Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gatesby1 (talk | contribs) at 11:48, 23 December 2023 (Translating images: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


detailed cite questions

I wanted to cite "The Encyclopedia of Mammals" so found another article that cited it to see how it's done, but that raised some questions. Then checked WorldCat to gather more data. Here's the info I have, followed by my questions. my book = my copy of the mentioned book; Mammal = Mammal article (book mentioned in Further Reading but I assume the format should be the same as cited); WorldCat = info from that cite.


my book has:  edited by David Macdonald, assistant editor Sasha Norris

Mammal has:  MacDonald DW, Norris S

WorldCat has:  authors:  David W. Macdonald, Sasha Norris


my book has: this edition published in 2006, copyright 2001, 1st published 2001, reprinted 2002, 2006

Mammal has:  2006, 3rd edition

WorldCat has:  2006, copyright 2001


My book has just the 1st name while others have 1st & 2nd initials or 1st name & 2nd initial. (I know capitalization is wrong in Mammal article.) That's correct info but that's not what is on the book. How should I list the name? My book lists them as editors, others list them as authors. Does this matter? How can I list as editor/assistant editor while using the Cite form.


It looks like the help files say if a book is reprinted (without major changed), I should use the original publication date. If so, looks like the Mammal article is wrong. But do I list the reprinted date anyplace?


As an added complication, this book was also published as a new edition in 2006, but looking at the ISBN, the Mammal article is using the same edition as my book. Sunandshade (talk) 21:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sunandshade: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per WP:SAYWHEREYOUREADIT, use the information in your copy of the mentioned book if that's what you used for your Wikipedia edits. Online resources may be incorrect, or different editions may have slightly different credits. You can use {{cite encyclopedia}} for references. GoingBatty (talk) 21:36, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
GoingBatty Sunandshade "Online resources may be incorrect" just like with articles/pages/websites on films and TV shows.
I have found countless films and TV shows which have had incorrect release dates by a year or two, in most places online, as most places get their production information from IMDB, if they don't have a Wikipedia article.
However I've also found occasional films and TV shows, which have been incorrect by 3, 4, 5+ years too.
I recently stumbled one which was listed on IMDB as being released in 2001 as a film.
However it was actually a 2 episode TV series which was released in the year 2000, so I've corrected. Danstarr69 (talk) 13:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Editorial versus authorial contribution to books certainly can be an important distinction to make, for example when the book is a volume of chapters by different authors. If it's something like an encyclopaedia, usually the editors are responsible for most of the entries as well, and sometimes the entries aren't even individually credited, so calling the editors "authors" is ok.
Worldcat is often sloppy about this distinction, as is google books. (An added complication for google books is that if a Wikipedia citation to a google books source has been generated by a script instead of manually entered, it will always misattribute authorship to the editor(s), even if the google books page itself has correct attribution.)
As to the first name versus initials thing, it sounds like the Mammal article is using Vancouver style referencing, which omits every part of a person's first and middle names except for the initial letters, which it includes smooshed together without any punctuation. It's very common in some scientific fields. You can achieve this affect by setting the |veditors= parameter to |veditors=Macdonald DW, Norris S. If you cite their full names like |editor1=David W. MacDonald|editor2=Sasha Norris, it's altogether possible another editor will change the citation style to Vancouver in order to comply with WP:CITEVAR, so it's not something to worry about too much.
For the publication date bit, you can use |date=2006|orig-date=2001. Reprints from the same publisher usually retain the same pagination.
Online resources may be incorrect is an important bit of wisdom to keep in mind. At some point, any database was populated by a human, or by an algorithm. Both commit errors. Folly Mox (talk) 12:41, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Folly Mox "Vancouver Style?"
It's called proper English, like the example I've just used by putting the question mark inside the speech marks, rather than outside like Americans would.
I'm constantly correcting things like that on IMDB, especially now than IMDB has started allowing people who use capital letters and initialisms in their names to be added as they are, which most people with stage names like rappers use. Although for some reason it can sometimes takes multiple attempts to get a nickname which contains capital letters in random places to be added.
For example, a few months ago it took me 5+ attempts to add some aliases to a group of rappers from Birmingham. I can't remember the name of the group, however I know that the groups name could be abbreviated (like 1D instead of One Direction), and they all used the groups acronym in their solo rap names occasionally.
The same goes for titles eg Mr, Mrs, Dr etc, however even they are occasionally overruled by the American admins, so you sometimes have to go back and correct them again, as that's how they are listed on screen in British productions, and is what their own guidelines say should be done. Danstarr69 (talk) 00:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Insofar as there is not consensus on what "proper English" is, any argument which begins "It's called proper English" has been lost in that first sentence. The rest is just a parade of prejudice and opinion. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:02, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to everyone for your comments. It has been an enormous help. With all of your comments & links, I have done a ton of research on WP & have learned a lot. I think I now have a pretty good understanding on how to cite an encyclopedia. Whew! Now that I have that under my belt, I can now do the fun stuff ... editing articles. Sunandshade (talk) 09:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copy and pasted from another website

This section is almost exclusively a copy and paste from a website called EarlyChristian Writings.com.

In this instance, it is best to confirm the sources (linked here), or just the website? Or would you suggest basic reformatting the wall of text?

Thanks! Doctor165 (talk) 21:26, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Doctor165: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest rewriting and summarizing what the website says, and then adding a reference for the web page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Doctor165, thank you very much for this report. Earwig's tool agrees with you and reports a high likelihood of copy violation, with the similar passages highlighted.
Note that copying may occur in either direction; that is, sometimes websites copy from Wikipedia. Once it's established that we copied from them, the copyrighted material must be removed from the article, and the record of it in the page history must be permanently expunged from Wikipedia; any editor can do the former, and an administrator can delete the old versions from the history page.
The important thing to do, is to signal right at the article using Template:Copyvio that the material is suspected to be a copy violation, which will signal administrators to have a look at it and make a determination, and take the appropriate action. I have added the template; you can see the result now at Barnabas#Alleged writings.
Whether or not you choose to rewrite or summarize the former text is up to you (please don't remove the template, if you do), but by far the most important step is to signal the suspected violation. There are a couple of steps after that (logging the notice, and notifying the contributor) and I'll take care of those. If it turns out that the copying went in the other direction, the investigating admin will simply remove the template. Thanks again for signaling this potentially serious problem, and happy editing! Mathglot (talk) 23:23, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What variation of English is preferred when editing?

Do English-language editors on Wikipedia use American English, Canadian English or UK English for spelling, punctuation, etc.? Chikaren (talk) 09:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chikaren Welcome! Language is one of a few issues where the en-WP-way is to keep it consistent within an article. If you edit the article London, you use UK, if you edit New York, you use American. And if you edit cheese, you follow the style that is there already, assuming there is one. More at WP:ENVAR. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Chikaren (talk) 09:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For more information, see MOS:ENGVAR. Just wanted to let you know that more information about this is available. TypoEater (talk) 15:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, oops, I didn't see that someone else had already said that. My bad! TypoEater (talk) 15:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with everybody, except that when we edit cheese, we should use French English. Mathglot (talk) 11:51, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fromage that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to edit a page

My family page is Beaver Creek Indian Tribe and someone by the name of YuchiTown keeps undoing my changes despite proof. The live chat provided no help as noone answered. All we wanted to do is change pee-dee to muscogee, and its offensive that i was told it was "an interesting research theory" when my tribe is trying to update our paperwork. We are not from that area, we are not from south carolina. we SETTLED here. 64.234.38.130 (talk) 15:34, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You need to come up with a reference pointing to a reliable source at the time you make the edit, not 'later'. You are in essence competing with a very reliable source which disagrees with your assertion. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that you have edited this article as User:ECreekNation and User:Edit807, and now here not logged in, hence an IP number for the account. Going forward, use only one account. Per what Tagishsimon wrote, changes to the article require references. Your response on your Talk page "I’m having the chief call the support line/ someone at the office as you are not authorized from my knowledge." will fail. There is no "support line/someone at the office". Editors are volunteers who live where they live and edit what they want to edit. David notMD (talk) 16:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Im not logged in as I’m using a different computer, I tried logging in and my password doesn’t work hence my ip address. The speculation as I’m trying to advoid anything is insanity. We are the source of that page as it’s OUR tribe. If you would like to delete the wiki page for false information we will be more than happy. 64.139.248.177 (talk) 17:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Would you like to contact the tribe yourself at this point if I’m just not providing enough resources though I’ve submitted these resources 64.139.248.177 (talk) 17:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IP user. You are in a similar situation to somebody who is not happy with an article about them personally: you are welcome to make suggestions for improving the article, but your changes will not necessarily be carried out, and any information you want to introduce must have been reliably published. See WP:FAQ/AS. ColinFine (talk) 19:47, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:RS. That is what wikipedia articles need. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you I will look into it, I fixed my login. Edit807 (talk) 17:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Uman holistic help

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Uman Hi I just wanted to have someone look at my page and suggest some edits because what keep happening is someone will find one issue and I fix it and publish and then someone finds another issue and then I republish but if I could have someone look at it as a whole and make and let me know what issues are with it overall I can fix it and get published without all the back and forth. Nabil vega (talk) 16:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nabil vega, I'm puzzled by the phrase "'Collective Impact' Model with Collaborative Representation of Artist Uman". Is that the name of a work (or exhibition, etc.)? If not, why that capitalisation? Maproom (talk) 16:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It a term when a smaller independent gallery works with a bigger Blue Chip Gallery to share the responsibilities of an artist. Usually and artist would leave their smaller independent gallery for the more resourced gallery. So the term is important and also showing a shift in the art world. its a specific model but I can also uncapitalize it. Nabil vega (talk) 17:08, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nabil vega: I suggest you review the adjectives in the draft. For example, what's a "taste-making" gallery? What source states that she "dazzled with their unorthodox and wholly original approach"? What source described her I Want Everything Now show was "successful"? Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:17, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the suggestion Nabil vega (talk) 21:21, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
made the changes and added more inter wikipedia links to bolster the notability and connections to the broader artworld. Nabil vega (talk) 22:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nabil vega, the "Personal life" section mentions her dogs and cat by name, and her chickens. This is referenced to an ARTNews article that says nothing about either dogs or cats or chickens. Why is that and how did you obtain that pet information? Cullen328 (talk) 22:16, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
this information was in an earlier version of the article I can remove that detail Nabil vega (talk) 15:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How long does it take an image to be replaced on Wikipedia?

So, I updated a new version of a map. When I open that image on commons, I see the latest version, however on Wikipedia I see the old version. How long should I wait approximately? PS: It's not about cache. Aredoros87 (talk) 17:06, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the details, but it can take a while. Worry after 24 hours. Raise a concern again after 48. Should be done before that. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the answer. I was talking about this file. In this article it's still not updated. Aredoros87 (talk) 18:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aredoros87 it's updated for me. I would recommend WP:PURGE to force refresh the image that is retrieved. This is usually not urgent, but when someone sabotages the images with disturbing content, purge is your friend. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot. I tried purge. It didn't work out, but I checked another page with that picture and it was already updated. Seems like I have problem with cache. Aredoros87 (talk) 19:58, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum amount of times you can edit an article

Hi, I just started using wikipedia and I was just wondering if there is a max amount of times that you can edit an article if you made a few mistakes, thanks! Soup Muncher II (talk) 17:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as maximum number of edits. However there is a three-revert rule, so be careful when reverting. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 17:38, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Soup Muncher II: Other than the physical limitations of the database, there are no hard limits. However, if you are repeatedly editing to game the system, you will get flagged, and the 3rr that Delta mentioned. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you make a mistake, just fix it, and indicate what you are doing in the edit summary. Other editors will appreciate your honesty. It's not all that rare that I'll make a mistake and then fix it with an "Oops" comment in the summary, along with some detail of how I screwed up previously. Mathglot (talk) 11:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What can be broken before it can be used

What can be broken before it can be used

41.122.4.148 (talk) 17:58, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A glowstick Soup Muncher II (talk) 17:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? 57.140.16.1 (talk) 19:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Eggs. Mathglot (talk) 11:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The human spirit. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 18:00, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cabinets of Goverments

I want to expand List of cabinets of Greece in order to create articles about all Greek governments. However, I don't know what the appropriate title is. This article for example,Second Cabinet of Kyriakos Mitsotakis writes about member of cabinets only, but i want to create articles about government work also.

Thank you...D.S. Lioness (talk) 18:17, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You should start a discussion on talk page of that article. Aredoros87 (talk) 18:30, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
there isn't a general rule about the proper title? D.S. Lioness (talk) 18:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's actually. Take a look on WP:AT Aredoros87 (talk) 19:35, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much D.S. Lioness (talk) 17:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! Aredoros87 (talk) 22:33, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Asking an editor to proofread my article before resubmitting it

Hi, I submitted an article that was rejected. The editor who rejected it said they or another editor could proofread my next attempt before I submitted it for publication. So I rewrote the article on the draft page... but now I'm not sure how to submit it to an editor without publishing it. This is the draft page, although I don't think you'll be able to see the updated version since I haven't clicked on "publish changes": https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Draft:Qmerit&action=edit Msbreslow (talk) 19:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please just hit publish and if you think it is ready submit. there is no pre-review option.Theroadislong (talk) 19:31, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response and the comment you left on the draft page. I've updated the draft to (hopefully) address everyone's concerns (and clicked on "publish changes" like you said - I appreciate the explanation). Msbreslow (talk) 20:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Msbreslow. "Publish changes" means "save" - it doesn't mean "publish to be part of the encyclopaedia". It was changed a few years ago, to remind editors that all edits are visible to anybody who goes looking for them: there are no private pages anywhere in Wikipedia.
You can continue to edit Draft:Qmerit, publishing your changes, until you have dealt with the issues mentioned by the reviewer, and then submit it again with the "Submit" button.
Note that you should remove any reference that doesn't mention Qmerit, or that only mentions its name, and also most references that come from QMerit, including from press releases (in particular, I think the Tom Moloughney piece is just regurgitating what QMerit says, rather than being truly independent). ColinFine (talk) 19:34, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation! I went ahead and hit "publish changes." Looking back, I felt the same way as you on the Tom Moloughney piece - that's one of the references I removed. Msbreslow (talk) 19:38, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resubmitting articles for review.

I made a draft:Darknet_(Neural_Networks) and seeing it is my first article I did not know if I fixed the problems User:BuySomeApples kindly showed me. " This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of websites). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. "

I found some more references that are longer about the floss program, darknet, but should I resubmit it for review now, or is it better to check more Wikipedia guidelines before using the resubmit button, so it will not be reviewed too soon? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Other Cody (talkcontribs) 22:06, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Other Cody: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest adding a |website=, |work=, or |publisher= parameter for each citation template. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can I upload files from my Desktop Downloads file to Wikipedia?

Can I upload files from my Desktop Downloads file to Wikipedia? MaryKathleen7 (talk) 22:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you can as long as it follows Wikipedia policy. special:Upload Other Cody (talk) 22:25, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MaryKathleen7: You need to be sure that the file you are uploading is either in the public domain, or covered by a licence which enables it to be copied on wikipedia. (Or that there is some reason why a fair use claim can be made for the use of the image.) If you do not know, or are unsure, then you should not upload it. Per the link which Other Cody provided, most files should not be uploaded because they are encumbered by copyright and lack a free licence. The most recent file of yours that I've seen, which you mention below, was a copyright violation, something taken from a third-party website which did not provide a licence for reuse. So, to repeat: If you do not know, or are unsure, then you should not. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:20, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How can I delete a photo I uploaded to my account?

I uploaded a file which I now want to delete. How do I do that? Thank you ahead of time. MaryKathleen7 (talk) 23:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've marked the WP and Commons instances of this image as copyright violations; both should be speedy deleted shortly. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I will try to get permission to use the photo. Can the permission be verbal or must it be in writing? MaryKathleen7 (talk) 01:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The easiest thing to do would be to have the photographer/copyright holder upload the image themselves. Please see donating copyrighted materials. 331dot (talk) 01:08, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
MaryKathleen7, 331dot is correct in describing the easiest way. There are other ways as well which are more complex and are described at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. In all cases, the free licensing of a photo is a legal transaction, and precise legal language must be used. Only the copyright holder, who is usually the photographer, can freely license their work. Verbal permission is not acceptable in any case. Cullen328 (talk) 03:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, MaryKathleen, and welcome to the Teahouse. In addition to what 331dot and Cullen328 said, note that permission to use an image in Wikipedia is not not enough. The mission of Wikipedia is to provide a freely-reusable collection of information, so as a rule we require not that images have permission to use them on Wikipedia, but that the copyright holder has licensed them in such a way that anybody may freely reuse (or change) them for any purpose, commercial or not, as long as they attribute the source. You'll need to make that clear in approaching the copyright holder. ColinFine (talk) 11:25, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of content if not notable/unsourcable

I'm in the midst of making some minor edits to a rapper's article, and there's a section where a song he was featured on by a notable artist followed by a song he was featured on by a less notable one - "In June 2021, Carti was featured on rapper/producer Pi'erre Bourne's song "Switching Lanes" from his The Life Of Pi'erre 5 album and on rapper Lil 1 Dte's single, "Homixide" from his self-titled mixtape." I have a citation for the Pi'erre Bourne song, but Lil 1 Dte isn't notable enough to have an article written about the track.

In this scenario, is it best to leave a "citation needed" tag, or delete the mention of the unsourcable track entirely? EphemeralPerpetuals (they/them) (talk) 23:34, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You need to make a judgement when you come across issues like this; is the uncited assertion worth noting in this article, or not? A quick google suggests to me that Lil 1 Dte is not obscure and nor is his work "Homicide". I know little about rap, but I'd be leaning towards either finding a citation, or using {{cn}}, rather than deleting. But there may also be other choices; artist articles may have tables of the artists work (or perhaps use of the artist's work by other artists) either in the main article or a discography article, so the possibility is that the fact can be represented somewhere else than the paragraph you found it in. But it is absolutely the case that there'll be places where mentions are made of completely non-notable artists, within articles about notable artists, with a view to promoting the non-notable artist rather than improving the encyclopedia. Where you believe that's going on, then deletion is a good outcome. (And to pick up on the observation you made, whether an artist or a track has a wikipedia article can be factored in to your judgement on whether a fact should stay or go, but it should not be the only measure, nor should undue weight be placed on it. Wikipedia's coverage is far from universal; there are many well-enough known artists and tracks which do not have wikipedia articles, but which return enough google hits to suggest that they're not completely obscure. There's a very wide spectrum between notable-enough for a stand-alone wikipedia article, and so obscure as to be of no conceivable interest in / relevance to another article.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your advice! I think I conveyed my words slightly wrong, however - I meant article as in a secondary source online when I said "Lil 1 Dte isn't notable enough to have an article written about the track", I meant news coverage, rather than a specific Wikipedia page.
But thank you very much for your advice, I'll scour online for any reliable references to Lil 1 Dte - my guess is, however, that there may not be much news coverage of this track, and is not likely to be as the track is a few years old, which is why I am leaning more towards deletion rather than a request for a citation. I believe that the reference to "Homicide" was in good faith, but whether it is sourcable is another matter. EphemeralPerpetuals (they/them) (talk) 14:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bobby Vee with Strings and Things did my article recived article approved cause i didn't get notice? Samchristie05 (talk) 00:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Samchristie05: It did. It was moved to mainspace by user:Another Believer, but perhaps manually rather than by using the normal Articles for Creations controls which would have left a note on your talk page? Anyway: it is now an article, so, thank you for writing it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:48, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
the reason why i keep every of my article in Article wizard Create Draft, cause i need to create music albums on draft, and waited for you guys to get approved to my article, and it doesn't work and i edited instead of the normal Article to Creations Controls. Samchristie05 (talk) 00:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thanks cause i always wanted to stick on Wikipedia Article Wizard
Draft Creation Samchristie05 (talk) 00:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I got hired part-time to edit some articles on Wikipedia, and my client informed me that the previous editor they hired got blocked from Wikipedia for sockpuppetry. If I continue to edit the same existing articles, won't Wikipedia think I am another sockpuppet account? How do I "prove" that I am indeed a different person or account? Glossy1718! (talk) 01:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:PAID. You should not, in my view, be taking work as a paid editor because you inevitably have a conflict of interest which will be to the detriment of the encyclopedia. You will not fall foul of sockpuppet policy if you are using a different IP address than previous paid editors. Ideally you will let us know who the client is so that work associated with that client can be checked for the sort of bias which tends to be introduced by the activity you have declared yourself to be engaged in. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Korean Academy of Science and Technology :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Glossy1718!. In addition to what Tagishsimon mentioned above, you might want to consider having your account verified by WP:VRT. This could help to clarify to others that you're who you're claiming to be and not someone else. You can do this by sending an email to Wikimedia VRT asking what's needed for VRT to verify your account. Of course, this will only probably work as long as you're not using the same IP address as the editor who was blocked. You could also try emailing paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org and explaining your situation. That email address is primarily used for reporting suspected undisclosed paid editing, but they might be able to help you with your sitution. Regardless of what you end up doing, you and your boss should probably take a look at WP:OWN and WP:BOSS. You should also be using article talk page's to make edit requests instead of trying to directly edit the articles you've been tasked to improve yourself. Finally, you should avoid repeating the mistakes of your predecessor. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Glossy1718, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure why neither Tagishsimon nor MarchJuly has explicitly told you that it is mandatory for you to make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor.
Please also note that most editors are volunteers, giving their own time; and while many of us are ready to spend time helping new editors learn what they need, it is an odd situation if we find ourselves giving our time to help somebody who is being paid but has not yet learnt what they need to know. I urge you to go slowly, and make sure you understand Wikipedia policies (especially verifiability and neutral point of view) before you attempt to work on articles about your clients. ColinFine (talk) 11:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you have properly declared your paid intention to provide new content and revise content for Korean Academy of Science and Technology. Per Wikipedia guide at WP:PAID, refrain from editing the article directly. Instead, create a section or sections at the Talk page of the article, proposing your changes and the references validating those changes. Add a review request. An editor will review your proposed changes and either implement or deny. Continue to add declarations of paid status for each article you are being paid to amend. David notMD (talk) 17:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reference help required

Lee Jun-ho (entertainer)

Hi. I wonder if someone could help me please. I seem to have made a right hash of this. I added a reference which is appearing under external links, but I wanted it to only appear in references. It is there, but appears with an error. It looked fine when I published it, but has now thrown an error and I don't understand what is wrong with it. This is reference 91 regarding Fundex awards (GOODDATA Corp). Ideally, it would not appear under external links at all and would appear correctly under references.

In addition, the row in the awards table that refers to the Fundex Award is a different format from everything else in the table. It seems that other data has been added using a template and I can't figure out how to get this row in the table looking the same as everything else.

If I could just get help to fix this page, I don't think I will have another go ever! I'm traumatised. You can't even seem to delete what you have edited. I didn't know about the sandbox or this site. I need to spend a lot more time learning before attempting changes again!

Thank you for any help. PetKat04 (talk) 02:44, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PetKat04: Sorted. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:53, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are a miracle worker! So fast. Thanks so much!!!! PetKat04 (talk) 02:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

my page is rejecting continuesly how can i improve

am submitting pages but its rejecting continuesly kindly asist me on this Ab.ms.abi (talk) 04:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ab.ms.abi: Welcome to the Teahouse. Your question here is the only one I see in your contributions, though you have made 4 edits in total, which suggests that pages you created before have been deleted. Usually they're deleted for reasons like advertising or otherwise inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you look up the exact names of the pages that were deleted you should see a deletion log as a popup if you try to edit them, which will show which admin deleted it and why. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How can i overcome ands submit again and get aproval Ab.ms.abi (talk) 04:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ab.ms.abi, are you referring to your sandbox? Your sandbox was deleted because it was apparently misused as "web host" per the admin who deleted it. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 05:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ab.ms.abi, here is the first paragraph of what Fastily very rightly deleted: In the fast-paced world of Internet technology, one company stands out for its commitment to connecting communities globally. Town Contacts Technologies Pvt Ltd (Town) is a dynamic Internet Technology Company that has been at the forefront of providing a diverse range of Internet-related services since its inception in 2014. And it continues in the same style. This is blatantly and crudely promotional. Yes, as Tenryuu surmised above, it's advertising, and utterly inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If the assistance you're asking for is assistance in advertising Town Contacts Technologies, the answer is a flat "no". -- Hoary (talk) 07:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you persist in trying to create an article with such strong promotional content it will be Speedy deleted again and you will be indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 09:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kindle Books

How can I cite the Kindle version of a book? LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk) 04:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@LeónGonsalvesofGoa: Welcome to the Teahouse! When I tried WP:KINDLE, I was redirected to Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Books_and_print_articles, which states "If there are no page numbers, whether in ebooks or print materials, then you can use other means of identifying the relevant section of a lengthy work, such as the chapter number or the section title." GoingBatty (talk) 06:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@LeónGonsalvesofGoa: Rightly or wrongly, I use the at parameter to reference the Location within a Kindle book. I do this with the rp template. For example:
<ref name="aardvark" />{{rp|at=Location 33}}
I don't know if this is an "official" method, but it seems to work. Mike Marchmont (talk) 12:24, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Am I understanding "Public Domain" the right way?

Hi Teahouse,

One of my subjects of interests is Australia, its defence and decision makers. A while ago I discovered (wonderfully) that photographs published openly by the US Department of Defense are all public domain. So I've gathered relevant shots onto a photo sharing platform, Flickr, and from there I choose relevant ones to upload onto wikimedia, which, for me, is a really simply process and easy to manage.

All of that has gone well, until, overnight, a user has decided to challenge, it would appear, almost all of those images. Yikes. You'll find that challenge here

My understanding is that images published to the public domain mean that they can exist on anyone's photo stream or file sharing platform, that people are free to "copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially."

I still have plenty to learn here, so am happy to have the process explained to me. I'm very keen to do things the right way, even as I (hopefully) improve articles.

MatthewDalhousie (talk) 07:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC) MatthewDalhousie (talk) 07:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MatthewDalhousie, welcome to Wikipedia! First, Wikimedia Commons is a sister site of Wikipedia, but also a separate one; it would be helpful to centralize future discussion regarding this topic on that site (commons.wikimedia.org).
I think the user you mentioned's main concern is that you have tagged the images under a Creative Commons license, while they are in the public domain. Public domain is allows for anyone to use the image in any way they like, but CC licenses often can be more restrictive. As these images seem to all be created by the US government, and therefore in public domain (and not CC), they would definitely be welcome on Wikimedia Commons!
They should, however, be tagged properly using the public domain license tags. A list of them is here c:Category:PD-USGov license tags, they are broken down by department (DoD, DoE, etc.). Cheers! — Frostly (talk) 08:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Another matter is that the "Author" field should be set to the photographer where possible, instead of yourself. Hope that helps! — Frostly (talk) 08:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
MatthewDalhousie, public domain means that the text or image is completely outside the realm of copyright laws, either because the copyright has expired or no copyright has ever existed. Works created by employees of the US Federal government while performing their job duties are in the public domain and are not restricted by copyright law in any way. The purpose of CC BY 4.0 or CC BY 2.0 licenses is to allow copyright holders to freely license their copyrighted material for re-use by anyone. There is no need whatsoever to apply CC BY licenses to public domain works, and you have no right to apply a CC BY license to any work that you are not the copyright holder of. All those files you uploaded to Commons should be tagged as public domain, not CC BY. Cullen328 (talk) 08:09, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see also that you've uploaded photos from Flickr without a link to the original source URL; it's helpful to include one to help verification of public domain status. — Frostly (talk) 08:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  1. @Frostly, thanks for the kind note and clear suggestions.
  2. I didn't even know there was a "public domain" setting for images updated from Flickr! I will be looking for that!
  3. Thanks you to you @Frostly and @Cullen328 for pointing out that Public Domain means there is no copyright whatsoever. I'm no lawyer, and I didn't know that's actually different to Creative Commons 2.0, 3.0 or 4.0. Where possible and appropriate, I will remove the
  4. Point taken about tagging correctly. I had thought that the Flickr wizard would absorbed that, but I can see it's just a bit more homework for me once it's uploaded. At that point I will see if I can make it clear that, with public domain images, that it's given that setting if the option is there. I trust it is.
  5. I will also look for the author field, and complete it with those details. Thank you both for your thoughtful reply

MatthewDalhousie (talk) 04:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand some of the elements of copyright law correctly, when a presumed copyright holder of an image donates that image to the public domain, they're waiving all their rights to it. Anyone, for example you, is then free to claim its copyright. Claiming it would not be illegal, but it would be misleading and generally obnoxious, and so I definitely do not recommend doing it (even inadvertently). And I may very well be wrong about this matter. -- Hoary (talk) 08:37, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
“Anyone is then free to claim its copyright.” Well... The point is that for that specific work, once it enters the Public Domain, there no longer ARE copyrights (and thus also no rights to license)”. People are then free to use, modify and reuse the work. To claim copyright is possible, but without modifications to the work, meaningless. To claim authorship over it would be a lie and would classify as plagiarism. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 09:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoary and @TheDJ,
  1. Now you point it out, it makes complete sense to say that public domain means there is no kind of individual right to that image any more. Again, just hadn't occurred to me.
  2. Claiming copyright if it is Public Domain is meaningless. *Random further question if you're inclined to give your mind to it!* I know a photographer in Canberra who has shots of various public figures, and says he's happy to have them on wikipedia, but isn't sure about making them creative commons because "once I do that, then people could take one of those images of a public figure and put a swastika on them and there would be nothing to stop that." (Not something I've had to worry about before! But I would have thought that, if someone was going to put a swastika on a picture of a semi-famous Australian they would just do that anyway.) Is there anything I could say to this photographer that would provide some assurance? Which is to say, help!
MatthewDalhousie (talk) 04:14, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
MatthewDalhousie, I too would think that the kind of person who likes attaching swastikas to people who don't describe themselves as Nazis is unlikely to be much deterred by matters of law. But as for the law, "personality rights" are often invoked. These are mostly (or exclusively?) about commercial exploitation, and so wouldn't be applicable. Perhaps, defamation would be. But as surely will be very obvious, I Am Not A Lawyer. -- Hoary (talk) 04:41, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In Australia, defamation laws would definitely come into play. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 04:48, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Says the guy who did law for two weeks.) MatthewDalhousie (talk) 04:48, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
MatthewDalhousie: honestly, there isn't really any assurance you can give, because your friend is absolutely right. Releasing their work under CC-BY-SA does give other people the right to modify the work in any way they wish, including ways that your friend might not be comfortable with. If they are not willing for their work to be modifiable in this way, they should not release it under CC-BY-SA, and thwrefore should not upload it to Wikipedia. Writ Keeper  04:35, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for thinking that through @Writ Keeper. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 04:41, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Frostly about tags, took a look through the extensive list, and I reckon that "Template:PD-USGov-Military" is tag that applies. I've tried to edit the captions with this image here to do that successfully - can you tell me if I have the right idea?</nowiki> MatthewDalhousie (talk) 05:06, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
MatthewDalhousie, "Template:PD-USGov-Military" is indeed the right template to use! I've made some additional edits on that page. Please see them and apply the principles of them to the other images! Let me know if you have any questions. — Frostly (talk) 08:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is the school "Starkey Ranch K-8" significant enough to warrant its own article?

It is located in Odessa, Florida, it is mentioned in Pasco County Library Cooperative. It is obviously a K-8 school. I am asking because I am not sure if this school is significant enough to get an article. The school was also constructed recently. NotABlanker (talk) 13:32, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@NotABlanker: see WP:NSCHOOL Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 13:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discord

I noticed you have a discord but couldn't find the link to it on it's dedicated page. Any help? Frittle (talk) 13:44, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Frittle: https://discord.com/invite/wikipedia Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 13:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
tnx Frittle (talk) 13:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Frittle: Welcome to the Teahouse! On Wikipedia:Discord, the link provided above is also available in the blue "Join Server" near the top of the page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Citation/Source/Reference

Greetings!

how to add a citation in infobox? Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 14:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Youknowwhoistheman: are you using visual editor? I usually switch to source editor when I need to insert a citation somewhere. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 14:31, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yeah, actually i used both, but still i don't know how to add a citation in infobox. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 14:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Youknowwhoistheman: Have you tried putting "<ref>the citation</ref>" after the content in the infobox while in source editor? Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 14:54, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thanks you so much, i'll try. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 14:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Awards Content assessment and importance scale

Hi, so I'm new to this Teahouse thing (and talk pages in general), and I finished making major changes to a certain (but unknowing) article. I noticed on its talk page that the article was part of the WikiProject Awards group, and that its content assessment and importance scales are set to Stub and unassessed, respectively. I know that higher ranks (eg. Featured, A-Class and Good Articles) need to be assessed and discussed by multiple people, but for the lower ranks, if the article meets the requirements, can I promote these ranks on my own (e.g. Stub → Start; unassessed → Low), or do I need someone's permission? If so, to what extent can I independently promote these articles ranks to?

I'm asking this here because this feed seems welcoming, and there's no activity on the talk page of the article I worked on. - Alex26337 (talk) 14:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Guessing this is about August-Graf-von-Platen-Preis, and yes, clearly no longer a Stub. Personally, I have felt comfortable upgrading Stub to Start and Start to C-class, but hesitant about doing C-class to B-class based on my own contributions. See Wikipedia:Content assessment for some guidance. David notMD (talk) 15:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alright based on your advise and how I reviewed the article as it currently stands, I promoted it to Start class (I still felt it needs more info) and Low scale. Thanks for the feedback. - Alex26337 (talk) 15:40, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source Ok thing

Hello, I remember in the past seeing a page where it had many soruces and they were color coded, and it said whether or not they were good to use but I do not remember what it was called.  Casper king (talk) 14:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Casper king: Are you thinking of WP:RSP? Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:48, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes thanks. Casper king (talk) 14:50, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resysopping after inactivity

There should be a policy which states that admins have to reapply for adminship after a period of inactivity. What is the link for this? Logoshimpo (talk) 14:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Logoshimpo: Its part of Wikipedia:Administrators, see Wikipedia:Administrators#Restoration of admin tools. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:51, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can I add information to my website from Wikipedia if I mention the source?

I want to make a website where there will be information from defferent egyclopedias like Wikipedia...

Constantin Psyllas Jounior Evidouvi (talk) 15:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Evidouvi: I think this would be useful WP:MIRROR Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 15:17, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Evidouvi You may of course just want to use small portions of the Wikipedia content, in which case please see WP:REUSE for the licensing requirements. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Company Tree's

There's a company (grandparent) which had a smaller company (parent), which had 8 divisions (children).

A bigger company (great great grandparent) took control of the main company (grandparent) in 2015, and put its child (great grandparent) in charge of it and 3 other companies (so the great grandparent is now in charge of 4 grandparents)

However the main company (grandparent) still continues to use its name today as its "official company name", even though it's child (parent) is now the "trading name" of the overall brand.

There's not really any mention of the "official company name" so my question is...

Can the "official company name" aka grandparent (which doesn't have an article for some reason) be added as a Parent company of the parent, along with the great grandparent which has already been added?

Also should the great great grandparent be added as the "owner"? Danstarr69 (talk) 16:24, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Danstarr69: Welcome to the Teahouse! I believe you're asking if new articles can be added for parent companies and corporate owners. Just as WP:BIORELATED tells us that "Being related to a notable person in itself confers no degree of notability upon that person", WP:INHERITORG tells us that "A corporation is not notable merely because it owns notable subsidiaries. The organization or corporation itself must have been discussed in reliable independent sources for it to be considered notable." Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:52, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
GoingBatty No, I'm saying there's technically 2 parent companies...
One which is the new parent, and is in charge of four separate entities.
One of which used to be the parent, but is now just the "official company name" of the company which used to be it's child.
1 - Can both be added as parents?
2 - Can the owner of the new parent, be added as the owner of the smaller company? Or should the overall owner only be listed on the new parents article? Danstarr69 (talk) 17:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Danstarr69: Are you asking about updating existing article(s) or adding new article(s)? What existing article(s) are you referring to? What published reliable sources have you gathered, and what information do they contain? GoingBatty (talk) 17:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
GoingBatty Updating existing articles...
Vantiva owns Technicolor Creative Studios which is the parent of Mikros Animation which used to be under Mikros Image.
However Mikros Image is now the "official company name" of the "trading name" Mikros Animation.
Mikros Image needs to be mentioned somewhere, but where exactly.
I'm not sure whether Vantiva should be added as the owner of Mikros Animation or not.
Once this is sorted out, I'll then mention the old and new divisions on the article. Danstarr69 (talk) 17:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Danstarr69: I suggest you start a discussion on Talk:Mikros Animation to discuss your questions with others editors, and provide the published reliable sources you have gathered that discuss the various ownerships and name changes. GoingBatty (talk) 17:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started as an editor

I need some help, I just started using wikipedia and does anyone have any suggestions/tips on starting as an editor? Thanks! Soup Muncher II (talk) 16:39, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see our introduction page and The Wikipedia Aventure. These two pages will introduce you to the software and our key policies and guidlines. Once you feel up to the task, see here for instructions on how to make your first article. I will also leave more information on your talkpage. Happy editing, NW1223<Howl at meMy hunts> 16:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oft-repeated (oft-ignored) advice is put in time - months - working at improving existing articles before attempting to create and submit a draft for a new article. David notMD (talk) 17:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Photographing faceless people: continued

The article Billy Woods, the faceless rapper, has a photo of him performing at a concert in 2022. Woods, a faceless person, does not wish to have his face shown. Both IP and registered editors have removed the image of Woods as for his facelessness. Though, even if they are to remove the photo from his Wikipedia article, it still exists on the internet; either that be on Wikimedia Commons, or on his article on the Indonesian Wikipedia.

I have asked for help before on here, and the consensis was to keep, as for Wikipedia:UNCENSORED. The most recent removal of his image was reverted, but the photo is still removed, which I have been reverting edits which do so myself.

Am I correct for reverting these edits, or should his face be removed from the article? Help. Roasted (talk) 17:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Roastedbeanz1, I think you are correct, if something is deleted from Wikipedia just because someone doesn't want something, it's always wrong (well, except for WP:UNDUE cases, but that is not a case here). Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 17:50, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback. Is there a way I can stop editors from removing his face, or will I have to keep on reverting? Roasted (talk) 17:52, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Roastedbeanz1, I requested page protection. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 17:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Billy_Woods. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:24, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tools

Hello and Greetings to You all, actually i’m finding some wikipedia tools which can make editing more easy and good. I may ask you to pls suggest me some of the tools. Pls. Thanks — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 17:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@QuadriOnMobile, hello! Have you checked Gadgets tab in the Preferences menu? There are multiple tools in the Editing section which you might find useful. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 18:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Deltaspace42 I know those, but i need suggestions of editors that which is the best tool. — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 18:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@QuadriOnMobile If you intend to edit from your mobile, you might like to read these suggestions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael D. Turnbull I went through it, it is very informational. Thanks — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 18:19, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

www.thestar.com.my.

Is the website www.thestar.com.my. considered a reliable source? I saw it used in the article Kuan Kam Hon and I was wondering whether or not it should be removed. Casper king (talk) 19:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Casper. The best place to ask about reliability of sources is WP:RSN. ColinFine (talk) 19:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Casper king: We have an article on it: The Star (Malaysia). I would say it's a reliable source but probably not for articles about the government or current ruling party, similar to The Straits Times in Singapore, which has the same trust rating by its audience according to our article on The Star. Asking on WP:RSN is a good idea, as ColinFine suggested. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:34, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a reliable source?

Looking for sources for alumni from a university in Brazil but I was wondering if edurank.org is a reliable source. It looks like it is but I am just trying to confirm. KaedenAwesome (talk) 20:33, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KaedenAwesome: see WP:RSN. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 20:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@KaedenAwesome I will just wing it. It may be a reliable source for the fact that the individuals listed are in fact alumni. However, I would not consider the brief descriptions as reliable. We have no idea about the sources they get this information from or what process they use to establish its accuracy. Fabrickator (talk) 21:20, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

What is the notability guidelines for Nominated ministers in Indian states? There is a thing of Nominated Minister/Ranked minister and in hindi it is called “Darja Prapt Mantri”. And kindly let me know that being a Chairman of state-level education board is notable or not? I’m confused. — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 21:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@QuadriOnMobile: see WP:POLITICIAN and WP:GNG. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 21:33, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Being a Nominated minister passes WP:NPOL? — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 21:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My reading (of this) would be that such people do not get a WP:NPOL presumption of notability, but must show WP:GNG. They seem to be private individuals nominated to a role by a politician; the roles may or may not be notable. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@TagishsimonThere are some articles in Hindi which shows that Nominated Ministers are most powerful than an MLA, see This, i hope they’re notable. Waiting for your response. — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 09:12, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article: Cowbridge Grammar School

I am a moderately experienced editor. I am struggling however to place an image at the top left of a chapter/paragraph of an article ie the above. The chapter is Notable Former Pupils. When I look at the preview the image seem fine at the top left. However when I publish even afer many attempts, it sits in the middle. Help needed! Hjamesberglen (talk) Hjamesberglen (talk) 21:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cowbridge Grammar School
It's being forced down the page by the infobox. Not sure what the solution is. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:40, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Tagishsimon: I've also tried removing "Cowbridge school, c.1860" image and after that the "School cap" image was correctly in the corner despite being higher than infobox's bottom, so it's not the infobox issue. It's still very weird behavior. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 22:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps it's just as well. The page looks like a car-crash with the image in that position. No-one sensibly wrecks a bullet-point list by pushing the first six or so rows to the right just to shoehorn an image in. I've moved the image to the references section, where there's space for it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hjamesberglen: Yeah, I've tried replacing "File" with "Image", clicked preview, seemed ok, published, and it's again in the middle. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 21:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to y'all for trying. I just wanted to place the school cap in the top left of this chapter. I've never has this problem before! Maybe a tech/bug issue then? Hjamesberglen (talk) 22:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I moved the "Cowbridge school, c.1860" image to the History section, and it looks okay now. ayakanaa ( t · c ) 01:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article

How do I get something to be the featured article on Wikipedia? I’m trying to put Weezer on there. Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:FAR --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok? Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:FA & WP:FAC, it needs to go through a lengthy process before it can be featured. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
? Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Theobegley2013: Can I help you? As Tagishsimon said, the process to have it featured is long and complicated. Raising the article to Good Article status is probably a good first step before shooting for Featured Article. And even Good Articles are pretty hard! You'd need to do a lot of work. (for reference, here's an example of an unsuccessful GA review). Cremastra (talk) 22:31, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Here's a Featured article candidate review which took about 6 weeks to complete starting from the point that the nominator thought the article was of sufficient quality. FA is super-hard to achieve. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:07, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Theobegley2013. You might want to aim for WP:GA status first since the process is a bit less rigorous and everything needed for GA-status is going to also be needed for FA-status. You might also want to discuss this on Talk:Weezer to see whether you can find anyone else interested in helping you or get some other input. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you using WP abbreviations? Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:25, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Click on the links, Theobegley2013. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree to aim for taking the article from B-class to Good article before nominating for FA. For both GA and FA, reviewers like to see that you made significant improvements, as evidenced by many edits, before nominating. David notMD (talk) 03:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And for GA there's the 10% threshold, correct? Cremastra (talk) 13:12, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cremastra 10% of Wikipedia articles happen to have GA status, but that's not a threshold rule. It could be 100% if the rate of improvement of existing articles outpaced creation of new/unmaintained articles. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:13, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Shushugah: I meant that the nominator had to have contributed more than 10% of the article. I'm pretty sure that's one of the GA criteria. Or am I hallucinating? Cremastra (talk) 02:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not an explicit part of the WP:GAN instructions, however there is certainly discussion. Part of the issue is technical, who gets credit, when there's mixed/multiple authors? Last relevant discussion I found is here Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations/Archive 15 § Overanxious nominators ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:26, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Journal publications in articles about academics

Wondering what the policy is about how many, and which, journal articles to include in articles about academics. This came up for me most recently in Phaedon Avouris, but is a general question. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 02:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Although it doesn't directly address the question, Wikipedia:Notability (academics) (apologies if you're already familiar with it) might suggest a general approach and might contain relevant wikilinks.
Much may boil down to common sense – listing an academic's every publication would usually be excessive, listing really influential ones would be expected, for those in between it might need a case-by-case judgement. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 02:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have often see sections with title "Selected publications" and 4-8 journal articles listed. Keep in mind that any listing of publications does not add to notability. David notMD (talk) 03:22, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to add language

Hello, I'm HmmOily and I want to know something. The page List of trigonometric identities has 38 languages, without Bangla. I recently created a Bangla version of that page ত্রিকোণমিতিক অভেদসমূহের তালিকা. But still the language number is 38, not 39. What will I do? Shabib (talk) 02:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HmmOily (talkcontribs) [reply]

Add a sitelink to wikidata - diff --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:38, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How do I upload an image on an iPhone in Safari?

I looked at Wikipedia:Uploading_images but I couldn’t find what it was telling me to do and I was wondering if it had a different procedure on an iPhone in the browser. MountainDew20 (talk) 03:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MountainDew20: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you're uploading a photograph you took yourself on your iPhone, then try using Wikipedia:File upload wizard. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The project seems to be inactive, and the only person who can give access to the proxy hasn't edited it since 2018. Are there alternative options available? Ferrari 499P (talk) 06:05, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do empty drafts qualify for WP:A3?

I have recently discovered an editor and an IP editor (might be one person, who knows) who are creating drafts for future events without adding anything into it and these just sit in the draftspace. Do these qualify for A3( or G2, G6) or should these be kept for at least 6 months? Respublik (talk) 08:08, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Respublik: I think they can be speedy deleted under WP:G7: If the sole author blanks a page other than a userspace page, a category page, or any type of talk page, this can be taken as a deletion request. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 08:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Technically they do have the draft AFC template. They're just empty in terms of content. Having re-read the full speedy deletion page, I can see that at least the A3 certainly doesn't apply. Respublik (talk) 08:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Does the editor in question show any history of adding content to the 'empty' drafts once the future events take place? Any success in having AfCs accepted? David notMD (talk) 09:03, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

General question, but confusion

Greetings.

I hope you all are fine, actually, I contribute mostly from Newpagesfeed, sometimes the pages are notable and sometimes not. But I improve everything, i improve every new article.

I had a question for you here, that if I edited a page, immediately after that another editor nominated the page for deletion. So will this have any impact on my account? Like sockpuppet etc? please guide me! Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 10:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editing an article immediately after someone has added a deletion tag to it will have no impact on your account. It's fine. It is not sockpuppetry. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:18, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks you. @Tagishsimon! Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 10:21, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Youknowwhoistheman: See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry. GoingBatty (talk) 16:51, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question: If I'm trying to find the information of a bare URL, the url is down, and and there's no archived link, do I note that URL as a bare URL (inline) AND a permanent dead link, or just a permanent dead link?

- Alex26337 (talk) 11:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex26337: Hello! I would place both tags, because permanent dead link doesn't imply that it is bare URL. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 11:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Full guidance is at WP:LINKROT. Folly Mox (talk) 12:06, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Alex26337: Since fixing a bare URL is going to be impossible for a permanent dead link, I suggest something like this: <ref>[https://www.domain.com/foo/bar/bat.html domain.com]{{dead link|fix-attempted|date=December 2023}}</ref> (Note that the example at Wikipedia:Link rot#Keeping dead links does not seem to conform with Template:Dead link#Caveats). GoingBatty (talk) 16:49, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accidentally added first 78 words from an article into the edit summary of a minor edit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Madcon&action=history Any way I can fix this or is this forever going to be there? KaedenAwesome (talk) 12:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KaedenAwesome: Hello! Could you please clarify what you want to fix? Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 12:52, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any way to remove the mistakenly added summary? It is honestly embarrassing and I simply wish to know if I must suck it up or if it (just the summary NOT the edit) can be removed? KaedenAwesome (talk) 12:54, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@KaedenAwesome, you can't remove the summary or edit and it's going to be in the history forever. The only exceptions are when administrators delete edits from history due to copyright violations or other reasons. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 12:57, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My shame must now be eternal... KaedenAwesome (talk) 12:59, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User:KaedenAwesome, don't worry about the edit summary. Thank you for using an edit summary. The edit you've accidentally missummarised does a lot of fiddling with national varieties of English: you've added serial commas, hyphenated an adjective phrase, and changed verb agreement for a corporate subject (Madcon have...Madcon has...).
In general, these sorts of stylistic changes should be avoided except to make an individual article internally consistent. Wikipedia doesn't privilege any particular national variety of English, so usually the initial variety of any article should be retained. Folly Mox (talk) 13:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@KaedenAwesome: It's a common mistake for new users. Administrators can hide the whole edit summary but we don't do that for simple mistakes. No replacement summary is possible. If we hid it then it would display edit summary removed and some people would think you wrote something abusive which had to be hidden. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:57, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question!!

One more times greetings!

Hey, can you tell me the criteria of a Journalist for article on Wikipedia? Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 14:11, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Youknowwhoistheman: Hello! Do you mean notability criteria? (If so, refer to WP:NBIO) Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 14:16, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks you. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 15:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are not specific criteria for journalists. 331dot (talk) 14:34, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks you. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 15:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Academic degrees abbreviations

According Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Abbreviations academic degrees abbreviations should be in the form BA, MA, etc. without dots but I notice various articles with dots. If I'm editing such an article should I automatically delete the dots? Mcljlm (talk) 16:46, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcljlm: Hello! The most important thing is that style should be consistent within a page. If you want, you can delete all the dots in the article and then in the summary give a link to the manual of style. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 16:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I meant all the dots related to academic degrees, no literally all the dots. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 16:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Making an Article for a Little-Known Artist

I came across a book in my grandpa's old things with a delightful and very familiar illustration style. "A Hallmark Pop-Up book- Christmas Time at Santa's Workshop". It's published by Hallmark and doesn't have a date (likely printed late 70's early 80's) so I looked up the artist. This artist, Pat Paris, has no article here but DOES have a Wookipedia article because it seems they illustrated the Ewoks kid's books and might have influenced the later TV show? There's some listings of other books by them on book trading/selling sites but this guy (or girl) has no other info I can find! I don't have enough to MAKE an article. Just a book in my hand and some dead links on Wookipedia. Any idea how to get enough to make a page on them? It feels wrong that WOOKIPEDIA has more than Wikipedia does. [1]https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Pat_Paris#cite_note-Galaxy_3-paperback swap SkeletonGod (talk) 18:44, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Note that fan-based wikis tend to have less stringent requirements than Wikipedia does. The Wookieepedia article about Paris has two sources, which is probably insufficient for a Wikipedia article. Terms like "little known" used to refer to a potential article subject usually means that the subject does not merit a Wikipedia article. If you can't find any independent reliable sources with significant coverage of this person, showing how they meet the narrow notable creative professional definition or the broader notable person definition, they would not merit an article. There isn't any way to confer notability on a subject; there must be sources about them, that discuss them in depth and show how they are notable, so that those sources can be summarized in an article. 331dot (talk) 18:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, I'll give up. Just a shame this person illustrated dozens of books at least, some for well known properties, and because they were all likely under tight contract with these companies there's not even a way to document or find them all. Just lost to time. SkeletonGod (talk) 19:12, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pat Paris isn't completely lost to time, for there is the Wookipedia stub article. I once started off-and-on searching for information on a once-popular children's author, and when I found something I'd add it to a computer file I started on my desktop. Four years later I published David Cory (author). You might want to start an occasional hobby of looking for Pat Paris information. Even if you never find enough good sources to write a Wikipedia article, perhaps you could add to the Wookipedia article, or find another location to share what you've found. Best wishes on your efforts to learn more about Pat Paris. Karenthewriter (talk) 21:32, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Inline citation/footnote for the same source within the article

I have a couple sources. Within my article, I need to reference the same source a couple times. But it generates a new footnote/citation/number each time. I have tried to define a reference list following instructions but I get the error "Cite error: A list-defined reference with group name "" is not used in the content (see the help page)."

To Define my list I did:

< references > < ref name="refname1">citation info here< /ref></ references> (Unlike my example here, in my article, I did not use a space after '< ' - I did it here because if I didn't it was changed how this message appeared).

In my text citation, after the piece of text to cite, I did:

< ref name="refname1"/> (again, no space after the '<' ) I also tried this with and without "refname1" in quotes. I get the same error.

What am I doing wrong? What would make it right?

Curious Canadian 23 (talk) 19:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Curious Canadian 23: Hello! I think you should remove <references> parts and it will work Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 19:14, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Example: first citation[1], second citation[1] Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 19:16, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. I tried it that way before adding the < references > part and it still gave me the same error. Curious Canadian 23 (talk) 19:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Curious Canadian 23, I suggest publishing it with duplicated reference, then I will edit it to make one reference and you will see in the diff how it's done. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 19:35, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's very kind of you. I have submitted for review and am unsure how to share a link to the article for you to edit. Curious Canadian 23 (talk) 21:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Curious Canadian, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. You make a Wikilink (a link to a page within Wikipedia) by putting the page name in double brackets, so [[Draft:Aston J. Hall]] appears as Draft:Aston J. Hall. You do the same within an article, so [[York University]] appears as York University. You can change the display text by using a "pipe" character thus: [[Scarborough, Ontario|Scarborough]] for Scarborough.
The fact that you've embarked on the challenging task of creating an article without knowing something as basic as this suggests to me that you are probably giving yourself a disappointing and frustrating experience. Would you enter a competition when you have only just taken up a sport? Or give a public recital an an instrument you never played before last week?
I always advise new editors to spend a few weeks or months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our six million existing articles (and in particular, learning about reliable sources and referencing) before they try to create a new article. In your case, I earnestly advise you to leave your draft on the side for at least a few weeks while you learn the craft. ColinFine (talk) 22:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Curious Canadian 23 I've merged duplicate references, here is the diff. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 23:05, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I see now. Thank you that was helpful. Curious Canadian 23 (talk) 23:11, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b one citation

Disappearing pictures

Is there a problem with Commons? I'm not seeing any images, just blank spaces in articles? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 20:51, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Murgatroyd49, hello! For me it's normal, the problem is likely on your side. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 20:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I was afraid of! I've done a complete reboot and tried different devices, still no images. All other websites I've tried are fine. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 21:02, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Murgatroyd49: Our actual images (not the file pages) are stored at https://upload.wikimedia.org. Claygate railway station displays an image at https:/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/33/Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg/300px-Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg. Does that link work for you? If not then it may be your Internet provider which currently fails to retrieve pages from that domain. Such things can happen. A few interface images are hosted here at en.wikipedia.org. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.png is displayed in the lower right corner. Does that work? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:43, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I can see the button but not the Claygate image. The link just locked up so it looks like I can't access the server. Must have words with my ISP. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:30, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Right, contacted my ISP and they twiddled a few things and the images came back. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:45, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am wondering if where I can advertise WikiProjects, if it's allowed. I am requesting this knowledge as my project Wikipedia:WikiProject Fossorials has no members yet, and it's its first day. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 20:54, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Realistically, a WikiProject will not succeed if there are not at least 5-10 members upon launch. Are you sure there are enough people interested in Fossorials for this project to be viable? Mach61 (talk) 21:33, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there are many people who like animals and Fossorials are animals that spend most of their time underground, so there are probably going to be people who like animals that are fossorials and maybe consider joining. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 22:22, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Consider reading Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide before proceeding further. Mach61 (talk) 22:33, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Memer15151: Wikiproject creation guidance is given at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Creating a WikiProject. The probability is that following this guidance is helpful, not least in avoiding the creation of projects which do not have obvious support. I get the impression you have not followed the guidance, and that you expect, for some reason, that your extremely niche project will be successful despite the long history of projects failing and becoming moribund on WP. I think you're kidding yourself & flogging a dead horse. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:35, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Trust me, I have nothing better to do today to be honest. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 23:49, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But I suppose I will still need to recruit members, and I am still wondering where you can do that. I'm not expecting this to be a super popular project, maybe 15-20 active members at most. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 23:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest G7ing the page for now and recreating after finding interested members. Not everything needs a project. Mach61 (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Memer15151: There's Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Recruiting editors, although it seems Reports bot no longer does the task listed here. GoingBatty (talk) 00:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(EC) Well, I gave you a huge great clue, above. Paragraph 2 of the 'Before you begin' section of 'Creating a WikiProject' provides a suggestion for you, which is to find related wikiprojects and post on their talk pages. Wikipedia:WikiProject Animals, for example, but there may be more. Read the section I pointed you to. Right now your project does not seem to have much of an aim, other than to be a project; and that is assuredly not enough. You would be trying to convince users to join, and right now it's not clear what they're joining or why they would be disposed to join. Again, in part, this is the result of your backwards process in which you decided to have a project, then wondered if anyone would like to join it, and perhaps eventually you'll get around to wondering what the project might do. So it's unclear what pitch you'll be making to potential members. And it may be that you get little response; may be that you get flamed for proposing a half-baked idea; who knows. hth. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:22, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to thank you for helping me, and I'm sorry if I may sound unprofessional, I'm pretty new to this kind of stuff. I've definitely learned from this.
Kind regards, UserMemer (chat) Tribs 00:37, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's no problem; you're not actively doing harm so it's all good, and, as you say, a learning experience. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:48, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How does a wiki article get tagged for search?

Does a content creator have to add something specific so that the article appears in search? Blue2berry (talk) 21:18, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue2berry, hello! What do you mean by "appears in search"? Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 21:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Blue2berry, if you mean like Google search, then I believe we can do nothing about it. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 21:27, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Articles are not indexed on Google until they are reviewed or until 90 days pass. Editors may prevent indexing, via the use of a {{noindex}} tag. For more information see Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing Mach61 (talk) 21:36, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please always be specific when you ask questions. There are many possibilities depending on which search feature you mean, where the page is and who created it. If you for example asked "How will Dev Pragad appear in Google searches?" then we could give a much more precise answer. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps. OTOH teahouse users should show patience and accept that users will not always post questions with forensic exactitude; it's probably as well to ask 'did you mean' questions in response, where you are unsure, rather than upbraid the user. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:01, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tagishsimon User:Blue2berry has been an editor since 2017, with some efforts as a paid editor. In my opinion, all of the responders provided useful replies. David notMD (talk) 04:10, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

What It's Wikivoyage? Translatemethebolla (talk) 00:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Translatemethebolla: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikivoyage is a sister Wikimedia project to Wikipedia that aspires to be a user-generated travel guide. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:30, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Translatemethebolla: See also the Wikipedia article Wikivoyage. GoingBatty (talk) 04:58, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where to begin?

Hi! I've been lurking on Wikipedia for a year now (and refuse to log in on my phone), but I'm not really sure where to start. I've basically run out of copyediting tasks or I'm hesitant to move on to the harder ones given a general lack of knowledge on both source & visual editor.

Also, what is the best place to report vandalism? I watch recent changes quite often, but often don't know what the best place to report those is. Thanks in advance! Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 01:27, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Schrödinger's jellyfish thank you for your contributions. Best place to report vandalism (if necessary) is Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and I would recommend installing WP:TWINKLE to make warnings easier. Is there a reason you don't log in on your phone? It would make additional tooling/communication easier. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:07, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I use a manager. Would having a mobile-exclusive account be alright, as long as I make it clear that it's me on the other device? Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes; something like "User:Schrödinger's jellyfish on mobile", perhaps. -- Hoary (talk) 02:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Schrödinger's jellyfish, your first paragraph: Forget visual editor: you're likely to run into its limitations sooner or later. (Or so I infer from what I've read about it. I've never been tempted to try it.) Source editing with syntax highlighting is the way to go. (Unfortunately I'm chronically unable to remember where within Special:Preferences I've enabled syntax highlighting; and when I look for this option there, I don't find it.) You will often be warned not to rely on your own knowledge when augmenting articles. And indeed you should not do so. However, your own knowledge is of great importance when editing: it helps you find good materials, to understand those good materials, and to faithfully summarize what's said in those good materials. So start with articles on subjects you know something about. -- Hoary (talk) 02:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Syntax highlighting is under Gadgets → Editing. Folly Mox (talk) 02:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both! I've turned it on. Already makes it a million times easier to use! Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As for editing on your phone, Schrödinger's jellyfish, I am going to be immodest here, and suggest that you read my essay, User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing. I have done 99% of my editing from smartphones for many years. Cullen328 (talk) 06:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Distinguishing between articles with same titles...

How to edit wiki pages that have that same article title Mozart12345678910 (talk) 01:47, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mozart12345678910, it's impossible for this situation to arise. Titles are discrete: as a trivial example, there's If (preposition) and there's also If (subordinator). If there is, say, a musician you'd like to write about who happens to be called Rudy Giuliani, you can create Draft:Rudy Giuliani (musician); when this is promoted to article status, the person who promotes it will do all that's necessary for the title. -- Hoary (talk) 01:58, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mozart12345678910: If you have a specific case in mind then post it so we can say what to do there. As Hoary says, it's not possible for two pages to have the exact same title. Maybe you are thinking of something else like what to do if you wanted two pages to have the same title. That will depend strongly on the subject of the pages so we need specifics. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My edit was undone but I do not know exactly why.

My edit of the A. Whipple House was undone but I do not know exactly why, or what I need to do to update the fact that the house no longer exists. It was razed December of 2023. DDezz (talk) 01:55, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @DDezz and welcome to the Teahouse! You must provide a reliable source in the form of an inline citation to confirm that statement. Happy editing, ayakanaa ( t · c ) 02:00, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. All I have are photos of the demolition and a Facebook post. Will either or both work? DDezz (talk) 02:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, neither will. You might look a newspaper website. (Or of course in an actual, wood-pulp newspaper.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:21, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! DDezz (talk) 02:22, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps this Worcester MA news website. -- Hoary (talk) 02:25, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to make a category entry say something different to the article name?

I've seen this done but I can't remember how.

Why would you need to? For things like:

  • Films/TV shows which are on the same article as the book/books they're based on.
  • Specific episodes of a TV series.

Danstarr69 (talk) 09:34, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Danstarr. Unless things have changed since I last looked at this (admittedly, a few years back), you can't. The "pipe" mechanism, which in other links accepts the display text, is used in category entries only for a sort key.
The only thing I can suggest is a redirect: Create the title (film) as a redirect to the title, and add the category to the redirect. See WP:Categorizing redirects. ColinFine (talk) 11:32, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New On Wikipedia

Hello,

I am Jassen Japheth Gaddiun. I am new to wikipedia and was frustrated when my article was rejected. I am new on wikipedia and will really need help. Please

Thank you. Jayofpedia (talk) 09:59, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not ask the same question in multiple locations, this duplicates effort. Please see my reply at the AFC help desk. 331dot (talk) 10:09, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I sincerely appreciate. Jayofpedia (talk) 10:11, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need help to publish a page

Hi,

Need help to publish a page, which has been declined earlier. Lam Hasan (talk) 10:12, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lam Hasan Hello and welcome. I assume this is about Draft:Syed Waliullah Farrukhabadi. What help are you seeking? 331dot (talk) 10:26, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is. Please help. Thank you. Lam Hasan (talk) 10:41, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My page has been declined, although I have provided citations. Syed Mufti Waliullah Farrukhabadi (died 1833) was a renowned author, thinker, physician and educationalist of his time. British historian William Irvine has written about him, and I have added a few recent newspaper articles that highlight his works. Lam Hasan (talk) 10:56, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How do I publish a page? Lam Hasan (talk) 10:41, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lam Hasan, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that, like many new editors, in immediately trying to create a new article, you are in the position of somebody who takes up a new sport and immediately enters a public competition, or who starts learning a new musical instrument and immediately gives a public recital. Not only are you unlikely to be successful, but you probably won't be able to understand the feedback you get.
I urge you, (as I advise all new editors) to put aside your draft for a few weeks or months, and learn how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our existing six million articles - and, particularly, learning about referencing, neutral point of view, and reliable sources.
I have not looked closely at your draft, but I see that most of your references do not give the essential bibliographic information (title, author, publisher, date) that assists any reviewer in evaluating the likely reliability and indepedence of the source. ColinFine (talk) 11:46, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Translating images

Hello! I recently saw an image on LVwiki, that was somehow translated into latvian, while the OG image was in english. Anyone know how to do that? Gatesby1 (talk) 11:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC) Gatesby[reply]

Which image on lv:Wikipedia, Gatesby1? Please give its name, after a colon, like this. -- Hoary (talk) 11:34, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I won't be able to find the name since I saw the image some time ago and I do not remember the name of the article/image. All I remember is that when I clicked on it, it gave me the english version of the file. Gatesby1 (talk) 11:48, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]