Wikipedia:Teahouse

RudolfRed, 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

English article about Płanetniks - can a native speaker have a look?

Hello ;-)

Nice to meet you, it's my first post on English Wikipedia :D I translated the article about Płanetnik - basically, a Slavic mythology entity - from Polish into English. Could some native speaker have a look at my translation, pretty please? ;-)

LINK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kaworu1992/sandbox

After a native will say it's okay I am gonna post it on Wikipedia ;-) I think? ;-)

Best wishes! ;-)

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 11:37, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@Kaworu1992 I made some copyedits for grammar, such as adding "the" or "a" in places, changing "divinated" to "divined", etc. I don't understand "because of eclipsing of functions płanetniks", or the rest of that sentence. David10244 (talk) 11:23, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

@Kaworu1992 I also edited the sentence that Carpimaps mentions below. I hope I didn't change the meaning. David10244 (talk) 11:25, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Hm... the "eclipsing" means that kinda both terms fused into one? Something like that? Sorry, maybe that was too literal a translation? --Kaworu1992 (talk) 14:07, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes it is too literal, in English, it has a different definition. Carpimaps (talk) 15:11, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

The article looks OK but some parts are confusing.

You should make sentences easier to understand. For example, I did not understand this sentence "By the name of płanetniks were also called the people who divinated the weather or controlled it." Also, you should make it present tense since this mythology still exists.

Though overall, the article seems fine. Carpimaps (talk) 16:53, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi ;-)

The sentence just means that we could also use a name "płanetnik" for people who divinated the weather? ;-) Also, I do not wanna argue with you about present tense or the past tense, but... actually, nobody in Poland knows this myth? xD And generally the whole Slavic myths and beliefs are a very niche topic and as a native Polish person, this is all news to me? And in this case płanetniks no longer exist, I mean, you do not encounter them "in nature" in modern day Poland, so past tense seems appropriate to me?

Please, tell me how this sentence you mentioned should get changed, okay? ;-)

ALSO, apparently I put this on Main Wiki... I hope that's alright? ;-)

Best wishes! --Kaworu1992 (talk) 11:16, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

User:Kaworu1992, I plan to copyedit your mainspace article Płanetnik later today assuming you have no objection.

A problem that was immediately obvious to me was your use of sentences such as Płanetnik – a character from Slavic beliefs. Here, you use the em-dash (–) to say 'is'. This is not done in English, except informally. I myself have taken up the habit having learned it from Russian. You could rephrase the sentence as follows: A Płanetnik is a character from Slavic beliefs. You also write: The name “płanetnik” is derived from “płaneta” – cloud. Here is another issue of formatting, where you have used the quotation mark " where usually foreign-language terms are italicized. You could also replace the em-dash by writing what you mean to say, in this case, you are saying that the term płaneta means cloud. Therefore, The name płanetnik is derived from płaneta, meaning cloud. If any other users can add to this, feel welcome.

Also, because Polish is your first language, and because you can speak and write in English at a high level (your English is much better than my Polish, even after watching How I Unleashed World War II a few times), you may also consider translating articles from the English Wikipedia to the Polish Wikipedia. I invite you to read the article for notable Polish-American and your fellow schizophrenic (I mean this without rudeness according to your user page) Francis E. Dec. Happy editing! Fishing Publication (talk) 13:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Fishing Publication I think your comments are spot on. You'll improve the draft much more than I did. Thanks! David10244 (talk) 08:30, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

How do I know wether or not I can use an image

Basically, I'm working on a page about a war in ancient greece. For the infobox I'd like to have an image of soldiers at the time, and I found a suitable image here: http://www.about-turkey.com/karun/aktepe.htm (the larger one) I don't know if I'm allowed to use it, since it's not in Wikicommons, but the image is quite old. How do I find out if I am able to use it? Many thanks! GeneralCraft65 (talk) 17:49, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, GeneralCraft65, and welcome to the Teahouse. For any image you find on the internet, you must assume that it is copyright and cannot be used unless you can find an explicit statement that it is public domain or released under a suitable licence. I can't find anything about copyright on that site, so I'm afraid not. Note that there may be copyright in the photo itself: just because the artwork is ancient doesn't mean that the photo is free of copyright. ColinFine (talk) 18:57, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Is there a website other than WikiCommons that I can use to find free-source images? Or could I recreate the image myself and upload that? GeneralCraft65 (talk) 10:32, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

@GeneralCraft65 If you use Google image search, it has an option in "Tools" called "Usage rights" which will limit the hits to those images with Creative Commons licenses, which is what we need for Wikimedia. That tool is not foolproof but it can help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:15, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

@ColinFine: just because the artwork is ancient doesn't mean that the photo is free of copyright - the WMF takes the legal position that it does. See Commons:When_to_use_the_PD-Art_tag#The_position_of_the_WMF:

WMF's position has always been that faithful reproductions of two-dimensional public domain works of art are public domain, and that claims to the contrary represent an assault on the very concept of a public domain.

GeneralCraft65, based on the above, you could upload ancient pottery and similar old works of arts to Commons and slap commons:Template:PD-art on it; that would satisfy copyright. However, are we sure that the images on the site you linked to are what they say they are? That site seems to be a one-person blog, with little guarantee of reliability. It would be safer if you could find the same images and a description linking them to that war on a museum page.

(Ironically, if the images are a Photoshop forgery, they would be recent enough to trigger copyright protection.) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Tigraan, I'm confused. Do you think that images of pottery are, or are not, "faithful reproductions of two-dimensional public domain works of art", are they? I thought ancient pottery is three-dimensional art, whele the wall paintings are two-dimensional works. Right? David10244 (talk) 08:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Eh. Arguably pottery painting is two-dimensional (even if the pottery itself is three-dimensional), but I suppose that’s not a very convincing argument.

I would say that the legal difference between 2D and not-2D is that you can more easily argue originality in the latter case. You can choose the angle of photography around the object, whereas faithfully reproducing a 2D object necessarily needs to be done in front of it. I have no idea if there is a standard technical way to take photographs of pottery, which would weaken the originality claim.

(Of course all that is academic - in the OP’s case we’re talking about wall paintings) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:40, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the wall paintings are 2D... unless the wall is really bumpy! (Kidding.) David10244 (talk) 11:02, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

The other key missing point: All of the above depends upon what country the pot and the person taking the photograph are in when the photo is taken. - X201 (talk) 09:51, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Sneako

I'm currently working on an article, Draft:Sneako. I believe the subject in question is notable enough to receive an article, but due to apparent sourcing and tone issues the draft has yet to be accepted. If anyone has any advice or suggestions on how to improve the article in any way, I'd very much appreciate it. Thank you. TheDonquavious (talk) 00:46, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TheDonquavious. Some of your references, like Heavy.com are mediocre and should not be used for contentious claims about living people. This living person is contentious. FreshersLive is not a reliable source. I doubt the reliability of The Latch, which looks like a clickbait aggregator to me. Media Referee is a clickbait site that speads gossip. HITC is a poor quality site that does not identify its editorial team. The Yahoo Finance source is just a reprint of a Daily Beast article. Personally, I often like some Daily Beast coverage but it is a mediocre source for use in a biography of a living person. WP:RSP says it should not be used for controversial statements of fact related to living persons.. The Next Management source does not verify the modeling jobs, and is a commercial primary source. Your draft has other problems such as repeatedly duplicated references. See WP:NAMEDREFS for how to correct that. Also, this person is supposedly notable for their far right ideas, but the draft fails to describe those views in any detail. In conclusion, the poor quality of the references leaves me unconvinced that this person is eligible for a Wikipedia biography. Cullen328 (talk) 02:03, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey, thank you for this thorough response, it was very helpful. I've updated the references, so please let me know your thoughts on my revisions. TheDonquavious (talk) 03:46, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TheDonquavious. Your references still look dubious to me. Which, in your opinion, is the very best reference that establishes notability? I would be willing to do a deep dive on what you perceive to be your best reference. Cullen328 (talk) 04:08, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

I see your point, but allow me to explain a bit. The best reference currently cited is the Hunger.TV source. However, there are several more articles I have not listed as citations because they are only passing mentions, but it should definitely be noted that Sneako is featured in a New York Times article, a Jerusalem Post article, an Insider article. These sources undoubtedly prove his notoriety the way I see it. If you agree, I would very much appreciate your say-so to add these as sources in the article. TheDonquavious (talk) 04:22, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

I never know what, if anything, "be featured" means, TheDonquavious. I clicked on the Insider link (as the least likely of the three to plead for my money). This has just one short paragraph about "Sneako". -- Hoary (talk) 07:54, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

TheDonquavious, I remain unconvinced that HungerTV is a reliable source. It looks like a clickbait gossip site to me. But even if it was accepted as reliable, it devotes significant coverage to Andrew Tate, not to Sneako. The subject of your draft gets a small section at the end of a much longer article about Tate, almost as an afterthought and a warning about associating with Tate. This is a highly opinionated piece, not news reporting. Cullen328 (talk) 08:39, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I guess I misinterpreted the question. This We Got This Covered article is a better example, as it focuses solely on Sneako. TheDonquavious (talk) 10:30, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

@TheDonquavious WP:WEGOTTHISCOVERED is specifically NOT a reliable source. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Okay, see TheSportsRush article. TheDonquavious (talk) 11:51, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

That tells me nothing about Sneako other than that he supports Tate. How is that relevant to a biography of Sneako and make him notable? Millions of people may support Tate and millions more may not but having an opinion about something notable doesn't make you notable: there is even an essay advising against that sort of argument at WP:NINI Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:44, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

It referred to him as a "popular internet star," but for something more in-depth see this SportsKeeda article. TheDonquavious (talk) 13:12, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

"Featured" means he is present in the article. TheDonquavious (talk) 10:31, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

@TheDonquavious Being present, or mentioned, is not really what "featured" means. "Featured" implies some prominence. David10244 (talk) 11:41, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

He has prominence in the Jerusalem Post article, as he was present during the event and explained what happened. The other two articles mentioned are ones where he is "present," but technically not featured. TheDonquavious (talk) 11:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

He is also present in this LA Times article, as well as this Mediaite article. TheDonquavious (talk) 12:11, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

I looked at the latter, TheDonquavious. One (1) sentence quotes Sneako as saying something. You're scraping a dead horse, or beating the barrel, or whatever. Spare time is finite; how about devoting it to writing about somebody, or something, that's notable? -- Hoary (talk) 13:08, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

He is notable TheDonquavious (talk) 13:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

TheDonquavious, he may be "notable" to some people in the everyday meaning of the word, but he is not Notable in the specialist sense that Wikipedia uses it to determine the suitability of a subject for a Wikipedia article. Follow that link and read the guideline page thoroughly; doing so will take far less of your time than you will waste trying to achieve the unachievable, and you will have learned something valuable.

It may be that sometime in the future enough independent, reliably published sources will have written about this subject at sufficient length as to make him notable in Wikipedia's sense, but right now it is at best WP:Too soon. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.55.125 (talk) 14:49, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Forget it, if you deem him unworthy of an article then so be it, I will update the article if new sources are released that prove otherwise. I can't be bothered with this right now. I have nothing more to say on this matter. TheDonquavious (talk) 15:25, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

@TheDonquavious: No hurry. The draft will hang around for six months and be automatically deleted if there is no activity in it, but it can be undeleted uncontroversially by requesting it at WP:REFUND in the event you want to improve it again. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Formatting book

Dear wonderful people here, i'm sorry that lately i have to ask many questions. At the moment i'm translating an article from the German wikipedia. There is one publisher, who has published two books on an artist, but with the same title like "on stefan müller" with the two books additional have other titles like "volume one "stefan müller: on art" and volume 2 "stefan müller: on his sculptures" - but with the same isbn.. how do i format this? volume 1 and volume 2 don't work... script-title would work, but is that what it is? I would be thankful for your help. Naomi Hennig (talk) 11:27, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Naomi Hennig, I don't notice him listed in the disambiguation page Stefan Müller. Are you saying that this is a two-volume work, with an English title and subtitles (and no German title or subtitles), volume 1 of which is subtitled "On Art" and volume 2 of which is subtitled "On His Sculptures"? Are you planning to use the template "cite book"? -- Hoary (talk) 12:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh, i made some mistakes.

1. i already translated the titles... in German it is: * 2010: {{Literatur |Titel=Ingrid Hornef |Hrsg=Carola Weber |Band=Band 1: ''Linie, Fläche, Raum,'' Band 2: ''Kunst im öffentlichen Raum: Skulptur, Installation, Modell'' |Ort=Wiesbaden |Datum=2010 |ISBN=978-3-00-030383-8}}

2. The artist's name is not Stefan Müller, i just used this as an example..

3. The title of the two books are always "Ingrid Hornef", but there are two volumes with different sub-titles?

4. Yes, i plan on using the template "cite book", at the moment i formatted it as if it were two separate books: * 2010: {{cite book |date=2010 |title=Ingrid Hornef: Linie, Fläche, Raum |language=de |location=Wiesbaden |publisher=Carola Weber|isbn=978-3-00-030383-8}} and * 2010: {{cite book |date=2010 |title=Ingrid Hornef: Kunst im öffentlichen Raum: Skulptur, Installation, Modell |language=de |location=Wiesbaden |publisher=Carola Weber|isbn=978-3-00-030383-8}}

Naomi Hennig, I'd cite it each time with either of <ref name="cw1">{{cite book |year=2010 |title=Ingrid Hornef | volume=1: Linie, Fläche, Raum |language=de |location=Wiesbaden |publisher=Carola Weber|isbn=978-3-00-030383-8}}</ref> and <ref name="cw2">{{cite book |year=2010 |title=Ingrid Hornef | volume=2: Kunst im öffentlichen Raum: Skulptur, Installation, Modell |language=de |location=Wiesbaden |publisher=Carola Weber|isbn=978-3-00-030383-8}}</ref> (augmented with information about the author(s) and/or editor(s)), combined with Template:Rp. -- Hoary (talk) 20:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Dear Hoary, that helps a lot, thank you. It's just that i want to give both books in the section "Further reading". Do you think i could handle it as i mentioned above? Kind regards, --Naomi Hennig (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Naomi Hennig, how about: {{cite book |year=2010 |title=Ingrid Hornef | language=de |location=Wiesbaden |publisher=Carola Weber|isbn=978-3-00-030383-8}} Two volumes: 1, ''Linie, Fläche, Raum''; 2, ''Kunst im öffentlichen Raum: Skulptur, Installation, Modell''. (augmented with information about the author(s) and/or editor(s)) -- Hoary (talk) 07:21, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Naomi Hennig, I think the formatting of the information is less important than the accuracy of the information. Worldcat hasn't heard of this ISBN, but amazon.de says that it's published by Blei & Guba and that it's written by Ingrid Hornef u. w. -- Hoary (talk) 07:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

That's not true, it isn't written by Ingrid Hornef... it only as texts of experts on her work... strang... i do have the books here, so i wonder, what Amazon did wroing. And thank you very much for the gute citation - i will use this! Kind regards, Naomi Hennig (talk) 12:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Naomi Hennig, I don't think that Amazon's descriptions are created by Amazon. My guess is that in some other database the book is described as having content by Hornef and others, and that this has subsequently been distorted somewhat in the description of Hornef and others as Autoren. However, I don't know the nuances of the German word Autor. Maybe they resemble the nuances of the English author. A nuance of author is that if I take a photograph (even if it's a very humdrum photograph that I take casually or lazily), I can be described as the "author" of that photograph (even though I can't be said to have "written" the photograph). -- Hoary (talk) 22:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Content plagiarized?

Hello,

I am editing a page where much of the content does not have inline citations. There is a section (does not have citations) in the article page that has exactly the same content info found in another website. So not sure who copied from who. I also found the user who added the content info. My question is what should be the next approach to this? Should I contact them via talk page and ask them to add the source? This is the page I am editing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padayani. The section is under Alapra Padayani. The website I found same content from: https://www.keralatourism.org/padayani/festival-detail/thacharickal-padayani/12 Thank you. Hecatesss (talk) 17:49, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Hecatesss, and welcome to the Teahouse. The material was added to Padayani in October 2020, but the external site you linked to says "Copyright 2018". So on the face of it, that appears to be a copyright violation, and should be removed immediately: see WP:COPYVIO. ColinFine (talk) 18:39, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

I have removed the offending text. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:22, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Creating A Page

Could someone please help with creating this article im not sure what to do Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 22:12, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Andrewsmith12345. You need to demonstrate that the subject of the draft article, Drug Addicts Anonymous, meets Wikipedia's inclusion criteria, known as "notability". The requirements are summarised at WP:GOLDENRULE. What your draft lacks is independent sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:29, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

OP blocked as a sockpuppet. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Edits Removed Due to (Incorrect) Copyright Judgement

Article: U-Con

There was no copywritten material on this site. Worse, there was a list of historical guests going all the way back to 1989 and that was deleted after I updated it. The page had been updated every year and sat in its current state since 2018.

https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=U-Con&oldid=1114327599

I simply added the guests from 2019, and now all the guests are gone. This makes no sense. And my edit is blocked, so I can't revert. How do I appeal this and avoid it from happening in the future? Intrepidgm (talk) 01:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Intrepidgm. According to the editors involved in removing the content, it was a copyright violation of this website. The article contained vast swathes of unreferenced content, in violation of the core content policy Verifiability. What the conference itself says about its guests is inappropriate for inclusion in a neutral encyclopedia article. If reliable sources independent of the conference discuss these guests, then that can be included, as long as it is referenced properly. Cullen328 (talk) 01:47, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Okay. I represent the con. What we need then on that page is something that clarifies that the guest list is not copyrighted. Would that be sufficient?

It is just a list of guests that attended and lists their works. I doubt that U-Con could actually copyright that, hence the confusion. But if there were clarifying language that the guest information was not Copyrighted by U-Con then we could update the Wikipedia article? Intrepidgm (talk) 23:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Intrepidgm: if you "represent the [conference]", then please read WP:PAID and make the mandatory disclosure on your userpage before editing Wikipedia any further.

A mere list of guests is indeed likely not copyrighted. (Simple facts cannot be copyrighted, and there are not that many ways to write a list of guests, so a list writing lacks the originality component of copyright.)

However, what the conference website says about the guests is almost certainly copyrighted. Even a standard, CV-like presentation of one’s career is susceptible of many changes in presentation.

Similarly to Cullen328, I doubt that material is worth including in Wikipedia anyway. However, if you want text from the conference website to be usable on Wikipedia, "not copyrighted" will not cut it. "Page text available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License" will. Please note that this means anyone, not just Wikipedia, can reuse that text - Wikipedia does not accept licenses "for Wikipedia use only". For more details, see User:Tigraan/Wikipedia_copyright_inquiries. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for that clarification. U-Con is a non-profit organization, and even its board members are not paid. In that context, the contributions I've made, reflecting over 30 years of a community group's history, are not paid for in any way, so I don't see how WP:PAID applies here.

I'm trying to determine how we can publicly record the history of this convention and organization, with no commercial PAID incentive of any kind. We can certainly list the authors we have invited, but again I struggle to understand how listing their published works as authors somehow violates copyright restrictions. We can certainly comply with a list of just names, but that seems unnecessarily restrictive and not reflective of "creating a list based on facts" such as published works. Intrepidgm (talk) 19:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Intrepidgm, I'm afraid you don't quite understand what a Wikipedia article should be based on. 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.

Many articles have been added over the years which don't meet current sourcing standards; if they go unnoticed, they survive, but once they're put under the spotlight for some reason, they often end up deleted. Has there been any independent coverage of this convention in reliable sources? Perhaps older newspapers? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:52, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Intrepidgm Paid says that interns are included in the "paid" category, which is interpreted to include unpaid interns (interns are gaining experience). I wish that that policy page explicitly mentioned those who volunteer for a nonprofit, or are serving on nonprofit boards, but it doesn't, as far as I can tell. Can anyone else clarify the "paid" status of such volunteers? David10244 (talk) 08:53, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328, David notMD, or Tigraan -- I predict that you all know the answer to the above.... and if volunteer status is documented anywhere. Thanks. David10244 (talk) 08:58, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Under unintended consequences, U-Con now nominated for deletion. David notMD (talk) 14:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Invalid sign?

Why did someone put a template on my user page that says my signature uses invalid colours? Mr. Silver| (Talk) 07:02, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Mister Silver, here is the history of your user page. If anyone had placed such a template on it, the edit would appear in the history. I see no such edit. -- Hoary (talk) 07:37, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hoary, I don't know, but when I click the Edit Button on my user page, I see the templates "Main other" and "Template other". When I double-click "Main other" I see the text "[[Category:Articles using Template:Background color with invalid colour combination]]". Same thing with "Template other". These templates were added right after my signature, so I assumed there's a problem with it. As for who added it, I really don't know. Mr. Silver| (Talk) 07:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Mister Silver: I think using the background-color style automatically calls on the Template:Ensure AAA contrast ratio, which in turn places the content into the Category you mention. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:15, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Right, it's an automated comment on a CSS infelicity. Something simple: any specification of the "color" attribute (i.e. the color of text) should come with a specification of the "background-color" attribute; any specification of "background-color" should come with a specification of "color". (Any CSS checker should point this out.) For text that links (as the important text in signatures does), this is complicated somewhat. Really, I suggest that you just use the default signature: vanity signatures are something of a waste of time (and of course a waste of bytes). -- Hoary (talk) 09:26, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Mister Silver: It happens because you use {{Background color}} or one of its redirects in your signature. That template makes a color check and code from this is left in your signature when you use it. Your colors are accepted by the template but templates are forbidden in signatures by WP:SIG#NoTemplates. You can use this instead (as it's rendered here, don't copy it from the source text):

'''<span style="background-color:navy">[[User:Mister Silver|<span style="color:silver;text-decoration:inherit;">Mr.&nbsp;Silver</span>]]&#124;</span>&nbsp;[[:User talk:Mister Silver|<span style="color:navy;text-decoration:inherit;">(Talk)</span>]]'''

It produces this: Mr. Silver| (Talk)

PrimeHunter (talk) 12:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Unarchiving a page from Administrators Noticeboard Incidents

Hello, I have a discussion that was never closed out but archived due to no activity for 72 hours. The other user was notified about it, and subsequently removed the notice from their user page as soon as the noticeboard archived the post.

I would like to re add it to the ANI, as the link at Help:Archiving a talk page says to do so under 'Continuing Discussions', but am not sure how exactly to do this. Do I simply copy the source of the previous post and add it as a new topic? Does the user have to be re-notified? And lastly, the Help page says to 'remove it from the archive', but I don't see a simple way to do that.

Thank you for your help!

Awshort (talk) 09:04, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, you can edit archives to remove the archived discussion like normal pages. You can just copy the source code and copy it back in ANI. You should re-notify the user as a courtesy, though I am not sure if it is mandatory. Carpimaps (talk) 14:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

my first content publication - help

hi. i m new to wikipedia and i d like to create and publish my first content. i m little lost as dont know where to start. my contribute button is greyed out.. where do i start from? thank you very much. Opunthia (talk) 11:37, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Opunthia, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. I have put some tips aqnd links on your user talk page to help you find your way.

Creating an article from scratch is a very demanding task that will lead to frustration and disappointment if you try it before you have learnt how Wikipedia works. My advice is to go slowly, learning about this huge endeavour by making small improvements to some of our six million existing articles, and only after a while read your first article and try your hand at that. ColinFine (talk) 11:58, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Colinfine for all your tips and help. My article already exists in Wikipedia in Polish and I am simply translating it in english to publish it in the wikipedia English version. I am just changing some of the references and bibliography. would you be able to have a look at it when i finish it on draft to make sure it follows all rules? thanks alot for your precious directions. marianna Opunthia (talk) 17:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Opunthia Translation can be valuable and does make it easier for new editors to create articles here. However, please note that the notability requirements may differ between the Polish and English-language versions of Wikipedia, so before you do too much work you should carefully assess whether the Polish article has sufficient sources meeting our golden rules. There are some technical things you should also do when translating that are mentioned at WP:TRANSLATE. Good luck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:26, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

St.Pete-Clearwater International Airport items cleanup

Hello and good day. Go to above airport, go to infobox on right, clean up my additional source. Scroll down to annual traffic, year 2022 should be by itself in lower left hand corner of table. Thank you for your time.Theairportman33531 (talk) Theairportman33531 (talk) 12:26, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Theairportman33531. With 15,000+ edits under your belt, is there some issue that prevents you doing this yourself?

Courtesy link: St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport . Nick Moyes (talk) 14:12, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Theairportman33531:  Done, I think. I tried to preserve the 10-year correlations in the table rows instead of equalizing the number of rows in each column. Is that what you want? Deor (talk) 15:34, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Ask for help to proof read my article COI

Hello,

So I am a first time user of Wikipedia and as a life long learner, spent a fair bit of time trying to familiarize myself with the platform. I was quite proud of myself for creating the following draft article: Draft:Didomi especially since the company I work for is a forward looking company. I have declared my COI as requested, and my article was rejected for the following reason: "Sources are mostly primary, PR or Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill". As a non-native, I would like to request a native american copywriter help to optimize the draft. If that type of service doesn't exist, then I'd just appreciate a simple objective response free of passive-aggressive comments. Apologies in advance if my question is irritating to any expert of this community.

Thank you,

Sarah

Sarah Reveillard (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Sarah Reveillard. While the draft could do with some work to make it more neutral (e.g. avoiding claims such as "provides a comprehensive solution"), your main problem is with the lack of independent references. Apart from basic, uncontroversial details about the subject, articles should largely be based on what genuinely independent sources have written about the topic. Many of your sources are Didomi's own blog or content on other sites that appears to be based on press releases. A properly independent source could be a newspaper article written about the company (unprompted by the company's PR) by a journalist without an interest in promoting it, for example. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks Larry, it’s now clearer, and I now see that sourcing Didomi’s blog and content along with self claims goes against the neutrality rule of Wikipedia. It was a lovely project while it lasted and made lots of learning. I used the wrong lense when doing it as I approached like a LinkedIn article 😁. I had also stumbled upon a similar company called OneTrust who is listed on Wikipedia. However, I also realise that it is also a double edge swords as if there is bad press, then it goes in there too.

I got carried away with the experience and didn’t quite think through that our little French company is far too small to be with the big dogs so to speak 😉 Sarah Reveillard (talk) 16:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Sarah Reveillard, the threshold for whether the company meets Wikipedia's inclusion criteria is set out at WP:GOLDENRULE. However, it's often best to wait for editors unconnected to the subject to decide it's worthy of inclusion, and you're right that an article can be a double-edged sword! Cordless Larry (talk) 17:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you Larry for sharing the golden rules. will keep it in mind in the future. 😊 Sarah Reveillard (talk) 17:16, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Sarah Reveillard Small companies can have WP-articles too, see Souldier (company), if there is independent sources. But the double-edged sword-thing is quite real. I know of a "case" where an editor created an article for her son, a soccer-player. She did it quite well, there were good sources and so on. But since the BBC told us last year that he awaits trial this year for one count of sexual assault, so does the WP-article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:36, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh woah, poor mum. Thank you for the added information. Good to know that it is still possible granted there is independent sources. Sarah Reveillard (talk) 18:09, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Sarah Reveillard: That's right, if negative information is published in reliable sources, that information will end up in the Wikipedia article for all to see, as was the case with the article about this woman's son. That was a consequence she neither expected nor wanted when she wrote the article. Likewise, once your draft is published in article space, neither you nor anyone else from your company should edit it ever again in spite of any negative press. You must propose changes on the article's talk page.

I'll add that sources matter most. No amount of fantastic formatting, no amount of polishing the prose of a draft is going to get it published if WP:Golden rule sources are not cited to demonstrate notability. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing extra considerations to account for once it goes live. I didn’t realise it wouldn’t be so easy to add more input when a negative addition is made. Sarah Reveillard (talk) 07:36, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Sarah Reveillard as the reviewer I just wanted to make you aware that what may come across as a not as helpful as new editors expect response is due mostly to the amount of submissions to review vs number of volunteer reviewers. Articles for Creations has about 200-250 submission a day and the backlog is unfortunately growing quickly (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Backlog chart). In an ideal world we would have enough reviewers to spend more time assisting/advising new editors but currently we are far from that. Some of us do spend time improving not yet ready drafts to the point of acceptance but these are usually on particular areas of interest with COI subjects being a very low priority. It would be nice if new editors had to read the basics such as the WP:GOLDENRULE before editing/submitting to save the misunderstandings and frustration. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 11:54, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

how can i edit protected pages

how can i edit protected pages Pastalavist (talk) 16:06, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Pasatalavist Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please use the article talk page associated with a protected article to propose changes.(for example, Talk:Joe Biden to propose changes to Joe Biden). If you mark your proposal as a formal edit request(click for instructions), it will draw the attention of other editors- but most protected articles are watched by others. 331dot (talk) 16:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Pastalavist See Wikipedia:Protection policy for details on protection levels. You can also suggest edits at the talkpage of the article in question. If other editors think your suggestion is reasonable, they may act on it at some point. See also WP:TUTORIAL on how to add references correctly, if you want to make edits that can "stick", good referencing is essential. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Death note characters

Hello. I wanted to know of Death note characters, why doesn't Near and Teru have wikipedia pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfp5 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Wolfp5 Possibly because WP-articles about them would fail the WP:N policy. If you have the sources demanded in that policy, you can try to make the WP-articles. But the internet is bigger than WP, perhaps you can find what you want in places like Death Note Wiki. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:12, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Wolfp5 Another answer to "Why doesn't X have a Wikipedia page" (these are called articles) is "because no one has chosen to write one yet". People who create drafts, or articles, are all volunteers, and they work on what they want. Gråbergs Gråa Sång is also completely correct in their response. David10244 (talk) 07:47, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

WP-trivia: Death Note is mentioned on Donald Trump in popular culture. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:24, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Near (Death Note) for half of the answer. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:23, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Piotrus, renowned scourge of lists of things fictional. Btw, I read in Jüdische Allgemeine today that you have "ilk" (well, with google translate anyway), quite an accomplishment. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

for removing dead url

Hi did removed the dead url from the diva page for that i have a link which is similer to that article thats why i did that ,plz do let me know can i do it or not plz.... RhaenyraHearts (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@RhaenyraHearts, Wikipedia:Link rot may be of help to you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:22, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

hey there is broken link in the diva page and i want to add a url ,but whenever i add the new url after sometime it goes back to the broken link should i do that or not plz let me know RhaenyraHearts (talk) 17:42, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Please see the messages on your talk page. Shantavira|^{feed me} 20:03, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Wrong language

Hi I visited a Swedish Wikipedia article and decided to open a Wiki account. Since the instructions were in English, I assumed I had enrolled in the English language Wiki site. I then published a new page in Wiki, in English, and again, the instructions were in English, so a ditto assumption. I was then told by "Disembodied Soul" that English articles are not permitted on the Swedish Wiki. But that dude did not say what I should do next. So do I have to open another Wiki account? Has my page been deleted, or can it be transferred to the English language site? Cheers Tomashssn (talk) 20:49, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Tomashssn, Disembodied Soul pointed you to a link with all the language Wikipedias. Accounts are global, so you can recreate the article on the English Wikipedia. Your article on svwiki was deleted, you can ask around there to see if an administrator is willing to provide you a copy to help on the English article. See WP:YFA for overly detailed instructions on how to create a new article. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 21:14, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks SGT, much appreciated! Tomashssn (talk) 21:41, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Tomashssn: Your interface language at a wiki can be set at Special:Preferences. At Special:GlobalPreferences it can be set for all Wikimedia wikis. Account creation at the Swedish Wikipedia is at sv:Special:Skapa konto which has an "English" link. I guess you clicked that but it only means you get an English interface during the account creation at the Swedish Wikipedia, before you can set an interface language for the account. I see how "English" could easily be misinterpreted to think the account creation is at the English Wikipedia. The account automatically works at all Wikipedia languages and other Wikimedia projects so it's not important where it was created. Years ago an account only worked at the wiki where it was created, and somebody else could create the same username at another wiki. Now we thankfully have a better system with global accounts. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:16, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

If you are ever in doubt where you are, the language code is in the domain name. en.wikipedia.org is the English Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:21, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks PH, much appreciated! Tomashssn (talk) 20:23, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

adding translation of wiki page in chinese

hello friends in Tea House,

such a lovely and relax space to talk about tech stuff :D

I recently just tried to add the chinese translation into my artist wiki page, and there is always just one red tag in the paragraph (english) which didnt allow me to publish the chinese version.

Would love to hear suggestion from the community, thanks a lot!!

Beatrix Pang :) Bpskhk (talk) 23:49, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Bpskhk Welcome to Teahouse! Are you Beatrix Pang? We don’t have pages that belong to people, and if this article is about you then you have a WP:COI. As for why your edit was reverted, we don’t include external links directly into an article unless it’s a citation. See WP:EL and WP:WIKILINK for the difference. I did not quite understand your question about Chinese version, and the English Wikipedia project has little to do with the Chinese Wikipedia, since most of us don’t speak both languages. Happy editing ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 07:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Beatrix. You should stop making direct edits to the article about you, and use the edit request mechanism to suggest changes.

You appear to have created a Chinese version of Wikipedia's article about you (which is not "your artist page") in a subpage of your user page on English Wikipedia: you should be creating it in Chinese Wikipedia. Have you read WP:Translate us? I don't know what you mean about a red tag: please explain further. ColinFine (talk) 15:16, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Help with adding March 13 birthdays

Being 86 on March 13 (today) I would really like to see Deborah Raffin (American actor) and Rupert Spira (English author) added to the Wikipedia list of notable birthdays on such date, but I lack the necessary skills and am too old to learn those skills; can't someone with the skills just add those two? Ozziemaland (talk) 00:27, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Added👍 You can view the page here March 13 PalauanReich (talk) 01:39, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for honoring my plea and making my birthday a joyous one! Ozziemaland (talk) 02:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Edit clash. I'd been about to say:

Happy birthday, Ozziemaland. Adding Deborah Raffin and Rupert Spira to that list would take me only a minute or so, but I'm not going to do it (for now, anyway). Here's why. Neither the article Deborah Raffin nor the article Rupert Spira gives me any reason to believe the birth date that it states for its subject. They could be wrong. (For all I know they could be mere hoaxes.) We shouldn't help misinformation to propagate.

However, perhaps PalauanReich noticed citations that I failed to notice. -- Hoary (talk) 01:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I hope PalauanReich's additions are allowed to remain in Wikipedia unless (and at least until) more authoritative information comes to light. Early Wikipedia articles maybe had too many errors, but the misinformation purveyed was so often corrected for a net gain to the accessibility of good data. An Italian proverb has it that the perfect is the enemy of the good, but wisdom resides in accepting the best possible within our abilities. Ozziemaland (talk) 02:45, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Ozziemaland: That discussion is veering into the philosophical stances of Deletionism vs. Inclusionism, but even so verifiability is a core policy.

In the case at hand, I see that Deborah Raffin includes this source which gives the date of birth. But... that source was published in 2012, yet the Wikipedia article had the DoB (without a source) since 2006. Could this be Wikipedia:Citogenesis? I will try to investigate, see you on the talk page. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 11:26, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

If anyone is wondering, "the talk page" is this. -- Hoary (talk) 12:09, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Adding Wikipedia links from other languages

This is most likely a dumb question to ask, but is it allowed to put a different language wikipedia article as a replacement as English ones does not exist yet? (Like Fujiē Elementary school _(Japanese)) I`ve seen those in Japanese Wikipedia so just asking. (AlphaBetaGammsh (talk) 01:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC))

You can certainly make an English page for that, but you cant just copy and paste the article and keep it in Japanese. More info here WP:RFT PalauanReich (talk) 01:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

フジエー sounds a strange name for an elementary school; do you have that right? It's not at all certain that you can make an article here for some elementary school: it's very rare for an elementary school to meet the notability criterion. If OTOH you're asking about a link within the text of an article here to an article (for example, an article about an elementary school) in Japanese-language Wikipedia because its subject lacks an article in English-language Wikipedia, then yes, you can do that. Use Template:Ill for this purpose. -- Hoary (talk) 01:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

For some bizzarre reason it exists. No idea how did that pass criteria. https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%9D%B1%E6%B5%A6%E7%94%BA%E7%AB%8B%E8%97%A4%E6%B1%9F%E5%B0%8F%E5%AD%A6%E6%A0%A1 AlphaBetaGammsh (talk) 02:28, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@AlphaBetaGammsh: Local Wikipedia projects are like sibblings in the sense that they all belong to the same family (i.e. the WMF), but they are also separate and distinct from one another; in other words, they all have their own separate policies and guidelines, and their own respective communities of users. Many projects have policies and guidelines similar to English Wikipedia, but many also have some that are quite different. Even in cases where policies like WP:N are similar, the other local Wikipedia may simply not have as many members of its community either trying to enforce the community's policies or even care about enforcing them. So, you tend to find lots of stuff on other language Wikipedias that probably wouldn't survive too long on English Wikipedia. It used to be the case that many secondary and elementary school did have articles written about them on English Wikipedia, but over the years the notability criteria for such schools has become more restrictive. Perhaps Japanese Wikipedia has either by choice or simply lack of resolve decide to follow less restrictive notability guidelines when it comes to such schools. Finally, just for reference, I believe the romanized form for 藤江 is "Fujie" and not "Fujiē". -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

So like each Wikipedia projects act like “States(in USA)” ? Huh.

Well thanks for the information, it was really easy to understand. Also not very used to those special characters, even as a Japanese. AlphaBetaGammsh (talk) 03:30, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Sort like states I guess, but maybe more like different countries which their own rules and regulations. Anyway, it's quite hard to create English Wikipedia articles about elementary and junior high schools because not many meet WP:NSCHOOL; so, these are often merged or incorporated into other articles. All secondary schools used to be considered Wikipedia notable per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES simply because they existed, but that was changed in February 2017 and stricter notability guidelines are now applied. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:24, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@AlphaBetaGammsh: I think you want {{ill}}. That will preferentially create a link to the English page if it exists and a redlink otherwise, and always link to the sister Wikipedia in another language. For instance:

1. Napoléon Bonaparte (page exists in English and in French under the same name)
2. Galilée (page exists in French, but not in English under the same name)
3. Galileo (page exists in English and in French but under different names; only the English name is displayed to the reader)

(see source code to see how it’s done) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 11:16, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Exactly what I wanted! Thanks for the help! AlphaBetaGammsh (talk) 23:26, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

COI question

I am a bit confused by the COI rules so id appreciate some help. I am sure that User:Harte-thompson is the wife of Alik Sakharov. You can see here that someone related to Alik is named Susan Sofia Harte Thompson Sakharov. There are also edit summaries saying Info removed at Mr. Sakharovs request. I am wondering if this is a rule violation or what the rules are on this. Thanks PalauanReich (talk) 01:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@PalauanReich: If the person is indeed related to the article subject, they certainly have a conflict of interest; see WP:COI for further details. However I note that the account hasn't edited since August 2020 so I don't personally think it's anything to be concerned about at the moment, as they're not actively influencing the content of the article. Neiltonks (talk) 08:36, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Furthermore, PalauanReich, posting off-wiki information about an editor (without that editor’s consent) is WP:OUTING, a rather serious offense. Please do not do that again.

(Asking some editor to disclose their conflict of interest is OK; linking off-wiki to evidence is not. Also, it is fine to deal with someone’s conflict of interest (as apparent from their Wikipedia edits) without knowing the exact nature of their conflict of interest.) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Will not do it again PalauanReich (talk) 15:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

{{ubl}} over <br />

Hi.. I think I have read somewhere either in policy/MOS/essay that state {{ubl}} is preferred over multiple <br />. But I couldn't find that policy/MOS/essay. Can anyone point out that policy/MOS/essay? Thx. Ckfasdf (talk) 01:59, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Ckfasdf. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists#Line breaks. This assumes it's a list and not just consecutive lines with line breaks in specific places like a poem. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Ok.. Thanks. Ckfasdf (talk) 16:23, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

How do I exclude templates with what links here

I’ve seen several articles which were likely orphans if not for being linked in a commonly used template.

Is there any way to exclude such templates when looking at back links? That might reveal pages that need a lot of more links to them Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 07:09, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Immanuelle this is a rather advanced question for Teahouse! Another user made a script for this. You can past the following into your Special:MyPage/common.js.

/* This script adds "Source links" below "What links here" in the sidebar.
   "What links here" will include pages using a template with the link.
   "Source links" tries to search for pages where the link is in the source.
   To use the script, add the following line to Special:MyPage/common.js:
 
*/ 
importScript('User:PrimeHunter/Source links.js'); // Linkback: [[User:PrimeHunter/Source links.js]]

~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 07:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

There's also a userscript to easily install userscripts:User:Enterprisey/script-installer Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:34, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång so it will just make me automatically not see template links anymore? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 15:04, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Someone stop this vandal.

A vandal here [[1]] removed big properly ref material without providing any reason. He should be warned for doing this or banned from editing.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 08:31, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Looking at that article's edithistory, I'm not sure that's WP:VANDALISM. @PrashantSahu1177, do you wish to comment? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Regarding Page Deletion

Hi everyone,

Recently I saw a wikipedia page in the name of Stellar Repair for Video which was earlier approved by so many moderators within wikipedia group recently got deleted without any notification.

I have a common concern here when a page earlier got approved by other moderators what is the purpose to moderate it again? Don't you think you are disrespecting other moderator who has approved it earlier?

The reason for deletion was secondary sources are not good mostly paid then how other moderators approved that earlier?

Don't you think it is also not ethical?

Best Rgeards Amitpandeys0281 (talk) 08:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Amitpandeys0281. Wikipedia doesn't have moderators. It has administrators, but administrators' role doesn't include "approving" articles. Notification that the article was at risk of deletion was visible on the article itself for a week, and you were notified at User talk:Amitpandeys0281#Proposed deletion of Stellar Repair for Video. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:52, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Cordless Larry. for your response!

Is there any way to restore it again? Amitpandeys0281 (talk) 10:26, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Amitpandeys0281 Since this was deleted via proposed deletion, anyone can ask for the page to be undeleted at WP:REFUND. One should be prepeared to adress the issiues though - there are stickier procedures to get something deleted for cause. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Putting aside the meaning of "moderator", I'm surprised to read of "a wikipedia page in the name of Stellar Repair for Video which was earlier approved by so many moderators within wikipedia group". Where did this happen? Anyway, here's the article: Stellar Repair for Video previously known as Stellar Phoenix Video Repair is a video repair utility developed by Stellar. The software repairs MP4, MOV,AVI, MKV, AVCHD, MJPEG, WEBM, ASF, WMV, FLV, DIVX, MPEG, MTS, M4V, 3G2, 3GP, and F4V files on Windows & Mac. It can repair videos shot from Android Mobile phone, iPhone, iPad, Digital cameras, GoPro cameras, drone cameras, DSLR etc. Plus references. Yes, just three humdrum sentences. -- Hoary (talk) 12:20, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Concern

Hi I have a concern about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:173.73.126.72. His explanation as to why my contributions to the talk were deleted is nonsensical. It is restricting my participation in the talk with no merit. 173.73.126.72 (talk) 10:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, article talk pages are for discussion to improve the article, not for voicing your opinions about the article's topic. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 10:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Situation: At article Annihilationism, on the Talk page, there was creation and then deletion of a section titled "False info." After several exchanges an editor deleted the section as having become a debate on annihilationism rather than on means to improve the article about annihilationism. A recourse for IP:173.73.126.72 is to edit the article directly - including adding references in support of a position. If reverted (reversed), then valid to start a discussion on the Talk page about why that was done, in hope of reaching a consensus. David notMD (talk) 11:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Warn IP editor

Hi, I have come across a IP editor who added wrong content/information of the candidates by copying the information belonging to another page. The sources inserted were directly lifted up and put in the page which are misleading until and unless checked by one. I have checked the sources and found that they belong to one and not the other. Refer: Next Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly election where wrong info was adding lifting up from 2019 Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly election. The ip user is User talk:2601:41:C500:4D80:F19A:CAAB:A1EA:9C5C, Since I am not aware of how to warn a user please someone take in account of this incident and warn or block the editor for any further disruptive edits since the edit went unnoticed for 3 days maybe since he added some sources editors might have mislead in a opinion that it was genuine. 456legend(talk) 14:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @456legend, welcome to the Teahouse. Looks like they've already been warned for various things. You can leave a message on their talk page, just like you can for a logged-in editor, and you can report them (at WP:ANI, WP:AIV, etc.) if they continue to be disruptive using this or other IP addresses. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:40, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@199.208.172.35 Thank you very much dear ip editor. I placed a warning note on the editors talk page. 456legend(talk) 14:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Article will be nominated for deletion, but I don't know when

Hello,

I was told that my article will be nominated for deletion by another user. I believe the user will fulfill his promise. I would like to just have the nomination discussion already, so I can move on with my life and then the situation can be settled. I can't force the user to nominate it today and I don't believe I can nominate the article either.

The article's likely going to be nominated under WP:BIO1E and WP:NOTNEWS. I don't believe I can improve the article to fix either issue, though I would like to argue my case, but at the moment, there's nothing to argue because the article is not marked for deletion yet.

What actions can I take here?

Thank youKatoKungLee (talk) 14:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

If the deletion discussion has not yet been started, there is not much you can do until it is. You could post a defense of the article on the article talk page, and then when the deletion discussion starts link to it from there. 331dot (talk) 15:12, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Someone stepped in and nominated it, so the situation is handled. Thanks.KatoKungLee (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

For the curious, Jackie Miley, an article about a teddy bear collector, is at AfD and KatoKungLee, the creator, has asked for an uncontested deletion. KatoKungLee, a prolific article creator, has several other articles at AfD, include Christian Cavaletti. a collector of Pepsi cans, Harry Sperl, a collector of hamberger-related items, and Douglas and Mary Beth Meyer, growers of a large grapefruit. On Talk page, KKL has defended the practice of articles about people famous for one (debatably obscure) thing. David notMD (talk) 15:26, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I had never heard of the WP:BIO1E rule prior to the last few weeks. I don't know if I agree with it or how it's enforced, but I'm going to be mindful of it now that I'm aware, since naturally, the goal is not to get articles deleted that I wrote.KatoKungLee (talk) 16:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Can I return this amendment?

Fixed lead line as per better source -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 14:55, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Karsan Chanda I can see that you have been editing Meena but I don't understand what you are asking. The Talk Page of that article will be the correct venue to discuss your edits if anyone WP:REVERTs your contributions. That's the standard WP:BRD process we use. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Any pages in neuroscience which needs work?

Hey there, is there any page in (computational) neuroscience which requires some editing. Even beyond deadlink and missing citations. I would be happy to help Didiogiorgio (talk) 15:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Didiogiorgio The article computational neuroscience itself has been marked as requiring some tlc to make it more readable for non-experts. There are a whole bunch of "See also"s that you could review for content. I presume that you are familiar with WP:NEURO and that may be a better venue to ask what else needs doing. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:42, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh my God!

There are many citations and references which are literally self-published websites.

This doesn't make sense given the amount of peer-reviewed paper we have Didiogiorgio (talk) 15:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Didiogiorgio This is not my area of knowledge, but you might be interested to know that you can find numerous related articles listed in some of the Categories shown right at the very bottom of the article. See Category:Computational neuroscience, for example.

We also have innumerable 'WikiProjects' which aim to work on specific subject areas. Most have a really useful 'Quality Assessment' tables for finding articles of varying importance to that WikiProject, and also varying levels of completeness. 'Stub' and 'Start' class articles are the shortest and have the most potential for quick-win improvements. Just click the number in the relevant cell of the table to see a list of all those articles. In you case, I'd guess WikiProject Molecular Biology/Computational Biology would be most relevant to your interests. Hoping this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Didiogiorgio Yes, replacing bad references with good references will be a great help to this encyclopedia! David10244 (talk) 09:08, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Explicit Text Use Permission

Hi! I have a question about permissions. Recently, I had a page deleted because it use too much similar lingo from the subjects own website. I can get permission from the subject to use any text I want from his site for his wiki page, but I had to start a new draft of the article since the old one was deleted and it is not a live article yet. In the permissions letter it specifically asks for the Exact URL of the page or file on Wikipedia they are giving permission for, but how can I do that if it is not live yet? I am including Wiki's specific letter lingo below for reference, thank you!

"I hereby affirm that I, [I, (name), am], the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [URLs of the content] as used here: [Exact URL of the page or file on Wikipedia], and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work." Pinkcell23 (talk) 15:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Pinkcell. I think they would need to be clearer about what they mean by "release" (to public domain? or under which licence?) and would need to send the authorisation directly. See WP:DCM.

But beyond that, it is comparatively rare that material from the subject's website will be suitable for a Wikipedia article, because it is unlikely to be neutral in tone. 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. ColinFine (talk) 16:53, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Pinkcell23 Assuming that you mean this website, the information it contains would only be of limited use when drafting an article about Jonas: to the extent mentioned in WP:ABOUTSELF. For an article about him to be accepted, you need to find sources which meet all of these criteria and show that he meets the relevant notability requirements. Don't waste your time trying to get permission to use verbatim quotes from websites: Wikipedia articles are based on editors recasting material in their own words and using a neutral tone. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:23, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Pinkcell23 If the site author gave you "verbal" or e-mail permission to use his words, that doesn't mean that you can give permission on the form -- you are not the creator of the content. That language, which you quote, explicitly refers to him, not to you. Also, that release allows anyone to reuse the same material (if he were to release it). Knowing that, please follow what Mike Turnbull and Colin Fine say about notability and reliable sources. David10244 (talk) 09:17, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

conflict of interest question

I want to clarify who can edit a page. I work for someone who wants a few edits to his page, e.g., job title and newest published book. Can I make those changes as someone employed by him? If not, is it possible to prompt someone else to make the changes? 2600:4040:4467:7000:D11C:62E7:EAA:7F8C (talk) 17:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read WP:COI and WP:PAID, which should answer your questions, as well as reading how to make edit requests. It would be easier for you to make the required disclosure if you create an account, but you must disclose even if you choose not to make an account. 331dot (talk) 17:12, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for confirming. I think it's best that I make the edits and disclose. 2600:4040:4467:7000:D11C:62E7:EAA:7F8C (talk) 19:26, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

You need to make edit requests and disclose. Please don't edit the article directly. David10244 (talk) 09:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

G 105.33.156.86 (talk) 17:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

No it is not possible 105.33.156.86 (talk) 17:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

IP user, please do not give incorrect advice. It is possible, if done correctly. 331dot (talk) 17:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

What 331dot wrote was create an account, dclare on your User page that you are paid to contribute to name of article, then on the Talk page of that article create a new section in which you describe the changes you wish to have made - including properly formatted references - and append and edit request so that a person from the edit request squad can look at in (in weeks to months) and decide to implement or deny. David notMD (talk) 21:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Editing/Links

Recently on a Science Fiction binge (Lost in Space), noticed some real-world locations mentioned as homes for an alien race (star system), wanted to include the episode in the category for that specific star in fiction and when in that category the link would auto scroll to a specific episode so people can know that this Star was mentioned in the episode. not a huge deal but thought it could be kinda neat for those looking for references. Mrhidesbees (talk) 21:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Mrhidesbees. You mean, add it to categories like Category:Fiction set around Rigel? What is added to a category is an article, not a section or anchor in an article, so I don't think there's a way to do what you are asking. ColinFine (talk) 22:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for pointing that out. I am largely ignorant as to how things work behind the scenes. Mrhidesbees (talk) 22:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, @Mrhidesbees. Further to Colin's reply above, I think there would need to be two criteria met to be worth even adding a mention to an article on a real star system. Firstly, it shouldn't just be some passing mention in a SF programme, but a significant part of the storyline. Then I feel it would need a supporting citation to permit someone to confirm that that star system was indeed used as the focus for a particular episode. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I think you have a point; if every passing mention of everything from everywhere was included in Wikipedia it would be a clusterjumble. I suppose an alternative would be to make a plot summary for each episode but that would take some work! haha. Mrhidesbees (talk) 22:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, very true. See also WP:TRIVIA. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:04, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Are corporate pages reliable?

I was editing The Chicken Rice Shop article and one of the main issues is citations for verification. I want to cite https://www.thechickenriceshop.com/find-us but I don't know if corporate pages are considered reliable or not by Wikipedia. I did check Wikipedia:Reliable sources but couldn't find anything. Imbluey2 (talk) 00:01, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

It depends on what information it's being cited for. If it's a basic uncontroversial fact about the business, it should be fine. Though it's always best to find a source independent of the thing you're writing about. And you need at least some independent sources to prove that the business is actually notable enough to have an article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:13, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hu, Imbluey, and wleomce to the Teahouse. The buguglyalien's advice is right. The relevant policy is WP:ABOUTSELF. ColinFine (talk) 11:55, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Correct vs Common vs Consensus

Though I’m not a new editor per se, I’m not so active in the ways that I would have come across this issue before. My question is in connection with an edit I’m wanting to make, but it exists independently of that edit. If there is a conflict between accuracy, common parlance, and Wikipedia consensus, what is the aim of Wikipedia as an organization, for Wikipedia as a repository of knowledge? What if an article is self-contradictory, such as a situation where an article’s longstanding and accepted text is that the article’s title (or a key section in the article, or whatever) is incorrect. On the one hand, the larger conflict needs resolving, but I don’t have the cycles to enter into that kind of argument. On the other, how should small edits to a self-conflicting article proceed? Follow the accepted incorrect wording/text or follow the article’s text that the title (or section or whatever) is inaccurate? I’d like to get an answer to this in the abstract, so I’ll forgo a link to where it came up for me for now. I could not find writing on this matter in Wikipedia Help, but maybe I wasn’t searching well. Triplingual (talk) 00:01, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

When there's doubt about what should be on an article, the answer is usually to discuss it on that article's talk page. If you need more input in the discussion (especially if it's a more obscure article where no one is looking at the talk page), you can make a post on a noticeboard. For example, if you think the article doesn't accurately reflect what its sources say, you can make a post at the no original research noticeboard. Or you can ask for input on a WikiProject, like if it's an article about psychology, then you can get more input from WikiProject Psychology. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:10, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello Triplingual. "Answers in the abstract" are often not helpful in discussing issues on Wikipedia. Your dichotomy Follow the accepted incorrect wording/text or follow the article’s text that the title (or section or whatever) is inaccurate does not necessarily capture all the possibilities. ColinFine (talk) 11:59, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

It is possible that they are not helpful for you, but it would be extremely helpful for me. Getting the answer for one article is nice, but having a conversation that leads to guidelines I can use in future editing is even better. I'll also be happy to hear pointers to where editing self-conflicting articles has been discussed before or policies that inform what to do in situations such as the one I described, or, as you say, in other possibilities. Triplingual (talk) 16:03, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

WP:V, WP:TRUTH, WP:ONUS, and WP:CONSENSUS combine to say information comes from verifiable sources and our priority is verification, not truth. When information that is verified is challenged, consensus determines inclusion or exclusion.Slywriter (talk) 16:14, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Citing author names that are in non-latin scripts

Given that there are multiple ways to romanize Korean, and particularly Korean names, would it be best practice not to Romanize any Korean names (when the person has not been referred to in English) when including them in references? (eg. 유, 석조; 김, 광일 (1994-10-23). "교량 붕괴 주범은 과적차량...철저한 단속 필요" [The main culprit of the bridge collapse were overloaded vehicles...a thorough crackdown is needed] (in Korean). KBS News. Archived from the original on February 17, 2023. Retrieved 2023-02-17.) :3 F4U (they/it) 00:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@Freedom4U I would include the original script, since that's an exact match, while romanization can be inconsistent, unless they're well known by a specific romanization e.g Sun Tzu. This has been discussed before, and while there are script-chapters and script-titles, I don't see anything about script-author. Help_talk:Citation_Style_1/Archive_73#Author/Editor_link_in_other_language. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:03, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Template:WelcomeMenu-introduction follow-up

I have a number of questions—writing out here to help myself use the mental frame of conversation to draw out my goals, curiosities, and current confusions, but will likely go follow up on elements myself.

• I'm interested in power tools: effective or commonly used ways to query for—data the community finds interesting.
  • I'm curious what level of activity triggers your threshold to prompt a Template:WelcomeMenu!
  • I'm also interested in bulk-editing tools. I made a series of around two dozen edits recently by hand, adding {{About| hatnote templates to disambiguation pages.
    • I'm curious about how to do edits in bulk.
    • And where I should raise discussion about it. Perhaps here on my user page, or on a user (project) subpage.
• I'm curious why the tooltip previews don't appear (for me) on mouseover of links in your post.
• I plan to follow up with wiki "adoption" or joining or contributing to a WikiProject.
• Heck, how do I check watchers, or how does the reply mechanism work here. What are the ways of (and levels of) bringing other's attention to edits, or questions, or topics, with appropriate light but effective insistence.

Mcint (talk) 01:30, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mcint, welcome to the Teahouse. Here are answers to some of your post. Wikipedia:Welcoming committee says: "Welcoming committee members welcome new users who have already made constructive edits". We don't welcome users who have merely registered an account without editing, and we usually don't say welcome to users who have only made vandalism. Your hatnote edits like [2] are contentious per Wikipedia:Hatnote#Disambiguating article names that are not ambiguous. If Les Misérables (1995 film) is the only 1995 film called Les Misérables then the full article name is not ambiguous and we usually don't make a hatnote. I think you should learn more about Wikipedia before using bulk edit tools. They can quickly make a mess. The default tooltip feature Page Previews is only active for links to articles and not other namespaces. A piped link may conceal that a link is not to an article. For example, I just wrote [[Wikipedia:Namespace|namespaces]] which produces namespaces but links to Wikipedia:Namespace. This is not an article so there is no tooltip. [[Namespace]] produces Namespace which is an article. Registered users can enable "Navigation popups" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. This is an alternative tooltip feature which is more geared towards editors than readers and it does produce a tooltip for other namespaces. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:50, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for an extensive reply, PrimeHunter!

I'll work on habits of checking the culture. I suspected there would be discussion, or policy about this somewhere. In this case, it looks like my intent of linking to related articles is also not preferred, although I find self-aware phrasings in the prose of some pages, such as "1862 novel of the same name, by" on the musical's page, excessively hard to skim. It does look like infoboxes contain these kinds of adaptation backlinks that I care to see. I'll look to those in the future.

• Given that the linking I really want to see seems handled by infoboxes, I'm still a little dissatisfied with hunting for the base reference of adaptations, but I guess I should revert these. Where else could I find discussion, debate, and policy, related to the reference type I'm interested in, but maybe not describing well. If not disambiguation, something like "a primary reference" for the page, page is an instance of other page. It seems like my questions might be appropriate or familiar in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, expounded thinking on the nuances might be there for me to find.
  • I'll look to WikiProjects or intro tasks lists first, for an active but guided and higher-context introduction to more extensive editing.
• Here perhaps, possibly irc:#wikipedia-en-help, where are other good places to think about asking or checking for novel (to me) kinds of edits? Or where

Excellent tip about Navigation popups, thank you. It looks like I should ask on MediaWiki for more help with using them elsewhere, as naive Special:MyPage/global.js inclusion does not solve it.

• Is there, analogously, some way for the editor's link-insertion search to search and offer completions from Help:, Template:, or other editor-relevant namespaces?

I'm quite happy to have discovered, through playing with settings and enabling introduction edit links section=0 how introductory sections are numbered. I've been wanting to transclusion of just introductions on another MediaWiki site. Mcint (talk) 08:16, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for an extensive reply, PrimeHunter!

I'll work on habits of checking for existing consensus. I suspected there would be discussion, or policy about this somewhere. In this case, it looks like my intent of linking to related articles is also not preferred, although I find self-aware phrasings in the text, such as "1862 novel of the same name, by" on the musical's page, excessively hard to skim. It does look like infoboxes contain these kinds of adaptation backlinks that I care to see. I'll look to those in the future.

• Given that the linking I really want to see seems handled by infoboxes, I'm still a little dissatisfied with hunting for the base reference of adaptations, but I guess I should revert these. Where else could I find discussion, debate, and policy, related to the reference type I'm interested in, but maybe not describing well. If not disambiguation, something like "a primary reference" for the page, page is an instance of other page. It seems like my questions might be appropriate or familiar in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, expounded thinking on the nuances might be there for me to find.
  • I'll look to WikiProjects or intro tasks lists first, for an active but guided and higher-context introduction to more extensive editing.
• Here perhaps, possibly irc:#wikipedia-en-help, where are other good places to think about asking or checking for novel (to me) kinds of edits? Or where

Excellent tip about Navigation popups, thank you.

• Is there, analogously, some way for the link-insertion search, to search and offer completions from Help:, Template:, or other editor-relevant namespaces?

I'm quite happy to have discovered, through playing with settings and enabling introduction edit links section=0 how introductory sections are numbered. I've been wanting to transclusion of just introductions on another MediaWiki site.

For myself, but mentioning, I want to 1) restyle the numbered headers I've enabled, and 2) enable fragment linking from the headers (and not just from the table of contents of a page). Mcint (talk) 16:55, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

How to get a COI article approved

I have been working on and twice submitted an article, which I am being paid to create (a fact that I disclosed at the outset). I submitted the first draft of the article, and it was declined; the reason the editor gave was that it sounded more like an advertisement and needed more independent sources. I went through, reworked much of the article, cut much of the copy and added in many more independent sources/citations. The article was declined again, with the editor stating that it was still exceptionally promotional — and noting that this is why COI editing is strongly discouraged. Despite probing both editors for additional feedback/clarification, I haven't received any.

Essentially, I am hoping someone can provide some thoughts on areas of the article that Wikipedia may deem as too promotional so that I can edit or remove those. In general, I would be super appreciative if anyone has advice on how to get a COI article approved. I am sure COI editing occurs all the time (whether people disclose it or not), and I have seen quite a few articles that are much more promotional or lacking in independent sources than the one I am creating.

The article is for Springbar; here is the page: Draft:Springbar.

Thank you in advance for your help! Xlea Nollmav (talk) 02:28, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Xlea Nollmav. I have been a tent camper (though less frequently in recent years) ever since the late 1960s. Mostly, I have used tents made of lightweight synthetic fabrics, but I have stayed in pre-erected canvas tents in both car-accessible and wilderness areas of Yosemite National Park a number of times. I read backpacking and mountaineering magazines and books, own hundreds of volumes, and have never heard of this company until just now. The first reference in your draft is to the company's own website which is a big red flag waving in a strong breeze for reviewers. Acceptable Wikipedia articles summarize reliable sources that are entirely independent of the topic of the article. The very first sentence includes overtly promotional marketing language spacious design, simple setup and mid-century style, referenced to the company's own website. That is the functional equivalent of hollering to reviewers, "Please decline this promotional draft immediately!" Claims that their tents have been used at the Everest Base Camp are poorly referenced and of little significance. That camp is a seasonal tent city, after all, visited by as many as 40,000 people a year. Who cares if this company's tents were once erected there? You have referenced some baloney about the company being mentioned on The Price is Right to the company's Facebook page. So, that is irrelevant trivia referenced to the exact opposite of a reliable source. When I read your draft, I conclude that some young investors have purchased a moribund, non-notable company, and are trying to promote it using 21st century marketing techniques. The problem is that advertising, marketing and promotion are strictly forbidden on Wikipedia. Language like All Springbar tents are designed and treated to be highly water and mold resistant, yet breathable, with tightly woven, double-fill, 100 percent cotton duck canvas. Springbar tents made in the USA are manufactured with Sunforger finished canvas and treated with the highly water-resistant Sunforger finish. Imported tents are made with HardyDuck finished canvas, which features a highly water resistant and anti-mold finish similar to those made and treated with Sunforger. Every Springbar tent uses a lap-felled seam construction, three types of cotton thread and special cotton bindings to prevent leaking. A fine-grade opaque mesh netting is used for all windows, and canvas reinforcements on windows allow for venting while keeping rain out. is overtly promotional and has absolutely no place in a neutrally written encyclopedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 05:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Delete the entire Products section. David notMD (talk) 09:01, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@Xlea Nollmav: Additionally, you must totally lose the mindset that Wikipedia is a publicity channel. It isn't, it must never be used that way, but you're trying to use it that way, and your employer is expecting you to use it that way. As long as that purpose exists, the article can never be published. Answer the question "what three sources cited in that draft meet all of the criteria described in Wikipedia:Golden rule"? If you cannot identify them, then the company doesn't merit an article here. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:17, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your perspective. That is a great approach to take. I appreciate it! Xlea Nollmav (talk) 15:39, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I will remove that section. Xlea Nollmav (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate the feedback! This is certainly helpful. Xlea Nollmav (talk) 15:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Question about Editing

So I have Noticed I have been editing while I was logged out of my account and I had to Endlessly claim it was mines and apologizes, So I did make some minor edits to claim it was mine and I need to delete the edit that shows my Ip address, how do I delete a edit? Spookycheems (talk) 03:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Spookycheems. Please read Wikipedia:Oversight and do not discuss this in public any further. You do not want to draw extra attention to it. I can delete this thread if you want. Cullen328 (talk) 04:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Ey 2601:202:8180:1F80:B4C2:7F9D:9929:E8AF (talk) 07:25, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hikaru no go and Takeshi Obata

Hello. In Hikaru no go page it is written that Hikaru no go won Shogakukan manga award in 2000, but in Takeshi-sensei's page it is written he won it in 1999. Which one is really true? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfp5 (talk • contribs) 08:03, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hikaru no Go and Takeshi Obata: Each is referenced in Japanese, so check the refs. The article Shogakukan Manga Award shows year as 1999 without a reference, but it has External links which may solve the problem. David notMD (talk) 09:06, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikiproject request SM Supermalls

my Draft is bad from WikiProject ok 210.23.189.140 (talk) 09:22, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Welcome IP editor to Teahouse! New proposed WikiProjects should approved at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council. The key thing there is a proven need and interest to maintain a WikiProject beyond one or two editors. I will remove the draft review, because that's intended for actual Articles. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@Shushugah new wikiprojects? 210.23.189.140 (talk) 10:59, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. You seem to have joined a group of IP editors from the Philippines who are determined to create articles on every SM shopping mall. While some of these articles now exist in mainspace (see SM Supermalls and dozens of similar articles) your latest attempt at Draft:SM City Sorsogon Design is, frankly, a mess. In its current state it is bound to be declined by a reviewer. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:40, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Upload denied

Hello everyone!

I am working on an artists page and wanted to upload a picture which comes from the artist itself, taken with her own camera. When I completed the file name and description I was told that it could not be determined if I was really the one who took the picture. How can I imbed these pictures anyway if there is obviously no copyright issue? I tried this with multiple ones and got the same result every time.

Thank you everyone for their time! DeSantarossa (talk) 12:25, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

DeSantarossa Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You say you are working on the draft for an artist, but you have the same name as the artist. If you are not the artist themselves, you must change your username at Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS as soon as possible. Please also read conflict of interest and paid editing.

If the artist took the picture of themselves, it would be easier if they were the one to upload it, not you. 331dot (talk) 12:47, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I would also note that images are not relevant to the draft approval process, which only considers the text and sources. Images can wait until the draft is accepted. 331dot (talk) 12:49, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, DeSantarossa. I'm afraid that you are wrong when you say "there is obviously no copyright issue". There is no copyright issue if the photographer chooses to release the picture under a suitable licence (which will allow anybody in the world to reuse or alter it), and if they personally assert that they are so releasing it. You cannot do that for them. ColinFine (talk) 15:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@DeSantarossa: It doesn't matter who owns the camera. The copyright belongs to the photographer regardless of who owns the camera. Did you take the picture? ~Anachronist (talk) 15:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Courtesy to Teahouse hosts: Draft:Hella Santarossa, which states she is also known as Hella De Santarossa. David notMD (talk) 19:04, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism, adding same content repeteadly without references

I came across Societat Civil Catalana article and found that user @Mariano211 edited the content by adding unreferenced text. I think the proper term for that kind of edit is vandalism. I reverted his edits but the user added again the exact same thing. I added a section in the discussion of the article to alert of the bandalism of that user. Can be something done to stop that user from damaging the article more than it already is and leave it as it was before his edits? 95.17.250.138 (talk) 13:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Vandalism may be reported to WP:AIV; edit warring may be reported to WP:ANEW. 331dot (talk) 13:28, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I reported the vandalism but it was declined because the user has not been warned. Unless some admin decides to step in and warn him, his removal of content and non referenced additions will prevail. 95.17.250.138 (talk) 14:13, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. You may not be aware that WP:VANDALISM has a very limited meaning within Wikipedia editing and adding unreferenced text which may be true but is unverified is not one of its characteristics: it is only vandalism if the editor makes changes which they know will damage the encyclopaedia. It seems you have a content dispute with Mariano211, a new editor who may not be aware of all our policies, one of which is to assume good faith. You should not edit war but seek consensus for what the article should contain at its Talk Page. Meanwhile, instead of reverting that particular addition, you could add a {{cn}} tag to show that it requires a citation, which Mariano211 may be able to provide: and of course if they cannot, is justification for the removal. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:22, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Well, I think that replacing content with non referenced text supporting the thesis of the political group which the article is devoted to damages the encyclopedia. It's difficult to seek consensus when the user keeps pushing his edit. 95.17.250.138 (talk) 15:03, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

this is not vandalism at all: I quoted a meeting of the European Parliament when the issue was discussed. Perhaps you do not like that meeting, but its existence is something totally objective Mariano211 (talk) 17:34, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

UPDATE: IP 95.17.250.138 and Mariano211 are having a discussion on the Talk page of the article. M has started the process of supporting intended changes with reference(s). David notMD (talk) 19:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

PL GNG

Hi, what is the GNG for a Programming language? Tzahy (talk) 13:39, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Tzahy Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are no specific notability guidelines for a programming language, so as you suggest WP:GNG would apply- the topic must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 13:49, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much 331dot. Tzahy (talk) 13:52, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@Tzahy You might also find the opinions in this essay of interest to you: Wikipedia:Notability (software). They are not a formally adopted guideline, however. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:58, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

JUDUCA - Abandoned Article

JUDUCA is a stub which requires ASAP expanding and actualization, the information is outdated as of 2016

多多123 (talk) 13:39, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

多多123 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has no deadlines, so what is the source of your urgency? We're only as good as the volunteers who choose to edit when they can. The draft is currently completely unsourced and probably merits deletion. Do you have sources changes to propose? 331dot (talk) 13:47, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response, but I believe it is an essential article for the Sports section of Wikipedia, although your point is valid.

'Wikipedia is not working to a deadline, though it is not an excuse for complacency.'

There are no encyclopaedic references available on the internet; there are primary sources. If the community and/or admins wish to delete it, go ahead, but I think this has great potential. 多多123 (talk) 14:55, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I just believe it is a good article with potential and requires a little clean-up to keep it up to date and to Wikipedia's standards. If these are achieved it would speak for itself. I'm asking for experienced editors to help with the expansion and actualization of this article. 多多123 (talk) 14:57, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

多多123 This isn't really a forum to request that others edit an article. That's part of the purpose of the maintenance tags, but they haven't resulted in others editing. If you have sources to contribute to this article, you're the best person to edit it. If you don't feel comfortable with editing it, but you still have contributions to make to it, you may make an edit request on the talk page. 331dot (talk) 15:02, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

👍 多多123 (talk) 15:08, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Which request would I make? 多多123 (talk) 15:11, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, 多多123. I'm afraid it is a good article with potention and requires a little clean-up is like saying "this house (which has no foundations and may fall down at any time) is a good house and just requires repainting". It is not possible for an article without citations to be a good article, or to "speak for itself". Unless and until independent, reliable sources are found, any effort spent on the article would probably be effort wasted. ColinFine (talk) 15:10, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Would local governmental references be still considered biased? 多多123 (talk) 15:14, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Golden rule for guidance. Generally local coverage (government or not) is insufficient to establish notability. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm learning as I go. 多多123 (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

My edits on page "Sonipat"

Hi there!

I am a new editor and learning the ropes of contributing to wikipedia which I have been using since I started typing on laptop. My first contribution was to page Sonipat as I am a resident of Sonipat which lies in country India. So, I started with putting the names of the famous schools from Sonipat with citations and links but those have been removed. When I started editing the page only 1 school was mentioned so I continued by putting 4 more school names but now we are back to square one. In case if I have followed any wrong practice contrary to wikipedia's guidelines then do let me know and if I were correct then I hope the edits which got removed will be reinstated.

Thank You

A sincere Wikipedia's lover Ajoobaa.in (talk) 15:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Ajoobaa.in Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You added some external links to an article, these were inappropriate for the article. Please read the external links policy. Generally, schools are only added to articles about communities if the schools themselves merit and have articles. 331dot (talk) 15:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. So, can I add the school names without links as I strongly believe that to make my city's page fully exhaustive for the readers then it should be replete with all basic information. Ajoobaa.in (talk) 16:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

There should not be a mere list of schools. Only if the schools merit and have articles themselves should they be mentioned on that article. The vast majority of schools do not merit articles, as they must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources that an article can summarize. 331dot (talk) 16:08, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Roger that! Ajoobaa.in (talk) 16:12, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Atom

When I go into the edit history of an article, on the left sidebar, under "tools", there's an RSS symbol with a link with the text "Atom." What is this? When I click on it it sends me to what appears to be an error page. :3 F4U (they/it) 17:06, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, 3 F4U. I had never noticed this, and had no idea, so I entered "WP:Atom" in the search bar, which took me to Syndication, which has information about it. ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

How does one 'fancy up' their User Page?

Hello, I just wanted to know how I would make one of those colored boxes, the one that gives tidbits about the user; "This user likes/is/ etcetera etcetera..." I've tried to find a Wikipedia: prefixed page for it but I can't. I've also tried to go on user pages and use the edit option to see all the markup and symbols that go into them, but everyone I go on has an edit-lock to prevent vandalism. [Which is fair, yes, I just wanted to state that I've tried all that I can to find a template.] So if someone could help me, I'd truly appreciate it. Thank you in advance. MetricPin (talk) 17:23, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @MetricPin, see Wikipedia:Userboxes, and Wikipedia:Userboxes/Userboxes. AdmiralAckbar1977 ^{talk contribs} 17:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@MetricPin They're called userboxes and there's a whole page about them and how to create them at Wikipedia:Userboxes Nthep (talk) 17:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Jinx @Nthep, you owe me a coke. AdmiralAckbar1977 ^{talk contribs} 17:30, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@AdmiralAckbar1977 no Cokes in the house, will a Pepsi do? Nthep (talk) 17:40, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh well thank you two. I think I just got lost in the nomenclature of these sorts of things. MetricPin (talk) 17:32, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Not a problem! Welcome to Wikipedia. AdmiralAckbar1977 ^{talk contribs} 17:33, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. MetricPin (talk) 17:33, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@MetricPin: And regarding edit-protected pages, you can still access the page content by clicking the "view source" option that appears instead of the regular "edit" option. For instance, if you go to the Main Page, you will see the "view source" option, which allows you to view (and copy, of course) the page content but not to modify it. — DVRTed (Talk) 17:45, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@MetricPin - Recently, I re-build my userpage and found helpful examples at User page design center/User page Hall of Fame. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 18:18, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Camila Coelho

Hello! I am working on creating a page for Camila Coelho, one of the biggest creators and entrepreneurs from the original 2009 blogger era that is a top creator to this date (was on Forbes 2022 creator list, CEO of two businesses), but I am running into some trouble despite having about 30 credible sources. Any help would be appreciated. Paulboy (talk) 18:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Paulboy Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. As odd as it may sound, you probably have too many sources. Fewer high quality sources are preferable to a large number of low quality sources. You have some interviews, these aren't acceptable as it's the person speaking about themselves. Good sources should go into detail about the significance or influence about the person as the source sees it. 331dot (talk) 18:31, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Paulboy (talk) 18:36, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

On that dreaded “Uncyclopedia”

Uncyclopedia is, what it’s name suggests, a Un-encyclopaedia. They have gone against everything we Wikipedians stand for, they make a mockery of Wikipedia on their page on us, and the website’s similarity has led many astray. So I present you this Query. Should we sue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C8:968C:9001:B9C7:5E23:C4EF:36A7 (talk) 18:29, 14 March 2023(UTC)

This isn't really the forum for this, but they're allowed to do that. The Foundation has lawyers who surely would pursue action if there was a legal case to do so. 331dot (talk) 18:34, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh. Bother. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c8:968c:9001:b9c7:5e23:c4ef:36a7 (talk) 18:50, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

(please note: creator of this page speaking) Some people enjoy “Uncyclopedia” very much, and, I have worked on both Wikipedia and “Uncyclopedia”. But, Uncyclopedia causes more problems than it solves. But the question still remains unanswered. (Forgot the clock so I don’t know what time, 14 March 2023) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c8:968c:9001:b9c7:5e23:c4ef:36a7 (talk) 18:42, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

IP editor, please sign your posts with four ~ (or simply use the reply button). The answer is that there is nothing to sue over. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:46, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh. Bother again.2A00:23C8:968C:9001:B9C7:5E23:C4EF:36A7 (talk) 19:07, 14 March 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c8:968c:9001:b9c7:5e23:c4ef:36a7 (talk) 18:59, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

You did get an answer, "The Foundation has lawyers who surely would pursue action if there was a legal case to do so." 331dot (talk) 18:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh. Bother a third time.2A00:23C8:968C:9001:B9C7:5E23:C4EF:36A7 (talk) 19:07, 14 March 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c8:968c:9001:b9c7:5e23:c4ef:36a7 (talk) 19:02, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for drawing my attention to Uncyclopedia. It's satire (I've heard that Americans don't understand satire, but I don't believe it). It's really very funny - have a look at this article.   Maproom (talk) 19:04, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

For one, I am not American, and two, I understand satire. (Just so you know, I used to work on Uncyclopedia, I know what to expect, and I fear what will happen if I click that link.)2A00:23C8:968C:9001:B9C7:5E23:C4EF:36A7 (talk) 19:10, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Follow-up to Ivan Law AKA Ivan The Great has officially solves the Tupac Shakur and Biggie Smalls Murders

Last.fm Ivan Law - IMDb Ivan Law - Wikitia (Hip Hop Homicides) of Holly Hood : Who Killed Tupac Amaru Shakur and Christopher Biggie Smalls Wallace - Kindle edition by Law, Ivan , Law, Ivan. Professional & Technical Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com. https://www.barnesandnoble.com/enwiki/w/holly-hood-who-killed-tupac-amaru-shakur-and-christopher-biggie-smalls-wallace-ivan-law/1141304364 Holly Hood Tupac and Biggie Homicides Solved (2023) - IMDb The Tupac and Biggie murder case solved by Ivan law podcast interview (Podcast Series 2022– ) - IMDb Monster Beats – Medium The Investigation of the Tupac Shakur and Biggie Smalls murders has taken a decisive turn with the addition of Ivan Law's name to the homicide file by the LAPD. From now onwards, Ivan the Great will be solely responsible for solving the murders that were unsolvable for over two decades. : monsterbeatspress (reddit.com) The tupac and Biggie murders Solved By Ivan Law Press release by Ivan Law - Issuu “A New Book coming to Unveil the Truth on Murders of Tupac Shakur and Notorious B.I.G our Most Beloved Hip-Hip Icons” – NBS-KA (nbska.com) Ivan The Great Monster Beats Ivan The Great Monster Beats (talk) 19:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Ivan The Great Monster Beats, welcome to the Teahouse. As you were told the last time you visited, you should discuss articles on their talk pages. However, you should cite reliable sources for any information you wish to add. Citing your own book is not likely to be enough. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:08, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Edit request for Bill Ackman

Hello, Teahouse editors! On behalf of Pershing Square Capital Management, I've submitted an edit request flagging issues with specific text recently added to Bill Ackman's Wikipedia article. An editor added text using Twitter and the New York Post as sources. The latter does not appear to be considered a reliable source, but one editor reviewing the request says Twitter is appropriate in this case. However, the text is not even accurate based on the Twitter source.

The reviewing editor has not returned to the open discussion so I'm hoping someone here might be able to help. Thanks in advance for any assistance resolving this issue. FMatPSCM (talk) 19:42, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Investigation question

is there a sockpuppet hunting squad i can join? Blitzfan51 (talk) 19:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)