Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ais523 (talk | contribs) at 14:57, 4 August 2022 (→does somebody have to be relevant in order for them to have a wikipedia article: a more complete explanation, together with links to relevant policies and guidelines). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


This is the teahouse
Shortcuts

Maproom, a Teahouse host

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

Admin abusing his privileges

How to report an admin on Wikipedia who abuses his power to ban and attack individuals without any debate and resolving any issues? Emirthesenat (talk) 07:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

in the first instance on the admin's talk page. If that's not satisfactory then file a report here: WP:AN/I. Polyamorph (talk) 07:57, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Emirthesenat I concur with the above advice- but you give a broad statement lacking context so it's hard to say more. Discussion is not always possible or even desirable in cases of severe disruption. Please discuss your concerns with the admin in question first. ANI should be the last option. Be aware that your own actions, or those of the other users, will be examined as well if you start a discussion there. See WP:BOOMERANG. 331dot (talk) 08:01, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot and Polyamorph: Juding by diff, this is about the OP's edits to Evolution and Project Power. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:08, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) It appears that this relates to a short block more than three months ago by user:Doug Weller. See Special:Log/block&page=User:Emirthesenat and [1]. This is the user's first post since the block, and I would strongly suggest that this be dropped. Meters (talk) 08:11, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See an attack after the OP posted here. User talk:LaundryPizza03#One sided and tyrannical behaviour and banning individuals on Wikipedia that disagree with Pizza's ideology. Doug Weller talk 08:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have blocked Emirthesenat. Cullen328 (talk) 15:51, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good call. Polyamorph (talk) 16:09, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's worth noting that neither user Emirthesenat complained about in that post (LaundryPizza03 (talk · contribs) or SchreiberBike (talk · contribs)) has administrator userrights. The closest either has to it is that SchrieberBike has a CRASH badge. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 21:04, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How to Link an english wikipedia article page to the German wikipedia

An existing page in english that I want to also have it available on German wikipedia TJH2020 (talk) 05:50, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what it is that you want to do. The German-language article de:Erich Honecker has a list of other-language articles about Honecker, and these include the English-language article Erich Honecker. Do you want to achieve something similar (but of course for a different article)? If not, please explain again what it is that you want to achieve. -- Hoary (talk) 07:39, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TJH2020 Within a sentence, you can highlight and link a word to an article that exists in another language Wikipedia, but which doesn’t yet exist on English Wikipedia. You can use an inter-language link for this. Details at {{ill}}. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:49, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The page already exists in English. I want to publish it on German Wikipedia. What the easiest and best way to do that? TJH2020 (talk) 20:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TJH2020, you would have to create the article in German on German Wikipedia, via their own article creation process. You can ask what their process is at the German version of the Teahouse: link. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:07, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article about Russian artist Vladimir Logutov

Hello!

I've made an article about Russian artist Vladimir Logutov in English https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vladimir_Logutov

But I received a messege from Wiki that the submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). And also it was said that my article appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia.

But here's an article about this artist in Russian Wiki

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%BE%D0%B3%D1%83%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2,_%D0%92%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80

So this is not an advertisment, he is an influantial and well known artist here in Russia. I tried to do my English article about him more informative, with more facts about his artistic practices then in Russian article and I'm surprised that it's not enough for English version of the article.

So I need an advice what can I do to make the article better? Maybe I should put more links from English resources? Or what? Gzub4ik (talk) 08:07, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gzub4ik Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Each language version of Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. What is acceptable on one version is not necessarily acceptable on another. The English version, as the oldest and with a large number of editors, tends to be stricter. Sources do not need to be in English. What usually matters is the quality of the sources, not the quantity of sources. We would rather have three great sources than dozens of poor sources. 331dot (talk) 08:17, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, thank you for the answer! I understood where i made mistakes. Too many random links and a huge size of the article. I'll try to fix it soon. Gzub4ik (talk) 16:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article on Caltech experimental physicist and professor declined

Hi, I recently submitted an article on notable Caltech experimental physicist Rana X. Adhikari which was rejected for not meeting wiki standards, even though the article is encyclopedic in nature, is heavily cited with published sources and provides plethora of info to readers. Could the editors' community point out sections that sound like an advertisement and citations that don't seem reliable so that I can make the article worthy of inclusion. Quentinhotwater (talk) 09:23, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You could start by following the advice you've been given when the draft was rejected. -Roxy the English speaking dog 09:38, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Roxy, there was no advice, only the following generic message that's left me confused!
"This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies." Quentinhotwater (talk) 09:46, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Quentinhotwater. This may be a case where "less would be more". Draft:Rana X. Adhikari certainly shows that this academic is notable, lack of which is the single reason that most drafts get declined. So, I would suggest cutting some material out that is really just trivia and often sourced to WP:PRIMARY things like interviews (including from caltech, which is not WP:INDEPENDENT of him), blogs and social media. Stick mainly to the high-quality WP:SECONDARY sources. So, for example, do readers need to know His curiosity in physics was sparked by a comic-book Monica Rambeau, the second Captain Marvel, who transformed herself into neutrinos to pass through the sun? Likewise, listing at the end all the interviews with him that have been published doesn't help and can sound as if it is just promoting how wonderful he is. Let his work and his awards demonstrate that without embellishment. I hope this helps.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:36, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With the examples you've listed, the rejection comments make perfect sense and so now I'd be able to improve the article. Thanks a ton for your help. Quentinhotwater (talk) 12:56, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Quentinhotwater Perhaps a nuance to you, but the draft was Declined, not Rejected. The latter would have meant that in the eyes of the experienced reviewer, there was no potential for the draft to be approved. David notMD (talk) 14:46, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for pointing that out. new to wikiedits so thought decline equals rejection. Updated my understanding and the query posted. Quentinhotwater (talk) 14:54, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Quentinhotwater I'm glad to see the article was accepted after the suggested tweaks. Adhikari sounds like a very interesting scientist, so perhaps you would now consider doing a WP:DYK for him (see that link for the instructions) and get some fact about him on the Mainpage in due course? Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:35, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MikeTurnbull sounds like a great idea. Thanks mate. Should be able to set aside a few pointers in the coming days. I'll keep ya posted. Quentinhotwater (talk) 04:54, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Michael D. Turnbull,
Here's some DYK statements. Let me know what you think and what I need to do next for this to appear on the Mainpage. Thanks!
Did you know...?
...that the idea of building a gravitational-wave observatory in India was first proposed by experimental physicist Rana X. Adhikari?
...that experimental physicist Rana X. Adhikari was the subject of an inspirational short film named LIGO: The Way the Universe is, I think?
...that Rana X. Adhikari, an experimental physicist at Caltech, worked as a car mechanic before joining academia? Quentinhotwater (talk) 04:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Translation of the page

Good evening,

I have tried to create an English version for the Estonian page https://et.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaidi_Ruusalepp but I have no permission for publish it. Could you please help me with this issue? Iya2101 (talk) 19:19, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to create it in draft space via WP:AFC. Please be aware the existence of an article on another project does not mean it is notable by English Wikipedia's standards. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:28, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Iya2101, you don't appear to have any experience whatever of editing en:Wikipedia (or indeed of editing et:Wikipedia). If your interest is entrepreneurs, I recommend that you practise editing existing articles about entrepreneurs before attempting to create a new article about one. (Or are you exclusively interested in Kaidi Ruusalepp?) -- Hoary (talk) 21:57, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! But I have created it in draft space https://prnt.sc/hZvaoYbH-Upy and did the translation. I exclusively interested in Kaidi Ruusalepp)) I need to create only this English version for Estonian page of this entrepreneur. Iya2101 (talk) 10:08, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Iya2101 Although I am not familiar with using the translation tool, this link does indicate that you tried to use it from Estonian Wikipedia to make a translation within the last 24 hours. What actually happened when you clicked the blue Publish button? As far as I can see from the heading notice, only those users with WP:EXTENDEDCONFIRMED status are permitted to use that tool. You clearly do not fit that criterion, so it probably did not allow you to go any further. This link shows me that you have only ever had two edits published globally across all Wikipedia sites. So it looks like your attempt to ssave (=Publish) the translation failed, and that you cannot save that converted text.
Also: what is your connection to Kaidi Ruusalepp? Have you been asked (or paid) to create this page for her? If so, you need to declare that Conflict of Interest on your user page before you try to write about her here. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:50, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help with article creation - first time

Hi I recently submitted an article and it was declined, it's my first ever article.


Could someone help me with updating it/correcting it so it's in a good enough state to get approved.


Draft:Healthpost JoshuaGNZ (talk) 21:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JoshuaGNZ, three problems are flagged. One of the three is This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Fixing this is a necessary step towards promotion to article status (though, by itself, not a sufficient step). It's highly unlikely that you'll persuade anyone here to look for these sources (if they even exist). Rather, it's up to you. Which do you believe are the best three sources? -- Hoary (talk) 21:49, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hoary,
The 3 sources I provided are from the largest news organisations in New Zealand and when look for references for the company they are the only ones that provide information that's not form the company website.
What other references could I use that I could find? JoshuaGNZ (talk) 22:07, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Joshua, and welcome to the Teahouse. The main problem, as Hoary says, is with your references. Two of them are based on interviews, and so are not independent of the company. The one about the Sanctuary would be a helpful source, but it doesn't actually say very much about the company, so without stronger independent sources, it doesn't do much for notability. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If such sources cannot be found, then there is literally nothing thqat can go in the article, and it will not be accepted however it is written.
My advice to new editors is always to spend several months learning how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to some of our six million existing article, before plunging into the much-more-difficult-than-it-looks task of creating a new article. As well as being likely to to suffer much less frustration, you will be adding vastly more value to Wikipedia that way than by struggling up the steep hill called New Article Creation. ColinFine (talk) 22:14, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Colin,
Thanks so much for your response, I think I understand now with the references. Even so they are an independent news sites, I've just referenced the quotes from the company, which cannot be verified.
Haha I think I'll have a go editing for a few months instead as you suggested. JoshuaGNZ (talk) 03:44, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've just referenced the quotes from the company, which cannot be verified.
Yes, that's part of the problem. But the more fundamental one is that those articles contain little or nothing which which does not derive from the company. In an article mostly based on independent sources, you could cite a few uncontroversial and non-promotional claims from those articles, but nothing more (see PRIMARY).
Enjoy your editing. ColinFine (talk) 13:46, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
JoshuaGNZ, on the plus side, you've clearly addressed the suspicion of paid editing, and I don't think that in its current state the draft is promotional. -- Hoary (talk) 22:31, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I'm trying to remove a very unflattering photo of my client actress Lisa Ann Walter from her Wikipedia page and replace it with a better photo (and one that she owns the rights to).

Can you please offer any assistance on how I can remove a very unflattering photo of my client actress Lisa Ann Walter on her Wikipedia page and replace it with a better photo? (it would also be a photo that she owns). We don't know who posted the original photo but it wasn't Lisa Ann. Here is a link to her page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Ann_Walter Thanks!! 173.197.81.18 (talk) 23:49, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is she willing to release the image under a suitable copyleft licence that allows reuse for any purpose, including commercial, as long as she is credited as the rightsholder? (Per our policies in re FU/FD, this is a hard requirement.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 23:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
EC Welcome to the Teahouse. The original image is at Flickr, and I think it is just fine (and presumably she did on the day(?).--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 23:59, 1 August 2022 (UTC)(I am not a Teahouser)[reply]
There's another image at c:Category:Lisa Ann Walter - seems to be the same person, looking at the eyebrows and chin?--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 00:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IP editor. Since you are editing on behalf of your client, you must register a Wikipedia account, and make the Paid contribution disclosure. This is mandatory and non-negotiable. The photo your client dislikes was uploaded by User:Stemoc, who retired from Wikipedia about four years ago. "Owning" a photo is not the same as owning the copyright to the photo. For example, wedding photographers and school photographers routinely retain the copyright to photos that they take, and the subjects own the physical photos but not the cooyright. Only the copyright holder and no one else can freely license a photo for use on Wikipedia. The most straightforward solution is for the copyright holder to upload the photo to Wikimedia Commons, freely licensing it for use by anyone for any purpose. If the photo in question has ever been published elsewhere, that will greatly complicate the process, because the act of publishing without an explicit free license creates a restrictive copyright. So, the straightforward solution is a "fresh" photo, never published elsewhere, uploaded by the photographer to Wikimedia Commons under an acceptable free license. Cullen328 (talk) 02:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So, in my personal view, the photo there is fine -- hardly unflattering. If the photo you want to replace it with is studio glamour shot, we might not consider it an improvement, and contest the change on the merits. Possibly. We want the photo that best shows how the person looks, not necessarily the photo that makes the person look best. Herostratus (talk) 23:37, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography section questions

I recently altered an entry in a Bibliography section (added the location of the publisher, rearranged the order of the info. within the entry). Should I leave the "date accessed" date alone, or should I change it to the date I did the altering? Also, I discovered one entry was a "Centennial Anniversary Edition". Is that the sort of thing that goes into the "Editon" box in the "cite book" template? -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 06:22, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pete Best Beatles I think it is good practice to change the access-date provided you actually tested that the URL link worked. This helps confirm the URL is still live and gives an approximate date when the Wayback Machine's archive should have copies. I don't think it is worth fiddling with the sequence of the parameters as that won't alter the way the citation looks after rendering and you might accidentally miss one or duplicate it. {{cite book}} says that you could indeed put "Centennial Anniversary" as the edition but shouldn't include the word "Edition" as the template will already add " ed." to the text after rendering. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:53, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page names

I can't sign my name on talk pages, Even if I use the four tildes. 209.97.89.182 (talk) 08:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are not logged in to your account. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First, It worked before. Second I don't have an account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.97.89.182 (talk) 08:49, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have signed your two posts here perfectly correctly. It shows your IP address and links to the IP address' talk page. That happens automatically for you if you click the 'reply' link. But if you click 'Edit' beside a topic title, as you say, you need to add four tildes. I suspect you either haven't appreciated what a tilde character actually is (it looks like this: ~) or your keyboard language is set wrongly, such that it types different characters than the keys actually show. This edit you made shows that you typed four 'equals' signs. What you need to use are four of these: ~ so that they appear like this: ~~~~. A good test is to open a basic text editor and hit every key in a line, both with and without 'Shift', and check whether your computer is displaying different characters that your keyboard shows. When I replaced the keyboard on my old laptop, I bought one from China which had an American keyboard layout. So now I have to ensure I set my laptop's language to Eng>US, not Eng>UK or all my $ and @ appear with the wrong keys, and I don't have access to a £ GBP key at all. If you are really struggling to get your correct keyboard language set, you could always type ALT-126 on a numeric keypad to generate each tilde character. Does any of that help? Nick Moyes (talk) 09:16, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weirdly it's only working here on the teahouse and not on talk pages,The only way I think It could work is maybe through using visual editing instead of source editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.97.89.182 (talk) 10:19, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wanted to create an article for NH Studioz

Hello,

I just wanted to know that I wanted to create a new Wikipedia article for my company NH Studioz. Pls. let me know that weather I'm eligible or not.

Mean to say that does it meet all notability criteria. ???? Iamit5000 (talk) 10:44, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Iamit5000 It is highly unwise to attempt to promote your business on Wikipedia. Our notability criteria for companies are set out at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Unless you very clearly meet those criteria, you would have no chance, and would simply be wasting your time and ours. It is highly inadvisable for anyone with a direct Conflict of Interest, such as you do, to attempt to write about their own company. If you are (or become) genuinely notable, someone will undoubtedly want to create a page for that business. That person should really not be you! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:06, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
NH Studioz has been deleted four times and is now salted so it can't be re-created without admin assistance. Theroadislong (talk) 11:14, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrating a Wikipedia article

Hello,

I've identified two images on gallery websites (available for free download) that it would be great to use to illustrate the draft Wikipedia article I'm working on for a Scottish women artist.

One image is CC-NC on the National Galleries of Scotland website and the other is published by ArtUK. I have contacted the Gallery (the Fleming Collection) who shared the image for ArtUK to publish and they have responded to advise the work is still in copyright, but they have not manged to make contact with the estate, so the image for is for non-commercial purposes. So again, CC-NC.

From reading the guide to Illustrating Wikipedia and following the upload wizard, I gather images must be uploaded to the Commons before they can be added to articles? And the license must be CC-SA.

Is that correct? Is there anyway of incorporating the CC-NC Gallery images?

Thanks Jh318m (talk) 10:45, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jh318m Welcome to the Teahouse! You have a pretty fair understanding of CC licencing, by the sound of it. In terms of adding images to Wikimedia Commons, no, you may not add anything which is still within copyright and has not been properly released under a CC0 or CC-BY-SA licence. It would be deleted from there.
That said, there are certain circumstances whereby you may add images just to English Wikipedia under a WP:FAIR USE licence. One such situation is where that person is deceased and thus there is clearly no chance of another image ever being created of that person. Only one such low-res image of them may be uploaded for immediate use in that one article about them, and only if no other properly licenced image is available as an alternative. I'm honestly not sure if our fair use policy extends to one example of their creative work - I would have to check the page I've just linked to to be certain.
BTW: When approaching a museum or gallery for access to an image, it is often worth stressing that all you would hope them to release would be a low resolution image suitable to illustrate a webpage, and not some high res version which they might feel is giving away their control over good quality images they might otherwise charge an 'admin fee' to provide to commercial publishers.
Does any of this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 11:16, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please see c:Commons:Licensing for a list of licenses which Wikimedia Commons does (and doesn't) accept. The former includes CC-BY-SA and CC0, but also CC-BY and other licenses not from the Creative Commons family which are equally accepted, such as MPL, while the latter includes CC-NC, CC-BY-NC, CC-BY-ND and CC-BY-NC-ND as well as most other stuff people often write in the "copyright" section of a Website's TOS. Seperately from licensing, Wikimedia Commons accepts media which is in the public domain in both the country where the media was first published, and the US. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:14, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Nick Moyes this is a huge help.
I think the WP Fair Use Licence could be explored however the image available for download is a high-quality image so I will err on the side of caution and not use it: https://www.nationalgalleries.org/art-and-artists/89743 The reuse of the creative work seems a bit complex too. Able to proceed with more understanding anyhow. I appreciate you getting back to me. Jh318m (talk) 12:48, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jh318m You're welcome - but bear in mind we're not experts on copyright issues here. You might wish to ask further more detailed guidance at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. It always help to link to any resource you want to ask about. Obviously no high res image would ever be permitted under fair use, but you can always ask what an appropriate resolution to scale an image back to would be. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editing a Page

Hi Guys I'm trying to edit a page but it brings up a coded page which I have no clue about. Am I doing something wrong? DDay197677 (talk) 10:56, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DDay197677 Which page or article are you attempting to edit? Are you using the Visual Editor or the source code editor? 331dot (talk) 10:58, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It’s the List of England Womens Football players List of England women's international footballers DDay197677 (talk) 17:23, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Which editor are you using? I don't seem to have trouble with it using the regular source editor- though it does appear to have complicated coding. 331dot (talk) 17:26, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ClueBot archiving

Hi, this might not be the right place to ask this, but I had a quick question about setting up the ClueBot III for auto-archiving my talk page. A while back, I set up the archiving system which did one round of archiving, but I didn't have enough traffic at the time to justify its continued usage, so I removed it. However, at this point in time, would it cause any issues to set it back up? There is already an Index and an Archive 1 from last time, so will it just pick back up from where it left off? Thanks for any help and/or recommendations for a more specific place to ask this question. TNstingray (talk) 14:39, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TNstingray Welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, although It's been a while since I set up archiving on my own talk page, I think you'll be OK with that. You've got a good, long age, and a reasonable maximum size. Personally, I prefer to keep all my recent posts on my talk page, and not shuffle them off into innumerable tiny archives like some users seem to like doing - which I find immensely irritating when trynig to understand past interactions (and tends to make me distrustful of their motives for doing so). But I think your settings should achieve that and pick up where you left off. If you wanted to enure more posts are visible, you could always change maxarchsize=75000 to maxarchsize=100000. Alternatively, you could change minkeepthreads=5 to minkeepthreads=20 to retain the most recent posts. But your current settings like fine to me. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:08, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. TNstingray (talk) 16:22, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can I start creating a page for the book: "Hobby fly fishing"?

I published a book in Romania this year 2022, about fly fishing for beginners. I present there information that cannot be found on the internet: the tools I created for tying flies, and new artificial materials. I made a rigorous and schematic classification of fly casting schemes. But the central element for which I request your consent to register this book on Wikipedia, is the fact that I created a new knot that does not exist until now for tying two threads and I made an essential upgrade for an existing knot that ties a loop. Both knots are surprising due to the speed with which they are tied and their excellent performance. I would like these contributions to artificial fly fishing to find their place in our current culture. And I end with the question: Can I start creating a page for the book: "Hobby fly fishing" Vasile Borza (talk) 15:26, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Teahouse, I'm afraid that the short answer is probably no. Wikipedia only summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable topic. It is not somewhere to announce new things or publicise books. Theroadislong (talk) 15:41, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Vasile Borza. I just did a Google search and could not find any trace of your book. That is not a good sign. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (books). The most common way that a book becomes notable is if it is the subject of several in-depth reviews in publications that are considered reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 15:53, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Vasile Borza Following what has already been said (to which I completely agree) I think your best bet is to create your own website and social media presence to promote your idea and to sell your book. Unfortunately Wikipedia is not the place for that. Our notability criteria for acceptance of any article about a published book is WP:NBOOK. Sorry. Maybe it is simply WP:TOOSOON! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:31, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I want to propose a merger

I want to propose a merger of the pages Goryō, and Ghosts in Chinese culture. I believe Ghosts in Chinese culture does a significantly better job at explaining the concept (Goryo is an east asian thing, but the article is more Japanese focused, and the end article should be East Asian cultural sphere general). There should also be a wikidata merge. What subst template should I use to make this happen? Immanuelle 💗 (please tag me) 21:21, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Immanuelle Welcome to the Teahouse. According to the articles, the former one relates to Japan, whilst the latter relates mainly to China. Is a merger actually a sensible suggestion under those circumstances? It almost looks as if the uncited Goryō article could be better made into a WP:REDIRECT to Goryo faith. It could be better to discuss the potential for redirecting Gory on the Goryo faith article first, whilst maybe mentioning the possibility of a merger at the same time. (Bear in mind I know nothing about either culture, so my observations are based on a quick skim of both articles) If, however, you still want to risk a formal discussion along the lines you suggested, you can find all the guidelines for doing this at Wikipedia:Merging. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:07, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I need help with article creation

Hello! I'm creating my first article on Wikipedia about a webinar called Worldwide AI webinar. The event will take place on September 23rd, 2022. Can I have some feedback on what I can improve to increase the chance of the article being published? Thank you so much! Olivia shannon 4021 (talk) 04:09, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It would certainly help if some or all of the people listed had Wikipedia articles which you link to, but I am doubtful that this webinar is notable before it takes place and perhaps not even then. --Bduke (talk) 04:21, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. After checking, the people listed do not have their own Wikipedia articles at the moment so I added a more detailed introduction about them and linking a few articles that write about them. Would it help the notability of the article if I include words of endorsement/referral from famous people on LinkedIn? Olivia shannon 4021 (talk) 05:18, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, the answer, IMHO, it probably no, as LinkedIn is not independent of the subject, per Wikipedia:General Notability Guideline. Also, well done for improving the introduction! But there are still problems, as the biographies are far too promotional in my opinion, if it is submitted, it might still fail WP:NPOV. Also, most refs you added are: a) their website (or a non-independent website) or YouTube videos they did (which are not reliable), YouTube is normally a WP:SPS, meaning it's self published (anyone can edit it, like Wikipedia). You also linked to several reliable websites where one of the speaker is an author, but it doesn't cover the person nor the company significantly, so none of the references are counting towards notability. But only two reliable, independent (and preferably secondary) references covering the event significantly are needed. Also, thanks for declaring Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest on your user page and welcome again! VickKiang (talk) 05:37, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Olivia shannon 4021, and welcome! If you feel that a draft is ready, you can submit it for review. But IMHO there might be some problems. First, some editors might say that it's WP:TOOSOON, and should be published later, which I agree. Currently, the references need to meet Wikipedia:General Notability Guideline at least, because it's organised by another company, it might need to meet Wikipedia:Notability (companies and organizations). If you have a look at these, you'll see that the references (refs) must be reliable, independent, and significant. Unfortunately, I don't think your draft meets this right now. It links to a couple of refs, but they aren't independent (two are directly from the company). There's another one you provided that doesn't really mention the webinar directly, so isn't significant. I also have doubts on whether it's reliable, the website says it's written by a guest, its about page also has dubious editorial policies. So I'm afraid that notability isn't met, and it would probably be declined right now. Second, Wikipedia articles should follow WP:NPOV, which means a neutral point of view. I don't think that this article is neutral. See these text: Worldwide AI Webinar is an annual online global AI conference that focuses on sharing latest updates, analysis, and insights from world-class AI experts, helping companies, and entrepreneurs find solutions for their business and strengthening the global AI enthusiast network. It gathers developers, engineers, researchers, inventors, and IT professionals from all over the world, regardless of their age, ethnicity, location, and working experience. Some featured topics in the first conference in 2022 are Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, AI in banking & finance, AI in healthcare, AI in production & manufacturing, Intelligent transformation. The conference is expected to happen on a 3D immersive virtual environment which includes different areas such as main hall, conference room, and networking areas. The words "immersive", "strengthening", "world-class" seems less than neutral from me. If you are a fan of the company, that's totally fine, but if you are a worker involved in the company, I would advice that you have a look at Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. This draft IMHO is promotional, in this case, they're usually declined. Sometimes, draft might be speedily deleted for being an ad (see WP:CSD). I don't think this is so bad that it meets the speedy deletion criteria, but IMHO it's sometimes promotional and needs to be more neutral. Even so, it's non-notable now, but maybe after the event there could be more refs. Regardless, many thanks and welcome! VickKiang (talk) 04:26, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your detailed answer! I'll keep these in mind and make changes accordingly! Olivia shannon 4021 (talk) 04:56, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Olivia shannon 4021: I will be blunt. To me, even if the puffery words were removed, this draft still looks like a conference brochure that exists solely for publicity purposes. Wikipedia is never, ever, to be used for that purpose! About 80% of it is needless fluff that could be cut out. Notable speakers? Hardly; the draft would be improved with complete removal of these, leaving in only those who are truly notable according to Wikipedia:Notability (people). Conference topics? Could be summarized in one short paragraph. As such, it is indeed a possible candidate for speedy deletion. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:39, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Olivia shannon 4021:, I believe you're wasting your time. Your draft says that a bunch of non-notable people have agreed to take part in an on-line meeting. That's something that many people do every week; it falls well below Wikipedia's standard of notability. If you're serious about creating this article, wait until December, check what reliable published independent sources have said about the webinar, and start your draft again basing it on what they've said. Maproom (talk) 08:01, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting an article

How do I delete a draft article? RogerPhilipChappell (talk) 11:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RogerPhilipChappell, you don't, because you don't have the required permissions. The method depends on why you feel it should be deleted - if you are referring to Draft:Roger Chappell Author then place {{Db-author}} at the top of the page and an admin will delete it in a few hours - if you are referring to another draft, please tell us which draft, and why you think it should be deleted, so we can help further Arjayay (talk) 11:35, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2013 Cincinnati Reds season Pitching section

Hello. Go to 2013 Cincinnati Reds season article, pitchers table. Note pitchers Arroyo, Bailey, Latos and Leake are not centered. Can you please fix so all data is centered and keep the color code intact also.Thank you for your time.Theairportman33531 (talk) 12:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

adding style="text-align:center;" to the top row of the table, mimicking the style of the batting table above it, has fixed the issue. on a tangent, the way colours are used on the table might be in violation of MOS:COLOUR. also see links at WP:TABLE for formatting and style guidelines. regards, TryKid [dubious – discuss] 12:41, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

template help

Hello and goodday. I need an editor to add an image space template so I can Include an image ([File:Riele Downs.png|thumb|Herself]]) (add one more "[") to riele downs page . Like anyone should help me include this image [File:Riele Downs.png|thumb|Herself]] (add one more "[") to Riele Downs page. CHEERS and happiest editing. Uricdivine (talk) 14:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Urlcdivine, and welcome to the Teahouse. Worrying about a picture on Riele Downs is like worrying about painting the windows on a house that is going to fall down because it never had any foundations. The only thing worth spending any time on on that article at present is finding some sources each of which is all three of reliable, independent of Downs, and containing significant coverage of her (as far as I can see, not one of the current sources meets all three of those criteria): amything else would be time wasted if the article gets deleted for lack of notability. Having an image will not help establish notability in the slightest.
On another subject: you can include a Wikilink to an image without displaying the image by starting with a colon. So [[:File:Riele Downs.png]] displays as File:Riele Downs.png. Or you can put <nowiki> ... </nowiki> round it, as I did on the snippet just above. ColinFine (talk) 15:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question about copyrighted material in declined Articles for Creation submission

Hi, are there any training courses available? I submitted an article however, I am not understanding the feedback. It states:


left a message on your talk page in "‪Your submission at Articles for creation: To The K...‬".

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted...


I do have any copyrighted material. I however, listed links to several articles, could this possibly be the issue?

Thanks in advance,

Torrence Singttk (talk) 14:49, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Singttk if you are asking about Draft:To The Kingdom the reviewer stated that material cannot be copied. Did you copy and paste parts of your draft word-for-word from another source? If so, that is Plagiarism, and is considered stealing. If you find useful information from a published source you need to rewrite the information in your own words. It is possible to use a small quote (one or two sentences) from a someone else's work if you use quotation marks to let readers know you are using the exact words of another author. You will also need to have a reference directly after the quote. I hope this is of help to you. Karenthewriter (talk) 15:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to have been answered on your talk page. WelpThatWorked (talk) 15:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The copyright violation content has been removed. All refs need to be embedded in the text, in conjunction with the facts the refs are verifying. To establish Wikipedia's concept of notability, need at least three refs that are independent published at reliable sources. Interviews do not count. David notMD (talk) 17:27, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Singttk I posted some info on your Talk page. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Iowa's 4th and U.S. congressional districts

Hello, all. I was wondering whether I should add links for times in the article where a congressperson gets redistricted, or just leave a page for "Redistricting in the United States" in the see also page, or both? PoliticallyPassionateGamer (talk) 14:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Sandoval

FYI - Samuel Sandoval 98, (Navaho Code Talker) died on July 29th and I don't see him included in 2022 deaths? 68.9.216.60 (talk) 16:54, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Wikipedia biography of this person so his name would not appear on this list. Only notable people are included. Cullen328 (talk) 17:09, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Generally, Deaths in 2022, like other lists in Wikipedia, contains only people who meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, so that we have, or could have, an article about them. Sandoval's death is noted in the article Code talker, but it is doubtful whether there has been enough material published about him as an individual to meet those criteria. ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

George Pell and a problem with his page.

Let me begin by saying I am an Australian and a person, and also drunk; However I feel there is a big problem with the page of George Pell.

The big problem on the page that stuck out to me is on the 'Acquittal' segment where the page quotes an official document and takes it clearly out of context; It states the quote "Making full allowance for the advantages enjoyed by the jury, there is a significant possibility ... that an innocent person has been convicted." taken from [|this document]. The quote is taken from the documented rules that the court is proceeding by, NOT a judgement in any way, but the quote on the wikipedia article heavily implies that.

It really feels like the page is in dire need of an audit. Error117 (talk) 16:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Error117. The place to raise such an issue is on the talk page Talk:George Pell. I've a feeling that the existing section Talk:George Pell#Reversions is about the same issue, but I'm not sure. ColinFine (talk) 17:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Error117, can you clarify what you mean by "the documented rules that the court is proceeding by"? I find that quote in paragraph 119, which is itself in the "Conclusion" section. That doesn't seem like it's just procedural statements? That seems like it's the judgment? Alyo (chat·edits) 17:13, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Most viewed pages

Where can I go to view the following? Most viewed redirects, most viewed pages on Wikipedia that are not articles. I am asking this because I would like to know which non-article pages on Wikipedia we should prioritize improving. I would also like to know about redirects because it would indicate which redirects have high traffic. Interstellarity (talk) 17:13, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interstellarity There are tools for doing the sort of analysis you want explained at meta:Pageviews Analysis, although most are intended for use in article space. I'm unclear about your objectives. For example, the WP:Top 25 Report shows that several articles get over a million views per month, whereas even this Teahouse had only 46 thousand and the Helpdesk 33 thousand last month. Supposing these two were indeed the most viewed non-article pages, how would you go about improving their content? High-traffic redirects are likely to be for articles where the underlying topic is known by several different names likely to be searched, such as Biden and Joe Biden and I don't understand what you would propose doing once you knew that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:23, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Michael D. Turnbull, I know that there are tools to see the most viewed articles, but I was curious about non-articles and redirects just for my knowledge. Interstellarity (talk) 11:36, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article submission references

Hi guys! I am currently creating a page Draft:Sharry. My first submission was denied. Probably because there was Crunchbase as a source. And I fully agree that it is not a reliable one. I changed it for reliable sources (serious news outlets) and a government organisation. Would anyone be able to advise if current sources look legit? Thank you very much! Satirew (talk) 17:53, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SatireW, government listing just proves existence, no help on notability. Everything else appears to be press releases. App Store also not a useful source. Per WP:CORPDEPTH, need reliable independent sources that discuss the company indepth. Slywriter (talk) 18:04, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Satirew, and welcome to the Teahouse.
The Czechinvest article may be reliable, but isn't independent. Property Forum certainly isn't a reliable source ("Property Forum is a leading event hub ... Please send press releases to"). I haven't looked any further. ColinFine (talk) 18:06, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Article Deletion issues

Hello,

My Wikipedia page "Samthong College" has been deleted by a reviewer after the article page is reviewed and published in Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia. While I was working on it, it has been deleted by a reviewer. I feel like this is not fair. I went to check around Wikipedia articles and I found there are some other articles published in Wikipedia that have no references citing like mine. Why nobody comes to request deletion with this. Is it because those articles are in the United States? So when it is in the USA, then they don't need to talk, have lots of word to say?

My question is about appeal. Would you like to tell me where I can do an appeal? And what to do please? I would like to bring my article "Samthong College" back please?

Thank you very much. 2601:448:8400:7E80:0:0:0:3B99 (talk) 18:11, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samthong College it was not deleted by a reviewer, it was deleted by an admin after the deletion discussion. Theroadislong (talk) 18:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, FWIW, after the AfD was over I was able to repurpose some of the citations and content from the original article to create Sam Thong. signed, Rosguill talk 18:35, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Hello and welcome. There was a deletion discussion about deleting the Samthong College article, located at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samthong College. You can request a review at WP:DRV. but please read that page carefully to see if a reason to conduct a review applies(or conversely a listed reason reviews are not conducted applies).
Please read Other stuff exists. The existence of other similar articles cannot be used as a justification for yours to exist; it could be that these other articles are also inappropriate, and have simply not been addressed yet. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inapprorpriate content to get by us. We can only address what we know about. If you want to help us out, please identify these articles you have seen for possible action. 331dot (talk) 18:34, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Thank you, anonymous person, for stopping by to ask this question. First of all, there is no "My Wikipedia page". Nothing at Wikipedia belongs to any one editor. There is only the encyclopedia, to which volunteers donate their time to improve and expand; the encyclopedia, and all of its pages, are owned by the Wikimedia Foundation. You only contribute your work to it. Secondly, the page was not deleted by a reviewer. It was deleted by discussion from interested members of the Wikipedia community; the discussion that led to its deletion can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samthong College. It looks like the discussion started on 2 July, ran for 11 days, and then was wrapped up on 13 July. If you feel that the deletion was done against policy, you can request a review at Wikipedia:Deletion review (if I were you, I wouldn't do that, it doesn't seem to me to have had any procedural problems). If you wish to have the original text of the article converted to a draft so it can be worked on more, Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion is a way to get that done. I hope this helps! --Jayron32 18:37, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article issue at DE wiki

I realise that this is not entirely the place to ask about a different language wikipedia. If someone could give me instructions on where, or whether, to ask, that would be great.

The article Alexander Unzicker in DE wiki https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Unzicker is about a fringe-view physicist with 52 publications and 385 citations. The article, however, does not appear to represent this accurately. An interview is included in which he is criticised as "can no longer be taken seriously", both he is otherwise presented as a normal, reputable author. The talk page, of course, has its share of his... supporters, so to say, of the nature monitorers of articles such as Grover Furr and Orgone will be familiar with.

His articles on ResearchGate are well-dressed pseudoscientific essays using high level mathematical and philosophical terms that may impress the layman but really has no actual relevance to the topic at hand (except the occasional indirect comparison of himself with Newton, Galileo, Einstein, etc.) He operates a YouTube channel, Unzicker's Real Physics, in which he espouses other fringe views and conspiracy theories, and a quick Google search reveals his affiliation with multiple fringe and conspiracy groups.

There are two questions I wish to ask here: 1. I unfortunately only have a rudimentary knowledge of German, enough to understand things but not really to engage in in-depth academic discussions over at de-wiki. Is it possible for someone here to help me with bringing the issue to the attention of de-wiki admins, or is it possible to do so directly here? 2. I would like to take this as an learning opportunity for en-wiki policy as well. Based on the current content of the article, how would BLP & verifiability policies affect the edits that can be made to the article and the supporting evidence needed for such? How could the wording be changed to better reflect the situation without violating BLP? Moreover, to what extent does IAR extend to cases like these (in the sense that the dicussion, being highly technical or pseudotechnical in nature, confuses the average admin, often causing fringe scientific theories and such to remain on wikipedia far longer than they should, and popular press discussing the issue is usually not readily available?)

Thank you for your time. 192.76.8.75 (talk) 18:47, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to bring this up on that version of Wikipedia, using whatever forum similar to this that they might have.(someone else here may know what that is specifically, I do not) If you explain that German is not your main language, someone may help you. 331dot (talk) 19:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The equivalent to the Teahouse is de:Wikipedia:Fragen von Neulingen. There have been questions asked and answered in English there, for example de:Wikipedia:Fragen von Neulingen/Archiv/2007/Juli#Simple German Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 20:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles that need cleanup

How can I find a list of articles that need cleanup? Also, if this list exists, how can I submit to it? Thanks. Réunion (talk!) 20:33, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Reunion: Welcome to the Teahouse. You may find Category:Articles needing cleanup to be what you're looking for. When you say that you're looking to submit to it, do you mean clearing it? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind about submitting, I was thinking of it in the wrong way. Thanks for your help :) Réunion (talk!) 23:29, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should I put up an article for speedy deletion? (and can I?)

Hello, everyone. I've been wandering on the site as usual, and I saw Simple Exercises on Existentialism. It hasn't gotten many edits since the banner asking for notability has been put up in 2019. Furthermore, it doesn't seem to make any claims of being notable, which would allow it to be speedy deleted under A7. Since I am quite new here, I did not want to kick the hornet's nest and ask for the speedy deletion directly, and instead decided to come here for advice. Should I ask for a speedy deletion, start a deletion discussion, or let it be? LuneDeCuivre (talk) 20:43, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would just redirect it to the artist. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:50, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I'll give that a shot. Thank you. LuneDeCuivre (talk) 21:25, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
LuneDeCuivre, you've got good advice from Praxidicae; however, a word about "speedy deletion". Very little exploration of Wikipedia is needed before one encounters articles that obviously call for deletion. But "obviously calling for deletion" is not a criterion for speedy deletion. There's a short list of criteria, here. I appreciate that lack of any claim to be notable may seem to allow speedy deletion under A7, and that the article doesn't say how the album is notable; however, an album is not a person, animal, organization, event, or (other perhaps than secondarily) web content, so A7 doesn't apply. "Proposing" deletion is often appropriate -- though I'd agree with Praxidicae that this article is best turned into a redirect. -- Hoary (talk) 22:05, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What to do if person who did reversal doesn't answer?

I'm fairly new as a Wikipedia editor and seek guidance. I tried to improve an article, however another editor reversed the edit. I then asked for clarification on their talk page. It seemed to me there had been a possible misunderstanding, however the person stopped responding over a month ago. What do I do now?

The relevant Talk page is here. 'wɪnd (talk) 21:16, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At the top of that archive page, 'wɪnd, we read "If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page." You wish to revive an old one, so User talk:David Eppstein is the place to go. -- Hoary (talk) 22:14, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoary I appreciate the response. I did try to revive it once already before it was archived and there was no answer. I'm curious what the common thing to do is when the person doesn't answer? 'wɪnd (talk) 22:44, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
'wɪnd, as it's about the article Pi, bring it up (concisely) at Talk:Pi. -- Hoary (talk) 23:13, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Is it possible to become an administrator if you used to vandalize Wikipedia? Sparrow mom (talk) 21:52, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you have not vandalized in a long period and have shown helpful contributions, you may become an administrator. Administrators are expected to improve the encyclopedia and not to vandalize it. FAdesdae378 21:55, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With the above as only your second ever contribution to Wikipedia, Sparrow mom, you seem to be an extraordinarily precocious editor. Why would you ask about vandalism? -- Hoary (talk) 22:10, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:KaFe Rocks

Hello, an admin declined this draft Draft:KaFe Rocks and said the sources are not reliable. When I asked him to explain why or which are not reliable, he never responded. Could someone review these and provide an honest evaluation?

: https://www.gamblingnews.com/news/time2play-will-be-the-new-home-to-twitchs-gambling-streamers/

: https://web.archive.org/web/20210901152624/https://egr.global/intel/news/kafe-rocks-opens-door-to-twitch-gambling-streamers-with-new-affiliate-brand/ - Behind paywall. You can see the first paragraph in Archive.org. It appears not to be interview and definitely not primary

: https://focusgn.com/streaming-app-welcomes-gamblers-after-twitch-ban

: https://www.yogonet.com/international/noticias/2021/08/27/59032-special-platform-launched-for-twitch-gambling-streamers-after-ban

: https://focusgn.com/glitnor-group-to-buy-affiliate-business-kafe-rocks

: https://igamingbusiness.com/glitnor-group-enters-affiliate-space-with-acquisition-of-kafe-rocks/

: https://igamingcapital.mt/cordelia-morgan-cooper-joins-kafe-rocks-group-as-head-of-people/

: https://egr.global/intel/news/kafe-rocks-recruits-new-head-of-people-from-catena-media/

: https://casinobeats.com/2022/02/28/crown-las-vegas-cdi-ukgc-kafe-rocks-novibet-the-week-in-numbers/ - 4 paragraphs of info

: https://europeangaming.eu/portal/latest-news/2022/02/21/109619/glitnor-acquires-affiliate-powerhouse-kafe-rocks/

: https://igamingbrazil.com/en/affiliates-en-2/2021/01/18/affiliate-grand-slam-andrea-bellezza-details-the-work-developed-by-kafe-rocks/ - initial 3 paragraphs are not interview and can be used. Chessterb (talk) 22:45, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I briefly looked at the first one. A sample: Time2play was established in early-2021 with a simple goal in mind – to provide customers with the best experience in the field of online gambling. Obvious corporate PR-speak. [...] The rating system at Time2play is based on metrics that are said Are said by whom? (My guess: By the company itself.) to be unbiased and honest. Years of knowledge in the online gambling industry and scientific knowledge allowed the company to come up with a fair process of reviewing. Experts are applying this process and make sure that the customers are provided with the most high-quality content. This too is just PR guff; do I really have to point out how? -- Hoary (talk) 23:21, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Chessterb: Get some coffee and refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
Discounting the paywalled source and the "fuck you, Internet Archive" source (which is most likely completely unusable anyway as there's no guarantee it can actually be accessed), none of your sources are any good. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 23:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Jéské Couriano, I never thought I'd hear such a "robust" expression over the tinkle of teaspoons and the rustle of corsets here in the teahouse. Thank you for sparing us "fuck you, Wayback" (possibly interpretable as a more specific directive); but am I right to infer dissatisfaction with the Internet Archive? If so, what have I been missing? (Perhaps naively, I've always been grateful for it.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's in quotes because the source in question is (1) on the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine and (2) behind a registration/paywall (from the site being archived, not the IA itself). In essence, these two in tandem mean the cite is very likely impossible to access, since the login is likely going to go to a non-existent or nonfunctional link. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 00:44, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, I see. Sounds reasonable! -- Hoary (talk) 00:58, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

updating

Hi, my name is Todd Wolfe and I have two questions. First I'd like to know how to update my own page which I was not the person that set it up, the page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Wolfe Second, is it possible to add my name/page to the Forest Hills High School page under "notable alumni? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_Hills_High_School_(New_York) This second request not of great importance but, just figured why not? 2603:8001:A300:4697:F041:D720:79E0:581B (talk) 00:20, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for asking, Todd. One problem might seem to be that anyone can say they're Todd Wolfe; but no biggie, as the only assertions we accept here from anyone are those that are backed up by what we call reliable sources. So, at the foot of Talk:Todd Wolfe, describe the changes you'd like made to the article Todd Wolfe, each time citing a reliable source (and never any variant on "I'm him! I should know!"). -- Hoary (talk) 00:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As for the high school, the article Todd Wolfe doesn't mention schooling. Feel free to self-nominate at the foot of Talk:Forest Hills High School (New York): again, citing a "reliable source". -- Hoary (talk) 00:34, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hi IP 2603:8001:A300:4697:F041:D720:79E0:581B. If you are the same Todd Wolfe, then you shouldn't try and update any already existing content or add any new content about you yourself. Before you do anything else, you should carefully read through this, this, this and this. There are processes in place in which you can seek assistance from others if you have concerns or questions about anything written about you on Wikipedia. What is typically done in cases like this is that the subject of an article (or persons acting on the subject's behalf) will start a discussion about the changes they feel need to be made on the article's corresponding talk page in the form of an edit request. These edit requests are then reviewed by other non-involved user who assess the request based on relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. If the requested edit is OK from a policy and guideline standpoint, then the request will likely be granted; if not, it won't. It's best to try and follow this process since doing so is the easiest way to avoid problems with other users. Finally, if you're planning on requesting edits be made on your behalf, you may want to consider registering for an WP:ACCOUNT. There's nothing wrong with editing from an un-registered account (i.e. an IP address) per se, but it's nearly impossible in such cases for others to verify who you're claiming to be. If you register for an account, you can then request that your identity be verified as explained here. By registering for an account and then having your identified, other editors will know (or at least have a good reason to believe) that it is actually you making a request and not someone else. This won't guarantee that all your requests are granted, but it might help avoid confusion. This is optional and there might be WP:REALWORLD implications as well, but some users written about on Wikipedia decide it's worth the extra effort. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:40, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help me finish my unfinished Draft:Foxzie

Hello, I'm a beginner in Wikipedia, and I wanted to add a important developer from my favorite game. My unfinished draft needs helping, I don't know much about Wikipedia. Will you improve it please? here's the link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Foxzie

Thank you. Toby's Cars (talk) 00:53, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cars, I inferred from your invitation to help an "unfinished draft" that it was one that merely needed to be finished up. But actually you've hardly started it. The first thing you need while you work on the draft is a set of reliable sources. If these exist, Google is your friend. For many proposed articles, reliable sources simply don't exist; and then no article can be created. -- Hoary (talk) 01:04, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit

I made an edit on the Virginia SA wiki page and only a few minute later my edit was reverted. I find this unfair seeing that my edit was productive and true and should not have been removed if you could help that would be very nice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia,_South_Australia ThirstyCamel20 (talk) 01:50, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ThirstyCamel20: Be lucky you weren't blocked for the blatant WP:Biographies of living persons violation on-the-spot. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 01:52, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ThirstyCamel20: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia relies on verifiable information that is reliably sourced. This is much more strictly enforced if it is about a living person, though a cursory search for the person in question turned up nothing over Google. Vandalism also isn't well-received on here if the edit was a joke. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:04, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ThirstyCamel20: You opened an account on 2 August. All of your article edits have been reverted. If "A notable resident of Virginia is the local warlord gordon pisseri, who is currently hiding from the romanian police." (unreferenced) is your idea being 'productive,' Wikipedia is not for you. David notMD (talk) 10:09, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can't get access to source

Hi there, I'm working on Music of ancient Mesopotamia and looking to improve sources and citations. A previous editor seems to have done a good amount of work on this article, but I can't check their work because I can't access one of their sources (book isn't available through my local library and can't afford to buy it). What do people do here? Thanks in advance! GuineaPigC77 (talk) 02:59, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GuineaPigC77: One option is to try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. No guarantees, but if another editor there is able to access the source, they can send it to you via email. DanCherek (talk) 03:03, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome thank you! GuineaPigC77 (talk) 03:11, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
GuineaPigC77, there is no requirement that a source be easily available, but rather that the source must be available somewhere. Your inability to afford to buy the book is not relevant in any way to its reliability, assuming that the author and the publisher have a reputation for reliability. Cullen328 (talk) 07:21, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yep that's what I figured. So I'm not removing anything at the moment. But the reason I'm interested in this source is that it doesn't quite look like a good source for the article (the article is about ancient Mesopotamian music but the source appears to be primarily about modern music). That doesn't mean the source is necessarily a bad one, I'm just interested in checking it out to read more. Thank you! GuineaPigC77 (talk) 13:49, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article Discussion

Gornja Garešnica I think this article need to move in draft space.thanksEndrabcwizart (talk) 09:15, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Endrabcwizart: Odd as it may seem, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, according to WP:GEOLAND and this one is not a hoax. Thus an article like this which has existed since 2010 would be better if improved in-situ, rather than draftified, I think. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:42, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update The Breaker (manhwa) with the latest sequel: Eternal Force

Hello, As I am not experienced in using the editing tool in Wikipedia, I may not be able to satisfactorily update a page I am interested to. the page in question is The Breaker, namely adding the latest sequel: The Breaker: Eternal Force, also found on Webtoon. Thanks in advance! Barracuda stew (talk) 10:35, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Barracuda stew, update it to the best of your ability. If you face a particular problem with it, you can ask about it here. -- Hoary (talk) 11:57, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback on draft article about Record Label

Hello there, I'm fairly new to wikipedia and wondered if somebody wouldn't mind giving me some feedback on a draft article:

Draft:Moveltraxx

My first submission was declined, since then I've made sure each point is sourced and have removed some of the lists as per the editor's original feedback.

Thank you. Djjdwetherspoon (talk) 11:08, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Djjdwetherspoon, did you read Slywriter's comments at the top of the draft? You should (1) answer his question, and (2) get rid of the huge list that makes up most of the draft. Maproom (talk) 14:03, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, yes I read Slywriter's comments and I replied to his question regarding the two independent sources. I removed some of the lists, however as this is an article about a record label I left the discography. All other wikipedia articles about independent record labels include similar sized discographies in the same bulleted list format. Djjdwetherspoon (talk) 14:52, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply, it seems some of my references might not be seen as independent from the source.
Would you mind telling me if the following sources would qualify:
https://www.beatportal.com/beatport-news/label-of-the-month-moveltraxx/
https://daily.bandcamp.com/label-profile/moveltraxxs-label-guide
Thanks again Djjdwetherspoon (talk) 14:56, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Wikipedia Account Autoconfirmed

Hi,

I am looking to get my account autoconfirmed. For that I have to make edits to other wikipedia pages. What I wanted to know was that do reverted edits count towards an account getting autoconfirmed? Also, if my account does get autoconfirmed eventually, how will I know?

Thanks. COLABSPK (talk) 11:22, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, reverted edits count towards an account getting autoconfirmed, and you will know it when trying to move a page. Now you have more than 4 days and 9 edits so you only need one edit to be autoconfirmed. Thingofme (talk) 11:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi COLABSPK. Don't move a page just to test if you are autoconfirmed. Special:Preferences will say "Member of groups: Autoconfirmed users". PrimeHunter (talk) 12:01, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notable People

How do I add myself to the notable people section of a page on my home town. I was on a TV reality show and have authored a couple of books. The page is Winsted Connecticut

Thanks,

Bob Buttafuso BigBobbyButt (talk) 12:36, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BigBobbyButt Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The short answer is- you don't. Those sections of articles (not "pages") are not meant as a list of people who deem themselves notable, but a list of people that meet Wikipedia's definition of a notable person and have an article about them that summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about them. Autobiographical articles are highly discouraged per our policy. The best indicator of notability is when an independent editor takes note of coverage of your career and chooses to write about you. 331dot (talk) 12:58, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would add that an article about yourself is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 12:59, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When last edited

What time zone is displayed when I check the date and time of a page's last edit? Bystander1943 (talk) 13:19, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bystander1943, welcome to the teahouse! It is in UTC, all timestamps in English Wikipedia are in UTC. Justiyaya 13:24, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

does somebody have to be relevant in order for them to have a wikipedia article

i.e. my dog or my mom Caucasianhamburger (talk) 14:48, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They have to be notable and it's unlikely your mom or your dog are notable or relevant. PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:51, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Caucasianhamburger: They do; see the general rules for article topics as a whole at Wikipedia:Notability and for people in particular at Wikipedia:Notability (people). Additionally, article content has to be verifiable; we need reliable sources to be able to write about someone or something and to be able to prove that the information is correct. This is particularly important when writing biographies of living persons, because we could end up significantly affecting someone's reputation if false information about them gets into the article. For someone who isn't particularly relevant/famous, it's generally very hard to find enough reliable information about them that we can prove the article about them to be correct, so in this circumstance, we take the safe route and don't create an article about them at all. --ais523 14:57, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&oldid=1102336869"