Wikipedia:Teahouse

Shantavira, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

Adding photos to an existing Wikipedia page

 Courtesy link: Intertype Corporation

The Wikipedia "Intertype Corporation" page has a couple of photos. I have 16 photos I took during 1966 while on a tour of the Intertype manufacturing facility in Brooklyn, N.Y. Would any of them be appropriate (and worthy) for use on the aforementioned Wiki page? I would donate them freely. If not on the page, perhaps in the Reference section at the bottom of the page? Here is a link to my photos, including a description: https://coutant.com/intertype/ Thank you. Stan Coutant Cmfwyp Vbgkqj (talk) 22:45, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Cmfwyp Vbgkqj, you can surely add photos there. You might also find reading WP:IMAGES helpful. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 03:35, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Cool photos. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 09:57, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Cmfwyp Vbgkqj, if you are willing to freely license the photos, then I suggest that you upload them to our sister project Wikimedia Commons. I think that there are too many for the article, but the best of them could be used. And we can add a link to a Commons page showing them all, for readers who want to see more. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion to article

I refer to article People educated at North Sydney Boys High School. Many persons have contributed over the years to a long list with proper substantive references. But recently the article was "prune to include only those with a separate article on themselves. This resulted in some deletions of notables worthy of articles in their own right but presently none exist. As the mass deletion was not reversed by a supervising editor, does this mean such a mass deletion is acceptable? When I clicked undo, that operation is prevented by subsequent alterations. Reversal only possible manually – a very laborious task made unattractive by possibility of same end result. Your comments would be helpful. Saki0710 (talk) 09:28, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Saki0710. We don't have an article on People educated at North Sydney Boys High School. Do you mean List of Old Boys of Sydney Boys High School? I don't see that any have been "mass deleted" recently, but if they were it was probably in persuance of Wikipedia's policy WP:ALUMNI, which please read. By all means create the articles for any additional people, and then add them to the list.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:06, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Your "recently" was misleading. There was a significant removal of names in 2015. The reasoning was valid then and valid now - alumni are listable if an article about them exists. There can be exceptions. In the list in question, a ref confirms that some became Rhodes Scholars, so names listed despite no articles. David notMD (talk) 10:43, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Sorry I made a major error in my posting! Article title should have read List of Old Falconians for which there was a mass deletion/pruning on 9 March 2021. The article in its previous form was subject to scrutiny by a number of supervising editors over the years (I know because they contacted me) but suddenly runs foul of one. That is disheartening as years of work disappears. And since I posted another name Peterson has been deleted with reason unreferenced. How can that be valid when the link is clearly made to a separate subject article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saki0710 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: List of Old Falconians, diff. Probably different school, but similar policies may apply Personuser (talk) 00:34, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Saki0710. The first sentence of List of Old Falconians says "This is a list of notable Old Falconians". (Emphasis added). "Notable" in this context means "already has a Wikipedia biography". This standard does not apply just to this article, but also to all of the tens of thousands of alumni lists on this encyclopedia. Without this standard, alumni lists would devolve to gigantic, sprawling lists of every person who attended, and the lists for prestigious universities would be filled with con artists trying to falsify their credentials. You mention "supervising editors" but there is no such title on Wikipedia. All editors are equal, although some are more experienced and knowledgeable than others. Nobody has the power to give a final stamp of approval to any content, and if poorly referenced or inappropriate content is discovered, then it should be removed. All the information is still present in the history of the article, and you are welcome to write well-referenced policy compliant articles about any who are actually notable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:38, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Tim Heatley

Hello, does it really take 4+ months to get the Draft reviewed? Spicyramens (talk) 00:40, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Spicyramens and welcome to the Teahouse. The wikiproject that reviews and accepts/declines new articles has a backlog of 4,904. It's really unfortunate that you've had to wait this long, but hopefully you'll get some feedback soon. Clovermoss (talk) 01:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@Spicyramens:, this is a great question. There really is no specific timeframe for a draft to be reviewed; Wikipedia receives thousands of drafts every day. It does take time for the editors to sift through them all— sometimes drafts are pure vandalism— so yes, it may take up to six months for your draft to be reviewed. In the meantime, keep working on it. I suggest having a look at WP:FIRST to fill in any gaps, and WP:PCR to help you with expanding it. Hope I’ve been of some help. 😇 🐍Helen🐍 01:24, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

To be more specific than answered by Clovermoss and HelenDegenerate, the backlog is not a queue. Drafts can be reviewed in days, weeks, or (sadly) months. All depends on what each reviewer chooses to pick next (with some bias toward keeping an eye on the oldest drafts). P.S. I doubt Wikipedia receives thousands of drafts every day. Can anyone put a number on that? David notMD (talk) 01:52, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

What is your connection to Draft:Tim Heatley? It was created in February by an editor suspected of being a paid editor. You submitted it to AfC in April, although you did no prior editing of the draft. David notMD (talk) 02:00, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

I do not know how many are created each day, but most are taken care of in the first hour with quick declines and speedy deletions. Around 30ish enter the backlog, and depending on how carefully a particular draft needs to be considered, it may be reviewed the next day, next week, next month or in sixth months. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:25, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Submissions. It between two and three hundred per day, some days a little less. RudolfRed (talk) 04:33, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

But please be advised that the stats there are simply the number of elements in the AfC date categories (for example Category:AfC submissions by date/29 May 2021) which don't include speedy deleted drafts after the category element count is updated the next time. You have to view the deletion log for that, which shows over 100 draft deletions in the last like 8 hours. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:31, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: Thank you for that extra information and clarification! RudolfRed (talk) 17:26, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

David notMD Yes, I am connected to Tim Heatley. Do I need to do something about it? Please send the instructions. Spicyramens (talk) 08:48, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Spicyramens I have placed instructions on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

He does not look notable. He built some properties. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 22:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Seeking Editing Advice/Suggestions

Hi There!

I am a student who is new to Wikipedia. One of my courses consists of editing and updating the Geophilus Flavus Wikipedia page, I was wondering if anyone would be able to provide me with some feedback or suggestions to help me improve this page? Any assistance would be greatly appreciated! Witchruby (talk) 03:22, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@Witchruby: You and your instructor should read Wikipedia:Student_assignments. Make sure any changes you make are backed up by citations to reliable sources. You may want to try the WP:TUTORIAL or learning game at WP:ADVENTURE. RudolfRed (talk) 04:11, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Witchruby. If you truly want to improve Geophilus flavus, then you need to familiarize yourself with the full range of scientific literature discussing the species, and use your critical reading skills to sort the articles thst devote significant coverage to the species from those that just mention it in passing. Immerse yourself in that significant coverage, and summarize it in the article, giving due weight to contradictory descriptions, adding references to any reliable sources that you have uncovered that are not already in the article. This type of article about a little known species should constitute an authoritative survey of the published academic literature. Your work will then become a great benefit to any future scholar who chooses to study this species in greater depth. Perhaps you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:00, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Here are three easy ways to improve the Geophilus flavus article:

• Ensure that the name Geophilus flavus is correctly capitalised and italicised wherever it appears in the article.
• Remove "the" from before it, throughout the article.
• Convert the section headers to "sentence case".

Maproom (talk) 07:08, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

We had another Teahouse questioner who was putting "the" in front of the species name. I wonder if this usage is coming from the course instructor? Pelagic ( messages ) – (08:39 Sun 30, AEST) 22:39, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Witchruby, congrats on expanding the article; I think it reads quite well now! Where "Geophilus flavus" is repeated multiple times in a paragraph, you can (but don't have to) abbreviate subsequent mentions as "G. flavus". Pelagic ( messages ) – (10:14 Sun 30, AEST) 00:14, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Pelagic,

Thanks for this feedback! And thank you for the suggestion re. G.flavus. If you're willing I'd be very grateful if you could evaluate the Article for C-class standard?

Kind thanks

--Witchruby (talk) 02:47, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

About newspaper sources

I declined a draft Draft:Sushil Chandra Roy Chowdhury because it only cited newspaper sources with zero other online sources. The way these references are written is also very vague from what I see and I couldn't accept and agree on those just in good faith. What if these are just randomly written and the alleged print sources don't exist! But what if the creator has these newspaper images; they are pretty old so I doubt that they have it but the creator has claimed so on my talk page. I can't ask them to upload it on commons since they won't own copyrights of it I guess. What do in such a case? Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@Nomadicghumakkad: Sources do not need to be online. If you doubt the veracity of an offline source, you can ask at WP:RX for someone to check on it. If I misunderstood your question, please clarify. RudolfRed (talk) 03:58, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Indeed, Nomadicghumakkad, sources don't need to be online. But there are some problems here. I notice that:

• his "Auto Switch" is mentioned as something other than his "Automatic Time Switch" but goes undescribed
• he's described as having employed the government of India [not vice versa?]
• he's described as a "genius"
• each of the references is extraordinarily vague [title of article? page number(s)?]
• nothing in the article is attributed to any of these references in particular
• he's described as "forgotten" [except, perhaps, among his descendants?]
• the biographee and the biographer share the same surname

-- Hoary (talk) 05:48, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Hoary, There is a clear WP:COI. My assumption is that he is from the same family line. And apart from that the article has all sorts of other problems like you have highlighted. My question is:

• If someone cites a printed source and give title, name of newspaper, date etc but provides otherwise no evidence that this source existed; do we accept that in good faith and not doubt it?
• What if the creator is claiming that he has newspaper clips/images of the said source, can he upload those on commons or somewhere? I think this one has already done it. See here [1].

Please guide. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 07:36, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Articles for deletion

From archive 1108: "Because unregistered editors cannot create pages in the Wikipedia namespace, they cannot nominate articles for deletion". I don't see how this is a "because" scenario. "Because my car is red, I can't have pancakes today". Can someone please explain that deletion thing? Not the car thing, but mmmm, pancakes. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 12:21, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion requires creation of a nomination page in the Wikipedia namespace. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to nominate a single page for deletion says how unregistered users can request it so it's a little inaccurate to say they cannot nominate articles for deletion. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:38, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! 73.127.147.187 (talk) 22:38, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Gallery

Hello, I came across the gallery section in Ini Dima-Okojie and noted that it was quite lengthy. I know wikipedia is not a repository of images so I want to know if anything should be done about this.TheSokks_(talk) 13:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

All these images were added very recently by Dynacorp. Assuming that they were indeed taken by that editor (as the Commons licensing information asserts) I think that the more normal process would be to assign them all to a Commons category, which hasn't been done, and then add that category information plus perhaps a couple of the actual photographs to the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:48, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Some at least of these images look like album or magazine covers, so may well be copyright violations. Dynacorp needs to respond quickly about this, so I'll leave a message on their Talk page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:57, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Another editor has now reverted all these recent changes to the article, assuming they were WP:COPYVIO. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:09, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull I also suspected COPYVIO was at play. Thank you for your time. TheSokks_(talk) 13:54, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: All of the images have been mass deleted at the Commons.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:07, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Doesn't "dynacorp" sound like a username violation? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 22:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Image

There is an image used in an article that presents information without sources, is this image, in which most of the countries in green under the label "Countries and dependencies with views of private businesses only", all this information has no source, apparently for some time, people added countries without taking into account reliable sources, I would like to remove this information as it has no sources, but I do not know how to edit the image. Seb { 💬 Talk + 📝 Edits } 14:10, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi JSeb05, I believe you would have to go to the Commons page to edit it instead, but the information is based on Google Street View and Coverage of Google Street View, which have a fair amount of sourcing and reliability. Since the SVG file is recommended to be edited in a text editor over an illustrator, then you will also need to understand SVG coding. Hope this helped.

Side recommendation; I would wait until whatever is going on at the coverage article calms down until you tamper with the files anymore. This is really late, and I'm sorry! Sennecaster (What now?) 17:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Tim Heatley

 Courtesy link: Draft:Tim Heatley

Hey, I declared the COI. Can someone review it now? I will edit and create other articles that I am not connected too! Spicyramens (talk) 14:28, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Spicyramens Teahouse hosts are not draft reviewers (well, a few are). Regardless, the draft is one of thousands waiting for a reviewer. As mentioned earlier, the system is not a queue. Can be days, weeks, or (sadly) months. You can edit existing articles and create more drafts. In my opinion, many of the references are only name-mentions of Heatley, or are interviews, neither being types that confirm notability. Heatley should not be quoted (Wikipedia care naught for what Heatley thinks or says). You did not write the draft, but you submitted it. I strongly suggest you work on improving the draft while waiting for a reviewer. David notMD (talk) 16:55, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

He does not look notable. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 22:46, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft help

FYI

 – Heading created by Tenryuu.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bhemabhai_Chaudhary?markasread=219149945&markasreadwiki=enwiki Please fix this problem NBC 84 (talk) 15:57, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@NBC 84: The reviewer is correct here, brother. Carefully read all the policies which are mentioned by him. Not a single reference in your draft is solely dedicated to the subject (the person) in question. Just because someone is a member of a political party does not make him a notable person. There should be written pieces/articles (at least five of them from very highly recognized sources) which talk only about him. I know it is a very salty experience to get something that you've worked on with dedication to get rejected like it was nothing. But this is the reality. Face it. Good luck with your future article submissions. 😉 Harsh Rathod Poke me! 16:46, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

One more suggestion: cite only those sources written in the English language because, obviously, this is an English wikipedia. Harsh Rathod Poke me! 16:56, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@Harshrathod50: That is not necessary. English language references are preferred, but foreign language references are allowed. RudolfRed (talk) 17:11, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

The relevant policy subsection is WP:NOTENG. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed and Tenryuu: That is just my suggestion. Simple. Harsh Rathod Poke me! 07:05, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

What is the best coffee maker under 100 $ machines in 2021?

 Carolagee875 (talk) 16:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• You're in the wrong place. This is not Which?. Bishonen | tålk 16:44, 29 May 2021 (UTC).

Which looks really interesting! 73.127.147.187 (talk) 22:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Should these "references" be taken out?

For the page Go Fridge, I see that there are a lot of "references" at the bottom. However, they look more like footnotes describing a person, rather than references. Should they be removed or moved somewhere else? Chuandmi (talk) 01:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

No need to delete the footnotes, Chuandmi. I tend to prefer separating footnotes out from references when there are a lot of them. If there's only one or two then I often don't bother. One way to achieve this would be to change <ref> to {{efn}}, and create a separate Notes section. Pelagic ( messages ) – (11:58 Sun 30, AEST) 01:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Got it, thanks! I noticed that most footnotes are after a person's name, but that person's name is hyperlinked anyways so it's redundant. For example, reference number 36 and 37 essentially states who that person is. Can those be removed? Also some footnotes like 42 are used on someone who does not have a wiki page. Does that footnote need to have a reference or should it be removed entirely? Chuandmi (talk) 18:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Wolfgang Klaehn (Klähn) (Oct. 13, 1929 – June 30, 2019). Painter from Hamburg, Germany.

 J.D. Usandivaras (talk) 01:46, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Wolfgang Klähn (Q2590246). He has an article on German Wikipedia but not other languages. Pelagic ( messages ) – (12:02 Sun 30, AEST) 02:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Oops, forgot ping J.D. Usandivaras. — Pelagic ( messages ) – (12:03 Sun 30, AEST) 02:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@J.D. Usandivaras: Welcome to Wikipedia. Did you have a question about your draft at Draft:Wolfgang Klaehn? RudolfRed (talk) 02:27, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I looked at Draft:Wolfgang Klaehn and cleaned it up a bit. It contains no sources, J.D. Usandivaras to get the article published, you will need to add sources. However, in a search I saw no reliable sources online. --- Possibly (talk) 06:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Rating wikipedia articles

Hi, I'm trying to have my wikipedia article On China reviewed for an assignment. I tried to put in DYK section but don't know if I did correctly. Could anyone help me with how to get the article reviewed. Thanks for any help. Clancoo (talk) 02:15, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Clancoo: Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure what you mean by On China being your article; it's been around since 2012. The article is already in mainspace, so there's no need for it to be reviewed, unless you're thinking of giving it a special designation like good article or featured article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:33, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Sorry I should of said article I worked on. Yes, I was hoping to get it rated, as i have brought it from a stub to a filled article. How can I go about that? Thanks for your help.

Clancoo: the second sentence of the second paragraph of On China, starting "The book opens", is oddly punctuated, and I can't find a sensible way to parse it. Maproom (talk) 07:48, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

... and the "Criticism" section needs thorough copy-editing. Maproom (talk) 08:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I changed the rating to C-class. With a bit of work, might be B, but that decision should be made by an editor familiar with the topic. Your submission failed at DYK (see Template:Did you know nominations/On China). The increase in prose length was sufficient, but DYK rules require that work be completed within 7 days. By the time you had applied to DYK, already too late. David notMD (talk) 08:49, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

"Whilst disregard the consequences". Yes, that section needs copyediting. And the article is written in AME I think, so all of the "Whilst" words are jarring. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 23:06, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

help - can't enable page preview functionality when reading Wikipedia articles

Can't enable page preview functionality when reading Wikipedia articles 77.13.198.210 (talk) 04:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

You need to create an account to have that option, 77.13.198.210.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

You need an account for Navigation popups but not for Page Previews. If you have disabled it then look for "Edit preview settings" at the bottom of pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:11, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Template for Statistics

Hi.Like there is a template {{adminstats}} for statistics of admins. Is there a similar template which non-admins can use? Vhhhhjhgy (talk) 05:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Vhhhhjhgy. I usually use XTOOLS to see stats like that; see the link here]. --- Possibly (talk) 06:09, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes Possibly I know about xtools but is there a template which can be used on userpage? Vhhhhjhgy (talk) 06:21, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Vhhhhjhgy, this isn't technically what you seem to be looking for (i.e. a selection of active counters), but I do find {{User toolbox}} to be a pretty solid substitute. It isn't interactive, but it does give you a comprehensive selection of links to more external tools and overview pages than the average editor could ever have a use for. AngryHarpy‍^talk 13:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm made for CSS beginning for level 1!

CSS

Use CSS for span <span style="background:lavender; padding: 2px 2px; border-radius:3px">CSS</span> It's rose gold! Q? 05:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@RoseGold1250: Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? If you want to learn CSS, try one of these tutorials on MDN. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft checking

I have created a Wikipedia page about Vansh sayani an Indian child artist. Which has not yet been approved. Can anyone tell me why it has not been accepted yet? Tellyring (talk) 08:18, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Tellyring Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has articles, not mere pages. You have not submitted your draft for review, I will shortly add the appropriate information so you can do so. 331dot (talk) 08:21, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Vansh sayani submitted for review. Please accept it. Tellyring (talk) 08:38, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I restored two Declines of this draft, which Tellyring had removed. David notMD (talk) 09:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Tellyring Teahouse hosts advise, but are not AfC reviewers (well, most are not). There is a backlog of about 5,000 drafts. It could be months before this is reviewed again. David notMD (talk) 09:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Also, you have been advised on your Talk page that there is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents about a proposal to block you for disruptive attempts to create and edit this draft (repeated copyright violations, edit warring, etc.). David notMD (talk) 09:05, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

• I have blocked Tellyring. I hadn't checked the draft history. 331dot (talk) 10:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Unjust accusation of copyright violation

Most of an article which I created has been removed on the grounds of copyright violation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Physics_of_Optical_Holography. The section which has been removed has been copied directly from Holography and I wrote most of it in 2011.

The reason for doing this was that the Holography article has been criticised for being too technical. I decided to create a separate article (as above) to describe the more technical aspects of holography, so I copied these from the main article into this one, and thena added some more technical detail. This is all explained on the article's talk page.

The article which is supposed to have the copyright violated is dated 2017, and even includes a photograph which I submitted in 2011. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Broken_hologram.jpg

This is a gross injustice. How can I have this corrected? Epzcaw (talk) 10:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Epzcaw. This is probably more of a "misunderstanding" than a "gross injustice"; so, perhaps toning the rhetoric down a bit might be helpful. It's perfectly OK to copy content from one Wikipedia article and add it to another, but in needs to be done in accordance with Wikipedia's licensing requirements as explained here. Please try to understand that a Wikipedia article can be pretty much edited by anyone at anytime, which means the version of the "Holography" article that you created back in 2011 might have been improved upon or otherwise edited by others over the years; so, proper attribution needs to be given to those editors. You sort of provided such attribution on the draft's talk page back when you started the draft in October 2020, but the post was unsigned and it was a bit ambiguous; so, it's quite possible that the person who reviewed the draft and "saw" the copyvio just missed it and assumed the worst. The content seems to have shown up on some other website other than Wikipedia (most likely without proper attribution to Wikipedia), which would actually be a copyvio, and the reviewer probably mistakenly assumed that's where the content originated. If you'd look at the draft's edit history, you'll see that another editor actually restored the removed content and clarified where it came from in their edit summary. Anyway, you've now blanked the draft which is the equivalent of asking that it be deleted per WP:G7; maybe you did just out of frustration, but the "copyvio" accusation could've most likely been sorted out through discussion. Being frustrated is understandable, but blanking the draft seems a bit rash, especially if you think that a WP:SPLIT from the "Holigraphy" article was warranted. As for the issues with the "Holigraphy" article, I don't know enough about the subject matter to try and rewrite it; since you do, however, perhaps trying to rewrite it per WP:TONE and WP:JARGON will make the article more understandable for the general reader. You don't necessarily need to create a new article if you can address the concerns raised about an existing article through copyediting or in other ways. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly Thanks for this. I'm certainly frustrated, and I think I need to take some time out from Wikipedia. I've always been scrupulously careful to give credit where it's due in my working life and in Wikipedia, and it is upsetting to find oneself accused of stealing one's own work in big headlines. I've had a discussion on the Wikipedia-en-help page which resulted in the re-instatement of the deleted text, but the large upfront "Copyright Violation" notice remains and apparently cannot be removed, so I don't see how any reviewer would bother with such an article when there is a 5-month backlog of articles waiting to be reviewed so it's better to delete it. Of course, anyone who wants to can undelete it and work on it but not me. I've also copied it into my Sandbox page, so I might start again sometime under a new heading with appropriate attribution.

I accept that I did the attribution of copying the material in the wrong place though I'm not clear, even after reading the article above, how I could have referenced the material after it had been deleted from the Holography article.

As far as the Holography and my draft are concerned, I believe there is a place on Wikipedia for a detailed discussion of the Physics of Holography which I've put together with appropriate referencing, but that this needs to be separate from the Holography page which will be read by people who do not want to trawl through lots of equations (which I put in originally). Without these sections, I believe the article will be more readable for the general public. The comment about the article being "too technical" has been there since 2017, but no-one else has tackled it.

Yes, the article I was supposed to have copyright-violated has actually reproduced without attribution a photo I added to Wikimedia in 2011, as well as presumably much of the text of the Holography article. Hey ho. Epzcaw (talk) 11:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Epzcaw: The draft currently has no content; so, if it remains that way, it will be deleted either per WP:G7 (as explained above) or per WP:G13. If you want to stop that from happening, you should restore the content.

For reference, Wikipedia’s policy on using copyrighted content applies to all Wikipedia pages; so, please make sure you properly attribute the content it your user sandbox because it’s otherwise at risk for being mistaken as a copyvio and being deleted.

The way you attributed the draft was OK, but a bit ambiguous and the reviewer either didn’t notice or misunderstood it. That probably happens quite a bit but it’s usually just a misunderstanding. Try looking at WP:PATT and WP:RIA since you can probably restore the content and attribute it in a single edit.

The comment about the draft being a copyvio was left by an AFC reviewer in good faith. You’ll see that another editor also left a comment explaining what happened for future AFC reviewers. These comments are just for the benefit of AFC reviewers and will be removed if the article is eventually accepted. The original AFC reviewer is probably off-line at the moment, but perhaps they will respond to the post on their user talk page once they log in again. People sometimes get WP:BUSY and make not immediately respond to a post; so, please be patient.

I don’t know anything about the subject matter, but try and remember WP:NOT because any article you try to create is still going to need to comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. — Marchjuly (talk) 12:42, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I undertand that people make errors - even me! Yes, the content was re-instated because I brought it to someone's attention, but my issue is that the draft article is forever labelled as "Copyright Violation" and so will never be reviewed for publication - so it's pointless having it there.

All the content is in my Sandbox page, and I will stick attributions in as many places as I can find to try to avoid this happening again. Anyone else is then free to take the content from my sandbox and use it (with appropriate attribution of course).

But thank you for your comments - I know you are trying to help. Epzcaw (talk) 13:41, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

​ I don’t think it's necessarily true that the draft will never be reviewed because someone mistakenly marked it as a copyvio, but you can find out yourself by asking at WP:AFCHELP. For reference, copyright violations are usually revision deleted so that they are no longer publicly visible even from the page's history. I asked an administrator who does lots of checking of copyvio about the draft, and she didn't revision delete any of the content. So, I'm assuming it's going to be OK as long as it's properly attributed. Moreover, the AFC reviewer can always WP:REDACT their comment if they want and they might do just that once they are informed of the actual state of things. From looking at the draft, it appears that the content has actually been restored by that particular AFC reviewer with an edit summary explaining why. I can't say whether the draft will ultimately be accepted because I don't know much about the subject matter, but you should be able to submit it for another review without worrying about the "copyvio" comment any more. As for any concerns that the wording might be too technical, you can always seek input from the members of WP:PHYSICS or WP:FOTO about the draft or the "Holography" article because that's where you're likely to find editors with experience dealing with these types of articles. — Marchjuly (talk) 21:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: The original reviewer who added the "Copyright Violation" comment has now removed it. They made an error and have acknowledged it, so all is well.

I believe that this is the best way to address the "too technical" comment, but of course understand that others may disagree. If the article is turned down, I will more than likely dispute it, but if I lose the argument, I will accept it, as that it how Wikipedia works.

But again, thanks for your input.Epzcaw (talk) 09:06, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Published author to be featured on Wikipedia

Good day, can you advise how to go about creating a bio as a published author? Petemiguelward (talk) 14:36, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Petemiguelward. Writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged. Please read the notability guideline for authors and Your first article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 14:48, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Petemiguelward: Being a published author does not, per se, make you notable. I am also an author of a book, and would not expect to have a Wikipedia article about me. Having seen your own website and how you write about yourself, I strongly urge you not to attempt to create an autobiographical article. Let someone else do that once you do attain Notable status, please. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Which WP would be better to improve this article

Hello. I would like some suggestions on which WikiProject would be best suitable to improve this article: Ganapathi Sachchidananda. There are indeed a lot of issues flagged. Thanks for your suggestions. -- DaxServer (talk) 14:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@DaxServer: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to improve it. There are several projects listed on the article's talk page. Depending on which section of the article you want to work on, pick the one that fits. For example, if it is the section regarding music, then try the Musicians Wikiproject. RudolfRed (talk) 17:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

YouTube

Can we use YouTube as a reliable source? --Eclectic-Polymath (talk) 14:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Eclectic-Polymath: Not always, and in some cases its strictly forbidden. If the youtube video comes from a verfied channel of a reliable Publisher, the reliability of that Publisher may be inherited. If the video isn't published on a channel by a reliable publisher, then no, it isn't reliable. You also have to keep WP:ABOUTSELF in mind. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Eclectic-Polymath, think of it this way: YouTube is not a source. It is a platform for hosting videos, some of which are reliable as described by Victor Schmidt, but most of which are not reliable. It is analogous to a bookstore or a TV set. Each sells or displays content, some of which is reliable and most of which isn't. Each YouTube video needs to be assessed on its own merits, using your editorial judgment, with the presumption that most of them aren't reliable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:14, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

WP:RSPYT has some advice on this. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:27, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Trouble with Verifiable References

Hello! I recently had an article declined because my sources were not considered reliable. I had suspected this might happen as I was working with old newspaper clippings from the 50's and 60's many of which are no longer in print. I am wondering how I can proceed or how best to use source material that was published years ago but is no longer verifiable online? Janegrey669 (talk) 15:46, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to Teahouse! Just to clarify, are you talking about Draft:João Artur da Silva? I see the following problems with provided sources:

1. None of these sources have a URL readily available online. There is one source with a URL, but that URL appears dead. Also, there is a source from The Guardian. Maybe, you could find it within The Guardian Archive?
2. Some sources have only the date (year) and author name, but not a title. Maybe, you could add the titles of the works?
3. Many of these sources are exhibition catalogs, so they include the material submitted by the authors and therefore might not classify as a third-party source. Do these catalogs have any commentary written by, e.g. exhibit curators? If not, catalogs might be considered not reliable like uncurated blog entries, news wire press releases, and article subject's own statements.

Hope that helps.Anton.bersh (talk) 16:16, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Just to clarify point 1: The source doesn't need a URL if you can verify it in some other way (e.g., by going to a museum or a library). It's just easiest to find material online instead of going to a particular place. Anton.bersh (talk) 16:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Stronger than that, Anton.bersh. A source absolutely does not need to be available on line, and even if it is, a URL is often not a crucial part of the citation, but a convenience for the reader or reviewer. The important parts of the citation are title, date, publication, author if available, so that a reader can in principle locate the source (eg through a library as Anton says). Giving this information also helps reviewers to decide quickly whether a source is likely to meet the three criteria of being reliable, independent, and having significant coverage of the subject. Most of your references do have titles, Janegrey669, but several of the titles suggest that these are not independent sources, but derive from the artist's associates or institutions. --ColinFine (talk) 17:36, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

The age of the sources isn't the issue, Janegrey669. Non-independent sources can be used for some material, providing that it's just basic details, but in general you want to be using independent sources as much as possible. You also need to ensure that everything in the article can be verified; what's the source for the claim that "In 1991 João Artur relocated again, this time to British Columbia, Canada, so that his wife, Raymonde, could be closer to her sister", for instance? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:44, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Question about Wikipedia:Notability

I was referred to this noticeboard by another editor regarding a draft I submitted. I am interested in learning about the WP:Notability and WP:NBIO requirements. I read through these carefully and thought that the sources in Draft:Apoorva Mehta met the requirements, but it was declined. I'm trying to learn what is acceptable for these requirements for future reference. Can anyone take a look and explain what I might be misunderstanding about the Basic Criteria in WP:NBIO? The sources are below which I thought had satisfied the “multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject” and my notes about each:

• Feature in Enterpreneur (reviewing editor says this doesn't count because it's "by a contributor")
• Featured on cover of Forbes (he is on the cover, is mentioned 38 times, describes a lot about his personal life and career)
• Another feature in Forbes (more than half of the article is directly about him)
• Featured in TIME (on the Time 100 list)
• Feature in GQ India (more than half of this article is about him)
• Feature in CNBC (is claimed to be "the youngest billionaire of Indian-origin", half of this is about him)
• There’s also this one but honestly looks like the same as the Forbes cover story above so I don't know if it would count for anything: Forbes India

Thank you. BuickaSoka (talk) 15:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Poof! Apoorva Mehta now an accepted article. David notMD (talk) 16:42, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

BuickaSoka, I read the Forbes and Los Angeles Times coverage and quickly became convinced that the article should be accepted so I boldly moved it to main space. I am joking only a little bit when I say that when the Los Angeles Times devotes significant coverage to someone who lives in San Francisco, then that person is notable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:49, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Cullen328 and David notMD Oh, nice thank you. I was pretty sure I had understood WP:NBIO but started to second guess myself and wondered if I was missing another requirement somewhere. Appreciate the feedback! BuickaSoka (talk) 17:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

All I did was make sections. David notMD (talk) 17:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Awards sections

Hi! Is there a convention for including Awards sections in the articles of heads of state? Thanks beforehand! NoonIcarus (talk) 16:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, NoonIcarus. The guidance that I can offer is that if there is a Wikipedia article about the award, and independent coverage in a reliable source confirming that the award was given, then it probably merits inclusion. Do not include obscure and unimportant awards ignored by reliable independent sources. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Understood, I think that clarifies the issue for the most part, many thanks! --NoonIcarus (talk) 17:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Anish Thangamuthu

Anish Thangamuthu Is Indian Politician.He is Born on (05/May/1997) in Kanyakumari district .He is Member of Indian National Congress (2015) He Is President of Virudhunagar district National Students' Union of India Secretary

And Tamil Nadu Congress Committee

References

Hello Kanyakumari123 and welcome to the Teahouse. Assuming you want to create a WP-article about this person, start with Help:Your first article and follow the guidance there. See also WP:BASIC. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

wikipedia policy on bullying and disruptive editors

Hi I am a new user, havent been able to contribute much yet. One of the articles I contributed to was deleted. I requested it DRV as i was not convinced with the reasons given for its nomination. They were not in line with wikipdeia guidelines and the nominator continued to jump from one reason to another vague reason, it felt like more of disruptive in nature. During the discussion I feel the nominator and the person who deleted it were working as a team, and both have also tried to intimidate me. The account that chose to delete it, is now blocked for sock puppetry. Can someone help me with this? I am open to constructive criticism of my work and also seek guidance on how to deal with disruptive expert editors. Shatbhisha6 (talk) 18:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Shatbhisha6 Swami Avdheshanand Giri is at AfD as of 12 May. This article was previously created, AfD'd on 29 March, then recreated for reevaluation. Confusingly, Draft:Swami Avdheshanand Giri also exists, which was Declined and then Rejected in late April. HOWEVER, the Declined and Rejected recommendations were both actions of User:Kashmorwiki, subsequently indef blocked as a sockpuppet. In addition, at the first AfD, Kashmorwiki had recommended Delete, but AfD decisions, as always, are made by an Administrator, not those expressing an opinion. The article and draft are near-identical. David notMD (talk) 19:42, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Both draft and AFD exist as after the new draft was created, VV, the nominator for previous deletion objected it with a link to the deleted article. I feel something suspicious with the way VV, Kichu have worked towards deletion of this page. I am a new user and not well versed Wiki ways. Also wish to know if me being a new editor with not enough contribution can be a reason for my arguments to be disregarded? I dont understand why VV has mentioned this in the deletion discussion? Shatbhisha6 (talk) 05:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

An WP:SPA template in an AFD is to indicate to the closer that an editor works on only a limited area of interest. It is not an attack on the editor as it stems from a fact. Your only edits were around this specific article. Best! VV 07:13, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Thats not true, and can be checked from my contribution log both in English and Hindi. This was my first article and truth is being a new user I'm not confident enough and thats why I have not contributed much, learning with baby steps. I only wish to know how does that matter to the subject or the article. And you being a nominator how does your vote count and my vote striked off? If only one vote counts then shouldnt only one of two should have been struck? Hope someone can guide me on that.Shatbhisha6 (talk) 11:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

2021 iHeartRadio Music Awards

The first paragraph regarding a tweet from Taylor Swift is clearly false. Please fix this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_iHeartRadio_Music_Awards 2601:648:8402:58F0:5925:F48C:D8E4:57BA (talk) 19:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2021 iHeartRadio Music Awards is the preferred place to report any factual errors in the article, 2601:648:8402:58F0:5925:F48C:D8E4:57BA.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

woodrow wilson

I have added a couple of paragraphs to the Home Front section of the Wilson entry. The entry is protected and I have not received a rsponse to my proposed insert. The current version is inaccurate and biased. <redacted> Rosalux1900 (talk) 19:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Rosalux1900, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you just add a suggestion to a Talk page, it will quite often happen that nobody will notice who is prepared to act on it. The suggested action in WP:Edit requests is to add the template {{edit request}} to your request, which puts it on a list which some editors watch. You have included a source, which is good; but you have not specified precisely what change you are recommending to the article. --ColinFine (talk) 21:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Rosalux1900. Please do not post personally identifying information. You did not make a formal edit request. You posted some information on Talk: Woodrow Wilson. Please note that this is a Good article that recently went through a peer review. The article already contains the following paragraph:

"Anarchists, Industrial Workers of the World members, and other antiwar groups attempting to sabotage the war effort were targeted by A. Mitchell Palmer and his Department of Justice; many of their leaders were arrested for incitement to violence, espionage, or sedition. Wilson was incapacitated and was not told what was happening."

This article is a biography of Wilson. It should not cover every single thing that happened during his presidency, especially things he was uninvolved with when his health declined. We have other articles such as Industrial Workers of the World, Eugene V. Debs and Palmer Raids where it is appropriate to cover these matters in greater depth. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:14, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Some of the issues that concern you are covered later in the body of the article in the section called "Red Scare and Palmer Raids". Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:44, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Verification

i magically got verified... how the awesome did that happen DA AWESOME BOI (talk) 19:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

what happens when you figure out the answer yourself before the people who could answer it answered it on a question DA AWESOME BOI (talk) 19:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

• Hello @DA AWESOME BOI, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I’m sorry but the Teahouse is a place for you to ask questions about editing here, please is there a question you specifically want to ask? By getting verified what do you make reference to? Celestina007 (talk) 20:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@DA AWESOME BOI: If you mean the user right called "autoconfirmed", that is added automatically by the software once your account has made a total of 10 edits and is over 4 days old. If you mean something else, please state more precisely what. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:39, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@DA AWESOME BOI: Ideally what would happen is that you post an update saying "never mind, I figured it out myself", which you kinda did, but even if you had worded it differently you may still have received follow-up replies. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) – (00:12 Tue 01, AEST) 14:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

draft:androidwedakarayo.com

draft:androidwedakarayo.com is my first Wikipedia article and it has been declined to publish two times in a row. I want to know why was it happening and how could I get it published successfully without declining it. How to develop the article to get published. Could someone help me with check my draft. If you are an admin, please do not delete it, it is still in draft mode and it doesn't do any harm to Wikipedia. Senlanka (talk) 19:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Androidwedakarayo.com. Status: Declined twice (5/29, 5/29), revised, resubmitted. David notMD (talk) 19:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Senlanka, I'm the reviewer who declined the draft the first time. As the decline message says, we need significant coverage in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Looking at the draft's current references, there are still issues. References #1, #4, and #6 are links to its own website. #8, #9, and #10 are actually the same source which is not actually about androidwedakarayo, it's just the website that hosted a poll. #5 (WHOIS), #7 (Google Play listing), and #8 (Huawei listing) don't help establish notability at all. #2 is a sponsored post from a marketing team. #12 and #13 don't constitute significant coverage. The draft is still in need of sources that satisfy the criteria I laid out at the beginning of this paragraph. Does that make sense? DanCherek (talk) 20:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi DanCherek I got what you said. Could you please decline the submission of the said article? Please do not suggest for speed deletion. I will enhance the article with more reliable sources and let you know before Submit back it again. Please don't suggest for speed deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senlanka (talk • contribs) 20:16, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Senlanka: I have removed your latest re-submission from the draft. Feel free to work on it at your leisure and resubmit for review if/when the issues have been resolved. DanCherek (talk) 20:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@DanCherek: I have checked references #8, #9. In those articles, the journalists have clearly mentioned the contest the held by androidwedakarayo.com and those references were added because I have added a section regarding the events that androidwedakarayo.co has been done. For example I will disclose with quoting the relevant paragraphs from the articles. Please let me know why did those articles are not related with androidwedakarayo.com. Then I can develop my knowledge about selecting references for wikipedia. I hope you will help me to understand.

Reference #8 from DailyMirror - DailyMirror is a well reputed newspaper in Sri Lanka and dailymirrior.lk is the official website of them. The said reference include like this, and in those articles, they have clearly mentioned androidwedakarayo.com also

Extended content

Yet, there was no formal competition being conducted regarding the Most Popular Smartphone Brand in Sri Lanka. A newpoll was conducted by Android Wedakarayo - a Sri Lankan tech/ mobile website which was hosted on their official website – www.androidwedakarayo.com & OPPO emerged as the winner of the title “The Most Popular Smartphone Brand of the Year 2018 – In Sri Lanka”. It was held on the website with the polling system from Pinpoll in which the public was allowed to vote for their choice of the brand – where all the Smartphone brands available in Sri Lanka was added to the Poll. Information about the poll was communicated in Social Media which resulted in most of the young tech enthusiasts voting for their choice of brand. Multiple votes by a single person were disabled whilst human image verification was enabled to verify the authenticity of the voters. The poll was active for one week and ended on 25th Dec, 2018 & subsequently the Poll results were shared to the public. (Results of Android Wedakarayo’ poll could be referred at http://www.androidwedakarayo.com/most-popular-brand-2018/) “OPPO is undoubtedly the go to brand amongst Sri Lanka’s young demographic. The brand topped our list in the polls for the most popular Smartphone brand of the year 2018. We believe that the brand has been effectively made an emotional connection with Sri Lanka’s youth,” commented GevinduAloka from the Android Wedakarayo team.(http://www.androidwedakarayo.com/oppo-winner/) Android Wedakarayo is a bunch of tech enthusiasts, believe-in sharing ideas and spreading awareness among the tech world. Android Wedakarayo writes, discusses, shares their views on the development of the tech world and even hold concern programs both online and offline in Sri Lanka. Founded in June 2013 by Rajitha Dananjaya Android Wedakarayo was initially a Facebook Group. With the main motive being “To contribute towards a tech concerned and digitally updated Sri Lanka”, the target audience comprises of mostly Sri Lankans whose native language is “Sinhala”.

Furthermore I have checked #9 and #10 references. #9 and #10 was copied the news form Dailymirror.lk and published on their own sites. Therefore, I have removed those duplicated references from the Draft:Androidwedakarayo.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senlanka (talk • contribs) 20:39, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Senlanka: Sure, it's a reliable source that is about Android Wedakarayo and can certainly remain in the article, but it's only approximately 100 words about your subject (excluding the quote), and so I hope you can support the draft with additional sources that demonstrate more significant coverage in order to establish notability. (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.) DanCherek (talk) 20:50, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@DanCherek:Thank you for your feedback Dan. It was very helpful to me. Can I add a YouTube video that has been uploaded by a YouTuber, who has YouTube verified badge? Is it a reliable source? Now I found an event that androidwedakarayo.com has been held in 2018 and the references are only on YouTube. But still I did not add about that event because I want to clarify about using YouTube videos as references.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Senlanka (talk • contribs) 21:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Senlanka: There is no blanket ban on citing YouTube; however, keep in mind that it is self-published, so the video is only as reliable as its publisher. For example, if I cite a news video from the official channel of The New York Times, that would likely be a reliable source. But if I upload my own video, that wouldn't be appropriate for citing on Wikipedia. I believe the verified badge only confirms that someone is who they say they are, and it's not an indication of reliability. Generally proceed with great caution and cite a YouTube channel if and only if other established reliable sources indicate that they are authoritative. DanCherek (talk) 21:27, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I see that a contribution I supposedly deleted has been restored. If I in fact did the deletion, it was unintended. So, sorry. Smallchief (talk) 21:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@DanCherek: Thank you so much for your explanation.

@Smallchief: Be cool bro. We all are humans and we all make mistakes during this journey. I saw that you have restored what you deleted. You are a humble guy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senlanka (talk • contribs) 21:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Help with editing the bio of a living artist

Hi

In February 2021, I was trying to update a profile of a living artist who happens to be a friend of a friend.

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

However, I was prevented from updating the biography because the moderator(s) suspected I was being paid for the work. I wasn't. It was simply a favor for a friend. (This was stated to the moderator at the time, to no avail).

Shortly afterwards, I suffered a serious health issue, and have been away from Wikipedia since - until now.

Rather than fall foul of very complicated rules again, I am requesting help, as a new / inexperienced contributor, in updating the artist's profile (as a favor to my old university friend, not a paid gig).

To make it simple, I want to improve / update / correct the biography paragraph-by-paragraph, so that I can easily see what is / what is not being rejected, and learn from it.

Would it be acceptable for me to post each proposed paragraph here on this Teahouse thread, for approval / disapproval / advice, before moving on to the next paragraph?

If not, how best should I proceed?

Many thanks. Blackpebblemedia (talk) 21:38, 30 May 2021 (UTC) Blackpebblemedia (talk) 21:38, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! Wikipedia rules against "conflict of interest" are described here. In particular, they say "Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships." (I added emphasis). Anton.bersh (talk) 21:45, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

• @Blackpebblemedia, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, No, you may not paste the proposed changes here, but you can do so on the talk page of the article in question. Please see WP:ER to guide you. Celestina007 (talk) 21:50, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

There will be a problem with pursuing the recommended path, which is to propose changes on the Talk page, so that a non-involved editor can decide. The article itself averages about one viewer per day, the Talk page less. But you can propose specific changes and submit an edit request, which will notify a need for it to be looked at. David notMD (talk) 22:16, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Be aware that much of what you added in February that was reverted does not belong in a Wikipedia article. For example, the entire Commodity and investment section. Also, hyperlinks are not allowed, so do not propose content with hyperlinks, as you had done in your reverted addition. David notMD (talk) 22:21, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Blackpebblemedia:, FYI, this page has been nominated for deletion, the discussion is here. Anton.bersh (talk) 23:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice, which is appreciated and noted. Back to the drawing board. Over & out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackpebblemedia (talk • contribs) 23:45, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Article:Iraj Weeraratne

I observe that Iraj Weerarathne article was not with reliable references. But how could this article still be on Wikipedia? Senlanka (talk) 21:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Since all content on Wikipedia is user-submitted, some of it is not verifiable, not reliable, and sometimes outright misleading. You can suggest deletion of the content you deem not suitable for Wikipedia. The easiest way to do so is probably Wikipedia:Proposed deletion. Anton.bersh (talk) 22:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

It had references until it was messed up earlier this week. An editor added a long lost of URLs in the section References rather than creating in-line references. The article has been in existence for years; in my opinion it needs a rescue rather than a proposed deletion. David notMD (talk) 22:42, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I've restored it to the last stable version. Now to see if it sticks... —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Concerned

An editor - currently blocked from editing following an ENW notice - has recently posted by real name, and my (private) work email address on their talk page. I have a chilled stomach with worry and anxiety. What are my actions here, what can be done to remove my details, if indeed they can? doktorb _words^deeds 23:49, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Doktorbuk. I suggest you go to WP:OVERSIGHT and contact the Oversight Team immediately via the email link on that page. I also suggest you try to take care of this a much as you can via email so as to avoid the this type of scenario from happening. WP:OUTING is a serious policy violation and in your email you should request that an oversighter remove the account's ability to edit its own talk page. You can also email any administrator and ask them to do so as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. doktorb _words^deeds 00:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Doktorbuk: If something similar happens in the future, don't post about it (even cryptically) on any public Wikipedia page since that could just attract attention. Remove the content per WP:TPG#Removing prohibited material (just leave a bland edit summary) and then contact an administrator asap via email and seek help that way. Don't try and engage the other editor any further because that will likely just make things worse. Generally, in the case of a blocked use, the name of the administrator who blocked the account as well as the names of any administrator who respond to an unblock request should be somewhere on the blocked editor's user talk page; so, contact one of those administrators (or the Oversight Team) via email, explain the issue and one of them will take care of it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:28, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

The editor in question has now been indefinitely blocked for repeated policy violations despite being a number of warnings and has had their ability to edit their user talk page also taken away. Just ignore them from here on and stay away from their talk page. If you think they're back editing using another account, then seek administrator via WP:SPI or via email. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:34, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Barnstars by IP

Do IP addresses could present barnstars to users? And yes, it could be a joke that an IP is asking this question. 125.167.117.156 (talk) 00:48, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Anyone including IP editors can give out barnstars. However, handing out a lot of barnstars for no discernable good reason is suspicious behavior, so be cautious. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Tags in edits

What does the "#1lib1ref" tags I am seeing in the edit summaries lately mean? GenQuest ^"scribble" 00:52, 31 May 2021 (UTC) GenQuest ^"scribble" 00:52, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, GenQuest. It is an annual campaign to encourage librarians to add references to reliable sources. The idea is that if every librarian on Earth added even one reference, the encyclopedia would be improved significantly. Obviously, the hope is that some of them will stay around and become active editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:00, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for the info. GenQuest ^"scribble" 01:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Mugshot

Why is Mac Jones Wikipedia page using his mugshot as his main photo? That's disrespectful. 2600:1004:B040:A8D8:3FFB:C3F3:5572:3572 (talk) 00:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse I don't think it's a mugshot; the info with the photo says it was created by his university; the article about him does not mention any arrests or convictions for a crime. 331dot (talk) 01:00, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

IP editor, I see no evidence that the photo in Mac Jones is a mugshot. Can you explain? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:04, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I see no evidence either. --Bduke (talk) 01:08, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Mac Jones One UA (cropped).jpg was taken from this UA video around the 1:35 mark. GoingBatty (talk) 05:08, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I was about to complain about copyright, but that seems to be in order. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Article : Virtue Clan

Hi there, so I would like to have this Draft:Virtue Clan be deleted coz, it seems like the last person made this was a sock puppet. So I would like to create a new draft on this and also would like the previous one deleted. Jocelin Andrea (talk) 03:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Virtue Clan courtesy link!

Hi Jocelin Andrea, and welcome to the Teahouse. The person who made it is a sockpuppet of a blocked, so if you want to rewrite the article (without copying any content over) you can CSD the article under the G4 criteria. If you want to continue working on the draft, make major edits or rewrites so it doesn't get G4'd and you still have the draft. I'll leave it up to you :) Sennecaster (What now?) 12:12, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

JoemarCurammeng123 (Real Name: Joemar M. Curammeng)

JoemarCurammeng123 is a Phillipinian Gamer, Playing Games/Vlogs such as: Roblox (created account born: february 29,2020 (Last Year), and others he played with same names. They also called launguages of "Luxembourgish/Phillipinian Gamer" about his Story. [More Updates and Titles are Coming Soon!] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joemarcurammeng123 (talk • contribs) 03:33, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Joemarcurammeng123: Welcome to the Teahouse! Did you have a question about Wikipedia that we can help you with? GoingBatty (talk) 05:05, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Your attempt to create an article about yourself at Draft:Joemarcurammeng123 was deleted. David notMD (talk) 11:10, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Second Opinion

Hello hosts, what's an appropriate forum to request a second opinion on a declined draft? TheSokks_(talk) 05:15, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello TheSokks. Drafts are not accepted or declined according to a reviewers opinion, but according to a set of criteria. Therefore there is normally no case for obtaining a second "opinion". What you would need to do is address the reasons for declining the draft. However, if you provide a link to the relevant draft here it is quite likely that someone else will take a look at it for you.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 06:44, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you @Shantavira, I think this case may have been the reviewer’s opinion. The draft page is deleted now (per my request if I may add) and the comment left on the draft was This source used in the article implies WP:TOOSOON and ELOY Awards doesn’t meet #1 of WP:ANYBIO. But other sources used include [2][3] [4] [5][6] [7] [8] Which are independent of the subject, reliable and non trivial. TheSokks_(talk) 08:07, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

If you want to create an article about Erica Nlewedim then submit a draft to AfC and you will get a different reviewer. Many drafts have been Declined more than once before being adequately revised, and then accepted. Declined is not the same as Rejected, which is when the reviewer decided that there was no potential for success. P.S. Teahouse Hosts are not reviewers (well, most are not). David notMD (talk) 11:17, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

For record sake, i am the declining editor and for very pertinent reason I wouldn’t accept the article into mainspace, chiefly because this article revolves around WP:1E, I beseech Teahouse hosts who have AFC rights not to accept the article(if ever created by this very user). I would personally proceed and request the titles “Draft:Erica Nlewedim” and “Erica Nlewedim” be Admin access only salted. This I shall do after I’m done with my knee surgery scheduled for tomorrow. Let the record also reflect that i have accepted decent article created by this user, for example see here and here. Whilst not divulging much, I should state expressly that this very editor in question ought to create the article in a peculiar manner in which they have failed to do.Celestina007 (talk) 18:37, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Wishing you speedy recovery. Your rationale for declining was TOOSOON now you say 1E despite the RS where the subject is discussed outside the context of the one event. Godspeed. TheSokks_(talk) 19:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

On another note, I know WP:OTHERSTUFF is an arguement to avoid but the other Nollywood beauties to look out for in 2021 listed here including Idia Aisien, Sophie Alakija, Ini Dima-Okojie and Omowumi Dada should not have stand alone articles per your rationale which is a wrong application of TOOSOON in any case. TheSokks_(talk) 19:43, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@TheSokks, WP:1E and TOOSOON are Semantics and both reference the non notability of a subject at the given time. Back to my comments without divulging any highly classified information, i believe it is in your best interest to refrain from creating that article but add it to WP:RA. Celestina007 (talk) 21:50, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Why? TheSokks_(talk) 22:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@TheSokks, “why” you ask? the answer to that question would be given to you if you attempt to create that article again. I won’t comment on this again, but you are more than welcome to try and recreate it and see how that plays out. Celestina007 (talk) 23:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Speedy recovery! TheSokks_(talk) 23:22, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@TheSokks, thanks, you are far too kind. Celestina007 (talk) 23:34, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand how to request that these pages be translated into English

Hello, I'd like to ask the the below linked articles be translated from German into English but I don't understand that instructions on the wiki pages for requesting this.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Beidler

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Wilhelm_Beidler

Once translated, I would think they would be linked to the pages on the family of Richard Wagner and descendants of Franz Liszt.

Thank you. 68.13.50.107 (talk) 05:56, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, you may list them at Wikipedia:Requested articles, but know that very little requests are actually fulfilled there. Instead, a better way to see those translated would be do it yourself! As a volunteer project, Wikipedia needs all the help we can get, so if you are bilingual, we would really appreciate it if you used those abilities to improve our encyclopedic coverage. I suggest you to read Help:Your first article to understand how the process works, and come back here if you have any questions. Good luck! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 08:23, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello I editor, and welcome. In the meantime you can you an interlanguage link to link to a non-English Wikipedia page whilst there is not one on for it on en-wiki. So, for Franz Wilhelm Beidler, we would normally just have this red link. But Franz Wilhelm Beidler also shows a subscript 'blue link' to that non-English article. Hope this helps a bit. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:29, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Adding Video

How to add this kind of box named External video in an article? 106.197.17.154 (talk) 06:03, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@106.197.17.154: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is the work of two templates working in conjunction, {{external media}} and {{YouTube}}. You can click the edit link next to the section header to see how its done. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:51, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I got a Barnstar!

I am super excited as a newbie to earn a Barnstar after my first published article. Really grateful to teahouse for all the assist, brace up guys because I am going to be pestering you some more for my 999 articles. Thanks. Bibihans (talk) 07:43, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep the new articles coming Bibihans! Thanks for working on Elijah Chinezim Onyeagba and expanding Wikipedia's coverage in international subjects. We're glad to have you with us, and we're also excited to see what you will come up with next. If you have any questions, feel free to drop by here. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 08:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Thank you so much. Been working on another Draft:Sanusi Mohammed Ohiare my second draft and also editing other published articles too. Bibihans (talk) 08:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Complete source code not appearing in phones and tablets

The compete source code doesn’t appear while trying to edit in phones and tablets . Jerry69420 (talk) 07:49, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Jerry69420: On mobile, you have to scroll to the specific section you want to edit. Once you expand the section, there will be a pencil-shaped icon next to the section header that allows you to edit that section only. An alternative is to click the "Desktop" link at the very bottom of the page, which will load the desktop version of Wikipedia. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 08:10, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Jerry69420. Are you editing Wikipedia directly in a browser on your mobile (i.e. don't try to edit via any sort of app), and do you have screen view set to 'Desktop view' each time? The latter is critically important, and there is a teeny-tiny link at the very bottom of every page allowing you to switch back and forth. I do a fair bit of editing in on a tiny iPhone, and have never noticed source code not being shown. Avoid using any 'edit app' which will restrict your abilities, as will using 'Visual editor', of course. (There is a setting in 'Preferences' to "Show me both editor tabs". Having ensured those conditions are all met, should the issue continue, you might then need to give us some examples or WP:DIFFS to show where you are seeing full source code on a desktop, but not on a mobile. Hoping the helps a bit, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:14, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Ok i tried desktop mode and it seems to work that way .

Good to hear we fixed it for you. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

How I can be extended and confirmed user?

I witnessed that some user's have subheading below their user name as E.C user. I want to be one. Guide me and how can I find new created articles, where I can copy edit and contribute. Huge Earth (talk) 08:10, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth: Extended confirmed just means that the account is 30+ days old and has 500+ edits, so keep improving articles and you'll get there someday. As for finding new pages, there is Special:NewPagesFeed; you are of course welcome to improve those new articles, but you can't mark pages as patrolled unless you have the patroller user right. Also, the feed includes new articles on all kinds of topics, which you may not be an expert on. Instead, I suggest you to start improving existing articles on topics that you are interested in: join a Wikipedia:WikiProject, be bold, and collaborate with other editors. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 08:19, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

REGARDING SPEEDY DELETION

PLS HELP ME😭😭😭 Harshal Srinivasu (talk) 09:41, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Harshal Srinivasu Please tell us what it is that you want help with(and please do not use all capital letters, that is considered yelling). There is no need to be sad, this is just a website. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Harshal Srinivasu: Are you asking about the speedy deletion of Kathathmikaa and Harshal S? I found out about them by visiting your talk page. The messages left on your page contain detailed descrittions of the concerns about these pages, including a message from the reviewer who actually deleted said pages. Anton.bersh (talk) 10:28, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

BMW M88 article 'talk' section

I want to mention in this article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M88 that the no 2 ref link is dead, I went to the talk section but it seems to be locked out, why's that? Also I tried to delete the link, but then I get any error talking about a missing link for the reference. Not got time to look into how to do that today, hence I just wanted to mention the dead link in 'talk'. Markpd (talk) 10:19, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Markpd Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I see nothing that would prevent someone from posting to Talk:BMW M88. What message do you get when you attempt to do so? 331dot (talk) 10:23, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Markpd: In this edit, I added an |archive-url= to reference #2 so readers can see what the web page used to say. If you come across another dead link, you can use the Internet Archive Wayback Machine to try to find an archived version, or tag the reference with {{dead link}}. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:00, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Advance ayurveda

advancement of ayurveda is right of ayurveda doctors. why not publish the definition of advanced ayurveda. Vdpankajjain (talk) 10:26, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Vdpankajjain Doctors or anyone have no rights to publish any topic on Wikipedia. Wikipedia does not merely post definitions; Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage choose to say about a topic. Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. Please review the advice left by reviewers, and also read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 10:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

practicing of ayurveda in India not quackery. Ayurveda medicine is being brought into the mainstream in India. You cannot call Ayurveda physician a quack. Vdpankajjain (talk) 10:34, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Vdpankajjain Please add additional comments to this section, instead of creating additional sections. As I said, Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state, including what those sources report as the views of various groups on Ayurveda. If those sources are not being reported accurately, please post on the article talk page detailing the errors. If those sources are being summarized accurately but you disagree with them, you will need to take that up with the sources or the groups like the Indian Medical Association that have those views, not us. 331dot (talk) 10:37, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia has articles titled Ayurveda and Ministry of AYUSH. Consider improving those rather than trying to create a new article "Advanced Ayurveda", which has been declined as insufficient content and referencing. David notMD (talk) 11:28, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Avigonesi

Draft: Avignonesi Hello! This is my first attempt to write an article and I nedd some help. The fist draft was deleted because the text apparently was too promotional. In this new draft I removed the parts that might have looked promotional, but I'm not sure it's encyclopedic enough. Could someone please help me? Dadesid (talk) 10:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Dadesid Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added the information needed to submit your draft for a review; but I might wait a bit, as there are still some unsourced sections. Please understand that a Wikipedia article should summarize what independent reliable sources state about the winery, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. It shouldn't say what the winery wants to say about itself, only what others choose on their own to say about it. If you haven't already, please review Your First Article.

I see that you declared a conflict of interest; if you are employed by this winery in any capacity, you will need to make the stricter paid editing declaration. 331dot (talk) 10:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you 331dot, I will search for more reliable sources and update the article. I updated my paid editing declaration.Dadesid (talk) 13:04, 31 May 2021 (UTC) I took a look at the other articles in the category and saw that they are not much different from mine though.Dadesid (talk) 13:40, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia freely admits that some of its articles currently do not meet all the required standards: they may date back to the project's early days when standards were more lax (and its all-volunteer editors haven't got around to improving them), or may have been created directly and escaped the attention of reviewers, so far.

Their existence does not, however, mean it should deliberately admit new articles that don't come up to scratch: the essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS explains more fully why this excuse isn't accepted.

Don't be discouraged. Creating a new article to an acceptable standard is difficult, and I myself haven't yet tried to do so in the 15+ years I've been editing here, but over 6 million articles show that it can be done. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.121.163.176 (talk) 16:03, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

'Reply to' etiquette - positioning of template within message

Hello Teahouse Helpers,

I always seem to have trouble with replying or pinging other WP users - despite reading the Help page. Just now I had this exchange:

I was only trying to help, but it seems barely worth this level of to-and-fro. Best wishes to you, [reply to: template removed]: [my sig removed] 10:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Also, FYI, use {{tl|reply to}} at the start of the reply, or use {{tl|u}} as you have used {{reply to}}. Happy editing! [Editor's sig removed] 10:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. [My sig removed) 10:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Must say I was surprised: Of all my many, many mistakes I have committed, this was not one I had thought of! I was a bit snippy, so probably got what I deserved! Is it really important - or perhaps etiquette - that the reply to template goes at the beginning? What's this {{tl|u}} template? Am I allowed to use that in the course of a reply, not necessarily at the start of it? This reply thing-y is as clear as mud to me; though I've manage to pick up a few formatting, and other, tricks, this one eludes me. Any advice appreciated. 49.177.30.125 (talk) 10:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! For information on how to use the templates, see Template:Reply to or Template:User link (abbreviated "u"). {{tl|u}} is a demonstration of Template:Template link (abbreviated "tl") which makes a template link stand out in a discussion, like this: {{u}}. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:06, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Meh, it's just a minor formatting quibble about the punctuation. "@Soandso: My opinion is suchandsuch" or "My opinion is suchandsuch, Soandso" rather than "My opinion is suchandsuch, @Soandso:" ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) – (23:51 Tue 01, AEST) 13:51, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Where to place inline citation with an Infobox

Hello everyone. I have just edited the Infobox for Pinkhill railway station. Previously, there was a citation to a bare URL, leading to a 404 page, against the first entry under "Key Dates". I have now cited a valid up-to-date reference. So far so good. However, the citation really applies to all five of the key dates, not just the first. I thought it would look odd to include the same citation five times on consecutive lines, so I thought I would just place it against the "Key Dates" sub-heading. But I can't see how to do that. Is there a way to do add a reference to a heading within an Infobox? Or should I place it against all five dates? Or doesn't it really matter. Thanks in advance. Mike Marchmont (talk) 11:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I checked Template:Infobox station and I can't see a way to achieve what you want. I agree it is a bit silly to quote the same reference on each row of the dates. Why not leave the citation out of the Infobox and place it in the main text in the history section, Mike Marchmont? Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:34, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, Michael D. Turnbull. It makes perfect sense. I've now taken your advice and moved the citation to the body of the article. I should have thought of that in the first place. Mike Marchmont (talk) 07:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Lost Memory of Skin

Hi, I was wondering when my recent article would be approved? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lost_Memory_of_Skin Thanks I.edit.copy (talk) 11:20, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

As is, this article is unlikely to be published because:

1. The article does not establish notability because it has only three references, one of which is the novel itself and another text is authored by the novel's author. The remaining source is a podcast, which is probably also not independent enough.
2. The article is mostly just quoted from the author's writing and speaking, which is not suitable for Wikipedia content. Wikipedia articles should prefer secondary sources over primary ones.

Anton.bersh (talk) 11:31, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Also, your draft has not been submitted for review. Clicking on the blue rectangle will submit it. There is then a waiting period of potentially months until a Reviewer gets to it. I strongly recommend you not submit it yet. This needs to be modelled after other book articles. Given that several of Russell Banks' novels are already subjects of articles, start by modeling from those. David notMD (talk) 11:34, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Creator has submitted Draft:Lost Memory of Skin. David notMD (talk) 14:06, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Incorrect Picture

Wrong Person's Picture Used

The Wikipedia page for Harry G. Stoddard (Harry G. Stoddard) has an incorrect image - it is not of Harry G. Stoddard, it is of George Booth. I wonder if the author could change this, or if I could upload a correct picture from the newspaper of which Harry Stoddard was the head (and I'm not sure how to do that). PaxtonPhil (talk) 11:47, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

PaxtonPhil Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Articles do not usually have a single author; this is a collaborative project. You will want to bring up this concern on the article talk page, Talk:Harry G. Stoddard, so the editors that follow that article can see it. Using an image from a newspaper would depend on how old it is as well as other copyright issues. 331dot (talk) 11:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

PaxtonPhil You use "we" on your user page, who is "we"? 331dot (talk) 11:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: Not any more: special:diff/1026109514 :) --CiaPan (talk) 12:36, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Problem fixed. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:48, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

HELLO, KINDLY TREAT AS IMPORTANT

Hello Teahouse, I'm a new user and I need some advice. I want to make my first article directly to the main page for some very important reasons. First, I am under a deadline to get this page uploaded and it's a very important aspect of a branding project I'm a part of. Having this page for my big brother (He's a tech-preneur making things happen here in the sub-Sahara) will go a long way in his career and driving the economy of my country as it is a criterion for a contract he's bidding for. I have studied extensively how to put together an article that gets approved and I have written a detailed piece (according to guidelines) however I have no idea how to publish directly on the main page or if I can get my first article published immediately after posting. Kindly treat it as urgent thank you. Grey Matter Copy (talk) 12:33, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Grey Matter Copy Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I will be frank with you in that Wikipedia has no interest in or concern with any deadlines you might be under, projects you have been assigned, and has no interest in helping clients you might have. Our sole interest is in building this encyclopedia. Anything else is a side benefit. No one can "publish things to the main page" as that's not what it is for. If you mean that you want to add your article to the main encyclopedia, you will need to submit it for review using Articles for Creation, mostly because you have a conflict of interest. There is no way to do that quickly; a speedy review cannot be guaranteed and it will likely take months. If you were to add your article directly to the encyclopedia yourself, you run the risk of it being nominated for deletion. 331dot (talk) 12:40, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

331dot Thank you. I am positive about the legibility of my draft, but can you explain why you think it'll most likely be nominated for deletion or point me to any articles that would help guide against deletion. I'll really appreciate this. Grey Matter Copy (talk) 1:14, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

You will find advice at WP:Your first article, but you also need to read about WP:conflict of interest. Getting an article published is not a rapid process, and there is no deadline. You and your brother obviously have a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of Wikipedia. It is an encyclopedia, and is not for promotion. As your purpose is to enable him to go a long way in his career and to assist him in the contract for which he is bidding, he may which to use another website to advertise his capabilities, but that is not the role of Wikipedia. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:43, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

David Biddulph Thank you, definitely not unclear about the purpose of Wikipedia. The page is supposed to exist to simplify the search for his personality when decision-makers need to. In my draft, I've made sure to not use any selsy words or promotional terms. Kindly help. Grey Matter Copy (talk) 1:15, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Grey Matter Copy No, you could not be more wrong about the purpose of Wikipedia. Please review the five pillars. 331dot (talk) 13:20, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Given your clear intent to create an article that is "...a very important aspect of a branding project...", if you try to by-pass Articles for Creation despite your COI and instead create this in main space, it is unlikely that it would go to Articles for Deletion. Instead, it would be nominated for Speedy deletion, and unless you could then quickly make a valid argument for it to stay, would be deleted with days, perhaps hours, by an Administrator. I recommend you read Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, specifically G11, to understand why. David notMD (talk) 14:15, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

David notMDThis personality I want to create a page for does merit a page as he is a stakeholder & prominent businessman in my country but seeing that I have a COI due to my personal relationship with him can I share my draft and can you help go through and decide if it's worth it and probably publish it? Thank you. Grey Matter Copy

Use the process detailed at Articles for Creation. Your draft will not get preferential treatment here and will not be considered anymore important than any other draft awaiting review. Polyamorph (talk) 15:32, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi Grey Matter Copy. Given what you've said, it's possible your brother is notable, as we use that term here, but it's also extremely likely you will create a highly promotional write-up, that will be declined, if not for other reasons, then for its lack of neutrality. I say that only based upon what we see so often from people who come here with your misunderstandings about Wikipedia's proper use. I hope saying that will help ward against the very prediction I am making.

Anyway, creating a proper Wikipedia article is not an easy task. As already indicated, it must be written in a scrupulously neutral manner. In additon to the prior link, please see WP:NOTPROMOTION, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch and Wikipedia:Wikipuffery.

All this just addresses neutrality. A draft article also must demonstrate the notability of the subject by citing to multiple reliable, secondary, independent sources that treat the topic in substantive detailTemplate:Z21. As very often when people read that they write articles citing sources but not of the correct type, please see Wikipedia:Common sourcing mistakes (notability).

Please note also that you must write in your own words, using the rights types of sources, with the right depth of treatment to corroborate the information written, but now the words used, i.e., in proper paraphrase. Any article that uses content already written elsewhere (but for some rare exceptions) will be deleted as a copyright violation and plagiarism.

After taking that in, in order to create a draft article, please visit the Wikipedia:Article wizard. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Ah lads, seriously? Obvious troll is obvious. Don't be feedin'!. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Bastun: Your post is quite inappropriate as extremely bitey, where you have no proper grounds for making it. Is it possible? Yes. Is it obvious based on the posts. Not at all. We get people here all the time who have come for promotional purposes with a profound misunderstanding of Wikipedia. There is no good foundation to determine the above is not in earnest.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Apologies. Remarks struck. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:08, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Grey Matter Copy: Based on what you wrote, I think you should publish your content to other places than Wikipedia. You could start (for free) with sites like LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, Medium (website). If you can afford spending $5-60/month, make a personal website with Squarespace or Wix.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anton.bersh (talk • contribs) 17:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I have zero interest in working on your draft. You are allowed to create and submit a draft to AfC as long as you describe the nature of your COI on your User page. David notMD (talk) 17:26, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Roofit Solar Energy draft re-submitted

Hello. My article Roofit Solar Energy was declined several days ago due to non-reliable sources. I had been waiting for it to be reviewed for 5 months and as it was declined, I edited all sources ad re-submitted it. Does this mean I have to wait again 5 months? I do not even know if this time it complies with all the rules. Can someone have a look at it and give me feedback? This is my first article here and I do care how it goes. Tea Mariamidze (talk) 12:36, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Tea Mariamidze Drafts are reviewed in no specific order by volunteer editors; it is not a queue. It could take five minutes, or 6 months. There is no way to know exactly, but the better your draft is, the more likely someone will review it. I will note that your draft just tells about the company and what it does. A Wikipedia article should do more, it should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia defintion of a notable company. Please review the definition carefully. 331dot (talk) 12:44, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Is this vandal also on Wikipedia?

Recently, many Uncyclomedia wikis, including Uncyclopedia, Illogicopedia, and others have been hit by a specific socking vandal (known from here on as Svex 88134kg, or Svex for short). They have created over 50 sockpuppets on Uncyclomedia wikis and caused significant disruption.

Svex seems to know how to redirect pages and use the {{Unblock}} template, so I'm assuming that they have experience with wikitext, possibly from experience vandalizing/editing Wikipedia. I'm trying to find any signs of this vandal on Wikipedia, along with any other IPs they use and ways to stop them.

Svex frequently uses open proxies, though their own IP geolocates to Ningbo. They speak broken English and creates pages of obscure stars. I've checked WP:LTA and found no clues. For more information, see their entry on UN:LSD, our version of LTA, or ask me or Casspedia on our talk pages.

I don't know exactly where to ask, so I'm putting this in the Teahouse. If there is a more appropriate place, feel free to move this conversation. Hipponias (talk) 13:17, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Hipponias. As far as I can tell, it's a "no" for the English Wikipedia – at least not using any user name containing "Svex" to cause any widespread disruption. In order to come to that conclusion, I searched the archives of the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, and then widened the search to other locations. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Hipponias: I'm also probably a good person to ask, though of course I don't know everything, and it doesn't ring any bells for me. We do block a lot of proxies, and also have some extensive abuse filters, so they may not even get noticed, or get very far. If you have info on IP addresses, especially but not only their native ranges, then I may (or may not) know more. My talk page may be a good place for followup. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:49, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Zzuuzz: I have sent Svex's IP to you via email. Hipponias (talk) 16:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Question about References

Good afternoon. Thank you for accepting me in the wikipedia community. I was writing my user page in order to practice) The most challengin part until now was to create correct references. The text I was writing is in English but one of the reference websites was provided exclusively in the Greek language. In this case is it correct in an English text to refer a foreign language website. In general, where I can find a guide for references and citations. I don't want to do any mistake. Is there any fellow editor who can correct and guide me in case I do a mistake? Antonis Theofanous (talk) 13:23, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Antonis Theofanous: Welcome to the Teahouse! Try reading Help:Referencing for beginners, and check out the links in the "See also" section that correspond to how you are creating references. You may use references in a foreign language on the English Wikipedia (and adding a |trans-title= in English is helpful). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:17, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:User pages for what can and cannot be on a User page. It is NOT for referenced, article-like content about you. Look at other editors' User pages to get a better idea. If you want to practice stuff, use your Sandbox. David notMD (talk) 14:28, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: Thank I already started reading it.

Hi Antonis Theofanous. Because your userpage was being used for this content, it was likely to be tagged for deletion and deleted at that location (under CSD U5). To avoid that result, I have taken the liberty of moving the page to the following location: User:Antonis Theofanous/sandbox, where practicing will be okay. This also frees up your userpage, now a red link, for re-creation with content more suited for that location (or not; you don't have to have a userpage). Although subpages for use as sandboxes can be created at any title in your userspace (i.e., your exact username + a forward slash + some title), the title I've moved it to you should see linked at the top of the interface, under the name "Sandbox". Regarding your original question, in addition to the advice above, please see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English sources (WP:NONENG) for the policy allowing use of non-English sources. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: What I should write on my user-page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonis Theofanous (talk • contribs) 14:09, June 1, 2021 (UTC)

@Antonis Theofanous: For the subsections of the guideline Wikipedia:User pages (linked above by David notMD) addressing proper and improper content for userpages, see WP:UPYES, and WP:UPNO. You might also look at a bunch of different users' userpages to get some ideas. Please note that I did not get your ping. Pings only work if you sign your post and save that signed post in the same edit that you include the linked mention of the other user. See also Help:Fixing failed pings. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:58, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

What is going on with this page and user?

What is going on with this page and user? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murtaza_Ali

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Akibmir88

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/Akibmir88 Skelly, a real skeleton 🦴 (talk to me!) 15:47, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Murtaza Ali moved (renamed) Murtaza Ali Khan. Akibmir88 indefinitely blocked for disruptive editing and edit warring. David notMD (talk) 17:38, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

My article 'Paruthumpara' got rejected

Hi all My article 'Paruthumpara' got rejected for some reason. Apparently the reason is that the article/subject is already exists. But I cant find any article in the same name under 'Paruthumpara". Paruthumpara is a place in Kottayam District of Kerala State in INDIA. There is another place called 'Parunthumpara' which is in a different district called IDUKKI. The spelling is very similar. Paruthumpara and ParuNthumpara. I strongly believe that the article about 'Parunthumpara' caused the misunderstanding that the article already exists. Actually they are two different places. Can some one guide me how to go ahead with my article 'Paruthumpara".

Thanks Ittymaathu (talk) 16:56, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

The reviewer was perhaps confused. As you say, the article Paruthumpara does not exist, and as far as I can see it never has existed. The reviewer has subsequently been banned, so we can't effectively question him about it, so I've reverted his review, and your draft has gone back to awaiting review so another reviewer can look at it. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:19, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hence, Draft:Paruthumpara. Much of the content is not referenced. David notMD (talk) 17:40, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I have a question regarding a biographical submission

I have add a half dozen media links to a piece I submitted after it was rejected, but I can't tell if it is up for review again. The living subject is Majid Bahrami. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Majid_Bahrami

Any help would be appreciated. Randalldshore (talk) 19:51, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Randalldshore. You added some references on 1 April, but you didn't pick the button labelled "Resubmit", so it hasn't yet been resubmitted for review. --ColinFine (talk) 19:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Reference a b c, etc.

For the life of me I can't figure out nor find directions for creating references for the same reference used multiple times that shows up in the reference list as 1. abc - each letter linked to a different use in the text of the same reference.

Doesn't happen automatically, can't find directions, help! Vabookwriter (talk) 19:52, 31 May 2021 (UTC) Vabookwriter (talk) 19:52, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Vabookwriter, and welcome to the Teahouse. For that you need named references: the first time you cite the work, you give it an (arbitrary) name, and the other times you just give the name, and no content. See WP:NAMEDREF. --ColinFine (talk) 19:57, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

A practical hint - find an article in which a ref has been used twice (a,b). One of the uses will have the full ref, preceded by the name (ref name=). May not be the first use of the ref. The other will just have the ref name. IMPORTANT that the second, third, fourth... uses of the ref name have a backslash before the closing >. David notMD (talk) 20:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Actually, the character before the closing > should be a forward slash (/), not a backslash (which is a \). So the references other than the one containing the citation should look like <ref name=xxx/>. CodeTalker (talk) 22:10, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. David notMD (talk) 16:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Trouble Uploading Screenshots For Reliable Source

I'm trying to add screenshots of a YouTube comment thread as a reliable source for an entry to the List of phobias (liomenoprosopophobia), but Wikipedia isn't letting me upload them because it can't detect whether they're suitable for Wikimedia Commons. Would quoting the comments be good enough for them to be RS, or is there another way to upload?

I also have another source from a Twitter thread of someone talking about the same phobia. LoveYouForever96 (talk) 20:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, LoveYouForever96, and welcome to the Teahouse. While some YouTube videos are regarded as reliable sources (those posted on the official channel of a reliable source such as a major newspaper), I can't imagine any context in which a comment thread could be one, since it would certainly be USERGEN. Ditto most Tweets. Furthermore, uploading a screenshot from YouTube (or Twitter) would almost certainly be a copyright infringement. It is never required (and usually inappropriate) to upload copies of sources, because if they haven't been reliably published (and so in principle available to any reader, though it isn't necessarily easy to access all such) then they cannot be used. --ColinFine (talk) 21:31, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for the info, ColinFine! Is there any other way to find a reliable source for the phobia's existence? It's a pretty rare one, I think, and it didn't have a name until I coined it a few months ago, so part of me thinks it might be too early to add it to the page until there's some substantial sources on it.

@LoveYouForever96: That sounds rather like a WP:NEOLOGISM. There's no place for a 'medical term' that you or your mum have just invented unless it's covered properly by medical sources at the very least. I assume it has not, since you don't know where to find sources. Thus, it's not something we'd want to see here in this encyclopaedia. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:21, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Corrections to spelling of my name

I tried to fix the misspelling of my name on an entry and it was undone because it wasn’t constructive? 74.111.98.157 (talk) 20:21, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

The problem is that at Marjorie O'Connell, four of the references are to your website, but nowhere in the content of your website does it give your name!!! If you fix that, the reference changes should hold. David notMD (talk) 20:46, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

rich and famous

It seems that Wikipedia is following the current trend of exclusively reporting about entertainment that already is famous, which is a guideline according to some user.

What I am actually looking for, is a website with information on lesser known musical acts.

Not just the Rich & Famous acts that we can read about anywhere on the webs.

I would be more then willing to start filling those pages, of acts that do deserve more attention despite not being listed with the Rich & Famous acts (modern day 'aristocracy').

I would love it when this discussion piece would lead to the construction of a site like that, not necessarily within the framework of wikipedia.com Basvossen (talk) 20:48, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Basvossen: Unfortunately you've most likely come to the wrong place. Wikipedia only covers people who have notability, which means that if they're on Wikipedia, they're probably "rich and famous" as you say. Also, Wikipedia doesn't really follow trends, if someone has notablility, they will probably have an article on them. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:53, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Basvossen, as the number of articles here about murderers, autocrats, socialites, princes and the like should show you, getting an article is not a reward for merit. But I'm puzzled by Blaze The Wolf's assertion that if people have articles "they're probably 'rich and famous' as you say". Very few were or are paupers, but very many weren't/aren't rich. None are as obscure as, say, any member of my family (myself included) that I know of; but very many wouldn't have been, or wouldn't be, recognized in the street. As for "the Rich & Famous acts", a lot of editors seem to want to write about these, and I'd imagine that a lot of people want to read material about them that is neither ephemeral nor promotional. If you can find material about musicians who've been overlooked, you're welcome to write them up. (As an example, I've always been sorry that Steve Miller (musician) is about some pop guitarist and that there's nothing about the Steve Miller who played with Hatfield and the North, Lol Coxhill and others.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:06, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for both answers. While #1 says, find (or start) a site somewhere else, #2 thinks it's a good idea. Indeed Hatfield & the North are pretty good. I've seen so many great musicians that haven't been included here. While music magazines should focus on music, they focus on this 'aristocracy' and indeed readers recognize names and get sucked in. So it's a matter of little demand on the non-famous side. Which can of course be changed, when media put more attention on lesser known acts, and stop playing 'Freebird' for the umpteenth time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basvossen (talk • contribs) 00:12, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Article rejected for no specific reasons.

No Specific Issues Quick question about an article that was posted earlier today and subsequently rejected. I disclosed my connection to the subject and while the editor who rejected the article left a generic comment that, because of my connection, I *may* not be able to write objectively about the subject, but there were no specific items in the article cited as promotional or otherwise biased.

Here's a link to the draft: Draft:QOMPLX

Thing is, I was brought into the project specifically to provide the company with an outside view and to outline the importance of objectivity, not to write a promotional article. It is difficult for me to correct any errors or biases when there are none identified. All the citations are from objective third party sources (I had to cull a lot of things that were given to me because they were press releases or links to partner statements and not objective).

To be clear, I fully expected that there would likely be changes required, and I communicated that with the company. I am not surprised at the outcome, only that I have not been given items to correct.

Is it possible for a review and to highlight any items that do not meet the objectivity standard, point out things that are missing, or otherwise give me information so that I can improve the article? Thanks MikeSpinney22 (talk) 21:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC) Mike--MikeSpinney22 (talk) 21:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@MikeSpinney22: A few minutes after you posted this, Theroadislong added specific feedback to Draft:QOMPLX. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

MikeSpinney22 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'v fixed your link. You and perhaps your client have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. It is not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves and what they consider to be their own history(either directly or through a representative). Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and a Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia has no interest in what a company wants to say about itself, only in what others completely unconnected choose to say about it. The company website, staff interviews, announcements of routine business activities such as purchasing a competitor, brief mentions, and other primary sources do not establish notability. We are interested in what unconnected sources have decided to write about the company, such as describing its influence on its industry- not what the company says is its influence. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 21:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@MikeSpinney22:, hi, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry your article was declined. I looked through the reason that it happened, and it has mostly to do with the notability of the company you're writing about. Articles have to have significant coverage from reliable third-party sources (sources not affiliated with your company) in order to be considered notable. I suggest reading Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view for more information about this. Kind regards, 🐍Helen🐍 21:27, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

As a general rule, is it regarded by Wikipedians as impossible for an article that is written by a disclosed contractor to be considered objective? I'm not disputing your assessment(s), merely wondering if I might be in a position to make improvements that would eventually pass muster. The reason I agreed to work with the company on this project--after initially suggesting that they would likely not be regarded as noteworthy enough--was that I found other examples of companies in a similar industry niche that do have pages. This particular company, for example, would qualify for inclusion on the Wikipedia "Unicorns" list of startups valued over $1B, they are only the second cybersecurity company to merge with a SPAC for the purpose of going public, they've done breakthrough research in identifying cybersecurity vulnerabilities associated with the SolarWinds attack (perhaps what they have not done is invested in a decent PR firm that could have gotten them credible coverage of some of these things!).MikeSpinney22 (talk) 21:44, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@MikeSpinney22: It's not impossible, but it's very hard. Usually a company representative has a difficult time writing based only on what others say about their company- usually because their goals in doing so are fundamentally different from the goals of Wikipedia. Sources put out by a PR firm either directly or indirectly would not establish notability.

Please read other stuff exists. As this is primarily a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. We can only address what we know about. Standards have as also changed over time so that what was once acceptable is no longer. If you are interested in helping out, you are welcome to help identify other inappropriate articles for action. 331dot (talk) 22:33, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@MikeSpinney22: I have the draft a trim to a more encyclopedic version. However, it is evident that the article contains very few reliable sources. Without those it will not be published. --- Possibly (talk) 05:49, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Einsteinium the last element to have a compound?

It doesn't seem that Fermium has a compound but Einsteinium's page doesn't say anything about it being the last one to have one. Is it? UB Blacephalon (talk) 21:26, 31 May 2021 (UTC) UB Blacephalon (talk) 21:26, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Sounds like a question for Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Oh Ill go there then. Thanks! UB Blacephalon (talk) 21:38, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Blacephalon. If a reliable source says that Es is the last element to have a compound, then the article Einsteinium could say so, citing that source (and probably a date!). If no such source exists, then the article must not make that claim, even if it happens to be true, as that would be original research. This applies to most claims of superlatives ("the biggest/oldest/tallest/newest"). --ColinFine (talk) 21:39, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

So is Es the last element to have a compound or does Fm have one now? And isn't it logic that its the last one? UB Blacephalon (talk) 21:54, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Again, this question is not appropriate for this board, and should be asked on the Reference Desk. It's also not clear what you mean by "last" (most recently discovered? Highest atomic number?) In any case, our article on Fermium has a section called Chemistry which may answer your question about compounds of fermium. CodeTalker (talk) 22:15, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I mean what is the furthest element on the periodi table that has a compound. We know Cf does, and we know Es does, but does Fm? And nobody getting back to me on the science portal... UB Blacephalon (talk) 22:46, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

The article section linked by CodeTalker above includes the explicit sentence "In the precipitate, the compound fermium(II) chloride (FmCl2) was produced." The preceding text of the section also indicates to anyone who understands chemistry terminology that Fermium forms various compounds. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.121.163.176 (talk) 23:31, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Now answered at WP:Reference desk/Science#Einsteinium the last element to have a compound?. The short answer is "no". Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

I read the whole thing and did not see that sentence. I guess it was mixed in with all the "Could form" and "should form". UB Blacephalon (talk) 15:28, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

How do you add a photo to a page?

 Gravitas85 (talk) 21:57, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Gravitas85: You can use Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, and then add the filename to the |image= parameter of the article's infobox. GoingBatty (talk) 22:06, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

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

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Gravitas85. I am assuming you have already found an image image you want to use on Wikimedia Commons? If not, go to this main page and type a keyword in the search box (it's at the top right in desktop view). If you find an image you like, but it's not quite the right one, you could click one or more of the "Categories" listed at the very bottom of the page. This helps keep related images together and helps you find others.

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

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

If you need advice on actually uploading your own image first, that requires a slightly different answer and a mention of copyright issues. Let us know if you need further help on that. Regards from the UK. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I have a pdf photo of the Purdue Pharmacy HQ building. How can it be attached to the Purdue Pharma article?

I have a pdf photo of the Purdue Pharmacy HQ building; How can it be attached to the Purdue Pharma article? I will be happy to send it to someone who can add the pdf, but I do not have the time nor computer ability to learn how to edit. My interest is only a result from the documentary called "The Crime of the Century" 47.185.105.108 (talk) 23:00, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. If it's a pdf, it sounds like it's not your photograph, and therefore you have no right to upload it to Wikimedia/Wikipedia. We don't 'attach' images to articles either, so I don't feel this is something you're going to succeed with unless you have one you've personally taken. Sorry about that. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:08, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Dear Nick: TY. Yes, I snapped it off of a CNN news show back in Sep 2019 with my tablet. The art work indicates a heroin addict cook spoon with black tar heroin in the spoon. I thought it would be cool to have it on the Purdue Pharma article since the "Crime of the Century" was just on HBO. L -o-

Just like Rock always breaks Scissors, preventing copyright infringement always overrides coolness. David notMD (talk) 00:23, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

That one is going on my userpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:50, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

In case it's not clear from the jokey replies above: no, if you snapped it off a broadcast then it's CNN's copyright, not yours, and you may not upload it. Sorry. Unfortunately copyright is difficult, and is the reason that so many Wikipedia articles do not have illustrations. --ColinFine (talk) 10:01, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP 47.185.105.108. Just going to add that whatever was shown on CNN might not even have originated at CNN; in other words, CNN could simply be showing someone else’s copyrighted work. Lots of content you find online or see on TV is probably being used or shown under a claim of fair use. If, for example, the footage was of a piece of art, then there might be two copyrights involved, one for the footage and one for the artwork, and both need to be taken into account. In either case, the screenshot you took doesn’t equate to a transfer of copyright to you as explained here and here. — Marchjuly (talk) 11:03, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Unknown parameter in infobox template

I added a newly-declared state mushroom for Texas to the List_of_U.S._state_mushrooms page and then tried to add this mushroom to the infobox on the page for Texas. I received this warning:

Warning: Page using Template:Infobox U.S. state symbols with unknown parameter "Mushroom" (this message is shown only in preview).

I then attempted to add "Mushroom" as a parameter on the Template:Infobox U.S. state symbols page, copying the existing "Mammal" parameter. It now shows up in the source for that page, but is not displayed in the infobox on that Template page and the parameter and value are not displayed on the Massachusetts page.

Help, please? Sunflower Farmer (talk) 23:23, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Sunflower Farmer: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. :) I know exactly what’s going on. If I were adding an infobox to, say, Robin Williams, I would be able to add in things such as his height, weight, and nationality. That’s because those parameters (as those bits of information are called) are part of the programming for the infobox. But if I added the parameter “biggest fan”, the unknown parameter message would pop up. The infobox does not recognise the “mushroom” part you put in because it’s not programmed to recognise it. If you would like to add in the state mushroom, I would recommend adding it somewhere in the main part of the article. I hope I’ve been of help to you. Kind regards, 🐍Helen🐍 00:15, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Sunflower Farmer: You've edited the documentation of the template instead of the template itself. The documentation (Template:Infobox U.S. state symbols/doc) is a separate page that describes how the template works, which is then displayed on the template page Template:Infobox U.S. state symbols. I don't edit templates myself, but I'm in contact with people that do, and hopefully we can get that parameter added in soon (I'll notify you when). ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 05:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

I think I have successfully made the changes.  --Lambiam 09:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, User talk:Lambiam! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunflower Farmer (talk • contribs) 16:04, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Infobox Ref

Hi, how can I add references to the infobox? TheSokks_(talk) 01:09, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi @TheSokks:, and welcome to the Teahouse. You know how there’s a source editor and a visual editor? Switch to the source editor, and you’ll see the source code for the infobox. There’s a little toolbar which has a button labelled “cite your sources”. If you put your cursor where you want the reference to be and click this button, a nifty little piece of code will pop up. Then just paste the URL of the source. Easy as pie. Kind regards, 🐍Helen🐍 01:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

This has been the most helpful! Thank you! TheSokks_(talk) 01:58, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Assistance with content update - bio of living person - COI

Hello Editors

A little while ago I placed a request for editing assistance on the Talk page of this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ian_Jacobs_(oncologist)

I've not received a response and wonder if someone in the Teahouse may be able to assist me?

I would greatly appreciate advice about how I might submit for consideration relevant updates to this article. I would prefer not to update the article myself as this would not be in the spirit of Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidance.

Many thanks Corde2020 talk 06:14, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

See WP:EDITREQ Meters (talk) 06:39, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Corde2020. Thank you for disclosing your conflict of interest. Please make a formal edit request on the article talk page following those instructions carefully. Discussion of the university's ten year strategy may be more appropriate for the article about the university. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Cullen328. Thanks so much for your speedy advice. :-) I shall make the formal edit request via the article's Talk page. Thanks for the edit request link, too.

Kind regards, Corde2020 talk 07:08, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Happy to help, Corde2020. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:22, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Darveshpur Shikarpur Bulandshahr Uttar Pradesh

create my articles page Derveshpur2021 (talk) 06:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Derveshpur2021, I don't understand what you are saying. What is your "articles page"? And is this meant as a command? Perhaps you were talking about what was previously the content of your user page. However well-intentioned, this was an improper use of a user page; and I have therefore moved the content to User:Derveshpur2021/sandbox2. You are free to develop the material in that sandbox. (You can use User:Derveshpur2021, your user page, for describing your activities on Wikipedia.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:55, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hard Rain SoloistEnsemble

I was wondering if I could get some advice on the authoring of my first article that was recently rejected (see subject above). I'm certain that Hard Rain SoloistEnsemble is worthy of a wiki page - it is a very important and significant ensemble, a charity and they run a major composition prize. The individual player membership have international reputations and Hard Rain's Seasons represent the largest season of contemporary music in Ireland. They are renowned in the field of contemporary art music. It is, therefore, obviously my inexperience as an author that is causing the problem here. I must say that I find wikipedia a little intimidating and perhaps some help and encouragement on these pages might help get this article across the line. It there anything you could help me with? Musicologiver (talk) 07:03, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Musicologiver, to establish that the subject of Draft:Hard Rain SoloistEnsemble in worthy of a Wikipedia article, what we call notable, you'll need to cite several reliable independent sources with extensive discussion of it. I don't see any such sources among those currently cited in the draft. Maybe you can find reviews of their performances? (Praising the ensemble here won't help at all, its the citations that count.) Maproom (talk) 07:25, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Naming composers they play adds nothing to their notability. Delete. David notMD (talk) 16:11, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Getting a politician's infobox to read "In Office" rather than "Assuming Office"

I'm trying to update the page for Mathias Cormann, who became the Director General of the OECD today. I've added his predecessor, but can't figure out how to get the infobox to begin with "In Office" rather than "Assuming Office" (i.e. I need to change it from future tense to present tense). I've also updated the infobox of his predecessor, to add his retirement date (yesterday), and I just don't see the difference between the two, that would yield this different presentation. Somebody hit me with the clue-bat, please? Bill Woodcock (talk) 07:15, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Finally found the answer. This | succeeding = [[José Ángel Gurría]] was lurking at the bottom of the template code. It overrides the successor field and the date calculations. Now I'm going to have a rant. For such a widely used template as that, the documentation is really bad and needs a major overhaul to explain what the fields actually do and what interacts with what. - X201 (talk) 10:34, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, it sure had me stumped! Thanks so much for digging into it and figuring the problem out. Bill Woodcock (talk) 10:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Kenneth Mayhew

Hi Team, Ken died on 13th May and not 14th May as listed. How do I get this changed please? Many thanks, Adam Battlefield Guide (talk) 08:23, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Would you be able to find a source that states the date of death? If so, I'll gladly correct the article for you or you could do it yourself. Anton.bersh (talk) 08:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Battlefield Guide (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would bring this up on the article talk page, Talk:Kenneth Mayhew. I looked at the source given for the death, and it is a Dutch obituary on him published on the 14th, but it doesn't give a date of death itself from what I can tell. If you have a source for the 13th, please offer it. 331dot (talk) 08:28, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Anton.bersh and 331dot: There's this article published on 14 May, saying he "passed away yesterday". Kleinpecan (talk) 08:31, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

I see, thanks for finding this source. I think the article contributor just read source 24 which was published on May 14 and did not specify the date and assumed the article publication date to be the person's death date. Anton.bersh (talk) 08:42, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Battlefield Guide: I have fixed it. Kleinpecan (talk) 08:41, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Be patient and learn

The first days of working on Wikipedia was very challenging and sometimes discouraging, especially when I received comments that required me to pay more attention to details and study every rule of Wikipedia. But I must say if one is patient enough it becomes fun and refreshing most importantly for people willing to learn, volunteer without any expectation of compensation. Working on two articles Draft:Elijah Chinezim Onyeagba and Draft:Sanusi Mohammed Ohiare has taken me through a complete university session of writing that has affected everything I write now. Thanks to this community. Just though to share this with people faced with seeming discouragement like I was, don't give up. Keep at it! Bibihans (talk) 09:41, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Add pictures of newspaper and magazine cutting as reference

Hi - I have to further edit an article by adding reliable sources that has featured in print media (newspaper cutting and magazine articles) which are not available on web / online. How to go about it? Please help. AmazingVoiceovers (talk) 09:46, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, AmazingVoiceovers, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is not required, and almost never appropriate, to upload a cutting from a newspaper. As long as the source was reliably published, then citing it consists in providing the information which a reader would require to access it, eg from a major library: title, author (if named), date, publication, page number. A URL is a convenience for the readerr, not usually an essential part of the citation. See REFB. --ColinFine (talk) 10:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Sources do not need to be online, so long as there is enough information to allow the source to be traced. You can use templates like {{cite news}} and {{cite magazine}} and fill in relevant information such as the publication title and date. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:10, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

I need a step-by-step editing guide

I am really confused. I do not know to write an article here, and I'm confused. I need help, please. Imdofficial69 (talk) 10:29, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Imdofficial69, Please take a look at the tutorial- Help:Introduction. Help:Your first article may also be helpful for you. It will be better if you go through the key policies by reading this page- WP:POLICYLIST before creating an article. These are advice on a good starting on Wikipedia. Gradually, while editing, you will also come to know about many other WP policies, guidelines and terminologies. — A.A Prinon  ^{Leave a dialogue} 10:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

This might be useful: Help:Your first article. Anton.bersh (talk) 10:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Imdofficial69:(edit conflict) I have left a welcome message at your user talk page. Please be advised that sucessfully creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks one can start on Wikipedia. That being said, you can follow these steps:

• First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our general notability guideline (GNG). Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
• Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
• Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
• Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
• Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
• Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
• Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request here or at the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:58, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Uploading more information on an existing table on Wikipedia article

I am not finding an option to insert more information for an existing table on an article that already exists on Wikipedia. ChabbieCee (talk) 10:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to Teahouse! First, make sure that the page you want to edit is not edit-protected (e.g., you do not see a lock icon at the top on the right and can see "Edit" or "Edit source" button). There are multiple ways to edit a table. To change the text in a cell, you can just click on it multiple times and start editing. If you want to add a column or a row, you can click on a row/column and a menu will appear, which will let you delete row/column, insert a new adjacent row/column, etc. Anton.bersh (talk) 11:04, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

I want to create a new page but a redirection is in the way

I want to create a new page for Samsung Electronics in the Czech language. Unfortunately the keyword Samsung Electronics is redirected to Samsung. Therefore the Samsung Electronic is not red and I cannot create a new page for it. Can anyone help how to proceed, please? Testestos (talk) 12:05, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

You have already asked about this at the Help Desk. I'll answer there. -- Hoary (talk) 12:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Help

I've encountered this message on some blocked user for some reasons and I'm confused whether there was a conflict-of-interest happened while creating their draft about their page/someone (if CSD G11'd). Note that I've speedy deleted their draft because it was used for promotion. The message from the blocked user is:

Christian here from G5 Daily News. We created the page yesterday and it has been blocked.

Can you please advise why and maybe some insights on how to improve?

Thanks,

G5 Daily News

I'm still not sure if there was a COI happened or just for promotion? Thanks. Lunar Eclipse_{Blood Moon} 13:24, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

If the user wishes to request an unblock, the block notice on the user talk page tells him/her how to do it. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:35, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

How I answer to a message

Fellow wikipedians! First of all thank you for accepting me in your community. I have already received so many answers from wikipedia members but I don't know how to answer them back. I already started reading the Introduction guide but I cannot find how I can reply to a message through a wikipedian's talk-page. Obviously, it is not similar to Messenger and Viber) Antonis Theofanous (talk) 13:55, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Antonis Theofanous: If you want to reply to someone on a page, you can ping them with a template like {{re}} or {{U}}. Just remember to use a colon to indent your reply so that it's easier to follow along. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:20, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: I think I did it correctly? )))

@Antonis Theofanous: See Help:Talk pages for more info on how to use talk pages. You can also go to your Preferences → Beta features and enable "Discussion tools", which will make it easier for you to reply to talk page comments. Kleinpecan (talk) 14:31, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

What I should write on my user-page?

Good afternoon fellow wikipedians? What I am supposed to write on my user-page? My credentials? My biography? Why I want to help Wikipedia? Antonis Theofanous (talk) 14:04, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Antonis Theofanous: Welcome to the Teahouse. Your userpage is where you can talk about yourself in relation to editing Wikipedia. This can be a little ambiguous, as, for example, some users do happen to be experts in a field, which direct their efforts towards a type of article. A more comprehensive guide can be found at Wikipedia:User pages, but things that are not okay include user pages that look like articles and blatant advertising. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Perfect! I will just write my interests in life) But why any of the wikipedians will bother to advertise himself from the time this page is closed and the information is not public in wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonis Theofanous (talk • contribs) 16:34, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Antonis Theofanous: The information is public within Wikipedia. Anyone can click on User:Antonis Theofanous and see your user page. Happy editing! (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) 16:50, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Dear GoingBatty did I did it correctly now?Antonis Theofanous (talk) 18:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Antonis Theofanous, your user page is fine now. Welcome to Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:31, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Antonis Theofanous: You have a few typos, but the content is appropriate. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 18:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Is it possible to un-submit a draft for review?

I genuinely don't know if this is actually possible, I haven't found anything by googling or any other way.

Would the draft get "un-submitted" automatically if gets rejected? Can I "un-submit" it myself? CordiBordi (talk) 14:14, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@CordiBordi: Please only seek assistance in one place at a time, to prevent wasting everyone's time. You have replies at the Help desk. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:20, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@CordiBordi: for the first one, yes, second one, I don't know! It's a good question. Sennecaster (What now?) 15:23, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

My first citation. Is it correct?

Dear friends. I did my first citation. Can you please tell me if I did everything correctly. It is in the following article the 10th citation about Romania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directors_and_officers_liability_insurance In case I do a mistake you will inform me? Antonis Theofanous (talk) 14:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Antonis Theofanous. You did it correctly! Good work. I have made one change in this edit, to add the date of the source article and the name of its author. These are essential identification details that make the citation more transparent for our readers. Wikipedia:Citing sources#What information to include might be helpful on this issue. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:01, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Fuhghettaboutit. I hope that I am not annoying) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonis Theofanous (talk • contribs) 16:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Self-proclaimed Page Control of Kingdom of Jeypore

Hello, I am a new editor in Wikipedia. I have knowledge in the field of history, particularly my regional history. Therefore, I do edits on Wikipedia and also have an article on submission.

Recently, I came to the page of Jeypore which is a place of historical importance in my region. I thought of improving the article which was very badly written and paraphrased. The page said it needs improvement with sources. Therefore, I did some edits, added some information with the relevant sources as per the guideline of Wikipedia. However, one user named RegentsPark deleted my entire work and reverted it back to the old version. I tried asking him about the reason for deletion but he was unable to give a valid answer.

I looked back at the edit history of the page and found out that RegentsPark frequently deletes the work of other users and reverts it back, which raises suspicion about his conduct in Wikipedia which is contributed by so many voluntary and knowledgeable users from all around the world. I also came to find out that one of the mates of RegentsPark called RexxS was also involved in some quarrel and faced trails in Wikipedia board.

Can you please look into this matter or advice me what is best to do in this situation. Should I re-edit it or wait for administrators to take action.

Kind Regards. RudolphHitz (talk) 14:38, 1 June 2021 (UTC) RudolphHitz (talk) 14:38, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@RudolphHitz: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. When you asked RegentsPark and RexxS why they did what they did, what was their response to you? It would help to know what they said in response to your inquiries of them, so that we can better help you resolve the situation. --Jayron32 14:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jayron32: Hello Jayron32, thank you for showing concern and replying.

I did not have any talks with RexxS but I found in the edit history of the WP:Kingdom of Jeypore and it’s talk page that RexxS was involved in a quarrel with some user.

My personal concern is regarding the attitude of RegentsPark. I edited the page yesterday after seeing the Wikipedia label that the article needs better sources and edit. Therefore, I spent a few hours in editing the article and added relevant sources as per wikipedia guidelines. However, in a few minutes my work was deleted by RegentsPark without any proper reason. He just said that I need to publish it on the talk page. I even asked him the same question with my public network username Rodotype but he didn’t give any reason behind the deletion.

This attitude of RegentsPark raises suspicion about his conduct which is clearly not as per Wikipedia policy.

Please look into my work in the page Kingdom of Jeypore and if you consider it fit for Wikipedia then please let me re-upload it. Thanks again. RudolphHitz (talk) 15:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

You and RegentsPark are having a discussion in the correct place, which is the Talk page of Kingdom of Jeypore. Continue there, and keep the discussion about the content, not about editors' conduct. Consider proposing text and references on the Talk page, and asking RP if acceptable. The goals is consensus. David notMD (talk) 16:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: To my surprise, I have not seen this rule apply in other wiki pages that editors have to first upload edits on the talk page and debate with some random user. Could you clarify, where does it say on Wikipedia policy? If my content is well sourced as per Wikipedia guidelines then why do I need to do this? Thank you. RudolphHitz (talk) 16:55, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia recommends BRD: Be Bold in your edits, but if Reverted, Discuss. See Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. I was not saying FIRST upload at Talk, as you and RegentsPark are already past that. The goals of BRD is to avoid edit warring, wherein two editors go back and forth inserting, reverting, inserting... This futile pattern can lead to editors' being temporarily blocked. The dispute here is you believe your content is well-sourced, while RP disagrees. If consensus cannot be reached, then there are avenues to ask for arbitration. But start by assuming good faith. David notMD (talk) 17:02, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Moulana Abdul Rashid Dawoodi

Please sir help me in this article as I am the media incharge of Moulana Abdul Rashid Dawoodi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Shaykh_dawoodi Shaykh furqan (talk) 14:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Shaykh furqan: Welcome to the Teahouse. Please disclose your paid relationship with Dawoodi on your user page. You may use {{paid}} to do so. Please also understand that Wikipedia is not for advertising or promotion. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Shaykh furqan. Your draft is nowhere near acceptable for Wikipedia. You have failed to provide references to independent reliable sources needed to establish that this person is notable. Of your three references, only one appears to be independent, and it mentions the person only in passing. Big parts of the content have no references, which is a violation of the Verifiability policy. Unreferenced statements like "The ancestral house of Shaykh Dawoodi was known for the piousness and Islamic preaching and love of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ which resulted in the spiritual development of shaykh dawoodi" violate the policy Neutral point of view, and names should be capitalized, though that's a minor point. One of your references says he survived a grenade attack but your draft does not mention that, which is strange. Unless you can come up with much better independent sources, your effort cannot be successful. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:18, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Cullen328, lol. Dawoodi is locally known among Barelwis in Kashmir and his best known for his polemic-speeches against Deobandis. If good sources are provided, this would really be a legit article but currently it fails all the notability criteria that we've here. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 18:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

TheAafi, that is precisely why I wrote, "Unless you can come up with much better independent sources . . ." Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:01, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Immediate help for new startup

Hi wikipedians! I , due to being ignorant from Wikipedia rules, created another account and used them interchangeably. They both were hence labeled as sock pockets and blocked. Now I want to return to Wikipedia community, because I never wanted to breach Wikipedia rules otherwise I would never create another account. Kindly can someone help me in this matter? I created this account will it also be labeled as sock pocket? I don't use previous accounts now which are blocked Meluhacentrist (talk) 15:46, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Meluhacentrist. Please disclose your previous accounts. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:59, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Meluhacentrist / Harrapocentrist / Aglrochisat. Since you will not be able to respond to this post by the account above, I am advising you that no response is expected by me to this post. In fact, I will say prophylactically: DO NOT respond to this (or any other post here), using any other account (or by any IP address), or at all. (Doing so will simply deepen the evidence of a sockpuppetry problem that your block is based upon.)

With that out of the way, I can only think of one way forward, that could possibly be effective. Using your original account, and at the talk page of that account (i.e., here), follow the instructions to fill out a second unblock template (i.e., {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}). Post that new unblock request at the very bottom of the page (below the existing declined one, without removing it).

In it, carefully explain how the accounts you have used were not, as they have appeared to others, used in bad faith (and not just as an innocent misunderstanding) to re-add disruptive material; to get around reverts and cross-reinforce each other when others were finding your edits improper. I would expect for any such appeal to be successful, you would need (in addition to being convincing on the merits) to be quite specific, addressing the detail of the series of edits that have this appearance, such as those listed as evidence here. I can tell you that if you are general, in sum and substance, just asserting it was all innocent (as is so common in response to blocks), that is useless and surely will be ineffective. Regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

1963 image PD?

Hello. I need help. This image coming from this source was taken in Yugoslavia in 1963. The author is unknown. Is it in the public domain? I'm not an expert so I need help. I tried looking on Template:PD-Serbia on Commons but I have a hard time figuring out whether it meets the criteria. Could someone help me? Paul Vaurie (talk) 18:33, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Paul Vaurie. Please note that I am not sure which picture at the Google search link you provided is the one you are pinpointing as being taken from the second link you have provided. Anyway, I often do my own research when copyright is involved. For this analysis, I am stating the proviso that I am assuming the following premises are correct: That {{PD-Serbia}}'s statements as to the underlying copyright law is correct, as well as your statement that the author is unknown; that the image is from Yugoslavia, and dates to 1963.

There is one piece of information you have not stated that is actually important to any analysis, and it is when the photograph was published. Because you have not stated that, and I have not seen how to easily determine that myself, unfortunately, for the moment we have to assume the adverse condition obtains.

Under that understanding, the image is putatively copyrighted, not in the public domain, and accordingly cannot be uploaded to the Commons, nor used here as a free work. This is because either: 1) it falls within the ambit of (b) at the template page, an anonymous work, and does not (could not) meet the condition of being taken before 1954; or 2) it falls within the ambit of (c) but was published after January 1, 1973.

For purposes of going forward, the seeming critical take away is that if you can determine (verifiably, with a source), that the publication date was before January 1, 1973, then it would seem to meet condition (c) and could be claimed PD, but this must be on the basis of affirmative evidence. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:12, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Re: ACORD Citations Needed

Hey teahouse -- looking over the ACORD page and wondering what citations would be needed to help remove the flag at the top of the page. Anything helps, thanks. Morrissey35 (talk) 18:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC) Morrissey35 (talk) 18:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)