Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1222

Archive 1215

←

Archive 1220

Archive 1221

Archive 1222

Archive 1223

Archive 1224

Archive 1225

I am not happy

I am not happy by the treatment of this website, I am sick and tired of abusive moderators destroying contributions and violating pages. I want a formal complaint against Pmffl Poppodoms (talk) 20:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

This seems to relate to the recent history of ArkWeb, which is now a redirect. Please follow the process at WP:DR. See also WP:AGF. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

You may also want to ping someone when you are doing this so they are not taken by surprise. @Pmffl Iljhgtn (talk) 20:27, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't want information, I want direct link to get this page rolled back Poppodoms (talk) 20:32, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Poppodoms. I have not looked at the issue, and I have no idea whether I would support your position or not. But Wikipedia is a collaborative project. If you take the position of "I'm right and they're wrong" you are not likely to be happy here, and you may find yourself blocked.

Incidentally, we don't have "moderators". Pmffl is another editor, like you and me.

Please look at the pages Andy pointed you to. ColinFine (talk) 21:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia contributor is abusing his power on it, this is not "I'm right and they're wrong" situation. It is simply abuse. Poppodoms (talk) 21:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Talk:ArkWeb has the context. 2 items of note here: there is currently only one English reference for this topic, and Poppodoms is trying to unilaterally control this article, even to the point of blanking it in protest. I admit I was too hasty in some of my edits earlier today, but I stand by the redirect, as explained on the talk page. -Pmffl (talk) 21:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I stand by the reverse redirect. Pmffl admitted that it was a browser engine on the Talk:ArkWeb - Wikipedia Poppodoms (talk) 21:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I did admit it, but that doesn't change the lack of valid English refs for this topic. Hence the redirect. I want to emphasize again, this is nothing personal for me. I realize you created this article and may feel some "ownership" of it, but that's not how wikipedia is supposed to work. (But I get it; it can be hard not to feel that way about work done here.) -Pmffl (talk) 21:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't feel ownership to anything here, I only contribute with the citations, I feel that you are not doing your job as a contributor, in looking at things objectively, and allowing it to naturally grow. You come behind and feel entitled to act like a moderator like it's "suspicious", when you are mere contributor like myself. Poppodoms (talk) 21:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

This should really be taking place on the relevant talk page and not here on the Teahouse I think. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:41, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

i understand. I apologise. It's resolved between two parties. Thank you very much, I appreciate it. Poppodoms (talk) 21:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I am speaking as an administrator here and have no opinion on whether or not ArkWeb is notable. But I do want to advise both Poppodoms and Pmffl that your behavior regarding this matter is poor. Poppodoms, you came here with an inappropriate hot and heavy attitude. Your comment abusive moderators destroying contributions and violating pages is overly aggressive and indicates a deep misunderstanding of how Wikipedia actually works. Contributions cannot be "destroyed" because they always remain in an article's edit history. The term "moderator" is not normally used on Wikipedia, and even if if you mean "administrator" instead, Pmffl is not an administrator. Pmffl, here and elsewhere, you have repeatedly stated that English language sources are required to establish the notability of a topic. This is false. It is perfectly OK to provide references to reliable sources in languages other than English on the English Wikipedia. If reliable sources are plentiful, then English language sources are preferable. For example, there is no need to add Italian language sources to Abraham Lincoln because the English language coverage is massive. But if English language coverage is limited, then references to coverage in other languages is just fine. Both of you, do not discuss concepts or refer to policies that do not exist here. Base your statements only on actual policies, guidelines and behavioral norms here on English Wikipedia. This is a collaborative project and hurling unfounded accusations and assertions is not the way to operate. Cullen328 (talk) 02:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Edits

my father has a wiki page and in the spouse column it says married with children, he wants me to edit that and put in the name of my mother and siblings, but wikipidea does not allow edits to the pages of people you are related to, what can i do to resolve this.

Tpiusukeyima (talk) 23:20, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Tpiusukeyima. Wikipedia is quite strict about what it does and doesn't allow in Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (please read that project page). Generally, spouses and children are only named if they are notable (i.e. qualified for their own Wikipedia article) in their own right or are very relevant to matters discussed in the article.

Usually, for example, names of non-adult children are not listed just because they exist: this is to maintain their privacy and protection — criminals, kidnappers and scammers can read Wikipedia as easily as anyone else.

We have some advice at Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. What applies to the subject of an article applies also to non-notable relatives of the subject. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 151.227.134.31 (talk) 00:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I have often seen spouse named and number of children, but not names. Typically in a Personal life section, along with where currently living. That info requires a ref. David notMD (talk) 05:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:COMPETENCE explained politely

Hi. How can I explain to a new editor that competence in English is required in a polite manner? Thanks. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 01:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

If someone has just started editing and then {{Welcome-foreign|lang=}} has some polite-but-firm text. If you think you can reasonably guess what their first language is, then the template also provides translations of the same welcome text (see docs). -- D'n'B-t -- 06:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Great. Thank you! '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 06:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, CanonNi. First, be aware that WP:COMPETENCE is an essay and therefore does not have the force of an official policy or guideline. That being said, I think the underlying concept that "competence is required" is widely accepted. This sentence is useful to think about: Rather than labeling them as "incompetent" in the pejorative sense, we should ease them out of the Wikipedia community as graciously as possible, with their dignity intact. The specifics of the lack of competence need to be considered. People who do not speak English well often perceive the English Wikipedia as more influential or as the "master Wikipedia". These editors should be gently encouraged to edit the Wikipedia language version in the languages they speak fluently. Other editors are so firmly dedicated to their ideology or religion or other strongly held point of view that they have difficulty writing policy compliant content. We need to politely explain that writing from the Neutral point of view is a core content policy that is mandatory. Sometimes an editor simply will not accept the constructive feedback and persists with disruptive editing. In such cases, you need to provide convincing evidence to administrators, who can decide on the most appropriate restriction for the good of the encyclopedia. That may include page blocks, topic bans or sitewide blocks. Cullen328 (talk) 07:19, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I understand. The editor seems to have understood. Thank you for this detailed answer! '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 07:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Accuracy of content

How is the submitted content examined for accuracy? 103.187.245.60 (talk) 08:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Be aware that Wikipedia does not guarantee accuracy, see the Wikipedia:General disclaimer. That said, readers and other editors are relied on to check sources and determine if they are accurately summarized in the article. If you see content that you believe does not accurately summarize the sources provided, you should discuss that on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

More at Reliability of Wikipedia. In general, errors can linger, more likely in areas with few interested editors. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:51, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

When to remove template message

Hi, I just edited Self-portrait (Giorgione) to add a citation link to the website of the museum where the painting is currently on display. The page now has just this one citation. Is this enough to remove the template message? or should I leave it there for now until further links are added? Thanks... SwollenSails (talk) 09:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello! The template can be switched to {{more citations}} as there's at least one source now. If you could find a source to verify the other contents of the article, that'd be great. Otherwise the information not cited by the reference can be removed. Thank you for your efforts! NotAGenious (talk) 09:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, thanks. So the convention is that I switch the template after adding the first link? If so then all good, I get it. Is there anywhere that explains template-switching in newbie terms? SwollenSails (talk) 10:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@SwollenSails Weeeell... Can't think of any at the top of my head. Help:A quick guide to templates and Wikipedia:Template index/Cleanup may be of some help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Can anyone at least explain this sentence — “The template can be switched to {{more citations}} as there's at least one source now” — to me? How do I undertake this specific task in future, if I want to just do it myself? Thanks. SwollenSails (talk) 12:21, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@SwollenSails New editors tend to use the visual editor as it is the easiest for simple text changes. Templates like the ones under discussion are much easier to swap using the source editor. There are tutorials for both at Help:Introduction. If you "edit source" on Self-portrait (Giorgione) you will see various templates at the top, under the one that provides the short description. Currently they are {{refimprove|date=April 2024}} and {{notability|date=April 2024}}. It was the former one that used to be {{more citations}} until Gråbergs Gråa Sång changed it and also added the second one. When changing templates like these, make sure you "Preview" before saving/publishing, to check that the new template does what you think it does. Incidentally, you don't need to add the date to the template if you don't want to: a bot will come along very quickly to do that if you omit it: see the edit history of the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Thankyou! That’s exactly what I needed. SwollenSails (talk) 13:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@SwollenSails I changed the template, since the one in place was now wrong. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok great, thanks SwollenSails (talk) 10:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Rudeness from mods

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.

---

So, I was editing a page Mike Breen and somebody undid my edits, all I did was add famous quotes of the man and then a mod took it down, when I asked him why, he was extremely rude and impatient, what do I do this is only my 2nd day here. CDoug17 (talk) 14:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User talk:CDoug17 § April 2024 '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 14:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@CDoug17 By long consensus, Wikipedia has very strict rules about additions to biographies of living people. You may know that what you added were "famous quotes" but most other people would not know that and would want to be able to verify that what you added was true. Hence, when placing such information into articles, we insist you simultaneously cite the source for your content (see this help page). As an aside, Wikipedia editors don't use the expression "mods". We have administrators but they have no more power to enforce the content of articles than anyone else. We have a guideline asking experienced editors not to be too aggressive towards newcomers but not everyone is perfect (including you, judging by your very first edit)! Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No one was rude to the user. I left a standard warning, followed by a weird discussion between me and another administrator, but neither that administrator nor I was rude in the slightest.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

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.

A sudden deletion of Xiao Yan.jpg with no actual reason

Hello everyone, a file Xiao Yan.jpg was deleted by User:EugeneZelenko with no actual reason, and the file clearly didn't violate any rules. I'm guessing maybe he deleted it by mistake, but if not i suppose he should have given a deletion reason?
Thisasia  ^(Talk) 14:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

See c:User talk:Thisasia: user has problem with understanding c:Commons:Licensing and was notified about this and other files. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Noted. But just to confirm, the c:Commons:Licensing indicates that YouTube items under the creative common licence are free to reuse or isn't?
Thisasia  ^(Talk) 15:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Youtube vids can be marked with a Commons acceptable license, like this one:[1]. Most aren't. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thanks for your response, but please what's the easy way to distinguish between the YouTube video common licence and none common licence?
Thisasia  ^(Talk) 16:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

If you look at that video, there's a "more" you can click to expand. It lists the licensing. If that's not there, you can't add it to Wikimedia Commons. Valereee (talk) 16:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Oww got it, Thanks for your reply.
Thisasia  ^(Talk) 16:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

MOS:ELLIPSES and MOS:LQ seem contradictory.

The following guidance seems contradictory.

MOS:ELLIPSES:

But where an ellipsis is immediately followed by any of . ? ! : ; , ) ] } or by a closing quotation mark (single or double), use a non-breaking space before the ellipsis, and no space after it: Jones wrote: "These stories amaze me. The facts suffer so frightfully ..."

MOS:LQ:

If the quotation is a single word or a sentence fragment, place the terminal punctuation outside the closing quotation mark. When quoting a full sentence, the end of which coincides with the end of the sentence containing it, place terminal punctuation inside the closing quotation mark.

• Miller wanted, he said, "to create something timeless".
• Miller said: "I wanted to create something timeless."

My guess is that MOS:ELLIPSES is not as clear as it could be. For example, perhaps it should be edited like this (or similar):

But where an ellipsis is immediately followed by any of . ? ! : ; , ) ] } or by a closing quotation mark (single or double), use a non-breaking space before the ellipsis, and no space after it: Jones wrote: "These stories amaze me. The facts suffer so frightfully ...".(Note that the period ending the sentence should be placed outside the quotation mark; see MOS:LQ.)

Or am I totally misunderstanding?

Thanks! – Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/him] 14:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Markworthen My interpretation is that an ellipsis is the set of (usually) three dots that indicates something is missing: in this case from a quote. That being so, it would be confusing to place another punctuation dot immediately after the ellipsis but it does need a non-breaking space before it. Another way to think of this is that any quotation ending in an ellipsis must indeed be a fragment, so the advice at MOS:LQ is good: put the quotation mark before the final punctuation. Your suggestion to alter the guidance could lead to extra clarity, so if no-one else here at the Teahouse has a different idea, you could be bold and add that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Excellent - thank you! Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/him] 16:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

coi use of DISPLAYTITLE:title template

Hi, may I change the display title of an article (OutTV to OUTtv), supply references to a number of sources validating the updated stylization of the name (almost all the existing citations on the page where the title resides), remove the phrase: "OutTV (stylized OUTtv)", as well as then update the article text to reflect the new title case? I have a displayed coi with the article and would also mention coi in the edit summary. The article currently exists with both styles used in the text. Or would this be better addressed via an edit:COI request? Thank you. Oshentree (talk) 23:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Oshentree. Thank you for your transparency. I think it would be better as an edit request. ColinFine (talk) 09:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

All right, thanks for your response ColinFine. No problem, will do. Oshentree (talk) 16:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Is there any possible way to get the "Deplorable Instinct" article posted?

It's a very popular story, and is high ranking on Amazon. I feel it deserves an article completely. Can you help me out please? Jasonsepice234 (talk) 23:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Jasonsepice234: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1222. For one thing, you have no inline citations, which are required for a Wikipedia article. Please don't add external links in the body of the article. Also, be aware that sites like Fandom are supplied with user-generated content, which undermines any reliability it would have had. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Deplorable Instinct has an overly long Synopsis and no useful references, thus Declined. Teahouse hosts advise, but are not co-authors. David notMD (talk) 05:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

A read of notability criteria for books should give you a good impression of what the AfC reviewers are looking for. I'd note that user generated content like fandom is considered pretty much useless as a source, as is book sellers like amazon. the press release may prove useful as a source but will not count towards notability.

One idea might be to wait until there is significant coverage in reliable independent sources, before resubmitting the draft. And in the meantime whittle down that synopsis to a couple of paragraphs. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@Jasonsepice234: I'll add that the "Literary significance" section seems to be your own editorial commentary, violating Wikipedia:No original research. Except for the synopsis, all statements must be cited to reliable sources that are independent of the article topic. If you cannot do that, then the topic cannot have a Wikipedia article. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Transfer copy from Wikimedia to Wikipedia.

Please help me with https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gaw54. I accidentally drafted the page on wikimedia rather than wikipedia. How can I most efficiently transfer the draft to finish it in the right format? It has been a while since I've created pages here and am getting very lost in the weeds. Any assistance would be much appreciated. Gaw54 (talk) 03:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately there isn't a way to move a page from Commons to Wikipedia. I'd suggest just copy-pasting the page and fix any formatting issues, which should be simple. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 03:35, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@Gaw54 Just to support the idea of copy/pasting your draft, but to say that it should not be added into youe user page. That's for you to say a few words about yourself and your own editing interests. Instead, you should either work on it at Draft:Bonnie Rychlak, or at User:Gaw54/sandbox. Then pop back here when you're read and we'll help you submit it for review at 'Articles for Creation'. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

What Nick Moyes says, but with the minor correction that it wouldn't be "Drafts:Bonnie Rychlak" (plural) but instead Draft:Bonnie Rychlak (singular). -- Hoary (talk) 11:58, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I've fixed the typo 'Draft' not 'Drafts' DOH! Nick Moyes (talk) 20:43, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

How do I create personalized user boxes?

I am intoxicated by use of User box to explain my user page and I don't know exactly how to create them. I mean, custom User box. Somebody help me please comprehensively. Caleb Ndu (talk) 19:49, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello again Caleb Ndu. Does WP:User boxes help? (General hint: if you want to know about something in using or editing Wikipedia, it's usually worth trying to search for the term with WP: on the front). ColinFine (talk) 21:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Caleb Ndu: Often the easiest way to create a custom user box is to find on another user's page one whose general appearance you like, copy the code from that user page, and paste it on your page, replacing the text and image with what you want. That's what I did for the top box on my user page. Deor (talk) 22:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Applying this now is my problem. I'm still new here. Caleb Ndu (talk) 22:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

You could use the template {{userbox}} (click on that for more instructions). For instance,

{{Userbox |border-c=black |#CCEEFF |white | How? |info-a=center |How do I make my own userboxes?}}

creates

How?How do I make my own userboxes?

-- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 12:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@Verbarson thank you. I'm satisfied with your answers. Caleb Ndu (talk) 23:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Need help getting an article reviewed.

I recently created this page: K. S. Radhakrishnan. However, it has not yet been reviewed by any editors. How do I request someone to review?

I have created articles in the past. They all got reviewed within a day or two. I didn't have to request for review or anything like that. Devan.varun (talk) 00:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Devan.varun, typically we don't really like requests for reviews. The backlog is currently and has been quite long so it might take a while. You do not have to request a review, it will be done sooner or later. Justiyaya 02:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@Devan.varun You created the article straight into mainspace, as you are entitled to do. All new articles are eventually reviewed by the new pages patrol and won't be indexed by search engines until that happens, or 90 days have elapsed. The alternative process you could have used is to create a draft and submit it for review in a process described at WP:AfC. If you had done that, then when accepted the draft would have been marked as "reviewed" and it would have been open for search engines to index. Unfortunately, the new pages patrol has an even greater backlog (>14,000) than the AfC one, so indexing may take some time. Note that editors experienced with creating articles can request that they become WP:Autopatrolled, which would mean that their future submissions would be indexed as soon as placed in mainspace. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Devan.varun (talk) 04:38, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Devan.varun Do you have a particular need for a speedy NPP review? 331dot (talk) 10:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Nope. I just asked because I wasn't sure what was going on. While I have created a few pages in the past, this is the time I experienced a delay in a page getting reviewed. Thanks for the clarification :-) Devan.varun (talk) 04:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Deleted for not fitting the narrative.

I edited the page on spirulina to include a link to a recent study. Editor Julius Senegal removed the edit, and when I asked him why he gave a bullshit answer. His honest answer would be that he's a shill for Big Pharma. What can I do? And why is Wikipedia becoming anti-science?

Spirulina

User talk:Julius Senegal#Why did you remove my edit of the spirulina page? 2600:1700:B2C0:5E10:D4BA:B511:43FF:4786 (talk) 15:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

It wasn't a "bullshit answer". The removal was done because your source does not comply with WP:MEDRS. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

IP editor, I would suggest you refrain from making personal attacks and strike out your baseless accusations. @Julius Senegal gave you the relevant guideline and was correct to remove your addition. Qcne (talk) 15:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Look at Julius' post. It's **NOTHING BUT** personal attacks. Again, his answer was bullshit. You are all showing that the once great Wikipedia has been ruined and is no longer a reliable source of information. 2600:1700:B2C0:5E10:D4BA:B511:43FF:4786 (talk) 23:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Please read WP:NPA. It is not OK to make a personal attack like that on another editor. You need to withdraw it, please. DBaK (talk) 15:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

His original post was **NOTHING BUT** personal attacks (along with a racist attack on the people of an entire region of the planet). I will not withdraw it. And I have taken screen shots to preserve all of this. 2600:1700:B2C0:5E10:D4BA:B511:43FF:4786 (talk) 23:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

You're pushing fringe theories and you're accusing those who remove the theories of being racist? The only thing that's gonna happen is that you're gonna be blocked. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 01:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

IP, our rules for medical articles only allow the best sources, so it's not a matter of 'not fitting the narrative'. It's a matter of 'this source isn't considered high-enough quality'. You can find more at the WP:MEDRS link. Valereee (talk) 16:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Is there nobody at Wikipedia who can be honest? You have all ruined a once-great source of knowledge and turned it into a pile of shit. 2600:1700:B2C0:5E10:D4BA:B511:43FF:4786 (talk) 23:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Rather than making racist personal attacks, he could have done a ten-second google search, found more sources (is NATURE a good enough source) and added to the entry. Again, Wikipedia has turned to shit.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Spirulina+Covid&t=ftsa&atb=v416-1&ia=web 2600:1700:B2C0:5E10:D4BA:B511:43FF:4786 (talk) 23:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

That's just a DuckDuckGo search? The Nature source seems to say Their broad-spectrum antiviral properties have been studied, however, their effect against SARS-CoV-2 remains unknown. Valereee (talk) 00:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

To revisit (again) the simple reason your addition to Spirulina (dietary supplement) was reverted: a single clinical trial doe not qualify for the requirements stated at WP:MEDRS. All the other journal references - from the DuckDuckGo search - are in vitro studies, which also do not meet WP:MEDRS. David notMD (talk) 03:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I have blocked the IP editor for one week for personal attacks, harassment and disruptive editing. Cullen328 (talk) 05:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

When User is added to an article talk page will they get automatically notified?

If I update an article talk page and mention a user, i.e. SomeRandomUser, will they automatically get a notification assuming they exist? Or do I need to go to their User talk page and refer them back to the article talk page? Nnev66 (talk) 00:42, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Nnev66: depends on how you mention them; see WP:PING and {{Ping}} for info. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

naming children

Is there a rule against naming the (minor) children of a person in a biographical article if they do not have an article of their own? I don't believe there is considering the multiple high profile examples of it on wikipedia, but I am in a dispute regarding this. — THORNFIELD HALL ^(Talk) 06:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Thornfield Hall: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1222. WP:BLPNAME is probably most relevant for you, especially footnote e:

This is generally interpreted by the community to include the removal of names of non-notable minors from articles about their notable family members, such as when a notable individual births or sires a non-notable minor. Notability is not presumed or inherited with extremely limited exception (such as heir to a throne or similar).

—Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

What allows Elon Musk's children to be named on his article? — THORNFIELD HALL ^(Talk) 06:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Nothing allows it, Thornfield Hall, except that no one motivated to fix the policy violation has yet done so. There are 6,813,262 articles edited by people of varying levels of policy understanding. These problems should be corrected when noticed. Cullen328 (talk) 06:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Thornfield Hall: At WP:BLPNAME there is this: Names of family members who are not also notable public figures must be removed from an article if they are not properly sourced. RudolfRed (talk) 06:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Thornfield Hall, I am in complete agreement with Tenryuu's interpretation and would like to add that WP:BLPNAME links to policy language, and the policy in question is among the most important and vigorously enforced policies that we have. Cullen328 (talk) 06:18, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

biology

why a mule is not productive 105.163.0.226 (talk) 09:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi.IP editor and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is for questions about editing Wikipedia. Try asking your question at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 09:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

There's information about this at Mule § Fertility. Bazza 7 (talk) 09:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

How to change username

How FarooqAhmedPGI (talk) 11:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Did you look at Wikipedia:Changing username? David Biddulph (talk) 11:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @FarooqAhmedPGI and welcome to the Teahouse. See Wikipedia:Changing username. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 11:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Adding a photo

There is a Wikipedia page that lists the various mayors of the City of Richmond, CA. There are photos of some of the mayors along with the dates of their service. My father was one such mayor but he does not have a photo next to his name. If I provide the photo can someone insert it in the appropriate space?

The page I would like to the picture to is: List of mayors of Richmond, California. Tahomadude (talk) 22:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

This can be done; however, it's important to realize that copyright on photos is complicated.

Is this a photo that you took? If not, who was the photographer? DS (talk) 02:18, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Tahomadude: Many of the photos on that page are official photos of the mayor created by the city and it seems are not covered by copyright. What is your father's name and is there an offical photo of your father as mayor? RudolfRed (talk) 02:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Tahomadude: Please see WP:A picture of you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:50, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Dear Teahouse staff

What should I do so that the User page: timbaraliris is modified and improved continuously.

This man deals with science and education. His data and his online publications will be added value for the Wikipedia site. TimBaraliris (talk) 18:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey, @TimBaraliris. So, that's not what we do here. We create and maintain articles on subjects, including people, who are notable per Wikipedia standards, which you can read about at WP:Notability (people). If you're Tim Baraliris, you might also want to read WP:AUTOBIO and its links. Valereee (talk) 19:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, TimBaraliris. You should also read WP:UP to discover what kind of thing is acceptable on a user page. ColinFine (talk) 20:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:TimBaraliris/sandbox

@TimBaraliris: I fear my colleagues have misunderstood, because you did not correctly give the name of the page to which you refer. The biography of Kujtim Baraliu in your sandbox appears to be written in Albanian. You can either copy it to the Albanian-language Wikipedia, or rewrite it in English, then submit it for publication on this Wikipedia using the process described at WP:AFC. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Biography pages

How do I create biography pages that are not deleted? That is what i want to specialize as a writer Edu.Report (talk) 18:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Edu.Report, the quality of the reliable sources that you cite is all-important. If you neutrally summarize high quality, independent sources that devote significant coverage to the person, you will be well on your way to success. Cullen328 (talk) 18:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks that is a great advice. Edu.Report (talk) 18:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:BACKWARDS may have something helpful. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:20, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

That is what I was trying to do, I started a draft and then I was deleted. I could not even edited. How can I work on the article before it is deleted? Edu.Report (talk) 18:23, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

You could work in your Personal sandbox. Qcne (talk) 19:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Not being an Administrator, I cannot see the draft that was Speedy deleted, but as explained on your Talk page, it was considered too promotional. I recommend you look at existing biographies to get an idea of how content is presented to be neutral versus promotional. Biographies, especially, must have content verified by references. David notMD (talk) 19:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Edu Report. If you make sure you ignore absolutely everything said, written, or published, by the subject or their associates, and write summarizing only what independent commentators have published about the subject, your work will be less likely to be regarded as promotional. ColinFine (talk) 19:44, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Edu.Report: You can request a copy of the deleted page be put in your sandbox, so you can improve it, by asking at WP:REFUND. Please note that pages deleted as a copyright violation will not be restored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I think you meant "will not be restored". ColinFine (talk) 21:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Corrected. Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

How to show words in an infobox

In the article Mugaku Sogen, I'm trying to get the name in the category "disciples" to automatically show in the infobox without having to click on a thing that says "show", the way it works for other names in categories in that infobox like names in the category "teacher". Can anybody please either fix that for me or tell me how to fix it in a simple way? Thank you.SigurdsSister (talk) 07:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@SigurdsSister: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! Without changing technical code, the simplest solution is auto-showing the names by setting the |expand_disciples= parameter of the infobox template at the Mugaku Sogen article to true, which I've done in this edit. If that is not the change you want, let me know. LightNightLights (talk • contribs) 12:51, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!SigurdsSister (talk) 14:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

What is jargon?

I know this is going to be a stupid question but, what is Jargon? I have heard someone said "Don't use Jargon." What is Jargon? Can someone please explain to me? Thanks! 2600:8804:8A81:FA00:C486:85E4:D18E:1F1 (talk) 02:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

We actually have an article on Jargon. CLick on that link and have a read, and come back here if you still have questions. HiLo48 (talk) 02:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP! For a list of jargon on Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Glossary. We usually try not to use jargon while communicating to newer users as to not cause confusion. Justiyaya 02:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

On WP, jargon would be something like "You have a COI regarding that BLP." Insider language. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for explanation. I had thought that Jargon was a Klingon dialect. David notMD (talk) 14:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

TaH pagh taHbe. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

LOL. However, the science fiction author Andre Norton did write a novel called The Jargoon Pard. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 151.227.134.31 (talk) 16:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Reliable source

good day.

I have a question.

I have restored link rot on the loserfruit wikipedia page. The article for reference there that was used as a source for the statement that she had the 2nd largest following has been restored.

Problem is that the statement wich got quoted from in that article, was in their turn quoted from another site that is not a reliable source. It is also listed in that article as such that it was only a quote/info that came from the unreliable source "according to lineups.com".

What is the policy on using an article as a reference in this? Infrabel1 (talk) 13:53, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy: Loserfruit. David notMD (talk) 16:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Profile Mismatch and Confusion

I need help with my profile. When I search the name Adamu Garba II on Google, the highlight that come from Wikipedia is that of one Adamu Garba Talba. He carries my picture, my schools and some details about me. While he is currently 72 years, i am 42 years. I need assistance on how to remove his details from my account, and create a robust Wikipedia profile for myself.

I will appreciate a helping hand from the Teahouse community. Thank you Adamu Garba II (talk) 14:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Adamu Garba II: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1222. If you're seeing this on Google, there's nothing Wikipedia can do; you'd have to use their feedback processes. Furthermore, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; it is not a site for profiles, particularly if they're used to promote the subject of an article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

You should also be aware that many people in the world share the same name. Very few names are unique. When I Google my real name I see dozens of other people with the same name. I have never been confused with any of them. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

The information at Wikipedia Adamu Garba Talba appears to be only about that person. David notMD (talk) 16:25, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

It appears you created a draft about yourself Draft:Adamu Garba II which was deleted due to six months of inactivity. David notMD (talk) 16:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

TWA doesn't work

Hi, I'm trying to play TWA, but when it goes to the "Login or create an account" popup, the buttons stop working. I put this on the TWA talk page, but I wanted to put this in the Teahouse so this problem could get more attention. (idk if i'm allowed to put this on the Teahouse, i'm just trying to play the game :,) ) [2] Yyeeetlol (talk) 16:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Maybe try inputting a new URl for each step instead of relying on the buttons.

For example, you'd first open[3]. After that, head to [4], and so on incrementing the number in the URL. This sounds like an issue with the first step, so maybe try skipping it.

TWA is known to be buggy and, honestly, we should probably stop recommending it to newcomets Sincerely, Dilettante 17:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Yyeeetlol Sincerely, Dilettante 17:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Dilettante, thanks, but now it's stuck at the "Reply to Will" button, I'm just gonna read the normal introductions. Thank you Yyeeetlol (talk) 17:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry about that! I don't have any other advice unfortunately. Sincerely, Dilettante 17:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure

Hello, Yyeeetlol. Please note that the page says This tour only uses the source editor. If you use the visual editor or have it enabled it won't work yet. That may be the cause of the problem you are experiencing. Cullen328 (talk) 16:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Cullen328, I changed it to the source editor, but it still doesnt work. When I try to press the button that "Im logged in", it still doesn't redirect to anything. Yyeeetlol (talk) 17:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Yyeeetlol, you will need to disable the visual editor, according to the instructions. Cullen328 (talk) 17:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Draft feedback (+ question)

Hello friends! I have just created my first ever real draft article, which is here. I was wondering if could get some feedback from Teahousers here on how I could improve my draft. I also have a question about sourcing, namely if I am allowed to use the website of the organization itself for basic factual information (such as headquarters and leadership info). That's all. Thanks! Antrotherkus 17:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Antrotherkus, WP:ABOUTSELF is the relevant guideline. It essentially states that you can use the website so long as the claims are believable. I'd read the section in full if I were you. Sincerely, Dilettante 17:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Antrotherkus, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Teahouse hosts aren't really here to do reviews: a reviewer will get to your draft in time.

In answer to your question: yes, you may use primary sources (which is a broader category than just "their own publications" for such information. However, the bulk of your draft must come from independent sources, and more specifically, you need several sources each of which is independent, reliable, and contains significant coverage of the subject. It looks to me as if the Sky&Telescope is largely based on what the FRIPON team have said, which means that it is not indepedent; and the ESA one does not contain significant coverage. ColinFine (talk) 17:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Single-artist Museum

Please add the following to the Single-artist Museum Listing. DuryeaMuseum.com

Thank you~ JayneDuryea (talk) 17:38, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@JayneDuryea: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1222. You have already been told on your user talk page that only single-artist museums that have Wikipedia articles will be added to List of single-artist museums. Do you have a vested interest in putting this museum on? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1218#Duryea_Museum. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:18, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

vitruvian man

was he/it the very first in italy 2A02:C7C:60A6:7100:290E:8FD0:81AD:1715 (talk) 18:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your question is, IP editor, but if it's not answered at Vitruvian Man, you could try one of the reference desks - possibly WP:RD/H. 57.140.16.57 (talk) 19:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Sandbox

Where can I find the sandbox? I wanna practice my editing before commencing. (Discopleasant (talk) 19:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC))

@Discopleasant: The sandbox for everyone is at WP:SANDBOX, and it gets cleared at regular intervals. There is also a link there for your individual sandbox, which won't be automatically cleared. RudolfRed (talk) 19:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Little Mermaid (2023)

The Little Mermaid (2023 film)

Please don't remove the Bulletin Awards and the Fido Award. Here are the links to show that these awards are real, not fake : WINNERS ANNOUNCED: Bulletin Awards 2023 — The Bulletin (onthebulletin.com)  ; Fido Awards 2024: ‘Anatomy Of A Fall’ Star Messi Finally Gets His Oscar Moment (deadline.com) Rincemermaid (talk) 20:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Rincemermaid: This is something you should raise on the article's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:50, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Article Wizard

Hi, here again. I'm in the article wizard right now, and I am looking to write a draft on a lake that I live near. For the three options of "I'm paid to edit, I'm writing about myself, or a close person/subject, and I'm not connected to the subject", which one of the last two should I put on? Yyeeetlol (talk) 17:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

You should be fine with not connected to the subject, as I don't believe you'd have enough of a conflict of interest with a body of water without being under some sort of water regulatory or pumping organisation. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 17:38, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@CommissarDoggo: Please ping enquirers when you reply, here on The Teahouse. In this case, Yyeeetlol. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:53, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Temporary Page for Wedding

I had the idea to make a funny, “gag” Wikipedia page for my brother at his wedding for my Best Man speech. My idea is just to have people use their phones to find his Wikipedia “page” while doing the speech and have something they can look at for fun throughout the evening, with the page simply being deleted the day after. Can I get a moderator or admin to “sponsor” me to let me publish a temporary article - again, one that would simply be deleted the day after? Mstanley92 (talk) 19:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Mstanley92: No, that's not something allowed on Wikipedia. You will need to find another website for your gag. RudolfRed (talk) 19:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Mstanley92. Please don't attempt do this. It will almost certainly end up quickly deleted per WP:What Wikipedia is not, and it might lead to your account being blocked if you're too persistent in trying to do so. Take a look at Wikipedia:Alternative outlets, and perhaps you'll find a website more appropriate for what you'd like to do. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Is source biased?

Hi, I'm looking to make an article on a lake, and I have a website for it but it's the cities parks and rec. Idk if this is a dumb question, i'm new to making an article but is this biased or will it hinder NPOV? [5]https://parks.snco.us/136/Lake-Shawnee] Yyeeetlol (talk) 23:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Yyeeetlol. Such a website can be used to corroborate uncontentious facts about the lake, but probably not to help demonstrate the lake's Notability (in the Wikipedia sense).

As for the uncontentious facts, to retain a Neutral Point of View, avoid repeating/paraphrasing anything that makes subjective value judgements. Statements such as "the lake's surface area is X square kilometers" or "it is the third highest lake in country Y" would be fine (if true); ones like "the lake lies in a beautiful setting" or "the lake is the pride of Municipality Z" would not, unless they were direct quotes of someone of relevant significance, such as 'Thomas Mann wrote that "the lake lies in a beautiful setting"' [with a citation to the quote]. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 151.227.134.31 (talk) 01:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:IAR still applied?

I just got to know about “ignore all rules” I want to know when this is applied exactly and whats the benefit of it and how exactly is useful ? HarryD (talk) 06:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. IAR is only relevant if the community feels that a particular action that may go against a rule nevertheless benefits the encyclopedia. It isn't a license for people to do anything they want. What IAR really means is that the spirit of the rules is more important than the letter of the rules. 331dot (talk) 07:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

HarshalDhotre06, IAR is the most difficult policy to apply properly and here is the standard I would apply: If other editors say, "yeah, that makes good sense" then you have applied IAR correctly. On the other hand, if other editors respond "what the heck are you doing?", then you have applied IAR incorrectly. The only time in 15 years that I recall consciously applying Ignore All Rules was in the case of Romola Remus, the very first screen actress to play Dorothy Gale, the fictional character at the center of the Wizard of Oz stories. The "rule" is that notable actesses must have multiple roles. Remus had but one. I concluded that her well documented single role in a very early silent film was enough. I explained my reasoning at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Romola Remus eleven years ago, and the article still stands. Cullen328 (talk) 09:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

How Much Context is Too Much Context?

Heya,

I'm a novice editor (as in not highly experienced, not the Wikipedia service award) that generally only makes the occasional tweak for various reasons, and I had a question about how much context to provide. On the Melina Abdullah article, it was mentioned that Dr. Abdullah has been selected as Dr. Cornel West's VP for the US 2024 election.

I had changed the line

In April 2024, independent presidential candidate Cornel West announced Abdullah as his running mate.

to

On April 10, 2024, independent, self-described, "non-Marxist socialist," U.S. 2024 presidential candidate Cornel West announced Abdullah as his running mate.

to add more context for unfamiliar readers, due to low media coverage of Dr. West, but most of the second half of the edit was removed. How much context is too much?

Should I put back U.S. into the edit to specify which country's election it is, since it assumes an American reader? Is mentioning a candidate's political leaning too much information, since it can be found in the linked article?

Additionally, I've noticed that titles (Sir, Dr., Ph.D., etc.) are not generally used in articles. Why is this?

Basically, how do I structure my edits to provide more context without it being too much? Madamepestilence (talk) 05:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Madamepestilence. The obvious problem that I see with your edit is that it is a self-description. Wikipedia has very little interest in how people describe themselves, and instead we prefer descriptions by independent reliable sources. Why is additional context even needed? Anyone who wants to know more can simply click the Wikilink Cornel West for all the context they want. That is the beauty of a wiki. As for the policy on honorifics, please read WP:SURNAME and WP:HONORIFIC. With very rare exceptions such as Dr. Ruth, we do not refer to people by their academic titles. We refer to them only by their surname after first mention, if their culture has a given name-surname tradition. That certainly applies to West. If a paragraph mentions his relatives named West, then it is permissible to refer to him as "Cornel" in that paragraph only, for the purposes of disambiguation. Cullen328 (talk) 09:46, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Madamepstilence, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer to your main question is that this is in the area of editorial discretion, and different editors might disagree about any individual case - the thing to do is to discuss it on the article's talk page and get consensus.

What I will say (without having looked at the article) is that at the very least, wording like that should not be included unless it cites an Independent source saying that about him. In an article about West, it would clearly be acceptable to say that he describes himself in a certain way, and cite his own publications, per ABOUTSELF; but in an article not about him, that seems inappropriate me.

Whether to say "US" or not is again a question of editorial discretion. I (as a non-American!) would say it is not necessary here, whereas it would be if it were in most other countries; but there's no harm in putting it in.

And you're right that we don't usually use titles and honorifics in articles, except once in the lead. See MOS:HONORIFICS. ColinFine (talk) 09:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Template/ Tag for "I'm making major changes to this article"

Is there a template or tag or something that says "I'm going to restructure this article over a couple of edits, in a short period of time" or something along those lines? For editors who are, for instance, moving sections around and saving between edits in a semi-intermediate state. e.g. deleting a section, then merging the content across other sections, for instance.

I think I've seen something like this before but can't find it by searching. Thanks!

JeffUK 09:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

{{under construction}} ? ColinFine (talk) 09:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

It was {{in use}} that I was thinking of, which is linked from there, thank you! JeffUK 09:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Fallout (series) article subject to terrible revisions by one editor

I’m new to this but I am hoping to receive some help on a specific article: one editor has spent the last hour repeatedly adding superfluous information and muddying a section of the Fallout (series) article. I think an article ban may be appropriate but again I am new so just having another set of eyes on this would be great Utopiayouser (talk) 06:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Before bans and blocks are discussed(if they are even warranted) you should first attempt to discuss this issue on the article talk page or with the editor directly. 331dot (talk) 07:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

User talk:Corporate132 and User talk:Utopiayouser have both been blocked from editing Fallout (series) for two weeks for edit warring. David notMD (talk) 10:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

How to re-assess an article?

I think this article Tone (linguistics) no longer belongs to the start-class rating because it has some reliable sources and is reasonably well-written with in-depth information. I wasn't sure how to re-rate it as a C-class or B-class (or if I have the permissions to do that at all). If someone else could confer on this topic, that would be much appreciated. Justanotherinternetguy^t@lk 13:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Justanotherinternetguy and welcome to the Teahouse. You can request re-assessments of articles by other editors at WP:WPWP/ASSESS '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 13:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Justanotherinternetguy^t@lk 13:13, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Moving AFD

Could anyone move this AFD to the AFD pages? 2A01:36D:1200:94F:1124:669:E55F:EAC8 (talk) 07:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

The OP has been blocked, but for future reference, the instructions for IP editors who want to create an AfD are here. 57.140.16.57 (talk) 13:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Submitting a draft through articles for creation

Hi! I am a newbie but want to submit a draft through articles for creation. Do I go straight there, or is it best to ask someone here to review my draft? Any help would be MUCH appreciated :) Becca33 (talk) 17:56, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Becca33Where's the article draft namespace? I wish to contribute to it's improvement. Caleb Ndu (talk) 18:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Use WP:YFA as a path to creating a draft. Be sure that you understand the essential need for references, and how to format references. AfC then allows you to submit your draft. There is a backlog. The system is not a queue, meaning that any draft may be reviewed in days, weeks, or sadly, months. All that said, general advice is to gain experience editing existing articles before attempting to create a new article. P.S. Teahouse hosts are here to advise, but do not wear a second hat as reviewers. David notMD (talk) 18:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Caleb Ndu While wanting to help other editors is admirable, given that you have had your account for less than two weeks, I suggest refraining from offering to co-author drafts by other editors. David notMD (talk) 19:00, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@David notMD That's not an issue. I wish to be directed to where I could be more friendly. I wish to interact with other editors as much as I can. I didn't join 2 weeks ago. I joined 2 months ago. Caleb Ndu (talk) 19:26, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Becca33 (talk) 14:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi! I have created a draft page through the article wizard on the page you linked above. Do I need to click publish for it to be reviewed - is there anything I need to add when publish? Becca33 (talk) 14:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Becca33, and welcome to the Teahouse. I echo David's advice: every day we see dozens of drafts written by eager new editors before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works. Hardly any of them are acceptable as they stand, and many are never going to be acceptable, because the creators have not begun by determining whether or not the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Naturally, the enthusiastic creators get disappointed (at the very least) that their efforts appear not to be appreciated.

I see that you are a Marketing professional: to be honest, you may find that more of a hindrance than a help, because often the ways of writing which are entirely appropriate in your work are entirely inappropriate in Wikipedia. So, as David says: go slowly, and make sure you understand fundmental concepts such as verifiability, reliable sources, independent sources and neutral point of view before you venture to follow the advice in your first article.

And I'd address most of that to @Caleb Ndu as well. ColinFine (talk) 19:41, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so much! :) Becca33 (talk) 14:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

porque me expulsan?

escuchadme Hectorinito (talk) 14:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Hectorinito, do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 14:29, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hola Hectorinito. This is the English Wikipedia. If you have a question about Spanish Wikipedia, you'll have to ask there - try es:Wikipedia:Café/Archivo/Ayuda/Actual.

On the other hand, if this was about your edit to Wanda Jackson in English Wikipedia, then it was correctly reverted, as there does not appear to be any reason to say she is connected with Spain. ColinFine (talk) 14:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

How can contribute to add a new page in Wikipedia?

I want to add a new page. Please let me know if it is possible? Paridhika Kayal (talk) 15:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It is possible, but it is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia. It's much like asking "how do I give a violin recital at Carnegie Hall" or "how do I build a house". There is a lot to learn first. I suggest that instead of diving right in, that you first spend much time editing existing articles in areas that interest you, as well as use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia and what is expected of article content. 331dot (talk) 15:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia in other languages

We would like to translate Electronic literature as a good article in Egyptian Arabic, Urdu, Tamil, Bengali, Hindi, Marati, Malayalam, Haryanvi, and Punjabi. Would we need different accounts for these languages? Is there one clearinghouse and one community? Would we need to work within the Wikipedia communities in each language separately? Is there a way to bridge a single account across multiple languages? What if we want to add more languages? Should we be coordinating updates across languages? Is there a way to do this within these various communities? thank you LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 15:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, @LoveElectronicLiterature! Your account will work on all Wiki projects. You do need to have each of your students create their own account, though -- you can't all edit through one account. You will need to follow the rules for each language wiki, as all are different, but many of the differences are not huge, and as a good article here on en.wiki, it is very likely it meets requirements for other language wikis. Valereee (talk) 15:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, LoveElectronicLiterature, and welcome to the Teahouse. The general answer is, yes, you may, but each different language Wikipedia is a separate project, and they may have different standards and procedures. You can find a general guide in Translate us, but you'll need to examine each Wikipedia separately to check whether what you are doing meets its requirements.

You don't need different accounts: normally, accounts are automatically enabled on any Wikimedia project (you may get an unexpected welcome message the first time you visit a particular version).

Some people have an interest in trying to keep articles in different Wikipedias in step, but there is no general requirement to do so, and often they are very different. ColinFine (talk) 15:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

editing wikipedia

how do I edit a semi-protected page? Ml5003 (talk) 16:02, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey, @Ml5003, you should be able to. Which page are you trying to edit? Valereee (talk) 16:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ml5003 By waiting until you've been on Wikipedia for 4 days and made 10 edits, please see WP:SEMI. There are several other protection types on that page too, so peruse them if you want. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Ml5003 as it appears you are an autoconfirmed user as seen here, you should be able to edit it like any other page (except extended confirmed and protected pages). What happens when you try? - Arjayay (talk) 16:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@CommissarDoggo, they already meet that standard. Valereee (talk) 16:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

I can see that now, I don't think I've ever heard of that issue before. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ml5003: If you click the "view source" tab, you should get a page that has a button to submit an edit request. If not, you can go to the talk page and place {{edit semi-protected}} in a new section along with a request for another editor to make the edit for you. (edit conflict) apparently you should be able to edit directly? RudolfRed (talk) 16:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Can't send emails on this wiki

I am very new here and well, the thing is that I accidentally revealed my IP Address on an edit - so I've been trying to use the form to send an email to Oversight for suppressing said edit. However, I am unable to do so since I "cannot send email to other users on this wiki", which is the alert I get every time I submit the form. I have provided the email address and have allowed others to send me emails on my preferences. So, I really don't know what I'm supposed to do now. I wonder if it is because this is a new account? EnvinyatarElessar (talk) 13:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @EnvinyatarElessar and welcome to the Teahouse. Have you tried Special:EmailUser/Oversight? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 14:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Ah you see that was the form I was talking about - every time I try submitting it, it prevents me from doing so as "You cannot send email to other users on this wiki". I was hoping to know how to resolve that very issue EnvinyatarElessar (talk) 16:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@EnvinyatarElessar: See Wikipedia:Requests_for_oversight for other options if email does not work for you. RudolfRed (talk) 18:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Show a tag next to the username whether a Wikipedia user is an administrator

What is a Wikipedia script or gadget to show whether a Wikipedia user is an administrator next to the username? The administrator status is displayed automatically without any script on Russian Wikipedia by appending character A in parenthesis after the user name.

For example, see [6]: in this example, the user Victoria (A) is an administrator (there is (A) after the username Victoria), whereas the user Lumaca is not an administrator (no (A) after the username Lumaca).

How to achieve the same in English Wikipedia? There is a gadget on English Wikipedia to strike out usernames that have been blocked, but not a gadget to show administrators. Please help. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 10:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Maxim Masiutin Welcome to the Teahouse. To be honest, I couldn't see the difference in the example you linked to.

But here on en.wiki there are a number of user scripts available to achieve what you want. Checking my commons.js file, I see that I have long been using User:Amalthea/userhighlighter.js, which renders admin signatures in a nice, obvious cyan colour. A quick check of that script description suggests there might be a better script at User:Theopolisme/Scripts/adminhighlighter.js, although I've never tried that one.

I also like seeing blocked usernames with a strike-through, but this, as you say, is a setting you can opt in for in Preferences>Gadgets>Appearance.

There are innumerable other userscripts available for a wide range of tasks. You can find them all by following links at Wikipedia:User scripts. I hope this gives you what you want. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for referring the "User:Theopolisme/Scripts/adminhighlighter.js", I will use it and give my feedback. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 14:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Upon your advice, I used the script User:Amalthea/userhighlighter.js for a few hours and was very happy with it. This was exactly what I wanted. Although it used background colour rather than the "(A)" prefix, it served my purpose anyway. Than you, you've made my day! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 18:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Maxim Masiutin Very pleased to have been of help! Nick Moyes (talk) 19:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Remove shudra sentences from devanga Wikipedia

Hello

please find reliable source in the below link no where it is mentioned that we are shudra

see and change it

https://pure.northampton.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/55104710/Haridarshan_Pooja_2021_The_influence_of_the_childhood_experiences_of_women_in_Bangalore_India_upon_their_aspirations_for_their_children_socio-cultural_and_academic_perspectives_A_community_based_study.pdf

Harishsk2022 (talk) 09:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

This page is for questions on how to edit Wikipedia. The place to propose improvements to an article is the talk page of that article, in this case Talk:Devanga. Please provide a reliable source for your proposal. The fact that some source does not assert something is irrelevant. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:35, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello

please find reliable source in the below link no where it is mentioned that we are shudra

see and change it

https://pure.northampton.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/55104710/Haridarshan_Pooja_2021_The_influence_of_the_childhood_experiences_of_women_in_Bangalore_India_upon_their_aspirations_for_their_children_socio-cultural_and_academic_perspectives_A_community_based_study.pdf

Harishsk2022 (talk) 09:40, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Stop adding this everywhere. Please. You did this to my talk page already. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 09:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

When it will get updated?? ??

How long time it will take!? Harishsk2022 (talk) 09:44, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Harishsk2022 You have made edit requests at Talk:Devanga which have all been denied. Asking the same here at Teahouse has no purpose. Please stop. David notMD (talk) 09:52, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't want to edit you just remove that word shudra from the devanga Wikipedia page

Hello

please find reliable source in the below link no where it is mentioned that we are shudra

see and change it

https://pure.northampton.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/55104710/Haridarshan_Pooja_2021_The_influence_of_the_childhood_experiences_of_women_in_Bangalore_India_upon_their_aspirations_for_their_children_socio-cultural_and_academic_perspectives_A_community_based_study.pdf

Harishsk2022 (talk) 09:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

At WP:ANI there is now a recommendation that User:Harishsk2022 be indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 10:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I have blocked them for one week for "disruptive editing" and have left an explanatory message on their talk page so they understand why their constant demands everywhere to make an edit they want has proven disruptive to everyone else. Hopefully, they will not try the same tactic again once the block expires, or it may become permanent. Competence is required. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

UPDATE: Now blocked for a further week for continuing their disruptive tactic on their talk page! Nick Moyes (talk) 13:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

As a heads up, they came onto #wikipedia-en-help on IRC and demanded we unblock them and "address [their] concern". —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Source assessment notes} 02:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

How do I go about removing "This article's lead section may be too short to adequately summarize the key points...."

Hello,

Several years ago I created the wikipedia page on Joseph A. Tunzi. How do I go about removing the "This article's lead section may be too short to adequately summarize the key points. Please consider expanding the lead to provide an accessible overview of all important aspects of the article. (March 2024)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_A._Tunzi Daryl77 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Daryl77 The lead (all the text before the first section heading) is five paragraphs and one sentence long. That is quite a long lead. This makes me wonder if @TDKR Chicago 101 in fact meant to add the Template:Lead_too_long template instead but added the short one by mistake. Qcne (talk) 15:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

My apologies, yes I meant to add the lead too long template. As you can see, the lead is quite long. My mistake. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I've updated the page to limit the lead to four paragraphs. Daryl77 (talk) 02:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@TDKR Chicago 101 I've updated the page to limit the lead to four paragraphs. Daryl77 (talk) 18:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Qcne I've updated the page to limit the lead to four paragraphs. Could you please remove the "This article's lead section may be too long. Please read the length guidelines and help move details into the article's body. (April 2024)" at the top of the page.

Here's a link to the page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_A._Tunzi Daryl77 (talk) 19:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Daryl77, you can remove it yourself if you think you've satisfied the concern. -- asilvering (talk) 19:57, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia Layout

why did you change the layout of information? In particular the dates lide/death, places etc of said individual...its too hard to read..bring back the old layout. 2604:2D80:D48A:300:C5C1:3692:D618:530F (talk) 16:27, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1222. This sounds like it is specific to one article in particular, so any concerns should be brought to that article's talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

The poster is using the mobile version and describing an infobox so I guess it's the issue at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Infobox television and phab:T362747. It wasn't intentional and there is work to fix it. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Excluding links within templates from a "what links here" page

I've been looking at the pages that link to Depersonalization derealization disorder and realized a majority only link to the article through the mental disorders template. Is there any way to hide pages that only link to the selected article through templates from the article's "what links here" search?

Thank you, Have a nice day! ¿VØ!D? ✨ 20:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

An "insource" search can be used. For example: insource:/\[\[[dD]epersonalization disorder/ finds 38 articles. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, appreciate it a bunch. : ) ¿VØ!D? ✨ 22:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@VastV0idInSpace0: See User:PrimeHunter/Source links.js for a way to add a "Source links" option to pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

question

how do I fix my "Draft:Meiko Mochizuki" Page? - From, AikoWatahi-Kun (talk) 17:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@AikoWatahi-Kun: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1222. For one, your draft doesn't have any inline citations whatsoever, which are required to establish the subject's wikinotability. Some of the external links you've put down lead to sites with user-generated content, which will not help in that aspect. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

thanks for the advice. AikoWatahi-Kun (talk) 23:29, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Formating for an image

I am working on this draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Heights_and_weights_of_US_presidents#Current_president and am trying to put in the picture of Joe Biden standing to demonstrate his height and weight. My questions is: Is there a way to make it so the image does not break through the line separating the sections. If you could help that would be greatly appreciated. Pickup Andropov (talk) 00:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Try Template:Clear after the image, before the next header. -- asilvering (talk) 01:14, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

When to remove the Orphan Template

I have expanded an article to un-orphan another article. Does one connection suffice to remove the orphan warning template at the top, or should more be established? The previously orphaned article in question is SAP Anywhere ElizabethIsAlive (talk) 10:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

You can remove it if there is at least one link. By the way, you should probably add a citation to the addition you made to the other page just so the section and link don't get removed. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 11:18, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

@ElizabethIsAlive - "Once it has an incoming link from at least one article or list, the orphan tag can be removed (disambiguation pages, redirects and draft articles do not count)." Quoted from banner on one the monthly backlog categories. More info at Wikipedia:Orphan. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 18:02, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

But WP:ORPHAN also states: More colloquially, editors also sometimes use "orphan" to refer to pages that do not have as many incoming links as they ought to, even if they do not meet the technical definition for orphan status. The Banner talk 19:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

That's true, but it basically means one link needed, though Mrfoogles (talk) 20:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

It is clearly stated in bold in WP:Orphan: "only place the tag if the article has zero incoming links from other articles". --Oloddin (talk) 03:59, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

^_@ 176.113.115.186 (talk) 17:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Can you accept my Adam Rose article?

He was the first ever Price is Right contestant to win 1,000,000 dollars. Thepersonwhowatchespages (talk) 00:57, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Adam Rose (The Price is Right contestant)

no Pickup Andropov (talk) 01:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

is the article taken? Cassopeia ...talk?... 01:02, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Thepersonwhowatchespages, please have a look at WP:FIRST for some tips on how to write wikipedia articles. -- asilvering (talk) 01:11, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Thepersonwhowatchespages, there's already some information about Adam Rose in the article The Price Is Right § Winnings Records, which is a lot more than the one sentence in your draft. If you think there's more to say about that him, then you could always expand that paragraph with more reliable sources. Improving an existing article is nearly always easier than writing a whole new one, and it could even be split off into it's own article later. -- D'n'B-t -- 04:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:BLP violation

I want to add this to the Rahul Gandhi article:

Rahul Gandhi has threatened that the whole of India will be on fire if the BJP wins the 2024 parliamentary elections and changes the Constitution, during an address at Delhi's Ramlila Maidan.

Will it be a WP:BLP violation?-Haani40 (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC) Haani40 (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

BLP violation or not, I wouldn't advise adding that to an article because the meaning is unclear. If he used the words "the whole of India will be on fire" then perhaps they could be reported in quote marks, but without further explanation it's unclear what those words mean and they shouldn't be stated in Wikipedia's voice. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: What he said was in Hindi. I have provided 4 citations for it, the 4th of which has an embedded video. When translated it means, "the whole country will be on fire if the BJP wins the 2024 Indian parliamentary elections and changes the Constitution". When there are 4 sources, can it not be stated that he (Rahul Gandhi) said so in Wikipedia's voice?-Haani40 (talk) 19:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

If you're quoting someone, then it should be in quote marks rather than Wikipedia's voice, and especially when the meaning is not obvious or the language employs metaphor. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: There are 4 reliable sources, one of which (the 4th) even has an embedded video, so maybe I can type,

According to Rahul Gandhi, he will set the whole of India on fire if the BJP wins the 2024 Indian parliamentary elections and changes the Constitution.

-Haani40 (talk) 20:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

..... or maybe,

Rahul Gandhi has said, "(we) will set the whole of India on fire if the BJP wins the 2024 Indian parliamentary elections and changes the Constitution."

-Haani40 (talk) 20:47, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

That appears to be a misrepresentation of what he said. None of the sources you've cited suggest that he said "we will set the whole country on fire", as you've quoted him here. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

As explained above, ideas expressed in Wikipedia's voice shouldn't include metaphors. Quote marks are necessary if this is to be included. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Haani40 I suggest read WP:NOTNEWS, WP:LASTING, WP:SENSATIONAL, WP:Weight.

Wikipedia generally avoids predictive news and rhetoric unless a lasting impact is confirmed by secondary source. If things really go bad and any academic book covers saying Rahul Gandhi said and things spiral downwards then some value otherwise it simple election season WP:SENSATIONAL rhetoric Wikipedia unlikely to have immediate space. Bookku (talk) 05:08, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

I suggest you follow more WP:RfC discussions by others on various topics without getting involved in actual discussions that will help, I suppose. Bookku (talk) 05:13, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

References

Question about editing.

Hello, I have a question about editing. My inquiry concerns an article being edited and whether adding a page in connection to more extensive subject matter or if creating a new article is required ? TriosLosDios (talk) 05:11, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

(talk) 06:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

TriosLosDios, please specify the article being edited and the info that might be added. 126.205.252.56 (talk) 06:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Plenipotentiary § Translation

Should said section be removed from the article due to being as an advertisement, a dictionary entry, and original research? This was proposed on the talk page in 2013, but there've been only 4 edits to the talk page since then. 2A0D:6FC2:6A90:4D00:0:0:0:5F9 (talk) 10:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

By all means by WP:BOLD and go ahead. If someone restores it, then is the time for further discussion. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:15, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Submitted Article - Draft:Andrew Wallas

Hello, would someone please help me? I have been in conversation with Wikipedia editor @DoubleGrazing who has made suggestions to an article I submitted about Andrew Wallas. I have made all the edits @DoubleGrazing suggested and re-submitted the article for approval last month. I logged back in today to find the message below and no update on my submission which has thrown me into a panic as to whether DoubleGrazing is a bonafide editor. Can anyone advise as to what the status is with the Andrew Wallas article as I am new to Wikipedia and finding it difficult to navigate? I would appreciate the benefit of your expertise as I am a bit lost now as to what to do? Thank you very much.

Notice of noticeboard discussion[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Warning to all Wikipedians! The user DoubleGrazing is a grandmaster editor who does not respect the rules of wikipedia and makes false statements. Thank you. Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Usedtobecool: thanks (I think). Sometimes I don't know whether to laugh or cry... DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply] Just ignore it, for now (I think). — Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC) Lornadot (talk) 09:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Your draft is submitted and pending, as indicated. 331dot (talk) 09:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I greatly appreciate your update and will edit the page as per all the suggestions for which I am very grateful. Lornadot (talk) 11:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Lornadot There's nothing wrong with @DoubleGrazing, they were brought to ANI by a seemingly disgruntled IP editor without actually citing any offences by them.

This can sometimes happen, where users are brought to ANI by other users for no real reason at all. That seems to be the case here, and the listing no longer exists on ANI, meaning it was likely removed. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 09:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that there's nothing wrong with me, but nothing I'm prepared to publicly own up to at this time. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Really glad to hear that @DoubleGrazing and I will edit the page according to all the suggestions and revert. Thank you again. Lornadot (talk) 11:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

"Only thing in life worse than being talked about", etc. Hey ho. DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I am very grateful for your prompt response. Lornadot (talk) 11:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

As for your draft, it still contains far too much promotional puff, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Before it can be accepted you need to remove phrases such as He works with individuals and businesses to fulfil their latent potential and He applied everything he had learnt and experienced to create a business with a spiritual ethos. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I will try and edit as per your suggestions. Lornadot (talk) 11:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

According to this draft, the FT wrote that Wallas said something about the space for reconnecting with your inner wisdom. I hope that this was just a columnist's joke. If not, then since I last looked at it the FT must have plunged into idiocy. 118.18.141.213 (talk) 11:04, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Dealing with Vandalism

Recently I saw a strange post on the Robotics talk page that I think was vandalism. After reading the protocol I decided to delete the post, but I'm still unclear about the process. Should I do anything else about this? SeiBean (talk) 11:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@SeiBean If someone is vandalising Wikipedia, you should revert the edit and apply a warning to the user. You can either do that by placing a warning template on their talk page manually, or by using a tool like Twinkle to apply it semi-automatically.

To clarify, you should, as a general rule, only ever start with a level 1 template for most examples of poor conduct on Wikipedia. It's very rare that you'll have to start with anything higher, as most vandalism is ultimately pretty harmless. Remember not to bite the newcomers. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 11:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Several hours ago, somebody posted something unrelated to the article of which that is the talk page. This edit wasn't vandalism. Then the same person removed it. This edit wasn't vandalism either. Which edit constituted vandalism? 118.18.141.213 (talk) 11:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

I checked the page history and then their contributions and couldn't find any actions from SeiBean on the talk page for Robotics. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 11:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

You'll have to forgive me; perhaps they reverted it before I edited it. I am still very new myself, I made my account last week. SeiBean (talk) 12:13, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

I assumed the original post was vandalism, as it seemed 1. totally unrelated and 2. something a troll might say. After I deleted the post under the assumption of vandalism; I am not sure why it lists under the person's name Apologies if that was not the right decision. SeiBean (talk) 11:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Temporal terms

This is not a question, but a suggestion. We editors should avoid temporal terms, such as "The author's most recent (or latest) book is...." Or "The author recently published ..." or "To date he has published ten books." These phrases remain sometimes for years after they are no longer true. We should instead use actual dates, such as, "In 2024, the author published ..." or "As of 2024 he has published ten books." Maurice Magnus (talk) 12:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Maurice Magnus The Manual of Style agrees with you: MOS:TODATE. Bazza 7 (talk) 12:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

New topic

how can i add -? Ronald Granberg (talk) 09:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

How can you add which new topic to what? 126.254.232.113 (talk) 10:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ronald Granberg, WP:BACKWARDS and WP:YFA may be what you're after. Starting an acceptable WP-article without and WP-experience is difficult. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:02, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

If you're asking about how to add a new topic to a talk page, there should be a button up with the view/edit/history buttons. TypoEater (talk) 13:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Need Guidance on Handling a Content Dispute Where Tags Are Treated as Vandalism

Hi, I'm relatively new to editing Wikipedia and recently faced a challenging situation.

While reading a high profile article I encountered a statement which I felt is too strongly worded considering the available evidence. I made a small adjustment explaining my rationale and opened a talk topic regarding the issue. My edit was immediately reverted without addressing the merit of the improvement. I then suggested a clarification which was also immediately rejected with a vandalism accusation. I then added a disputed tag to the aforementioned statement citing the disputed guidelines: "Information that is particularly difficult to verify", "Reference to sources that are outdated or whose reliability has been subsequently questioned." My tag was immediately reverted and I was again accused of vandalism, reported and subsequently called out on my own talk page. The statement indubitably fulfils the required conditions to be considered disputed according to the guidelines; The nature of the dispute makes me think that there might be strong underlying religious biases affecting the editorial responses, though I'm not sure how to address this without exacerbating the situation.

A fellow more experienced editor referred me to this page. Much thanks. Omar Jabarin (talk) 03:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@CleverTitania: Omar Jabarin (talk) 03:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Omar Jabarin Revert business is most times waste of time and energy distance yourself immediately from that. Discuss at talk pages follow WP:DR.

My personal perception is Middle east topics would have lot many experienced Wikipedians from all sides so just note down on talk page and let other experienced users take care. You can productively work in the articles where less users are there gain experience and then later you can always join back. Thats my personal advice.

Bookku (talk) 03:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Is this about Second Temple? There already an extensive discussion about this at WP:RSN in addition to the article's talk page. Please clarify what help you are asking for. RudolfRed (talk) 03:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Omar Jabarin: fixing ping RudolfRed (talk) 03:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Just how to progress in such scenarios. The whole situation seems frozen and seems like it was done in complete contrary to guidelines though I might just unfamiliar with the pace and workflow. Why is it acceptable to remove a totally legitimate dispute tag without the dispute being resolved? Shouldn't it be removed only once the dispute is actually resolved? Why the repeated vandalism accusations and hostile tones towards legitimate edits and clarifications? I'm just trying to draw more experienced editors attention to the issue and current climate for novices since I feel helpless. I guess I'll put the situation on hold for now and check what's up in a few days. Omar Jabarin (talk) 04:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Omar Jabarin To my experience on Wikipedia up til now our long explanations matter less but what matters is concise presentation of applicable reliable sources and links to applicable policy such as I referred link to WP:DR and the other user WP:RSN.

Read previous discussions in archives of the same and related articles study what references have been provided and can you provide any new academic reference to suggest a new position.

It's not you only but we suggest other users too, to gain experience from other topic areas too. Bookku (talk) 13:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@ Talk:Second Temple discussion you can provide a neutral synopsis of the discussions up til now there with applicable reliable sources policies and then request a third opinion at WP:3O there after WP:DRN there after WP:RfC Bookku (talk) 13:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

hi...

hi...how do you create your own article so where not a lot are taken?...thanks [[user:Penny(Cassopeia)|<span style="font-family:Gothic;color:darkslateblue">Cassopeia</span>]] [[user_talk:Penny(Cassopeia)|<span style="font-family:Sans;color:pink">...talk?...</span>]] (talk) 00:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

why....is my signature like this?...it's supposed to be different...can someone help fix my signature? to where i want it?... [[user:Penny(Cassopeia)|<span style="font-family:Gothic;color:darkslateblue">Cassopeia</span>]] [[user_talk:Penny(Cassopeia)|<span style="font-family:Sans;color:pink">...talk?...</span>]] (talk) 00:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Penny(Cassopeia), welcome to the Teahouse. Select "Treat the above as wiki markup" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal-signature. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

ohh... ok ty [[user:Penny(Cassopeia)|<span style="font-family:Gothic;color:darkslateblue">Cassopeia</span>]] [[user_talk:Penny(Cassopeia)|<span style="font-family:Sans;color:pink">...talk?...</span>]] (talk) 01:04, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

it's fixed! thanks! Cassopeia ...talk?... 01:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

you can start writing something in your sandbox and send it to be a draft which can then become an actual article. Pickup Andropov (talk) 00:59, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

ty Cassopeia ...talk?... 01:08, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Casswiopeia, and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds as if you are where I was eighteen years ago, desperately wanting to add an article to Wikipedia in order to "make my mark".

Now, I know that creating a new article is not the only way to contribute to Wikipedia (I've only ever created a handful), and, if you try it in your first couple of months, before you've learnt a lot about how Wikipedia works, you are likely to have weeks or months of disappointment and frustration, not to mention wasting your time (and other people's time) on impractical drafts.

I always advise new editors to spend a few months making improvements to existing articles, and gradually learning about crucial policies such as verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view and notability before even trying to create a new article. Then, when they think they are ready, they can read your first article to find out how to do it. ColinFine (talk) 14:43, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

How to get an article reviewed quickly

I made an article about a sport event but till date hasn't get reviewed and remains a draft. What can I do to improve that and done it quickly. Regards--KEmel49 ^t@lk13:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello. There is no way to guarantee a speedy review; reviews are conducted in no particular order by volunteers. Do you have a particular need for a speedy review? 331dot (talk) 13:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

If you didn't, check the advice in your draft where it says "Improving your odds of a speedy review". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Reporting an administrator

Hi. I've never had to do this, so I'm not very good on reporting. There is an administrator who just randomly deleted my page (and looking at his talk pages this has happened more than once) under "copyright infringement", and he didn't even bother to check if the issue was fixed (I had fixed it about half an hour before the page was deleted). It's definitely disruptive, as he doesn't even put in the effort to see if the deletion reason has been fixed. MemeGod ._. (talk) 15:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Nevermind, he did fix it. MemeGod ._. (talk) 15:59, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@MemeGod27 That's good. In future, simply drop the relevant person a note on their talk page to explain the situation. Hopefully they will check and restore, as appropriate. Also (in future) please avoid directly copy-pasting from sources that you have not written yourself. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't know how I convey your request in search for non addition on right preferences .so I usually turn on my sand box in hiring anytime questions to reveal its basics of journals and writings menage .

hopefully I desire to work on protoplasmic plants to encourage wast studies on longitudinal growing plants or weather oriented grades of polling gene consumer fruit field techios kelp managers for deoxygenated species in non rendering species of monophyletic kingdom.Cephalonia Pooja kumari bhardwaj (talk) 06:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Do you perhaps have a question? 126.205.252.56 (talk) 06:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Looks like vandalistic chatbot (Large language model) gobbledygook to me. Check out the User's Talk page. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 151.227.134.31 (talk) 18:02, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

I have blocked this editor as not here to build an encyclopedia because they are spouting gibberish and Competence is required. Cullen328 (talk) 19:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

WRITING A NEW ARTICLE FOR PUBLICATION

I AM A NEW WRITER ON WIKIPEDIA i want help on how to promote individuals and independent personalities to be accorded the rightful place they deserve online. Please put me through. Revbunmi (talk) 14:27, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Revbunmi Hello and welcome. Wikipedia is not about promoting or honoring individuals. Our only interest here is in summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability- such as a notable person. I might suggest that you first spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to learn more about how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content- as well as use the new user tutorial. Writing a new article is the most difficult task to attempt to perform here, and some experience and knowledge is highly recommended to avoid disappointment and frustration. 331dot (talk) 14:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Revbunmi: (edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I am afraid that promoting anything is forbidden here. That being said, please see your first article. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

The reviewer explained why your draft Draft:OLUBUNMI ADELEYE THOMAS was declined. David notMD (talk) 20:08, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Redirect into disambiguation

I recently turned Lummi from a redirect into Lummi Nation into a disambiguation page, given that there were a wide variety of pages about "Lummi" with no easily discernable primary topic (IMO). Would anyone take a quick look and see if I missed anything or did it wrong? I've never done a disambiguation page from scratch so I don't know if I missed any technical aspects or anything. Thanks! PersusjCP (talk) 16:27, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@PersusjCP: Looks good to me. I have fixed most of the many inbound links; always worth checking when you make that kind of edit. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:22, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Can/Should I make this edit?

I was reading a page that is considered a contentious topic (Gun politics in the United States) and one sentence in particular just struck me as really out of place. It is the opinions of a political scientist and a SCOTUS clerk regarding a certain supreme court decision. Although they are experts, they aren't, in my opinion at least, that noteworthy. I've followed this topic for many years and have never heard their names before. Since there are thousands of political scientists and experts, I feel like that alone does not merit the inclusion of their opinion on the subject page. (Additionally there aren't any balancing opinions, both of these opinions are highly critical and there's no mention of people in favor of it so it's also an issue of WP:BALANCE) Several days ago I added a topic on the talk page mentioning that I think their inclusion should be deleted and laid out my reasons and it has not received any kind of response. Would it be acceptable for me to go ahead and make the edit or should I wait for at least someone to contribute to a consensus beforehand? (The guidelines for contentious topics were not clear to me) Blast335 (talk) 16:35, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Blast335, don't make the change yet. Your argument than that you haven't heard of these professors and that they are random law experts probably just got ignored. Do a bit of research on this first and then make a proposal just based on balance, perhaps with a balancing source. Both are well-known professors who specialize in this area. The sentence you object to is poorly written. Magarian is a professor of law at Washington University; it has been 30 years since he was a young law clerk. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:07, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. Perhaps my assertions were a bit strong regarding the significance of the two individuals, however I still would argue that their inclusion, even with a balancing source, adds little to nothing to the article. That there are experts who disagree with the Supreme Court's decision should be apparent by the fact that the decision was not unanimous since the Supreme Court is made up of legal experts. If they are disagreeing with the aspect of the decision that is unanimous then it is unclear.

Since the topic of the page is a summary of US gun politics and not of the Heller decision, would it perhaps be better to add some balancing sources and make a single statement along the lines of "Legal experts specializing in Constitutional law received the decision with mixed feelings" and then cite supporting and dissenting scholars? Given that those scholars, although respected and known in their fields, are not well-known public figures the inclusion of their name doesn't convey anything all that meaningful for the average reader. (Related, if I did go along with that route, would it be appropriate to remove all but one of the sources already cited and add a single balancing source? There are three sources for the existing statement which seems a bit excessive).

Thank you for you advice! Blast335 (talk) 18:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

The place for that discussion is the talk page of the article and you have a reasonable argument to make. Wikipedia is many encyclopedias in one; not all content is expected to be written just for the average reader. (Our science and math articles get quite technical for example.) We don't leave out academic research or detailed history of a topic just because the average reader may not be interested. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Edit to Billy Sinclair

Tried to onsert a change which, admittedly, may pose conflict of interest. The page now has some kind of "error" notice. How to return page to original format prior to attempted edit? Billy Sinclair (talk) 20:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Your two edits to Billy Sinclair have been reverted. (Past actions can be seen at View history.) What you did was to 'break' a reference adding content inside a reference and deleting the symbol that closes the reference. When you tried to fix it, the closing symbol was still missing. David notMD (talk) 20:11, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Billy Sinclair. Are you the person who is the subject of that article? If you are, please read WP:ABOUTYOU. You certainly have a conflict of interest, and should not normally edit that article directly, but instead should make edit requests for changes you would like to see to it.

If you are not Billy Sinclair, then you must change your username immediately. ColinFine (talk) 21:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Help With File

I would like to add a full file length of Lucid Dreams, but due to restrictions, I sadly cannot. Could I have someone do it for me? It would just be placed under the 24 sec file clip of Lucid Dreams.

Thanks! Caden danda (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Caden danda, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is always worth clarifying which article you are talking about. We appear to have articles on three songs or albums called Lucid Dreams - just because you know which one you are talking about, that doesn't mean that other people will.

I'm not sure what you mean by "add a full file length", but I'm guessing that you mean to add the audio of the whole song or album. That will almost certainly be a copyright violation - a short clip of copyright material can be used in an article as long as its use follows the non free content criteria, but it must not be excessive in length.

If that was not what you meant, please clarify. ColinFine (talk) 21:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Note: request clarified and answered in #Some plz add full lucid dreams to Wikipedia page on juice wrld below. --ColinFine (talk) 21:43, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

I am so sorry, I totally forget about copyrights, I apologize. I hope you have a good day! Caden danda (talk) 21:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Some plz add full lucid dreams to Wikipedia page on juice wrld

If someone could add the full length of juice wrld's lucid dreams to Juice Wrld, it would be awesome! Caden danda (talk) 21:33, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Please see my reply to your previous request, where I explained that the answer is a definite No, as that would be a copyright violation. ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry Again! Caden danda (talk) 21:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Please, upload this photograph

In the Draft:Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (soundtrack) article, there is a photograph of the cover of the soundtrack, can someone upload it well ,please?? 201.188.154.22 (talk) 22:27, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

non-free images can't be used in drafts. It will need to wait until the draft is approved. RudolfRed (talk) 00:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP 201.188.154.22. Non-free content can only be used in articles per non-free content use criterion #9; so, you should follow the guidance given in WP:DRAFTS#preparing drafts, and (as pointed out above) only upload the file after the draft has been approved as an article. If you try add the file to the draft, it will be removed either by a WP:BOT or another user and tagged for speedy deletion as orphaned non-free use per speedy deletion criterion F5. If you're worried that the AfC review of the draft will somehow be affected by not having an image in the main infobox, please don't. Whether the draft is going to be accepted entirely depends on whether the album is considered to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Recordings; the presence of or lack of images in the article isn't going to be considered when assessing the album's Wikipedia notability.

Now, if the draft is upgraded to article status and you're still unable to upload the file yourself, you can ask for assistance at Wikipedia:Files for upload. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

This request seems strangely familiar. Hasn't it been made before? 126.254.166.142 (talk) 03:27, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it has. This is yet again one of many IPs who have unsuccessfully attempted to get this draft moved to the mainspace (resulting in it now being indef semi-protected) and requesting for this iamge to be uploaded. This requests should now be taken as spam. Trailblazer101 (talk) 00:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Reporting a user for constant violations of WP:NPA

Wow, I can't believe I'm already back here asking about a report-related message. I (I've stated this a few times lol) am not very experienced with reporting users, and how should I report someone? It's been an ongoing issue that is 100% not going to get fixed without some sort of intervention, and I guess I've just had enough of it. Thanks :) MemeGod ._. (talk) 07:20, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

MemeGod27, the official channel is WP:ANI but you may not be ready for it if you have to ask. Assuming you're talking about HamiltonthesixXmusic (I have not notified them but may have to if you confirm), it may be best to go talk with them first, on their talk page. {{uw-npa2}} may suit the purpose. If that does not make it better, you can go to ANI. You need WP:DIFFS of specific edits that are incivil in order to make your case. Issues have to be serious, or ongoing and repeated after the last warning to be considered for admin intervention. I checked only the most recent exchange, not the whole history. Without a pattern, that one edit alone won't be considered bad enough for admin intervention. If it's not too complicated a case, you may want to make it on Cullen328's talk page instead. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:56, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay, will do so. Thanks! MemeGod ._. (talk) 07:59, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Colours of Error Messages

Can black and white error messages such as "Leave site? Changes you made may not be saved. Leave. Cancel" be coloured so that they be more easily seen out of the corner of one's eye.

How can Wikipedia software be advised of this request? ----MountVic127 (talk) 06:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

@MountVic127: I assume this message comes up when you try to close a browser tab with the editor open? If that is the case, I'm fairly certain that it would be your browser displaying the message rather than Wikipedia so there's nothing that can be done by us. If it's something different than closing the tab, could you describe how to get this message so that we can see it as well, to figure out where it is coming from? Tollens (talk) 06:20, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

@Tollens: Not sure. Need to retrace my steps. ----MountVic127 (talk) 08:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Women in Music - Iraina Mancini article (no source to support a claim)

the part on "Undo The Blue received positive reviews." has no source, theres no credible data online to support this claim. Do i delete this sentence then?Iraina Mancini Space011 (talk) 08:05, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Space011. Yes, if you have made a reasonable attempt to find a source and failed, then you are fully entitled to remove the claim. Make sure you say something appropriate in the edit summary, so that this won't be mistaken for vandalism. If somebody disagrees, they can discuss that with you on the talk page - see WP:BRD. ColinFine (talk) 09:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Appropriate graphics for penis article

DNFTT

For the Human penis article, do we absolutely need such an unpleasant photo at the top? Do note that a lot of people who use Wikipedia are school kids being taught sex ed. My daughter is only 11 and reasonably disturbed by the pic. I believe the graphic is just too much for a younger demographic who hasn't yet been exposed to nudity of others. I am a full grown man and even I feel like shielding my eyes and it makes me not want to read the article's top most paragraph to avoid looking at that pic. I am not homophobic or someone who is conservative or against nudity online, but it's unsettling to look at such a sad unappealing pic, and wondering if it can be changed to something better? In the article for woman's vagina, it shows a more palatable cartoon which is less an eyesore. Am I able to just use a cartoon instead that shows overall a medical diagram illustration? 49.180.233.23 (talk) 01:23, 20 April 2024 (UTC) Is it also possible to add some kind of function over the graphic photo where it warns people that the picture contains real nudity and they can choose to click and reveal the picture? Instead of just making everyone who opens the article to be forced to be greeted with a super gross looking penis instantly while reading the article. I am not wanting to censor Wikipedia however nobody wants to go on Wikipedia and be catching glimpses of something that can't be unseen. And also I feel angry at Wikipedia for choosing such a picture that is not appropriate for kids and making them feel unsettled to have to look at that. 49.180.233.23 (talk) 01:25, 20 April 2024 (UTC) I would think WP:NOTCENSORED would apply here. We have much worse shown on this site, and it would be hard to find a line between offensive/disturbing and not. Lynch44 (talk) 01:27, 20 April 2024 (UTC) Hi IP and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not censored, and there are images that might disturb readers. However, you can choose to hide images with user scripts, such as this one. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 01:28, 20 April 2024 (UTC) Yes, it can be changed to something better if there is one. A cartoon or illustration, yes, if there is one, and provides just as much information. The answer to most Wikipedia questions about images is either 1. that's the best available, for lack of many alternatives or by consensus, or 2. that's the one picked by the person that added the image and no one changed it for reason 1 or any other reason (check talk page to see if it was ever discussed before). Images that children shouldn't see are in articles that are exactly about those topics. But on exact topics, Wikipedia has very explicit images. I would suggest that you create an account and log in, which can be done completely anonymously and will keep you logged in for a year. It can prevent, for example, your child making an edit revealing personally identifying information while disclosing their IP (which Wikipedia does automatically), making them trackable. When logged in, you could set your preferences to disable article previews, so that offensive lead images don't show unless you visit that page. You could add the script suggested above. Or you could try any of the other options suggested on the page Help:Options to hide an image. Goes without saying internet is not a safe place. If you can, you should be on top of what your child is looking at on the internet. Assuming that you are, you can rest easy while they browse Wikipedia generally for non-sex/anatomy topics. When you know that they are going to read about sex/anatomy this week or month, what you could do is use your browser settings to hide images by default on Wikipedia. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC) Cultures vary. This is a very subjective topic. Even the statement "internet is not a safe place" could be debated. And I have no idea what homophobia has to do with any of this. HiLo48 (talk) 06:57, 20 April 2024 (UTC) I have really got to say that nobody should be disturbed in the slightest by this illustrative image, which shows the topic quite well. IP editor, please ensure that your daughter never views Human penis size which includes a far more dramatic photomontage. Cullen328 (talk) 06:37, 20 April 2024 (UTC) For the interested, some press-coverage on this issue:[7]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:47, 20 April 2024 (UTC) IP has a partial block for "trollish harassment. possible block evasion". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Change user name or delete account?

Is it possible to change my user name? I got divorced and my user name incorporates my ex. I do not ever sign in because of this. If not possible to chance user name how do I delete the account? I can not seem to find answers for either. Thank You Husbandofles (talk) 11:59, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

@Husbandofles You can change your username here. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your direction. Please excuse my inability to locate that page and complete the very easy process. Husbandofles (talk) 12:12, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

No worries at all, Wikipedia is a veritable rabbit warren of policies, noticeboards and essays so anyone can be forgiven for missing something. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:19, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Submitting article on artist Bonnie Rychlak for publication

How do I submit this article in my sandbox for publication review: User:Gaw54/sandbox. Gaw54 (talk) 04:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Gaw54 Another editor has since added the appropriate template to do this, so once you're ready - just click where it says Submit your draft for review. ---- D'n'B-t -- 07:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, I don't seem to be able to submit the draft for review. I'm thoroughly confused, as I've been directed in circles no matter how I try to do this. Please advise. Thank you. Gaw54 (talk) 15:05, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Gaw54. But you should remove all the external links from your text, per WP:EL. You should also remember that a WIkipedia article is a summary of what independent commentators have published about the subject, not a list of what you happen to know about the subject, or what the subject or their associates want people to know. ColinFine (talk) 09:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I'm confused as to what is considered an external link, even after reading the information on the WP:EL link. I would appreciate guidance as to which specific links are considered external. I'm also having difficulty figuring out how to move the draft for review. Thank you for your assistance. Gaw54 (talk) 15:10, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Your draft is here Draft:Bonnie Rychlak where you can click submit for review. Theroadislong (talk) 15:25, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

How to change title of article

Hi, one of the pages that was suggested to me in the suggested edits box on my homepage was this one: Gallery Waldinger. The page is a stub, and I started to try to track down a couple of relevant links to add citations. However, in the process, I realised that the gallery is generally referred to — when mentioned online in English — as ‘Waldinger Gallery’ (following the English-language convention of gallery names having the word “gallery” as the second word in the name, not the first). In Croatian, the name is the other way around, as is the convention in most central-European languages: ‘Galerija Waldinger.’

It seems likely that the original stub may have been created by someone who was not a native-English speaker, and so the page was created with the Croatian naming convention, but written in English. I thought that it would make sense to change the title of the page to ‘Waldinger Gallery,’ thus following both the English-language convention and also the name referenced in other places online that could be used as a citation.

However, when I went to edit the page, I realised that the main title of the page is not editable. So, two questions: firstly, is the change that I am proposing reasonable, and if so, secondly, how would I go about making it?

Thanks. SwollenSails (talk) 12:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. I think you are probably right in renaming the article as all the few English references to the gallery refer to it as Waldinger Gallery. I've moved and edited the article for you but for future reference see Wikipedia:Move. I'm unsure if the article would be deemed "notable" however so I will look for some citations. AWN08 (talk) 13:55, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, this is great, thanks. So, if I get it right, the general way things work is that a page is not actually ‘renamed’ so much as redirected to a new version of that page with an updated title. Thanks again, good to know for future edits. SwollenSails (talk) 15:37, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Exactly, the same page is given a different name and normally the old name becomes a redirect (except on certain circumstances). Glad I could help. AWN08 (talk) 15:42, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

How do I edit portal pages' "Did You Know" entries?

This Portal:England has an incorrect DYK in rotation: "that the 1952 Farnborough Airshow DH.110 crash is the last time spectators were killed in an accident at a British air show?" (Is unfortunately not true since 2015). I've removed it from here Portal:England/Did_you_know/3, but it's still showing up on the page.

Thanks JeffUK 15:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@JeffUK: you may need to purge the cache of that page. Mjroots (talk) 19:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, it seems to have moved on to another set of DYKs now, I guess next time it finds this one it will be the updated version. JeffUK 15:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Help with paraphrasing

I want to add some sentences here but need help with paraphrasing. If I add it as it is (which will be a copyvio), it would be, "Further, the duty was levied on every stage of manufacture. The duty was levied on nearly all goods sold even within the village. A minute fraction of the tax collection was spent on roads and bridges and almost nothing on inland navigation."

How best can I paraphrase the sentences above? I have been accused of misrepresenting what my sources say and so, I thought it would be better to ask here.- Haani40 (talk) 16:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

You may write it as follows or you may reframe it yourself with words of your choice "Additionally, a tax was imposed at each stage of production. This tax extended to the majority of goods sold, even those within the local community. However, only a small portion of the tax revenue was allocated towards the development of infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and waterways." Leoneix _(talk) 17:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

OK, thanks a lot.-Haani40 (talk) 17:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

References

Lua error

I keep getting a Lua error everytime I try to put an image, what should I do to fix this error? thanks Cassopeia ...talk?... 17:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

it says this "Lua error in Module:Portal_image_banner at line 39: attempt to index local 'title' (a nil value)." Cassopeia ...talk?... 17:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

@Penny(Cassopeia): I suggest asking at the village pump technical WP:VPT for problems like this. And please don't use small text RudolfRed (talk) 18:10, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

ok and sorry Cassopeia ...talk?... 18:32, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Title of the sequel to Coffee Talk (video game)

I just need to know if it is better for it to be titled Draft:Coffee Talk Episode 2: Hibiscus & Butterfly or just draft:Coffee Talk Episode 2 because although the former is the full name, the latter is more concise and still unambiguous. JuniperChill (talk) 11:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @JuniperChill and welcome to the Teahouse. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (video games). '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 11:05, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

@CanonNi how about in normal text because it seems tedious and too much to repeat the full name over and over again. This could be Coffee Talk Episode 2, Episode 2, Hibiscus and Butterfly, etc. I also found that most sources do use the full name so I think that is the case of common name. JuniperChill (talk) 11:24, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure but I think a short form of the name is fine in normal text, as long as it is clear that the game is being referred to. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 12:02, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games may have some advice. They've probably run into this situation before.--Tbennert (talk) 02:23, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Edit request

How whould you submit an edit request on a talk page that is extra-protected? Blackmamba31248 (talk) 00:12, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Blackmamba31248. Do you mean Extended confirmed protected? It is highly unusual for an article talk page to have that level of protection. Please provide the title of the article, and perhaps we can provide you with specific advice. Cullen328 (talk) 01:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

It is on the Isreal-Hamas war, where i noticed the map needed to be updated. Blackmamba31248 (talk) 01:42, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

If the talk page is also protected, you can request an edit at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 01:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Israel–Hamas war, I suppose. 126.205.254.12 (talk) 02:00, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

@Blackmamba31248, you won't be able to make an edit request there, as you don't have the experience yet. You can tell us here what edits you believe need to be made. Valereee (talk) 02:23, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, the Map is very outdated and clearly needs to be updated, since Isreal has almost entirely evacuated from Gaza. That’s the only change i think should be made. Blackmamba31248 (talk) 02:26, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

It looks like there are multiple sections discussing this on that talk. Maps are difficult, it requires people who have the skills to make them, and updates that are needed daily and sometimes hourly are a challenge when a particular subject is changing constantly. Valereee (talk) 02:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I understand, but í was generally talking about how the map hasn’t been updated since the war started it seems. Blackmamba31248 (talk) 02:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I've just added a section to the talk asking if the map should simply be deleted. Valereee (talk) 02:37, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

One thing that Wikipedia doesn't aspire to be is a news website. A map can show the situation as it was months earlier. 126.205.254.12 (talk) 04:43, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

List of medication brand names

I am contributing to an article on Ketotifen, a medication, and listed brand names under which the drug is marketed in section Ketotifen#Brand names. I used source data from [8].

Still, I am not satisfied with how the list looks now at Ketotifen#Brand names - it is a coma-separated list of tens of lines comprising hundreds of names. Is there a better way to present the data in this case? What would you suggest? I saw how brand names are listed for similar articles, but none of them had so many entries, so I couldn't take the same approach.

Please advice how can we present the list at Ketotifen#Brand names to look good. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 16:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

". . . coma-separated . . ."? A Freudian slip, perhaps? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 151.227.134.31 (talk) 18:07, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Maxim Masiutin: You can use {{Flatlist}} to improve the accessibility of such lists, but per WP:NOTDIRECTORY, that list may not be appropriate for the article. Try adding it to the corresponding item on Wikidata. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I mediated upon your proposals and decided to remove the list of exact brand names and gave their approximate number instead ("more than 200"). I observed that pharmaceutical drugs on wikipedia generally list a dozen or two brands, which is easy to present in any form of list or enumeration. But when there are more than 200, probably not all of them merit mentioning. However, I could not find a reliable source that would have allowed me to select only the most widely used brands. Such information was available for the US only, but I didn't want the article to be US-centric, as pharmaceutical drugs such as ketotifen are used worldwide. Therefore, your advice of thinking about the WP:NOTDIRECTORY rule led me to remove the names and use "more than 200". Thank you! Could you please review Ketotifen#Brand names and let me know if you like it or should I improve it somehow. I will transclude this subsection of the Teahouse to the talk page of the article for visibility. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 05:21, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Notability

I have noticed many batteries (c.100 personnel) have articles but some battalion-sized units, such as 3 Military Intelligence Battalion and 3 Regiment RMP (c. 500 personnel) simply have redirects to larger articles. Is there a policy on which size units should have separate articles, or is it dependent on the notability of the history of units. PercyPigUK (talk) 12:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, PercyPigUK. I'm not aware of any such policy. In nearly all cases, what governs whether a subject merits its own article is 1) its notability, and 2) whether it is independently notable, or a part of something else that is notable. ColinFine (talk) 14:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

You may want to ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history. They probably have a guideline you can use.--Tbennert (talk) 02:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

PercyPigUK} Since this is a volunteer project, much of the time what articles exist are related to what topics volunteer editors feel like working on, and not primarily on what policies exist about creation of such topics. The main bar to creating an article is the policy of WP:Notability, but if your topic passes that bar, you may create the article. See WP:YFA for tips. Mathglot (talk) 07:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Publish a draft

There is a draft Draft:TheDisInsider that was created a few minutes ago, is it a good idea to publish it as an article or not?? 201.188.130.53 (talk) 05:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP, you can't move it to mainspace (ie, "publish it as an article") yourself unless you create an account and log in. If you want to put it into the queue for review by an AfC reviewer, you will have to press the blue "submit the draft for review" button on the draft. But I don't think it will be accepted in this state. Please have a look at WP:N for details on what makes a subject eligible for an article. -- asilvering (talk) 06:16, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Submitted and Declined. David notMD (talk) 07:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

How to have the appearance of the site, when logged in with an account, the same as when not logged in?

I have noticed that when I am logged in with my account, the site behavior and appearance is different from when not logged in. How can I set it so that when I do log in, the site remains visually the same as when not logged in? I have reset my preferences, but it's still different. 117.222.43.76 (talk) 11:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1222. I have no idea how old your account is, but is your default skin set to Preferences → Appearance → Skins → Vector (2022)? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:46, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't mean Vector. That I have enabled, of course. What I mean is, there are some features that aren't enabled by default. For example, one of the features: when I reset all visual settings to default, the feature of previewing a page by hovering the mouse gets disabled. I can, of course, enable them one by one, but I would like the visuals and features to stay the same when logged in as they are when logged out, without me having to go into preferences.

My account was made in early 2020. 117.222.43.161 (talk) 13:56, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

If resetting all your settings to default makes it incongruent with what it's like when it's logged out, you're going to have to do a lot of trial-and-error with your preferences. For your specific example it should be under Preferences → Appearance → Reading preferences → Enable page previews. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:25, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

I do the opposite: I take pains to make sure the site looks different when I'm *not* logged in, including having the 'Publish' button in a different color. I want to make sure I know when I'm not logged in, by mistake. Mathglot (talk) 07:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Help me with editing an update on my Wikipedia page (Richard G Capen Jr)

I am about to turn 90 and have been told by several media friends that my Wikipedia page neds to be updated. After all ONE DAY I will pass .... So, I have two paras I'd like to add. Is there someone who might help me? Many thanks. Dick Capen, San Diego SnapperCreek (talk) 14:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Dick, and welcome to the Teahouse. You need to be cautious about updating Wikipedia's article about you: please read ABOUTYOU for general advice, and in particular, for any specific changes you would like to see, please use the edit request wizard to request the changes, and an uninvolved editor will review them. Please note that all information should be backed up by a published source - your own knowledge or recollection is not sufficient - and preferably by a source wholly unconnected with you. ColinFine (talk) 14:59, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

@SnapperCreek: You may also find our FAQ for article subjects useful. In particular, we'd like a photo of you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Richard G. Capen Jr. Cremastra (talk) 16:34, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Can't edit Mohammad Reza Zahedi

I've been able to edit other semi-protected articles before, but I can't edit Mohammad Reza Zahedi and I can't see the criteria for doing so. It is obviously edited by other editors, so what credentials do they have that I lack? Algotr (talk) 18:24, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

@Algotr: If you click the blue lock at the top of the article, it explains it. That article is extended-confirmed protected, which means you needs at least 500 edits and an account at least 30 days old. Your account is old enough, but your edit count is only 460. RudolfRed (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Algotr. That article has stricter protection called Extended confirmed protection, due to disruptive editing. Its talk page is unprotected. You can make Edit requests there. Cullen328 (talk) 18:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikimedia tag

If I want to upload a still frame from a movie made in Australia in 1949 what copyright tag could I look at using? Robbiegibbons (talk) 00:31, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Robbiegibbons. A still from a 1949 movie is almost certainly copyright restricted and cannot be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Please read WP:NFCI for the very stringent standards for use of non-free images on the English Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 00:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey, @Robbiegibbons. If there's something in that still that is discussed in the article, it's possible you could upload it locally -- that is, here on Wikipedia, rather than on Wikimedia Commons -- under fair use, but there are pretty strict limitations. Can you tell us what it is you want to upload and why it's useful in the article? Valereee (talk) 02:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello. I am not disagreeing, as copyright is far from my expertise (it's such a complicated subject) but if you are not Australian it's worth noting that many things made before 1955 in Australian are public domain. See here. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 04:18, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

As that document notes. Notcharizard, It is best to check the copyright for a pre-1969 film using the detailed resources from the Australian Government, Australian Copyright Council or the Australian Libraries Copyright Committee. I agree that copyright is complicated. That is why highly paid lawyers spend their entire careers studying, analyzing and arguing in court about copyrights laws worldwide. Cullen328 (talk) 05:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Help:Public domain may be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

That is (maybe) true, but it would have definitely been restored in the US due to URAA. @Robbiegibbons: are you aware if the film was simultaneously published in the US? —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 18:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Draft article not accepted

Hallo. I am trying to create a page of Keravnos triathlon club, a club based in Nicosia Cyprus. It was not accepted because not many refferenses. The think is that, in Cyprus triathlon is not very popular, and the only references is that the club is member of Cyprus Triathlon federation, and the club's web page. the draft link is the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Keravnos_Triathlon_Club Can you help me please? Christoschristou (talk) 15:43, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Christoschristou, welcome to the Teahouse.

If a topic does not have many independent references then it is unfortunately not 'notable' by our standards at this time, and therefore does not merit a Wikipedia article. The specific notability guidelines for sports clubs are at WP:NSPORT. As a review, I would also agree with this decline.

Hope that helps, Qcne (talk) 16:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Refs do not have to be in English. David notMD (talk) 19:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Getting back a sandbox page

Hello, I made an article in my sand box page and then moved it to the draft section to get approved. I now currently do not have a sand box because it says to redirect me to the article that I sent for approval. If anyone could help that would be greatly appreciated. Here is the link to my sand box and the problem https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User:Pickup_Andropov/sandbox&redirect=no. Pickup Andropov (talk) 21:10, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Pickup Andropov. If you follow that link, you can simply Edit that page, and remove the redirection (which is a line starting #REDIRECT). Just remove it and anything else, and start whatever you want in the sandbox. ColinFine (talk) 21:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok thank you. I had thought of it but was not sure if it would mess up the draft in anyway.Pickup Andropov (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Photos of officeholders

Hi! I understand the general guidelines for uploading photos to Wiki Commons (that they have to be your own uncopyrighted pictures), but what I’m wondering is: what is the procedure for uploading official portraits of officeholders? For example, a senator’s photo for the infobox. I recently published an article about a local sheriff and am wondering if I’m allowed to upload her official portrait. If not, I’m wondering how so many officeholders have their official portraits in their infoboxes. Thanks! Schtamangie (talk) 22:43, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

@Schtamangie: Some official portraits are public domain (such as the US Federal Government and some states) and these can be uploaded to commons. Other countries and states have different rules. RudolfRed (talk) 22:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok, that makes sense! Thank you! Schtamangie (talk) 22:57, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Schtamangie. Being an "official portrait" found on some kind of government website doesn't automatically release a photo from copyright protection; so, it's best to assume the photo is protected copyright from the start and then work from there. If the photo you want to use is not one you took yourself (and if it is, it isn't a photo you've taken of someone else's copyrighted content), then it's copyright has to be owned by someone. So, you're going to need to figure out who that might be and then work from there. Your best bet is to probably ask about this at c:COM:VPC, providing as many details (e.g. link to the source website) as you can about the photo's provenance . With more details, someone might be able to give you a more definitive answer.

In addition, you seem to be misunderstanding some things about Commons and copyright law in general. For reference, Commons does actually host lots of copyrighted content, but the content needs to copy with c:Commons:Licensing. When someone uploads a photo they take to Commons, it doesn't necessarily mean they're waiving or otherwise transferring their copyright ownership to Commons or anyone else; it just means they're making a version of their work available under a type of copyright license that makes it much much easier for others to re-use. They're still the copyright holder of the work and are just only putting in place some basic conditions regarding the re-use of their work. As long as those re-using the work comply with the terms of the license the copyright holder has chosen, they can freely do so; if re-users violate the terms of the license, they are then infringing on the copyright holder's rights. In the latter case, however, it's the copyright holder, not Commons, that needs to seek redress.

Finally, if you want an quick example of the what it means to upload something to Commons, just look at the licensing statement you're agreeing to release your contributions to Wikipedia under every time you click the "Publish changes" button. You're still the copyright holder of the content you add to Wikipedia; you're just agreeing to release it under a license that makes it easier for other to re-use or modify. In other words, you're agreeing in advance to allow others to re-use your work in pretty much anyway they want as long as they comply with the conditions of that license. Commons, for the most part, works the same way when it comes to the files it hosts. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the in-depth reply! That’s really helpful to understand some of the technicalities of copyright license! In my case, based on what @RudolfRed said, I’m pretty sure the image I was looking to use unfortunately cannot be used. So I think I’d have to personally take a photo of her and upload it. Thanks again! Schtamangie (talk) 23:38, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Schtamangie You could always call/visit the Sheriff's office to see if they would be willing to let you photograph them. Many public officials, especially elected officials, don't mind. 331dot (talk) 12:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

@331dot great idea, thank you! Would it be allowed if I emailed the office and asked them to send an uncopyrighted, unreleased photo that they’d allow me to upload? Or would that violate the Wiki Commons rules? Schtamangie (talk) 22:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I think you mean you could ask them if they have a suitable, properly licensed image that is compatible with Wikipedia- yes, that's an option, though harder than taking the photo yourself copyright-wise. 331dot (talk) 23:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok, gotcha. Thank you! Schtamangie (talk) 23:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Content Appropriate for User Page

I'm a college student taking a writing course on digital authorship. For a project, I'm planning to make some edits on Wikipedia regarding a subject that I've researched. Alongside that, I would like to use my User Page to discuss said subject and the edits I plan on making. Would such a use be permitted?

In the case that it matters, my research subject was primarily on Sci-hub and more generally about dissemination of scientific literature. Mistermath314 (talk) 00:01, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Mistermath314, it's difficult to answer that in general terms without knowing exactly what you're planning. Normally, discussing your activities (or planned activities) on Wikipedia on your user page is fine, but using it for lengthy discussion of subjects unrelated to Wikipedia is generally not. There's some guidance on what should and shouldn't be on user pages here. A brief statement of subjects you're interested in, and if you wish why that is, is also just fine. If you want to draft a potential article, or edits to one, you can use a userspace sandbox for that; you could also use such a sandbox to keep track of references you might like to use, things you need to look up more information on, or the like.

So far as stating that it's a "subject that (you've) researched", do be aware that Wikipedia doesn't allow publication of original research. Facts in Wikipedia articles should be verified by reliable and independent sources, not be the product of your own investigation. If your own research has been published in a reputable publication, see the guidance on citing your own work—it's not forbidden entirely, but it must be kept within reason; doing it excessively will likely be seen as self-promotion or spamming. And of course do be aware that the more information you choose to reveal about yourself, the more likely it is that someone could use that to determine your actual identity, so it's up to you how much of a concern that is. You are never required to reveal your identity or personal details about yourself on Wikipedia, and you should think carefully before you do; there's often no taking that back once it's been done. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey Seraphim! Seems like it's a general no with regards to the user page. I was aware that previous student from a previous semester had used their user page for a similar purpose, but it seems like they were able to do so because their topic was discussing Wikipedia itself.

Also, I was aware of the rule against publication of original research and have been briefed on that before. I do plan for all of my edits to be entirely factual, and not citing myself or any of my own conclusions. Thank you for the reminder and warning, though! Mistermath314 (talk) 00:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

The Talk pages of the articles you intend to edit are a better place to state your intent. However, you may not get any replies. Other option is to be bold in editing the article, and go to Talk of you are reverted. David notMD (talk) 00:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Separating a subheading into its own article

Hello, for a few months now I've been going through the "discography" section for the artist "Aphex Twin". I've noticed that, on the page "Richard D. James Album", the discography section links to "Analogue Bubblebath 3.1". While this is a separate release (even though it's a small one), it links back to Analogue Bubblebath 3, as 3.1 is under a subheading. I understand WHY this happens (technically it's just a re-release with extra tracks), but it's inclusion in the discography page essentially creates an infinite loop, unless the reader manually finds out the next release in the discography. Is there anything I can do / should be done about this? I feel like it should either be removed from the discography header or placed into its own separate article. Beachweak (talk) 22:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Beachweak, it is possible to have a link go to a specific section of another article. I did so in that case; you can look at Richard D. James Album and its history to see how I did that. Normally, such rereleases and the like are not notable in their own right, and so should not be separate articles. But that way, someone who clicks on the discography link will be taken straight to information on the 3.1 release. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Format of Wikipedia references

This is a general suggestion for the reference format of all pages. When a reference link (or any link) is clicked on, the current page will redirect to the site of said reference. Readers must click a reference, read it, and return to the main article. Why not change this so that the article will stay open and the reference will open on a separate tab? In current format, the reader cannot easily keep the reference link open while reading said article. Also note that for the page to redirect to and back from the reference is more cumbersome and time-consuming than opening a new tab and then deleting it. 58.239.47.203 (talk) 12:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP user - in most software, if you hold control while clicking on a link, it will open in a new tab. - Arjayay (talk) 12:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Or alternatively, right-click on the link, then click 'Open Link in New Tab' on the menu that appears. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 151.227.134.31 (talk) 17:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Clicking the link using the middle mouse button (the scroll wheel) works, too! miranda ^:3 02:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. If you create an account (which is free, and arguably more anonymous than letting Wikipedia display your IP address - at least, if you don't choose to use your real name for your account) then you can go to your User preferences and pick the gadget "Open external links in a new tab or window". ColinFine (talk) 17:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Change title of an article

I was wondering how you change the title of an article. The organization discussed in the Tribe of Tahquitz has officially changed their name to "Tahquitz Community" the old name, though relevant to the history of the organization, has officially changed. If you look at the official website the URL still says tribe but on the home page it says community. If you can help that would be great.Pickup Andropov (talk) 21:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Technically, you don't rename the article, but instead move it – see Wikipedia:Moving a page.

When you do this, the old title becomes a redirect page, so that people who search for the old title will automatically be taken to the new one. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 151.227.134.31 (talk) 22:49, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. That worked like a charm.Pickup Andropov (talk) 03:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Help with condensing text

I happened to come across this,

And Ibn Qudamah refuted the conditions of Abu HanTfah, as he said, "And whenever the people

of a country apostatize and their rulings are implemented in it, then they become a Dar of Harb concerning taking their wealth as Ghanlmah and taking their offspring which were born after the apostasy, as slaves. And it is upon the Imam to fight them, as Abu Bakr As-Siddlq, may Allah be pleased with him, fought the people of apostasy with the Jama'ah of the Sahabah. And because Allah, Ta'ala, ordered the fighting of the disbelievers in (many) places in His Book, and those ones are the most deserving of them to be fought. Because leaving them might tempt the likes of them to imitate them and apostatize with them, then the harm will become great through them. And if he fights them, then whoever is captured is killed, those of them who flee are pursued, their injured are finished off, and their wealth is taken as Ghanlmah, and this was the opinion of Ash-Shafi'T. And Abu HanTfah said, 'It does not become a Dar of Harb until three things are joined in it: That it neighbours Dar Al-Harb (and) there is nothing between them both from Dar Al-Islam. The second: That no Muslim or Thimml remains secure in it. The third: That their rulings are implemented in it.'" Ibn Qudamah said, 'And with us, that it is the Dar of kuffar in which there are their rulings, so it is a Dar of Harb." "Al-Mughnl Wash-Sharh Al-Kablr", Vol. 10/95. So Ibn Qudamah made the cause for the ruling upon the Dar to be the type of rulings that

are implemented in it.

Please help me condense it. Can I add it to the article on Divisions of the world in Islam, the article on Kafir or both?-Haani40 (talk) 03:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Please also correct the citation error.- Haani40 (talk) 03:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

If it needs attribution, please begin your sentence with, "According to...... "-Haani40 (talk) 03:31, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Teahouse is general guidance forum- not final arbitrator of what content is right for a particular article.

Questions on Whether a source is reliable enough generally should go to WP:RSN. Generally prefer academic sources where available. Bookku (talk) 03:43, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

At least, someone can condense it right?-Haani40 (talk) 03:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

If some one helps you then welcome. But at some point you will be needed to be on your own isn't it?

I was almost in midst to guide with how to at your talk page, but you have surprised me with some strange bite at my talk page. Let us hope you find some other helpful user. Happy editing anyways. Bookku (talk) 07:20, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

References

The Independent Regulatory Board (IRB) of the Eastern Africa Power Pool (EAPP)

My draft article has been rejected. I need your support. What I am trying to do with this article is to give information about a regional organization in the Eastern Africa region. Please advise. Thank you. Ephrem-IRB (talk) 08:49, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:The Independent Regulatory Board (IRB) of the Eastern Africa Power Pool (EAPP) '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 08:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Please do not use multiple forums to seek assistance, as this duplicates effort. You've asked this at the AFC Help Desk, please use that forum. 331dot (talk) 09:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

How one can decide that any article is ready for publication or not?

Can anyone move the article back to draft with the comment "I don't think this article is ready for publication"? Bhajan Das (talk) 10:30, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@Bdas.in, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure I understand your question, but if someone sees a WP-article that doesn't meet the requirements (WP:N etc), WP:DRAFTIFY is one of several options. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:58, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@Bdas.in Welcome to the Teahouse. Interesting question. It comes down to being a judgement call, based on your Wikipedia editing experience, and with a number of major caveats if I were to say 'yes'.

To revert an article to draft, you must be able to justify your actions, and it must be a brand new article which has only been edited by the creating author (although someone else adding a few categories etc is not really major editing by a second party).

You can't draftify an article that has been in the encyclopaedia for a some time. WP:PROD or WP:CSD or WP:AFD are then the right avenues to consider. The reasoning to revert to draft might be that it has no sources (which is a very good reason to draftify), or it may be highly promotional and not written in an encyclopaedic tone. You should engage with the creating editor to explain your actions, and what you think they need to address to make it acceptable.

Your suggested edit summary is not sufficiently informative for some situations, but could be for obvious lack of notability or citations. Just being a short article isn't justification to revert to draft, providing there are sources used to show notability. For example, we can accept on line articles on animals and plants species, so long as they can be shown to be actually exist as a valid species. Hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Linking to a persons social media accounts

Is it permitted to link to Anastasia Kingsnorth 's social media accounts? For instance I am drafting an article on User:JuniperChill/Anastasia Kingsnorth and I need to know if I would be permitted to link to her Youtube, Instagram, Tiktok, etc somewhere. JuniperChill (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

@JuniperChill: Please see WP:ELOFFICIAL, both sections, for the policy. At a quick glance I would say you probably shouldn't venture beyond the 3 examples you mentioned - the official website appears to fail, otherwise that would probably suffice on its own. I would suggest that YouTube link could be used on its own, as it links to the others, but it's not completely obvious and some bending of the rules might apply. These links belong in the external links section. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:00, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Juniperhill, and welcome to the Teahouse.

My advice to you is to concentrate on building the foundation of your draft - the sources establishing notability - before worrying about superficial details like external links, infoboxes, or pictures.

In house-building terms, you are worring about whether you can put up a satellite dish on your house before you have surveyed the plot to see if it is suitable to build on, or checked local building regulations to see if the house you want to puild is permitted.

At present, you have four sources, which are probably reliable (that's good) but which look to me as if they contain mere mentions of her. (Several of them want me to create an account to look at them: that is allowed for sources, but mean I haven't gone in and checked whether my suspicions are correct).

If I am right, then not one of the sources contributes to establishing that she meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Until you have several sources that do so, you do not know whether your plot is safe to build on (the subject is notable) and all your work will very likely be wasted.

In writing an article, absolutely your first task should be to find some sources, each of which meets all the criteria in the golden rule. Until you have done that, there is no point in doing anything else at all towards your draft. ColinFine (talk) 20:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Actually, I did not originally create that article, its just that it has been deleted and I undeleted (restored) the page. The original creator added the four sources. My Google Search / Google News (may be different wherever you live. Me and Anastasia are UK based) has a full article on Daily Mail and The Sun about her, but both cannot (generally) be used as sources since WP:RSP tells me it is unreliable/defunct. Also found a couple on heatworld, Popsugar and she even made it onto the government website (gov.uk), none of which are on WP:RSP. Others have also returned news letters focusing on Saffron Barker, her (best) friend and which she has a proper WP page. Oh, and a little more at Reality Titbit. JuniperChill (talk) 13:35, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Essays mentioned by P&G

I understand that sometimes essays are mentioned in policy/ guideline page for more/easy explanation, but do this essays hold any power with regards to their interpretation of what is written in the policy, or at least more importance than other interpretations? For example Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ is mentioned at WP:NPOV. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 16:09, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I understand this concern since I also observed many times essays are valued more by (experienced) users than polices. I doubt Teahouse volunteers would be able do much, unless some well experienced and respected user takes up the issue.

My perception is to note down such experiences one by one on respective policy and essay talk pages and leave it to the posterity that some users will club all such instances and raise issue. Bookku (talk) 16:23, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Per my knowledge, some essays do carry much more value than others, like say WP:SO, but what is valued in them is their content. My question is about those essays that are based on interpretation of any policy/ guideline and are considered worth enough to be mentioned in the respective P/G's page. So can that essay's interpretation be enforced with lesser tendency to discuss? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 17:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor

'So can that essay's interpretation be enforced with lesser tendency to discuss?' What do you mean by this is not clear enough to me. Can you give couple of more examples, that shall help you put up the issue at next level in better way.

I suggest to take up next to Wikipedia talk:Essays before going to any centralized notice board. My perception is people discuss a lot at centralized notice boards usual results are status quo rather than change, unless you are well prepared with previous discussion at relevant smaller talk page. Bookku (talk) 02:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@Bookku:Firstly, a generalized example of this is that I can say 'Per xyz policy guideline' and the make any change and the only reason it could be debated for is that there is any exception to that P/G, but no one can state that they believe the P/G should be ignored here, however essays do not hold such power of their own. For example see this edit, in which an editor tried to remove something citing an essay, which I would have accepted it it was part of some guideline, but it was an 'essay', itself stating that it is just a suggestion, and I started to discuss about it with them and restored the previous version only and only because I was not enforced to follow the essay as with P/G. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 11:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Also I am lesser inclined to start this at Wikipedia talk:Essays because Wikipedia:Essays itself is an essay and talk page is for discussing the page, and anything written on that page doesn't matter, or does it? That may be part of question. Also it will attract lot less attention than required to solve this, I think. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 11:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I am not moving anywhere myself now, I would like to first go through all the related articles about essay before proceeding. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 12:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Then WP:VPP seems ultimate destination, you will be preparing before reaching out there is good idea. All the best. Bookku (talk) 13:49, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, ExclusiveEditor, and welcome to the Teahouse. I think that WP:VPP is a better place to ask and discuss questions of this kind. ColinFine (talk) 17:49, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Thank you. I didn't yet start this at VPP of a doubt that this is a question, and not even a proposal, so should I post it there or if there is any relevant noticeboard for it? If you could clarify, I am moving there. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 19:09, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

• Hello ExclusiveEditor, congratulations first off, and welcome back! So... ultimately, the enforceability of anything derives from the strength of the consensus backing it. The default assumption is that policies have the strongest consensus and individual editors almost always should follow policies. Guidelines come next and they should be followed unless you can show that there's a good reason not to follow one in a specific instance. What about the rest of the things? Well, that's why we say experience matters. You can read policies and guidelines all day, but only with experience can you know which pages have the backing of what kind of consensus. Everyone agrees with applying WP:SO to banned editors, and so until someone brings up one day that that's terrible and convinces sizeable portion of the participants in that discussion to their point of view, such that everyone realises it's not actually uncontroversial and also not a policy or a guideline, that's when it becomes just another page. There are many instances where practice differs from even policies and you may find yourself debating with someone about what such and such policy says, and they will respond to you that that policy does not reflect practice and therefore it is the policy that needs to change. Then you start an RFC at a central location to either affirm that the policy needs to change or that the other editor is wrong and the policy still enjoys strong consensus. Now, getting back to your WP:AIRPORTS example, don't revert someone just because they are citing what is just an essay. Have a good reason to revert them first and play the "essay" card only to enforce your independent good reason. As to what is the consensus status of it, that you have to investigate for yourself. Though it is not a PAG, if all editors editing for that Wikiproject adhere to it, and it doesn't contradict existing core policies and guidelines, it deserves some respect, because it has consensus support from people to whom it's relevant. However, some day, someone may look at it, and decide that that's a horrible page. Then they could convince the community that that page should lose its consensus status. That is what happened, for example, with WP:NMILITARY. For the longest time, you could get articles kept at AFD citing NMIL, then editors from outside the project disagreed with it enough to create a stronger consensus against it, and now it does not carry weight in AFDs. Such would be the status of pages that don't have status. Some pages are written by a single editor and almost no one ever cites them, so those pages have no standing. Some essays may have been written by one or two editors but have been cited so many times without significant challenge that they may as well be policies. Information pages attached to policies and guidelines have a stronger status than essays in general. However, again, you need to investigate who wrote it, how often it's cited, whether it's challenged often and by what proportion of participants. Some advice and explanation in information and help pages may have the backing of RFCs. Latest RFCs with overwhelming consensus are what deserve the highest respect. Latest RFCs with rough consensus may have to be adhered to when there's controversy but people may still protest that the consensus isn't that strong. And so on. Please let me know whether I managed to clarify or confuse the issue. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

  @Usedtobecool: Thank you for clarifying many things which I had in back of my mind. I am currently going through PAGs and one purpose my question served was to decide, if to prioritize the essays cited/mentioned in PAG over others, to read. And yes, given that you mentioned lot of ways to tell if a page has backing among users, I am curious to know what are the methods to implement this ways, like how to find how often it's cited, whether it's challenged often. I predict 2 methods as checking what links here and talk page, other methods will be appreciated. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 15:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

  ExclusiveEditor, yes, as someone stumbling into a page for the first time, I would check the history. If multiple people are still actively editing and debating it, it means people care which must mean that it must be of some value. Also, in reading it, if it makes points that are easy to agree with, especially if it cites policies, guidelines and highly-attended RFCs or summarises them. And, as you say, talk page and what links here. Especially, if you can find discussions from what links here and see what the reaction of people usually is when it's brought up, that gives you an idea of what kind of backing the page has. If you just read the page and disagree vehemently with what it says because it's lacking in common sense or it contradicts existing policies and guidelines, and want to efficiently discredit it, that's when you play the "essay" card. Ultimately, the best use of essays is to efficiently share the views that you agree with, without having to write it up anew every time you need to say it. Kinda like templates in that way. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

  As for pages linked from PAGs, the same considerations, plus try and find out when it was added to the PAG and whether it was discussed. If it was added by the same person who wrote the essay and there was never any discussion about it, there is no way to know what the value of that page is. Just like vandalisms and hoaxes can remain in articles for a long time, randomly added essays with no value may as well be there, linked from bona fide PAGs. And their consensus may derive only from WP:SILENCE which is the weakest form of consensus. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Randomly editing the article by someone

Can anyone please look the article Nyla Usha. Someone has randomly editing the page changing the family details and adding fake pictures. I have added the orginal picture and not sure how long it will last. The earlier picture was edited. Please check. Paavamjinn (talk) 15:49, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome! The new photo and the one that was being used both appear to be non-free images, so I've removed both for now. While we appreciate you trying to provide a better image, images on Wikipedia still need to be freely licensed (see the image tutorial for more detail on this). GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 16:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Epistolary Poem

Myself and another Poet have done to date 196 Epistolary Poems. How do I edit and add us to Epistolary poems? We have a book that has not yet been published, but our work can be seen on Facebook. Thank you for your help. Kristy Raines, United States and Dr. Prasana Kumar Dalai, India

SummerRaines aka Kristy Raines

SummerRaines (talk) 15:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, welcome, and congratulations on your book! Unfortunately, before material can be added to Wikipedia, it needs to be verified in reliable sources that are independent of the subject — for example, an independently-written newspaper article about your poetry. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 16:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Another season, another bio to consider

As recently related at DYK, "The Sign"--last week's official penultimate episode of Bluey Series 3--spoke a lot to me, a former Waterbury, Connecticut resident who had to move to Central Florida seven years ago on account of my male superior's job change. The Connecticut part gradually reminded me: Isn't it about time I finally worked on Silas Bronson as my next AFC assignment?

For those not in the Tri-State--or the Brass City--Silas Bronson (1788-1867) was the 19th-century figure after whom Waterbury's library was named; I was a frequent patron of theirs during my 2006-2017 residence. (Even a portrait of his graces the entrance area at 267 Grand Street). I always meant to get an article on that namesake going at the time, but never went as far as a single paragraph + ref at my now-defunct article sandbox. The further away from CT I got, the further it drifted away from my mind, my schedule, and my commitments.

Until last weekend, after all that hard work on "The Sign"--to the point where I even put a note about it in my brand-new AFC queue (set up to prevent future G13 pings from landing on my talk; blame half a year of recent music-curation duties on my Miraheze site). He may have lent his name to a Central CT library--but what else made him stand out? (No wonder my own current uncertainty over his extended notability made me hesitate on launching it this late morning, thus bringing me back here to the Teahouse to get things sorted out in advance.)

So far, I have two references to show for it: One from the old Sandbox, and another from this morning's preliminary research at GBooks--both of which mention that Bronson bequeathed $200,000 to establish Waterbury's library.

• "Exhibit Label: Gypsum var. Selenite--Side Note on Silas Bronson Library". The Mineralogical Record Biographical Archive. 2007. Archived from the original on 2016-03-03. Retrieved 2024-04-22.
• "Gifts and Legacies in the Last Decade". Annual Report of the Board of Education of the State of Connecticut. New Haven: Tuttle, Morehouse & Taylor, Printers. May 1871. pp. 89–90. Retrieved 2024-04-22.

Calling on the S.S. Cunard (talk · contribs)--and those at WP:Connecticut--for help, assistance, and further sources. As I told myself this past overnight during kitchen chores, it'll be the shame of my life if I never start his article. (Maybe the library itself deserves a companion page too?) If all goes well, I'll meet you back in the draftyard. Best of research--and let's hope for the best!

P.S. As a former CT and current FL resident, I feel ashamed to see the former's current Senator and the latter's current Governor support oppressive laws like KOSA and Don't Say Gay. It is high time we at Wikipedia called on both to resign--but that's for another venue. (To say nothing of the current TikTok crisis that reared its head back in Congress this past Saturday...)

P.P.S. Happy Earth Day, environmentalists! --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 15:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@Slgrandson: I'm not clear what help you are asking for here. Can you please phrase it simply? RudolfRed (talk) 15:11, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Viable sources about Silas Bronson himself, first thing. (Sorry if my trademark commentary got in the way.) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 15:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

It is high time we at Wikipedia called on both to resign - please read RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS. ColinFine (talk) 16:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Is it 'bad form' to edit Wikipedia with only an IP?

Is it generally considered 'bad form' to edit Wikipedia without creating an account, so that only my IP shows?  Does this annoy some editors who have user names? 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:8062:CC61:BE4E:A1BC (talk) 22:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I have been editing Wikipedia without an account for around 20 years, for reasons I won't bore you with. It's perfectly permissible (and I know this is stated in Policy somewhere, though I can't remember where offhand).

Some editors will likely choose to advise you of the advantages of having an account (which have never mattered to me, but might to others). Some editors with accounts are a little suspicious of IP editors, but if one's edits are all above board, they have nothing valid to complain about. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 151.227.134.31 (talk) 22:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I edited as an IP for a long time. But yes, there are a number of advantages to having a registered account. You don't have to. If you don't want to, then that's fine. But if nothing else, you're going to get more scrutiny than a registered user. That's not according to policy, but according to culture. Heck, I had a name change years ago and I got all kinds of crap from people just because they didn't recognize me. GMG^talk 23:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

The IP might be thinking of m:Founding_principles. I'll also provide the obligatory links to Wikipedia:Why create an account? and Wikipedia:IP editors are human too. There are advantages to an account, and you may need a slighter thicker skin without one, but most users are well used to IPs editing and think nothing of it. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Please review talk at the Norse colonization of North America - Wikipedia. A few days ago, I began with-- "Attempting to remove a false statement." and things went back and forth for about a day or so. But then yesterday a change appeared. A green bar with the words, "A long apologia for an outdated source" is there now. If you look at the talk page you will see people were claiming my sources were "...out of date", "...not reliable." etc... But how could someone dismiss Magnus Magnusson - Wikipedia or his co-author Hermann Pálsson - Wikipedia "one of the most distinguished scholars of Icelandic studies of his generation"-- as unreliable or out of date? Their 1964 book "The Vinland Sagas" is still considered to be essential reading in this topic. Someone also claimed that Carl O. Saue, the repected geographer was "...fringe" for proposing that Irish Monks may have crossed the Atlantic before 11th century Icelanders and Greenlanders did it. Sauers proposal was never considered as 'fringe' and professional historian Charles E. Nowell (1904–1984) accepted Sauer's proposal.

I am from New England... someone admitted they had examined my IP number and figured I am from New Bedford. Seems they were not happy about that. Was I dealing with serious UN-Acceptable Wikipedia behavior? 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:8062:CC61:BE4E:A1BC (talk) 03:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Talk:Norse colonization of North America § Attempting to remove a false statement. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 03:15, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

This doesn't seem to be anything to do with you editing as an IP address. It's a debate about an edit. You're proposing something, other people disagree, something was improved. It's a common type of discussion. Disagreements over edits are rarely pretty, but I think this one is well focused and it would be a mistake to think it's related to your account status. I would expect a similar response if I made the same sequence of edits. Sorry that doesn't resolve this dispute for you, but I think it answers the question you asked here. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 05:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks all for commenting. Without a doubt, I'm in the newbie category when it comes to editing, even though I first tried it a bit about 15 years ago. I started up again about a week ago. I was surprised to see the opposition form up so quickly. The first 'source' they rejected was the 1964 book by Magnus Magnusson - Wikipedia and Hermann Pálsson - Wikipedia. But that book has been highly regarded by reviewers from the start. It appears in nearly every bibliography of recent books covering this subject. How can I get M&P, Carl O. Sauer - Wikipedia, and J. R. L. Anderson - Wikipedia accepted as credible sources? 2601:18E:C380:1DC0:8062:CC61:BE4E:A1BC (talk) 13:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Editing without an IP means that with only three mouse clicks, using tools available within Wikipedia, I can tell that the IP user is probably in New Bedford, Massachusetts, United States. Once you have your own User Name, such tracking is much more difficult. HiLo48 (talk) 01:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

With varying degrees of "probably." Doing the same for my own current (because dynamic) IP, one learns that I am supposedly in Ashton-under-Lyne, which is wrong by more than 150 miles :-). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 151.227.134.31 (talk) 02:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear it! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Studies on the social dynamics here show that IP users are more likely to get reverted than registered users. Users with red-linked talk pages (indicating a newly registered account) are also more likely to get reverted than experienced users. There's no policy against it though. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 02:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

It's also possible that those groups of editors do more stuff that reasonably needs reverting. BUT I will admit, if I see IP-edits on my watchlist, I'm probably more likely to check if there's shenanigans afoot. Sometimes there is, but I like to think I don't revert without seeing a need. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

For example, I just saw this [9] on my watchlist. I checked it and reverted it. Come to think of it, I think WP:WATCHLIST is also a bonus for registered users. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

It's perfectly fine to contribute to Wikipedia anonymously. While there are benefits to creating an account, such as watchlists, gadgets and the ability to customize the user experience, it is up to you if you want to register or not. Anonymous editing is as easy is clicking "edit" and submitting your changes. CpX41 (talk) 11:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:IPMASKING may be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

What is bad form (and highly illegal) is the way the Board is implementing the change. Denying editors the option to identify by IP is a breach of their human rights. Nowhere does the Board say that publishing IP addresses is illegal (they've had 24 years to make that argument). The scheme involves secretly recording the IPs used by each unregistered editor for twelve months. That also is a breach of their human rights, and nowhere is the unsuspecting editor told what she will be getting herself into. Of course, the editor is not told anything - she is simply told that "a temporary account will be opened" for her. Expect a challenge in the European Court on day one, because this will be done by cookie implantation, and consumers must be given a statement of what the cookies will do and then presented with a dialogue box enabling "a clear and informed choice" to either accept or reject them. 2A00:23C5:E12F:5300:C588:17E2:E52E:6CDD (talk) 10:58, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Litigation involving the Wikimedia Foundation is prepared to document it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

2A00:23C5:E12F:5300:C588:17E2:E52E:6CDD is apparently a banned user. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:22, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Architect David Carnivale

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.

---

This is David Carnivale. April 17,2024 someone nominated an entry for me that I've been proud to have for 15 or 16years for deletion. The page is under my name and the address is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Carnivale Since I'm not an editor, I cannot see if there is a "deletion discussion" or object, or offer any reasons it should not be deleted. It is awkward and b its nature immodest to suggest reasons why one's page should remain, but I believe if someone who is able to, would be kind enough to either object, or post my reasons the page should remain, I would be grateful. I did manage to email one editor- but have no clue as to whether they added my remarks to the 'deletion discussion.' At the risk of boring you (forgive me!) I will copy the reasons below. Thank you in advance, Architect David Carnivale The reasons are as follows: Having been the first architect in the world to have a website (affordablehouse.com) which made its debut March 15, 1996 - the world's first architectural website it should be noted - featuring what at the time was the second book to be printed cover-to-cover on the internet (the site was simplified and revised around 2022 after having been "on the air" so-to-speak for a quarter century - so it is no longer quite "cover-to-cover") is alone enough to warrant my page. Remember, in 1996 only 25k-30k websites were functioning at all; another 75k simply said "Under Construction."

Secondly, another item is that, acting pro se I fought N.Y.S. all the way to the Supreme Court against special interest legislation affecting N.Y.S. architects and for the most part I succeeded.

Third, in an 8 year federal case, acting pro se, which went twice to the Delaware District Court ('Carnivale v. Staub' Civ.No.08-764-SLR), the U.S. Federal Circuit (Appeal from the U.S.Patent and Trademark Office,Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, in No. 92047553 'Staub v. Carnivale) and twice to the Third Circuit (Civil Action 1:08-cv-00764-SLR) - all of which I won - I brought trademark law, specifically the 1946 Lanham Act regarding trademark protections, into the computer age. The case is now cited throughout the country and established that tiny alterations in domain names are insufficient to protect against claims of trademark infringement. The Delaware District Court accepted evidence as having proven that, via my website, as of the 2007 date of the trial, 2,301,503 people had read all or part of my book (and it must be noted that the "unique viewers" the webhost reported counted everyone using a particular browser, such as Google or Yahoo etc., on any given day as being one "unique viewer" - meaning that 2.3 million figure was many times that in terms of individual people). That Delaware District case "Carnivale v. Staub Design, LLC, No. CIV. 08-cv-764-SLR" had its judgement entered 1/8/13; it was affirmed along with the statistical evidence mentioned, by the U.S.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit [no. 13-1354 decided 12/3/13] and was again affirmed, including the statistical evidence, by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in its decision [Staub Design LLC. v. Carnivale, Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit 2015, No. 2015-1306 decided August 6, 2015]. This shows three federal courts have considered it proven that millions had read all or part of my book as of 2007; undoubtedly millions more have done so in the subsequent years. Though I am not a "famous" architect, I suggest that few architects have had their writings read by, and drawings seen by, millions of people and suggest that alone is worth a Wikipedia entry.

In turning to my page I see a few inaccuracies which have crept in over the years; my projects now number more than 700 across the U.S. (not 500) and my book is now self published rather than published by BookSurge. Having practiced for nearly a half century (not quite but getting close) and having won nearly every preservation award there is in N.Y.C. (I am a very traditional architect with a strong interest in preserving historic architecture) I am not unknown and am as much an architect as any of those listed under 'American Architects' - and on Staten Island, a place of 500,000 people, I can say that I am fairly well known. I do not know why someone moved me from "People from Staten Island" to "Artists from Staten Island"- that is inaccurate in that I am an architect, a retired college professor, a preservationist and an author - and as you likely know, architects, while they should be artistic in nature, are part historians, part engineers, part mathematicians and part businessmen too - putting me in the limited 'artists' category is simply inaccurate. i see that has been corrected since, for which I am grateful. I saw at one point someone called my page a "Puff Piece" which does not reflect that I was the first pioneer of a major profession on the internet, and, acting pro se for 8 years in federal court, I altered trademark law regarding the internet. For these reasons, I ask that you might be kind enough to enter my comments into the discussion for me, since I haven't been able to figure out how to do that. I thank you in advance, Sincerely yours, David Carnivale 2603:7000:6E3B:C199:E8BA:D11:E26:2FB8 (talk) 03:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Slightly reformatted. -- Hoary (talk) 04:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I see that you have already posted the text above, or something close to it, to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Carnivale, which is where arguments for (or against) retention of the article David Carnivale should be made. -- Hoary (talk) 04:10, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

David Carnivale: if you want to convince people that the article is worthy of keeping, you should give your reasons briefly. I suspect that few people will have read the walls of text you have posted here and at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Carnivale. I certainly haven't. Maproom (talk) 07:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Like many people, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which summarises what secondary sources have already publikshed about subjects.

WIkipedia is not interested in what you have said, done, been, or created, except insofar as people wholly unconnected with you have chosen to write about those things. THe only kind of argument which would be relevant to keeping that article is to present several reliably published sources where people with no connection with you or your associates, and not prompted or fed information on your behalf, have chosen to write at some length about you. If such souces can be found, they will establish that you meet Wikipedia's criteria of notability, and the article can be kept. It will probably need to be rewritten, to be based on what those independent sources say, not on what you or your associates say or want to say - hence the "puff piece" criticism. ColinFine (talk) 10:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Having been covered in multiple academic journals, e.g. [10], [11] and law reports notability is established. Cases don't get into published law reports unless they are notable. 2A00:23C5:E12F:5300:C588:17E2:E52E:6CDD (talk) 11:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

2A00:23C5:E12F:5300:C588:17E2:E52E:6CDD is apparently a banned user. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

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.

Please help correct the date the US Navy's Thresher was lost.

Hello, I recently discovered that when you search about the Thresher submarine in one spot it gives the incorrect date that it was lost. The information is that of the Scorpion submarine. Also the pop-up paragraph you get when hover over the text refers to the Scorpion so they may be accidentally cross linked. The Threshers anniversary just passed, and I am actually a newly hired ship builder so it would mean a lot if you could help fix this error so that the tragic loss can be remembered honorably and accurately. If you follow the link and look to the upper right-hand side in the section below the little round "W" you will see what I'm referring to. Thank you.[12] 173.225.51.130 (talk) 15:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello. The place to discuss this is on the Talk page of the relevant article. ColinFine (talk) 16:15, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

To add to what ColinFine said, if a search engine's summary is incorrect, that's often a problem on their end, not Wikipedia's, and you need to go through their own error reporting channels. 57.140.16.48 (talk) 16:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of a last name from an article / Deletion of an article from Wikipedia

Hello,

I have a couple question regarding the editing process on Wikipedia. Is there a chance to have a last name of an artist deleted if they prefer to be mononymous? In case this artist decides to delete the Wikipedia page, would they be able to do so?

Many thanks.

Kind regards, Irina Irina Shtreis (talk) 16:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Articles can certainly note that musicians prefer to be mononymous (for example, Cher or Sophie (musician)). However, if their full names are described in reliable sources, those will normally be included as well. If the name cannot be sourced to reliable sources, it should be omitted from the article. As for deleting the article altogether, this is a little tough to answer without knowing which article this involves. For well-sourced articles that meet the notability guidelines, they normally won't be deleted. If the article is not well sourced, or if it does not meet the notability guidelines, deletion is likely, particularly if the subject of the article wants it to be deleted (see WP:BIODEL). GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 16:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

If it's Lawrence (musician), the cat seems pretty much out of the bag. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

With exceptions, people who are subjects of an article have no power to delete the article. David notMD (talk) 16:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Fix Sorting Mistake on Category Page

Found a mistake on the Category:Urine page, Cow Urine is listed under "U" instead of "C" like Camel Urine is. I went to the edit page button but there wasn't really anything there. This was the only text in the edit box: {{Commons cat|Urine}} {{Cat main|Urine}} [[Category:Body fluids]] [[Category:Excretion]] [[Category:Urinary system]] [[Category:Animal waste products]]

Far from the 56 pages and 4 subcategories that show up on the page when not in editing mode. How do I correct this? Blast335 (talk) 16:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

It's actually based on what's in Cow urine, not the category page itself. Cow urine has {{DEFAULTSORT:urine, Cow}} at the bottom above its categories which makes it appear under U. Hope that helps! Happy editing, ayakanaa ( t · c ) 16:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I've removed {{DEFAULTSORT:urine, Cow}}, since I saw no particular reason for the article to be sorted that way in any of its categories. Deor (talk) 16:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

How does one get back into Wikipedia after taking a period of absence?

I have been taking an absence from Wikipedia for a few months, is there anything I can do to get back into Wikipedia? Thanks! Wikihelper59 (talk) 15:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Wikihelper. Just start making usefull edits and accept feedback from other editors. Cullen328 (talk) 17:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Censorship in Spanish wikipedia.

Red Alert! Censorship on Wikipedia in Spanish The Spanish Wikipedia faces a disturbing threat: the deletion of new content under unjustified accusations of lack of relevance or self-promotion. Articles on figures like Fernando Oramas, La Movida Literaria, and Fernando Calderón España have disappeared, and this cannot continue! I call on librarians, creators, and the entire Wikipedia family: Let's join forces to investigate and prevent censorship in the Spanish version! Wikipedia is based on the collective construction of knowledge. Deleting content based on subjective or vague criteria undermines this principle. We need transparency in deletion processes and active community participation to assess the relevance of topics. What can we do? Investigate deletion cases: Analyze the reasons given for deleting these articles. Did they meet Wikipedia's verifiability and neutrality standards? Promote debate: Participate in deletion discussions and contribute reliable sources that support the importance of these topics. Defend freedom of expression: Wikipedia shouldn't become a space for censorship. Let's defend the right to include relevant information, as long as it's properly supported. We invite everyone interested in preserving free knowledge to join this fight. Together we can ensure that the Spanish Wikipedia remains a reliable and diverse source of information! Charlestompkins222 (talk) 00:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

So, do you have some question about the use of English-language Wikipedia? (That's what this page is for.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

If, Charlestompkins222, you're asking about the disappearance of Draft:Fernando Calderón España (in English-language Wikipedia), to which you contributed, Justlettersandnumbers deleted it as promotional, and rightly so. -- Hoary (talk) 00:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Charlestompkins222, the purpose of the Teahouse is to discuss editing the English Wikipedia, so I am not going to comment on another language version. But I will comment on Draft:Fernando Calderón España. That draft was unreferenced, which violates two policies, namely, Verifiability and Biographies of living persons. The draft was also highly promotional and written like a hagiography, which violates another policy, the Neutral point of view. So, three severe policy violations in a single draft. Deleting such poor quality content is good sense, not censorship in any sense. Cullen328 (talk) 01:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

For the record: on the Spanish side, the article es:Fernando Calderón España was deleted (log) from Spanish Wikipedia by Virum Mundi (on es-wiki: es:Virum Mundi (talk · contribs)) on 20 April 2024 for "lack of sourcing and promotional". Mathglot (talk) 03:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't want to speak to es.wiki's policy on the matter but I can't imagine that they'd take kindly to this attempt at BRIGADING and I can't imagine that it would help your case. -- D'n'B-t -- 17:31, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Geometry Dash Level Names in Disambiguation Pages

Recently I was looking up GD Level Names just for fun, and when I looked into the edit history, I saw that a lot of level names were removed from the pages by some unregistered user saying something like "no geometry dash", or "no geometry dash level names in disambiguation pages". Is this some kind of unspoken rule or something? 𝒞𝑜𝑜𝓅𝑒𝓇 𝒢𝑜𝑜𝒹𝓂𝒶𝓃 (talk) 17:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I suppose WP:DISAMBIGUATION would be helpful for this. Industrial Insect (talk) 18:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Photo Usage

FYI

 – made new section ayakanaa ( t · c ) 19:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I need info on using photos found in Wikipedia (and the need for permissions)for a book I have written. 2601:586:CD00:7F90:856A:E8B5:6A2F:10DE (talk) 18:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. You asked the same question over at the help desk earlier today - there is an answer there: Wikipedia:Help desk#Use of Wikipedia photos. 57.140.16.48 (talk) 19:11, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Seeking Advice on Revisiting a Redirect Decision for 'Collision at Rainbow Bridge'

I was excited about a new page I created called Collision at Rainbow Bridge. However, another user redirected the page to Rainbow Bridge. I did not know at the time of creating the article that there had been a prior discussion about leaving this topic as a redirect. That discussion took place a couple weeks after the collision and when information was still changing.

Several months have passed since then, and I think that new developments and additional information have stabilized and that the topic is notable enough to warrant its own article. I had put in a lot of time and effort to gather reliable sources and create the page. Could someone please advise on how to initiate a new discussion about this redirect, such as where to do it? Should I open the discussion on the talk page of the redirect, and is there anything special I need to include in the message to ask for input?

I'd also like any thoughts on whether trying to reopen this will succeed and is worth doing.

These are the relevant link:

Link 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Collision_at_Rainbow_Bridge&redirect=no

Link 2: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Rainbow Bridge explosion

CipherSleuth (talk) 02:54, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

CipherSleuth, as I see it, somebody was driving recklessly at high speed and sadly, the driver and their spouse were killed. That is sad but it happens all the time. The only unusual aspect is that the crash happened close to a border crossing. I fail to see why this incident deserves a freestanding Wikipedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 06:47, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. In terms of notability, the incident was initially treated as a terrorist attack. The President of the United States, the Governor of New York, and the Prime Minister of Canada were all briefed on the incident. It led to the closure of every major border crossing in the area, the cancellation of flights at Niagara airport and the suspension of Amtrack Service. It also was not a case of reckless driving. The driver likely lost control due to a mechanical failure that prevented him from breaking. There have been recent news articles about recovery of the black box in the car and attempts to subpoena the car maker for records. So, to my mind, the incident is notable and not the case of a simple car accident - three sentences about it in the article on Rainbow bridge does not seem sufficient to me. Hence my question about opening it up for another discussion. CipherSleuth (talk) 14:03, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

The notability guideline for an article about a specific event is WP:NEVENT. Have there been published reports or works about the collision since the week it happened? Reconrabbit 12:30, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello Reconrabbit. Thanks for linking to WP:NEVENT, which is helpful. I think there is an argument that the collision meets that the guidelines, given that it was so unusual in terms of its impact on the region. There were also political reactions to it and commentary on misinformation as to the cause.

In terms of sources, I cited 20; most were published the week of the incident, which I acknowledge weakens my case for a standalone article. But I do cite 4 articles, including two within the last couple months, that touch on the cause of the accident and the investigation. For now, I am housing a draft of the article here: Draft:Collision at Rainbow Bridge.

This was a time-consuming lesson not to work on creating an article without realizing that there was already a talk-page discussion about it (which I unfortunately never came across). But maybe at some point I can get it published. CipherSleuth (talk) 19:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

New here :)

Im looking for help on a wiki page im working on for an enterprise which is doing good work, how do I prove that the references are indepth, reliable, etc? While it is first draft, I'd love to hear your suggestions on tone and language to work on it further. Healingvibes (talk) 18:55, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Healingvibes, and welcome to the Teahouse.

You probably won't want to hear this, but the reason you don't know how to evaluate the sources is that you have plunged straight into the challenging task of creating an article without first spending time learning the necessary skills. It's like saying "I've done a bit of carpentry, so I'll build a house" without practising basic skills like surveying, or familiarising yourself with the legal requiremnts for a house. Naturally, you are likely to feel out of your depth.

I always advise new editors to not even think about creating a new article until they have spent several months making improvements to existing articles - especially, finding sources where these are lacking - and learning core principles such as verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view, and notability.

Frankly, Wikipedia doesn't care whether your enterprise is doing good work or not (we have plenty of article on really bad things as well as good ones): what it cares about is whether there is enough independent reliable published material to base an article on - remembering that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

So, anything written or published by, or based on the words of, the subject or its associates, does not contribute to establishing notability. Anything (like the Journal of Ethnic Foods article) which does not even mention the subject, is worthless as a source for an article. You need to find places that meet the description in the previous paragraph above: where people who have no connection at all with Last Forest, and have not been given information on behalf of Last Forest, have chosen to write about it. See Golden rule for more about evaluating sources.

One more question: when a new editor comes along, and immediately starts trying to create an article about a particular organization, they very often turn out to have a connection with that organization, and to not be aware that promotion (i.e., telling the world about something) is forbidden in Wikipedia. So, I ask directly: do you have a connection with Last Forest? ColinFine (talk) 20:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Should this talk page (and article edit notice) get the WP:A/I/PIA templates?

First, disclaimer: I requested protection for the page way back then(diff1, diff2) specifically as enforcement, because people were warring about the topic that I can't talk about, but I hadn't carefully read that I was supposed to have added the templates first.
Reasons for asking:
1. This is not the primary topic of the article, but it is the topic of both a section already in the article and a section people tried to add to the article.
2. There had been a discussion in the talk page that was started by an IP and had been responded by 1 non-extended-confirmed account (and 2 EC accounts), there also was an IP yesterday using insults.
I don't plan on answering questions, as this is already a restricted topic, if you feel this question by itself already violated the remedies then please feel free to revert it, but also please fix my mistake if it should have been templated, thanks. – 2804:F1...83:ADC7 (talk) 22:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Issues attempting to verify a claim

Hi there. I've been working on the page Money Money 2020 for a little bit now, and I was trying to find a source for the claim that Roy Miles produced the music videos on the "Disease is Punishment" DVD so I could possibly remove the "claims need verification" disclaimer. From my research, there's only really two sources I can find; a Discogs listing[13] with the credit on the back, and an Amazon listing[14] with the same. I'm wondering if either or none of these are reliable sources? If not, I'm unsure how to verify this claim, even though I know it's true. Thank you! Beachweak (talk) 15:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@Beachweak Discogs is not a reliable source since it's user-generated (see WP:DISCOGS), and neither is Amazon per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#Amazon. If you can't find a way to add the claim, even though you know it's true, you can't add it on Wikipedia. We require everything to be sourced to a reliable source. If you can find a reliable source that supports that claim, you can add that information. Cheers ‍Relativity ⚡️ 23:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply! That clears up a lot. Beachweak (talk) 00:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

New Editor

Im looking for some help on a wiki page im working on. I was told that the footnotes weren't formatted properly but I can't see where to fix that. Thank you! ShaneMatthews (talk) 17:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I forgot to attach the link

Draft:Fitch Means ShaneMatthews (talk) 17:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@ShaneMatthews: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1222. Your citations aren't inline, so you should move them to the end of the information they're sourcing. Another problem that a reviewer has noted is that the tone of the draft isn't appropriate for an encyclopedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you guys for your help. Still getting the hang of writing in a "dry" manner. I may have to outsource to get an idea of the language that should be used. ShaneMatthews (talk) 18:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, ShaneMatthews. Your draft says that Means is known for his soulful vocals, introspective lyrics, and captivating stage presence. Who says so? Why should any reader believe that? Is that the personal opinion of User:ShaneMatthews, or did a reliable music industry publication say that? If a reliable source said it, then put it in quotation marks and properly cite the source. If that is your personal opinion, leave it out. No original research is a core content policy that applies to the personal opinions, assessments and critical judgments of Wikipedia editors. Our role as Wikipedia editors is to accurately summarize what the full range of reliable sources say about the topic, without injecting our own opinions. Cullen328 (talk) 02:33, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much this was super helpful! ShaneMatthews (talk) 02:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Reliable sources Question

hey guys,

I'm a newbie working on my first article but unfortunately just got rejected due to not having reliable sources.

I realise this is a very basic question but just wondering if there's a good way of figuring out what a reliable source is.

Draft:Pauline Nguyen

The person I am attempting to create a page on has appeared on TV programs and has a number of articles discussing her in respected newspapers. She has also published books. Is there any way of knowing what I can use from these sources?

Would it be valid criteria to discuss the subject purely as an author considering she has published many books?

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks

Dom Dviva (talk) 01:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Dviva. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes the significant coverage that published reliable sources that are entirely independent of the topic say about the topic. The references in Draft:Pauline Nguyen are either interviews of Nguyen or things written by Nguyen. None are independent. So, the issue is not how you frame her career. It is the lack, so far, of fully independent sources. Cullen328 (talk) 02:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

A source that helps to establish the notability of a topic will have three characteristics. It will be reliable, it will be independent of the topic, and it will devote significant coverage to the topic. All three are required. Cullen328 (talk) 02:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

i'd also like to add that there's a quiz on wikipedia that you can take to see how much you know about reliable sources.

there's also a pretty sizeable list of sources on wikipedia that are either allowed or outright blocked for use of sourcing. paper2222 (talk) 07:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Cullen328 Thanks so much for the response. I understand what you are saying.

However, when I look at other wikipedia pages I quite often see features and interview style articles being used as sources. Just so I'm clear is it that these can't be the ONLY sources that are used but can be quoted here and there provided there is enough independant info online about the person?

Really appreciate your help :)

Dom Dviva (talk) 03:12, 23 April 2024 (UTRyuC)

Dviva, your understanding is correct. The first and most important task, by far, for a Wikipedia editor writing a new article is to establish that the topic is notable by citing the type of high quality sources I described above. Once notability has been established, then reliable non-independent sources can be used for routine, non-controversial details like date and place of birth, schools attended, marriages, children and so on. But nothing evaluative or contentious. Please read WP:ABOUTSELF. Cullen328 (talk) 03:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Apte surname page

hi i have a question regarding this page and i would like to know where i could find more sources unfortunately i only have a book written in 1914 and a website as a source and would like to be assisted in editing Apte surname page proffesionally Aptearnav (talk) 06:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Aptearnav. That article Apte is what is called a "set index" article. See Wikipedia:Set index articles for more information. "Apte" is a surname. Every entry in that article should be a Wikipedia article about a person with the surname "Apte". No one who is not the subject of a Wikipedia article should be included. Wikipedia:Write the article first explains the concept in much greater detail. Cullen328 (talk) 06:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

ok thanks, i am guessing that i can add information about genealogy/family tree and the sub group and tradition that they follow? Aptearnav (talk) 07:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Aptearnav. Yes, the page linked by Cullen328 says A set index article (or SIA) lists things only of one type, and is meant to provide not only navigation, but information as well, so you may add information about the family. Please make sure that anything you add is cited to a reliable source. The book published in 1914, and the website, may or may not be reliable sources depending on who published them, and in what circumstances. ColinFine (talk) 10:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Page mover permission not working

I have 'page mover' rights on Wikipedia but cannot move an article to overwrite one of its redirects, I get the error: "The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid." Why do my permissions not override this error? Thanks, – Olympian ^loquere 09:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

I think you can only overwrite redirects that only have a single revision. See Wikipedia:Page mover#delete-redirect. —Kusma (talk) 09:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

That's correct. See also WP:Page_mover#Page_swapping on how to install a script to automate round-robin moves instead in such cases. Polyamorph (talk) 09:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both! Best, – Olympian ^loquere 10:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Problem going live

Hey guys,

I'm a newbie when it comes to Wikipedia editing so i would like to ask you if you guys can help. I wrote a wiki page 5-6 months ago and it still is in my sandbox unable to go live for a reason! can you guide me on what i should do ?

Mistakefinder77 (talk) 08:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

You need to go through the articles for creation process by submitting it for review. Looking at the sandbox page now though, I can fairly confidently say that it is not going to pass that review process; it doesn't have any citations at all and only a couple external links, which is a really big no-no on Wikipedia.

Until you have any reliable citations on that page to source the information on there, it will not pass. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 08:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

would you be interested in helping me a bit more? i really need this to go live! Mistakefinder77 (talk) 08:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

I can help you out on specific questions relating to the article, but I can't make it for you if you get what I mean? You've chosen to make an article at around 33 edits, something people usually do for the first time after a couple hundred edits or most likely more.

What I'd personally recommend is to do some stuff from the task centre like citation hunting to learn more about how to cite, that should help you with making your article. Additionally, see WP:YFA for how to make articles. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 09:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

yea i get it ofc you can't write it for me! i just needed some help on what to do. Citations and then going live i guess ! thank you so much Mistakefinder77 (talk) 09:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Your draft appears to have been copied from the subject's website and therefore constitutes a copyright violation. I've consequently requested speedy deletion. There is now information on copyright posted on your talk page; please read it. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok, best thing I can tell you is to look up X article name in the news tag of Google. That'll give you a very good idea of whether a topic meets notability guidelines. If there are no relevant and reliable sources there, you likely don't have enough to make an article.

When I look for sources through that method, I don't find any. That is a problem, and a pretty major one at that.

And, yes, as DoubleGrazing said, a likelihood of copyright violations that high is another really big problem, and unfortunately not one you can really come back from as there are no good sources on the channel and thus no way to replace that copyrighted information. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 09:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Mistakefinder77, you wonder what you should do. Your first task, I think, is to acquaint yourself with the idea of an encyclopedia. Carefully read some "Good Articles" (articles recognized as "good" via a semi-formal process) in a subject area of interest to you. (If computer games, then try some of these.) Then, as has already been suggested, work to improve existing articles, of course always citing reliable sources. Only then consider creating an article afresh. This may sound difficult. It is difficult. If it's easy, either you have an extraordinarily aptitude or (far more likely) you're doing it wrong. -- Hoary (talk) 09:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

thanks a lot guys hope i will be able to do it ! Mistakefinder77 (talk) 09:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Mistakefinder77: you also need to disclose your conflict of interest before attempting to create another draft on this subject. I've posted instructions on your talk page. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

In summary: Your draft was Speedy deleted for copyright infringement, your first choice for a User name matched your proposed topic (a Youtube channel), you did not declare your being either paid or conflict of interest on your User page, and you admit you could not find any independent published content about your proposed subject that could serve as references. David notMD (talk) 11:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Assistance Needed: Wikipedia Page Update Query

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Same question posted at Wikipedia:Help desk#Assistance Needed: Wikipedia Page Update Query. Since someone has already responded there, I'm closing this to avoid any confusion and to keep the discussion in one place. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

---

Dear Wikipedia Help Desk,

My name is Nina, and I'm reaching out for guidance regarding updating the Wikipedia page for Envac. I work as a digital marketer at Envac, and I recently attempted to update the page using information from our company website. However, I received an email stating that all my changes were removed due to copyright concerns.

Could you please advise me on the correct procedure for updating the page? Do I need to provide any documentation as an Envac employee to verify the information? Your assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your help.

Best regards, Nina (NINASALEHI2024) NINASALEHI2024 (talk) 12:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

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.

Dave Harris (baseball)

Hello. Need your help on this. Go to above article, scroll all the way to bottom of article where the two references(#s1&2) are. Can you make a separate Reference section above the external links section? I am lost on this as I see nothing in the edit window on how to do this. Thank you for your time.Theairportman33531 (talk) 12:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

I did it for you, but if you ever need to, you just have to add the template reflist, see WP:REFLIST. Põhjapõder (talk) 13:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Have a good day.Theairportman33531 (talk) 13:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Deleting a sandbox

Hello. I would like to ask what is the easiest way to delete an alternate sandbox of mine. I remember asking an AI about it but I forgot what it is. Underdwarf58 (talk) 13:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

If you're the only one that has edited the page, you can add {{db-self}} to the top, and an admin will either delete the page or explain why they can't. For more info see WP:G7. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:46, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Underdwarf58 (talk) 13:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Underdwarf58: my mistake, the relevant guideline is WP:U1. G7 also works but U1 is specifically for pages in your own userspace. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

About copypasting

I stumbled upon the article Yeyi people of which the history section is a blatant copypaste from a book. I was wondering as to how to proceed since I have never had to deal with such an issue. Should the edit simply be reverted? Especially given that the formatting has not been adapted to Wikipedia (introduced with this edit). How should I generally proceed? Thanks Põhjapõder (talk) 13:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting this, Põhjapõder. I've removed and hidden the copyright-violating content. There are instances where content from an external source can be reused on Wikipedia, but since our content is published under a license that allows re-use under certain conditions, in general we need affirmative evidence that content that we re-use is also published under a compatible license. If published content isn't clearly compatibly licensed then we have to assume that it isn't, and content that violates copyright has to be removed as quickly as possible for legal reasons. If you've identified text that might violate content, you can tag the section with {{copyvio}} - this template is a little complicated but you can click the link for instructions. If an entire page violates copyright and there is no way to remove it or revert to a "clean" version, you can instead add {{db-copyvio}} to the top, which flags the page for WP:G12 speedy deletion. And if you're not sure, there is the copyright noticeboard where you can list a page for our resident copyright experts to review. You can find more information on copyright at Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Copyright violations, and you might also be interested in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Cheers! Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the explanations and links, the whole thing is much clearer now! Põhjapõder (talk) 14:30, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Adding SVG images without being rescaled to square

Draft:Strict Fibonacci heap

How do I ensure that SVG images do not get resized to 1:1 ratios? I tried the four different image modes, but none seemed to work. Inputting a custom size still forces the image to be square. Is it necessary to convert the image to a bitmap format? That would be undesirable since bitmap images are not easy to edit (e.g. translate text in the image). IntGrah (talk) 14:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@IntGrah: commons:File:Rank-list and fix-list in strict Fibonacci heap.svg says "Original file ‎(SVG file, nominally 512 × 512 pixels, file size: 6 KB)". That means our software thinks you uploaded a square image and will display it as square no matter what you do. Other uploads at the time like commons:File:UniBE31 IBMPlexSansKR-Light.svg don't have the problem. I don't know details of the SVG format and cannot say whether the error is in the uploaded file or our software. Try changing something in the image and upload it again at commons:Special:UploadWizard, or maybe ask for help at commons:Commons:Help desk. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Wiki project

I have created a draft WikiProject for the Food and Drink industry in England as I think that the main article and related articles could with this project improve, expand and hopefully see articles within it meet the WP:GOODARTICLE criteria.ChefBear01 (talk) 07:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Then, ChefBear01, you might link to this draft. -- Hoary (talk) 07:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

This is the draft WikiProject Draft:WikiProject food and drink industry in England. ChefBear01 (talk) 14:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary:, I would like to invite you and anyone that wished to join to the above WikiProject.ChefBear01 (talk) 16:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Billy Williams (baseball) citation issue

Hello. Go to above article, scroll down to Chicago Cubs, second paragraph, where the sentence ends ...failing to drive in a run in his last 15 appearances, citation (reference#7). I cant link up the URL to Retrosheet, it might be a bad link, I have had problems with Retrosheet before. Perhaps you can fix it. Thank you for your help.Theairportman33531 (talk) 15:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Fixed. The link used a lower case "l" and it should have been an upper case "I" (lwillb vs Iwillb) -- very hard to see and nearly drove me crazy trying to find it! LizardJr8 (talk) 17:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

It was driving me nuts as well. Tried numerous times. Thank you for your assistance. Have a good one!Theairportman33531 (talk) 17:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

How do I post a correction to a published article?

Article in question

United States Navy Nuclear Propulsion

My EDIT In the early days of the Nuclear Power program (1960's) the Navy was accepting other ratings as long as they attended and passed the courses at the Navy Nuclear Power School and passed the operational experience at the various 'Hulls' such as S1-W for some submariners and A1W for the USS Enterprise. They accepted IC-men (Inter-ship Communications Technicians, BT's (Boiler techs). In one case they accepted an AT (Aviation Electronics Technician) as a reactor operator (RO) on the USS Enterprise. They refused to give the men a special 'Nuclear Rating' as it could possibly lead to problems in foreign ports of call.

How I know this - Personal Experience

I entered this information as it was missing from the Enlisted Ratings lists on your article. I don't know how to site a source as this was my field of endeavor in the Navy Nuclear Program from 1964-1971. I was the AT in question, serving as a Reactor Operator on the USS Enterprise (CVA(N)-65. The only proof I have are my various documents issued during my tenor and my DD-214 upon discharge. Admiral Rickover gave me permission to keep my Aviation Rating while serving as a Reactor Operator.

Thank you for any guidance you may have

David Vann 2601:80:C502:D4F0:8CE4:9437:F990:2F50 (talk) 22:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Unfortunately, your personal experiences, no matter how accurate, are not valid article content. Information must be in a published reliable source that can be verified. Private documents also aren't acceptable sources. 331dot (talk) 22:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Formatting help

I added an entry about Sarah Woodhead to Timeline of women's education for the year 1873, but I can’t get the formatting right. Can somebody fix it for me please?100.11.62.252 (talk) 04:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Done. – 2804:F14:8092:9F01:F56F:2C15:5C83:ADC7 (talk) 05:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks!!100.11.62.252 (talk) 22:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Selecting "pull quotes" to reflect critical consensus

Is there a policy in place for selecting pull quotes to reflect critical consensus on a piece of media?

This came up in regard to a movie (Problemista - Wikipedia) but its something that will have an effect on NPOV for many, many articles.

It's common to have a section of an article summarizing the "reception" of a movie, book, or album -- and that section often consists of a handful of selected quotes from hopefully notable and representative critics. But it's quite easy to suggest a negative critical reception by selecting (as happened in this case) three negative quotes about a move that, in fact, received generally positive reviews.

Is there any established guideline for this? It seems like common sense, but it would be nice to have the support of a formal policy.

Distingué Traces (talk) 22:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse. If I understand correctly, the Reception section for Problemista recently was a single paragraph detailing "generally favorable" reviews according to Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic; then, an editor added three more paragraphs of unfavorable reviews.

As I understand it, the relevant policies here are WP:DUE and WP:NPOV. It would be undue weight if three of the four paragraphs of this section were about unfavorable reviews if overall the film received generally favorable reviews. The same logic would apply if all unfavorable reviews were removed from the article.

How I would recommend solving this issue is to add back maybe one of those three removed paragraphs. You could research and add another paragraph of favorable reviews to make the section overall "generally favorable." Mokadoshi (talk) 23:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Of course, there is a policy about this, and it is the Neutral point of view, which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic both report that the film has generally positive reviews, and both are reliable sources as described at Wikipedia:Review aggregators. Accordingly, it is a violation of NPOV for an individual editor to add quotes from three negative reviews because that clearly skews the section in a non-neutral direction. I also posted this on the article talk page. Cullen328 (talk) 00:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Help regarding infobox image format

Hi, I am here to seek assistance in matter regarding to determine the issue with infobox image format on the city related articles. See my previous discussion: Talk:Hyderabad#Infobox and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#City related articles infoboxes and now here: Vijayawada, where this particular user Toddy1 insists on sticking to a particular format when it is not mandated anywhere and also comes up with a interpretation that the infobox project mandates not to have seven images. In my opinion and the previous discussion, there is no particular format and the users are left to their interpretation of the image format on the infobox: [Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 203#Putting captions in galleries in infobox]]. If at all I am wrong in this matter, I will just refrain from editing further. Please guide me and thank you in advance. Please ping me when replying. 456legendtalk 17:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@456legend: Please follow the process outlined at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. 456legendtalk 01:01, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

How do I delete a User Subfolder?

Hi, I recently completed WP:TWA and now there exists a "user subfolder?" of User:Pauliesnug/TWA/{a bunch of other files}. How can I recursively delete all the /TWA pages? Thanks! pauliesnug ^{(message / contribs)} 20:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, paulinug, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. Users cannot delete pages, even their own user pages, but what they can do is put {{db-author}} (with the double curly brackets) at the top, and an admin will be along tod delete the page.

I don't know whether they can delete the whole structure in one go, or need to do each page separately (I'm not an admin); but I suggest you put that in the top-level page, adding a note clarifying that yes, you are asking them to delete the whole structure. ColinFine (talk) 20:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you pauliesnug ^{(message / contribs)} 02:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Joanna Lambert and Jo Lambert

Hello, I noticed Joanna Lambert was proposed deletion recently. I started to add new citations. After in which I noticed it is a duplicate article to Jo Lambert in the main space. I am not sure the protocol, should they be merged? PigeonChickenFish (talk) 05:16, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

It does not appear to be a duplicate, it was moved: Joanna Lambert. I guess you were editing it while it was moved? – 2804:F14:8092:9F01:F9F8:9351:41E7:923 (talk) 05:23, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

It is showing as two different articles for me; with two different names, and a different number of citations? PigeonChickenFish (talk) 05:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, they are two articles about the same person, and yes they should be merged. Mathglot (talk) 05:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Look at the histories of the 2 pages(Special:PageHistory/Joanna Lambert and Special:PageHistory/Jo Lambert), the PROD now shows as having happened on Jo Lambert, not on Joanna Lambert like you remember. The citations on Joanna Lambert were added in your edit, before that is only the redirect left behind from the move. – 2804:F14:8092:9F01:F9F8:9351:41E7:923 (talk) 05:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

How to figure about Reliable Resources

hello, i am new here and trying to contribute in Wikipedia by editing and citing. How to find out that the references I've added is reliable or not? GrooveGalaxy (talk) 06:36, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi GrooveGalaxy. There's some general information about the types of sources Wikipedia considered to be reliable found in Wikipedia:Reliable sources. There is also a list of individual sources whose reliability is often asked about found at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources that contains a brief assessment of various sources. Neither of the two pages I've mentioned, however, covers every possible situation and every possible source; so, if there's a specific source that you're not sure about that's not covered by those two pages, you can ask for an assessment at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Italian Wikipedia

URGENT

I need to speak with an Italian Wikipedia administrator immediately. As soon as possible. It's really important. Thanks 151.47.245.144 (talk) 19:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

You might want to go to Italian Wikipedia. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 19:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@CommissarDoggo No. I'm blocjed there 151.35.113.55 (talk) 20:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

We can't help you with blocks on the Italian Wikipedia, you will need to handle this there using whatever process they have to do so. 331dot (talk) 20:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@331dot They haven't any. 37.163.91.235 (talk) 21:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@331dot This is why I would like to speak privately with an Italian admin 37.163.91.235 (talk) 21:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

It is unlikely that there are any admins of the Italian Wikipedia who will be here and see this message. Sorry.

it:Wikipedia:Revisione del blocco looks like where you need to go. ColinFine (talk) 21:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

No one here will be able to help you. If you are unable to get help at Italian Wikipedia, then I am afraid you are out of luck. Mathglot (talk) 05:32, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

The notion that the English Wikipedia is the "Master Wikipedia" or the "Dominant Wikipedia" or the "Boss Wikipedia" is widespread but false. Each language version is autonomous, and the administrators on the other language versions do not accept English language Wikipedia editors trying to tell them what to do, so we don't. They are perfectly capable in almost all cases of running their own Wikipedias. Cullen328 (talk) 07:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Can I write a second draft article for review in my sandbox when it contains a redirect to my first article?

Hi, Some time ago I wrote a draft article (Shot peen forming) in my sandbox and had it reviewed. It was then accepted as ok and the corresponding wikipedia page created. I'd now like to write a second article. Can I do that in my sandbox without affecting the "redirect" notice in my sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User:CSK45Kays/sandbox&redirect=no

Alternatively, where could I write a draft of my new article so that it can be reviewed? Thanks CSK45Kays (talk) 07:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, CSK45Kays. In theory, you could do that but in practice, it would be messy and confusing for new page reviewers and eventually, for yourself. In practice, you can create an unlimited number of new sandbox pages tailored to your specific needs, in the form of User: CSK45Kays/sandbox/A or User: CSK45Kays/sandbox/XYZ or whatever you choose to be memorable to you. I cannot begin to count how many sandbox pages I have, but when I look at them all, they make sense because I have given them logical names. Cullen328 (talk) 07:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello Cullen328 (talk) and thanks for your quick reply. Have now created a new sandbox page. Thanks again. CSK45Kays (talk) 07:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

You are welcome, CSK45Kays, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Ask questions here at the Teahouse any time you want. Cullen328 (talk) 08:00, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Add birth date without numbers

I am trying to enter a birthdate without the precise day in the template in this article but it breaks for some reason and I don't know how to fix it. What do I need to enter for a birth date without a precise day ? The article in question : Fusajiro Yamauchi Maxime12346 (talk) 08:01, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Maxime12346. What is your reason for not wanting to give the precise date of birth? Is the current date inaccurate? You can not use "unknown" in an infobox unless the parameter in question accepts "unknown" as valid input. If the data requested by the infobox is unknown, then just leave that field blank. Cullen328 (talk) 08:13, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Something like Template:Birth based on age as of date might be what you're after. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:15, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia "Contents" floating icon

How do I remove the floating "Contents" icon from the upper left side of the Wikipedia page? It always blocks the text that I am trying to read. Thank you. 65.129.42.118 (talk) 21:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1222. Are you talking about the ? It's been a while since the default skin (Vector 2022) was implemented, but you may want to create an account or reduce your browser's zoom level for this site; the former should allow you to relegate the icon to a sticky header. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 09:11, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Error restored 25 times

Block evasion by an LTA.

Someone who knows when a U.S. presidential term ends and what a president might do just before leaving office needs to take a look at Mark Geragos. In that article history, an error has been restored 25 times. Related reverts on other pages warrant attention as well, but I won't rehash that now. 45.236.107.86 (talk) 08:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC) The article Mark Geragos has been "semi-protected" for well over a month, and has shown no sign of edit warring since. If you believe that the content is now erroneous, then you're welcome to make an edit request at the foot of Talk:Mark Geragos. Be sure both to specify the precise change you want, and to point to reliable sources for any proposed addition. -- Hoary (talk) 09:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC) I did that, there and on other pages. I wish people would just focus on actual content. 45.236.107.86 (talk) 09:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC) If that edit was made by you, then you are admitting that you are circumventing a block. Don't do that. ColinFine (talk) 10:18, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Citation footnotes

Hello Teahouse Team, I am seeking guidance to help publish my article (first-timer here). I submitted my article and received a message stating I need improvement regarding citation footnotes. My submission included linked citations and numbered citations. Will you please help me understand the footnoted citations? Are these required? Here is link to my draft submission Draft:Adetokunbo Omishakin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Adetokunbo_Omishakin Thanks so much! Transportation17 (talk) 19:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Transportation17 see Help:Footnotes (which was linked in the decline reason). Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 19:31, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Sungodtemple! Transportation17 (talk) 19:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hyperlinks are not allowed, and your draft, Draft:Adetokunbo Omishakin, has no references. David notMD (talk) 03:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Button that turns unsourced claims into sourced ones.

Hi Transportation17 it looks like you resubmitted your draft without adding any citations at all, so it just got declined for the same reason. If you take a took at an existing article on a comparable topic (such as Pete Buttigieg) then you'll see how there are inline citations in the article backing up the claims it is making with reliable sources. Since you're using the Visual Editor, all you need to do is click on Cite (it looks like the image to the right) when you you get to the end of a sentence. You'll need to have, at the very least, three different reliable third-party sources before this article gets accepted. And as David said, you'll need to remove the external links from the article body as well. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! This is the most straightforward response I've received, very helpful! So to be clear, I am NOT allowed to use hyperlinks? I'm a bit confused about this because I see hyperlinks throughout Wikipedia all the time. I will use the "cite" button you referenced, thank you. But no hyperlinks? Please differentiate between references, hyperlinks, citations. And, specifically, which I need to apply. Thank you! Transportation17 (talk) 15:30, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

From the reader's perspective, a citation is what appears in the main body of the text - in a wikipedia article that normally appears as a number like this^[99], other contexts often looks like (author YEAR). The reference is what they see at the end (either in footnotes, endnotes or bibliographies depending on what type of thing they are reading) which gives full details of where the information came from. Every citation "points" to a reference; so the reader, wondering why an auhtor is making a certain claim can be directed to where they got that information from.

From the editor's perspective it doesn't really matter which is which because you create them both at once - the numbering and creation of the footnote is more-or-less automatic - so you'll see people say citation and reference interchangeably.

References will pretty often (not always) contain an external link. But in the main body of an article, except in a very few circumstances, only internal links (links to other wikipedia articles) are used. -- D'n'B-t -- 17:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Further to the above, you mention 'hyperlinks': in an article (or other page such as this one) these also include links to other articles in Wikipedia, which are there to further clarify and inform readers but cannot be used as citations since Wikipedia itself, being user generated, does not qualify as a Reliable source. 188.220.144.58 (talk) 13:23, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Potential conflict of interest

Hi all,

I‘m associated with an organization . Are there any circumstances under which I may edit the Wikipedia article about this organization?

Cheers

Michael Claus Michael Scharpf (talk) 21:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Claus, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for coming here and asking.

There are a few contexts in which that is allowed, but generally not: it depends on the nature of your association, and on the kind of edit.

See the Plain and simple conflict of interest guide first. Note that if you are in any way employed by the organisation (including as an unpaid volunteer or intern, and even if editing Wikipedia is in no way part of your job) then you are regarded as a paid editor, and the requirement to make a declaration, and the restrictions on editing, become mandatory. ColinFine (talk) 21:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Claus Michael Scharpf: See also Our FAQ for article subjects. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:02, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Mentorship

I wish to know who is my Mentor. Any help? Fugabus (talk) 18:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

It is me. What do you need? LegalSmeagolian (talk) 18:40, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok, Let's discuss on your talk page. Thanks for welcoming me. Fugabus (talk) 18:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Of course! LegalSmeagolian (talk) 18:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Sourcing.

If I use the internet archive to access a book and use it as a source on Wikipedia. Do I cite the book itself or the internet archive ? Maxime12346 (talk) 21:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Cite the book, but consider including the URL of the online location where you read it (the Internet Archive) in the URL= field. Perception312 (talk) 21:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Creating a wikipedia page for a fiction film

I'm trying to create a wikipedia page about a new film (link here) I have added a number of sources that have been deemed unreliable and I therefore cannot get the page approved. I'm confused about what qualifies as reliable, as this is about a fictional film and takes quotes directly from established news sources that report on the film and interview its filmmakers. Any help is greatly appreciated! Moviemaniac18 (talk) 18:22, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Interviews with the filmmakers do not contribute to notability as they are not independent sources(though they can be used for other purposes). IMDB is not considered a reliable source as it is user-editable. The film itself can be a source for its cast and crew. Typically an article about a film should discuss reviews by professional reviewers/critics, I don't see any.

You also have several unsourced passages. 331dot (talk) 18:29, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Moviemaniac18, and welcome to the Teahouse.

If the film is new, then it is very likely to be WP:TOOSOON.

To write a new article, about any subject at all, the very first question is "Where have people completely unconnected with the subject, and not fed information on behalf of the subject, chosen to write at some length about the subject?" If the answer is "Nowhere", then it is a waste of everybody's time to even try to write an article now. Maybe later, when independent sources have taken note of it.

Remember that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Infobox

I've been editing this page and this page. They have the exact same line in the infobox: First appearance - Star Wars. The source code is exactly the same, but the words "First appearance" display on two lines on the Chewbacca page, and on only one line on the Darth Vader page. Any idea why this is? I prefer the Vader formatting, where the text doesn't continue onto a second line. Wafflewombat (talk) 04:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

I really looked at this for a while, trying various things including tweaking image size, and changing following fields, but couldn't find the issue. Mathglot (talk) 06:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

I've looked at the generated HTML, and it appears to be the same in both cases; so this is down to the browser's layout algorithm, and is not in Wikipedia's control.

For some reason, it is allocating the widths of the two columns in the table differently in the two cases, but I can't see any particular reason. I thought it might be to do with the length of the lines in the second column, but I can't see anything obvious. ColinFine (talk) 10:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

In Chewbacca, "Co-pilot and first mate on Millennium Falcon" has a line break before Millennium Falcon for me but for some reason makes the second infobox column much wider than the widest line. The problem goes away for me if a forced line break <br /> is inserted where it already breaks the line. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Good job! Problem solved. Thank you! Wafflewombat (talk) 00:19, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Lloyd Law College

Hi,

I want to know the process to resolve the below issue for the following URL Lloyd Law College

ISSUE - The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations. Please help to demonstrate the notability of the topic by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention. If notability cannot be shown, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. Vivek the writer (talk) 06:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

That sounds like the next of a warning about questionable WP:Notability, but I don't see that on the article now. On the other hand, the two templates about advertising and lack of citations accurately reflect the current state of the article, and if I were you, I would work on resolving those issues. Mathglot (talk) 07:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Convert citation help

I need help to convert this source properly because an FA and GA articles have cited it and I feel like the source wasn't converted properly, but I'm not sure how. This is the source here [15]. 🥒Greenish Pickle!🥒 (🔔) 04:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Greenish Pickle!:, I'm not quite sure wha tyou mean by "converting" a source; do you mean, citing it? To my knowledge, four articles cite this source:

• Chris Redfield (GA)
• Jill Valentine (FA)
• Resident Evil 5 (FA)
• Sheva Alomar GA)

You seem to be complaining about something having to do with how that source was cited, but what exactly is the issue? At FA Jill Valentine for example, that source is cited like this:

{{cite book |last1=Geyser |first1=Hanli |year=2013 |chapter= Return to Darkness: Representations of Africa in Resident Evil 5 |editor1-last=Balaji |editor1-first=Murali |title=''Thinking Dead: What the Zombie Apocalypse Means'' |location=Lanham, MD |publisher=Lexington/Rowman & Littlefield |pages=103–119}}

Do you have an issue with that (other than the title, which should not have embedded italic markup)? Mathglot (talk) 07:47, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

I've already talked to some people off-wiki and they also think its fine. So, yeah. It should be fine now. Thanks for weighing in. 🥒Greenish Pickle!🥒 (🔔) 07:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Actioning a consensus

I admit, I didn't invest that much thought into it, and some people were confused by the wording of it, but a while back I opened a RFC at Talk:Somalia regarding the map being used. Is it possible to get someone to action it? Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 12:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

under 'Somalia showed as controlling Somaliland' Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 12:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

@Fantastic Mr. Fox:, what action do you think would be warranted? Responses are all over the map, and my guess is a closer would evaluate it as no consensus, meaning the status quo would remain. You are welcome to request a formal closure, but I hardly see the point of it. Mathglot (talk) 07:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

I think there was a direction towards including 2 maps being displayed (one showing full territory, one showing claimed but uncontrolled territory), the issue was people immediately decided discussion was boring once the protection on the image expired (1 months after opening RFC I think) and edit warred over it until earlier this month. It probably will happen again considering that's been the trend for about a year now. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 07:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Fantastic Mr. Fox:, if you are not getting sufficient participation to achieve consensus, you could try notifying some WP:WikiProjects. Mathglot (talk) 07:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Will do, cheers. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 07:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

adding photos

how do I add pictures to articles? MayoTicTac (talk) 20:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

It depends on several things, but most importantly, the copyright status of the pictures.

If they are pictures that you made yourself (and are not pictures of copyright items) then you can upload them and add them to an article. If they are already at Wikimedia Commons, you can add them to an article.

If they are in the public domain (either because they are very old, or because their copyright owner has explicitly put them in the public domain, as the US Federal government often does for images it publishes) then you can upload them and use them in an article.

If you can demonstrate that the copyright owner has explicitly released them under a suitable licence, you can upload them and use them in articles.

For most pictures you find on the internet, you may not upload or use them.

See Help:Upload for more infomation. ColinFine (talk) 22:01, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

@MayoTicTac:, see Help:Pictures. Mathglot (talk) 08:13, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Question about Oversight

Is it possible for oversighters to suppress the details of attempted edits disallowed by a public filter? QwertyForest (talk) 07:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, QwertyForest, that depends entirely on the specific content of the disallowed edits. Suppression by oversighters must meet stringent standards. Edits are not suppressed lightly. Cullen328 (talk) 07:13, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi QwertyForest Have you tried emailing Oversight? Usually, you'll get a response one way or the other from an oversighter: they'll either thank you for bringing the matter to their attention or they'll let you know there's no need to do anything. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

How to cite pages from a book.

I have cited a book as shown here (https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Hiroshi_Yamauchi&oldid=1220410268) and I was wondering if you could tell what I need to write in the code to add a precise page. Maxime12346 (talk) 16:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Maxime12346: the {{Cite book}} template takes an optional page= parameter (or pages=, if citing more than one). The value is then simply the page number(s). HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Maxime12346 If you are citing from a book several times in an article, with different pages supporting each time the book is used, then the simplest way to show which page(s) are relevant each time is to use WP:NAMEDREFs with the template {{rp}}. See the linked documentation for the details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:25, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

State of New York law

Referring to a law passed by New York State is it better to write "Because of a New York State law, "... a New York state law ", "... a New York State law" or "... a New York state law"? Mcljlm (talk) 05:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Mcljlm, I assume your question refers to the wikicode underlying the link, is that right? Exposing that here, you asked this:

is it better to write "Because of a [[New York (state)|New York State]] law, "... a [[New York (state)|New York state]] law ", "... a [[New York (state)|New York]] State law" or "... a [[New York (state)|New York]] state law"?

Is that a fair restatement of what you are asking? If so, this is about New York State, and so the link should contain that, ruling out options 3 and 4. The word State is part of the proper name, thus capitalized, when speaking of New York State, thus ruling out number two, leaving #1. Finally, per WP:NOPIPE, rather than [[New York (state)|New York State]] you should simply write, [[New York State]] and allow the WP:Redirect to handle targeting the correct page for you, like this: New York State. As you can see; no WP:Piped link is needed here. Mathglot (talk) 07:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Mathglot. If I understand WP:NOPIPE correctly [[New York State]] is better in case New York (state) is changed to New York State. I wonder how likely that is. Mcljlm (talk) 12:06, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Please Help

I am Nilpriyo. Probably start editing Wikipedia from 2020. I love Bengali and Hindi serials very much. I know almost everything about Bengali serials. So I have created the page of various serials by reliable source. I have mostly created Bengali serial pages. Especially Zee Bangla, Star Jalsha, Colors Bangla and Sun Bangla I have produced and edited almost all serials. Besides Star Plus, Colors TV, Zee TV I also like serials very much. .But I don't know much about the serials of these channels so I can't edit. Not only that I have also created pages for various actresses. If someone gave wrong information on Bangla Serial page, I would have removed it. I always used to edit the things I knew. One day there was a complaint that I was paid by the channel so I mostly made serial pages. This complaint was first made by someone called The Banner. Later after the salary complaint was settled he made another complaint that I am editing COl. Which I knew nothing about. Later after getting the link I understand about the matter. I am editing what I know so what is the relationship with COl here?? The Banner kept repeating that complaint after many persuasions. Even after the reliable source is added to the serial page I created, the intentional page votes for Delete. In the meantime, I wrote in favor of delete vote on the page I created, or I am promoting as a person from the Marketing Department. Now from The Banner another person named CNMall41 is saying in my name that I do Col Edit. Tell me how long will I tolerate these false accusations. Repeatedly such false allegations threatened my Edit. I am currently busy with my studies so I can't spend time on editing. So I don't know how long I have to endure such complaints. A few days ago I created this page called Astami. Where reliable sources are linked that pass WP:GNG coverage. It was drafted [[16]] by him on the complaint of salary, Col. It would be great if someone could help me with this. Nilpriyo talk 12:19, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

unrelated to the issue, but did you write your signature by hand?

the "talk" links to the disambiguation page for talking as opposed to your talk page, and the time, which is written as 12:19, 25 april 2024, is tomorrow in both utc and my time zone

related to the issue, i agree that, independent of whether or not you are paid, your edits do come off as overly promotional, and with improper use of citations, and that they should go through the afc process, as opposed to just being pushed straight into mainspace with no evidence of consensus or other editors' input i could find

using jogomaya as an example, they're just clumped together at the end of the lead, as opposed to spread out in later sections, like development (missing from the article, which is kind of disappointing but fair, as not everything has extensive info on its development), plot or setting (also missing, so an outside reader like me will have no idea what it's about), or cast (not missing, but devoid of any form of citations, and probably too long for this wiki's scope, read wp:notstats for more info on this part)

from reading the article, the only things i know are who worked on it and when it was released. all i could piece together about the show itself was that it exists, has characters, and is in genres, and this seems to also be the case for nearly, if not every article you've created

for more info on what you could do to make your edits seem less promotional and your articles seem more like wikipedia articles, i'd recommend reading the manual of style and its film-focused counterpart cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Question

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.

---

I have a question. If I contribute constructively for a few months here (with no evasion in the meantime on it wiki), may I be unblocked on it wiki? Or is there no chance? 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 08:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@14 novembre that's entirely a matter for the powers that be at it.wiki to decide. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing I know, but considering I'm blocked there I was asking if some it wiki administrators could answer here. I will therefore mention some of them which were involved in the case: @Elwood @Parma1983 @Superspritz @Meridiana solare @Atlante @Kirk98 @9Aaron3 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 08:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't know how many it.wiki admins frequent the en.wiki Teahouse, sounds like a long shot to me... Presumably you still have some way of lodging an appeal there, even though your account's (or should I say accounts') TPA has been revoked? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Does it.wiki have a system similar to WP:UTRS, by any chance? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 09:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

If you don't mind me asking, why are you blocked on it.wiki? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 08:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@CanonNi My main account was blocked for inappropriate edits such as incorrectly publishing drats and publishing improperly formed articles (anyway, I believe the indefinite block was excessive) 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 08:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, I guess the block is up to it.wiki admins to decide. There's not much en.wiki editors can do about that. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 09:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

And I can not understand why I've been pinged. I'm not an amministrator at it.wikipedia , and so I can not remember that "I was involved in the case". Meridiana solare (talk) 09:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing @CanonNi, block appeal is a brand new procedure at it.Wikipedia, it's still at settin ing and it's can be only used for block made after the new appeal policy (I don't know why, the discussion was very fast and I was able to read it only some chunk) Meridiana solare (talk) 09:23, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@14 novembre: Please, keep questions and issues relevant to it.wiki limited to it.wiki. Do not "spam" here your own personal troubles on "foreign" projects others than en.wiki. That said, a good behaviour on another wiki is not a good reason for an unblock in your original local wiki. Especially when you keep inappropriate behaviours on it.wiki, such as continuous block escapes, trolling, and so on (last one: two days ago). The reasons for your indefinite block are far deeper than "improper edits" as you claim here. If you don't understand it, you have few or no chances for a successful appeal for unblock. Please, stop bothering en.wiki users and en.wiki admins with issues they are not related to at all (it.wiki is totally outside of their scope) and they're substantially not interested into. By the way, the simple fact that you are considering "en.wiki as a tool to re-enter it.wiki" just confirms that your understanding of the project, of its purposes and of its way of working is still far to be sound. And, last but not least, that you're starting behaving improperly also on en.wiki by starting this kind of useless discussions in service pages or talk pages of users not interested/not able to help you in any way on another wiki.--Superspritz (talk) 10:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Superspritz So, what is the answer to my first question? 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 10:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Superspritz The reasons for your indefinite block are far deeper than "improper edits" as you claim here. Could you kindly explain what they are? 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 10:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Nobody here can reliably answer your first question. Superspritz said a good behaviour on another wiki is not a good reason for an unblock in your original local wiki, and that's probably the best answer you're going to get here.

As Superspritz said, you are heading for a block here as well if you continue this disruptive editing: it is disruptive because it has nothing whatever to do with en Wikipedia. Please stop, now. ColinFine (talk) 10:42, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@CanonNi Can't see how it can be seen as disruptive. I've done lots of useful contributions here (over 5000), created 12 articles, helped contrasting vandalism. 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 11:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@CanonNi @Meridiana solare @Superspritz So, in practice, there is no chance of getting unblocked in a near future? 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 11:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine Mentioning you due to your previous helpful answer 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 11:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine As an example, the user 14 novembre aka Calicanto2023 fails to mention there is check user evidence of vandal-only accounts being used (such as this one involved in a hoax article, or this one) and that they keep disrupting itwiki to this day. They repeatedly requested unblocking through WP:RA (itwiki's WP:AN) and other misc places, but even more vandal-only sockpuppets were found. I'm happy their edits on enwiki appear constructive, but on itwiki it's time to move on. Titore (talk) 12:50, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Wow, 39 sockpuppets. I'm surprised they haven't done the same here. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 12:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Titore You maybe right. Anyway the most recent disruptive account on itwiki was November 2023. However, I think the answer to my question is that there is no chance. Correct me if I'm wrong. 78.209.62.17 (talk) 13:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Titore By the way, some other sockpuppets have been blocked but not inserted in the list, whereas Quadroblu and Antonino20 are not sockpuppets of my account. They have been inserted there by mistake. 78.209.62.17 (talk) 13:11, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

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.

How to do the dotted text with the question mark when hovered over

Title. I've seen it before on articles to clarify abbreviations, but I don't remember the names. Lampyscales (🐍) 13:15, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Lampyscales, I believe you are looking for Template:Abbr. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 13:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Lampyscales (🐍) 13:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

DYK

Hello, I'm interested in making DYK for my articles. I don't know how to do it easily. Could you please point me in the right direction? TheGreatPeng (talk) 05:38, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

If you're wishing to nominate an article, see WP:DYKNOM. However, it isn't exactly "easy", as nominations are subject to discussion and reviews. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 05:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

May I know what tools are more helpful for DYK? Thanks TheGreatPeng (talk) 05:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

DYKcheck is useful for checking articles with potential problems. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 05:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

It appears that you have succeeded in creating a DYK nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Taiyin Xingjun. David notMD (talk) 10:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much, finally I did it. TheGreatPeng (talk) 13:25, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Lack of information and media in Turkmenistan

Hello all. I am turkmen. And from Turkmenistan. Where the social media, news media, in general the internet is very restricted. So it is nearly impossible to give sourcing on articles about famous people in Turkmenistan like musicians, artists and famous people. You may find sources about government officials but for ordinary famous people, it is impossible. Only information you can find is their own social network, YouTube channel bio, instagram bio maybe spotify's about artist page and etc. And I know you need reliable and independent sources to cite in the article page as a reference. But in my case to provide more content from Turkmenistan to Turkmen wikipedia and English wikipedia is so hard. My articles get removed because of unreliable sources and etc. What can I do to add more articles about my country's famous people and etc to wikipedia? Thanks in advance for your help. Vgarly (talk) 03:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Sopranoman '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 03:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Vgarly: Maybe this will help you: sources don't need to be online. You can cite newspapers, magazines, books, etc without a URL. RudolfRed (talk) 04:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. It is great to know that I can cite newspapers, magazines, books and etc. Most of the artists don't make it to state newspaper, magazines or any other publications. Everything is controlled by state. Only information you can find is the persons social media pages. In that case which I have zero resource, is it possible to add pages to wikipedia? Thanks in advance for your time and help! Vgarly (talk) 04:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Vgarly. If you have zero resource, then it is simply not possible to write an acceptable Wikipedia article. Certainly there must be reliable publications outside Turkmenistan that cover the country, perhaps those published by émigré organizations? Cite those, or coverage of Turkmenistan by publications in other languages that report on Turkmenistan. Cullen328 (talk) 07:23, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Publications made outside the Turkmenistan are mostly publications about sports, russian news media publications about government officials in Turkmenistan and very few others. Famous people who are not connected to government or outside media does not make it to media but they have good influence on Turkmen people and they are known by them. Only way i can prove that they are known is either from their social media accounts or from couple of unreliable social media articles on the internet. Just because they don't make it to media and don't have enough sources to cite, I can't contribute to wikipedia about currently famous people in Turkmenistan. Vgarly (talk) 14:06, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Vgarly. You could also have a look at Wikipedia's WP:Categorization system: here is our Category:Turkmenistan people, and if you drill down appropriately under it, you will find categories like Category:20th-century Turkmenistan actresses with four articles, six articles at Category:Turkmenistan lawyers, and seven Category:Turkmenistan poets. You could have a look at some of those articles, and see how they were sourced sufficiently to have an article here, and that may give you some ideas about resolving your question. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 08:09, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

why does wikipedia block my projects when i don't put any harmful content?

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhh AKARmaker25 (talk) 14:50, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

There is no evidence in your contributions from this account that you have made any edits to anything other than here. Did you have content Speedy Deleted? There are many reasons for a SD, including using copyright protected content and promotional/advertising. Only an Administrator can see SD history. Or were you editing not logged in, or with a different account? David notMD (talk) 14:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Are you referring to your activities on el-wiki or Wikidata? This is English Wikipedia, separate from both of those. ColinFine (talk) 15:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

John Snow

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.

---

Is John Snow real? My mom wants to know 149.125.212.162 (talk) 16:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

He is. Ghursta (talk) 16:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

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.

Is it possible to see a user's talk page that was deleted?

I had started a discussion with User:Mormon Avenger, but that user was blocked for SOCK. The talk page was deleted. I recall the user brought up a good point as to a dispute, but I cannot recall what it was.

Is there any way to retrieve that conversation? It isn't a big deal, and it isn't a lot of text, but I thought I would ask. Subanark (talk) 15:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Nevermind... I was looking at the wrong user. Subanark (talk) 15:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Note to hosts that this user's problem is solved, which never existed and was created out of confusion. Also, @Subanark, you cannot see a deleted page as that could only be done by administrator, checkusers, and oversighters. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 16:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

There are references at Draft:Kinemaster.

There are references at Draft:Kinemaster. And the information. So why shouldn't you accept it? Aceept it now. Ghursta (talk) 16:15, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Also, This is not my draft. Ghursta (talk) 16:15, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ghursta Please see Your First Article and the Manual of Style, what you're attempting to submit is two sentences, one in the lead and one in the history section alongside a single citation to the subject's own website.

For an article to be approved, it needs to prove that it's notable by using reliable, secondary sources. This draft does not do that and will never pass the Articles for Creation process in its current state.

I'll advise that you learn more about how Wikipedia operates and how articles of a similar subject should be laid out before you submit an article to be reviewed again; I'll be adding a welcome message to your talk page with some helpful tips. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are here to advise. Some may also be draft reviewers, but that is not their function here. As made clear, the only submitted reference is to the Kinemaster website, which is not an alloweed contribution to establishing Wikipedia notability. David notMD (talk) 19:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

on two things (that's more than one and less than three)

minor questions of varying yet low importance

1. is there a technical reason creating a page can't be marked as a minor edit?
2. is it even worth making a disambiguation for two or so articles (assuming the term is as commonly used for both targets and it's unlikely that there are more)?

cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

1. I assume it's because creating a page would not be considered a minor edit in most (if any) circumstances
2. WP:DISAMBIG says that it depends on whether or not there is a primary topic. If there is no "primary topic", or if there are multiple, then the disambiguation should be appropriate.

Industrial Insect (talk) 18:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

1. seems fair. worst case scenario, it's subject to being speedy deleted, so whatever
2. so it seems this is a good opportunity to be reckless dumb hasty bold and make a handful >:3

thanks cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:06, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Cogsan: The ability to mark a page creation as a minor edit was removed in 2011 at phab:T29860, with some objections. It's the third point at mw:Release notes/1.18#New features in 1.18. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

1. Creating a page is not a minor edit. If you do find a way to mark it as one, it will make other editors suspect that you may be up to something dishonest.
2. I believe the policy is to only use a disambiguation page if it lists three or more topics; with only two, instead each should have a hatnote to the other. Maproom (talk) 21:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

borders

Hi! I am looking for a page that explains how to put borders on your user page, does anyone know what page that is? Thanks! Radio bzzrt 22:02, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@RadioactiveradioWX: Like my user page? If so, what I did was I put <div style="border:17px solid #ed4a6a; background: #edc2cb; width:99%; padding:6px"> at the top of my userpage and </div> at the end of my userpage. If this isn't what you're looking for, let us know. Cheers ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

yes that is a good style of a border, i'm going to do it like yours but a different color of course. TY Radio bzzrt 01:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Mentors

who is my mentor on here? I don't have a mentor and this is a new account, what am I doing wrong? or users are ignoring me? or something? IDEK... User:RadioactiveradioWX 03:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Not every new user is assigned a mentor. You are not doing anything wrong. If you wish, you can go to Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area and get "adopted" by another user. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 03:54, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

ok, I will go look there. thx User:RadioactiveradioWX 04:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@RadioactiveradioWX That adopt-a-user link was in use before the current mentoring system was created. To use the current system, simply navigate to the foot of the page Special:Preferences and check the box next to "Display newcomer homepage", then save changes. Now you will be able to go to your own userpage and will find the extra "Homepage" tab to the left. When you click to view that tab you will find that you have an assigned mentor and various other features. See WP:GTF for full details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:09, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Thank you for the comment, I have already figured it out thanks to CanonNi. Thanks Radio bzzrt 01:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Change misspelled name in page title

This page misspells the name of a relative: Ambrose McGuirk

The last name was and is McGurk. I was able to correct the body of the article and the Wikidata page. But I cannot figure out how to change the title of the page. What am I doing wrong?

I have many newspaper clippings showing his name spelled correctly. Do I need to submit those somewhere before I can fix the the title? Chicago1066 (talk) 20:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

That's accomplished with a page move, which may be requested at requested moves. 331dot (talk) 20:36, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

I've looked at all the sources cited in the article, and none mentions "McGurk", though they do mention "McGuire" and "McGuirk". So I don't see a move as justified. Maproom (talk) 20:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

I notice that the Querant has now changed all three uses of "McGuirk" in the Article to "McGurk", without any citations to sources, but has not moved it to a new title, leaving a Title/text mismatch. This is clearly unsatisfactory, especially as Maproom has already confirmed "McGuirk" in the existing references.

Chicago1066, what are your published Reliable sources for making this change? We cannot accept the entirely unsupported assertions of an anonymous person who may at the least be mistaken if not acting in bad faith. You do understand that surname spellings can change in the course of immigration to the US and subsequent family dispersals over the course of a century or more?

If the subject's surname was indeed "McGuirk" but he was consistently known publicly as "McGurk", then the latter should be used in Wikipedia per WP:COMMONNAME, although with an acceptable reference the other spelling could be mentioned in the article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 188.220.144.58 (talk) 21:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Reliable sources such as these? What else? Birth and death certificates? Draft registration? Census records?

"The Badgers: Milwaukee's NFL entry of 1922-1926" by Michael D. Benter, ‎ Saint Johann Press (February 1, 2013)

The Racine Daily Tribune, February 18, 1922, Page 6 , "Milwaukee Gets Bay Charter in Pro Grid League"

The Journal Times, (Milwaukee WI) Sat, Oct 14, 1922 Page 15, "Badgers Pick Up Earl Potteiger"

The Appleton Post-Crescent, Dec 17, 1925 Page 17, "Grid Bosses Take Blame for 'Scandal'"

Chicago Daily Tribune, Dec 17, 1925, Page 25, "Pros Tell Full Story of Prep Scandal"

Stevens Point Journal, Mar 18, 1926, Page 4, "Ambr. McGurk Loses Pro Grid Franchise"

Beaver Dam Daily Citizen, Mar 18, 1926, Page 6, "Mulkern Enters 'Pro' Grid Circle"

The Racine Journal Times, Thu, Nov 11, 1926, Page 24, "Chicago Men Fail to Purchase Football Franchise"

Chicago Tribune, January 27, 1948, Ambrose McGurk obituary

NOTE re this: ... "but has not moved it to a new title, leaving a Title/text mismatch." ... That is the crux of my question. I tried every way that seemed available to change the title, but Wiki would not allow the incorrect title -- "Ambrose McGuirk" -- to be changed. My question is: Where do I find specific instructions on how to change an incorrect title?

Thanks to all for suggestions.

72.110.198.121 (talk) 01:16, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

72.110.198.121 / Chicago1066 (assuming you are one person editing under both – if so please log in in future), those sources look reliable, but you need to cite them in the same way that other facts in the article have inline citations. See Help:Referencing for beginners if you're unsure of how to do this. If you don't do this correctly, the overall edits and the evidence for "McGuirk" in the existing referenced sources will cause other editors to revert you.

'Changing an article title' is not actually done by literally changing it, instead you 'Move' the article to a new title, which leaves the old title as a Redirect for those who might search using the other spelling. Instructions for doing this are at Help:How to move a page.

Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 188.220.144.58 (talk) 03:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Wanting to update the 2014 Isla Vista killings article

I have been wanting to update the 2014 Isla Vista killings because a lot of the information is outdated and the sources in the article are unreliable. I actually did do a complete update from the article but an admin reverted me saying I needed to create an WP:RfC if I wanted to update it. I tried creating one but users said that I needed to do other forms of discussion. I then tried to get a WP:third opinion but that was also reverted. What can I do to do to update the article? Shoot for the Stars (talk) 23:21, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Shoot for the Stars, your attempt at an RfC was malformed. You need to read and follow the feedback you have been offered. You need to explain specifically what is in error. Incremental changes are always easier to make than sweeping changes, and the bottom line is that you must gain consensus for your proposed changes. Cullen328 (talk) 02:51, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

The article doesn’t portray the perpetrator as the supreme gentleman he was. Gickskizz (talk) 04:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Gickskizz, that comment is not useful or productive in any way. Trolling is not allowed on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 04:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Update template dates?

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.

---

I see some people (mostly IPs) update maintenance template(like npv dispute, unreferenced) dates to latestcurrent month. I think it is wrong as the dates are to measure how long the problem has been there. Am I correct? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

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.

Feasibility of Creating a New Page on Designated Areas for Onshore Wind in EU Countries

Hello, I am considering creating a new Wikipedia page titled "Areas Designated for Installation of Onshore Wind in EU Countries" and would appreciate some guidance on its feasibility- The page would provide links to the pages containing information of areas sensitive to installation of wind turbines or areas designated for this purpose. which should be done to implement European Commission recommendation #3219 (p.16), dated 18th May 2022. Before I begin, I would like to understand the following: Is this topic notable enough for Wikipedia? Does this potential article overlap significantly with existing pages, such as those on renewable energy in Europe or specific onshore wind projects? Would this article be better suited as a standalone page or as an addition to one of the existing articles? Ilia Panov 2024 (talk) 07:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Ilia Panov 2024. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes what reliable sources entirely independent of the topic say about the topic. Accordingly, you would not be able to use anything published by any EU institutions to establish the notability of the topic. You would need to rely on coverage in academic and news sources entirely independent of the EU and its energy policy institutions. If you can find such sources first, then proceed to begin writing the article. See WP:BACKWARDS for some useful advice. Cullen328 (talk) 07:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

How do I have a page about myself in wikipedia?

I am new and also lost in wikipedia. I am a credible businessman/entrepreneur in the Philippines and mentioned in so articles as well. How would I be able to make my own page so that I can add my name as a link on those articles. H-Audio Technologies (talk) 10:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@H-Audio Technologies As a general rule, writing an autobiography is very strongly discouraged due to the clear conflict of interest.

If you really wish to create an autobiography, then you will have to go through the articles for creation process, being extremely careful to avoid anything not written neutrally.

...And halfway through writing this answer, you got indefinitely blocked. Hopefully it'll help someone anyway. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 10:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Removing "needs additional citations for verification" template message

Hi! For around a week I've been editing the page on Money Money 2020 to try and possibly remove the template message. It's been there since December 2009 and I've went through and cited more things, added to the article and removed claims I couldn't find sources for. Would it be alright to remove the template message? I feel nervous doing it considering the length of time it has been there and would love if somebody could give it a quick review to see if it's okay. Thank you very much! Beachweak (talk) 16:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Beachweak: if you feel that the article is now properly supported with citations, you're welcome to remove that maintenance tag. (For context, it was placed there when the article had one source, and that was a YouTube clip. Now it has 16 citations.) Don't be nervous, if someone disagrees with your edit, they can always revert it, and you can then discuss the matter on the article talk page. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:40, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@Beachweak Looking at its history you seem to have done a stand up job of improving the page. I've added two citation needed templates, which, given the banner it has at the top of the page, is a really good sign. I'd say it's finally ready for that template to be removed. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 17:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I went ahead and removed the template, thank you for the reply! Beachweak (talk) 17:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi everyone! I'm new.

I've been using Wikipedia my whole life and its probably my favorite website. I always say its like zooming in on a fractal or something where you can always find more and more interesting stuff by digging deeper and deeper. You can never run out of cool things on Wikipedia.

Despite loving the site, I always considered it daunting to try to edit or contribute to it, given the standards I feel the writing is held to and the difficulty of writing subjectively. Recently I've seen a few articles just browsing that could definitely be improved in a straightforward and uncontroversial way, so I made an account to touch those up. So far I've made a contribution to a page about an archipelago in the arctic and described my changes in detail on the associated talk page. I've also raised an issue on a talk page for an article about slurs.

Before I make any more edits myself, I would appreciate if someone more experienced could look at my contributions so far and let me know if I'm doing anything incorrect before I make more contributions. I'm not even sure if this is the right place to ask for this kind of thing for instance, and I don't know when I should be raising issues on a talk page as opposed to just editing the page myself.

Thanks all, I love this website and I appreciate the work everyone does to make it what it is. I'm hoping to be a useful part of that soon. Cyrusabyrd (talk) 12:12, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

I hope this will be seen as a friendly comment. But it just seems weirdly funny to me to hear someone talking about using this newfangled thing called Wikipedia their "whole life." My own first experiences with actually using computers (when Bill Gates, Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs were still teenagers) involved punching cardboard cards in Fortran and feeding them into a hopper. The time I did it and finally stopped getting error messages, my program would wait its turn (excuse me, I'm on line; I should say wait IT'S turn) at the computer at TUCC, Triangle Universities Computation Center, in Research Triangle Park, NC (yep! a real address) a dozen or two miles away. I never actually saw the computer. Uporządnicki (talk) 12:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

No offense taken, I'm 27 and I already think about how different the world is. Kids growing up today are going to interact with a completely different, more centralized and monetized internet than the one I grew up on. They will spend more time on the computer than I did. I remember the first smartphones and the days when nobody had them, for kids today they will have always been there. I make video games as a profession, and the entire concept of a video game as a self contained piece of software you bought on a disk died completely when I was a teenager. Games now are more like a service you subscribe to, nobody born after 2003 will remember going to a store and picking out one game with their allowance. I used to be so jealous of guys like you who got to see the first computers and be a part of that, and now I realize that I got to see things that the next generation won't see. They might be jealous that I got to use Windows XP back before Windows had ads in it. I'm sure in a few years I'll be shocked to hear that someone has played Minecraft or Fortnite their whole life. But yes, I've used this website since I was a child and its always been there to keep me curious. Decades later its still a marvel to me, one of the greatest things we ever built. Cyrusabyrd (talk) 13:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

They still have video game stores at my local mall, strangely enough. I have no idea what people buy there. -- asilvering (talk) 22:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Cyrusabyrd:, and welcome to editing. My advice is, be bold, get stuck in, and feedback will come when people think it is needed. It's true that much feedback is negative, in that people may revert your edits, but that's a learning process, not a rejection. Occasionally, someone will thank you for an edit. It's a good feeling. Often, editing an article will spur other people to edit the same article; not because your edit wasn't good enough, but because it spurred them on to re-read and then improve the article further. There is no need to justify your edits on the talk page. Of course, if someone disagrees, reverts or changes your edit then feel free to start a discussion, but on the whole your edits will speak for themselves.

Feedback: Don't edit your contributions to a talk page (except for obvious spelling or grammatical errors). Add a new contribution. If someone has read your text, they may not notice when you have changed it, and so they will miss out. But they will see a new reply more easily. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 13:24, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, this is good advice. I was afraid of negative feedback but its not that I am afraid of the criticism, I am just afraid of inadvertently making a bad change or making someone else have to clean up after me. I also worry about any edit I make reading as a criticism of the person who wrote that section before me, and this can make writing edit notes stressful. "Made the wording less subjective." or "The source disagrees with this sentence, removed it." can probably read as mean spirited so I overthink things like that. I think there's just a culture to this website that I need to tune into before I know what's accepted.

Regarding justifying things on the talk page, in my my proposed changes to the list of ethnic slurs(I know this is a weird thing to start with, I swear I just like linguistics) I thought it was better to raise issues on the talk page than to essentially replace what someone else already wrote. Its a more active page so I took this route, but with the Arkticheskiy Institut Islands edit I figured I should just do it myself since nobody will be looking at that talk page for a long time, and I explained the changes further on the talk page mostly for fun and to invite further contribution. I say all of that to invite correction in case there's anything off about my understanding of the purpose of talk pages or the standards for when its acceptable to edit something.

Thanks for the point about editing talk page contributions, I noticed afterwards that all of my edits were clogging up the history and I didn't realize at first that I can give edit notes for them. If its normal to double post like that with corrections I'll do that instead, I was worried it would mess up the formatting of the site and clutter things unnecessarily, but I'm noticing other people do it a lot and you make a good point about edits. Cyrusabyrd (talk) 13:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Edit summaries are only 'necessary' (or at least highly desirable) for article edits; don't bother on talk pages. And don't worry about clogging up page histories, it's not as if they are ever going to fill up, is it? If you see the last 500 entries, does it matter if they go back a month or ten years? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 14:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

welcome!!! looking through your contributions, you've done a great job so far :) i hope you stay here! ... sawyer * he/they * talk 18:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia page on umarjaum

I a want a Wikipedia page on umarjaum which is Pakistani singer. Floers2026 (talk) 02:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Floers2026, this is obvious from both your talk page and your list of contributions. But MicrobiologyMarcus has rejected your attempt, saying "stop". "Stop" means that you must stop. So please just stop. -- Hoary (talk) 03:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Umarjaum has been Speedy Deleted and Draft: Umar Jaum has been Rejected. Nothing you created so far suggests whe is notable. David notMD (talk) 22:16, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

a question

hey guys - does anyone remember the videos called strawberry shortcake sets the school on fire and charlie brown gets a gold card? they've become lost media and i'm trying to hunt them down at this point 2A02:8084:EA4:2B80:9982:222D:A1B5:AD5 (talk) 21:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:18, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP! And welcome to the Teahouse, though your question does not reflect Wikipedia. You could try other sources though! Neko Lexi (talk) 14:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

thank you 2A02:8084:EA4:2B80:3C9F:A882:2CE4:B4F1 (talk) 21:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Np. Glad I could help Neko Lexi (talk) 22:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Entertainment#a_question_to_some_people

i got no responses here - any ideas? 2A02:8084:EA4:2B80:6C46:BBB:D875:B623 (talk) 22:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

It looks like anyone has not got to you yet. Be patient and someone will get to you eventually, sometimes it just takes a while because other people are busy and might not respond in a few minutes. I always go do something else while I'm waiting for a response. Maybe try that Neko Lexi (talk) 22:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

what other things is there so i can ask? i'll be patient 2A02:8084:EA4:2B80:252F:94D5:1624:8FB9 (talk) 22:14, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

it looks like someone got to you, check your question Neko Lexi (talk) 00:13, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

wait my time is wrong, April 20th is tomarrow Neko Lexi (talk) 00:14, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

• tomorrow* spelling error Neko Lexi (talk) 00:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

when do u think it was posted? Emotionaldam (talk) 04:02, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

for the former i think it was may 2016 but for the other one it was july 13, 2016 as seen here https://quiteaplaylist.com/search?url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1beEQDMnzVw 2A02:8084:EA4:2B80:C906:BCF5:FC3E:D114 (talk) 22:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Neko Lexi, "tomorrow" is a relative concept that depends on which time zone you live in. Wikipedia is a worldwide project. "Today" for you could be "yesterday" or "tomorrow" for other editors in other parts of the world. Wikipedia, as a worldwide project, uses Coordinated Univeral Time or more specifically UTC+00:00, which is the time zone for the United Kingdom, Portugal, and many West African countries. Cullen328 (talk) 03:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

i'll check 2A02:8084:EA4:2B80:6961:A248:89BD:3C83 (talk) 21:39, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Vandalized Articles

DOes anybody know of any commonly un protected articles that are often vandilized so that i can camp the articles . IronTitanlol (talk) 01:10, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@IronTitanlol:, vandalism is the main reason for page protection. What do you mean by "camp the articles"? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 01:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

He wants to keep the article in check, he can do that by adding it to his watchlist. 41.216.192.99 (talk) 01:33, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Mainly watch the articles IronTitanlol (talk) 01:34, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

In that case you can add pages to your Watchlist. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 01:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@IronTitanlol: if you want to fight vandalism look at WP:CVUA and WP:RCP RudolfRed (talk) 01:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@IronTitanlol, if an article is commonly vandalized, it will be page-protected. If you notice that an article is often vandalized, you can request page protection for it at WP:RPP. -- asilvering (talk) 22:50, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

'olol'koy Beach Park

Oxnard Beach Park has been officially renamed. I wanted to move the page put I wasn't sure how to properly format 'olol'koy Beach Park. Thanks, 〜 Adflatuss • talk 18:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

I moved it ^48JCLTalk 19:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

I would like an experienced user to check the format. Thanks, 〜 Adflatuss • talk 19:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@Adflatuss, what's the formatting issue? Do you mean just the spelling of the title? I've moved it to 'olołkoy Beach Park, following the spelling given in one of the references. We maintain diacritical marks for place names unless there is a version of the name that is more commonly used in English that has no diacritics. -- asilvering (talk) 21:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I haven't dealt with diacriticals in titles so I wasn't sure how it all works. Thanks, 〜 Adflatuss • talk 22:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@Adflatuss Oh, one thing though: what I didn't do is write a bunch of new redirects to the article. If there are any spellings or formats of the name that you think someone would plausibly type in to the search bar while looking for this article, it will be helpful if you can create a redirect for that spelling that points at 'olołkoy Beach Park. I expect most people will not be typing the ł correctly, so we should have redirects for things like ololkoy Beach Park, and so on. No need to go nuts with creating a dozen redirects, just the ones you think are most likely to be something someone tries to type. I just did that one (Ololkoy Beach Park) for you, so you can just copy the source code from that and reuse it. -- asilvering (talk) 22:38, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks 〜 Adflatuss • talk 22:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Establish a new historical person

I understand we are a organization of volunteers.

I have waited years to be able to document a decade of railroad inovations and now that I am able I seem to be going in cirfcles.  I have edited seemingly without issue.  My primary addition seems to be mostly working but I get no feedback.

If I create a new entry should I wait for a repy or what?

Is there any way to repair errors?

None of the help options [teahouse, community, help, etc] help; just send me in circles.

I am MarkWHowe, I am publishing Isaac B Howe in my 'sandbox'.  I have no idea if this is even seeable by anyone.  'sandbox' ???? MarkWHowe (talk) 03:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

How will I even know if anyone resopontds to this?? MarkWHowe (talk) 04:04, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. If you're starting an article in your own sandbox, it won't be seen by anyone unless you initiate the articles for creation process, which would involve moving the article to the draft namespace and submitting it for review. Are you able to provide a link to your sandbox article? lavender|^{(formerly HMSSolent)}|lambast 04:14, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User talk:MarkWHowe/sandbox

Mathglot (talk) 05:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Comments, MarkWHowe:

• Sign talk page comments, but don't sign drafts.
• Place a reference immediately after the proposition, or set of propositions, that it verifies (and not between the subject and predicate of a sentence).
• All that your draft says about Isaac Bridgman Howe is that he "was the original Superintendant" of such and such. The rest is about the such and such, not about him. How was his superintending significant? If he was significant in some other way(s), then how?
• Please read WP:PERSON, carefully.

HTH. -- Hoary (talk) 05:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

MarkWHowe As to what can be 'seen', posting here at Teahouse brought people to look at your Sandbox. There is really no other way any editor would have stumbled upon it. If at a future time you submit an expansion of what you have so far to Articles for Creation as a draft, then in time (days to months) an experienced reviewer would decide if it deserved to be an article. More content and more references will be needed to confirm that Howe was a notable person. David notMD (talk) 08:09, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Given your User name, are you a descendent of IB Howe? David notMD (talk) 08:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

" I have edited seemingly without issue." Well, no. You made sizable additions to three railroad articles without including any references. All of that - as explained on your Talk page - has been reverted. This is not to say that your additions were not true, only that Wikipedia requires references. David notMD (talk) 15:23, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Reply to David notMD;

I am pretty confused; I am delighted that what I wrote is viewable, but my MarkWHowe says I do not have a userpage. I tho't that was where I said he was my Ggfather, and where I found the 'sandbox'. The tutorial indicated that when editing I would see a symbol for linking and referencing but sometimes they are there and sometimes they are not.

Do I have a talk page? Seems like the system is saying I do not. MarkWHowe (talk) 19:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I do have a talk poge. I don't think I had it before. Thank you, I will get busy attempting to insert the references . MarkWHowe (talk) 19:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Reply to Hoary;

Unfortunately I do not understand the first two points regarding 'signing' or 'reference placing'.

Perhaps I didn't make it clear that he was the superintendent that caused the CNW to connect with Omaha and the UP first. Would that satisfy your significance issue? There are a number of other significances but I am now trying to get started. 47.208.19.67 (talk) 19:15, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Please remember to sign in whenever editing. Otherwise your edits appear with a number (IP number). Reference placing: References are inserted into the text, uusually at the end of sentences (after the period). The software automatically inserts a superscripted number and show the references in a References section. You appear to have mastered this on your User page. You being a grandson of IB Howe is considered a conflict of interest, which you have acknowledged on your User page. This does not preclude your creating an article about him. David notMD (talk) 00:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

A greater problem, one that may not be possible to avoid, is that it appears that your proposed references (private letters, family write-ups...) do not qualify as independent, secondary, reliable sources. For example, a bio of EH Williams written by his great-grandson. I leave to better editors than I to explain the problem. David notMD (talk) 00:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

I really appreciate you taking the time to help on this.

As I said previously, we have been working for years to get to this point. The Chicago Northwestern did not have any record of this until I donated the letters to them. Now they have acknowledged that it all is true and makes sense. My total guess is that information was consumed in the Chicago fire but it is just a guess. Otherwise I only know what I know from the letters.

The details of history result from putting together little bits of information until they form a totality that make sense. For me the first step would be to get this story out into the open where others can add details they know to be true. But this cannot work unless the story gets out. I'm pretty sure you understand; it seems like Wikipedia thinks along the same lines as well. I hope so.

First question: will Wikipedia except the article by the CNW historical society as evidence? They obviously accepted the letters as evidence. MarkWHowe (talk) 03:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Now to the greater issue regarding Wikipedia.

Of course I have a much longer, detailed article that I would love to see published. Previous historians have missed details and made wrong assumptions that need correcting. Three in particular are deceased, one of which just last year, and if my information had been available to them while living just think of what could have been gained to history. H Roger Grant of Clemson left no one to carry on according to his department. Sad. MarkWHowe (talk) 03:50, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

MarkWHowe, your draft bears little resemblance to an actual encyclopedia article. We learn only that a person once lived and held the job title of "superindendent" on a railroad, which is a vague and broad job description. Coverage of this person in published reliable sources appears neglibible. We don't learn his birth and death dates, where he was born, how he was educated, what sort of work career he had before becoming a "superindendent", what job duties he had, what he accomplished on his job, or how reliable sources assessed his career. Those are the usual components of an encyclopedia article about a historical person. Cullen328 (talk) 04:02, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

As examples, see List of Union Pacific Railroad civil engineers 1863 to 1869 for links to articles about railroad civil engineers. My own understanding of reference quality is that private letters or an article based on same published in a historical society newsletter do not qualify as references. "The details of history result from putting together little bits of information until they form a totality that make sense." is considered synthesis, and is not allowed as being original research (Wikipedia:No original research). David notMD (talk) 09:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. That was just to test the waters, which it has certainly accomplished. No letters from history, no original research, no articles from historical magazines, &c pretty well makes everything else useless. Since it is already written I might as well put it in the Sandbx in case anyone is interested in railroads in this forum. MarkWHowe (talk) 15:23, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@MarkWHowe, Cullen328, David notMD, and Hoary: If coverage is needed, I found this biography which appears to be of the Issac B. Howe in question; also located this obit. The first source mentions that Howe also served one term in the Vermont House of Representatives, which gives automatic notability per WP:NPOL. I could work on the draft if needed. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Ask Mark if he us interested in having a co-creator. David notMD (talk) 23:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you BeanieFan11;

I posted the rest [well almost all of the rest] on my sandbox that doesn't exist ;-} Since it doesn't exist I look forward to hearing it is visible. If there is any possibility of not giving up on this I would be most appreciative.

One other possiblity I have considered is if we can get anything qualified, we can add the rest of the info under 'sources' the same as Edward Williams did. MarkWHowe (talk) 00:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@MarkWHowe: Hi Mark. I can take a look at everything and should be able to work on the draft / sandbox in a few days (I'm busy with other stuff through Sunday at least) – I want to affirm though that Issac B. Howe does qualify for an entry and I expect we'll be able to get an article published on him within the next month. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:24, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

I am so grateful!!! If you are a RailFan as well as a BeanieFan, there is lots more we can do fixing history. I would love to snag a grad student of Prof. Grant.

In the meantime I will play with the Galena, CedarRapids and Dr. Williams; Dr. Williams was a remarkable person and his Wiki article doesn't even scratch the surface, as can be seen by the source item. Thanks again! MarkWHowe (talk) 01:18, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

MarkWHowe You have added 9,800 words about IB Howe to your Sandbox as a proposed draft of an article about him - none of which can be accepted because none of it is referenced. To this effort and any other effort - including unreferenced content you added to existing articles (all reverted) - desist. Only add content if you are able to add reliable source references at the same time. Howe's letters are not an acceptable reference. David notMD (talk) 03:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Others have said they wanted to see ythe details.

Perhaps I don't understand what a 'sandbox' is. I tho't it was a place to put an article together. Also I understood it took months. If I am in error please guide me.

Perhaps a decade or more ago I was involved in an article regarding a bridge on the UP RR in Wyoming? or Utah? I have no recollection, but I don't recall it being this difficult. Perhaps there is an AI vehicle that can fix it now?? MarkWHowe (talk) 03:24, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

I think I am learning. I tho't I was using my "Sandbox to work on text and references that [I] intend to insert into existing articles". Let's forget about IB Howe for a bit if we may, but I hope you won't delete my sandbox.

I did a small edit on the CR&MR; could you see if it passes? Is my problem that I click 'publish' when it is not ready? Should I be leaving it in 'review' mode until it passes the editor's eye? I was afraid it would go away if I didn't 'publish'. MarkWHowe (talk) 00:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

A Sandbox can be turned into a draft, and then submitted for review. Some editors (me for example) use their own Sandbox to work on text and references that they intend to insert into existing articles. The point I am repeatedly making is that what you have now put in your Sandbox has no potential whatsoever of becoming an accepted draft - after you submit it - because it has no references. If you intend to submit your Sandbox content, add reliable sources where you have them and deleted everything that is not referenced. There is no Wikipedia AI to 'fix stuff'.

Hacked account

HELP, SOMEBODY HACKED MY ACCOUNT AND CHANGED MY PASSWORD AND CONFIRMED A NEW EMAIL 2600:6C50:4800:1052:D438:52F:6767:4C2 (talk) 18:33, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

What was the old account? (I would recommend finding a bureaucrat or administrator with that info) ^48JCLTalk 20:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

IP, please see WP:HACKED. -- asilvering (talk) 21:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Also see Wikipedia:User account security for more details. K.O.518 (talk) 01:54, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

style questions

Where should questions about Wikipedia:Manual of Style be asked? Thanks. rootsmusic (talk) 01:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Normally, in the talk page accompanying whatever's the relevant project page. Thus a question about Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters would normally go in Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters. -- Hoary (talk) 02:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Removing blatant Misinformation and Original Research

I found a couple of misinformations on the Djong (ship) page, where they distorted the information from the source to change the narrative and present a false information, so i fact checked it through the source and found that the information was usually about Chinese but instead they used it to pass it off as Javanese descriptions, can i just edit it out or do i need a consensus? considering that other way of consensus lead to nowhere (as in, no one had or willing to fact check anything) Merzostin (talk) 16:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@Merzostin: You can just edit it out, but if someone restores it, use the talk page to follow the process outlined at WP:DR. In fact, you can pre-empt that by mentioning on the talk page why you are removing it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

ok thank you, i followed your advice. But there was this person that reverted the removal of this one quote and refused to accept facts from the sources that i have provided on the talk page, even though he can't produce a single source, this lead to many WP:DR, all ended up nowhere, the latest one was RfC, which is still on going but again so far have received 0 consensus from anyone except mine, i assumed none of them wanted to read or confirm my 9 evidences vs 0 evidence provided by the editor, that's why i said it was such a blatant misinformation and vandalism. Anyhow i need your advice on this (although i have reverted it now, i'm sure when this editor came back online to this suspicious empty account, he would revert all of it just because) Merzostin (talk) 03:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

(Untitled)

I need to add content between <ref and ref> Please help! Sharmantueller (talk) 02:35, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

I have made a very minor adjustment to your message; I hope you don't mind. You mean, between <ref> and </ref>? If so, then like this: <ref> your content here </ref>. What's the problem? -- Hoary (talk) 03:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Sharmantueller, in Hoary's example, "your content here" should be replaced with complete bibliographic information about the reliable source that you are citing. Cullen328 (talk) 04:55, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello Sharmantueller I've found this article about Rosanne Tueller. Didn't read it but maybe it is helping. BTW: your username contains "Tueller", too. Are you in any way related? Maresa63 ^Talk 08:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:WikiProject The Weeknd

Greetings, I have recently created a collaborative project laser-focused on improving articles related to the Weeknd. However, it is now on death row for not getting permission to be created (a process I did not know up until now). My question is:

1. Since the project is on death row and the WP:WikiProject Council/Proposals currently does not accept any proposals, how do I get the go ahead?
2. Would you be interested in helping improve the project?

dxneo (talk) 08:18, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Dxneo, more precisely, you recently re-created it, after it had been deleted. What you write here doesn't suggest that you read (or understood) Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject The Weeknd, which concluded that the project should be deleted. Please read it, carefully. -- Hoary (talk) 10:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Hoary, honestly I didn't even see that discussion, I was just amazed that someone of the Weeknd's stature does not have a WikiProject. Since I'm now trying new things and expanding, I thought it wouldn't hurt to create a WikiProject, I drafted it in my notepad for days then pasted here only to find out that it has been deleted like a month ago. I went through that discussion and noticed that the main problem was that the WikiProject was abandoned and it was linked to two pages, as you can see I'm really working hard and improving the project, working on linking it to every the Weeknd-related article and list, is there a way I can save the WikiProject? dxneo (talk) 11:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Dxneo, if nobody in a WikiProject notices an MfD discussion about it (or notices the discussion but can't be bothered to participate in it), this suggests to me that the WikiProject is dying. Still, Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals says "If your group can't wait for the new process, please only create group pages in the userspace of one of your members." So you could provisionally move the pages there. -- Hoary (talk) 12:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Hoary, like I said multiple times, I did not know any of this a day ago when the project was created. I thought it worked like articles, you just create and improve. I am here to learn so that I don't make the same mistake, anyway Thank you so so much, I'll work on improving the project and finding more participants after school. If you have further advice please fire away sir. dxneo (talk) 14:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@Dxneo, it's very unusual to have a whole wikiproject for such a narrow topic. What you might be able to do is to set up a Task Force under another wikiproject (WP:POPMUSIC maybe?). But typically you'll want to see if there are any other editors who would be interested in making that task force with you, before you go ahead and do it. -- asilvering (talk) 22:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Asilvering, what do you mean by "it's very unusual to have a whole wikiproject for such a narrow topic"? I truly think the Weeknd has a lot to offer compared to some WikiProjects I've seen while I was studying how to construct a WikiProject. I might be wrong or maybe might have misunderstood you but look at Sia, Adele and Olivia Rodrigo, if the Weeknd was fully expanded it would be more than the aforementioned WikiProjects. I am here to learn, if I'm missing something please do teach. dxneo (talk) 22:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, those are very unusual. A typical wikiproject is something like WP:CANADA or WP:POPMUSIC. If you can find enough editors who want to go in with you on making WP:WKND or whatever, you can go ahead. But that's not terribly likely to happen. (WikiProject Sia is particularly odd.) -- asilvering (talk) 22:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Asilvering, I don't think "unusual" is the correct word, see Category:WikiProject Musicians. I was also amazed when I saw WP:WikiProject Sia, way too simple. dxneo (talk) 11:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

looking for advice for new draft article

here is a link to my draft any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Draft:Rogers behavioral health - Wikipedia Concon456 (talk) 08:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The draft does little more than say that this organization exists; it should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. "Significant coverage" is that which goes beyond just telling of the existence of the topic and what it does, and goes into detail about what the sources see as important/significant/influential about it. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Agreeed. @Concon456: You should first track down those independent and reliable sources. Wikipedia doesn't keep articles unless they meet the site's "notability" threshold. All 3 sources currently in the article are just listings, which are not independent and won't affect whether the article can be kept. Once you find the sources, I think this is a great essay on writing articles here: Wikipedia:Writing Wikipedia articles backward Good luck, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 13:38, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Dealing with an editor reverting page but not responding to talk page

The page in question is Korg PS-3300, an old keyboard from the 70s. The page as it is currently is full of unreferenced info and references that are used are just songs on Youtube, instagram posts, forum threads, that sort of stuff. I did a big cleanup, adding better references and condensing a lot of overly technical info as seen in this revision: Korg PS-3300.

An editor reverted my edits so I left a message on their talk page to reach consensus, which they haven't responded to. After 7 days of no response, I undid their revision, which they immediately reverted. I don't want to edit war, but dispute resolution seems inappropriate as they haven't responded to a talk page message and might be unaware of their talk page. What to do? InDimensional (talk) 21:16, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, InDimensional. I suggest that you start by explaining the issues at Talk: Korg PS-3300 in detail, and then inviting the other editor to join in. The editor in question, User: Mojosynths, has been actively editing that article for many years, but otherwise has little experience more broadly. Dispute resolution is always appropriate in cases like these. There are things that an administrator can do, but you must make a good faith effort at dispute resolution first. Cullen328 (talk) 21:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi InDimensional. While it's good you tried to engage in discussion with this other editor, it's not so good that you did so only on their user talk page. It's much more appropriate to discuss changes to articles on their corresponding talk page because that makes it easier for others to participate in the discussion and also makes it easier to keep records of such discussions for future reference. There are almost certainly more people interested int the subject watching the article's talk page than there are watching this other user's usert alk page. So, maybe you should try again, this time on the article's talk page; explain what you think needs done and then post a {{Please see}} template on the other user's user talk page and on the talk pages of relevant WikiProjects (make sure you don't violate WP:CANVAS though). Giving the other user the chance to participate in a discussion on the article's talk page might make them want to join in. They can still decide not to, but they won't be able to ignore any consensus established by others through article talk page discussion. Finally, try to start small instead of trying to discuss everything at once. This can help to keep the discussion manageable and avoid it becoming so filled with detail that it's hard to follow. Focus on the one or two things that you absolutely feel need to be fixed and explain why in terms of relevant Wikipedia policy and guidelines. Provide links to reliable sources whenever possible if you're trying to correct factual errors. For what it's worth, it matters not to Wikipedia whether you succeed in improving the article in lots of small steps or with one giant leap, but often the bit-by-bit approach goes more smoothly and helps establish a good working relationship with the others involved. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed response and advice, I will try a new discussion on the article talk page. InDimensional (talk) 15:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Declined Article

Hey, I wrote my first article and it got declined, the reason shown was lack of reliable references , can anyone help me to resolve the issue? Ahammed Hashir (talk) 16:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Ahammed Hashir and welcome to the Teahouse. I believe you are talking about Draft:Kamal H Muhamed. As you said, your draft was declined due to a lack of reliable references. For example, if you look at the "Early life and education" and "Personal life" sections, there are no references cited to support the text in these sections. It is extremely important that all claims in an article are verifiable with supporting references to reliable sources. This is especially true for biographies of living persons because false information could be disparaging to the article subject. Therefore, you must update your draft to support each claim made with a citation to a reliable source. Note that these sources must be independent from the subject, so Muhamed's autobiography would not be sufficient for these sections. An example of an independent reliable source would be an article published in a major newspaper. Your draft was declined, not rejected, so once these issues have been fixed you can resubmit the draft for another review. Mokadoshi (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

About Removing Yahoo Labs template

Hi! I’m wondering if a template in Yahoo! Labs could be removed. I did a lot of hard work and I think it’s time to remove the anti-advertising template now. Thank you! K.O.518 (talk) 18:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @K.O.518, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a conflict of interest with Yahoo! or Yahoo! Research? For example, are you a current or former employee? If you're not, then you can remove the advertising template if you think it no longer applies. You do not need to ask for permission. Please see When to remove maintenance templates for more information. It looks like the "list format" template could also be removed. I wouldn't remove the "primary sources" template since that still looks to be applicable to this article. Let me know if you have any questions, Mokadoshi (talk) 19:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

I don’t have any relation with Yahoo and I’m doing this because I want to help pages like this become good. I’m freelance editor so I go back and forth about what I want to edit. Thank you! K.O.518 (talk) 19:12, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Great, I was only asking about the COI (conflict of interest) because When to remove maintenance templates only applies to editors without a COI. Thanks for your contributions to the encyclopedia! Mokadoshi (talk) 19:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Per that page: "exceptions apply: see individual template documentation". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Is there a specific exception that you're trying to point out? Can you be more specific? Mokadoshi (talk) 17:35, 27 April 2024 (UTC)