Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Noophelia 2.0 (talk | contribs) at 10:47, 5 February 2021 (→Features of "authority control" and how to improve its correct reflection). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


This is the teahouse
Shortcuts

331dot, a Teahouse host

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


I also received similar toxicity from a Wikipedia editor

In 2018, I'd watched the premier of a film about four very well-known British Dames, all of whom are elderly, and highly-respected. They've appeared in many loved films, plays, and television series. I wrote a short article about the film for Wikipedia, with a selection of good links to their individual pages, and other things that were of interest. It was well thought out, neutral, and a more than a good start. By no stretch was it a promotion, or mentioned media companies. It wasn't adoring, but simply factual. The criticism I received from a Wikipedia editor was toxic. And this person removed the article, despite there being thosands of similar short articles on Wikipedia. Mine was certainly longer than some of the "stubs" I sometimes read. So, where I used to always contribute to the annual fund raiser, I don't now. 'R', London, 5 Feb 2021. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.225.136 (talk) 02:30, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ishaan bommakanti 6548

 Ishaan bommakanti 6548 (talk) 13:03, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ishaan bommakanti 6548. Do you have a question? -- Hoary (talk) 13:36, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.My question is How do you become an Administrator? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.212.247.211 (talk) 07:35, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Background

I am the daughter of an artist who passed away in 1999. During the pandemic I went through a large collection of information about him and digitized it. Both of my parents have passed away so my sister and I have the copyright for his artwork. I signed up to be a Wikipedia contributor/editor and have created a page about my father in my sandbox. I have a COI statement as well. I have photographs of my father's artwork that I would like to include in a Gallery section of his Wikipedia page. Some photographs are taken by me or my parents and some by museums.

Questions

For pictures taken by me/my parents: should I include copyright information in the metadata "Roswell Weidner Estate"? How will this affect the media in WikiMedia Commons? For pictures taken by institutions with copyright information in the metadata: I am working with the institutions to get their permission to post their images or should they post their images in WikiMedia Commons Categories for their institution? One of the institutions I am talking with already has a large number of items in a WikiMedia Category: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Paintings_in_the_Pennsylvania_Academy_of_the_Fine_Arts Is there a similar forum in WikiMedia Commons that I should address these questions to? Thank you. ArtLover113 (talk) 17:44, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ArtLover113: When you post artwork, or images, on Wikipedia, it must be freely licensed. That means in short: it must be free for re-use, by anyone, for any reason, as long as they provide attribution. That includes to make money. That doesn't mean you can't also make money off it, but that anyone else can too. That's why we have so few images of some things on Wikipedia, because folks are unwilling to release their photos in that way. However, if you fully understand the implications of uploaded images, we would love to have them. Let me know if you need clarification on how free licenses work here. AdmiralEek (talk) 17:49, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you need more detailed guidance about issues of upload to Commons, there is a "Help desk similar to the one here". that you could use. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:57, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ArtLover113, User:ArtLover113/sandbox is a very well-done draft; nice work! When you're finished working on it, feel free to give me a ping (use {{Ping|Sdkb}}) and I'll be happy to move it to mainspace for you. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:41, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArtLover113 The Early life and training section has lots of unreferenced content. Same for Personal life. Sadly, what you know to be true cannot be included without citations. David notMD (talk) 09:27, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My conflict of interest at the Old Royal Naval College as i need to replace the whole text about this charity

I am a volunteer at the Old Royal Naval College (it is a charity). I have agreed to help this charity and update the content of their Wikipedia page, but I am a little bit confused about my declaration of the conflict of interest.

Where do I need to put a 'sign' that there is a conflict of interest when I log in?

I have found this line; please see below. What do I need to do with it? [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) ORNC-W2020 (talk) 19:58, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please advise. Thank you for your help. ORNC-W2020 (talk) 19:58, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ORNC-W2020 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may make the conflict of interest declaration on your user page (User:ORNC-W2020) and you should on the article talk page of the charity's article(it's an article, not a mere "page"). The article talk page is where you should make formal edit requests(click for instructions), detailing changes you feel are needed, preferably sourced to independent reliable sources, as that is primarily what Wikipedia articles summarize.
Please understand that the article is about the charity; it does not belong to the charity and its has no special rights to the article- but your input is welcome. 331dot (talk) 20:06, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I will add that while there are templates you can use, it's enough to just make a simple statement. Don't necessarily worry about the formatting yet. 331dot (talk) 20:06, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dear 331dot, thank you. please let me know where exactly i can declare my conflict of interest on my page? I have written it on my 'user talk page'. is it right? thank you. ORNC-W2020 (talk) 15:01, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ORNC-W2020 That's sufficient(to post it on your user talk page) but you might want to post it on your user page (User:ORNC-W2020), as your user talk page is meant for communication with you. 331dot (talk) 15:10, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My submission at Articles for creation: Jakops (January 30)

Hello this is Joanna,

I uploaded "Jakops" on January 30, 2021.

We need help to publish this article, the person Jakops are a Famous Producer in Korea, Japan. We don't surely use to this tool, Wikipedia, but Me and my client will update references soon.

and I want to ask what is the exact mean about declined Submission?

"This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."

and how to solve this problem? What specific materials must be included in order for this article to meet the criteria? Are there any references to match this? or just examples? I saw many of references in Wikipedia, but still don't know how to solve this problem. If there any way to help us to meet then criteria, it might be really helpful using this tool to publish our article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joannaseok (talk • contribs) 02:25, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By references, we mean reliable sources like newspapers, news sites, things like that. These sources must be reliable, and blogs/self-promoted links do not count as reliable. If you cannot find any good reliable sources, the subject might not qualify for a Wikipedia article. More specifically, "articles" #5, #6, #7 are not "references", in that they do not cite an actual source. "Articles" #3 and #4 seem to be of the same thing. You need to cite good sources on this subject, and be sure to insert citations on core portions of the article (name, discography). Aside from that, there are also some manual of style issues, and grammatical errors. By "we" and "client", do you mean you are doing this in partnership with someone also? Wikipedia strongly discourages people with a conflict of interest from making articles that they have a bias towards/against. You must inform others of any potential COI's you have. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 04:19, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
More specifically, Joannaseok, if you have a paid relationship, you need to publicly declare that on your user page (that is, which company you work for and for which client's behalf). You may use {{paid}} to do so. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:30, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Joannaseok: Based on what you wrote above, I'm afraid you might be unaware that Wikipedia is not here as a tool for anyone to promote anything. Please see WP:NOTPROMO. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:43, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Hi- Sorry I'm sure you've gotten this question a million times but I'm having trouble navigating this site. I've got a dispute over content on the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Anthony and an anonymous user who is trying to pretend they are unbiased (but that's silly) keeps adding and removing content. I tried posting on the talk page for that page, but I don't understand who sees that. If it's only him (her?) then I don't suspect we'll get very far. Thanks for your help. AnnieBee3 (talk) 17:37, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AnnieBee3, welcome to the Teahouse. Please have a look at WP:EW and especially WP:AVOIDEDITWAR where you will everything about Edit Warring, in the meantime we will have a look on the edits at this article. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:57, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Much of the content of Dave Anthony is cited to sources written by Anthony, or to which he was a major contributor. Such citations, and the content based on them, should be removed. Maproom (talk) 08:10, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User Pages

Why are unregistered editors not allowed to create their own user pages? 47.227.95.73 (talk) 18:36, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is because IPs are not people and it would be useless to make a userpage for a dynamic IP that switches hands every few days or so. IPs have no single identity, just geographical location. 216.12.50.120 (talk) 18:53, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest creating an actual Wikipedia account. DestinationFearFan (talk) 18:54, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I was just wondering because I have some user boxes on my talk page that would be more fit if I had a user page. 47.227.95.73 (talk) 21:05, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just want to say that IPs can create userpages. See, for example, User:220.101.28.25. GeraldWL 03:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Where can i find articles to edit?

I am looking for somewhere where i can find articles to edit. Thanks. Thank you. I know how to edit already so i should be fine. Starman2377 (talk) 19:54, 2 February 2021 (UTC) Starman2377 (talk) 19:54, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Starman2377, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia:Task_Center is a good place to start, be sure that you have made familiar yourself with editing, for example at Help:Editing. Enjoy editing, hope my answer was of help. CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:03, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Starman2377, you may also want to subscribe to User:SuggestBot/Requests, where you can set the bot up to deliver suggested articles to your talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:29, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Starman2377 Thank you for trying to improve the encyclopedia. One thing you'll want to learn to do is preview your edits before saving them. If you accidentally add errors, you can always undo your edit by self-reverting. For example, when you tried to add the M134 Minigun to the main article template in the rotary gun section with this edit [[1]], you broke the template. I see you tried to fix it by making additional edits before giving up and leaving the broken template. You'll want to be a bit more careful in the future. If you can go back and fix it, it will help you learn editing better. You need the curly double brackets for the template ( {{ }} ), with the items separated by the pipe ( | ) symbol, but not the square brackets ( [[ ]] ) for the items in the template. Happy editing. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:52, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]


==Thank you==

I have fixed my error and have also made my edit work. Thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starman2377 (talk • contribs) 15:12, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The first of several questions

I Looked through the reliable sources list and discovered that I had found several sources that were not present on the list as reliable or unreliable such as Gematsu,Dual Shockers Nintendo life. If this get's answered I'll add the rest.

P.S. Thank you for your time and I appreciate any advice. Vessel of Domination (talk) 20:21, 2 February 2021 (UTC) Vessel of Domination (talk) 20:21, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vessel of Domination. That list cannot possibly be all inclusive. I suggest that you also search the archives of the Reliable sources noticeboard. If you are still in doubt about a specific source, you can start a discussion of that source there. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:26, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Vessel of Domination: You can find a specific list of sources for video games here. Gematsu and Nintendo Life are listed as reliable, while Dualshockers.com is listed as unreliable. SK2242 (talk) 09:02, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article Live Update

Hi, I submitted an article (Name : SportsTiger) last day. When will Wikipedia live that article? Kartiksinghh (talk) 06:28, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kartiksinghh, Draft:SportsTiger is still awaiting a review. Please be patient. GeraldWL 06:32, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Any tentative publishing time, Gerald ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kartiksinghh (talk • contribs) 06:43, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article reviewing can take days, weeks, or months. Depends on how fast reviewers get through 'em. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 06:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Kartiksinghh, your draft is extremely brief and one sentence has 11 references. Both of those are red flags for reviewers. See WP:REFBOMB. If there are so many references, then why isn't there much more to say about the topic? Is it perhaps that the references are to passing mentions or are generated by company PR or say nothing new about the topic? The draft looks rushed and very strange. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:52, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cullen, Thanks for feedback. Then how we improve our article? Please suggest! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kartiksinghh (talk • contribs) 08:00, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kartiksinghh, not a suggestion, but may I ask what do you mean by "we"? Are you a paid editor? GeraldWL 08:04, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Kartiksingh has already made a paid editor disclosure on their user page, regardless of what they say below – and is presumably the new account of User:Sportstigerapp who was blocked for violating the user name policy. (This is not a block violation, because such blocks encourage the user to create a new account with a different user name.) --bonadea contributions talk 08:35, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, am not paid editor. Sorry for mistake!

AS noted by b, Your User page states paid editor. David notMD (talk) 08:37, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

how to move an article bc of a name change

Hi, I'm Johnny Burgin, and used to go by Rockin' Johnny Burgin, but I dropped the Rockin' a couple of years ago. I'd love to move the article from Rockin' Johnny Burgin to Johnny Burgin, but since I just set up my account, I'm not sure I can move it, I cannot see any move tab. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockin%27_Johnny_Burgin 

Please advise. thank you Noborderblues (talk) 07:58, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia policy is for the name of an article to be the name by which the subject is usually known. I see that all eight of the sources listed in Rockin' Johnny Burgin refer to you as "Rockin' Johnny Burgin". Maproom (talk) 08:24, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Noborderblues, welcome to the Teahouse! What Maproom said. If the situation has changed, sources are needed to show it, you can read the "rule" at WP:COMMONNAME. Cat Stevens is one example. Another thing: per WP:Conflict of interest, please don't edit the article about you directly, but you are welcome to suggest changes and sources at the article's talkpage, Talk:Rockin' Johnny Burgin. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:10, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Possible self-editor

Hi, I think I found someone that's exclusively editing content about themselves. Should I do something about this? Thanks. Xurizuri (talk) 10:46, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Xurizuri, welcome to the Teahouse! Guidance at WP:COICOIN. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:50, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Private Space on Wikipedia which can be viewed by others but not deleted or edited?

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Is it possible to create a 'private area' on Wikipedia(like you can on some sites or platforms)whose content cannot be edited or deleted? It might be an area where you wish to air your views about a range of matters without feeling that you are going to be 'jumped on' or have your work deleted or edited when you want neither. Or is everything on Wikipedia accessible by others so there is no room for privacy whatsoever or a 'personal space' which cannot be 'invaded'? Mahler johnson (talk) 11:31, 3 February 2021 (UTC) Mahler johnson (talk) 11:31, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mahler johnson All pages on Wikipedia are visible to the public, there are no private areas. Some pages are more visible than others; pages in Draft space aren't easy to find unless you know where to look, but all edits appear in the Recent Changes feed which is monitored by many different people at all hours. Sandboxes allow for experimentation and generally others do not edit them, but they are not immune from deletion processes(such as if someone is promotionally editing in their sandbox, or copyright violations). If you want to talk about Wikipedia or write something without others knowing about it here, you will have to do it off-wiki. 331dot (talk) 11:37, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
e/c Yes within reason it's your user page here User:Mahler johnson please read WP:UPNOT for what you can put there. Theroadislong (talk) 11:39, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mahler johnson I'll add that if you want to say, draft an article and get it the way you want it before submitting it for review, you can do that in a word processing program on your computer/phone before actually transferring the text here and submitting it. That's not an uncommon thing to do. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mahler johnson: No, there is no 'private space' at Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service, where you can put anything you want for as long as want. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, you're free to contribute here if it serves building the encyclopedia, according to the project's policies. If you want to publish in the Web and have your contents safe from modification by other users, you need to buy appropriate service from some web-hosting company or start one on your own. --CiaPan (talk) 13:39, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Essentially, the answer is 'No'. There is no personal space which can be viewed but cannot be 'invaded' by others for modification or deletion. In other words, there is no real, authentic, anonymity. That is somewhat disappointing. Never mind, I have the choice to quit or remain under such conditions.Mahler johnson (talk) 11:51, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which begs the question why would you want such a space? Theroadislong (talk) 11:59, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Because I am human and, like all humans, value anonymity and the free expression of my identity. Which begs the question why anyone would want to ask such an invasive question. Mahler johnson (talk) 12:03, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a project to build an encyclopaedia, there are plenty of social media sites for your "free expression of identity". Theroadislong (talk) 12:06, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mahler johnson (ec) I'm curious as to how you want to express your identity and remain anonymous at the same time- those goals seem incompatible. In any event, as noted, Wikipedia is not a forum for free expression. As you were told, your user page is a place where you can tell the Wikipedia community about yourself in the context of you as a Wikipedia editor, and in general it will not be edited by others, unless content that violates guidelines is placed there. If you just want a space where you can do what you wish with it, you won't find that on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 12:09, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And 'a project to build an encyclopaedia' is incompatible with an allotted space for the free expression of the individual? Oh Dear...The fact that the expression of identity is itself a social act means that it can only take place within such an environment. Anonymity simply means freedom of individual thought under such conditions. They are not incompatible. You have interpreted the term 'anonymous' too literally. However, where such conditions are so restrictive that they are verging on the dictatorial, then that, in my view, is not an enriching experience for all but rather like having the 'freedom' you have in being in a cage. I expected a negative and a 'piss off then' reaction from devotees. I expected to be 'jumped on' and that is precisely what has happened. Mahler johnson (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:21, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mahler johnson No one has told you to "piss off", but if you think that asking a question and getting an answer is "being jumped on", I don't think Wikipedia is the place for you. We want you to participate, and we are willing to help you learn how to do so, but what you want to do doesn't seem compatible with Wikipedia's purpose. Wikipedia is not a place intended for the free expression of the individual, and has guidelines and policies for its content. I'm sorry you see these things as "dictatorial", because they aren't. 331dot (talk) 12:30, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No one has explicitly told me to "piss off" unless you class telling somebody to go to other sites as a 'piss off' implicitly. That is what I mean by "jumped on". When I first made an enquiry about sourcing and referencing a few days ago, one editor implied that I was trying to get pages deleted. My question has been answered. This site is too authoritarian with its highly restrictive guidelines and criteria. They are so restrictive that one feels there is no anonymity for individuals whatsoever. It's almost Orwellian. After a few days on it, I am starting to feel like a rugby player at the bottom of a collapsed scrum. Or perhaps like a budgerigar in a tree full of sparrows. I have had enough already. Can somebody show me the way to get out of here? Please.....Thank You... Mahler johnson (talk) 12:44, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mahler johnson I was simply suggesting alternatives that might be better suited for what it is that you wish to do. If you want to participate here, you are welcome and free to do so, but you seem to have issues with this collaborative environment and guidelines. I'm sorry that you feel as you do, but it's your choice. You may simply stop using your account. A courtesy vanishing may be an option for you as well. Best wishes to you. 331dot (talk) 12:48, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No. I do not have so-called "issues" with so-called "collaboration". I have worked in a highly social profession all my life where working closely and cooperatively with people has been part of the job, a part of my life. So please do not make unfounded allegations. As I have stated, my experience of this outfit is that its structures and practices are authoritarian. There is no room for something which is intrinsically human and that is independence and anonymity : the discreteness of my existence as a person. It is so authoritarian that I do not(or rather seems that I do not)have access to the withdrawing and deleting of my 'account'. All I wish to do is press a few buttons, delete my presence here (as I could on most sites) and say goodbye but even that is not possible. Hotel California. Mahler johnson (talk) 13:03, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mahler johnson For both technical and legal reasons, it is not possible to delete an account; all edits must be attributable to someone. The best we can do is a vanishing, as I described. Is there a certain policy with which you disagree? There is nothing "authoritarian" about community consensus and discussion to get there. I'd love to work out this problem with you if you really want to contribute. 331dot (talk) 13:09, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My "disagreements" are clear from my posts on this section. Stalin and Hitler also referred to "community" and "consensus". It is time for me to go. This is my final post. To leave this place of no room for individual anonymity and expression. I do not wish to "contribute" under such conditions where others are asking me why I am asking legitimate questions. It is rather like being monitored in a police state. Posts from Wikipedia to my email will be blocked. I would appreciate it if somebody 'vanished' my presence. What an awful inhuman expression! And then turn the light out.....Thank You Mahler johnson (talk) 13:22, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As also requested I'm trying to turn the light out. No lasting success so far Flashing bulbB . Zindor (talk) 13:52, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm completely lost!

Hi, I'm trying to write a Wiki for the Doreen Valiente Foundation, and also the Centre For Pagan Studies, also one for the man who founded these 2 organisations, John Belham-Payne - I'm his widow. I keep being reminded that I am close to all of these subjects and have a conflict of interest, but honestly they are charities, and Im interested in telling the correct version of events in their development. Believe me, I am the only person who knows enough about these things to be able to or to be interested in writing a page. I'm doing a bit at a time, as I discover things from family and colleagues. Can you give me some suggestions on what I need to do to fulfil your criteria please? Is there someone who would "hold my hand"

Thank you in advance. Julie Joolspayne (talk) 12:07, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joolspayne Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. One does not "write a wiki", as a wiki is a type of entire website of which Wikipedia is one example. One writes a Wikipedia article. I am sorry for your loss. I would say that if you just want to tell the world about your husband and the organizations he founded, and document their histories, there are other venues where that is permitted. Wikipedia is only interested in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen to say about a topic, showing how the topic meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Wikipedia content cannot be based on personal knowledge for verification purposes- again, there are places where you can post whatever you wish without these requirements. 331dot (talk) 12:13, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy links Draft:Centre For Pagan Studies and Draft:John Belham-Payne. Theroadislong (talk) 12:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have to say that, if true, "I am the only person who knows enough about these things to be able to or to be interested in writing a page" makes it sound as if "these things" don't belong on Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 13:29, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Given your close personal knowledge and connection to these proposed topics, you must include only information that rests on reliable source references. Not you, not family, not colleagues. Only published by people with no connection to the Centre or to John. If you cannot find reliable sources, no amount of information collecting and writing will succeed in becoming an article. The website of the Centre For Pagan Studies does not qualify as confirming notability. If you do find sources - no copying - as that is a forbidden copyright violation (a problem you ran afoul of about the Foundation). David notMD (talk) 14:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well there are references to him in books like the biography of Doreen Valiente - Witch by Philip Heselton, The Charge of the Goddess book of poems by Doreen Valiente, etc . The Pagan Federation too, as he was an active committee member there. He spoke at The Parliament of World Religions there is a reference there. I'll start to rephrase his page and the others too. I think I've got the hang of it now. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joolspayne (talk • contribs) 14:11, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Considering Leaving

I am considering leaving Wikipedia and want to take my work with me. Can I do that?

==Feb 2021==
If you "do not want to be here" why are you still posting there? Please read wp:not and wp:nothere (also wp:talk might be helpful. Talk pages are not forums to discuss Wikipedia (or to tell us you do not want to be here) or the topic, they are there to propose improvements.Slatersteven (talk) 12:56, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't think I belong here anymore. SBohrman (talk) 13:25, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Every time you wrote something for Wikipedia, you did so immediately above a notice that told you that by doing so "you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL". So no, you can't remove your contributions. -- Hoary (talk) 13:33, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.SBohrman (talk) 13:57, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note I was not informed about this. My post refers to a series of messages like this one [[2]].Slatersteven (talk) 15:53, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alvin the Architect - Music Artist

I've recently been trying to create an artist page for Alvin the Architect but keep getting denied due to a lack of "notability." Thus, I wanted to know what will need to take place in order to get register the artist's Wikipedia page. Alvinthearchitect (talk) 13:52, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By "artist page" I suppose you mean "article". He'll have to attain notability -- about which, please see Wikipedia:Notability. When this happens, people other than Alvin himself are likely to want to create an article about him. If at first they don't, then the article can wait until they do. -- Hoary (talk) 14:04, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Alvinthearchitect: Addition to Hoary, I spot two issues. The first one is your references. I see that there only 3 references from the same website. Please read over Wikipedia:INTREF4 for reliable sources to include onto your draft. The last issue I see is that you are that person, I assume. If I'm wrong, please let me know. But, the reason why I'm saying that is because your username is the title of the draft article you're trying to write about. Please read over COS for information about conflict of interest and how to maintain a neutral tone while writing about a living person that you might have a close relationship with. I hope this helps! Jack Reynolds (talk to me!) (email me!!) 14:13, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Life in Jesus Christ is good

The thing that I want to said is here, Lord is good all the time bcos he is the one that protect u and ur house, families, always we should praise him

@Mazang biran Godwin: Thank you for reminding us of that. Also, please make sure to sign at the end of your message using ~~~~. Jack Reynolds (talk to me!) (email me!!) 14:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mazang biran Godwin: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place to ask questions about using Wikipedia. Do you have any such questions? 331dot (talk) 14:59, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

National Guard Bureau entry and edits

Good morning. One of my coworkers recently attempted to upload a revised entry for Wikipedia's page on the National Guard Bureau. A moderator with the pseudonym "MaterielScientist" promptly rejected the edits stating they "weren't constructive." My coworker has requested clarification on the moderator's discussion page, but not received any response. They then attempted to re-submit the edits and was, again, denied but this time by a different moderator who deemed the second submission as potentially disruptive to Wikipedia's terms. We would like to resolve this impasse so that we can upload our well-researched revision of the National Guard Bureau page. Please offer any guidance you may have on a way forward. 55.190.156.41 (talk) 14:50, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you or your co workers work for the NGB or otherwise for the US federal government, you must review the paid editing policy and make the required formal declaration. There is discussion about this matter on the article talk page, Talk:National Guard Bureau. It appears the content was copied from other sources; I would suggest further discussion take place on the article talk page. If you work for the Bureau, you should not directly edit the article, but you may make a formal edit request on the talk page, detailing changes you feel are needed. The article should summarize what independent reliable sources state about the Bureau. 331dot (talk) 14:57, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From Vikipedi to Wikipedia

Hello, I have a Turkish wikipedia (Vikipedi) page, all the written information has been checked and verified , if I want to open a page in the English wikipedia, can I use all this information ? Is this information valid for English Wikipedia ? Thank You Cenk Taşkan (talk) 15:42, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is the topic? deisenbe (talk) 16:21, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Each language Wiki has different standards for what are considered reliable source references. English considered more rigid. Process will be easier if there are some English language references, although Turkish refs can be used. Other Teahouse hosts will provide guidance on translation process. David notMD (talk) 16:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Cenk Taşkan, welcome to the Teahouse. Pages from a different Wikipedia project can be translated into another (WP:TRANSLATION has the information you're looking for), but be aware that guidelines and policies may differ between the two projects (such as notability criteria). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:29, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Acts of Vandalism against Dream11

Hi there, I want to bring it to everyone's attention that there is an IP address who continues to make misleading changes to

  1. REDIRECT Dream11 . I need to understand if there are measures that one could take to avoid such acts of vandalism? RohitSridhar1994 (talk) 15:57, 3 February 2021 (UTC) RohitSridhar1994 (talk) 15:57, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
RohitSridhar1994, welcome to the Teahouse. Please have a close look at the following for the future: Wikipedia:How to deal with vandalism and Wikipedia:Edit warring. In the meantime I have requested a semi protection for the article and warned the IP user. CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:13, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for a speedy response, I also recommend you to go through the article's talkpage for clarity. RohitSridhar1994 (talk) 16:18, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RohitSridhar1994, I read the talk page before, anyway the IP user has been blocked for one week. CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:19, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A stray (

Article Henry A. Wise, note 26, ahead of the author's last name there is a stray ( without balancing ). I can't figure out how it got there, or how to remove it. Thank you. deisenbe (talk) 16:19, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi deisenbe. I guess you mean a curly {. I have removed it.[3] PrimeHunter (talk) 16:33, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How can I update the title of an article?

Bipolar UK was formerly MDF:the Bipolar organisation. I have updated the text of the article to reflect this, but do not know how to change the title - can anyone help please? Pineappleshake (talk) 16:46, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pineappleshake Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Changing the title of an article requires a page move; you may request this at Requested Moves. 331dot (talk) 16:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ho to create Company Page

Thanks for given me the opportunity of joining this great medium. Is it proper to put paid editor on company page? 3CHUBBML (talk) 17:05, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

3CHUBBML Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have "company pages", it has articles about companies. Those articles are typically written by independent editors, to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Wikipedia has no interest in what a company wants to say about itself.
You should make the paid editing declaration on your user page, User:3CHUBBML. 331dot (talk) 17:11, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response, have updated the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 3CHUBBML (talk • contribs) 18:33, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Status: User blocked and User:3CHUBBML/sandbox at Speedy deletion. David notMD (talk) 20:50, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to add photo and edit info on fathers wikipedia info

My fathers info ( DANE LUSSIER screenwriter ) needs some additions and corrections. Would also like to add his photo and misc. info also correct couple dates. How do I do this please? Thanks, Dane Lussier Jr. 2603:8000:7043:7429:A880:2159:7739:21EE (talk) 17:27, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dane Lussier Jr. In order to upload a photo, you will need to open an account, and make at least ten edits over a period of at least four days. You have a conflict of interest regarding your father, which you should disclose on your user page. You should not edit the article directly. Instead, make a formal edit request at Talk:Dane Lussier. You will need to provide reliable sources supporting the additions and changes you want to make. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:41, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Upload Image from Mobile

I'm at work all day and everything is really slow so I've been doing minor edits to articles on my android phone (using the website on firefox). I wanted to go through and add the cover art for podcasts, but when I tap on "Upload locally to Wikipedia" it appears to just refresh the page or link back to the page I'm on (WP:FUW). Is the page broken or is uploading non-free content not supported on mobile? TipsyElephant (talk) 17:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TipsyElephant: The File Upload Wizard fails for the mobile website because the withJS URL param does not work on mobile. In addition, it looks like the desktop website fails as well due to coding errors in cross-browser-support. I am afraid that you will likely have to switch to a desktop computer for file uploads, or (Only recommended if you know for sure what you are doing) use the plain upload form which does not do the template code stuff for you. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:39, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit

Hello I was wondering why some text that is not wrong gets erased, and if there is a way to get it back. Jmegahey520 (talk) 17:37, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jmegahey520 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume this refers to your edits to Steve Jordan (drummer). Your edits used Wikipedia as a source; Wikipedia cannot be used as a source in Wikipedia articles as that is circular reasoning and Wikipedia is not a reliable source. I think it might help you to use the new user tutorial to learn more about how Wikipedia operates. 331dot (talk) 17:47, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the Rhythm and Blues Music Hall of Fame page there is a hotlink to a website that may have been legit at one time but it is now spam. I don't know how to change the three references to www.rbhof.com but it could be dangerous. It appears that www.rbhof.com does not exist anymore or has been hijacked. Perhaps a more experienced person can fix this? Thanks very much. Regards, Randy Randy Edward (talk) 17:44, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a link to save some time in dealing with this Rhythm and Blues Music Hall of Fame (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). MarnetteD|Talk 17:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 41.191.107.195 (talk) 18:19, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added some '[dead link‍]', and found this archive link of it. Not sure where to put it, so here it is for others. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 20:10, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicting guidance

I have a question. I realize under MOS:JOBTITLES that common noun titles shouldn't be capitalized. However, there's MOS:SPECIFICLINK that suggests linking to a specific page instead of breaking up the linkage. So my question is, should something like United States Secretary of State be stylized as [[United States Secretary of State|United States secretary of state]] because of MOS:JOBTITLES or is the solution to be [[United States Secretary of State]] because of MOS:SPECFICLINK?

Secondly, what sense does it make to put the job title as lowercase in the article, but leave as the original (not lowercase) in the infobox or is an infobox policed under different rules? Snickers2686 (talk) 18:22, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Snickers2686. As far as I can tell there is no conflict. When you say MOS:SPECIFICLINK suggests not "breaking up the linkage", you seem to have interpreted that as advising against piping a link (such as to make a specific title lowercase, in order to follow MOS:JOBTITLES' rule for a generic use); that piping the link is "breaking up the linkage"; it is not. The heart of MOS:SPECIFICLINK's guidance is that, in most cases, a link should send the user to the most specific topic appropriate to the context, rather than to related but less specific topic, i.e., linking to [[Icelandic orthography]] is better than linking to [[Icelandic language|Icelandic]] orthography

So, if it is appropriate in a context to link to an article that is a job title as the most specific link, and the use is generic, then piping the link to a lowercase presentation in order to follow MOS:JOBTITLES, meets MOS:SPECIFICLINK on all fours, because you're still linking to the more specific topic.

Lastly, I don't think the infobox use should be treated differently. It its use is in the generic, it gets lowercased, and if not, not. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:53, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to use a preexisting category so i can add pages that fit under the preexisting category.

I would like to know how to do this so i can help make Wikipedia a better place. Starman2377 (talk) 18:30, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Starman2377: Categories are added by simply adding the name of the Category at the end of an article just like a normal link, e.g. [[Category:Wikipedia Teahouse]]. You can also use a tool like HotCat which allows you to quickly add, change or remove categories without editing directly. Regards SoWhy 18:37, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Music artist wilkepedia page

Am on the right track? Here’s my draft

Draft:Mike Devoe  Syent713 (talk) 19:52, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Syent713 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It's probably disappointing and frustrating to hear, but I must be honest. The first thing I see is that it lacks independent reliable sources to support its content. A Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources state about article subjects, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of (in this case) a notable musician. Please see your first article for more information. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to get my article approved

Hello, I submitted an article on the Cedar Falls Authors Festival, a wonderful year of programs that focused on the five nationally known, best selling authors with ties to Cedar Falls. I thought it was another way to educate the public about these authors. I was not trying to promote it. It is OVER! My reviewers did not seem to get it. I got discouraged and worked on other projects and now I cannot find my draft. Where is it? How do I fix it? Thanks, folks Professorpost Professorpost (talk) 20:02, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Professorpost Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The good news is that your draft was only deleted for inactivity(six months) so I have restored it. That's why you couldn't find it. There does seem to be a concern that some of the content could be copied; that will need to be rewritten. The draft seems like a good accounting of the festival- however that's not what Wikipedia is for. Wikipedia exists to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about an event like a festival, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable event. The article should talk about the event itself, not those associated with it or those that the event features.
If you are associated with this event, you will need to read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you may need to make. 331dot (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aathira Rajeev

Hello,

Why is Aathira Rajeev not notable? She has won an international realty TV show and also some local/state beauty competition. Can you please have a look? Solvz (talk) 20:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Aathira Aalinkeel Rajeev --Paul ❬talk❭ 20:40, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Solvz Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please review the Wikipedia definition of a notable actor (or actress); this is the definition that you will need to show wit significant coverage in independent reliable sources that this person meets- or the more general notable person definition. You have not offered any independent reliable sources to support the content of the article. IMDB is not considered a reliable source as it is user-editable(like Wikipedia). 331dot (talk) 20:44, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question on reliable sources

(Redacted) I know that UGC websites and self published media are unreliable, but what else is not a good source? Darubrub (talk) 22:01, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Darubrub: If you're just trying to get a sense of what is reliable and what isn't, you can visit Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. There's also code that automatically blocks blacklisted sites from being added to articles, and sometimes you won't know until you try to save the edit with the source. I'm not sure how to interpret your announcement that you've been banned from devforums. Hopefully you will have a more constructive experience here. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:35, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I didn't knew there is a list of blacklisted websites. Darubrub (talk) 22:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any purpose to references which link to media sites which are behind a paywall?

Example is "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_the_Midwife#cite_note-53"

This links to The Telegraph, which is a subscription only news source Alex Hudghton (talk) 22:05, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex Hudghton: That is fine. Sources do not require free or even easy access. See WP:PAYWALL. If you want to check what the source says, and don't have access, you can ask at WP:RX RudolfRed (talk) 22:14, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Alex Hudghton: It's possible that the reference was not behind a paywall when it was added. I've updated the reference with an archived version from the Wayback Machine so you can read it. GoingBatty (talk) 02:28, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, Wayback Machine is OK? - I did think of that but wasn't sure - thanks for the replies Alex Hudghton (talk) 08:33, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy MacDonald sound effects artist

User:Jaqor1

I am having great difficulty in editing Jimmy MacDonald's 'Citizenship' which should read British / Uniited States and not (Scottish / United States).

I have also supplied a Birth certificate (via url) to support Jimmy MacDonald's correct Birth Place (Crewe, Cheshire, UK) and not (Dundee Scotland).

On my recent review of the page - 'Jimmy MacDonald Sound Effects Artist' a tag has been added (citation needed) regarding birth place change,

My belief is that the Birth Certificate supplied (via url*) verifys both (Birth place Crewe - citation needed) and (Citizenship - British / United States).

I have attempted to edit these items but appear to be making a hash of it, which is not my wish at all. Jaqor1 (talk) 09:43, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Url* https://p13.zdusercontent.com/attachment/315404/pEXBk680g9LTgrGVRwGnI1ciU?token=eyJhbGciOiJkaXIiLCJlbmMiOiJBMTI4Q0JDLUhTMjU2In0..vtPsPNpgkQxp1XQ_2-tccg.xInhezDxeoiR9-_dF91yXYxpJ2yzzstcCCP1xrZ_2XonOuDAVC_19AvRHSrK4xcGxOZQ5OYVoINVRXaujZbmnF7GbAQv0jpqGF_1Ti18G-NkcEGUtscXTiEbr2vjsEQrJ5gdt0lNcppa2ibiBu37ottuMn688kC0g6cCzCNSdneT9V2B0jKjs2UXCsJ9Xp29spPJiuiUsMIOjuWGKNqwuTw5-kWcJ4yGa5Ksnf10FKr7QD8Cc_CQF82RmlQ-jbIthEdBZfMISbIBDrucrzKLmofIt69xjUyo6xLVIqdnxps.-LhprkK33ID1jKqV7w8gTA

Jaqor1 (talk) 22:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC) Jaqor1 (talk) 22:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The simplest format for a reference to a web page is "<ref>[http(s)://www.domain.eu/blah/blah/blah.html Title of the page]</ref>", after stripping the session ID and other junk from the link. I have fixed this for you. But this doesn't address the problem of citing a primary source that's hosted by person(s) unknown. -- Hoary (talk) 22:46, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
. . . and the best place to discuss it is Talk:Jimmy MacDonald (sound effects artist). -- Hoary (talk) 22:50, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wanted to edit a title

Hi there, got a measure that my edit wasn't constructive. Just wanted to add an "a" to the name of William Peagler. His page seems to have his name typo'd:

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

His official bio even shows his name spelled "Peagler"

https://msuspartans.com/staff-directory/william-peagler/585 76.185.27.192 (talk) 22:19, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and restored your version along with a page move to the correct surname. Thanks for your contributions! —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:27, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I want to submit online articles to add info to a Wiki Page Scoony11 (talk) 23:22, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Scoony11: I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what you're trying to do. Could you make your question more specific? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 01:09, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Scoony11, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are, as you say, a close relative of Glenn Hetrick, then you should not be editing the article about him directly, but should be making edit requests on the talk page instead, according to PSCOI. For information about the (quite restrictive) rules on external links in articles, please see WP:External links. --ColinFine (talk) 12:30, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox ideas

How long dose it take for a userbox idea to get made? I made a idea in December 31 last year. It's now Feb 3rd, and it has not been made, while all the others have been made. W JennilyW (talk) 23:35, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps ask at Wikipedia_talk:Userboxes/Ideas? -- Hoary (talk) 00:01, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JennilyW: Or, make it yourself! Try tinkering around with the various settings that go into it. See WP:UBX. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 01:08, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JennilyW: First, I advise patience. Everyone is volunteers, so it may take some time for your request to be processed. Second, you can try asking one of the users listed at Wikipedia:Userboxes#Users_who_make_userboxes_upon_request directly. If you go down that path, then update your previous request to state that you have asked someone directly to make it, so that there is not duplication of effort. RudolfRed (talk) 01:12, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thank you. JennilyW (talk) 02:55, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JennilyW: You don't have to wait; you can build your own userbox using the Userbox template, like this:
UBXThis user can create their own userbox
There are a couple of examples on my user page. --Verbarson (talk) 09:09, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Which is what User:Ganbaruby has already said, I've just noticed... --Verbarson (talk) 09:25, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Change a photo

 Courtesy link: Allegra Edwards

Hi! Someone created a Wikipedia page about me and I am trying to replace the main photo that is used. The current photo is unflattering. How do I replace it?

Thanks! AllegraRoseE (talk) 02:10, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AllegraRoseE, if you want a better photo, you can take one by yourself and upload it to Wikimedia Commons under a free license. Meaning that it cannot be copyrighted. However note that high quality photos are more welcomed than low quality. GeraldWL 02:31, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gerald Waldo Luis, "Meaning that it cannot be copyrighted" is not accurate. AllegraRoseE, you can upload a picture to which you hold the copyright (eg a selfie, but not a picture taken by somebody else unless they have formally assigned you the copyright) to Wikimedia Commons, licensing it under a licence that allows anybody to use it for any purpose, but you will still hold the copyright. --ColinFine (talk) 12:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@AllegraRoseE: You should also not be editing the article about you, since you have a conflict of interest. After you upload your photo, you can post at Talk:Allegra Edwards using the {{request edit}} template to ask other people to update the photo or make any other changes. GoingBatty (talk) 02:34, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@AllegraRoseE: Hi, may I assume you would prefer this file already on Commons you uploaded? This could be done (although I would suggest cropping some of the empty space). --LordPeterII (talk) 00:07, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Claims

The Apostolic founders section of the article Apostolic succession repeatedly uses "claims", twice in the opening sentence to the section ("traditional claims" and "the churches claim"), then goes on to list 13 churches or groups of churches that claim apostolic succession, such as, "The See of Rome claims to have been founded by..." Is this a correct use of "claim" on Wikipedia or should all "claims" in the section be changed per MOS:CLAIM? I thought I would ask here for a neutral opinion before either changing it or addressing the issue on the article Talk page. thanks – Epinoia (talk) 02:10, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Epinoia, it's not fundamentally wrong; claim is being used as a noun first and a verb afterwards. Editors could try to use synonyms for it like allege if they feel like switching up verbs. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:24, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But "alleged" is also a word to watch as an expression of doubt, per MOS:ALLEGED – cheers, Epinoia (talk) 02:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Right, but it depends on what the sources say; if that is what they said then that's what they said, regardless of whether it's right or wrong. The MOS is warning against using words that have different meanings; admit and claim do not mean the same thing, while claim and allege are virtually the same, though one can have a little more weight than the other. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:03, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update my Fiance's Wikipedia

 Courtesy link: Jeremy Jackson (fighter)

Hello, I'm new here and I had no idea that I wasn't allowed to update my Fiance's wikipedia (until I tried). He is incarcerated and sent me a letter and spoke of what he wanted to add about his personal life. His references of resource is His book that was published. He has no financial gain but wanted to tell His story. Is there anyone who can help make this happen? Gnesia (talk) 02:29, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gnesia, welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, Wikipedia takes much more stock in reliable sources than in what he has to say. As you are also affiliated with the subject, you should declare a conflict of interest, and refrain from editing the page directly; you may suggest edits via edit requests on the article's talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:35, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gnesia Because of your conflict of interest, which should be declared on your User page (something like "I am Jackson's fiancee."), your path to improving the article is by making specific recommendations on the Talk page, for other editors to decide to incorporate or not. Jackson's book about himself is not considered a reliable source of information. That includes his pre-fighter personal life and the behavior change in prison. David notMD (talk) 03:03, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Refs

How do I put titles on refs? I added a ref to a page, and it was red and it said "Title=". How do I add it? JennilyW (talk) 02:57, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JennilyW: You need to go into whatever citation template you're using and add |title= in it. Give the title after the =. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:05, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi JennilyW. The url isn't enough to identify the sourse since web pages move around. See the citation form at Template:Cite web and be sure to include the title of the page, the publisher (name of the website), and the access date for the page (the day you looked at it). StarryGrandma (talk) 03:08, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JennilyW: ...like I did in this edit. It would be better if you found an independent reliable source instead of the company's Twitter post. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:09, 4 February 2021 (UTC) Okay.[reply]
The only thing I could find was there Twitter post, but thanks for helping me out! JennilyW (talk) 03:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to reply to that last comment by saying that then it probably doesn't belong in the article, JennilyW. But having looked at it, and seen that the only references in that section are both Tweets (generally not considered reliable) from the company (not independent) and both dated before the stated release dates (crystal ball), and having searched for reliable independent sources about Loomian Legacy and failed to find any, I have removed the section. If you can find a reliable independent source, it can, of course be restored. But while dates are the kind of thing that we can often use non-independent sources for, a date at which they were going to release it is not a reliable source either for the fact of its release or for its release date. --ColinFine (talk) 15:46, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Phoenix 7119

Hi. I recently created an article with credible secondary sources about businessman and philanthropist, Wallace Rasmussen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Wallace_Rasmussen

I was told: “This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article.” However, I learned that other references about Rasmussen do exist. So, I located them and added them to my article. As it turns out, Rasmussen was a favorite interview subject of the late oral historian, Studs Terkel. Since Terkel’s oral histories were basically edited transcriptions of recorded interviews of his subjects, lacking very little direct “criticism” from Terkel himself, I located book reviews of Terkel’s books and cited them in my article. To maintain organization, I added all references to Terkel’s books about Rasmussen, as well as the aforementioned book reviews, to my article under the heading “Studs Terkel’s Oral Histories.”

Could you answer a few questions for me please: (1) Does this new section improve Rasmussen’s standing as a subject who “qualifies for a Wikipedia article?” 2) Is my new section, “Studs Terkel’s Oral Histories” sufficient/appropriate? Is the heading appropriate for Wikipedia? If not, what do you recommend?

I’m new to Wikipedia, so I would certainly appreciate your thoughts and assistance. Thank you for your time. Phoenix7119 (talk) 03:55, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Phoenix7119. If the reviews of Terkel's books devote significant coverage to Rasmussen, then they contribute to Rasmussen's notability and are useful in your draft. Otherwise, they are of no value in an article about Rasmussen but may possibly be useful in articles about Terkel and his books. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:39, 4 February 2021 (UTC
Phoenix7119, I went through those book reviews. Some do not mention Rasmussen. Others mention him in passing but do not devote significant coverage to him. I noticed one that had a quotation from him but the author didn't spend more than a handful of words describing him. None appeared to devote significant coverage to him, as far as I saw, and to me, they do not add up to notability. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:52, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen 328 Thanks for the advice. I'm going to use it to make the necessary changes to my article. Thanks so much for your time. Phoenix7119 (talk) 10:49, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

small question

in editing i use italics very often, so i have a question. when you italicize something, do you have to click off the italic button before hitting the next key or does it not matter? example: Doja Cat released her second album, titled Hot Pink. vs. Doja Cat released her second album, titled Hot Pink.

The difference between the two is that in one sentence, the period is in the italics and in the other the period is out. Does it make a difference? VersaceSpace is wondering why you would request an article when you could just make it yourself... 05:08, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

VersaceSpace, welcome to the Teahouse. Are you using the visual editor or source editor? Assuming you're using the visual editor, you'd have to turn it off before you start typing anything else. Please also provide a link to your user talk page in your signature. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@VersaceSpace: Leave the period out of the italics. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:44, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
VersaceSpace, I agree with Ganbaruby. The period is not a part of the album title, so it should be outside the italics. It makes no difference whether you are using the visual editor or the source editor, where you italicize with wikicode. The principle is the same. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:00, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The visual editor is a little more finicky, as moving the caret to the last italicised character sets the caret to italicise any following text unless one remembers to turn it off.
Like the others, only the title should be italicised; external punctuation should not. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:25, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My edit did not appear.

My question is that I have edited the Tiger Trail Section of San Diego Zoo Safari Park Article as The cub,Moka currently resides in Lions,Tigers and Bears sanctuary but it is not appearing,As the headline says. Ishaan bommakanti 6548 (talk) 05:15, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your content has been removed, at least twice. It's unsourced and poorly written trivia, and, at least the one time I removed it, it was in the middle of a reference. Meters (talk) 05:25, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ishaan bommakanti 6548: You can see that your edits have been reverted by going to the San Diego Zoo Safari Park article and clicking the "View history" tab. GoingBatty (talk) 05:29, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you were asking about this last edit, it did not appear because it was embedded in the reference. Your text would have shown up at the bottom of the article in the list of references (unless it completely broke the ref, I didn't check). Meters (talk) 05:31, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, your edit contained the word "currently". This is not generally allowed, per WP:CURRENTLY.--Shantavira|feed me 09:26, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Ishaan bommakanti 6548. I see you trying very hard to improve Wikipedia by editing articles about things that you know about, and adding information that is missing. I remember doing the same thing when I was new fifteen years ago. The trouble is that Wikipedia is not interested in what you know - just as it was (and is) not interested in what I know. Wikipedia is only interested in information which a reader next week or next month or next year has a way of verifying, so information which has been published in a reliable source. Unfortunately, we already have a huge amount of unsourced information in thousands of articles, mostly from long ago when editors were less careful about this: in my view, all that unsourced information has negative value for Wikipedia, because a reader has no way of checking whether or not it is correct. So now when somebody adds information without citing a published source, it doesn't improve Wikipedia, but further reduces its value. Adding sourced information usually adds to the value of Wikipedia, and so does adding a source to unsourced information which is already in an article. --ColinFine (talk) 16:00, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Transcluding an episode table from the main article

I am trying to add the episode table from List of Teacher's Pet episodes but when I try to add the List of Teacher's Pet episodes template, all of the content copied directly from the article will appear instead of just the episode table. Please tell me what to do FlutterDash344 (talk) 05:43, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@FlutterDash344: Could you clarify what you're trying to do? What are you copying, and where are you trying to put it? Template:List of Teacher's Pet episodes is not a thing, and the article List of Teacher's Pet episodes uses Template:Episode list. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:47, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay. I will try to add Template:Episode list instead. FlutterDash344 (talk) 05:50, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@FlutterDash344: Is [4] what you were trying to do? It requires the target to be marked with <onlyinclude>...</onlyinclude> like [5] to indicate which parts should be transcluded. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:08, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: Yes, that was exactly what I was trying to do.FlutterDash344 (talk)

Measles page

I was hoping to add a short sentence in the Research section about the variety of strains of measles. This appeared to be a logical place to place it along with a reference that gives details of the strains. However the page is semi-protected so how should I proceed. HaraldW1954 (talk) 06:59, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HaraldW1954: Make an edit request at the article's talk page. Preferably we want you to write out the exact sentence you want to add, and be sure to include reliable sources. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article rejected due to notability issue

HI, my article got rejected due to credibility issue. I have submitted all the references and credits as required by the subject. Please tell me what do we, I really want to publish this article. Need Help Roninaks (talk) 07:04, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Roninaks: Draft:One was deleted because it was unambiguous promotion. I can't see what was originally in the draft before it was deleted, but Wikipedia is not a means of promotion since everything must be written in a neutral point of view. If you have a conflict of interest with the subject, you are strongly discouraged from creating an article about it. Please read the conflict of interest guideline and make any relevant disclosures before you try again. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:18, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can read it. The opening paragraph: Sreenath Gopinath (born September 05, 1993) is an Indian entrepreneur, social activist, e-commerce specialist, cybersecurity expert, innovator and Actor. His entrepreneurship and innovations are guided by his farsighted social perspective and his value-based core competencies has aided, in cofounding four start-up organizations, with positive returns on investments expanding over a time span of three years. And it continues in the same vein. It's a hagiography, obviously promotional. -- Hoary (talk) 07:34, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HOW TO KNOW ARTICLE IS GOOD ENOUGH TO PUBLISH A PAGE

1. How to know my article is good enough to publish a page? 2. How do I publish a page? Does it automatically publish a page when my article is accepted after review? MariaWanders (talk) 07:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MariaWanders: You've submitted Draft:M Lhuillier to the AfC process. A volunteer editor will give you a review; it may be accepted, in which your draft automatically becomes an article, or declined, where the editor will give you instructions on what to improve. There's a lot of drafts to review, so be patient! I am not a reviewer, but I can tell you that your draft will likely be declined because you did not demonstrate that the the subject fulfills the notability guideline. Please read WP:NCORP and find more independent, reliable sources that provide significant coverage about the subject. You also need more of these sources to back up every piece of information in the article. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:25, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is my article approved?

Hello, I would like to know if the article I wrote on YesWeHack, a cybersecurity company, is published. I asked for an approval and someone kindly moved it from draft to the main page two days ago. I can now find it within Wikipedia but if I'm searching for it on a motor engine, with, for instance, "YesWeHack wikipedia", the page I created does not appear. My question is: is there a delay for the article to appear on a motor engine? Or should I do something else because the article was not properly published? Thank you in advance! Mathbsnd (talk) 09:59, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mathbsnd, the article has been in the mainspace, so yes it has been approved. Wikipedia has no control on whether search engines display this site on their knowledge panel, although we know that they can display it. It's probably just a matter of luck. But that doesn't matter -- you made an article, and that's already great. GeraldWL 10:04, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mathbsnd, the page isn't marked as reviewed yet so it's set to no_index, so likely won't appear in search engines. After it's reviewed or after 90 days, whichever is sooner, it'll be available for search engines to index. Regards, Zindor (talk) 11:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Per what Zindor wrote, Wikipedia has a new articles patrol process. Either it clears the no-index within 90 days, or if no one gets to it, happens automatically at 90 days. No way for you to speed up the process. David notMD (talk) 11:36, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved the article to draft as it appears to be a paid for article which bypassed the review process? Theroadislong (talk) 11:56, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Courtesy link: draft:YesWeHack TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 13:52, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article Assistance - SysCAD

Hi, I am looking for some assistance with Draft:SysCAD. If anyone would be available to review it would be greatly appreciated. DanMunchie (talk) 10:34, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(i) When you say "principals", you mean what are conventionally spelt "principles". (ii) The draft is only four sentences long. If this is all that can be said about the subject matter, is the subject matter notable? -- Hoary (talk) 13:21, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Making a wiki page

can anyone make a wiki page for me 103.151.184.206 (talk) 12:18, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Almost certainly not, unless you make a proposal that's somehow attractive. -- Hoary (talk) 13:18, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not social media. Subjects of biographical articles must meet specific definitions of notability. Editors are strongly advised against trying to create an article about themselves. David notMD (talk) 13:49, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help. My article was deleted.

My article was speedy deleted. I want to revise it so it meets the Wikipedia Guidelines but I need access to it. What can I do? Dcfmagic (talk) 13:19, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's not possible. I've seen it: it looks as if it's written for a company brochure. This website isn't a congeries of corporate advertising; it's an encyclopedia. If you believe that your subject is notable, then start from scratch, using not what the company says about itself and its birds, but instead what independent, reliable, published sources say. -- Hoary (talk) 13:27, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@hoary I understand and apologize. I did not intend to cause an issue. Is there any way I can have a copy of the article, for my own purposes. I am requesting a copy of my work, not to be published. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcfmagic (talk • contribs) 13:56, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dcfmagic The content can still be seen here Draft:Miliquin Macaws, and yes it is totally inappropriate for an encyclopaedia article. Theroadislong (talk) 15:29, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am afraid that I had to delete about 11.6 KB of text for being a copyright violation of https://tcfeathers.com, which appears to be a copyrighted website. Please never copy texts from the internet onto Wikipedia. From my experience, 99% of the texts not written for Wikipedia are also unsiutable for Wikipedia, even if we could get the legal stuff sorted. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update Content - Massachusetts House of Representatives' 17th Middlesex district

We are reaching out from the Office of State Representative Vanna Howard of Massachusetts 17th Middlesex District. Vanna Howard is the newly-elected State Representative and now serves the 17th Middlesex District. Could your team please update the content on your page:

Massachusetts House of Representatives' 17th Middlesex district https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_House_of_Representatives%27_17th_Middlesex_district

Thank you! 73.142.12.88 (talk) 13:48, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mai

Hello, IP. Edit requests should go on the talk page, backed up by a reliable source. Thanks, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 14:45, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article gets only a few views per day, and the Talk page, less, so that suggestion will not work. I will see if I can finds a newspaper citation for Howard being the State Representative, and add that information. David notMD (talk) 15:18, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This should do: https://www.thetimesherald.com/elections/results/race/2020-11-03-state_house-MA-23048/. David notMD (talk) 15:22, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It occurred to me that the appointment of Vanna to that level of position in a US state should really be announced somewhere official - like the state's website. And after a bit of digging, I found it: https://malegislature.gov/Legislators/Members/House. So I wonder: Is a state's website a sufficiently reliable source for Wikipedia? (It seems to me that it should be higher up the scale than even the most reputable newspaper.) And if not, why bother including the website on the US State infobox? --Verbarson (talk) 17:35, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, either or both. Do you want to do it? And while at it, use that .gov citation to update all of the other Districts that have new representatives? David notMD (talk) 18:33, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Consider it done [[6]] (But only for Vanna Howard) --Verbarson (talk) 20:15, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
and [[7]] to put the overview right. --Verbarson (talk) 20:23, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RS-fail

I made an addition to a page. It was almost immediately deleted with the tag "RS-fail". What does that mean ? 78.144.85.108 (talk) 15:33, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP, RS stands for Reliable source. In this case, it looks like your edit was reverted because you didn't provide a source to back it up. See WP:CITE and WP:RS for more information. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 15:51, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I probably won't continue this matter; for the same reason I don't get into discussions on Twitter.

78.144.85.108 (talk) 16:25, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

just started

Just started,

Dear all, I just started mostly because I have seen some missing citations for which I know what to link. Now I have seen some sections which were a bit messy according to my clinical knowledge. When do you think it is the right time to start rearranging structures of pages (e.g. creating a new structure, linking others which are totally independent? Etc)

any advice is appreciated. Giorgio Didiogiorgio (talk) 16:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Didiogiorgio and welcome to the Teahouse. Those with expertise in medicines and related technical areas are always very welcome here. You need to take a read of WP:MEDRS, which covers some of the specially high standards Wikipedia sets for medicine-related articles. You won't run into trouble if you use reliable WP:SECONDARY sources. You might want to comment on the Talk Page of any article where you propose to make a major restructuring, in the hope of attracting other editors from the various Projects that are interested in those articles — and of course you could join those Projects yourself. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:59, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
From looking at your past edits, you appear to be off to a good start. One small thing - refs are placed after punctuation. If you are starting to make major changes to an article, be explicit in your Edit summaries, and it may be wise to create a new section at the Talk page of the article, explaining your intent. Keep in mind that what you know is true is useful, but verification with citations is essential. General rule is BRD: be BOLD in your edits, but if REVERTED, take to Talk for a DISCUSSION. David notMD (talk) 18:03, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I put some userbox with images on my page, I just wanna know could I get in trouble for putting images in the boxes.? Max20characters (talk) 16:20, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As your user page stands, the flag of the USA and the colour blue aren't going to cause any copyright problems. Have a look at File:English language.svg it may be a better match for your text in the userbox. - X201 (talk) 16:46, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hello, Max20characters, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. Any image that is already in Wikimedia Commons (as those two are) may be used by anybody, anywhere, for any purpose, as long as they give attribution. Adding them to a page in Wikipedia automatically gives that attribution, because it is at the image's page in Commons. An image that has been uploaded to Wikipedia rather than Commons may or may not be available: you would need to look at the image's description page to see whether it was free or non-free. If it is free (public domain, or licensed with a free licence such as CC-BY-SA), then you can use it anywhere. If it is non-free, then you may use it only if such use meets all ten criteria in NFCC - which include that it may be used only in articles, so non-free images may not be used on a user page. --ColinFine (talk) 16:48, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ColinFine, ok thank you for the info, X201 thanks for the info and image, i will use it for my userbox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Max20characters (talk • contribs) 17:11, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile Edit Functionality

I'm using an android phone on firefox. I can't seem to edit more than a single section of an article (i.e. content below headers like See also, External links, Further reading, etc.) and was wondering if there's a way to do this that I've overlooked. It's quite frustrating because I can't move a section that's in the wrong place or make minor edits to multiple sections at the same time. I also noticed there doesn't appear to be a "minor edit" checkbox while using mobile. Why is this? Especially when most mobile edits are probably going to be minor. TipsyElephant (talk) 17:22, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TipsyElephant: The mobile version (as well as the app) don't have all the features of desktop. Editing the whole page doesn't seem to be supported on mobile, as well as edit checkboxes (minor edits, watchlist, etc.) If you do need them, I personally recommend using the desktop site, and changing your skin to either Timeless or monobook (with responsive mode turned on). it still can be a bit difficult due to the narrow screen size, but this solution allows you to use all desktop features on a mobile device. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:45, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seek help with draft article on Joseph Conforte

Hello! I need a reviewer or two to help with my draft article about the infamous Joseph Conforte. My draft has been rejected, saying I need to avoid Peacock Words and I need more citations, but Paul Carpenter, the editor, did not provide any detail of what word or fact needs my attention. Can anyone help me? Owilli2019 (talk) 18:21, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Joseph Conforte ‎ Possibly (talk) 19:39, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Owilli2019 Welcome to The Teahouse. Sentences like "Thus even in death, Joe Conforte seems to mock the world by not having proof he is gone." certainly have no place in an encyclopedia, we just need the dry referenced facts, much of your content has no sourcing. Wikipedia summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic. Theroadislong (talk) 18:29, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note a significant article on Joe Conforte already exists, but was converted into a redirect due to sourcing issues. Possibly (talk) 19:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Owilli2019: This is a very large article, which may make things difficult for a first article,as it requires so many fixes. The biggest problem is that lacks independent sources for the many claims it makes. I removed the references to an unpublished interview, as this is not the kind of sources we use. If you want to get this article published, I suggest cutting it down to three paragraphs. Then, after reading WP:RS andWP:SIGCOV, find five independently published articles that talk about what you have said in the Wikipedia article. Material that you have collected on your own through research, as you mentioned on my talk page, is not a WP:RS. Thanks. Possibly (talk) 19:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Owilli2019: - I think he deserves an article, but the sourcing is poor, and it's not written in the correct style, as others have pointed out above. I identified several sources and put them on the talk page. I recommend you read the sources, as well as the Rolling Stone source you already use, write the article based on what is in them (in your own, non-florid words), and use that as the basis for your draft. Save what you have now as a text file for future use. Ping me when you're done and if it looks good, I'll move it over the redirect. Then you can gradually add more of the info from your saved file as you can source it. The link for the resource is WP:SIGCOV. Good luck! TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:49, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic! I'm learning... Owilli2019 (talk) 20:56, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adding content

 Courtesy link: Lisa Daniely

Just made first two edits, adding to an actor’s filmography. Appear in red & not the expected blue despite trying to get the wording correct. They are existing headings. Clearly I have not got it quite right. Guidance please. Oldfilmguy (talk) 19:28, 4 February 2021 (UTC) Oldfilmguy (talk) 19:28, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Oldfilmguy: You need to enter the article titles as is. For example, it should just be Scotland Yard (film series) and Sherlock Holmes (1984 TV series). You can use a pipe trick (adding a | after the closing parenthesis before the closing square brackets) to remove the disambiguator. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:37, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Engine

Hi, what "wiki engine" does Wikipedia use? For example, wikipedia.org, wiktionary.org, and wikimedia.org seem to use the exact same website design but another wiki website fandom.com looks completely different. I would really like to know. Is it called "MediaWiki"?

Thanks 47.150.227.254 (talk) 20:02, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@47.150.227.254: Yes, Wikipedia as well as (AFAIK) fandom use The MediaWIki engine. The funny thing is that the MediaWiki engine can produce very diverse html output. Depending on the installed skins, the output of the engine may vary significantly. For example, Wikipedia and it's affliates use vector (the default), [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?useskin=cologneblue Cologne Blue, monobook, Timeless, modern and minerva (Default for Mobile devices) depending on the user preferences. The joke about this is that even those skins aren't fixed: many things can still be changed by editing MediaWiki:Common.css (if you have the edit previliges). Fandom.com seems to be using a skin called "Oasis", based on their Special:Version page (I have chosen a random Wiki in this case). Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:12, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! :-) @Victor Schmidt:

47.150.227.254 (talk) 20:20, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is the procedure around disputed edits, or, how do I get consensus?

Hi

A week and a half ago I came across this edit [8] while browsing recent changes (side question: how do people do nice wiki-links to a specific edit?) I boldly reverted the change since I felt after looking at the description of the movie that it was very much related to Chabad, and I suspected that the IP-editor's reason for removing it might have been more because it was critical of the religion than because it was unrelated to it. However, the established user Sir Joseph disagreed with me, and reverted my reversion: [9]. I then thought the right thing to do was to take the discussion to Sir Joseph's talk page (right?), and after some discussion we agreed that singling out just the one critical movie was inconsistent. Either all cultural works not specifically about the religion should be removed, or the movie in question should be allowed to stay. See discussion here. Lastly, Sir Joseph told me: "You might want to post on the article talk page and see about consensus", so I did just that: [10].

Now a week and a half has passed without comment, so I thought I should ask you guys how this process is supposed to work. Do I just go ahead with my preferred option of re-inserting the originally removed movie if nobody answers after a while? In that case, how long is a while? Do I directly ask some prolific editors of the article for comment on their talk pages, or what?

Thanks in advance for any help! Knuthove (talk) 20:30, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Knuthove: You can use Template:diff with the specific revision numbers to make a very nice link. Finding consensus on smaller articles can be a bit tricky, because they are poorly trafficked. However, if someone reverts you, they are an ideal person to talk it out with. If only SirJoseph is active on that article, then maybe its better to just talk it out with him. If you can't come to an agreement, you can always ask for a third opinion formally. Formal dispute resolotuion also exists. Whenever talking about specific editors on a talk page, it is best to ping them using Template:ping, as otherwise they probably won't see your message. AdmiralEek (talk) 21:05, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As an add-on, if you just want to show the changes between a revision and the one right before it, use {{dif}}, where the first parameter takes the ID number of the resulting revision. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:40, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What merits a new section?

Hello. A few months ago, I added a new section to a Wikipedia article about a politician and a "scandal" he took part in. I won't go into too much detail, but he hit someone with his truck on purpose and went to court for it. It was removed for being previously being mentioned (albeit in passing), but I went into detail about the subject and the backlash the politician received. Are there any rules on when to add a new section? Deathconsciousness (talk) 20:35, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UNDUE would definitely help! WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 20:52, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You added a lot of detail about a 2008 incident already briefly covered in the article, that ended in a reckless driving misdemeanor and a settled civil suit. I agree WP:UNDUE applies. David notMD (talk) 21:24, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to add a name on the Bossa Nova Singers wiki page

I want to add Bianca Rossini under the "B" category on the Bossa Nova Singers wiki page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Category:Bossa_nova_singers&oldid=prev&diff=1004876725

I do not understand the instructions given, they are not clear.

Best, Patrick Lockwood Patrick Lockwood (talk) 22:17, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Patrick Lockwood, and welcome to the Teahouse. You do not add entries to a Category: you add the category to articles. So what you would need is to add the category to the Wikipedia article Bianca Rossini, which doesn't currently exist (that's why the link is red). If she meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then an article could be written about her. You are welcome to create it, but be aware that creating a new article is a very difficult task for an inexperienced editor. Alternatively, you could try and interest somebody else in doing so: either at Requested articles (though the takeup is very low there) or at a suitable WikiProject such as WikiProject Dance or WikiProject Women in Red. Once the article is written and accepted into the encyclopaedia, then it can be added to the category. --ColinFine (talk) 23:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

John F Mazzaferro article has Problems

So I don't even know what to do with this article: John F Mazzaferro. The person that made the article has been told on his talk page about COI, specifically in relation to this author. It's basically a list of links, and it's related to a living person. I genuinely have no clue what template I'd even mark it with. I kinda don't think he's notable enough but I don't really have any experience with checking that. Please help, this one is too much for me. Xurizuri (talk) 01:57, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Xurizuri, I've gone ahead and moved it to draftspace, as it doesn't really meet any article standards. It seems the original editor is inactive, so if anyone feels like working on it, now's the time. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tenryuu, thank you! Is there anything else that needs to be done with the article? (other than writing it into a functional article) --Xurizuri (talk) 02:05, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Xurizuri, only that it should be worked on every once in a while; inactive drafts are procedurally deleted six months after their last edit. When it's ready slap a {{subst:submit}} on it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Or tag it with Proposed deletion. Mazzaferro wrote several (5? 7?) technical books back in the early 1990s. A quickie search found nothing about him, just lists of the books. I cannot see how this can be rescued. David notMD (talk) 08:33, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Give feedback on Ashish Chanchalani

I saw the draft Draft:Ashish chanchalani. There were some mistakes in this draft that I fixed. Now I think the draft Ashish chanchalani is worth publishing. If you give your opinion and find some mistake, correct it, publish. Marwadi Indian (talk) 03:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It awaits a review. At the top, one reads: "Review waiting, please be patient. / This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order." This means what it says. Please be patient. -- Hoary (talk) 04:48, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Why is the title not "Ashish Chanchlani"? David notMD (talk) 08:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@David notMD, Actually the title Ashish Chanchlani is protected by administrators. Marwadi Indian (talk) 10:35, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, this is an attempt to again create an article about the person Ashish Chanchlani by giving it the working title "Ashish Chanchalani" because the original was deleted and salted? David notMD (talk) 10:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I Understand you deleted my edit on Yu-GI-Oh! GX but...Why? i can explain.

A wall of text that isn't a question. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 08:47, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well...I Am The YouTuber Lightning Alexis. i got famous thanks to making AMVs by someone more famous inspiring me. however year ago i did actually find and spoke to Shin Yoshida at a japanese social media. it was very hard to find him. back at that day before i left the japanese media after my question got answered privately i copied and pasted what Shin told me into a personal document of mine because i want to reveal an official yugioh canon relationship: Alexis Rhodes/Asuka Tenjoin and Jesse Andersen/Johan Andersen. a lot of people argue with my fans about if there's any proof of Alexis loving Jesse instead of Jaden. yesterday i exposed and revealed to everyone on YouTube what one of the writers Shin Yoshida explained to me in japanese about if Alexis and Jesse are in a relationship or not. year ago at a japanese social media i asked Yu-Gi-Oh! GX's writer in private about if there's a relationship between Alexis and Jesse. Shin Yoshida confirmed in japanese to me that Alexis and Jesse ended up together offscreen in Episode 179 Farewell Judai! a Tearful Graduation Ceremony and after the confirmation and explanations, Yoshida requested me to leave immediately duo to this conversation between us only. at late February 2020 i exposed to the internet and YouTube, Alexis and Jesse's canon relationship without proofs of them liking each other which caused me to argue with most people and fans and get bullied by them for months until i faked apologizing to the fans about lying to them without proofs because i know i did actually talk to the writer in private at japanese social media that got shutdown since the conversation ended and is encrypted in private sections the writer keeps for himself. i faked my apologies out of fear against the fans and people that bullied me and mistreated me and as a result of the bullying i quit YouTube for a week until i returned by moving forward from what happened yet i proved myself right to the fans and people by revealing yesterday the proof of Alexis and Jesse in a relationship canonically. after i exposed and revealed Shin Yoshida's answer and explanations to me in japanese, fans and people became outraged and anxious after Alexis and Jesse are officially canon like Sakura and Sasuke from the Naruto Anime. some fans killed themselves duo to heartbreak and some fans riot against my fans who are hyped and happy by Alexis and Jesse officially canon. because of Shin Yoshida's confirmation about a relationship that he and Kazuki developed but couldn't show the dance and how Alexis and Jesse ended up together, their reason for not showing the affections and how Alexis and Jesse like each other was because they didn't want to upset their fans including while still developing Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D's at the year 2008. i proved the fans that bullied me wrong as i was mistreated for a year duo to showing no proof until i finally showed what Shin told me at the japanese social media. while Alexis and Jesse are canon next to Yuma and Kotori, fans are questioning about Akiza and Yusei if the two kissed offscreen or not. Kazuki Takashi stated years ago that Yusei knew Akiza loves him and he didn't return her feelings but gets together with her later in their lives. duo to Yoshida's confirmation also from year ago my Alexis and Jesse AMVs are also officially canon and relevant. heartbroken and angry fans that prefer Jaden with Alexis however blame Shin Yoshida and Kazuki Takahashi for making Alexis and Jesse a couple offscreen in a cut script and writing of Yu-Gi-Oh! GX Episode 179. the fans that are hyped however are happy and thank me for exposing the truth and proof of their favorite characters ending up together and that Kazuki and Yoshida are blessing writers and directors for keeping a secret for many years. additional Jaden and Alexis fans are also suffering deep depression and traumas since Shin Yoshida's confirmation got revealed. Alexis and Jesse ended up together in Episode 179 offscreen despite that Jaden and Alexis are more popular and my fans and i celebrate today Yoshida's Explanations and Answer. it's all true. i swear. i did suffer a lot back then. it made me stronger because i don't give up on revealing the truth. this is what Shin Yoshida told me year ago when i spoke to him privately in his japanese social media after i requested to meet him: アスカはジュダイを愛しているが、他の誰かを愛しているので彼に告白するのをやめた。十分なスポットライトが得られなかった2人のキャラクターの間のより成熟した発展を探求したいと思いました。卒業パーティーでアスカとヨハンが踊る脚本を作りましたが、当時5Dの開発を始めていたため、画面に放映できませんでした。あすかと十代の関係を望んでいる観客を怒らせたくなかったので、脚本をあきらめました。あすかと十代を一緒に作りたかったのですが、ユーベルとヨハンのせいでできませんでした。 Johanは、彼がどれほど特別で成熟しているかという理由でJudaiの分身であり、AsukaとJohanの開発の間に削除されたスクリプトがありました。さなえいは、アンデルセンが成熟していることから、十代よりもヨハンを好むことを認めた。あすかは未来へと進み、一緒に旅に出たヨハンと一緒に先生になります。これは私たちの間だけであり、あなたは私たちの会話を聴衆に公開することはできません。はいあなたの質問に答えるために。 Asuka x Johanは、私たちが見せることができなかった開発を彼らに与えたので、カノンです。私は今あなたの去りを要求するかもしれません。ご質問ありがとうございます。

that's the proof of Alexis and Jesse canonically in relationship. he confirmed it himself. it wasn't easy to find him and it's very hard to get his or Kazuki's attentions. i didn't give up however because i believed in myself to find the writer. the edit was based on what i experienced back then year ago. everything i suffered until now...i suffered the most in life. i wish my edit will stay....i study computing at college and it's tough but i'm really good at it somehow. i hope i'll get more appreciation. i doubted myself too much in life. i'm tired of people bullying me for exposing a canon yugioh pairing. Alexis fantrust (talk) 07:37, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CliffsNotes, please? Nobody is going to read a mighty wall-o-text, much less some which includes text that most of us can't read and can't trust Google Translate to not screw up (as it tends to falter on Japanese). —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 08:37, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Alexis fantrust Before I went half-blind trying to finish reading all that, I got a sense that you have unpublished information that led to your edit at Yu-Gi-Oh! GX, which was reverted by another editor (not by anyone here at Teahouse). The next proper step is to start a discussion on the Talk page of the article. I strongly recommend keeping it short. David notMD (talk) 08:43, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Duly started. Kind of. -- Hoary (talk) 09:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Net Worth (Forbes & Bloomberg)

I was new to Wikipedia and I had a question to ask you guys. I usually use Bloomberg Billionaire Index to edit on Wikipedia pages. I usually don't use Forbes to edit. But, some of my edit were removed by the same user and the user is an experience user. I do not violate any rules in Wikipedia & I just edit those billionaire's net worth with the reference & evidence on my edit (date, time, link, access date & much more) But they are replacing Bloomberg Billionaire Index with Forbes. Can anyone tell me why?? LohShiSan2004 (talk) 07:47, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Features of "authority control" and how to improve its correct reflection

Can you explain or just correct it?

Why does the page of Alexei Eryomin not reflect all 9 parameters of "authority control" reflected here [11]?

Even on ptWiki and esWiki - 5 parameters are reflected [12], and on enWiki only 2? Noophelia 2.0 (talk) 09:21, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Noophelia 2.0, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikidata stores identifiers at A L Eryomin (Q87055226). Each Wikipedia language codes which of them to show, if the language even has a feature to show them. The English Wikipedia has Template:Authority control. You can post suggestions to Template talk:Authority control. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Issue with Grevys zebra article

It says it’s subgenus is Dolichohippus but the zebra article says all zebras are in the sub genus Hippotigris does anyone know if the Grevys zebra or the zebra article the true sub genus for the Grevys zebra — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.254.10.148 (talk) 09:34, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both have been used. See Grévy's zebra#Taxonomy and naming and Zebra#Taxonomy and evolution. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:49, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&oldid=1004983353"