Wikipedia:Teahouse

331dot, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2–3 days.

Help Wikipedia

(Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.)

Chicago 'L' articles

A couple of IPs (presumably the same person) seem to be going through all the Chicago 'L' stations and changing all the buses to be in monospace font (e.g. Jackson station (CTA Red Line), Chicago station (CTA Brown and Purple Lines)); in the latter case, they've also changed references to other lines to use a coloured template that I think is intended for line diagrams. I'm pretty sure I'm right that this is all inconsistent with WP:MOS and should be reverted, but I wanted to check that was the right thing to do before I go ahead and revert basically every contribution two users have made. YorkshireLad (talk) 20:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

• Example diff.

@YorkshireLad: I agree the nowiki tags should be removed, but the rest of the edit looks fine to me (or at least, it should be inspected carefully rather than reverted in bulk).

You should really try talking to them, though I am not sure how. That diff is from an IPv6 with four edits in a 10-min window, so the IP address is changing and they cannot be reached via user talk pages. My best guess would be to open discussion somewhere central (is there a Chicago public transportation Wikiproject?), and point to it through edit summaries and hidden wiki comments in the source text. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 21:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

@Tigraan: Many thanks for your answer. There isn't a CTA Wikiproject, though there is one for Chicago and one for rapid transit (inactive), so I guess either would work, or perhaps Talk:Chicago 'L'. When you suggest edit summaries/comments, do you mean I should remove the <code> ... </code> tags when I find them and add the note there? Or add a note to all the as-yet unchanged pages? YorkshireLad (talk) 10:12, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

@YorkshireLad: Yes, I would suggest to remove the code tags and leave a hidden comment next to the resulting text, pointing to wherever you decided to open the discussion. (Copy-paste the comment across pages to make it easier.) But honestly that's a bit of a long shot, I do not know of any consistent way to contact editors on dynamic IPs. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:33, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Getting the social handles of Urdu Wikipedia verified

Hello, I want to ask on behalf of the Urdu Wikipedia community about getting a blue tick on the social handles of Urdu Wikipedia. I've seen the handles of Arabic Wikipedia verified so far. Get the Urdu Wikipedia official social media handles a blue tick. We are on facebook, instagram and twitter @UrduWikipedia. Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 05:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello @AaqibAnjum:, you should raise this question directly in an appropriate forum on the Urdu Wikipedia. All language-specific projects are autonomous, and we on English Wikipedia usually can't help you with questions regarding other Wikis. Also, please do not post the same question in multiple forums like Teahouse and Help desk at once. Thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 07:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

@AaqibAnjum: Maybe somebody at meta:Meta:Babel might have some ideas. Also, is there a Wikimedia Pakistan affiliate? Pelagic (talk) 08:48, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Pelagic: Sadly, Wikimedia affiliates in India and Pakistan are not working as of now. See Wikimedia India and Wikimedia Pakistan --- Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 08:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

HIDE USERNAME

How to hide title of the page or username? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1008rajpuranalas (talk • contribs) 09:05, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

@1008rajpuranalas: Why would you want to do that? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, 1008rajpuranalas. I'm guessing that you think you have created an article, but it has your user name as its title. I'm afraid that this is because you have made several errors that are very common among inexperienced editors.

First, you have attempted to create an article on your user page. That is not what your user page is for: it is for telling the Wikipedia community about yourself as a Wikipedia editor. See user pages.

I considered moving your user page to a sandbox, but I don't think there is much point, because I think it is likely to get deleted as promotional anyway. This is the second common mistake: a Wikipedia article is not for you to tell the world about something: it is a summary of what independent published sources have said about the subject. Creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks in editing Wikipedia, and I always advise new editors to spend a few weeks or months improving existing article before they try it. In any case, I suggest you read your first article carefully.

Contributing to Wikipedia can be very rewarding. But it is not easy, and there are many policies and processes to learn about. --ColinFine (talk) 09:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

User has added several links to their user page in articles - since deleted - Arjayay (talk) 11:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Is it ok to put a (non pornographic) link to Pornhub at the bottom of the article?

Hi, I just created an article about a documentary film Shakedown (2018 film) that was released on Pornhub as its first non pornographic content. So is it OK to put a link at the bottom of the article that links to the documentary on Pornhub? It's not a pornographic film, but yeah just wasn't sure if that was ok or not since it's pornhub. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avonsicier (talk • contribs) 21:57, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

@Avonsicier: I think it is OK, if I am reading WP:EL correctly. If someone disagrees, they will remove the link. Please don't ask the question in multiple places. RudolfRed (talk) 00:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Avonsicier: We don't add links to distribution services for film articles, regardless of type or venue. Mention of the unique situation should be OK, as long as it's cited. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 02:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

​Since Pornhub is on the Spam blacklist you can't add a link to it without asking for exemption on the Spam whitelist. We do occasionally link to films that are made available online (Big Buck Bunny), and your page seems fairly harmless as there are no links to the main Pornhub page on there. – Thjarkur (talk) 09:38, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Editing Company Information

Hello,

How can we edit company information to reflect the new CEO, location, products and company story/mission? I am being told me edits aren't contructive....not sure what that actually means.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JKALINA22 (talk • contribs) 00:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@JKALINA22: Post a request on the article's talk page along with {{Edit request}} and an unconnected editor will look at it. Also, accounts can only be used by one person. RudolfRed (talk) 00:43, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

You removed text which had references to published reliable sources and replaced it by text which was unsourced and used blatantly promotional language. The wording of your change suggested that you were editing on behalf of the company, so you need to read about conflict of interest and about paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:45, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

JKALINA22 (edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, you must review and formally comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies(the latter is a Terms of Use requirement). Once you do that, you may propose any changes you feel are needed to the article about your company on the talk page as edit requests. However, I can tell you that much of what you propose here would not be accepted. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say about article subjects like companies, not what the company wants to say about itself(such as what it considers to be its "mission" or what it considers to be its own history). It would be okay for you to propose adding the CEO of the company or its location- but the rest would need independent sources with significant coverage(not press releases, routine announcements, staff interviews or other primary sources) to support it. 331dot (talk) 00:47, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link to unconstructive edit [[1]] TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 03:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@JKALINA22: To be specific, to Peeled Snacks, you added:

On the go or comfy at home, (redacted copyvio) feel good about snacking with Peeled Snacks.

This sounds like ad copy, and is totally inappropriate language for Wikipedia, which is an encyclopedia, like Britannica or Encarta. Please see WP:TONE and WP:NOTADVERTISING.

We do, however, want basic facts (like the CEO and location) to be correct. Please post at the article's talk page (Talk:Peeled Snacks) using {{Edit request}}, including a reference so we can verify the information. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 03:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@JKALINA22: Also, I had to redact part of the original quote above because you copied it from the company's social media and/or other copyrighted source. Do not do this. It is a violation of copyright law and cannot remain on Wikipedia. Offenders can lose their editing rights. (Note to admins: I've tagged Peeled Snacks with RD1 and info about the redaction here as well, if someone will have a look please.) —[AlanM1(talk)]— 10:25, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

When will my article be approved?

Hello there and good morning! I would like to enquire when would my article be approved please? I have completed 10 edits and it has been more than 4 days. I'm checking to see if I missed any steps.

Thank you and have a lovely day ahead! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiranmayii (talk • contribs) 02:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Not yet submitted. There is a blue box on your Sandbox draft to submit to Articles for Creation. At AfC there are thousands of drafts. Can be weeks to months for a review to select yours and review it. That said, it will absolutely be declined, as none of the text has references, and all of the references for the exhibitions list are to the company's own website. Also, wrong to hyperlink artist names to the company website. David notMD (talk) 02:26, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Hiranmayii: Courtesy link User:Hiranmayii/sandbox. Before you submit, syntax and formatting aside, you should know that there's no chance the article will be accepted. You are missing independent sources that demonstrate the gallery is notable. The gallery's own web site and social media sources do not show notability. I did a quick Google search for the gallery and can't find any media coverage at all. This is all I could find, and it looks user submitted. [[2]] I'm sorry you went to all that trouble. If you can find one source, you can add a mention and the source to Kuala Lumpur#Arts. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 03:11, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Hiranmayii: I had a look at your draft as well and agree it with @Timtempleton that it will not be accepted without significant changes. It needs independent sources to establish notability, and a search I did turned up nothing much in that area, so it seems unlikely that we would be able to publish the article. I can see you have an interesting organization, but Wikipedia is not here to promote anyone's business, which makes what you have written ineligible.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:47, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Hiranmayii (talk) 06:40, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Thank you so much for your input. I will rework the page to establish notability.

All of the "references" to KL's own website must be deleted. David notMD (talk) 11:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

I want to create a page.Please advise me some topics

I want to create a page in wikipedia but don't know which topic to write about. Can someone advise me any topics?I am interested in the field of science and technology , So it would be better if you give related topics — Preceding unsigned comment added by Universology (talk • contribs) 05:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Universology: Welcome to the Teahouse, and by extension, Wikipedia. If you're looking for suggestions you can go to WP:Teahouse/Suggestions to get SuggestBot up and running on your talk page to give you suggestions every once in a while. Creating an article is one of the most (if not the) difficult things to do on Wikipedia. I suggest reading through Help:Your first article if you want to get introduced to starting articles. You can only start submitting directly to the main articlespace when you're autoconfirmed (i.e., your account is at least 4 days old and has had more than 10 edits made). Otherwise feel free to start a draft in draftspace before putting it up for submission. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:06, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

 Update It seems you already have SuggestBot. Ignore my suggestion then. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Universology, WP:RA has some categories related to science and technologies where you might find something interesting. Be careful though, not all suggested topics are notable. Check the notability guidelines at WP:N before you begin. You might want to read WP:YFA too. If you are just looking for something to work on without being bothered about the somewhat complicated notability guidelines that we have, you could try working on an article for any species. A list such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals/Missing mammal species might be of help. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Regarding decline of my content on wikipedia

Hi,

I have posted an article, can see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Soniasinghania/sandbox , Can any one help me what is exact problem there to publish. Should I give some more references to prove each and every line in the article?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Soniasinghania (talk • contribs) 06:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Soniasinghaia:, welcome to the Teahouse. References are just half of the story, and if the Times of India are a reputable source, I don't see too much of a problem with notability and subject coverage. The issue that pops out to me is the comment that appears after the  , and I have to agree: the tone is not neutral enough and is written from the viewpoint of the company (Robert McClenon). It is too promotional and that needs to be cleaned out before it is acceptable to be submitted for article review.

Of course, since you wrote the draft is written from said company's viewpoint, you would have a conflict of interest and must disclose this on your userpage (and preferably also on the draft's talk page). You are allowed to make small factual corrections that are properly sourced, but anything larger than that should be done through {{Request edit}} templates on the draft's talk page. For more reading on the subject please consult WP:COI and WP:PAID. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:52, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu, edit requests in cases of WP:COI are for mainspace only, drafts can be edited directly, that's why they must go through WP:AFC. Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:57, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: Ah, my apologies. I just assumed the process would be the same in both places as it would make it less likely for drafts to be approved if they were being written with a COI to begin with. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 13:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Soniasinghania! it would be easier to respond if you'd said that you had read all the bluelinks in the message that says the draft was declined and the additional note that was left, and asked more specific questions about what exactly you are having trouble with. Without that, here's what I can say:

Although having references to prove each and every claim in the article is one of the basic principles of Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:Verifiability), that's not what notability is. Before we can even have an article, we need to establish that the subject is notable (see WP:N, or WP:NORG which specifically talks about organisations). Basically, we need multiple (three or more usually) reliable sources (see WP:RS) which cover the subject in detail (as opposed to mere mentions) and are independent of the subject (not based on press releases from the company, not published by the company itself, not written by someone connected with the company, not a paid placement by the company) (see WP:SIGCOV which explains this in more detail). The draft was declined for not meeting this requirement. So, basically, better sources are needed. Personally, I think the sources you have are almost there but not quite yet. Many of them are routine coverages, or based on press releases, or mere mentions when talking about something else such as the project that the company is participating in. A few of the sources don't appear to be reliable to me based on just how they look and read but I am not an expert on Indian sources.

Secondly, the writing may not exactly be up to encyclopaedic standards. But as long as it is not overly promotional, other editors will help you with this when notability has been established. So, it's not a big deal, again, as long as it is not overly promotional, which I don't think it is.

Finally, you were told that it would be unacceptable for you resubmit without answering the conflict of interest question. Wikipedia values neutrality. It is almost impossible for someone connected with the subject to be neutral. So, we require connected contributors to disclose their connection with the subject and have all their edits go through peer review. That means creating articles only as drafts that go through the WP:AFC process, and once the article is accepted and published, using WP:Edit Requests at the article talk page. See WP:COI. If you have any financial interest, WP:PAID applies. You must disclose your COI/PAID status, or make a firm/explicit denial that you are in no way connected with the subject before you continue editing on a subject that another editor in good faith has queried to you about having a COI about. So, please read WP:COI and specially carefully read WP:PAID, and disclose your relationship with the company as instructed there if you do have a connection, or otherwise deny having the conflict of interest, for example at your userpage or the draft's talk page and then continue editing.

I think that about covers it. Feel free to ask a follow-up as necessary, after you have carefully considered my comment supplemented with a careful reading of the pages as suggested. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Rejected creation of a page of a railway station with new name with redirect to existing old page

Recently I was traveling and was trying to find the renamed name of a famous railway station on Wiki but unable to get it so I created a page with official name and just redirected to existing page with old name. I thought initially to change the name but following WPCOMMONNAME definition i reverted back as suggested by other senior editors.

So the easiest way was to create a page with New Official Name as suggested by Wiki and then redirect to existing page. However on submission of draft for new page with redirection, it was rejected.

Deen Dayal Upadhyaya_Junction

Redirected to Mughalsarai Junction railway station

Kindly note I have provided reference to change of official name through newspaper and a copy of draft circulation by the government on twitter. May I know if there is something that I missed or was it a misunderstanding?

References

DBigFacts (talk) 06:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

DBigFacts, this appears to have been sorted, with the redirect created now. Is it appearing how you intended now? ~~ Alex Noble - talk 07:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

…

DBigFacts, I've added your reference to the talk page so that people can find the supporting article. I was a bit lazy and didn't format it as a proper citation. Would you like to convert it to {{cite news}}? Pelagic (talk) 08:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

DBigFacts, redirects do not require references. Instead the claim should be established at the target article itself. You also seem to have tried to create the redirect in visual editor but using the instructions for source editing. These apparently led to your submission being construed as a test edit and was declined by the reviewer as such. I have fixed the formatting and moved it to the mainspace. Feel free to review my edits which are accessible through the history tab at the top of the redirect page. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:18, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks to Alex Noble , Pelagic and Usedtobecool for your help and clarifications. TeaHouse rocks. DBigFacts (talk) 09:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool and Pelagic: Kindly note that a lot of Indian cities, districts, etc got their name changed recently and quite a few overzealous new editors try to enforce that in Wikipedia, disregarding WP:COMMONNAME. These new name changes include Allahabad -> Prayagraj, Faizabad district -> Ayodhya district, Mughalsarai -> Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Nagar, etc. Since WP:COMMONNAME applies here, the RfC for move should happen in the main settlement articles, as in the case of Allahabad, and related articles bearing the name of the place should follow that. Since Mughalsarai was not moved to Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Nagar, there is no reason changing the article name of the railway station, or creating a FORK. Also note that Bangalore wasn't moved to Bengaluru (the official name, changed in 2005) despite multiple move requests. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:28, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Dark matter: Maybe Dstar (d*(2380) hexaquarks should be added to this wiki.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter Maybe Dstar (d*(380)hexaquarks should be added to this wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.230.68.79 (talk) 09:40, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor! Improvements to articles are best discussed at their corresponding talk pages, in this case at Talk:Dark matter. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:18, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Please make a request at Talk:Dark matter - at the help desk we aren't experts in every single topic area on the Wiki, and the editors that watch the article's talk page are much more likely to know what they're talking about, and so can make a better decision about inclusion in the article. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

How do I help articles Without citations?

Citations are very Important. I want to help Wikipedia by adding citations. Can you please Add a option to search for pages without proper citation? RhysTTime Inc (talk)

References

RhysTTime Inc, would Category:All articles needing additional references do? Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:21, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by RhysTTime Inc (talk • contribs) 10:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

RhysTTime Inc, also note that your username is in violation of WP:CORPNAME. I think you'd best abandon this account and create a new one. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:42, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

I was not aware of the username policy when I made my account. If I could change it, I would. Your regards RhysTTime Inc (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

As you just started using this account two days ago, I recommend you delete all the content on the RhysTTime Inc User page (promotion is not allowed) and then just abandon that account and register a new account with a different name. Does not have to be your real name (great majority of editors don't). David notMD (talk) 11:06, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Initiate to create the page

Hello Dear I`m Saeid, a new user of Wikipedia. I create my company page here but I don`t know how to start write the content. I need your advice to start edit my page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saeid.shanghai (talk • contribs) 11:33, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

The advice is on your user talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Saeid.shanghai, firstly, please don't. Most businesses aren't notable enough, and will likely be deleted. If any topic hasn't received significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the topic, please don't create an article.

If you really have to, first read, and follow, the instructions at wp:conflict of interest, and wp:paid editing.

Then follow the instructions at wp:your first article, which will guide you through the process. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 11:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Bot concept

Hi, I'm thinking of a bot concept that allows the automatic, non-controversial tagging and cleanup of certain articles. It can, for example, add tags like {{lead too long}} or {{Uncategorized}}, but not, for example, {{copy edit}}. It can also potentially tag articles unsourced for an extended period of time for PRODding. What would be your opinions on this potential bot? Thanks. tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message) 13:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I like your proposal, but WP:Bot requests is probably the better place to post this. PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 13:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

The Lord of Math, you might also want to open a discussion at either Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) or Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals), as this would likely have more impacts than a typical bot. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 13:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Alex Noble and PorkchopGMX: Thanks. BRFA required a "consensus" for bot tasks and I'm looking for one. So is Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) the preferred location for obtaining it?Thanks. tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message) 13:50, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

The Lord of Math, Proposals would be the where consensus is made; the idea lab is for developing the details before it goes to proposals. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 13:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

References

Is it possible for a copyeditor (who is not the original author of an article) to modify or update a reference? In my case, a new edition of a reference work has made a small change to an earlier edition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rogermccart (talk • contribs) 13:54, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Rogermccart Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Any editor is welcome to edit any article, editors that create an article have no more rights to it than any other editor. If you are concerned about stepping on others' toes, you can first discuss what you want to do on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 14:36, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Rogermccart: Welcome to the Teahouse! Please remember that no one owns an article and you are always encouraged to be bold with your edits regardless of whether you're copyediting or modifying references. I also wanted to say thanks for your copyediting; if you're interested, the Guild of Copyeditors is always happy to accept new members if you want a centralised place for articles that need copyediting. We're in a month-long drive for completing old copyedit-tagged articles if you want to participate. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Accusation of vandalism

All I know is that Widr blocked me with Vandalism and I have never been on this site prior to today. Those claims made against me are fraudulent, unfounded and slanderous. I will take this to a higher court if need be. I don.t have a user name  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.24.66.119 (talk) 14:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC) 

All I know is that Widr blocked me with Vandalism and I have never been on this site prior to today. Those claims made against me are fraudulent, unfounded and slanderous. I will take this to a higher court if need be.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.24.66.119 (talk) 14:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC) 

If you are blocked, you must make a formal unblock request on your user talk page, instructions should be provided there. You should also be aware of no legal threats. 331dot (talk) 14:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

First, that is a 31 hour block, so calm down. Second, given you have not registered an account, a different person may have created content ("vandalism") that led to the block. Best recourse if you want to continue being a Wikipedia editor is to register an account. And yeah, stop with the "higher court" threats, as there is no higher court. David notMD (talk) 15:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

David notMD, just for clarification: the 31-hour block was enacted after the question was posted, and was not the one mentioned in the OP. Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 15:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

List of leaders of dependent territories in 2017

Please help me

I wrote The article List of leaders of dependent territories in 2017 which was not accepted for publication. I specify that all information was entered in good faith and after it was verified in the available sources. The article The article was considered unpublishable for reasons related to the missing citations from reliable, independent sources and to insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. I don’t know what I can do. This article is of the chronological list type. For such articles, it is not possible to insert citations, because such citations do not exist. I wrote this article starting from the data presented in the websites which I presented as External links and from the results of my own research on various websites of the authorities that appear for different entities or on the site of CIA World Facebook, old editions.. On the other hand, the sites Rulers and World Statesmen are the most reliable sources in the field of arkhontology which can be easily accessed. If I try to find information from the press this would be a long research and I am not sure that I will find information for all the events that took place so long ago. On the other hand, quoting such sources would lead to a volume of information that would exceed the actual article. On the other hand I do not know what information I could add for those unfamiliar with the topic. I believe that the terms regarding the territorial entities and the functions of the leaders of its can be accessed implicitly through the links within the article. I do not think it is possible that a person who does not have at least elementary knowledge about the problems exposed would be interested in accessing the article. Starting from the above, please help me and suggest what should be added and what the modified event should be for the article to be publishable. I mention that I have a masters degree in political science so I think I have knowledge that will qualify me in approaching the problem.

Bogdan Ulaia 14:50, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Bogdan Uleia Please only seek assistance in one location. 331dot (talk) 14:59, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Bogdan Uleia, I just took a look at your draft and I could not find a single citation in it. As well as that, the reason that your submission was declined, was because it didn't provide context to people unfamiliar with the subject. It was an extensive list and used templates, but how were we to know it wasn't just random? I suggest you read WP:WBA for more info. Also, you sign your talk messages by using 4 tildes, like this ~~~~ Bᴇʀʀᴇʟʏ • ^{Talk to me}∕_{What have I been doing} 15:40, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Bogdan Uleia: Welcome to the Teahouse. Other than the question that Berrely asked you, what do your yearly articles contribute that the current list of leaders of dependent territories article doesn't? --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Contact with article's source—COI?

Hi, apologies for asking another question. I wrote an article (Pride in STEM), and nominated it to appear at WP:DYK. I then made contact with the organisation to ask a question, and at the same time informed them that they now had a Wikipedia page article. As part of their reply, they sent back some links to third-party reliable sources, which contain information I'd like to add to the article. I just want to check—does the existence of that conversation constitute a WP:COI? They haven't supplied me with any text to add, they're not paying me, and I'm not a member of the organisation, nor do I know personally any of its members. YorkshireLad (talk) 15:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

YorkshireLad Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You don't need to inform the subject of the existence of an article(not just "page", a subtle but important distinction). Since you have been in contact with them and they have provided you with information that you intend to use, you should declare that as a COI. It's not paid editing(a different policy). Just my opinion. 331dot (talk) 16:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

On "page" vs. "article": Thanks, I've corrected myself above (I got it right the other two times, though!) YorkshireLad (talk) 16:24, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

YorkshireLad, I wouldn't call this a conflict of interest. Yes, there might be a bit of a conflict, but realistically, we all have some form of conflict of interest with everything. You might want to mention that they sent the sources in an edit summary, but I wouldn't expect an editor to do anything more. Just bear in mind that they aren't going to send you sources critical of them. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:20, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Alex Noble That's essentially what I was saying, they should note that they have been in contact with the organization. That's all. 331dot (talk) 16:22, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

331dot, edit conflict. I wasn't disagreeing with you, but replylink doesn't tell you until it's been posted. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:27, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Okay, so an edit summary should be fine, rather than a declaration on the talk page? (I haven't normally contacted people to tell them they have a Wikipedia article, by the way! They're just quite a small operation—one that meets WP:GNG, but nevertheless small-scale—so I thought they might be interested to know.) YorkshireLad (talk) 16:25, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

YorkshireLad, personally;

• No need for COI template on user page {{UserboxCOI}}
• {{Connected contributor}} is debatable - you aren't really connected to the group, but it wouldn't harm to use if you want to be cautious
• Definitely mention in edit summary, or in any discussion you're involved with about the article. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

citing sources

While creating an article. Is it best to cite sources that are already on wikipedia or sources outside wikipedia? Part of me thinks if sources are already on wikipedia, they've been already vetted so that may be the best way to go but please let me know. Thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msansevieri (talk • contribs)

Msansevieri Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It's certainly easier to use more well-known sources that are often used on Wikipedia, but if you have a source that you truly believe meets the criteria of a reliable source(in short, a source with a reputation of editorial control and fact checking), you are welcome to use it. The worst that will happen is that someone might disagree and ask you to support what you are trying to do. 331dot (talk) 16:24, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Msansevieri. Unfortunately the assumption that sources used in a Wikipedia article have "been already vetted" is not a safe assumption. If it is a Good article or a Featured article, the assumption is probably good; if it was created in the last five years, it's likely to have been vetted at some time (though it can happen that people insert badly-referenced material later). But many older articles are significantly substandard: more often, they lack references, but there are many which do contain references, but to unreliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 21:49, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

I found something to be added to the Spice_(bomb) page under "Use in combat"

Under use in combat there is only 1 entry. I know of another confirmed case where this weapon or weapon alteration kit was used. It was used on the night of 20-21st of January 2019 by the Israeli air force in a strike on Qatana, Syria.

https://twitter.com/QalaatAlMudiq/status/1087798994712084481

I know Wikipedia editors usually use largely unsourced articles as sources, but I find direct evidence to be much more convincing. Can someone update the page for me? Or can someone make me an extended confirmed user so I can do it myself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yuvaez (talk • contribs)

Yuvaez, Please ask at Talk:Spice (bomb), using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. We aren't subject experts on every topic here, and it is better for the people knowledgeable about the topic to answer edit requests. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:37, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

but also, I imagine that you will need a better citation than a twitter account. We can't use original research for our articles, as there is no way for use to verify it - see wp:nor. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:41, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Autoconformation and adding photos

Hi , so I'm a new member (registered yesterday) and I think I read on some article that I need to be autoconfirmed to add photos on pages, how do I know I'm autoconfirmed or not and do I need to wait 4 days to add pictures to pages ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meem0408 (talk • contribs) 17:45, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Meem0408 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for being willing to participate. You have met the 10 edits requirement to be autoconfirmed, but your account must be four days old, which it won't be until a few hours into March 8th. You won't be able to upload images until then. 331dot (talk) 17:49, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Meem0408, if the images are your own, or are released under a free license, you can upload them at commons:main page now.

If the images are under fair use, you can make a request at wp:files for upload, although it may be quicker to just wait until you are autoconfirmed. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 18:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Meem0408. Being autoconfirmed will allow you to upload images to Wikipedia, but before you do so I suggest carefully reading Wikipedia:Image use policy, Wikipedia:Non-free content and c:Commons:Licensing. Image licensing and use can be tricky and it's easy to make mistakes. Lots of people upload images, but many of these end up being deleted shortly after because their licensing or usage doesn't comply with some relevant Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons policy or guideline. Once you figure out what image you want to upload, where you want to upload it, and which Wikipedia article or page you want to add it to, then you might want to ask for more help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, particularly if you're not 100% sure about which license to use for the image. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

विकी लव्स वुमन 2020 थोड़ा और यूज़र फ़्रेंड्ली हो सकता है क्या ?

विकी लव्स वुमन 2020 किस तरह की प्रतियोगिता है ? कहीं कोई वन स्टॉप सल्यूशन है क्या, जहाँ से सदस्य बनने के बाद कैसे शुरू करें, ये मालूम हो सके

This is the English Wikipedia, so please ask your question in English or get help from another Wikipedia in your language. LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 18:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@LPS and MLP Fan: Do you know if other language Wikipedias have a place similar to our Teahouse? --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, you'll find 23 other language equivalents listed under "languages" in the left-hand toolbar. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

• Translation (from Hindi): What kind of a competition is Wiki Loves Women 2020? Is there a one-stop solution anywhere, where after becoming a member, one could learn how/where to start? Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

  Header translation: Could Wiki Loves Woman 2020 become a bit more user friendly? Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:12, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

​You are the MVP. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Wing Commander Anuma Acharya (Retd): Welcome to the Teahouse. I unfortunately cannot help you in Hindi, but the WP:Wiki loves women project focuses on creating African-women based content. The link I provided has more details. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Creating article about studio album that as of now just redirects to the artist's discography page

Hello fellow editors! I have created an article before for an Swedish album that had an redirect to the page of the artist. The page I am talking about is Darin Zanyar and the album in question was Fjärilar i magen. Before I created the article the album name (in the article for Darin Zanyar) redirected to the page for him, but the User Sulfurboy helped me out with that and now it redirects to my article instead, that I've mentioned above. I just wanted to ask here now when I am making an article for another album of his, "Tvillingen", if there is anything I have to do before creating it, since it also redirects to the same page for the artist. You'll find the album I am talking about under "Discography" on Darin Zanyar. Thank you in advance! Zandor (talk) 18:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

DariuZzandor, I am not sure what the problem was or how Sulfurboy helped you but in case of Tvillingen, you should be fine just removing the redirect and converting it into an article. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool Thank you for the quick answer! I don't really know if there was a problem to begin with, but he helped me with nominating the redirect-page for deletion, which I believe is what you are recommending to me now. After that my page could be seen and I could link to it instead of the redirect. I have looked around how to nominate the redirect for deletion my self but I haven´t really understood the instructions, could you help me with this in any way? Thanks again :) Edit: Do you mean i should change this page to an article directly by removing the redirect and paste my already written information? Zandor (talk) 19:48, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

DariuZzandor, I did not know you'd already written up the article on your user subpage, so yeah, that's what I meant, just hit edit on that redirect page and add all the content to make it into an article. Although copy-pasting is generally a bad idea, in this case, there are little downsides. So, you could do it. But I think either a WP:HISTMERGE or a WP:MOVE would be better. So, we need an administrator or at least a pagemover, I think. @Cullen328, Nick Moyes, and 331dot: -- Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:44, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh, sorry for leaving that information out. I thought I could write it on my subpage just to have it ready after the deletion of the redirect had been made. However, I will wait for the administrators to act in this matter, thank you again Usedtobecool for your help. Zandor (talk) 09:22, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

DariuZzandor, if you don't get a reply here, either use copy-pasting or try WP:RM#TR. If you don't care about the edit history of all the work you did in your userspace, copy-pasting is fine. It's just that having a history would be helpful if one needed to get back to a previous version, which will be left behind in your userspace if you copy-paste. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:16, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Infobox image not displaying

Hi there. I couldn't have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Olga_Sorkine-Hornung.jpg being displayed in the infobox in Olga_Sorkine-Hornung. Can somebody pls fix that. p.s. uploading the same file to Commons didn't help: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Olga_Sorkine-Hornung.jpg

 Done There was a duplicate image = parameter in the template. Deleting the dup fixed the problem. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 19:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Adding pictures to pages

I am a new user called Quantum squid and want to know how to add pictures to a page. Please help me. —Preceding undated comment added 19:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Quantum squid88, where are the pictures at present? The answer is very different for (1) "in my camera", (2) "on Wikimedia Commons", (3) "I found them on the internet", etc. Maproom (talk) 19:21, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Quantum squid88, Thanks for wanting to contribute here. The steps to add pictures are different depending on what type of images you want to add.

If you want to add images that are already either uploaded to the English Wikipedia, or on Wikimedia Commons (our store of free media), this is done by adding [[file:imagename.jpg|caption]] to an article - see Help:Pictures for the details

If you want to add new images, not yet on Commons or the English Wikipedia, it gets more complicated:

• Firstly, did you take the images? If so, commons:Special:UploadWizard

• If not; are they released under a free license - (most Creative Commons licenses, except ones that include no derivatives and no commercial use), also commons:Special:UploadWizard

• If not either of the above, it gets more complicated. 99% of the time we can't just use images taken off the internet.

Have a read of wp:Non free content criteria, then submit a request at wp:files for upload, where experienced volunteers will handle the image . ~~ Alex Noble - talk 19:21, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

What can I do to help?

What should I work on? Do I need approval from one of the Wikipedia bosses before doing any big edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoxyLOL (talk • contribs) 20:19, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@FoxyLOL:, you should work on whatever strikes your fancy. Some people make large content changes or create new articles. Some people work on grammar and proofreading-type issues. Some people work on behind-the-scenes maintenance. There's a lot of opportunity and variation. New editors are often advised to start with smaller edits to existing articles and the Category:Articles needing cleanup has ~20,000 article to choose from. You don't need anyone's approval to edit (hence "anyone can edit") but you do need to follow certain policies and guidelines. This link goes to a page specifically designed to get new users started. I hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:30, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

20,000 articles? I'll never finish that. Those links are helpful, but that sure is copious. Are all the rules and guidelines equally important? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoxyLOL (talk • contribs) 20:33, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

FoxyLOL, I would personally recommend looking at Wikipedia:Everything you need to know, a very brief overview of the most important policies. If you know these, you'll probably be fine, and will pick up the rest whilst editing.

In terms of tasks to do, we have Wikipedia:Task Center, which is designed to showcase to newer users the kind of maintenance tasks you can do. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 21:18, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

That is simpler, thank you! There is so much to do here! — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoxyLOL (talk • contribs) 21:22, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

FoxyLOL, There is a lot to do- sometimes it seems overwhelming but if a lot of editors do a little, we'll get there. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@FoxyLOL: Shameless plug: If you're interested in copyediting, you will be glad to hear that we have a Guild of Copyeditors here on Wikipedia where we focus on getting rid of as many copyedit tags on articles as we can. We currently have a month-long drive in clearing those tags if you're interested. :) --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:13, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

You can stop socking. That's what. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 00:19, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Flyer - Are you privy to evidence that FoxyLOL is a sockpuppet? Otherwise, your comment appears unfounded, and rude. Also, you appear to have a vendetta against FoxyLOL, as you appear to have reverted every edit. David notMD (talk) 01:54, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

@Flyer22 Frozen: If you have evidence that FoxyLOL is a sockpuppet please submit it to WP:SPI. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 02:48, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

I do not understand. What am I doing wrong? I made small improvements as I read pages, is that wrong? What am I supposed to stop exactly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoxyLOL (talk • contribs) 04:34, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

@FoxyLOL:, the user @Flyer22 Frozen: is suggesting that you/your account is a Sockpuppet of someone else who is misbehaving on Wikipedia by using two or more accounts simultaneously to deceive other users and perpetrate mischief (see Wikipedia:Sock puppetry).

My reply here explaining this Assumes Good Faith in your not being a sockpuppet and in Flyer22 Frozen being mistaken. I myself have absolutely no view on the issue and will not be drawn into further discussion of it. Others may well pursue the matter, since both sockpuppetry and false/mistaken accusations of it are considered serious breaches of conduct on Wikipedia. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.123.27.199 (talk) 21:08, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

David notMD, yes, I am privy to evidence that FoxyLOL is a sockpuppet. I would not have reverted all of FoxyLOL's edits and stated what I stated above if I wasn't. Many editors know that. FoxyLOL's behavior is the same as a well-known sockpuppet. A WP:CheckUser has been run on the account, and the CheckUser was clear that the account was using a colocation host and that the colohost has been blocked. So if I report FoxyLOL in an SPI without CheckUser evidence identifying them, it will need to be based on behavioral evidence. I was not expecting a host to be used since this sock doesn't regularly use one. I wasn't expecting the sock to somewhat (emphasis on "somewhat") alter their useragent. If FoxyLOL wants to continue on with the FoxyLOL account instead of ditching it, so be it. Like I stated in a recent sock case resolved on my talk page, I can wait. I can wait for FoxyLOL to edit without their colohost and to make more edits that will lend evidence to an SPI report. Even if they get a new colohost, the behavioral evidence will pile up. As for being rude to socks and reverting their edits, and vendettas? Yes, just like in this other recent case, which I ended up taking to SPI, I am rude to socks who keep wasting my and others' time, especially when they scream that they aren't a sock and call me a cunt. Yes, per WP:EVADE, and unless they reverted vandalism or other disruptive editing, I may revert them across the board even if their edits are improvements. Vendetta? The only way I could have a vendetta against someone is if I'm familiar with them, which would make FoxyLOL non-new. But reverting FoxyLOL is not about a vendetta; it's about WP:Deny. I'm not going to debate WP:Assume good faith, which doesn't mean I need to play dumb. I don't need advice about taking things to WP:SPI or not stating anything about someone being a sock until I report them in an SPI. The top of my user page/talk page is clear about how I feel about and go about these things, and so is the aforementioned sock case that was resolved on my talk page. If you or others reply to me on this, there is no need to ping me. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 22:59, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

When I look at FoxyLOL's contribs, all I see is a bunch of gnomish grammar/style edits that could be anyone. Flyer22, could you share with us whom you think the behavioural pattern points to? Also, where you say there is no need to ping me, does that mean you are checking back on this thread, or that you don't intend to reply even if pinged? Pelagic (talk)

Anonblock

What does it mean? I tried to edit without using my account. i did nothing wrong as well, just trying to input the scores for an n.c. state basketball game. can someone explain plz? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WizardGoose1921 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Please, see Wikipedia:Blocking_IP_addresses and WP:SOFTBLOCK. Ruslik_Zero 20:49, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Oncoming limited access to news articles

Many newspapers are limiting the number of "free Articles" a person can view on their website. For many, this includes archived articles that go a long way in expanding the Wikipedia pages of individuals which are considered stubs. So my question is this: How do we balance this issue going forward? This likely to become a huge issue in the future with more and more outlets doing this, or in some cases, requiring a paid subscription just to view any articles. How can we cut this problem off at the pass? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sportsfan1976 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Sportsfan1976, Wikipedia policy says that a resource doesn't have to be easy (or free) to access, just that it be available in some way. So sources behind paywalls are acceptable (if they are reliable of course): see WP:PAYWALL. We also have the resource exchange for helping people get at sources they do not have direct access to. --ColinFine (talk) 21:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

American Banjo Museum

I wrote the article American Banjo Museum. The article was correctly tagged as being written from a fan's point of view, rather than a neutral point of view, and written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic. I think I have addresses these issues. Would someone look at the article to we if that’s true. I want to migrate sections to the banjo article, but wan’t to be sure I have satisfied the cleanup first. Thanks, Jacqke (talk) 22:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Jacqke, and thanks for taking the time and dedication to improve the article. At a quick glance I believe the language could be toned down even more to be neutral.

Shameless plug: If you'd like someone to look it over thoroughly you are welcome to leave a request at the Guild of Copyeditors' request page and someone can take it on for you; you are welcome to keep making changes to it in the meantime should you choose to do so. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:19, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. If it needs more neutrality, I’ll keep working in it. I'm still too close to writing it to be objective right now. Jacqke (talk) 22:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Jacqke. The article is very interesting and the opening paragraphs seemed quite neutral to me. Then, I ran across the statement "the banjo took on a role as big as the electric guitar holds in music today", and that statement impressed me so much that I read the two references that follow that assertion, and neither said anything like that. Please remember that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and you really ought to provide a reference to a high quality academic source to make that particular claim. Certainly not the museum itself. You may be correct that some of this content belongs in Banjo because an article about a museum should summarize what independent sources say about the museum, not what this museum says about itself, or what it teaches people who spend all day studying its exhibits. So, go though the article asking yourself if every sentence summarizes what reliable sources independent of the museum say about the museum. Anything else should be removed quite ruthlessly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:23, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello Cullen328 Thank you for your appraisal and for taking the time to look at the sources. I will definitely follow your advice. I will seek out a wider group of sources not associated with the museum. On that note, I am waiting for the arrival of history books to broaden my sources. I will cut things from the article that aren't about the museum itself. I will go back through my sources to make sure they adequately cover the information, line by line. I tend to write after I have dwelled on a large body of information over time. Then it becomes a process of aligning sources with content; I am fairly certain I will find that the line "the banjo took on a role as big as the electric guitar holds in music today" came both from a recording of the museum's audio as well as from a presentation by its executive director. Either way, that line may need trimming from this article, since the question will be, "...What [do] reliable sources independent of the museum say about the museum?" You have given me much to think about and I appreciate yor effort and judgement. Jacqke (talk) 10:14, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Can't find edit button

how do u edit I can't find the button? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waw2 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Waw2. Which article do you want to edit? Sometimes an article has been protected by an administrator which means that it may only be edited by certain types of accounts. If that's the case here, then that might explain why you're not seeing an edit button.-- Marchjuly (talk) 23:53, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Notable?

While researching the film The Last Starfighter, links to this page: The Last Starfighter (musical) brought me to this page: Storm Theatre. It seems like one compliments the other, and neither are really that notable for the categories they fall under (Broadway Musicals / Broadway Theaters) here at WP. Question: are they notable enough for inclusion? The Musical can easily be reduced and absorbed into the main Film article under Adaptations considering there really isn't any content or notable links within the musical article. Not really sure what the notability is of the Storm if the only claim to fame is this one musical. Maineartists (talk) 03:10, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Maineartists. The article about the musical is unsourced and the one about the theatre only has a single citation. At first glance, neither would seem to meet WP:GNG, or any other subject-specific notability guideline. So, if you do some WP:BEFORE and think there's a way to WP:PRESERVE the articles, then that's great for Wikipedia; if you've considered that already, then you can WP:PROD (as long as neither has been prodded before) or start a discussion about them at WP:AFD. You might, however, want to ask about these at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Theatre before any prodding or AFDing just to see if any members of that WikiProject might be able to help out. That's were you're likely going to find editors familiar with this type of thing who might know where to look for sources and how to best assess notability. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:38, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

The wrong photo of the house.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashlawn

In reviewing this page it was evident to me the photo of the house shown is not the Ashlawn that's included in the National Register of Historic places. Instead, the house which is, in fact, Ashlawn is maybe just a half mile or so away. The error was probably due to a misunderstanding in the application for recognition in the "National Register". When reading the application it cites the house as 1 Potash Hill Rd. I don't know if it was a mistake at the time or the street numbering has changed. In any event, the current address of Ashlawn is 179 Potash Hill Rd. The photo of the house shown on the referenced page may be 1 Potash Hill Rd, but it is not Ashlawn. The House in the National Register can be seen here: https://historicbuildingsct.com/ashlawn-1790/ Please note the photographer of the house also discusses the address problem.

I have tried to edit the photo several times, to no avail. I used the photo in the later link, which I don't believe is copyrighted, but was continuously unsuccessful. I don't believe there are any other errors in the article, beside the photo.

As far as any cites go, I grew up in the area and know which house is Ashlawn.

Thomas F. Lepore (talk) 03:11, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Thomas F. Lepore

Hi Thomas F. Lepore. This sounds like something you might want to start a discussion about at Talk:Ashlawn. Starting a discussion about this on the article's talk page, will make it much easier for others who might also be knowledgable about the subject matter to join in. For obvious reasons, Wikipedia would want the photo used in the article to actually be of the right house, but sometimes whether that's the case might take some discussing to sort out. While I've got no reason to doubt you probably right about this, Wikipedia's standards are more stringent, and therefore something more than just taking you by your word is going to be needed. The current photo used in the article states it was taken back in 2008; so, if the house is still standing, then the easiest way to resolve this would to simply take a current photo of the house, compare the two, and see if or how they are different.

I'm not sure what problem you're having in trying to upload a new photo of the house, but if the house is still standing, then pretty much any copyrighted photo you find online of it is not going to be accepted per Wikipedia's non-free content use criterion #1 of Wikipedia's non-free content use policy as long as it possible for someone to simply take a photo of the house and upload it under a free license that Wikipedia accepts. So, unless you can do this yourself, convince someone else to do so, of get someone who's already done to agree to release their photo under such a free license, a new photo is going to be hard to upload. That doesn't mean that the other photo cannot be removed if it's clearly the wrong photo, but it might mean that article will have to go photo-less untll another suitable image is found or created. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:28, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

@Thomas F. Lepore: I've copied your concern to Talk:Ashlawn. Look for further responses there. Deor (talk) 18:23, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Authors need to be more impartial or uniform

I have been a longtime Wikipedia lover, but recently, I have been a little vexed with some articles. I would like to point out, that your political articles are becoming very noticeably biased.  In regards to conservatives many assumptions and opinions have been written without scrutiny. On the counterpart, there are many individuals on the liberal side, who's controversies have been omitted or favourably critiqued.  I didn't seek this out. I have just been studying up and could not help from being aware of it.  Mostly of media figures I have been studying.  It's a shame that this isn't free of opinions. I want facts. It's becoming just like another mainstem news outlet.   Please be aware of some your authors and thier biasness.  It does no good for education. Well unless you want to completely brainwash the youth. 

Please, I beg of you.  Thank you for your time.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:989:4401:B0A0:4DC1:6CC8:85F5:AE0C (talk) 05:36, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. We deal with specific situations here, so please provide links to specific articles that you think are biased. Otherwise, nobody has a way to respond to your specific concerns, since we have over six million articles. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:59, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Cullen328 An almost weekly target of the "Article X is biased" complaint is Donald Trump. Perhaps that's what the IP is referring to... (just a thought) Mgasparin (talk) 06:19, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, Mgasparin, there are dozens of highly experienced editors who work every day to be sure that particular article complies with our policies and guidelines, and those editors have a very wide range of points of views about the current president of the U.S. Every sentence is scrutinized constantly, and the article is the product of consensus. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:29, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

I know, I am one of the editors working on that very article. Mgasparin (talk) 06:31, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your work in that particular battlefield, Mgasparin. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:36, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Edit Attributions Help

I just made an account and I've made edits before, so I'd like to change the attribution for those edits with my IP to my username. I looked up how to do it in the Help, but I'm unsure how to implement it. The specifics are that I made the last 2 edits on Wisconsin Badgers football and probably other edits that I can't think of that I would like to be attributed to this account rather than showing my IP. -Packerfan213 (talk) 07:08, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Administrators can do that, and I am sure one will be along shortly to help.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 07:30, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Packerfan213. I actually don't think that can be done. Wikipedia's licensing requires that edits be attributed to each account that made them; so, the edits you made with your IP address are probably going to have to remain attributed to that IP account. I think the best that you can probably do in this case is added something to your new user page stating that you previously edited with that IP account. IP accounts are often used by different people and while I believe you when you say you made the edits, Wikipedia's licensing requirements probably are not going to allow such a thing since it has no way of knowing for sure. Anyway, I'm not an administrator and there is a chance I'm wrong on this; so, if you want a more definitive answer, you can wait unitl one of the administrators who answers questions at the Teahouse comes along or you can ask for assistance at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:45, 6 March 2020 (UTC) Perhaps 331dot, Cullen328 or Nick Moyes can clarify whether this is possible. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:47, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

According to Changing attribution for an edit, it is possible, but I'm confused on the implementation. Do I add the table to the bottom of Wisconsin Badgers football, or have an admin do it? -Packerfan213 (talk) 07:54, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

The notice at the top of that page states "As of 2005, edits are no longer reattributed, so this page is no longer active", Packerfan213. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:00, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Ah, so it does. Rather large oversight from going from a Google result to an article header, my mistake. Packerfan213 (talk) 08:07, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

What can I do to my article so that it is considered notable?

Hi! I am a marketing manager. I have submitted this draft article about Alconost Company, but it has been rejected due to the lack of corporate notability. My question is, what exactly can I do to improve the article and make it actually published? 1. Shall it be submitted by someone else, since I'm considered related to the company? (I have take advantage some time ago of its services). 2. Shall I delete some sources which are considered self-published? If so, what sources? 3. Or is it something that I can't change (the company just doesn't have enough reliable links at the moment). I am looking forward to your feedback, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khristina Adamovich (talk • contribs) 09:03, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Khristina Adamovich. Since it seems that you are the marketing manager of the company, you probbaly should carefully read through Wikipedia: Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure before you do anything else. The fact that you are employed by the company doesn't mean that the company cannot have an article written about it or that you cannot be the person to do so; it might, however, be quite difficult for you to do so no matter how hard you try to comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines simply because doing so may be contrary what you typically do to market the company; in other words, you might find it hard to write about the company in non-promotional neutral manner, especially if that means including unfavorable information about the company.

As to whether the either you or anyone else can create an article about the company, that is something that's going to depend upon whether the company satisfies Wikipedia: Notability (organizations and companies). If you can show that the company has received significant coverage in multiple independent sources (like what mentioned in Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Significant coverage), then most likely an article can be written; on the other hand, if the only sources you or anyone else is able to find are trivial in nature (e.g. listing in business directories or small blurbs in trade publications), then it's likely going to be hard for anyone to write an article that would survive a deletion discussion. Self-published sources can sometimes be used, but only certain types and only in certain ways. Moreover, badly written articles full of promotional wording, etc. about a Wikipedia notable subject can always be cleaned up; however, even the most perfectly written article about a non-Wikipedia subject is unlikely going to be able to be saved.

One other should you probably should read is Wikipedia:Ownership of content and "Wikipedia's Law of Unintended Consequences". Since your the company's marketing manager, you probably have lots of control over its online presence. A Wikipedia article, however, is not owned by those who create it and the subject it is written about; so, neither you nor anyone associated with the company will have any final editorial say over what type of content is added to the article. Only content deemed in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines will be considered OK, and anything else can be removed by anyone anywhere in the world at anytime. In other words, if your starts to receive some bad press, there's a good chance that such information will eventually find its way into the article. So, you won't be able to use the article to promote the company and you won't be able to automatically keep out anything negative about the company. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:31, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Khristina said they have take advantage some time ago of its services, so I didn't read their post as implying they work for the company. In that case, I'm not sure what I am a marketing manager is meant to signify. @Khristina Adamovich: without looking at the article myself, if the reason given was "notability", then it's most likely your case #3. Does that help, Khristina? Pelagic (talk) 11:30, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Handball

Hallo,

IHF World Men´s Handball Championship Tournaments 2023 Details Poland/Sweden

Qualification "The World Championship organizers will be directly qualified, ............ 32 places are distributed as follows:

+ Host nations: 2 + Reigning world championship: 1 + Africa: 6 + Asia: 4 + Europe: 12 + Pan America: 5 + Oceania World Card: 1 + Wild Card: 1

                              32 Teams

Look at Europe. Here can you read Europe 12 Teams.

Competition Dates Host Vacancies Qualified

Host nations 2 Reigning world championship 1 Africa 6 Asia 4 2022 European Men´s Handball Championship 4 Teams Pan America 5 European qualification 9 Teams Oceania/ Wild Card 1 Wild Card 1

                                               33 Teams

33 Teams is wrong.

What is right:

Europe 12 Teams or 2022 European Men´s Handball Championship 4 Teams plus European qualification 9 Teams = 13 Teams

Best wishes Manfred Kirsch — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.221.73.217 (talk) 12:05, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

What does all that mess mean...? --CiaPan (talk) 12:47, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

It may be about 2023_World_Men's_Handball_Championship. In any case, the best place to report an error is the talk page of the article in question. Maproom (talk) 12:55, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

But I can't see any error here. An error is usually a wrong word, an incorrect number, a misplaced sentence... Something that can be specified or pointed at. We got an unformatted copy of some data (without information if it is from Wikipedia or some other source) and one sentence "What is right", with no obvious connection to any specific part of the jammed data above it. Whatever it is, it certainly is not an error report. CiaPan (talk) 13:08, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

It makes more sense if you look at it in source form. In any case, it's correct that the original poster should discuss it at Talk:2023_World_Men's_Handball_Championship. I'd suggest simply providing a link to the source of the data that you posted. If you need to post parts of it and retain the formatting, put <pre> before it and </pre> after it. Place your comments after it (outside the pre tags). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:15, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft reviewed twice but both declined with the same reasons

Hello there. I need your help, I created a page for a company that I work for (I am an employee). I submitted it 2 times but both were declined with the same reasons: 1 is "the submission appears to read more like an advertisement and the 2nd is "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". Thank you!Nice0903 (talk) 13:34, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Nice0903, in the nicest way possible, most businesses aren't notable enough to have an article here. As we can only write based on the sources that exist, if a business hasn't received enough significant coverage for us, then we simply can't have an article, no matter how much it is edited.

You might want to read Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability, an essay that goes into more detail about how and why this is the case. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 13:41, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Nice0903, Also, you might already have been told this, but please read and follow both the conflict of interest and paid editing policies. There are some extra steps you have to take as a paid editor, and you must disclose you are being paid - full detail in the links. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 13:42, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Hey Alex. Nice0903 did not say they are being paid to write the article, just that they are an employee. I'm reading "created a page for" as meaning 'created a page about' rather than 'created a page at the request of'. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 00:07, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Nice0903 (edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, you must review and comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies(the latter is a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory). Looking at your draft, it is sourced to what seems to be nothing but press releases or routine business announcements; these do not establish that your company meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company(please review). What is needed is significant coverage in independent reliable sources, sources that have chosen on their own to write about your company in depth. For example, Ford Motor Company and Microsoft merit articles because many sources not associated with Ford or Microsoft have chosen to write about them, not just republish press releases or print routine announcements. Not every company merits an article here, even within the same field. If there are no independent sources with significant coverage of your company, it would not merit an article at this time. You may find it helpful to read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia and writing an article- which is the most difficult task to undertake here. 331dot (talk) 13:44, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

How to make a "knowledge panel" for an article?

Hi, please tell how to make a knowledge panel. Thank You.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Suparno123 (talk • contribs)

Suparno123 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to Google knowledge panels, that come up in search results, you will have to contact Google for information. 331dot (talk) 15:58, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

@Suparno123: You may be referring to an Infobox that appears in some articles. Check out Help:Infobox for guidance on that. RudolfRed (talk) 17:12, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

How to improve coverage and cite more reliable reference.

Hello, I'm quite new to wikipedia and I am currently creating an article of a secondary school. Unfortunately, it got declined. It was due to not enough significant coverage of it. And the reference may not be able to be verified. I would like to ask how to improve the above problems. I understand the content may not be enough but how can I cite some more reliable reference? For a school, how can I cite some reference that can be verified? Please help, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HunterThePenguin (talk • contribs) 16:02, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

HunterThePenguin Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has articles about subjects that receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability Secondary schools are often notable, but there must be information from independent sources that do more than just cite the existence of the school. These might be news reports about the school itself, independent reviews, anything more than routine coverage. You may find it helpful to read Your First Article. Things like the school song and classes really should not be in the article unless those aspects are significantly discussed in independent sources. 331dot (talk) 16:08, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for responding 331dot, what about news article that may possibly promoting the school? i.e. reporting about certain aspects about the school that is good, or awards etc. Will these article be seen as advertising? How can I cite them properly. Thz! HunterThePenguin (talk) 16:24, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Previously I have mistakenly read the wrong feedback of the reviewer. Two attempts were declined due to my article is possibly not too neutral and the coverage is not significant enough. Since a lot of references are from the school websites or other possible promotions they made. I understand the tone may not be too appropriate. I think I can handle that part. Unfortunately, I would like to know how significant the coverage should be. For a school, what kind of information is needed to make it more full? Any help would be appreciated. Thank you. HunterThePenguin (talk) 16:51, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Carmel Secondary School.   Maproom (talk) 16:57, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

HunterThePenguin Significant coverage goes beyond routine coverage and basic announcements. A news story that just tells of the existence of the school would not be appropriate; a news source that discusses some aspect of the school in depth(such as if a news organization chose to write about the education system of the school, or misconduct by staff, or anything as long as it is in depth). Mere announcements of awards or events at the school do not usually qualify; unless is a major, significant award or event.

Are you an employee of the school? 331dot (talk) 17:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

No. I create this page purely because I think the English information of this school is lacking as it also has a Chinese wikipedia page. Since it's an EMI school, I find it suitable to create a page for it. Perhaps I should collect more information before I resubmit next time instead. ZeroApocalypse (talk) 03:31, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: the query editor (Hunter...) has changed name to User:ZeroApocalypse. David notMD (talk) 18:51, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Help editing Bob Quaranta article

Hi, I'm editing the Bob Quaranta article. The article has existed for about 10 years and now I'm being told it's not notable. As far as notability for a musician, the article sites associations, thru recordings, with a number of artists including Mongo Santamaria, Willie Colon, Adalberto Santiago, Jellybean Benitez and Ed Palermo BiG Band as well as Grammy nominations and chart positions for a few of these recordings. The information can be seen on Allmusic and Discogs which are listed as External References. The references have been criticized because they only mention Bob Quaranta as part of the overall article. I've been editing the article to try to bring it up to speed. My question would be how to fix this article for resubmission. Thank youDontwantone (talk) 15:57, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Dontwantone, here on Wikipedia, we use the word "notable" in an idiosyncratic way. It doesn't apply to articles, it applies to the subjects of articles. It means that the subject (in this case, Quarantina) has been discussed at length in several reliable independent sources. So, you need to find such sources and cite them in the draft. Writing about him here on the Teahouse won't persuade anyone. Maproom (talk) 16:55, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Item is now Draft:Bob Quaranta, as rather than pursuing an undeletion, content submitted as a draft (and declined, most recently 6 MArch). David notMD (talk) 18:12, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

As noted below, creator of the draft decided to end the effort, so draft no longer exists. David notMD (talk) 18:49, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Deleting the Bob Quaranta

After the article being around for about 10 years, I guess it's time to delete it. I'm not sure what more I can add besides Allmusic and Discogs. What's available on line are mostly mentions in reliable sources. I'm wondering if the article and comments could be deleted or if I can delete in edit. I'm not going to try to resubmit. Otherwise, I'm fine if you delete it. Thank you for your attention — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dontwantone (talk • contribs) 18:32, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Bob Quaranta article

Hi again, I'm just wondering if the deletion box that comes up if you click on Bob Quaranta Wiki can also be removed. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dontwantone (talk • contribs) 19:26, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Dontwantone If you mean the box indicating the deletion of the article/draft(not "wiki"), no, it cannot be removed. 331dot (talk) 19:35, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

​The deletion box is only visible to editors who are logged in. The article will only appear in Google results for a couple of more days, after that people will rarely if ever encounter that deletion box. – Thjarkur (talk) 22:07, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Can someone review my edit?

Here, https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Doppelg%C3%A4nger&action=history , i suspect that a certain website is promoting itself inappropriately on this article. I removed mentions of the website's name, but i am not sure if this is the right call. Can someone confirm if my actions were appropriate?

Not sure if this is the right page for questions like this. If i should post questions like this elsewhere, let me know. I read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion before making my edit.

--Disoff (talk) 20:35, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Disoff. I agree with your edit. If anybody disagrees with it, it is up to them to discuss it with you on the talk page, according to BRD. --ColinFine (talk) 23:19, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Is this a viable source?

I am in a minor dispute over an article’s notability and the other user cited https://www.hopechannel.nz/show/the-story-keepers/ as an establishment of notability. Is this correct, and if not what should I do? 98.127.4.44 (talk) 21:16, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

The source the other user cited seems to just be a list of episodes with short descriptions. That would not be considered significant coverage. Also, it seems to be on the website of the company that produces it, in which case it also isn't independent. Given that all the sources currently used in the article are the show's episodes themselves, I definitely agree that it should be deleted. However, in your deletion proposal, you should probably have just left it at "no indication of notability" - especially "our notability guidelines" sounds like you're trying to speak for Wikipedia, which might be why the deletion was objected to. Next, you could try to get it deleted through Articles for Deletion, which is a slightly more complicated prodedure, but certainly doable. Keep your motivation simple: a quick description of how terrible the sources are should be enough. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 23:25, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Deeply appreciated. Thanks! 98.127.4.44 (talk) 23:43, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Trying to learn

As new to editing, I would like to add topics to wikipedia, and don't know how. This is one issue. Another is that I would like to add to certain pages and don't really have the expertise to do so at this time. Some things are very basic and seem simple enough, but it can get a little confusing, I would assume until you 'learn' the pattern of how to properly include something.

As an example, I know a professional musician who plays numerous musical instruments. This musician has a page which someone created. I made a few corrections on the page and added, in addition to drums, which this musician does play, the rest of the musical instruments that this musician plays. Shortly, there after, a couple days later, the additional instruments were removed and cited as not being known for playing any instrument but drums. Now, if you go on this musician's youtube channel or other social media channels, you will see this musician playing other instruments besides drums. Plus, there are numerous public interviews, including TV interviews where this musician clearly states what instruments that which they play. I am not sure what kind of 'support' you would need besides visual evidence that the person does play those instruments and where they publicly state that they play those instruments.

So this is something I am trying to figure out. Not to put up anything about someone that isn't true but should be up on a public page like wikipedia as they have this skill set.

Any suggestions or direction would be appreciated.

Thanks, Bill — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tibetbill (talk • contribs) 21:24, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Tibetbill! Adding new articles is one of most difficult tasks at Wikipedia. I'd rather suggest you to start from small improvements and expansions of existing articles, so that you learn all technical details necessary for proper composing and formatting articles before you try to create a brand new one. Meanwhile please see the links I added at your talk page in the User talk:Tibetbill#Welcome! section – they will provide you with useful informations and hints about contributing. Happy editing! CiaPan (talk) 22:20, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Tibetbill. To your example: Wikipedia is pretty strict when it comes to biographies of living persons. Basically, everything has to be backed up by a source. If you want the information to be in the article, you should add a statement in the text of the article (not in the small information box) saying that she also plays this and that other instrument and then add a reference to back your statement up, for example to one of those interviews you mentioned. For how to make the reference, see Wikipedia:Tutorial/Citing sources. The reason it should be in the text and not in the box is because the box is supposed to contain only the most important information, and the instrument she is known for is drums. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 23:52, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

I will add that interviews with the subject of a biography article are usually not accepted a reliable sources, as a person can say whatever they wish. David notMD (talk) 00:29, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Editing trouble

Hello! ^_^ . I don't know If I actually changed anything, but I can't "Edit source", only that "Edit" that I can't ever understand and I prefer to edit as I did formerly, how can I change to that preference or it's default on Wikipedia now?, hope you can understand me ^_^ --CoryGlee (talk) 22:09, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

@CoryGlee: Welcome to the Teahouse! From your question I believe you do not want to use the VisualEditor? If that's the case, go to your Preferences → Editing → "Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta". --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:38, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Excellent!, thank you very much!. ^_^ --CoryGlee (talk) 22:45, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Reklam amaçlı olmayan, yazdığım madde sürekli silindi

Merhaba Reklam amacı olamayan, 3 gündür üzerinde çalıştığım madde silindi. her defa maddeyi yazıyorum. yine siliniyor. wikipedia editörü olmak istiyorum. lütfen yardımcı olun — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aytemiz1 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

@Aytemiz1: Welcome to the Teahouse. This is the English Wikipedia; were you perhaps trying to get to the Vikipedi? --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 23:03, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Boss 429 Wiki page question

I have done research, and have information that directly contradicts a paragraph in the article. I am new to editing, what is the proper etiquette in this situation? Boss 429 Mustang Sbradley02 (talk) 00:19, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sbradley02. I do not know what exact paragraph you are referring to, so let me split this into two cases. (1) If the paragraph references sources, please read those sources first. It may be that the sources do not actually support some of the statements made, in which case you may delete those statements. It may also be that some of the sources cannot be considered reliable, in which case you may remove those sources as well as the statements they support. (2) If the paragraph does not reference any sources, feel free to delete it.

You may get into a dispute over your removals. If you remove unsourced or improperly sourced statements and another editor simply puts them back, you are in the right: ask them (while remaining polite, of course) to provide a source that backs it up.

Also consider adding the place where you found your information to the article as a source. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 00:50, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! In this instance it is the first paragraph under Power. The source (based on the paragraph) makes the often repeated claim that muscle cars in the day were often under rated for insurance purposes. These claims are almost never backed up by actual dynamometer measurements on truly stock engines (also pertinent to this particular engine, I was able to find a reference stating that insurance surcharges were not added by the industry until the following model year, 1971). I located a number of period magazines, and was able to find actual dynamometer measurements on stock engines, therefore I would argue that it is a more reliable source. Unfortunately the referenced book in the Wiki page seems to be going for $245 used, making a check of the source problematic. Sbradley02 (talk) 01:05, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

I do not know what a dynamometer measurement is, but I am inferring that such a measurement would confirm that the horsepower was in fact 375 bhp. If I'm understanding that right, I would say the first thing you should do is add a statement saying "dynamometer measurements confirmed..." and reference the magazine (with page number, issue number &c) that says that is the actual horsepower. See Wikipedia:Tutorial/Citing sources for that. Then, you should probably make the false advertising statement a lot shorter, and maybe make it more explicit that it is speculation (there already is a "Supposedly", but you could replace that with something stronger). Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 02:12, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

After the second sentence in that paragraph you could add a sentence to the effect that dynamometer testing of stock engines as reported in automobile performance magazines stated horsepower ____ and torque at ____. That would support the 'official' horsepower of 375 without your having to see the ref that implied a higher HP. David notMD (talk) 09:30, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

How can I submit a retouched picture?

I have to admit that a lot of the way articles on Wikipedia are formatted is beyond me. That's what's kept me from creating an account and becoming a regular participant. Every once in a while I'll see a grammar error and correct it but that's been about it - until today. I happened to see a picture while checking out Charlotte Greenwood's page and saw a picture that was marred with writing and other defects and thought it might be nice to submit (for approval, of course) a cleaned up version of it. For what it's worth, here's a link to it: Charlotte Greenwood Retouched

David C. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.3.138.195 (talk) 03:40, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

As the image is stored at Commons, our store of free media, you are free to make any derivative works.

To do this, go to https://commons.wikimedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Special:Upload&uploadformstyle=basic, upload your version under a new title, and then copy the file information from commons:File:Charlotte Greenwood NYWTS.jpg into the summary field, which will copy over the license information etc. This is the information starting == {{int:filedesc}} == - Just copy the whole page. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 08:44, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Print a draft article?

Is it possible to print a draft article before publishing, so that I can edit it/mark it up manually, then make the changes on Wikipedia and publish?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LPascal (talk • contribs) 04:33, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, LPascal. It is possible; just look at the sidebar to the left, under the Print/Export heading, and click either "Download as PDF" or "Printable version". --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 04:48, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Does “smartphone price” count as information that deserves to be on Wikipedia?

I am currently working on improving the Nokia Android smartphones articles and I’m currently working on the articles of the first series of phones. I noticed that in most articles the product price is mentioned mainly in Euros but I don’t know if it is acceptable on Wikipedia. What I feel is that:

1. Since smartphone prices can vary over time and in different countries (taxes, marketing strategy etc.), there is no point in adding it
2. However, in some cases, the price can be notable (for eg. If the price is the highest or lowest for a production smartphone)

So, is it appropriate to add such info to an article, especially when the phone is not as popular as flagships? Besides, is there any place besides the teahouse where I can ask topic-specific doubts (because I have the feeling I’m asking too many questions here alone)? RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 06:53, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

RedBulbBlueBlood9911, see WP:NOPRICE, point 5 in particular. The best place to ask is the article talk page. If there is low activity on the article or the question is more general, ask at the talk page of relevant WikiProjects. If you want to know whether a particular guideline or policy applies in a particular case, ask at the talk page of that policy/guideline page. For example, there is a discussion related to NOTPRICES at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Asking here is fine too. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:23, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

There's also {{help}} and {{admin help}} to advertise a request for help from experienced editors and admins respectively in whichever talk page you happen to be. Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:27, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

User page

May please visit my user page--Jotham Mapenhure Zvinongoza (talk) 09:10, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Jotham Mapenhure Zvinongoza

Hello, Jotham Mapenhure Zvinongoza, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have tried to create an article on your user page, but that is not the right place for it, so I have moved your draft to User:Jotham Mapenhure Zvinongoza/Herbert Mahlaba. (It has left your user page redirecting to the draft: you can edit your user page to remove that. Your user page is for telling other editors a bit about yourself as a Wikipedia editor.)

Writing a new article is one of the very hardest tasks in editing Wikipedia: most people think that you do it by writing what you know. Unfortunately, this doesn't work very well, because Wikipedia is not interested in what you know (or what I know, or what any random person on the internet knows): it is interested only in what reliably published independent sources have said about the subject. Writing an article starts with finding published sources (and if you can't find suitable sources, you know there is no point in trying to write an article on the subject). I recommend reading your first article, and User:ian.thomson/Howto. --ColinFine (talk) 09:49, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

No separate page on Indian Locomotive class WAGC3 and WAG-11?

Hallo I want to inform you that there is no separate article page on Indian Locomotive class WAGC3 and WAG-11. If any one make separate article page on these two locomotives then it will be a very helpful for us. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suvadeep Saha56 (talk • contribs) 09:33, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

How to be a Reliable Sources for Maps and Map Website

Hi there,

I'm planning to add a passenger railway map which is a screenshot of my personal website www.railaround.com and a link as an interactive map in one of the "Rail transport by country" articles. Besides COI issues, Billinghurst kindly pointed out that my website would not be considered reliable sources.

Basically, the GIS information of my maps are originally from OpenStreetMap, with corrections by compare with official railway operator manually. I can easily find some other personal made maps in Wikipedia articles and links to those interactive map website. I do want my map to be one of them. So I need suggestions. How to make a non-official map and map website to be a reliable source. Is there anythiny I can do? Please give me some advises. Thanks in advance.

Luojie820 (talk) 11:59, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Luojie820 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You creating your own map based on various information you have would be original research. You should be citing where you are getting the information and using that information directly, not creating a map of your own based on it and citing your own website. I can't speak to it directly but it is entirely possible the other maps you mention are also inappropriate, as this is a volunteer website where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate content to go undetected; we can only address what we know about. The only way you could demonstrate that your website is a reliable source would be if you could show that you are a recognized authority on the issue, with a reputation of fact checking and editorial control- which it doesn't seem that you are. Is there any particular reason you are so interested in directing people to your website? 331dot (talk) 12:15, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Luojie820 I agree with 331dot on this. Guidelines for how we identify reliable sources are found at RS. Your website doesn't have any details that I could see about where the information comes from, who publishes it etc., and so it's not easy to see how a reader could establish its reliability. If I read you correctly, you say that you take GIS data from OpenStreetMap, and then correct it yourself by gathering information from other maps and information sources, but we have no way of confirming whether you have done that work accurately - normally, we would look for a source with an editorial panel checking over the work of its authors, or that is written by academically respected experts in the subject it covers. So, while I am sure you have gone to great efforts to make it accurate, that doesn't mean that it's reliable in the way that we use that term here. GirthSummit _(blether) 12:22, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

331dot, GirthSummit, thank you both for your reply.

As a rail fan, the website I created is purely for my personal hobbie. I travelled a lot, each time before I went abroad, I read "Rail transport by country" series articles in Wikipedia and find a passenger railway map of that country to plan my journey. However, I always found a simple PNG map can not provide enough detailed information. That's the reason I create my website -- an interactive map of pure passenger railway information.

I think if there's currently no similar map with enough authority, the readers of "Rail transport by country" may willing to see a less authority map, even it says "hey, we can not confirm the accurate, errors may contains".

However, I understand your concern and respect all the rules which make Wikipedia such a great place. I just say what I think about of this question and hope it can be understand.

Thanks. Luojie820 (talk) 13:30, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

how do I submit a new article?

I would like to submit an article about musician Lee Fardon. Fardon is referenced in several articles but does not yet have his own entry. How do I go about this?