Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Brooklynguy7 (talk | contribs) at 20:38, 28 October 2020 (Replying back to a comment on a talk page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


Articles

Are there any way to see and article you have to pay to see? 2603:301B:2702:AE00:4154:77D0:4AF7:7393 (talk) 20:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. You do not have to pay any money to Wikipedia to view an article. 331dot (talk) 20:43, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IP user. If you are talking about a reference in a Wikipedia article that points to a paywalled source, you can ask at REX, and somebody may be able to help you see it. If you are asking about something not connected with Wikipedia, then I'm afraid we can't help here. --ColinFine (talk) 21:24, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you're a regular editor, then you may be able to gain access to The Wikipedia Library which includes a lot of works you'd otherwise have to pay to access. --Paultalk12:22, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Technical help with fixing a tracking category

Hi all, hope that you're well! I am seeking some help fixing up a tracking category at {{Peer review}} and was hoping someone could help.

In brief, an editor puts {{Peer review}} on an article's talk page and then selects what type of peer review page they want. Then, a peer review page is created.

However there are often problems with this. I am trying to implement two tracking categories so I or a future bot can fix up some uses of this template. The code is on the template but not working. My aim is:

I have been having trouble implementing them and was hoping someone knowledgable around here may be able to help :). Tom (LT) (talk) 23:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tom (LT), you may be better off asking your technical question at WP:VPT, The Village pump technical questions page on Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tom (LT): If I understand your question correctly: you can add the category to the current page if pagename does not exist with:
{{#ifeq:{{PAGEID:pagename}}|0|[[Category:Unopened requests for peer review]]}}
To add the category to the current page if it is not in the Talk namespace:
{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Talk||[[Category:Wikipedia peer reviews not in talk namespace]]}}
—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that pagename is Wikipedia:Peer_review/{{PAGENAME}}/archive{{{archive|}}}? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article instructions to readers

I seem to recall that there is a guideline against using instructions to readers in articles, such as "(See below)" or "Please note XXX and YYY." Is this written into WP:PAG or was I imagining it? Elizium23 (talk) 20:09, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did not find the guideline on WP:PAG, nor on WP:MOS. Given that Wikipedia is frequently edited, often one paragraph or section at a time, such usage risks "orphaning" the instruction when "below" or "XXX" are modified to the point that the instruction no longer makes any sense. Surely, there oughta be a guideline somewhere...--Quisqualis (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Elizium23 and Quisqualis: MOS:NOTE. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible to wikilink within an article using the hashtag (#) to specify the target section, but some editors frown upon this. I use it sparingly.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 21:32, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AlanM1, hmm, thanks. This is as I recall it, but it does not seem to explicitly rule out "see above/see below", only when such language is non-neutral. Elizium23 (talk) 23:52, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Elizium23: We have hatnotes like {{Further}} and {{Broader}} so I don't think there's a problem with the idea of "See", maybe just the specific active word. "Please note" is similarly active, even if only referring to another (part of the) article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Photographs taken from Facebook

I'm working on creating a new biographical article. Can I use a picture of the person I'm writing the article about that has been posted on his social media accounts, like Facebook and is set as Public? Donnaocchineri (talk) 21:21, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Donnaocchineri, and welcome to the Teahouse. Almost certainly not, I'm afraid. With certain exceptions (which almost never apply for a picture of a living person), images used must be free for anybody to copy or modify for any purpose, commercial or not. A statement that a picture is "public" does not normally meet this requirement. See Uploading images. --ColinFine (talk) 23:11, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for answering. I can use it if I ask the owner of the profile for permission and he grants it, right? If I get the permission, should I credit it to that person's Facebook profile page then? Thanks in advance. Donnaocchineri (talk) 07:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you ask the copyright holder for their permission and they agree to give their consent, then you should upload the file Wikimedia Commons instead as explained here. However, you need try confirm that the person your asking is actually the copyright holder of the photo and didn't just upload a photo taken by another person to their Facebook account. Generally it's the person who takes a photo, not the subject of the photo, who holds the copyright over the photo. You also need to make sure that they fully understand and agree to c:Commons:Licensing and c:Commons:License revocation. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CSD tag removed by IP address

Hello Teahouse folks, could I please get advice about a CSD situation? Recently I tagged an article for being promotional, but then the article creator removed the tag. My understanding is that the creator cannot remove it, so I re-added the tag but then it was removed by an IP address.

The IP has no other edits and I am suspicious that it is the same person who just deleted the tag while logged out. Could you please suggest what I can do about this? Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 23:26, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 1292simon. The Criteria for speedy deletion states: "For most speedy deletion criteria, the creator of a page may not remove the deletion tag from it; only an editor who is not the creator of a page may do so.". This indeeds sounds like the creator of the article is removing the speedy deletion tag. Only CheckUser's can verify if it's the same user. However, this doesn't sound serious enough for them to be involved. I recommend to just retag and let Administrators get to it. If the removal of the tag continues, alert Administrator of the page and user at The Administrators noticeboard Incidents page. Eyebeller (talk) 23:43, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Eyeballer. Many thanks for your help. As suggested, I will retag the article and see how that goes. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 23:49, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi 1292simon. The template seems to have been removed yet again. You could try re-adding it again, but someone has connested the speedy deletion of the article on its talk page which makes the tagging contentious and it will likely just continue to be removed. At some point, any benefit Wikipedia might get from a retagging of the article for speedy deletion is going to be outweighed the disruption caused by edit warring over the tag. The IPs might may be WP:SOCKS and end up being blocked, but you may end up blocked too even if you're really only mean well. So, if you truly believe that this article should be deleted as WP:SPAM, then perhaps try asking for direct administrator assistance at WP:AN or Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam. If you're not so sure, then you might also try nominating the article for deletion at WP:AFD instead. WP:BEFORE doing so it might be a good idea to seek input first from relevant WikiProjects like WP:AFRICA or WP:PRIZE to see what some other editors who might be familiar with that type of article may think. If there's a way to WP:PRESERVE the article, than outright deletion might not be necessary. At the same time, if the community consensus is that the article should be deleted, then IPs will not be able to stop that from happening. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I nominated the page for semi-protection to stop removal while logged out. The responding admin deleted the page instead. —teb728 t c 02:17, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article has been restored a draftified instead per WP:RPP#Anzisha Prize. Since you tagged the article for speedy deletion 1292simon and the creator has posted on your user talk page, perhaps you can explain what happened and recommend that the creator to submit the draft to WP:AFC for review instead of trying to re-create the article again directly in the mainspace. Trying to do the latter will only likely lead to the article being deleted again, most likely for good. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone for your help with this. I'm quite confused about how this all unfolded, but glad to see that the article has now been moved to Drafts.

In general, it seems like a loophole that the article creator can just log out to delete a CSD tag as an anonymous IP? Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 06:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, its very possible it's the same person a gd fan (talk) 16:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing my name!

I left off one letter in my name and there doesn't seem to be any way to fix this!

Also, I don't understand how I am going to get an answer to this question.

Deena Stryker (not, Deena Stryke)! Deena Stryke (talk) 00:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deena Stryke As you have almost no contributions, I would suggest that you just create a new account. 331dot (talk) 00:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Deena Stryke:, you can have your username changed by following the instructions here at WP:CHUS. Merzash (talk) 00:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merzash Generally, if a user has few or no contributions, especially if not to articles, they should just create a new account. 331dot (talk) 00:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Thanks for the clarification. Merzash (talk) 00:47, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deena Stryker has been registered since 2006, though. Elmssuper 04:59, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't look like they've made any global contributions per meta? The user could request usurpation, instructions here. —valereee (talk) 16:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cn span

How do you add/remove a citation span? I've been seeing that template from other articles. Thankyou Apollogone (talk) 04:50, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apollogone, are you referring to Template:Citation needed span, which is a less-used alternative to the more common Template:Citation needed? For both, you can just delete it once you've added a citation, although for the span template, you need to be a little more careful with the code. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 06:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hi Apollogone. You can find some information on this kind of thing in Template:Citation needed span. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Apollogone: The key with the span template is to be sure not to remove the statement that is wrapped with it. E.g., In:
{{Cn-span|date=October 2020|text=This is the statement.}}
you remove the red and add the purple, changing it to:
This is the statement.<ref>{{Cite ...}}</ref>
I hope this helps. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@AlanM1: This is great thank you. I'm still familiarizing myself with the templates because there's alot. Btw, would there be any reason why I shouldn't remove the statement wrapped with a span? Apollogone (talk) 09:43, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hey thanks to all who enlghtened me. Sure is a help! Apollogone (talk) 09:40, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Apollogone: The reason is that statement is rendered as part of the article. The purpose of the template is to mark that statement as needing a cite. So, the point of this is, when you find a citation for the statement, you remove the template and add the cite. If you can't find a cite, the advice at Template:Citation needed/doc#How to respond to this tag is Except for contentious claims about living people, which should be immediately removed if not cited, there is no specific deadline for providing citations. Please do not delete information that you believe is correct solely because no one has provided a citation within an arbitrary time limit. If there is some uncertainty about its accuracy, most editors are willing to wait at least a month to see whether a citation can be provided. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to tag my article

As most of the Teahouse editors know, I am a new editor who has just been autoconfirmed. I am looking to get my first article (Draft:Karikku published in my first attempt and am really thanfkful to the experienced editors for the help A section showed me that I should tag my article to improve my chances for a faster review. Can you please advise me how to do it, or you may do the needful yourselves. I am in no hurry Assassin7177 (talk) 05:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC) I just spotted a new issue Draft:Karikku_YouTube_Channel discusses the same topic as my (Draft:Karikku. But the first one was declined. So will it reduce my chances for success — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assassin7177 (talkcontribs) 05:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Assassin7177: That section tells you to give WikiProject tags on the talk page. I've gone ahead and added WikiProject India and WikiProject YouTube at Draft talk:Karikku. This lets editors involved in those WikiProjects to see that there's an article relevant to them that needs reviewing, hopefully getting you a faster review. There's a lot of pending drafts to review, so be patient! The other draft will not reduce your chance for success; the only thing that matters is how well you've written your draft.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 05:51, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There are at least two complications here. First, it appears that the Original Poster has changed their user name. At least that is what it appears, that they are may be either User:Assassin7177 or User:Atlantis77177. Second, the title of their draft has a history, and the title Karikku is create-protected (salted) in article space. If the subject of this new user's draft really is different, disambiguation will be necessary. However, I haven't seen the deleted article. Only administrators can view deleted articles. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Surely there is no need for disambiguation? If the topic has (unexpectedly) become notable, the create protection can be lifted by an admin, once an AfC reviewer has accepted it. --bonadea contributions talk 18:52, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Bonadea - That is true. I had disambiguation on my mind. If their topic is a different topic with the same name and is notable, the create protection can be lifted. I think that their topic is a different topic, although I am not sure. I don't think that their topic is notable, which is a different matter. Also, if their topic is notable, and is accepted, it may be necessary to watch the article to ensure that it is not hijacked. But anyway. They first need to establish notability. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:17, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jennifer Lopez Preview Page Wikipedia

When I did a yahoo search for Jennifer Lopez and it pulled up the Wikipedia preview page, it only listed ONE of her children, Emme. Max's name needs added to the preview page, so who can add his name to this preview page? ProChoiceLiberal (talk) 05:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ProChoiceLiberal: Wikipedia has no control over what information shows up on Yahoo or any other search engine. The page we have at Jennifer Lopez does not list any of her children's names (WP:BLPNAME).  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 05:43, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ProChoiceLiberal, I checked Lopez's Wikidata page, since search engines sometimes draw from there, and it lists Max. So there's nothing more for us to add.
As a matter of general internet literacy, Yahoo search may not be the best search engine—Google search is generally considered much better. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 06:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:BLP we avoid naming non-notable relatives, particularly if they are minors. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft feedback?

Hi everyone, I have a short Article that I will probably be submitting to AfC soon. I would love any feedback or edits you might have over on the draft or its associated Talk page. I'm a pretty new editor so apologies if it's a little funky. [1] TheMusicExperimental (talk) 05:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC) TheMusicExperimental (talk) 05:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My first reaction is to wonder how your subject meets Wikipedia:Notability (music). -- Hoary (talk) 06:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary, see Draft talk:Yazmin Aziz (musician). {{u|Sdkb}}talk 06:24, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
TheMusicExperimental, I made a few copy edits and added some categories, but overall that page looks perfectly ready for mainspace. You can choose to submit it through AfC if you want, but since the subject is clearly notable (which is the main thing AfC reviewers are checking for), I'd just move it directly to mainspace as soon as you're satisfied with it (it'll still receive a review from a New Page Patroller). Nice work! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 06:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Sdkb!TheMusicExperimental (talk) 13:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Given that Draft:Yazmin Aziz (musician) is your first attempt at creating an article, I disagree with the advice to move it to mainspace directly. Going through AfC will take time for a review (as short as days, but sadly, as long as months), but better that than you move it to main and risk a New Page Patroller nominating it for Article for Deletion. Surviving AfD can be harder than dealing with a Decline at AfC, whereas succeeding via AfC supports article credibility. David notMD (talk) 11:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's sounds like great advice David notMD, I'll do it that way. TheMusicExperimental (talk) 13:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MinecraftKitty

Ummm there is a user with the user name MinecraftKitty it appears to be compromised by someone I believe an admin should take action. (If you don't see anything weird just check the contribution page of the user)

User:MinecraftKitty  Creed (Assasination contract me)

That user last edited in 2017. 331dot (talk) 08:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but yet we don't know if the hacker just thought hmmmmm maybe I should vandalize a bit! Just to keep safe {re|331dot}}.  Creed (Assasination contract me)

Could you remove the part of your signature that says others can contact you for assassinations? 331dot (talk) 08:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure but why, I'm not gonna assasinate someone for real @331dot:  Creed (Talk!)

Wikipidean's Creed Because it is not appropriate for a public forum. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 08:59, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sorry for wasting your time  Creed (Talk!)

Question about Module map.

How i can Create a module map for an article? Mubashiir Channa (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mubashiir Channa if you mean Lua modules please see WP:Lua for guidance. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:51, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalizing? Or giving opinions?

Ip user https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:150.129.238.196 Is making weird edits that are either giving opinions on an article but in an unacceptble way or vandalizing. I'm pretty sure he is vandalizing.  Creed (Talk!) Wikipidean's Creed (talk) 09:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they made one edit that was appropriately reverted. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Images are being deleted although that are my own creation and capured by me

Hello Friends, I am creating a page which provides information about a popular game, the images i used to upload in that article were mine and i want it to be used for free for any purpose, it's getting deleted with a reason that i don't own it. How wiki editors are checking this? do they have any information about original author? this is really disappointing that my work is being declined by saying i don't own it. Sukrut5151 (talk) 09:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sukrut5151, is the picture a screenshot of the game or the logo of it by any chance? If yes, is the game copyrighted/can you share a link to the logo photo? GeraldWL 09:52, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what's happening there but you can contact the user who deleted and prove to him that you own that image. Or maybe it had a copyrighted logo @Sukrut5151:  Creed (Talk!)

Courtesy Link: Draft:ScarFall - The Royale Combat. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 09:59, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sukrut5151 Appears the image was deleted from article because it was deleted at Commons as a copyright violation. Separate issue: when editing an article, it is helpful to briefly describe what was done in an Edit summary. This helps other editors find when something was changed, and what was changed. David notMD (talk) 11:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all respected editors and Teahouse members I'll retry with your suggestions — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sukrut5151 (talkcontribs) 11:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has been criticized for its uneven accuracy [source: Wikipedia].

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


"Wikipedia has been criticized for its uneven accuracy" [source: Wikipedia]. Thought for today, and tomorrow, and the next day.

The article made about my life, work and career, after 3 years, is less than 50% complete. Is there any way to contact Jimmy Wales or Larry Sanger to ask them how it is possible to finally get an article to read correctly? At the moment the article does not serve any viewer truthfully as it is inaccurate, because it is incomplete and looks shoddy. I wonder, daily, how it is possible to get an article finished without having to tolerate editor's negative attitudes.

Note: I don't read emails from Wikipedia editors as I will no longer tolerate being accused of lying, accused of paid-editing, asked for an exchange of help in return for editing, and spoken down to.

I see that areas of the article require secondary and tertiary sources. If my work is published and archived by BBC News and obviously verifiable, why does it need to be also mentioned in other sources? This was never needed in the past so why now? Oh, editors are being awkward and pedantic again. Now there's a surprise.

Does Wikipedia believe in democracy (even though it feels as though most of you are Republicans), as it feels like a dictatorship here.

"Wikipedia's community has been described as cultlike,[105] although not always with entirely negative connotations.[source: Wikipedia] Not always?

Are there any female editors out there who might not be so ego-fueled, perhaps? Contact me via my website please.EddieLeVisco (talk) 10:26, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As usual here is the courtesy link Ed Gold, these questions have been asked multiple times and the answers have been repeatedly ignored. You comment endlessly about how useless the volunteers at Wikipedia are but you have done nothing to help us, if there is content missing from the article please request for it to be added on the article’s talk page here Talk:Ed Gold], being sure to provide reliable secondary in-depth sources, it really is that simple. Theroadislong (talk) 11:14, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Repeated advice here at Teahouse and on your Talk page - which has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the people trying to advise you - is that as you are the subject of the article, you are strongly advised to not edit the article directly, but rather advised to propose specific changes, i.e., new content, at the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 11:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User given warning for sexism. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Earlier this month User:Michael D. Turnbull made many valiant attempts on the Talk page of the article to identify references that could be considered reliable sources. The article was improved. However, appears there was a falling out, and he has moved on. Given your past behavior, I doubt any volunteer editor will take up your tasks. You were also advised that you could consider a paid editor, but that person would be required to declare being paid, and could only request changes at Talk rather than edit the article directly. David notMD (talk) 11:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Putting an image in an infobox

Hi, when I put an image inside an inforbox, what is a no no or rule in inserting an image? Does it need to be an image from an article related to the subject? thank you Clyeana-Clyde (talk) 11:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Most common beginner's error is using an image that is protected by copyright. David notMD (talk) 11:56, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
When trying to add an image, its best to use the Upload Wizard, a template which will guide you trough the steps to uploading an image. If you want to know all of the details, you can read this very long article about copyright policy. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 11:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Clyeana-Clyde: Images in a Infobox must (almost by definition) be directly about the subject. They may not be lifted and uploaded from copyrighted sites, so for that reason I have proposed this image you claimed to be your own for immediate deletion. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick, can you help me delete the image, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clyeana-Clyde (talkcontribs) 13:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The image is marked for speedy deletion, so it should get deleted pretty soon (almost always under an hour). --Paultalk13:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Paul thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clyeana-Clyde (talkcontribs) 13:17, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Clyeana-Clyde: Can I ask, are you connected with the company, or know Ned Coten, or are being paid to create Draft:Ned Coten? If so, please could I ask you to read the following two shortcut links and, if appropriate, follow the instructions for declaring any conflict of interest you might have? See WP:COI and WP:PAID. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again @Nick, thanks for responding to my inquiry. Kindly help me please to delete immediately the photo you're referring to be deleted so that the draft I made won't have a problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clyeana-Clyde (talkcontribs) 14:03, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Clyeana-Clyde: make sure you sign your posts! You can do so by adding 4 tildes. (~~~~) Le Panini (Talk tome?) 14:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

retrieving password

Hi, I was wondering how you retrieve a forgotten password if you have only your username, thanks ! Ninonbmardisson (talk) 14:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go! -> Help:Reset password Le Panini (Talk tome?) 14:51, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Should i rename my article

The name of my article is shown as 'Draft:Karikku'. Should I change into 'Karikku' and remove 'Draft' from it. Assassin7177 (talk) 15:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Assassin7177: No, you have submitted it for review, and if the reviewer accepts it, it will move to "mainspace", that is, the live encyclopedia, and the "Draft:" part will be removed then. (In fact, you can't move the article yourself, because the title Karikku has been protected so that only an administrator can create it.) Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 15:48, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the username

One of my co-editors suggested that my username showed violence, a statement I truly agree with, as it was a friend who created this account for me. I applied for changing the username and was granted permission in my 2nd attempt. From then on there has been no response and my username remains the same. I checked the Wikipedia page with this information, but I am still not satisfied with the information I got. I request the Teahouse-editors to help me out. Assassin7177 (talk) 15:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assassin7177, it looks promising but FWIW everyone is a volunteer and sometimes things take time. It looks like you only made the request 3 days ago. Just be patient. —valereee (talk) 16:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New to all of this...Creating a wikipedia for my client..any suggestions??

How do I create a wikipedia for my client? Parisontitusbrand (talk) 15:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Parisontitusbrand, please see Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Help:Your first article - this pages both contain important details and help for you to get started. Be aware that you will still be subject to the same review process as everyone else :) Ed talk! 16:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming articles

How do you rename articles? Piulin (talk) 16:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Click on the move button in the top right corner. You can also move it to other sections here (such as from article to draftspace). Le Panini (Talk tome?) 16:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Piulin, however, the button will only appear once you are autoconfirmed. Dylsss(talk • contribs) 16:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ok, thanks. Piulin (talk) 18:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Piulin: If you need help with a page move, post a request at WP:RM RudolfRed (talk) 17:22, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
thx Piulin (talk) 18:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

mohammad bahrani long pendin

I've created the page Mohammad bahrani for almost 8 weeks but it is still pending. I am new here so can you tell me haw long it takes? is it normal? and if so how long it can take? نارا دلجو (talk) 17:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It will be reviewed when it gets reviewed; 2 months is about average given how backlogged AfC is. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 17:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Link: Draft:Mohammad Bahrani
@نارا دلجو: FWIW, the fact that it was not quickly declined is usually good – that usually means that it doesn't fail on any major grounds (notability, copyright, etc.). However, having said that, I see that you have several references to IMDb, which is generally not considered to be a reliable source here (see WP:RS/P#IMDb). I would suggest removing those cites and finding better sources for the relevant statements. Also, while English-language sources are not required, as a practical matter, the lack of them can also contribute to the time to review, since it limits the likely reviewers to Farsi-speakers. Lastly, I'd encourage you to improve the references to a consistent format with as many of the important details as possible (author, title, website or publisher, date) (see WP:ERB for a quick primer on using the cite tool, which can also make it easier to get the right-to-left and left-to-right markers in the right places (cite 29 seems confused in this regard). I hope this helps. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HELP! making a article on an underground, relatively new record label

Good day, I have a question about my article.

It is about a new independent record label Hamage Records. (see draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hamage_Records) Previously, I asked how to submit my article for publishing. I was told the page most likely would end up being deleted. I have searched everywhere and there aren't a lot of sources on this label currently (it is understandable, as they are just starting up) except for youtube links, links to their music, and links to some interviews done by their artists. I would like to make sure this page is top notch, as I would like to help the label build a bigger fanbase. Is there anyone here who can give me tips or help me find ways to make this page more creditable in the eyes of Wiki?

Many thanks Musicnewgen3ration (talk) 18:03, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Musicnewgen3ration, Wikipedia articles require significant coverage in reliable sources. If there is no such coverage, the record label likely isn't notable by Wikipedia standards. This means the record label isn't ready for a Wikipedia article yet. —valereee (talk) 18:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Musicnewgen3ration, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that if "there aren't a lot of sources on this label currently" then it does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article is possible. Like many people, you probably have the misconception that Wikipedia has anything at all to do with telling the world about something new: Wikipedia is only interested in what independent people have published about a subject (that is, people not connected with the subject), and if there is little or no such material then there is nothing which can be put in the article. "Help[ing] to build a bigger fanbase" is an example of promotion, which is forbidden on Wikipedia. In the case of your label, it is probably also TOOSOON. Please do not spend any more time and effort on this, unless you can find at least three places where people who have no connection with Hamage, and have not been prompted or fed informtion by or on behalf of Hamage, have published significant coverage of it in reliable sources: if you do, you will be wasting your own time, and that of anybody who reviews your attempt. --ColinFine (talk) 18:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

a move button disappeared

I cannot find a MOVE button. I've been banned for 24h but it supposed to be gone by now but I still cannot see it. I want to publish my sandbox content and I need help. Thank You in advance. Jaroslaw Cichon (talk) 18:22, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you intend to move your draft into articlespace then you accept all the consequences of doing so, including article deletion (if it isn't up to snuff) and/or being blocked (if it's suspected you are a mercenary hiding their colours). —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 18:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, Jaroslaw Cichon. You do not have a Move button because your account is not yet autoconfirmed: it has not existed for four days. But even if you have, please do not move your sandbox to mainspace: this will be a waste of your time and anybody's who has to deal with it, because your sandbox is absolutely nothing like a Wikipedia article. It has no references, and therefore does not establish that the subject is notable; and it hardly says anything about the subject anyway. Please read your first article in order to find out how to go about the very difficult task of creating an acceptable Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk) 18:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jaroslaw Cichon, You're not autoconfirmed, so you can't move pages yet, and even if you did move it, I would nominate it for speedy deletion criteria A1, because in its current form, it isn't possible to tell what you're actually talking about. Also you haven't been blocked on this account, please don't create alternative accounts to evade blocks as that can be a form of socking. Dylsss(talk • contribs) 18:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recreate the same page

How can I recreate the same page. As a new user I wasn't aware of title line I thought that I misspelled the case sensative letters. Rockstar250802 (talk) 18:30, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest. You are related (family) or associated (boss, work, neighbor, good friend) with the subject at hand therefore your view could be reflected in the article and not what the acceptable sources report.104.35.254.90 (talk) 19:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to PEROSH

Hi, I'm new! I've spent all afternoon editing the page about PEROSH and adding lots of citations - it came up with a warning before that there weren't enough references. I checked each edit as I went along. Now all the changes have vanished. What can I do about this?  PEROSH2 (talk) 18:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you had a number of edits removed as they were made with a conflict of interest. I'd take a look at the guidance on conflicts with particular reference to declaring them properly and then making appropriate edit requests on the article's talk page. --Paultalk20:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi yes I've had a mail to say I have to make a declaration that it is paid content. It's not but I'll see if I can construct a declaration that is truthful - ie doesn't say it is paid content. I used the username PEROSH2 to make my affiliation crystal clear. I'm still trying to find my way around the system! I'm on holiday and can't spend much more time on this so if that doesn't work will give up. As anyone who looks at my edits will see, I've been adding in lots of external references (ie things not published by PEROSH) which is what the existing page has marked up as being short of. PEROSH is a partnership of national research institutes for occupational health and safety. It's vision is use of scientific evidence to inform the work of policymakers at national, European and global level.So for example at the moment scientists in the member institutes are providing scientific evidence that is being used to inform the national covid response. I guess a partnership of scientists set up to share knowledge between national institutes, work together on projects, and with a vision on use of scientific evidence to save workers lives and protect their health just doesn't fit the boxes wiki has. Will have a go at the declaration if I can navigate to the page. Alternatively if one of the wiki editors can go through and decide if they want to add in any of the external references I've cited (things like publications in the British Medical Journal on occupational health) that would be great MT at PEROSH (talk) 12:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC) .[reply]

What is a COI?

Hi! I was wondering what a COI means? I tried to edit a Wikipedia article about my grandfather (who is an artist) since it’s a stub but my editing was removed since I couldn't provide a source. Diorthecat (talk) 18:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disregard : Conflict of interest. You are related (family) or associated (boss, work, neighbor, good friend) with the subject at hand therefore your view could be reflected in the article and not what the acceptable sources report.104.35.254.90 (talk) 19:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Diorthecat: There is some information on your user talk page about what a conflict of interest (COI) means in the context of Wikipedia. Also keep in mind that just because something is true, it does not mean that it is appropriate to add it to an encyclopedia – for instance, family members of a notable person are usually not mentioned in the article about that person, unless they are also notable (and never if there is no source for the information.) Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 20:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Titles or text

What is the style of WP concerning national football teams names/article names. Should it be a literal translation of the name from the original into English or an attempt to disregard that one not be of that nation to be included therefore to call it any particular European or South American country name such as Mexican for Mexico when the name is not in the original "can" but "co" or Brazil when it is Brasileira or Brazilian? Thank you.104.35.254.90 (talk) 19:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC) 104.35.254.90 (talk) 19:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP, welcome. The most common name in English sources is typically the chosen title. More specific guidance can be found at WP:UE. Regards, Zindor (talk) 21:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Capital Punishment

Hey- I'd like to get some feedback on Talk:Capital punishment. Is there a Wikipedia policy rule against using colors in a map on Wikipedia in away that is not neutral? Geographyinitiative (talk) 19:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC) Geographyinitiative (talk) 19:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

illustrating statistics by color is not a bias. Facts are not always pretty.104.35.254.90 (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Geographyinitiative, I'm not sure what you're asking. Can you clarify what you mean by "colors in a map on Wikipedia in a way that is not neutral"? —valereee (talk) 21:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As the OP says on the linked talk page, they object to the color scheme in File:Capital_punishment_in_the_world.svg, where countries that practice the death penalty are in red, countries that have statutes allowing it are in orange, and countries that ban it are in blue. While I frankly doubt that the color scheme amounts to bias, there would be a case for better accessibility to go from darker to lighter colors (or the other way around) down the list of legends. Right now, both extremes (death penalty allowed or banned) are the darkest colors, which makes it hard to interpretate for color-blind readers (to see a black and white version, go to [2] -> "contrast" tab -> desaturate page). TigraanClick here to contact me 08:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Christina Borum

I just want a wiki page. As a published author, I know I am not famous but I think that once you google my name I come up no one else. My books come up, my information comes up and that should be enough for a page right? Christina35221 (talk) 20:00, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Christina35221: See WP:NAUTHOR for the guidelines on articles about authors. If you fit, you can make request at WP:RA RudolfRed (talk) 20:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is a declined autobiography here Draft:Christina Borum with zero reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 20:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, existence is not a criteria for inclusion in WP. It is "notability" based on a specific type of information, recognized authorities that publish very credible news and information. Get the national and international press to comment about you, your industry or profession, not merely what can be self published.104.35.254.90 (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, not to nitpick, @104.35.254.90:, but there's no such thing as A criteria. There might be many criteria. Or ther might be A criteriON. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:08, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, Christina35221, nobody in the entire world has a Wikipedia article, not even Jimbo Wales. Wikipedia has articles about notable people (and other notable subjects). If Wikipedia at some time has an article about you, it will not belong to you, it will not be for your benefit, you will not have control over the content, it may or may not say what you would like it to say, and it will be almost entirely based on what people with no connection to you have published about you, not on what you say or want to say. That is because Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a publicity outliet. --ColinFine (talk) 21:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

im just a kin *Sobs*

 Spazzin321 (talk) 20:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, noted. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Zindor (talk) 20:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm new!

I've spent all afternoon editing the page about PEROSH and adding lots of citations - it came up with a warning before that there weren't enough references. I checked each edit as I went along. Now all the changes have vanished. What can I do about this? MT at PEROSH (talk) 21:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 MT at PEROSH (talk) 21:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MT at PEROSH, so, it looks like you might be someone who works at PEROSH and have been assigned to write on Wikipedia about it? —valereee (talk) 21:50, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, apparently all my edits were removed by a user hiding behind the name 'Tradescantal'. Why does wiki allow this?

 MT at PEROSH (talk) 21:34, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 197.220.84.76 (talk) 21:42, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MT at PEROSH: Because your edits were seen as promotional.
Before you do anything else, disclose your employment on your user page with the following template: {{paid|user=MT at PEROSH|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}
After that, try to just make edit requests at Talk:PEROSH instead of actually editing the article.
If you must edit the article for some really important reason (like your boss is holding a gun to your head or something), write as if you worked for a rival company. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:55, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Canis dirus trouble

I am sorry, but I am very annoyed and worried. On the Canis page, the list of species did not include C. dirus, and when I added it as a species, I later got a notification that I may be blocked from editing if I did anything else bad. Can you help me? Procyon 2.0 (talk) 21:51, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Procyon 2.0: The word "extant" means "still around." It does not mean "extinct," which means "not around." ExtAnt and extInCt are not the same word. Dire wolves are extinct, not extant. That's why your edit was reverted as vandalism. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that that was why your edit was reverted, Procyon 2.0, but I cannot see in the least why William Harris warned you for vandalism. It looks to me like a good-faith, but slightly mistaken edit. The earlier edits to Liopleurodon, Kepler-17b and Betelgeuse also look like inappropriate but good-faith changes by somebody who is keen to contribute, but rushes into editing without learning how Wikipedia works. Care to comment, William? --ColinFine (talk) 22:24, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I concur with your assessment Colin, and have apologised on Talk:Procyon for my over-reaction. The earlier string of escalating warnings on that Talk page were not all for vandalism, and your observation about Betelgeuse not actually being vandalism is correct. William Harris (talk) 07:54, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, my article was not approved as my submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Can you please guide me, what will be reliable sources for me as a film director and producer? I have many articles, interviews, and film pages to prove it. Thank you, Patrik. Dracekmiky (talk) 22:50, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dracekmiky. You have the usual sort of problems of new editors who plunge straight into the difficult task of creating their first article without spending a few weeks or months learning their way around Wikipedia first, and improving some of our six million existing articles. See common sourcing mistakes specifically, and your first article more generally. Also, given the fact that you claim File:Patrik Krivanek.jpg as your own work, what is your relationship with Krivanek? You almost certainly have a conflict of interest, and perhaps also are a paid editor. If you are the latter, you must make a formal declaration of the fact, and understand that a Wikipedia article is not for the benefit of its subject, and most of the sources must be wholly independent of the subject of the article: Wikipedia has basically no interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves. --ColinFine (talk) 00:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox

What is that one "This user has been on Wikipedia for" userbox, and does it update automatically? Le Panini (Talk tome?) 23:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Wikipedian For. Enter your start date in the parameters and it'll do the rest. Zindor (talk) 23:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft feedback: A Delay is Better (album by Pamela Z)

I noticed that only solo album by Pamela Z didn't have an Article and so I made a draft [3]and Talk[4] for it.

I'd love your feedback here or on the Talk page and absolutely welcome your edits. I haven't done an album Article for anything yet so I especially appreciate any experience someone might have.

Thanks! TheMusicExperimental (talk) 23:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TheMusicExperimental. The draft you submitted to WP:AFC was accepted; so, A Delay is Better is now an article. Being accepted via AFC is usually (but not always) a good indication that the subject matter most likely meets WP:GNG and is deemed Wikipdedia notable, but it doesn't necessarily mean there aren't still issues which need addressing. So, you might want to ask someone from WP:ALBUMS to take a look at the article and assess it; generally, WikiProjects are a good place to ask for specific feedback because that's where you're likely to find editors who might be familiar with a certain subject matter or type of article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:45, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - what is the problem with the intro for the article of Fadolín? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fadol%C3%ADn

? It says the intro is unsourced - but there are three sources, including the New York Times, a curated new music publication, and the American Viola Society.


This article is modeled on the article for the 5-string violin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-string_violin

The only difference here is that it is about a six string violin.

Thank you. ZabarSafari (talk) 00:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ZabarSafari, and welcome to the Teahouse. No, the difference is in the quality and independence of the citations: and that is far more important than almost anything else about the article. I haven't looked at them all (if you formatted them as citations rather than bare URLs they would be easier to evaluate - see REFB) - but the ones I have looked at are either not independent (classicalmpr.org, American Viola Society - and the latter is annoying without a page number) or just passing mentions (NYTimes). Please see WP:CSMN. --ColinFine (talk) 00:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
None of ref 1, 2 or 3 confirm the sentence "The name "fadolín" was etymologically derived by Ljova (Lev Zhurbin) as a portmanteau of FA-DO-vioLIN). David notMD (talk) 01:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As a subscriber to the New York Times, I am always interested in looking at their coverage of a topic. This is what they had to say about this topic: "There was also a pensive piece for fadolin (a six-string violin) ..." That is a sentence fragment, or what is commonly referred to by Wikipedia editors as a "passing mention". What is required is significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. The General notability guideline says that:
"Significant coverage addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material."
So, the draft article needs references to reliable, independent sources that discuss this fadolín topic in detail. One reference in the draft describes the word as a neologism. Please be aware that Wikipedia does not accept articles about recently coined words. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree you -- the issue is that the sources for fadolín are right now rather disparate. The true origins of the name "fadolín" are that Ljova had a "baby-naming contest" for his new 6-string viola in 2008 (see [1]) and the winning answer was FAMIola -- a viola with a FA and a MI. By connection, if six-string viola-sized instrument with added FA and MI strings was a FA-MI-(vi)OLA, a violin with extra FA and DO strings became a FA-DO-(vio)LÍN. This has not been explained elsewhere, and the sourcing is murky.

However, the instrument builder Eric Aceto has built 26 of these instruments (by his count), and the naming convention of calling a 6-string violin a "fadolín" is becoming more common, see for example [2] or [3] and more generally [4] --- so yes, most of the work is being spread on Facebook, though fadolín has also received mentions in the New York Times, and also in the New Yorker [5]. It has also been used in an academic context at Princeton University [6]. The body of work for the instrument is rapidly expanding.

Thank you for your guidance and patience! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZabarSafari (talkcontribs) 17:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

How does WP:BLP1E apply to Sirhan_Sirhan? Charles Juvon (talk) 00:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Charles Juvon: as far as I can tell, it does not, because it fails point 3, just like the example of the Reagan shooter. RudolfRed (talk) 02:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How can I access my rejected article?

Hello! I submitted an article recently, which was declined. Is there any chance I can access it again to make some changes to it? It tells me to go to Draft:Kateulina and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, but whenever I go to it, it mentions that my article has been moved or deleted. What can I do about this? Kateulina (talk) 02:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kateulina: You can try asking at WP:REFUND to have it restored so you can fix it, but that request might be declined based on the reason it was deleted. RudolfRed (talk) 02:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@RudolfRed: Normally this is OK to suggest, but G11 deletions fall outside the scope of WP:REFUND. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kateulina. If you click on Draft:Kateulina, you'll see that it was deleted per speedy deletion criterion G11 by and administrator named Jimfbleak. This means that you can't access the content any longer. If you'd like more specific details as to why the draft was deleted you can ask them at User talk:Jimfbleak; however, when a draft is deleted by an administrator for such a reason, it's usually because the administrator felt that there were so many serious problems associated with the draft that it would be impossible to fix the draft so that it's in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citation changes

If a citation URL redirects to a new URL (eg. an organisation updates its website URL although the content of web page is still relevant) - is it best to add a new citation for the new URL next to the old citation, or should the existing citation be updated to include new URL and retrieval date? There may also be updates to the associated Wikipedia text based on the updated webpage used in the citation. Gobiidae (talk) 03:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gobiidae. Wikipedia doesn't necessarily delete no longer accessible citations for the reasons given in WP:DEADREF. So, in my opinion, if the "old" url is no longer accessible, then you can probably treat it as a "deadlink" and try to find an archived version of it. You can then update the WP:ACCESSDATE (i.e. "retrieval date") parameter and other relevant parameters accordingly. If you're absolutely certain that the old source and the new source are identical not only in content but in the context used and that only the url has changed, then you probably could simply just replace the url and tweak the other citation parameters as needed. If the old source and the new source are different, however, then it might be better to cite them separately. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Marchjuly --Gobiidae (talk) 07:17, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My article was declined

My first article was declined yesterday. I request the Teahouse editors to lend me a helping hand by doing necessary edits for my article, as it is really important for me--Assassin7177 (talk) 04:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC) Assassin7177 (talk) 04:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was declined by an pretty experienced editor named DGG for the following reason: "This is a PR notice for a non notable youtubechannel. The references a re usual PR that is found in newspapers". DGG is not only an AFC reviewer, but is also an administrator, an oversighter and a checkuser. In other words, DGGs is someone who has been around quite a long time who has an established track record of having a really good understanding of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The Wikipedia community only confers such user rights on editors that it fully trusts to do what's best for Wikipedia. So, it might be best for you to ask DGG on his user talk page to clarify why he declined the draft and what he thinks is needed for the draft to be ultimately accepted.
You've asked about this draft previously at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1081#Help me improve my article, Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1081#Help me improve my article_2, Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1081#Changing the title of an article, but what you seem to not be understanding is that Wikipedia editors can't make a subject Wikipedia notable through editing. It makes no difference how well written or formatted an article is if the subject hasn't received the significant coverage in reliable sources that it needs to establish its Wikipedia notability. While the subject of this draft might be quite important to you, it's still going to have be something that's deemed Wikipedia notable to Wikipedia's readers for an article to be created about it. It could be that this is simply a case of WP:TOOSOON and that an article just can't be created about this subject at this particular time. It might also be a case where those wanting to create an article about this subject need to start looking to look for some place other than Wikipedia to create content about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:51, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Marchjuly (talk) Thank you for your advise. I have asked DGG about it and am expecting response to come fast. But still, could you comment on my information provided without concentrating on the subject, as in that way, I could atleast be sure that my style of writing is proprer
Assassin7177, writing is OK while notability is lacking.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is it considerable as a reliable source ?

I found [5] it was an article This which was deleted because it was having promotional publications, though I found [6] from Dinesh Lal Yadav so my question is shall I consider it as reliable or promotional? as there is no bylineDtt1Talk 07:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question-2 - if there is an article which is on a reliable source but is an interview so can it be considered as reliable, can we use it ?
If I understand Q1 correctly, DJ Felix was deleted via AfD even though it had a ZEENEWS reference, and you are now asking if a different ZEENEWS article can be a reliable source reference for a different person. Answering requires someone who knows reputation of Zee Media Bureau. David notMD (talk) 08:11, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Even if an interview is published in what's generally regarded as a reliable website/magazine/newspaper, what the interviewee says in the interview normally isn't usable. See Wikipedia:Interviews. As for Zee News, unfortunately it goes unmentioned in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, and there's no clear and recent discussion in the archives of WP:RSN. I suggest that you ask about it on WP:RSN. My own reaction to what's said in the article Zee News (and particularly from the content of what's now its seventh endnote) would be to avoid it as a source for any material that might have political ramifications. -- Hoary (talk) 08:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New York Times articles (pre 1970's)

Hello! I am doing research on a topic that is discussed in older New York Times articles (pre 1970's). I can see some of the preview text and the date, but I cannot see the author's name. It seems that only current subscribers can see the author's name. Are there editors who are NYT subscribers that can look up the author information? This must be a frequent problem. The Times is such a valuable resource for citation. Thank you! Thriley (talk) 07:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thriley. You can try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City or Wikipedia:WikiProject Newspapers and perhaps you'll find someone who has access to the NYT's archives. You might also want to consider asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:03, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! I will consult those pages. Best, Thriley (talk) 08:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thriley, I suggest that you visit Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library/Databases/Requests#New York Times to see if the access described there via ProQuest would help you. I have been searching NYT via ProQuest for several months, and I have found it to be very useful. Eddie Blick (talk) 23:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle

How to revert someone's edits; I mean how can I revert someone's edits which appear disruptive? And How to use and enable Twinkle to my account Abhishek Kasaudhan 123 ( talk) 08:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to revert someone's edits: Help:Reverting. You can enable Twinkle in your Preferences, section "Gadgets". Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Abhishek Kasaudhan 123: Remember to include a good edit summary when you revert someone! For Twinkle, if you don't revert for vandalism, the gadget will have a pop-up asking for your edit summary.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 11:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there; I'm still a bit confused about one thing that sometimes while reverting someone's edits, I saw people mentioning something like this, "Undid revision 95836362 by XYZ." So, do they manage to it manually/on their own; or some special tools help them. In addition to, if there are such tools, then how can I enable them to my account and use them for reverting disruptive edits? Abhishek Kasaudhan 123 ( talk) 13:16, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Abhishek Kasaudhan 123: When you look at the "View history" tab of an article to see the edit history, each edit has an "undo" link at the end. See WP:UNDO. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there; I can't find the undo option anywhere! Or maybe its not being enabled to my account; if it is so, I would love to see the procedure of unlocking it. Please help me through out this. Thanks Abhishek Kasaudhan 123 ( talk) 11:46, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to understand whether or not it's okay to use a company logo or not

Hi all! So I've recently started developing the page Stonewell Cider. I know it's a long way from finished, but I have plenty of stuff that I'm going to tack on in the coming weeks before I submit it for publication. My question is whether or not I can put its logo on the page or not. I read WP:LOGO but honestly couldn't really make heads or tails of it. Thanks in advance! Xx78900 (talk) 10:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Xx78900 Hello and welcome. As I understand it(and you might wish to wait for some other opinions), company logos can be used as fair use, but must be uploaded to Wikipedia directly and not Commons(where fair use images aren't allowed). 331dot (talk) 10:18, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Thanks for the reply! I think I'll upload the image then as the page remains only a draft for now anyway. If someone comes along with a good reason for deleting it, I'll do so. Cheers! Xx78900 (talk) 10:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Xx78900: Please see WP:DRAFTS#Preparing drafts for more details, but non-free content cannot be used in drafts. If you add such a file to a draft, it will be promptly removed per non-free content use criterion #9. My suggestion to you would be to first get the draft you're working on approved, and only then start worrying about adding a logo for the company to it. It's matters not whether the draft has a logo in it; it only matter whether the company you're trying to create an article about is deemed to meet Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, Xx89000. Your question is like "Please tell me how I can build a turret on this house that I haven't yet found a plot of land to build it on. --ColinFine (talk) 12:54, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Marchjuly: Thanks for the reply! And cheers I'll leave off the logo for now then no worries, I did read through but I didn't clock hat drafts didn't count as articles, my bad. I'm fairly confident it will be considered notable when it comes through as it is discussed at length in a variety of national newspapers so I think it will pass. I'll hold off on the logo though. Cheers. And @ColinFine: I'm not sure my question was quite as extreme as you made out, nor deserving of a rude reply.Xx78900 (talk) 16:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Xx78900 By the way, Draft:Stonewell Cider goes to your draft whereas Stonewell Cider does not. And, in my opinion, minor/local organization awards do not contribute to notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. David notMD (talk) 14:38, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply and the advice, I'm still new to the whole thing! Yes, the smaller awards may not be notable, but I felt they were worthy of inclusion anyway, as they can be sourced. I have multiple sources from a variety of national newspapers discussing the company (or at least its roducts) in a non trivial manner, so notability shouldn't be an issue by the time I bring the article up to a stage where I feel comfortable submitting it. Cheers. Xx78900 (talk) 16:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Trump

Your write up about Donald Trump seems very negative compared to Barack Obama or Joe Biden. Why is that? 90.253.183.164 (talk) 10:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Articles on Wikipedia are not positive or negative, they simply summarize what independent reliable sources say about the topic. If you have changes to suggest that are sourced to independent reliable sources, please offer them at Talk:Donald Trump. Note that Wikipedia does not claim to be free of bias; the sources are presented to the readers so they can evaluate them and judge them for themselves. 331dot (talk) 10:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Articles on Wikipedia are not SUPPOSED to be positive or negative. Articles on Wikipedia are also written by human beings who, with the best of intentions, will still at least HAVE their individual biases and beliefs. I haven't read the articles in question here, but I hope no reasonable person would think that positivity/negativity could never happen in Wikipedia. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:19, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AzseicsoK I should clarify that the intention is that articles are not positive or negative- and if the OP feels changes are needed that enhance that goal, they should propose them. However, if coverage in independent reliable sources is "negative", any Wikipedia article about the covered topic will be "negative" as well, irrespective of the biases of the editors. Article content will not be whitewashed. 331dot (talk) 13:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, I also note now that you DID make clear from the start that " ... Wikipedia does not claim to be free of bias ...," a caveat that I overlooked when I first looked to comment. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AzseicsoK, to argue that everyone has a bias is not to say that the tone could be neutralized. Plus you're arguing in a professional tone to someone new to the Wikipedia customs. You know how people look at Wikipedia outside. "It's editable, don't trust it!" "It's not written by academics." "It's not a research paper!" "It sounds like a fandom site." When meeting such people, talk nicely-- after all, that's what Teahouse is. GeraldWL 17:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Gerald Waldo Luis actually, you make me see that I wasn't clear in my intent in my original statement. I wasn't talking to the new person; I was responding to the person who answered the new person. (And my second comment--on reflection, worded very badly) was meant to acknowledge that I didn't read all the way to the end of that second person's answer before I responded. I was picking apart something--a bit from the wrong sided, I admit. If I came off as "not nice" to the new person, I apologize. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need general advice about adding a character image

Hello! I have been busy rewriting the page Lloyd Garmadon in the hope of raising the article class from Start to GA. I would like to include an image of the character, but as I have never done this before I am concerned about copyright. There is an image of the character in Wikimedia Commons (File:Lloyd.webp) but it has been nominated for deletion. Should I attempt to find a suitable free image or avoid adding an image altogether? Any general image advice would be very much appreciated. Thank you so much! Fieryninja (talk) 10:35, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fieryninja. Wikimedia Commons doesn't accept any type of fair use per c:COM:FAIR; so, unless the image you want to use can be verified to meet c:Commons:Licensing, it will be near impossible for Commons to keep it. Wikipedia does, however, accept certain types of fair use content uploaded locally as non-free content; however, the policy on using such content is quite restrictive. For fictional character images, it kind of depends on the nature of the character. If the character is basically the same appearance as the actor who is playing the part and the actor is still living, then it can sometimes be hard to justify using a non-free image because a free-equivalent image of the actor from around the same period of time is simply often considered acceptable to serve the same encylopeadic purposes as a non-free one per WP:FREER; however, if the character appears in special make up or in a special costume, then sometimes a non-free image of the actor as they appear in character is allowed. For the most part, non-free images of animated characters tend to be allowed since basically there's no way for a free equivalent to be created or found absent the original copyright holder of the character doing so. Such images are generally OK as long as they are used for primary identification purposes either a the top of or in the main infobox of a stand-alone article about the character, but much harder to justify when they are used in other articles or in other ways. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your response. It has really helped me understand the general concept of fair use. I have studied the fair use guidelines and conclude that as the character is animated and bears no resemblance to any living person and cannot be replaced by a free image, then using a non-free image is acceptable under the criteria of fair use. I have also done further research in terms of the copyright guidelines published by Lego, which is the copyright holder. In their Fair Play Brochure they make the following statement about use of their copyrighted material under the heading Misuse on the Internet, "The LEGO Group owns copyrights to all of the building instructions, publications and photographs used in its catalogs, on its packages and websites. Copying, scanning and distributing these materials in the internet would be an infringement of the LEGO Group’s copyrights. Nevertheless, we permit very limited reproduction of our copyrighted material on websites for non-commercial purposes only, e.g. posting on a website to exchange information or making fair use commentary)." I believe therefore that is acceptable to use an image of the character that has been published on the Lego website for the purpose of illustrating the character in the infobox. I welcome any feedback from contributors on this subject before uploading it. Thanks Fieryninja (talk) 11:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What to do with dead links?

What would be the first action taken when seeing permanent dead links? Should it be removed immediately or taken care of in an alternative way? And si there a difference between "broken" and "dead" links? Apollogone (talk) 10:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC) Apollogone (talk) 10:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Links taggged as permanentely dead should not be removed. Instead, they should be replaced with an alternative link that is working and supporting the content in question. AFAIK the terms "broken" and "dead" are often mixed up, howewer, "dead" is used to adress more permanent failures, while "broken" referes to links that are temporarely unavailable due to server overloads, temporary server misconfiguaration (such as expired SSL certs) or similar reasons. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing A Page?!?

Hi, I am looking to publish a page that has been in my drafts for about a week now. I do not have a publish button, although I have been on wiki for some time now. How do I get the page reviewed and published?

Do I need to allow more time? Correctioncontributer (talk) 11:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Correctioncontributer Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added the appropriate information to your draft to allow you to submit it for a review. However, if you were to do so, I think that it would be rejected. This is because it does little more than tell of the company and what it does. Wikipedia articles (not just a "page") must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Brief mentions, name drops, announcements of routine business, interviews, and other primary sources do not establish notability. Please see Your First Article for more information.
If you are associated with this company in some way, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you could be required to make. 331dot (talk) 12:03, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hi Correctioncontributer. Drafts aren't automatically published; you either (1) need to do so yourself or (2) submit the draft to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review. I wouldn't suggest you try and do (1) unless you've got an established track record of creating viable articles. Lots of new editors try (1) only to see their work tagged or nominated for deletion (sometimes rather quickly) because it's not considered to meet the basic criteria for a Wikipedia article. So, (2) might be your best option since it will given an experienced AfC reviewer a chance to look over the draft and assess whether it has what it takes to be a viable article. If the reviewer feels it does, they will move the draft to the WP:MAINSPACE; if not, the reviewer almost always explains why and sometimes even suggests things that need to be approved. Having a draft declined by a reviewer is not the end of the world and you can resubmit for another review again as long as you don't keep resubmitting the same declined version. Since you're draft seems to be about a company, you might want to look at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for some general idea as to what types of things an AfC reviewer is going to be looking for when they assess the draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extinct or extant

Hi, it is me again, Procyon 2.0, with another question. I know the difference between extant and extinct, extant meaning in existence, and extinct meaning the opposite.But how do I mark a species as extinct? Procyon 2.0 (talk) 12:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Procyon 2.0: this is about your edits to Canis, yes? The point is that you added the species to a list headed "Extant species". It would need a separate heading "Extinct species". I don't know if there is a special way to do that: you'd have to look at Template:automatic taxobox. --ColinFine (talk) 13:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The dodo is (famously) extinct. Go to the article dodo, prepare to edit it, look in the infobox, copy the relevant property–value pairs, copy them into the article you want to edit, get your browser to go back from editing dodo. -- Hoary (talk) 13:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SandBox Content

Hi Teahouse, I would like to ask your guidance on what to write in a sandbox? maybe you can share some samples.

Thanks Dil Dilthor (talk) 13:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The point of the sandbox it to write, or do, whatever you want with it. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 13:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
However, its a good place to start draft articles before they are submitted for review. Wikipedia:Requested articles is a place where articles are sorted into a category, so pick one that interests you. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 13:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But keep in mind that certain policies, such as copyright and harassment, still applies to the sandbox. You shouldn't also take benefit of the sandbox to make Wikipedia a promotional or social media platform. GeraldWL 13:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I use my Sandbox to be sure that I have properly created a reference before pasting it into an article. And if I intend to revise a section of an article, I copy it into my Sandbox, work there, then paste back. David notMD (talk) 14:44, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. I use it to transform paragraphs or infoboxes that would take much time (i.e. the sidebar at COVID-19 pandemic), or to make drafts.

Grammar Flaws

When one of the most important issues in Wikipedia is related to grammar issues, and many articles have clear grammatical flaws, why correct these flaws faced the reverted and the message of managers to not correct these flaws? Arvinwikiedit (talk) 14:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While you did fix some grammatical issues, you did introduce wording that wasn't correct in some cases. Instead of manually going through and fixing the changes, the users just revert the whole thing. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 14:20, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You have been advised on your Talk page that in many instances the grammar or spelling was correct before your changes, or there may be a choice, with both corrrect. For example, see Serial comma. David notMD (talk) 14:50, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TFWiki.net

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:TFWiki.net This is my first article which I am currently working on. Could someone help me build up this page. It's a very important website that deserves a page. Nosecone6133 (talk) 14:25, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nosecone6133. Absolutely the first thing you need to do, before you write another word, is find at least three places where people who have no connection with TFWiki have chosen to publish a signficant amount - at least a few paragraphs - about it in places like major newspapers or books from reputable publishers - no fan-sites, wikis, or blogs, and nothing self-published. If you can do that, then you can write an article, by forgetting everything you know about the site and summarising what these independent commentaries say about it. If you cannot find three such sources, then the site does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and any further effort you spend on it will be a waste of your time. If you haven't already read your first article, that would be a smart move. --ColinFine (talk) 14:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosecone6133: Also, just to clarify, nobody and nothing "deserves a page" on Wikipedia. Articles here are not for the benefit of the subject. It may be that Wikipedia and its global readers would benefit from an article, summarizing what the sources that Colin wrote about above have written about the subject. It's important to keep this distinction in mind when choosing sources and writing an article here. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My article gets rejected again

What do i have to do to register a new page, concerning real businesses, and institutions that operate in my city Tirana, Albania ? Brenton Kotorri (talk) 14:38, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Brenton Kotorri: I assume this referes to Draft:Balfin Real Estate & Hospitality. You would realy need at least three independent (no interviews or press releases) reliable sources (no user-generated content) with significant coverage (not yust passing mentions) about the subject. Please also note that "declined"!="rejected". "declined" means "Eh, this is not ready for mainspace. Please improve it." while "rejected" means "Sorry, this cannot be a Wikipedia article, please stop wasting everyone's time". Your draft was declined. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:54, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see, however, that a draft on this subject was declined earlier, and then deleted as promotional. Be aware that a mention of a company in a list, or the results of a Google search do not qualify as qualifying references. David notMD (talk) 14:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brenton Kotorri (talkcontribs) 09:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can I downloaded music on Wikipedia?

Please I do not know if I can download music on Wikipedia Mhiz Destiny (talk) 15:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more specific in your meaning. Britmax (talk) 15:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What? Le Panini (Talk tome?) 15:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Download music "from" Wikipedia? or Upload music "to" Wikipedia? Maineartists (talk) 15:33, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, according to your user page, Wikipedia is not social media. It's an encylopedia, for information. You can't download music here. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 15:34, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Technically you can download some old music (some of Beethoven's works or some national anthems for example) from Wikimedia Commons if it is there. But you definitely can't download newer music (if I recall correctly, the page on Oppa Gangnam Style has a short excerpt of the song as it is deemed to be important for the article, but technically it is non-free media and is hosted on Wikipedia). 45.251.33.192 (talk) 05:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Byte deducted

Hi I'm Mhiz Destiny i reverted someone's edit and my byte was deducted I do not know if I did the right thing or not please I need advise Mhiz Destiny (talk) 15:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be the edit made on [7]Jerusalema. You removed an external hyperlink, thinking it was a typo. Read up on the article linked to learn how it works and how to script it. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 15:39, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources

Are LinkedIn, IMBd and Filmibeat reliable sources Atlantis77177 (talk) 16:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LinkedIn and IMDB are definitely not, although we often include IMDB in an external links section i.e. not as a source. See WP:RSPSOURCES for the rationale behind each. I'm not familiar with filmibeat, but it would really come down to where they are sourcing their material from. --Paultalk16:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
IMO Filmibeat looks very doubtful for at least anything WP:BLP-related. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Own page

Can someone change their own wikipedia like age or hometown etc Roberts Hogg (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Roberts Hogg, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to people editing the Wikipedia article about them (which is not their "own": it does not in any way belong to them) then the answer is No, they are strongly discouraged from directly editing the article, except to revert obvious vandalism (but some people interpret "vandalism" as meaning "anything I don't want in that article": this is not the meaning). People with a conflict of interest, including the subject of an article, are welcome to make an edit request on the article's talk page. See AUTOPROB for more. --ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question For Wikipedia Editors (reposted because I forgot the subject line)

This website is so incredibly wild to me. You have hundreds, if not more, professionals and experts creating articles about the most menial subjects. Almost every conversation I've seen in talk pages is formatted like a professional letter, and as I've been led to believe, 99% of the people who work on Wikipedia don't get any money for their work. Which brings me to my question, directed towards the more long-term or senior editors and admins here: Why? How did you get started here? Why do you keep going? If you have one, what's your real-life job, and does that job affect the work you do here? Do you do this because you enjoy it, or because someone needs to, and you can't stop? Do you see yourself still doing this in five years? Ten? When do you retire from a job that has no boss, no pay, and no hours? *How* do you retire from something you can't get away from?

Thank you for your time, Locke TheLockeDoctor 16:33, 27 October 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thelockedoctor (talkcontribs)

Hello, Thelockedoctor. I can only answer for myself: I have been editing here since 20062005; until 2011 I was also in full-time employment, but I retired then. I do it because I love being part of a huge, non-commercial, collaborative project; and I like helping people (and "non-commercial" is actually one of the most important points for me). I also volunteer at a local tourist site, I'm a trustee of a charity, and I was one of the founders of a company which for twenty five years has been running theatre venues at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe with entirely volunteer labour: I don't see this as all that different, except that I'm entirely free to do or not do what and when I want. It can get addictive, but isn't always. --ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also see WP:Why to contribute. --ColinFine (talk) 17:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I do so becuase I have time to spare and Wikipedia was quite usefull in my life so far, so I want to give something back. Side Note: There have been 121,697 editors with at leats one edit or logged action in past 30 days. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To Learn the Truth, Read My Wikipedia Entry on Sichuan Peppers has a little on that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:18, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thelockedoctor, it's actually tens of thousands of active editors and millions who have ever edited, per Wikipedia:Statistics. I edit because it's a ton of fun. :) I like collaboration, and I love discovering a topic that is missing. —valereee (talk) 18:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All of the above, plus it's a learning experience – a way to keep the mind sharp. I'm a (non-web) software developer and it's an opportunity to learn a new environment and set of languages. It's also a way to learn about subject areas that I would likely never be exposed to, in the process of copy-editing a page on a mountain in India, town in Russia, esoteric corner of mathematics, etc. I also occasionally get to use some of my life experience (hopefully) for the benefit of the project and its users. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:28, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citing

Can I link to sources that are not publicly available, such as citing a research paper on a paid-for database? WildeViolets (talk) 17:35, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WildeViolets, hello! Often yes, see WP:PAYWALL. JSTOR is a popular source around here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

?

&D4135t;D4135t (talk) 17:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't add nonsense to the Teahouse. --a gd fan (talk) 19:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see that as nonsense. D4135t was advised to visit Teahouse, and in a very succinct way asked what Teahouse is. The answer - a place to ask questions about how edit or create Wikipedia articles. David notMD (talk) 01:24, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

approving page

Hi.

I'm not sure why my wiki page won't be approved? Arushi kapoor (talk) 18:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft User:Arushi kapoor/sandbox was rejected, it has no sources and nothing to suggest that the subject is notable. Theroadislong (talk) 18:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Arushi kapoor, assuming you mean User:Arushi kapoor, that page is meant to write a little about what you do and like to do as a WP-editor (WP:UP), it is not a place to submit an article. If you want to try that, start at Help:Your first article. If this is about you or someone you work for, see WP:AUTOBIO and WP:COI first. WP:BLP and WP:TUTORIAL can also be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:15, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hello. I created an article -Draft:Dmitry Borisovich Volkov. It was reviewed and remarked about the ad style. The article was translated from the Russian Wikipedia. I ask experienced editors to help me look at the page with a professional eye and correct the style of the article. It is difficult for me to do this since I am not an English speaker. I am asking for help from a native English speaker. Please help correct the style of the article. Many thanks! 2A00:1FA1:41D2:7D38:4008:5E01:7DDA:6715 (talk) 18:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's going to be difficult. If the sources were in English, I would advise that rewriting the article from the beginning is going to be easier than "correcting the style": delete the whole draft, keep only the reliable published independent sources, and then write the article based on what those say. But when the sources are in Russian, you're going to need to find a native English speaker with a good understanding of Russian. Maproom (talk) 21:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I very much ask anyone who has knowledge of the Russian language, please see the article. I will be very grateful for your help! 95.153.128.35 (talk) 05:35, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at the state of Georgia's 128th Congressional session. My grandfather - Senator #19, Roy Noble from Vienna - is NOT the person that is hyperlinked to his name. How can this incorrect hyperlink be removed? 2600:1700:5850:7F30:4C96:8D5D:455B:846 (talk) 19:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which article are you referring to, IP editor?--Quisqualis (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi person editing from ...455B:846. I have fixed the issue with this edit. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic number of contributions

Hello, I need help with a userbox. There's a userbox named Template:User contrib, and I usually put my contributions manually, (eg: 505, then 567, then 613), and it's inconvienient. Is there something to put in there that makes the contribution number grow automatically? (sorry for the bad grammar) --a gd fan (talk) 19:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi a gd fan. I don't think this is currently available and would require someone writing a new module/program/magic word for the purpose, or that a bot be dedicated to regularly updating the template's number parameter on userpages containing this (and similar) templates. I don't have the technical background to explain why that is, but I base my post on the fact that none of the various templates that provide counts of aspects of user contributions have this feature, despite that providing such a feature would be such an obvious improvement to these types of templates, as well as on reading Template talk:User contrib#Automatic Updates (and the silence to the post at Template talk:User contrib#Why aren't the edit-counts filled automatically? (like it's done for the mobile userpages). Of course, posting a question like yours to a public help forum like this sometimes makes it happen (but I wouldn't hold my breath)<--see that? I'm daring someone to show their amazing programming skills, making it more likely to happen;-) Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:28, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Fuhghettaboutit: Well, I though MediaWiki had a built it command like {{PAGENAME}} and {{BASEPAGENAME}} for a user's contribution number, and if it did, it would be something like {{CONTRIBNUM|(user)}} a gd fan (talk) 20:36, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at magic words before posting above, and it isn't there AFAICT.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

I am new here. I am thinking about writing an article here on Daniel Zdrodowski who is running for Circuit Attorney in the St. Louis Prosecutor election against Kim Gardner (the latter already has a wikipedia page).

My question is this : is Daniel Zdrodowski notable enough for a wikipwsia page? ce (talk) 19:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ce, notability does not arise from candidacy for office, so, in the absence of notability as a person, no.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:52, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Charlie Emery (edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Per the Wikipedia definition of a notable politician, merely being a candidate for office does not typically merit someone an article. There are very rare exceptions to that(such as Christine O'Donnell) but in those cases the candidate receives outsized coverage in independent reliable sources, far beyond a typical political candidate. If Mr. Zdrodowski wins his election, he would then meet the notability definition(even before he officially assumes office). If he is notable for something else, he could merit an article for that, which could then include the fact he is seeking public office. 331dot (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited a page which name is World Sunni Movement and it is not indexed by google

Why some article is not index by seacrh engine. Can anyone help to index this page Superman3355 (talk) 20:18, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Superman3355 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Articles are not indexed by search engines until they are formally marked as reviewed(or 60 days I think). Do you have a particular need for it to be seen in search engines quickly? 331dot (talk) 20:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Thanks. I am new and at first reviewer tagged some issue and I had solved that now what can I do for index. I am very interested to write in wikipedia but for this problem I am worried. Thanks again.
You cannot control the indexing of your article. If it passes review, or after 90 days following creation, whichever is sooner, will determine indexing of articles on Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:50, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at this edit request

Hello, can somebody please take a look at this edit request on the talk page of Fardad Fateri. It is a small request. Direct link is available here - Talk:Fardad_Fateri (the last request on the page) GoMetroGo (talk) 21:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GoMetroGo As noted in the request, "The requested edits backlog is very high. Please be extremely patient. There are currently 111 requests waiting for review." Efforts to "jump the line" don't usually work. Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 21:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up to Music

 Clizi (talk) 22:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As said before, this is a reference desk on editing Wikipedia. Instead, click this link -> Wikipedia:Reference desk, and someone there will gladly give you trivial facts about the media. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 22:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone,

Is there anyway for the paid tag to be removed from this page The_Urban_Legend_(comics)? I tried tagging the admin, but he is unresponsive. Many thanks! Zerotimesfour (talk) 22:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zerotimesfour:, removing a {{paid contributions}} tag requires removing the text that is at issue. It appears that about 66% of the current text was authored by two suspicious accounts, one of which was blocked for undisclosed paid editing. At that level of suspicious editing, is probably best if the entire article were to be re-written by a neutral party who has no conflicts of interest. I hope that helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Zerotimesfour:, I have cleaned the article up. It's now free from promotional nature. GeraldWL 05:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interface/Style Question

Hello. Is it possible to edit the links I see at the top of my page, for my Talk page, Sandbox page, Watchlist, and others? I would like to add reference links (like to the Manual of Style or a user sub-page) to this list. Thanks,  Longchess (talk) 01:57, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't think you can change those links, you can add those links to your User Page. JackFromReedsburg (talk) 02:18, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response: I was taking a look at Help:User style and wondered if there was a way to change those elements, but adding the links to my user page will serve as well. Longchess (talk) 02:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Longchess, it'd be possible to do that with a user script, possibly modeled after User:Lourdes/PageCuration. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 05:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sdkb, thanks, that worked perfectly! Longchess (talk) 12:13, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My First Article Could Use a Second Set of Eyes, Please?

Hi, I've been working on getting the following article up, but keep running into minor issues. Is anyone willing to take a look at the article and offer advice for any other changes? I just made edits to the footnotes but would like to get an additional set of eyes before I submit again.

Draft:Imani_J._Walker

I appreciate any and all help ahead of time! Thank you. Duragdaddy (talk) 03:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Duragdaddy, The Declined reviewer called for better referencing. Also, minimally, remove the Link column in the tables, as articles are not supposed to contain hyperlinks. Better if the Online appearances and interviews table is completely deleted. David notMD (talk) 09:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to make Football kit png

Hello , How a football kit used in articles of  football clubs are made ?? Like I saw many editors upload png of football kit and how can I make football kit png .Is there any application to create it ?? Thanks WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 06:52, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's generated using the {{football kit}} template which combines a bunch of existing images. Your best bet is to find an article about a team whose kit is a similar pattern, copy the code and vary that. --Paultalk09:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading 100 images

Hi, I'm working on an article in my sandbox for 100 Views of New Tokyo. While I probably don't want to use all 100 images in the article (is this even allowed?), I found a few are already on wikimedia commons and thought it would be nice to upload them all and perhaps link to them. I don't really know how to do this, nor am I sure about copyright issues (the images were produced from 1928 to 1932).

The images can be found in good quality here

If it isn't possible to upload all 100, can someone just upload this one from 1929 for me?

Cheers, Dark Clouds of Joy (talk) 07:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You'll want the template {{commons category}} Paultalk07:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure I understand. Is that what you use to link to commons?
Yeah so you'll want to insert {{Commons category|One_Hundred_Views_of_New_Tokyo_(woodcut_series)|One Hundred Views of Tokyo}} into your article (normally around the External Links/See Also section. --Paultalk08:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It seems I'm not allowed to use the "upload wizard" yet. It tells me to do it at commons. I think they are okay for copyright, but it is confusing as Japanese law is different than US.
Also, I don't fancy uploading a hundred images one by one, is there a handy bot or something? Dark Clouds of Joy (talk) 07:36, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Dark Clouds of Joy, to make search easier, we usually make categories. For example someone wants to find corona photos, they can find it at the coronavirus category. The upload wizard is only for copyrighted images. GeraldWL 07:40, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Dark Clouds of Joy: Unless I'm missing something that says the images are under a different license, the page you linked says at the bottom that it is "Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Visualizing Cultures Creative Commons License Creative Commons - some rights reserved", i.e, "CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 US", which is not a "free license" as required by Wikimedia Commons (because of the "NC" part). Unless you can make a case for fair use per WP:NFCC, they cannot be uploaded here or used in an article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to be a pain, this copyright stuff is very confusing! The images were all produced from 1928 to 1932, I don't think the MIT has the copyright. As I said, there are already a quite a few images from this series on wikimedia commons: Category:One Hundred Views of New Tokyo (woodcut series) so I don't see a problem with uploading the rest. Dark Clouds of Joy (talk) 07:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're quite right, the copyright has probably expired on these images. If you look at Commons:File:Fujimori Kabuki-za.jpg you'll see that a relevant declaration re Japanese copyright law has been placed under Licensing. You can follow that example by clicking edit on that page and copy-pasting the code you find there. --Paultalk08:22, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also that is quite a cheeky claim on MITs part. --Paultalk08:23, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks to you all for helping. I uploaded one image without too much trouble here I don't think I can stomach uploading the other ninety or so!
While I'm here, what's the deal with fair use? I'm working on an artist born 1899, died 1993. I can't find a photo of him, so would one of his prints (or more) be acceptable? Dark Clouds of Joy (talk) 08:38, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fair Use really only extends to an image that identifies the subject. So if the article is about the artist, the fair use image would have to be of the artist. Self portraiture might count if that's the only image available, but a copyrighted image of something else definitely wouldn't. (An image of just the artists signature may be considered public domain, so long as it's not a caligraphic signature, as it's not considered a creative work in of itself). --Paultalk09:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that's a shame. Thanks anyway. Dark Clouds of Joy (talk) 09:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC) (ps. Love the gnome!)[reply]
If I understand you correctly, all of these were published by 1932 at the latest. That's well over 50 years ago. If I understand commons:Template:PD-Japan correctly, then if the copyright of this series was held by its publisher, they're all in the public domain; but if it wasn't, then anything by anyone who died no later than 1967 is in the public domain; and anything by anyone still alive in 1968 is not in the public domain. (I doubt that the publisher owned the copyright, and if you say it did, you might have to provide evidence for this.) Incidentally, photographs are handled differently. I am no expert on copyright matters, and really the place to ask about it isn't here but instead Commons, specifically, commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. -- Hoary (talk) 11:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We are not lawyers (or not those who represent the WMF anyway). I don't believe the WMF wants us to make decisions like this. If a page clearly states a restrictive license (as this one, I believe, does), I don't think it is up to us to try to determine if that license is invalid. It's just not important enough in the overall scheme of things compared to the risk of copyright violation, IMO. If you wanted to contact the page publisher (MIT) to seek clarification of the status, and present the argument, such that they will publish a clearly-stated free license for those images, then that would be the way to go, I think.
BTW, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is just as invalid an argument with regard to copyrighted images as it is for text. The presence of one (possibly-infringing) image in a series does not justify others. I'm certain that Commons and Wikipedia have many, many examples of copyright violations at any given time – some that remain for a long time. That has no bearing on what should be done in any particular case, which should stand or fall on its own merits. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:49, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need Help

Hello There Hosts! I recently created an article Draft:Rohan Solomon which clearly meets the wp:gng criteria as it does have Independent Reliable Sources to it, But it got rejected by a reviewer stating This draft does not appear to indicate which of the musical notability criteria is satisfied. If at least one of the criteria is satisfied, please revise this draft appropriately, with a reliable source, if necessary stating on the talk page which criterion is met, and resubmit. But as I see that it is meeting the GNG criteria clearly, but I am not sure if its enough or not to qualify as The reviewer must have seen the links cited, It would be great if someone can guide me (if the draft is missing the major thing which isn't allowing it to pass the musical notability criteria. Thanks Dtt1Talk 07:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dtt1, it looks like there are 14 sources in that draft currently. Could you provide us with the three you think best establish Solomon's notability? {{u|Sdkb}}talk 07:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sdkb Yes sure, The best three sources are-
The first and third of those are based on interviews with Solomon, and so don't qualify as independent. The second is a listing, with no discussion. What Wikipedia needs to establish notability is several reliable independent sources with in-depth discussion of the subject. Maproom (talk) 09:40, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Government published books

Is government published books trusted on Wikipedia? and Is the books who published by government considered reliable source on Wikipedia?. The books like :-

1.Census of India, 1961: Madhya Pradesh Volume 8, Issue 2 of Census of India, 1961, India. Office of the Registrar General

2.Madhya Pradesh: Narsimhapur. Supplement Gazetteer of India Volume 7 of Madhya Pradesh: District Gazetteers, Madhya Pradesh (India)

3.Madhya Pradesh District Gazetteers: Chhindwara Gazetteer of India Volume 37 of Madhya Pradesh District Gazetteers, Madhya Pradesh (India) Sumit banaphar (talk) 08:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah--Paultalk08:34, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So can I make changes while using these sources as a reference (consensus)Sumit banaphar (talk) 10:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sumit banaphar: Only with consensus, which you don't have. Two other editors and I have objected to your edits. Courtesy links: Talk:Banaphar, Talk:Udal of Mahoba, Talk:Alha.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 13:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@  Ganbaruby! :-Sir just tell me one thing that if I'm providing you the links of government published books which is consider reliable source everywhere. Than what's the problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumit banaphar (talkcontribs) 15:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Article Creation

How do I find new topics to create an article and contribute? My area of expertise are cricket,real estate and listed companies. KnowledgeWriterSara (talk) 09:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProjects are a good way too find areas that need improvement or extra contribution. They're all structured slightly differently but most have a To-Do list or something similiar. You might want to take a look at the wikiprojects Cricket, Architecture and Companies. --Paultalk09:17, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, KnowledgeWriterSara, and welcome to the Teahouse. As well as the advice Paul Carpenter has given you, please remember that creating a new article is not the only, or necessarily the best, way to contribute to Wikipedia. We have tens of thousads of seriously substandard articles (many of them created in the early days) which currently add little or no value to Wikipedia. Improving some of these (and nominating for deletion the ones which can never be turned into a satisfactory article) may add considerably more value to Wikipedia than creating a draft for a new article on a subject of doubtful notability. --ColinFine (talk) 10:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I confirm the advice given above. If you want your contributing to Wikipedia to be pleasant and productive, keep away from creating new articles. Maproom (talk) 11:16, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
At a minimum, not until you have developed a clear understanding of what belongs and does not belong in an article, and what "reliable sources" means. David notMD (talk) 14:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moved in to Draft Twice

Hi Everyone, i created an article 'Appu Series' few days back. One editor moved it into draft Draft:Appu Series (videos). However the page was deleted earlier and i was aware of it and the content was completely different, i didn't copy and paste from anywhere. Am i not eligible to create articles into mainspace? Nagarjunsuresh (talk) 11:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC) Nagarjunsuresh (talk) 11:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nagarjunsuresh: You say that the two versions are the same, but I took a look at them and they're basically identical ([8] [9]). The move was carried out by 1292simon, who identified that the draft has "POV and tone issues" that you need to address before it can be published onto the mainspace. Just because your article is in the draftspace does not mean it's "deleted"! Instead, we just want you to work on it a bit more so that it can be brought up to Wikipedia's standards. Once you fix these issues, hit the "Submit your draft for review!" button, and a volunteer will check to see if it's up to par.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 13:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which source do I use when they have the same contents

I've never run into this before, but I came across the same article written by the same person on multiple news outlets. Should I include all of them or only one of them, and which one should I include? My instinct is to include either the GlobalNews.ca source or the CTVNews source because the page I'm working on already has multiple sources from CBC and the Globe&Mail.

https://globalnews.ca/news/2438895/site-c-protesters-dig-in-prepare-for-arrests/

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/site-c-protesters-arrests-1.3394523

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/site-c-dam-protesters-in-b-c-prepare-for-arrests-1.2727299

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/site-c-dam-protesters-brace-cold-and-prepare-for-arrests/article28047465/ TipsyElephant (talk) 12:05, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Vidyanand Nandkeolyair (talk) 13:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Vidyanand Nandkeolyair: Do you see how on every page after "Keven Drews", it says "The Canadian Press"? That means that it's an article written by a reporter at The Canadian Press, a news agency, and the article is distributed through the various outlets listed above. In this case, any one of the websites is fine to use; just make sure to put "The Canadian Press" as in the |agency= field when you're using a citation template.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 13:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

profile for a former prominent athlete

I submitted a profile for a former prominent athlete. How does it get 'live'? Bhorler1975 (talk) 13:36, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bhorler1975, While it may sound like a semantic difference, we refer to "articles" rather than "profiles".
I assume you are talking about Draft:Blair A. Horler
It isn't remotely close to ready.
Please read Wikipedia:Autobiography
Writing about yourself is highly discouraged.
No articles about living people are permitted unless they have references. You can read more about references and general requirements for new articles at WP:YFA S Philbrick(Talk) 13:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Bhorler1975: You will need to declare on your userpage whether you are actually Blair Horler, or are someone else who's simply chosen to user their name as your username. If the latter, you need to abandon the account and create a new one under which to edit from. I'm sorry to read in the draft that he's dead. Use of the term 'was' in the first sentence does seem quite clear on that point! This appalling edit you made a while ago does make me wonder if you're genuinely trying to write an article about him/about yourself. If you are, I suggest you try to gain more general understanding of how Wikipedia works before diving into the hardest task here - creating a non-promotional article about yourself that meets our Sports notability criteria. See WP:REFBEGIN for how to support every single statement about a living person with an inline citation. If you can't - just remove the rest. I suggest you start by giving The Wikipedia Adventure a go, and try to collect all 15 competency badges as you do our interactive tour. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:05, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Chums (company)

Hi,

I believe you rejected my article last night. I have edited it today but wondered if it needs editing more to be accpeted.

Your help would be massively appreciated

Thanks user (talk) 14:20, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A reviewer Declined Draft:Chums (company) and gave reasons why. The hosts at Teahouse are not the reviewer. You have made some changes and resubmitted. David notMD (talk) 14:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Click0987. All but two of your references are not independent of the company, as they are clearly based on interviews or press releases; the remaning two only mention Chums in passing. None of these contributes at all to Wikipedia's criteria for NCORP, without which an article on the company will not be accepted. Basically, Wikipedia is not interested in anything the company says or wants to say: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the company, and have not been prompted or fed information by the company, have chosen to publish in reliable sources. Unless you can find at least three examples of such writing, then you are wasting your time and effort. --ColinFine (talk) 16:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube notability - BLP

Hello all, I am continuing to amend Draft: Malinda Kathleen Reese to get it up to shape re notability (The draft has previously been rejected and discussed in this Teahouse). I was directed to (and read) Wikipedia:WikiProject YouTube/Notability and this dicussion which states "However, official channels of notable organisations, such as Monty Python's channel, may be acceptable as primary sources if their authenticity can be confirmed"- so would this suggest that the YouTube citations in the draft- videos uploaded to YouTube by the subject on her own channel, in which she provides factual information about herself- be considered reliable sources?

Many thanks, Mojo0306 (talk) 14:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mojo0306, checked the sources. Found RSes like The Independent, WSJ, etc, so it is notable. Will do a cleanup for the draft. GeraldWL 15:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerald Waldo Luis:, that would be great, many thanks! Mojo0306 (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Mojo0306: Yes, but treat them as primary sources, which you have to be very careful with. Basing an article on too many primary sources is not ideal; instead, we want independent, secondary sources. Also, primary sources do nothing to establish notability.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 15:04, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ganbaruby: Brilliant, thanks for the guidance. The newspaper articles included in the list of citations (including Washington Post) should help with notability. Mojo0306 (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Mojo0306, per WP:ABOUTSELF they can be used a little for stuff like born in/born when etc. However, they do not help with WP:N, and content based on them should be minimal. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Many thanks. I have tried to use them as minimally as possible. Mojo0306 (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notable or not? New article about indie band.

Hello. I'm interested in writing an article about the band Spring Offensive. Though I'm not sure if the article would be considered notable enough or not. I think the main issue would be that they haven't been active the last years with the exception of a concert they wanted to perform in May this year (which has been postponed to May 2021 due to the pandemic) . They toured a handful of countries in Europe when they were active and they still use their Twitter & Facebook page, their music is on Spotify, Apple Music, etc. and I've been able to find some articles about them to source the information about things like the band members positions, location, tour dates, the music released. Guidance on this would be appreciated. Thank you for reading. Neon700 (talk) 15:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Neon700: Notability is based on whether "a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (WP:N). They don't have to be particularly active, nor does their music have to be on streaming platforms. Instead, a good article should have multiple of these reliable sources to back up the information. Refer to WP:YFA for some general guidelines on creating an article.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 16:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaning up my talk page

Hello Teahouse Hosts

Is it permissible to delete content from my talk page?

Thank you in advance for your help -- Bughub (talk) 15:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bughub Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, you are permitted to remove content from your user talk page. There are a few limited exceptions to that, but none of those are really pertinent to you. Removing content from your talk page is considered an acknowledgement that you read it. 331dot (talk) 16:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citing Sources Visually

Hello, I usually like to edit and add visually, because I don't really know how to do source edit on here. I got a message saying that one of my edits was deleted because I didn't cite a reliable source. Is there a way to add Cite sources visually, or am I stuck with having to do it all on Source Edit? Thanks in advance. Mr Mosaic (talk) 16:35, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Mosaic, you can add sources in Visual Editor. When you edit, near the top of the page it says Cite. Click on that and it opens up a box into which under the Automatic tab you can enter a URL or ISBN, and VisEd will create a properly-formatted citation, which you then click to insert. —valereee (talk) 16:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Creating portals

Hello, I have a question. Can you make portals even if you are not an admin? And do you use the draft namespace? Because I'm trying to make a portal for wildfires a gd fan (talk) 16:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi a gd fan. Yes you can make a portal, but bear in mind the markup in portals is more unusual than articles and there's more of a focus on CSS, transclusion and features that rely on Lua module backends. The Portal space was overhauled in the not so distant past, automated features were added and the source code of most portals were made uniform; this gives the ability to make space-wide updates. If you do make a portal i would suggest basing it on an existing portal. The talk page of WikiProject Portals is a handy place to ask for help if you get stuck, although you're always welcome to ask here. Regards, Zindor (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To answer the second part of your question, i've used sandboxes in the past when creating a portal. If you create yourself additional sandboxes, for example User:a gd fan/sandbox2, you can test transclusions between them. Zindor (talk) 17:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's also the secret Portal sandbox. Zindor (talk) 18:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled question

Hello,

I created my first article and it got deleted twice anyway i took the remarks that were made to me and i tried as good as i can to make it compliant to wiki. Nevertheless i would really like to have some experienced users to have a look at it before i submit it again to see if there are any corrections i should make. The article is in my drafts. Fadidib (talk) 16:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I assume this referes to Draft:Rudy Rahme. I dont have the time right now to make a full assesment (and that would not be done on the Teahouse anyway), but here are my two cents:
  • The last sentence in the introduction is a classic example of WP:CITEKILL. One, maybe twwo references per fact. More is overkill.
  • Not all sources appear to be reliable. Right the fist one I opened smells like WP:UGC.
  • Not all sources are WP:SIGCOV.
  • Some of the refrences lead to nowhere. For example, number 23, [10] causes a DNS error. the closest one I could come up with, [11] is not even close to WP:SIGCOV.
Note: If you want to make a cause of WP:NARTIST, there are probbably editors who are more familar with that. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:20, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Common Room

Where is the Wikimedia Common Room? Jake E Schmidt (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jake E Schmidt, welcome. Are you looking for Wikimedia Commons or somewhere else? Zindor (talk) 18:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

creating a wiki page for everyone to see

I have already created a draft but i don't know what to do after that TheDerpingMemes (talk) 17:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TheDerpingMemes - I see your user page says "I create pages based on fictional story telling and roleplay" - I am afraid Wikipedia is not interested in such pages, such as Draft:Clevic aviation and space which you created - only pages based on reliable published sources - Arjayay (talk) 18:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WhatsApp group.

Hi, thanks for inviting me. I want to ask you a question, is there any WhatsApp group relating Wikipedia administration? If it is then please add me there. باوا جی (talk) 18:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC) باوا جی (talk) 18:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @باوا جی, there is an IRC chat, and a Discord (the latter of which is what I use). As far as I'm aware, we don't have a community WhatsApp group. Ed talk! 19:35, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@باوا جی There is also a specific IRC chat for administrators, but that is open only to those with administrator rights here on English Wikipedia. Personally, I think it best to keep most discussions out in the open, and visible for all to see. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

using primary sources for basic information

I've been reading up on when it's ok to use self-published sources, and am a little confused on how exactly it all plays out in real life.

The article I'm working on is for a musical artist who has a long list of releases, and for the release dates of all of these it's easiest to just use the artist's bandcamp page to get that basic information, rather than trying to find an interview for each one (many of them were minor releases of one or two songs and for these there probably isn't any independent source anyways).

But the guidelines say it's important that "The Wikipedia article is not based primarily on such sources." What exactly does "primarily" mean? Is there anything wrong with using a self-published source (the artist's bandcamp page) extensively for just getting release dates into the discography section? I'm not planning on using it much for the rest of the article, just that section.

If it matters, this is the page I'm working on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kadesh_Flow And this is the wikipedia guide page I'm referencing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Self-published_and_questionable_sources_as_sources_on_themselves Existrud (talk) 18:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Existrud: regarding "primarely", it means that articles should not be use many primary sources and only a few non-primary ones. There is no definite percentage I can give you, but over 50% primary sources you realy will get in trouble at AFD. Note that there shouldn't be any plain external links in article bodies, so either convert them to references or remove them. WP:REFNAME might also be of interest. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:25, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Victor Schmidt:. Existrud (talk) 19:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

citations

Having trouble viewing and modifying existing citations in "edit source" mode. All I see is reflist. Having trouble initiating a citation; no clue. NoPatriarchy (talk) 18:34, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You edit where the source is located, not the references section. (Superscript [#] indicates a reference.) All {{reflist}} does is list the references above where it's invoked on the page. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 18:46, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, NoPatriarchy. We have a couple of really useful guides you should read which make the seemingly complex task of adding inline citation quite straightforward. Our official guide is at WP:REFBEGIN, and one I threw together can be found at WP:ERB. Both have little videos you can watch, too. Let us know how you find them and how you get on. 18:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Taking a look at your recent edits to Battle of Virden, I can see you've struggled to add references immediately after statements, but instead have incorrectly added them to 'External links' section. I also see you are aware of this and are intending to fix it, which is excellent. I suspect you might be planning on using one source to support multiple statements throughout the article. In which case, I'm pasting below a short pioecve of advice reusing a reference, and identifiying different pages from the same book in different inline citations:...
...To reuse a reference you give the reference a name, then on subsequent uses you 'call it up' by that name, without having to re-enter all the details again. See WP:REFNAME for a full explanation. You can then use the {{rp}} template to add specific page numbers immediately afterwards, like this: First fact found on page 29 of a book.[1]: 29  Second fact found on page 114 from the same book.[1]: 114  You put the reference in the article text, but, by some computer magic, the reference appears in the 'References' section, without you having to add anything there.

References

  1. ^ a b Willmot, A.; Moyes, N. (2015). The Flora of Derbyshire. Pisces Publications. ISBN 978-1-874357-65-0.
I hope you find this helpful. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:37, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Social media as a source

Am I able to use a social media post as a proper citation if no published article exists? Brooklynguy7 (talk) 18:53, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the teahouse Brooklynguy7. In general 'NO!', because social media posts aren't regarded as reliable. However it depends what statement it is you're trying to support, and what link looks like. Very minor stuff about an individual can be supported with content from their social media stream, but should mostly be avoided. See WP:SOCIALMEDIA for more guidance on that. One could also consider presenting the statement and the link on the article's talk page to gather other editors' views before trying to use it within an article. Getting feedback on things like that is also a good way to learn. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes Thank you very much for answering both of my questions. I really appreciate the warm welcome as I'm figuring this all out. I appreciate your insight on using social media posts as proper citations. I made some edits earlier and was flagged by another editor because I used YouTube as my citation, so I was curious about the rule for social media posts too. I was discouraged by the flag, but like I said, I'm just trying to learn and be a better editor! So I very much appreciate your help! Brooklynguy7 (talk) 20:35, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2 Questions in One

Sorry for asking 2 questions at once but How do I create a good article and how do I add images to an article? Blaze The Wolf (talk) 19:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaze The Wolf: Any article that one might call 'good' on Wikipedia is about a NOTABLE TOPIC, contains a short, concise WP:LEAD which summarises the page. Everything is written in a neutral, encyclopaedic tone, and is WP:VERIFIABLE because it contains REFERENCES to RELIABLE SOURCES, and links to and from other articles. Adding images is a stage further down the line, and you can't simply take a picture off the internet and add it to Wikipedia. If you link to the image you'd like to add, we can advise you if it's likely to be OK or not. All images found on Wikimedia Commons can be inserted into Wikipedia articles. Read YOUR FIRST ARTICLE for further guidance. Start with small, simple steps as you learn how things work here. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 20:29, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Replying back to a comment on a talk page

How do I properly reply back to someone's comment on a talk page? Or even here in The Teahouse? Thanks! Brooklynguy7 (talk) 20:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Brooklynguy7: You find the original thread/topic you created, click 'edit source', then you use a single colon to indent your reply.
Two colons indents it a bit more
Three colons even more still! So try to keep all the related discussions in one place. Read more at WP:TALKPAGE and WP:PING. (Remember to put something in the 'Subject' field if you do start a new discussion topic.) Nick Moyes (talk) 20:22, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes: Ah, thank you! I appreciate that. I'm learning!
OK, Brooklynguy7 One step at a time is always best- you're bound to make a few mistakes at first. No worries. If you want to 'ping' or notify someone in your reply, make sure you both include their username in the way you did (or the way I've just done in this reply) AND sign your own name within the same edit, by typing four keyboard tildes (like this: ~~~~) at the very end, then hit Publish changes. You can't add a signature on a subsequent edit or the notification won't work. Do give The Wikipedia Adventure Tour a try, too. Cheers Nick Moyes (talk) 20:34, 28 October 2020 (UTC)  [reply]
Appreciate it Nick Moyes! Brooklynguy7 (talk) 20:38, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]