Wikipedia:Teahouse

Tenryuu, 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

Infobox photo doesn't show up in edit mode

Hi. There is a picture misplaced in the infobox of the article on Ubeidiya. I'm talking of [[File:Tel Ubeidiya.JPG]], a small greyish mound. It must be removed, as the archaeological site described in the article is NOT the tell in the photo. It's like placing a photo of Washington, DC in the infobox of the article on Washington state. I don't know what template has been used, because the name of the file is not appearing when I go into edit mode. It must be some automatic connection to Wiki Commons or something else i don't know. Came across the same problem on German Wiki, where the infobox photo doesn't show up in edit mode either. Anyone? Thanks! Arminden (talk) 15:30, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

The image is taken from Wikidata and should be changed there. Ruslik_Zero 18:47, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ruslik0: hi and thanks! Obviously, I'm not good with that, otherwise I would have figured it out already, so could you please do it? If you have the patience to explain me how, I'd be grateful for next time; for now, removing the wrong photo is my first priority though. Thanks! Arminden (talk) 04:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

PS: I've fumbled around, have "fixed" the Wikimedia Commons name: nothing. Next I've fully removed the Wikimedia Commons line: nothing. Finally, I've added into the infobox |image=|image_size=|caption= (and left them empty), and the photo has disappeared! I don't know why, so I'm not sure if and in which situation it will work again in the future, nor if I've taken away smth. important by removing the faulty Wiki Commons line. So if you could give me at least a hint, I'd still be grateful. Arminden (talk) 04:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

On the page in Wikidata linked above, you can see the image and 'edit' link right to it. Click on it and you will be able to change the image. Ruslik_Zero 20:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Ruslik0 & everyone else: I don't know what you mean by "change the image". I do not have any image for Ubeidiye; I just don't want the Tell Ubeidiye image to show up automatically. The problem is, I don't understand the mechanism through which the image pops up by itself. If you can clarify that for a technical zero like me, fine and thanks. If not, maybe somebody else has a minute. I have no idea what the long sausage of data on the Wikidata page means. I have solved the problem on the article page by fumbling blindly, I hope I didn't remove anything otherwise useful, but now it's only about learning and understanding. But I can live without. Arminden (talk) 13:14, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, you solved your problem. The details about Wikipedia-Wikidata relationship can be found in Wikipedia:Wikidata#Infoboxes. For instance, {{Infobox_ancient_site}} fetches the default image from Wikidata if no image is specified. Since you specified "null image" by inserting the empty parameters nothing is shown currently. Ruslik_Zero 13:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Arminden Every Wikipedia article has a Wikidata entry associated with it. Wikidata is a database that can hold various bits of information, and these can be reused in articles. Certain templates (like that infobox) will load information from wikidata if you don't specify a default value. Assuming you're on the desktop site the link to get to the Wikidata item for any article in the sidebar on the left - it's the link labelled "Wikidata item" in the "tools" section. In this case the entry is https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2660882. The article is automatically loading the image from the database entry on wikidata - to fix it go to wikidata, scroll down to the image property, click the "edit" button then click "remove". 192.76.8.91 (talk) 13:33, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Ruslik0, thank you very much! Great, I can now look into that. It's not a nice feeling improvising in the dark, and it won't be the only time I'll came across this. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 13:39, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Ruslik0, hi. Your explanations were excellent, I've learned a lot. Now, the problem goes deeper. The entire connection between the Wikidata entry (item Q2660882) and the article Ubeidiya is WRONG. Q2660882 is titled "Tel Ovadia" (Hebrew for Tell Ubeidiya), and deals with a tell (archaeological mound) some 400 m away from the site dealt with in the article. The tell isn't even excavated and is of relatively little interest, is one among many Bronze & Iron Age tells in the region. Whereas Ubeidiya is the second-oldest site with traces of humans outside Africa. A difference of some 1,4 million years, 400 m, and a huge one in magnitude of scientific importance. How can we now decouple/disconnect the two? Tell Ubeidiya is only mentioned as a sideline on the Ubeidiya page, and is there just because the confusion is so common and because the tell doesn't have a page of its own as an archaeological site, although it does have one as the core location of the depopulated Palestinian village of Al-'Ubaydiyya. Maybe it should be connected to that article? Which already has the item number Q4702134... Not my field, big mess, maybe you can do something. Thanks again! Arminden (talk) 16:21, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I think I've managed most of what I intended to do; for the rest I've left invitations to others on the talk-pages. Thanks for putting me on the right track! Arminden (talk) 20:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Users on mobile inadvertently adding "tel:" in front of anything that their autocorrect thinks might be a telephone number

See this diff . This is not the first case I have seen – I have to confess to assuming IP editor vandalism first time it happened. Aradd1, can you say anything about what set-up you have that may have caused this to happen? John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:13, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@John Maynard Friedman: Sounds like phab:T116525, see also phab:T256758 AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 21:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@AntiCompositeNumber:, yes, that looks to be it. I guess someone will have to construct a bot to search the entire project for each instance and remove it. <expletive deleted> Apple whizz kids who bought into the fatuous 'move fast and break things' mantra. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:27, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps not as serious as Excel screwing up gene names!. --ColinFine (talk) 21:59, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Excel won't screw up gene names if the user knows how to use Excel properly. By default it looks at the data being pasted in, and guesses the data type from that. People who paste data into Excel, or use Excel to open text files, need to learn how to apply the "text" format to a column or a range of columns. This is user error, although it's a frequently seen error. (I hope I put this comment in the right place.)73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I have a hunch that the majority of Wikipedia Users--or at least the ones who visit the Teahouse--are too young to remember "expletive deleted." Full disclosure. I first heard of Nixon when my parents explained to me that Eisenhower would retire soon, and the Nixon was running against Kennedy. Uporządnicki (talk) 22:31, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

As usual, we have an article for that: Expletive deleted. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 22:39, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@John Maynard Friedman There's a discussion on this at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). ―Qwerfjkltalk 07:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Advice on reliable sources

Hello, I'm currently editing a draft for an article about the specific kinds of transphobia that are aimed at trans men. There are pages on nonbinary people's struggles and trans women's struggles, so I thought I'd add the page for trans men to complete that little trifecta. I've had the page sent back to me to edit some more and one of the reasons was unreliable sources. I had sourced from JK Rowling's transphobic essay and from scientific papers and studies about trans men, but I'm wondering if it sourcing and quoting from books by trans people about transphobia face by trans guys will be what Wikipedia is looking for? E.g. sourcing Transgender Warriors by Leslie Feinburg or from Trangender History by Susan Stryker etc. I want to make this article the best it can be so it can help other trans guys like myself! Thank you for any guidance, -Vulture /Transandrosupport Transandrosupport (talk) 16:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC) Transandrosupport (talk) 16:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Transandrosupport. I don't think the reviewers are looking for any particular type of source here (providing that the sources are reliable per WP:RS), but rather for you to reference sources for the parts of the draft that are currently lacking them. For example, you've written: "Transphobia specifically directed at trans men and transmasculine people mainly takes two forms: that which is derived from misgendering them as women and thus heavily rooted in misogyny and that which is derived from a specific predjudice towards men taken out on them and thus is heavily rooted in misandry". Is this based on a source, or is the idea of two forms of transphobia your own? If it's the latter, then I'm afraid this is original research, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Transandrosupport Hello, welcome to the teahouse! There are three main problems with your draft - firstly there are entire sections that seem to have no sources, secondly many of the sources you have used are not reliable, and thirdly you seem to be combining sources and drawing conclusions that are not explicitly stated by any of them. Looking through your draft the sections like "Medical Abuse", "Misandristic Abuse", "Abuse Denial" and "Transition pessimism" have no sources at all - these sections all need references to show where the information in them has come from. Advice on what kind of sources are considered reliable can be found at WP:Referencing for beginners and WP:Reliable sources. Social media like twitter are almost always unusable as sources. Sites like Tumblr and medium are self published blogs and are generally unusable unless the person writing them is a recognised expert in the field. Opinion pieces and personal blogs can only be used for attributed opinions, e.g. you can use JK Rowling's site as a source for JK Rowling's opinion (i.e. "Writing on her website, JK Rowling stated that ...") but cannot be used as a source for facts, and certainly cannot be used in the method you've used them where you've linked attempts to get puberty blockers banned to a specific post on a blog (see WP:Synthesis and WP:Original research - you need a reliable source that makes that specific connection, you cannot make it yourself). Hope this helps. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm a bit concerned that Transandrophobia has been prematurely published (pinging Transandrosupport and Timtrent). I don't say that because I object to the article existing, but I'm worried that without better sourcing, it might become a target for deletion nominations. I'm also slightly worried that the word transandrophobia returns zero Google Scholar results. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:04, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

On the topic of Google Scholar results, I wonder if transmisandry is actually the WP:COMMONNAME. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry (edit conflict) I understand your concerns. As you can see from the article, "Transmisandry" is synonym and it might be a better title. If you feel strongly I will not stand in the way of your sending it back to Draft space. I took the view that it has a better than 50% chance of surviving immediate deletion process. As you know, that is our guidance at WP:AFC. I was as cautious as I felt necessary. I am content to be guided by you in this matter. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 20:13, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to call on Cullen328, who might be so kind as to give us a third opinion. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:17, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry please feel free to take any action without asking me. I think it behoves me to be steadfastly neutral over this, and supportive of any consensus you determine Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 20:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Transandrosupport, please note that a statement such as "Transandrophobia was coined in 2017 by a trans man who goes by the username Saint-Dionysus on his blog" can't be sourced to the blog alone. The blog establishes that the term was used, but not that it was coined by the blog; that claim requires a secondary source. You can make original claims like this in an essay but not in a Wikipedia article, I'm afraid. Wikipedia articles can only say what can be supported by reliable sources - nothing more by way of interpretation. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

An acceptable Wikipedia article should summarize what published, reliable sources say about the topic, and should contain no original research and no content that cannot be verified. A blogger using an anonymous handle is not a reliable source. WP:NEOLOGISM is relevant to the title of the article. Currently, the article has a lot of "citation needed" tags, and either all that content should be removed or references to reliable sources that verify the content should be added. My recommendation would be to move the article back to draft space until these issues can be addressed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:40, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Cullen328. I've moved the article back to draft so that these issues can be resolved without the risk of deletion. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:25, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry Following your advice I've removed the section on the blogger. I got in a little over my head yesterday so I appreciate you preserving my work. I've sourced everything now, nearly every sentence- I hope it's alright to ask but could you give it a onceover to see if I've missed out anything vital before I submit it again? As you can probably tell, the topic means a lot to me, being a trans man. And a significant number of transmasculine people I know have expressed interest in such an article existing. The last thing I want to do is scupper the whole article. Many thanks and thank you for bearing with me (I'm still quite new to wikipedia, the last time I made an article on an old account was 2018)

The draft is getting better but there are still some original research issues where you're citing sources as examples of an argument that you're making, rather than summarising just what the source says. I've tried to explain this at Draft talk:Transandrophobia#Need for secondary sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:01, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

How to create an article on Wikipedia

How do I create an article on Wikipedia? Americansaintinmexico (talk) 19:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Americansaintinmexico Just click on a red link and type in the edit box, then click Publish changes. I strongly recommend you read Wikipedia:Your first article. ―Qwerfjkltalk 19:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

• Americansaintinmexico Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would advise a little more caution. Creating a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. It takes much effort and practice. You will greatly increase your chances of success if you first gain experience editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Diving right in to article creation without experience often leads to disappointment and frustration as your work is mercilessly edited and deleted by others. I would advise you to use the new user tutorial.

If you do want to attempt to create an article now, please read Your first article and then visit Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review by another editor before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia. Then you find out problems first. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Americansaintinmexico, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have asked one of the most frequent questions we get here. My answer is that for a new editor to try to create an article is like getting apprenticed to a builder and immediately trying to build your own house. Everybody knows what a house looks like, right? So you just have to throw up a few walls and so on. Unfortunately, what the new apprentice probably doesn't know is all the work that has to go into a house before you throw up the walls: surveying the ground and making sure it's stable enough to build on, building the foundations, etc. If you don't do all that work your house is likely to fall down - and any work you've done on the visible part of the house will probably be wasted. A Wikipedia article is just like that - if you don't survey the ground (check WP:notability) and build the foundations {find the required independent reliably published sources), your article may fall down - not be accepted into the encyclopaedia; and if you write so much as a single word before you do that ground-work, you are very likely wasting the whole of your effort. That is why I always advise new editors to spend a few months improving some of our six million existing articles (some of them really need it!) and learning how Wikipedia works, before they try to build a house. --ColinFine (talk) 21:00, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine You have asked one of the most frequent questions we get here maybe we should create a template: Hello, [[User:{{{1}}}|]], and welcome to the Teahouse... ―Qwerfjkltalk 07:51, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Can someone help get the article to a "neutral" pov?

 Courtesy link: Draft:Presearch

Carrabre (talk) 23:56, 26 July 2021 (UTC)Carrabre

My article Presearch has been declined. I work on the team, would love the communities help in getting a page up! Carrabre (talk) 23:56, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Carrabre - Well, as the declining reviewer, I will say that some editors are not interested in providing free help to an editor who is editing in the course of their employment. (But another editor might help you, maybe.) Robert McClenon (talk) 00:07, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Carrabre: Conflict of interest editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. Please disclose your COI on your user page with the {{UserboxCOI}} template. GoingBatty (talk) 01:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Carrabre: Oops! It appears the {{paid}} template would be more appropriate. GoingBatty (talk) 01:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Carrabre (talk) 17:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)Carrabre understood on the not wanting to help piece, but it would probably be less work for you (albeit less fun than watching me struggle on my first article) to help get it up to wikipedia's standards.

help with proper articles to reference in /Draft:Noise_militia

i'm not sure why and which referenced source is good and what should be done in references . if they need to be deleted, then which one. very confusing please assist--thank you 613codify (talk) 01:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC) 613codify (talk) 01:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@613codify: It appears that references #2-5 are from blogs, and reference #6 is a press release by the artist. GoingBatty (talk) 01:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks GoingBatty, that was my thought process in the decline. Bkissin (talk) 12:58, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

thank you as that was helpful.but i want to ask something. references #3-5 represent music review sites of which some of the info in the article is referenced and i'm not sure if they are 'blogs' per se.perhaps i need the definition of 'blog' again please assist====

Account blocked?

Hello. Am wondering why my account suddenly appears to be blocked, or "not exist". Possibly I'm missing something. Can someone help? Thanks. -- Motke MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:11, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MotkeKhabad: Welcome to the Teahouse! Your account isn't blocked (see the block log) and still exists (as you were able to post here). What are you seeing that led you to think your account is blocked or "not exist"? GoingBatty (talk) 01:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MotkeKhabad: Did you try to edit Wikipedia while using a VPN or similar? If so you probably got caught in an IP block. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 01:25, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

{{|192.76.8.91}} @192.76.8.91 Not that I recall, but it's possible my VPN was left on by mistake, tho I use it infrequently. If there's an IP block, what can I do about it to resolve the issue and remove it? Thanks. MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:41, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MotkeKhabad: If you need to be able to edit from blocked VPN's (e.g. if there are firewalls wherever you're editing from that you need to get around) you can request an WP:IP block exemption, however these rare and are only granted if you have genuine need for it. If you have tried to edit the site with a VPN on by mistake then turn off your VPN and try again. If it still won't let you edit then either wait 24 hours or clear your browser's cookies. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 01:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

• You have to tell the name of the blocked account you are talking about. Capitals00 (talk) 01:57, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty @192.76.8.91 @Capitals00 Thanks for your help, all MotkeKhabad (talk) 02:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for your quick reply, @GoingBatty. Sorry, I'm newish to WP: how do I reply to your reply? I don't see an indication online or in WP as to how to respond. Thanks and sorry to trouble you re basic stuff. -Motke MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC) MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Just mention the name of the concerning user in your message. Capitals00 (talk) 01:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

As GoingBatty said: What are you seeing that led you to think your account is blocked or "not exist"? If you saw that the page User:MotkeKhabad says "Wikipedia does not have a user page with this exact title" then it merely means your account hasn't created an optional user page. You are not blocked and you don't need a user page to edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Thanks for your help! MotkeKhabad (talk) 02:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MotkeKhabad To reply to other users, use either {{ping|Example}} or [[User:Example]] to notify them. ―Qwerfjkltalk 07:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating a page on Leadership Initiative for Earth and/or the LIFEboat Flotillas

As described at http://www.jeffreygibbs.org/getting-a-life LIFE was a Vancouver environmental organization which organized several environmental conferences on tall ships. Hundreds of young people took part. Would it be suitable for me to create a page on either of these topics, relying on Gibbs' page as a reference along with others in the standard Wikipedia style? Ilnyckyj (talk) 03:11, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). This starts off by saying that "[a]n organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." The website of Gibbs's is not independent of this. If hundreds (even tens of thousands) of people took part, this doesn't contribute to notability, as the term is (perversely?) understood hereabouts. What matters is what has been written about it all, in reliable, independent, published secondary sources. -- Hoary (talk) 05:05, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for that guidance. I think the issue may be more timing than the level of journalistic interest, since not a lot of outlets have coverage from the late 1990s available. I will see if I can find anything in news databases.

Ilnyckyj (talk) 20:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

A 26 February 1997 Canada NewsWire article entitled "All Aboard! Lifeboat Flotilla" stating that it "will carry 200 youth and some four dozen educators aboard 13 large sailboats and heritage ships through the islands and waterways of BC's Gulf Islands."

A 25 June 1998 Canada NewsWire story reported: "Leadership Initiative for Earth (British Columbia) The Flotilla is a large-scale ocean expedition about sustainability combining the elements of adventure with hands-on learning for young Canadians."

A 13 March 1997 Globe and Mail article is all about the Flotilla "Vancouver Teens learn to tackle environmental problems."

Canadian Newsstream also contains 13 articles that reference the LIFEboat Flotilla: https://www.sindark.com/NonBlog/ProQuestDocuments-2021-07-27.pdf

Ilnyckyj (talk) 20:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Ilnyckyj, a quick look suggests that you have enough material for an article on the "flotilla". NB cited material does not have to be online, and a Wikipedia article (or draft) mustn't link to a web page, file or whatever that appears to violate copyright. While I don't want to judge the status of the anthology ProQuestDocuments-2021-07-27.pdf, it looks very iffy (however convenient it may be). -- Hoary (talk) 23:19, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I made that PDF purely as a demonstration that the flotillas got media coverage, not as a reference to link.

Ilnyckyj (talk) 20:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft of translated article

I'm working on a draft of a translation from Portuguese Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Antonio_Peticov

It's been rejected again due to a lack of reliable sources. It cites, among others: the Jornal do Brasil, one of Brazil's oldest newspapers (official archive of a print copy); a recent book published by a major Brazilian publishing house; an article in VICE Magazine Brazil, which is supported by the aforementioned book; a video interview on TV Cultura, a major Brazilian network (which was conducted by the late Antônio Abujamra, a well-known actor, director, and TV personality); the official website of São Paulo's metro system; an arts and culture website created by the government of Brazil; an interview in Domingo, an arts and culture magazine published by the Jornal do Brasil; a blog entry from the University of São Paulo; the government website for the city of São Paulo... it is objectively better sourced than the PT Wikipedia version.

I'm not seeing any indication that the article was reviewed by someone who speaks Portuguese and could properly verify the sources, so at this point, I'm genuinely at a loss as to what else I can do to bring this translated article's sources up to the standards of EN Wikipedia. Whatever issues one could have with the article, I'm surprised that veracity of sources is one of them. Actionactioncut (talk) 05:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Does pt.wp have an equivalent standard to WP:Biographies of living persons? Because I get a sense that BLP sourcing requirements are part of the issue. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 05:34, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano I mean, the PT version only cites the subject's website and reads like a love letter to him: "Fruit of his incessant curiosity, Antonio was discovering and learning, experiencing different scenarios and assimilating colors, aromas, flavors, sounds and putting together a balanced rational and emotional archive of all this" as just one example. While it does have an equivalent, it was not rigorously enforced in this instance. I've aggressively rewritten the EN version to remove all purple prose, maintain a neutral POV, reduce the length, make it read more like an article than a resume, and include proper citations and formatting, all of which the original lacks. Actionactioncut (talk) 05:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I do speak Portuguese and I agree that the article would very likely survive a AfD. It passes WP:GNG and easily (in my point of view) passes WP:ARTIST. Being in-depth profiled by Jornal do Brasil and by Folha de S. Paulo alone would, likely, grant him notability. His profile at Enciclopédia Itaú Cultural doesn't grant him notability per se, but it's a big indication that he is respected by his peers.--SirEd ^Dimmi!!! 06:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps Locomotive207 could comment here. -- Hoary (talk) 06:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Actionactioncut and Locomotive207, the section "Posters, book, and album covers" is unreferenced. It should be referenced. This section aside, the referencing is not perfect. However, this is not a "Good Article" (let alone "Featured Article") candidate; so while the referencing must be good it does not have to be perfect. I am surprised by Locomotive207's verdict, and look forward to reading their comment. -- Hoary (talk) 12:36, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Since the issues I had with the draft have been fixed and issues cleared up by other editors here, I will now go ahead and accept the draft if nobody has any objections. Sorry for the late reply.--🌀Locomotive207-talk🌀 21:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Whether and how to flag content "citation needed"

Hey, Teahouse denizens. I'm making a few minor edits to an article and found an opinion statement that isn't attributed to a source. Can you point me to info on what to do in such a case? Haven't found guidance in the MOS. Aredbee (talk) 05:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Aredbee: Welcome to the Teahouse. Without knowing which article this is to make a further judgement, if it's a statement that is blatantly an opinion, you could straight up delete it. If you want to err on the safe side, you can put {{citation needed}} right after it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu 🐲: Thanks! It's in the article on Cab Calloway, under the Music Career heading, in the third graf, the last part of the second sentence: "but they were not up to par with Cecil Scott's band." I'm thinking this is a case for a "citation needed," since if Scott's band was better it may be why the Alabamians broke up. Aredbee (talk) 06:01, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Aredbee: Another editor taking action would find a suitable reliable source as a citation, or delete it. It also lets readers visually see that a statement hasn't been properly cited, and that they should take it with a grain of salt. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:14, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Creation of the page Veronika Matyunina and admitting it into the English Wikipedia as a page

 Courtesy link: Draft:Veronika Matyunina

Hello. I'm Adam Daniel, whom I'm known as Lyubomyr Bilyovych (Ukrainian) and Berislav Ismailović (Croatian) in Slavic sources, I'm from Malaysia and I'm 16 years old this year. Other than my native language, Malay, and English, I'm very interested in various languages such as Chinese, Ukrainian, Bulgarian, Croatian, Polish, Czech, Russian, Serbian, Macedonian, Belarusian, Persian, Arabic, Urdu, Hindi, Bengali, etc. I'm actually an editor of Wikipedia in various languages since 2018. I would like to plead to you for this thing:

I recently created a new English-language Wikipedia page titled as Veronika Matyunina, where the page is from the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia page Матюніна Вероніка, she's a Ukrainian table tennis player, whom she is born on August 10, 2006. I would like to create a page about her in English actually. Could you please admit my created page titled Veronika Matyunina into the English Wikipedia, and let the page that I created share together with the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia page Матюніна Вероніка? Thank you.

Could you also please help me how to credit the editors when I translate the page on Veronika Matyunina from Ukrainian to English?  Adamdaniel864 (talk) 06:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Adamdaniel864: Welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft has been moved to draftspace, as it has barely any information, and there are no references whatsoever. You can take material from the other wikis, but just be aware that not everything will make it over due to a difference in policies and guidelines. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Note also that while the Ukrainian article on her has a number of sources, you must credit the editors there when you translate that page (if that's the approach you are taking). See WP:Translate for guidance on this, Adamdaniel864. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:16, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

WikiFauna for advanced technical editors

There is the WikiGnome, WikiDragon, WikiKnight, etc. But I would like to know what fauna in the wiki space relates to editors that are advanced and often technical, cheers 180.251.151.92 (talk) 06:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I understand your question correctly but if you wish to find editors who are knowledgeable in some technical area, then the best way is probably to go via the WP:WikiProject_Council/Directory/Science portal and click through to the topic you are interested in. These usually have lists of interested editors. Another method is to look at the category pages: for example I'm listed in Category:Wikipedians interested in chemistry. Whether people in such categories are competent in that topic is another matter! Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I worded my question incorrectly, sorry. So, for example, WikiDragons are users that edits articles in massive differentials, WikiGnomes edits in small amounts. So, the Wiki- for advanced technical users is…? 180.251.151.92 (talk) 07:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Ah, I see... you want a suitable neologism we could start to use. WP:WikiGeek perhaps? The idea is that you would write a humorous essay on that topic and then add a brief summary to the WP:WikiFauna article, as others have done. Good luck! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! 180.251.151.92 (talk) 23:56, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

This Indian Olympian article has to be updated

Hiii, C. A. Bhavani Devi is an Indian Sabre who yesterday created history by becoming the first Indian fencer, who appeared in Olympic and won first match against Spanish world number 4. Lots of arti are available on internet that can be used as source of information. And one problem is that the sportsperson's first name is Bhawani Devi and Sundararaman is her fathers name. It's Tamil , these folks don't write their surname instead they use thir father's, Grandfather's, Great Grandfather's name respectively before their first name. Isn't it strange but they do that. Paste a tag or Templet at the top of article so readers not get confused. Huge Earth (talk) 06:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Huge Earth, there are thousands of Olympics-related articles that need to be updated. This will take some time, a few months judging by past experience.

If the title needs to be changed, see WP:MOVE for guidance. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth: Welcome to the Teahouse! You may suggest edits and provide reliable sources on the article's talk page: Talk:C. A. Bhavani Devi. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Legacy articles for our parish of Boyton, Wilshire

Could Wikipedia include in their existing article on the parish of Boyton, three articles on the parish which have legacy value, with more such articles probably to come sometime in the future? 2A00:23C7:A00D:2F00:41AC:8E2A:6DC4:CD1C (talk) 09:54, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

From Alex Saunt.

Do you mean at Boyton,_Wiltshire#External_links? If they are self-published, probably not. You can find guidance at WP:ELYES and WP:ELMAYBE. Depending on what kind of articles this is, one possibility is to add a "Further reading" section. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Sources

Hello, i'm currently working on a draft for the Italian politician Pietro Amendola. However, i couldn't find a lot of sources for Pietro Amendola. Another thing, the best one i could find was from the Associazione Nazionale Partigiani d'Italia ("National Association Partisans of Italy") but it was marked as WP:SELFPUBLISHED. Why was this the case?

The National Association Partisans of Italy is recognized as a charitable foundation. And Pietro was a member of the organization. Besides, the National Association Partisans of Italy have also been cited in several other articles.

Does anyone have any sources on Pietro?

And why is the source by National Association Partisans of Italy not valid? Khalif Ali Husain the Third (talk) 10:02, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Khalif Ali Husain the Third: Even the Italian version of Wikipedia only has one source (see it:Pietro_Amendola) which suggests to me he is a minor figure who will not pass English Wikipedia's notability requirements. I suspect the reason the NAP of Italy is not a good source for showing he is notable is exactly as you say: he is a member of that organization. The source may be valid for other articles (for example to verify some simple fact). Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:53, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Khalif Ali Husain the Third Welcome to the Teahouse! I checked the 2 sources in your Draft:Pietro Amendola (sounds like an interesting man). ANPI may not be a glaringly awful source on history in general (I can't really say), but the problem with both sources is that they are writing about their own member, which leads us to the independent part of WP:BASIC. Basically, organizations tend to write about their own members in a mostly positive way. Those sources may not be useless for some basic facts per WP:ABOUTSELF, but they don't make a case for WP:GNG.

On more sources, perhaps you can find something useful at [1]. La famiglia Amendola looks promising. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: Pietro Amendola does pass Wikipedia's notability requirements. Since he was a politician who served as a deputy in parliament. And according to Wikipedia :

"The following are presumed to be notable:

Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels. This also applies to people who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them.

Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage."

In this context, a "deputy" is a member of the lower house of the Italian Parliament, equivalent to a member of the House of Commons in the UK or a member of the House of Representatives in America. Apologies if I am telling people things they already know. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:19, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

An article deletion

How to remove deletion from An article that is correctly written Roselyn jordan (talk) 10:43, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Roselyn jordan (talk) 10:43, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Roselyn jordan Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer depends on what form of deletion you are talking about and what article; from your edits I assume you are referring to Khaleed which has been nominated for deletion. If you object to the deletion, please comment on the discussion, linked to in the deletion notice(and I'll put it directly; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khaleed). 331dot (talk) 10:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay thanks 331dot can you Help me remove the deletion I would love if this article I wrote to be on search engines — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roselyn jordan (talk • contribs) 10:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC):Roselyn jordan I've said what you can do about it, please comment there. 331dot (talk) 11:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Okay thanks a lot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roselyn jordan (talk • contribs) 11:22, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Roselyn jordan, your task is to show how the article does meet Wikipedia's requirements. You may point out (coolly and politely, of course) that the reasons people are presenting for deletion are mistaken. Simply declaring that the subject of the article merits (or even needs) an article will have no effect. -- Hoary (talk) 12:24, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hoary, Okay thanks a lot so how can this be done is there any direct link that I can send an appeal to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roselyn jordan (talk • contribs)

Yes, you make your case at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khaleed. Note the links under New to AfD? Read these primers!, they can be helpful. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:33, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Roselyn jordan You need to go to the link you were given (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khaleed) and explain why you think the article meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The issue here is that people do not think this musician is notable - i.e. he doesn't pass the tests in WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG. You need to find substantial, reliable, independent coverage of this musician that demonstrates that he meets Wikipedia's definition of a notable person. The seeming consensus at the AfD discussion is that the only source that comes close to meeting our requirements is the vanguard piece, and even that seems to be promotional. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 12:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Roselyn jordan: Since you uploaded some of the photos as your "own work", it appears you have a conflict of interest to disclose on your user page. See the note on your talk page for more information. GoingBatty (talk) 12:58, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

No pictures on a Shinkansen when there should be?

Howdy. I'm a huge fan of the Shinkansens of Japan, and so is my girlfriend. I was researching the variants of the 700 & N700 Series when I noticed there doesn't seem to be any pictures of the new N700S-3000 variant owned by JR West. I would've tried to remedy this myself, but it appears there are no images of the N700S-3000 series anywhere on the internet, and I haven't even mentioned how I'm afraid I would screw up the formatting somehow and be made a fool of on Wikipedia. I recognize that this isn't particular to any sort of Editor, but I just wanted to bring this issue to light.

And since the tutorial says I should post the URL of the page, here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N700S_Series_Shinkansen MB-15NavalCommander (talk) 11:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MB-15NavalCommander: One issue with no images of the N700S-3000 series anywhere on the internet is that even if such images were available Wikipedia respects copyright and hence only images that are freely licensed can be uploaded to Commons for use in articles (there are a limited number of WP:NONFREE exceptions). Hence it is helpful if editors can take and upload their own photographs, as in the infobox for that article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:38, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

EDIT: Of course, I answered my own question there. Many thanks, Michael. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MB-15NavalCommander (talk • contribs) 11:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

If these new Shinkansens are being tested on regular railway lines, I'd be surprised if there weren't enthusiasts taking pictures of them. Maybe you could write a message at https://www.facebook.com/japan.shinkansen/ asking about copyright-free pictures? Maproom (talk) 12:51, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

And I assumed this was about some sort of smartphone... Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Dhorkë Orgocka

FYI

 – Added section header GoingBatty (talk) 13:21, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Dhorkë Orgocka

Why my article is not accepted? Wikiiiicontributor (talk) 13:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Wikiiiicontributor: Welcome to the Teahouse! At the top of your draft, it states "This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article." Hopefully you can rewrite sections such as: "her performance was qualitative. Orgocka was known for her naturalness, she was dynamic on stage, lively and full of energy with a warm word and interpreted with temperamented". Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello

FYI

 – Added section header GoingBatty (talk) 13:38, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I’m a writer and I have a client who would like a Wikipedia Page created for him. I would be appreciative of some assistance as to how I go about doing so for my client.

My contact details are below:

I look forward to hearing back from you most propitiously.

Kind regards

Avril Bunton-Williams 2A00:23C4:771D:8901:5C94:1B12:1602:F816 (talk) 13:35, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Avril! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially if you don't have Wikipedia experience and if you have a conflict of interest (COI). COI editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia, and requires that you disclose your conflict on your user page - see WP:DISCLOSE. You would also have to determine if your client meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, then you would put aside everything you know about him and gather independent reliable sources and summarize what they say. There's lots more information at Help:Your first article. GoingBatty (talk) 13:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Start with reading WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. Per those links, do you have 3-5 sources that are at the same time reliably published (WP:RS), independent of your client and about your client in some detail? If not, give up. If you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!" move on to WP:YFA, WP:COI and WP:PAID. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:48, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Although not an absolute requirement, creating an account is recommended. Stressing need to understand WP:PAID, and thus declare same on your User page ((Wikipedia frowns MIGHTILY on undeclared paid editing). In addition to general notability, there are additional guidelines if your client is an artist, musician, academic... Consider naming the person here, and perhaps a Teahouse host will do a quickie search on the name, and express an opinion as to potential for notability. David notMD (talk) 14:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Avril, being a writer is barely relevant. I'm not a writer, but I've created several Wikipedia articles. The difficult bit (almost impossible for inexperienced editors, it seems) is reading, understanding, and following Wikipedia's various guidelines and policies, particularly regarding notability.   Maproom (talk) 15:07, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Are museums acceptable references for articles?

I am doing research ahead of potentially creating my first new article. The subject is the GE 25 ton switcher. Hundreds of this locomotive were produced over more than 30 years, so I believe it meets requirements for notability. There are several books that cover it in detail, but I would need to order them or borrow them from a library to use them as references. However I have also found some information online. My question is, are webpages of museums considered acceptable references for articles?

I've found information on the locomotive here [2], here [3] and here [4]

The second webpage seems unlikely to be a good reference based on my understanding of the requirements, but what about the other two? One would imagine museums are a decent source; after all, not anyone can change this information. I want to make sure I have a sufficient number of good references before I create the article so it doesn't end up being deleted.

Thanks! Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Generally, museums are ok, especially large ones. The 2nd ref is more questionable (if the most detailed). If applicable, double them up where 2 say the same thing. To demonstrate notability, if challenged, books might be necessary. Johnbod (talk) 16:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift response! I went ahead and created a draft using the museum webpages as references, and I'll submit the draft to AFC once I have a chance to look at one of the books that covers the topic. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Can an article be replaced be another?

Can Regional Council of Pays de la Loire be replaced by Draft:Regional Council of Pays de la Loire since the draft give more citations and information? Also, the article was created today, that is, while I was making my draft. (Also, how to prevent users to create articles while another user is creating a draft on the same topic?) Excellenc1📞 17:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

It should probably be merged. ―Qwerfjkltalk 17:42, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

That may be too simple an answer. Jazerty268 (the same editor who earlier moved one of your drafts to mainspace without asking), created an incomplete and unreferenced article in mainspace a couple of hours before you posted your draft. A simple solution could be to copy content from your draft into the article, and then ask that your draft be deleted. Any opinions/solutions from experienced Teahouse hosts? David notMD (talk) 18:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I would copy and paste the contents of Excellenc1's draft into the article overriding the existing article, leaving an edit summary like "Replacing article with draft version, see the history of Draft:Regional Council of Pays de la Loire for attribution." then turn the draft into a redirect to the article to stop it being G13'd. Basically treat it like you would if you'd re-written the article in a user space sandbox. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 19:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I have given a merger proposal in the talk page of the article. Excellenc1📞 03:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

You might want to preserve the history of the draft. ―Qwerfjkltalk 07:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Is it possible for you to accept the proposal? Excellenc1📞 12:10, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 If there's no opposition, then you can be bold and do it yourself. ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Please check Draft:Regional Council of Pays de la Loire and Regional Council of Pays de la Loire, I have a strong feeling that I have messed up. Excellenc1📞 13:05, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 Looks fine to me. ―Qwerfjkltalk 13:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Archives for talk page

Hello Teahouse hosts. I return regarding assistance with archiving my talk page, this page which you can see HERE. Using a template, I added Cluebot III, and I am uncertain what happens at this point. I've read various pages of information regarding archiving but end up rather confused. I'm uncertain as to move old material into the archive at this point. I deeply appreciate any assistance one might have for me. Kind reagrds, Hu Nhu (talk) 17:22, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hu Nhu: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! It looks like you've set up the template correctly, so you don't need to do anything else at this point. The bot will start automatically archiving your talk page next time it runs (which could take up to a few days). At this point you just need to wait! 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you 192.76.8.91 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hu Nhu (talk • contribs) 19:55, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Ingeborg Kindstedt and Maria Kindberg

In 1915 Ingeborg Kindstedt and Maria Kindberg participated in the first ever cross country automobile trip for a cause; woman suffrage. Kindstedt, age 50, served as the mechanic during the 10 week trip; Kindberg, aged 55, owned and drove the car. Both were Swedish immigrants who had settled in Providence, RI. The trip was launched by Alice Paul and the Congressional Union for Woman Suffrage, and the women drove from San Francisco to Washington DC. It was covered extensively in the press at the time and in suffrage histories since. When they arrived in DC they met with Congress and also with President Wilson.

Despite their considerable contributions to this trip, Kindstedt and Kindberg have often been "othered" or even ignored entirely by historical accounts, in part because they were middle-aged, spoke English with an accent, and didn't fit the CU's mold of being young, native born, well-educated, and well-connected. There was tremendous anti-immigrant and anti-labor sentiment in the US at the time, and Kindstedt was also a member of the Industrial Workers of the World.

Full disclosure- I wrote a novel about this trip ("We Demand: The Suffrage Road Trip") in which they are the main characters. Part of my intent was to give them the credit they deserve and have never really received. I think they deserve their own Wikipedia page. Do you agree? Bluecando (talk) 17:49, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bluecando: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia's standards for inclusion, called "notability" depend on significant coverage from independent reliable sources, and not original research. Those sources don't have to be online, so press coverage from the time and suffrage histories could be used. GoingBatty (talk) 19:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Bluecando. It sounds interesting, and if you found enough material to base a novel on, then it's quite likely that they meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability and there could be an article on them. I would caution you to stop thinking in terms of "they deserve an article": nobody and nothing in the entire universe "deserves" or "merits" an article, because nobody and nothing has an article, and a Wikipedia article is not in any way for the benefit of its subject. The question is not whether they "deserve" an article, but whether Wikipedia, as a project which summarises material already reliably published, would benefit from an article about them.

If your research turned up susbtantial amounts of material about them that was both reliably published (as opposed to unpublished or self-published) independent sources (so, not based on what they said about themselves, or what their associates said about them) then you can certainly write an article about them. It's not clear whether you would be regarded as having a conflict of interest (it certainly would be if you wanted to cite you own work, but since that is fiction it seems unlikely that there will be anything suitable to cite), but I suggest it's best to be up-front about it on the article's talk page and your user page. I'm guessing that in writing your novel you made various interpretations of the sources, and perhaps theorised about the events or what people's motives were for their actions: you need to be very careful to avoid such extrapolation in the article, however convincing it appears, and stick to what the sources actually say. You shouldn't even mention any controversies about them (for example) unless there has been published discussion specifically of the controversy.

I'll add to this my standard advice for new editors considering creating an article: you are in the position of a new apprentice builder who decides to build a house. The obvious bits of building the house look within your skills, but you may not have thought about what goes on below the surface, in surveying the ground and building the foundations. (I'm aware that you are an experienced writer, so this may have less force than for other new editors; but creating a Wikipedia article is different from most other kinds of writing). I therefore always advise putting aside the project for a few months and working on improving some of our six million existing articles, and thereby learning how Wikipedia works and what we're looking for. --ColinFine (talk) 20:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Created new page but there is a version in Spanish too

Hello. I created an English Wiki page for Australian actor Luke Cook but noticed that there seems to be a Spanish version on the ES wiki site. What is the protocol here? Do they merge or stay separate? https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_Cook

Thank you Grapepinky (talk) 19:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

They stay separate. I did notice that the Spanish article cites sources that are not considered reliable here at the English Wikipedia. The English article also has an unreliable source: Amazon.com which indicates it's content comes from IMDb which is generally not a reliable source. A helpful resource when considering source reliability is Reliable source/Perennial sources explanatory supplement. Gab4gab (talk) 19:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Grapepinky Hello! I'm not quite sure I understand your question, but here goes: That several WP:s in other languages have their own article on a subject is very common, and sort of the point. Luke Cook also has articles in French, Italian and Portugese. What you can do is to check is if any of the others have any good sources you haven't used. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you bothGrapepinky (talk) 20:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Grapepinky: Speaking in general, each language's Wikipedia operates independently and each community therein has its own rules and guidelines, so what is considered acceptable on Spanish Wikipedia isn't necessarily so on English Wikipedia, and vice versa, so it is wrong to assume that any material on one wiki would transfer easily to the other. But the rules shouldn't be so divergent that a well-sourced article in one language couldn't be usable as a guide to the creation of a corresponding article on another language. --Finngall ^talk 22:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Restoring Autoblog's main article

Autoblog had a main article starting in 2007, along with all of the other Weblogs Inc. properties. Somewhere along the way, someone decided it would be better to redirect auto blog to spamblog and refer to autoblog.com as a subsection of the Weblogs Inc. page. Given that Autoblog.com is a top-10 automotive website, and other sister-sites such as Engadget still have a main article, it would make sense to restore the old page (removing redirects) and allow it to be edited to reflect current information about that site. 2600:4040:400A:4F00:8DAA:4809:A15C:C439 (talk) 19:39, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, the article Autoblog (website) was deleted in 2016 per this discussion, which determined that the website was not notable. Then, a separate discussion decided that "Autoblog" should be redirected to Spam blog. If you feel like after 5 years the website is now notable, you are free to create a new article for it through the same channels as creating any other brand new article. You may want to read WP:YFA for instructions about how to create such an article, and also WP:NWEBSITE for further information about the notability for websites. Also note that "other stuff exists" is almost always not a convincing argument. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 20:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I was thinking things should be as simple as creating a new page, except I'm unclear on how that new page would live under /autoblog, like the old one. 2600:4040:400A:4F00:8DAA:4809:A15C:C439 (talk) 21:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you're asking. Creating a new article is not "simple", especially for newcomers. I don't know what you mean by "/autoblog"; subpages are disabled in the article mainspace. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 21:17, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

What I should have said is /autoblog.com which refers to the wikipedia URL - which used to be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoblog.com The main article should belong there, but with redirects, I don't even know how that would be done.2600:4040:400A:4F00:4072:4BB7:85CD:C4E9 (talk) 17:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Advice on Wikipedia Article

 Courtesy link: Draft:United States Stove Company

I am trying to get an article approved, but I am hitting road blocks. I am wondering if my article has too much fluff content. It is titled "United States Stove Company." Is it better to keep articles short? Or, is it better to include as much information as possible as long as the content is reliable? ChattWiki423 (talk) 20:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Having whole sections with no independent sources isn't good. I've removed a couple. References to sources based on press releases, or on what employees have said, generally leaves a poor impression and should be avoided if possible. Maproom (talk) 21:53, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Follow-up to New Article

Moving an article out of the Sandbox

Need help to move an article out of my Sandbox and have it published.

How do I do this? Vedlagt  (talk) 21:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Vedlagt, if you mean Draft:David Provoost, it is already out of your sandbox and has been submitted. To greatly improve its chances of success, what you might do is ensure that Provoost's major claim to notability is presented in the first sentence. As it is, the first sentence is about his baptism. (Reading this, I think "Should I care?") The second paragraph starts "He was an important figure in early New Amsterdam", which is promising. I expect the rest of the paragraph to justify the claim of importance; however, it doesn't start to do so. Indeed, the entire draft currently reads like an entry in a genealogical compendium of some kind; NB this is a well-acknowledged example of what Wikipedia is not. (What Wikipedia is, is an encyclopedia.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:57, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Do my external relationships create a COI? Does any COI forbid direct editing of affected articles?

Hello,

From WP:COI:

While editing Wikipedia, an editor's primary role is to further the interests of the encyclopedia. When an external role or relationship could reasonably be said to undermine that primary role, the editor has a conflict of interest (similar to how a judge's primary role as an impartial adjudicator is undermined if they are married to the defendant.)

Any external relationship—personal, religious, political, academic, legal, or financial (including holding a cryptocurrency)—can trigger a COI. How close the relationship needs to be before it becomes a concern on Wikipedia is governed by common sense.

I have external relationships with the University of Alaska system. I am a current student at the University of Alaska Fairbanks and an alumnus of the same university. I was until the fall of 2019 an employee of the University of Alaska system.

Do these external relationships trigger a COI which prevents me from editing the article on Pat Pitney? Pitney, since the summer of 2020, has been the interim president of the University of Alaska system. I am currently the top editor on that article, as seen at https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/en.wikipedia.org/Pat_Pitney.

I chose to interpret WP:COI as saying that my external relationships created the appearance of a COI to a reasonable third party, even though my personal common sense doesn't think the relationships are close enough to be of concern on Wikipedia. Consequently I put a COI declaration for this article on my user page, but continued to edit the article directly.

Have I acted correctly? Or alternatively:

- Was I mistaken in thinking that a reasonable person would see my external relationships as a COI?

- Is my common sense mistaken in thinking that these particular external relationships are not of concern on Wikipedia, and that I can continue to edit the Pitney article directly?

Thank you. Dieter.Meinertzhagen (talk) 21:43, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dieter.Meinertzhagen, and welcome to the Teahouse. I would say that they do trigger a COI, but others may disagree. I would suggest putting an Edit request on the article's talk page, rather than editing it directly. --ColinFine (talk) 10:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating an article

Hello Teahouse hosts. I have created a number of articles, but I am uncertain if I should include categories when I submit it. I've not done so in the past and others come later to add them. May I include them when I first write the article? Kind regards to all,Hu Nhu (talk) 22:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Hu Nhu (talk) 22:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hu Nhu: Are you creating your articles in draft space or a user sandbox? If so then you can add categories as you write the article, but you should disable them by adding a colon at the start of the link (e.g. write [[:Category:Foo]] instead of [[Category:Foo]]). When the page is moved into article space the AFC script will automatically enable the categories. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 22:29, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I will do exactly that. I appreciate your continued help. Kind regards,Hu Nhu (talk) 23:36, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Article on Anna Tenney

 Courtesy link: Draft:Anna F. Tenney

Need Help getting arrticle published on Official Anna Tenney , She is a verified Amazon Influencer, TikTok Influencer, Social media influencer on all social media platforms, An Actress,and song writer. please help get my article published please Fianaarmstrong1 (talk) 00:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fianaarmstrong1: I wonder whether you used your own knowledge of Tenney to write this draft, or if you are Tenney. Per the multiple comments on your draft, you need to find multiple independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of Tinney, and summarize what they say. Delete everything that is not sourced. Carefully review the comments on your draft and click on each link to the Wikipedia guidelines, and read the guidelines completely. Continuing to submit a draft that is not adequately sourced risks having the draft rejected (instead of declined). GoingBatty (talk) 00:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Fianaarmstrong, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks as if you have a (very common) misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is: you think it is social media, where it is appropriate to tell the world about something. It is not: that is called Promotion and is strictly forbidden. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

My advice to you is:

1. Put Tenney aside for a few months, while you learn how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to some of our six million existing articles.
2. Throw away the text you have written - most of it is nothing at all like an encyclopaedia article, and I doubt if it is salvagable.
3. Read about notability, and find the (at least three) sources that are reliably published, wholly unconnected with Tenney, and contain significant coverage of her.
4. If you can't find such sources, abandon the project. (I think people have found that it is often difficult to find adequate sources for social media influencers; but you may be lucky).
5. If you find the sources, forget everything you know about her, and write a neutral summary of what the independent sources say. --ColinFine (talk) 10:56, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Debashish_Banerji and C5 of WP:Academic

Hello, I am struggling with determining notability of this person. Please see my existing discussion with creator here: [5]. C5 is not a familiar criteria for me and hence bringing it here. The subject is a named chair. But C5 also says Major institutions, for these purposes, are those that have a reputation for excellence or selectivity. Named chairs at other institutions are not necessarily sufficient to establish notability. - how to determine this? Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 01:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 01:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Ah. I don't think it's major. (See here.) While most WikiProjects seem to be more or less moribund, that on Higher education is a welcome exception. Nomadicghumakkad, I suggest that you ask about this matter at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education; you're sure to get informed responses. -- Hoary (talk) 02:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I see it's already discussed then Hoary. One way I thought one could evaluate if institute was significant or not by the amount of well cited research it was producing on the concerned subject. What do you think? Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 11:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Nomadicghumakkad, I have my own opinion about that; but again, I suggest that you ask about major-or-not at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education. -- Hoary (talk) 12:11, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Consensus on County Durham (district) article

I for one think the article has enough good stead to be a solo article from the ceremonial county and council articles for two reasons...

1. It is formed of seven former districts and boroughs which were once separate but now merged. 2. The council article doesn't really cover notable towns and Durham well in the article and as a result the article covers the wider unitary authority and it satisfies WP notable for geographical reasons...

Can we try to reach a consensus on the article...

Article is here County Durham (district) and debate is here [6]

RailwayJG (talk) 01:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Rejected draft follow up

Draft:Geoffrey_Leonard - This article got rejected due to poor sources. I was just wondering if someone could explain what is wrong with the sources please. Thanks DreamlessGlare (talk) 02:36, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, I ended up getting help on the IRC DreamlessGlare (talk) 04:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

How reliable are magazines like L'Officiel, ELLE, Forbes etc.?

Hello, I'd like to ask about the reliability of magazines about fashion/lifestyle like L'Officiel and ELLE and a business magazine like Forbes. Are they eligible to be considered third-party sources to prove one's notability? Jchauofia (talk) 02:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Forbes is actually a special case: Articles written by staff are OK, but articles written by authors described as "contributors" are not due to not being subjected to the same editorial process staff articles are. See WP:FORBES. ELLE is considered reliable per WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard discussions. I cannot speak to L'Officiel's reliability as a source. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 03:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Based on L'Officiel I'd say it can be used, of course context matters. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:53, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Mirrors

 Eye ay en (talk) 05:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

What about mirrors, Eye ay en? -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Your edits at Jeremiah Arkhams were reverted because the editor stated that some of your references were not considered reliable sources, as they were using content sourced from Wikipedia articles (hence, "mirrors"). You have since added content ref'd to fandom and Wikis, so the question of reliable sources may occur again. David notMD (talk) 11:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Greetings and Love to all

How to Create a wiki page? Hi and greetings to eveyone. I hope that you are doing good.

Can i Create a page for myself, friends, family members, companies i have worked in or other companies? What are the things that i need to take care while i write an article? i saw people add links too as references section so what type of links are acceptable? SheilaChan83 (talk) 05:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, SheilaChan83. You have a conflict of interest about "myself, friends, family members, companies i have worked in" and are strongly discouraged from editing in those areas until you thoroughly understand Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and are fully prepared to disclose your various conflicts of interest. Are these people and companies that you want to write encyclopedia articles about truly notable, as Wikipedia defines that concept? Articles should summarize what referenced reliable, independent sources say about the topic. Plese use the Articles for Creation process to review draft articles whenever you have a significant conflict of interest. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:04, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Short version of Cullen328's answer: No you can't. Oh, and be careful while making other kinds of edit. In your very first edit (summary "Fixed Grammatical Errors in 1st Paragraph"), you fixed no grammatical errors, you introduced one grammatical error (by removing the copula "is"), and you introduced one orthographic error (changing "Its national dish is [...]" to "It's national dish is [...]"). -- Hoary (talk) 09:09, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Signature but no question

 Arun Khatauli (talk) 05:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

What is the meaning (-1) and (+3) in contributions list?

When i check my contribution than some points like (-1), (+3) or (0) are written against my edited pages. What does that mean i need to know about it. As per my assumptions it is the change in size of the file after edit done by me. Please elaborate my point of concern. Manojipandey (talk) 06:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Manojipandey:, you are correct, its the change of article size in Bytes. If you made the page bigger, it will be green, if you made it smaller, red, and if you didn't alter the size of an article, it will be a gray zero. When the size change is over 500 bytes, wether positive or negative, that number will be bold. Note that bytes aren't exactly equal to characters, while most characters like a or B only take one byte, certain special characters and in particular emojis can take up to three. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Question about a rejected article Amhara organizations vs Black-owned business

Hello on June the 2nd, a page Draft:List of Amhara organizations was rejected by a user citing Pointless list as there can be multiple Amhara organisations across the world in different sphere and they cannot be incorporated into one list. Yet here on wikipedia you have Category:Black-owned companies of the United States & Black-owned businesses. Only notable companies/organizations that made news coverage can seriously be added to the article, i don't understand this double standards towards Amhara organizations. Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 06:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 06:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Dawit S Gondaria, I'm afraid you are comparing a list article to a category, which is an entirely different thing. See WP:CATEGORY for more information.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Roger (Dodger67), thank you for your response, and fair enough on the categorization. But there are also lists of companies, for countries and also in subdivisions, for example the United States. List of companies of the United States by state, Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 19:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

cash a check from Spencer strasmore vista

 2600:1700:1D21:1FAF:614F:9B01:98B4:B235 (talk) 08:58, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Exactly what problem are you encountering while attempting to edit Wikipedia? -- Hoary (talk) 09:01, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback

Hello,

I would need assistance in regards to receiving some feedback in regards to the following page:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:H.IKEUCHI_-_The_Fog_Engineers.

I have tried to improve it to implement words that are more neutral and that the article is perceived as a an encyclopedia article, however I don't have a lot of experience in this and would really need some assistance, please.

Any feedback and idea is appreciated.

Thank you. NinaMon. (talk) 10:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@NinaMon.: Your draft was immediately deleted by an administrator as it was a copied from elsewhere. I can't see the draft now it has been removed but you must not just copy material you find elsewhere on the Internet. You may use reliable sources but you must put them into your own words and add citations to show where the facts can be verified later by other readers. Writing articles on Wikipedia is quite difficult for beginners and you would be best to start out by improving some of the more than 6 million articles already here. Mike Turnbull (talk)

Rosa Glaser Reliable Sources/References

The article I have written was not yet accepted because it was said that there were not sufficient reliable sources and references added to the article. It is the first time I try to publish an article on the English Wiki. I do not understand why the mentioned sources are not reliable. You may check them out. I have published this article on the Dutch Wikipedia and it has been published in Wiki. See Dutch Wiki article Rosa Glaser In that Dutch Wiki I haven mentioned a lot of Dutch sources. ( after the story of Rosa Glaser origines in the Netherlands and Germany) If it might be helpful I will add these Dutch sources also to the English sources and references. There ar also a lot of German sources and references available. In adition I mention that a Dutch Memorial Museum of the concentration camp Vught has investigated the story and made an exhibition of it that have been shown in several Dutch cities and is touring right now in German cities. That museum also added in their museum the story of Rosa Glaser. I don't know how to proceed and what to do, so Please will you help me? Thank you very much Doberran (talk) 10:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Doberran (talk) 10:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Doberran A few points, in no particular order: You need to master the art of inline citations, WP:TUTORIAL/Help:Referencing for beginners can be of help with that. This is essential. Use "Glaser" throughout the article, not "Roosje", it's how we do it. Encyclopedic tone tends towards distant, dry, dusty and bland. Text like "Roosje grew into an emancipated woman who defied conventions with flair. ... She lost the love of her life in 1936, found consolation in the arms of another and married Leo; the wrong man." should be, well, less poetic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Link: Draft:Roosje Glaser. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:36, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Mrinal Dev Burman and Murari Lal Gupta for speedy deletion.

Hi there!,I would like to nominate Mrinal Dev Burman for speedy deletion as the subject is not notable enough and fails WP:MUSICBIO. Also, there has been no resources cited.

Also, Murari Lal Gupta has been nominated for speedy deletion by me. Pls let me know if I have made any mistakes.

I have posted the message on the article's Talk page. Thank you. Jocelin Andrea (talk) 13:37, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Jocelin Andrea, I can't see the former article anymore as it's been speedily deleted (but I guess that's strong indication that you did it correctly) and the latter article has been tagged correctly (in terms of the technical process) so far as I can see. I think you missed a signature on this talk page notification but otherwise it looks right. Thanks for your edits! — Bilorv (talk) 14:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank You then! Yea will sign them right away Jocelin Andrea (talk) 15:05, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea: You didn't actually tag Murari Lal Gupta for speedy deletion; you proposed it for deletion, which is a different process. If you want to tag it for speedy deletion, replace the prod template with the appropriate CSD template. Deor (talk) 17:15, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the information, have tagged it for Speedy deletion now. Jocelin Andrea (talk) 00:36, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea: I notice that in Talk:Murari Lal Gupta, you contested the deletion, saying "This article should not be speedily deleted..." This seems to contradict your comments above and later in that Talk page post. If you think it should be deleted, you should fix that. Or if not, remove the comments about not being notable. Either way, it should be consistent.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for informing, have removed the comments now. Jocelin Andrea (talk) 04:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Edit removed

When I edited a page, added a new section and added references the next day my edits were removed. Can someone explain why? 2502renegate2502 (talk) 14:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC) 2502renegate2502 (talk) 14:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@2502renegate2502: Welcome to the Teahouse. Assuming you're talking about the edits made at K. Shanmugam, your edits have been reverted for [...] unsourced addition, citation placed wrongly, possible copyvio: you added material that was not sourced, the material you did source was cited improperly, and the material may have violated copyright, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Ok, thanks for your answer. Now how do I find out if I did the citation correctly or if I did a copyright violation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2502renegate2502 (talk • contribs)

If you copy/pasted the content from another source exactly or only slightly paraphrased, then - voila! - copyright violation, even if you referenced the source. David notMD (talk) 16:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@2502renegate2502: Check out WP:EASYREFBEGIN for how to properly cite content, and make sure you're not copypasting content, extensively close paraphrasing, or excessively using quotes to avoid copyright violations. (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.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:29, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Ok and how do I cite correctly? 2502renegate2502 (talk) 19:11, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

The first link I provided has details. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:53, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@2502renegate2502: You could also discuss this directly with the editor who reverted your change, Justanothersgwikieditor, by leaving a message on their User Talk page.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:55, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Gronk Oz, thanks for the ping. I started the conversation over at 2502renegate2502's talkpage. Thanks!

Featured list

If I think a Featured List does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines should I nominate it to be delisted or should I open an AfD? TipsyElephant (talk) 15:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! I would reccomend that you start by sending the list to WP:Featured list removal candidates for delisting. While you can nominate featured content for deletion you'll find that any AFD you open will be flooded with "Keep. This is a featured list." type comments that don't actually address the notability concerns you have. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@192.76.8.91: thank you! That's a really good point that I hadn't considered. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:13, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: in special cases, AFDs do stand a chance of succeeding on an FL, but it would be astonishing for an article to meet the FL criteria and not be appropriate as a standalone list. So FLRC and then AFD could work. Notice that notability is not quite the same as what a list needs to have—see Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists. What is the list? I'm guessing it was promoted pre-2010 when standards were a lot lower. — Bilorv (talk) 17:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv: the article is Hugo Award for Best Fancast, which was promoted in 2015. However the editor had 15 or more articles on the other categories of the award promoted around 2010. Here is what may argument will be, let me know if I'm missing anything obvious or if you think it will immediately be rejected or anything like that:

The article appears to have significant notability issues. According to WP:FLCR, featured lists should “cover a topic that lends itself to list format and ... meet the requirements for all Wikipedia content.” Most of the sources currently being cited are not reliable and independent secondary sources. Some of them don’t even mention the words “fancast” or “podcast” such as Guardian article. The only result on Google News for “Hugo Award for Best Fancast” is this trivial mention by Locus Magazine. Searching for “Hugo Award” “Best Fancast” gets some hits on Google News, but it’s all extremely WP:ROUTINE even for demonstrating notability of the award itself rather than this category specifically. Google Books and Google Scholar yield even fewer results with nothing that contains in-depth or significant coverage of this specific award category. I don’t see how this specific category of the award is independently notable from the Hugo Award and even if the Hugo Award is notable this category does not WP:INHERIT that notability. The subject of the article is very specific and I don’t think it’s appropriate to have a stand alone list per WP:SALAT. I also noticed while assessing the article that there are quite a few other “Hugo Award for Best …” such as Hugo Award for Best Fanzine and Hugo Award for Best Fan Writer (it appears the same editor got at least 15 award categories promoted to featured), but claiming that this article should not be deleted or not be delisted because similar articles exist would likely be considered an example of WP:OTHERSTUFF. The article was promoted to a featured list in 2015, but there doesn’t appear to be any discussion about the article’s notability during the nomination. I think the article should either be merged with the award or deleted, but before opening an AfD I figured I should nominate it to get delisted.

TipsyElephant (talk) 19:48, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Hmm, interesting. I can't tell from a first read what my opinion on this would be, but I think it would be reasonable to go to FLCR with that rationale and then AFD if it gets delisted. — Bilorv (talk) 20:09, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

help with Glenn Bray article

hello i am still trying to find someone to help me with Glenn Bray article, the only help i got so far has been telling me about sources, but as many times as i have reread about it, nothing makes sense, i do not work on computers, and it has been very frustrating figuring out what is wrong, having no clue of the problem presented. There is a documentary made by netflix about Glenns art collection, i am not sure how much more noteworthy the person needs to be... all the different books published with art he owns... so i am at a complete loss Sirskull (talk) 17:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Sirskull. When writing an article, the content needs to be based on what reliable sources document about the subject. Taking this on a sentence-by-sentence basis, you've written that "Bray was born in Van Nuys, California on April 1, 1948". What's the source for that statement? You need to add a reference to the source at the end of the sentence. Then you have "His father Gene Bray owned Sylmar Builders Supply, a hardware store that began business in 1959". What's the source for that? You need to reference that too (it might be the same source as his birthplace, in which case you can place the reference after the second sentence rather than the first). And so on for the whole article.... Does that make sense? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Does this rewritten draft meet the neutral POV requirement?

I first submitted this page and got a response saying it was rejected because it didn't meet the notability criteria. In trying to address that issue, I ended up making the page not have a neutral point of view. I then tried to fix the tonal problem but failed abysmally. The latest comment cites notability as an issue again, although commenters have said it does meet the notability criteria (academics). I've since gone over the guidelines with more attention and rewritten the article. I just wanted to make sure this is okay as I don't want to aggravate people even more by submitting something that's not good again.

Thank you for your help! Whatevergb (talk) 18:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Whatevergb, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I see both Bkissin and Hoary both of whom are editors well versed in policy have accessed the article. I find it more helpful if you initiate a dialogue with either of them, they’d tell you what and where the problems are and if addressed they’d accept the article. Bringing this to the Teahouse is a good move but an even better approach is what I just said. Celestina007 (talk) 23:15, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Whatevergb, I wish that the draft said rather more about what was written in the reviews of his books, but this can be added later. The man seems notable and the description isn't promotional. If you submitted this again and I noticed the resubmission, I'd convert it to an article. -- Hoary (talk) 07:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 and @Hoary: Thank you so, so much! I'll get on it! Whatevergb (talk) 14:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Post-Move bot

I just did my first page move, and got a template listing the stuff at WP:POSTMOVE.

Honestly, most of the stuff there seems like it'd be way more efficient and not too technically challenging for a bot to do, and possibly more reliable too.

Thoughts? Intralexical (talk) 19:04, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Intralexical: well, there's Wikipedia:Bot requests if you want to write up a proper description of the tasks that you think could be automated, and where people might have more expert views on what parts of the edits could go wrong if done by bot. I think fixing the double redirects by hand is not really necessary per Wikipedia:Double redirects as a bot does retarget these within a few days. There could be some practical and useful automation, so it's a reasonable idea. — Bilorv (talk) 01:57, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Visual editor "1 notice" popup?

Using the visual editor, there seems to always be this popup that says "1 notice" and "Find sources:".

It is quite annoying. Is there any way to disable it from being shown by default? Intralexical (talk) 19:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Intralexical, hello and welcome to the Teahouse we apologize for the delay in answering your question, the problem is your question appears to be vague and a little hard to understand, could you expressly state what the problem is? Celestina007 (talk) 23:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Intralexical: I assume you're referring to the black triangle with the white exclamation mark in it next to the blue 'Publish changes' button in the top right of the screen in desktop view. If so, it hardly seems intrusive, and one simply needs to avoid clicking it. However, perhaps you're editing in 'mobile view' and are seeing more prominent notices than I am. I think it's there as a prompt to encourage readers of articles which have few references to go and find more to add and improve the page. I'm not aware there is a way to stop them showing, though others might know of a way. If the problem is with mobile view, try editing in 'desktop view' instead (which is what I do) when on my phone. Sorry I can't offer you a better solution. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you two for the replies! The ⚠️ icon is indeed what I was talking about. I believe the behaviour I described was due to the article I was editing being in the Draft namespace. It would always pop open even if I didn't click it, hence why I found it annoying. Anyway, I guess it's not so bad if it won't show up most of the time. Intralexical (talk) 00:00, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Intralexical @Nick Moyes I previously had this problem, where the notice appeared in all articles. I recommend using the 2010 wikitext editor instead. ―Qwerfjkltalk 09:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

COI

I have been asked to avoid writing articles about myself, my family, friends, colleagues, company, organization and competitors.

Why is this? Why can't I write an article about these things in a neutral style? SacrificialPawn (talk) 20:32, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

SacrificialPawn Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia article are typically written by independent editors, who take note of a subject in independent reliable sources and choose on their own to write about it. They summarize what those independent sources say, demonstrating how the topic meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability.

Please review, if you haven't already, the conflict of interest policy as well as this plain language explanation of it; I think it will answer many of your questions. It is often difficult for those with a COI to set aside what they know about the topic and any materials put out by the topic and only write based on what others say about it. Note, however, that policy say "avoid", not that it is absolutely forbidden. If you truly feel that you can set aside what you know about the topic for which you have a COI and only write based on what others say about it, you may submit a draft using Articles for Creation for review by an independent editor; keep in mind that if such a draft is accepted, you would be limited to edit requests afterwards. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

331dot, Thank you for clarifying that I am not forbidden from writing about my company or family. I have already read the conflict of interest policy but I find the WP:COIPAYDISCLOSE section to be quite vague in regards to employees of notable companies and unnecessarily presumptuous in relation to our motives for writing here. If another editor finds something I've written to be false, I would expect them to flag it in their review, and I will make the required corrections. SacrificialPawn (talk) 21:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

If Draft:Owkin is about your company, you must declare your paid relationship on your User page. Undeclared paid editing can lead to being blocked. All the other examples are COIs, and also need to be declared. And understand that there is no ownership. Within certain limits, anyone can edit any article. As in directly, not via review for you to act upon. David notMD (talk) 21:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

David notMD I have declared my COI on my User page. Please can you explain COI in relation to family member? Do I have to reveal my identity publicly for that? SacrificialPawn (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes you would have to declare a COI to edit an draft about a family members of yours, this declaration does not need to be specific enough to state the actual relationship only that one exists. This relationship could simply being a friend of the subject. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 22:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@SacrificialPawn, hey, I’m very impressed you are disclosing a COI. Okay, everything that has been said to you about COI is very much apt so I wouldn’t re-echo what has been said, but If you have read the room so far what is being said to you is “yeah (technically) you can and it’s not (necessarily) against policy, we are mandated to tell you the truth, whilst that is true please my advise to you would be not to create the article(s) you have a COI with, the reason is this, a COI makes WP:NPOV very difficult. Furthermore have you read our notability threshold? If not, please read it, and if you have, do you see the requirements there? Look at the wording, specifically this: In-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject any COI article you create would be made to pass through that test to the latter(the scrutiny would be very thorough) and may cause you stress when it is critiqued thoroughly so whilst “yes” you can create COI articles, please do not, there is “the truth” and there is “reality” if you want to see an article created you can use the WP:RA method, also, and as 331dot told you, you might also use the WP:AFC method, the afc method is good but believe you me the scrutiny is extremely thorough. Furthermore and theoretically speaking, if writing articles for friends and family is what brought you to Wikipedia then in time you’d realize what Wikipedia is WP:NOT. As I said earlier there is “truth” and there is “reality“ Celestina007 (talk) 22:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

At Draft:Owkin, the first and third refs are company generated; the 2nd and 4th confirm fund-raising for the venture, which establish existence, but not notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. David notMD (talk) 02:22, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Drafting new article in AFC

Drafting new article Drafting new article in AFC and do not know how to save my work so I can start again at a later date. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Roxiegrossman (talk) 21:35, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Appears you discovered that "Publish" means "Save." W uses Publish because it wants editors to know that anything saved within W can be seen by other editors by looking at the editor's Contribution history. David notMD (talk) 21:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Adding pages

Hi! Can I know if I can add pages without it being reverted? NataliaNutella1226 (talk) 21:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@NataliaNutella1226? hello and welcome to the Teahouse, it isn’t an anomaly for editors to make good faith edits and have it reverted if it appears not to be constructive, in order for you not make edits that don’t get reverted you have to familiarize yourself with some of our policies, practicing in your sandbox and “starting slowly”, such as correcting spelling errors. In time you would be able to make perfect edits that would not get reverted. You may want to see WP:TUTORIAL and WP:CTW. Celestina007 (talk) 22:05, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

More than 20 of your edits to Characters of the Marvel Cinematic Universe were reverted. You could ask on the reverting editors' Talk pages why. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

HELP

--Crystalnewbold2021 (talk) 23:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Crystalnewbold2021 (talk) 23:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Crystalnewbold2021: This is a page for asking about Wikipedia. We can't help you with any personal issues, such as you describe in your sandbox. User:Crystalnewbold2021/sandbox Should an admin redact the personal info that has been shared there? Sorry for the Streisand Effect. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:35, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

We can't help you with your issues. Contact the relevant local authorities. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 23:49, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

HELP

I NEED ASSISTANCE Can someone please help me I would like to create a Wikipedia page for "Molding Messengers"? It would be hugely appreciatedUgochukwu75 (talk) 01:12, 29 July 2021 (UTC) Ugochukwu75 (talk) 01:12, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Ugochukwu75, you first should carefully read the criteria for corporate notability and verify whether your business meets the standard. If it does, then find around 3 reliable, published, independent, secondary sources which cover your business in depth. If you find the sources, base your article on the sources, forgetting what you know about your company, and avoiding any promotional language. Don't copy/paste from your sources into the article, as that will violate copyright. Follow the instructions and advice at Your first article, and submit your finished draft at Articles for creation. Good luck.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:02, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Help me post the durable crystal

Hello, I have a couple articles to post and the the process looks intimidating. I don't know how to set up a page or anything, would anyone like to help me? I'll tell you what it's about. First on the page durability there could be a heading, "Durable Crystal." The page should also be led to by "Durable crystal under types of durability, durable crystal, durable substance, imperishable, imperishability, imperishable crystal, imperishable substance and expansion elements." Then I have a regular page outlined history, applications, process etc for about four pages. I have a second page, "Creation" and a paragraph under gravitational Singularity entitled, "Theory." If you like, you may view the pages on my website; Azapizzazz dot com/durability. Should I just post here in questions? This looks easy. Good.  Azapizzazz (talk) 01:20, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Azapizzazz: Welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, Wikipedia does not do original research. If there are reliable sources that significantly talk about "durable crystals", then it might merit an article. There are tangentially related pages on here, like Durability, that you might be able to add to with reliably sourced information. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Help me semi protect the Philippines women's national volleyball team article

There has been a lot of vandalism happening on the article Philippines women's national volleyball team mostly coming from unregistered users. To avoid possible future vandalism, please help me semi-protect this one. Thanks. Volleybae (talk) 01:32, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Volleybae: Welcome to the Teahouse. You're going to want to go to Requests for page protection to make such a request. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:38, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Help

A few days ago I had created this user page to use Disam Assist. How can i use this to fix Disambiguation link? Please help me. Thank you ! Fade258 (talk) 02:04, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fade258: You’re better off asking at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), as the script suggests. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 05:48, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your guidance.Fade258 (talk) 05:56, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Template creating

Somebody please help me to create a template on Template:Indian Administrative Service Officer. Please.... Shaji issac (talk) 02:17, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I'm very new to this. How do I make a Wikipedia page for an educational institution?

Hi, is it possible to make a Wikipedia page of an educational institution in Malaysia? I've checked and searched, so far it does not exist. Am I allowed to make the page if I'm an employee? Thank you. RadhiMIT (talk) 02:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@RadhiMIT: Welcome to the Teahouse. Regardless of your affiliation, you should read Your first article; creating an article is one of the hardest things a new user can do, and you are strongly encouraged to edit preexisting articles first to understand how to use Wikipedia (the interactive tutorial may help out here). With that said, you must disclose your paid relationship on your user page, User:RadhiMIT (the red link means that the page hasn't been created yet) before anything else. If you are able to establish the institution's notability as Wikipedia defines it from reliable sources, you can start a draft through the Articles for creation process.
If the draft is accepted upon review, you are strongly discouraged from editing the article once it is in mainspace (without the Draft: prefix), and are recommended to submit edit requests in the article's talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

POV allegation on several articles around same topic

Hello. I have been using Wikipedia as a regular guest as a relatively reliable knowledge source for years. Unfortunately, I have noticed that certain several articles revolving around same certain subject are biased toward a certain viewpoint. I don't know if this is a work of an individual or not, but I wonder if I can request an NPOV evaluation or something of the sort encompassing several articles at once, perhaps by category grouping. Of course, I can just discuss my concerns on the articles' respective talk pages, but the number of articles is somewhat large and it might be impractical to complain on all of them. Thank you for your attention. Tsubasanomura (talk) 07:01, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Tsubasanomura, and thanks for getting involved in helping to improve article content. There's a specific forum for discussing this issue, which is Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. I suggest raising the case there. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:32, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Will I destroy everything?

Will I destroy everything? 106.213.77.0 (talk) 07:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Probably not but please try to be constructive when you edit here on Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

If you mean "Life, the Universe, and Everything", see Phrases from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and please, don't. David notMD (talk) 11:23, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Please can someone explain why my ip was seen editing on a page i never visited

Hi there, today I noticed I had messages on Wikipedia (which is something I never knew you could get) I clicked on it and noticed that I was banned in January for editing an article I had never visited before, I also had a message from this month about editing the same article? keep in mind that at this point I didn't have a Wikipedia account and didn't and still don't have any interest in editing Wikipedia articles, could someone explain why or how this could happen? thanks. JDFtrains (talk) 08:47, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

JDFtrains IP address can be used by multiple people, for various reasons. If you were not responsible for the actions that led to the block, you have nothing to worry about now that you have created an account. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Article improvement verification

Hello, I recently submitted a project that was accepted on ThrustMe. This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. In the near future, I will try to improve this article. However, I might make some mistakes, especially on the neutral point of view aspect as I am related to the topic of this article. Is there a way to submit changes, like submitting a draft, to ensure that the changes do not conflict with wikipedia rules? Antoinebore (talk) 09:40, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Antoinebore. Another editor has left messages in a section of your talk page explaining the correct way to handle your conflict of interest: thanks for being upfront about this in relation to the article. Basically you need to follow the guidelines linked from those messages, which means only adding suggested new content (using the edit request template) on the Talk Page of the article (Talk:ThrustMe), giving specific details along the lines "please change X to Y" or "please add Z", with citations to relaible sources. Other experienced editors will check these requests and act on them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Michael D. Turnbull, thanks for the clarification. I have another point I'm not sure about: should I also use the change request template for minor changes, such as grammar, spelling, writing style? Antoinebore (talk) 12:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Antoinebore: Strictly speaking you should ask before making any change but if the change is "minor" in Wikipedia's rather narrow definition of that term (WP:Minor, which includes undoing vandalism of the article but not tone/grammar changes), I don't think anyone would object, especially if you again mention your COI in the edit summary. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:50, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Public Statues and Sculpture Association

I need help with editing the page on the Public Statues and Sculpture Association page. Our edits have been rejected twice, and we don't understand why. The user name is Edgar Boehm and (redacted). Edgar Boehm (talk) 09:48, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Public Statues and Sculpture Association, declined twice, with reasons given by the declining reviewers. Given the connection to the now defunct Public Monuments and Sculpture Association, perhaps renaming and expanding that article can be made to work. Hyperlinks are not allowed in articles (a flaw of the draft), and all added content must be verified by inline references. See Help:Referencing for beginners. David notMD (talk) 11:34, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

On second thought, my renaming suggestion is bad advice. Articles about no-longer-existing companies and organizations are meant to be kept. Perhaps you can use that article as a model for what the draft should look like (no hyperlinks, needs refs, etc.). David notMD (talk) 12:02, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Chagam and Chagum

There are two articles Chagam and a recently created a copy of it "Chagum". I have added the redirect of Chagum to the respective article, but it still does not do so. What can I do?

Thanks in advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 13:00, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Jocelin Andrea, Redirects to other namespaces, in this case Drafts, are not allowed in Mainspace. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:30, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you then, I see that the article Chagum has been deleted. Is there anything that I can do? Jocelin Andrea (talk) 13:41, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Jocelin Andrea, If it definitely is the same place, you can improve the Chagam article. It desperately needs a few sources to verify the content. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:20, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

to publish the article

I have completed the edit, can I publish it? or should it be reviewed by any experienced contributors? if so, can someone help in reviewing it? LizKurian (talk) 13:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

1916 Election

I was wondering why the 1916 election page has two random US senators as running for president as opposed to Hughes and Wilson. I think someone might have mucked with the page because the table with the main details seems to be wrong? Connorhird (talk) 14:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

(1916 United States presidential election) Vandalism. Now reverted. Thanks for spotting and alerting. - X201 (talk) 14:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

My first article

Could someone please look at my draft article and point out any glaring errors?

My hope is to add important detail on all the most influential Courtiers in the UK Royal Family.

Thank you! UKRoyalFan (talk) 14:08, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

My page keeps getting refused?

Hi. I'm trying to get a page set back up for Mike Heaton of Embrace, as for some reason his original one had been removed. I've included sources etc and there is nothing on there that isn't factual, nor is it any less lengthy than other links to the band. i've looked on help pages here and nothing is assisting me Smithykit (talk) 14:59, 29 July 2021 (UTC)