Jump to content

Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mmartinkov (talk | contribs) at 22:29, 11 March 2021 (→Repeatedly being branded a paid contributor). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

    ↑ To top of page
    Shortcuts
    Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)
    • For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
    • Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
    • If your question is about a Wikipedia article, draft article, or other page on Wikipedia, tell us what it is!
    • Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
    • For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
    • New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).
    Ask a question

    March 8

    Talk?

    Dear Wikipedia,

    I am still having problems to talk to your writers. In an article I posed via Talk a remark. What happened? The writer did delete it without comment.

    Is this the way we relate to each other?

    Regards. 145.129.136.48 (talk) 00:12, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi there! When Hob Gadling deleted your post on Talk:Hans Eysenck, the user added a comment in the edit summary stating "delete contribution that does not belong here because of WP:TALK". If you don't understand an action an editor made, you can ask a question on the user's talk page: User talk:Hob Gadling. GoingBatty (talk) 00:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The page to which Hob Gadling pointed you starts The purpose of an article's talk page (accessible via the talk or discussion tab) is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or WikiProject. Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views on a subject. You weren't proposing a change, and seemed to be doing no more than giving your personal view. -- Hoary (talk) 02:00, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    First Draft

    Hello All, light bulb New proposal

    I created my first Draft I was hoping to get someone’s insight on how I did. Page can be found here: Draft:Nouveau Shamanic Thank You. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 06:41, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    The link to the NYT is broken, which is a poor sign. Also, you have used the same reference twice in two cases (NYT and Film School Rejects). You need to look at WP:OPCIT to see how to use the same reference multiple times. In terms of content, I think more explanation is needed in simple terms. Did you just copy what was written in the articles you were citing? Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Note also that Nicolas Cage#Acting style already includes stuff about Nouveau Shamanic, Elvisisalive95. For a separate article there needs to be good evidence that this style is independently WP:NOTABLE. It can't inherit that notability from Cage himself, there have to be several WP:SECONDARY sources that specifically discuss the topic at some length. Shame Cage doesn't seem to have produced his promised book on it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:42, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Michael D. Turnbull I’m not sure why that link comes up as broken, I googled the article again. Brought up the site, saw that the article was working. Then I took the link again re-posted it, yet when I click on it through Wikipedia it shows up as broken. If you were to Google the article it would show up. Strange, I’ll have to work on this. Also I’ll try to use more laments terms i read the article then did my interpretation of what was being said. I’m going to look for more sources and hope Cage does release his Oprah Best Sellers List book!  Thank you very much! Elvisisalive95 (talk) 13:27, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Elvisisalive95: The link to the NYT you need is [1]. If you compare the source code here with that currently in your draft, you'll see the draft has a peculiar sort of "double" version of the URL. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Elvisisalive95, I'm not sure what was up with that link, but I've replaced it with the proper one. I also fixed the ref names, which were not functioning properly before. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 13:41, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    User:EDG 543 Thank you very much, when I click it here it works. But I just clicked on the link after your revisions of the draft and it seems to automatically come up again as broken. Check again and let me know if it’s the same on your end. Maybe it’s in need of a manual entry? Elvisisalive95 (talk) 13:45, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Elvisisalive95, it was working for me when I had initially tested it, but it was broken again when I checked just now. I'm not sure why, but it had become a sort of double URL again, as Mike Turnbull had mentioned earlier. I fixed it manually, and it seems to be fixed now. Try it out to see if its fixed for real this time. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 13:53, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    User:EDG 543 I just tried, and eureka! It does work now! I truly appreciate that, good to know going forward! Thank you Elvisisalive95 (talk) 13:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Elvisisalive95, hey, no prob. Good luck on the draft! Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 14:00, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Corona effects the editing frequency of wikipeida ?

    Before corona , last year with avarage one edit per minute in ANI , but the editing speed reduced nealy one edit per ten minutes ..what may be the reason ? How to increase editing speed ?

    (Trodento (talk) 03:15, 8 March 2021 (UTC))[reply]

    It would be better if many people reduced their editing speed. It's likely that the results would then make more sense. -- Hoary (talk) 03:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Trodento: Please clarify what you refer to. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:53, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the OP is trying to say that there have been fewer edits in general since covid? I'm not sure. 331dot (talk) 10:05, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Other way around, I think: Wikipedia has seen a spike in people editing pages during the pandemic Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:58, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure edits to ANI is the best example of anything really, other than the amount of incidents being reported. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:17, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    How to delete

    How do I delete my account? — Preceding unsigned comment added by D and D master 2016 (talk • contribs) 12:43, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    D and D master 2016 You can't, but see this link: WP:VANISH. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:49, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks to Wikipedia for providing this platform to talk through the helpdesk and communicate on some issues. I am here to request that our company named Showboat Sausages Brand is missing from a link on Wikipedia: Link but thanks to Wikipedia's terms & conditions that they provide the opportunity to discuss with them.

    Company Name: ShowBoat Brand Sausage Link to Our Company: Link — Preceding unsigned comment added by Showboatbrand (talk • contribs)

    Hello Showboatbrand, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your link is page which list WP:s articles about Sausage_companies_of_the_United_States, your company is not there because afaict, WP doesn't have an article about you. Maybe it should, I have no idea atm.
    If you think WP should have such an article, there are 2 things you can try. You can post at WP:REQUEST, which tbh has a huge backlog. Or you can learn how WP-editing works, and try to make one yourself. I recommend you start with these links: WP:NORG, WP:TUTORIAL, WP:YFA and WP:COI. Also, per one of WP:s many many (many) rules (WP:ORGNAME) your username is not ok. If you want the org-name in there, something like "Kim at Showboatbrand" is ok. The easy way to fix this is to just abandon this account and make a new one. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Contacts with authorities of the Russian Wikipedia

    Please give me contacts with the persons who are responsible for the Russian Wikipedia. I have spent too much time on this and cannot find them. All links lead to English Wikipedia. Konstantine Gunin (talk) 15:50, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Konstantine Gunin, friend, there is no single person or group of people "responsible" for the Russian Wikipedia. It is managed by thousands of volunteers, just like the English one. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 15:53, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    As I don't speak Russian, all I can suggest is that you start at "the Russian Wikipedia Main Page". and look for links to something resembling a Help Desk or Teahouse — surely Russians must drink tea ;-) Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:02, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Konstantine Gunin: This is a link to this Help Desk's Russian counterpart: ru:Википедия:Форум/Вопросы (transl. Wikipedia:Forum/Questions).
    And this is a link from the Teahouse: ru:Википедия:Форум/Помощь начинающим (Wikipedia:Forum/Help for beginners). --CiaPan (talk) 16:19, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    User blocked

    Hello my user is Aless28, I don't know why someone blocks me, I was trying to make a page for artists, please help me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aless28 (talk • contribs) 16:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Aless28: This post is your only post on Wikipedia. User:Aless28 has not been blocked. Were you editing using a different username or IP address that was blocked? GoingBatty (talk) 17:00, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @(talkI was trying to make a page the page is this one: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gvantanamo my Ip address is blocked forever and also the page is now canceled I don't know why, it is an artist and I was making his page — Preceding unsigned comment added by CorvialG1927 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    We can't help you. You'll need to deal with that at Italian Wikipedia. CUPIDICAE💕 17:05, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) @CorvialG1927: It appears three users on the Italian Wikipedia deleted the article you created there because it was "obviously non-encyclopedic or promotional content". it:User:CorvialG1927 (which is not an IP address) was blocked there for misusing multiple accounts (as you have done here), which is called "sockpupperty" on Wikipedia. As Praxidicae said above, you can discuss it further on the Italian Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 17:12, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    DJ biography?

    I am looking to write a bio on a relatively big DJ from Africa and the Middle East but i am not sure if i am allowed to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AceManager (talk • contribs) 18:26, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    AceManager, I see no reason why you wouldn't be allowed to... If you have a close relation to the subject (ex. the DJ is you, your brother, paying you to create the article, etc.) you must disclose your conflict of interest before beginning. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 18:31, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    FYI
     – Merging from a separate section below. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:52, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    I read that when writing a bio on someone they have to have a certain amount of fame is that true — Preceding unsigned comment added by AceManager (talk • contribs) 18:37, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    For the article to be accepted, it needs to establish that its subject is notable. That word is used in a non-standard sense here in Wikipedia: click that blue link to learn what it means. Maproom (talk) 18:46, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    If you're associated with the DJ or know them personally/professionally, then you should not write the article because of apparent conflict of interest. Also if your username is an organization/group you should change your username. If the person doesn't have external news articles about them, then I would hold off on creating an article until they do. I would read WP:MUSICBIO and see if they meet that criteria. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:59, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Anthony Lolli page - no response to talk requests for edit

    Hi I have tried multiple times to submit a request for edit using the talk page on the Anthony Lolli. It states I have a COI but I have clearly stated that I am being paid to edit the page. My IP has been blocked for direct edit but just want to resolve the situation ASAP. Can someone get back to me with a way forward? Thanks Aude — Preceding unsigned comment added by AudeNF2021 (talk • contribs) 18:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @AudeNF2021: In this edit by you, you added {{request edit|D|ADV}} to request someone reviews your request. However, by adding "|D|ADV", you accidentally declined your own request. You should have only added {{request edit}} with no parameters - see the instructions at Template:Request edit. Victor Schmidt and I have fixed the {{request edit}} templates for you. In the future, I suggest that you request work on one section at a time, as some editors may feel overwhelmed to review an entire rework of an article. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 19:43, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Adding images

    No matter how hard I try, I can't put a picture into my userpage. It is very frustrating. Help!~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarioFyreFlower (talk • contribs) 20:04, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @MarioFyreFlower: What picture are you trying to add to your userpage? Has it already been uploaded to Wikipedia or Commons? What wikicode are you using to display the image? Do you have an old version of your userpage that shows what you were trying to do? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 20:37, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Why was my Article removed.... I thought it was constructive... and useful...

    I submitted a legitimate article, and it was removed saying it was "not constructive"... How do I change the article so that it appears constructive and so that it doesn't get removed?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Capping&direction=prev&oldid=1009465121

    Screenshot of removed article: https://www.dropbox.com/s/nmh9ilujfsuavw9/Screenshot_of_Removed_Article_Capping_20210308.png?dl=0

    Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by MAXmonkieROD (talk • contribs) 20:09, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello MAXmonkieRO, and welcome to Wikipedia! Phuzion reverted your edit, and probably could have left a more informative message as to why, instead of a generic, standardized template. However, the generic standardized templates are often useful. At any rate, there are a couple problems with your edit to Capping. First, Capping is a disambiguation page, not a proper article. Disambiguation pages are designed to solve the problem of multiple articles on different topics with the same or similar titles. They exist to direct readers to the appropriate article, when more than one could match the search term they used. Disambiguation pages should not have additional content. Your edit appeared to be adding a new definition of Capping for which we don't have an article, which is not the purpose of a disambiguation page. Second, assuming you were trying to add a new article, in addition to that not being the place for that content, you did not cite any sources for the content you added. Any time you add uncited content to anything in Wikipedia, do not be surprised when it gets reverted. Lastly, the content you added seems like it may be better included in existing articles like Capitalization, Caps lock, or Title case. A case may be made for adding a link to one or all of those articles to the disambiguation page on capping, but that's all that should be added, a link. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Red linked name

    Please I need help, I see my name in red letters on wikipedia edit history and some other people in blue letters. I joined ten months ago, does it mean that I am not yet a verified wikipedia editor/creator? What does it mean please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faith Daniel Adepoju (talk • contribs) 20:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    It's ok to be red. I've been red since 2009...
    —Trappist the monk (talk) 21:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, Faith Daniel Adepoju. The red letters simply means that you have not yet created a user page. Click the red letters and the software will ask you if you want to start that page. Start it and type something about yourself as a Wikipedia editor. Click " Publish changes" and your signature will turn blue. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:10, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Report user for abusive behavior

    What the best place to report someone for abusive behavior?RepublicanMMA (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    RepublicanMMA, I recommend going to Wikipedia:Requests for administrator attention. You are likely to find what you are looking for there. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 21:37, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Grammy Award

    Hi Folks!! Is a Grammy notable? It's not something I really know about. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 23:51, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    User:scope creep, Grammys can be evidence of notability per WP:NMUSIC. TSventon (talk) 00:09, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. scope_creepTalk 00:11, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, scope_creep. The Grammy Awards themselves are definitely notable, but that does not necessarily mean that every single person who has won a regional Grammy award for off-camera work is notable. It is an indicator of possible notability but not proof of notability. In the end, it comes down to to the question: "Has this person received significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources?" If you can confidently answer " yes", then go ahead and write the article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:08, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @Cullen: It was to verify the notability of several articles on the coin noticeboard. They are all producers, created by a UPE and they look very similar in form and content, pushing the Grammy side of things, more than other aspects. I'm not sure if they are notable. They have all won several grammy's or been nominated, but whether the sources are suitable, I don't yet. scope_creepTalk 10:44, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    March 9

    Namdhari kuka lehar

    Founder of kuka lehar SRI SATGURU RAM SINGH JI. Not sen sahib or bhagat jawahar mal. Please edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:8100:2184:E5C7:0:0:9A0D:8CBD (talk) 02:51, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Could you please make your request more specific? Are you suggesting a change to an exiting article? Are you requesting a new article be created? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 04:19, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The Namdhari article is a mess and needs help from someone who is literate in English and in the relevant south Asian language or languages. As written, I cannot decide who the article says the founder is. -Arch dude (talk) 07:48, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Surrounding text with colour

    Hi,

    I'm trying to surround text with colour and a border. The problem is, if the text wraps, the border surrounds it as a box but the colour doesn't, which looks bad. I'm using {{font colour}} to achieve the background colour for the text. Is there some other template I can use which will occupy the entire inner space of the border rather than stopping at the text? Here's the problem on my page: User:DesertPipeline#Wall_and/or_hall_of_fame. If anyone can help, I'd appreciate it. Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 04:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    DesertPipeline, would {{divbox}} work? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:35, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    User:Tenryuu: Thanks, that works. I can't get the same look as the previous method, but actually I think it looks good like this. DesertPipeline (talk) 05:51, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    What to do about article about crank

    I've stumbled upon an article about a crank. Since he's not a particularly well-known crank, I don't see the point of having an article about him. Complications are that he's working in a field that I have no official qualifications in and that he's a Wikipedia editor. What to do? Note that I'm not a deletionist or anything, but an article about a crank is always a potential misinformation risk and if it's an obscure one you run the extra risk of most of the editors of the article being people who are influenced by him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.61.180.106 (talk) 12:04, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Without details of the article it's not really possible to comment. If he passes the notability criteria then Wikipedia welcomes an article about him, however 'cranky' his work may appear. Having said that, the appropriate place to raise concerns is at the article's talk page. If it seems that any discusion there is being overwhelmed by editors with some sort of agenda or POV, there are processes for tackling that also. Eagleash (talk) 12:12, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    >Without details of the article it's not really possible to comment.

    Why not? Isn't there a general sort of approach to this sort of thing? I deliberately didn't mention any names because I wanted some impartial advice. The article's talk page seems to be mostly inhabited by crickets. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.61.180.106 (talk) 12:22, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    IP, please "sign" your comments (by hitting "~" four times in a row). Actually I agree with you about imprecision in a quest for impartiality, but people here are accustomed to being told. Eagleash, this must be James Fulton (researcher). I agree that crankiness is no barrier to article creation/retention; but this article is very thin, and it's not at all obvious that the biographee merits an article. The IP has written on Talk:James Fulton (researcher). Perhaps consider taking this to AfD (though I haven't looked in a search engine). -- Hoary (talk) 12:26, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hoary: Well-spotted! Having now had the chance to look at the page, it appears to have been around since 2008 – without sourcing(!) even though it has been edited by some very experienced contributors. As such it could be subjected to a BLP-prod, which it now has been courtesy of Shantavira (who beat me to it!). As for why not; well yes, there's a general approach in that notable subjects are in; non-notable ones are not, unsourced ones need references or deleting. But 'there's an article, I don't like it' doesn't help much when seeking advice, because there can be so many variables. Eagleash (talk) 12:45, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There are two additional reasons that general questions without specific article references are problematic here on the help desk. First, most such questions (but not this one) are looking for validation for a specific answer, and the "questioner" does not want the opposing viewpoint to be exposed. The second reason is WP:IAR: sometimes, the generic answer is the wrong answer. -Arch dude (talk) 17:50, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, one could provide an answer with a disclaimer such as "Other things being equal, ..." or "Unless there are other factors, ...", or plain "Normally, ...". Meanwhile, anyone interested (but disinterested!) is welcome to comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Fulton (researcher). I'd like to thank the IP for bringing our attention to this article. -- Hoary (talk) 23:54, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hoary: And the third reason: If you do not link to the article in question, then the poor overworked help desk volunteers end up doing extra work to try to research your question, as in this case where Hoary worked to find the article even though the IP declined to name it. -Arch dude (talk) 01:54, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Is my edit grammar is good in this section?

    Is my edit grammar is good in this section? Rizosome (talk) 14:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Rizosome, the grammar for the section seemed satisfactory. I cleaned up a few things, but other than that, it was just fine. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 15:30, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rizosome: I made some edits as well. Since abbreviations are established in the first paragraph, those abbreviations can be used for the rest of the article. I also added some wikilinks, the most important of which is for the Navratna status, since I had no idea what that meant. GoingBatty (talk) 20:53, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Tannaker Buhicrosan

    I would like to discuss the current content being displayed on the page for 'Tannaker Buhicrosan' as I have 'certified' information that contradicts what has been published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Budden (talk • contribs) 14:58, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Paul Budden: You can start a discussion on the article's talk page, but any information must come from reliable, published sources. RudolfRed (talk) 15:11, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    And note, Paul Budden, that your book Paper Butterflies appears to be a self-published source, and thus should not be cited. If you have research which has been reliably published, it may be cited, but you should not do so yourself, as that is regarded as a conflict of interest - use an edit request in that case. --ColinFine (talk) 22:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]


    Happy to just list the original sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Budden (talk • contribs) 09:48, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    List of Coppa Italia finals

    I would like that this page were a FL. I was advised to enter data on the spectators of the finals. Much information is impossible to find. What can I do? Dr Salvus (talk) 15:05, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Dr Salvus: You can start a discussion on the article's talk page to gain visibility. You could also ask for assistance at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:57, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    How can edit to wikipedia content?

    Hi; Myself muhammad waqar, I want to edit and contribute in the content of Wikipedia and want can put my external link into my edited link? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.160.117.77 (talk) 15:33, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    What you are doing isn't right. You can't just spam a link to your website in the article as you have been doing. That is why your edits were removed. Wikipedia is not a place for you to advertise your blog. See WP:PROMO for more information on that. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 16:36, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a sock puppet of Mahammad Waqar‎, also using the newly created Ahmed113355‎ account, plus several IP addresses. The user keeps spamming, cheating and lying, and should be blocked indefinitely. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mahammad Waqar.—J. M. (talk) 17:35, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ahmed113355: If you continue to WP:LINKSPAM you run the risk of getting your URL blacklisted. If that happens, then nobody will be able to use any of your pages as references even if they would be useful. -Arch dude (talk) 17:57, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    And the user keeps spamming even after receiving the clear warnings here. This may safely remove any remnants of WP:AGF for this user. Could an admin please block both accounts indefinitely, plus the IP addresses (and any other accounts and addresses the user may be using, possibly an IP range, too), and possibly make a statement on the SPI page? The problem with SPI these days (and many other areas in many Wikimedia projects, and not only Wikipedia) is that it is desperately understaffed, often to the point of being abandoned, and many requests at WP:SPI, WP:ANI, WP:AIV and elsewhere never get any response at all.—J. M. (talk) 19:28, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I think blacklisting his URLs will be easier than playing Whac-A-Mole with his sockpuppets. -Arch dude (talk) 05:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Blacklisting is definitely a good idea, I agree it should be done. Still, both accounts definitely have to be blocked, for several reasons. The most obvious reason is that Wikipedia rules clearly say that spamming, cheating and sock puppetry is a form of vandalism that deserves an indefinite block. But it is also very important to block at least sock masters on Wikipedia for future reference, should anyone need to explain why they revert their edits (the spammer may come back and work around the blacklist, or spam with links to a different site etc.), why they don't violate the 3RR by reverting their edits (reverting an edit made by a blocked user is not a 3RR violation) etc., why yet another sock puppet should be blocked from editing etc. The most unfortunate and unfair fact about chronic cheaters and spammers on Wikipedia is that good, experienced editors who are dealing with vandalism and spam (critically important, but thankless job) are at a constant disadvantage and often need something tangible to refer to when they have to explain their actions. And a blocked sock master is exactly what they need in these cases.—J. M. (talk) 05:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Absolutely block all known sockpuppets. The blacklisting may cause this person to quit creating new sockpuppets, as they would not help him add his linkspam. -Arch dude (talk) 16:59, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I hope you're right. I'm all for the blacklisting. But someone actually has to do it at last. There is unanimous support for blocking the user here and on the SPI page, this case is as clear as it can be. And not an admin in sight who would at least say something. The biggest problem is that this has been the rule rather than the exception in recent months. When you look at the table in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations, the situation is pretty grim. Many hopeless cases that never get any reply. And other parts of Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects look even bleaker. Many urgent and rightful requests at many places are completely ignored. I have been editing Wikipedia for 15 years and the stark decrease in administrative activity in the last year or two is alarming. It really makes Wikipedia look like an abandoned project increasingly often. If this trend continues, I wonder whether Wikipedia actually has a future.—J. M. (talk) 18:36, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Using a Wiki Service

    Hi there, I hired a group to create a wiki page for my past business history. That history was 25-years selling to top stores. Most articles were before online magazines. They now say that I need notability from 15-20 articles on Top-Tier websites, and their PR dept can help with that. I also am published as a poet and children's author. As we started the process, I was told there was plenty to work with. When I look at others with a Wiki page in my generation, they have links to PDF magazine stories of their business. I'm not sure what to do. When I told them I was not interested in the payment plan for 15-20 articles, they dropped me. Is this normal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThinkingInText (talk • contribs) 22:02, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @ThinkingInText: No one should be creating wiki articles for money because it's unnecessary. If you are notable by Wikipedia's standards, an article may be made about you. This is a scam, and you should report it to paid-en-wp@wikimedia.org. Do not spend anymore money. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:10, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for getting back, but there are wiki businesses online. I don't know how else to get a page. You mention "an article may be made about you" Who does that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThinkingInText (talk • contribs)

    Volunteers here on Wikipedia, not PR people. Nobody legitimately representing Wikipedia will ever ask you for money, and there's no charge for anything here. Undisclosed paid editing is a violation of Wikimedia's terms of use, so if they can't send you examples of their work, where they declared they were being paid for it, they are either lying or are violating site policies. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:24, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @ThinkingInText: Most of our six million articles are written by volunteers who choose what to write about. If you or your business satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (people) or Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) then a volunteer editor may write an article some day with no action from you. Businesses who claim to write articles for payment are often dishonest, making false claims and promises. Some of them aren't actual businesses but just somebody trying to get money for nothing. If they do write an article then it may be crap and be deleted quickly. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:32, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    How do you start to get an article? Contact a volunteer? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThinkingInText (talk • contribs)

    @ThinkingInText: If you just want to tell the world about your business, you should use social media or other alternatives intended for that purpose and with less stringent requirements. Wikipedia is not interested in what a business wants to say about itself, only in what others say about it. If your business meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable business, someone will eventually take note of your business and write about it. Please note that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily a good thing, see WP:PROUD. 331dot (talk) 22:50, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    I wish I had never started this conversation. I don't want to tell the world about my business, you jerk. I don't want to use social media...you are condescending. I don't need a lecture from someone who has no idea what the reference is about. I'm asking a legitimate question. I created something that was valuable and collectible. I have given university commencement addresses. The work I created was published in magazines and newspapers, probably when you were in a booster seat. I hired a group because this is foreign to me. So don't you dare give me your attitude. I don't need it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThinkingInText (talk • contribs)

    Hello, ThinkingInText. It appears that you are under the common, but utterly mistaken, impression the a Wikipedia article is in some way for the benefit of its subject. It is not: a Wikipedia article is for the benefit of Wikipedia and its readers. Many subjects do derive some benefit from an article, to be sure, but some definitely do not: doing so is no part of Wikipedia's purpose. If at some point we have an article about you, whoever writes it, it will not belong to you, it will not be controlled by you, it will not necessarily say what you want it to say, and it should be almost entirely based on what people unconnected with you have published about you, good or bad. See an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. --ColinFine (talk) 22:53, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    I understand that. I was just asking if what i experienced was normal. I use Wiki for some research I do. I am aware of the style of the content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThinkingInText (talk • contribs) Hi Colin, Thank you for showing up on this thread. I saw you on the tea house section. I am now aware that I shouldn't have hired a group, but I have no idea where to start. I have been told by people finding my past product, that I should have a Wiki page. That's how this all started. AThere's nothing to sell. It is history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThinkingInText (talk • contribs)

    @ThinkingInText: Please note that personal attacks are not permitted. I was trying to help. I don't know what I said to set you off, but I'm sorry. Wikipedia does not have pages, it has articles. This is a subtle but important distinction. 331dot (talk) 23:17, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks, apology accepted. As an example of what I don't know, I use the word "pages" not the appropriate word "article". — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThinkingInText (talk • contribs)

    ThinkingInText, as 331dot already said, personal attacks are not allowed on Wikipedia and if you continue in this manner, you may get blocked from editing. Please listen to the advice, what others are telling you is definitely true (and they have nothing to apologize for), and these people are much more experienced on Wikipedia than you are. There is nothing wrong with their attitude, but I can surely see a striking lack of humility in your posts. I would also like to add that editors should refrain from writing about themselves on Wikipedia or even suggest that someone writes about them, per the Conflict of interest guideline, paid editors have to disclose their conflict of interest, and even they should refrain from writing or editing the articles directly. Generally, you should really read the What Wikipedia is not guideline. You really do not seem to understand its purpose and the way Wikipedia works.—J. M. (talk) 23:22, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Article requests can be added to Wikipedia:Requested articles but nothing may ever come from it. There are a lot of requests and few volunteers looking at them unsystematically. Most volunteers prefer to find topics on their own and not examine often poor requests. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:31, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    ThinkingInText, I think that posting to Wikipedia:Requested articles is almost always a waste of time. There's little that you can do. I'd like to say that people and companies who merit articles will eventually get them, but this would be untrue. The subject must be "notable" according to Wikipedia's slightly odd criteria for this (whereby plenty of individual episodes of long-running TV programs are "notable", but only a tiny percentage of museum curators are), and it must interest at least one volunteer who has time and energy on their hands. Thus it is that Tim Hilton, writer of one of my favourite books, doesn't have an article, that Gustav Emil Ern, manufacturer of my favourite kitchen knife, does not, etc etc. And it's very likely that they never will have articles. Now, what's fascinating is your mention of an outfit that hopes to sell a "plan for 15-20 articles". Do please tell us more. Did you find them, or did they find you? How much do they charge? Do they specify examples of their past work? Et cetera. -- Hoary (talk) 05:01, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Removing a series/franchise from a category page that already has it as a subcategory

    Could anyone please tell me if it's okay to do this? I've asked about it here before, but I keep getting differing answers; here is what the MoS says about it. I also asked about it on the talk page for WikiProject Categories, but deleted it after going about twelve hours without a response.--Thylacine24 (talk) 22:08, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Generally, it should only be in the subcategory. If someone is disagreeing with you on this you should ask them why. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:26, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beeblebrox: Could you please tell me if you mean that I should contact the people in question about this? I will, if you think I should. Also, the MoS seems to tolerate the opposite of your view. Could you please explain that? Thanks for replying, because I'm a tad stressed over this at the moment and I also just made some edits in line with what you describe.--Thylacine24 (talk) 22:36, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Take, for example this article that I wrote: Hidden Lake (Alaska). It is in Category:Lakes of Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska, which means it is defacto also in Category:Lakes of Alaska by borough, and in turn also, in ascending order, Category:Lakes of Alaska, Category:Lakes of the United States by state, Category:Lakes of the United States, Category:Lakes by country, Category:Lakes, and finally Category:Bodies of water. It is already an implicit member of all of those simply by being added to the original subcategory, so there's no need to add it directly to any of them. I am assuming that the reason you are bringing this here is because someone has challenged or reverted you removing redundant categories, that's why I suggested asking whoever that might be why they object. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:47, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beeblebrox: Okay, I'll consider doing that. Could you please tell me what you think of the MoS's take on this?--Thylacine24 (talk) 22:50, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems like the main distinction the MOS makes is diffusing-vs-non-diffusing subcategories, so it may, in some cases be appropriate for an item to be in two subcategories of the same main category if both reference some separate defining characteristic. That's how I read it anyway. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:55, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beeblebrox: Not sure I understand that, but I'll take your word for it. So I guess fiction/media doesn't always apply, though? Please feel free to look at my edit history and see what you think works and what doesn't, because I'm honestly kind of lost on this without a consensus response. (If you don't want to, then I understand.)--Thylacine24 (talk) 23:00, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    March 10

    Need to find guide-page.

    Hello, can anyone please link the guide page to writing short summaries for anime or TV Shows. Thanks. SenatorLEVI 02:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @SenatorLEVI: Try MOS:TVPLOT. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:58, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you!!!SenatorLEVI 05:06, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Help with references

    I need to fix references 3, 4 cited at the end in the wiki article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rios-Caledonia_Adobe . The 'brochure' does not exist anymore and I need to instead link to the official website which has a self guided tour published in one of the pages of the website https://www.historic-rios-caledonia.org/museum-highlights.

    Please help update. Thanks Schalkv (talk) 06:22, 10 March 2021 (UTC) schalkrv[reply]

    Hello Schalkv, I've replaced the previous 3rd and 4th citations with the website you provided. However you should provide more sources since multiple statements rely too much on a single source. Morever you should link the sources, in the article talk page or just reference them to the apporopriate statements. SenatorLEVI 06:44, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Delete my last edits please!

    Hi! Can someone please remove my edits made from 18:56, 09 Mar 2021 until now? Specifically the two (draft)pages I made on 18:56, 09 Mar 2021 and 08:15, 10 Mar 2021 ? I made a mistake while making those pages as they are now double but I can't seem to completely remove and/or delete those pages. Someone please help me!

    Thank you,

    user: Annavermeij — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annavermeij (talk • contribs) 09:06, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Annavermeij: Only administrators can delete pages. I have deleted Draft:Kim Sun-woo (Singer). Are you sure you also want the first page Draft:Kim Sun-woo deleted? There is no reason to delete it if you still want to work on a draft about Kim Sun-woo. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:18, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Please delete that page too as there was a mistake in the name. Thank you very much though! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annavermeij (talk • contribs) 09:28, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Annavermeij: If you are planning to create a third page then it's better to change the name of the existing page. Which name do you want, or do you no longer want to make any draft about him? PrimeHunter (talk) 09:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Could you maybe rename it to Kim Sun-woo (singer) ? I will continue to edit that page after the name is changed. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annavermeij (talk • contribs) 12:04, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    You don't need to worry about doing the renaming at present, Annavermeij. Your main issue will be in getting the draft accepted as an article, which means passing notbility test, as per WP:NSINGER. If accepted, the draft can be moved to the correct title later. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    National African American Gun Association - Wrong information regarding origin

    Hello Editors,

    First of all thank you for recognizing my organization that I founded. My name is Philip Smith, National President of The National African American Gun Association

    In placing information about the origin and purpose of NAAGA you have made some serious errors. They are the following:

    1) Smith founded NAAGA in response to perceived discrimination in the National Rifle Association (NRA).[3]

    ( that is incorrect. I founded NAAGA to give our community an Firearms Organization that was built for the Black Community and allowed us to voice our Black perspective on Firearms related issues. It wasn't because of the NRA or any other organization. We don't worry nor do we focus on any other group except ourselves.


    2) Reasons for our growth are diverse. Our members aren't monolithic. They all join for different reasons, it could be Hunting, domestic abuse survivor, Self Defense, and/or Sports Shooting as it relates to African Americans.....and Politics.


    I hope that helps

    Philip Smith National President — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:19C1:A5E0:3CBE:D360:9EC0:D1D9 (talk) 11:49, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Any concerns about the content of the article should be made as formal edit requests(click for instructions) on the article talk page, Talk:National African American Gun Association. Please understand that Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources state about a subject, not what it wants to say about itself. If you have independent reliable sources that discuss why you created the organization, please offer them in your edit request; we need something verifiable, not just your word. 331dot (talk) 11:54, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Super straight (sexual orientation) - how to make the corrections to the draft?

    This: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Super_straight_(sexual_orientation)

    Good day. I tried to make an article but it was sent back to make it better before submission

    How can it be improved? Thank you for help — Preceding unsigned comment added by UkraineQueer (talk • contribs) 13:41, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    UkraineQueer, the user who reviewed your draft made this suggestion: This needs more coverage to show that this isn't just a neologism. It also needs to be written to be more neutral and encompass all of the coverage it's received in the media, including the copious amounts of criticism. By that, they mean that you need to include some more reliable sources to show that it isn't just an insignificant phrase that will fade in a few weeks. Try to find more sources discussing it, such as major news sources, etc. The reviewer also said that they would kindly mention your draft at WikiProject Sexology and sexuality so that some editors with experience in this subject matter can assist you. Another issue raised was that we had to be 100% sure that the article is written in a nuetral point of view, meaning that we don't appear to be in support of the sexuality or against it, regardless of whether you actually are or not. We have to give due weight to all of the criticism that is very present, but also make mention of the people that support it. I hope that helps a bit. Other editors are likely to chime in with more advice. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 13:52, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    How to edit category ?

    Hello Wikipedia Administrator or Any Rights holders ! I attempt many times to edit category but it cannot happen . Please tell me how to edit.Thank you(Fade258 (talk) 17:11, 10 March 2021 (UTC))[reply]

    @Fade258: Which type of edit are you trying to make to which category? You made a sensible edit [2] to a category but reverted yourself. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:23, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    PrimeHunter, I am not talking about edit which is recently mentioned in your reply.I am talking about How to add content in category page.(Fade258 (talk) 17:28, 10 March 2021 (UTC))[reply]
    @Fade258: Which type of content? If you want pages to be listed in the category then see Help:Category#Putting pages into categories. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @PrimeHunter:,Please read this once If i want to add content in this category of section 0-9 Part then. How can i add content in that section i.e. 0-9.(Fade258 (talk) 17:38, 10 March 2021 (UTC))[reply]
    @Fade258: Content under 0–9 or letter headings cannot be added by editing the category page. The only type of content you can add there is adding pages to the category as described at Help:Category#Putting pages into categories. See Wikipedia:Categorization#Sort keys for how to control where in a category a member page is listed. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:44, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fade258: Try clicking on any template in that category, and then click the "Edit source" tab on the template. Scroll all the way to the bottom of the source, and you'll see <noinclude>[[Category:India cricket templates]]</noinclude>. The Category in brackets adds the template to the category, and the <noinclude>...</noinclude> tags ensure that articles containing the template are NOT included in the category. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 17:55, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Adding an article piece on Peace Innovation

    Hello,

    I wanted to see if I can add an article piece on Peace Innovation in Wikipedia's Peace page under movements subsection. Is this possible and how can I go about getting it.

    Best, Fiti Taupau — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalameli28 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Kalameli28: What exactly is Peace Innovation? AdmiralEek (talk) 20:36, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Page draft

    I recently made a new page on someone, how do I submit it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NHEJEJ (talk • contribs) 18:18, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    You add the template {{subst:Submit}} at the very top. And then wait, it can take some time. You can continue improving the article while you wait. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:32, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict)NHEJEJ, I have added the "Submit the draft for review" button on the draft, you can't miss it. Go ahead and click the button and you'll be on your way. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 18:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There is, however, no hope your draft Draft:Joe Blystone will be accepted in its current state. We need independent reliable sources, not just WP:PRIMARY ones from the person's own website. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:37, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Undoing undiscussed move

    A user changed draft name from Super straight (sexual orientation) to Super straight without any discussion

    Please undo this change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Super_straight

    Also, another reason is that article with such a name already exists - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Straight UkraineQueer (talk) 18:32, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    UkraineQueer, I have taken care of this. Please see the talk page for relevant discussion. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 18:41, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Why separate articles for Rashtriya Ispat Nigam and Visakhapatnam Steel Plant?

    Why separate articles for Rashtriya Ispat Nigam and Visakhapatnam Steel Plant?

    I find it both are same. RINL is also called Visakhapatnam Steel Plant. Rizosome (talk) 18:49, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Rizosome: Sometimes articles on same subject get created by different people. You can start a discussion on the article's talk pages to suggest they be merged. See WP:MERGE for more info. RudolfRed (talk) 19:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Looking at the articles, Rashtriya Ispat Nigam is the company, and Visakhapatnam Steel Plant is the place that they own. So it's possible that both are useful- if they had different content, and weren't both tagged as "written like an advertisment". Joseph2302 (talk) 21:28, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    {{Template:Juworld.net}}

    Hi. Please could you help me to extend this template? Dr Salvus (talk) 21:24, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Dr Salvus: How would you like to extend the template? GoingBatty (talk) 23:05, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    GoingBatty I would like that you and other users made some adjustements. I'm not very experienced in this things. Dr Salvus (talk) 23:13, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dr Salvus: I understand that you don't know how to extend the template, but I don't understand your goal. What do you want the template to do that it doesn't already do? GoingBatty (talk) 23:14, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    GoingBatty [Juworld.net] is an unofficial site about Juventus. There are statistics about players and coaches of Juventus etc. Dr Salvus (talk) 14:30, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dr Salvus: Yes, I see that {{Juworld.net}} provides a link to https://juworld.net/ but it's going to be hard for anyone to help you if you cannot articulate how you want to make the template better. GoingBatty (talk) 20:34, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Michael Avenatti's article keeps getting changed.

    My name is CJ.

    I made several changes to the Michael Avenatti page and they keep getting changed back. I even linked to the sources as required by Wikistandards.

    I corrected that he is now a former attorney as his license was revoked by the California state bar and is no longer able to practice law, and I also noted that he is a convicted felon and cited the source of that as well.

    Someone keeps changing it back. I suspect it could be monitored by some sort of reputation suppression bot (which many rich attorneys use who try to cover up shady things they've done in the past), but you may want to change it back to the corrections I'd made, and then potentially lock it. Someone is obviously trying to hide something here.

    Please contact me for more info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agentgfunk (talk • contribs) 22:58, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Agentgfunk: The Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle is common on Wikipedia. You boldly edited the article in good faith to try to improve it, and another editor reverted your edits twice. The next step is to discuss it on the article's talk page: Talk:Michael Avenatti. Hopefully, the editor who reverted your changes will join the discussion to explain what they meant by "undoing as it's related to other changes that will be undone". Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:10, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]


    March 11

    Convert an entry

    I created the entry on Thomas Adam Regelski and was not familiar with the biography layout. I now realize the biography layout would be the better choice but have not been able to figure out how to convert the entry I created into a biography page. Can you help me figure this out?

    --Kruguitarz (talk) 01:31, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Kruguitarz: As far as I know, we to not have any explicit sample layouts for a "biography". Take a look at several articles on similar subjects and find one whose layout you think is appropriate (Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Infobox_academic is a list of possible pages). Next, make a note of what you are about to do at Talk:Thomas Adam Regelski and add the {{under construction}} template at the top of Thomas Adam Regelski. itself. Make incremental changes to the article to bring it gradually closer to the layout you picked as an example. You will probably start by adding an "infobox", possibly {{Infobox academic}}, Then add section headings to form the articles outline, and finally move the current material into your new sections. As soon as the massive rearrangement is complete, remove the {{under construction}} from the article and note this milestone on the talk page. Remaining work can then proceed as normal editing. -Arch dude (talk) 03:16, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Kruguitarz: You might be interested in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography, specifically the "Lead section" and "Order of events" sections.
    In the Regelski article, the whole "Music as Social Praxis" seems inappropriate. The article should be about Regelski, not multiple paragraphs about social praxis. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:48, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The long section Thomas_Adam_Regelski#Music_as_Social_Praxis appears to be an essay, with little relevance to the subject of the article. It only mentions Regelski once, in an unreferenced paragraph. Maproom (talk) 08:37, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Sample: A praxical mindfulness of music instead recognizes the ongoing value of musics as serving the sociality that is a central trait of humans Being human through their sociability, their social interactions with each other. I can't actually parse this sentence as a whole, yet it seems to distil Exceedingly Deep Thought. -- Hoary (talk) 13:45, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Publishing a profile

    I want to publish on Wikipedia, the profile of a well-known educator from Pakistan.

    No profile of her exists on Wikipedia presently. I am writing one with pictures and references from published material in local (Pakistan's)newspapers and magazines and previous published and unpublished pictures on her personal achievements, awards, and citations.

    What are the basic requisites for publishing on Wikipedia? To whom I should send the article (or writeup)?

    Please respond back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdulazizansari (talk • contribs) 02:27, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Abdulazizansari Wikipedia does not have "profiles", not a single one. Wikipedia has articles. You are welcome to submit a draft article at Articles for creation, if this person meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 02:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Abdulazizansari: please start by convincing yourself that the subject meets Wikipedia's notability requirements (WP:N). Do this before putting any effort into writing the article. If your subject is not notable we will delete your article and your efforts will be wasted. Once you are sure, take a look at several Wikipedia articles on similar educators to see what an article should look line. Then, go to WP:YFA to begin writing your article. -Arch dude (talk) 02:52, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    May you please inform me of any issues on the article for North Toronto Christian School?

    Few other editors have edited the article for my school. I would like to make sure the article is in good shape. In the past, I removed large amounts of promotional content from the article, and took and added a photo. Can someone please help me look it over and tag any issues that are on the page, please? Thanks! Félix An (talk) 02:54, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Félix An: My biggest concern is that I do not see enough references of the correct sort to establish notability. Please try to find such references, or someone may come along and nominate the article for deletion. See WP:NCORP and WP:CSMN. Otherwise, it looks pretty good. However even an otherwise perfect article on a non-notable subject will eventually be deleted. -Arch dude (talk) 03:30, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Félix An: I've cleaned up the references a bit. Reference #4 is a dead link. Is NTCS still a member of ACSI? I don't see the school listed on https://acsiec.org/member-schools GoingBatty (talk) 04:09, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Redirect weirdness

    I clicked on a wikilink to neotropical birds (at Towerkill) and ended up at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. That doesn't seem right at all, but I'm mostly clueless about redirects so I'm not sure how to fix it. I did adjust the link in the article to (I hope) point somewhere more logical. Can a more experienced Wikipedian fill me in on what to do about the strange redirect? If anything? Wikignome Wintergreentalk 03:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Wikignome Wintergreen: Looks like neotropical birds originally redirected to Neotropical Birds Online, an online encyclopedia project sponsored by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. When the Neotropical Birds Online article was redirected to Cornell Lab of Ornithology in this edit, that meant that neotropical birds now leads you to Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Your edit to Towerkill looks good to me, so I've changed neotropical birds to also redirect to Neotropical realm#Endemic animals and plants, and confirmed that there are no articles that link to neotropical birds. Thanks for the report! GoingBatty (talk) 04:45, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! What an odd sequence of events. I'll file away how you did the redirect-switch-thing for future reference. Wikignome Wintergreentalk 04:56, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Wikignome Wintergreen: Neotropical birds was the original title of the former article Neotropical Birds Online. It was moved in 2009 [3] and redirected to Cornell Lab of Ornithology in 2020.[4] See WP:EDRED if you don't know how to edit redirects. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:30, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you too. I mostly stick to basic copyediting, but I'm trying to slowly expand my knowledge into other, scarier areas of the Wikipedia jungle. Wikignome Wintergreentalk 13:44, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Undoing undiscussed move AGAIN

    A user changed draft name from Super straight (sexual orientation) to Super straight without any discussion for the second time.

    These changes were reverted by more experienced user yesterday and now it happened again.

    Please undo this change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Super_straight

    Also, another reason is that article with such a name already exists - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Straight — Preceding unsigned comment added by UkraineQueer (talk • contribs) 07:54, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

     Done as requested. (The pre-existing article name differs only in capitalisation.) Maproom (talk) 11:45, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    hi

    hello, if my edit is reverted and I think that's a mistake, how should I proceed?

    For eg- the article says "However, Sides Three and Four sort of grab you by the throat." This is wrong english it should be "However, Sides Three and Four sorts of grab you by the throat." OR However, Sides Three and Four sort of grabs you by the throat.

    I made changes , but it was reverted back. Also In most cases they're 10 times better." I changed it to In most cases, they're 10 times better." was reverted back.


    thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pratss31 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Please sign all your talk page messages with four tildes (~~~~) — See Help:Using talk pages. Thanks.
    @Pratss31: immediately after you were warned on your user talk page about 4 bad edits, you made another one: [5]. Explanations on your talk page.
    "Sort of grab" was 100% grammatically correct. Check the expression "sort of" in a dictionary. And it was said in a quoted sentence. If/when you think your edits were ok, the way to proceed is on your user talk page where you received the messages.
    Furthermore, the top of this page says; "IMPORTANT NOTE: DO NOT ASK QUESTIONS HERE, unless they are about the help desk itself. - DVdm (talk) 15:09, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    DVdm you probably owe this user an apology. This is the correct place to ask questions. I found most of the "bad edits" to be at least in good faith, and a few to be suitable. However, Pratss31, if we are citing a quote, we write down (misspellings and all) for these works. I'll expand a little on your talk in a bit Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:12, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lee Vilenski: The question was about how to proceed when one thinks someone made a mistake. It was clearly not about the help desk itself. - DVdm (talk) 15:16, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pratss31 and Lee Vilenski: Ouch! Big apologies. I thought we were on the talk page. Facepalm Facepalm . - DVdm (talk) 15:39, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Request from Burma

             Hello from Myanmar. I am an ordinary student from Burma. The military terrorists are blocking access to Wikipedia.

    That's why we can't access directly Wikipedia from Myanmar. When we access through VPN and proxy, we can't edit because of Wikipedia's policy. Please, can someone help to fix this situation?

    Thanks and regards, Thura Linn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kodualzaw (talk • contribs) 14:44, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Kodualzaw, I'm sorry to hear that this is happening, but I'm not sure that we are capable of doing anything to address this situation. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 15:17, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, Kodualzaw. I'm not sure if we can do anything about this, but the problem is mentioned at WP:Open proxies#Rationale, and there are links in that section to a couple of pages which might help you. --ColinFine (talk) 15:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Kodualzaw It's not much, but perhaps Block_of_Wikipedia_in_Turkey#Circumvention can give you some inspiration. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:12, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Alan Hevesi Photograph

    Good morning. The first picture that pops up in Wikipedia when you search Alan Hevesi is not Alan Hevesi it's former Eastchester Town Supervisor Jim Cavanaugh. Mr. Cavanaugh is wearing a blue coat with a brown leather lapel blue shirt with rust colored collar dark blue tie with oval designs and eyeglasses. Please remove this picture. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61unclestan (talk • contribs) 16:43, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    61unclestan the image was removed at 15.34, but is still showing on a Google search, which will presumably get updated at some point. TSventon (talk) 17:01, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Queen Elizabeth of Great Britain

    Please note:

    Queen Elizabeth is the I (first) of Great Britain and she is Queen Elizabeth ii of England ONLY. The SCOTTISH King James VI JOINED the crowns of: Scotland, Northern Ireland, England and Wales. He became JAMES the first (I). This infuriates most Scots. Scots are a Nation in their own right NOT a part or region, of England!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.188.24 (talk) 17:20, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Please raise this issue on the talk pages of the appropriate articles. Make specific suggestions for changes to the articles, and provide references. -Arch dude (talk) 17:27, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Her WP:COMMONNAME is Elizabeth II- no sources used Elizabeth I to refer to the current monarch. So that should be the article title. And nowhere in the article does it refer to her as the second Queen Elizabeth of Scotland. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:30, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Issues related to Scottish nationalism and their relationship with the UK or England will not be solved here; this is why we focus on what independent reliable sources state. If you have such sources, please do as asked above. 331dot (talk) 18:47, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi. I can't figure out how to arrange the photos vertically on the left side of the Hester Diamond article; I've been trying for at least an hour and my dyslexia has kicked in. Maybe you can just do it for me! Smiley face. Thank you. JSFarman (talk) 19:46, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    "Criticism" paragraph

    I use Wikipedia constantly and have also donated to the service frequently. Recently I have noticed a disturbing heading that seems to accompany otherwise excellent entries: the "Criticism" paragraph.

    These only seem to appear when a) an individual or organization takes centrist or center-right views; or b) an individual or organization supports Biblical Christianity.

    This is neither a scholarly nor an impartial approach to the sharing of knowledge. If it is necessary to have such a paragraph - and incidentally, the 'criticism' is always negative - the 'critic' should state his or her name. Also, and this should be obvious, ALL entries that deal with important individuals or organizations need a "criticism" paragraph, regardless of their position on the political or religious spectrum.

    Otherwise, Wikipedia is in danger of shrinking into another leftist mouthpiece masquerading as a legitimate knowledge service.

    Thank you for considering these ideas. LM, California 

    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.5.68.113 (talk) 20:00, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Criticism or controversy sections have long been a controversial part of some Wikipedia articles. See this page about the practice. In general, it's better to integrate negative and positive information in the article, but sometimes a dedicated section is warranted, and at any rate, the practice isn't going away soon. It also isn't limited to individuals or organizations with center right views or Christian views (I'm not sure what you mean by "Biblical Christianity"). It could be that you notice it more in those articles because you read more of those articles and are primed to notice it by the culture of persecution that has been intentionally fostered by the American right in recent years. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Is worldfootball.com reliable?

    Is it reliable? Dr Salvus (talk) 20:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Dr Salvus, worldfootball.com do not exist or at least it redirects to a personal blog. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:48, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    worldfootball.com redirects to https://www.football-data.org/. If you mean worldfootball.net, then I believe that is reliable, and we have a template for citing from it: Template:WorldFootball.net. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:52, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Unable to remove page from draft status

    Hi,

    I am attempting to update a page that is in Draft Status due to paid content. Previous contributors on this page have been banned for not disclosing payments. I, however, am not being paid, have no conflict of interest with the subject at hand and am compiling the page to Wikipedia standards. Why am I still being threatened with bans and not given the opportunity to update the page? Although I am not being paid, I am willing to submit any necessary disclosures.

    I understand the need to remove paid contributors in order to maintain the objectivity standards of wikipedia. What I have seen in recent days goes beyond maintaining the standards of wikipedia. Is there anything I can do to publish a page that I believe deserves to be shared with the world? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmartinkov (talk • contribs) 22:28, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=1011621536"