Wikipedia:Teahouse

GreenMeansGo, 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

Where can I express my sincere love for the encyclopedia?

There are good days. There are bad, but overall, I just love you all. Thanks for doing all of what you all do. The hosts, the contributors. Everyone. Feel free to revert this after posting. Just wanted to say a great big ole "Thanks!" to all of you.  ♥Th78blue (They/Them/Their • talk)♥ 22:17, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@Th78blue: There's no need to revert that. It's a great sentiment to hear, and one I can wholeheartedly support. We all have our off days and all have our "this is brilliant days". With your 9,000 edits to date, you've made a great contribution here. So, "thank you", too. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:59, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@Th78blue: Thanks for the sentiment (there's not enough warmth here, sometimes IMO), and thanks for all of your work and time you've spent to improve Wikipedia. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 21:19, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks both of you! I love it here, and plan to stay. I was a LONG time wikipedia reader, but only made an account not that long ago. I am quickly racking up the edits though given how obsessed I have become with the whole thing we have going on here. It is addictive. The only discouraging aspect can be interacting with controlling or grumpy editors that feel they "own" a page or a process. Other than that though, I'm in love! ♥Th78blue (They/Them/Their • talk)♥ 14:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

How to publish a draft article

FYI

 – Formatted header. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 02:48, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I have created a draft article in my userspace.

What are the steps to have that published?

John Kaunitz John Kaunitz (talk) 02:46, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, Kaunitzj. I'm afraid your draft has several problems. First, it should have been written in draft space or your sandbox, not on your user page. Second, it appears to be an autobiography. Third and most importantly, it has absolutely no reliable, independent, published secondary sources backing up its facts; every single statement, especially in a biography of a living person, needs to be backed up with an appropriate source. I recommend you take a look at WP:FIRST, WP:AUTO, and WP:Verifiability. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 02:55, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

It also appears to be copied almost exactly from the site located at the included external link. I don't see any copyright statement on that site, but lacking a statement that the text is under a compatible license, I think your draft may be a copyright infringement, and might end up quickly deleted. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 03:00, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. Although I must confess I don't completely understand. I have created the article in my sandbox but moved it to a separate page to give it a title. I can move it to the Draft space it that is what I should do.

The article is supported by the references at the end all of which are published secondary sources that verify the content of the article. Can you please explain what the problem is. There is no article on Wikipedia for Adaptive Noise Cancelling that explains the concept or points to the history of its invention. The article is intended to address this deficiency. THE ISDE website I refer to is my website so I am not sure what needs to be done to alleviate any copyright concerns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaunitzj (talk • contribs) 04:29, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:Kaunitzj/Adaptive Noise Cancelling  melecie  t - 04:37, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

@Kaunitzj If someone who owns or manages a website which they are citing as a source, they would need to place a permanent statement on that website (or on the relevant pages, at least) releasing that content under a CC-By-SA licence, permitting its re-use, even commercial. Only then may it be copied verbatim into Wikipedia. Nick Moyes (talk) 04:46, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I see you mean User:Kaunitzj/Adaptive Noise Cancelling! I'm sorry, I thought you were talking about what you'd posted on your user page. Unfortunately, you still need to work on your referencing; you should back up everything in the article with inline citations, not just a few sentences here and there. Also, I see that the first three references cited are apparently your own work, which may be a problem - see WP:SELFCITE. I'm not sure if adaptive noise cancelling is notable as a concept. If you just want to submit it anyway, you should move it to a draft and then add {{subst:submit}} to the top.Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 04:47, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Alternatively, Kaunitzj, you can simply place {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} at the top of your user space draft and the reviewer will move it to draft space for you (see Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft). Or you could simply move the article directly to mainspace yourself, but I think you'd run into some problems - it may get moved back to draft or proposed for deletion. Submitting it to AfC is generally safer. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 05:14, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

@Kaunitzj I advise against submitting your draft for review at this time. The following need addressing:

• The lead is way too detailed. It should be a succinct summary in two paragraphs (See WP:LEAD).
• The main content is way, way, way too long and far, far, far too technical.
• WP:NOTABILITY needs to be based on sources independent of you, the author of these references. Show me how the ‘world at large’ has noticed and written about this concept. The only source ‘’not’’ written by you is a book mentioned in the last few sentences. Find three others that talk about it, and base the article on them, not on scientific papers or websites you’ve published.
• Aim your language at a 16-17 yr high school student, not at someone who has already immersed themselves in a subject for a lifetime.
• Your own userpage makes your WP:COI fairly evident, but is written in the 3rd person, not the first person. Please fix that, and make it a single, brief paragraph, not a detailed biography.
• Less is more.

Hope this helps Nick Moyes (talk) 05:58, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I would echo Nick Moyes' recommendation that you word it as though you were trying to retain the attention of a high school student who didn't have a particular interest driving them to your subject. A normal conversational tone that's neither too dry nor too boosterish. Right now, it reads as though you're writing for a patent examiner, which is its own, very specialized, tone, and not the one you want to strike here. But it's an inherently interesting subject, so I think an article is warranted, and it will be good reading when you're done. Bill Woodcock (talk) 14:13, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Please help with citations for a new article.

Citation and new article help I am trying to create a biography for a living person, Sir Edward Banayoti Sawiris. This is my first Wikipedia article, and I am lost. There is a suspect page about him that someone has published here as a revenge mechanism. The content is not accurate. I have references and fact-checked everything. Can anyone, please help me upload it? Thank you J.S. Wolfe JSWolfeAuthor (talk) 19:40, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

•  Courtesy link: Edward Banayoti Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 19:50, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, JSWolfeAuthor. That seems to be a contentious article, subject to much... contentiousness. As you've already found out, wholesale replacement is not an option. You can, however, make edit requests on the talk page (Talk:Edward Banayoti), backing up your requested changes with reliable, independent, published sources. See Wikipedia:Edit requests. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 21:58, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I note in passing that the long draft in JSWolfeAuthor's sandbox contains a plethora of details that surely came directly from the subject, and the entire draft has no inline citations to references at all. JSWolfeAuthor would be advised to study Wikipedia's policies on Conflict of interest, Paid Editing, Reliable Sources and Referencing. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.90.66 (talk) 07:25, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Swatantra maharjan

 Swatantra Maharjan (talk) 04:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Sir, this is a Wendy's Wikipedia discussion page. Explodicator7331 (talk) 16:14, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Crompton Greaves Consumer Electricals Limited is notable but rejected

Draft:Crompton Greaves Consumer Electricals Limited is notable but rejected. Company is registered and also listed on Bombay Stock Exchange and National Stock Exchange of India. Help to improve and resubmit.--PQR01 (talk) 05:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@PQR01 In the notability guidelines WP:NCOMPANY it says that being WP:LISTED in stock exchanges is not enough to establish notability. Please read the helpful comments left at the draft. In general at the Tea House, we are not interested in directly editing the 6 million existing articles or countless drafts proposed. Rather we focus on pointing you in the right direction in the sea of policies and guidelines. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Why is my article deleted?

I write all by myself and also add news paper links. Bivash Maji (talk) 06:24, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Which article was that, Bivashmaji? --ColinFine (talk) 12:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Bivashmaji: Your Talk Page has numerous entries explaining why various articles you created or contributed to have been deleted. You recently created Kumari Shailja without going through articles for creation and it will, in my opinion, not survive the new pages patrol because it is poorly written and does not demonstrate she is notable enough. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:55, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

What is going on? ha.wikipedia.org ??

I received an message from a bot, went to another language wikipedia that i don't understand, does this happen randomly?

https://ha.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dawit_S_Gondaria Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 06:45, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria: Many other language Wikipedias will automatically insert a welcome message when you first access it while logged in. You don't have to worry about it. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 08:25, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

What is autoconfirmed user?

 --Spotanus (talk) 08:44, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Spotanus Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. An autoconfirmed user's account is four days old with 10 edits or more. For example, you are autoconfirmed. 331dot (talk) 08:52, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

And it gives you certain extra access privileges. For example, you have to be autoconfirmed to create new pages in article space, move pages, and edit semi-protected pages. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:32, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

how do you stop the constant funding calls?

for people who are incredibly poor and can barely access a computer, these are really dismaying. has wikipedia considered looking into contacting wealthy individuals?

 68.146.192.74 (talk) 08:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I hope no one is making phone calls to you soliciting donations for Wikipedia. If you are referring to the message banners that appear, Wikipedia has no way to know the financial status of users. If you want to suppress the messages, you may create a (free) account and turn them off in the account preferences. Wikipedia does not want you or anyone to donate if they are unable to. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Review my wikipedia draft (taking too Long)

Please review my Wikipedia article draft.I have been waiting for long . If anyone is free please, help me out.Thank you have a nice day! Garryishere (talk) 10:09, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

You only submitted Draft:Suraj Beera today? It has been rejected and will be speedy deleted as blatant promotion. Theroadislong (talk) 10:14, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Garryishere: If you're asking about Draft:Suraj Beera, you can see that it has been rejected and will likely be deleted soon because Wikipedia is no place for advertising. ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 10:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Removing answers you don't like and shouting about other articles isn't going to get your draft approved. ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 10:33, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

OP blocked as a sock: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Andrewsuraj1. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 04:07, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Style question regarding internal links

Hi. I notice that there are two ways people tend to handle internal linking: sometimes by replacing the link with a complete word, and sometimes by breaking the word halfway through. For instance, if I were discussion Parisian people, I could either link to the article Paris like so: Parisians or like so: Parisians. I recognize that Wikipedia special-cases the latter, to make the difference invisible to readers, so this is more a question of editing style than anything else.

Thanks, Bill Woodcock (talk) 10:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Bwoodcock: I think it's a matter of preference or convenience; [[Paris]]ians requires fewer keystrokes and (to me) feels more intuitive than [[Paris|Parisians]]. ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 10:40, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Bwoodcock: I would say, just do whichever you prefer. If someone else cares enough to change it, then let them. Maproom (talk) 11:44, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

If you link plural to singular without 's' then I recommend [[woodcock]]s for source readability. Don't change existing uses to [[woodcock|woodcocks]]. Other than that, it doesn't matter much. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:49, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

grey rectangles

Ok, I'm not a new user. But this question is best asked in context: what causes the grey rectangles on the lines above and below my response to the previous question? Maproom (talk) 11:48, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

They've gone. I'm still puzzled. Maproom (talk) 11:49, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Maproom: I fixed a syntax error in my reply to Bwoodcock that had inadvertently left part of my reply and yours as preformatted code. ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 11:52, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! Maproom (talk) 12:24, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Specifically, there was a missing </code> and then a couple of carriage returns. Bill Woodcock (talk) 12:26, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Signposts

I had subscribed for the signpost. Why did not I get it delivered. I have my the name of the page I want the signpost to be delivered at the bottom of this list. Why did not I get the post? Itcouldbepossible ^{(Talk) (Contributions) (Log)} 12:29, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Please be patient. You can see on the current issue page that the current issue is dated 29 November – two days before you subscribed. You will get the next issue. ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 12:42, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@ClaudineChionh Thanks Claudine Itcouldbepossible ^{(Talk) (Contributions) (Log)} 14:26, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

hometown

 12.247.77.10 (talk) 13:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, do you have a question? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 13:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Limited permission to use a copyrighted image

Hi, I recently reached out to the copyright owner of an image for permission to use the image in a Wikipedia article. They said they would be OK for it to be used in the Wikipedia article, but wanted to make sure that it didn't involve "irrevocably releasing the source material" as per suggested by Wikipedia in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission I would appreciate some advice as to what my next steps should be with regards to this image. Should I just upload it under 'fair use'? Does that mean that the original copyright owner can be sure that they retain the copyright to the image, and it isn't under a free license?

For specifics, the article I am working on is Raoul Whitfield's. I reached out to the copyright owner of the covers of the Black Mask, a magazine he wrote for. I asked for permission to use a cover of an issue that featured an illustration of his story. They said OK but under the aforementioned conditions. I would love to be able to use the image for the article, but of course I want to make sure I am going about it in the proper way.

Thank you for anybody who is able to help! Kting97 (talk) 14:04, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kting97. If the copyright owners are not willing to license the image under a licence such as CC-BY-SA, then the only way it can be used is under Fair Use, and their permission is irrelevant. But Wikipedia's version of Fair Use is very restrictive: if you wish to use an image that way, you must ensure that the image and its use meets all the criteria listed in the WP:non-free content criteria. It is possible that a magazine cover might be shown in that way. You will need to explain the justification in detail when you upload the image (to Wikipedia, and not to Commons, which does not accept non-free media). See image use policy. --ColinFine (talk) 14:25, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Kting97 Welcome. First things first: Unless you want the illustration for an article on the subject of a photo, my understanding is that 'fair use' does not apply. Fair use images can be uploaded to English Wikipedia (not Wikimedia Commons), but I don't think fair use would apply to a picture of a magazine cover to which that person once submitted their work, unless the article was about that magazine. As ColinFine has just noted, context and purpose is everything.

Over at Wikimedia Commons (who have their own rules and far more knowledgeable admins wrt copyright), once an image is released under a Creative Commons licence, that release licence is indeed irrevocable. However, the author still retains the rights of that image, and thus there is an obligation on anyone using it in the future to credit the creator, even if they use it commercially. One way round anyone's fears of losing control of a high quality image is for them only to release a small, low resolution version (72dpi) for display on a monitor, but unsuitable for publication in a printed work. This is something that so few people seem to appreciate, and would often suffice to allay their fears of losing control of the main image.

My understanding is also that the copyright owner cannot email you that image with an "it's OK' for you to upload it" note for you. They would need to email it in themselves to our image volunteer teams (called OTRS) who then check it has come from a legitimate source, suitably licenced (including for commercial re-use) and they'd do the uploading for them. (Or you upload the image, get them to make an OTRS declaration, and leave a note on the uploaded image that an OTRS submission has been made)

The folks over at Wikimedia Commons seems to like hiding the details of this process away, so that nobody can understand it at a glance - or even find it in their Help Center page- so every time it takes me ages to find the guidance. Try https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Email_templates as the starting point for granting CC-BY licencing permissions. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 14:37, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine for the speedy reply and for the links to the appropriate Wikipedia page, will read through those links and hopefully the image with my written explanation falls under Wiki's guidelines (and, more importantly, the law itself) for fair use. All the best, Kting97 (talk) 14:39, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Nick Moyes for replying to my question! The cover of the issue I specifically asked them about is an illustration of the story he wrote. I thought it may work similar to the cover of a novel. It was actually novelized but I also figured it might be easier to reach out to the copyright owner of the now-defunct magazine versus the publisher of the book (Knopf Doubleday). His works don't have separate Wikipedia pages, and would probably not fulfill the notability requirement for stand-alones, so I thought illustrating at least one of his works through an image in the article would be appropriate. Noted on the points about Wikimedia Commons and the image quality. I don't know if I would be able to convince them to upload the image themselves and explain the nuance of the copyright... my initial e-mail was based on one of the templates, which is how their questions about copyright and the irrevocable release of the source material came up, so I will try my best with a fair use upload with a low resolution image. All the best, Kting97 (talk) 14:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia's Donation

Wikipedia's Donations Why won't you donate to wikipedia? I know that I haven't even donated myself, but i'm only 13 what can i do? Nothing, and thats where you come in, if you donate to wikipedia then they can keep giving us knoledge. They have fed us with a bunch of knoledge, and what have we done? Nothing. Notice the loop? The word Nothing has been said twice! Twice to many. If you donate your feeding them energy to help support us! -HL 74.196.165.160 (talk) 14:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You are going to want to create an account, go into your preferences, navigate to the Banners tab, and uncheck Fundraising. Wikimedia Foundation does not track the identity of IP addresses, so it doesn't know your age, income level or whether you donated in the past. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

What is this supposed to mean, and why can't I see @Shushugah's response? Galacticitis (talk) 14:55, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Galacticitis Try again, my friend. I can see it. It's right above your reply. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:22, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh yeah! Don't know why it wasn't appearing then. Thanks Nick! Galacticitis (talk) 15:23, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Galacticitis No worries. Here's a first tip for you: If you reply via the 'reply' link at the end of someone's post, your own reply will be automatically indented and signed for you, which makes life quite easy. But if you reply by clicking 'edit source', it'd then help if you'd force your reply to be indented by place a colon (or one extra colon than the last reply contained) at the very start of your reply. This forces the text to indent one level, then simply sign your post with the four tildes (~~~~) as usual, which adds your name and timestamp. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:33, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Nick Moyes. I have never seen a "reply" link on this or any other page, and I don't see it mentioned at Help:Talk pages. Does it only work with certain skins?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:00, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

“Reply” links can be enabled in Preferences (check the “Discussion tools” box, then click “Save” at the bottom to enable them.) —GMX🎄^{(on the go!)} 16:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Shantavira, have you activated the Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures Discussion tools thing? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:12, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Shantavira @Galacticitis My apologies to you both. I had so forgotten I'd set this as an optional preference, that I'd totally not appreciated it wasn't something automatically available to everyone. I suspect it will be in time. I must remember these things when I'm giving newcomer tips that turn out to be useless (it's for that reason I maintain a separate account purely for demonstrating Wikipedia to others, as it keeps all the default settings seen by a new user. I probably need to use it a bit more to remind myself what everyone else actually sees!) Sorry again, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:20, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

No problem @Nick Moyes. I've turned that feature on and you're right, It IS easier. Galacticitis (talk) 02:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hyphen in blank space in table

If a cell in a table had is empty, should we keep it empty or add a dash or hyphen? Which hyphen should we use

Example:

This is an example	Age	Occupation
Henry Schrader	22	Police
Jesus Christ	46	-

Say Jesus Christ dont have occupation. Keep it empty or add dash like this?? Geanard (talk) 16:01, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Geanard My own gut reaction is to suggest that a hyphen (or equivalent dash) helps show that the creator of the table wasn't just forgetful, but knew the contents were not known. When editing tables with WP:Source Editor, it also makes it easier to search (Ctrl-F) for empty cells. I haven't gone off and checked WP:MOS for you - maybe someone else will - but I'd be quite OK to see a dash in place of unknown data at this moment in time, and assuming there isn't some prior established consensus on this issue. Hope this 'one man's view' is of some help. Either way, you won't have committed some heinous editing sin. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:45, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

New productions not reflected on WP Netflix templates

Hi Teahouse, The templates of "Netflix original series and films" and "Netflix original ended programming" don't reflect newer films/movies and series shown on Netflix; an example being Barbie films from 2020 onwards. I've been a regular visitor on those templates and it's currently making me mad!! Please Help/Advise!!! Polygork (talk) 16:09, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Have you tried being bold about editing? If you feel that there's something that needs to be done, go for it. It doesn't matter what you do, so long as you contribute to the wiki in some way. Life is too short to be checking over your Wikipedia edit, just do it (without being reckless, of course.) Explodicator7331 (talk) 16:42, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

removing an archived post

Can an archived post that was declined on [1] be removed, as the post is listed twice and the edit request was granted on the second request? The grammmar was in fact incorrect and needed to be changed. I do not know why basically the same post is needed and was hoping there are extenuating circumstances. 73.167.238.120 (talk) 16:22, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

That is an incredibly long archive. Please provide a link to the individual sections within it. My gut reaction is to leave archived posts there, even if duplicated, as going back to edit minor errors makes archives look like they're OK to fiddle with. Perhaps the only rationale, normally, would be to remove copyright infringements that are subsequently unearthed after the posts are archived. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:36, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I do not know how to provide a link to the individual sections. The heading is Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2020, and as you can see, the heading and edit request show up twice. I did mean to add to the section already created and did not intend to create a new section. Two of the same sections seem to be taking up space, and the edit was indeed changed. Any advice you have is appreciated. 73.167.238.120 (talk) 17:08, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the desire to tidy things, IP, but archives should not be modified without a very good reason, such as the one outlined by Nick above. Tidying is not generally considered a good enough reason. Please do continue tidying other areas of Wikipedia, though! Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 19:02, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Also, how you link to a section is by adding a # (hashtag/pound symbol) and then the name of the section exactly (special formatting and article links should be omitted though). For example, if I were to link to this section I would type [[WP:TEA#removing an archived post]] (I use WP:TEA as it's the shortcut for the teahouse and easier than writing out Wikipedia:Teahouse) ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:06, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

This highlighted link takes me to the top of the archive. Can someone show me what I missed to get to the specific section and can an editor who replied on this topic remove an edit request, so it does not look like I was tidying? Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2020 73.167.238.120 (talk) 04:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

You need to add the heading title after the #. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:05, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The text I try typing does not seem to give me the result I am looking for. 73.167.238.120 (talk) 05:50, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

why

 Warfter (talk) 16:51, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Why not? ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:55, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Warfter Well, why not? Welcome, anyway, to the Teahouse - a place where we help new users with editing problems they encounter on Wikipedia. Do you have a question you need help with? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Will redirect cause a problem?

I am currently researching a new article on the 19th century children's magazine The Little Corporal. I checked Wikipedia to see if there is already an article with this name, and discovered Little Corporal redirects to the Napoleon article. If I name my article The Little Corporal will that be redirected to Napoleon? Would it be best to add (magazine) to my title, to avoid redirects? Karenthewriter (talk) 17:13, 8 December 2021 (UTC) Karenthewriter (talk) 17:13, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Karenthewriter Welcome to Tea House! Currently The Little Corporal is a red link, so whatever you do with it, it will not redirect to Napoleon. This is a good example to add a WP:hatnote on either articles, once they're both live with a template like {{See also}}. If you have more specific questions about redirects, you're welcome to contact me on my talk page or ask here again. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you 🦝 Shushugah. Since many public libraries are doing away with printed reference books (a librarian told me to go online for information) providing accurate articles on classic children's magazines is my main good deed Wikipedia project. Until I started researching The Little Corporal I had no idea that Napoleon Bonaparte had a nickname that would cause me trouble. Karenthewriter (talk) 19:06, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Huh, I thought The Little Corporal was Hitler. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:01, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Shushugah The Little Corporal is published, with nary a sign of a redirect problem! Thanks for your help! Karenthewriter (talk) 08:25, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Question about sources and good research websites.

I am wondering where you can get new sources of info for Wikipedia articles chronotymp. (talk) 17:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Chronotymp. Take a look at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. You can use any source with a green background. Cullen328 (talk) 18:24, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Chronotymp archive.org can be worth checking, especially if the topic has existed more than 20 years or so. You have to register, but it's free. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Article on another language's grammatical topic?

Hello, I was thinking of creating an article on Avyay ―Hindi language topic. I had a doubt on whether it would be accepted here that we create articles on another language's grammatical topics (the topics must be notable to the native language Wikipedia and can be translated) here on english Wikipedia. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 17:52, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Lightbluerain Welcome to Tea House! There's no requirement for anything published on English Wikipedia to be published elsewhere. What are two-three best sources you have on Avyay to establish its notability? Otherwise, editing an existing article like Hindi (language) might be easier. You can ask for feedback at WP:WikiProject India too. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:33, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Shushugah, Thanks for such a kind response.😊 Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 18:44, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

CONFIRMED

How do you become autoconfirmed? You'vegotmail27 • TALK 17:55, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@You'vegotmail27 you need 10 edits and to be registered for 4 days, which you are. See WP:AUTOCONFIRMED for more info. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:12, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Shushugah: OK, i was just wondering why i am not, because i have more than 100 edits, and i am 4 days old. Is there a problem?You'vegotmail27 • TALK 18:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@You'vegotmail27 Your account was created on 4 December 2021 at 21:46 (UTC, I assume that is). Seems you've got about three hours to go. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 18:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh, HA! Makes sense. Time zones are always confusing lol. I'll go do some more wikilinking. Thanks for the info! You'vegotmail27 • TALK 18:20, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Wikignome Wintergreen thanks! I misread 12/4 as April 12 😅 and was surprised I didn't see anything in logs, but didn't overthink it. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Untitled letter and signature

FYI

 – Added header. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 18:30, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

 38.124.151.181 (talk) 18:28, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

q

IP blocked for vandalism. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 18:57, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Search page history

Hi, does anybody know if Wikipedia has tools to search a page history using some keyword or a keywords set? Thank you in advance, Paul Siebert (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Siebert Welcome to Tea House! In general WP:Village Pump (Technical) may have more knowledgeable people. I found on WP:SEARCH this blame tool. Happy searching! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:02, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

thanks Paul Siebert (talk) 19:53, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Siebert Would WP:BLAME help? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:32, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Paul Siebert (talk) 01:35, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Requesting talk page access removal

Hello! So while browsing through recent changes, occasionally I will come upon a user who is basically on their last warning making an edit that is vandalism or unconstructive and I revert it, report them, and they get blocked, and then inappropriately use their talk page. Is there any specific place I should go to request a user's talk page access to be revoked? I don't think WP:AIV would be an appropriate place since the bot there simply removes reports if the user is already blocked. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:17, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: You can contact the blocking admin and ask that they revoke the talk page access for the blocked user or another admin who is recently active [2] RudolfRed (talk) 19:23, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Alright thank you! Wasn't sure if that would be an appropriate thing to do or not. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:25, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf That's good advice @RudolfRed has given. I couldn't easily see which IP it was that you had reported and had then editied their talk page after being blocked, but any serious misuse of a talk page is quite likely to result in any administrator removing TPA if they see it. Good question. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I was being rather vague on purpose (WP:DENY) but I had also forgotten who it was and had seen a blocked user/IP misusing their talk page before. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:55, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Managing mischievous editing

About a year ago, whenever I made a change to an article concerning my daughter, and the circumstances relating to her death, it kept being removed. When I drew this to your attention via Teahouse, you looked into this, and stopped it. I am about to arrange a major edit based on an academic paper published in a well-respected law journal. I expect that this will also be taken down by the same person or someone sympathetic to him. How can I stop this? Also, my understanding is that whenever you cite a reference, it must be an independent source and not a blog website where an individual is giving his views or interpretations. This article has many references to a particular blog website, which I propose to have removed. Where there are independent sources that deal with the point being made by the blog website, I intend to use them instead. I get the distinct impression that references to the blog website are being used as a way of promoting the blog website. Is it ok for me to do this? Obviously, if there are any issues with my alterations where they do not conform to Wikipedia's rules, I am happy to amend accordingly. RobinEllie (talk) 20:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Death of Eleanor de Freitas Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 20:31, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1075 § Account creator and administrator for Death of Eleanor de Freitas

Hello RobinEllie and welcome back to the Teahouse. I've provided links to the page in question and your previous post here. This is the first time you've revealed that you have a connection to the subject of the article; that means you have a conflict of interest and should not be editing the article directly except to make small, uncontroversial changes. I've placed more info on your talk page. You can post concerns and requested edits on the talk page of the article (Talk:Death of Eleanor de Freitas). I'm short on time today, so perhaps someone else can address your other questions. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 22:01, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm back to ramble on a bit more. As far as protecting the article against "mischievous edits", RobinEllie, there are a number of options. If you see some suspicous editing, it's probably best you don't try removing it yourself (unless it's really outright, obvious vandalism), since you have a conflict of interest. You can:

A) Post about it on the talk page, perhaps pinging McPhail, since they created the article and seem to have an interest in maintaining it; they're also quite active and experienced, which is good. See here for what "pinging" is and how to do it: Help:Notifications.

B) Holler for help here on the Teahouse, but that's not the ideal solution, since this is a place to answer newcomers' questions and we don't want it cluttered up with content disputes or requests for admin action.

C) Go to WP:ANI if the disruption is persistent, but the process of reporting things there is... not simple.

D) Post on the page of a friendly, active editor you know and ask for their help.

Your choice; I'd recommend option A to start out with. As for the blog, that's something you should bring up on the talk page. Blogs are generally iffy but occasionally usable. McPhail might be able to help sort out whether this is a valid use (or replace it with different, better sources, since you say you can provide them). Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 23:25, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Block

I'm not sure if this is the correct place for me to post this, so if it isn't please redirect me. I was banned from making an account until 6th of June 2022 and I don't know why, since I haven't done anything wrong. The last thing I did was make a page in the greek version of Wikipedia, which was about companies. Could I get unbanned? I do not know what the ban is about, nor the previous ones. I haven't even visited these pages in the past. This is the information the sign-up site shows:

Your username or IP address is blocked from doing this. You may still be able to do other things on this site, such as editing certain pages. You can view the full block details at account contributions.

The block was made by ‪Johnuniq‬.

The reason given is:

Disruptive editing: per Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Request for extension of partial block

Start of block: 01:51, 6 December 2021 Expiration of block: 01:51, 6 June 2022 Intended blockee: ‪2A02:587:0:0:0:0:0:0/32‬ Block ID #12237660 If you believe you are seeing this message in error, you may submit an appeal on the administrators' noticeboard, on your talk page, or by UTRS.

Return to Japan.

Was it because I was editing the page too much? 2A02:587:340A:407A:11FE:F9DB:8ED9:8EB1 (talk) 21:01, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

It appears you've been caught up in a range block. Other than that I'm not exactly sure what you should do. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:57, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP! Welcome to Tea House! The instructions posted were good. You can either post an appeal at WP:AN if the block is mistaken or alternatively register an account, so that you can edit without restriction. See WP:REGISTER. Hopefully you can resume back to editing ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 22:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Shushugah: Registering an account isn't possible from an IP address that is blocked from doing so. Otherwise, if it's an editing block, a registered account doesn't bypass an IP address range block. You need the "IP block exempt" user right to bypass the block, and that user right is generally given only to trusted established accounts, not new accounts with no history. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The block prevents editing of three pages (Blind Channel, Adèle Exarchopoulos, John Stamos). The IP is free to make suggestions on the talk pages of those articles but it would be much better if they were to find another topic. An account could be requested at WP:Request an account but any continuation of problems at those articles will lead to further blocks. Johnuniq (talk) 00:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

AfC process

I accidentally created this article in the mainspace. A kind person turned it into a draft. But it doesn't have the AfC template needed for when I get to submitting it. Can anyone add the correct AfC template for me please? CT55555 (talk) 22:12, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:EWL_Management_Limited

@CT55555:  Done. For future reference, the template is Template:AfC submission, and you can read about the template's documentation there. There's a helpful shortcut to insert an un-submitted banner, which is {{subst:AfC draft|username}} (replace "username" with whoever created the draft). ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 22:30, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Merge or move proposal

I made a post at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chess_problem, here's a summary.

Chess puzzle and chess problem seem to be the same thing, despite what chess puzzle says. So maybe merge chess puzzle into chess problem?

But chess puzzle is more often used than chess problem, so maybe move chess problem into chess puzzle (chess puzzle doesn't have much information)?

It seems quite silly to put both a merge proposal and a move proposal sign, but if I do nothing it'll probably take a long time before someone notices (last talk page post was 15 months ago). What should I do?  AltoStev (talk) 00:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

• @AltoStev: Shortly after your post on the Teahouse, you got an answer on the talk page, opposing your proposal (and IMO for good reason). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:36, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

How do we evaluate notability guidelines for Not for profits?

I know WP:ORG says that Organizations are usually notable if they meet both of the following standards:

1. The scope of their activities is national or international in scale.
2. The organization has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the organization.

Does it mean that it is similar to companies minus the WP:CORPDEPTH? I am in process to work on page Draft:Ayuda Efectiva. It has other problems too but I want to be first sure of notability guidelines. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 00:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Whether an organization is for-profit or not-for-profit is irrelevant. All organizations need to meet the criteria: significant coverage in multiple reliable sources (of at least regional scope) that are independent of the organization. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:29, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Whitewashing. Sockpuppetry?

It appears that certain users are continually removing anything that could be construed as negative. For example the adware and dark pattern "claims" which are actually facts that are backed up by more than one citation and reference. Anyone care to elaborate? What usually happens when certain users repeatedly try to whitewash an article? While there is no direct evidence of sockpuppetry yet, these users appear to be associated with the article's subjectmatter in some way. The article in question is MacUpdate. Bigmaaac (talk)

@Bigmaaac: I think you need to back off. The edits you are reverting are grounded in Wikipedia policy. Removing citations to blogs is OK. Removing tangential negative information is OK. Removing statements that misrepresent the cited source is OK. If you want to include that stuff, see WP:BURDEN; the burden is on you to gain consensus to include it. The material removed looked pretty questionable to me. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:37, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Anachronist: The things you are saying may be rooted in wiki policies but IMHO the material removed did not fall into those categories; that said I would assume removing statements what misrepresent a subject in a *postive* way is ok too? By that I mean on Wikipedia in general, not just macupdate or whatever. As in material that is borderline marketing copy lifted from a press release? There seems to be a bit of that floating around the site.

• @Bigmaaac: You should certainly remove PR puffery from articles on-sight. However, when removing or adding content, please do not mark your edits as "minor" (as you did here for instance) - "minor" edits are corrections of spelling, table formatting etc. which do not change the information a reader would acquire by reading the article.

I think you are in the right regarding whether to include spamware etc. accusations against MacUpdate, but you are certainly in the wrong by just reverting it without much of an explanation. I would suggest to open a discussion on the talk page, and if nobody objects within a few days you can put your version back in place, otherwise follow the steps listed at WP:DR. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

• @Tigraan: Thank you for clarifying the best practices, appreciate it and I'll do my best to stick to them. Bigmaaac (talk)

How To Post A Company Profile On Wikipedia

Hi , I am totally new to wikipedia , my head has tasked me to post our company's profile to wikipedia and i would like what are the steps to post and do i need to have prior knowledge on coding as i am not trained in this area. Zolandani (talk) 01:36, 9 December 2021 (UTC) Zolandani (talk) 01:36, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Zolandani: A few things you need to understand:

• Wikipedia doesn't have "profiles". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of knowledge. It has articles of encyclopedic value.
• Why does your boss want you to write about your company on Wikipedia? Wikipedia is NEVER to be used for publicity purposes. Ever. If that is the intent, find another venue.
• Please see WP:PAID and comply with it. You entered into a legally binding obligation to disclose your paid editing status when you created an account here.
• Is your company notable? That is, does it meet the requirements in WP:CORP? If not, then it doesn't merit an article here. See Wikipedia:Golden rule for a good overview.

If you have read, understood, and complied with all of the above and still believe you want to write an article, go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation and follow the instructions to write a draft article and submit it for review. Absolutely do not attempt to publish the article yourself; it will likely be deleted and your account might be blocked. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:41, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Zolandani: And to all this, one might add: If an article about your boss's company does one day pass muster to appear in Wikipedia, it will NOT be in your boss's control. Anybody can change it, and if the changes are properly sourced, they will appear--whether your boss happens to like them or not. Uporządnicki (talk) 01:52, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Zolandani: if would be helpful to read Your first article and Citing sources. When you write your draft you will need to have independent references sources. Don't use information from the company website, or documents written by anyone connected to the company, for those references would be seen as being biased in favor of what you are writing about. Have there been newspaper and magazine articles written about the company? Not articles that just mention the company in passing, but ones that primary tell about what the company does. You'll need at least three good references. Keep a neutral tone when writing (don't make it sound as though you are trying to promote the business) and don't add anything that can't be referenced.

You don't need to know coding, for the above listed how-to articles will explain what you need to know, but at first it is rather complicated. It would be very beneficial for you to first do some editing of published articles to learn just how Wikipedia "works." Your employer assigned you a difficult task, and I hope he or she will be understanding if your article is reviewed and declined. Many newcomers attempt articles when they are not prepared to do so, and their hours of work can't prove that their subject is notable enough to warrant an article on Wikipedia. Best wishes on your project. Karenthewriter (talk) 03:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Zolandani: Show your boss the above responces and WP:PSCOI. If they order you to disregard any of it, resign and find a job with a boss that will not demand the impossible of you. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 11:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Psychology

What is humanistic theory? 105.112.120.205 (talk) 02:05, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. On Wikipedia, humanistic theory is currently a redirect to humanistic psychology. Perhaps the latter article can answer your question. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 02:36, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Need help with my userpage

I don't know if this is the right place to ask about this, but I'm not able to add the Seven ages unsure and WikiProjectAutomobiles infobox on my user page. Can someone help? Galacticitis (talk) 03:19, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Galacticitis I was able to learn that posting User WikiProject Automobiles in double brackets {{}} to your user page will add you as a member of the project. I wasn't able to find a project called Seven ages. I hope this helps. Karenthewriter (talk) 04:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I mean to say the seven ages of Wikipedians infobox. Pardon the error,@Karenthewriter.Galacticitis (talk) 04:50, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I think @Galacticitis is talking about userboxes. I can link to Wikipedia:Userboxes, but I struggled with adding the ones on my own user page, so I have little sage advice to offer. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 04:52, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes. I am talking about userboxes but I misnamed it as infoboxes. I've got it now, so thanks @Karenthewriter and @Wikignome Wintergreen for your help, however little it may be. Thanks again Galacticitis (talk) 04:55, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

See history of restored redirected deleted page?

Hi. In this deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nine-dimensional_space_(2nd_nomination)), participants refer to CSD criterion G4, which says the page is similar to what was there before the first deletion. How can I see what was there before the first deletion? When I go to the page's history ([3]), it seems to only go back to first deletion (redirect). Danstronger (talk) 04:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hmm, seems kinda off-beat, but I'm new here so not for me. please wait for another answer,Danstronger. Galacticitis (talk) 04:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Maybe only admins can check? Galacticitis (talk) 04:32, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

"Deleted" pages are visible to administrators, etc. Below I reproduce part of this one. -- Hoary (talk) 04:38, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Nine dimensional space was commonly used by physicists in models exploring superstring theory - it was posited that 6 imperceptible spatial dimensions exist in addition to the standard 3 dimensions of length, width, and depth. Later, an extra spatial dimension was added once the concept of membranes was introduced and study of superstrings evolved to M-theory. To both the 9 spatial dimensions of superstring theory and the 10 spatial dimensions of m-theory, the temporal dimension of time was added requiring equations that handled 10 dimensional geometry for superstrings and 11 dimensional geometry for m-theory.

References

@Hoary: Ahh, that makes a lot of sense, thanks for the sample! Danstronger (talk) 04:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

First article

Hello, I am going to create my first article. Can anybody give some suggestions? Thanks. Spotanus (talk) 04:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Well, WP:YFA will help, and start by finding valid references.David notMD (talk) 05:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Spotanus: If you're looking for things that you might want to write about have a look at WP:Requested Articles. There are also a load of WP:Wikiprojects dedicated to specific topics, e.g. WP:Women in red is dedicated to increasing our coverage of women. I would advise that you avoid biographies of living people and medical articles when getting started, as both those topics have special sets of sourcing requirements. 192.76.8.80 (talk) 18:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Editing request

Hi there,

I have requested for some additional information to be added to the article Ezhava with proper citation. Nobody is updating it. Who is responsible for this addition?

Thanks in advance ! 172.103.134.113 (talk) 05:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, I don't see an edit request on your contributions page, but I do see an edit request at Talk:Ezhava by Malayalee0121. If you are the owner of the account, please remember to log in. To answer your question about "who is responsible", the answer is nobody. Everyone here are volunteers (like you) that have certain interests and topics that they are comfortable editing, and not everyone may feel knowledgeable enough in that subject to edit about it. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

My article is at the two month threshold to be reviewed.

Hello, fellow Wikipedians!

As the title says, my article has been waiting to be reviewed for 2 months now. Is there any way to expedite the process? I have been very much patient with my efforts. I understand Teahouse is not for reviewers, but can anyone give me a timeframe on how long I could be waiting since it has already been 2 months. The article did get declined once 2 months ago, but has since been fixed to the best of my knowledge. Godsentme1 (talk) 06:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Godsentme1, how about reverting your removal of the "decline" template, which said it shouldn't be removed? -- Hoary (talk) 06:44, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hoary I just previously made an edit about 2 hours ago and removed that by a mistake. Can you assist on reverting it back, thanks for the catch appreciate it highly.Godsentme1 (talk) 07:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hoary I fixed that on my own, however, one thing I noticed about Wikipedia is you guys only respond to the negative. Still, my question has not been answered about how long can I be waiting for a review since it has been 2 months. Instead of answering the question, you go look to see what error you can find lol. I can assure you that was a mistake when I made an edit previously and it's fixed now the box is back never intentionally removed it. Now, how about actually answering the question I originally asked? Or I can't get an answer about that because it's not negative?Godsentme1 (talk) 07:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Godsentme1, thank you for readding it. The simple answer is, I don't know. And nobody else does, either. Somebody is going to regard themselves as qualified to evaluate it, and will then evaluate it. I don't, so I won't. You seem somewhat annoyed: if you are, then since God sent you, you might ask Her to smite me. (I believe that smiting is Her thing.) Good luck! -- Hoary (talk) 08:05, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Also, being extremely hostile to AfC reviewers, badgering and attacking them and making baseless accusations, is a) the exact opposite of "very much patient", b) not something that will help expedite a review, and c) likely to get you blocked if you should post anything like that again. Being patronising is not a blockable offence, but it certainly doesn't make it more likely that people will review the draft you created. --bonadea contributions talk 08:13, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hoary I was not annoyed. I apologize if it came off that way. Not here to make enemies thanks for your help in any way appreciate you! thanks and bonadea I was not rude to Hoary did not use foul language I asked a simple question. I did not attack him as well just asked a simple question again not here to make enemies so thank you for the information given.Godsentme1 (talk) 19:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Godsentme1: Well, your response to Hoary was not exactly polite, but the unveiled hostility and the patronising tone I mentioned was on the user talk page of the AfC reviewer – I linked to it in my post. Rudeness does not equal foul language, however, and you should be aware that you are skating on thin ice below, where you are again badgering people, making unfounded claims, and repeating yourself over and over. You have submitted the draft for review. Somebody will review it today or this week or next week or in a month's time or at some later point in time. The Teahouse is not the venue for that discussion, and you have two constructive choices if your aim is to improve Wikipedia: keep improving the draft, or forget about that draft and edit other articles. --bonadea contributions talk 20:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

bonadea Ok thanks for the information. Enjoy the rest of your day.Godsentme1 (talk) 20:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

• @Godsentme1: I suspect one of the issues here is that there are lots of references but many that are not very useful under the WP:GNG rules. So here’s a trick to expedite the review: find the best three sources for the article and say which you think they are (either below the submission comments, or on the talk page of the article). (Do not remove other references, just say which three are most likely to establish notability.)

As the link explains, that makes it easy for the reviewer to check notability (as they only have to check three sources instead of 28). The flip side, of course, is that if those sources are found insufficient, you do not get to propose three more and the draft is toast. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Whatever happens to the draft, you should read bonadea’s advice above, too. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

And, —Godsentme1, there is no "two month threshold": that is an estimate, based on the number of drafts awaiting review. As others have explained, the actual time depends on whether and when a reviewer chooses to pick up a particular draft. --ColinFine (talk) 16:33, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Tigraan Ok I hear you about the 3 references but please tell me how can these criteria be ignored https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles The subject meets criteria one for musicians by having being published in several magazine articles not to mention the subject has also recently appeared on the Billboard charts. My issue now is why are we making this a problem when the subject meets the criteria for notability under those rules. How can we disregard that is what I'm trying to ask? I'm not being rude or hostile I'm addressing my point. My thing is yes there is 28 references but why are we making this that they have to be narrowed down to the top 3. Again please take a look at Wikipedia guidelines for notability here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles I never made these terms Wikipedia put these in place. I think we can't ignore these don't you agree?Godsentme1 (talk) 19:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Tigraan Written from Wikipedia's criteria it says: Under criteria 1 the subject is notable already under these Wikipedia guidelines. There is no need for the draft to be toast because we can't ignore this. How can we ignore these criteria terms set by Wikipedia? Again take a look below what I pasted from Wikipedia "Has been the subject of multiple nontrivial published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published and are independent of the musician or ensembles. Wikipedia wrote these terms into place so my question now is how do we overlook these. Again I'm not being hostile or rude in any manner I'm proving my point now. Also again the subject has recently appeared on the Billboard charts at position 9 of 25. I would like for a serious reviewer to view my claims and see that the draft gets published seeing that the subject meets the criteria for notability. I think we all can come together and agree on this and publish it today. I've shown and spoken my case about how is the subject notable and I have high valid points.Godsentme1 (talk) 19:38, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria.

1) Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.[note 1] This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries[note 2] except for the following: Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.[note 3] Works consisting merely of trivial coverage, such as articles that simply report performance dates, release information or track listings, or the publications of contact and booking details in directories. Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases.

Also Tigraan how I believe it should be is that a reviewer should review all the references because we all know the subject is notable. If he was not then I do not believe you would be even saying to narrow it down to three. You would have just said the subject is not notable. Instead of us playing a game of Russian roulette where you want to have me place 3 references on the talk page then if I don't pick the right ones then the draft is toast? All links should be looked at. Again we all know that the subject is notable so why play Russian roulette to get the draft taken down purposely? It does not make any sense why was that even mentioned when again the subject is notable per "Wikipedia's" guidelines. I'm not attacking or being rude in any way just simply explaining my point. The draft should be published as it highly meets the criteria https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles

And I believe you know that it meets the criteria. So instead of being so hard on me please just take the time to look at my points they are very valid.Godsentme1 (talk) 19:56, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Godsentme1, Tigraan invited you to find the best three sources for the article and say which you think they are (either below the submission comments, or on the talk page of the article). I see that atop the draft, you have nominated four: (i) Sheen Magazine – AJDAGURU Releases “Love Yourself” Video; (ii) AJDaGuru's passionate new song "Love Yourself" - Singersroom.com; (iii) AJDaGuru Is What The Game’s Been Missing! - Hip Hop Weekly; (iv) AJDaGuru Shares Visuals for Seen It All - AllHipHop. Thank you. Now wait and see what the next reviewer makes of them. -- Hoary (talk) 22:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

• Godsentme1, you seem to believe that you know more about the applicability of Wikipedia guidelines than reviewers of Articles for Creation and Teahouse responders, who are therefore obtuse for not deferring to your superior judgement. It is possible that you are very intelligent and extremely familiar with the guidelines, but considering that you have been here for two days and twenty edits, the latter is unlikely to be the case. And even so, just asserting things will not convince anyone that you need to convince.

Furthermore, about we all know the subject is notable... I am afraid "we" know nothing of the sort. I did not know that person existed before reading your draft. But then, I could cite at most three hip-hop artists, so I do not know much about that area. I suspect you do not know all three of Hypathia, Michael Faraday, or Zulfikar Ali Bhutto either, even if they are all notable persons in their respective fields. The way we decide if persons are notable is not by the assertion of knowledgeable editors, but from the sources.

Finally, you say that if [the subject was not notable] then I do not believe you would be even saying to narrow it down to three.. If you had read the link to WP:THREE I gave you, which is not a long read, you would have seen the second paragraph which says Often, there will be a lot of references in an article, many of which use poor sources. I'm not willing to slog through dozens of sources to evaluate them. I am, however, willing to look at a few sources in detail if somebody else (i.e. you) does the footwork to figure out which ones are the best.

To improve the quality of your future interactions with other editors, I suggest to read the wikilinks they gave you, and to keep your future posts concise. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:25, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wikipedian my Article declined due to Non-notable!!

Hi Wikipedian I am stuck here on my article to publish, My article got declined due to Non-notable!!, Please help me how can I improve it. Article link is here! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Social_Champ Shakeelahmedseo (talk) 06:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

First, Shakeelahmedseo, decide if there are any better sources. If there aren't, you won't get anywhere, so just stop. If there are, read up on how to add references. (You've added them in the wrong place.) Move the references. Then add more and better references. -- Hoary (talk) 06:49, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Citing Wikipedia to Help Clarify Mathematical Convention Confusion and Demonstrate Internal Consistency

Hello, I am working on a new draft article at Draft:Gallery_of_Atomic_Orbitals. In the article I use a mathematical symbol $L$ for a Laguerre polynomial which stand for a certain function which can be defined in a number of different ways depending on the convention choices chosen by a particular author. These different convention choice have led to lots of confusion and edit wars on some other pages on topics related to my new draft article. To curtail this confusion I have explicitly called out the possibility of different convention choices on my page and stated which convention I am using along with references to some textbooks and peer-reviewed articles which use the same convention. In addition, to establish even more consistency with other important references, I have cited some important places that readers will likely encounter the convention I have chosen before they find themselves digging in old textbooks. One of these places is the Laguerre polynomials Wikipedia page. I have gotten the feedback on my page that I should not cite Wikipedia because it is user generated. Does this advice apply in my case even though I am citing Wikipedia to establish internal consistency on a matter of convention?

Thanks for taking the time to help me become a better Wikipedia contributor! Twistar48 (talk) 07:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Twistar48: Don't worry about cross-page standardization. As long as you choose a convention that is used in sources and stay consistent, you shouldn't run into any problems. If you really want to, use {{efn}} and {{notelist}} and mention other notation in notes. You may also want to go to the talk pages of relevant WikiProjects, such as WikiProject Physics, to ask if there's a convention that editors in that field have agreed on. On a separate note, I don't know if your draft is notable enough apart from the atomic orbital article to have a standalone article. Have you considered improving that article instead? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 08:22, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Thanks very much for your response. I could see changing the convention discussion to be a note and removing the wikipedia citation, leaving it instead as a link perhaps. I will look into this. Regarding notability of the article: Yes, I know if it is very similar to atomic orbital article. I see my article as being complementary to that one, similar to Spherical harmonics and Table of spherical harmonics. The table or gallery page is strictly for showing a large number of examples of a topic (equation, orbital) on a separate page so as not to not clutter the main page with too many figures. Meanwhile, the main page can focus on textual exposition about the topic. Thanks also for the WikiProject Physics talk page link, I can ask about this idea there. Twistar48 (talk) 08:41, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

"reliable sources" for topics which do not get mainstream coverage

What would be considered a "reliable source" for topics which don't really get mainstream coverage of any sort? I'm in particular asking about game console homebrew - I feel like I could add to this topic on several pages, but I cannot figure out if I'd be allowed to - most of the sources that are treated as "reliable" in the community exist on various wikis or random tweets from people who work on this stuff. Radostin04 (talk) 07:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps the following process: (i) Look for articles on similar subjects. (ii) Look near the top of the talk pages of those articles for the templates of "WikiProjects". (iii) Choose the single WikiProject that (a) is related and (b) has a talk page that seems lively. (Unfortunately, most WikiProjects are more or less moribund.) (iv) On that talk page, ask about "reliable sources" for your proposed subject. Good luck! -- Hoary (talk) 08:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Radostin04: Fortunately, WP:VG is one of the more active WikiProjects. It has a collection of reliable sources at WP:VG/RS and even a customized Google search that allows you to search through those sources. I would suggest you start seeing if you can find anything in those sources already considered reliable. If not, you can ask at WT:VG/RS about specific sources you wish to use. Regards SoWhy 11:19, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Anurag Chrimar

FYI

 – Added section heading – ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs)

My article is getting rejected every time. Kindly notify me in which particular area I am doing the mistake. AnuragHitech (talk) 09:55, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@AnuragHitech: You are wasting the time of all those volunteers here who try to assist in building this encyclopaedia. You have deleted two "declines" from your draft, by KylieTastic on 2 December and by CNMall41 on 7 December, leaving just the latest decline from Eagleash on 8 Decemeber. The draft itself purports to be a biography of a living person (you?) but fails completely to demonstrate that this person is one of the few of the seven billion+ people on this planet who are noteworthy enough to merit an article here. Use social media, if you wish, to promote Anurag Chrimar, not Wikipedia. The one substandard reference you cite for Chrimar is based on an interview of him in a newspaper article that isn't even about him, so not independent of him and not significant coverage. Give up! Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Restored two Declines. There are no references about Chrimar. No refs = no article. David notMD (talk) 11:15, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: Thank you for the ping; my bad, I did not pick up on the earlier declines or I probably would have rejected the draft. The creator has now asked for AfC help via my my talk page. I have responded there as best I can. FWIW, there is a duplicate item at Draft:Anurag Chirimar which it seems was speedily deleted per a message at the creator's TP but has been re-created. Eagleash (talk) 15:22, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Apartment & Buildings

What are the notability criteria of apartments & buildings? Is there any such page on Wikipedia which is not historical architecture just a building where people live? Behind the moors (talk) 10:24, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't think that there are specific guidelines for such buildings, so the fallback is the general guidance for notability. There are certainly articles about such buildings, for example Grenfell Tower — and not just because of the sad outcome of the Grenfell Tower fire. As always, the key is to find reliable secondary sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal

Good day! Is the title in this article written correctly? Don't vandalism?: 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal--Станислав Савченко (talk) 11:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The article has been in existance since 2015. The number 1 is part of the formal name. David notMD (talk) 11:20, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks!--Станислав Савченко (talk) 11:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Vishwananda

Hi, could anybody give input on the Draft:Vishwananda. It was previously submitted for immediate deletion. I didn't quite understand that, as the article was certainly not in any way a kind of promotion of the subject, it was instead rather critical. But I rewrote it, really paying attention to the sources, to have more reliable secondary sources. Vishwananda is quite well known in Germany, but he also has Ashrams in the UK and USA. He is very popular in eastern European countries, like Poland or Czech Republic. So I guess notability is given. He even just bought a new Ashram in Germany, which owns it's own lake! There was an article about him in the Times of India, but also in many German speaking newspapers or TV stations. Any input from your side is appreciated. Hanumandas (talk) 11:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

You have done a lot of work since the Decline, but the Life and Bhakti Marga Activities sections still lack references. David notMD (talk) 11:30, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you David, I will try to amend this. I did translations from German de:Vishwananda and de:Bhakti Marga (Religionsgemeinschaft), on which I also worked myself, where I left out some of the less good references. Hanumandas (talk) 09:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

I've had a look at some of the sources cited – not all, because I'm somehow unable to access most of the German-language ones. The numbers below refer to the references cited a few minutes before I posted this.

1 is, like Wikipedia itself, not a reliable source.

3 is based on what the subject said, so not independent.

13 does not mention the subject.

4, 7, 8 and 9 seem to me enough to establish notability.   Maproom (talk) 11:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Maproom, this is very valuable, I can easily substitute 1, 3 the Times of India link, I mainly mentioned it because it is a respectable newspaper. You know, this whole Mahamandaleshwara thing, I think is not really that important, but these titles are given at Kumbha Melas, where there are millions of people, and there is a lot of news coverage, so it's likely reporters were there, or there was an announcement by the Nirmohi Akhada - but personally; I don't think it's important at all, so we could also just leave it off. But it's similar to Nithyananda receiving the same title just two years earlier by a different Akhara, Mahanirvani, see here https://www.deccanherald.com/content/311948/nithyananda-feted-mahakumbh.html and both are actually pals. For 13, it's about Bhakti Marga, and it's of course his organization, and Deutschlandfunk is a very respectable source. But again, I don't mind leaving it off. Again thanks for the advice, and now I know where to focus on. Hanumandas (talk) 09:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Edit filter log in Chen Yifa

1. Refer to this.I roll back [4].
2. Special:Contributions/头号发吹(Special:Contributions/Touhaofachui) rolls back without giving any explanation.So I use Template:uw-spam2 and says don't use instagram.com.
3. I use Template:uw-npa3 because Special:Contributions/头号发吹(Special:Contributions/Touhaofachui) use edit summary say Also undo any other sabotage made by Rastinition without giving other explanation.
4. Because he says any other sabotage makes me feel bad, so I record this incident here. Maybe I can get some good opinions.

By the way, Special:Contributions/头号发吹(Special:Contributions/Touhaofachui) only edits Chen Yifa in zh.wikipedia.org and en.wikipedia.org, and the account name is related to Chen Yifa, there may be a problem with WP:COI.

PS:Special:Contributions/蟲蟲飛 move page User talk:Touhaofachui to User talk:头号发吹. So Touhaofachui is 头号发吹. Rastinition (talk) 11:40, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

• Rastinition and 头号发吹, I think you got off to a wrong start but otherwise it looks like a fairly standard content dispute. I would encourage you to discuss on the talk page of the article.

头号发吹, please take a moment to review WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF - please refrain from accusing others of "sabotage" just because they disagree with what should be written in an article.

Rastinition, your approach of wholesale reversion and immediately escalating Twinkle templates was unnecessarily confrontational. In particular, instead of this revert, you should have only removed the Instagram link (the subject of the article is known for Youtube, so having a Youtube link to the channel is OK). You should not have made the accusation of spamming just based on an edit filter, when manual inspection reveals the actual edits to be well-intentioned. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply.If he explained that at the beginning, we could do better.I think our problem is invalid communication, so I came to the teahouse.I think the communication is more effective than before.Because I only follow Youtube now, Youtube’s problem is solved. I don’t have the motivation to edit in Chen Yifa. In addition to what you mentioned above, is there anything else I haven't noticed? Rastinition (talk) 14:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

头号发吹：I'm sorry I called your strange edit "sabotage". You're right about instagram/Youtube/forum as references. Those info is removed already. You may want to write your reason of editing clearly without using some random confusing abbreviation. By the way, my ID has nothing to do with Chen Yifa, although I watched her live stream often. This doesn't violate WP:COI. Stop making nonsense speculation/accusation with zero evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 头号发吹 (talk • contribs) 13:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

What to do about permanently dead link?

Hey, folks. I recenetly came across the article for Bam Thwok and noticed that it had some dead links, so I decided to find archives of them, but one seems to have been excluded from archive.org, and no other archives of it seem to exist. Seeing as a lot of the information in the article is attributed to it (including direct quotes), what should be done here? On a related note, should the article have the "featured article" tag if it can't be verified? ArcticSeeress (talk) 11:55, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi ArcticSeeress. With respect to dead links, please take a look at WP:DEADREF and WP:ELDEAD because there are different ways for dealing with them depending upon whether the link is question is for a citation or for an external link. Generally, dead links that are citation are removed just because they're dead because there still may be some value as a source for keeping them as is. For external links, the link loses it's value fairly quickly once it becomes dead and thus replacement or removal is more often done than in the case of citations. As for question about WP:FAs, only those articles which have gone through the FA process should be marked as such; generally, you should be able to find out whether an article is an FA by checking the top of its talk page because there's usually a banner and other information about such things. Just for reference, the current version of an article might've be a bit different from the one that was assessed when the article was undergoing its FA review. For this reason, sometimes an article is re-assessed and downgraded if the change has been for the worse. Bam Thwok is still currently listed as an FA, but whether it still meets the criteria for an FA is probably something you should discuss at WP:FAR if you have concerns about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:35, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Re. the FA process, Bam Thwok was made a Featured article in 2007 and doesn't seem to have been reassessed since; the process has become a lot stricter since then so it is quite possible that it would not be considered up to today's standards – I see a {{citation needed}} tag on it, for instance, which would need to be addressed.

Re. fixing dead links, I was able to find a source to replace the dead Aversion link in one case (here) – editors more familiar with the subject matter might be more able to help in the other cases. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 12:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the replies, both of you! I'll see if I can I can find any other sources to to replace the dead one. Seeing as the dead reference had been brought up before on the talk page, maybe I'll see about bringing it up for review. ArcticSeeress (talk) 15:16, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia as a one Whole System.... How it works and how to study about it.

Hello, I want to study how wikipedia and other projects are built and how they function as a whole how do i start? 2405:201:1003:807:F57:3169:996F:38A1 (talk) 13:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

You might like to start with the in-house magazine WP:Signpost, which has sections on published academic studies on Wikipedia. You could also look on Google Scholar or similar for relevant material. Note that this Teahouse is really intended for new editors who have questions about how to edit Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

You may find some leads at Wikipedia and linked articles, and perhaps WP:PRESS 21 etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:50, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Using two infoboxes

 AverroesII (talk) 13:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Is it permitted to use template infobox: spy and template infobox: philosopher for the same person? (removing some headings so that the infobox: spy simply describes their espionage career)

Hello AverroesII and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, you can use multiple infoboxes, and the best way to do that is to embed them - see Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes/embed. In this case, I think it would be easiest to start out with Template:Infobox person and then embed the other two infoboxes (Template:Infobox philosopher and Template:Infobox spy) into it using its module parameters. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 16:55, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Independent review request for article with COI

Hello, I am hoping I might find an editor or editors who are willing to do an independent review of my article on Byron Adams in order to satisfy any concerns over bias / quality and remove the COI template at the top of the article. Any help with review or further guidance as to how I could better request is greatly appreciated. Vivwest (talk) 14:04, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The COI tag is valid, as you confirmed a connection on your user page, and since March of this year increasd the length of the article by nearly 3X. David notMD (talk) 15:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Project page changes

Hello Teahouse, how do I propose or make changes/edit a Wikipedia project page?, there are some changes I would like to be made on WP:PLACEDAB. Josedimaria237 (talk) 15:15, 9 December 2021 (UTC) Josedimaria237 (talk) 15:15, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Josedimaria237, and welcome to the Teahouse. WP:BRD applies to project pages just as to articles - but you need to assess whether your change is likely to be controversial in the context of a Wikipedia guideline in deciding whether to be bold and edit, or to discuss on the Talk page beforehand. --ColinFine (talk) 16:41, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Does this WP:BRD literally mean that I should go ahead and make the change myself? There is a discussion on the talk page but there haven't been any consensus reached. Josedimaria237 (talk) 19:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

It means that you might go ahead and make the change yourself, if you conclude that it is not likely to be controversial, Josedimaria237. If there is already a discussion going on, then that is obviously not the case (you didn't mention that before). --ColinFine (talk) 21:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine Yes, a discussion is still going on but I think it is unlikely a consensus will be reached which would make an admin make the necessary changes. I am asking because these changes will affect some articles I nominated for RM.

Josedimaria237 (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Error message for Spain

Why is "Request from - via cp5011.eqsin.wmnet, ATS/8.0.8 Error: 502, Next Hop Connection Failed at 2021-12-09 15:10:49 GMT" generated for autoconfirmed users? Kent Dominic·(talk) 15:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Kent Dominic Looks like a problem with some of the servers on the Internet path from you to Wikipedia (ATS = Apache Traffic Server), rather than with Wikipedia or that particular article. I think you've just had bad luck but if the error persists, try the WP:Village_pump_(technical) where the geeks hang out. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Cite which creates a download

Is it permitted to use a cite such as reference 10 on Reile's Acres, North Dakota which downloads a doc onto the users computer? Lyndaship (talk) 15:38, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Lyndaship WP:RICHMEDIA doesn't specifically ban such links but the real problem in that article is that the references are mostly bare URL that would be much better if properly expanded, with authors/publishers credited. I tried the "Expand citations" bot but it didn't help much. You would be greatly helping by being WP:BOLD and working to improve things there, if you're interested. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:06, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Someone made a suggestion in a comment on my draft page. I've changed the article to accept their suggestion. Should I respond/How to respond to the comment?

I'm working on a draft page at Draft:Gallery of Atomic Orbitals. A user left a comment for me which I addressed in a recent edit. I would like to respond to their comment letting them know I have accepted their suggestion. (a) would this be appropriate and (b) how, mechanically, do I respond? Twistar48 (talk) 15:51, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Twistar48: Yes, that's a good idea. The best place is probably at the Talk Page of the Draft, Draft talk:Gallery of Atomic Orbitals so any future reviewer and/or reader will see it. You can "ping" the particular user to the new comment in the same way as I've pinged you here (look at the source code). Make sure you sign that edit, or the ping won't work. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:12, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Help at Shinola (retail company)

Hello. John here on behalf of Shinola (retail company) to suggest some updates and corrections to the company's article. I've disclosed my conflict of interest on the article's Talk page, and I understand I should let other editors review my requests instead of editing the article on my own. However, I'm not getting editor feedback using the "request edit" template as suggested. Can someone here help or at least confirm I'm submitting requests correctly? Thank you! JS at Shinola (talk) 16:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@JS at Shinola: The request has been made correctly but I'm afraid there is always a backlog and I'm not a subject expert, so can't help. Your next step might be to politely ping one of or two of the editors who have worked on the article, below your edit request, but even that may not elicit a response. Use the ping mechanism as I did here (see source code) and be sure to sign that edit so the ping will take effect. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:18, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Architecture Firm, New

Getting my architectural page approved - Thank you to everyone who collaborated on a response to my questions on my page. Thanksgiving week has thrown me off schedule a little, but I’m trying to jump back into this and really dig in on this. One giant clarification, yes, I am a paid employee of SJCF, but I am not attempting to write this page because I am being specifically paid to. It is a labor of love for me, as I am now one of the old timers here.

I have taken all of your suggestions and am re-doing another draft. It’s difficult…we’ve been in business for more than 60 years, and we have breadth of coverage in the media, spanning a large amount of time, but not depth in articles. Bob Schaefer (our original ‘Schaef’) was a humble man who eschewed publicity..he liked for our buildings to speak for him. Even to this day, in many articles in our local media, you’ll see ‘courtesy photo’ under one of our renderings…and it is driving me crazy as I attempt to pull this together. Additionally, while the NY Times might have an architecture critic, most Kansas papers do not, and so in-depth architectural coverage is largely non-existent. Another clarification on the article one of you mentioned that talks about ‘reusing furniture’…that article also talked about the challenges presented in managing a school bond issue during the great recession in 2008. Thank you everyone for the help, the critique, the suggestions. I love that a group of writers comes together to do this and do it well. WikiLDMR (talk) 16:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your appreciation of our editors, WikiLDMR (though I was not one of those who helped in this case). I'm not clear whether you are asking a question. Note that Wikipedia does not differentiate whether you are specifically paid to work on this: you have a COI as an employee, and you are paid as an employee. But you've made the declaration, so that is fine. --ColinFine (talk) 16:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy Draft:SJCF Architecture WikiLDMR - You have made no edits since the draft was Declined on 22 Nov. MANY of the references confirm that SJCF was the architecture firm, but provided little to nothing about SJCF. I recommend you focus on finding more content about the firm and reduce the list of projects. David notMD (talk) 18:13, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

WikiLDMR I did some searching of news sources, and I'm skeptical that the firm qualifies for an article. What you need to qualify for an article here is "depth in articles" in newspapers/books/journals. So if there has not been that (for whatever reason), the firm isn't going to qualify. I did see one reasonably good article to add to your list: Graham, Sherry. 2002. With 45th anniversary, new location schaefer johnson a firm on the go. Wichita Business Journal 17, (15) (Apr 12): 5, https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/with-45th-anniversary-new-location-schaefer/docview/229727072/se-2?accountid=196403 (accessed December 9, 2021). But you'll need more like this, and probably more that are not purely local per WP:CORP. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

conflicting articles

If there are two Wikipedia articles with conflicting information on similar topics, how do you know which Wikipedia article to make corrections to? Does someone want a specific example to help them answer my questions? Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 16:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes please. Knowing what people are lookng at is immensely helpful when answering such an open-ended question. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:50, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The answer, always, is "what do the sources say?". If one is consistent with the sources and the other not, you know which one to alter. If the sources say differently, and both appear reliable, it may be appropriate to edit both to say that the sources are inconsistent. If it is a matter of interpretation of the sources, you probably want to start a discussion either on one of the articles' talk pages or on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject; in either case, it's worth adding a note to the other talk page(s) linking to the discussion. --ColinFine (talk) 16:52, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

My understanding is the date of the death sentence for Dylann Roof should be the same across articles. So either use the date the jury recommended the death sentence, the date the judge formally sentenced Roof to death, or both dates and indicate which is which. [5] [6] Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 18:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The date should be the one when he was formally sentenced. Mjroots (talk) 18:52, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

How Do I Request To Have My Draft Published?

 Courtesy link: Draft:PufferfishDave  Puffer Dave (talk) 17:56, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Puffer Dave: Welcome to the Teahouse. Before you ask for help to get your draft published, you're going to want to find reliable sources that significantly talk about the subject. Since you have a similar username, I assume the subject is yourself, and would strongly discourage you from writing a draft about yourself. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Puffer Dave, if you're referring to Draft:PufferfishDave, any such request would be rejected. It cites no sources at all. It doesn't even have any content, just a heading. Wikipedia is an encyclopdia, with articles on notable subjects; it's not social media. Maproom (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

It did have far more content, but I tagged it for speedy deletion and it was deleted, it has been recreated though with less content but would still be rejected outright. Theroadislong (talk) 18:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Puffer Dave Be advised that Wikipedia is not a free hosting service for anyone to post nonsense biographies about themselves. See WP:NOTWEBHOST. Please don't try and do that or the Draft will be deleted again and your account could have its editing privileges withdrawn. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. You might wish to find another platform for your 'fun facts'. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:09, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

i'm having trouble adding subtitles to an OGG file

hello all, i need help

i was trying earlier today to add subtitles to an ogg audio file that i used in an article via the wikimedia commons. i tried using the same format shown in the template "the subRip format" but the ccs in the audio were very delayed and out of order..

what should i do? Sevencosmoi (talk) 18:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Sevencosmoi Welcome to the Teahouse. For technical queries like this, you might be better of asking at WP:VPT - our place for very technical queries. However - and this is a biggie - I have already nominated two of your uploads for deletion from Commons, and must ask you to stop doing any more, or face having your editing privileges there withdrawn. As far as I can see, you have been taking copyrighted music clips and releasing them to Commons under a Creative commons commercial reuse licence. I doubt you own the rights to this music so, unless you do, you would be breaking national laws and risking damaging Wikimedia Common's reputation for only hosting legally-released content from their owners. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:29, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Nick Moyes yes, i saw your message on the talk page and replied to you there. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sevencosmoi (talk • contribs) 19:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Sevencosmoi: (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.) ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:56, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Why am I blocked on WikiSource?

Today, while I was going to create a local account for WikiSource, I was informed that my IP address or username was blocked, even though I have no blocks on any blocks that I know of. Can anyone inform me why this has occurred?

-Thanks, IntellectuallyOlder(Alt. Account) (talk) 18:24, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@IntellectuallyOlder(Alt. Account): Your account here should work there, so you shouldn't need to create a new one. As you may know, each project is run seperately so we can't help you with blocks at Wikisource. Try asking at [7] or [8] RudolfRed (talk) 18:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

RudolfRed, he just told you his username or IP address is blocked and you tell him to post a question on their noticeboards about why he can't post questions on their noticeboards. Catch-22. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 18:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

IntellectuallyOlder(Alt. Account), actually not a question for English Wikipedia, perhaps better suited for meta but anyway. Are you talking about English Wikisource (https://en.wikisource.org/) or old Wikisource (https://wikisource.org/)? You have an account on the latter, though their AbuseFilter log] suggests they have an overzealous account creation filter. -jkb- or Ankry, can you investigate this? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 18:51, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@IntellectuallyOlder(Alt. Account): I released the filter restrictions a bit. The filter was not intended to prevent account cration, rather to slow-down spammers. However, your problem might mean that we will have a problem with sleeper accounts, soon (creation of 4 accounts in 5 minutes should not trigger the filter if no other IP actions were performed in this time period). Ankry (talk) 19:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

If an IP is blocked, we need to know at least the block # in order to go on. If you do not wish to provide it in public, you can contact an active admin vi email asking for help. There is also help address <wikisource@wikimedia.org> served by VRT (former OTRS), but unsure id it is announced anywhere. Ankry (talk) 19:28, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

and we need the name of the account that is supposed to be blocked at oldwikisource: neither the User IntellectuallyOlder(Alt nor the user IntellectuallyOlderer are registered there. -jkb- (talk) 22:07, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Ankry, I don't know if something more is going on, but when I spot-checked the users in the AbuseFilter log it was mostly users with a few dozen edits on a Wikipedia and no obvious spam. For example: w:fr:Spécial:Contributions/Matteo.Rohner, w:tr:Özel:Katkılar/Bruheradam, w:fr:Spécial:Contributions/Zizou72, w:fr:Spécial:Contributions/FlyChickenFly and w:uk:Спеціальна:Внесок/Maks of Kharkiv who is a rollbacker on ukwiki with 1000+ edits, seems rather unprobable for a spammer. Many from France so either your spammer is French or there is a campaign on frwiki to promote wikisource. Let's see if the filter will be triggered less after the change and/or if spam goes up. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 12:44, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: I am unsure what is going on. I made the filter public, so you can see it. The example entry from the log is 2021-12-09T18:25:28: Matteo.Rohner (talk | block) triggered filter 12, performing the action "autocreateaccount" on Special:UserLogin. Actions taken: Disallow; Filter description: rate limiting IP edits And I wonder why this filter was activated. Does User Matteo.Rohner not belong to the group "users" or is the string "autocreateaccount" different to itself? Any help is welcome. Ankry (talk) 14:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Ankry, just guessing: if you don't have an account since you're trying to create one, how could you be a user? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:41, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Ankry, or I could be wrong. Matteo.Rohner got registered at 18:25 and triggered the AF at the same time. Possibly they had multiple dormant tabs open. Bruheradam registered at 16:03 but triggered the filter at 17:52 when they already had an account. I suspect this might be true for all. And maybe !(action == "autocreateaccount") should use = instead of ==? Not sure if that matters but it would explain if that always evaluates to true. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 16:06, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes. You are right. The problem should go away already. Ankry (talk) 16:08, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Editing help

FYI

 – Added header. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 18:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

 Meusme123 (talk) 18:46, 9 December 2021 (UTC) How do I edit others?

User has been blocked for vandalism. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:47, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

How do We suggest a Canadian Public Figure to be added to Wikipedia?

Hello! There is a Canadian public figure who is a young singer/songwriter and actress who should be added to Wikipedia. How does this happen, and how can we help? Jmartins88 (talk) 18:51, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Jmartins88 Welcome to the Teahouse. The criteria for whether or not a young musician or, indeed, a musician of any age, can be found at WP:NMUSIC. Unless the criteria there can be met, it could well be TOOSOON for such a page. Who is "we"? If you represent the artist or are a family friend, you would have a Conflict of Interest were you to try to create such a page yourself. Only one person may use a Wikipedia account, as we do not permit sharing. Assuming this person does meet our 'notability' criteria, it is likely that an up-and-coming artist would quickly attract interest from someone else who wanted to write about them (based upon Reliable, independent sources). They could submit the name and some sources to WP:REQUESTED ARTICLES, but the list there is huge, and there is no certainty anyone would pick up on their name and run with it. If you told us who this person is and point us to the best sources which talk about him/her then we might be able to offer some practical observations on the chances of success. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

RC Patroller question

Hi, I am not so new at wikipedia but new enough to need to ask questions. On the page about RC Patrolling says if vandalism should be tagged or deleted, how would I tag? Msaskiw (talk) 20:49, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Msaskiw Welcome to the Teahouse. It's great that you're doing RC patrolling ( I used to do a lot myself). Basically, if it's vandalism, just delete it by reverting the edit. Then warn the editor with a rising scale of warnings. First offenders usually get a 1st level warning, and so on. The best way to do this is to ensure you have WP:TWINKLE enabled in your Preferences. Having done so, the TW menu at the top of the screen will allow you to leave an appropriate warning for that user. If they continue to cause problems after their final warning, then and only then is it the time to report them to WP:AIV. You can use Twinkle to automate that process, too. My tip with troublesome editors was to keep a tab open for each one and keep coming back to see if they've editing again. So revert and warn; watch, revert and warn again; until final level warning is exceeded. For bad vandalism I'd ignore the first level warning and judge whether or not to start with a 2nd level or (rarely) a 3rd or only warning - but do that only sparingly for the very worst, offensive abuses. Does that answer your question? Nick Moyes (talk) 20:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: This is admittedly something I'm curious about as well but you don't seem to have explained what it means by tagging an edit that's vandalism. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf If you read the RCP page, you'll see the OP has slightly confused what is required. There's no mention there of tagging vandalism. However, bad edits can be tagged with such things as , , ,, etc according to how poor the edit is, and assuming it's not so bad that it would be best to revert it. All vandalism should be removed immediately it is detected. There are times when one can't be sure whether or not it's vandalism, so tagging a poor edit can be appropriate. Of course, going to the editor and asking them to address it themselves is something we often forget we can also do. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:18, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Msaskiw - @Nick Moyes Yah that helps alot! Thanks so much! Excited to start Patrolling Correctly!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Msaskiw (talk • contribs)

@Msaskiw: You really should learn how to reply properly on talk pages (by pinging) and to indent that reply (and to sign your reply, of course) before you start engaging with other editors via RCP, or you'll cause quite a bit of confusion if you drop by a users page with a personal note and forget to sign it with four tildes (like this: ~~~~ ), and Preview before publishing it.

My tip for good Recent Change patrolling is not to lurk at the top of the list all the time (everyone does, it seems), but look much lower down the list for things like changes to school articles (they get lots of vandalism); edit summaries like "fixed it" or "fixed typo" are obvious flags to be checked (use Ctrl-F to search the list for these keywords).

Use the ORES colour indicators to spot the most likely issues, and check the contributions of all editors who you revert, as one bad edit can reveal a pattern of many others. Keep monitoring their contributions, and even consider temporarily adding an article to your watchlist for a week to keep any eye on subsequent edits they might come back and make there.

Here are my favourite Recent Changes settings which filter out the least troublesome edits and flag up only the most likely to be problematic.

I also strongly advise enabling 'Navigation Popups' in Preferences>Gadgets] as this lets you very quickly view diffs, hist, IP contributions and other information just by hovering over the relevant link on the Recent Changes page - something the default mouse hover function does not offer you. And finally, don't fall into the trap of assuming all IP editors make bad edits; they don't. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 21:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

         Hi Nick Moyes, thanks for the tip on talk pages, For Recent Changes Patrolling I use wikiloop doublecheck so the advice on RC Patrolling so some of the                        advice doesnt apply but yes I will be sure to apply the others! Msaskiw (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Also, you indent your reply by adding a colon (:) to the beginning of your comment. Adding a space causes some weird formatting. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip! Msaskiw (talk) 22:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

No problem! If the convo goes too deep you can simply just use {{outdent}} which basically makes a line from the last comment to your comment to connect it with the previous comments above it while also making it so we don't end up going to the point where 1 letter is on the first line. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:13, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

"notability"_and_"citation"_guidelines

Hello, this is in response to User:Scope creep. The first article I have contributed "Gregg Hill (jazz composer)" has been flagged for "notability" and "needs more citations from reliable, independent sources" and was moved to draftspace. I have cited 2 independent articles on the composer (a newspaper article and liner notes of a major commercial jazz release by Rodney Whitaker who has his own Wikipedia page. So at the very least Gregg Hill(jazz composer) should be connected to that page if he doesn't yet merit his own article, correct? Can you tell me if the sources I have are indeed not appropriate, or where the issues are in the article in terms of content and tone if any? Please advise the best course of action or connect me with someone who can help this article meet standards before submitting for review? I have posted my query on the Teahouse but have not gotten any response. Perhaps User:Cordless Larry can assist or suggest someone to help? Thank you in advance so much for your help! EroniousThunk (talk) 21:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

•  Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1133 § assistance meeting "notability" and "citation" guidelines - Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 21:43, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello EroniousThunk. As you can see if you follow the link above, you did get a response to your last post. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jazz was recommended as a place to find jazz lovers who might help dig up more sources. I doubt that liner notes count here, but I may be wrong. You could certainly use the newspaper article to cite mentions of Gregg Hill elsewhere on Wikipedia. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 22:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Limit to editing wikis?

Hello, I decided to make a new account on wikipedia and wondered if there is a limit to editing pages. If there is, please reply. If not, you can ignore this question. Many thanks in advance! 👍 Blocks72 (talk) 21:24, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Blocks72: It depends on the situation with your old account. Depending on that, the answer is 100% yes, or 100% no, or somewhere in between. Please explain. Also, not sure what you mean by a "limit". Also, somewhat concerned that you named your account "Blocks", which has an unfortunate connotation here ... --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:32, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Blocks72, one limit is the limit on promotion. Somewhere in this series of edits, you changed "Missouri’s Ozark Mountains" to "Missouri’s famed Ozark Mountains". Please remove "famed". -- Hoary (talk) 23:05, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

How do I remove template messages?

Hi! Hope you all are having a good day. I'm quite new to this process and I have a few questions. These days, when I see a template message that says something like "This plot summary may be too long...", I edit the plot summary below to make it more concise. What do I do then? Can I remove the message? I think you can remove them by clicking on them in the visual editor, but this doesn't always work, specially when the box is within a table of contents. The visual editor thinks you're trying to click on the table itself. Same thing with the messages that say "citation needed". What I'm currently doing is adding the citations next to the "citation needed" sign. Thanks in advance! Pablov95 (talk) 22:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Pablov95 and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, if you believe you've fixed the problem, you can remove the template (and if you get pushback, that's when conversation and consensus - ideally - happen). I don't use the visual editor, so I can't help you there; in source mode I just find the "PROBLEM HERE" marker between its curly brackets and delete the whole thing, leaving some relevant comment in the summary to show I'm not just randomly removing maintenance templates.. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 23:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Pablov95 Welcome to the Teahouse. This probably isn't the answer you want to hear, but I would always use WP:Source Editor for removing templates, and never Visual Editor. (I still can't master working with templates with VE myself after many years). In source editor (which you can ensure is always offered to you by setting your Preferences to show both editing tool options) you find the template text between double curly brackets {{}}. So long as you're confident you have addressed the matter, then removing the template is ideal. (I'll look forward to someone answering your directly, as I'm always keen to learn, too). Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:04, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Article declined for the second time when it meets notability criteria 1

I need help. this situation has turned into something that's bigger than me. For the second time around my article has been declined even when I stated in the comments that the subject meets the notable criteria under option 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles The reviewers are overlooking this and just declined the article for a billboard chart lyric when the claim to notable was not charting. The claim is for the subject appearing in multiple magazine articles independent of the subject. So can someone please help me. I can't wrap my head around how are reviewers able to ignore the criteria and continue to deny the article. I waited 2 months for a review and the reviewer does not look at the fact that the subject is notable in other categories. At this point I feel I need to be helped by someone in high position to look this over. Please can someone help me with this, I'm crying out loud at this point and can't understand. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:AJDaGuru Godsentme1 (talk) 23:03, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Please see the most recent message(s) added to this thread above. -- Hoary (talk) 23:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Godsentme1 Courtesy: Draft:AJDaGuru has been declined twice, revised and resubmitted. It will be in the hands of the next reviewer who decides to review it. There is no "...someone in high position to look this over." The review system is not a queue, so could be days, weeks, or sadly, months, waiting for a review. In a response to a suggestion posted at Teahouse, you have identified in a comment what you believe to be the strong references that confirm his notability and reduced the over-referencing. Good. David notMD (talk) 08:59, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Banned editor editing anonymously as IP

I strongly suspect a topic banned editor edits an article they are banned from anonymously, as IP. What shall I do? I understand CheckkUser team does not check IPs, out of the concern for outing. --Armatura (talk) 23:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC) --Armatura (talk) 23:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Armatura: You can still open a WP:Sockpuppet investigation but you will have to support your suspicions entirely with behavioural evidence, e.g. shared interests and shared editing quirks. 192.76.8.80 (talk) 00:27, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Reliable Source

Is Ranker.com a reliable source to use on things?

No (no editorial oversight). Fan opinion sites (and all other forms of user-generated content) are never acceptable sources unless the subject is using the site to talk about themselves (and even then there's a strict limit on how much we can use such sources). —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 00:23, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano: Gotcha. Can I use Buzzfeed for things like that? I assume not. ― Kaleeb18^Talk 00:33, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Ask RSP. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 01:06, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

• Basically, no it isn’t because of what has already been aforementioned, you are right to come here to ask, which is a trait concomitant with any good faith editor who seeks to build an encyclopedia. Now, whilst we at the Teahouse are always more than happy to assist, I can teach you how to use sources, you might want to read WP:RS for starters, basically what you want to know is a reliable source must have a reputation for fact checking, and a presence of an editorial oversight team, if both are satisfied then you are probably looking at a good reliable source. Celestina007 (talk) 09:45, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Can you unilaterally change names of articles?

I know how to move the page and change name, but can you just go ahead and do it?

I want to change Amhara Mass Media Agency old name to Amhara Media Corporation new name since 2020. I left an message on the Talk page. Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 01:22, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes, under the WP:BOLD rational. I would just do it unless you have a WP:COI. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 01:36, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Ariconte thnx Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 01:45, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

• @Dawit S Gondaria, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, to expatiate on what my colleague Ariconte told you, the answer to your question is both yes and no depending on the context. Yes you can unilaterally move an article to a different name & No, if the title of the article is controversial, that is, has been moved in the past then no, you cannot unilaterally move the article what you want to do is open a discussion on the TP of the article if there is little to no participation then you can go to WP:RM and initiate this request. Celestina007 (talk) 09:56, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Resolved

When a topic has a google knowledge graph

What do you do if a specific topic has a google knowledge panel but no Wikipedia do you create an Wikipedia article? Rednike01 (talk) 03:07, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@Rednike01: If you encounter a Google Knowledge panel with no Wikipedia article, you don't have to create a Wikipedia article. Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially if you've never edited Wikipedia before. To learn how to edit, you could view Help:Introduction and The Wikipedia Adventure. I suggest then spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the subject, and determine whether it meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article, and be prepared for a process that may include months of waiting, rejections, and rewrites, before an article is created. Your Draft:JumondR Rondaii does not have any independent sources. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:54, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

What exactly does the tag (cleaning up COI / citespam) mean?

Greetings Wikipedians. Would you be kind enough to tell me if "(cleaning up COI / citespam)" is an 'official' way to explain changes to an article, and if so what does it mean? I think it means that the text of the article wasn't changed, just citations which are viewed as spammy or in conflict, is my view on this correct?

FWIW this isn't about an edit I made, just have seen it on several pages.

Thanks in advance! FranMichael (talk) 03:17, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@Franchisemichael: Welcome to the Teahouse! Could you please give us an example? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Sure thing! From a page I follow so I was alerted to this change.

https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Franchising&action=history

03:53, 10 December 2021 (UTC) FranMichael (talk) 03:53, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

• @Franchisemichael, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, i would give you a blanket answer to your question, if an article you created has a {{COI}} tag, it means the person who put the tag suspects you (the article creator) has, to a certain degree a form of relationship with the subject of your article, the editor who put the tag usually should initiate a conversation with you. You can read more about this here; WP:COI. As for the CITESPAM tag, it means you are reintroducing multiple (perhaps dubious) sources in diverse articles across this collaborative project for purpose of promotion (spamming) Please see WP:CITESPAM for a more detailed in-depth explanation. Which brings us to the crux of your question, there isn’t anything like Cleaning COI, what the person ought to do is initiate a conversation with you, as for “cleaning cite-spam” it is doable, that invariably means they are removing what they believe to CITESPAM from the article, I hope this helps. Celestina007 (talk) 09:22, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@Franchisemichael: Thank you for providing an example of an edit summary with that text. In the future, you can always ask the editor directly if you don't understand their edit summary. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:43, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Citations

What do I put for authors in a citation if there is like 5 of them? ― Kaleeb18^Talk 03:30, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: If you're using a template such as {{cite web}}:

• Use |author1=, |author2=, |author3=, |author4=, |author5= to display all five
• Use |last1=|first1=, |last2=|first2=, |last3=|first3=, |last4=|first4=, |last5=|first5= to display all five
• Choose one of the above and use |display-authors= to display a designated number of authors (e.g. |display-authors=2 will display only the first two authors)
• |display-authors=etal displays all authors in the list followed by et al.

For more information, see the documentation at Template:Cite web. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:42, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thank you. ― Kaleeb18^Talk 03:48, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

editing rules

Editing restriction:

I just read the following message:

"Hello, please stop reverting the edits. I have been instructed to edit the page because sections have been improperly sourced. I am the original author of the page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArcticFox55 (talk • contribs) 03:26, 10 December 2021 (UTC)"

clarification[edit source]

For the record I have not been reverting however, this was my question:

Dear Kpddg

I'm sorry but I'm new to Wikipedia - please explain why I can't edit a page? My edit is designed to provide clarity and honesty and so I don't understand how it is that you state no one can edit the page? I look forward to your response and apologise if I have misunderstood Wikipedia.

- I wonder if anyone can explain what is going on - not a great experience for my first edit on Wikipedia. THANK YOU Yorkshire views (talk) 03:38, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@Yorkshire views: Welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse! Thank you for trying to improve the Simon Reevell article. Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, you did the right think by posting at User talk:Kpddg to ask why your edits were reverted. (I think the post from ArcticFox55 is unrelated to you.) In the meantime TheresNoTime restored your edits because Kpddg didn't explain the revert. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:48, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@Yorkshire views: Hi, welcome to Wikipedia - I'm sorry your experience hasn't been great so far. I've restored your changes and asked the editor to explain why they removed them. It could be because we require reliable sources for many claims, but the editor in question could have at least left you a message letting you know why.

The message you saw (Hello, please stop reverting the edits [...]) was actually another editor (ArcticFox55) leaving Kpddg a message, and was not directed at you - there's a tutorial you might find helpful, as Wikipedia has a bit of a learning curve. -- TNT (talk • she/they) 03:49, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Simon Reevell

@Yorkshire views: It looks like Kpddg acted hastily and TheresNoTime has reverted the reversion (i.e., added back the content that you added). It's no reflection on you – thank you for your contribution. ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 03:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@Yorkshire views: :@TheresNoTime: :@ClaudineChionh: Hello. I reverted this edit as it was poorly sourced. But I believe you have said that it is fine. Sorry for not including this reason in the edit summary. I have responded to the editor in concern on their talk page as well. Hope you are satisfied. Thank You. And apologies Yorkshire views for this not being a 'great experience' .Kpddg (talk) 04:32, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Hollywood pedophilia

 2600:100A:B025:2BA4:8E40:C1D5:477C:983A (talk) 04:46, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Is there a specific question, IP? GeraldWL 04:56, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Seeking help in replacing album infobox image

The scan of File:Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark album cover.jpg[9] was misaligned, creased, dim, and shadowy around its edges, so I uploaded a much crisper version (still low-res and meeting the same upload criteria as the first). The original upload was from Discogs.com, while my replacement was from semi-official Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark fansite Messages.[10] However my new version is not showing in Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark (album). I am not terribly experienced here and would appreciate the help of a seasoned editor. Thanks. Paulie302 (talk) 07:33, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

As I view the article, Paulie302, I see the newer image, the one that you recently uploaded. Try refreshing your view of the page, or of course your view of the page that should show the new image (as well as, lower down, the old one). -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

It's a problem in your browser, which keeps old images in an attempt to download less each time you go back to a page. See Wikipedia:Purge#Purge_local_browser_cache for instructions about purging your browser's cache. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:55, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Numbered list I'm struggling to format

There's a numbered list on First Council of Nicaea, under Promulgation of canon law, that I'm struggling to format correctly; I've looked in the style guides, but I can't find anything covering this. In the text, it appears as:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9–14.

15–16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

- which is not only not how a numbered list should appear, but also, I can't figure out how to format a numbered list with items 9-14 and 15-16 appearing as they do. Listing items 9-14 out in full - essentially just repeating myself - seems wrong and wonky. Any help? --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 13:09, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@Ineffablebookkeeper: No special formatting has been done, it is exactly the same in the article as you've got it here (I'm looking in the source editor with 9-14 just as 9hyphen14). The laws themselves are cited from here[11] and I guess you'll have to go back to that source to find out why they have been entered as they have. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:19, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Images from US government websites?

I am working on Shelley H. Metzenbaum's page and wonder if images posted on US government pages are allowed for use on Wikipedia? In particular, I am wondering about the image here: [12]. Thanks in advance for any help or guidance. DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:07, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi @DaffodilOcean. The copyright statement covering that site is, I think, here, and does appear compatible. The US government - and some other governments around the world - does usually license things in a usable way. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 14:25, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Wikignome Wintergreen - thanks. Do I have to put the page into wikicommons before I can use it? And/or what is the next step before I can use the image?DaffodilOcean (talk) 15:00, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes, that's the correct process and allows the image to be used in all Wiki projects, including other-language versions. Use the Wizard linked from the Commons home page and follow the process to say this is a US Gov source (you'll be asked for the URL, for example). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:11, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@DaffodilOcean - here's a direct link to the Wizard for you. Don't forget your ruby/silver slippers, and pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 15:23, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Wikignome Wintergreen - easy. Thanks for the link, that was super helpful and I didn't even need the ruby slippers for luck. DaffodilOcean (talk) 15:52, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

How to get my information onto wikipedia

Hi there, I am a musician who's wanting to get my information onto wikipedia, and the information added is to be added by wikipedia itself. So for wikipedia to add my information to their list, just like how wikipedia has an info site of Martin Garrix, how can I send my information to wikipedia to do this? How to do this as well? Tejas Nayak (talk) 14:22, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@DragonSlayeyer1: Hello Tejas! Please check out WP:NOTABILITY. In order for you to be able to have an article on Wikipedia you'll have to a be a notable figure who has received coverage from reliable, secondary sources. Also, I recommend changing your signature to actually include your username as with how it is now it shows your username as being "Tejas Nayak". If you are notable then please take a look at WP:COI and WP:PAID. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:41, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I'm sorry to disappoint you, DragonSlayeyer1 but 13-year-olds who happen to be interested in music usually won't merit an article in this encyclopaedia. The very few musicians who are notable for their skills and performance will get written about by our volunteer editors. Trying to write an autobiography about yourself is not recommended. A limited amount of information may appear on your user page (as you have already done) but note that this is intended to assist other editors here to know a bit about you: it is not to promote yourself to the world and is not indexed by search engines. There is no-one to "send information to" — we research things from published reliable sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:43, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

AFC

Is there any possible way of knowing if an article has come via afc or has been directly moved? It is necessary to know, when I visit new pages. ― Itcouldbepossible^Talk 14:36, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes, the edit history of the article should allow you to see how the article arrived in Main Space. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:45, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Most times if it was accepted though the AFC helper script it will also automatically have the AFC Project banner on the talk page. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 15:30, 10 December 2021 (UTC)