Archive 1235

←

Archive 1238

Archive 1239

Archive 1240

Archive 1241

Archive 1242

→

Archive 1245

I’m looking for insights on the AfD process regarding the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keramikou 28. I’d like to understand the notability standards it would need to meet to avoid deletion. The topic involves [insert brief description of Keramikou 28 here, e.g., a notable art space or cultural hub], but I’m unsure if there’s sufficient coverage by reliable sources to establish its significance by Wikipedia standards.

Could anyone advise on key factors that might contribute to a stronger case for retention, such as specific types of references or any unique Wikipedia guidelines that might apply? IlEssere (talk) 19:53, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

In order to be notable it need to:

1. Give a least 2-3 strong reliable sources (more is always better) see wp:Notability for more info.
2. It looks like it needs a rewrite see wp:Neutral point of view for more info.

The best thing I can suggest is that just in case it gets deleted, copy the article to your sandbox. It will also let experiment with it.

User Page Talk Contributions Sheriff U3 20:50, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

If you're going to copy a article to the sandbox, why wouldn't you ask to userify within the AfD itself? That would at least preserve the page history in compliance with Wikipedia's licenses. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:56, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

That would be the better option for sure, I did not know about it when I posted. thank you for mentioning it @Rotideypoc41352.

User Page Talk Contributions Sheriff U3 22:03, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Or at the very least, copy the following to the edit summary of your sandbox (WP:COPYWITHIN) because multiple have edited the article:

• Copied content from [[Keramikou 28]]; see that page's history for attribution

JuniperChill (talk) 22:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Important link:

1. https://communitism.space/

Starting with Communitism's mission, if wecarefully examine the "About" section on their website, it becomes clear that this initiative originate as a formal organization with a primary goal of preserving culturally significant buildings in Athens. Keramikou 28 was not the first building the helped preserve.

2. https://gold-ailina-51.tiiny.site/

The Greek state recognizes the building as a listed monument due to its cultural, historical, or architectural significance. This recognition includes protection from any alterations or demolition, as well as ensuring its maintenance. The process of recognition typically involves an evaluation by relevant authorities and may include specific regulations regarding its use and management.

3.https://www.oneman.gr/onecity/urban/to-emvlimatiko-ktirio-tis-kerameikou-28-poleitai-kai-to-communitism-psaxnei-neo-spiti/

This link highlights how the building at 28 Kerameikou Street has become a symbol for art, the Athens Gay Pride, and the vibrant drag community in Athens. It reflects a space where diverse events—like performances, parties, and exhibitions and resilience of the local LGBTQ+ scene.

4. https://www.lifo.gr/guide/arts/news/i-kunsthalle-athena-apohaireta-tin-kerameikoy-28

This article in LIFO highlights the significance of the building at Kerameikou 28, emphasizing how Kunsthalle Athena transformed it into an essential cultural venue for Athens. It describes the building’s role as a creative hub that welcomed a diverse array of people—locals, immigrants, artists, and cultural area marked by social challenges and vibrant urban life.

5. https://www.artnet.com/magazineus/reviews/bradley/remap3-athens-art-fest-10-19-11.asp

Artnet, a major art magazine, talks about the building at Keramikou 28 having crucial impact because it exemplifies the event's ethos of transforming neglected urban spaces into vibrant cultural hubs. Situated in Athens' Kerameikos-Metaxourgeio neighborhood, an area known for its rough edges and high vacancy rates, this building symbolized how art can breathe life into a community.

6.https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2021/nov/28/a-locals-guide-to-athens-five-great-things-to-do

The Guardian mentioned the building under Communitsm, describing it as a labyrinthine mansion-cum-workshop that looks like it could fall down at any minute.— Preceding unsigned comment added by IlEssere (talk • contribs) 21:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

A complication, and another.

Given that three of the !votes at the present AfD are "delete and salt", I fear copying the article content to a user sandbox may be a poor decision, perhaps resulting in a deleted sandbox and further problems.

IlEssere, you've made 21 edits to the AfD already, which is rather a large amount. At this point I'd gently suggest allowing the process to run its course. Folly Mox (talk) 03:57, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

True, lets see how it goes. IlEssere (talk) 14:26, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

RE: putting citations on items in a long list, where many of the items have the same citations. Should I

(a) put citations on every single item in the list, or

(b) group items together into sub-lists with the same citations, and then give the citations only at the end of each sub-list? In that case, I guess that I should separate items in the same sub-list by commas, but separate different sub-lists by semicolons? Dr.bobbs (talk) 04:14, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

You can reuse citations, I would put a citation on each item as it would show that it has something to back it up. User Page Talk Contributions Sheriff U3 04:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Dr.bobbs (talk) 15:45, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dr.bobbs I would do option (a). You can use "named references" to reuse the same citations. See Help:Footnotes#Footnotes: using a source more than once for the source editor or Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/4 for the visual editor. Hope that helps, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 06:05, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Dr.bobbs, the Named reference functionality allows you to re-use a single reference multiple times within an article, without clogging the reference list with duplicates. Once you understand how it works, you will use it all the time. Cullen328 (talk) 06:09, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

As a further refinement, if you are using almost the same reference - e.g. different pages in the same book - you can differentiate them without repeating everything, as explained at Help:References and page numbers. - Arjayay (talk) 11:48, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Dr.bobbs (talk) 15:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Dr.bobbs (talk) 15:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

How to create a new wikipedia page Tordaddy (talk) 08:40, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Creating a new Wikipedia article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia, and we usually recommend that newer users first gain experience, read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial. You do have some edits under your belt, so if you have independent reliable sources to summarize in a draft article, you may use the Article Wizard to create and submit a draft for review. It will be good for your first few attempts if you use that process first, so that others see it before it is formally part of the encyclopedia, instead of afterwards when it will receive more scrutiny. 331dot (talk) 08:44, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@Tordaddy You have already tried to create Draft:Medha Servo Drives and Draft:Megha Engineering and Infrastructure Limited (MEIL) but both attempts are lacking relaible sources, never mind ones that demonstrate these companies are wikinotable. When a new editor arrives and immediately tries to create such articles, experienced editors know that they are almost bound to fail, since the newbie is writing their draft backwards. Also, some may suspect a conflict of interest. Why did you choose these topics? Do you have any connection with these companies? Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:26, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

In history, it's essential to avoid imposing our contemporary perceptions onto the past. Instead, we should understand historical events and figures within the context of their own time.

A lebanese identity didn't exist during the time of the saints of this category, and categorising them as Lebanese clearly violates wp:NOR. Calling someone like Saint Barbara Lebanese is like calling Paul the Apostle a Turkish saint just because he was born in what would become the Republic of Turkey almost two thousand years later.

The category for Turkish saints notes that it should be empty, most likely for the same reason I've mentioned above.

Therefore, I think the saints should be removed from the Lebanese category. (Right? Or am I missing something?) Since there don't seem to be reliable academic sources that call them Lebanese. Otherwise, it should be okey to categorise Saint Paul as a Turkish saint.

I'd like to hear what you think Whatsupkarren (talk) 08:10, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

The Republic of Turkey didn't exist until 1920 or soon after. Turks arrived there in the 11th century, and Anatolia became known in western Europe as "Turchia" in the 12th century. I agree that it would be wrong to describe St. Paul as "Turkish" or "from Turkey".

The case of Lebanon is different. It didn't become any kind of political entity until 1920. But the region was known as "לְבָנוֹן" before the birth of Christ, and the Old Testament refers to its famous cedar trees. So it seems to me reasonable to describe a Christian saint as "from Lebanon". Maproom (talk) 10:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom Lebanon being mentioned in the Bible doesn't mean there was a lebanese identity nor does it prove that these ancient saints wouldve been identified as Lebanese. A saint from 2nd century Tyre can't have been Lebanese, Tyre, Beirut, Tripoli, Bekaa, etc aren't part of historical Lebanon. 140 years ago no one from those areas would describe themselves as Lebanese. This is my main issue; the sources don't describe any of the saints as Lebanese, describing them as from Lebanon is better but still problematic since they're from what is today Lebanon and not historical Lebanon which is only mount Lebanon. Whatsupkarren (talk) 08:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Whatsupkarren: histoical Lebanon was not "only mount Lebanon", see for instance this map. Jesus is described as "Nazarene", though Nazareth was never a political entity. Saint Petroc is described as a Cornish saint, without Cornwall being a political entity. I believe that "Lebanon" has designated a region of the world for thousands of years, and it is appropriate to describe a person from that region as "Lebanese"; its relatively recent status as a nation state is irrelevant. Maproom (talk) 10:00, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Your map dates to the Ottoman period not to the period of the saints in question. Tyre and Beirut were part of a region called Phoenicia by outsiders, most of its inhabitants would be called Phoenicians or Syrians by outsiders (although the term Phoenician and Syrian are also problematic)

"Jesus is described as "Nazarene", we have reliable primary and secondary sources to support this claim.

Do you know of any ancient figure who described, for example, Pamphilus of Caesarea, as Lebanese? Likely no, therefore categorising him as such, I think, obviously violates Wikipedia:No original research. Whatsupkarren (talk) 11:12, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom Whatsupkarren (talk) 11:12, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

I cited that map to refute your claim "historical Lebanon ... is only mount Lebanon." I doubt anyone has ever described Pamphilus of Caesarea as Lebanese, as Caesarea was not in the region then and now known as Lebanon. If your "Saint Barbera" is Saint Barbara, there are claims that she was born in Heliopolis, which was then, as now, regarded as being in Lebanon. Maproom (talk) 14:07, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom Pamphilus of Caesarea was from Beirut. Saint Barbara's birth place is disputed. But again, is there a primary source that called her "Lebanese"? Highly unlikely. Here's my main issue, that there are reliable primary or secondary sources that call any of those saint Lebanese. Whatsupkarren (talk) 17:11, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Whatsupkarren, if someone was born and grew up in a region that was then and now known as "Lebanon", I don't see it as original research to describe them as "Lebanese". Maproom (talk) 08:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom So you think every area in present day Lebanon has been Lebanese for almost 2000 years ? Someone from 3rd century Tyre can't be described as Lebanese, he might be described as Phoenician, Greek, or Syrian. Tyrians in the 2nd century weren't called Lebanese, Tyre wasn't part of a region called "Lebanon" are there primary or secondary sources that say Pamphilus of Caesarea was born in Lebanon? one might find sources saying he was from present day Lebanon, in the same way Paul the apostle was from present day Turkey. Whatsupkarren (talk) 10:44, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

No, I don't think that. I thought you posted here looking for advice. I was clearly mistaken. Maproom (talk) 18:30, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

A user named YuranHigger have vandalized the 2024 Botswana general election, he was telling people to hang themself and hurled a racial slur. He should be blocked right now because he is going to vandalize the articles.

Look at what he doing! User contributions for YuranHigger - Wikipedia 50.91.26.176 (talk) 04:03, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

I had to revert his edits because it was vandalism. 50.91.26.176 (talk) 04:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree that it is a problem. User Page Talk Contributions Sheriff U3 04:10, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Good news! Joyous! have blocked YuranHigger from vandalising again! 50.91.26.176 (talk) 04:30, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

The Teahouse isn't the place to report vandalizers. You should go to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents next time. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 05:47, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Got it. 50.91.26.176 (talk) 05:58, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism is also an appropriate place to report blatant vandalism like this. (You only need to report at one place, not both.) jlwoodwa (talk) 19:27, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

hello, I'm new to Wikipedia, so is there like a instructions or anything? Saarabout (talk) 21:47, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi there, Saarabout, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, we have lots of help and guidance available for you to read and work through. I've left a welcome message with some really useful links to them on your own Talk Page. Good luck learning how to become a Wikipedian! Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

ok, thank you! Saarabout (talk) 21:50, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

What exactly did not appear constructive? 🤨 2600:1004:B0B6:C892:452F:8ABE:5102:654F (talk) 20:58, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. THIS edit of your was not deemed constructive. I suspect you intended it to go somewhere else. But putting it in the 'short description' was not appropriate. Can you appreciate why it was reverted and why you were informed on your talk page? In future, you might like to think about asking the reverting editor directly on their own talk page, rather than asking here. All reverting editors should be willing to give you a reasoned and polite answer to such a question. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:53, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Having been active on WP for a long time, I remember how simple it used to be to start stubs and/or contribute to the development of articles. Lately, I've mostly contributed bits to well-established articles. I've just recently started a new one and I see I have a choice between submitting it for review or simply publishing it. Please tell me about the advantage that each route may offer. Thanks.Joel Russ (talk) 17:05, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

You are free to publish directly but run the risk of it being sent to WP:AFD, I suggest you re-write it in a dry neutral tone and submit it for review. Theroadislong (talk) 17:15, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Theroadsolong. So you've read my draft, I take it, and think it would be good to dry it out some. Reviewing, not just on WP, is generally coloured by the subjective viewpoint & feelings of the reviewer(s). Since there's a "risk" there will be a review, do you believe the reviewers would tend to frown upon me publishing first?Joel Russ (talk) 19:23, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

If you submit for review you will get feedback on how to improve the content, if you simply publish then you will be at the mercy of new page patrolers. Theroadislong (talk) 19:28, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy link Draft:Richard Raymond (publisher). Theroadislong (talk) 19:30, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

I mean, the AFC backlog is less than two months now and less than 1000 pending submissions. I remember when it exceeded four months and 3000 pending submissions. But still, it can take anywhere from within a few hours, to several weeks/months for an article to be subsequently be reviewed, and eventually be indexed on search engines (or immediately if your autopatrolled. The WP:NPP backlog is over 11k unreviewed articles and only 1700 unreviewed redirects. In addition to your article being send to AfD, it could also be sent to draft space, be merged/redirected or even speedy deletion.

AFC is optional if you are autoconfirmed (10 edits and 4 days) unless you have a conflict of interest with the article your writing about or are being paid to edit that. I tend to no longer write articles via AFD if there's a good chance its notable enough and will likely survive an AfD. JuniperChill (talk) 21:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

@Joel Russ By my count you have created ten articles but none since 2009. Standards on en:Wikipedia have risen a lot since then, particularly regarding wikinotability and the policy for biographies of living people. For those reasons, I think you would be best to use WP:AfC for your next couple of submissions, although as already advised, that certainly isn't mandatory. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:32, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Mike, good advice. I've been learning.

Most of my activity in recent years has been adding information, or attempting improvements in wording (etc) with existing articles.Joel Russ (talk) 23:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

there is a bunch of pages that have the incorrect front picture even though they are the first picture on the article. How can I change this and make it the correct picture? NossonLA (talk) 00:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Can you tell us what articles specifically have this issue? 331dot (talk) 00:22, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I think I vaguely remember this issue. If the first picture is in the infobox, try adding a hidden comment immediately after it: <!-- [[File:Example.jpg]] --> (replacing Example.jpg with the desired picture). jlwoodwa (talk) 00:31, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Why do some pages need to be super detailed and with many references while there are a lot of pages with barely references or content(stubs)? CrimsonScarletBurgundyy (talk) 01:00, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@CrimsonScarletBurgundyy: Wikipedia has existed for over two decades, and its standards for encyclopedic articles have increased over time. Many old articles don't meet those standards; you shouldn't model new articles off them, and they're irrelevant to other discussions. If you come across an article like this, you're encouraged to improve it, or nominate it for deletion if you think it can't be improved. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:55, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

We would like all articles to be as 'super detailed' (though not unnecessarily over-detailed) with as many references as is appropriate, but somebody has to voluntarily put the research and work in to make them so.

Provided a subject meets the minimal requirements of WP:Notability, a stub that cites the mimimal requirement of WP:Reliable sources is better than no article at all, because it can be expanded and improved: this is usually easier than starting a new article from scratch.

Some types of subject, such as valid species, are automatically presumed to be notable even if there are very few sources for them (at least one, the scientific paper that first describes them, must by definition exist), and very little about them is known: it's assumed that more information will be discovered and published in due course. When it is, some Wiki-volunteer than has to notice and actually add it – this doesn't happen automatically. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.86.81 (talk) 04:22, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@CrimsonScarletBurgundyy All articles are encouraged to be super detailed with a lot of references. Stubs are simply anomalies that have not had the attention from the community to be improved. Stubs usually are super short for these reasons:

1. Obtaining reliable sources for the subject is extremely difficult or impossible,
2. The article was never fit for Wikipedia in the first place and can be deleted, or
3. More simply, no editor is interested enough to improve it... but you can always change that. TheWikiToby (talk) 04:33, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I was reviewing recent changes when I happened to come across this draft Draft:Zachs Vlogs. Seems to be mainly written by one person with the intent of promoting his YouTube channel. Could someone provide a second opinion/suggest possible alternatives? VolatileAnomaly (talk) 06:18, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I suggest just letting it be. Under normal circumstances, drafts are not deleted for lack of notability WP:NDRAFT, and and the editor has not edited for 20 days. Ca ^{talk to me!} 06:25, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi all! I am not sure who to ask about this and on which wiki, as this involves the English and Russian wiki. So the English wiki page for Costume Jewelry has no linked translated page on the Russian wiki. But there is an article that is on the Russian Wiki for ru:Бижутерия that seems to be, while not a direct translation, a solid match for the Costume Jewelry article, with even the same image in use. But the English translation linked to that article is Bijou (jewellery) which I would say fits the Russian article much worse than the Costume Jewelry page and the content seems to be referring to something else.

My proposed structure would be to have Costume Jewelry correspond to Бижутерия. I am not sure if there is an article in the Russian wiki that would match Bijou (jewellery). How, or maybe who, would I approach to get this looked at? Is this an issue for the Talk pages of all three articles?

I would be very grateful for any guidance!

EDIT: For that matter, I think the French article fr:Bijou linked to the ru:Бижутерия is not a good match either. The French article is very similar to the English one and I think they both describe something else from the Russian article. Is this an issue I should bring up on the talk page of the Russian article? Or do translations work both ways? Many thanks!

Cryo Cavalry (talk) 08:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, @Cryo Cavalry, adn welcome to the Teahouse. Interlanguage links are mostly done now via Wikidata entries, and can only be 1-1.

What I would suggest is to go to the relevant Wikidata entries d:Q3575260 ("bijou") and d:Q1536680 ("costume jewelry"), and simply edit their links as appropriate. I note that the "bijou" item links to articles in a number of languages whose title is "bijouteri(a)", and I guess that many of them may have the same problem.

If you feel you should discuss the issue first, then I suggest d:Wikidata:Project chat as the best place to do so. ColinFine (talk) 14:07, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

That's a good overview – I just want to note that d:Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts is a better (more specific) venue for discussing this kind of issue. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:24, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine @Jlwoodwa thank you so much for your advice! This really clears it up :) Cryo Cavalry (talk) 08:00, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello friends

My draft Thetrendingpeople where I took help from my mentor @Karnataka was recently declined by @DoubleGrazing, @HitroMilanese with feedback, saying the references do not show notability. They mentioned needing multiple sources that are in-depth, reliable, secondary, and independent.

I have included several sources that I believe meet these requirements—they are detailed, from reliable publications, and provide independent coverage of the subject.

Could you please take another look? If there are still issues, I’d appreciate any specific advice on what to improve. Thank you for your help Bhashaji (talk) 07:10, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Bhashaji,

Firstly, please don't ping me each time you write a message like this, unless you're talking to me, or otherwise specifically want my attention.

Secondly, your draft was declined. If you want it to be reviewed again, you need to address the decline reasons and resubmit it. Or if you're just disputing the review, then you'll need to give some tangible reasons for this, not just say that you think it's fine.

I would also suggest that the best place to discuss this would be on the (most recent) reviewer's talk page, or alternatively on your own talk page while pinging the reviewer, not here at the Teahouse or an uninvolved editor's talk page.

Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:18, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello @DoubleGrazing,

Thank you for the clarification and help. I apologize for the ping and for any misunderstanding about the best place to discuss the draft review.

If possible, could you provide any specific areas where you feel the current references might still fall short? I want to ensure the draft aligns fully with Wikipedia’s standards and am happy to make any changes based on more specific guidance.

Thank you again for your help

Thanks & Regards,-- Bhashaji (talk) 09:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bhashaji: primary sources do not establish notability, and that arguably includes the two churnalism pieces cited. Please study the WP:ORG notability guideline to see what sort of sources we need to see. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:24, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello @DoubleGrazing

Thank you for your clarification and help. I understand that primary sources do not establish notability and that secondary sources are essential. I have reviewed the WP:ORG notability guideline as you suggested. Based on this, I am actively searching for more independent, in-depth sources that provide substantial coverage beyond the current citations.

My goal is to ensure the article meets Wikipedia's notability standards with appropriate, reliable sources. I appreciate any more pointers you might have regarding suitable source types or further improvements.

Thank you again for your help.

Best regards,

Bhasha Bhashaji (talk) 10:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Why is that? BombCraft8 ^{(talk) (contributions)} 20:57, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Maybe there is not enough sources, or maybe no one has gotten around to it. If you what to work on them you can. User Page Talk Contributions Sheriff U3 21:58, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@BombCraft8: I assume it's got something to do with the creation of the MOS namespace in September 2024. Looking at an archive of the page prior to this change, MOS:FILM and MOS:NOPIPE were not listed. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:56, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

oh ok BombCraft8 ^{(talk) (contributions)} 23:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@BombCraft8: I have reported the bug at phab:T378953. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:26, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

thx BombCraft8 ^{(talk) (contributions)} 12:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

i need like better sources, i don't know what's wrong with the sources i used but the page i made got rejected because of it. probably am just an unlucky person, i don't know. thought it'd work Dylanowich (talk) 00:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

So good sources are:

1. Reliable Courses
2. Not Original Research
3. Not a companies website

Anyways wp:Reliable sources lists everything out in a helpful way.

Also make sure that you are citing your sources correctly. wp:cite lists everything out plainly.

User Page Talk Contributions Sheriff U3 01:30, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Dylanowich, and welcome to the Teahouse.

While part of what @Sheriff U3 says is useful, their 3 headings are misleading and unhelpful.

The two sources you have may be OK, but usually we need at least three sources. The first one you have cited to "Barrons" (whatever that is) but it's clear that they are just an aggregator (at least for this purpose). You need to track down the source of the report and cite it properly. Articles with no byline are likely to be viewed with some suspicion, and we need to know whether the original publisher is regarded as a reliable source or not.

The second one says that "Lebanese state media" said something, but in your draft it simply says that that something happened, without ascribing it in the text to one of the parties.

Also note that this subject falls under WP:Contentious topics/Arab–Israeli conflict, and you should make yourself familiar with what that means before you do any further work on the draft. ColinFine (talk) 13:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello Would you please help fixing the Link error?

• Source of the page link: Talk:2024 United States presidential election#Article shows signs of democratic bias

Regarding reference #4 subject: Is US economy better or worse now than under Trump?". BBC.com. - it shows the link error {{cite web}}: Empty citation (help): Check date values in: |date= (help).}} however, I could not find the reason. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 13:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Goodtiming8871. Fixed by [1]. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:52, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello user:PrimeHunter you are a real champion, thank you. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 14:04, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

May I respectfully ask for some editing assistance (preferably from someone in NZ) to update my father's wiki page in preparation for his anticipated death from cancer. It is important for our family to have his page available as a resource for any media attention. Thanks in advance. AdrienneFord (talk) 00:22, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

It would help to know which article you are referencing. You may use the edit request wizard to propose edits to the article about your father. 331dot (talk) 00:28, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Lindsay Yeo

There are some inaccuracies and I'd like to add some additional info with sources.

Might there be someone I could chat with to assist? Or are you saying I should collate the material and then submit somewhere? Thanks AdrienneFord (talk) 01:06, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I see the edit request wizard and will attempt to use that option. Thanks for your help. AdrienneFord (talk) 01:10, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@AdrienneFord: This must be a very difficult time for you; my sympathies. You may find WP:About you and our FAQ for article subjects useful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:13, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I am unable to understand how to correctly format calendar dates in Wikipedia. My standard at work is the ISO-8601 (Y-M-D) format, but it appears to have problems in Wikipedia. How do I format "source" and "cite" dates without problems? Henrilebec (talk) 21:11, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Our syntax for citations is, mmh, very picky. You're formatting dates like this: 2024–October–30. That's actually rather unorthodox; YMD is usually formatted 2024-10-30 (and without em-dashes). Use that format, and it should work. Cremastra (u — c) 21:28, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@Henrilebec: See also MOS:Dates. Style for citations differs between articles; please use whatever format is already present in a given article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:17, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Is there a faster way for articles to be reviewed? I have about a dozen articles on the backlog right now, waiting in the void of the New Pages Feed to be reviewed. 🍫 TheBrowniess (talk) (contribs) 🍫 04:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@TheBrowniess: There's no reliable way to get your articles reviewed faster. It helps if you make sure they clearly demonstrate the notability of their subjects, since that makes them easier to review. Why do you ask? I don't see how it matters much whether an article is reviewed (except to reviewers, of course). jlwoodwa (talk) 04:48, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I just like seeing them get indexed honestly 🍫 TheBrowniess (talk) (contribs) 🍫 05:08, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Even if they are not reviewed, they will automatically be indexed after 4 months. Ca ^{talk to me!} 06:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

You could keep editing and one day become either autopatrolled or join the new page patrol and start trying to clear the void. Cremastra (u — c) 12:58, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I'll probably need to get at least a hundred articles under my belt before I get such a privilege. 🍫 TheBrowniess (talk) (contribs) 🍫 14:17, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Can someone who is fluent in Japanese please help me with this section of the Daihatsu Wikipedia page? I found two external sources and used a translator and wanted to confirm my edits are ok and in line Avienby (talk) 22:27, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi there, Avienby. Welcome to the Teahouse, and sorry for the long wait for a reply.

If you just pasted in machine translation of a copyright source, there's a very good chance you've breached our strict rules on adding Copyrighted Content to Wikipedia (irrespective of what language it's in). You need to use your own skills with the English language to add content in your own words and not rely on literal translations.

So, simply go back and read through to rewrite it in your own words, and avoid Close Paraphrasing. At the same time you should probably shorten it quite a lot. I'd suggest you've added too much WP:TRIVIA in that section. You could also seek input via a post on the article's own Talk Page. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:11, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

I only copied in the Japanese text and direct quotes which is what I was referring to @Nick Moyes Avienby (talk) 22:12, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@Avienby: To contact editors for Wikipedias in other languages, you can use WP:Embassy or the equivalent page in the other language. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:24, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

i edited [redacted] to include [redacted]. however, i am unable to find hard sources for it. Solomoncyj (talk) 12:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

As with any claim, no matter how familiar you may be with its veracity, if you're unable to find a source for the statement, it shouldn't be included in an article. Folly Mox (talk) 12:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Solomoncyj. I have reverted your edits and hidden them in the page history as a violation of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Never give alleged identities of living people without good reliable published sources. It could harm them whether the claim is true or not. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

hi @PrimeHunterdid you also remove my request for citation sources, if so, why? i put it there to see if anyone can find credible sources to back up the claim Solomoncyj (talk) 14:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Solomoncyj: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons says: "This policy applies to any living person mentioned in a BLP, whether or not that person is the subject of the article, and to material about living persons in other articles and on other pages, including talk pages." Without published reliable sources, a claimed secret identity of a living person doesn't belong anywhere at wikipedia.org. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:26, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I may have found sources:

• https://pdfcoffee.com/keekihime-2-pdf-free.html
• https://somoskudasai.com/noticias/cultura-otaku/popular-cosplayer-es-atacada-en-un-evento/
• https://www.animegeeks.de/angriff-auf-cosplayerin-keekihime-waehrend-comiket-in-japan-sorgt-fuer-aufsehen

and can they be used? Solomoncyj (talk) 14:18, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Solomoncyj: Two of those sources are about an attack by a stalker. If there is a secret identity then maybe it's protection against stalkers. Wikipedia is often the first result in search engines like Google. I would only consider mentioning an alleged identity if it had already been widely reported by very reliable sources. Your links look insufficient. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C4%81%E1%B9%87ini

I used a recommended Tuningmeister (talk) 15:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Tuningmeister That article has over 300 page watchers, most of whom won't be looking at this Teahouse page. Please make your point at Talk:Pāṇini. You could suggest a re-phrasing, for example, based on the sources the article uses. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

As far as I know, the topic below is a concern about political views,

• link 2024 United States presidential election

and has been expressed by several users for more than 11 months or more.

However, the issue has not been resolved yet.

Could you please place it in this article? {{political POV}} Or would it be acceptable for me to place it in this article? I am not much experienced with Wikipedia, so I would appreciate your help. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 14:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Goodtiming8871 It is hardly surprising that this particular article has been subject to non-neutral POV-pushing, since the election itself only takes place tomorrow. Adding a template won't help. Instead, I suggest you post any specific concerns on the Talk Page of the article, after you have read the contents of the big yellow box at its top. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:08, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Since the election is tomorrow, I think it is the duty of Wikipedia users to add a template now,

so that many users are aware that the biased content is being criticized and that this is before it is resolved. In other words, since many users, even left-wing users, are currently saying that the content edited now is severely biased,

we should minimize the interference of biased Wikipedia content in the election.

I could add the relevant template part, but I have been involved in the process of neutrally correcting the biased edits, so I am asking for help from other users. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 15:19, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello. I received approval for the bot's task. In short: due to some technical difficulties I was unable to use Muninnbot's account. So I had to use my own KiranBOT account. I have sent out the notifications of the recent archival, here is an example diff. Kindly let me know if something should be changed, like the edit summary, or the main message, or some other thing. courtesy ping @Rotideypoc41352: —usernamekiran (talk) 17:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

It looks good to me! We'll see how it goes. Thank you:

• Usernamekiran, for all your hard work
• Sdkb, who started the original Bot inoperable thread that led to resumption of these notifs
• and everyone else who helped at that thread.

Also, I tried to update the Munninbot userpage. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

• I forgot to mention: similar to Muninnbot, KiranBOT will not send notification in case the thread/section title is updated after creation. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:24, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

  I have a rudimentary logic to resolve this issue. But given the upcoming Diwali festival, I will be busy in office as well as personal life. I will work on the issue as soon as I get free time, which might be after 10 November. In case anyone wants to stay updated, I recommend watchlisting User:KiranBOT/Teabot, where I will post the documentation once the issue is taken care of. —usernamekiran (talk) 02:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello! If I am looking at a Wikipedia article for a person or organization I'm personally familiar with and notice copy editing errors, what is the correct protocol for handling that? In my specific case, I was looking at the article for the school affiliated with my church (of which I am an active member and in conjunction with which I have particiapted directly in events with said school) and noticed a typo. I tried to understand from the WP:COI guideline if it would be acceptable to simply edit in this kind of instance or if I should leave something on the talk page, etc. but I'm not sure—just want to make sure I'm following general guidelines, even if the actual edit is very straightforward in this case. NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 20:03, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. As per policy, simple typo corrections are acceptable for an editor with a COI to make themselves. 331dot (talk) 20:06, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Missed that on the policy—was exactly what I was looking for. NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 20:17, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

When I attempt to send a text message with a hyperlink to a wiki article with an ellipses in the title, IOS splits the message at the ellipses, sends a link text to the partial url, and sends the rest of the url in a seperate text. For example, I was trying to send a text with a link to the “That's Not My... (book series)” article. The link was automatically split into these two texts-

1- en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/That%27s_Not_My

2- .._(book_series)

and so the hyperlink that is sent (in the first text) obviously just goes to the “article doesn’t exist” page. This happens both in the normal messages app and in WhatsApp . Turning off all the keyboard autocorrect settings does nothing and Googles not being any help either.

Does any one have any work arounds aside from telling the text message receivers to combine split urls?

NymphNymph13 (talk) 04:52, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Use email? -- Hoary (talk) 05:11, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi NymphNymph13, welcome to the Teahouse. That's Not My... (book series) has three period characters in the title. You could try encoding each period as %2E: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/That%27s_Not_My%2E%2E%2E_(book_series). Or maybe you only have to encode the middle one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/That%27s_Not_My.%2E._(book_series). PrimeHunter (talk) 06:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

This works easy too! Thanks PrimeHunter 🙌 NymphNymph13 (talk) 21:04, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Another option is to use a redirect to that article that doesn't include periods: That's Not My. jlwoodwa (talk) 21:33, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

@NymphNymph13: Use Special:UrlShortener. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:33, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

This is the exact sort of thing what I was looking for. Thanks Andy NymphNymph13 (talk) 20:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Can we propose a certain guideline for descriptors of generals in the American Civil War? I have been suggesting to describe a general who was subjectively more known for service with the Confederacy as a "Confederate" general (like Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson for example) rather than "American" which is reserved for mostly Union-aligned generals like Sherman and McDowell. 9mm.trilla (talk) 05:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Of course you can propose it. You say that you "have been suggesting" it, from which I infer that have already proposed it somewhere. Please don't propose this kind of thing in more than one place. (And this is not the place.) -- Hoary (talk) 06:11, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

@9mm.trilla: I don't think boldly changing all the lead sentences of article about Confederate generals is the right way to go about doing this; it's kind of a big change that should be discussed first per WP:CAUTIOUS. I've asked about the change at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Confederate officer biography lead sentences and you should really be seeking consensus there before changing any more articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:29, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

@9mm.trilla, You should talk about this on Talk:American Civil War UnsungHistory (talk) 21:06, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Not so. Talk:ACW is for discussing that article, not the subject matter (or other articles). The link provided by Marchjuly looks like a fine place to get information about how to handle rank descriptors. I'll interact there on the merits. You may find there's previous consensus on the subject, or it might be time to measure it afresh. BusterD (talk) 21:26, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello everyone. Some editors are sabotaging my WP:RSOPINION edit stating "the source is not reliable for statements as to their author's opinion". Note that, the question is not "if it warrants includement into the artice". The question is: Is it WP:RSOPINION or not? Here is the text and then its source:

Buniyatov writes that the descendants of Khwarazmians call themselves Turkmens and they reside in the Musul and Kirkuk, the North of Iraq. Buniyatov further mentions that the descendants of Khwarazmians that call themselves Turkmens are referred to as Khurzumlular in Anatolia and there are 8 villages in Manisa, Turkey where Khurzumlular live as society.

And here is the source I attributed it to: Buniyatov, Z. The State of Khwarazmshah-Anushteginids. 1097—1231 М., 1986. page 159.

They are sabotaging my contribution and not constructive at all. Even threated to delete my COMMENTS, 1 of them threatened to get me blocked.

P.S.1.: As an indicator of contructive intention, I suggested them that they can oppose me under "due credit" (due weight) criteria, and in case they do so, I told them that I will add more sources covering the topic. P.S.2.: Besides the quoted part and source above, My contribution had another part that from an official government website corraborating the quoted part above. but I am not including it here. --176.88.165.232 (talk) 17:43, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Editors are expected to resolve differences by discussion, and if they are unable to reach consensus, to take steps outlined in dispute resolution. In most cases, there is no person in authority who can come in and decide a matter - so appealing here is not likely to be very useful. ColinFine (talk) 18:38, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you. I am not appealing here. I just want outsider views/assessments so that they can maybe persuaded. What do you say? Is that WP:RSOPINION? 176.88.165.232 (talk) 18:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Again, Dispute resolution lays out the steps to take to resolve a dispute. ColinFine (talk) 21:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Если я являюсь новым пользователем, я должна писать статьи сразу? Какими источниками я могу пользоваться при написании статьи? Prosto Hanna (talk) 10:08, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Prosto Hanna. This is English Wikipedia so it's easier for others to help you if you try to communicate in English. Google translate says you're asking about how to create articles. There's some information on this in Help:Your first article and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, but it's geared to English Wikiepdia. If, by chance, you're asking how to create Russian Wikipedia articles, then you should ask about that on Russian Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:34, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

@Marchjuly,that person is saying "If I am a new user, should i immediatly write an article? Which sources can I use when writing a new article?" UnsungHistory (talk) 20:28, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Additionally "Статья",the name of this topic means "article" UnsungHistory (talk) 21:01, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Prosto Hanna,Marchjuly сказал "Привет Prosto Hanna. Это Английскайа Википедиа так што тебе будет лехче помочь есле ты попытаешься говорит на Английском. Гугл переводчик говорит што ты спрашаваеш поповоду как делат новые статьи. Есть про это информациа в Help:Your first article, и Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, но они по англиски и для англиский википедии. Есле ты спрашываеш как делать новыи Рускийи Статьи на Википедии, тогда лучше спрашевать на Русский Википедии" UnsungHistory (talk) 01:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

So, over the past 10-20 minutes (at the time of this being asked), I've been working a lot on the article Jørgen B. Lysholm. I moved it from Jørgen B Lysholm to Jørgen B. Lysholm, but in the page history, the move was classified as a minor edit? Why was this, and is this normal? RedactedHumanoid (talk) 22:49, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi RedactedHumanoid. The move is classified as a minor edit at the new title [2] but not the old title [3]. This is normal. Before 2005 it wasn't even in the page history of the new title (see Wikipedia:Moving a page#Page histories). And moves are only in the page logs of the old title.[4][5] I don't support it but that's how it is. The move is shown at both titles at Special:Contributions/RedactedHumanoid so the move is still visible there if you hide minor edits. If a user was wacthing the old name then it remains in their watchlist and the new name is added so watchlists will also still show the move if you hide minor edits there. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:44, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I attempted to insert a infobox on my userpage but the wikitext did not convert into a infobox,if you look on my userpage now you will see an infobox because i used alternate methods (the insert tool in edit mode),but what kind of glitch is that?I can recall 2 such cases where the wikitext did not convert,the one on my userpage and one time on Joan Enric Vives i Sicília page when i tried to insert a contains outdated information tag and i actually accidentally published it but i reverted it so what is going on?? UnsungHistory (talk) 03:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Hey User:UnsungHistory. It sounds like you are in Visual Editor mode, if you'd like to use Wikitext instead of using the insert Template dialogue, you'll need to switch to the Wikipedia:Source editor. Hope this helps! MolecularPilot 04:03, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

File:SantaClaraCitySeal.png

Hi, I believe that this file is PD-CAGov since it's a seal of a city in California that was placed in fair use wrongly. How do I change this?

{{PD-CAGov}}

Itscyp (talk) 02:28, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Since no one's answered yet, I've notified Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:00, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Most likely uncopyrighted, trademarked. - Jmabel | Talk 17:58, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@Itscyp: I've imported it to Commons and added categories for you, see c:File:SantaClaraCitySeal.png. For future reference you can just edit the file page. —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {u - t? - _uselessc} 17:59, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

this might be helpful UnsungHistory (talk) 04:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I have 5 questions: 1st what exactly would be consired "formal writing" on Wikipedia? Could someone please show me when I added informal sentences to my draft. 2nd How much you need to write about a subject for it to have "significant coverage"? 3rd If the subject I am trying to add is fairly known (100 millions streams on one song of hers in spotify and 17,6k subscribers on Youtube, 27k the specific song was used in Youtube Shorts) but there isn't so much sites talking about her and interviews, what do I do? 4th Are those sources considered ok?: Pitchfork, The Fader, Serendeepity, stereogum, Tambourhinoceros, Youtube and Youtube Topic. 5th could someone give me an example to what to add my to draft? I have no idea, I thought it was pretty complete.

I further apology for the long reply but my draft has been declined 2 times and if it's declined 3 times I am quitting so I wanna improve as much I could possible could. Sorry x2. CrimsonScarletBurgundyy (talk) 15:52, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Also an editor said something about putting banner inside the "shell"? Coulld someone explain CrimsonScarletBurgundyy (talk) 15:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@CrimsonScarletBurgundyy I'll take just one example. To her surprise, the single turned out to be very famous and acclaimed by the whole internet. That is both informal and, more importantly, uncited. Who said she was surprised and what evidence do we have that the whole internet acclaimed it? I'm afraid you have taken on the difficult task of writing a biography of a living person without understanding and complying with Wikipedia's very strict policy explained at that link. I suspect you have been writing your draft backwards and as that essay explains, this almost never succeeds. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:01, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Number of streams or subscribers doesn't matter. On youtube, see WP:RSPYT. Serendeepity seems to be a webshop, that doesn't help, but the Pitchfork (website) article looks usable. You should remove everything from Draft:Molina (singer) that you can't cite to a WP:BLP-good source. See also WP:ABOUTSELF. That you don't know her husbands name doesn't mean it's unknown, so just remove such bits. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:03, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

CrimsonScarletBurgundyy, every single substantive assertion in your draft must be referenced to a reliable published source, since your draft is a biography of a living person, and the standards for that type of article are stringent. Currently, vast swathes of your draft are unreferenced, and, to be frank, that is unacceptable. Those assertions must either be referenced or they must be removed. Cullen328 (talk) 04:39, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I was planning to write an article on Dostrotime, a 2024 album by Squarepusher. However, currently Dostrotime is a redirect that goes back to the artist page. How would I go about turning this redirect either into a draft or a new article? Beachweak (talk) 11:14, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Beachweak Welcome to the Teahouse. All topics on Wikipedia need to meet our Notability criteria. You can read more on music album notability for standalone pages at WP:NALBUMS. Unless the album itself has met those criteria, or been written about in detail and in depth by a number of high quality, independent mainstream sources, a WP:REDIRECT would be the most appropriate things to have to help users find it. You should feel free to create or expand a section within the band's main article, if you wish.

To answer your theoretical direct question about creating a draft article and replacing the Redirect, simply start a draft article (the title isn't too important at this stage) and submit it to WP:AFC (You'll find a Wizard tool at that link to help you). If accepted as a valid stand alone article, a reviewer will rename and move it to replace the existing redirect link.

If you're honestly convinced that a topic is going to meet notability criteria, then you can start a draft or sandbox article and, when finished, replace the text at the redirect page with your article. But I would not advise that route, as others might still disagree with your assessment and revert back to the redirect again. Going through a draft process is the best advice as you'll get feedback along the way if your first submission fails to convince a reviewer.Nick Moyes (talk) 11:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Beachweak, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Technically, it is possible to edit the redirect directly into an article (see WP:RTOA) but unless you are confident that you can create in one go an article that is sufficiently well referenced and written to survive a deletion discussion, I don't recommend it.

A better approach is to create a draft, using WP:AFC. When you think your draft is ready for mainspace, you can either submit it for review (in which case the accepting reviewer will handle moving it over the redirect); or, if you are confident it is good enough, you can post a request at WP:RM. ColinFine (talk) 11:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I've been trying to look for a list of drafts I've created, and XTools only shows mainspace articles. Is there a Special: page or somewhere else that shows drafts a user has created? EF⁵ 18:34, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@EF5 If you navigate to Special:Contributions/EF5, you can use the drop-down to limit the search to the Draft namespace and also tick the box which says to only show page creations. This gets you to this search result, which is what you want, I think. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:36, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

To feature in extraordinary detail a "List of Republicans who oppose the Donald Trump 2024 presidential campaign" ... being a political news source (among other things), legally you are required to post an equally detailed "List of Democrats who oppose the Kamala Harris 2024 presidential campaign" article. It truly grieves us that several years ago, the great concept such of Wikipedia turned so blatantly biased, that Wikipedia's info cannot be deemed reliable as truth by roughly 55% of Americans. Please reconsider. 104.13.160.248 (talk) 22:00, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a news source, it is an encyclopedia. If you have independent reliable sources that discuss Democrats who oppose the Vice President's campaign as a distinct topic, you are welcome to create such a draft via the Article Wizard.

Wikipedia does not decide what is true, only what can be verified. See WP:TRUTH. Truth is in the eye of the beholder when people who storm the US captiol with a noose in an attempt to execute the Vice President are dismissed as "tourists" who a presidential candidate has pledged to release. 331dot (talk) 22:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Your hyperbole isn't exactly relevant to the issue at hand. Uporządnicki (talk) 22:49, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

AzseicsoK The OP said "cannot be deemed reliable as truth"; I was simply emphasizing that Wikipedia isn't about the truth as they claim. It's absolutely true that the rioters had a noose and were chanting "hang Mike Pence" but the other side dismisses that. 331dot (talk) 08:25, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no such legal requirement, and how could it have been equally detailed as List of Republicans who oppose the Donald Trump 2024 presidential campaign when almost no significant Democrats are opposing her campaign? We do have List of Democrats who opposed the Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign which was called List of Democrats who oppose the Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign when he was still running. Democratic opposition to the Kamala Harris campaign seems so little and non-notable that an article is not warranted. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:01, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

The notable figures most often mentioned in this context are Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard. Both those people severed their membership in the Democratic Party some time ago. Cullen328 (talk) 04:57, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Gabbard left the Democratic Party 25 months ago and RFK Jr. left the Democratic Party 13 months ago. Cullen328 (talk) 05:05, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

The best known Democrat who opposes Harris may be Rod Blagojevich, the disgraced former governor of Illinois who had served 8 years of a 14-year prison sentence for corruption when Trump commuted his sentence. Now he supports Trump. Rather different from the numerous high-profile Republicans who oppose Trump, including many from his own administration. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no such legal requirement, so it doesn't matter whether Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, a news source, or a food truck that makes buffalo wings and has a website with a bunch of articles as a side gig. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 07:10, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I added a new topic to the article, "Biting", I found some references and got it started fairly well, I thought. Every zoologist knows that these "true bugs" will bite. All of them. Someone kept editing my changes, deleting text and references. I got tired of that today and told him off sarcastically, and deleted the whole topic. I want to apologize to the community, but not to the ignoramus who says that bedbugs etc. don't bite, they "pierce". I will not do an edit war, I ain't got time for that, so I gave up. Wastrel Way (talk)Eric Wastrel Way (talk) 23:25, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Wastrel Way,which article are you talking about?it will be easier to assist UnsungHistory (talk) 02:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

(note to User:UnsungHistory, he's talking about Hemiptera, according to contrib history)

Hey Wasteral and welcome to Wikipedia! I understand how frustrating it can be to have your contributions undone by someone else, and I'm really proud of you for starting a discussion on the talk page instead of being stuck in an edit war.

You did back up your claims with WP:RELIABLE sources from what I saw, two different papers, so I'm not sure why the other user was reverting your claims and calling them "unreliable" and "ancedotal" on the talk page. These are primary however. - they can still be used but I recommend you check out our guideline on using these WP:PRIMARY (but you did seem to stick within these).

It's totally okay to just not want to be involved in a discussion anymore though, if you need some help finding something else to work on you can visit the Wikipedia:Task Center (or - one of my favourite tasks, add your opinion to some WP:AFD discussions, see a getting started guide here: Wikipedia:WikiProject AfD Engagement/HowTo).

I also see from your edit history that you're a biology PhD student - that's super cool and I'm really glad you are sharing your knowledge on Wikipedia. I recommend you see our notice to WP:EXPERTs on how to contribute and make sure to reference all claims. MolecularPilot 02:37, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I was a zoology Ph.D. student about 50 years ago. I moved on to law and computers, and I am now retired. I like working on wikipedia and I've written a few articles. I thught the topic "Biting" was important enough for the article, but I'm giving up on that because I ain't got time for this. Probably I don't have much time for anything :-) Wastrel Way (talk) 14:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)Eric

@Wastrel Way,you can always challenge people on the talk page,edit warring is discouraged (Wikipedia:Edit warring),i also advise you to see Wikipedia:Conflicting sources, i can see you and those reverting your edits are using different sources UnsungHistory (talk) 03:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Wastrel Way Just a tiny 'point of order' from a retired 'Senior Keeper of Natural Sciences': You are incorrect to claim that all taxa within the Hemiptera will bite. Or, as you put it elsewhere: "every fucking single one of them." I presume you are referring to insects biting humans? Yes, as you know from experience, many of the larger taxa can indeed bite (or, rather, pierce) the skin of a human when provoked, and they can be exceedingly painful. But not the smaller species within this family, such as all the aphids. Making a claim that all of the Hemiptera can bite humans by piercing their skin would require some pretty reliable sources, and I simply do not believe they exist. But I'm always happy to learn new stuff if you can prove it to me! Cheers Nick Moyes (talk) 11:19, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I accept that correction, and obviously I was a bit overwrought when I wrote that. I was still in the process of adding to the topic with reliable sources. And it's hard to find reliable sources for things that are well-known to zoologists in the field, but have no real scientific notability. "Watch out for that bug, he can give you a bad bite" doesn't make it into the literature. Thanks. Wastrel Way (talk) 15:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)Eric

Hi. I am not logged in and therefore cannot place the {{retired}} tag on my previous user accounts Aarushthakkar153 and Aarushthakkar0909. Can somebody do that for me please? 2607:FEA8:FD04:8183:BC1F:FF73:8E47:AD (talk) 13:51, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

You have not retired though, you are blocked. Theroadislong (talk) 13:53, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

@2607:FEA8:FD04:8183:BC1F:FF73:8E47, Done, inserted retired tag into your account,but remember,if you change your mind,you can always come back UnsungHistory (talk) 02:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@UnsungHistory: The user was blocked for sockpuppetry, so no, they'd have to appeal their block if they wish to use one of those accounts again. There is no need to add {{retired}}. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:53, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, sorry for the oversight UnsungHistory (talk) 16:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

how to share 2409:40D4:3063:8148:5C23:7B2A:54E6:4968 (talk) 15:35, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. What is it you want to share? If you mean that you want to reuse content from Wikipedia for some other purpose, please see WP:REUSE. Otherwise, you'll need to clarify. ColinFine (talk) 16:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about,give more context please UnsungHistory (talk) 16:48, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

After years and years of making mostly (almost exclusively) very mechanical edits to Wikipedia, including major tweaking of tables, I discovered--literally just last night--what is called a "Sticky heading." With those, as a reader is scrolling through a long table, the heading--the row of captions for the columns--stay at the top of the screen. It's marvelous! I wonder why it isn't used more. Is there some downside to them? Or is it that most editors working on tables just aren't aware of it, as I myself wasn't until a few hours ago? Uporządnicki (talk) 10:37, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@AzseicsoK Welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, they sticky table headings are very useful (if you have the right browser). Like you, I have that option selected in the Gadgets section of my Special:Preferences settings since I first noticed it. It's often worth browsing through not only the standard Preferences settings, but also the opt-in ones in Beta-features to see if some of them might be relevant to your own viewing and editing activities.

Looking at the sub-section it's in, I suspect that feature is a relatively new one. I note that I didn't include it a couple of year ago in one of my alternative accounts where I listed the difference between my personal preferences and those seen by a brand new user. (I might have to go back and edit it now you've reminded me) You can check out that list at User:NM Demo. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:57, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@AzseicsoK: List of stars in Crux uses {{Sticky header}} which is from October 2023 and doesn't require the mentioned gadget. Nick Moyes is referring to the gadget Make headers of tables display as long as the table is in view, i.e. "sticky" in the "Testing and development" section at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. In spite of the section name, it has been a gadget since 2017.[6] The gadget applies to all tables but works poorly for some of them. Editors presumably test that {{Sticky header}} works well on a table before saving it. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:25, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Funny you mention it. I put that Sticky header template on the Crux list just this morning. (BTW, I misnamed it in my original post here.) Uporządnicki (talk) 17:22, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Chippenham Park

Hi - I have a client who owns Chippenham Park. They have asked me to update the outdated image on Wikipedia (they have copyright), however I don't have permission. Can I get permission? Or can I submit the photo to replace the current one? Thanks for your help! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chippenham_Park Blue Check Shirt (talk) 11:46, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Blue Check Shirt: Copyrighted images are not allowed at Wikimedia Commons, and allowed to a limited extent at Wikipedia. You will definitely need to see Wikipedia:Image use policy and then comply with it. --CiaPan (talk) 12:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@CiaPan:. Of course copyright images are allowed on Commons, provided the copyright holder has licensed them with an appropriate Creative Commons license. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:14, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: THX, I've crossed the mistake out. --CiaPan (talk) 12:19, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Blue Check Shirt Images are handled on our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. There are instructions for how to upload an image on behalf of the copyright holder at Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team. Basically, email is used for the photographer, who is the copyright holder in most cases, to confirm they license the image you upload. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Blue Check Shirt Once uploaded and approved for use on Commons, photos would appear alongside the three other existing images there, which you can see at c:Category:Chippenham Hall. You can then select which image to insert - but do avoid using anything that purely promotes the current use as a wedding venue, if there are more informative and encylopaedic images of the property itself. I would venture to suggest that we would welcome multiple images of the property and grounds, including any old architectural drawings or maps that show the estate, providing they are over c70 years old, and thus out of copyright.

Oh, BTW: Should you wish to add any text content, other than insert a new image, you must ensure you declare your connection to the property and the article you want to edit. We have instructions to help you on this at WP:PAID. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:21, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! This is exactly what I needed! Blue Check Shirt (talk) 12:36, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Blue Check Shirt! In view of your opening post, allow me (an ex-publisher) to emphasise a point which many people are mistaken about. The copyright holder of a photograph usually remains the photographer (or their heir), even if they took it for a client (there are various exceptions – it's complicated).

Copyrights can be legally transferred, but this has to have been done via a legal contract (and usually payment). Owning a copy of a photo does not mean ownership of the copyright, and even if a photo is used by contractual agreement (such as to illustrate a book, magazine or brochure), that is usually a one-off licenced usage.

The instructions at our sister project Wikimedia Commons should guide you, but be sure that you and your client understand the issues. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.86.81 (talk) 19:37, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I've recently been trying to edit Wikipedia more actively, and there have been multiple instances where I've seen some information omitted from an article that I believe is worthy of inclusion. However, I don't want to add unsourced information and get immediately reverted. I'd like to know if there are any essays or guides on finding reliable and appropriate sources for easily verifiable information (such as the functionality of a piece of software or the director of a movie). Thanks in advance! /home/gracen/ (yell at me here) 18:39, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

GracenC, when you believe something is worthy of inclusion, why do you believe it? If you can think back to where you learned it, that may qualify as a source. Maproom (talk) 19:13, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply! In hindsight, I should have included this in my initial post, but I'm looking for sources on things that I've personally experienced (for example, I know that Obsidian (software) has support for publishing notes on the web because I've seen it myself). I may be new, but I at least know about WP:NOR :) /home/gracen/ (yell at me here) 19:25, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @GracenC, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's great that you're looking to add sourced information to existing articles: that is a wonderful way of contributing to Wikipedia.

I don't know of any particular way to find suitable sources, but there is a tool which might be useful: the template {{find sources}}.

If you paste it into (eg) your own sandbox, you can follow some of the links, especially (for some subjects) books and news, or (for others) books and scholar.

eg

{{find sources|php}}

will show you

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL ColinFine (talk) 19:18, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks; I wasn't aware of this! Unsurprisingly, I'm already familiar with Google, but these other links are new to me. /home/gracen/ (yell at me here) 19:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@GracenC for stuff that is a bit older, archive.org can be quite useful. If you stick around, you will get access to the WP:LIBRARY. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, hope you are well. I notice lots of external references to archived antique items, I love these because then I get detailed photos. I tried to add some exactly like those for items that could benefit, but they got deleted. For example this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Japanese_War_Medal could benefit greatly from this (which is not for sale and never will be again) https://militaryantiquestoronto.com/product/russo-japanese-war-medal-1904-1905-in-box/

Can anyone assist me in understanding better why many identical links are on the site but that one got deleted so I can better serve the community requirements? Thank you so much! AntiquesCollector (talk) 12:31, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@AntiquesCollector You added a random link to a marketing website with no explanation, so it was deleted as spam. Thank you for wishing to add images, but to do so you need to carefully follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Images. If you are seeing "identical links" in Wikipedia please link to an example. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:49, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I absolutely did not "add a random link to a marketing website". That is not true. AntiquesCollector (talk) 12:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

To re-ask. We don't own external images so we can't upload them but there are thousands of links on Wikipedia that help us add context to entities we are learning about. Example ima-usa.com/products/british-p-1888-slade-wallace-equipment?variant=26168902341 is linked from Slade–Wallace equipment. My question is why I get deleted when I do the exact same thing.

For each link I added I made sure it was added extensive value through high quality photographs and I added an explanation for each addition. You might be confusing me with someone else? AntiquesCollector (talk) 12:55, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@AntiquesCollector The example you quote is citation #9 in our article Slade–Wallace equipment. It is there to help readers verify the content of the text in our article. I'm not sure what your intention is when you referred to the 1904-5 medal link. Did you want to add that picture to a Wikipedia article? Or did you want to use the image as a citation verifying some content you proposed to add? I can't see anything in your contribution history to help me understand what you want to do. Please explain further and people here will help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:04, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Mike, that is very helpful and I'm grateful for the help. So for context, I added a link to this (not for sale, will never be for sale) https://militaryantiquestoronto.com/product/ww2-canadian-sten-gun-long-branch-1943-dated-dewat/ as a citation on the Sten Gun page, the reason being because it has such amazing photos and it gives perfect context to the fact that, here in Canada, the Sten design from Long Branch was slightly unique. The citation was removed. But it was identical in purpose to the IMA link, if not superior in terms of the extensively detailed photos. What did I do wrong that IMA did right please? Thank you again, deeply appreciate you taking the time to educate me. AntiquesCollector (talk) 13:14, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I see you added a about a half-dozen links to that site in various places, which no doubt contributed to the idea that it was being link spammed. Is it your website, or are you associated with it in some way? MrOllie (talk) 13:20, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh I see. OK thank you that was very helpful. At least now I understand. No it's not my website. I'm friends with the owner but in the military collecting hobby everyone is friends, we all know each other. You won't find any collector who is not friendly with all the dealers. But I promise you I was not seeking to spam or create anything commercial, nor would I have benefited from that. I would never do that.

If you look at the photos you will agree they are the best to be found, anywhere. And that site is cleanest and easiest military collectible site to view photos on. That's the only reason I posted that particular link. In each case, same thing. It's simply about adding amazing context to historical items. Photos this good are hard to find, but they really do enhance the experience of learning about these items greatly. In the military collecting hobby 95% of the websites are outdated and not easy to surf. AntiquesCollector (talk) 13:38, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

The problem here is that references are intended to point the reader to a source that supports article content, not to point them in the direction of more general context or nice photos. If we want to illustrate an article, the correct approach is to upload and add the photo to the article so that readers can see it there - but that of course requires the uploader to have the appropriate permission to do so. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:49, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

And yet that's exactly what these do? wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:LinkSearch?target=ima-usa.com

To be clear I am not arguing and I am grateful for your help Larry. At least I understand your position better now and that was very helpful and I thank you for that.

Anyone who thinks those links were spam never reviewed them in context. Ask any hobbyist. 100% of them will tell you they love those ref links and those photos. I don't own them so I can't upload anything. Literally that is the only clean website in the hobby with super detailed photos you can get through quickly. I guarantee you the users of that page would prefer those links be left instact. It's just a case of hammer nail. Editors looking for reasons to disinclude rather than seeking to provide the best quality information.

Again I deeply appreciate the help. You guys are aweome, it feels good to at least undertsand the unknowns here. Cheers. AntiquesCollector (talk) 13:59, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

It may well be that there are similar links used inappropriately as references elsewhere on Wikipedia; if so, they should ideally be removed. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

All due respect, no, they help us. We love those links. Did you view? Example take a look here https://militaryantiquestoronto.com/product/ww2-us-army-m38-tankers-helmet/

You won't find more detailed, quick-to-surf-then-get-out photos anywhere on the web. We love that. 100% of the users of the page you're talking would upvote all these links. Nothing is purchasable on these pages Larry. They are archives that exist solely for educational value and all users would agree that the value they add is priceless. Some of these items are very rare and to really understand them it helps us deeply to be able to scroll through highly detailed imagery. The links should remain. They are not spam they are education. Again not arguing or disrespecting you in any way and deeply grateful for the feedback, you helped me understand this much better. AntiquesCollector (talk) 14:12, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

they are absolutely spam and should be removed. Theroadislong (talk) 14:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Abolutely not. Please at least look, i.e. https://militaryantiquestoronto.com/product/ww1-canadian-cef-battalion-level-signal-lamp-in-transit-case-with-spares-1914-dated/

That item will never be for sale. Spam requires a commercial vector. There is no commercial vector to that item. It's gone, forever. The value here is only educational. If you were in the hobby you would understand how much value that link adds. Anyhow not here to argue with you sir. But no, they are not spam. There is no commercial vector. Thanks for the explanation nonetheless you've been helpful and I appreciate that. AntiquesCollector (talk) 14:19, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

They might be the best photos available, but they don't fulfil the function of references on Wikipedia, which is explained at Wikipedia:Citing sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:18, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I will read it. I appreciate you taking the time to educate me. Cheers. AntiquesCollector (talk) 14:20, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @AntiquesCollector: I may have missed it, but I don't think that anybody has linked to WP:external links in this discussion. That page explains when and how external links may (and may not) be used in Wikipedia articles. ColinFine (talk) 16:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Colin. Cheers. AntiquesCollector (talk) 16:10, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@AntiquesCollector On your example from the beginning of the thread, I think the WP-article and that pic are different medals, the WP-article is about a Russian medal. But if that wasn't the case, it would be possible to add an "External links" section to the bottom of the WP-article, something like

• Picture of the medal at militaryantiquestoronto.com

However, that particular link will cause "YUCK!! WEBSHOP!!" reactions in Wikipedians, as seen above, though I get your point that that particular item is not actually for sale, the site hints it might be at some point, and anything that appears to "promote" a webshop etc is generally frowned upon around here.

On the sten gun example [7], those are some nice pictures, and an argument could be made it would be a decent EL. I have no strong feelings on that, but if you like, you can ask for input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. Also, since you're friend with the owner of the website, he might also be the photographer, so you could show him Wikipedia:A picture of you, which has info on how a photographer can "donate" pics if they want. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the excellent and thoughtful reply. AntiquesCollector (talk) 20:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

For some reason the "review(afch)" button is not appearing on sandboxes. Its still appearing on drafts, but not on sandboxes. Shadow311 (talk) 23:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I started a section on this talk page to request help. I posted a long list of reliable sources that could be used to improve the article, but I need to know how to use these reliable sources without violating the synth policy.

Talk:Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusion#Many_reliable_sources_report_that_DEI_is_being_used_as_an_excuse_to_dumb_down_educational_standards

The Last Hungry Cat (talk) 21:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Hey Hungry Cat! Welcome to Wikipedia! You've given a lot of sources there, but one that there's a lot of is reduced math requirements for graduating or becoming a teacher, so I'll focus on that as an example of how the policies and guidelines apply, that you can extrapolate to the others. To not violate WP:SYNTH and WP:OR you need to prove that reliable secondary sources have said that a) math requirememts are being reduced in specific places (done!) b) that less math requirements to be a teacher makes the students "dumber" (I think you should choose a better word however as this is subjective and carries negative conditions) C) that less math requirements are an example of "diversity, equity and inclusion" (the article that you are editing), d) that a,b and C have all been proven in multiple significant instances of reduced math requirements (as the article is about a really broad topic). But even if all 3 come true in reliable secondary sources , you can't make the really the broad claim "dei makes people dumber" (again, I suggest you choose a better way to phrase this), but you CAN say "reduced math requirements to be a teacher, labelled a dei requirement by X, have lead to poorer student outcomes in situation A,B,C". Hope this helps! MolecularPilot 00:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Can I have some tea. Kuku1escu (talk) 00:22, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Cullen328 (talk) 00:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I got a message "We're sorry, but we cannot accept blank submissions. If in fact you did include text within the article, but it isn't showing, please make sure that any extra text above your entry is removed, as it may be causing it to hide and not be shown to the reviewer."

How to solve this? kindly suggest Sandeephbk2024 (talk) 09:51, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Sandeephbk2024, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know whether you intended to or not, but what you have submitted for review was your user sandbox User:Sandeephbk2024/sandbox, which has no textual content at all, and so absolutely cannot be accepted as an article.

You have also submitted Draft:Trivitron Health Care, which has been declined as its sources do not show significant coverage in independent reliable sources, and so do not establish the company as notable in Wikipedia's sense., ColinFine (talk) 10:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I have added few more reference links and removed few content Sandeephbk2024 (talk) 10:32, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

All three of the sources still look to me like routine business coverage, @Sandeephbk2024. That's not enough: why is the company notable? ColinFine (talk) 11:23, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I cant find any other links. Sandeephbk2024 (talk) 12:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Sandeephbk2024, sources do not have to be online and linked, it would be OK to cite (for example) a printed book or journal that could be consulted in a library somewhere, provided the citation gives all the necessary bibliographical details (Author, Title, Publisher, Publication date, page number etc.).

However, an article must have sources (preferable three or more) that meet the criteria ColinFine lists and links above. If such sources do not exist, then by definition the subject is not Wikipedia:Notable and cannot have a Wikipedias article at this time.

It may be that your subject will become notable in the future (see Wikipedia:Too Soon), but I would have expected a 27-y-o company to have had more coverage in reliable media than you have presented so far. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.86.81 (talk) 19:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. i have added few more links in that draft Sandeephbk2024 (talk) 07:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I have been using twinkle recently, and I have been doing some testing with it. Unfortunately, it seems that I can't test the tag tool in my sandbox, but can only test it on articles. Does there exist some test place to use all of Twinkle's features? RedactedHumanoid (talk) 02:25, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Twinkle can tag articles in draftspace. -- asilvering (talk) 11:15, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi! I've avoided doing too much on here but have recently started reading up on policies & guides etc. Thanks to only having an older phone & a Kindle at my disposal I didn't want to mess up articles too much!

I've written & corrected formal letters and documents at my job for over a decade, so I enjoy correcting typos, grammar & improving overall readability. With this in mind, would it be good for me to start with basic copy-editing? Blue-Sonnet (talk) 18:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Blue-Sonnet: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1240. We always welcome copyediting; I hope you have a basic understanding of the monstrosity that is Wikipedia's Manual of Style before you take on such an endeavour. You may be interested in joining the Guild of Copy Editors at some point. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I've dipped my toe into the Typo team, is that a better start do you think? Blue-Sonnet (talk) 19:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Can't say for certain but I think it's a good start. Just make sure that words really do have a typo as some may be using a variant of English from nations that consider the spelling to be correct. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:19, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Thank you! I'm starting with removing presumptuous language (avoiding quotes etc. as per instruction page) to get used to the MOS :) Blue-Sonnet (talk) 20:26, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Blue-Sonnet! You might also enjoy the lists of common misspellings, one of my favourite ways to get some satisfying typo-squashing done. Happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 08:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Bookmarked, thanks for the suggestion @StartGrammarTime! Blue-Sonnet (talk) 13:03, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello there i tried to make an article about the floods in Marienburg in March of 1888 in English but the codes that i used Don't work for me but for others it does?!

also can someone help me with making babel boxes? MalborkHistorian (talk) 08:43, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

You're missing the closing }} tags on every one of your templates. -- asilvering (talk) 11:13, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

.... which I was just about to add and have now done so. For Babel boxes, see WP:BABEL. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:16, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

thanks :) MalborkHistorian (talk) 16:24, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

thanks :) MalborkHistorian (talk) 16:24, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

how to add my own self made image? image of an animal, medication, etc. no worries about copyrights, i took the image myself with my iphone. but, i dont know how to add image to article. how to do that? Noam Atadgy (talk) 10:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Noam Atadgy I suggest you begin by reading WP:IMAGES and Wikipedia:Uploading images come back here with any specific question once you have followed those instructions. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:38, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes. when i edit a wikipedia article, how to add my image to the article? Noam Atadgy (talk) 11:56, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Noam Atadgy The most detailed instructions are at Help:Pictures, which was one of the links on the page you had already been pointed to. First, of course, you must upload your picture to Wikimedia Commons, which you have not yet done. The Wizard for that is Commons:Special:UploadWizard. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:00, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Noam Atadgy: if you plan to upload pictures of medication please note that the product packaging may very well be copyrighted and the image can't be uploaded to Commons even if you took picture by yourself. See c:COM:PACKAGING. MKFI (talk) 15:43, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Noam Atadgy Which is exactly the problem with your first upload of that picture of the box of dimenhydrinate tablets. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:50, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I see... my bad mates. I'll give up for now. Noam Atadgy (talk) 17:08, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Noam Atadgy Sorry you have had this problem: copyright is complicated and we don't want to discourage you from adding encyclopaedic pictures in general. I've placed a suitable template on the file so it will soon be deleted on Commons. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

how about an image of just the tablets? without the box. will it go through if i photograph that? Noam Atadgy (talk) 17:21, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

As I said, copyright is tricky and depends on several factors. The experts are on Commons at c:Commons:Village_pump/Copyright so you could ask there, giving your specific intention. Note that we do have such images on Commons but many like File:Ramipril 1.25 MG Oral Capsule.jpg are OK because of who took the image and under what circumstances. We already do have File:Dimenhydrinate .jpg. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:35, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I need assistance with labeled maps on Wikipedia. The article Leagues Cup, a soccer tournament in North America, has a section on its format. I need help with displaying the locations of the teams from each organization into a single labeled map of all teams from Mexico (Liga MX teams shown at bottom), Canada, and the US (both countries' MLS teams shown at top). I am hoping that an editor may help me with creating one, or if possible, may please create one for me. Here are the maps in question that are to be used for reference (if they can be formatted better in this request then please do so):

𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 17:34, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Yovt. Please make your request at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab. Cullen328 (talk) 19:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

is a Croatian professional football player (born June 14th,1999. in Zagreb)who is playing right back for NK Rudar Velenje.[8][9] Ivan Lagundzic (talk) 20:15, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Ivan Lagundzic, please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Cullen328 (talk) 20:22, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

In addition to Cullen328's suggestion, I'd recommend you read Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing, Ivan Lagundzic. Sincerely, Dilettante 23:05, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

The account used with this name is powerful and needs help making an important edit one of you will do that is very most holy.The wikipedia page associated with the burial place of Mohammad is wrong. It is the third most holy for Muslims and referring to it as 2nd or 3rd is blasphemy of the highest order. Also, the spelling of city is wrong. Look and see. Medinat never with an h ever so why has the spelling changed. That hurts very much TEAM GOD and we are currently in Armageddon so pray fervently with all your heart and soul. May the holy spirit guide you and know befriending this account buys you infinities of protection in this EPIC battle. TAZZ1776 (talk) 18:50, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, TAZZ1776. The best place to discuss this is Talk:Medina. Cullen328 (talk) 19:28, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

The sentence "The city is considered to be the second- serving as the holiest and third-holiest cities respectively" certainly needs some attention. Maproom (talk) 00:20, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I was at settings but cant seem to be able, to, change name. How do I change my name? Noam Atadgy (talk) 10:22, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

If you mean your username, you may change it via Special:GlobalRenameRequest. 331dot (talk) 10:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, done thanks. My new name is Weed 1 Noam Atadgy (talk) 11:55, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

My name wasnt changed yet, does it take a few days, or what happened? Noam Atadgy (talk) 17:09, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Per the linked page, "Your request will be processed by global renamers or stewards and you will be notified by email when this process is completed or rejected." I doubt it's instant. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

It seems there's a problem, they notified me by email what the problem is, I'll make a new request. Noam Atadgy (talk) 03:16, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

They said:

The request to rename "Noam Atadgy" to "Weed 1" could not be completed.

Note from the declining user: You are currently blocked on the Hebrew wiki with the reason "Not here to contribute". Renaming policy requires that the user is not seeking the rename to conceal bad conduct - https://w.wiki/rsg

For more information, please visit this help page: <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Unified_login#Frequently_asked_questions>. To discuss your rename request, you can post on this page: <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Steward_requests/Username_changes> or contact us via https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/Wikimedia_Global-renamers. You must still log in to your current account name first. Noam Atadgy (talk) 03:17, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Is there an article about betting/wagers on elections? If not, I think that might be fun to write and I saw many reliable sources about the topic in a google search just now. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:49, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Normally betting on elections is used as a means to buy votes. But I am not a criminal, so don't ask me how that works exactly. So I would like to see that aspect covered in the article. 2A02:3035:B07:530:180:786A:E014:DDFD (talk) 04:50, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

That could be interesting. But be sure to not make it just about American elections. People bet on elections all over the world. HiLo48 (talk) 04:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Certainly the scope of the article would need to be global. Iljhgtn (talk) 12:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Found a couple of mentions: Gambling#Fixed-odds_betting and Bookmaker#Range_of_events. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:54, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Seems to me like it might be substantial enough to be an article unto itself. Good links though, thanks. Iljhgtn (talk) 12:58, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn It's fairly easy to find sources like [10], but try to find some solid sources on the topic as a whole, at least on national level. This book [11] might be useful. The phenomena could be centuries old. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:58, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Could be. I will get started. Iljhgtn (talk) 04:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

The 2024 election has passed. The 2024 page was moved permanently to mainspace on November 8, 2024, the day after the election was called for Biden. Today is the day after the election was called for Trump, therefore I submit that the article should be moved to mainspace now. {{u|Squeeps10}} {Talk} Please ping when replying. 04:52, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Squeeps10, the draft was rejected. Robert McClenon wrote on it: "Do not discuss resubmitting this draft at least until reliable sources identify the President-elect of the United States." That won't happen for another four years. -- Hoary (talk) 05:30, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Hoary, User:Squeeps10 - I meant the 2024 President-elect of the United States. He has been identified by reliable sources. If my comment were interpreted as referring to the 2028 election, it would mean that there could be no article about the campaign during the campaign. I think that it is still too soon to have an article on the 2028 election, but my comment did not mean to wait until November 2028. I think it is reasonable to discuss whether to un-reject the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:14, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi- I was attempting to create an article for Bimpin- but it was declined. I have all the sources ready- I just wanted to run it by an editor before I create the article.

I started before and it was declined. Brayden Shaw (talk) 05:30, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

See Draft:Bimpin. Which would you say are the three best among the sources? -- Hoary (talk) 06:41, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Brayden Shaw, none of your sources are reliable, independent and devote significant coverage to Bimpin. Without such sources, it is simply not possible to write an acceptable article about Bimpin. Cullen328 (talk) 06:47, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

This is the best I could find for WP:N-purposes, but it's far from enough. WP:TOOSOON. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:34, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Have there been instances (I'm assuming they are rare) wherein a WP policy has been counterproductive to the accuracy of the encyclopedia?

If so, is it possible for someone to point me to certain examples?

Thank you very much. Fenharrow (talk) 19:47, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Please see wp:Ignore all rules UnsungHistory (talk) 20:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

that is the policy in use in those cases you are talking about,but i do not know any specific examples, UnsungHistory (talk) 20:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm relatively new here, but I don't imagine that Wikipedia editors keep a list of contributions as examples for certain rules. My personal recommendation is that, if you're deciding whether or not to violate a rule, WP:BEBOLD and just do it, as long as you feel that it is in the spirit of improving the encyclopedia. The worst that can happen is that your edit gets reverted. If you're just curious, I'm not really sure where to look. Hope you have a nice day! /home/gracen/ (yell at me here) 20:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

your edits getting reverted is not the only thing that could happen,bans and blocks can happen,warnings on your talk page can happen,but those are less frequent though UnsungHistory (talk) 20:46, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm sure most editors will assume WP:GOODFAITH and just revert, even if they see your edit as vandalism. Again, pretty new here, but I can't imagine that your account would get a warning for a single edit. Also, if you want to get feedback on a suggested edit you're not sure about, you can always open a discussion on the talk page. /home/gracen/ (yell at me here) 20:55, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@UnsungHistory, @GracenC is exactly correct. Editors who find vandalism are expected to assume good faith and revert an edit if they find it to be a controversial edit, unsourced edit, whatever. Bans are rare and are usually community or Arbitration Committee decided so we call any normal restriction of editing as a block, not a ban. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 21:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

That makes sense. Fenharrow (talk) 01:10, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Fenharrow (talk) 01:09, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Speaking as an administrator, it is definitely true that a large majority of editors are acting in good faith and will receive gentle guidance for minor errors when new. But there are malicious people in the world and if a new account makes a death threat or spreads vile hatred, that account will be indefinitely blocked immediately without warning. I have done so myself on more than a few occasions. Cullen328 (talk) 21:38, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Regarding "counterproductive to the accuracy" see WP:TRUTH. Even supposed reliable sources often get their facts wrong and this will be reflected in Wikipedia. At the Teahouse we are constantly hearing complaints that someone's biography is inaccurate despite the facts being properly sourced. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:47, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

That is an interesting essay. Thank you. Fenharrow (talk) 10:41, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi everyone!

I've just translated the article for Monopol Magazine into English, but unfortunately, Wikipedia isn’t allowing me to complete the translation on my own. Could anyone help review and publish it?

Here’s the draft link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Monopol_Magazine IlEssere (talk) 15:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@IlEssere I suggest you submit Draft:Monopol Magazine to WP:AFCREVIEW and you'll get advice from the editors who specialise in doing reviews. You might like to check the History section, which at present still has part in German at the end. Also, I'd advise adding more sources to confirm wikinotability and so readers can verify the statements which at present have no sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Please also have a look at Help:Translation, especially regarding attribution and other policy requirements. Lectonar (talk) 10:45, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

queria excluir já que infelizmente não foi aprovada Alexandre Graduado Gato (talk) 10:43, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Alexandre Graduado Gato, if you'd like to work on an article in Portuguese, please do so at Portuguese-language Wikipedia. Meanwhile, please see the advice on your talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 11:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I thought there should be a Category for this?? Fan of composer Rebecca Clarke (talk) 22:34, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

People can be accused of various things, Fan. Wikipedia usually doesn't pay any attention to mere accusations. Though perhaps you meant indicted or convicted. For exceptionally soundly reported yet unindicted offenders, see the categorization of, as a (rare) example, Jimmy Savile. -- Hoary (talk) 00:14, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Biographies of Living Persons (WP:BLP), if the person is alive, we would be very conservative about publishing about anything except a conviction (or, if a lawsuit, only if it is over). Even then, if we can avoid publishing bad stuff about a person that's not key to understanding the person, and the events that make her notable -- a youthful DUI conviction, that sort of thing -- we are supposed to.

But even then, we have to be super careful about putting a person in a bad category. For one thing, the crime'd have to be defining characteristic of the person. For another, we are required to provide a proximate ref when saying bad things about a person, but you can't do that with a category (they get their legitimacy from ref'd statements elsewhere in the article) and, even worse, the person would appear on the page "Category:Drunk drivers" with no ref of any kind anywhere on the page. This is not allowed (altho granted that part of the policy is mostly honored in the breach). And not only that, if the category exists editors will tend to stick the person into it even if it isn't a defining characteristic.

Sure, if the person is dead, its altogether different. You can write whatever you think is appropriate, including mere rumors, as long as you've got refs. Dead people could go in "Category:People who did such-and-so bad thing" with no problem. But if the category exists editors are likely going to keep sticking live people into it.

So, interesting idea, but not going to fly. But thank you for bringing it up. Carry on. Herostratus (talk) 05:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Fan of composer Rebecca Clark, welcome to the Teahouse! Your assumption / suggestion is not aligned with our categorization practices: see Wikipedia:Categorizing articles about people § Defining and § Sensitive categories; for the general case see Wikipedia:Categorization § Defining characteristics. Folly Mox (talk) 13:00, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

How do I add a citation inside of a template (example: review score template). I know you can add it inside of the template editor like this: <,ref name=":9" />, so I assumed that the 9 would link to the 9th source of the article, but it doesn't? Can someone explain how it works please? I'm trying to add review score tables in some articles, but I cannot figure out how to put the right citation to the right publication. Thanks. Ackyducc (talk) 19:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! So, the example that you gave us is a named sourced (WP:REFNAME) and can only be used if that citation has the ref name parameter on it already. So you'll have to find the source in the article and add <ref name=":9"/> in place of the citation's beginning <ref> tag. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 21:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Ackyducc, a reference name has nothing to do with its numbering when displayed or its position within the wikicode. An ideal reference name should be a mnemonic that helps human editors recognize what it is. For example, if you cite an article in the New York Daily News, a logical reference name would be something like NYDN. A reference name like ":9" was probably software generated. You can change reference names, but you need to be sure to change it everywhere it is invoked, or the software will generate an error message. Cullen328 (talk) 21:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

To add on, the numbered reference names are automatically created by the WP:VisualEditor when adding citations or duplicates (correct me if I am wrong, I don't use VE). There are tools like WP:REFRENAMER that can help change the VisualEditor generated one to an easier to understand version. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 21:43, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Cowboygilbert, you are correct. Despite:

• a dev task on the problem being open for eleven years
• a similar task being open for nine years
• a proposal to allow better reference names placing 5th in the 2019 Community Wishlist survey
• a similar proposal to at least improve automatic reference naming placing 22nd in 2022
• a similar proposal to improve reference naming placing 6th in 2023
• two of the earliest wishes in the new Community Wishlist project (one now merged into the other) asking for this behaviour to be improved

Despite all of this, the VisualEditor still uses the stupid garbage bare numerals as REFNAMEs. It's incredibly disorienting and error-prone.

The VisualEditor already has the citation metadata as ingested by Citoid, and the page source to avoid duplicate names. Seems like this could be fixed simply by comparing two lists when the edit is published, yet here we are still. Folly Mox (talk) 13:51, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I wish to modify the "Terminology" section of the article on the Greenhouse effect, based on a compilation of recent peer reviewed research articles. However, this will reverse the views in a couple of earlier references. How should I proceed? Parveson (talk) 14:53, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please use the article talk page(Talk:Greenhouse effect) to discuss what you wish to do; I suspect that many editors follow that article and will discuss it. 331dot (talk) 15:01, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Or why not be bold and do it, and if it gets reverted for some reason, go to the talk page and discuss WP:BRD JuniperChill (talk) 19:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

here is my introdution; WooXperto LLC is a privately-held WooCommerce and WordPress development agency specializing in custom eCommerce solutions. Based in Dhaka, WooXperto offers a range of services including plugin development, theme development, Gift Card System, Digital Wallet, eCommerce store setup, and website migration. The company also provides advanced SEO services, third-party integrations (such as CRM and ERP), and product image editing. With a focus on seamless integration and tailored solutions, WooXperto is committed to solving complex development challenges and maintaining long-term relationships with clients across various industries. Md Shaifullah at WooXperto LLC (talk) 11:02, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Md Shaifullah at WooXperto LLC Your Talk Page explains why these drafts were not acceptable as articles on wikipedia and have been deleted as being entirely promotional, which is against the purpose of this encyclopaedia. It is clear from your username that you are a paid editor and there are some mandatory things you must do, as explained at that link, because of your conflict of interest. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:08, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Indef blocked David notMD (talk) 19:27, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I was looking to upload an image in the infobox for Usha Vance, and when I filtered for some creative commons licenses only I got these results, but then they do not seem to indicate which creative commons license they are using. Anyone able to help clarify this for me or help to add this image or one of them to her infobox here?

[12]https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/usha-chilukuri-vance-wife-of-j-d-vance-speaks-on-stage-on-news-photo/2162474316

[13]https://parade.com/culture/jd-vance-wife-usha-vance Iljhgtn (talk) 19:52, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

As the wife to the VP elect of the United States, it would be odd if she did not have a single CC licensed image that we could upload. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:52, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

None of those indicates they have a license we can use. Potentially she could be in photos on some US-gov site somewhere, or appear on one fairly soon. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:16, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Is it advisable to include a comprehensive list of all the papers published by a renowned scientist, along with links to each one, when creating their profile page? Estermoyb (talk) 13:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Estermoyb Absolutely not. You could select a representative set of examples (e.g. those most highly cited or discussed in third-party sources). Many scientists have their full bibliographies at the web of science and various other online sources which you could cite. It would help to know the person you plan to write about before we give further advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you—I wasn’t aware of this. I know the scientist personally, I was working on his English profile since it’s currently only in Spanish, but it’s quite incomplete and provides very little information about him. His full list of publications isn’t available online that is why I added the full list of his articles to the sandbox, including links to the original publications, but I've since removed it following your input.

Also, do you know if I should include all his patents and books? Estermoyb (talk) 09:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Estermoyb I can see that you have done an immense amount of work on the biography draft for Carlos Belmonte Martínez [es] now at User:Estermoyb/sandbox. I'm not sure whether the name here on English Wikipedia should be Carlos Belmonte or Carlos Belmonte Martinez but that's a minor point. I would recommend submitting the draft for review: he is clearly a notable academic. We don't need a list of all his patents and books since Wikipedia doesn't aim to be a c.v. but is an encyclopaedia explaining to readers what a person's or a topic's main long-term significance is. However, on en:Wikipedia we have a very strict policy regarding biographies of living people and you need to read that carefully. In particular, all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. On the other hand, we don't need eleven citations to back up one statement, which you have at one point regarding his research. So my overall advice is to focus on the person, not the research (except as necessary to support claim of notability) and cut all the minor details until the draft is accepted as a mainspace article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:40, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

... incidentally, I had no difficulty in finding a fairly detailed list of his publications via Google scholar. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I’ve removed the lists of patents and articles and added references to support all claims that are made throughout the page.

I reviewed the "living people" guidelines and believe the page is compliant. The only personal details included are that "he lives in San Juan," which he has approved, that he has three children—also with his approval—and that he has collaborated professionally with them in various companies, which is a public aspect of his business career. Additionally, there is a street in Alicante named after him.

@Estermoyb It is entirely irrelevant for Wikipedia's purposes that the subject of a biography has "approved" any content. By the verification policy, articles can only be based on material already published in a reliable source (some of which may be WP:OFFLINE) and anything that cannot be verified must be removed. For some personal information, sources such as the individual's own website are acceptable, as described at WP:ABOUTSELF. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:27, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Many of his roles in various research centers and editorial boards are from earlier periods, so there aren’t direct online records of these positions due to the lack of internet at the time. However, Carlos provided an official CV link from Presidencia.gva (the Generalitat Valenciana’s website), which is the source used by Spanish authorities for various verifications.

I'm ready to submit the draft for review but can't locate the submission option. Please, could you assist me with it? Estermoyb (talk) 20:48, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Apologies, I just submitted it. It seems my page didn’t load properly, and when I clicked the blue button to send the article for review, nothing happened. I assumed it was just part of the template. Estermoyb (talk) 21:00, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

The source you've cited in support of the statement that "Carlos Belmonte is married, has three children and resides near the Mediterranean coast in San Juan, Alicante" doesn't appear to contain that information. Please note that only information that is supported by reliable, published sources should be included in the article, per WP:VERIFY. Even if you know it to be true, that information doesn't belong on Wikipedia unless it can be sourced. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:21, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Refs do not have to be accessible on-line, but then you need to use a print format.David notMD (talk) 03:59, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Apologies for this. I included references to the other companies he founded with his children, Pablo and Diego, based on his own account, though I don’t have an online source confirming it. I also added a link to the news article about a street being named after him in Alicante province, where he resides in the San Juan area but I neither have a reference for it. Estermoyb (talk) 20:18, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:49, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång, This should be posted elsewhere like the village pump instead of the Teahouse. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 19:55, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I think it's ok here too. There's a ginormous thread at the village pump already. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:13, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Agree to disagree. The Teahouse is meant for a person to ask question, not to be used a bulletin board. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 20:27, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

My User Page,well,not my main user page, as I still plan to possibly edit it in the future, this user page, I have no intention of editing it and if anyone edits it I will count it as Vandalism, someone please Protect it UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 16:24, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, UnsungHistory. I am an adminstrator. We do not pre-emptively protect pages. Actual disruption must take place before a page is protected. You do not own that page and you do not get to decide that any edit by anyone else is vandalism, because it isn't necessarily. Cullen328 (talk) 17:32, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Actually,It is my other UserPage, UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 18:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

UnsungHistory, what I said applies to every single one of your userpages. Cullen328 (talk) 20:31, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm wondering how the article cosy game is cited in this way. JuniperChill (talk) 19:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@JuniperChill:, It looks like it is cited using Help:Shortened footnotes which is a very valid citation style for any articles per WP:CITEVAR. It is unusual to see it in an article that isn't mostly newspaper, book, or journal citations. But, we can't do anything about it. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 19:59, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm fine with that format being used, even if its not what i'm used to seeing/using. I wasn't looking to change it to what I'm used to anyway, even before reading WP:CITEVAR. I was just looking on how I would use that format when citing sources. JuniperChill (talk) 20:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

You can read about it in Help:Shortened footnotes are at the template, {{sfn}}. Just know that whenever you put a {{sfn}}, you must have the actual source in a "Sources cited", "Works cited", or "Bibliography" section and it has to use a citation template (either WP:CS1 or WP:CS2 will work). Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 20:31, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Can you help with converting my site back to English? Me'tatron (talk) 21:34, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Main Page Me'tatron (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Me'tatron, I'm not sure I fully understand. Is the interface in another language? If so, go to Special:Preferences, scroll down to "Internationalisation" and then set the language to English. win8x (talking | spying) 21:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Me'tatron, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm also unsure what you mean. The interface language is set at Special:Preferences. The default is "en - English". If you have changed it then the "Internationalisation" heading may currently be in another language. This link will be in English. If you mean the stories on Main Page are not in English then there must be a machine translation in your browser and it cannot be changed at Wikipedia. If you mean you don't get an English page when you enter Wikipedia than maybe you are not viewing a page here at https://en.wikipedia.org where "en" is the language code for English. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:57, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm currently considering adding a criticism section on the page of a Prime Minister. The criticism will of course be referenced and cited. Nevertheless, I am quite certain that his supporters will remove my added content. Do they have the right to do so, even though the criticism is referenced and cited by valid sources? Benzekre (talk) 20:24, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Benzekre In general, criticism sections tend to suck. Consider instead if the content you wish to add can fit in existing sections, Personal life, Early life, Political positions or whatever. You also need to consider the relevant parts of WP:NPOV. And yes, other editors might revert or change what you add. If so, try to discuss and follow WP:DR as best you can. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Benzekre, as prime minister of Britain, Boris Johnson has been widely criticized (though perhaps never compared to a lettuce). Yet the article about him lacks any "Criticism" section. The criticism is instead contained within "COVID-19 pandemic" and other sections. -- Hoary (talk) 22:02, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I tried to make a custom signature but they said it is too long they did not let me sign the Wikipedia:2024 open letter to the Wikimedia Foundation,or at least i did but they reverted it as "invalid",i tried to change it to adress their concerns but i messed up and now have the following signature:[[User:UnsungHistory|<span style="color: Purple">UnsungHistory</span>]] (talk) 20:39, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) is my signature that got rejected,is there a policy against that?none that I am aware of, [[User:UnsungHistory|<span style="color: Purple">UnsungHistory</span>]] (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

the only issue i can see is it's length but signature policy is here- WP:SIGAPP aquarium substrate^talk 20:54, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

the use of "it's" as the possessive form of "it" hurts me on a spiritual level. that aside, it's kind of strange. i did some tests for both the proposed and current signature and

• as is, both were rejected on my end for not including links to a page associated with my account. figured that'd happen
• hastily editing mentions of your username to mine worked just fine. one even made my name purple (how ungreen!)

it seems the issue for the current one is just not ticking the "treat as wiki markup" box, and that your signature in the open letter was removed due to not including a timestamp. as is, i'd say work on this current one by including a talk page link or something cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 21:09, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Aquarium substrate,how is it too long?58/255 characters,that is less then half UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 21:33, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@UnsungHistory, it looks like Aquarium substrate assumed that the broken signature formatting was your final version of your signature but probably didn't understand your original question. But it looks like you fixed it. I think the issue was that it was using decimal HTML code output instead of actual signs (which breaks the CSS formatting). Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 00:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I am fairly new to Wikipedia so please bear with me.

I was editing and updating History of Google. In the process when trying to add new citations manually or automatically it changes the number and description of the citation to a previous citation on the page. When I try to edit it to fix the problem, it shows the correct information on the edit page but immediately runs into the same problem once inserted.

(Section was 2020s. Attempted citations for "In September 2024"; [14][15] Thank you. CF-501 Falcon (talk) 00:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@CF-501 Falcon Citation numbers can change in a weird way in the visual editor sometimes. I suggest going ahead and making the edit. That way, I can better understand the problem (I can revert the edit if it looks major). Cremastra (u — c) 00:57, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, @Cremastra. I have gone ahead and done as you asked. Thank You. CF-501 Falcon (talk) 01:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, it hasn't thrown up any errors, so I guess it's good. Cremastra (u — c) 01:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, See you around! CF-501 Falcon (talk) 01:22, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, do we have any policies about the use of foreign-language sources? Are they considered equally as appropriate or credible as English-language sources? It can be difficult to establish the credibility, notability, etc. for example of Japanese sources now being used on a site I heavily edit when I don't know any Japanese. Wolfdog (talk) 20:03, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Wolfdog. Yes we do. See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English_sources. A link at the top of that section is Wikipedia:Translators available. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:31, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Wolfdog:. I answered your question on WP:RSN, you might want to check it. Other than Musical Theater Japan, I'm sure all the sources are reliable Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 01:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I'm currently working on my user sandbox and I'm on my way on adding categories to it, but are user sandboxes allowed to have article-like categories? Thanks. 3461x (talk) 01:16, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@3461x Not until you've moved it to articlespace, no. Cremastra (u — c) 01:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

You can preface the category name with a colon, like [[:Category:Mountains]]. That way you can have categories in the draft article withough affecting the category pages. When the article is in article space, you can remove the colons. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:52, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi 3461x, welcome to the Teahouse. You can also use {{Draft categories}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:44, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

editing archived discussions or pages to fix malformed links. yay or nay?

the big shiny "do not modify" text seems to say nay, precedent of that happening seems to say yay cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:10, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Cogsan: Some formatting issues and syntax errors are OK to fix. What type of "malformed links" do you have in mind, and is it in user talk archives? PrimeHunter (talk) 19:53, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

talk archives, user talk archives, wikipedia talk archives, recently archived discussions, the whole spectrum. you never know when something will end up in rfd because someone created a redirect instead of fixing a minor spelling mistake. see wp:autoconfimred and its incredibly long rfd discussion for an example, and for the context of said discussion, the typo was in archive 528

still, "some" seems enough, if it's limited to uncontroversial (or even mildly helpful) technical fixes, so thanks cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:43, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Cogsan: "malformed" would usually mean wrong syntax like having the wrong number of brackets or a disallowed character. You appear to refer to misspelt links and not malformed links. We usually don't fix those in archives, especially if they still work via a redirect. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

sometimes an user references another thread, or even a concrete answer, in a post. When that is archived some helpful snackbar comes if you click on it, and says where in the archive it can be found. But sometimes an equally helpful robot modified the title with something like "SOLVED" and the snackbar doesn't work anymore on the modified title. Therefore it would help to modify the link to the real target instead of a "clever" search engine. 176.1.130.21 (talk) 05:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Why not primary be or share being the most important? Also, what are the disadvantages of prioritizing secondary sources as most important? - S L A Y T H E - (talk) 05:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Slaythe, please read and digest Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources. -- Hoary (talk) 07:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

1numberblock (talk) 15:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Is your question about the article Earth? David notMD (talk) 15:38, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

No, it's about the mode which makes the links to [((1))]. 1numberblock (talk) 15:43, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@1numberblock: If you mean switching from VisualEditor to the source editor then click the pencil icon at the top right and select "Source editing". See Help:VisualEditor#Opening VisualEditor. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:55, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

No,I want to switch to Wikitext 1numberblock (talk) 16:01, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

There is detailed help on both editors, and other topics, at Help:Introduction. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:03, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

No need to reply,This should be archived

@lowercase sigmabot III!💜 1numberblock (talk) 16:12, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

1numberblock (talk) 16:13, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@1numberblock: Discussions that haven't had activity in a few days will be archived. There's no need to summon a bot. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:00, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Then this question should be SELENCE 1numberblock (talk) 18:04, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

1numberblock (talk) 18:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@1numberblock: The source editor uses wikitext. The wikitext is the "source" which is edited directly by a tool called the source editor. If your problem is solved and no more help is needed then you can just write something like "Thank you, problem solved". Others will know there is no need to post and the section will be archived automatically in a couple of days. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:32, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you,problem solved. 1numberblock (talk) 07:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

1numberblock (talk) 07:46, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I am interested in creating a page/article. I would like assistance creating the page/article, and reply.

Kind Regards 2600:1702:5C58:4040:88E:E4E4:4000:4461 (talk) 18:10, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

we have a how to guide on this Wikipedia:How to create a page UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 18:14, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

i think WP:FIRST would be more helpful here. otherwise the teahouse isn't for co-editors or people who will write the article for you. aquarium substrate^talk 19:04, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Also, strongly recommended that you create an account and then put in significant time improving existing articles before attempting to create an article. David notMD (talk) 19:16, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 09:47, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

This article has been declined several times I checked it out and tried to follow the instructions to improve it, but it was still declined. What is it that we may be doing wrong. Can I have someone help me improve it? Bobbyshabangu _talk 17:18, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Bobbyshabangu, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks to me as if you have written the adraft BACKWARDS.

To take an example, the section "Format and Content" is unsourced, and looks very like what the organisation says or wants to say about itself. But Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 17:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Gently, Bobbyshabangu is an experienced article creator with 119 live articles under their belt. @Bobbyshabangu: have you tried asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Africa or WP:AFCHD? I agree with the reviewer that the current sourcing doesn't establish notability per NORG. Folly Mox (talk) 13:15, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks colleagues. @ColinFine indeed the user who initially created the first draft of the article reached out and asked the same questions " What is it they are doing wrong, how can they improve the article?" and I decided to assist them improve the article because of several reasons including:

• Help new users edit Wikipedia - I can see that although they are not really new users but they are not active users.
• There's a dearth in African content online and on Wikipedia - It has been my mission to increase African related content on Wiki as well as African languages
• Encouraging/Activating (African) user - No one has a formulae to activating new users. However, I've learned over the years that the best way to activate/encourage users is to actively use the 5 pillars of Wikipedia to improve their articles. This sometimes is a challenges because we don't have a lot of reliable sources in the African continent and oral citations is out of the question.

@Folly Mox thanks I'll check it out. Bobbyshabangu _talk 02:25, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, @Bobbyshabangu. Sorry I didn't check the history. That's a very good set of reasons to help, and reminds me that I can sometimes lose sight of what it's like to be a new or inexperienced user. ColinFine (talk) 11:14, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

If you visit my user page, you might notice that my userboxen are poorly formatted. How do I fix this? Any help is appreciated! Drdr150 (talk) 17:13, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Drdr150 The usual way to fix that is to use the template {{Userboxtop}} above all your userboxes and {{Userboxbottom}} at the foot. I previewed this change by editing your userpage and it places everything into a single column to the right, as expected. However, with all the boxes you have, when you don't have much else, you may not feel this helps. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm sure I saw a template next to the GA/FA icon on articles that looked something like: "Checked ✓", and when you hovered over it, it said something like "this page was last checked on [insert date]". But now I can't find this on any articles, and ChatGPT doesn't seem to know anything about it. Was I hallucinating? It is a wonderful world (talk) 16:32, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh, the check mark is normal on WP pages,it is to assure people that it is a documented wikipedia policy,unless you are talking about something else? UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 16:51, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@It is a wonderful world You'll see the same icon right now on the Helpdesk. It is because that page is currently suffering from vandalism and has a particular form of protection. WP:PROTECT has details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh I see, that's what it was. Thank you so much. I thought it was an icon to indicate that the page had gone through a full source check (superior to even that of an FA spot check).

On that topic, has this idea ever been proposed? I could see it being very useful for users who want to know how reliable a pages information is. It is a wonderful world (talk) 18:44, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I think that the problem with that proposal is that the very next edit to the article might make it unreliable again. If I were really concerned to see the "most reliable" version of a WP:FA, I'd look on its Talk Page for the version that had been reviewed/accepted, which is normally reachable via the Talk Header or edit history. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:48, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thank you for your help. It is a wonderful world (talk) 11:56, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Marie Curie when was this page created?? Izzybjordyn (talk) 15:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Izzybjordyn It was created on 29 October 2001, turned into a redirect in 2002 and then returned on 25 February 2002. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 15:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Izzybjordyn, welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know what you want it for but if you want to cite the article in a work outside Wikipedia then you can click "Tools" at the top right of the article and "Cite this page" to get [16]. The suggested citation formats don't use the creation date where it had almost none of the current content. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:38, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

why ask for fire colors It says it do not exist what do you mean wikipedia 149.154.23.130 (talk) 16:02, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

If you look at the article for Fire it clearly mentions that fire can have different colors. That being said, the Teahouse is for asking questions about using and editing Wikipedia, did you have something related to that topic you needed help with? Amstrad00 (talk) 16:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I was wondering if I could upload a screen capture of Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons for use in a future article. Would it be tagged as non-usable for the site at all, or is it OK since the screen capture was taken by me? Would I be able to do the same for other social media sites? Surayeproject3 (talk) 02:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Surayeproject3, it should be okay. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Screenshots of Wikipedia, it has everything you need to know. win8x (talking | spying) 03:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Surayeproject3. The only potential problem that occurs to me is if the specific screenshot included a non-free image as opposed to a freely licensed or public domain image. Please read WP:NFCI for an understanding of the policy and legal challenges of such non-free images, which we allow in very limited but very important ways, such as identifying artwork in articles about movies, TV shows, plays, books, and musical releases, as well as logos used in articles about companies, commercial products and sports teams. Be sure to exclude such images from your screenshot. Cullen328 (talk) 04:02, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Might as well add another mistake that could be easily be made, don't include parts of your operating system (Windows, MacOS) in the screenshot, or of your browser. win8x (talking | spying) 04:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

My plan is to upload a screenshot of a Wikipedia article/edit, would it be fine to upload as long as it doesn't include the Wikipedia article? Surayeproject3 (talk) 04:17, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Correction, I meant Wikipedia logo at the end. Surayeproject3 (talk) 04:17, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

When I view a Wikipedia article in the way I normally view it, there is, near the top of the browser window (and immediately below the place where I can type "http(s):// [blah blah]"), a row of little tabs ("Bookmarks toolbar", perhaps), each with the minuscule icon of the browser (Firefox), the OS, or something (e.g. a message forum) related to the OS. The icons are so tiny that I can hardly believe that their inclusion would be problematic. And there's probably some way to hide the row from view; I haven't investigated. (Worst case, I could remove each tab.) There's no other sign of the OS in the browser window. The Wikipedia logo does not appear. (Wikipedia's incomplete-jigsaw-sphere used to appear, but that was a long time ago.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

In most browsers, if you press F11 the browser will switch to a full screen mode that hides the various toolbars. Amstrad00 (talk) 16:17, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

In my case, I'm currently working on edits for Millennium Force. In a certain part of the article, a note is mentioned that explains that the trains were slightly modified following an incident on Superman the Ride. While there is a link to STR's page when mentioning the coaster itself, I want to create a direct link to the incident (as mentioned on STR's page) directly accessible when selecting "incident" on Millennium's page. (There are 2 mentioned incidents on STR, I want to link it to the second one from 2004) Thanks! Therguy10 (talk) 14:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Therguy10: You can use the following notation: [[ARTICLE#SECTION]]. In your case it would be [[Superman The Ride#Accidents and incidents]] NightWolf1223 <Howl at me•My hunts> 15:41, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I've put the link in for you. Your specific request needed a thing called an Anchor. This (WP:LINKPART) will explain what I've done. - X201 (talk) 16:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@NightWolf1223 @X201 Thank you very much! Therguy10 (talk) 16:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

A few days ago I published a new film article, The Ballad of a Gunfighter. I've written other articles, but with this one the Info Box lists the first reference as 2, and the second reference is shown as 1. The number takes the reader to the correct reference source, but I can't figure out why 2 comes before 1. Any ideas on what went wrong? Karenthewriter (talk) 16:26, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Karenthewriter You have put some in the Infobox and some in the article,and i am not sure what exactly happens but some sort of counting system there,nothing went wrong though UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 16:48, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I have written dozens of articles with Info Boxes and have never had references get numbered in the wrong order. It is hard to believe that nothing went wrong when the references are incorrectly numbered. Karenthewriter (talk) 23:08, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

A named reference in the infobox comes first. An reference (named or not) in the text comes next. Then, on recycling the named reference from the infobox, the next reference reuses the number. Besides, the visual editor names its references. 176.1.130.21 (talk) 04:59, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Karenthewriter: The reference with number 1 is in the released parameter of the infobox and it's processed first when the infobox uses the parameter to automatically generate the short description "1963 American film". It would also have happened in the country parameter. Just ignore it. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

PrimeHunter, thank you for giving me the reason for the oddity. This is my first article on a theater-released film, so I never gave a released-year before, so never experienced references numbered in non-chronological order. Karenthewriter (talk) 21:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

User:UnsungExtra is a account i created for use for examples -- UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 22:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

No need to announce that at the Teahouse! The guidance at WP:ALTACCOUNT should be followed, though. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I posted it at Teahouse because I wanted to just make it have more attention in this community,and possibly be used as an example in some help page, I was inspired by UserBob,I did not know where else to announce it. UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 22:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

get our site back up Our website Terrorist Research & Analysis Consortium (TRAC) was taken down because it said we had something promotional on there. We can remove this it is no problem I just don't know what part you objected too. Can you advise us of what part to remove and how to activate it again? Tracross (talk) 20:57, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terrorism Research & Analysis Consortium --Finngall ^talk 21:13, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Also inquired about last week: see Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1239#TRAC_website --Finngall ^talk 21:17, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@78.26: You deleted this, and there was just one !vote, and looking at the earlier versions in the deleted history, it seems like this would be appropriate to restore to draft space for improvement and review. Do you object?

no objection whatsoever. I’m strictly on mobile device for the next few days, or I’d do it myself. I fat finger everything on my phone. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:32, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Tracross, you can improve it while it's in draft space, but once it's in article space, you have no business touching it except to propose changes on the article's talk page. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:24, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I think the AFD was before soft deletion at low-participation debates was as much of a thing as it is now. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 00:34, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I have undeleted the article and moved it to Draft:Terrorism Research & Analysis Consortium. Tracross, please try to improve it there and press the submit button when you believe it's ready to review. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:08, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Is there a consensus on how dates should be written in citations? Such as November 8, 2024, 8 November 2024, 11-8-2024, etc. I came across MOS:DATEUNIFY, so I'm assuming it's more about being consistent with other citations. I've been trying to clean up some and add more info to them too. But I've frequently noticed the dates are often inconsistent for the same page. Thank you in advance and sorry if this has been addressed elsewhere already. Snakester95 (talk) 01:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

MOS:DATETIES could be possibly argued to apply to such situations even that it seems to apply more to dates appearing the article than dates appearing in citations. Probably the safest bet here would be to stick to MOS:DATEVAR and WP:CITEVAR and defer to the date format used by article's creator or its primary contributors. If you want to change from one date format to another, you could always propose it on the article's talk page and explain why. If nobody responds in a reasonable amount of time (this can vary based upon how regularly the article is being edited but a week should be OK), you can assume WP:SILENCE and make the change. If someone reverts things back, you then know who to discuss things with and where to discuss it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good Marchjuly, thank you for the response! Snakester95 (talk) 02:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

If I were to replace e.g. an unreferenced section template with inline CN tags instead would I be able to take the date of the tag and apply it to my inline tags? Here's a sandbox example: [17] Traumnovelle (talk) 03:37, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Traumnovelle, welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, that's correct; you can take the date and use it for the inline tags. Cheers, — Frostly (talk) 05:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I want to delete some of my subpages which are not useful anymore. so, what is the proper way to nominate a subpage to make it deleted. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 06:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey Perfectodefecto!

I'm assuming you mean pages in your User namespace.

The correct way to do this is to tag them for Speedy Deletion under Criteria U1 - see info about this here: WP:U1.

Simply add {{Db-u1}} to the top of the page!

Let me know if there's anything else I can help with! :) MolecularPilot 07:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Many Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 07:23, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

How do I improve my editing quality? HiLux duck (talk) 06:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello User:HiLux duck!

Welcome to Wikipedia! We're so excited to have you here.

I see you've done the Wikipedia Adventure - that's a great way to learn the basics.

My main recommendation would be to just dive right into editing - one of our core principles is to be WP:BOLD. Other editors, including myself, will be more than happy to help you learn should you make a mistake.

However, if you're looking for some reading, I'd recommend the simplified manual of style or the pillars of Wikipedia.

If you have any other questions please feel free to reach out to me (on my talk page) or ask another question on the teahouse.

Happy Editing! MolecularPilot 07:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Just as for other activities, by acquiring many skills and exercising them vigorously. Wikipedia has plenty of "help" material about this kind of thing. You should also exercise your curiosity. I see you've been editing the article Citroën Xsara Picasso. This has a table titled "Petrol engine". No source is provided for the information in this table. We need to know where it comes from: Directly from Citroën, or from some other source that's putatively independent of Citroën? If the latter, then really independent, or just recycling the info it gets from car companies? And within that table, what's going on with the claimed top speeds of the "1.8i" and "2.0i" variants? (Measured in mph, the 1.8i is described as a tiny bit faster; measured in km/h, the 2.0i is.) This is the kind of thing that a good Wikipedia editor should notice and preferably chase up in reliable sources (but if time doesn't permit source hunting, then preferably flag with the appropriate template). -- Hoary (talk) 07:25, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Few years ago a draft was made in the English Wiki page from the Amharic published Wikipedia ? How can I publish it and make it live Draft:Fesseha Atlaw. Fesseha1 (talk) 07:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello Fesseha1!

Welcome to Wikipedia.

The way to submit a draft is to go through the articles for creation process, where draft articles are reviewed (by an experienced editor) and then published.

I have added a box on the top of the draft with more information about this, including a button labeled "Submit the draft for review!" that you can press once you would like to submit it.

However, in its present state, the article does not indicate that he qualifies for an article, and seems to be formatted less-than-optimally. Please review our simplified manual of style and guidelines on whether people qualify for an article before submitting so that you can increase your chances of the article being approved.

Please don't hesitate to ask any other questions you might have! :) MolecularPilot 07:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

This draft was created (on 2 May '24) by Tedolightnirvana, who is blocked for their efforts at advertising. So, how to publish that draft? Find some other website (unrelated to Wikipedia) and do it there. As for en:Wikipedia, the best course is to wait until somebody unrelated to and independent of Fesseha Atlaw creates a policy-compliant draft (if that would be possible). -- Hoary (talk) 07:58, 9 November 2024 (UTC) ... amended Hoary (talk) 08:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Many Japanese people are talking about that they came from Japanese news or TikTok, in Norme's livestream live chat (If you didn't know who Norme is, see Draft:Norme). I tried searching for Japanese news about Norme, but I couldn't find anything. I also want to add a source from my draft article "Norme" about the Japanese news on Norme, so you can search for it. If you find it, please add the link. Bakhos2010 (talk) 11:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Bakhos2010 Teahouse Hosts are here to advise, but not to find references for you. David notMD (talk) 11:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Nevermind, i find it the news Bakhos2010 (talk) 12:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I found that Draft:Miss AI was declined earlier after being moved back to draft space however, the author has not shown any interest to update the draft yet. Moreover, I have gathered latest news and some reliable sources related to this subject. so, If I update this draft will that create any issue.? —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 10:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome to have a go; but before you do, be sure that the subject is notable. (Incidentally, "Guardian" didn't opine anything. The Guardian didn't either. A particular Guardian columnist did. Though of course it's not you who's to blame for this loose writing.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 11:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary If I create a draft with the same title after this draft being (auto)-deleted, will that be ok.? —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 12:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Perfectodefecto, if you'd like to start the draft afresh, you don't have to wait. You can instead blank it and start writing a better draft as early as today. But a good idea would be to write some of it away from Wikipedia (e.g. on your computer's hard drive), and once this is good enough for it to be obvious that the new draft is or very soon will be better than what it replaces, blank the current draft and paste in your new material. After that's done you can and probably should improve your draft, of course. -- Hoary (talk) 12:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Many Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 12:38, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Pcx1 Present

I anyone edit this article properly Bandara Dissanayake (talk) 12:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Can anyone edit this article " Draft:Pcx1_Present " Properly

Bandara Dissanayake (talk) 12:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

"Unprecedented", "mind-boggling", "icons", "exceptional", "further cements his status", "staggering achievement", etc. The internet is already overflowing with promotional flatus. Wikipedia doesn't need to spew more of it. People come to Wikipedia to escape from promotion, not to wallow in it. Please start by cutting out this junk. -- Hoary (talk) 12:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bandara Dissanayake Anyone who wishes to do so can edit Draft:Pcx1 Present. However, if you wish to have it accepted you will have to follow Wikipedia's policy about biographies of living people in relation to inline citations, for example. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, newbie here. Belle de Costa Greene has a piece missing from her entry and I am unsure how to put it in. She was pivotal to Edward Curtis' ability to document the vanishing native Americans. It was she who greenlit his work to create his masterpieces and JP Morgan funded. This is explained in the 2012 book Short Nights of the Shadow Catcher about Edward Curtis - and she comes in as a pivotal figure in the book a few times. I think this adds to her page as it helps people understand the immense impact she had. It was more than collecting books, it was also creating them. TurtlesLiveLong (talk) 16:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh, apologies. My question: How/where do I add this? I don't think listing that book as a resource does it justice. Could a sentence be added to her page as well? Thank you. TurtlesLiveLong (talk) 16:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@TurtlesLiveLong, yes, you can absolutely add a sentence about that to the Belle da Costa Greene article. It's a meaningful fact about her career, and Short Nights of the Shadow Catcher is a reliable source for that information. My guess is that the place to add it is in the second paragraph of her Career section. I did a short search, and you can also source the info to this article by James Balestrieri, which may have some other info that's worth adding (I'm not sure, I've only skimmed da Costa Greene's article and Balestrieri's discussion). Balestrieri is Communications Manager at the Western Spirit: Scottsdale’s Museum of the West, so I'd say that his article is also a reliable source, and there's a bit about her on that museum's website as well, as well as a bit online in this exhibit about her that just opened at The Morgan Library and Museum. If you wanted, you could also add something like "greenlit by Morgan's librarian, Belle da Costa Greene" in the section on The North American Indian in Curtis's article, linking her name there to her WP article. FactOrOpinion (talk) 18:17, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a website named Jatland.com which is a type of a wiki. Should i use the pictures uploaded on the articles of Jatland Wiki because the photos available on Jatland Wiki because the photos present on this site are not available on any other site and the copyright of that website states that “Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.” as per this and the content is available under GNU free documentation license. And i want to upload photo of some persons like this one Thanks TheSlumPanda (talk) 14:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@TheSlumPanda Copyright is tricky. WP keeps most of the pics at the sister-site Commons, and that site has this to say on GNU: Commons:Licensing#GNU_Free_Documentation_License.

My reading of that is that you can not assume that a pic is ok on WP/Commons because you found it on Jatland.com. What you can try is talking to the uploader on Jatland.com and ask if they are the copyright holder (almost always the photographer), and if so, ask if they are willing to upload the picture on Commons. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing this information TheSlumPanda (talk) 18:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

An image of Jock Campbell, Baron Campbell of Eskan (File:John ('Jock') Middleton Campbell, Baron Campbell of Eskan.jpg) has been deleted from Commons (and thus from en.wikipedia) because the Creative Commons licence used by the National Portrait Gallery, London for the image is CC-BY-NC-ND-3.0.^[1] Before I spend the time doing it, may I first confirm that if I create a version of it (scaled down to < 1MB?), I can upload here? There is no known alternative and it seems (to me at least) to be essential to the bio article and will only be used in that article. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 15:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 15:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@JMF Yes. Since the Baron is dead, a fair use photo is acceptable. To my knowledge, we treat everything not allowed under c:COM:L as is if it were fully copyrighted, so adding a NFCC justification and lowering the resolution are mandatory. Mach61 15:52, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Good. That was what I believed but the Commons deletion threw me a bit. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:23, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@JMF Note that if you upload it as non-free at WP:FUW, you don't have to worry about low-res, bots will automagically take care of that after a few days. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:58, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

TYVM and yes of course I forgot to resize but no, I didn't know about the bots cleaning up after me so I've just uploaded a smaller version, which works fine in an infobox. (It's at File:Jock Campbell, Baron Campbell of Eskan.jpg, if you want to check anything.) 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 19:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

help open flash 2603:800C:2E00:9B93:A560:544:200:39C (talk) 19:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi 2603:800C:2E00:9B93:A560:544:200:39C, if you're having technical issues with your flash drive, you can ask for assistance at the computing reference desk. The Teahouse is focused on Wikipedia editing questions. Best, — Frostly (talk) 20:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

If I wanted to break out the Background section of Cathedral of Saint Paul (Minnesota) talking about the three previous cathedrals into their own article, how would you recommend titling it? I don't think they each merit their own article, but one more extended article about the three would work. Historic Cathedrals of Saint Paul, Minnesota? Former Cathedrals of Saint Paul, Minnesota? ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 17:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Not "historic", Darth Stabro. Like very many of the words of any natural language, historic is polysemic, meaning what you here intend it to mean but also something like "having a rich history". I'm too lazy to read the article Cathedral of Saint Paul (Minnesota), but can easily imagine that plenty of people would claim that the current one has a rich history and therefore is "historic". "Former cathedrals of Saint Paul, Minnesota" [note the lowercase "cathedrals" within that] seems good. -- Hoary (talk) 21:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I am a disabled Author, from Canada, who has written a book about backpacking the world alone, in a wheelchair.

The book is "Travels in a Blue Chair: Alaska to Zambia, Ushuaia to Uluru".

How do I get a page about me written, without it getting deleted? I have tried over the years, but to no avail.

I can't even find much content about Disabled Authors' contributions to literature, although much is included about Black, LGBTQ+, Hispanic, Asian and various Religious folk!

Can someone please help me/us to get out of the Wikipedia shadows, and receive a bit of Wikipedia equality?!!!

ISBN 978-0-59-546149-3 2607:FEA8:1380:276:81C6:18EC:1BA1:C33B (talk) 00:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the teahouse. You can certainly write an article about yourself per WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY but it is highly discouraged because most contain WP:NPOV issues. You can go to WP:Requested articles but it'll probably sit until it's notable. I don't write articles about books but I took a look at WP:BOOKCRIT and I don't think the book, as of right now, is notable enough for an article. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 00:44, 8 November 2024 (UTC

For your book (ISBN 978-0-59-546149-3) (or any particular book), please see what's written about "notability" in Wikipedia:Notability (books). I've put "notability" in scare quotes because excellent books can fail to be "notable" in Wikipedia's sense, and garbage can manage to be. As for "content about Disabled Authors' contributions to literature" more generally: an interesting point, and one that you might wish to bring up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disability. -- Hoary (talk) 03:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback and guidance. I will follow up on Project Disability. 2607:FEA8:1380:276:1599:D439:6DD0:ACAB (talk) 10:41, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello IP user! Read Wikipedia:Autobiography! Ned1a Wanna talk? 22:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, can I please apply for page protection on Bodhidharma. Due to historical negativism and POV Thankyou Foristslow (talk) 22:27, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Foristslow. We protect pages only due to clear-cut vandalism and ongoing disruption. I do not see that here. Continue discussing the routine content disagreements at Talk: Bodhidharma, and work toward consensus. Cullen328 (talk) 23:28, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

the problem is there seems to be some editors that have a POV about indian Buddhism and trying to remove Chinese cultural Buddhist involvment on many Chinese Buddhist related pages.what is the best way to go about addressing these issues moving on. Thanks for your help Foristslow (talk) 00:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Foristslow, there are various forms of dispute resolution available to you. The first step is always to do your best to build consensus through discussion on article talk pages. Cullen328 (talk) 02:44, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

thanks again for the reply. First of all does Wikipedia have a mentor program for editors. As I wish to extend my knowledge of the procedure and processes to extend my ability to contribute. And second with this one, I am afraid that I do not have much confidence in the other editors involved as I am concerned about impartiality, as many of the reference material that they are using is obscure, local knowledge or by oral transcript and most often very weak, and not accepting other resources because they do not fit a particular narrative. I am used to writing reviews on medical journals and papers on related subjects with well cited reference and acknowledgments. Thankyou once again for your time. Foristslow (talk) 03:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello can someone please explain How do I answer back the below comment or even if I should ? There is not a ability to reply to Joshua Jonathan, he has just regurgitated the points in my initial complaint and is this acceptable as my conversation was about resolution, his discourse is aggressive and almost hounding in nature. I have asked him to help on talk instead of being so derogatory and now threatening Thankyou Foristslow (talk) 00:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hay, I am having problems with a editor on the Bodhidharma page not wishing to collaborate and work together, or nor wishing to reply to references to initial investigation into historical discrepancies. Hiding my dialogue on the talk page with lists of my editing inexperience, instead of addressing the real issues. Now going to other pages that I had previously edited that, this editor has no history on, and reverting my edits with the same condescending tone's. Happy to know if I am out of line, a bit over enthusiastic in the beginning admittedly. Thankyou Foristslow (talk) 23:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

You definitely could use some mentorship; your latest edits to Bodhidharma are rambling, misrepresenting sources, adding unsourced misinformation, and adding grammatical errors. Regarding there seems to be some editors that have a POV about indian Buddhism and trying to remove Chinese cultural Buddhist involvment on many Chinese Buddhist related pages, see WP:PERSONALATTACKS and WP:AGF. Regarding many of the reference material that they are using is obscure, local knowledge or by oral transcript and most often very weak, and not accepting other resources because they do not fit a particular narrative, this comes very close to disqualifying yourself as an editor. If you expect well cited reference and acknowledgments, you should ask yourself if you have any serious command of the scholarly literature on (Chan) Buddhism. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk!\

How do you add a redirect page on a see also line? When I do see also | xx | cc (separated and some not there because of it attempting to redirect xx), it does everything right EXCEPT it always leaves the brackets visually. How do I make it so it looks like a normal see-also without the extra brackets? SixDellTisks (talk) 00:04, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi SixDellTisks, welcome to the Teahouse. Your incomplete example makes it unclear what you refer to but maybe you are using {{see also}} and place brackets around the page names. There should be no brackets whether it's redirects or articles. {{see also|xx|cc}} works fine, and both pages are redirects:

See also: xx and cc

PrimeHunter (talk) 00:19, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

So recently I was perusing some project pages to see if I needed to delete any weird links, and I discovered that someone on the page Alan Espínola attempted to put it up for deletion, but the template didn't work and no deletion subpage was created. I was thinking about removing it, but I'm wondering if I shouldn't since it would technically be removing a deletion template. I was thinking about contacting the user who attempted to put the article up for deletion, but they are currently indefinitely blocked. What should I do? Gaismagorm (talk) 22:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) If you feel the page should be discussed at AfD regardless, you probably can fix the syntax and start the discussion yourself. If you think the page was inappropriately nominated and perhaps was part of the reason why the user who added or the user who dreated the article were blocked, you could ask about it at WP:AN to see what an administrator thinks. FWIW, I've not done a WP:BEFORE for Espínola, but they don't, at least at first glance, seem to meet WP:NOLY. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:36, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I myself am kind of against deleting it, since there a dozens of similar Olympic athlete articles just like this. Honestly it's quite shocking how many Olympic athletes, small African locations, and obscure companies have pages with almost no sourcing (or in many cases no sourcing what so ever). The latter two are definitely issues, but I feel like Olympic athletes probably are a little trickier to judge. Gaismagorm (talk) 23:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Gaismagorm had the nomination been recent, and not made by a blocked editor, I would have corrected it. Any editor is welcome and able to make a correct, policy based nomination. For the present I have removed the imperfect template (left in 2023) form the article. Thank you for pointing this out. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 00:30, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for the advice! Gaismagorm (talk) 02:13, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

It mostly comes from new accounts, I'm not sure where to go about this. Maybe there should be a semi-protected status on the page to prevent future vandalism, but im not sure about the procedure on this. Goonsnick (talk) 23:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Goonsnick, Black history has seen a total of five edits this year, two of them constructive ones by you. I wouldn't call that "a lot of vandalism". Maproom (talk) 23:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I hate people who disrespect black people. I mean, what did the black people do to them anyways????? 1 love nations (talk) 03:04, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi! I just joined because I wanted to create a page about a temple in my area that has been around for quite a while (1990), but I don't exactly know. Sorry if this is a stupid question! Pandaman23 (talk) 21:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

And also why are some pages edited differently than others? Some are like I can edit directly meanwhile others are edited in their source. Pandaman23 (talk) 21:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Pandaman23 Help:Introduction is a good guide to editing in general and the difference between the "visual" editor and the "source" editor. As a new user, you won't be able to create a new article directly yet and must use the articles for creation process. However, I would strongly advise you to gain some experience first by editing existing articles: writing from scratch is more difficult before you have some experience in the way Wikipedia works. Good luck! Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you so much for the help. Also one more thing this person reverted one of my edits or something how do I see what they changed and why? Pandaman23 (talk) 07:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Pandaman23 If you mean edits at Hindu Temple of Greater Chicago, see the "View history" tab on that page, which leads to [18]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Pandaman23 (talk) 07:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Since I'm inexperienced I'm not sure about this but do you think its justified for him to revert my edits. were they really that bad? I mean what was wrong about them I made them a bit grammatically correct and shortened sentences. Pandaman23 (talk) 07:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Pandaman23 That is a reasonable question. It's possible that @Ram1751 doesn't object to all of your edit, but it's almost always a mistake to try to read other editors minds. Per WP:COMMUNICATE, I suggest that the 2 of you try to discuss your disagreements at Talk:Hindu Temple of Greater Chicago and see what you can agree on. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for being so helpful! Pandaman23 (talk) 04:25, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

here - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Helloarunsunil007123&direction=next&oldid=1256104527

i have given valuable citation and all but it still had not approved

Helloarunsunil007123 (talk) 05:24, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Helloarunsunil007123, You have created this page on your userpage instead of the main space Tesleemah (talk) 06:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Also you might need to see Help:Edit, WP:Verifiability, WP:Notability Citing Sources to reconstruct your article, I noticed the In-line references are not ok Tesleemah (talk) 06:59, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Helloarunsunil007123 This is now located at User:Helloarunsunil007123/Sandbox.

@Tesleemah You could have moved this for them, you know. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh I didn't catch that early enough. Thank you, I will do that another time Tesleemah (talk) 11:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Fix the references (see Help:Referencing for beginners) and then submit for review. David notMD (talk) 11:27, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

This is a question I'm wondering, There are WikiProjects, but I have no idea on participating them. I wanted to participate in WikiProject Television and WikiProject Turkmenistan, but what are the rules and guidelines? - 𓆩♡𓆪𝘚𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘢𓆩♡𓆪 ・ ︶꒦꒷ 💬・✏️ ꒷꒦︶ 12:40, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Sellena8053 On the Television page you linked it says Technically speaking, anyone who edits or contributes to TV related articles is a participant, and there are no requirements other than that. If one wishes one can further identify oneself with the project by listing one's name as a participant. This helps spread the word about the project and can help other editors see what types of articles that user is interested in editing.. The Turkmenistan project only appear to have three members so is presumably not very active. You could try asking one of those participants, but the answer is probably the same. In my experience most Wikiprojects don't have much interaction between members. That interaction takes place on the relevant talk pages. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh, okay then. Guess I'll have to work on my draft on the KTK Article, at some time, since it falls under the scope of WikiProject Television 𓆩♡𓆪𝘚𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘢𓆩♡𓆪 ・ ︶꒦꒷ 💬・✏️ ꒷꒦︶ 14:09, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

What is a topic I can write about to make an article? NoBrainFound (talk) 16:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Thanks for wanting to contribute. My advice is that you first gain experience and knowledge of how Wikipedia works by first editing existing articles, before you dive in to the very difficult task of creating a new article. Creating a new article is not the only or even best way to contribute. Many successful editors have never created a single new article. 331dot (talk) 17:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I recently discovered this sitar artist and loved his work. He seems to have good coverage. Need some feedback if he is worthy to be here...

• https://www.thehindu.com/entertainment/music/rishab-rikhiram-sharma-on-a-multi-city-tour-in-india-with-his-sitar-for-mental-health-music-series-discusses-the-privileges-of-being-a-luthiers-son-and-explains-why-he-adorns-his-hands-with-mehendi/article67938385.ece
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/htcity/cinema/rishab-rikhiram-sharma-to-go-global-with-tour-want-to-use-my-sitar-to-make-more-noise-about-mental-health-101712225540706.html
• https://www.cnbctv18.com/entertainment/indian-sitarist-rishab-rikhiram-sharma-first-united-nations-musician-advocate-for-mental-health-19425362.htm

-- Uncnehut (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

If he has more you can make an article, Also check Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Ned1a Wanna talk? 15:27, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Uncnehut I don't need to look directly at your first two sources to see from their URL that they are based on interviews, so are not independent sources. The third may be OK. Your main task will be to show that he meets wikinotability guidelines and to do that you need about three sources which meet our golden rules. There is more advice at this essay. As you are a newcomer here, I would strongly advise you to contribute to existing articles about topics that interest you until you are more experienced. Writing biographies of living people to the necessary standard is a very tough challenge. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:15, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I did some digging and found Vacation Express operates scheduled seasonal flights from Nashville International Airport to Cancun[19] and Punta Cana[20] on Viva and Allegiant Air respectively that were not listed in the article. How should these destinations be listed? Other airports do not list VE as an airline, but I don't think Punta Cana should be listed under Allegiant, for example, because it is not bookable through Allegiant's website, only VE. So should it even be listed in the first place? King airaglub (talk) 00:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I think you may be confusing the difference between a Tour operator and an Airline. A tour operator takes customer bookings, and may hire or commission individual seats or entire (charter) flights from an airline; the airline operates the planes. Some airlines do not take any bookings directly from customers on some (or all) routes, but only from tour operators – kind of a Business-to-business arrangement.

There can be other arrangements, but what you describe does not appear to me to qualify Vacation Express as an airline. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.7.95.48 (talk) 01:25, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

So what should the flights be listed under? King airaglub (talk) 03:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Off the top of my head, I would have thought under the airlines Viva and Allegiant Air as applicable. Others may disagree. Make a decision, be Bold, and see if anyone disagrees – that is a (not the only) usual way of reaching consensus on Wikipedia. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.7.95.48 (talk) 18:07, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Do people who edit Wikipedia when they edit the wikipedia page for wikiPedia havea conflict of inerest? Do they need to submit edit requests. And also related pages lik e Criticism of Wikipedia, etc. 115.188.72.131 (talk) 115.188.72.131 (talk) 07:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC) 115.188.72.131 (talk) 07:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't think Wikipedia editors have a conflict of interest with regards to Wikipedia. Member of the Wikimedia Foundation probably do, but not the rest of us. It's like a student editing about the school they attend, or a religious person editing about their church. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Yeah. If the definition of Wikipedian is someone who edits Wikipedia, then the only edits will be made by Wikipedians. There may be issues with WP:ADVOCACY, but that can happen on pretty much any topic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

To put it into perspective, 115.188.72.131, around 100,000 different people edit on Wikipedia every month (including you and me). We are all the Editors of Wikipedia – see also Crowdsourcing. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.7.95.48 (talk) 18:11, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, How can I find the reliable source of Adam West, please?! Most of them have already been used? Televisionbuff831G (talk) 02:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

There are several Adam Wests, Televisionbuff831G; but your username suggests the Batman Adam West. If you qualify to use the Wikipedia Library, try using it; if you don't, work on some other articles until you do qualify. -- Hoary (talk) 03:32, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

In order for me, not to be banned from using Wikipedia, the best I can do is to create my blog, and go from there. That's where I can do a biography of Adam West. This is very hard. 2600:1700:6A10:96B0:51D4:10F0:83CC:318C (talk) 03:37, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Blogs are not typically considered a “reliable source” except in some very specific situations. If you create your own blog, the cite that, it would definitely be original research, a real no-no. — TadgStirkland⁴⁰¹ (Tadg^Talk) 18:14, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi,

Where is the archive for Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy?

Thanks, JohnRussell (talk) 18:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I've just had quite a look around there, and I can't find one. My guess would be that as a "speedy" process it is not archived, the same way we do not archive speedy deletion nominations. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:23, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I am new to using Wikipedia, despite this account being 4 months old because I was inactive and decided to use my account again. I like to edit my user page: user page by adding more templates. What are some great templates I can use because I am curios on how Wikipedia works. NicePrettyFlower (talk) 18:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

While noting that the main purpose of this project is to develop and maintain encyclopedia articles, Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries may be what you are looking for. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:25, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

How come when people make accounts they aren't immediately on the search page. And, when they hover over their name, it doesn't show. 1 love nations (talk) 22:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi 1 love nations. It's not clear what you mean by search page. If you provide a specific example of the problem you're experiencing, someone might be able to help you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:36, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I meant that you would search yourself and find you but, that doesn't happen do you know why? 1 love nations (talk) 03:03, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I think he means the Wikipedia search bar Ned1a Wanna talk? 15:09, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Do you mean you are looking for your name on Wikipedia after creating an account when you use the search page? Tesleemah (talk) 07:04, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes I do 1 love nations (talk) 15:35, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

In that situation put User:1 love nations or put a user filter. Ned1a Wanna talk? 15:37, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

If you're searching for User:1 love nations, that won't show in the search results because you've not yet created a user page. If you search for User talk: 1 love nations, you'll get a result as that page exists. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:38, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Ok 1 love nations (talk) 22:40, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I just visited the Summary History for Music for the Requiem Mass to correct a link and didn't realize I had set off such a reaction from an unregistered user. I personally felt that their edits were unnecessary, not an improvement, and in some cases, lessened the content: [21], [22]. I reverted with a Summary stating: "Not an improvement. No RS provided. Out of context." It was met with: F*CK OFF, and Maine Artists - is this another page you think you OWN ??? It's a shit page anyway and needs a lot of work, with or without my help. You and your ilk really need to be identified and BANNED permanently from Wikipedia editing." I still do feel that this user's edits are unproductive or non-contributing (and in some instances: incorrect): [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Music_for_the_Requiem_Mass&diff=prev&oldid=1230533027. I do not wish to revert or edit back for fear of further eruption. I have never encountered this user before and think that this must just be a pattern that they have experienced with other editors on WP. Thoughts? Maineartists (talk) 15:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Maineartists. All editors (even unregistered accounts) are expected to follow WP:CIVIL as best as they can, but sometimes people don't. Perhaps they're just having a bad day or perhaps they just don't care. Either way, you can pursue this further at one of the administrator noticeboards if you want, or you can put in your rear view mirror for now and hope that's the end of it. Either way, if you feel the edits that were made were not in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you can revert them or start a discussion about them on the article's talk page; in this case, the latter might be a better approach to avoid edit warring. Anyway, edit summaries (good or bad) aren't a substitute for talk page discussion when it comes to content disagreements among editors; you can't force the other person to participate, but they can't ignore a consensus established in such a way. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I've added a user warning to the IP account's user talk page. I'm not an administrator, but anyone can add a user warning if they feel one is warranted. How the account responds to that will probably provide an indication on what to do next. If they continue to attack and insult you, you can seek assistance at WP:ANI if you like; however, you might want to look at WP:ANI advice before doing so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Marchjuly. I appreciate it. Maineartists (talk) 00:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

My bad for not noticing that the edit in question was made five months ago; however, for future reference, there's generally no point in I or anyone else adding a user warning or seeking administrator involvement with respect to something like this so far after the fact, especially when the account in question hasn't edited since then. I suggest you just ignore this and continue to try to improve the article in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines. If the IP comes back and repeats the behavior, deal with it then. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Maineartists, there are various comments that I could make, but perhaps first among them should be that the pair of edits you point to -- plus another that told you to "fu#k off" [such coyness in spelling!] -- were made five months ago. If an IP number behaved obnoxiously months previously but doesn't seem (even with a different number) to have reappeared thereafter, I'd just ignore the behavior. Secondly, you say: "I do not wish to revert or edit back for fear of further eruption." I suppose that on occasion I refrain from editing to improve an article because I'm pretty sure there'll be repercussions that, however wrongheaded, will waste my time. But I have no fear of eruptions. It's the erupters who tend to injure themselves, swiftly and grievously. -- Hoary (talk) 02:11, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary This is extremely helpful. Thanks for taking the time to answer from a personal level. I appreciate it. Best. Maineartists (talk) 14:37, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Please help Harry-Shaun (talk) 02:04, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I've left a welcome template on your talk page with various links to helpful pages for newcomers. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 02:12, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I wrote a draft of a page, and it was rejected. I wondered if anyone could give me more feedback on my sources. I thought that they were pretty good! Specifically, I included a Wall Street Journal and a Forbes article that were about the subject.

Can anyone give me more information on what I can do better?

Here is the draft of the page: Draft:Impel

Thank you. LilyXChloe (talk) 21:29, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

LilyXChloe Hello. Can you describe your relationship with the company? You claim that you personally created the company logo and personally own the copyright to it. Policy requires you to disclose a connection(WP:COI) and the Terms of Use require disclosure if you are an employee or otherwise compensated by the company. 331dot (talk) 21:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

To clarify (as someone who had no involvement with this article's rejection), the "Forbes article" (incorrectly cited as being written by someone named 'Forbes Georgia' when that's simply the publication name) is actually just a press release disguised as Forbes native content. This WSJ article seems like it reasonably contributes to notability but cannot substantiate it on its own, while this one seems to get its information from a press release and likely just falls under WP:CORPTRIV. Just my two cents, but pinging SafariScribe to apprise them of this discussion. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 21:43, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

The draft just summarizes the routine business activities of the company; not significant coverage in independent reliable sources that shows what sources say makes the company notable as Wikipedia defines it. 331dot (talk) 21:44, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

It was Declined, which is less severe than "Rejected". David notMD (talk) 03:32, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

How to create archive 1? UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 18:49, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I could not find the instructions anywhere,all i could find applies to AFTER something got archived already UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 18:52, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

See the one-step instructions at Help:Archiving (plain and simple). Dan Bloch (talk) 18:59, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

well,I would not like auto archives,i would very much preffer for me to select myself what gets archived on my talk page UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 19:01, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

See Help:Archiving a talk page#Semi-automated cut and paste procedure. Dan Bloch (talk) 19:22, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Elli/OneClickArchiver is very easy to use. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 19:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@UnsungHistory The script linked by Just Step Sideways works well. It will add "|Archive" buttons to each section of a talk page. When your "/Archive 1" page starts to get full, you'll need to add Template:Archive basics to your talk page. The script/button will also work on any page archived by User:lowercase sigmabot III (which I think includes all the noticeboards). Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Maybe too specific to ask for the Teahouse, but I'm wondering if there's any precedent for mass-deleting redirects that shouldn't exist, even if they are probable. There's a norm with taxa articles that they should remain redlinks instead of redirects so that 1) the parent taxa can easily wikilink all of them, and 2) any interested editor can easily determine which of these don't yet have articles. Our template for this specific kind of redirect even reads "Note that the practice of creating redirects from species names that could be articles is strongly discouraged." I'm looking at the article List of Chlaenius species, and I have no idea what to do here. Most of the links are blue, but these overwhelmingly lead back to Chlaenius, a few lead back to List of Chlaenius species, and seemingly only one actually leads to an article. Usually when there are one or two of these, I just create the articles, but there are literally hundreds of them. Is there any easy way to mass-delete these so they can properly function as redlinks? TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 20:26, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

This should be discussed at the Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion or at the WP:Village pump. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 05:12, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Forgot to ping, @TheTechnician27 Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 05:12, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I know an account known as @BigMac, which is currently a McDonalds restaurant burger. The Wikipedia terms of service and the rules say that advertising users are not allowed and should be blocked, like accounts like @Rationalwiki. Am I allowed to block the user? Karrenswates (talk) 07:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

User "BigMac" last edited 19 years ago. Is this user really worth our attention? -- Hoary (talk) 07:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Also, only WP:ADMINs can block users. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

If you were an admin(istrator), then you might be allowed to do it but you would not normally do it. User BigMac does not seem to pose a risk of doing anything wrong, and blocks are preventative, not punitive. -- Hoary (talk) 07:37, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Karrenswates, there is no account that I can detect, blocked or unblocked, called User: Rationalwiki, even though that is a website well known among skeptics. Why use that particular example, which is evidence of nothing? The hamburger account has not edited since before many college sophomores were born, and has never once edited to promote the big burger chain. Do you really think that investigating this ancient account is a good use of volunteer time? Cullen328 (talk) 08:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Also, 'Bigmac' is a character in a popular series of children's books. Perhaps the account was named after him: naming accounts after fictional characters is quite common. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.7.95.48 (talk) 21:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I went into @BigMacs account, and according to the account, @BigMac was born in a McDonalds restaurant. Karrenswates (talk) 07:33, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi I submitted content to publish an article about my page. It was neutral, describing my biography. But its rejected. How can a person publish his article? Ashutosh Kapoor (talk) 09:38, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Ashutosh Kapoor, no, your deleted draft was not neutral. It was overtly self-promotional, not at all neutral, and very poorly referenced. Please be aware that self-promotional editing is strictly forbidden on Wikipedia. Try social media sites instead. Cullen328 (talk) 09:48, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Ashutosh Kapoor Wikipedia is not a place to post your resume or otherwise tell about yourself; please see the autobiography policy. You also edited your user page, which is not article space, but a place for you to tell about yourself as a Wikipedia editor or user only(not anything and everything about yourself). 331dot (talk) 09:50, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

My draft for Woven Finance was declined, please i need help Emmysimple (talk) 10:35, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Emmysimple. What do you specifically need help with? All the information you need is in the decline notice at Draft:Woven Finance. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:40, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

this is the report, what do i need to do please. this is my first time posting Emmysimple (talk) 11:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Emmysimple Are you affiliated with or associated with Woven Finance in some way?

You need to find independent reliable sources that offer significant coverage of this company and describe how it is a notable company as Wikipedia defines one. These sources should not be the reporting of routine business activities, press releases, staff interviews, or the like. Ideally you should have such sources in hand before attempting to write a draft, see WP:BACKWARD.

We usually advise newer users to not dive right in to creating new articles- the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia. It's best to first gain experience and knowledge by editing existing articles, to help learn how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. I might suggest using the new user tutorial as well. 331dot (talk) 11:12, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I want to create a bot in Wikipedia but i need assistance and help. Can you please explain how to make one? Thanks. Karrenswates (talk) 07:36, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Karrenswates. Unsurprisingly, the shortcut WP:BOT takes you to Wikipedia:Bots, which includes a section called "How to create a bot". Read that entire page, paying close attention to that section. Cullen328 (talk) 08:37, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

What do you want a bot to do that is not already done by existing bots? David notMD (talk) 12:18, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

When I try to edit articles using the UI even though there is something that says this article is bad for X, Y, and Z, I see that other users have already fixed the problems on the articles. How do I make good edits when there are no more edits to make? Wikihelper59 (talk) 17:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Wikihelper59, the Wikipedia:Task Center has a list of articles needing different edits. I believe you are intending to "Copy-Edit" to help improve articles. There are resources to help you there. Have fun! CF-501 Falcon (talk) 18:25, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Wikihelper59 Citation hunting is always a good way to find articles to edit, that and it'll help you learn how to make citations properly. There's also plenty of stubs out there, just waiting for someone such as yourself to improve them. I always find it useful to go through Wikiprojects like Military History or Videogames, looking at their stub class articles. You can find those here: Category:Stub-Class military history articles Category:Stub-Class video game articles.

If you're so inclined, WikiProject Military History actually has lists of articles that need specific improvements, so you really can fill your boots if you know where to look. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 19:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Wow thanks! I appreciate having so many places to start Wikihelper59 (talk) 14:16, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi everyone! I’m looking for a new photo for Oliver Stark, the photo on the page was taken in 2011 and not very accurate of his current appearance. I am struggling to find a photo that is allowed to be posted on the Wikicommons, could anyone help me find one? TIA <3 Olivergrandeee (talk) 13:53, 11 November 2024 (UTC) Olivergrandeee (talk) 13:53, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Olivergrandeee: Your best bet would be to either meet Stark and take one yourself; or contact his agent and ask them to release a suitable image under an open licence (you may include a link to WP:A picture of you). Note that permission to use an image "on Wikipedia" is not sufficient). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:17, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Olivergrandeee Interestingly, the image currently in the article, File:Oliver stark14.jpg, has a tag from the c:COM:VRT folk saying that it was copyright of Stark himself, which means he must have been in touch with them to agree its being licensed. Hence he may be amenable to providing another photo. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:05, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I was reading the article for the Scots song "Cam Ye o'er frae France", and felt as though the way the meaning of the song was written was inefficient as well as sometimes incorrect. I was hoping to change the formatting significantly, and was wondering if there was any permissions or the like I needed to do this. I am a new editor but its not an important page by any means (the last time the talk page was used was in 2014). Any tips/info would be greatly appreciated. RazorPantherz (talk) 15:47, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@RazorPantherz We encourage all editors to be bold at making changes, bearing in mind that subsequently they may need to discuss their edit if reverted. That's the process described at WP:BRD. The main thing you need to watch out for is that you don't engage in original research. Any change you make beyond simple formatting, needs to be backed up by reliable, published sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

my topic i am trying to make an draft about is lacking sources, there are indeed sources, such as the oficial IBM website, but they do not directly reference it, just site technologies it includes TheABCDEL (talk) 16:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@TheABCDEL, please read Wikipedia:NotSource. You did not find external sources referring to the device anywhere in Draft:IBM 003. Drdr150 (talk) 16:35, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi! I'd like some advice on grammar if possible.

As background, I'm mainly doing typo correction but also ventured into very basic copyediting on a couple of articles to get more experience.

I recently edited a couple of paragraphs on Yukio Mishima & was watching for feedback to see if I'd misunderstood anything, and there have been some corrections that I've taken on board. There is one I'm having trouble with, however.

My use of the word "whilst" was removed an "extreme Britishism" - it's only a few diffs down in the history, but let me know if you need a direct link.

I've been checking the MOS for guidance but had trouble finding much beyond British/American spelling differences. I'm totally fine & understand how that side of things works, but I'd like to know how to approach differences in grammar so I don't make the same mistake again. Do you have a link to the relevant part of the MOS or any advice on how to approach this in future?

Many thanks for your help! Blue-Sonnet (talk) 00:28, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Generally lean toward simpler language. "While" means the same thing and is more common. There's WP:POETIC and Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Contested vocabulary, but neither of these go into depth. If you're asking about language variants in general, the rule is just to stick with whatever's currently used in that specific article. I'll say that calling something an "extreme Britishism" seems a little prejudiced, but it can probably just be ignored. Thanks for your copyediting work! As someone who makes more than a few mistakes when writing, it's incredibly helpful. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien Thank you for that, I was thinking it was because the term was a little too flowery, but the reference to it being "extreme" made me panic that I'd violated some specific rule! "While" would work better in light of Wikipedia:POETIC so I think I'll stick to using that in future, thanks again! Blue-Sonnet (talk) 16:48, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm a 70+ year old Brit, and the use of "whilst" strikes me as archaic. Maybe it's current in some other English-speaking nation? Maproom (talk) 16:50, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

This article has been removed and I'm looking for help to get it published successfully. I have removed all peacock words and think the tone is appropriately encylopedic. I've had some issues with references, too, but am doing tutorials to learn how to fix those problems. Here is the link: Draft:Mary Rutan Health

Thank you,

Stella Worth Stella Worth (talk) 20:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Stella Worth, this is getting better, the tone has improved a lot. Part of the trouble, though, is that you have some promotional content - even if you just give the bare facts for some of this, it's not really encyclopedic. Picture it like this: many articles submitted to Wikipedia are effectively never substantially edited again after their creation. What in this article would still be useful in ten years? -- asilvering (talk) 20:22, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Stella Worth, it's unclear what the subject of Draft:Mary Rutan Health is meant to be. Is it the hospital? Or the health cnter? Or the nfp? Maproom (talk)

Do the multiple reliable sources for being rated C-class (see Wikipedia:Content assessment) have to be cited inline, or can they be listed in a general references section (i.e. the article is tagged with a {{inline}} tag)? Mrfoogles (talk) 18:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

For context, the article I was trying to rate when I thought of this was Differential optical absorption spectroscopy, although I've now put it as Start because it only really has one subsection. I've run into this a couple times, though. Mrfoogles (talk) 18:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I would class that as start for the same reason. As for C-class, some wikiprojects care more than others, and most don't really care much, so in general you're free to go by vibes. Typically I'd say that B-class is what requires inline citations and C-class doesn't, but it's worth keeping WP:MINREF in mind - we mostly don't require inline citations anywhere. Even in Good Articles, strictly speaking. (Though most reviewers will be pickier.) -- asilvering (talk) 20:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

"Likely to be challenged" is kind of a nightmare of a criteria, though -- almost no statements are ever challenged in obscure articles, while essentially any statement made on the United States page must have at least 2-3 citations, in practice. Mrfoogles (talk) 21:13, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

you're telling me. -- asilvering (talk) 21:29, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I have been doing suggested edits on Wikipedia and many articles say "This article contains wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information". I don't understand where in the world does this article contains this subject because they haven't help me get started to this platform. So I need more understanding about this. NicePrettyFlower (talk) 22:20, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@NicePrettyFlower: That message is displayed by {{peacock}}, one of many cleanup templates. The subject of an article is just whatever that article describes. For example, the subject of the article Pennsylvania is the US state of Pennsylvania. Does that answer your question? jlwoodwa (talk) 00:04, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for making a good example. NicePrettyFlower (talk) 00:35, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello~~~ I propose merging [[User:Wuwenhao19960507/sandbox]] into Unemployment in China. The edit history of this article is significant due to its specific time points, which are very important to me, so I wish to retain it. This is my first time editing Wikipedia, and while I understand some of the rules, I'm not fully familiar with the process. Hence, I'm requesting assistance from an administrator to move the content properly. If there are any issues with formatting or content, please let me know and I will promptly make the necessary adjustments. Thank you for your help! ~~~~ Wuwenhao19960507 (talk) 04:59, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Wuwenhao19960507 Thank you for wanting to improve the article. The content in your sandbox seems to me to be well-sourced and comprehensive. If I were you, I would copy/paste each section of your sandbox one-at-a-time into the existing article, using the source editor and placing each section where you judge it best fits. An admin is not needed as the existing article is open to editing. The existing edit history of the article will be retained: your additions will then appear as new entries. As usual, if anyone reverts part of your new content, you need to discuss that on the Talk Page of the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate your suggestion and will follow your advice accordingly. Wuwenhao19960507 (talk) 00:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

that's what I want to do, this is related to the 2024 US presidential election results Theprez11ue (talk) 03:02, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

If you care to make a level-headed, well-informed, persuasively referenced objection to an article, you're free to do so on that article's talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 03:06, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I just finished working on Costa da Mina and for some reason two of the three images that I've used to illustrate the article don't appear while viewing the article, but they do when I'm editing in the visual editor. Does anyone know what may be causing this? I don't believe I've ever encountered this issue. Thank you! BaduFerreira (talk) 19:13, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

BaduFerreira I restored the two images by removing the alternative name of Elmina Castle. Possible that {{ }} inside a file description 'broke' the image. David notMD (talk) 20:05, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

See |cat=no at Template:Lang#Syntax and usage. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@BaduFerreira: I have used |cat=no when {{lang}} is used in link text.[29] PrimeHunter (talk) 01:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

How interesting, I've never noticed that template field. Thank you for the help to the both of you. All the best BaduFerreira (talk) 03:27, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

idk Emirates380 boeing (talk) 06:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@Emirates380 boeing: I'm not sure what you mean by 'Fala', but if you want to discuss the reasons why the page User:Emirates380 boeing has been deleted, you may want to read the message User:Hey man im josh has left at your Talk page first:

User talk:Emirates380 boeing#Speedy deletion nomination of User:Emirates380 boeing.

Also, please be sure to read detailed rules linked there (′section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion′ and ′Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service′). --CiaPan (talk) 07:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

A few weeks ago I was editing the article about Redout and I added a description of the plot and a description of the game modes. I did a similar thing with the ship classes for the article about Wipeout 2048. Aside from the fan wikis, there isn't much information about these kinds of things. Do my edits count as original research, since I basically paraphrased the in-game descriptions? ApteryxRainWing (talk) 12:46, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

My interpretation is that this would be similar to the Plot section in an article about a novel (for example) where the text of the novel serves as the source, which the editor (you) rightly summarises and paraphrases. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction in general, and check out the articles listed at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Video games. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.7.95.48 (talk) 18:14, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Fortunately, video games is one of the search domains for which the {{find sources}} template is tailored. For example, see

• Find video game sources: "Redout" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

This should help generate a lot of sources you can then use to expand your article. Mathglot (talk) 08:01, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

The title is self explanatory: For example: 𒆳𒀭𒊹𒆠. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 02:26, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

RedactedHumanoid, if they're salted I imagine that this is because they (A) have been found to appeal to certain trolls and (B) don't seem to have any encyclopedic use. -- Hoary (talk) 04:37, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

So titles that contain characters that aren't in the BMP don't have encyclopaedic value, or am I getting that wrong? RedactedHumanoid (talk) 05:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

It is more to stop trolls. If you wish to create an encyclopedic article that uses a salted title that doesn't not touch on technical restrictions, have a draft ready either in your sandbox or draftspace and request a move accordingly. – robertsky (talk) 05:21, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I see. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 05:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Unusual characters may be accidents and not vandalism. In either case, it probably shouldn't be in a page title. Administrators can still create meaningful titles on request. By the way, it's called blacklisted, not salted which is protection against a single specific title. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:41, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

right column "labels" info does not currently contain all the entities in the narrative. had multiple failures trying to report directly to Volunteer Response Team 2603:8000:BE00:AAE8:2912:4952:62BE:ED35 (talk) 15:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

IP editor. The c:Commons:Volunteer Response Team are people who sort out copyright issues on Wikimedia Commons, not those who respond to edit requests on en:Wikipedia. You can either edit the article Boney James yourself or make an edit request on its Talk Page. You may find the Category:Boney James albums helpful in listing his main albums, all of which have individual articles here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:48, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi gang, first time caller. Some recent edits to Paul Williams (comedian) have added a section for a game between friends he reportedly created and mentioned on an episode of a podcast.

Personally, I don’t feel this information has any encyclopedic value - it seems like a casual podcast anecdote, the punchline to which has also been included in the text. But that’s just my opinion. I can’t really find any policies this inclusion is actually violating. It’s uncited, sure, but that’s easily resolved. Maybe WP:NOTDIARY?

Is there anything I’m missing, or is this just a case where the content of Wikipedia isn’t at my personal discretion? Geesi (talk) 14:28, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Looks to me like it should be removed per WP:UNDUE, also it's currently not cited to any sources. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I did see that one, though my interpretation was that it specifically referred to giving undue weight to viewpoints. I do see now the mention of aspects, though it isn’t really elaborated on or defined in the rest of the policy.

I feel I should be looking for some sort of “Wikipedia is not exhaustive, not everything someone says or does is automatically notable for inclusion, don’t make a mountain out of a molehill, etc” policy, though I recognise notability guidelines refer to the articles themselves and not the content within.

I’ll still hold off for now, but thanks for your take! Geesi (talk) 15:12, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Maybe you're looking for WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:36, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I saw that one too. It sort of applies, but seemingly isn’t used in the context of BLP, and more guides away from unnecessary lists or data. I even thought about WP:NOTPLOT within that, but I don’t think such a creation really qualifies as creative work.

I’m pretty sure I’m massively overthinking this. Thanks for your input as well. Geesi (talk) 15:55, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I made the classic Wikipedian move of citing UNDUE when I really mean WP:MINORASPECT, the adjacent part of the NPOV policy that deals with details/aspects as opposed to viewpoints. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Ah, that fits perfectly! I’ll admit I glossed over the balance section as I naively assumed it was all about balancing viewpoints. Unfortunately another user has jumped on the edit, but thanks very much for your time! ☕️ Geesi (talk) 17:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I would appreciate seeing actual examples of hatnotes using About, For and Other uses, especially examples in which the reader is referred to a disambiguation page. I'm having trouble implementing the general usage instructions in the template pages for these. Johsebb (talk) 19:32, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

You can do this by going to the appropriate template page e.g. Template:About and clicking on "What links here" in the left hand menu column. See for example Alpha. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Is it possible to edit an existing es.wikipedia if I am logged in on canadian wikipedia? I just want to add a photo to an existing biographical article. I had assumed they are all one gigantic wiki, but maybe I'm wrong? EarthMother52 (talk) 16:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@EarthMother52 You global contribution history shows only this edit. Accounts are indeed global, so you should be able to use the same logon to edit on other-language versions. Note that each has its own policies, so those for es.Wikipedia will differ from ours. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:53, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, EarthMother52. There is no such thing as the Canadian Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is for all English language speakers worldwide. Cullen328 (talk) 17:33, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Basically I wanted to add a photo to a wiki page devoted to a relation of mine but first of all I am only able to view it on es.wikipedia translated into English. It does not even appear in a search of English language wiki. So when I go to the page via es.wikipedia it doesn't recognize that I am signed in. On top of that issue I don't see any "upload photo" option anywhere. Sorry, I am brand new here. EarthMother52 (talk) 18:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello! There are a few things to consider here. Different language versions (English Wikipedia, Spanish Wikipedia, etc.) are independent communities which often have different policies, although you do share one account on all of them. Regarding photos, there are two ways to do it. You can upload them on Wikimedia Commons, which hosts freely licensed pictures that can be used on all Wikipedias. You can also upload them on one specific language version of Wikipedia under what is called "fair use", meaning the picture is copyrighted but an equivalent free picture cannot be created, which is very rare.

If you wish to upload a photo of someone you know, assuming you took it yourself and are okay with having it under a free license (meaning it can be reused, modified and commercialized while giving you proper attribution), you can upload it on Wikimedia Commons. However, editing the article directly is not recommended (on English Wikipedia, there are the conflict of interest guidelines, although I don't know if they are identical on Spanish Wikipedia). It is best to go on the article's talk page and put an edit request there, noting that you know the person and took the picture of them. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:45, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Why is removing the deletion tag from a page you created yourself wrong? Cyber the tiger (talk) 18:03, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

It's generally regarded as deceptive, @CyberTheTiger and goes against the spirit of consensus. If you disagree with the deletion, you should instead engage in the deletion discussion to explain why the page meets Wikipedia's notability and content guidelines. qcne (talk) 18:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

The exception would be deletion via a WP:PROD, where the page creator can certainly stop the proposed deletion and subsequently engage in a consensus-building discussion. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:30, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@CyberTheTiger,you do not own the page you created,you can object off course,providing a reason of why it should not be deleted ("I created it"will not be excepted),but removing the deletion tag is when a major consensus is met UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 19:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

•  Courtesy link: Blood vessel § Structure

i found out that Krogh’s dilemma that helped formulate the capillary recruitment hypothesis. is false and this video explains why i'm to lazy to edit wikipedia about it if anyone wants a crack at it feel free to do so. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgo7rm5Maqg Noaski5 (talk) 02:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

At Blood vessel, the original estimate by Krogh for the cumulative length of blood vessels in the human body is stated and referenced, followed by a revised much shorter estimate, also referenced. There is no need to consider a lengthy YouTube video as a reference. HOWEVER, at Blood vessel, the reference for Krogh is wrong and needs to be replaced. David notMD (talk) 08:42, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

You probably would be better off discussing this at Talk:Blood vessel since that's where you're likely going to find someone familiar with the subject matter. You could also be WP:BOLD and fix things yourself. Finally, stating you're to lazy to edit wikipedia about it when you're not too lazy to post about here at the Teahouse sort of rings hollow, don't you think? -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Youtube is not a reliable source but the specific channel you provided is, however it is in a nutshell, according to this essay (Wikipedia:Oversimplification)it is discouraged UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 19:55, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Where do you request a rollback (and not the permission to become a rollbacker) to someone who has the right? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 15:42, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, ExclusiveEditor, there is no such place. It would usually be preferable to instead simply revert whatever edit you're looking at yourself, with UNDO, Twinkle, or any of the other various tools available to non-rollbackers. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Would've been great if more groups were added to recently active groups. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 16:15, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

To clarify, rollback doesn't really allow you to do much you can't do without. In the vast majority of cases, you can revert edits in a few clicks (rather than a single click with rollback) to the same effect. The only case where rollback is needed is to revert large removals that happen to remove something on the spam blacklist, but it is usually better to review these by hand. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

The other editors who replied before me are pretty much right. Another use for rollback is if a user has done, let’s say, 50 very quick unconstructive edits to different articles, rollback is usually the best way to revert them all. Such users can be reported to WP:AIV and the blocking admin can deal with it. For other cases, Twinkle is enough. win8x (talking | spying) 20:17, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

In South Florida, there is a Census Designated Place called Biscayne Gardens. It is in Miami-Dade County and has around 40,000 residents. For whatever reason, both Wikipedia and Google Maps has this place as Golden Glades. This is a legacy error but now the Census Bureau has corrected the name, and the county government, and just about everyone else knows the area as Biscayne Gardens. (Biscayne Gardens Park, Biscayne Gardens Elementary School, Biscayne Gardens Chamber of Commerce, etc.)

I tried to edit the Golden Glades Wikipedia page and had some success, however, I could not figure out how to make Wikipedia land on a dedicated Biscayne Gardens page even though most of the references are corrected. Basically, there is no such place as Golden Glades, and if someone wants to look up Biscayne Gardens, there should be a page called Biscayne Gardens, and not be directed to Golden Glades.

Does the whole page need to be copied into a new page titled Biscayne Gardens, or does it have to be done over? Can the actual page name be changed?

Any help in this regard is greatly appreciated. I am a member of Biscayne Gardens Civic Association and a concerned citizen wanting uniformity and consistency as several important downstream end-user rely on this information.

Thank you very much! Any help is greatly appreciated! Golden Glades, Florida John.corina (talk) 13:48, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

 Done. I've moved the article over the redirect; now at Biscayne Gardens, Florida. Deor (talk) 16:08, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help! This is amazing. However, I see there are still references to Golden Glades in the article that should be Biscayne Gardens instead. For example, the label of the front page map shows Golden Glades and should of course be Biscayne Gardens. There is also a replacement needed in the Demographics section. The only exception being, just above "Geography" on the front page, it states, "It's also the location of the Biscayne Gardens Interchange..." That needs to be changed to the Golden Glades Interchange as that is what it is actually called and was really the source of the Census Designated Place name confusion. If you would be so kind and make these changes that would be great or if you think I can do it I will try! Thanks Again! John.corina (talk) 17:09, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@John.corina: I've made those three changes. If you see anything else that needs fixing, feel free to make the neccessary changes yourself. Deor (talk) 20:50, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi,

I have been working on an article draft

Draft:Curtis School - Wikipedia

Please provide feedback or help to improve it before i submit it Mangoflies (talk) 23:25, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

The best way to get feedback is to submit it- but I must say that it reads as a promotional brochure for the school. If you were to submit it now, it would be declined quickly. "Mission and values" is wholly unencyclopedic as it's just what the school says. A Wikipedia article should primarily summarize what independent reliable sources choose to say about the school. You only offer one independent source, which is far from establishing that the school is a notable organization. 331dot (talk) 00:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello 331dot

Would you like to help find reliable sources because there are quite a few out there Mangoflies (talk) 00:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Mangoflies, this board isn't for recruiting people to help with your draft - we're just here to help with how Wikipedia works, generally. You can find a list of known reliable (and unreliable) sources at WP:RSPSS, and plenty of information about what you're looking for in a source at WP:42. Happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 05:57, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I can't find reliable sources for you. If you want to write about this topic, you need to be the one to do the work. You have gone about this backwards; you wrote a text and are now looking for sources to support it- you should find the sources first and have them in hand before you begin writing. 331dot (talk) 09:32, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Mangoflies. Please note that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 22:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

There really isn’t anything to make a new article about because nothing is notable. Mangoflies (talk) 00:39, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Mangoflies: Don't worry, there are definitely reliable topics out there with no article about them. You can take a look at Wikipedia:Requested articles, but I find that list to not be the best for truly reliable topics. In my case, I like to look at articles about plant genuses and create an article about one of the species listed there—see Sonchus, for example. But you don't have to create articles—we have a plethora of other things that need to get done at the Task center. Cheers ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Relativity

Most of the stub articles are unreferenced junk that just needs to be deleted. Mangoflies (talk) 01:14, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Mangoflies: Not necessarily. There are lots of stub articles that could be improved to a much better quality. And, no, it doesn't necessarily mean that they need to be deleted, and most of the time it doesn't. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:20, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Relativity I had to put a stub up for deletion and many people were agreeing with me. There was no reliable source, or even a source at all, and nobody could find any.

I don't understand how a topic that was this un-notable even made it onto the platform Mangoflies (talk) 01:25, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

The issue is that a lot of these stubs were created 10-15 years ago when the bar was much lower. This leads to a dissonance between the standards back then and the standards of today. I hope this helps you to understand. NightWolf1223 <Howl at me•My hunts> 01:28, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, improving existing articles is often more productive than creating new ones. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:49, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien

all of the good juicy articles are already class A or event FA Mangoflies (talk) 01:50, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

The vast, vast majority of articles are not. "A class" isn't even really used outside of a few exceptions, so I get the impression that you haven't taken a very close look. Consider skimming the lists at WP:VA4 for some of the "good juicy" ones. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:53, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Mangoflies Have you come across this page yet: Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Assessment. If you click those links for the counts of stub or start class articles, it will take you to a huge list. Each Wikiproject has something like this. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:16, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello again, @Mangoflies. Wikipedia has tens of thousands, probably hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, of seriously bad articles which would not be accepted if they were submitted for review today.

Many of them should be deleted because their subjects simply don't meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Some of them should not be deleted because their subjects certainly are notable, but the current article does not cite the relevant sources. And there are many in between, whose subjects may or may not be notable.

Getting one of these up to an acceptable standard - or getting it deleted if it cannot be - will in my opinion add more value to Wikipedia that twenty editors who haven't yet learnt about topics such as notability, verifiability, reliable sources or neutral point of view all creating drafts and trying to get them accepted. It will certainly take up less time from reviewers and new page patrollers. ColinFine (talk) 23:05, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello everyone,

I’m working on a draft article for AlwaysBeSmile, a musician, which you can find here: Draft:AlwaysBeSmile. I would be very grateful if someone could take a look and offer any advice on improving it. Specifically, I’d like guidance on meeting notability standards and ensuring the article is well-formatted and ready for submission.

Since I'm editing on a mobile device, any tips for mobile or VisualEditor would also be very helpful. Thank you so much for your time and assistance!

Warm regards, AlwaysBeSmile AlwaysBeSmile (talk) 04:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @AlwaysBeSmile, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your submission looks like it is an WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY, which is allowed on Wikipedia but is generally avoided due to problems in providing a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view in your writing. I took a look at it and I can already see issues in verifiability due to lack of reliable sources. It can also be grounds for deletion under WP:SELFPROMO due to your username and the fact that an administrator can tell that it's you. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 05:02, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello AlwaysBeSmile. Everything stated in a Wikipedia article must be verified by a reliable reference. You can’t just state things that you know (for example: AlwaysBeSmile is a musician), you have to cite a newspaper or magazine article, or a reliable website that isn’t directly connected to AlwaysBeSmile that gives that information. I would suggest you read Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners. If you can’t find good reference it may be too soon for an article on the subject. Karenthewriter (talk) 05:36, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @AlwaysBeSmile, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please note that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

This tends to make it very very hard to write an acceptable article about yourself: even if you can find suitable independent sources, you then need to forget everything you know about yourself, and write a summary of what those sources say - even if you know they are wrong. (see WP:verifiability, not truth). This is difficulat for most people. ColinFine (talk) 23:10, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

They are famous, but they don't have a Wikipedia page so maybe we can do that. Rollingonthefloorwaackin (talk) 09:05, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Rollingonthefloorwaackin. Welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to try writing an article (not a wiki), please read WP:Your first article and follow those instructions. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:19, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Rollingonthefloorwaackin, and welcome to the Teahouse. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 23:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I keep forgetting the policy name here at WP when an editor argues: "Well, they do it over at [this] article - so we should be able to do it here on this page." The policy states: "Just because one article does it, doesn't mean you should." I just can't remember the WP:??. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 22:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Maineartists! Is it WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS? Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 22:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

That's it, Perfect4th! Thanks! Maineartists (talk) 23:28, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

WP:OTHERCONTENT could also apply in the case you've described above. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:23, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I want to create a new page, but I couldn't find how to create it. Can you help? Ahmetdese (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Creating a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia, and many people who dive right in as their first task as a new user end up disappointed and frustrated as things happen to work they spend hours on that they don't understand. I don't want you to feel bad- it is highly recommended that you first gain experience and knowledge as to how Wikipedia works by editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel as to how things operate and what is expected of article content. I would also suggest using the new user tutorial as well.

New accounts cannot directly create articles- if you want to dive right in despite this advice, you may use the Article Wizard to create and submit a draft. You should first read Your First Article, and gather independent reliable sources to summarize in an article. 331dot (talk) 20:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your information. Enjoy your work. Ahmetdese (talk) 20:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Ahmetdese You have created a draft at Draft:2024–25 TFF Second League, but it has minimal content and no references. David notMD (talk) 03:29, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

There is related content at TFF 2. Lig, with a link to an article about the 2007-08 season, which may serve as an example. David notMD (talk) 03:34, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

how to change the name of my drafts Ryecaliii (talk) 02:44, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Ryecaliii. In order to change the title of a page, you generally need to WP:MOVE the page; moreover, in order to move a page, you need to be WP:AUTOCONFIRMED. Since your account is still too new to be autoconfirmed, I've moved the draft you were working on in your user sandbox to Draft:Echinamoeba thermarum. In principle, drafts submitted to Wikipedia:Articles for creation belong in the draft namespace and most likely the same move would've been made by one of the AfC reviewers looking at newly submitted drafts. You can continue to work on improving your draft while it's awaiting review. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Ryecaliii, it was very nice for Marchjuly, who is a helpful editor, to move the draft for you. That being said, the title of a draft is by far the least important part of a draft, because the title is always going to be changed if the draft is accepted. Your draft looks very promising to me but I will leave the determination to an AFC reviewer. Cullen328 (talk) 03:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Just to update my earlier post Ryecaliii, your draft was reviewed and accepted by an AfC reviewer. The article can now be found at Echinamoeba thermarum. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:16, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I've seen that special page on Russian Wikipedia called "Global user account vanish request," and it might be some feature that could be hidden on other wikis. How does Global User Accounts vanish in CentralAuth, instead of being blocked or globally-locked but the entry is visible. I just want to know about that policy - 𓆩♡𓆪𝘚𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘢𓆩♡𓆪 ・ ︶꒦꒷ 💬・✏️ ꒷꒦︶ 08:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Sellena8053: see Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing. MKFI (talk) 08:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, okay, read the article and it's just user-requested vanishing in good faith. What about bad faith vandals that are requested by CheckUser, or in extreme cases, Arbitration Committee or WMF Office to redact the offending account from the public archives as a result of long-term abuse? - 𓆩♡𓆪𝘚𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘢𓆩♡𓆪 ・ ︶꒦꒷ 💬・✏️ ꒷꒦︶ 12:04, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@Sellena8053: I am not aware that can happen. Wikipedia:Oversighters can suppress individual edits, but this is different from account vanishing. Vanishing specifically does not remove edit history, it only renames who performed the edits. MKFI (talk) 12:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Doesanyone else see the malformed {{cite web}} located at the end of Draft:2007 Greensburg, Kansas, tornado? It looks like this:

• Our+%E2%80%9CPerfect+Storm%E2%80%9D&rft.date=2024-02&rft.aulast=Sweet&rft.aufirst=Mary&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fkcmh.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2024%2F02%2FGreensburg.pdf&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3ADraft%3A2007+Greensburg%2C+Kansas%2C+tornado" class="Z3988">

Not sure what's happening, it looks perfectly normal in the visual and source editors. Also seems to look fine on mobile. E_F⁵ 16:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Looks fine here (desktop view). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:47, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Looks fine (mobile Web view) Synonimany (talk) 13:52, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

On United States Virgin Islands, in the infobox, I don't know why for area, the km² comes first, but for population density, the sq mi comes first. 50.204.47.99 (talk) 02:38, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

You can ask at Template talk:Infobox political division. Cullen328 (talk) 02:57, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Possibly because area is given in both units whilst population density per sq.mi. only (so it has to be recomputed to 1/sq.km., and may be that's why that value is given as secondary)...?

|  area_sq_mi = 133.73
|  area_km2 = 346.4
| 
|  ...
| 
|  population_density_km2 =
|  population_density_sq_mi = 653.6

Just guessing. --CiaPan (talk) 12:02, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

How can I put sq mi first on both? I also want to do that on Guam. But Northern Mariana Islands has km² first. 50.204.47.99 (talk) 12:25, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Fixed by omitting area_km2 to get conversion from area_sq_mi with sq mi displayed first.[30] PrimeHunter (talk) 13:34, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Bravo! CiaPan (talk) 14:06, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

On my user page, Wikipedia suggests some edits for me but I've mostly gotten articles that are stubs or need more sources. I'm not particularly good at fixing either of those things, but I am really good at finding small grammar mistakes (such as mixing up "your" and "you're" or adding an apostrophe when pluralizing or bad capitalization) so is there a way to filter to articles that just need help with spelling, grammar, and the such? ApteryxRainWing (talk) 12:20, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@ApteryxRainWing Welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds as though you might like to join the Guild of Copy Editors. We always like to have WP:WIKIGNOMEs! Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@ApteryxRainWing: You might start with Category:Wikipedia articles with style issues by month, or similar categories. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:44, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

My favorite place to go for that would be the "Help Out" section of the WP:Community portal. Perception312 (talk) 15:19, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

If I come across sub-standard material, and see that it came from an editor who is now blocked due to lack of competence in the subject and undisclosed alt accounts, is it ok to lean in the direction of just deleting the material rather than trying to salvage it? Mikewem (talk) 01:38, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Mikewem, You would have to evaluate the article for notability before nominating for deletion, Most importantly you will need to do WP:BEFORE to be sure there are no sources outside the article to reflect their notability.

To cut the story short, while you may raise an eye brow on previous articles created by blocked account, you will need to evaluate critically and be more neutral in your judgement before nominating for deletion. You might go through WP:Notability to see if the subject meet up with the notability guideline. Tesleemah (talk) 02:31, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I didn’t want to be too specific because I’m getting really useful info from my generalization (thank you for this!), but in this case, it’s just one or two sentences that were added by a now-blocked user within a larger article that is perfectly notable. Mikewem (talk) 17:33, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Mikewem, if the editor was (under a different username) blocked at the time, then the material is the result of block evasion and should be deleted. If the editor wasn't, and the material was added to an existing article, then you can either (A) remove the material or (B) revert the article to the state it was in before the material was added. (So which, (A) or (B)? Well, how extensive were the dud additions/changes, and how extensive have been the subsequent worthwhile additions/changes (by other editors)?) -- Hoary (talk) 03:10, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Is the idea that dud contributions may possibly steer subsequent additions/changes by other editors? And so some judgement is required to determine the worthwhileness of iterations on a dud? In some cases the other editors’ iterations on a dud are worthwhile, but in some cases, iterations on a dud can be reasonably judged to be not worthwhile?

Thanks for helping dig into the nuance here, this is so helpful and I really appreciate it. Mikewem (talk) 17:37, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@Mikewem, in one of the areas I consider my own speciality, I keep coming across several editors (or maybe the same editor under different guises) from waaaay back, who are now banned. But that is not to say that everything they contributed was erroneous. In fact, quite the reverse; they added huge volumes of good material, sometimes well-sourced, and sometimes not so much. If we were to apply today's Wikipedia standards to everything they did back-in-the-day, Wikipedia would shrink to a quarter of its current size. I prefer, whenever possible, to assume good faith (WP:AGF), and rescue whatever they added, which often involves simply adding proper citations.

Wikipedia has recently lost a much valued editor with 100,000plus good edits to their name, after a dispute on core policy. Some editors might have lost their rag and started abusing everyone in sight, leading to a ban. As it happens in this case, the editor chose to retire themselves, and Wikipedia is a poorer place without them.

Of course, if you have come across someone who created an account on Monday, and starting deliberately damaging Wikipedia from Tuesday onwards, then maybe you are right to treat them differently.

WendlingCrusader (talk) 14:21, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so much, I found this breakdown really helpful Mikewem (talk) 17:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi all - I've drafted an article about Draft:Winifred Reuning. I figured that someone with a glacier named after them would be notable, however, most of my information is from obituaries. I'm not sure I should submit it to the AfC process. Would someone mind casting an eye over it & let me know if she is notable. There's not much more information that I can add to it. Blackballnz (talk) 07:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Blackballnz, it looks good to me; but I'm not a reviewer. One comment: the reference currently numbered 3 is to an issue of a journal. It should use the "cite journal" template, and include a page number, while still giving the url of the archived version. I'd do this myself, but I'm using a laptop right now and finding it awkward. Maproom (talk) 08:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Maproom, I will make that change to the reference. Blackballnz (talk) 08:24, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, Blackballnz, but it doesn't look good to me. Not yet, anyway. There are obituaries and obituaries; don't cite "Dignity Memorial". I'd expect to see her written up in newspapers; do you have access to any newspaper archives? Small point: I'm pretty sure she wasn't born to a prof emeritus or even a dean; rather she was born to somebody who later became both. Those points aside, what's in the draft is good; I do think though that the draft needs more evidence of (Wikipedia-defined) notability. -- Hoary (talk) 08:31, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@Blackballnz I checked The Wikipedia Library for Winifred Reuning but, unfortunately, all I could find was mentions of her (no details) as editor of that Antarctic Journal. Usually if someone has received write-ups in US newspapers the library would have something. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Why was a glacier named after her? (I haven't looked at your draft, so please excuse me)

I see a possible parallel with Enola Gay Tibbetts, who is primarily notable because her son was the Captain of the B-29 that dropped the first atomic bomb used in anger, on Hiroshima. A large portion of the world has heard of Enola Gay, not least because OMD wrote a song with that title, but it doesn't make her notable; the Enola Gay article is all about the aircraft and the mission.

If that helps, great; if not, never mind.

WendlingCrusader (talk) 14:38, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

WendlingCrusader, sorry to disagree, but there is absolutely no correlation between Enola Gay Tibbetts and this subject.

Why wouldn't this pass at the very least GNG? She received the National Science Foundation Award and was one of the first women to deploy to Antarctica. Plus: "From 1980 to 2005 she was editor of the Antarctic Journal of the United States, and her name appeared on every masthead from 1980 to its final issue in 2005." Not to mention the obvious: "The Reuning Glacier in Antarctica was named after her." I wouldn't call a tribute celebration in The Antarctican Society an "obituary". It is an RS that covered her career (posthumously). This is a good strong stub that I am confident others will contribute to as more sources are found. Maineartists (talk) 15:05, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks all, especially for looking in the Wikipedia Library (I don't have access quite yet). I can make some small changes and put it in AfC, but I can see that the response will depend on who looks at it. I don't think it's possible to make significant improvements at this stage, but more sources may be found over time. Blackballnz (talk) 18:38, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey! I'm currently working on the article for the roller coaster Green Lantern (Six Flags Great Adventure) and need some help with adding and changing info now that the coaster is officially defunct. Where would I go to get some help, and where can I go to get help for other articles (roller coaster related or not) for the future? Therguy10 (talk) 18:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to The Teahouse, you might find specific help here Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks. Theroadislong (talk) 18:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Catya Plate's page has been flagged for "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject." I am her personal assistant and trying to work on getting this unflagged. She had hired someone years ago to write it, I've reread it with the guidelines and don't see a reason for why it is flagged. Please advise us on how to go about this. Thank you very much. And the page is this: Catya Plate. Radhika48825 (talk) 19:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

You've already asked this question here: Wikipedia:Help Desk#Getting a page unflagged, please don't ask for support in multiple places. Amstrad00 (talk) 19:35, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Already asked at Talk:Catya Plate#Efforts to unflag the page; discussion appears to be ongoing. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:36, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

What are barnstorm and what do they do? TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 16:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

See WP:Barnstars. 130.74.59.192 (talk) 16:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Barnstars are Rewards for doing stuff here UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:24, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I just created a new musician Wiki page and its ready to be posted online. Having trouble with publishing it, even though all the changes have been saved and I hit the "Publish" button, it is still not coming up online. Is there something that I'm missing here? Thanks in advance. Dan Vadim Von (talk) 22:23, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

You have edited your user page, which is not article space and doesn't appear in search engines. I think you confused creating an article with creating an account. Did you intend to adopt the name of the person you edited about as your username? New accounts cannot directly create articles and need to use the Article Wizard to create and submit a draft. Your draft can be moved in to draft space if that's okay with you. 331dot (talk) 22:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I created this page about myself. Can I move the entire block of content into Article Wizard? How can I move it into draft space? Dan Vadim Von (talk) 22:43, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Your draft autobiography must be moved, either to your "sandbox" or to draft space. And a tip: remove the promotional junk ("legendary", "prestigious", etc). -- Hoary (talk) 22:35, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Adjusted the wording. How do I go about moving the content into either the sandbox or the draft space? Dan Vadim Von (talk) 22:44, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I will do so. One moment 331dot (talk) 22:45, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I have moved it to Draft:Dan Vadim Von. Your draft is completely unsourced and highly promotional. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell about themselves, please see the autobiography policy. Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability- like a notable musician. Most people have great difficulty doing that about themselves. 331dot (talk) 22:49, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

For help with sourcing, see Referencing for beginners. 331dot (talk) 22:50, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dan Vadim Von,It might be cache,refresh UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:28, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

While updating article, would it be wrong of me to take the information from website and make ChatGPT write an encyclopedic summary and paste it on Wiki, and then check and scrutinize it thoroughly as I would do with my own edits and publish it if I find no mistake, nothing wrong and no wrong interpretation? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:48, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

If no, then the case of '5% of new articles on Wikipedia are AI generated' would be slight less to worry about. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:50, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, if it's thoroughly scrutinized, it's not violating any wikipedia policy. But LLM text is often... crap. So ymmv. The other trouble is that LLMs can parrot copyrighted text without you realizing it, so check for that as well. All in all I think it will take you longer than simply writing the content yourself the first time. -- asilvering (talk) 20:31, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2024-10-19/Recent_research

For my tuppence-worth, it would be wrong to paste it into an actual Article, because this would then be present for a period in Article Space (with likely inaccuracies and hallucinated references) before you had checked everything in it, but it might be acceptable to paste it into a Draft and check it there. Even better might be to work on it on your own device, and transfer it to Wikipedia (as an Article or, preferably Draft for Submission) only after you have checked and copy-edited everything.

Others may disagree. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.7.95.48 (talk) 18:23, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

"Paste, check, publish" means it won't hit mainspace before it's checked. jlwoodwa (talk) 21:37, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Another problem is that it is well known that LLMs rely on Wikipedia as a source, and thus including an LLM summary may mean including a Wikipedia summary, which my trigger WP:CIRCULAR issues as well as WP:WINARS. Mathglot (talk) 07:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot: Yeah, so I mentioned that I am intending to take the information from a reliable external source and just use LLM to summarize it. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 13:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Why do that when you can just summarize the source in your own words? Your English seems fine. Using LLM seems to be not only a waste of time for Wikipedia, but also a waste of time for you. You could go to whatever trouble it takes to add such a summary to the article, only to have it completely reworded or removed altogether by the very next person who edits the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:42, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor,I suggest no UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:31, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I want to make a article about Fire colors but idk how to make refrecnes 1,250,261,161a (talk) 14:54, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Please see Help:Referencing for beginners. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:12, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@1,250,261,161a You may not need to make an article from scratch, which is in any case a difficult task for a newcomer. You could add well-referenced extra information to articles like Fire and Colored fire. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:52, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Give more context please,what do you mean by "good references" UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I could not find a template for Cult groups, so I started creating one in my sandbox. Then I discovered it HAD existed at one point, but was moved to Template:New Religious Movements. There's a 12 year old archived discussion in which they decided to perform this move. To me, the conflation of Cults with New Religious movements is a ridiculous error, and perhaps libelous, as not all cults are specifically New Religious in nature (example the Manson Family). Having The Branch Dividians in the same template as the Latter Day Saints is ludicrous. Wikipedia instructs to use the most common term for titles and the term Cult is extremely common in reliable sources. So it seems to me we have a big missing page in Wikipedia in this regard. I'm looking for thoughts on how we can rememdy this. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 19:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

You might try asking at WT:NRM for interested editors. -- asilvering (talk) 20:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Iggy pop goes the weasel My issue is this would be very duplicative of the NRM (already massive) one and a term that is far, far more likely to result in edit wars. The term is also extremely contentious without a great definition - what exactly a “cult” is varies so widely from source to source that creating a consistent navbox from any one of them is a nightmare. What will be the basis for inclusion? Any group that has been called a cult ever? Or are we going to OR our way into deciding which ones are Real Cults? Seems bad. I agree with you about the Manson family but honestly sometimes the less strictly religious groups are still classified as NRMs, like Landmark Worldwide. And I don’t think it’s odd with the Mormons - plenty of people would edit war over including them in any prospective cult navbox so I don’t think that would solve the problem. They’re also often accused of being a cult. See why the cult leader category was just deleted. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:25, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

The current solution is factually lacking and misleading... I read the old discussion from 2012. We have a responsibility to be complete and factually accurate. As Wikipedia is built upon reliable secondary sources all we really need are reliable secondary sources that refer to a group as a Cult. It's an error to conflate all of it under the banner of Religion, particularly when we're forced to leave major Cults out of the existing template: For example we have NXIVM, a major recent example of a non-religious Cult referred to by reliable sources as a Cult. I cannot understand why there's so much reluctance to use a template that lists Cults and related topics when the articles on Cults already refer to them as Cults. Wikipedia also instructs us to use the most common term for things and while everyone knows the word Cult and it appears in reliable sources with great frequency, for more than "New Religious Movement". New Religious Movement simply does not equate to Cult and vice versa. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 16:44, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@Iggy pop goes the weasel There are plenty of secondary sources that refer to Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, or any religion at all, as cults. So is the scope going to be any group that has ever been described as one? What is the inclusion criteria? And if not, what is the definition? We don't have a List of cults, or List of groups described as cults, for the same reason, because there was no agreement on what constitutes one. A navbox based purely on a contentious label is bad. And no, under some definitions they are more or less one-to-one, Landmark Worldwide is non religious and is often called a cult, but has also been described as an NRM. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:51, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@Iggy pop goes the weasel,this should be brought up at the Village pump UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:37, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

how do i become a mod here? TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 16:41, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@TheSmartWikiOne You don't, because there are none. We have administrators who go through a rigorous scrutiny process before being accepted by the community. The process is described at WP:RFA. Newcomers like you are would be extremely unlikely to be accepted in that role, nor would you need to be an admin to help add content or improve the encyclopaedia in other ways. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:05, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

You spend months if not years building up a good edit history, demonstrating your temperment and good understanding of Wikipedia policies, as well as a need for the tool set(which is all being a "mod" or admin is, just extra tools, it conveys no additional authority or status). A formal requirement is that you be at a minimum extended-confirmed(account is 30 days old with 500 edits or more). Please see WP:RFA for more information. There is also an election process(which has just concluded its first cycle) but the requirements are the same.

My advice is to simply focus on being a good editor and less on obtaining the admin toolset; if you develop a need for the tools, other editors will see this and consider nominating you. If you were to nominate yourself, it would be closed quickly as you are now. 331dot (talk) 17:05, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@TheSmartWikiOne,what do you mean a "mod"?give more context UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:43, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I assume they mean moderator as in Internet forum#Moderators. It's similar to Wikipedia administrators. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Galaxy111 (talk) 18:05, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Take a look at Wikipedia:MOS#Quotation_marks. Amstrad00 (talk) 18:10, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Didn't see that section, thank you! Galaxy111 (talk) 21:30, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Why is editing other users' talk page comments inappropiate? Cyber the tiger (talk) 17:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Usually, editing other's comments can be seen as inappropriate because it's almost "bending what someone says", and when someone changed what someone else says, that comment may take on a different meaning. E_F⁵ 17:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@CyberTheTiger You will find more information at WP:OTHERSCOMMENTS Shantavira|^{feed me} 20:33, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@CyberTheTiger: Perhaps if you provide an example of when you think it should be OK for someone to edit another's comment, it might be easier to answer your question in a more specific way. For example, your original post contains a spelling error and many people would see "correcting" that error as something that should and needs to be done; Wikipedia, however, doesn't hold talk page posts to the same publishing standards as it does article content and recommends not making such editorial changes because doing so can create more negatives than positives. For sure, some might not care and actually welcome such corrections, but others might feel offended by them because it makes them feel as if their posts are being graded in some way. So, Wikipedia tells us to live with such mistakes as best as we can and seek clarification when they somehow might affect the meaning of the post. Generally, Wikipedia only suggests we edit or remove posts made by others when they're serious policy issues involved (like a personal attack against another editor, posting of someone's personal information, copyright violations, etc.) or perhaps to fix a formatting or syntax error that's impacting the page as a whole or how the post is being displayed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:51, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@CyberTheTiger,I have done so before,removing personal attacks,but,normally,no,and also adding a comment is considered an edit,and that is exactly what talk pages are for and that is completely acceptable, UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:34, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

i was talking about editing someone else's comment that they already posted Cyber the tiger (talk) 21:36, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@CyberTheTiger please provide link to comment,that might be able to provide more context UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 21:45, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I am trying to update the map for the United States Climate Alliance which seriously needs a new version with all the states correctly highlighted with better colors as well. I already have a new SVG file for it, but I cannot overwrite the file.

It is also used in multiple other wikis, and I wonder how I can go about updating the map. Should I upload a new file and replace it in all of the wikis? How would that work? BrakeCoach (talk) 17:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I suggest asking at WP:Graphics Lab/Map workshop ColinFine (talk) 22:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I am trying to add a source to the Sergei Tabotirisky page, but it has been protected because of the people from the Hearts of Iron 4 mod "The New Order", where he is a meme.

the source I am looking to add is part from the book: The Russian fascists: tragedy and farce in exile, 1925-1945, when it mentions him being assigned to the Bureau of Russian Refugees, on page 24.

I just want to know where you can get access to edit the page. JamesAndew (talk) 23:43, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

If you use the edit request wizard, it will help you put a request on Talk:Sergey Taboritsky with a template that will put the request in a pile to be reviewed. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:50, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I figured it out, but thanks for responding anyway JamesAndew (talk) 23:57, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

As part of the Dog Breed article:

I want to convey the point that breed standards from major dog organizations include behavioral factors. There is no citable source that says "breed standards from major dog organizations include behavioral factors." Is it legitimate to make this point by linking to several breed standards? If not, how can the point be conveyed?

I want to convey the point that dog breed selector programs include behavioral and personality factors. Again, there is no citable source that states this. Is it legitimate to make this point by linking to several dog breed selector programs? If not, how can the point be conveyed? Wygk (talk) 18:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@Wygk The journal article doi:10.1111/brv.13128 says pretty much what you want to include, I think. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:20, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

That's a good article, however, I have quite a few references for the inheritability of behavioral traits.

The point that I am trying to convey is that behavioral traits are often assumed to be associated with breeds, and this is evidenced by their inclusion in breed standards and dog breed selector programs. How is it possible to illustrate that point? The only way I cna think of is through citing examples. Wygk (talk) 22:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Quoting and citing guidelines from particular standards would demonstrate the point for those standards only, it might be considered WP:Original research or Synthesis to extrapolate that to a generalisation, or to carry out your own survey of standards.

Might there be reference to this matter in published material from some major dog-show, such as Crufts, or from its (or another) 'pan-breed' organisation such as The Kennel Club? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.7.95.48 (talk) 02:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I have been looking at Arthur Ingram (died 1742) for a bit now. It caught my attention for the weird title, but it seems like he fails a claim to notability, except for the fact that he was a British Member of Parliament.

On one hand, I cannot find any actual other information about him other than in the article, which seems like nothing that should hand him a wiki article. On the other, I am ursure whether being an MP is enough to claim nobility. Wikipedia:Notability (people)/Subnational politicians says that "Members of the devolved legislatures of the United Kingdom are presumed notable." I'm not sure if that means MPs are notable?? Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Politicians and judges says "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability" but also "Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels [are presumed notable]," which I think includes British Parliament. And lastly, List of MPs elected in the 1715 British general election has every MP that does not have a wiki article in a red link, suggesting that that article should be made, for the fact that are MPs.

I need someone else's insight on this.

Qwaabza (talk) 03:38, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the last quote you give above would definitely qualify as 'notable' (by status, rather than by available published documentation) a Member of Parliament (of the Kingdom of Great Britain, as it then was) – this is a National-level office, one step above the also-notable members of the devolved legislatures of the UK; the Scottish and Welsh Parliaments, the Northern Ireland Assembly, and the London Assembly (which of course did not exist in the 18th Century).

I suspect that more sources might exist for Arthur Ingram somewhere, but they would probably need deep research to find, perhaps in libraries or local government archives covering Horsham, for example, or in Parliamentary records, or in newspapers of the period (the first daily newspaper had begun publishing in 1702). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.7.95.48 (talk) 05:20, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I guess it's just a underdeveloped article rather than a non-notable one.

Qwaabza (talk) 22:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Qwaabza,you can just move the page,and add a Template:Multiple issues UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 04:14, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

No, please don't do that. There is no reason to move the article that I can see, and Template:Multiple issues is a container template - you shouldn't be adding that to any articles unless you're also adding maintenance templates. It doesn't need any maintenance templates, because there's nothing wrong with it, at least as far as I can tell. I have however added a stub template. -- asilvering (talk) 04:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

How is logging out to make problematic edits as an IP address socking? An IP address is not an account Cyber the tiger (talk) 18:03, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

From WP:SOCK:

Sockpuppetry takes various forms:

Logging out to make problematic edits as an IP address qcne (talk) 18:26, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Editing the same article or Talk page from an account and logged out so as to appear as an IP address would give the impression that two people are involved. David notMD (talk) 19:54, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

It would not be directly sockpuppetry (technically,as the policy does not say anything about that),but still,disruptive editing is not ok UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 00:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

No, @UnsungHistory, that's not correct. Logging out to edit as an IP is WP:LOUTSOCKing. -- asilvering (talk) 04:26, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, would like to check as to whether the addition of Elon Musk on the Musk article's disambiguation header (as per edit) is in conflict with any specific style guidelines? I have noted an ngram search result showing considerable correlation, yet this explanation was apprarently not accepted by User:Paytonisboss who reverted my edits and cited WP:RS, which doesn't quite make sense in this context for a disambiguation header. Now I'm not quite in a position to edit due to 3RR and the other user did not respond. 151.192.43.70 (talk) 04:22, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

hes not related to the musk to what i found in my reasurch best regards, Paytonisboss (talk) 04:59, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

It's precisely because the topics are not related that there is a need for disambiguation. Considering that many readers today searching for "Musk" might be looking for Elon Musk more than any other meanings conveyed by the "musk" word (as supported by the ngram search), adding this additional notice helps them, and one direct click is more helpful than having to go through an entire disambiguation page. 151.192.43.70 (talk) 05:47, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I've restored 151.192.43.70's edit to the hatnote, for the reasons advanced above. Deor (talk) 15:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks & appreciated. 151.192.43.70 (talk) 06:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I ran into a disagreement with another editor. After submitting this picture to these websites [31] [32], the results show that it is unlikely to be AI-generated. But the other editor claims the opposite that it is flagged as AI-generated. How can I show my proof or have a third party verify the results? Vacosea (talk) 02:14, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

If it's not AI-generated, what is that stuff in the background? It doesn't make sense. What's the provenance of the image -- where did you get it from? Who is it of? Mrfoogles (talk) 02:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Has the photo already been uploaded to either Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons? I tried looking for it, but couldn't find it. Do you want to upload it to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons and use it on some Wikipedia page? If you're just having a disagreement with someone about this photo that's not really related to Wikipedia, there's not much anyone here at the Teahouse can do to help resolve that.

The main concern when uploading a photo to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons is the photo's copyright status because the respective policies of each site only allow photos which satisfy certain conditions to be hosted. Once the copyright status of a photo has been sorted, it's encyclopedic value to the project then becomes a concern, particularly with respect to Wikipedia. So, it's possible that a photo might be fine from a copyright standpoint, but using it still might not be desirable from an encyclopedic standpoint. It's this last bit that often needs to be resolved through discussion much in the same way disagreements of over text content are expected to be resolved. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

The other editor is arguing a source is not reliable because this portrait was one of the co-authors, but you can't judge a background by feeling. This looks generated but the person is real and passes both detection tools. The strangest thing is that the other editor claims they receive the opposite results from AI checks. Vacosea (talk) 04:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

As a kind of general reply: no, the image is not AI generated, as it pre-dates the popularization of most AI image generators. The image URL suggests January 2020; the Internet Archive has caches going back to 29 February 2020. The stuff in the background, then, is less than ideal choices in where the photo was taken and how it was edited. The provenance of the photo appears to be newbloommag.net, a magazine focused on Taiwan news. Internet Archive caches of the homepage show that in January 2020, the main writer of the publication was doing quite a few interviews. While I cannot pinpoint—without spending a lot more time on this—the precise webpage and thus the subject of the photo, I infer that the photo is either taken by the writer or provided by the interviewee, and is likely copyrighted. Absent a release under a compatible licesme, our non-free content criteria pretty much only allow non-free photos of people after their death if there is no free alternative available. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 03:21, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

@Rotideypoc41352 I disagree about the year making it unlikely to be AI, thispersondoesnotexist has been around since at least early 2019. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 07:21, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm working on an article about a species of spider described in Beiträge zur Araneologie, a German journal. However, I am regrettably not fluent in German, which adds considerable difficulty to reading the article in question. I have therefore relied on the assistance of Google Translate for this matter, however, translation software does have its limitations, especially regarding topics such as arachnology with highly specific vocabulary and a limited database available. Can I still use this article as a source even though it has been translated, or would it not be appropriate owing to the potential inaccuracy of the information gained from translation? Mediocre.marsupial (talk) 05:56, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Such software has certainly gotten better over the years, but it's still not without flaws as explained in WP:MACHINETRANSLATION. You could try different online sites to see if they roughly translate the original German the same way and then pick the best. FWIW, you don't need be able to read the source at the level of a native speaker as long as you're reasonably confident it's reliable and you're using it in the right context; if however, you want to be cautious, you can (1) discuss the source on the article's talk page, (2) seek assistance at WP:Germany or (3) seek assistance at WP:TRANSLATORS. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, that link is exactly what I was looking for! I should've searched for machine translation instead of translation software. I think I might have understated my ineptitude in German though, I really don't know a word of it. I gather that this is a reliable source as it's cited in the World Spider Catalog, and I plan to use it for describing the spider in question, which seems like the right context. I'll check if any translators can help. Thank you so much! Mediocre.marsupial (talk) 06:25, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

The difficulty is that machine translation tends to be far more accurate for everyday language than it does for technical and specialist language. Particularly where an everyday word has a specialist meaning in the technical context, or where a word has two alternative meanings and the context is necessary to know which applies, machine translations often make a complete and utter hash of it. Machines struggle to resolve linguistic ambiguity.

But the good news is that if you are a subject expert on spiders, this may compensate for your lack of German. Although we are not supposed to write from personal knowledge or experience (a big problem for experts who "know" that they're right), having expertise means you know the contexts with which the machine translator struggled, and you might be able to untangle the machine's mistakes. You can use the machine translation if you can convince yourself that the source really does say what you think it says. As a trivial example, if the machine translation tells you a fly has hairy radio aerials, you're probably justified in describing it as having hairy antennae. If it tells you that the fly has a double-lobed bathtub, you are probably doomed, unless you know enough of the original language to work out what alternative translations are available for the original word that gave rise to bathtub. Elemimele (talk) 11:06, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I've noticed that when trying to use machine translation for this article. Not many technical terms used in the article have everyday meanings, and when the translation doesn't exactly make sense (e.g. Cheliceren-Klauen = lit. 'cheliceral claws' = 'cheliceral fang') I can figure out what the term actually means from context (chelicerae do not have claws). I wouldn't call myself a subject expert on spiders, but at the very least I can tell the basics and have enough reference books to rely on for clarification. There's also the glossary of spider terms in German Wikipedia, which helps as one can refer back to the labelled diagram there. Mediocre.marsupial (talk) 10:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

People working on translations here on-wiki generally frown upon translation software being used, as it often creates more problems down the line; e.g., many articles sitting at WP:PNT are machine translations which no one gets around to correct and/or copyedit. PNT incidentally is a page where you could drop your article once finished, and sooner or later some good sould will come by and do the final touches. Lectonar (talk) 10:46, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm a new user on the wiki. I posted a draft about a topic and it was rejected because it was advertising content. I really don't know why there is advertising content in it. Is there a way to make the wiki easier for new users like me? Thaokin98 (talk) 08:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Sky Solution   Maproom (talk) 08:37, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

The words "Sky Solution provides innovative technological solutions" suggest that the draft was written by a PR person who doesn't know what the company actually does. Maproom (talk) 08:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Thaokin98, language like unique needs and evaluated as a pioneer in providing digital solutions are vapid promotional phrases devoid of substantive content. After reading your draft, I have no idea what this company does, other than the utterly vague "solutions" word, which is used repeatedly. Here's a question: how can a company that is less than two years old be "evaluated as a pioneer"? Consider a true tech industry pioneer like Hewlett-Packard which has been around for 85 years. Their article doesn't talk about "solutions" or them being "pioneers". It talks about the genuine products and services that the company has offered, and their genuine accomplishments. Cullen328 (talk) 10:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Rejected means that the draft is so contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia that all content should be deleted and start over, modeling wording on existing articles about businesses. Or else, decide to abandon this effort, in which case put Db-author inside double curly brackets {{ }} at the top, and an Administrator will delete the draft. David notMD (talk) 12:21, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Recently i created an article about a company, i gave some references, but unfortunately the article submission declined. How can I find good sources of references, but in this case this company has only a limited number of references, like some business directories. Then how can i add references if that topic doesn't have enough sources. Can you please give me a solution? ITZMECAMALIN (talk) 05:14, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @ITZMECAMALIN: if there are insufficient sources to show that a subject is notable, then it is by definition not notable, and an article on it could not be published. Wikipedia articles almost entirely summarise what independent and reliable sources have said about a subject, and if such sources don't exist, it isn't possible to summarise them, and therefore isn't possible to have a Wikipedia article on the subject. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:14, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Your draft also has promotional wording that needs to be removed: "growing its fleet to meet diverse customer needs and ensuring a high standard of vehicle quality and customer service." See WP:NPOV. David notMD (talk) 12:17, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

OK thank you ITZMECAMALIN (talk) 12:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I recently edited the Wikipedia entry on Ann Charters, a personal friend of mine. She wanted me to add her new book to the entry, which I did. So the reference was the author herself. Is this not okay?

Ritlarge (talk) 20:54, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Nope,Verifiability,not truth UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:55, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Please see the Wikipedia guideline on conflicts of interest; basically, you shouldn't be editing your friend's page at all but you can request other editors to do so on your behalf. AntiDionysius (talk) 21:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I found your edit. There was no actual reference, but there is now. It was all in capital letters, it is not now. So you did no harm, but you did not do all the good you wished.

It is inadvisable to edit the article about people (etc) known to you personally. This is described as a WP:COI. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:01, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@Ritlarge I ought to have pinged you. My error. I have done so now. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:02, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I am eager to learn/ It is aan honor to be among you. Ritlarge (talk) 21:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@Ritlarge: You weren't signed in when you made that edit - please try to remember to do so in future. The article on Ann Charters lacks a photo of her. Perhaps you can take one? See WP:A picture of you for guidance. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I’m Jordan, a newcomer to Wikipedia who is looking for some guidance on the article deletion process. Before I get into my question, let me first state that I do have a conflict of interest, I'm an employee at Dell Technologies and here on Wikipedia to make requests to update information related to the company. With that out of the way, I'm aware of the edit request process and have made some Talk page requests, but I'm not sure what the best process for someone with a COI like me to follow if I think an article (or articles) might need to be deleted.

As I've been looking across Wikipedia at the various Dell-related articles, I've come across several about defunct products that I don't think ever had good sourcing or meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines (from what I've read and understand of those so far). Some of them are in poor shape and there aren't sources available to "fix" them (examples: Dell Axim, Dell Support Center, EMC NetWorker). I'd like to bring them to editors' attention to see if they should just be deleted.

What's the best way for someone with a COI to handle articles that might not meet Wikipedia’s notability standards? Is it ok for me to nominate them for deletion? Is there somewhere I could provide editors with a list of articles that I think might need deleting?

Any assistance or direction editors here might be willing to offer would be very appreciated! JM with Dell Technologies (talk) 18:24, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@JM with Dell Technologies: Your first step would be to follow the process at WP:Before - you say "there aren't sources available ", but how much have you looked for them? And rather than proposing deletion, maybe you can suggest other articles into which the articles that concern you can be merged? It would also be great if Dell could release some of its many product images under open licence, so that we might use them. See WP:IfSMC. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

If you genuinely don't feel that an article is justified or will ever be supportable by sources, I believe you are entitled to nominate it for deletion via AfD exactly as any other editor would, provided you're up-front about your COI (as you have been so far - thank you!). If you have the twinkle tools installed, there is an "XFD" item under the "TW" menu that starts a deletion dialogue. Otherwise, follow the instructions at WP:AFDHOWTO. Check WP:GD too for general hints about deletion. I'd just warn you that there is a risk that some editors will be MORE motivated to keep an article simply because its deletion was requested by someone related to the article! It's also important to note that we don't delete just because a product is defunct, or because the article's in a poor shape. It has to be demonstrably unsourceable/non-notable or in irremediable state. Elemimele (talk) 12:37, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Teahouse, I have been trying to create a expanded and more complete version of Brighton Applefest. I have 3 main questions. 1. At the bottom it is listed as a stub, what is the way to add my rewrite? 2. Can someone please read the new version at User:CF-501 Falcon/sandbox. 3. Once read over, would the page benefit from an exact list of all events hosted during Applefest?

I hope this is the right way to ask for help. Thanks CF-501 Falcon (talk) 01:19, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

CF-501 Falcon, I was about to say "remove the colons from the ends of the headers" from your draft. But more simply, remove the headers. However, add the header "References" to the bottom. I don't see why the by-law is worth mentioning. Remove dollar amounts. Copy the result. Set out to edit the current article, but simply blank it. Paste in the content of your draft. "Publish" it, with an edit summary such as "thorough rewrite". (NB this procedure is usually not a good one; but here, it would work well.) Please do not add "an exact list of all events hosted during Applefest". -- Hoary (talk) 02:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Hoary, I have done as you said. Should the "this page is a stub" be deleted? Can you also please check the article? Thanks CF-501 Falcon (talk) 15:09, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

As far it goes, CF-501 Falcon, it's OK. But surely an article about a festival should say what goes on in it. And this article does. I quote:

The festival offers a variety of attractions. Its primary draw is its parade, and a street festival featuring fresh foods and local crafts. Other attractions include hayrides, a classic car show, live music, Kinsmen pancake breakfast, a firework show, and a children's amusement park. Vendors can be found around town selling local arts and crafts.

However, the sole source cited for this is the municipal website. I get the impression that this article on a festival is largely sourced to those who run the festival. Any better sources? -- Hoary (talk) 08:59, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I was able to find one other source, a local news station, and have added it. As far as the municipal citations they are the only reputable source I could find, the rest are Facebook.

Is there anything else to improve the article? CF-501 Falcon (talk) 14:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

how do i answer questions to? TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 21:55, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Be more specific. At what Talk page were the questions asked? David notMD (talk) 23:23, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

at tea house TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 14:55, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @TheSmartWikiOne, and welcome to the Teahouse. I would respectfully suggest that you might not yet have enough experience to answer questions here. But please have a look at WP:Teahouse/Host lounge/Expectations. (I think that page may no longer be formally active, but it is still a useful guideline). ColinFine (talk) 15:14, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I am a school archivist, and I was wondering what the scope of articles I can edit is using the material I have access to. WP:TWL/Archivists would seem to imply that it is recommended to use private archives as sources of reference in archives, but as the institution I work for is a private one, I am wary of running afoul of WP:COI or WP:PAID. I can understand that writing articles about the School I work for would be considered a flagrant COI, but would it be acceptable to improve the articles on the school's alumni, or even- several stages removed- articles related to things the alumni have achieved during their lives? Would it be necessary to post content proposals to every article that has even a tenuous link to the school? OldSwinburne (talk) 14:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @OldSwinburne, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I would say probably not. Determining a COI is not entirely an objective question, and others might disagree; but to me it seems that the question is something like "Is there a reason to think that this person might hold the existence or content of the article as more important than Wikipedia's policies such as notability or neutral point of view?" I can see that a member of staff of a school might meet that criterion in respect of certain alumni, but it seems pretty tenuous to me.

(As an aside, that question - my personal formulation - implies that people who come to Wikipedia specifically to create an article about some subject do have a COI relating to that subject, even if they have no material connection with it. I believe this to be that case, though I don't usually pursue the argument). ColinFine (talk) 15:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

When the English version of a page is edited, are the translation then due to be updated to match it? Terrainman (talk) 16:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

If people are viewing an English-Wikipedia article via a browser that provides machine translation to another language, then naturally the translation will reflect any change made in the English article. But if they are reading an article about the same topic in a different Wikipedia, then no, the two articles can contain totally different text. Even when one was originally a translation of the other, it will not necessarily get updated to reflect changes in the original article. I have translated from the German Wikipedia, but I rarely go back to an article that I've already translated to check if it's been updated. I probably should! Elemimele (talk) 17:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)