the case. SevenSpheresCelestia (talk) 03:04, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

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

Infobox for Maddie Ziegler

Maddie Ziegler’s article doesn’t have an infobox. I’m a new user, and I don’t really know how Wikipedia works. Can someone please add it for me, or teach me how to create an infobox? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazychickennthang (talk • contribs) 02:05, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Crazychickennthang: I see you already posted about this on the article's talk page, which is the best way to discuss it so you get get consensus with other editors. RudolfRed (talk) 02:07, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Regarding recently deceased persons

How do I properly reference a recently deceased person on their article page? Please provide exact format and what counts as a "reliable source". The one I added was removed, so I'm not sure if I correctly understand. MokshaVRao (talk) 03:46, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome, MokshaVRao. It would have been fine simply referring to the announcement on her official website of her death. But you expanded the page about Rajee Narayan wih 14,000+ bytes of uncited and badly-referenced content. Stick to one factual statement supported by one reference. Avoid flowery prose and bare urls, too please. See WP:REFBEGIN for how to add full citation details. Nick Moyes (talk) 04:22, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Technical Advice

How do you add a line break in your personal links tab at the very top right? I have a lot of links and want to make them even, is this possible? Heart ^(talk) 04:36, 1 October 2020 (UTC) Heart ^(talk) 04:36, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@HeartGlow30797: assuming you use vector as your skin (the default) this is not possible because of the way the skin works internally. If you use a different skin, you can tell me that and I have a look. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:12, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Editing Reference Section

Hello, can some volunteer to edit reference section for my draft article. I want add the particular page number in my reference document. In the reference section of my draft article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Laborate_Pharmaceuticals_India_Limited Reference number 2. I want to add the particular page number for this document. The page numbers are 65 and 66. Please add these page numbers to Reference number 2. Good day Allin96 (talk) 04:41, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Allin96:  Done see changes. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:09, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Victor Schmidt mobilAllin96 (talk) 06:20, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a newspaper - When to post a name

I have been editing an article about a school district that is currently experiencing a scandal alleging long-standing sex abuse of students by teachers. I added a section about the scandal. Someone was just arrested tonight, and he was identified in multiple news outlets. I added his name to the article because it is public information, but I would like to consult policies that discuss the guidelines about how to keep Wikipedia encyclopedic, since it is not a newspaper. Could someone please direct me to guidelines that discuss what to include and what not to include in an article? Also, are there policies that discuss editor liability for defamation? Thank you. – Kekki1978 talk 04:50, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Omit the name. See WP:BLP1E and WP:CRIME. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 07:00, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Jéské Couriano Thanks for the links. They were helpful. I removed the name. Regards. – Kekki1978 talk 08:26, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Quran In Multi-Language and Mystery of Digit [19] By Adnan

Hi:

I developed from home a C# ASP.NET Xamarin.Android application and mobile-app proposed for use by Religious educational institutions. In its present form, the application solution can be used to present/search the holy Quran in multiple languages (49) in addition to calculation of numerical values for the Arabic alphabets for Quran's verses, using 19-digit system, to extract the hidden meanings of Quran's verses. The application concept it can be developed for the holy Bible and Torah in the future.

I believe this program gave a lot of answers which can be seen by Millions of Muslims and later Christian and Jewish when I developed the Holy Bible and Torah solution.

1) I want to publish the documentation 2) A website that can be used like Google or Wikipedia 3) What is the charges Alimusa893 (talk) 06:14, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Alimusa893. This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Do you have a question of this kind? -- Hoary (talk) 07:08, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Articles to be worked on by high schoolers

Hi everyone. I'm an English teacher at a cram school in a non-English speaking country and I'm considering having my students, who are returnee junior high schoolers and high schoolers, work on improving articles on Wikipedia. I've taken a look at Articles for improvement to come up with a list of articles students can contribute to, but I was wondering if you have any suggestions on what would be suitable for them to write about. Any help is appreciated. Thank you. ~★ nmaia ^d 06:56, 1 October 2020 (UTC) ~★ nmaia ^d 06:56, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello @NMaia: and welcome to the Teahouse! Using Wikipedia editing as an educational tool involves more than just finding articles for them to work on. There is a resource for educators here which I recommend that you familiarise yourself with, including a noticeboard especially for discussing student assignments. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 07:15, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Bonadea:, thank you for the link! I'll be sure to check it out. ~★ nmaia ^d 07:33, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

To me, mention of "returnee" students suggests Japan. If so, "returnees" will be able to write much faster than domestically-educated Japanese teens, but (for various reasons) not necessarily any better. And while conventional Japanese (mis-) education may (over-) emphasize fastidiousness (certainly a requirement for genuine improvement), the education of "returnees" is perhaps less likely to do so. While I don't doubt your or your pupils' good intentions, would you be able to oversee their work while the work is being carried out? ¶ The thing is, I've often been underwhelmed by the fruits of similarly well-intended class efforts at the undergraduate level (and seemingly by users of English as a first language). -- Hoary (talk) 07:22, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it would be overseen by teachers. Their English is by no means perfect, and that is part of the point of this exercise, to have them improve their writing skills. So nothing would go live without thorough proofreading. ~★ nmaia ^d 07:33, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Your project already sounds more appealing. I wish you all the best with it. -- Hoary (talk) 07:52, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

FWIW I've noticed that articles about Indian films and Indian actors tend to need work on spelling and grammar and seem to be neglected by regular editors.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:25, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Independence Day

I requested that Nigeria's Independence Day be featured on Wikipedia's homepage here, but when I checked the main page, it was ineligible, the reason being "refimprove section". What does that mean? Josedimaria237 (talk) 09:19, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Josedimaria237. I don't see where you got that message, but it is referring to the template Template:refimprove-section, which is tag that can be added to sections of articles to mark that their referencing is not adequate. --ColinFine (talk) 09:54, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

/* Very Cool People */ info about the band musicians

Could anybody help me and check my article about the Latvian band Very Cool People https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Very_Cool_People and give me comment on improvement. Why isn't the musical notability criteria is satisfied? I guess I have met all the criteria. Help me, please! Thank you in advance.

Aiga Aiga Liva (talk) 09:26, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Aiga Liva Which of the musical notability criteria do you claim this band meets? 331dot (talk) 09:33, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Aiga Liva (talk) Hey! Thank you for the question, in my opinion, they meet 5 notable criteria:

4.Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.[note 4] - They are one of the most active Latvian concert bands also outside the country. They have represented Latvia in several international important events that I have mentioned also in the article

6.Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles.[note 5] This should be adapted appropriately for the musical genre; for example, having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. Note that this criterion needs to be interpreted with caution, as there have been instances where this criterion was cited in a circular manner to create a self-fulfilling notability loop (e.g. musicians who were "notable" only for having been in two bands, of which one or both were "notable" only because those musicians had been in them.)

7. Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.

11. Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.

12. Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or television network. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aiga Liva (talk • contribs) 06:58, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping 331dot. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:04, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Adding tags to a draft

Hi, I am writing an article https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Draft:Phil_Coy&oldid=976360918 and in order to help the process I want to "add tags to a draft" This process reveals the error: Please check the draft page title. It doesn't seem to be in draft namespace

I would be grateful if someone could explain how to edit the draft so that it is 'in draft namespace'

many thanks

D Silly soul (talk) 09:49, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Silly soul. Draft:Phil Coy is indeed in draft space, as its name begins with "Draft:". I don't know what you mean about adding tags to a draft: "tags" are usually templates such as those in Category:Cleanup templates which editors add to existing articles to mark particular ways in which the articles are in need of improvement. Did somebody tell you you needed to add something? --ColinFine (talk) 09:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: thanks for looking at this, that's good to know that the article is already in the draft space (i thought it was!). I was following one of the suggestions "Improving your odds of a speedy review" which suggests 'add tags to your draft' Silly soul (talk) 10:31, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, Silly soul. Right - that's talking about WikiProject tags - you can add them to bring the draft to the notice of members of those WikiProjects (I wasn't aware of this advice, but it makes sense). I've never seen the page WP:WikiProject Articles for creation/Add WikiProject tags before, but my guess is that it wants you to give the whole page title "Draft:Phil Coy". Did you perhaps just give "Phil Coy"? (I'm only guessing). --ColinFine (talk) 10:36, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: thanks for your advice, I changed to "Draft:Phil Coy" and it allowed me to add the tags! Silly soul (talk) 13:34, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

wikimedia statistics

Hey, does anyone now the website to wikimedia statistics Alvin kipchumba (talk) 10:39, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Alvin kipchumba: Google does! See here. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:27, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Alvin kipchumba (talk) 14:23, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Alvin kipchumba: I'm not sure what that means, but does this link help? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:46, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Alvin kipchumba: Likewise - I am also unclear what you mean. You're now mentioning Wikipedia, not Wikimedia, so maybe WP:STATS is what you're after? Nick Moyes (talk) 15:31, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

ThanksAlvin kipchumba (talk) 20:03, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Edit

How to edit a page with proper manner 2409:4043:2099:1AC9:0:0:2AAA:28AC (talk) 10:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I can think of different interpretations of your question; can you provide more information? Is there a certain article you are attempting to edit, or do you just want to know how to edit in general? 331dot (talk) 12:03, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

How I edit a page with proper manner that it doesn't get remove and it didn't create any problems for the editors. 2409:4043:2099:1AC9:0:0:2AAA:28AC (talk) 14:09, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

I've placed your response here; please edit this existing section to make further replies, to avoid the discussion being in several locations. Have you previously made edits that were removed? It will be easier to help you if you reference a particular situation. 331dot (talk) 14:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

See WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:08, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Disney family page.

HELLO FRIENDS! As I am new at being a Wikipedia contributor, I need your kind assistance. I am updating some information and all I desire to do is the exact correct manner in making additions to Wikipedia content!

I want to add the name of the second son of Raymond Arnold Disney to the Family Tree section. His name should be included alongside of his brother who is Charles Elias Disney, as he is the second son of Raymond Arnold Disney and Meredith A. Disney. Can you update this Family Tree chart page showing the second son? His name should correctly show as Daniel H. Disney (1956-) There are references to his name on both of his parents actual Find A Grave pages: Raymond Arnold Disney Memorial # 6782179 and Meredith A. Boyington Disney Memorial # 7319432. Also, personal information for Daniel H. Disney is shown on www.danieldisney.com

Please reply when possible when you have made this update!

Thank you so much for your help! I send you my best regards!

(Mary Hunt 2020 (talk) 11:08, 1 October 2020 (UTC)).

Sincerely, Mary Hunt.2020 Mary Hunt 2020 (talk) 11:08, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Mary Hunt 2020 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The best place to make this sort of request is at the talk page of the article, Talk:Disney family. I will note that Find A Grave is not considered a reliable source as its content is user-generated. 331dot (talk) 11:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Northern Middle School

Hello or Bonjour! I would like to make a page about my previous Middle school (Northern Middle School, I am confused on how to create a page for that my town (Hagerstown MD) Already has a page and I feel as if it’s my duty to work on my towns presence on Wikipedia. AviaWilliamEdits (talk) 12:31, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

AviaWilliamEdits Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Successfully creating a new article is the hardest thing to do on Wikipedia. It takes much time and practice. You will greatly increase your chances of success if you first spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content.

A school merits an article if it gets significant coverage in independent reliable sources showing how it meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. If you can do that, you should use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review by another editor before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 14:02, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Help with removing a stub template

About 3 years ago I started expanding the article Charles Stuart (painter)] classed as a Stub (on Pageviews) . If it seems reasonable, I would like to remove the stub template. Unfortunately, I cannot find it. Can anyone help? BFP1BFP1 (talk) 13:05, 1 October 2020 (UTC) BFP1 (talk) 13:05, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

There was no stub template in the main article, but there was a stub rating on the talk page. I fixed it for you here. That's how you fix that problem. --Jayron32 13:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Jayron32 BFP1 (talk) 15:22, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Transfermarkt and Reliability

Why isn't Transfermarkt a reliable source?

I put it in an article and an admin deleted the source saying "Transfermarkt isn't reliable" Can someone please explain? Neverbuffed (talk) 13:12, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia has guidance on what a reliable source is. You can find it at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. What criteria listed there do you believe qualifies Transfermarkt as a reliable source? --Jayron32 13:17, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Neverbuffed This has been discussed many times by football project, the reliable sources noticeboard discussion can be seen at WP:TRANSFERMARKT (but we discussed this again at WT:FOOTY a few months ago). Transfermarkt is user-generated content, and so not a reliable source. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:28, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Notable criterias ?

Hello !

I would like to create a Wikipedia page about an artist (Sarah Coponat) I follow on social/streaming platforms such as Twitch, Spotify... She is a Twitch Partner (Top 1% of all active streamers on the platform), her live streams on Reddit often gather 150k+ views and she has about 160k monthly listeners on Spotify at the moment, 7K instagram.

Her work hasn't been featured in movies nor as she gotten any large awards to my knowledge although she did perform live twice on minor french Tv shows, but her live stream stats are definitely consequential and she has built a fairly big fan base.

Upon reading the notability guidelines, I am not sure whether those stats would be enough to make an article about her. Could a more experience writer give advice here? 2A01:CB1C:8032:4300:C496:7CE1:A4D1:3F15 (talk) 13:31, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. To merit a Wikipedia article, a subject must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about the subject, and those sources must demonstrate how the subject meets the special Wikipedia definition of (in this case) a notable person. Viewership or social media follower numbers are not a part of the notability criteria, as they are easily gamed(is it one person who watched the video 10,000 times, or one person registering multiple accounts?) among other reasons. A person can have 5 social media followers and merit an article, and can have 5 billion and not merit one. It depends on the coverage in independent reliable sources. "Significant coverage" does not include press releases, interviews with the subject, or other primary sources. If they do not have significant coverage in independent sources, they would not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 13:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Aiv

What is AIV?Acidic Carbon (Corrode) (Organic compounds)-&nbsp —Preceding undated comment added 13:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Acid Of Carbon Hello and welcome. AIV refers to Administrator intervention against vandalism, which is where vandals can be reported. 331dot (talk) 13:54, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Acid Of Carbon: On Wikipedia, when someone use a two or three letter initialism that (from context) clearly refers to something on-wiki, and you want to know what it means, the easiest thing to do to is to search for it with the prefix WP: (in this case, WP:AIV) using the search box at the top of every page. You'll see it's a valid link in the list of suggestions and, if you go to it, you'll find out what it means. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:25, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Maryland

So I was just looking at some items in the Wikipedia namespace and from there I ended up at Maryland. I went to the edit history and saw what looks like a weird bug. The third oldest (go to the very first edits to the page) edit removed 84,860 (or was it 86,840?) BYTES of code according to the edit history.

Is there any explanation for this discrepancy? 45.251.33.149 (talk) 14:20, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

There is a known issue with revision histories in the earliest days of Wikipedia (~2001). Someone at WP:VPT may be able to provide details (or maybe search there for discussion), but I wouldn't worry about it. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:32, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks AlanM1 ! 45.251.33.149 (talk) 16:00, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

uploading an audio file

hey, i have a problem uploading my audio it keeps saying error cannot upload audio Alvin kipchumba (talk) 14:20, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Alvin kipchumba. That is like phoning a garage and saying "I have a problem starting my car, it keeps just not starting". Nobody can help you unless you explain what you are trying to do (and where), and exactly what happens. In particular:

• What format of audio file?
• What is the copyright status of the file?
• Where are you trying to upload it to?
• What tool are you using to upload it?
• What is the exact error message you get?

--ColinFine (talk) 14:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

• copyright status= Oct 1,2020
• i am trying to upload it to show how to pronounce a word
• i am using the tool made while editing the page at the top
• the message keeps on saying -error cannot upload filethis wiki does not accept files with this extension.3gpp.

Alvin kipchumba (talk) 15:08, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Alvin kipchumba:

1. To where are you trying to upload the file? Please provide the URL (a link to the page).

2. For which English Wikipedia article is this?

3. Who/what is the reliable source for this file? If you want to say (in Wikipedia's voice) that this is how to pronounce a word, it needs to be from a reliable source. By "copyright status", we mean, "is this audio file freely licensed?". Does the copyright owner consent to it being re-used by anyone with modification for any purpose, including commercial?

Please also see WP:INDENT for how we try to keep talk pages organized. I indented the above for you. Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 15:37, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

thanks for the linkAlvin kipchumba (talk) 18:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Publish my track listing

I just want to publish my track listing for my mixtapes and albums on wikipedia. I don't write anything about my works that is biased, I only state information that anyone can find. Can you guys help me make my articles about my music. I only want to write out the track listing that's it. Blakestyle (talk) 14:59, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Blakestyle Wikipedia is not a web host for your music, nor is it a place for you to tell the world about yourself, please see the autobiography policy. If you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician and receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources, an independent editor will eventually take note of your career and choose to write about you. Also keep in mind that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 15:03, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Editing our English entry

Hi everyone! We are the European Theatre Convention, a network for public theatres in Europe. This is a non-profit organisation. We prepared a description of our network and its activities but it apparently sounds too much like an advertisement. We are all ears to see how we can avoid this, unfortunately we don't really see how? We have read and tried to include all advice from your community, and are now a bit stuck. Would anyone have experience and would give us a few hints on how to improve our entry? Thanks a lot!

The draft in question: Draft:European Theatre Convention  Joséphine ETC (talk) 15:44, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Joséphine ETC Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would suggest that you avoid using "we", as it makes it sound like multiple people have access to your account. You will need to review the paid editing and conflict of interest policies for information on formal disclosures you may be required to make.

Your draft was rejected because it does little more than describe what your group does. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about(in this case) an organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Wikipedia is not interested in what an organization wants to say about itself, only in what others have chosen on their own to say about it(no press releases, staff interviews, announcements of routine transactions, etc.) Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 15:49, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Is editing grammar and spelling a minor or major change?

Is editing grammar and spelling a minor or major change? I would think major if you're reformatting an entire section of text from list to prose, for example, but what about things like your -> you're or a misplaced comma? AlexMozzarella (talk) 16:09, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

For help on the definition of a minor edit, try reading Help:minor edit. David Biddulph (talk) 16:19, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

ROBLOX Corporation

Hello nice to meet you! I want ask how to do new topic I created some information about ROBLOX Corp. But when i am searching it i can find it here is a link (Hello from Azerbaijan) Animelover0001 (talk) 16:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

(After adding section heading) You appear to want to translate the existing article in English Wikipedia at Roblox. That's fine but better done in your sandbox rather than on your talk page. When re-creating the article on another language Wikipedia, you should acknowledge the English WP as the source of the original text etc. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 17:08, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Animelover0001: Since the company is pretty much known only for one thing, it's probably best to just slightly expand the information about the company that is already in the article about its product, Roblox. If you want to do a major expansion of that page, please consider discussing it on Talk:Roblox first.

Also, this is the English Wikipedia. If you are translating from another language's Wikipedia, please read WP:Translation first.

Also, please remove the content on your user page and user talk page that are "about" Roblox. You can copy the content to a user subpage or your personal sandbox if you like. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:05, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Pages for new users to edit

Question moved from another section to its own. Giraffer ^munch 16:25, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

What pages should be recommended for new users to edit?InsulinRS (talk) 16:20, 1 October 2020 (UTC) InsulinRS (talk) 16:20, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

InsulinRS Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, and thanks for wanting to contribute. I don't know if I would say there are particular articles for new users to edit, but I would suggest that a good way to approach your activities here is to start small, say with looking for spelling or grammatical issues to correct, and work your way up to more substantive edits and creating articles(if you wish to, it's not required that you create articles). You can find suggestions of articles to edit for various issues at the Community Portal. 331dot (talk) 16:51, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@InsulinRS: Probably one of the best places for new users to start is by doing copy-edits on any page. Clicking the "random page" link on the left, or Special:Random if you are on a mobile browser, will take you to a random article. Look for typos or clearly out of date information and fix it. Be careful about things like dates and spelling variations, as they are not necessarily errors in need of correction. See WP:Manual of style for details.

Another place to start is by finding an article on a topic you like, go to the talk page, and see what "Wikiprojects" it is in. Look for other articles in those Wikiprojects that you might like.

Until you get the "hang of things" it might be better to hold off adding new material or making other content changes. You can always suggest a content change on an article's talk page to see if others have comments. Just say you are new and you want feedback, then say what you think needs changing.

Also, be sure to be very careful if you are editing an article which "hits close to home." See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for more details on that.

I hope this helps. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:57, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Created

Hey everyone, I have currently created a wikipedia page and published it. However it got declined, and I was wondering if there is anyone here who could help me or giving me an advice of how to get my wiki page published?

Thank you in advance.

Marcel 2A00:23C7:A882:3600:C844:A724:F55C:31EE (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse; there are no edits from your IP address other than your comment here, so I assume you have an account you made the draft with; please log in to your account before posting. 331dot (talk) 16:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Is there a policy for listing films in episode lists?

I'm currently in a minor dispute on List of South Park episodes over whether the film should be mentioned somewhere on the page. I brought up List of The Simpsons episodes as having had a consensus to include its film on its list, along with List of SpongeBob SquarePants episodes as, while not including the films on the table, does mention them on the bottom of the page, but I was redirected to WP:OSE by one user while another removed any mention of the film on List of South Park characters. Is there some sort of policy on whether or not to mention films on episode list pages? Unnamed anon (talk) 17:52, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Unnamed anon: I doubt it – that seems far too specific for policy. To me, an "episode list" page is a list of episodes of the TV series (or other episodic production), a thing that is entirely separate from any film, book, amusement park attraction, etc. based on the same concept. That's why we have other pages for those things, and usually a page that lists them all. WT:TV is probably a more focused place to ask or search for past discussion. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:37, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

While @User:AlanM1 is partially correct, there has already been an rfc on it. My suggestion to you, @Unnamed anon, is to direct the users who disagree with you to the rfc at Talk:List of The Simpsons episodes/Archive 2. There was consensus to include them in that rfc. Hope this helps! Ghinga7 (talk) 19:59, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ghinga7 and Unnamed anon: The complete link to the RfC is Talk:List of The Simpsons episodes/Archive 2#RfC: Inclusion of Simpsons Movie.

I disagree with the finding of consensus there. The only argument to keep is basically "these other articles do it that way", which doesn't seem like it's supposed to be a valid argument in these types of discussions, is it? It was also suggested that a wider community RfC be conducted at WT:TV, but the only mention of the subject there is the notification of that Simpsons RfC (six years ago). OTOH, I don't think it's that big a deal. A couple of "include" votes suggested that it should not be in the table with the episodes, but instead mentioned in a subsection or other convenient place in the prose of the article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:31, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree that there should be a wider rfc, but for now, we should keep the status quo, which is that every single episode list, save for a few, includes movies that are part of the series.

On your second point, yeah, there were a lot of "every other article does this, why change now?" !votes, but there were also some very well-thought out ones, such as the last one. Ghinga7 (talk) 20:51, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Citing content from other wikipedia Articles

Hello, while I was browsing the recent changes list today I came upon this edit to which I reverted. The IP user stated on my Talk page that the edit was referenced via this Wikipedia article, as it is a direct copy-paste from it. However, this statement in the Boeing 737 article is also missing a reference, and would like to request guidance on what the proper course of action is here. Thanks! Transcendental36 (talk) 18:14, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Transcendental36, you were correct to revert the edit, as you cannot cite Wikipedia in another Wikipedia article, Wikipedia being a tertiary and self-published source. As well as that, if the IP copied content from another article, they should have placed {{Copied}} on both the relevant pages. Hope this helps! — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 19:18, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

New page patrol

Hey, I created this article Pakundia Adarsha Mohila College 10 days ago. I've noticed that the page has not been patrolled yet and hence does not appear in Google Search. Is there any way to request someone to get this page patrolled? Cheers. Userths (talk) 18:14, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Userths, the new pages backlog for articles is currently about 4 months long. Someone will get around to reviewing it eventually, just be patient. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:19, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Is writing articles hard?

I have noticed that many articles are often written by a single person, and are quite comprehensive and include many references and are published as a single edit. What does it take to write an article like this? How much time does it take? Does it require reading all of the references completely? How to choose which details to discuss and where to find all that knowledge? I have seen many articles that seem to be published by students, for an assignment in university, i would guess, they make an account, publish an article with one edit, and never come back again. But then, there are also people who create so many articles that they have to make several user subpages to list them all. Is the process followed by a student the same as the one followed by experienced Wikipedia editor who publishes massive amounts of articles? Is there some trick, or some strategy, that can explain how to write good articles quickly? 37.225.46.209 (talk) 19:02, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! Different articles are written at different qualities and you shouldn't be aiming for the same level of experienced editors who have created thousands of articles. Generally creating articles isn't that hard, but requires you to put a bit of effort into it. Often pages are deleted for not being notable, and it is important to make sure the article you create passes notability guidelines. I suggest having a read of my first article and submitting your draft through the Articles for Creation process, to get constructive criticism and feedback on the draft. Hope this helps! — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 19:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:MFA doesn't answer the question whether the editors do indeed read all the sources all the way through. Most articles have dozens of sources, many of which are books. Is it necessary to read all the books completely? I was never sure if people who write articles do actually do this.37.225.46.209 (talk) 20:53, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Sometimes, you won't have access to the whole book. You just have to look at the portion you're citing so you're not randomly citing books and websites that don't talk about what your article says. Ghinga7 (talk) 21:05, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

User page bling

I would love to add on my user page some of the items WormTT uses in the right column of his page, e.g. education level, etc.

Also, I'd like to display on my user page my edit stats, similar to how Beeblebrox displays his admin stats.

Are there templates for this stuff? Ad Meliora (talk) 19:26, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Ad Meliora, you are able to press the "edit source" button to view the wikitext/html for the user pages, and copy the content to your own (though I strongly suggest adding your own twist to it!). For WormTT's userpage, they used <div> tags, but you can easily create the same effect with templates {{Userbox top}} and {{Userbox bottom}}. The statistics on Beeblebrox's userpage were made using {{Adminstats}}, which can only be used by admins, as it needs to be updated by a bot. Hope this helps! — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 19:32, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Berrely! — Ad Meliora ^Talk∕_Contribs 19:38, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

This user is
Nick Moyes.

@Ad Meliora: See also Wikipedia:User page design center for more bling-laden ideas. (BTW: Nice work on the dab pages - I've tweaked a couple of them). Nick Moyes (talk) 19:59, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Nick — Ad Meliora ^Talk∕_Contribs 20:01, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Wow, IP editor, that's one of the best-looking userboxes I've seen! Every home should have one. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:44, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

But then Wikipedia would look less like a Bulletin Board System and would start looking more like literally every other modern website. It only seemed like a fun idea as long as i was convinced that i would be able to add it to your user page. 37.225.46.209 (talk) 21:27, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

As a bit of fun here, I'm OK with it. But, no, please don't add it anywhere else. But thanks, anyway. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:16, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

False positives from the bot

Hello and thank you for your attention. I've been flagged two times right now for possible vandalism - 1 and 2. I know those are not vandalism - just because they aren't, anyone can see it and check. So they are false positives. I did everything the bot tells you to do, so I'm not here to report the bot's actions. I want to know what to do in these situations. Should I stop editing, as the bot seems to be easily triggered by my edits, or should I continue reporting and reverting false positives? Does the bot target people it warns multiple times? ThatStoopidGuy (talk) 21:01, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Cluebot reverted one edit because year-2020 is preferred over year-present; reverted the other because there was no reference to confirm the fictional characters are identified as adopted. Because Cluebot identified these as possible vandalism rather then obvious vandalism, the program did not leave warnings on your Talk page. Please keep editing - Wikipedia needs many concerned article editors.David notMD (talk) 00:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Question on obtaining images for an article

How does one know if an image is "free" to use to illustrate a Wikipedia article? Is there HTML that is embedded in the IMG SRC code that states that? Thanks Untipoflaco (talk) 22:07, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Untipoflaco, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid there is no easy method. You know an image is free if you can find unequivocal evidence either that the image is in the public domain (which usually means either that it was published a long time ago, before a certain date, which might depend on the country where it was published, or that it was produced by a body such as the US Federal Government, which has declared that images produced by its employees in the course of their work are usually public domain) or that the copyright holder has explicitly licensed it under an licence such as CC-BY-SA. If the image is on the Internet, you usually need to find an appropriate copyright message somewhere on the website where it is published. Most images on the Internet are not free, and cannot be used. --ColinFine (talk) 22:52, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Making an edit

How do I make an edit? Jackiezee (talk) 22:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jackiezee, and welcome to the Teahouse. You've just made an edit here, to post your question! That's how you make an edit. If the problem is that you're trying to edit an article that is protected, then see Edit request. --ColinFine (talk) 22:55, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

how do i use templates? Gaharnomo3 (talk) 00:39, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Notification that and article was successful submitted?

I have written and submitted my first article using the article wizard. When at the end of the wizard, I added "submit" (with the brackets and subst:submit) at the beginning of the article and then clicked "publish". However I never re=eived a notification that it was successful submitted. I am guessing that it is in the public drafting area, but how can I be sure? And if so, how, and how long will it take to find out if the article is successful? Desmond123x (talk) 02:10, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Desmond113x Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. "Publish changes" should be understood to mean simply "save changes", it does not actually submit your draft for review. I have added the appropriate information to allow you to do so. 331dot (talk) 02:16, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Noob/. Grammaraguy52761 (talk) 03:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Desmond123x (talk) 04:41, 2 October 2020 (UTC) 331dot

Hi, I hope that I am writing this correctly. Thanks for your links. I have been thought the beginning intro and I have been practicing the last few weeks using visual editor with a friend - who is also a beginner (but a bit more seasoned). I have also spent the last weeks writing the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Desmond123x/sandbox. I have been looking at a number of good YouTube videos on how to proceed. They have been enormously helpful: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyK-hzYYPfg&frags=wn&ab_channel=WikimedianinResidenceUniversityofEdinburgh and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJooaYYQveY&ab_channel=WritingforWikipedia%28w4w%29.

I have tried to submit our article several times using the methods spelled out in these videos. The "move" tab appears to be missing, so I have gone through the "article wizard" and hit "publish". (with subst:submit on top)

What do I do next to submit my draft for review?

I have submitted Draft:Brit Bunkley draft of your behalf this time. The next time you can simply put {{subst:submit}} on the draft and hit the publish button. If you copy it from here, please copy it as it appears when viewing the page. Reviewing is a slow process, it may take a few weeks or more, but if you are lucky you will hear back a lot earlier. Note that the move button will appear earlier or later on itself when you are WP:AUTOCONFIRMED, though I strongely recommend using the review process, at least until you get the hang of the things. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Message from new user

Noob/. Grammaraguy52761 (talk) 03:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia Grammaraguy52761. The Teahouse is a good place for new users like you to learn how to use Wikipedia. Do you have a question? —teb728 t c 04:30, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

User Indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 15:18, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Merge request advice?

Hello, I'm not very good at editing articles and stuff. Does anyone have any advice about the conditions where a merge request would be advisable? I very recently (today) submitted a request to merge [[Adapter (computing) with Adapter, but I am not sure if this is something that should be done or whatever. Yeah, does anyone have any helps or advices? Vedvod (talk) 03:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

PostScript: the template didn't work? or did I just not use it properly?

@Vedvod: You've put up the {{Merge to}} on Adapter (computing), but you forgot the {{Merge from}} on Adapter, which will give the proposal more visibility. You also should also specify a |discuss= parameter in both templates to make sure the link in the template goes to the same discussion. I've done both for you; other than that, you followed all the steps #1 and #2 at WP:MERGE, good job! It would help to give a little more reasoning as to why the two pages should be merged other than it "seems unnecessary", but if there's consensus to merge or no opposition after a while, be bold and perform the merge (steps are outlined at WP:PROMERGE). ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:47, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Thank you for your help with this. I will attempt to keep this in mind in future. I have amended the reasoning provided. Sorry if the ping was a bad decision –––[Vedvod | My (bad) contributions to this site | Talk] 09:20, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@Vedvod: No worries! It's very good practice to ping whoever you're replying to, even if it's just a thank you. Happy editing! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:47, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Wolfman

 Gojiej (talk) 04:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Gojiej and welcome to the Teahouse. This page is for questions regarding how to edit Wikipedia. Do you have a specific question in mind? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:31, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

as a transgender person, i ask what is the basis to ask the aliens questions, should not we be asking you questions?

 Rachel Vanderthorne (talk) 04:31, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Rachel Vanderthorne and welcome to the Teahouse. This page is for questions regarding how to edit Wikipedia. Do you have a specific question in mind? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:31, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Unreasonable requests for sourcing

Sometimes during edit disputes users make unreasonable requests for sourcing and I don't know how to best handle it. Below are examples.

Sample 1: There is a story inside a textbook. Many reliable sources confirm this story is in the textbook, it is not disputed. So I post a recent edition of the textbook in the article. A user complains there is no source that confirms the story exists in that particular edition. I am unable to find a source to confirm edition information, only sources say it is in the book generally. There is no reason given for the doubt, just a made-up theory it is not in every edition.

Sample 2: There is a boat called "Goat" owned by Mr. Hinderson of NY registered in 1855, according to state records and linked in the article about Mr. Hinderson. Other sources confirm Mr. Hinderson did own a boat of this name, it is not disputed. A user complains how do we know there is not a second Mr. Hinderson from NY with a boat called "Goat" registered in 1855? It might not be the same Hinderson, there could be two. They request a source confirming this is the person of our article, without providing evidence of another Mr. Hinderson with a boat named "Goat".

These 'disputes' hinge on WP:V which states "any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material." My response has been their requests are unreasonable and not credible and to basically WP:IAR. Their response is V is policy and they can dispute anything at any time. It is sort of wikilawyering, but I would like some guidance on how to deal with non-credible sourcing requests. -- GreenC 04:39, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

GreenC I would tend to agree with you and side with you in both examples. If the other editor was repeatedly doing this pointedly and in an unreasonable manner, I would suggest to them that their constant wiki-lawyering was disruptive to the Project- and would collate diffs to evidence that disruption (probably best done off-wiki), and would report them to WP:ANI. If you have cited good sources and another editor repeatedly removes them with the excuse that "oh, you can't be sure if it's a different edition", I might regard that as a content dispute where WP:3RR applies, and you might be exempt from edit warring for reverting 'masked vandalism' - but it depends on circumstances, as always. The only way we can be sure that Mr Hinderson owned that boat is to find his grave, exhume him, bring him back to life and ask him in person. Until we have the technology to do that, we have to act in a reasonable manner in accepting proper sources, and ignore the small-minded idiots who say "oh, but what if...?"  I make that comment only in response to you're hypothetical examples here, with no insight into any past disputes you might have entered in to, or any worries over any past competence in citing good sources. Reasonable challenges to sources are, just that: reasonable. Unreasonable ones are, well, you know where I'm going. Keeping discussions on an article's talk page is often the best way to ensure disputes over sources can be readily found by everyone interested in that article. For disruptive editors, keeping the conversations on their talk pages is useful to admins who might want to assess their competence or any disruptive editing they've undertaken, and whether they ask out of good faith, or are simply WP:NOTHERE. Does this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 09:46, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes: Yes thank you Nick. There's nothing in policy about a "reasonable" challenge of a source, that I know of, it's sort of unwritten. Maybe there is an essay? In both cases there is an undercurrent of disruption in a wear them down sort of way because they were previously thwarted in other content disputes, but they would of course deny that and these are experienced editors who are not normally behavior problems. I guess RfC or ANI if it continues. -- GreenC 13:55, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Afc: Jair Burgos is declined

Submission of Jair Burgos is declined with comments - Sources are not reliable. Before submission of this draft for review, I had searched on wiki. To make sure each and every source which I am mentioning in Jair Burgos must be used in other already published bio on wikipedia. I am considering since these sites are one of reliable sources thats why these pages are listed on wiki. These sites are used in various published pages. Many of them has their own wiki page as well.

Adding search links for your reference.
1. backstage.com - https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?search=backstage.com&title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=1&ns0=1
2. patch.com - https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?search=patch.com&title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=1&ns0=1
3. digitaljournal.com - https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?search=digitaljournal.com&title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=1&ns0=1
4. issuu.com - https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?search=issuu.com&title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=1&ns0=1

Please guide to fix the mistake and include this page for listing.

I am accepting my mistake to use image. Thank you so much for correcting my mistake and removing from draft. Vsp.manu (talk) 04:51, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Vsp.manu, I tried to see your draft and have same concerns. IMDB is not reliable and others may not. Backstage is definitely not reliable because it doesn't meet the WP:RS criteria. Same goes the case with Issuu. Digital journal report is not reliable because it is a PR. Please see WP:42 for more help. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:12, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Vsp.manu While it may be a starting point in evaluating a source's reliability, the presence of a source elsewhere on enwiki is not, in itself, a guarantee that it is reliable in general, or for the particular claim you are using it to cite. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 10:17, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Please make me administrator

 Tamilreporter123 (talk) 05:35, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

If this is a serious question, WP:Requests_for_adminship may help you

Vedvod (talk) 05:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Tamilreporter123, You joined the Wikipedia a day before yesterday and today you want to be an administrator. Wow! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:06, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey! A man sentient being can dream... It also may help them in future? idk

Vedvod (talk) 06:17, 2 October 2020 (UTC) why do i sign like this?

Tamilreporter123, there is a very low chance of you becoming an administrator, least of all because you don't pass the requirements. Administrators are users with special tools that allow them to delete pages, block user, etc, and for almost everything you need to do on Wikipedia, you wouldn't need those tools. The administrator right is given to experienced users in good standing, and I'm sad to say you currently don't qualify for it. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 07:01, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Berrely,

Technically, as stated here,

"The English Wikipedia has no official requirements to become an administrator. Any registered user can request adminship ("RFA") from the community, regardless of their Wikipedia experience."

but yes, it would be very hard, especially since there is is a discrepancy here, where

"The...prerequisites for adminship are having an account and being extended confirmed (having both 30 days' tenure and 500 edits) so that you can file your own nomination."

The result is that according to one article, the user can in fact register and just is unlikely to be accepted, but the other article states that they are unable to register. So you are half-correct in saying that they currently don't qualify for it, though I'd trust the information on WP:RFA over WP:MOP.

I'm sorry about this unnecessariness, I just felt like pointing it out –––[Vedvod | My (bad) contributions to this site | Talk] 09:17, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Berrely was quite correct, and you would be wise to heed their advice. While you are correct that those are the formal requirements of being an administrator, you would need to pass a community discussion at Requests for Adminship. As stated there, "However, the likelihood of passing without being able to show significant positive contributions to the encyclopedia is low." Each participant in RFA discussions has their own personal criteria for evaluating if someone merits being given the toolset, but as a new user you lack a good edit history that shows things like good judgement, temperament, a cool head, good contributions to the encyclopedia, and a need for the tools. As Berrely noted, but I'll reiterate, you can do 95% of things on Wikipedia without being an administrator. Being an administrator carries no special status, you would just have buttons that would be irresponsible for everyone to have(like deleting articles). If you really want the toolset at some point, I would actually forget about it for awhile and concentrate on being a good editor. If you spend enough time doing that(likely years), other editors will see your contributions and any need you might have for the toolset and nominate you. In the short term, though, your chances of being given the tools are just about zero. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

I misread the signatures above; apologies to Vedvod. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@Vedvod and Tamilreporter123: I want to point out that spurious RfAs can be regarded as disruptive. As to the question itself, realistically, you need to be here and do good work (thousands of edits) in many areas of the project for at least a couple of years to acquire and refine the skills needed to be an admin, and for others to be able to see that in your contributions in order to vouch for you in an RfA. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 10:30, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Tags

What WikiProject tags should I add for an article about a programming language and how should these tags be spelled/capitalized? 84.238.45.164 (talk) 08:10, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

If this is about Draft:Flix (programming language), then probably {{WikiProject Computing}} and {{WikiProject Computer science}}. Since it's a draft, you don't have to assign it a quality rating as "Draft" will automatically be chosen, and importance-wise I would rate it "Low". Do note that this isn't essential until the draft gets approved, and adding this doesn't improve your chances. ◢  Ganbaruby! 

 (Say hi!) 08:31, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! JorKadeen (talk) 08:36, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Photos in Wikipedia

Hello,

Are accepted photos from Instagram, Twitter, Flicker or facebook to be added in Wikipedia pages?

Forever Jose () (talk) 09:25, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Forever Jose. Usually no. Photos need to be under a free license in their source. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 09:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@Forever Jose: Whilst Instagram and Facebook don't really give the user the option of releasing their images under an appropriate licence, Flickr does offer that. The default position is that every image on Flickr is copyright of the author, and thus unusable. But look for the licencing icon on a Flickr image page and you can determine whether that person has altered it to make it reusable here. It categorically MUST be released under a licence which permits commercial reuse. Just non-commercial reuse it definitely not acceptable - so CC-BY-SA is the abbreviation you'll be hoping to see. In the upload process you would link to the page it came from so that one of the volunteer checking team can verify if it was properly licenced at the time. I've once or twice contacted photographers on Flickr and asked if they'd consider changing the licence of on particular image so that it can be used on Wikimedia Commons or elsewhere - and usually with good results. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:58, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Modifying the title while on draft

Hello, I am working on a draft that by mistake I placed the title wrong It should say Ignacio Pena Del Rio but it says Ignacio Peña Del Rio This is the draft: Draft:Ignacio Peña Del Rio Anyone knows how to accomplish this? Angie Lynn Anderson (talk) 09:45, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Angie Lynn Anderson Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If there is an issue with the title, I would leave a note on the article talk page that the reviewers will see; if they accept your draft, they will handle moving it into the main encyclopedia and what title it is at. (I've fixed the link to your draft, you don't need the whole web address). 331dot (talk) 09:48, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Oops - Whilst I was considering suggesting that, too, I thought it quicker to change the draft article's title - which I've just done. Sorry for the clash, 331dot. regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:51, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angie Lynn Anderson (talk • contribs) 09:55, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes That's certainly fine too- it just saves a step in case the draft is not accepted. But there is no problem in doing so. :) 331dot (talk) 09:58, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

How to edit a protected page

The page I want to edit is protected so what can I do know? 2409:4043:2099:1AC9:0:0:2AAA:28AC (talk) 10:03, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may post on the article talk page detailing the edit you wish to make. To increase the chances it will be seen by another editor who could potentially carry out your request, you may make it as a formal edit request(click for instructions). 331dot (talk) 10:08, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

I go to the talk page but I can't write anything because there is not any option for me. Is that because I'm a anonymous user?If yes than what can I do.please tell me 2409:4043:2099:1AC9:0:0:2AAA:28AC (talk) 10:31, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Please add follow up comments to this existing section instead of creating a new section. There should be a tab that says "edit" at the top of the talk page, if you are using the full desktop version(even on a phone). I'm not sure how to edit it with the app or mobile version(though I'm sure others here do). Personally I find using the full version easier(even on a phone). If it does not say "edit" at the top, it is possible that the talk page is protected(though this is highly unusual); we can tell you more if you let us know which page you want to edit. 331dot (talk) 10:39, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

I want to edit a page called Banafar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4043:2099:1AC9:0:0:2AAA:28AC (talk) 11:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

There isn't a page called Banafar. There is a page called Banaphar which is semi-protected, but Talk:Banaphar is not protected so you can make your edit request there. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

IP: Please read the earlier posts on that page, in case your requested change was previously proposed (and declined, usually for lack of a reliable source). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:21, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

How to write an article about a website?

Hi everyone,

I'm relatively new to wikipedia editing and I wrote an article on the Human Journey Website but it got rejected. https://humanjourney.us/

The problem is that I need to find better sources aparently. Here is my draft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Human_Journey

Now, just to be clear, I have written several scientific papers in international journals and I know how citing sources is usually done in the academic world, but here I feel things are a bit different.

I have a list of websites that link back to the Human Journey website but the best thing I could see as a source so far was a mention in a magazine's blog. So I have several ideas, please let me know if these make sense. I could include more information about the authors of the website, who include authors with books and articles I could cite. Or I could look for web statistics and include that information about the website maybe? If not, I guess a third route would be getting an article about the website published by some source that is considered reliable and then citing that in the wikipedia article?

Another doubt I have is about the content, so say if I want to summarize the content of the website, do I really need an external citation for that? For example, if one of the guiding ideas of the website is: "Discover who we are, how we evolved, what we might become", and it has four main sections with different names which I explain, and this is taken literaly from the website itself, do I need a citation to state something which is self-evident like that? It seems to me sort of like how articles about movies summarize the plot without needing to include citations for that.

Any suggestions are welcome!

Pau PA Packard (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello there @PA Packard:. Wikipedia's inclusion standards can be found several places at Wikipedia. WP:42 is probably the most concise statement, and WP:GNG contains more details. The basic principle is that, since Wikipedia articles should only be based on the highest quality source texts, we need good source texts before an article about a subject can be created. Wikipedia needs more than just confirmation that a subject exists, it needs evidence that there is 'enough' reliable source text that exists out there that can be used as sources for writing a good encyclopedia article about the subject. Not everything in the universe that exists has existing source text written about it, if something, such as the website in question, does not have substantial independent writing about it already, it probably doesn't qualify for a Wikipedia article. Of course, I may be wrong, and if the significant, independent, and reliable source texts do exist, you can use those to establish sufficient notability. But if the sources don't exist, we don't have anything to use to research and write an article from. I hope that helps! --Jayron32 12:14, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Hi Jayron32 and thanks for answering. I'm not sure if this is how I'm supposed to reply here. I hope you don't mind following up on your answer, and I do realize you are simply citing wikipedia's rules and trying to explain the basic idea. I understand the ideal, but it seems to me like a lot of wikipedia pages about media and publications don't really seem to adhere to those high standards. I was looking at the page for the Journal of Neuroscience for example. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Journal_of_Neuroscience

It basically summarises some of the key aspects of the journal's structure and content. It includes two citations, one citing itself, and the other cites a statistic about its Impact Factor. That hardly seems to me to be substantial independent writing, and I assume the situation for other scientific journals and other types of media is the same.

References "The Journal of Neuroscience". 2013 Journal Citation Reports. Web of Science (Science ed.). Thomson Reuters. 2014. Maunsell, John (2013). "New Journal Sections". The Journal of Neuroscience. 33 (1): 1. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5529-12.2012.

I've also seen movies that only cite online movie databases, or games that cite their own advertisments and press releases, or simply a couple of online databases.

Pau PA Packard (talk), 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Adding map image created in Google Earth

Will Wikipedia accept a map image for an article that was created in Google Earth? How

How do I add a map overlay image created in Google Earth to the Wikipedia article I wrote? I have attempted to add the image, but it is not being accepted. 2nd ABG (talk) 12:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@2nd ABG: No – they are copyrighted as evidenced (at least) by the (usually many) copyright notices at the bottom. Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2015/June#Google Earth Images is a previous answer from MCQ. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Google indicates that I may use a Google Earth map image provided I attribute it to them. I would like to add the map overly image to the Wikipedia article I wrote. Would you please inform me of the instructions to enter the image? When I attempt to add it, it is being rejected.

From Google: "Generally speaking, as long as you're following our Terms of Service, these guidelines, and you're attributing properly, you can use our maps and imagery. In fact, we love seeing creative applications of Google Maps, Google Earth, and Street View." https://www.google.com/permissions/geoguidelines/ But we know you're looking for more specifics to ensure you're using our maps and imagery correctly. We suggest starting with the general guidelines below as these will apply to all projects. Feel free to click directly to the section that applies to your use"  2nd ABG (talk) 13:49, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@2nd ABG:. Whilst it isn't hugely clear what you are not allowed to do on their guidelines, I'm pretty sure that you cannot take aerial photos from Google Earth/Google maps and make them available here (for non-commercial and commercial reuse). I think those permissions related to use of image within their API, and not just lifting images to add to post on Wikimedia Commons or on Wikipedia. I think that Open Street Map might be more 'up your street' if you pardon the pun, though it does not provide aerial photos. Like Wikipedia, Open Street Maps is user-generated and can be updated by any interested person with a love of mapping and (presumably) a GPS device. See Wikipedia:Maps for Wikipedia for more links to using maps. (Please don't reply by starting a totally new thread - just edit this one and reply beneath, adding in one extra colon at the start of a paragraph than the person you're replying to use - this indents it one step further in. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:46, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Articles

I want to know how many articles are there on WIKIPEDIA and who created them and I also wanna know how to create an article. Acdor (talk) 13:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Acdor, and welcome to the teahouse. There are currently 6,930,452 articles on Wikipedia. You can see who created and wrote the pages them by clicking on the tab called 'view history', where there is a list of all the past edits to a page. The oldest (last) revision is who created the page. For statistics on prolific page creators, you can see WP:MOSTARTICLES. To create a page, you may want to go through The article wizard. This will guide you through the basic steps of creating an article. Also see WP:1st for help on writing your first article. Best, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:02, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Article creation and Draft problems

Hello. I have created my sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:F.Alexsandr/sandbox and It is said that I can use it to create drafts of articles that I can later submit for review. However upon creation of sandbox I can no longer write an article there that I can submit for review. Is it intended that way, being used as a sort of a Notebook, or am I missing something? F.Alexsandr (talk) 14:00, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, F.Alexsandr, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. You can create as many sandboxes as you like, called more or less anything you like. You have User:F.Alexsandr/sandbox; you can create User:F.Alexsandr/sandbox2, or User:F.Alexsandr/Some other title. (The only thing special about the one called "sandbox" is that if you use the standard skin on the desktop, there is a link to it automatically at the top). I'm not sure what you mean about you "can no longer write an article there" - you can edit it just as you already have.

But I recommend creating articles in Draft space (rather than in a sandbox) using the article wizard. Have you read Your first article? --ColinFine (talk) 14:49, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

That's good advice but note that your sandbox works like any other Wikipedia page. You can save successive versions of it, each containing a draft article or any other content you wish. Then, if you look click on the "View history" tab, you'll see each version is stored with the date and time you saved ("publish changes" in Wiki-speak) it. To return to any individual earlier version of the sandbox, just click on the timestamp associated with it. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 14:57, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: @ColinFine: Thank you for responce. What I mean is, if I will write an article in my sandbox, will I be able to submit it from there (If yes, how can I do it) or I will have to manually copy-paste it into an Article Wizard? F.Alexsandr (talk) 15:11, 2 October 2020 (UTC)