Wikipedia:Teahouse

David Biddulph, 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

I do not authorize a wiki page: Dorothy Ruiz Martinez

Hello, how do I report a wiki page? I do not authorize the page, it is using my personal information, and I want to remove it from Wikipedia. The page is Dorothy Ruiz Martinez. I tried to make edits to the page at least to protect my privacy, and to remove inaccurate information, but every time I publish the final edits, it reverts back to the original article. Some user Molly Polly is reverting back the page. I do not authorize any personal information on this page. How do I remove it?

Thank you! Rafaela Mars (talk) 05:27, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Rafaela Mars: Welcome to the Teahouse! I'm sorry you're having problems with the Dorothy Ruíz Martínez article. The information at Wikipedia:Contact us/Article subjects might be helpful. It's common for people to find that their edits have been reverted. Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, it's helpful to share your concerns on the article talk page: Talk:Dorothy Ruíz Martínez (with reliable sources, if possible). Since you have a conflict of interest, I suggest using the {{request edit}} template to ask other editors to help you improve the article. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 06:04, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! GoingBatty — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafaela Mars (talk • contribs) 06:14, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@MollyPollyRolly, please remember to respect the privacy of personal information when dealing with non-public figures. The edit by @Rafaela Mars appears to have removed only unnecessary private information that is not of benefit to the reader, in addition to condensing down some parts that were overly wordy. If you have a problem with their edit, I suggest recovering the portions you don't agree with removing, rather than undoing their entire edit. ––FormalDude talk 06:08, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@FormalDude: And please remember that when anybody removes references, that constitute usually as a form of vandalism and therefore was in need of being restored. I might be wrong in assuming bad faith of Rafaela Mars, but lets be honest; she didn't introduced herself as Dorothy Ruíz Martínez.--MollyPollyRolly (talk) 17:48, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@MollyPollyRolly: Actually it's not a form of vandalism as explained here, particularly when you see an edit summary such as this; it might not have been the correct way for Rafaela Mars to try and approach things, but also automatically assuming that the disputed content automatically needs to be restored is also not automatically correct each and every time per WP:BLPEDIT. These types of situations happen more often then not, and sometimes it's better to try and slow things down a bit and get others involved to try and sort them out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Rafaela Mars. Authorization by the subjects of Wikipedia biographies is not required and there is no process for that. Wikipedia contains biographies about people that Wikipedia editors conclude are notable, and we summarize what reliable, published sources say about various people. At this point, we have no way to verify that you are actually Martinez. If you want to verify your identity, you can contact Wikipedia:Volunteer Response Team. You are free to leave an edit request at Talk:Dorothy Ruíz Martínez as mentioned above noting inaccuracies in the article or anything that genuinely violates your privacy. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:25, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Rafaela Mars Much of the disputed information appears to have been sourced to an interview of Martinez, published in Familia in 2014. The reference is still used (#1). Whether any of that information is germane to an article about her life and career can be questioned, but there does appear to be a source. It is very common for articles to have a Personal life section in which spouses are named and number of children provided (but not named). David notMD (talk) 11:31, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Rafaela Mars. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Relationship between the subject, the article, and Wikipedia for more information, but there are ways for the subjects of articles to seek assistance from others when they have concerns about article content. It's also important to understand that Wikipedia articles are written about subjects and not for subjects, and this means that the subjects of articles have no claim of ownership over the article. That doesn't mean that anything goes, but it does mean that article content is going to be assessed in terms of relevant Wikipedia policy and guidelines and not based upon what the subject might want. This is one reason why the subjects of article are typically encouraged to seek assistance from the Wikipedia community at large when they have concerns about what's written about them; the subjects of articles might mean well but they just might not be familiar enough with Wikipedia to successfully correct any problems they think need fixing, which might actually not be problems at all from Wikipedia's viewpoint. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I realize this is meta, but I think Wikipedia mishandles requests to delete BLPs when the subject objects. We seem to want the subject to prove they are not notable, and that's not quite right. It is paramount to respect Privacy here, a human right, and our presumption should lean towards privacy, not away from it. Rklahn (talk) 02:03, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE gives some support to that, but someone has to (in this case, since the article isn't glaringly awful atm) start the Afd. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:44, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

There are circumstances where a subject wants an article deleted because it paints them in an unflattering light due to the sourcing; an example from recent memory is Peter A. McCullough, who'd very much like that the article on him not mention the various COVID-related stuff he's said and (either he or someone working on his behalf) has attempted to get the article deleted in an effort to hide it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 08:45, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

There are levels of privacy. The idea that a notable person can object to a biographical encyclopedia article on them existing seems absurd to me. If Pope Francis decided that he didn't want to have an article here, would you suggest that we take it down and completely scrub his existence from our site? Obviously not. And, while this person is not at that level of notability, the principle seems the same. There is, of course, room for legitimate objections to specific material to be included in said article, but if you really don't want an encyclopedia to write about you, you should try to live a non-notable life. --Khajidha (talk) 15:52, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

How we can contest unrightful post rejection?

Hi,

We have worked years to gather all the information we have, our clan was closed for over 400 years since it served the Shogunate, now in past years we have opened to public, with information sharing, knowledge management and much more on the warfare arts.

We have made properly argumented post that was rejected by someone who is not even a Japanese person, nor knows anything about true Ninja/Samurai development when he rejected out of no foundation our post here.

Viorel Cosmin Miron 05:44, 1 September 2021 (UTC) Viorel Cosmin Miron 05:44, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, 柴田バネッサ. You keep talking about "we" and "our". Shared accounts are not permitted on Wikipedia, so you should talk about "me" and "my". Your references are formatted improperly. Take a look at Referencing for Beginners. That's a start. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:00, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Also, vast swathes of your draft are unreferenced, in violation of the core content policies Verifiability and No original research. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:07, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Pinging SIRavecavec, the one that actually wrote the question. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 07:12, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

You are so wrong, I know the people who have individual accounts, again if you had nothing constructive to add, please refrain next time! Viorel Cosmin Miron 18:45, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@SIRavecavec: No, Cullen328 was correct. You come across as one account shared by multiple people, and you did not format your references properly. Nothing was "so wrong" about that. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:33, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:The Order of Musashi Shinobi Samurai. Personally, I agree that the Rejection was not appropriate. A Decline with guidance would have been better. That said, I recommend removing both galleries and a lot of unreferenced content about what individuals were doing. The article Samurai has links to articles about clans - these may serve as models for your efforts. David notMD (talk) 08:21, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I also agree that outright rejection was inappropriate. I have replaced it with a new submission template. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I would just add that this is the English-language Wikipedia, and may not warrant the same level of detail that a Japanese-language article on the same topic would; particularly since verifiability (for English-speakers) is much easier using English-language sources available on the web or in English-language libraries, and the verifiability of your article hinges entirely, or almost entirely, on Japanese-language sources not readily available to English-speakers elsewhere. This is in no way a critique of the value of the article or its topic. Just pointing out that there's a lot of detail there, and you may find it easier to get an article approved which begins more simply. Also, you need to finish translating or transliterating your References and External Links sections. EVhotrodder (talk) 07:48, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

EVhotrodder, the language of sources is of absolutely no relevance for either the notability of the subject or the content of the article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:17, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Panama Presidents photos

Presidents of Panama new photos.

On Wikipedia Commons, may I upload these photos? . I saw another user upload files from here , and I wanted to make sure every President of Panama has a photo. EducationThruLists (talk) 14:52, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi EducationThruLists. Those photos are copyrighted- at the bottom of the page, it says "derechos reservados" which means "all rights reserved". Wikimedia Commons only accepts freely licenced images, so these would not be accepted at Commons. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:00, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@EducationThruLists: Welcome to the Teahouse! For each person without a photo, I went to the article about them and requested a photo on the article's talk page. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:27, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@EducationThruLists: I also requested photos for you on Talk:List of heads of state of Panama. GoingBatty (talk) 15:34, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

And I think why the ones mentioned in the PDF that are on Commons, they look to have been taken around 1945, so maybe the copyright on them has expired (I know nothing about copyright law in Panama). Joseph2302 (talk) 15:32, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

You could probably check out Copyright law of Panama to make sure. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 15:53, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

References

Thanks all of you EducationThruLists (talk) 15:34, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Where are the photo requests? EducationThruLists (talk) 22:33, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@EducationThruLists: On Talk:Daniel Chanis Pinzón, Talk:Alcibíades Arosemena, Talk:José Ramón Guizado, Talk:Ernesto de la Guardia, Talk:Marco Aurelio Robles, Talk:José María Pinilla Fábrega, Talk:Bolívar Urrutia Parrilla, Talk:Jorge Illueca, Talk:Manuel Solís Palma, Talk:Francisco Rodríguez (President of Panama), Talk:Rubén Darío Paredes, and Talk:List of heads of state of Panama. GoingBatty (talk) 00:08, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

How to put <ref:name="1"> correctly to avoid getting an error message

Hello, I was editing references in the page about NU'EST, when I noticed that the second and third references are basically the same. After that, I tried to put the ref name 1 template and when I saw the preview of my edit, I saw that there was the message that there was an error in the reference (this is not the first time that when I try to do this type of edits, this warning message appears). How can I add the template successfully? Bloomingbyungchan (talk) 17:08, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bloomingbyungchan: "1" is not a valid value for the name="" attribute, as values must not be purely numeric, try using ":1" instead. See WP:REFNAME for more info. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:09, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

I unfortunately have the same problem. As I mentioned the two sources are the same, the only different thing is the way the publisher of the article is written, also when I look at the preview, the number of the second reference doesn't become the same as the first. This made me think: Is it possible to hide the reference template inside the ref name:1 one? Bloomingbyungchan (talk) 18:31, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bloomingbyungchan: I can't see your edits in the page history, could you link to where you're having issues. Reference names cannot be numbers, you either need to add some text or punctuation to them. As a general point it's a good idea to make your reference names somewhat discriptive (e.g. "Billboard interview" ) so that it's easier for other editors to see what they are. Also bear in mind that citation names are case sensitive. Have you read WP:REFNAME? It has some helpful information on how to use named references. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 20:09, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm having problems here. You can't see the edits because I preferred resolving the problem by going here in the Teahouse, rather than publishing edits that ruined a reference. Bloomingbyungchan (talk) 09:32, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bloomingbyungchan: is it the Star News ref? The footnote numbers you see when reading the article are automatically generated, so you can't use them in the source code. So you need to invent a useful label add it as a name attribute. The first occurrence could be <ref name="Star News">{{cite news|title=애프터스쿨 ...}}</ref>, or maybe use the author+year name=Park2011. Then the second instance you replace with just <ref name="Star News" /> or <ref name=Park2011 />. Note the extra slash, as /> in place of ></ref>. Hope that helps! If you're inclined to do a bit extra, it'd be nice to update the citations to credit the authors. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 18:32, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Note: you can't add a name to an existing ref in Visual Editor, only in source mode. Also, see Special:Diff/1042388356 for an example where I added the author and date to another ref (I used VE for that, wanted to confirm that it doesn't auto-add a ref name). ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 18:59, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it's that reference and I finally managed to fix that issue. Thank you so much for your help and answer! Bloomingbyungchan (talk) 19:02, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Glad to hear that it worked for you, Bloomingbyungchan! ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 17:07, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Templates of AUshield

What is templates of /////? Mlik point (talk) 05:43, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Mlik point, you are using the templates in your inscrutable question about them. You can see what they are and what they do as clearly as anyone can. How do they work? Well, as an example, this. But perhaps, so far as I understand your question (which isn't far), I misunderstand it. If so, please rephrase it. -- Hoary (talk) 05:51, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

We need more templates of AUshield in List of road routes in Victoria. Mlik point (talk) 05:55, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point Pretty sure this is already answered in #Can you upload files? above. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 05:58, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Templates of AUshield (numbers)

What is template of //////? Mlik point (talk) 06:10, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

What kind of information do you want when you ask "What is template of [template]?", Mlik point? -- Hoary (talk) 06:14, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

It's about AUshield. Mlik point (talk) 06:17, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

What is it about AUshield, Mlik point? -- Hoary (talk) 06:19, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

It's example: {{AUshield|N|1}}. Mlik point (talk) 06:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, Mlik point; precisely what do you want to know about {{AUshield|N|1}}? -- Hoary (talk) 06:33, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

It runs clockwise around Australia (not in Tasmania). Mlik point (talk) 06:43, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Templates don't run anywhere, Mlik point. And you haven't said what it is that you want to know. -- Hoary (talk) 07:13, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Mlik point, are you by any chance asking how to make templates for additional Australian highway shields? I can't answer that myself (because I don't know). But if that's your question, maybe now someone else can answer it. Uporządnicki (talk) 00:15, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

"An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive"

Hello! I'm pretty new to Wikipedia, and I've recently been editing the first table on the page Ali filmography to fit with WP:CHRONO (a first step as part of the guild of copy editors). I've just done a batch of editing and am trying to save my changes and log off, but I keep getting this error - "An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive, so it has been disallowed. If this edit is constructive, please report this error. Disruptive editing may result in a block from editing." How do I fix this without having to abandon my changes entirely? Also, is there a better way to do this? Sorry if this is a dumb question haha Karanoia (talk) 06:28, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

You can report this at Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives. I think this can be bypassed by asking an editor with extended-confirmed rights? ― Qwerfjkltalk 08:57, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

The attempted edit can be seen at [1]. The cause was probably Idiot (2002 film). Try saving a version without that word, and then request an edit on the talk page or here. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:39, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll attempt putting these suggestions to use.--Karanoia (talk) 03:26, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

User Anasnadeem2548

Hello! User Anasnadeem2548 (Contributions) is spamer. Examples of his edits: one, two, three four etc all his edits. --Avedon (talk) 14:48, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but I will not write about this for the 3rd time, if you do not need help in the fight against spammers or vandals - I meant this deletion of my message about this spammer. I don't have time to search for the forum here where my message would be appropriate. --Avedon (talk) 14:48, 4 September 2021 (UTC) Avedon (talk) 14:48, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

If you look at the editor's contributions and at his user talk page you will see that his spam had been reverted and he had been warned. No further action is needed at this stage. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:06, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

I inderstand. I didn't look. Anasnadeem2548 was blocked forever without notice on Russian Wikipedia - my request about him to administrators. It doesn't make sense to warn such users like he. --Avedon (talk) 15:28, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Your earlier edit was reverted because it was at the wrong place (Wikipedia talk:Help desk rather than Wikipedia:Help desk). For Anasnadeem2548, normal progression is next level warning on Anasnadeem2548 Talk page, and then on to block. David notMD (talk) 15:41, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Russian Wikipedia has different formal rules: 1) the comment written in the erroneous place is transferred to the correct forum; 2) administrators (if they delete normal comments) write the reason of delete in the description of the edits, and are not work silent. I thought so here too. It is not customary to silently roll back normal comments. But I understand. That's all. --Avedon (talk) 18:40, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Avedon: Thanks for reporting the promotional-only account which I have indefinitely blocked. The advice above is correct in general but it has become customary to block such activity when that is all they are doing. Johnuniq (talk) 23:21, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

I am engaged in the fight against vandalism and spam on the Russian Wikipedia (apart from my other activities in RuWikipedia). Found the vandal and spammer Anasnadeem2548 - he was blocked indefinitely without notice. Also, I found that he made 14 edits in the Eng. Wikipedia. I looked at his edits here. They all contain spam for the one site - real estate agency or something like that. I decided to report this facts here... Thanks for the help. Regards. --Avedon (talk) 00:15, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Avedon: For cross-wiki spam, also see meta:Wikiproject:Antispam. Johnuniq (talk) 03:10, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Avedon (talk) 03:24, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

about French mathematical seminars

This page has a list of French mathematical seminars, and I can read some of this list in Numdam, so I added an external link, but Numdam says; It is forbidden to download a substantial volume of articles in order to assemble an entire volume of the paper edition or an author or subject based collection.. Should I write a note about it? SilverMatsu (talk) 15:32, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@SilverMatsu: Welcome to the Teahouse! Numdam's download rules would seem notable for an article about Numdam, but not for the general French mathematical seminars article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:36, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thank you your reply. I'm worried that downloading all the seminars listed in the article would violate numdam's Terms of Use.--SilverMatsu (talk) 15:48, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps not many people try to download all the seminars listed in the article ...--SilverMatsu (talk) 16:02, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

I think you're worrying unnecessarily. This is just a fair-usage clause, analogous to the old rule about how much of a volume you could photocopy. Basically Numdam are making individual papers available for private study, but what they don't want is someone reconstructing whole volumes or the entire works of one academic as the electronic equivalent of a bound volume. That's not what you are trying to do, and if any individual finds the numdam site via Wikipedia, what they do with it is between them and Numdam. It is certainly helpful to make it possible for readers here to search out odd papers that are of interest to them. Elemimele (talk) 16:08, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele: Thank you your reply. I was relieved to hear that.--SilverMatsu (talk) 16:13, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

By the way, this article has a red link Séminaire Cartan and also, redirect Cartan seminar redirects to this article, so it feels like a self-link or double redirects in a sense, should I remove one or the other?--SilverMatsu (talk) 06:06, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Article verification

Hello! I am new to Wikipedia. Please help me with article verification. It would be great to have it published soon. If I have done something wrong, please write to me Thanks a lot! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SvetlanaManuylova/sandbox?action=edit&veswitched=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by SvetlanaManuylova (talk • contribs) 17:09, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Your question was answered at WP:Help desk. Please don't ask the same question in multiple places, as it wastes the time of volunteers to answer a question which has already been answered. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:23, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Along with this, remember to sign all your talk page entries via the 4 tildes, like so ~~~~ _Signed,Pichemist ^(Talk) 19:32, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

All content needs to be verified by independent references. David notMD (talk) 20:32, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you so much for your answers! Unfortunately, I have a question again. Can you please tell me which of the links are not suitable? When choosing these links, I proceeded from the fact that each of them contains important information and can be considered independent. I have read the criteria for this many times, but found no reason to exclude any of the sources. I would be very grateful if you could help me. Also, please clarify about the photos. Ted gave me the right to identify myself as her owner. However, it was just in personal correspondence. Can you please tell me if I can go a different way and cite an outside source for our picture? Or is there some other way to use it? Thank you very much for your help. Have a great day.SvetlanaManuylova (talk) 17:31, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@SvetlanaManuylova: Please document your conflict of interest on your user page - you can use {{UserboxCOI}} for this. The external links in the "Moving to Canada" and "Interesting Facts" sections are not appropriate per WP:EL. The links in the "External links" section should provide more information on Bobier - those that don't should be changed ore removed (e.g. Manitoba Institute of Trades and Technology). Please provide independent sources per WP:BASIC to demonstrate notability, and use footnotes per Help:Footnotes. For the photos, please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:50, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Ii mad

 105.112.211.127 (talk) 20:32, 4 September 2021 (UTC) Gloi

Welcome to the Teahouse! Did you have a question about Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 00:03, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome, please avoid sending blank messages in the teahouse as it directs volunteer assistance away from those who need it most. If you require any help, feel free to start a new thread. _Signed,Pichemist ^(Talk) 08:26, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Creating new artist bio

How do I create a new artist bio and add links to it? Is there someone I can pay to do this for Lucyp123 (talk) 03:13, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Lucyp123: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see that you've already started at User:Lucyp123/Sample page. Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. First you would read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and disclose any conflict on your user page. Then you would read WP:MUSICBIO to determine if Brooks meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, then you gather your reliable sources and follow the instructions at Help:Your first article. Also, I recommend investing time improving existing articles before writing a new article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:53, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Lucyp123, and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds as if, like many people, you have the misunderstanding that Wikipedia is a place to tell the world about yourself - it is not, and promotion of any kind is forbidden. If you meet the criteria that GoingBatty mentioned, then there could be an article about you: you are discouraged from writing it yourself, but not forbidden. Whoever writes it, it will not belong to you, will not be for your benefit, will not be controlled by you, and will not necessarily say what you want it to say. 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.

As for paying somebody: I strongly advise against it. You can certainly find somebody who will take your money to do this: many are scam-merchants. I guess some will at least try to give you a good service and stay within Wikipedia's policies: but as I made clear above, they cannot guarantee that an article will be written, or will present you how you want to be presented. You're much better off finding other outlets. --ColinFine (talk) 11:10, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Make an entry for an ecommerce store

Pls let me know how I can create a page for an ecommerce store that sells outdoor patio furniture. Alyiaamir72 (talk) 05:24, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Alyiaamir72: Welcome to the Teahouse. You should read Your first article, and find good reliable sources (three really good ones are what reviewers usually look for) to establish its notability as Wikipedia defines it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:33, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Alyiaamir72: Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. First you would read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and disclose any conflict on your user page. Then you would read WP:NCORP to determine if the company meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, then you gather your reliable sources and follow the instructions at Help:Your first article. Also, I recommend investing more time improving existing articles before writing a new article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:40, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Alyiaamir72, the deleted Draft:Bluu patio furniture was unreferenced, overtly promotional and unacceptable for Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and comply with the mandatory Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure if it applies to you. Attempts to promote a business on Wikipedia will meet a vigorous pushback from experienced editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:16, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Feedback on some drafts

After coming across them as part of my college project, I decided to make a few articles on some notable families/people/orgs from my city (Pune, India). Two of them are up for review. I would love some constructive feedback on them and the few others that I have been working on. If these topics are not suitable for Wikipedia, I am happy to db-g7 them at anytime.

In review:

• Draft:Dajikaka Gadgil
• Draft:Sheetal Agashe (reverted to stub, as I was not sure the Marathi books/news sources in print would be acceptable)

Yet to submit:

• Draft:Paranjape Schemes (reverted to stub for the same reason for the bio above, still working on it)
• Draft:Mandar Agashe (kept at length the sources allow, happy to revert to a stub if that is more suitable)
• Draft:P. N. Gadgil Jewellers (got a lot to do, still working on it)

Rejected:

• Draft:Sarvatra Technologies (expanded post rejection with the seemingly reliable sources I had, came here for feedback upon speaking with the reviewer who rejected the draft)

In the month I have been editing, I have already successfully created several articles on similar individuals from Chitpavan brahmin families (my college project topic) and their works, and hope to make more on similar subjects whom I found notable in the course of my studies, if this action is welcome that is (I've been made aware by senior editors that the nature of the subjects I wish to contribute is strictly monitored by the project).

As I have stated in every COI suspicion against me, I am doing this out of my own nerdy interests and on my own time. I'm happy to abandon/delete these drafts if these topics are not suitable for inclusion/have no potential and go back to my real life studies. I am interested in these subjects, but I am not THAT interested to devote so much time editing them as I already have so far. Disrupting the Wiki project is also not something I wish to do. Please guide me on what I should do. Thanks! AngryMushroom (talk) 07:02, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi AngryMushroom! I went ahead and accepted Dajikaka Gadgil. It looks in exceptionally good shape—the only thing I saw was a very minor MOS:NICKNAME issue, a detail in the Manual of Style that even many veteran editors don't know about.

Assuming the others are similar, I don't think there's anything major you need to worry about in terms of article writing; just always have in mind the notability guidelines, and be aware that if you write about topics that are more borderline notability, they're more likely to run into opposition. This is unfortunately especially true of India-related articles, as many editors don't know Indian languages and other reasons. AfC is also going to be de facto stricter than if you just moved your articles into mainspace yourself and let new page patrol evaluate them.

The main concern that I think you have is that, when veteran editors encounter a newcomer writing articles as good as yours, suspicions of undisclosed paid editing immediately arise. To counter that, I'd suggest filling out your user page with some details about what types of articles you edit and why. I see that some of your past interactions have been stressful—sorry about that. Keep in mind that other Wikipedians are all human, and we're trying to make judgements about things like notability and which editors are UPEs to the best of our abilities, which means we can be wrong. Don't take it personally, and just explain yourself as needed, and if you're coming to it from the right place, things normally eventually work out. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:38, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

FYI - Sarvatra Technologies was Declined, which is less severe than Rejected, as the latter indicates that in the eyes of the reviewer, there is no potential to succeed. My general comment is that your drafts, while competent in composition and adherence to Wikipedia style, may be declined for lack of notability. Every person and every business are not necessarily article-worthy. David notMD (talk) 11:55, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi @David notMD, thanks for pointing that out. I completely understand that not everything is article-worthy, and I will be extra careful in the future when selecting my article subjects. Good day! AngryMushroom (talk) 13:56, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Sdkb, thanks for your reply. I have left you a message on my talk page. AngryMushroom (talk) 15:38, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Creating new wiki pages

How do i create a wikipedia page and could you run me through the process? Prajnawood (talk) 10:25, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Prajnawood If you want to try to make a WP-article, make sure you have the sources demanded at WP:GNG, otherwise you are wasting your time. Make sure to use inline references, this is essential. WP:REFBEGIN can help with that. Guidance on article-creating at WP:YFA, and general guidance at WP:TUTORIAL and WP:TWA. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:39, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Prajnawood, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. I'm afraid your question (which we get a lot here) is a bit like "How do I build a house and could you run me through the process?" The only sensible answer to that is "First learn the building trade". Writing a Wikipedia article maybe isn't quite as complex a task as building a house, but it is much harder than it looks, and most inexperienced Wikipedia editors who try it have a disappointing and frustrating time. For that reason I always advise spending a few months improving existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works before trying it. Happy editing! --ColinFine (talk) 11:17, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Prajnawood, I agree with Colin. Walk before you try running. A few people break that rule and succeed, but fewer than one in a hundred. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:00, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Signing inline vs. after line break

I have recently been signing my posts after a line break, like so: ...end of comment.<br />~~~~. My rationale is that, on talk pages, it can occasionally be difficult to determine if a paragraph in line with one above it is written by the same author as the above paragraph or by someone different, and it requires visually scanning the last line of the paragraph to determine if there is a signature there. A signature following a line break leaves no doubt that the end of one paragraph is the end of my comment.

However, I have seen an overwhelming majority of users signing their posts inline, such as this: ...end of comment. ~~~~ In fact, this post itself, even though it's written by me, will be signed inline; the signature is hard-coded into the edit form, and I'm intimidated by the all-caps instruction not to edit it enough to follow the instruction.

Are there any good reasons to use inline signatures over line-broken signatures? Is it just an unspoken rule that has become a custom? Am I even allowed to make this decision on my own, or have I overlooked a rule somewhere that expressly forbids or urges against my preference? I'm not overly attached to my method and would certainly change if there is a rule or urging against it, or even if there were a reasonably convincing argument for another method; however, while I appreciate customs and traditions, I feel they should have a better reason than "because that's how it's done".

Funny story: The preview for my edit (on my screen) displays my signature on the next line (like after a line break) due to the length of the sentence preceding it, so I'm writing another sentence to point out it is indeed inline. ~ JDCAce | talk ~ 10:27, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

JDCAce, the news website to which I pay most attention tells me of global heating, successes in a worldwide war against women's reproductive rights, environmental degradation caused by lithium mining, political and social repression in a large percentage of the nations of the world, and more. Feel free to put your signature in whichever position you prefer, and don't worry about it. -- Hoary (talk) 11:43, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@JDCAce: Welcome to the Teahouse. Like Hoary said, you can put your signature in whichever position you prefer, but all of the scripts for commenting that I've come across will auto-sign at the end of the last paragraph. If you'd like another method of viewing posts as discreet blocks, you might want to try Convenient Discussions, which has an option to reformat comments in its settings. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:36, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

It really is a matter of choice, but please put your sig at the end of the last para,not on a newline of its own, it looks far better, thanks.

-Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 15:41, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree: your example does look pretty bad! Thankfully, the <br /> method retains the paragraph's indentation, like in this comment's signature.
~ JDCAce | talk ~ 21:36, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

At least the shouty all-caps is working... ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:39, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate everyone's responses, and especially @Tenryuu:'s suggestion of Convenient Discussions! I'm beginning to lean toward inline style, given its overwhelming preference among the community. I believe I have seen over three months only a single other user employing the <br /> method! ~ JDCAce | talk ~ 21:36, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Pelagic 17:58, 6 September 2021 (UTC) ⁓ I've seen wikis where the convention was to sign before the comment. It looks fine when everyone is doing it, reminiscent of IRC or chat clients.

Pelagic ⁓ There may be software tools here which assume the timestamp will be the last element. The format of this paragraph works, but now it looks like I'm @-mentioning myself. 17:58, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Esav Marrakech

Hey guys I've been lately improving article that i wrote week ago and i still wonder when submited to review if maybe can accepted or still need some edits if it is help me out guys it really can help. Thanks youHellmuSa (talk) 12:50, 5 September 2021 (UTC) HellmuSa (talk) 12:50, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@HellmuSa: Well, you asked the same thing a couple of days ago, in Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1122#Draft:Esav Marrakech. You got some advice there; were there any parts of that advice that were unclear or hard to understand? The draft is waiting for review, Draft:Esav Marrakech. --bonadea contributions talk 13:08, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bonadea i already edited in order of the advise that have been given and i still feel like it missing something so yeah am conviced yet with my edited. thanks HellmuSa (talk) HellmuSa (talk) 13:12, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

My comment of three days ago: "Needs more content and refs about the school. Documenting that it exists and how it came to exist are not enough." You have done nothing to address this. David notMD (talk) 14:27, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Also, an editor changed the image caption from "View of ESAV school entry..." to "Artistic creation of ESAV school entry..." Is this an edited photograph? Is there a better possible caption? and who is John Ricke, who claims this as own work, uploaded to Commons a week before you created your draft? David notMD (talk) 16:05, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: I changed the caption based on the conversation now archived at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1122#Draft:Esav Marrakech. I'm open to editors using a better caption. GoingBatty (talk) 16:33, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

I just saw that Jhon Ricke is an account of a sockpuppeteer (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Asaidmanar), who has probably created HellmuSa. Bloomingbyungchan (talk) 16:17, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

HellmuSa denies, but is under scrutiny as a possible sockpuppet at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Asaidmanar. User:Jhonricke is a confirmed sock, indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 20:59, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Entry for Stakeholder Capitalism

Hi, one of the editors has made an arbitrary decision that Stakeholder Capitalism is the same as Stakeholder Theory on the basis that they are the same thing, when a simple Google search shows they are not the same, or everyone would be using the terms interchangeably.

https://www.google.com/search?q=stakeholder+capitalism&sxsrf=AOaemvJldTUqIUgvk7nSpI5SlhcuQ-kTMQ%3A1630852325850&source=hp&ei=5dQ0Ya3nMKKx5NoPhd65kA4&iflsig=ALs-wAMAAAAAYTTi9fC1kNvvoMIJfFshlkOwnQDytU-i&oq=stake&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAEYADIECCMQJzIECCMQJzIECCMQJzINCAAQgAQQhwIQsQMQFDIICAAQgAQQsQMyCAgAEIAEELEDMgUIABCABDIICC4QgAQQsQMyCAgAEIAEELEDMggIABCABBCxAzoICC4QsQMQgwE6CwguEIAEEMcBEKMCOgsILhCABBDHARDRAzoOCC4QgAQQsQMQxwEQ0QM6DgguEIAEELEDEMcBEKMCOgsILhCABBDHARCvAToLCAAQgAQQsQMQyQM6BQgAEJIDOgsILhCABBCxAxCDAVCK1gFYxNoBYLbmAWgAcAB4AIABcogB7wOSAQMzLjKYAQCgAQE&sclient=gws-wiz

Someone's attention to this matter would be appreciated.

Bolgerb1953 (talk) Bolgerb1953 (talk) 14:33, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bolgerb1953: Stakeholder capitalism currently redirects to Stakeholder theory. That is a fairly old redirect. The new, capitalized version that you wrote, Stakeholder Capitalism, also redirects there, because we shouldn't have identical titles displaying different things. The reason for redirection was WP:POVFORK; we don't have multiple articles about one subject that represent separate points of view; they should all be in the same article. The guideline WP:COMMONNAME determines how articles should be titled when there interchangeable possibilities for a title and this ngram result clearly shows "stakeholder theory" is most commonly seen in books. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:40, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

"'Added reference to the emerging concept of Stakeholder Capitalism, which is the more commonly used term today for the same concept.'" MrOllie (talk) 14:45, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Bolgerb1953 - You have raised this question in at least four places: here; on your talk page, at great length; at the AFC Help Desk; and at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard, twice. The length of your posts makes it difficult to address the issue. I am willing to try to conduct dispute resolution at DRN if you will agree that is the only place where the issue will be discussed, and if you will first answer a question that you were asked on your talk page, which is whether you have a conflict of interest. You have filibustered rather than answer that question. So: Do you have a conflict of interest, and are you willing to discuss in only one place? Robert McClenon (talk) 21:35, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thanks again. Please again understand I am very confused by the difference between these different forums, which are very difficult to navigate even when one has tried to answer the questions. I assume this is the forum for such a discussion.

1. I am not being paid by anyone for this article and my organization nor none of its work is mentioned in it, even though it should be. Again, I cannot figure out where or how to post this information other than here. A. I am a subject matter expert. See my Linked in page. While my organization has an interest in the subject, which makes us experts, we would reap no financial gain even if we were mentioned, no more than E. Freeman reaps a gain by being mentioned in Stakeholder Theory. B. My being an expert in the field of people management is no more a conflict than if I were called in to be an expert witness in a trial. C. My company provides services on human capital reporting, not on Stakeholder Capitalism per se.

A. This is a field being mentioned in the New York Times, Fortune, the Business Roundtable, World Economic Forum, McKinsey, EY, Council for Inclusive Capital, and many other--not one of which makes any mention of Stakeholder Theory.

2. Again, Stakeholder Capitalism encompasses the environment; Stakeholder Theory is one approach to addressing the people management. There are others, such as Enterprise Engagement, which is also in Wikipedia. A. Stakeholder theory is to Stakeholder Capitalism what quantum mechanics is to physics.

Thanks again for your help...I assure you that if I had known how to answer the gentleman's questions about conflict of interest, I would easily do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bolgerb1953 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

colors

how do i turn white boxes yellow Kcrules (talk) 16:06, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Kcrules: Welcome to the Teahouse! It appears you're having some problems working on List of Walt Disney Pictures films. The code that article uses to make table boxes yellow is style="background:#ffff81;". You may wish to review Help:Wikitable and/or post your suggestions on how to improve the article at Talk:List of Walt Disney Pictures films. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:39, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

The #ffff81 is a hex code for yellow (I presume). ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:41, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Question regarding WP:BLPSELFPUB on Pete Buttigieg article

Dear Teahouse,

This is AndrewPeterT. Although I have had a Wikipedia account for several years, I have not actively edited articles in a while. Moreover, I wanted to ask a question regarding a Wikipedia policy I have not encountered before, namely using an article subject as a self-published source.

I am currently in the process of improving the Wikipedia article for United States Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg. My hope is to eventually get his page to Good Article status. Recently, Secretary Buttigieg announced on Twitter the names of the two children he and his husband have adopted: https://twitter.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1434167993769111552

This is my question: Would citing Tweets like the one above be considered a violation of WP:BLPSELFPUB? In particular, because Buttigieg's Tweet involves a personal detail, I am worried it may be self-serving and therefore violate the first criteria. Also, other editors have already provided information and sources regarding the names of Buttigieg's children. I believe adding this Tweet will complement the references currently present in Buttigieg's article.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much! Hurricane Andrew (444) 18:15, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@AndrewPeterT, hello! IMO, adding the tweet is at best harmless here, since NYT is quoting the same tweet, with the names. My personal preference per WP:BLPNAME is to not include the names of the babies at all, but that's up to editorial consensus, the policy allows both "solutions." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:55, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer! Hurricane Andrew (444) 20:26, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@AndrewPeterT I took the actual given names out. They were just born, and have no inherent notability; there is no compelling reason to publish their names here. See WP:BLPNAME. --- Possibly ☎ 15:06, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

How do I remove my self from Wikipedia?

I don't want to be apart of this community anymore, How do I remove my self from Wikipedia? (Larryvnash) Larryvnash (talk) 19:03, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Larryvnash: The simplest way possible: just stop editing here. --CiaPan (talk) 19:09, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Larryvnash: If you wish to have Draft:Larry Nash deleted, just say so here, and someone will take care of that. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:18, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm new here

 Zrogo (talk) 21:05, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Zrogo Teahouse is a place to ask questions about how to edit or create articles, or what to do when someone leaves a message on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 21:21, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Zrogo Welcome to Wikipedia! If you have questions about editing, this is the place. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:22, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

User has been blocked as a disruption-only account. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:50, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Does LROCKjn have a question?

 LROCKjn (talk) 02:07, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Inserted a section title. David notMD (talk) 02:15, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Categories and Redirects

What policy or guideline discusses the use of categories for redirect pages? I've noticed that stuff like The Verge and Michael Brooks (political commentator) end up in categories like Category:Video podcasts when a magazine or person is clearly not a podcast. I was considering making a redirect for the podcasts and adding those to the category instead. TipsyElephant (talk) 02:46, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Not sure for Michael Brooks but for The Verge, they do have multiple audio podcasts as seen here. As for category, maybe it was added wrongly or the editor that added it got confused with the videos that The Verge published frequently on their YouTube. I don't remember The Verge having any video podcasts be it on their website or on YouTube, maybe they have in the past but I'm not certain about that. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 02:55, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Hi there! There's lots of information at Wikipedia:Categorizing_redirects. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:56, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Unique titles

How do I change the wording of a title? If I write a new article about Bill Jones, and there is already an article called Bill Jones, I would like mine to be "Bill Jones (butcher)" and the older one "Bill Jones (baker)". How do I do that? What happens if someone doesn't like "baker"? Roryjohnston (talk) 04:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Barack Obama is well known. If I want to create an article about Barack Obama (butcher), I do not rename the older one "Barack Obama (politician)". Actually even if he weren't well known I wouldn't do that. If there's just one article, about a baker, or politician, let it keep its name, and have a disambiguating "hatnote" at its head. See for example the top of the article John Bulmer. If this approach threatens to become laborious for the reader, we start a separate "disambiguation" page. -- Hoary (talk) 05:17, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@Roryjohnston: In the example Hoary provided, President Obama is considered the "primary topic". Other times, there is no primary topic, so Bill Jones is a disambiguation page with links to articles with disambiguators. For more information on this, see Wikipedia:Disambiguation. GoingBatty (talk) 06:02, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

But for a user who has created few articles, Roryjohnston, I would strongly advise using the articles for creation process: this has the added advantage that you don't need to worry about the eventual name of the article, as the reviewer who accepts it will sort that out. --ColinFine (talk) 10:55, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Did not have the more/move tab when I log in

Hi,

My name is Raymond.

I wanted to change the current title of my page. But cannot do it because I do not have the "more/move" tab needed to execute this change.

Can you advise please? 202.80.43.236 (talk) 05:04, 6 September 2021 (UTC) 202.80.43.236 (talk) 05:04, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

You mean, you're Raymond?

Whoever you are, your user page can't be moved. (There is a procedure for being a user and their user page, etc, being renamed.) Or are you asking about the title of an article? -- Hoary (talk) 05:12, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary For the record: The above IP edit was not done by me. Raymond (talk) 05:20, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm not surprised, Raymond. Sorry to have bothered you. (Oh dear: by writing this, I'm bothering you again. Please ignore this message) -- Hoary (talk) 08:22, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and guess that this IP's name is Raymond and wishes to get a userpage with "Raymond as it's name." _Signed,Pichemist ^(Talk) 14:53, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

You can't move a page until your account is autoconfirmed, which usually happens when your account is 4 days old and you have made at least 10 edits. Only logged-in edits count, not posts like this one where you are logged out. You can also request help with the move at WP:RM RudolfRed (talk) 05:14, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Railway interchange template

How to create a railway interchange template? For example the railway interchange template for chennai suburban railway is {{rint|chennai|suburban}} or {{…|chennai|s}}. How do I create one for a different system? Footy2000 (talk) 07:43, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Footy2000. Looking at Template:Rail-interchange, I don't think you need to create a new template but rather add a new location code to the existing one. Perhaps you could ask at Template talk:Rail-interchange? Cordless Larry (talk) 08:25, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@Footy2000 If you asking for missing icons you want for use in an article for different railway system other than the existing Chennai Suburban Railway ones, Template talk:Rail-interchange is better place to discuss about it. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 08:33, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

I will. Thank you.Footy2000 (talk) 09:43, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Boris Savinkov

hiya, i was trying to edit a page about a russian revolutionary called Boris Savinkov but it was reverted. see, in the popular Hearts of Iron IV mod Kaiserreich: Legacy of the Weltkrieg, an alternate history scenario where germany wins WW1. Boris Savinkov features prominently, as he can become dictator of Russia within the game. i am a regular in the kaiserreich community, whichis how i know about savinkov, so, as it was a cultural depiction of him, i thought i would put kaiserreich in his popular culture section. i also cited the official wiki for the mod as my source. unfortunately, my edit was removed and im not sure why. i dont think it broke any copyrights and it was verifiable. Chapayev478 (talk) 14:01, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Boris Savinkov, and the addition to popular culture was reverted by a 'bot (an automated program). Can anyone weigh in on this? David notMD (talk) 14:11, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@Chapayev478: Welcome to the Teahouse. You said you cited the official wiki for the mod as [your] source. Unfortunately, wikis are not considered reliable sources as they are user-generated and thus not verifiable. Wikipedia also can't use your personal knowledge, as that would be considered original research. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:12, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

May i create pages which has been deleted before.

May i create articles which has been deleted before with reason (created by a blocked or banner user). I saw many that are eligible but is deleted. I also got requests from person whose articles got deleted because of same reason. As i mentioned above. Thank you JamesAlfa (talk) 14:41, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, JamesAlfa, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, if you believe that the people meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then you may create articles about them. However, I would caution you:

1. Creating a new encyclopaedia article is much more difficult than it appears, and I always advise new editors to spend a few months improving some of our six million existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works before they try it;
2. When you do try it, I strongly advise using the articles for creation process and creating a draft; and
3. It's not clear who you have been requested by, but you may very well have a conflict of interest: this doesn't prevent you from working on the articles in question, but you must understand the limitations this may cause, and should nbe open about it. Remember that an article about somebody does not belong to that person, is not in any way for that person's benefit, and should be based on what people unconnected with them have published about them, not on what they or their associates say or want to say. --ColinFine (talk) 15:39, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Sir, ColinFine I'm new to Wikipedia i know, i will get all the knowledge about creation of Wikipedia. I got so many articles that could be created because that Articles are of notable persons, Eg - Shadab Chauhan and Vishal Bhujbal and 2-3 more that could be created. I only want to ask now is that, if i created then i will not be blocked by anyone to do so because i hesitate for doing that. Please check and answer me. Thank you JamesAlfa (talk)

JamesAlfa: you won't get blocked just for recreating a deleted article; but it will be up to you to justify the notability of the subject, which is why I strongly advise you to create a draft and put it through review. Make sure you understand what Wikipedia means by notability, which is not quite the same as it means in normal use. Who is it that has asked you to create these articles? If it is the subjects, or their associates, then you definitely have a conflict of interest. Shadab Chauhan has been deleted twice, once because it was created by a banned user, but before that for being unambiguous promotion or advertising. Make sure your read WP:YFA before you start. --ColinFine (talk) 16:42, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine No sir, i joined Wikipedia to contribute not to earn. I was learning wikipedia since 6-7 years. I got a best platform to know anything about any. No one asked me to create who are associated with Shadab Chauhan of any one. Actually Shadab Chauhan is a Politician from Peace Party of India, he is well notable. That's why i wanted to create his Wikipedia and nothing else. Thank you sir, for sharing such valuable informations to me. JamesAlfa (talk)

@JamesAlfa Please sign your comments properly with 4 tildes ~~~~. Do not use 3. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:10, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

QwerfjklOk sir that was my mistake. JamesAlfa (talk) 02:26, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Hi Sorry I’m new to this. I thought I cited reliable, industry neutral sources for information (magazines, articles, press releases), all cited correctly, however my article has been rejected “This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified.” TheSangster (talk) 15:44, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

TheSangster Hello and welcome to the Teahouse Press releases are not independent reliable sources, because they are put out by the subject itself. The same goes for brief mentions or announcements of routine business activities.

It appears that you have a conflict of interest and are a paid editor. Please read those policies and make the required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 16:13, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @TheSangster: You are mistaken in thinking that press releases qualify as independent, reliable sources; see Wikipedia:Independent sources#Press releases. Many of the citations in your draft, like those to "articles" at Recruitment International and Recruiter sites, are clearly to material that was promulgated by the company itself and thus are not independent sources. Wikipedia isn't interested in what the company says, or wants to say, about itself; you need to find sources with no connection at all to Itris. If you want to discuss why the draft was declined further, you can ask the declining reviewer, User:Umakant Bhalerao, for his rationale on his talk page. Deor (talk) 16:16, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Confused on deletion.

I moved the article of Shahajas Thekkan (an association football player) to the draft space, as he fails WP:NFOOTY. The draft is here. I don't know what SD tag to be placed to delete Shahajas Thekkan redirect from the mainspace. Will someone help me out? Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?} 16:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@Ken Tony: Hi there! Seems that WP:R2 would work. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:34, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply GoingBatty. Someone else did it, but this would help me in future. Cheers! Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?} 17:10, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@Ken Tony: Is it fair to say someone else did it fastily?  ;-) GoingBatty (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Ha, Yeah. XD. Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?}

Creating an article when the title already goes to another article

I would like to do an article about the horror movie A Serial Killer's Guide to Life and when I tried typing that name in the search box it sent me instead to an article about the lead actress, Katie Brayben. At the top it says:

Katie Brayben

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from A Serial Killer's Guide to Life)

At Help:Your first article it says this is a "redirect."

I've been editing for a few months and people have helped me here at the Teahouse and at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Horror. I know how to find reliable sources and cite them and how to write neutrally. Editors have given me a lot of encouragement and positive feedback. So I think I'm ready to start an article. This movie has 92% at Rotten Tomatoes, a notable star (Katie Brayben), and it streams on Showtime, Amazon Prime and Hulu.

Using the Article Wizard at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_wizard I got to the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_wizard/CreateDraft. There's a box to type in the name of the article I would like to write (A Serial Killer's Guide to Life) but I'm worried that if I do that and hit "Create a new article draft" that there will be some sort of technical conflict since that title is currently a redirect.

What should I do? The Horror, The Horror (talk) 16:42, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, {U|The Horror, The Horror}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. No, that's the best thing to do. It is possible to get to the redirect and edit it into an article, but unless you are experienced enough to create an article in one go that will meet the basic criteria, it's a much better idea to create a draft. When you get the draft in a suitable state and submit it for review, the accepting editor will handle moving it over the redirect. --ColinFine (talk) 16:46, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Repinging The Horror, The Horror. --ColinFine (talk) 16:47, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, ColinFine! So by using the Wizard box, it crates a draft that I can submit for review. I'll try that! The Horror, The Horror (talk) 16:49, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@The Horror, The Horror: I updated the Katie Brayben to include A Serial Killer's Guide to Life so readers understand why they were redirected. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:12, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, GoingBatty! You've been like my godfather on WIkipedia! I've made the draft but I see there are 1,200 ahead of me! So about 4 weeks from now I may get an answer, it says. Oh, well! I;ve been too busy to even come to Wikipedia in over a week, so the time should go fast. I did see "Warning: The page A Serial Killer's Guide to Life redirects to Katie Brayben. Please ensure it is not a copy or that this page is located to the correct title." Thank you, everyone! The Horror, The Horror (talk) 18:48, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@The Horror, The Horror: Nice job with the draft! Drafts are reviewed in no specific order. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 18:55, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Best steps to create page on English Wikipedia that exists in German Wikipedia

I am looking for guidance on the best/proper steps to take when creating a Wikipedia page that exists in German Wikipedia. The person in question (Ulrike Lohmann) will meet criteria #3 of WP:PROF, so I am not concerned about establishing notability. She has a page on the German Wikipedia site de:Ulrike Lohmann.

From reading through the various Wikipedia pages, I found some information at WP:TFOLWP and the information on the template for {{translated page}} for the talk page. Is it acceptable to use a Google Translate version as the first version on the English Wikipedia? Then, as a next step, I think it would make sense to edit the page to get everything into better English and update the article.

Is this an OK plan, or are there other things I should consider?

I recognize that one alternate plan is to make a new page from scratch, but that doesn't seem very efficient. DaffodilOcean (talk) 19:54, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Translating German Wikipedia, but be sure you know both English and German; machine translation is not allowed on it's own. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:15, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@DaffodilOcean: See also Help:Translation#Avoid machine translations. If you want to use Google Translate to produce a rough version, it's best to copy what it produces and emend it in your user space, moving the article to mainspace only whan you're satisfied that its accurately translated into proper idiomatic English and acceptably sourced. Deor (talk) 20:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

I do speak some German, so I am comfortable with the translation (thanks also for the link on avoiding machine translations). Once I have the translation set, am I OK if I put the {{translated page}} note on the talk page, or are there other steps I need to take? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaffodilOcean (talk • contribs)

My comments would be: (1) Google-translate does make mistakes in translation from German, especially with technical language where word-for-word translation leads to incomprehensible stuff that makes no sense in an English-language context. For example, government institutions that don't exist in the English speaking world sound a bit daft without any explanation. Google-translate will also translate people's names, and other things that shouldn't be changed. (2) Yes, it's sufficient to include the template. The point is to acknowledge the original authors, so by pointing at the page that you have translated, you provide a route for a reader to go back and see who wrote the German text. (3) You may encounter pictures that are not in wikicommons. (4) Sometimes it's difficult to know what to translate, and what to leave. The German name of a company might need to be given in original German so that people can search for it by name; but it might be helpful to translate if the name gives an indication of what it actually does. (5) You may need to change some wiki-links into inter-wiki links that point for the moment at the German equivalent, but will automatically point to the English article if someone gets round to writing it. (6) Templates on the German wikipedia often have different parameters, names and formats to their equivalents on the UK wikipedia, so expect to change them all. This includes pictures. The best thing with pictures is to find a suitable bit of format in an English article, and paste the German file links into the English-style picture template, together with translated captions, and then see if the picture looks right, and appears. If it doesn't appear at all, it's not in commons. Good luck!

Elemimele (talk) 21:10, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Excellent - I think this gives me all I need. Thanks for the help (and I apologize for forgetting to sign the second question I had). --DaffodilOcean (talk) 21:26, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@DaffodilOcean: I've done this once using Google Translate for a German article (Paul Trappen), and it is a painfully slow process, not simply copy-and-paste. I started with the Google translation, then I went through the translation of every cited source to get a better context around a translated sentence from the German Wikipedia article. Once I was confident I understood the gist of it, I rewrote the Google-translated sentence in my own words if necessary. I think my English version of the article came out better than the German original, but it was not an easy task to create an English article "correctly" using Google Translate. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:31, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@Anachronist: - OK, thanks for the tip and the link to a page where this has been done. This is helpful. --DaffodilOcean (talk) 10:48, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

How do you purge a Username and start a new account?

How do you purge a Username and start a new account? 2600:6C64:7D3F:A12B:DA3:E10F:9237:60DA (talk) 21:06, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! You cannot delete a username, per Wikipedia:Username policy#Deleting and merging accounts. You can just abandon it and create a new account (presuming you're not engaging in block evasion. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:26, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

If you look above the section that GoingBatty linked you to, you will also see the procedure for renaming your existing account.--Khajidha (talk) 11:25, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

On Uploading Logos of companies and organizations

Should I recreate a logo/illustration on my own based on the organization's current logo, or that will be a copyright infringement too?  SX3001 (talk) 21:09, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@SX3001: Welcome to the Teahouse! There's no need to recreate a logo. You can upload it as a non-free file using Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

SX3001, adding to the answer, if a logo is complex enough to be subject to copyright (not all are), then reproducing it by any means is a copyright violation. Threshold of originality is the relevant legal concept.Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Cullen328 Thank you for prodiving me with the technical term of such a copyright violation. GoingBatty Thank you too; So I can download the logo from a company/organization's website and then use it in a page thanks to the non-free file disclosure without any problem or the image ending up getting deleted? I've uploaded a logo once and it got deleted on this page—I've downloaded the logo from the company's website and I've uploaded it and credited the work and the sources to their website. SX3001 (talk) 00:57, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

SX3001, the Omeros logo was removed from the article because it had an inadequate non-free use rationale. You should use Template:Non-free use rationale logo and complete all of the relevant fields. The file was later deleted because it was no longer being used in an article. An additional clarification: there are many types of pages on Wikipedia, but use of non-free images is limited only to live encyclopedia articles. They cannot be used in draft articles, for example, and should only be added after a draft is moved to the main space, and only in the specific article specified in the rationale. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:36, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi SX3001. Just going to add that non-free use of a file isn't automatic and there are ten criteria that need to be satisfied each time you use a non-free file. Non-free logos are generally OK to use per item 2 of WP:NFCI when they are used for primary identification purposes at the top of or in the main infobox of stand-alone Wikipedia article about whatever the logo represents. So, for example, if you wanted to use the logo of a company in the main infobox of a Wikipedia article about said company, then that's probably OK. Other types of non-free uses or use in other types of articles, however, can be much harder to justify. For example, if you wanted to use an non-free logo for a company in an article about the company's founder, then it would be much harder to justify. In addition, former or historical logos can be particularly hard to justify because they typically are no longer used for primary identification purposes. Generally, such a logo itself needs to have be subjected of sourced critical commentary somehwere within the article as explained here for it to be considered OK to use. It's typically not considered enough just to say an organization changes its branding; rather, there needs to article content specifically corresponding to the change in logo that discusses reasons for the change (e.g. any controversies associated with the change) that not seeing the logo would make the corresponding article content quite hard to understand. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:16, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

The above said, uploading a logo is fairly easy. Start at Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, chose "Upload a non-free file", > "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use." > "This is a logo of an organization, company, brand, etc." and follow the other instructions that appear. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:08, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

unreferenced or blp unsourced on Amanda Robins

recently Template:Unreferenced is added. this is biograghy of living person, so can i replace it with Template:BLP unsourced? 28au21 (talk) 01:37, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@28au21: Welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, you are correct - you may change {{Unreferenced}} to {{BLP unsourced}} on a biography of a living person. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:56, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Reliabilites

Hello, I was wondering if things such as verified youtube channels and twitter accounts are realiable, and if accounts that are generally accepted as the verified accounts other channels are also reliable. Timothy Darrell (talk) 02:44, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@Timothy Darrell: Welcome to the Teahouse! It depends on what you're trying to do. If WP:YOUTUBE and WP:RSPYT don't answer your question, please provide more specifics. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:59, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: I'm specifically talking about a minecraft youtuber with a verified checkmark on youtube and twitter and tweets/vids/streams that isn't self-serving. Example: tweets that show their birthday (from an adult youtuber), Streams that show their POV in an event, and videos about an SMP(Survival Multiplayer). Timothy Darrell (talk) 03:23, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@Timothy Darrell: Maybe you're talking about Draft:Technoblade (Youtuber)? Per WP:BASIC, I suggest you focus on finding multiple independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of Technoblade, and paraphrase/summarize what they say, to demonstrate that Technoblade meet's Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability", so your draft can be approved. If you haven't done so already, please review the instructions in Help:Your first article. Leave minutia such as their birthday for later. GoingBatty (talk) 04:19, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

reference

i don't know how to add a reference, please explain Npk482376 (talk) 05:53, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Npk482376! There's guidance at Help:Referencing for beginners, or at Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/1 if you're using VisualEditor. Feel free to let us know if you have any specific questions or want help with a specific page. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:26, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

How can I change my Username?

Hi there I'm a new user and struggling on my own for some time now to get started with my own writings to be published. I'm a writer anyway mainly in Bengali, but write in English too. First thing, I need to change my username. How can I do that? Could anybody here kindly help me regarding this? FKTipu (talk) 09:09, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

WP:Changing username --David Biddulph (talk) 09:17, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Material rejected because "that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations."

Hi!

I have a little trouble posting a material about a person. Material was rejected because it did not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations.

Checked for help and it looks like I have not added necessary citations according to Wikipedia articles of Biographies of living persons.

Wanted to know - what citations are necessary and where to ad them (footnote)?

Article itself may be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Juris_Hmelnickis

Hope, somebody can help me with this issue. EgilsDoro (talk) 09:15, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@EgilsDoro, hello! These should help: WP:REFBEGIN and the parts about referencing at WP:TUTORIAL. If there's stuff you can't cite, like date of birth, delete it, WP:BLP is a strict policy. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:58, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

You should also make sure your draft meets the demands at WP:BASIC. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:00, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Question about articles

Hello! I have a question.

Can articles about a sub category of a bigger topic include information that may already be in another article, or should a Wiki article be linked instead? MD380 (talk) 11:03, 7 September 2021 (UTC) MD380 (talk) 11:03, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

The same information can absolutely appear in more than one article. Assuming that it is relevant to each article and is not being given undue weight in them. --Khajidha (talk) 11:27, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@MD380 That's a broad question, hard to give a meaningful answer. Consider, for example, Star Trek/Star Trek: The Original Series. There is some of the same info, but the subarticle has focus on it's own topic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:29, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Other examples - for some of the minerals which are also essential nutrients, there are articles "_____ in biology" that can be considered as sub-categories of the mineral articles. The biology articles have a link to the mineral articles, but also contain enough content about the minerals so that it is not necessary to go back and forth between the two. (And, the main articles have some content about biology in addition to the link to the biology article.) David notMD (talk) 11:59, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Level of technical sophistication of mathematical articles?

A couple of editors and I have had an argument about a reading of WP:TECHNICAL that's come to something of a standstill, and I'd like to make sure I'm taking a reasonable position before I commit to it any more deeply. The disagreement is over whether a given mathematical article should be written entirely at an elementary level, e.g. towards an audience of 10th graders in a U.S. high school, given that the subject is covered in sources at that level. My position is that WP:TECHNICAL implies we should try to balance elementary and specialist material to the extent that they differ in our pool of sources, as the subject is also of interest all the way up to professional mathematicians and is covered in sources as far as that level. Like, the article should be broadly accessible to a general reader, but should include specialist material in addition to more elementary material to the extent that they clash, so that it can be useful to both audiences. WP:TERTIARYUSE also seems to indicate to me that the "gold standard" for sources for any mathematical article would be widely-used textbooks at the undergraduate-to-graduate level, which implies to me that the article should be a survey of material around that level. Do I have the right idea or am I misinterpreting these pages? Mesocarp (talk) 11:34, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

The place for discussion is the talk page of the article, Talk:Polynomial in this case. If you fail to reach consensus there, dispute resolution is an option. You might also discuss at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics if you feel that the concern isn't specific to the one article. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:54, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

I see, so the meaning of policy etc. in that context needs to be hashed out via consensus around the article—like, the larger community doesn't already have some sort of strong guideline to follow in this context? I guess from that angle, my position might be valid, but it depends on consensus there? I think where I'm coming from makes sense, but I am in the minority right now. Mesocarp (talk) 12:12, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

How to handle existing redirect for different person

I am not sure of the protocol here. I have a page ready to move to the mainspace (Draft:Susan Schwartz). The draft I am working on is about a scientist.

In 2011, someone setup a redirect for a different Susan Schwartz that goes to the page for Friends of Five Creeks. Do I delete the existing Susan Schwartz redirect? Do I copy my text onto the existing Susan Schwartz redirect? Do I move the existing redirect to another page that has a title something like 'Susan Schwartz (non-profit leader)'? Some other option?

Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance. DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:01, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Turned down.

I wrote a Wiki page for a former MMA fighter, its been turned down. I don't understand as there's tons of wiki pages for fighters (mma/boxing). I feel I have provided decent bio material, better than most wiki pages for fighters & the references used are legit interviews with the athelete from a journalist.

I would add his career statistics, but I don't have the knowledge how to create the templates that u see in wiki pages for MMA fighters and boxers. If someone added the template I would fill in the details. 31.111.56.179 (talk) 12:53, 7 September 2021 (UTC)