Archive 1090

←

Archive 1093

Archive 1094

Archive 1095

Archive 1096

Archive 1097

→

Archive 1100

Hi, what are you meant to do about edits that are sourced to something you wouldn't ever be able to verify? I was having a look at this edit request on the page for Slipknot, and the user is claiming that there is an incorrect piece of information cited to an old print magazine with no digital copy. There doesn't seem to be any way to access that source and verify that piece of information (without buying a copy of the old magazine on ebay or something). All digital sources of the quote in question are just copy-pastes of the Wikipedia article, and it's certainly worrying to me that (potentially contentious) information about living people is in a Wikipedia article with no way to verify it, but I don't understand enough about Wikipedia policies to know what to do in a situation like that. Seems like if you wanted to spread lies about someone on Wikipedia the best way to do it would be to cite a somewhat obscure and inaccessible offline source... Volteer1 (talk) 15:06, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Volteer1. I know what you mean, but the fact you would need to order a back copy or go to a library (etc.) does not make a source the source something you "wouldn't ever be able to verify". I can't guarantee someone will be able to provide the source if you request it Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request (WP:RX), but that is one very useful way to try to get a copy without doing more involved legwork, and I have many times seen quite obscure requests fulfilled there. For our policy on this, see WP:SOURCEACCESS, Wikipedia:Offline sources and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Cost. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:16, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: I see, thanks. P.S. thanks for this. Volteer1 (talk) 16:21, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, is online news platform link(apple music, wynk music, jio saavan, google play music, resso music) reliable sources for singer ?? Jroynoplan (talk) 13:16, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jroynoplan: Almost always no. It realy depends on wether those sources are the subject talking about itself, user-generated content or written by staff with editorial oversight. If it is anything but the last one, it's unreliable. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Victor Schmidt:, thanks for your reply. If the singer have 1 or 2 news article then can I add apple music profile, google play music, wynk music profile, jio Saavan music profile as a secondary source ?? Jroynoplan (talk) 7 February 2021 (UTC)

AFAIK it depends on the intended use, since Google Play Music etc. are WP:PRIMARY and /or user-generated sources and may only be used for basic stuff (if they are primary sources (if the artist has created it) or should not be used at all (if they are WP:UGC). Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

How can I speed up the article creation process? What is the fastest time that an article can be approved from the AfC? RoyceShey (talk) 16:38, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello RoyceShey, and welcome to the Teahouse! At WP:AFC there isn't a queue - rather drafts are put into a category where reviewers will take a look at them to determine if they are suitable for includion. This means that some get reviewed quickly, others may take up to 3-4 months to be reviewed. I'm afraid I've had to decline your draft, this is because the subject of the article doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO at the draft's current state - all the sources are WP:PRIMARY and it reads too promotionally. Please also make sure that the source verifies the statement it is supposed to support. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 16:47, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Please judge my actions fairly

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ali_banu_sistani#February_2021

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ali_banu_sistani#Warning Ali banu sistani (talk) 15:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: The exchange on the Talk page and Warning about diparaging an editor are at User talk:Ali banu sistani. The latter: "Ali banu sistani, you must immediately cease from speculating about other editors' motivations —especially about them being paid for editing!— including their national origins or political allegiances. That is completely unacceptable. Any further violations of that nature are likely to be met by sanctions." I agree with the editor who wrote the warning. Wikipedia welcomes discussion as to article content, but strongly opposes comments attacking the motivations of other editors. David notMD (talk) 18:30, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I believe two corrections should be made in Wikipedia geographical descriptions: 1. Crimea is now a part of Russia, not Ukraine. 2. Cyprus is now considered a country in Europe, not the Middle East 2601:643:8100:F100:F81A:7A2E:CD23:52A7 (talk) 18:37, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP! This isn't really the place to suggest changes to Wikipedia, but rather to get help with editing. Suggestions usually belong on the WP:Talk page of the article in question. But I can answer anyway:

If you take a look at the Crimea article, you will see that the infobox actually has both: "Ukraine (de jure)" and "Russia (de facto)". This properly describes the current situation, with Russia effectively having annexed and controlling the peninsula, while Ukraine (and many other countries) still consider it to not belong to Russia. This is what reliable sources tell us, and you are unlikely to convince others to change it.

As for Cyprus (island), I do not agree that it is part of Europe. Do you have reliable sources that say so? Or do you maybe mean that Cyprus is part of the EU? The latter statement is already in the article. --LordPeterII (talk) 19:26, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi from Czech Republic. I'm doing something wrong, but in fact, I don't know what, and how to do it right. I'm working on LP discography by the British sixties band The Searchers. For example this one. Text is OK ... well don't laugh at my English :-) ... but all of the albums cover art I've uploaded were deleted. I assumed that the album cover of LPs (or SPs or CDs) are free to use. All music albums on Wikipedia have images with original covers, but these were deleted by administrators because of "it's not freely licensed". I'm not very good at English, so it's hard for me to read all these File copyright sites (too many pages, and more and more links on each new page, plus professional English is too difficult for me - I fought for three hours and gave up). I understood that it's my mistake. I probably had to use a Non-free use rationale? But I don't know where or how. Are somewhere simple instructions? Lukas Huttershofen (talk) 14:33, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Huttershofen: I'm not expert in uploading images, but if you go to Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard and select the option of uploading locally to Wikipedia, the steps for uploading a non-free album cover are fairly simple. (When asked for the non-free rationale, select "This is the official cover art of a work.") Note that in most cases, only use in the article about the album itself is permissible. If you have any problems, you can come back here for further help. Deor (talk) 18:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Huttershofen: Deor has already pointed out that you need to locally upload to Wikipedia (not Commons), because in fact album covers are not free to use. If you are unsure how to proceed during uploading, you could also take a look at one of the existing cover-art pics, e.g. this one and click "edit" (don't save, just to open the code), where you will see something like this:

{{Non-free use rationale album cover|Article= Meet the Searchers
 |Use=Infobox
 |Source=
 |Name= [[Meet the Searchers]]
 |Artist=  [[The Searchers (band)]]
 |Label= [[Pye Records]]
 |Graphic Artist= unknown
 |Item= 
 |Type= 
 |Website= 
 |Owner= 
 |Commentary= 
 <!-- OVERRIDE FIELDS -->
 |Description= [[Meet the Searchers]] cover art
 |Portion= 
 |Low_resolution= yes
 |Purpose= to use in infobox in article about the album
 |Replaceability= Not replaceable
 |other_information= 
 }}

 ==Licensing==
 {{non-free album cover|image has rationale=yes}}

You could copy the content and adjust the entries according to your new image. --LordPeterII (talk) 19:10, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Deor: Wow. Dear Deor, this is EXACTLY the information I was looking for. Three hours! Thank you very very much! I uploaded the first picture and I think it works.Huttershofen (talk) 20:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@LordPeterII: Perfect! Thanks a lot to both of you! Really a lot! Huttershofen (talk) 20:30, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Teahouse folks, it's good to see you again. Recently I came across an article's history which had an edit attributed to "username removed" with a strikethrough going through those two words; that was also how the username appeared in the diff (I'm not linking to it here, since I'm not sure if I should draw attention to someone who may have reasons for hiding their username). It didn't seem to be an instance of wp:revdel; if that had been the case the diff contents would not have been visible. Could you tell me if this is a new enwiki feature, or if it's something I just haven't noticed? Also, what are the policies if any that govern the use of this feature? Thanks! Airbornemihir (talk) 18:56, 5 February 2021 (UTC) (please ping while replying.)

Hi, Airbornemihir. The revdel function can hide usernames and edit summaries too. A stricter version would be suppression. Regards, Zindor (talk) 19:15, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

@Airbornemihir: Perhaps WP:OVERSIGHT of an IP address of an edit by a user that was accidentally logged out. RudolfRed (talk) 19:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed and Zindor: that's helpful! Airbornemihir (talk) 20:54, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, my class has studied Emmet Till in support of Black Lives matter this year. I was checking on some information and was surprised to see the Google search page clip in the sidebar said that Emmet Till had been "lynched". In the biographies that I read to prep for my class, I could find other horrifc means that led to his death, but no hanging which is the usual meaning of lynching. Can this be corrected? Or does someone know that besides the other means, lynching was used as well. I just like accuracy. English Teacher/Florida High School 47.202.124.231 (talk) 14:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I suggest you research the meaning of lynching it doesn't necessarily mean death by hanging. Theroadislong (talk) 14:18, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

BTW, 47.202.124.231, the definition of lynching aside, I'm grateful that you thought of contributing to Wikipedia as part of your teaching activities. Airbornemihir (talk) 20:54, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Replace Bio Wikipedia's biographical page for me is mostly correct. However I would like to make some editorial changes and add some information. May I submit a complete re-write to you and have one of your editors use it to replace the existing bio? Chapman B. Cox (talk) 12:22, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

No, but you're very welcome to present the suggested changes and the suggested additions on the article's talk page. Be sure to provide reliable, independent, published sources for what you say. (I realize that the article Chapman B. Cox is currently very poor; a revised version should improve on it.) -- Hoary (talk) 13:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Chapman B. Cox: I recommend that you use the {{request edit}} template and make one suggestion at a time, as editors might be more likely to help with small changes than a complete overhaul. GoingBatty (talk) 22:02, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I want to create a Review Score box for the To_Each... album, which seemed to look good, but I always get this message and I don't find the solution to make it work. Cite warning: <ref> tag with name Larkin cannot be previewed because it is defined outside the current section or not defined in this article at all. Thanks for your help! The Music Guides Playlists (talk) 11:43, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Suppose (i) that you have an article that has a section ("Phil") that you want to edit, (ii) that inside this one section, there appear one or more examples of <ref name="Larkin" />, and (iii) that somewhere outside this section, you have <ref name="Larkin">All the details</ref>. Then when you edit the section "Phil" and preview your work, you'll get this warning. -- Hoary (talk) 12:21, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

... and, what may not be obvious, it's not a warning that you're doing anything wrong. It's not like a compiler warning, that means "what you're doing kinda works but isn't really a good idea". It's more like an apology: "what you're doing is probably fine but this edit preview can't show you the references properly". Maproom (talk) 22:10, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

This page sounds like it was written by Biden's campaign manager. I need to give additions, and corrections to what appears. Much is left out. But, I read the Wikipedia owner is himself a woke liberal, so maybe what I suggest will be cancelled?

I used to donate to Wikipedia, but after reading that only liberal points of view are welcomed, I thought I would try to be a conservative editor -- see how it goes -- and see how non-woke documentation is accepted by Wikipedia.

Please provide link on how to suggest edits and additional content to this super-woke article.

Thanks, Jody JodyNCalifornia (talk) 22:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I suggest you find a different topic area to work in. The last thing we need are more partisans in a topic area that is literally infested with them. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 22:15, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @JodyNCalifornia: Welcome to the Teahouse! Everyone is welcome to suggest edits at an article's talk page, Talk:2020 United States presidential election. Be sure you include independent reliable source(s) with your suggestion. You might be interested in Help:Introduction to Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. GoingBatty (talk) 22:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

How much Americium is in a smoke detector? Is it all Americium? UB Blacephalon (talk) 22:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Blacephalon: The Teahouse is for questions about editing Wikipedia. The fine folks at WP:Reference desk may be able to help you. GoingBatty (talk) 22:19, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

OK Thanks! UB Blacephalon (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm trying to get ahold of the Russian Wikipedia ambassadors but it looks like a bunch of the Russian-English ambassadors linked on the Russian Wikipedia ambassadors section are no longer apart of Wikipedia. Who should I contact about this on the English Wikipedia? Is there a certain help desk I should write to? Thanks! Tyrone Madera (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Tyrone Madera: I am not sure what list you are referring to, but several of the users in the ru section of Wikipedia:Local_Embassy have been active recently. If you are having trouble with something at the Russian Wikipedia, you will need to ask there. RudolfRed (talk) 22:44, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I am new to Wikipedia and would like to edit a page. How do I do this? I don't want to just 'edit' a page if there are particular protocols in place. Do you have any advice? 173.164.157.182 (talk) 11:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC) 173.164.157.182 (talk) 11:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse, for the very first you might find the lecture of contributing to Wikipedia helpful. Hope that helps. CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:08, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you CommanderWaterford,

I read the 'Contributing to Wikipedia' and appreciate the link to that information. In respect of the rules here, I closely followed directions & drafted my 'draft' page which is ready to be reviewed and edited/changed & potentially published by an administrator. Thanks for your time. I only wish to add a few words to a page. Here is the new draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:McGuire_at_Snyderlab/sandbox/userspace_draft_for_mcguire_at_snyderlab The few words I'd like to add are in the 'Entrepreneur' section.

Here are the new words: "Personalis, January, Mirvie" Please let me know if they are approved or not approved by the Wikipedia adminisration. Those three words are companies Michael P. Snyder has recently become co-founder of and this information is factual. I provided links to the evidence & additional references. Those are the only words I have ever tried to edit on any Wikipedia page (beyond the talk/learning/teahouse type pages). After I added those three words, most of the Michael P. Snyder page was deleted.

If the few words I'd like to add are 'up to snuff', then I'd also like to edit this page further so it is more 'neutral' sounding, written in a 'just-the-facts' style, and better conforms to Wikipedia Standards. Let me know what you think of my draft and if you have any changes, I'm happy to make them.

Thank you, McGuire McGuire at Stanford Snyderlab (talk) 11:38, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

There is an existing article Michael P. Snyder created in 2017 which you are aware of because you have also been editing that. Your edits were reverted as not appropriate. The article remains. Delete your draft. As a paid editor (declared on your User page), you are prohibited from directly editing the existing article. Instead, you can only propose specific changes on the Talk page of the article. What you have done there (pasted in your desired version of the entire article) is not helpful. Lastly, the existing article is at risk for being nominated for deletion, as the only 'references' are to journal articles co-authored by Snyder. (I moved all that to a Selected publications section). An article about Snyder should be about Snyder - citing published stuff about him. An overly detailed description of his research does not belong. Thank you for bringing this to the attention of Wikipedia editors. David notMD (talk) 12:13, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

UPDATE: The existing article has been converted to a draft. As such, you (McGuire) can work on it directly. What is needed: learn how to reference. Every factual statement about Snyder needs to be referenced or removed. Remove all the superscripted numbers. When properly formatted, references embedded in the text automatically show up as numbered references in the References section. At Selected publications, remove the numbering and shorten the list to a few of his most important journal articles. Cut all the overly detailed descriptions of his research. No hyperlinks in the article. No mention of companies he as started unless there are published articles (not just press releases) about those companies. My own opinion is that Snyder's career makes him Wikipedia-noteworthy, but this draft needs a major, major overhaul. David notMD (talk) 12:59, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you David notMD.

Thank you and your colleagues for assistance. I am also working with a Nobel Prize winner (not for money) to get this page factual and we are very appreciative of your time.

A few questions for the Wikipedia administrators:

1. How do I add three neutral, factual referenced words to a Wikipedia page? I became a member of Wikipedia for the first time this past week and I only added a few words. I have never edited the Michael P. Snyder page before adding those few words. After I added those words (factual, neutral & referenced - not to a journal article), most of the page (including the few words I added) was deleted. I figured out how to look at the 'history' of the page so I could restore the full page (which I did not write) which was deleted. All of this can be seen clearly in the history of the page. When looking at the history of the page, I can see that the half of the page that was deleted was there from last year.

2. Following your helpful instructions, I am rewriting the page so that it is more neutral, 'just-the-facts' style, and better conforms to Wikipedia Standards. What kind of references does Wikipedia prefer over peer-reviewed journal articles? I did not write any of the references you mention, however, if there is a different reference source you recommend, please let me know. The references I added only support the few words I added to that page and my references are not to peer-reviewed articles.

3. When writing my new 'neutral', 'just-the-facts' style version of the page to conform better to the Wikipedia standards, where should I put my draft? I have been instructed by David notMD that the draft area I created is not the correct place to put drafts. I have started with the draft from the page that was deleted. Please let me know - where is the location I should move my draft to and I will move it there.

Thank you Teahouse Hosts and Wikipedia Administrators, Regards, McGuire McGuire at Stanford Snyderlab (talk) 12:54, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

We are writing past each other. As I added in Update (above), the existing article has been draftified. Work there. Only there. Your first effort needs to be to rescue what existed. Peer-reviewed journal articles are not 'references'. What the subject of an article has written contributes nothing to establishing notability. Same applies to what subjects say about themselves in interviews. David notMD (talk) 13:05, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

In your draft, you appear to want to add content about companies Snyder has started: "Dr. Snyder is the founder of Qbio and co-founder of several Biotechnology companies. These include: Personalis, SensOmics, January, Filtricine, Mirvie, Protos, Exelixis, Protometrix (purchased by Life Technologies, now part of Thermo Fisher), Affomix (purchased by Illumina and SensOmics. He also sits on the board of numerous other biotechnology companies." None of that is article-worthy unless people not affiliated with Snyder or Stanford have written about his role in starting these companies. Fix everything else first. David notMD (talk) 13:08, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I just looked at the article and see what you mean. You all type very fast! I was so concerned with ensuring that the three words I added were well referenced, I didn't notice that Wikipedia has completely vanished Michael P. Snyder. I will delete the 'draft' page I created and go to sleep as I've stayed up till 5:15am here reading all the Wikipedia 'instruction' pages trying to add those three words correctly. It looks like a group of Wikipedia editors are rewriting the article quite quickly now, so I will leave it to the experts, look at the article page tomorrow & ask my questions after reading the new version. McGuire at Stanford Snyderlab (talk) 13:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you David notMD The only company names I attempted to add were 'Peronalis, January and Mirvie'. Those are the only three words I have ever tried to add to Wikipedia. The other company names were there already.

Below are several organizations and "people not affiliated with Snyder or Stanford who have written about his role in starting these companies" - which are not peer-reviewed journals and may help the current group who are rewriting the article, as omitting the truth about the companies he has founded is omitting the facts, and we are all here to help Wikipedia reveal facts, not hide them:

• https://www.crunchbase.com/person/michael-snyder-2
• https://www.r42group.com/michaelsnyder
• https://education.23andme.com/webinars/big-data-and-human-health/
• https://www.geekwire.com/2017/wearable-sensors-knew-researcher-getting-sick/
• https://www.olink.com/sf-oct-2017/
• https://www.prweb.com/releases/labroots_highlights_harvard_university_geneticist_dr_george_m_church_and_stanford_university_genomicist_dr_michael_snyder_in_genetics_genomics_2019_virtual_event/prweb16235398.htm

McGuire at Stanford Snyderlab (talk) 13:50, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

McGuire at Snyderlab Under unintended consequences, your desire to add 'Peronalis, January and Mirvie' to an existing article revealed that the article as it existed in no way whatsoever met the requirements for Wikipedia biographical articles. There is no going back. Blame User:Kinnamaa for creating this fatally flawed article back in 2017 by bypassing the Articles for Creation (AfC) process that would have Declined it then. The draft cannot become an article without everything being fixed. This Stanford website: https://med.stanford.edu/snyderlab/about.html can be used as a reference for his education information and other content. However, in looking at the bottom of it, apparent that content from it was copy-pasted into the Entrepeneur section. Also, some of the websites you listed clearly got content about Snyder from the Stanford website (very similar wording) so those do not contribute to establishing his notability. David notMD (talk) 15:05, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

See [[1]] for examples of valid articles about Stanford faculty. David notMD (talk) 16:03, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you David notMD,

I appreciate that someone here has finally acknowledged that I did not write the original content for that page, only attempted to three words - which have now been deleted with half the page. Thus, my experience using Wikipedia comes with trepidation making me unsure of adding even another word without the entire draft page being deleted forever - despite you letting the other editors here know that I can contribute to the current draft.

I will spend some hours reading the link you shared with me [[2]] in an attempt to correctly contribute/rewrite content to Stephen P. Snyder's article page which I have never edited or even read entirely before - mostly so I can learn how to add valued, properly formatted content to Wikipedia. Since I have deleted the draft page you suggested I delete, I will post my draft submissions in the talk page of Michael P. Snyder for the Wikipedia Admins to approve of first - as I feel this is the most respectful thing to do and I realize that if I just add to the actual draft, someone might mistake my few contributions as reason to delete the entire article. Thanks for the examples, I'll give it a try... hopefully have something to share in the next couple days. I work about 100 hours a week at Stanford Medicine just trying to save lives and though I am paid by Stanford, this Wikipedia writing is entirely a volunteer effort for me, so thank you for your understanding and patience. I'll catch up on my sleep and try again tomorrow. Cheers, McGuire McGuire at Stanford Snyderlab (talk) 23:25, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Given that the proposed article is currently a draft at Draft:Michael P. Snyder, you as a declared paid editor are allowed to edit it. Only after it is an accepted article are paid editors supposed to limit themselves to requesting changes on the Talk page.

Hello! I submitted a draft for review last month, however, it was rejected by the reviewer. Is it possible to connect with the reviewer and ask for help to know which part needs improvement?

Also, can companies connect to a writer to write a certain article? If yes, how do they connect to writers? MariaWanders (talk) 01:07, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

MariaWanders Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You can communicate with the reviewer on their user talk page; their name is at the top of the decline notice.

A company is free to have someone write for them, they must comply with the paid editing and conflict of interest policies. You need to as well, if you work for the company.

Please understand that a Wikipedia article should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Wikipedia has no interest in what a company wants to say about itself. Press releases, announcements of routine business transactions, brief mentions, staff interviews, and primary sources do not establish notability. 331dot (talk) 01:17, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: Thank you for your help! :) I am still not used to the technicalities of this platform.

(edit conflict) @MariaWanders: Funny enough, I gave you suggestions the last time you asked a question here, but you didn't seem to edit the draft since my response. Theroadislong did also leave you a similar response inside the submission declined box, where there's a couple links for you to read. If you're still confused and have specific questions, try reaching out to the reviewer at User talk:Theroadislong. As for your second question: that's called paid editing and is strongly discouraged. If you were paid to write the draft, you have to make a declaration of a conflict of interest. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 01:21, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Hello! I apologize for not responding to you in the previous thread. This is my first time having a Wikipedia account, and I still get confused about the technicalities on how to use this platform. I am here to improve my research and writing skills only. I'll check my draft first, I think I have a problem in citing my sources. Thank you for your help. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MariaWanders (talk • contribs) 01:40, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Tom (LT) Thank you for reviewing my write up on 7th January 2021. I have removed all the links that did not connect. could you please re-review and accept. Kind regards Agantukaya (talk) 02:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Agantukaya: If you want to reach a specific user, please use their talk page. In this case, that would be User talk:Tom (LT). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:24, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

ERROR in "2020 United States Elections" Wikipedia page Wikipedia Page says: Public perceptions and analysis In a poll conducted in February 2020, 59% of respondents expressed confidence in the "honesty of U.S. elections".[180]

BUT GALLOP SOURCE (180) SAYS - 59% were NOT CONFIDENT in "honesty of US elections" WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Although their faith has been shaken for some time, Americans are heading into their next presidential election with relatively little confidence in the honesty of the process. Four in 10 Americans (40%) interviewed in 2019 said they are confident in the honesty of elections in the country, while the majority (59%) said they are not. JodyNCalifornia (talk) 23:15, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@JodyNCalifornia: I've corrected it for you. Next time, please discuss article concerns at that article's talk page, in this case at Talk:2020 United States elections. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 00:13, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@JodyNCalifornia: Please sign your posts with a space and four tildes: ~~~~ placed at the very end of the text (I've moved it for you). Also note that the "Subject/headline" field should contain a concise description of your post (which you're putting in the text box below it, where it runs into the rest of the text). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:25, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@AlanM1: I made the heading because there wasn't one, my bad. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:59, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi,

I have done some work on the existing article on Pat Spurgin, who was a 1984 Olympic gold medalist under that maiden name. Since then she has married (becoming Pat Pitney) and had a career in the Alaska state government and at the University of Alaska under her married name. She is now the interim president of the statewide University of Alaska system.

As long as she is primarily notable as a 1984 Olympic gold medalist, I see it is appropriate for the article to be named Pat Spurgin and for the lead paragraph to focus on that accomplishment. If, on the other hand, she is primarily notable as the present interim president of the University of Alaska, then the article should be named Pat Pitney and the lead paragraph should include Pat Pitney's accomplishments.

I personally believe that Pitney's recent accomplishments have eclipsed the 1984 accomplishment of Spurgin. I have read:

Wikipedia:Official names

Wikipedia:Article titles (specifically WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NAMECHANGES)

Help:How to move a page

Would it be most appropriate to me to go ahead and make the page move from Pat Spurgin to Pat Pitney, or instead to first request comment on the BLP's Talk page beforehand? Are there references other than the ones listed above which I should consult?

COI disclaimer: I am an alumnus and retired employee of, and a current student at, the University of Alaska but I have no current financial or business connection with them other than by paying tuition and fees when I take a course. I have never had any kind of business or personal contact with Pat Pitney.

Thank you, Dieter.Meinertzhagen (talk) 22:30, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Dieter.Meinertzhagen: It's definitely better to start a discussion about this first. See WP:RM#CM (and the more general WP:MOVE) to gain consensus first. It's also a good idea to notify other major contributors to the discussion by using Template:Reply to (see Help:Notifications; also see this reply's source code for an example). You might find the XTools statistics ([3]) for the page helpful for who to contact. Good luck! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 00:20, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Dieter.Meinertzhagen: For the time being, I created Pat Pitney, which redirects readers to the Pat Spurgin article. This can be removed as part of a move request. GoingBatty (talk) 04:09, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I want to know that how should I create a Wikipedia page for a news website so that it will not delete. My page name of Wikipedia will be "ALatestNews". The link to the Wikipedia page given here: www.alatestnews.com.

My questions are: 1) Can we create the page of "ALatestNews" on Wikipedia 2) What will I have to do for creating a page on Wikipedia? 3) Which kind of external link will be needed? 4) Also please tell me an alternative external link if possible. Digimarksomnath (talk) 05:01, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Digimarksomnath: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for wanting to add to it. First, read WP:NORG to see if the company meets the notability guidelines. If it does, then follow the guidance at WP:YFA for how to create the article, including tusing the wizard there to create a draft for review. It is not often easy for new users to create an article, so you may want to start by working to improve existing articles until you have more experience. Also, if you have any connnection to ALatestNews, you will need to follow the required disclosures at WP:COI and WP:PAID. RudolfRed (talk) 05:20, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Digimarksomnath. Based on a search I just ran, I do not think sufficient reliable, secondary, independent sources exist that have published material about Alatestnews in order that an article on it is possible at this time. Articles must demonstrate the notability of their subjects by citing such sources, which, hand in glove, are also used to verify the information content. If these sources don't exist, no suitable article can be written. I could, of course, be wrong about the existence of the rights types of sources that treat the subject in enough depth, but please don't waste your time unless they do. Please note the right way to write an article here: Gather your sources first; write only about what they verify citing them as you go. Note that primary sources can be used in limited ways, but do nothing to help demonstrate notability. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:52, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Regarding this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Master_Prabhakar_Reddy can someone help me what else has to be done. Why is it still unable to meet requirements of a publishable article. I read the comment provided by the editor but this person is notable for many events not a single event. --Svpnikhil (talk) 07:08, 8 February 2021 (UTC) Svpnikhil (talk) 07:08, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

You should read WP:MINREF, WP:REFB, WP:FOOTNOTES, and WP:CITE, since those were the links included in the decline message. The specific message for declination was "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations." WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 07:11, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I added those citations. can u refer this to someone else to verify --Svpnikhil (talk) 07:20, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Svpnikhil: Unfortunately there is no sign of the person being notable according to Wikipedia's definition of notability. That is not a negative reflection on the person – it is true of almost every single person in the world. In addition (and more obviously at a casual glance), the draft is still pretty much unsourced. The only information that is sources is that about his Guinness records, and that's all primary sources. How did you (or the original draft creator) know anything about Reddy's background, career, family etc? --bonadea contributions talk 08:13, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Is there someone who I can ask or a way to flag what I wrote so I can get a decision? UClaudius (talk) 04:07, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@UClaudius: You can ask on the article's talk page. GoingBatty (talk) 04:10, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@UClaudius: You can ask, but replies unlikely. The article itself gets about 60 views per day, but the Talk page gets zero. If you put the article on your watch list, you will be notified whenever the article is edited. David notMD (talk) 09:49, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Anurag Kumar 285 (talk) 10:17, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Anurag Kumar 285 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place to ask questions about using Wikipedia. Do you have such a question? 331dot (talk) 10:23, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Why does “Death announced on this date” appear on certain dates? If it’s not the date of death, why isn’t the death listed on the date the person died? Forgive me for asking, I am a novice Wikipedia user. But it seems pretty silly. For example, if on a Wednesday I inform the press that my father died two days ago on Monday, his death should be listed with everyone else who died on Monday, not the day I chose to announce it. (My father was not a notable person, I’m only using this to illustrate my question). Surely for notable people, there would be there would be government records or other credible sources to confirm the actual date of death, should the person announcing the death not include the actual date in their announcement. Thank you for your help. 14.161.30.221 (talk) 12:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

It usually means that the date of death was just not reported - if you take a look at the source material and it'll often say "so-and-so has died, as confirmed in an announcement by whatever-representative, confirming the death". You'll often see this in recent news reports in the brief period between announcing the death and a journalist writing up a proper obit. It's especially common when the source is a social media post by a family member who is, in the throws of grief, not being particularly clear whether they mean it happened last night or that they heard about it themselves last night etc. --Paul ❬talk❭ 13:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

The article Kineo Kuwabara says: "Kuwabara died on 10 December 2007, a fact that was only announced in February 2008." If the second half of that sentence were deleted, somebody who later found a January '08 source implying that Kuwabara was alive might reasonably (but wrongly) infer that "10 December 2007" was a mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoary (talk • contribs) 13:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

You didn't mention any example but Deaths in 2021 currently has five "death announced on this date". In all five cases, the listed source gives no date for the death. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:48, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I am trying to include some code, using <syntaxhighlight>, but the language is not recognised. Is it possible to write one's own syntax highlighting rules? DBoffey (talk) 20:11, 7 February 2021 (UTC) DBoffey (talk) 20:11, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, DBoffey, and welcome to the Teahouse. On a quick look at mw:Extension:SyntaxHighlight, it appears to me that you can't, but you may be able to tease more information out of that page. (BTW, I found that by typing WP:Syntax highlighting into the search bar.)

Thanks for that - that is what I thought the answer would be, but no harm in asking??? DBoffey (talk) 11:35, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

--ColinFine (talk) 22:54, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

OmegySock is my sock Can I use my sock on public WiFi or am I abusing accounts? EpicOmegy (talk) 13:29, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

EpicOmegy Having an account for use on public computers or networks is an allowed use of alternate accounts. You only need to make it clear that is the purpose of the alternate account, and identify it as related to your original account. 331dot (talk) 13:35, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you... I do have a Fandom rep with like... socking but I wanted a fresh start on the real wiki, not Fandom... EpicOmegy (talk) 13:36, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, please review the draft article I have uploaded with the headline of Ekvita. Thanks in advance Naila02 (talk) 06:53, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

It seems you haven't submitted the draft. Regardless, draft reviews happen in no particular order, and asking people to review it won't make it "cut the queue line" and get reviewed faster. Wait until someone gets around to it. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 07:05, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:EKVITA. Confirming not submitted. David notMD (talk) 09:53, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Naila02: I have added a template to the top of your draft to help you submit it for review. Before you submit the draft, please add more independent reliable sources, especially in the History section. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:42, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the great job you guys are doing. I need a guide about creating company page, pls what are the things to avoid? Transparent Afr (talk) 12:34, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry, for one. 331dot (talk) 12:35, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Transparent Afr: I suggest reviewing WP:PSCOI, WP:PAID, WP:NCOMPANY and Help:Your first article. GoingBatty (talk) 14:52, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I've recently practiced writing/editing an article in the communal sandbox. I would like to submit the article for an editor's review and consideration. Because I have a conflict of interest, I was directed to the disclosure page. Can't quite figure out how move forward as I'm given a message that I don't have permission to create a page. Any suggestions? Thanks in advance. 2607:FEA8:3FDE:9B00:898A:E5C1:587D:C242 (talk) 16:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. I recommend that you create an account: this is not required, but it makes it easier for people to interact with you. Either way, what you can do (with or without an account) is to create a draft using the articles for creation process - and if you have a COI, you should do it that way anyway. Also read Your first article if you haven't already. --ColinFine (talk) 16:28, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Incidentally, the Sandbox has already been cleared, but you can retrieve what you did in it by going to its history, picking the last version you created, going "Edit", and copying the source. You need to read about formatting references. --ColinFine (talk) 16:31, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

The School of Architecture at Taliesin page is out of date because the School has changed its name to The School of Architecture. (See cited source within the page; the legal documentation of the name change can be found at https://ecorp.azcc.gov/CommonHelper/GetFilingDocuments?barcode=20090410077820.) What is necessary to change the page title? Jopdrix (talk) 15:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jopdrix: I have moved the article from The School of Architecture at Taliesin to The School of Architecture. In the future, you can start a conversation on the article's talk page when you have suggestions for the article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:42, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I'm brand new at this but I have gone through the tutorial and created a new article/page in my sandbox. Can I now somehow edit the name of my Sandbox and submit it for review for publishing? Thanks! Vegan4theAnimals (talk) 17:15, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Vegan4theAnimals Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have no edits other than this comment. Have you saved ("published") your sandbox yet? 331dot (talk) 17:18, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

The sandbox article is at User:Vegan4theAnimals/sandbox. Vegan4theAnimals, I suggest you use the article Wizard. You will go through a series of questions at each step to help you understand what is required for a successful draft. The last step is "Draft creation". In the box put the title, in this case Tamerlaine Sanctuary and Preserve, press the bar saying "create new article draft". When the preloaded page comes up, paste in the text from your sandbox and hit publish. Voceditenore (talk) 17:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Update, Vegan4theAnimals. User:331dot has kindly added a template to your sandbox page which makes the whole thing easier. Just follow the instructions on the template. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

When I'm trying to fill in more info for a citation that was just a bare URL, should the "access date" be the date I'm accessing it, or that of the person who originally inserted the citation? What about in the case of if a bare URL is dead and I manage to find a Wayback Machine capture that was from the day the user had added it? And is any of this written anywhere in Wikipedia's help section? I couldn't find much in particular about the access date. Undead Shambles (talk) 11:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Undead Shambles. If the content on the website still verifies the prose, then just put the date you're accessing it. There are parameters called 'url-status' and 'archive-date' for the other scenario you describe. More information can found by reading the examples section here. Zindor (talk) 11:49, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! --Undead Shambles (talk) 11:53, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Undead Shambles. Just to add a bit more on this subject, access dates are for sources that can change; URLs that can go dead, and the like. (If a site gets taken down then the access date is useful in finding the page [or the right version of the page] in an archive; knowing when it was last live, and contained the putative verifying material.) For that reason, there is no need to place access dates for true paper sources, e.g., a book that you are citing and providing a courtesy link to a scanned copy. Just on the possibility it might be helpful as an example, for such a paper book, what's usually cited for transparent attribution is title, author(s), page(s) [that verify your addition], year, publisher, isbn and url if available. As to help pages on this, a quick look at places where I thought I'd find info failed; I only found past discussion, such as here. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:27, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Undead Shambles P.S. Aha: Help:Citation Style 1#Access date.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:34, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification and the links Fuhghettaboutit! And that in fact answered another question that had been on my mind in the past but I forgot about (what to do in the case of link to a book). :) --Undead Shambles (talk) 17:48, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Undead Shambles: Anytime!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:14, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I have found a draft that is the same thing as a redirect already existing (Worm_on_a_string, Draft:Worm_on_a_string) Would I start a AfD? CSD doesn't have a category for this. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 17:50, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

WhoAteMyButter, A10? S Philbrick(Talk) 18:08, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@WhoAteMyButter: I would simply leave it there (and decline it as redirect if it gets submitted). WP:a10 only applies to things in article space. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:36, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I think it's intended as a redirect in mainspace, but is just going through AfC, and not actually supposed to be a redirect from draftspace. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 18:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Drafts can be redirected to mainspace. I have noticed that some editors really really think that stuff in draft space should be deleted as soon as possible, but that is a side issue. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:48, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

CSD A10 is only for articles, not drafts as far as I can see at WP:ACSD RudolfRed (talk) 18:55, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi editors!

I'm a bit confused about an article I've submitted because it's been flagged for not having noteworthy news sources. I read the guidelines on notability and I'm not entirely sure which articles I should remove or add.

I've checked other companies for citations and TechCrunch and Forbes 30 under 30 are okay and some tech companies even use blogging sites like Lifehacker.

Since I'm creating stubs for companies in Germany, I want to figure this out so I can do it properly. I'm not being paid for it. There are just so many good Germany-based companies around that don't have English pages.

Thanks! Marx J Engels (talk) 16:29, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Marx J Engels, and welcome to the Teahouse. You'll have to ask Robert McClenon for detail about why he declined Draft:Passbase, but you can start off by reading his coments more carefully. He did not say that it didn't have "noteworthy news sources". He said it had a lack of "significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject" - all three parts of that are important, not just reliability. He also said that it was "written from the viewpoint of the company": Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. On the subject of TechCrunch, SPS says that "Careful consideration should be given to whether a piece is written by staff or as a part of their blog, as well as whether the piece/writer may have a conflict of interest, and to what extent they rely on public relations material from their subject for their writing. TechCrunch may be useful for satisfying verifiability, but may be less useful for the purpose of determining notability." --ColinFine (talk) 16:38, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Marx J Engels. Agreeing with everything above, I'd just note that the fact you can find other articles with poor sourcing (if indeed that's the case; context is everything) is a good argument for editing those articles to include better sources, and if they actually are not on notable subjects (because insufficient reliable, secondary, independent sources exist, treating them in substantive detail), after checking, to nominate them for deletion and so forth. The mere fact other articles exist that may not comport with our standards, policies and guidelines has little precedential value because of the nature of this site – how article are built and assessed or not assessed. We have loads of content that needs changing or removal. See WP:OTHERSTUFF. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:08, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both for the clarification! Marx J Engels

The explanations given by User:ColinFine and User:Fuhghettaboutit are reasonable summaries of why I declined the draft. (They read my comments.) In particular, what the company says about itself is less important than what third parties say about the company. Also, looking at other articles on other companies is not always helpful. We have 6.2 million articles, and some of them are good, and some of them are not so good, and some of the articles should be deleted. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:18, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I am an author of the first-ever book on Indian women in engineering. I would like to get an entry into Wikipedia on the book ([[ https://smile.amazon.com/Roots-Wings-Inspiring-Stories-Engineering-ebook/dp/B07GZW1FCF%7CRoots & Wings: Inspiring stories of Indian women in Engineering)]] and also myself, the author. Can you help me do this?

Thank you. Girijasister (talk) 16:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Girijasister: Please read WP:PROMO, WP:Notability and WP:PSCOI. GoingBatty (talk) 16:45, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Girijasister. The indications I see, after targeted searches, and given that you published this book through Notion Press, a print-on-demand book publisher, are that the book is not notable – under both the general notability guideline and our subject specific notability guideline for books – and that you are not notable as well, or at best, are of questionable notability.

That statement can sound harsh to people when "hearing" that word in its vernacular sense, rather than in the specific sense way we use it here. Let me just say on that issue that the vast majority of the world's organizations, people and their products are not notable either – I am not notable, in Wikipedia's sense of the word. As an outsider, just running online searches, I absolutely could be wrong. It could be that there does exist, and I failed to find, the multiple, published, reliable, secondary, independent sources that treat the book (or you or both) in substantive detail, upon which a suitable article can be founded. You, of course, are far more likely to be aware of what has been published about you and the book than I could be. (On that subject, please note that: this is the type of source that might be useful; the many mere mentions, blogs; social media, places selling the book, etc., I found, are not.)

Nevertheless, be aware every day we delete a few hundred pages on non-notable subjects (and many more as unsalvageably promotional drafts, written by insiders misusing Wikipedia to promote themselves and their products; or whose drafts got deleted because they violated copyright, including by their use of their own non-free copyrighted writing, that they have published elsewhere on the web), who were not realistic and wasted their time writing about a subject that did not warrant an article. Of course, most of them failed to "read the manual", and treated this place like a social networking site, or résumé forum rather than an encyclopedia.

If you are intent on proceeding, despite your conflict of interest, then I hope you will consider at the least two takeaways from this post: 1) you must comply with WP:PAID, since you could not have a more direct financial connection than writing about your product; and 2) the right way to write an article is to gather your sources first–third-party-authored, reliable sources, entirely independent of you, and then write only about what they verify, citing those sources as you go for all significant factual statements; primary sources can only be used in limited ways and do nothing to help demonstrate notability. See also, generally, Wikipedia:Autobiography and Help:Your first article. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:09, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I need to clarify something above. I thought the source I linked to from The Times of India was a fairly decent one for use, where I didn't find many others. Actually, it appears I'm mistaken; that this newspaper-site "article" is actually part of their blogging platform, that anyone can sign up for, and so is user-generate content.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I have created many times page with the name "DM Somnath" on Wikipedia but it was deleted by Wikipedia for the reasons. Please tell me which kind of external link I need to use for creating the Wikipedia person page. Digimarksomnath (talk) 16:59, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Digimarksomnath, looking at the page's deletion log, it appears that it was deleted because it didn't make any assertion of significance, and was speedily deleted. You should also be aware that writing about yourself is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:15, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

To add to this, we have articles on topics only if they meet our "notability" definition. Notability is an external trait not related to how good an article you can write—the majority of people who want a Wikipedia article are not notable because they just haven't been covered in newspapers, books or reliable sources of the appropriate depth and scope. Such people will never get an article no matter how much they try. On the flip side, those who are notable need to make extremely strong claims to this by citing as many reliable sources about them but independent of them (i.e. not written by the subject themselves, someone they work with, someone they've paid etc.) as possible. — Bilorv (talk) 19:48, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

So I know that you start as a user, then after 4 days and 10 edits, you become an administered user, but what is after that? Brothers of Bear (talk) 18:58, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Added a heading RudolfRed (talk) 19:03, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

After 4 days and 10 edits your account becomes autoconfirmed. It will take many years and lots of good edits before you qualify as an administrator. After 30 days and 500 edits, your account will be "extended confirmed". There is no "chain of command". RudolfRed (talk) 19:05, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Brothers of BearYou may be looking for Wikipedia:User access levels.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

There are various user access levels, but these are much more narrow in scope than many people expect. For instance, if an administrator and an unregistered user are having a discussion about whether to include a fact in an article, both are on equal footing. Neither have the "right" to impose any action on the other. The outcome of the situation, at least in theory, depends on whose argument is stronger. Administrator privileges are about two things: (1) uncontroversial actions that would be bad if in the hands of a malicious user (like the power to block obvious trolls); (2) the ability to implement consensus, the result of other users who have come to a conclusion (like the decision to delete a page). Similarly, autoconfirmation is not about being, say, responsible enough to edit semi-protected pages. It is simply that if an account like that goes power mad then it is easy for the disruption to be prevented (block the account and the person can't just create another one and go back to business straight away). — Bilorv (talk) 19:42, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Brothers of Bear. Actually, the way it works is that Wikipedia's elfs, ogres, fairies, and their brethren, marching forth rank-by-rank (e.g., Most Perfect Tutnums, etc.), gang together and attempt to crush under their heel the awful frumious Bandersnatches (such as Trolls), mostly by starving them of sustenance; prime weapons in the fight include fairy dust, blocks of ice and glue traps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I wish to review rejected article(s) related to my subject to see if I can make one publishable and to see what sources they relied upon. A draft I'm working was rejected and when looking at a list of related rejected articles one had the name of my subject but I moved away from it and now can't find that list. How can I search the contents of any submission to find relatable content? Thanks.Owilli2019 (talk) 19:02, 8 February 2021 (UTC) Owilli2019 (talk) 19:02, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Owilli2019. I think you're looking for the link to a historical revision in the history of the redirect from his name, provided to you in your prior Teahouse question here. Please advise if that's not what you meant. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:21, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello. My discussion about my draft article is not what I'm looking for. The draft I seek was about organized crime or mafia and it had Joe Conforte's name in it. I can deliver on the facts on Joe and others to a point where maybe that draft could be an article? I don't know because I didn't read the draft. I'm grabbing at straws and I don't want to waste your time. Thank you.Owilli2019 (talk) 19:43, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I think you're describing what the above user is trying to point you to, this permanent link of a now-redirected page called "Joe Conforte". You can see the page's full edit history and all of its old revisions at [4]. Otherwise, if it's a page you've edited then take a look through your contribution history, Special:Contributions/Owilli2019. If not we could learn more with the exact name of the page at which it was hosted (even if that page has now been deleted). But without this it would be hard to find what you're describing. — Bilorv (talk) 19:53, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep looking. It was a group of drafts rejected because of reliable sources, I believe. Next month I'll look for articles and drafts to improve after my article is hopefully published. :)Owilli2019 (talk) 21:44, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, this is my article: User:Godzillavsme/sandbox

I need the codes to make the page right. Can anyone help me? Like the sidebox and proper format. Godzillavsme (talk) 17:17, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Godzillavsme, if you are referring to infoboxes, see this. Thanks, Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 17:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Godzillavsme: A good way to see how to do something is to look at how someone else already did it. Find an article about a similar subject, click the "Edit" tab to open it up in the editor, find the relevant code for what you want (like the {{Infobox blah| ...}} near the top, and copy/paste the code to your draft, changing the details as needed. Close the edit window on the similar article without "Publishing", since you're not trying to make any changes to it. You can also read documentation for a template by going to its page (Template:Infobox blah in my example). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:44, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Can someone in the Teahouse check and review this draft, Draft:List of 2021 PBA season transactions? Thank you. Jayjay2020 (talk) 01:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jayjay2020: Looks like you already resubmitted the draft. GoingBatty (talk) 01:48, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I wanted to know if I’m on the right track. This artist has wilkepedia credits with other musicians refer his name on wilkepedia, how do I connect the 2? Syent713 (talk) 02:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

At the top of the editing hotbar is a link button. From there you can insert custom links like this. To insert links manually, read Help:Link. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 03:09, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I've been working on creating guidelines for the WP:PODCASTING Wikiproject and I started a conversation about creating a manual of style at the wikiproject talk page (here) and someone mentioned WP:MOS. I was hoping to start a subpage at WP:MOS for podcast articles and I was wondering if anyone here could point me in the right direction. A quick summary and links to commonly used help pages on the guidelines and expectations would be extremely helpful and I would tremendously appreciate it. TipsyElephant (talk) 01:58, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, hmm, I guess the relevant question is, how much style information is there specific to podcasts that it'd be important to note? Most projects that have an in-house style guide are a lot broader/more active than WP:PODCASTING, so be careful not to contribute to WP:CREEP and be wary of how the page might fall out of date if unmaintained. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Can I change the permission of an image once it has been uploaded? Several images I uploaded were deleted and I'm unsure what is the best way to proceed. They're images to illustrate the page of an alive person, provided to me by the person - that illustrate things about his career. i.e. an image of the person imparting a seminar, with colleagues at the place of work, etc. GM 03:20, 9 February 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pamvzt (talk • contribs)

No. Whoever owns the image's copyright needs to go through the procedure at WP:Donating copyrighted materials. Unless a contract stipulates otherwise, the copyright holder for an image is the person who was behind/controlling the camera. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 03:43, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

How do I cite a picture as opposed to a url? Rosenberg.suzanne (talk) 02:19, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Rosenberg.suzanne, you could try citing the URL for the picture, maybe? Be careful you're not doing original research, though. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:20, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Rosenberg.suzanne: You already posted this at Wikipedia:Help_desk#citations. Please don't post the same question in multiple locations at the same time. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I’ve just successfully uploaded this image and would like to make it available in the wikiLove templates. I could not make sense of the instructions and have accessibility challenges (editing from an iPad or iPhone. Could you help? Hoping for help completing task, not just advice. Thanks very much!

 DrMel (talk) 00:48, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@DrMel: Usually, WikiLove syntax just uses tables to do it. If you use Twinkle, the Wikilove prompt will let you customize everything except for the background color. A couple other ones use Template:WikiLove, but the text doesn't seem to be very customizable except for a trailing comment at the end. I don't know how much you can get done on mobile, but try tinkering around with this syntax to create your own:

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Heart Labyrinth.png|120px]] |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thank you for being awesome! ~~~~ |}

Produces:

Thank you for being awesome! ~~~~

Hope this helps! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

In my endeavours to follow Wikipedia's editing process I seem to have fallen fowl of the system. At all times I have identified my link to 'Jimmy MacDonald' I have identified the difficulties that I have experienced in actually carrying out the complete editing process. I have followed advice given. Please advise if a (copy) Birth Certificate purchased through the legal channels within the UK (the only way this can be purchased) can not be used as the 'Citation needed' for both correct change of 'Birth Place' (from Dundee to Crewe) and change of 'Citizenship' (from Scottish-United States to British-United States)Jaqor1 (talk) 09:09, 8 February 2021 (UTC).Jaqor1 (talk) 09:09, 8 February 2021 (UTC) Jaqor1 (talk) 09:09, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jaqor1: Since you have a conflict of interest, you can add the {{request edit}} template when you post on Talk:Jimmy MacDonald (sound effects artist) to get more visibility to your requests. Wikipedia is not interested in seeing a birth certificate. Instead, it is important to see what independent reliable sources have to say about MacDonald. GoingBatty (talk) 14:49, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately I can not find the {{request edit}} template? I can find the {{request edit}} page via your message but nothing how to add to Jimmy MacDonald's Talk page. Please advise.Jaqor1 (talk) 17:25, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jaqor1: Just copy {{request edit}} and paste it at the top of your proposed edit on the talk page. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:28, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I spent a lot of time working on an article for a subject that hasn't been written about yet and somehow It got deleted is there anyway to get it back? Leoellsworth (talk) 02:49, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Leoellsworth, what was the page? You can make a request at WP:REFUND, but it may not be granted depending on the circumstances. If the topic you wrote about does not pass the notability guideline, it won't be possible to restore the page. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:19, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I am guessing it was Speedy deleted or considered only promotional, as no draft or article shows up at your editing history. You could leave a message at the Talk page of the Administrator who deleted it. David notMD (talk) 08:32, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

"Ashish Chanchlani (This title is protected) " was removed for not being notable. But I believe it can be recreated, as all notable sources for the article are from well-known news websites. I probably don't know how to write an article, because any contribution I made to that article proved to be wrong. But if a user wants to recreate Ashish Chanchalani, I would appreciate it. And I wanted to make it as a fan. Marwadi Indian (talk) 06:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Title has been salted due to persistent recreation after multiple snow delete votes. If sources of notability ever do appear, a more experienced editor can help recreate it. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 06:39, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

You posted a question about this topic at Teahouse four days ago and a reply was "There is no "mistake" that can be "fixed". The community has recognised the fact that this person does not meet the notability requirements. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashish Chanchlani from July 2020, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashish A. Chanchlani from August 2020, and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Ashish Chanchlani from October 2020. Non-notable people can become notable, but the draft clearly shows that nothing has changed since October 2020 (and apparently not since 2017 when articles about this person were first being deleted, re-created, and deleted again.) Asking volunteer reviewers to donate their own time to review this article is not productive or helpful to Wikipedia, and creating it under yet another article is a form of gaming the system."

I think that is a "No". David notMD (talk) 08:42, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Is there a way to secure wikipage 196.22.6.199 (talk) 11:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Do you mean how to protect a Wikipedia article from inappropriate edits? If so, please read Wikipedia:Protection policy.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:49, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

And if you mean how to protect 'your' Wikipedia from any modifications not approved by you, please read WP:OWN. --CiaPan (talk) 11:53, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

please i have a serious problem while using latex software ,i was typing with the software when my system went off ,immediately i restarted my laptop and everything was wiped off but my pdf files was still in my laptop, i cant find the main software were i typed my work because its completely wiped off, please how can i get my typed documents on my latex back, i can only see the pdf files but not the softwares(Latex) that typed the work  129.205.124.85 (talk) 11:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm afraid that this is not the right place for this question: this page is for questions about using and editing Wikipedia only. It is possible that somebody can help you at the Computing section of the Wikipedia Reference Desk, but in all honesty, I doubt if you have provided enough information that anybody can help you. --ColinFine (talk) 12:35, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Jashn Agnihotri

Why Jashn Agnihotri Wikipedia Article is not published ? i tried my level best but i am failed. Please help me with it AsliRahulGupta (talk) 11:51, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, AsliRahulGupta. Not counting the three sources in Hindi, which I haven't attempted to read, there is not one source you have given that both has significant coverage of Agnihotri, and is independent of her. Unless all three of the Hindi sources meet these standards (and are reliably published, which I also haven't checked), then there is nothing which establishes Agnihotri's notability. If you have "tried your level best", then that strongly implies that she does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Remember that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 12:46, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi {{ColinFine}} Sir now i remove all that three Hindi sources. will you please help me out for this. I am not much aware about Editing on wikipedia. What can i do now ?

 Seansrobloxvideosandmore2 (talk) 14:03, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

We'll try and answer you in your section above, please don't shout. Zindor (talk) 14:07, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Keep getting some pop-up notice about some Lupin plugin not working that appears then disappears. Anyone know what it's from? Govvy (talk) 11:57, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Govvy, while it's possible someone here will know, you might get a better answer at VP Tech. Regards, Zindor (talk) 12:20, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

k, I shall repost and try there, thanks. Govvy (talk) 12:24, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Note: Now resolved at VPT. Zindor (talk) 14:28, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, my article-draft about Krahn Chemie was declined. I know that paid content is not gladly seen, but my aim is always to be as objective as if I had not customer relationship. So I think, this article matches the criteria of wikipedia. After all it is a 1:1-translation from the german wikipedia, where this Content was uncritical accepted. For an international acting company it is from my view relevant to be also in the english issue of wikipedia. So I am wondering, why this content was declined.

Also I know, that trade publications in the anglo-area are very near to the industry. The german trade press, where the most of the sources are taken from, are not that near to the companies compared to British oder us-publications. Furthermore it is usual, that industry news are appearing in the industry press.

So, what can I do to get this matching your criteria in e.wikipedia.org?

Looking forward to your replies. Kibonaut (talk) 10:26, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Kibonaut Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please be advised that each language version of Wikipedia is its own project, with their own editors and policies. What is acceptable on the German Wikipedia is not necessarily acceptable here on the English Wikipedia.

Your draft was declined because it relies almost entirely on primary sources. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company says about itself. An English Wikipedia article should only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. If a company does not receive significant coverage in independent sources, it would not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. 331dot (talk) 10:33, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I think I understand Kibonaut to be saying that trade publications that he has cited are actually more independent than they seem, unlike similar US/UK publications. Perhaps Victor Schmidt is more familiar with this idea and could lend his opinion. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:27, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hm. Chemistry isn't exactly my favorite topic area, but I took a look. And What I found doesn't seem to favour an article here.

• The first source, [5] is a directory entry on wer-zu-wem.de
• The second source, [6] is the company website, so not independent
• The third source, [7] is published on a publishing company website, but apepars to have some reliability.
• The fourth source, [8] looks unreliable at first, but seems like a trading journal for plastic progressing, so likely reliable
• The remaining sources are substantially identical (sometimes with slight modifications) identical to articles on the company website. For example, this one on chemie.de is substantially identical to [9] so probbably unreliable. Articles on chemie.de are also partially mirrored from Wikipedia.
• no exception to this is the last source, [10] which uses indirect sppech, with the aparent source being [11], so can be considered a primary source.

To conclude, I am not convinced that the company meets WP:NCORP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:05, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you all at first for the fast and helpful replies! I see the english Wikipedia focusses on other criteria than the german Issue. For companies in the german Wikipedia-Project the company figures like revenues, number of branches count, here we have reliable sources. Got that so far. In front of this I understand the reservations about the article, but still think, the Krahn Chemie is notable as an international player in the chemical industry. I'll try to provide some more reliable sources. btw: In draft there is also the article about the Holding Otto Krahn Group. Hopefully that works.Kibonaut (talk) 15:03, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

 Seansrobloxvideosandmore2 (talk) 10:05, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Seansrobloxvideosandmore2, "It doesn't work" could mean a dozen different things. How do you expect people to help you when you don't explain the problem you are having? --ColinFine (talk) 11:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Sean, here's some questions:

• Where are you uploading the file, Wikipedia or Commons?
• What's the file extension, .jpeg?
• Did you create the image?

Zindor 14:12, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Seansrobloxvideosandmore2: You may wish to read the advice given at Wikipedia:Uploading images, where I have just added the following clarification:

Certain file formats are not accepted on Wikimedia Projects, and may need to be converted to a supported free format prior to uploading. Additionally, some file types produce better results than others. For more information on preferred file formats accepted for sound, video and image files at Wikimedia Commons, see Commons:File types.

Hope this helps a bit. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:17, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Should we add content based categories even to pages which redirect to distinguish pages. ExclusiveEditor (talk) 15:01, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Good question, ExclusiveEditor! In general, no, we should not do that. There is further explanation at WP:SPECIFICCAT as well as a link there to a further page of advice for use under certain specific circumstances. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

IS there a way to send a multilingual link to the wikipedia page that corresponds to the language of the browser of the user? I want something like: https://xx.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloe_vera that the browser automatically redirects to the user's native language if it exists, or else to the english version. Brinerustle (talk) 12:06, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

SOLVED: you can do this with the URL produced by https://qrpedia.org/, just replace this part of the URL:

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

with:

//en.qrwp.org/

and it works! doesn't work so well in languages with non-ascii symbols.

AFAIK there is no automated way to send the user to their native-language article on different projects. On multilangual projects, it might be possible to redirect to user preferences language within the same project. Multilanguag projects are mainly Wikimedia Commons and Metwiki. There it works via Special:MyLanguage/insert page title here. The qrwp.org/ stuff doesn't seem to be affilated with Wikipedia in any way, nor am I able to infer how it works. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:53, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

There is an explanation for how this works at the article QRpedia Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:06, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I was reading up on the biography of Frances Brundage and there is no mention of her doing illustrations for William Dafoe. Why is that? Robinson Crusoe was the second book next to the bible with the most translations in the world. I find it very odd that her illustrations to this very famous author not mentioned. 142.167.237.26 (talk) 15:03, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I think you mean Daniel Defoe. --ColinFine (talk) 15:55, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. You are quite right and, assuming you can find a suitable source which confirms this (and there are many, as here), you are free to add this information to the article yourself, if you wish. Alternatively, you might feel happier just leaving your suggestion at Talk:Frances Brundage and hope another editor will act on your suggestion. In fact, article talk pages are the best places to raise concerns about errors and omissions in articles. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I would like to be noticed so i can work with others who have a common goal. Starman2377 (talk) 15:49, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Starman2377, and welcome to the Teahouse. There are lots of bad ways to get noticed on Wikipedia (which is only one out of thousands and thousands of wikis, by the way), but the only good way to get noticed is by doing lots of edits that improve the encyclopaedia. But if you are looking for editors who share your interests, have a look at WikiProjects, and see if you can find one (or more than one) that suits you. --ColinFine (talk) 16:06, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I created a draft Jisbar a week ago and I would like to know when can I hope to see my wikipedia page published ? Thanks :) Sarah Desse (talk) 16:17, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I created a draft Jisbar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jisbar) 2 weeks ago. I have to wait but I wanted to know when can I hope to see it published ? Thanks :) Sarah Desse (talk) 16:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Declined. Address Reviewer comments before resubmitting. David notMD (talk) 16:45, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kittyo/sandbox

I have written a draft article about Anglo-Welsh novelist, Cledwyn Hughes, who was my father. I am using the beta visual editor which I find helpful. I understood that pressing 'publish' in a sandbox would send the article for review by a more experienced editor. I wanted to also make it known that I am his daughter before it was published fully, if accepted. I have pressed the publish button but I am now puzzled as to whether I have submitted the article for review or need to take another step. The article is still showing sandbox labels at the bottom of it. I would be grateful with any help you can give me on either getting help with the draft or declaring my relationship with the subject. Thanks! Kittyo (talk) 11:08, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kittyo, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for being open about yout conflict of interest - have you read conflict of interest?

"Publish" that you chose means only "make this page publicly visible", not "publish to the encyclopaedia" - I have added a header with a button so that you can submit itfor review. But you need to start by removing all the references to unreliable sources (such as Wikipedia and blogs), so that the reliable, independent, substantial sources that are required to establish notability are evident. Remember that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 11:54, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I removed the use of Wikipedia articles as references, replacing those with Wikilinks (which turns the words blue). References for the books he has written do not contribute to confirming his notability. You needs to find stuff to use as references published about him (not by him). And on your User page, state that Cledwyn Hughes was your father. David notMD (talk) 13:30, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

It is now at Draft:Cledwyn Hughes as a not-yet-submitted draft. David notMD (talk) 16:46, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I have RedWarn installed but it does not show up. What is going on? 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 16:43, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi there @Kepler-1229b! What browser are you using and have you made sure to reload your cache? — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:53, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I've noticed in your common.js, there appear to be a stray : on the first line, before mw.loader.load( '/w/index.php?title=User:Evad37/rater.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript' ); // Backlink: User:Evad37/rater.js. Could you try removing it, as it likely is causing a syntax error. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:57, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

What are Deleted edits? ExclusiveEditor (talk) 15:26, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: These are mostly edits that one person has added, but which a subsequent user has removed in a follow-up edit. You can still see the deleted edit by looking at the 'View History' tab of an article, which shows every edit ever made to a page. (There are a few exceptions to this, where particularly obnoxious our personal content has been blanked from view by an administrator (see this explanation of how that process works). Nick Moyes (talk) 15:37, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

"Deleted edits" in the "Edit count" tool (https://xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org/ExclusiveEditor) are edits to pages which have subsequently been deleted. Only administrators can see such edits. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:07, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey teahouse, I have a question regarding the uploading of photos to Wikipedia. Almost every relevant album on the English Wikipedia has a photo of its cover art to accompany its article. How do I do this? I presume cover art for albums meets the criteria for fair use here. versacespace (talk) 17:42, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

VersaceSpace, have you checked Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:46, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello All, this is my first Talk question after beginning drafts for the Vratislav Stula biography. I received a "talk" message today claiming all of my wikimedia images may be deleted. The media I have upload are my own documents, from my archives, my property, my images from my camera, and do not have any copyrights associated. Ironically, the "talk" message I received to delete my media has disappeared. Did I upload my images incorrectly? Was the "talk" message claiming to delete my images legitimate? Thank you Wikipedians! Cheers --GerardPaulStula (talk) 18:42, 9 February 2021 (UTC) GerardPaulStula (talk) 18:42, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

GerardPaulStula, are you perhaps referring to the message on your Commons page here? Chaheel Riens (talk) 18:52, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, GerardPaulStula. The messages are at your user talk page at Commons, which is separate from your user talk page at Wikipedia. What it is saying is that you have uploaded those files without specifying what the copyright is. Commons assumes that all materials are copyright, and so not acceptable, unless the uploader qualifies them to explain exactly how it is that they are free: are they in the public domain by reason of age? Are they the uploader's copyright, in which case the uploaded must explicitly release them under licence CC-BY-SA or equivalent? Has the copyright owner explicitly released them?

It seems to me that many of those documents are copyright, and the copyright is owned by somebody other than you: this remains the case even if the owner cannot be traced. You need to clarify this for each one.

But I'm wondering why you are uploading all these. If they are to illustrate an article, that's fine, as long as the copyright issue is met. But if you are intending to use them as sources for information, please be aware that all sources used in a Wikipedia article must have been published by a reputable party with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking. an article should be based almost entirelty on reliable Secondary sources; published primary sources may be used in limited was, but information which has not been published may never be included in an article: see WP:OR. --ColinFine (talk) 19:00, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

They are indeed being used as sources here User:GerardPaulStula/sandbox. Theroadislong (talk) 19:10, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the alert. The media I have upload are my own documents, from my archives, my property, my images from my camera, and do not have any associated copyrights. Should I insert the {{Cc-by-4.0}} code to the media files list above? What is the proper way to insert this code? Thank you again. Cheers--GerardPaulStula (talk) 19:16, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@GerardPaulStula: You should only include that code if they are images that you truly created yourself. A photograph of an existing photograph is not a new image; the copyright still belongs to the original creator. —C.Fred (talk) 19:37, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

GerardPaulStula: unless you can definitively show that some of those documents and photos are in the public domain, there is no way that you can keep them in Commons. But, as Theroadislong has pointed out, you are attempting to use them as sources. This is a waste of your time, and ours. As I said above, all information in a Wikipedia article must come from a reliable published source, and most of it from secondary sources.

On the other hand, the picture of Stula you probably will be able to use, because once your draft is accepted as an article (and not before) it is likely that you can upload that photo to Wikipedia (not to Commons) as a non-free content, as long as you make sure it satisfies all of the non-free content criteria. --ColinFine (talk) 21:58, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

How do I create a Wikipedia bio? Ybmad (talk) 19:11, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ybmad: Thank you for considering creating an article! The first think you would need to do would be to locate multiple reliable sources that provide extensive coverage of the subject. Then you can start work on the article. You might want to start as a draft by putting Draft: in front of the name of the article (example: Draft:Clark Kent). Once the draft has been reviewed and meets the necessary criteria, then you can request assistance in moving it to main article space. —C.Fred (talk) 19:40, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I'll expand on C.Fred's advice, Ybmad: I would advise anybody who has not already created several articles to create a draft using the article wizard. I would also advise reading your first article carefully; and frankly, I would advise you to get several weeks' or months' experience improving existing articles before you try this extremely difficult task. One more point: if the biography you are intended to create is of yourself, please don't. autobiography is strongly discouraged. --ColinFine (talk) 22:04, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

What WikiFauna fits me? There are to many faunas on there, and I don't know which fits me. Please help! JennilyW (talk) 21:21, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

JennilyW, you'll have to figure that out for yourself haha! Some wikifauna are better known than others (gnomes being the best known), and you don't need to identify as any particular fauna to edit. A (perhaps) comprehensive list is at Wikipedia:WikiFauna. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:46, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm very new here. I tried to make some edits to a site based on new information, and a thoughtful editor made changes. I would like to chat with that person, but I don't know the process or protocol for communicating within Wikipedia. Is there a way to contact someone by way of their nickname? Lambjet (talk) 22:55, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, Lambjet! Welcome to Wikipedia! Each user on Wikipedia has a talk page. For example, yours is at User talk:Lambjet, and mine is at User talk:sportzpikachu. Articles have their own talk pages too! For example, the talk page for Google would be Talk:Google. On talk pages, you can leave messages for other editors by pressing the "new section" button at the top of the page, then include a subject and message. Make sure to sign your messages with four tildes (~~~~), and happy editing! ―sportzpikachu _{my talkcontribs} 23:58, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

How do you delete a page on Wikita that was previously rejected on Wikipedia and which was deleted?

I had created a Wikipedia page for someone, which was rejected, and which I later found had inaccurate information. This wikipedia page was deleted, but this person still shows up on Wikita.

I am also not able to use my Login for Wikipedia on Wikita, and I am not able to delete the page; when looking to request a edit, it comes up with a plan page that says you need to pay for changes?

I want to delete this page because I do not want this inaccurate information for this individual to display on their SEO

Please advise. JonahFerguson (talk) 00:03, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@JonahFerguson: You will need to ask that site (which is not affiliated with Wikipedia) on how to delete the page. You may not be able to, because when you posted to Wikipedia, you agreed that the text could be reused by anyone for any purpose as long as they provide attribution per the license. RudolfRed (talk) 00:49, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi JonahFerguson. Wikipedia is entirely unaffiliated with Wikitia. Nevertheless, a quick google search located that site's deletion policy. However, because that site is blacklisted here, the software prevents me from saving this post with the URL included. Just navigate to that site and type into the search box "Wikitia:Deletion_policy". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:52, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey teahouse, can someone please reduce the monstrous image size of the lead photo at this article. Thank you. versacespace (talk)

 Done, VersaceSpace. The image field in the infobox should contain only the file name and no other wiki markup. I removed that extra stuff and the image displays properly now. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Cullen328, thank you. versacespace (talk) 01:08, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Greetings to all,

I recently found a page for Aaron Pilkington, who is a state representative. I think this article fails Wikipedia's notability guidelines. That is one thing, but it also appears the page was created and edited by its own subject. It was created by a username PilkingtonAM.

I'm not sure how our community handles this sort of thing, and I wanted to inquire. Kirby777 (talk) 02:25, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Kirby777, welcome to the Teahouse. While it's not strictly prohibited, autobiographical editing is frowned upon. The guideline permits some edits:

In clear-cut cases, it is permissible to edit pages connected to yourself. So, you can revert vandalism; but of course it has to be simple, obvious vandalism and not a content dispute. Similarly, you should feel free to remove obviously mistaken facts about yourself, such as marital status, current employer, place of birth, and so on. (Note it on the talk page.) If the fact has different interpretations, others will edit it.

Links removed. In other cases, it's best to use edit requests on the talk page to suggest changes to be implemented by other editors. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:29, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

WP:WARNVAND states that "...users should be warned for each and every instance of vandalism."

1. Does this include the last disruptive edit(s) a vandal has done before being reported to WP:AIV, or should warnings and reports not be done simultaneously for the same edit(s)?

2. Should a user be warned for old edits that constitute obvious vandalism which had been reverted by someone else a long time ago (without having issued a warning), even if such behaviour is no longer taking place? Oqwert (talk) 01:38, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

(1) This seems rather pointless. Posting to AIV shows that you've given up remonstrating with the user, so why also remonstrate with the user? (2) No. -- Hoary (talk) 03:33, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I agree doing so would be pointless but found that bit from the policy a bit confusing. Perhaps it could be reworded to make these exceptions clearer but I guess not that many people will interpret it literally. Oqwert (talk) 03:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

"Shukriyaa" is a 1998 Hindi Bollywood Drama movie but the page of this movie is not on Wikipedia. Source:

• https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0469826/fullcredits
• https://www.cinestaan.com/movies/shukriyaa-14914
• https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/shukriyaa Digimarksomnath (talk) 17:04, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

imdb is never a reliable source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:28, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

The other two do not provide enough content to support notability. Need better refs before you decide to try. David notMD (talk) 22:15, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Digimarksomnath: To learn more about Wikipedia's criteria for the inclusion of films, see Wikipedia:Notability (films). GoingBatty (talk) 04:32, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

How is the difference between Biography and Autobiography handled?Ggae1885 (talk) 22:06, 9 February 2021 (UTC) Ggae1885 (talk) 22:06, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

An autobiography is when you write about yourself, which is strongly discouraged. A biography is an article about someone else, which is no problem, unless you are connected to that person and so would have a conflict of interest. RudolfRed (talk) 22:07, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

On your User page you have clearly stated the nature of your conflict of interest, in that you have created Draft:Rita Asfour, which is about your wife. You may continue to work on the draft. And when satisfied with the completeness and quality, submit it. At the moment, the draft has serious problems. Sections have no references. The galleries of images are not working. David notMD (talk) 22:29, 9 February 2021 (UTC) David notMD (talk) 22:23, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Much to my chagrin all my images were deleted and I am working on learning how to fix my problems.

Can anyone please tell me how I am doing on my references?Ggae1885 (talk) 22:19, 9 February 2021 (UTC) Ggae1885 (talk) 22:19, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ggae1885: The "Early life" and "Malibu" don't have any references, so please add some before submitting the draft for review. You shouldn't use a Wikipedia article as a reference (see WP:CIRCULAR), so I converted it to a wikilink for you. I also fixed some technical issues with a couple of references for you. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:40, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Dear Wikipedia, I am writing as the author of an article - Draft:Ako Akhalaia. I, myself, am One of the contributors and editors of Georgian Wikipedia. It’s been a while since my submitted article is in the drafts section. You say that person - Ako Akhalaia does not meet the recognition criteria, and the article needs additional resources. Fifteen certified links accompany the article. Here are the leading media agencies of Georgia, the Public Broadcaster, etc. He is Also the official Representative of the Cannes Lions Festival in Georgia + Publisher of Harvard Business Review. This person is the founder of the most popular Marketing magazine in Georgia. His awareness in this area is very high. You can quickly check and verify this. We want to make sure that he can be found in the English Wikipedia as well, so if you do not mind, please, review the article again and help us as colleagues publish the article. I really appreciate any help you can provide.--გიორგი ჩუბინიძე (talk) 23:20, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@გიორგი ჩუბინიძე: You wrote "We want to make sure..." - who is "we"? You use reference #3 in the "Education" section, but the article mentions nothing about Akhalaia's education. I suggest you add more independent reliable sources, including one that confirms he is the "Publisher of Harvard Business Review". GoingBatty (talk) 04:49, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

 DBisutti (talk) 01:43, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia pages are not "owned" by anyone. To add a photo, read Help:Pictures. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 02:13, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Can anyone help me navigate how to upload a profile picture on my wikipedia profile page for Danielle Bisutti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danielle_Bisutti

Thanks for the help! DBisutti (talk) 01:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

DBisutti, welcome to the Teahouse. You may have understood what Wikipedia is for. It is for encyclopedic knowledge of a subject, and is not used to promote or advertise for them. As far as photos go, they can be used so long as it's released under Wikipedia's licences or meets fair use criteria; just be aware anyone can take said photos and use them for any reason —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:34, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@DBisutti: You (and your representatives) should not be editing the Wikipedia article about you - see Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. If you choose to upload a photo (using Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard), you can go to Talk:Danielle Bisutti and request that someone adds it to the article using the {{request edit}} template. GoingBatty (talk) 04:55, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I noticed a rather large company headquartered in California does not have its own article, Bay Alarm. But I am reserved as to start creating a new article about it for a couple reasons. I am not sure if it is popular enough to warrant an article on Wikipedia, and I am clueless about how to start creating a new article, seeing as I have never done so before. Can someone advise on if and how I should start? - NYBrook098 (talk) 05:02, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

NYBrook098, welcome to the Teahouse. The keyword you're looking for is notability instead of popularity. If you can find it being significantly covered by reliable sources that are independent from the subject, there's a possibility. There's more information about creating an article at Your first article; just be aware that creating an article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia and that if you go through the Articles for Creation process, reviewers will do their best to help you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:12, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Tenryuu, good point. I will do my research and make sure everything is reliable before I make my final decision. Thanks for your response. - NYBrook098 (talk) 05:17, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

NYBrook098, no worries. I'm not a reviewer myself, but if and when you create a draft, pick the best three (or four) sources from your repository. Reviewers tend to go through a lot of drafts in the backlog (I think in the thousands right now?), so drafts with no citation overkill will be more positively evaluated. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:19, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

How many edits did I make so far? Earthsmoke91 (talk) 13:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Earthsmoke91 You may view your contribution history here. I would suggest that you heed the comments on your user talk page and not be concerned with your edit count. 331dot (talk) 13:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

earthsmoke91 I'll defer to 331dot regarding the wisdom/unwisdom of checking your edit count, but if you still wish to check the number, you should check [12] - you can also access this link at the bottom of your contribution history. Airbornemihir (talk) 20:54, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Earthsmoke91, you have made 49 edits, including the one today in which you changed the first sentence of Death to say that it's only "semi-permanent". Thank you for self-reverting. I remind you: If you wish to be allowed to continue editing, then you need to stop making edits like that. Maybe before you make another edit, you should come to this page and ask editors here whether your idea for an edit is a good idea. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:51, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi all.

I've been an editor for a couple of years and I think I've done a pretty good job.

Mostly I create articles for early satellites that were just red links or NSSDC dumps. Occasionally, I am aghast to find truly embarrassing articles and then I spend too much time making them barely acceptable. For instance:

• this is now Spaceflight before 1951

• this is now Corona (satellite)

and today's salvage:

• Once this is now Aerobee

The latter two aren't done, per se, but they aren't embarrassing anymore, at least.

I guess my question is...am I accomplishing anything? It's quiet and lonely out here. I'd give a lot to know that what I'm doing is meaningful and valued.

Thanks for listening.

--Neopeius (talk) 05:39, 9 February 2021 (UTC) Neopeius

@Neopeius: From your user page, it is obvious that your contributions are valued (featured and good articles, and featured lists in review). If you are not enjoying it, then consider a WP:BREAK and continue the work later. RudolfRed (talk) 05:56, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Neopeius: Have a virtual hug from a stranger. Wikipedia's glad to have you. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

The work you've done to these articles clearly shows you've put a tremendous amount of effort into them! Your edits aren't "going to waste" or anything like that. No single person could possibly be expected to improve every corner, nook, and cranny of Wikipedia to perfection. Wikipedia is always a work in progress, and nothing will be 100% done. With that said, you've done a damn good job of making the article presentable and readable. Your work is certainly not overlooked or ignored. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 06:02, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Everyone has to take a break at various times. You will return refreshed. --Bduke (talk) 06:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Neopeius, one thing I like to do when questioning the impact of our work is play around with the pageviews tool a bit, and spend a beat internalizing just how many people read us. For instance, Corona (satellite) got 145,000 views over the past year. That's not a small number—imagine if you'd given a talk to an auditorium with 145,000 people, would you feel like you'd accomplished anything? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 09:18, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the words of encouragement. They help a lot. :) --Neopeius (talk) 14:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Yikes. To me, that (the pageviews thing) is incredibly depressing and discouraging. --bonadea contributions talk 07:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

This article was messed up by an IP address editor. What is the way to get some attention on it for some "patrollers" to get it fixed?

E.g., is there a template that can be added to the article? Or is it by some other mechanism, if any?

--Mortense (talk) 06:47, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Mortense, welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for pointing out the article; I've reverted it. In the future, you're able to do so yourself; most times you'll be able to go to the page's history, look for the revision that created the problem, and click the "undo" link. That will bring you to an editing window, and you can click Publish changes to reverse the changes in that area. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

The IP made two messed up edits. I have reverted the other. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I want to update my university's (METU Budapest) infobox but I wanted to ask if we are allowed to use private e-mails as reference? If so, is there a template/guideline for that? East6 (talk) 09:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

East6, Hello! No, you can't use private e-mails, even if you upload them to googledrive or something like that, see WP:RS. Per WP:ABOUTSELF you can, to a limited extent, use something like the university's official website. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:42, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Deleting previously uploaded images SitarBlue (talk) 09:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi,

I recently uploaded a series of images under my account that I would like removed but can't seem to find them linked to my account or any delete option. Could you help me this? There are permission-related reasons they need to be removed.

Thank you for your help.

• Hello SitarBlue, the images you uploaded are on Wikimedia Commons. You can find them here. Thanks, Jack Frost (talk) 10:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Jack Frost! How would I go about deleting these uploads? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SitarBlue (talk • contribs) 11:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

By going through the process described at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Mass deletion request. ("Mass" doesn't mean "vast quantities"; it means more than one, for the same reason.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:15, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Martinevans is removing an addition I wrote and I need to give him further information to better understand my article. 217.61.224.100 (talk) 12:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse Every user has a user talk page which you may use to communicate with them. It is usually linked to in a user's signature, and can also be found in article edit histories. To help you, I will link to it: User talk:Martinevans123. 331dot (talk) 13:17, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

In fact, you might find it useful to read BRD. This is how Wikipedia often works: somebody makes an edit, somebody disagrees and reverts it, and then they have a discussion to reach an agreement on how to make Wikipedia better. --ColinFine (talk) 13:25, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Few drafts I worked on and moved to mainspace were moved back to draftspace with editor leaving notice Not ready for mainspace, incubate in draftspace; They looked okay to me. How do I improve them further and move them back? They are

Draft:1mg Draft talk:Cycle Baba (Raj Phanden) Draft:Akshay Chaturvedi

If they not suitable for Wikipedia, should I just delete them through that process?

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 14:06, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I have asked to replace the whole article with a new text (it is about the Old Royal Naval College).

How can i go around to do this? Also, this article has about 20 words which i need to connect with Wikipedia pages (for example, if i mention Elizabeth I, this word (Elizabeth I) has to be linked with a Wikipedia page about Elizabeth I). Shall i just add these links after the words or shall i do something else? Thank you. ORNC-W2020 (talk) 13:26, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

You have been repeatedly told what to do on your user page, you need to request any edits on the article talk page here Talk:Old Royal Naval College. More information about edit requests can be found at WP:EDITREQUEST Theroadislong (talk) 13:40, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Remember, ORNC-W2020, that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 14:06, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

My question is: so I want to edit video-game pages and make them larger, but what if my sources are just my knowledge of the subject? Do I put my name on the references? Rocket League rules (talk) 13:43, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Rocket League rules Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Personal knowledge is not acceptable as a source on Wikipedia, as all information must be verifiable to something that is published and can be examined by interested parties. 331dot (talk) 13:47, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thank you 331dot, but do I need sources for my images that I make and upload myself? (If I take a screenshot, and upload it) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocket League rules (talk • contribs) 13:54, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

It is fine to take images yourself and upload them, that's actually easier than finding images elsewhere as you usually have the copyright to images you take. You just need to follow the process at WP:UPIMAGE. 331dot (talk) 13:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Not if they're screenshots, 331dot. No, Rocket League rules, if you make images entirely yourself, you are free to upload and license them, but your photos of screenshots are generally copyright both to yourself and to the holder of the copyright of what is on the screen, and you do not have the power to license them. --ColinFine (talk) 14:09, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine Thanks for the clarification. It wasn't clear to me that they were discussing screenshots. 331dot (talk) 14:46, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok, so how would I upload a Rocket League screenshot? Do I have to contact Phyonix and ask if I can use the screenshot from their game? Rocket League rules (talk) 14:15, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Rocket League rules There may be some circumstances where you can use screenshots of non-free software/games but you need to carefully read the policy on this at WP:SCREENSHOT and follow the rules carefully using the template {{Non-free game screenshot}} for example . Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Sorry to keep bothering you guys but there is a slight problem. Rocket league(Which is the page I will be editing) was $10 back in April when I bought it, but now they changed it to be free-to-play. Rocket League rules (talk) 14:21, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

The issue is not what they charge, it is what the copyright status of their program is. My advice re WP:SCREENSHOT still applies. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:22, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

If you click on one of the existing screenshots in that Rocket League article, you'll see what others have done to get "fair use" of the screenshots, for example "this one".. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:26, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Please how do i open a wikipedia page for a company eg. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_Name?? Please help

Ugochimobi (talk) 14:30, 10 February 2021 (UTC) Ugochimobi (talk) 14:30, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ugochimobi. I'm afraid that your question shows that you have a fundamental (though very common) misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia does not contain any "company pages": what it does contain is articles about notable subjects including companies. An article about a particular company - which is only possible if the company meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - does not belong to the company, does not necessarily say what the company would like it to say, and should include only information which people who have no connection with the company have chosen to publish about it.

If the company does meet the criteria for notability, then anybody at all may write an article about it; except that people who are connected with the company are discouraged from doing so, since they are likely to find it difficult to discard what they know and think about the company, and limit themselves to what independent commentators have reported on. Be aware also that creating an article that gets accepted is one of the hardest tasks there is in editing Wikipedia, especially for inexperienced editors; and a conflict of interest makes it even harder.

If you are here to help us improve Wikipedia, you are very welcome. But if you are here to promote your company, or enhance its online presence, please save yourself and other editors a lot of hassle and wasted effort, and find somewhere else to do it. --ColinFine (talk) 14:46, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

This also goes for if you are editing about clients. If you are, you must, per the Wikipedia Terms of Use, make the required paid editing declaration. 331dot (talk) 14:52, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi,

I submitted a "Draft:David Hood (physiologist" and I wanted to find out the status. Where or who do I write to to find out the status.

Thanks Solome2020 (talk) 15:03, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Solome2020 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may simply view your draft to keep up to date as to its status. (Draft:David Hood (physiologist)) You also have a message on your user talk page about its status. 331dot (talk) 15:11, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi Solome2020. The pink notice at the top of the article, containing the last decline of the draft has at the bottom right a big blue button labeled Resubmit, which you haven't invoked, so the draft has not been placed in the queue for reassessment. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:12, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I want to put {{subst:submit}} in my sandbox but don't want to submit my sandbox for review (As no one submits sandbox for review.), My sandbox is this. ExclusiveEditor (talk) 15:25, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

There is already a comment above from when you asked this before ExclusiveEditor! I don't understand why you would want to put {{subst:submit}} into your sandbox unless you did want to submit it as an article. However, ignoring that, many users including myself use the {{User sandbox}} template in our sandboxes so we can submit from there when we are ready to do so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

What is differnce between Teahouse and Reference desk? ExclusiveEditor (talk) 15:41, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

In general, the Teahouse is for new editors who want to ask simple questions to begin contributing to Wikipedia. The Reference desk handles more general questions from anyone, including questions not relating to editing here. See for example science questions at WP:Reference_desk/Science, where I learn something new most days. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:48, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Account retrieval Please help. I forgot my account password to TicTawCentral and I don't have an email address set up to retireve it. Where can I get it back? Brothers of Bear (talk) 15:11, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Brothers of Bear, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added a header, because you didn't start a new section. I'm afraid that if you've lost the password and haven't got an email set up, then there is no way to retrieve it. Just put a message on both User pages to say that they are the same person taking over because you've lost the password. On another subject, your User page is the wrong place for a draft article: Please move it either to a sandbox or to a draft (eg [[Draft:The Barraclough Brothers]). If you want to delete User:TicTawCentral/sandbox/List of Barraclough Series Episodes I was going to say you can use {{db-auth}}, but that is only for pages that only one author has contributed to, and I see another editor has edited that; so you want WP:MFD. --ColinFine (talk) 16:02, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

When and/or how does a "Draft" status of an article I have written become a published / official Wikipedia page? Poesía latinoamericana (talk) 14:52, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Poesía latinoamericana Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has articles, not mere pages. I have added the appropriate information to your draft to allow you to submit the draft for review. If the reviewer accepts the draft, it will then be formally part of the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 14:57, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Poesía latinoamericana If Draft:Tomás Cohen is submitted as it currently exists it will be Declined. References need to be incorporated into the text. The program then automatically creates superscripted numbers and puts the refs in the References section. See Help:Referencing for beginners. Also, hyperlinks are not allowed in the text. David notMD (talk) 16:11, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello My question is how to give an update about my town on Wikipedia, whenever people search about my town on google map they couldn't see any write up about it.

The name of the town was not place there, so I need someone to help me to update it there so that when people search about it can get information. Nrs Badamasi (talk) 16:09, 10 February 2021 (UTC)Nrs Badamasi

From your Talk page, clear that there is no article about your town, so not so much update, as if you want one, you will have to create it. You could model it on Ungogo, Nigeria. David notMD (talk) 16:19, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

 Robert Lynn Pirtle (talk) 16:22, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Robert Lynn Pirtle, do you have a question? Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 17:09, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wikipedia. My question is to enquire about the reason the page containing the biography for Doctor Rodolfo Correa Vargas was deleted, and what are the requirements I must meet in order to have this page re-published. Thank you. 2800:810:42A:88D0:9A6:A7F4:FE4F:75C6 (talk) 16:46, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Assuming you're referring to Rodolfo Correa Vargas, it was speedily deleted under criterion A2, as the content was written in a language other than English and was found on another Wikipedia project, where it was deleted three times. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:13, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I want to put {{subst:submit}} in my sandbox but don't want to submit my sandbox for review (As no one submits sandbox for review.), My sandbox is this.

ExclusiveEditor Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Are you saying that you want to directly create new articles without going through a review? You should only do that if you are very experienced in article creation and fully understand the requirements of a new article. Even if you do, it is often helpful to get other eyes on it before you formally make what you write part of the encyclopedia; if you directly create an article and it is deficient in some way, it risks being nominated for deletion or even speedy deleted. If you still wish to directly create a new article, you may simply remove the submit coding from your sandbox. 331dot (talk) 14:55, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: If you're looking for just the template, you're going to want {{AFC submission|T}}. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:29, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I know about the contruibutions button but i cant find a number of how many edits i have made. Starman2377 (talk) 18:39, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Starman2377: Check your preferences. Here's a link to a more detailed count. Regards SoWhy 18:46, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Go to preferences and it will show the number of edits. TigerScientist Chat 18:46, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Starman2377, at the bottom of your contribution page (on desktop), there's an edit count button, which will take you here. You've made 345 edits, so you're well on your way to becoming extended-confirmed. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:47, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

 89.241.118.203 (talk) 18:38, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

That could be happening for a bunch of different reasons. Titles are case sensitive, so that could be one. Could you send us the URL to a search result where the page doesn't exist but you think it should? Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I always get "This page does not exist" 89.241.118.203 (talk) 18:40, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

You're asking the same question as you did above; I've merged the threads, and please see my reply above. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:48, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Good afternoon! This past December I created a Wikipedia article for Stephen Fichter carefully following the Wikipedia format. In an effort to address every detail for publication of the article, I have an inquiry regarding conflict of interest (COI). My question is twofold. Since I am a professional colleague and consequently a friend of Father Stephen, I was concerned about your COI caveat. It is suggested that a potential conflict be mentioned at the outset. As a sidebar, since time has elapsed from my initial writing of the article, I had every intention of working on the COI issue in December, but COVID has impacted my life in a very personal and challenging way. I am just now getting back to my desk to begin my work again.

That said, I have read extensively all that you provide in the way of articles and see that there are three simple ways to mark your article accordingly. I believe that I will choose option 2 (statement in the edit summary) to explain that I am not being paid to write this article.

The reason for writing the article was not to promote any specific project of Father Stephen’s, but rather to include him in the Wikipedia roster for accomplishments that clearly meet your notability criteria. For example, Stephen is a published author, movie producer, app developer, an often quotable source for New Jersey newspapers and sometimes the New York Times, and talk guest on Sirius, CBS, and Relevant radio shows. He enjoys notoriety in Bergen County, New Jersey. As you can see from the article I created, he is the pastor of one of the largest parishes in the Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey and has worked as a sociologist/researcher for 13 years for CARA (the leading research institute for the Catholic Church). So would you agree that option 2 is the best way to disclose this background information regarding my association with Father Stephen?

I believe my article is currently under review for publication. At this stage, save for adding the COI disclaimer, I believe I have done everything I can to see this article through to publication. Can you tell me if there is anything to do at this point to expedite its publication? Is there a way to know where the article may be in the approval process? I apologize for all of these questions. This is my first time to submit an article to Wikipedia, and I want to make sure that my submission meets your best standards. Thank you so much for your kind help with all of this! Frank S. Weaver (talk) 18:56, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Stephen Fichter

As it sits, you have unreferenced claims in the draft. Until those get sources, that makes the draft drastically less likely to be accepted. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 18:59, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Dear admins, hi there, Ashleyyoursmile unfortunately declined my article on FPP because i didn't name sources. The text as well as the picture are my copyright. the text is my translation of my original article on german wikipedia. I now added to sources. One is german, but would be great, if at least the english one would help to bring FPP also to english wiki. It is a great, really disruptive technology. Please let me know, if there is anything else i can do to have the article published thank you!Antiquatuss (talk) 17:16, 10 February 2021 (UTC) Antiquatuss (talk) 17:16, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Fiber Patch Placement Deor (talk) 17:55, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Antiquatuss: English Wikipedia had different standards than German Wikipedia—we will almost never accept an article unless it has been referenced. The references can be in German if there aren't good ones in English, but they need to be added. The references you added are both in German and offline, and while those things are both allowed, they each make it very difficult to verify, and the fact that they're not supporting specific facts inline is also a problem. I'd read WP:REFBEGIN and add more sources. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:10, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

thank you, sdkb! i understand and will try to settle things during the next days. Antiquatuss (talk) 19:16, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

My submission got declined due to my references and I was wondering what a preferred source type is? "Primary sources" were mentioned but the reviewer didn't seem to be talking about them like they are the preferred type. So, what is a "primary source" and what's wrong with using them? Mktingpro13 (talk) 21:15, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Mktingpro13 You can look at Wikipedia:Primary sources. A quick and simple answer: A primary source is a type of source that are written by people close to the event. They mostly include routine coverage and contain original research (Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Original research, Wikipedia:Original research examples). Also, try finding secondary sources. DestinationFearFan (talk) 21:21, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Mktingpro13 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A primary source(click for more detailed info) is a source that comes from the subject itself. For example, a company website is a primary source about that company. Press releases, routine announcements, and staff interviews are also primary sources. Wikipedia greatly prefers to summarize what independent reliable sources state about a subject, not what the subject says about itself. There are limited circumstances where primary sources are acceptable as a source, but never to establish notability. Please read Your First Article for more information as well.

I noticed that your username suggests you work in marketing. If you are editing about or on behalf of a client, the Wikipedia Terms of Use require that you make a formal paid editing declaration. You should also review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 21:23, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello beautiful people here, can someone help with a quick review on draft:Paa Kwasi? Big Ayeh (talk) 16:33, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Big Ayeh: What do you need help reviewing over? Jack Reynolds (talk to me!) (email me!!) 16:34, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

An article I contributed Big Ayeh (talk) 16:40, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Big Ayeh, do you have a conflict of interest with Paa Kwasi? GeraldWL 16:42, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

No, but I believe the artist in question (Paa Kwasi) is a recognized Ghanaian musician who deserves a shot on wikipedia's platform if only we've been able to provide credible sources. Thank you. Big Ayeh (talk) 16:51, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Big Ayeh: There are a lot of submissions currently pending. You've submitted yours, but as the notice says, please be patient, and we'll get to it eventually. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:16, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts and draft reviewers are different groups of people (with a wee bit of overlap). You have added a lot to the draft since it was declined on 4 Feb. Only recourse now is be patients. Could be days, weeks, or (sadly) months. David notMD (talk) 23:38, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I am confused of how to use wikipedia. Woofy.io (talk) 19:59, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Woofy.io, you can start with this link: Wikipedia:About. Depending on what you want to do, it may require some reading and/or more precise questions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:32, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,Woofy.io and welcome to Wikipedia, a look at Help:Your_first_article might help you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 23:59, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I am an author and comedian and when you google my name, it has all my photos, however they are attached to another author of the same name’s information. I’ve gotten many confused emails (as I’m sure she has as well) and would LOVE to have this fixed, I just don’t know how. I’ve reached out to the other Author a few times assuming she ran the Wikipedia page but haven’t had any luck. Any help you could offer would be a blessing for both of us. For the record, my name is Tiffany Jenkins, and My website is jugglingthejenkins.com. I am not a british socialogist married to someone name Iain :/ 47.199.70.125 (talk) 00:15, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

There is a Wikipedia article Tiffany Jenkins for the other TJ. What Google does is its mix-up. David notMD (talk) 00:35, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I answered the same question at the Help Desk. Please don't post the same question in multiple places. RudolfRed (talk) 00:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Why someone removes my cite from Wikipedia without telling me

I have a complaint about that when I add a citation to Wikipedia but someone removes my cite from Wikipedia it has happened 4 times. here Rajiv Kapoor

and My cite is; https://alatestnews.com/rajiv-kapoor-died-at-58-youngest-brother-of-rishi-kapoor/ Digimarksomnath (talk) 05:13, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Digimarksomnath, This citation is not reliable. A better citation is now added by another contributor. Also, Please look for citations from notable media outlets, like NDTV, Times Group. Thanks Tatupiplu'^talk 06:10, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Digimarksomnath: When an editor improves an article, they may not inform the previous editor(s). You may add the article to your watchlist to monitor when it changes. GoingBatty (talk) 01:46, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Is there a comprehensive guide on how to use it effectivley? WiiBoi (talk) 01:26, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@WiiBoi: If you're looking for a guide on how editors add their signature on talk pages, try Wikipedia:Signatures. If you're looking for the essay about signatures of living people in articles, see Wikipedia:Signatures of living persons. There are many "other tools". If you can be more specific with your question, we could provide more detailed answers. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 01:29, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Like, I just wanna know how to cite and list and ref stuff properly when the time comes to make my first article and whatnot. WiiBoi (talk) 01:32, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

For a guide on citing sources, See this link. For a guide on reliable sources, See this link. I also highly recommend using ProveIt GT to add references. 777burger ^{user talk contribs} 01:45, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

• WiiBoi Play the video in WP:INTREF3. Jerm (talk) 03:02, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

How to protect xylem inc article to prevent non employees from editing our article X2021 (talk) 15:06, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Quite simply, there is no way to do this because employees should not be editing it and the software does not allow for exclusive editing rights. Please read WP:COI, WP:PAID and WP:NOT. CUPIDICAE💕 15:07, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

X2021 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You cannot prevent non-employees from editing any article about your company. Please see WP:OWN for more information. Articles cannot be locked to the text that the company might prefer, because Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources say about article subjects, not what they want to say about themselves. You should use your own website or social media accounts to say what you wish about your company. 331dot (talk) 15:09, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

If you mean Xylem Inc., it does not appear to have problematic editing going on. What is the issue? David notMD (talk) 16:16, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@X2021: Please note that it is not "your article". Instead it is Wikipedia's article about Xylem, in the same way as a newspaper article or entry in any other encyclopedia (e.g., Encyclopaedia Britannica). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I was wondering whether I'm allowed to post on a Wikiproject talk page that I'm not active in to ask that Wikiproject to improve an article. For instance, can I go to the video game or sports Wikiproject and leave a note asking if anyone would be willing to contribute to an article about a podcast that talks about video games or sports? If I'm an active member of the Podcasting Wikiproject and not the other two is this considered a type of soliciting that isn't allowed? TipsyElephant (talk) 03:27, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant You can post on any talk page. Jerm (talk) 03:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Also, does reverting vandalism or bad edits count as "mainspace edits"? WiiBoi (talk) 03:18, 11 February 2021 (UTC) WiiBoi (talk) 03:18, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

WiiBoi for your first question, read WP:SIC. For your second question, yes, at least according to your Wikipedia Contributions page. 777burger ^{user talk contribs} 03:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I found this user advertiseing there users on other sites and games User:Hiya-Fella_123 What should I do? JennilyW (talk) 21:46, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@JennilyW What do you mean by "advertising"? DestinationFearFan (talk) 21:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

The only edits by Hiya-Fella 123 are to advertise their online identity. No evidence they are 'here' to contribute productively. With that in mind, and another reason, i've blanked their user page. Thank you for bringing this our attention, JennilyW. Zindor (talk) 22:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

DestinationFearFan I ment to say advertising. I mispelled it. Your welcome, Zindor. JennilyW (talk) 03:50, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Actor Larry Romano's filmography should include the very important film The Irishman (it currently does not).— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:17c0:2060:c80f:c5fb:75f1:290c (talk) 04:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I was wanting to take down a Wikipedia article about me - how do I go about this? 58.7.105.200 (talk) 06:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

You may want to take a look at Biographies of living persons/Help which discusses how to get a page about ones self edited. Getting a page deleted is a different process, but Biographies of living persons/Help is probably the place to start. If worse comes to worse, you can email me using the form at [13] and I can try and help. You should know, this will expose your email address to me, and you will not be anonymous. Rklahn (talk) 07:12, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Really simple question: What are the specific keystrokes to save work as I'm going along, and avoid submitting it to an editor way in advance of attained a clear and reference-rich article?

Many thanks, Mojo18888 Mojo18888 (talk) 08:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Mojo18888 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. IF I understand your question correctly, when you are working on a WP:DRAFT, "publish" is saving as you go along, you are "publishing" in the draft, not making it an actual article. Anyone online can look at the draft if they know where it is, but it's not a part of article-space. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

For me, Ctrl+Return seems to pull up the publish screen. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 08:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

FYI, The cross-browser access key for the publish button is S. You may need to press a browser-dependent key combination for access keys. For example, in Firefox the full shortcut is Alt+⇧ Shift+S. The enter key may also work depending on the browser because the edit form is a Html form (but it does not work in multiline text boxes, such as the main edit area, or things that are static content like the chapta image. See also Wikipedia:Keyboard shortcuts. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:11, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi!

I work for a notable new company and we'd like to set up a Wikipedia page about us. I'm just wondering if anyone could provide some advice around how we might do this in the correct way. We're not trying to fill our page with marketing hyperbole (I understand that's not allowed and rightly so), we just want to have a factual page that communicates our company journey. I have a couple of more specific questions:

1) Are we somehow about to reference ourselves? Some of the stuff we'd like to include in our page can only be verified by us e.g. we may want to explain how our products are made and there's no third party that we can reference in this scenario.

2) How can we go about displaying our logo? I understand that images on Wikipedia will lose their copyright protection so how does this work with company logos?

3) When creating the article, do I need to set up a "company account" or do I need to somehow disclose that I'm a part of the company?

Please forgive my lack of experience with Wikipedia! I'm very appreciative of any help you can give.

Thanks 124.254.80.6 (talk) 00:12, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@124.254.80.6: For #1, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources for sourcing. In a nutshell, you can't write what you say about yourself - that would be highly unreliable. If that's the only source of info about the company, that's usually a sign that the company wouldn't pass the notability threshold required to have an article approved. For #2, you're a long ways from this - I'd worry about that last. For #3, don't create an account that implies it's shared. Also, see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

A "notable new" company? It might be hard for a new company to meet Wikipedia's definition of notability. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 04:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

• You seem to fundamentally misunderstand what Wikipedia is. When you say you are here to "communicate our company journey" and "explain how our products are made", that is considered promotional, you don't have to be selling something or soliciting customers. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company says about itself; Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. You should use your own website to tell about your company and its products. In addition, the fact that it is a new company probably means it does not meet the criteria for an article at this time.

Group/business accounts are not allowed; accounts are for individuals only. Whether you create an account or not, you must comply with the paid editing policy and make a formal declaration. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I am a artist trying to have a page about my career how can i do that without getting flagged  Sourlyrics2020 (talk) 04:07, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Sourlyrics2020: Honestly, you don't. Specifically, reliable sources should cover you significantly, and ideally an uninvolved editor should be someone not connected to you and decide to start said article. Writing about yourself is frowned upon. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:25, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Sourlyrics2020, and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds as if you have a common misunderstanding, that Wikipedia has anything at all to do with advancing somebody's career. We know that a lot of people think it does - some of them complain to us because our article about them says things that they don't like. But this is the job of Wikipedia: to collect and summarise what reliable independent published sources say about a person (or any other subject), not what that person wants to say about themselves. So if at some time there is an article about you, it will not belong to you, you will not control its contents, you will be strongly discouraged from editing it directly, and it will not report what you say or want to say, but what people who have no connection with you have published about you - possibly including bad reviews, or problems in your life, if they have been covered in reliable sources. See An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. --ColinFine (talk) 11:31, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

hello admins im new here on wikipedia currently i'm working on a draft of Draft:Junaid Bhat as it's complete for now and it was recently put on review by a russian senior wikipedian sharlie please help me to review it as soon as possible so that i can get my first work published thank you Prakrutiprajapanti (talk) 10:25, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Prakrutiprajapanti: First, Teahouse hosts are not Reviewers (well a few are, but it does not matter). Your draft is one of more than 4,000 waiting to be reviewed. It is not a queue. Each reviewer decides what they want to do next. Could be days, weeks, or (sadly) several months. MEANWHILE, work on the draft. Many of your 'references' are confirmations that Bhat took a photo that was used in a news source. You need more references that are at-length about Bhat and his career. David notMD (talk) 10:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Second this. Prakrutiprajapanti, I declined your draft as a matter of course, not because you asked for review. If you have any further questions please feel free to ask them. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 11:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I have made my tenth edit on the wikipedia page and I am willing to learn as to how i can become an autoconfirmed user? Please help. Shroom Jaiswal (talk) 10:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Shroom Jaiswal Hello. As you have ten edits and your account is more than four days old, you are autoconfirmed. 331dot (talk) 10:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response. My account is almost a week old with 10 edits as of today. I have also received a notification for my 10th edit. Do I get a notification on turning into an autoconfirmed user? Since i havent got one yet, i am curious! Thanks, Shroom Jaiswal (talk) 11:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

No, I don't believe there is a formal notification. If you have additional comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating a new section. Thanks 331dot (talk) 11:23, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Shroom Jaiswal. Welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but autoconfirmation really isn't a big deal - all it says is that you've bothered to create an account, stayed around a few days, and made a few edits, so you're probably not a drive-by vandal: that's what it's for. As for the things it allows you to do, I would strongly advise you not to do them yet, because you probably haven't understood enough of how this huge and ungainly beast works. In particular - I would advise anybody who hasn't recently successfully created several articles (and that includes me, who have been editing for fifteen years and made 18 000 edits) not to create an article directly, but to use the articles for creation process if they want to do the much more difficult than it looks task of creating a new article. The other major thing that it gives you is use of the Move tool - but again, please don't use this until you understand how to use it, and when to discuss moving a page first. Another really helpful thing to look at is BRD, which explains why some of your well-intentioned edits may get reverted, and what to do if they are.

But don't let me put you off: as I say, I've been here for fifteen years, and I wouldn't be editing if I didn't get something from it. Happy editing! --ColinFine (talk) 11:45, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Please can you give me a step by step guide of how to protect Wikipedia article, and allow only those with user names to edit. Lamsey (talk) 11:49, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Lamsey, welcome to the Teahouse. It's not the easiest thing to do, but you can request page protection by following the instructions at the top of the page at WP:RFPP, and you may like to read about protection policy before making requests. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 12:21, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Can you control spammers' messages? Does Wikipedia do any sort of protection to stop scam? InfoMCollinson (talk) 12:05, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, we can (and do) delete spammers' messages. What kind of scams do you have in mind, InfoMCollinson? -- Hoary (talk) 13:37, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

My family is dead and someone rejected my page. Why? InfoMCollinson (talk) 13:29, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I quote: "This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia." This is an encyclopedia. What you wrote doesn't look at all encyclopedic. -- Hoary (talk) 13:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: draft:Amayans WP:NOTHERE User looking at potential block. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:45, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Bit late to ask this question, but I only recently read the Wikipedia policy on usernames, and I was wondering if having "Wiki" in my username is misleading. Thanks for your time. WikiWolf7 (talk) 13:39, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@WikiWolf7: See Wikipedia:Username policy You want to avoid anything that makes you appear to be part of the Wikipedia Foundation, but WikiWolf7 is fine. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello everyone. I'm not sure where to ask this question and it's a bit ungermane to Wikipedia, and I apologize sincerely if I'm in the wrong place. I was wondering if anyone knows if the Lua script works on Miraheeze? And if so, how can it be imported? I appreciate any advice, and I apologize again if I'm in the wrong place. Herbfur (Eric, He/Him) (talk) 04:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC) Herbfur (Eric, He/Him) (talk) 04:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Try WP:Reference desk/Computing. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 05:34, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! Herbfur (Eric, He/Him) (talk) 13:52, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I'm trying to write a draft article in my sandbox, but most of the cites I've tried referencing always throw a "Cite has empty unknown parameter" error in the list of references. As far as I know, there's nothing wrong with the cites or the content of them, but perhaps I am overlooking something miniscule. Can someone help me out? Thanks. NaranjaLujosa ^{let's talk!} 13:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@NaranjaLujosa: You had stray “|” symbols at the end of your references. I removed them. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:56, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I was wondering how to make one of these and color one. I want to use it for just personal use (since election numbers going up and stuff are satisfying to me).

Xdude gamer (talk) 14:00, 11 February 2021 (UTC) Xdude gamer (talk) 14:00, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

If you just want to download it and use it for your personal purpose, you and just download it, edit it, and follow the agreement (usually it's CC-BY 3.0, sometimes it will be different). but if you want to remake it for the Wikipedia/Wikimedia purpose, that will be a different story (you need to prove your color is correct). --Discover The Universe! (talk) 14:04, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

(ec) : Welcome to the Teahouse, Xdude gamer. If you click on one of these maps at Electoral College of the United States, you will see a larger version. Click again and you'll arrive at its location on Wikimedia Commons. There is an icon at the top of the map's page which will allow you to download a copy for personal use. The file format is .svg, which in principle can be edited with a text editor, although that's a little tricky if you have no experience. There are manuals and tutorials available onlne and free software such as Inkscape which can edit these files as graphics. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:07, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I have just found a page Pluralsight which links in the lead section to a co-founder of a company, Keith Brown. Alas, there is no article about Keith Brown (author) and a link appears a redirect ...back to the Pluralsight company.

I find it a bit unkind to tell me there is some more info about a person and bring me back to where I've just been. Should I delete such links from articles? --CiaPan (talk) 09:12, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, yes but there is an exception when linking to section anchors. See WP:SELFRED. Regards, Zindor (talk) 09:57, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@CiaPan: I have just created {{No self-redirect}} for this purpose and used it in the article.[14] I don't know how to test whether a redirect is to a section. It should probably also be coded to work for {{No self-redirect|[[Keith Brown (author)]]}} and {{No self-redirect|[[Keith Brown (author)|Keith Brown]]}}. I may get back to that. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Wow, nice template. I've looked into it, could not parse a word. Thank you, PrimeHunter! --CiaPan (talk) 14:48, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

It seemes like he/she is trying to add the Semi-protection on María Grever, I am not sure what is he/she trying to do. I don't know where should I put this problem, (not sure how to slove this), so I am requesting help here. Discover The Universe! (talk) 13:45, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Discover The Universe!, welcome. I think in this case the I.P might have just been fond of the article and was misguidely trying to protect it from other I.P users. I've left a note on their talk page. I'll also keep an eye on the article for a while because there's been an uptick in activity, but not enough to warrant protection. Regards, Zindor (talk) 15:01, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Note: Grever is today's Google Doodle. That explains everything. Zindor (talk) 15:08, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello! The article Anna Kournikova (computer virus) was added to On this day today. I am looking to update the talk page for the article, with the fact that it was featured today. I need the On this day ID for it to work. How do I find that? Thanks! Tucker Gladden 👑 14:52, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. There is no need to do that, TuckerGladden. AnomieBot adds these automatically, see for example Talk:Siege of Medvėgalis from earlier this month. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I recently write a article on Dr. Hemant Sonare, and it is deleted because it was notminated for deletion. I want to work on it to improve my mistakes that I did. So, how can I get it back? and could anyone help me with that to improve? AmanMsonare (talk) 15:50, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Hemant Sonare also existing as Draft:Dr. Hemant Sonare, was deleted for being "Unambiguous advertising or promotion." One comment was specific Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over. You are welcome to try again if you think it is possible to create a neutral draft with references that support Wikipedia's concept of notability. David notMD (talk) 15:57, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Given your User name, suspicion that the draft was about you or a family memver. See WP:AUTO and/or WP:COI for reasons Wikipedia does not like this. David notMD (talk) 16:02, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

How do you make a userbox? Hello, it's me again, Leo Aguado. I've looked at some user pages, and they have something on them that is a userbox. I want one too!... but how do I get one/create one?

Thank you. Leo Aguado (talk) 03:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Leo Aguado, on Wikipedia:Userboxes you can find:

• A search box to find already-made userboxes
• how to construct a userbox yourself, and
• Wikipedians who will make userboxes at your request (Under the See also section)

Hope this helped! 777burger ^{user talk contribs} 03:19, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Burger777 Thank you for this info. It will help me personalize my user page. Leo Aguado (talk) 04:07, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Find the userbox you want, then copy and paste it. Simple! Jvelas0822 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:06, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

• Are there general guidelines on when you should/shouldn't use certain parameters in people-related infoboxes (e.g.,infobox person, infobox scientist)? I understand the guideline that you should only add relations or children names when they are notable, but not sure if there are other do's or don'ts here.
• On this edit, any suggestions on how you can keep together the family aspects of the infobox (relations, spouse, children) so it doesn't appear as if the "relations" portions is part of the subheading "Scientific career"? I used a horizontal rule but doesn't seem quite right. Engineerchange (talk) 03:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Engineerchange, i've switched the infobox to 'academic' so it has the parameters needed. There's additional guidelines in the MoS and also WP:BLP Regards, Zindor (talk) 09:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, Zindor! Cheers, Engineerchange (talk) 16:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

What is a good idea for a new page? 23chicken493 (talk) 14:56, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello 23chicken493, there's a large list of requested articles here. versacespace (talk) 16:23, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey there, I've been working on this page --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nic_Fanciulli

It's been rejected a couple of times and I've since updated all of the citations so they only come from reputable publications.

It's so strange as there are so many pages out there which are published with statements like 'this page has multiple issues' - i.e. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrixxman - yet it's still live. Or Nicolette's page, for instance, which has barely any citations --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolette_%28musician%29.

Is there anything else that I can do here?

Happy to take feedback.

Thankyou, looking forward to hearing back from you.

All the best! Mgoldenbarnes (talk) 15:57, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Mgoldenbarnes, while Draft:Nic_Fanciulli is in its current state, I would have little hope of it's being reviewed and accepted any time soon. If a reviewer looks at it, their main concern will be to check whether the sources it cites establish that Fanciulli is WP:notable. When they've looked at the first five sources and found that none of them does anything to establish notability (they're all based on interviews with him, and so not independent), they'll have the choice of ploughing on through the next 51 sources, or just throwing the draft back in the queue and finding a better use for their time. I'm not a reviewer, but I know which I'd choose. If you want to get the drafted accepted soon, I recommend going through the list of sources, and removing all those based on what he has said or otherwise not independent, and all those which don't have significant discussion of him. That will make it easier for a reviewer to find the sources that do help to establish notability – assuming that there are any. Maproom (talk) 18:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Mgoldenbarnes and Maproom, it does appear that Fanciulli is notable, per sources like [15] and [16], so the draft should not be being declined for notability at this point; I left a note to that effect at the draft. Maproom is right that there are a lot of non-qualifying sources there, too. Most of these are still fine for referencing, but I'd recommend having instances of the best notability sources at the end of the first sentence to make those ones clear. The best sources for musical artists are typically independent reviews from established journalism outlets; the NPR piece is a good example. You might also want to merge duplicate refs; see source editor instructions and VisualEditor instructions.

The other issue with the page is promotionalism. It'd be okay to mention the grammy nomination at the end of the lead if the lead were longer, but it's not good to have it in the first sentence. "sold-out" performance also doesn't strike me as encyclopedic.

Regarding the other pages you mentioned, there's unfortunately a lot of content on Wikipedia that got added before our modern standards developed. That content is gradually being dealt with, but per WP:OTHERSTUFF, its existence doesn't mean that the modern standards can be ignored. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:07, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Thankyou so much, that makes perfect sense to me! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgoldenbarnes (talk • contribs) 16:29, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

The murder of Russian Jews by the Russian Imperial Army was, in fact, the first 20th-century genocide in Europe, beginning eight months before the Armenian genocide Alexander Gendler (talk) 16:21, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Alexander Gendler Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your edit was reverted as original research, as you did not offer any independent reliable sources to support your claim. If you have independent sources to support your addition, please offer them on the article talk page to gain consensus. 331dot (talk) 16:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I want to find out if I can write an article about my Religion on Wikipedia, basically just listing basic facts about the religion and key points, also I would like to know what will I be able to link to and what not as this could be a conflict of interest as I am the founder of the Religion. I won't be writing it as an advertisement I want to write about it like any other Religion out there, telling what it is about, who founded it, what does it stand for basic tenets, which Gods are worshipped etc. All advice will Gratefully be received - Thank You. TheOldFaith (talk) 16:32, 11 February 2021 (UTC) TheOldFaith (talk) 16:32, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

TheOldFaith Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has articles that summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Wikipedia is not interested in what an article subject says about itself. So for there to be an article about your religion, others unassociated with it need to have written about it. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell about something that they created. If you just want to tell the world about your religion, you should use social media or alternative forums where that is permitted. 331dot (talk) 16:38, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Per comment left on your Talk page, you are blocked until you change your User name AND you promise not to try to create an article about the religion you founded. David notMD (talk) 16:47, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

will people tell me where to edit an article I have no clue Hellothereyoushall (talk) 17:11, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

:Hello Hellothereyoushall, read WP:Your First Article, which will likely answer all of your questions. versacespace (talk) 17:17, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I misread the question, on the top corner of every article there's a button that says "edit". You may click that and edit the article as long as the article is unprotected. versacespace (talk) 17:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Hellothereyoushall. You might find useful ideas at Wikipedia:Task Center.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I have tried to use the online resources to learn how to compose and submit an article, to no avail. I need help with very basic how to issues. Such as how to save what you write. Things that are straightforward in WORD. I have written extensively in WORD and published many articles in my professional field. At 74 I am not very tech savvy. Talking with someone by phone or having a basic idiot's guide would help a lot. I am stymied at the starting gate.

Peter Karzmark Where'sBenton? (talk) 18:02, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Where'sBenton?. Composing a new article from scratch is one of the harder tasks on Wikipedia, but you can find guidance at WP:YFA. You would do better to start by editing existing articles, and you can learn how to do that at Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Adventure. Incidentally, I and many other folk here are well into their seventies.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:12, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Where'sBenton?. As a start, you can create a Help:Userspace draft to practise in. When you hit "Publish" it means that you are saving changes to your draft. Further guidance at WP:TUTORIAL. For an article to be accepted as article, it must among other things meet the criteria of WP:N. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hypothetically:

1. If Wikipedia existed in a time when all reliable sources said Earth is a flat like paper, not round like a ball
2. An innovative, but unrecognized and unpublished, scientist found a way to persuade editors of Wikipedia the world is a like ball and not like a piece of paper, contrary to reliable sources
3. Reliable sources had the power to punish with humiliation and ban from public discourse people making assertions contrary to the "fact" the world is flat

Would Wikipedia's policies demand support of the dominant view of the time, i.e. the world is flat, even when the editors know the dominant opinion is false? Danallenhtn (talk) 23:01, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Danallenhtn: While it may sound preposterous with that analogy, yes. If it isn't in reliable sources or primary sources (in limited cases), then it by definition is original research, which is prohibited. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 23:05, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes. See above all else, Wikipedia requires verifiability. See also: WP:TRUTH RudolfRed (talk) 23:23, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor:Thank you. I understand your answer is correct and why it must be so. Is it well-known this makes Wikipedia a tool of corruption in the case where reliable sources are corrupt? To the extent Google search and media use Wikipedia to adjudicate truth on controversial topics, where reliable sources are corrupt, Wikipedia is a link in circular chain, perpetuating falsehood. Danallenhtn — Preceding undated comment added 23:34, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

One can hope. Wikipedia:General disclaimer is linked on every WP-page. See also Wikipedia:Press coverage 2021 and preceding pages, media seems well aware that WP has flaws. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:29, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. CUPIDICAE💕 23:40, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
• Danallenhtn Truth is in the eye of the beholder, so Wikipedia presents the sources to readers so they can evaluate and judge them for themselves. You are free to feel as you wish. Most reliable sources are private entities that can determine what they say and/or what appears on their platforms, just as you can determine what is said and done within the four walls of your residence. If you feel that reliable sources are in error or that Wikipedia is in error, you are free to go and purchase your own computers, pay to operate them, pay programmers to program them, and have your own platform where you say what you wish. 331dot (talk) 09:35, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Danallenhtn: additionally, your starting analogy (which could course this issue, and probably has) is not the same as issues where "reliable sources are corrupt". Either we don't know they're corrupt, in which case we'd include them, but everyone else wouldn't have an issue because they'd also not know the sources are corrupt. Or we do know they're corrupt, in which case they certainly wouldn't meet WP:INDEPENDENT and we'd exclude them on those grounds. The "flat earth" scenario and the "corrupt" scenario are not analogous. Nosebagbear (talk) 11:12, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Nosebagbear: There is at least one topic of significance to humans where reliable and independent sources dictate misinformation with tragic consequences. Sources reporting as if the world is a ball a not sheet of paper are attacked and therefore not reliable in spite of their correctness. Partisan interests have the resources to control reliable independent sources globally.

In other words, at the moment, you don't know your sources are corrupt. The corruption can be observed, but the observation is not publishable, because corrupt interests prevent publication. For some topics, there are no reliable independent sources, because all reliable sources are controlled by the cabal documented in Time Magazine Danallenhtn (talk) 14:58, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

If all we have for that is your word, that's not enough for Wikipedia, since we don't know who you are. I assume this is related to your discussion at Talk:Zapruder film, and your assertion that the Zapruder film has been tampered with. This isn't just Wikipedia, by the way. This is how all tertiary sources work; you'll find that Encyclopedia Britannica, for example, doesn't even mention the possibility. If this is something you don't agree with, that's fair, but that means that maybe Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, is not what you're looking for. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Writ Keeper:I don't see how what I am taking about here has anything to do with the Zapruder Film. Also, I am not trying to suggest there is anything wrong with Wikipedia or any other tertiary source. The reason I made an entry on this page is I wanted to verify my understanding of how Wikipedia works. I got that verification. Once that happened, the implications I brought up came to mind, so I stated them. It is kind of obvious when boil it down to this: if all reliable sources for information on a topic are controlled by one entity, there are no reliable sources independent of one another. Who would have thought a single entity could control all reliable sources? I never would have thought that was possible but here we are. A good example is Hunter Biden's laptop, particularly with regard to what it says about the Biden family businesses. Another example is the topic of the phone call recordings between Joe Biden and Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko. Danallenhtn (talk) 21:18, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Our understandings of reliability and rule against original research are indeed limitations of Wikipedia, and it contributes to our systemic biases against (e.g.) women in history, people of color in academia and communities with a history of oral tradition. Not sure what you're trying to connect the Time source to (Time is a reliable source itself...) but yes, in my view American media's control by the rich and powerful does mean that they are biased against holding to account corrupt multi-millionaires like Trump and Biden; we do have biases in that we often recognize the state's war crimes and overturning of democracy in foreign countries as legitimate because many of our sources (particularly the ones cited in practice) are American. — Bilorv (talk) 18:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Some recent edits show (Username or IP removed) – how is it possible to remove the Username or IP from an edit? Here's a Diff – thanks, Epinoia (talk) 15:26, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

See WP:Revision deletion. Generally a username/IP is only removed for privacy (i.e. someone unintentionally editing while logged-out) or enforcement reasons (i.e. a username that attacks another editor). —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 15:39, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, but these edits weren't redacted for disruption or vandalism or copyvio – if only Admins can perform Revision deletion, does this mean an Admin made the edits and removed their Username? – thanks, Epinoia (talk) 15:46, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

It's possible for the content of the edit to be (otherwise) fine but the username to be unacceptable. This is especially common with long-term abusers who harass users as part of their usual MO. Unless WP:Oversight is involved the revdels should be in the deletion log for the page. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 15:49, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

In this case, the username or IP was removed by an Oversighter so it wasn't a simple revision deletion. It's unlikely that an Admin made the edits. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

What are anon users? I use Wikipedia on my phone, too. When I go to an article history on my phone (or computer), i see how many users, ANON USERS, and bots edited that article. But what are anon users? Are they a secret part of the administrative group? Are they types of unregistered users? Anyways, that's my question. Thank you! Joshua's Number9 (talk) 18:45, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

It's the same as unregistered users (any unregistered user, not one specific type). Any user who edits without logging in to an account is an anonymous user, identified only by their IP address. --bonadea contributions talk 19:21, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi! I have declared a COI for Perfect Daily Grind where I am the managing editor. My issue is that despite used as a source 20+ times on Wikipedia, and being a major trade publication in the coffee sector (7+ million views a year), Perfect Daily Grind doesn't have a Wikipedia page. I have entered a request, but understand that may be turned down.

Fundamentally: I'd like to understand more about the situation.

Put simply: if a source is "good" enough to be repeatedly referenced on Wikipedia, does it then deserve its own publication page? There are a number of independent secondary sources mentioning the publication, and while many of them are trade publications, they simply often quote Perfect Daily Grind.

What do we need to add? More independent secondary sources talking about the publication? Because that's quite difficult, as a news/info source -- most of the time, people just quote the website directly.

I appreciate that Wikipedia shouldn't be used for marketing purposes (and believe me, it's not my aim to do so) but we just wanted to check why it is that a source that is "good enough" to be used on Wikipedia doesn't already have its own page.

Thank you in advance to whoever answers this. :) Rjocoffee (talk) 16:15, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Rjocoffee, Perfect Daily Grind likely merits an article if it passes The criteria for notability for websites or the general notability guideline. 777burger ^{user talk contribs} 16:59, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Rjocoffee As managing editor, change your declaration to paid. See WP:PAID. As such, you are allowed to create a draft and submit it to Articles for Creation for review. See WP:YFA for process. Critical is having independent secondary sources about PDG. At some length, not just name-mentions. David notMD (talk) 19:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I want to create an article on Ed Kallina, who was a NFL player and minor league baseball player. I found an image with him on it, but I need help with image use licenses. Here is the image he is on, https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3790/12140194195_85270022e2_o.jpg (he is number 10), could someone tell me if I could use this image and what tags I should put on it. Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:32, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, BeanieFan11, to upload an image to Wikipedia, you have to go to WP:FUW. However, please note that if your image is copyrighted, you cannot use it simply to identify a person. versacespace (talk) 16:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, BeanieFan11. Because Kallina is dead, you can use a non-free image only in an article about him (not a draft). Please read the policy on use of non-free images, especially #10. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:06, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, but could you tell me if the image I listed can be used and what tags I should put on it? BeanieFan11 (talk)

BeanieFan11, what is the original date of publication of the photo? If it is copyrighted, you would have to crop out the other players. Wait until the biography is in the encyclopedia and upload it at that time. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

The picture was published in around 1930. It is of the 1930 Joplin Miners. I found the picture on this website, http://www.historicjoplin.org/?cat=185. I was planning on just cutting him out of the picture, does that make any difference? Thanks for the help. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:07, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I know that there is a rule against speculative information, but i'm not sure if this applies or not. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Re-Logic&diff=1006111753&oldid=1006110612 19:50, 11 February 2021 (UTC) WiiBoi (talk) 19:50, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

It seems to be unreferenced. Ruslik_Zero 20:15, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I made a Wikipedia article for Savanna Karmue and submitted it in the Articles for Creation (because I have a declared COI with her and already established that on my talk page and the article submission page). I have tried my best to clearly follow all the rules and regulations Wikipedia has to offer, reading over all the things I've needed to do and complete.

I already submitted my article and it is currently waiting for someone to check it. Can someone please quickly check to see if I followed all of Wiki's standards (I am not asking to let me skip the line and review my article but simply glimpse to see if I met all COI standards). Also, how will I know whether my article is declined or not (will Wikipedia send me a notification)? Thanks so much for all the help I've received so far.

Tracksthegeneral (talk) 21:56, 11 February 2021 (UTC)Tracksthegeneral Tracksthegeneral (talk) 21:56, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Tracksthegeneral I just made a minor fix to the article but from a first glance it seems alright. versacespace (talk) 22:13, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I undoded this edit because they removed the space from "in depicted", making it "isdepicted". Is this how I undo bad edits? JennilyW (talk) 21:50, 11 February 2021 (UTC) Or can I get a guide for undoing edits? JennilyW (talk) 22:04, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, JennilyW If that was the only thing they did, then yes, you were correct in your revert and we encourage you to keep doing that. But if he made a good contribution in the same edit it's much better to edit it yourself instead of reverting. versacespace (talk) 22:09, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

– this was clearly a typo and could have been fixed instead of reverted (I fixed the typo) – see Wikipedia:Alternatives to reversion – you are correct that reversion is how to undo bad edits that can't be easily fixed – cheers, Epinoia (talk) 22:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I noticed my last entry was there, now it's gone? My last one was an addition to the history of Stewart BC's past newspapers I included a front page up loaded image of The Stewart Times front page. Today, my entry and photo is gone? Canpressnewsnow (talk) 17:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

If you look at the bar at the top of the page you will see a tab, "View history" – click on that tab to see all the edits to the page – it looks like your edit was reverted due to lack of reliable sources – to proceed, either add sources or discuss on the article's Talk page per WP:BRD – or you can question the editor who did the revert on their User Talk page – cheers, Epinoia (talk) 17:52, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Canpressnewsnow. If you are indeed the copyright holder of File:Stewart times front page.jpg, then you should not be inserting anything relating directly to the Stewart Times into an article, as that is considered a Conflict of interest: you should instead make an edit request on the article's talk page, prefereably citing an independent published source for the information you wish to add. --23:05, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi! Would this be considered a reliable source: https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Doukhobor? (Link taken from Doukhobors) DoggieTimesTwo 22:46, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

– New World Encyclopedia is a mirror site of Wikipedia and is not considered a reliable source – cheers, Epinoia (talk) 23:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

DoggieTimesTwo, you may be interested in the RSN discussion on this topic. As a follow-up off of that, the reliable sources noticeboard's archives are a great place to see if any source's reliability has been assessed, or if it's not there, you can start a discussion on there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:21, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Where can I read emails got in Wikipedia? I can't find an Inbox or something similar. Once I see an e-mail on my "Notifications" I don't know how to access it. Thanks! --Alfajor123 (talk) 21:27, 11 February 2021 (UTC) Alfajor123 (talk) 21:27, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Alfajor123: Welcome to the Teahouse. The notifications you get here aren't e-mails, but either pings or messages on your user talk page. Clicking on the notification will bring you to the message. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

– there are no emails in Wikipedia – in the menu bar at the top right of the screen, beside your username you will see an Alerts bell, this is where you will receive notifications if someone has left a message on your User talk page or mentioned you in a comment – the bell will show the number of alerts, click on the bell and the alerts will be listed, click on the alerts to jump to the edit that prompted the alert – you can go directly to your User talk page by clicking on "Talk" in the menu bar – hope this helps – cheers, Epinoia (talk) 21:45, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Alfajor123 You also asked this question on the Helpdesk, and I have responded there. Please do not ask the same question in multiple places. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:47, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Alfajor123. If you've recieved an email notification then it will be in the inbox of the email associated with your account. If you would like to reply to the the user who sent the email, it's best to go to their user page and click 'Email this user' in the left navigation panel. If you reply directly you risk revealing your email address. Regards, Zindor (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Your email address is revealed if you use 'Email this user'. If you don't want them to know your email address then contact them on their user talk page. See Help:Talk pages. User talk pages are public so everybody can see the posts. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:19, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Alfajor123: Some users create an email address solely for Wikipedia with an address which doesn't reveal their identity. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I know there's a standard or rule regarding how you format tables when doing a filmography. When displaying the years, you display each one individually instead of a rowspan, however the only thing I could find that demonstrates this is WP:WHENTABLE under Filmography and I could've swore there was something else out there on Wikiland that articulated this rule as well, but I can't find it. Anyone know where I should look? Thanks! Snickers2686 (talk) 18:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Snickers2686. WP:FILMOGRAPHY disagrees: 'Use of rowspan formatting in "Year" columns (ex. #2) is acceptable, but rowspan formatting should not be used in other columns, per WP:ACCESS.' PrimeHunter (talk) 23:31, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Mary Wilson (singer)

Hi, I am confused on the template with current events on Multiple issues tag. I just saw on the recent death on Mary Wilson on February 9, and this came out like this: Example:

Or if this could have a current event tag but with a More citations needed tag without Multiple issues tag, it could be like this: Example:

This seems confusing and it could have a Multiple issues tag in it in one warning tag, could anyone help me with these templates? Alan835 (talk) 15:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Alan835: It seems the {{recent death}} tag was removed, but were you asking about how to combine them under {{multiple issues}}? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Well if I want to make it two warnings, I need to have a Multiple issues tag so that way it could prevent this from one tag to another tag without a Mutiple issues tag. But if its a current event with citations needed tags, I will have to add a Multiple issues tag. If this was added a one single warning with a current event, it will be like this:

Code: {{Multiple issues| {{current}} {{More citations needed|date=February 2021}}}}

But I have to know that maybe this could not be allowed on other articles during events, is there a way to make this possible? Alan835 (talk) 16:50, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Alan835, are you asking about guidelines as to when not to use {{Multiple issues}}? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:38, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

why are websites like IMDB and PremiereDate not good references? what makes a good reference? what are some examples of good references (TV shows). I am just curious about one article Draft: The Secret of Skinwalker Ranch Brothers of Bear (talk) 21:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Brothers of Bear You can see Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Reliable source examples. For TV shows, some reliable sources are (depending on what channel it is broadcasted on and where it is):

• Discovery Science Channel
• UKTV
• Travel Channel
• SHOWBUZZDIALY (if you want how much people watched it)

Also, IMDB is semi-reliable, but shouldn't be used as an only source. If you are using IMDB, then make sure to have other sources backing it up. DestinationFearFan (talk) 21:56, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

IMDb is not semi-reliable, it's straight-up unreliable because it's a wiki. Wikis do not have effective editorial oversight. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 22:37, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Allow me to throw in my two cents. IMDB is usually a reliable source for showing cast and crew members. As with plot summaries in Wikipedia articles, anyone can watch a film and go to IMDB and fix anything that is clearly wrong. The more eyeballs, the better, so the info is usually more reliable with more significant films, but less so with straight to video or little seen foreign films. This is different than a source that states information that can't be easily verified. A subtle yet important distinction. Where you don't want to use IMDB is to demonstrate notability, since any movie can be added. If you just want to use it to source a cast or crew member you're usually OK. Here's a longer discussion if you're interested Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_24#Is_IMDb_an_unreliable_source.3F. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:18, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to add to my comment above in case it was misconstrued. IMDB should be a source of last resort, knowing it's user generated. It's better to use an independent third party source to show cast and crew, but that's not always possible. Bottom line, it's only as reliable as the user community that adds the info and oversees the entries - kind of like our plot summaries. For lesser known movies, I'd be wary of using it. Indeed, the movie on the site may not even exist. This is a good example that was shared with me of what appears to be a fake movie with an entry. [[17]] Our checks and balances worked and the user who tried to create an article with this as a source was blocked from Wikipedia. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:14, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

 Frank6292010 (talk) 02:52, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Frank6292010. Do you have a question? -- Hoary (talk) 03:00, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

I have been asked to add citations demonstrating that the artist's work has been acquired by the museums listed in the wikipedia draft. I am in possession of all existing historical source materials for the artist including his sales log book, which was one basis for the museum listings. I also have a receipt for the most recent acquisition. Two museums continue to list his name among their art holdings per their websites. I have no information on whether his works continue to be held by the remaining two museums, although I could research that. How should I cite these acquisitions given that where they are mentioned in independent publications their source is the artist? How is that better than using primary sourcing (sales logs)? Would it also strengthen the article to include partial lists of major gallery showings and large corporate collections when considering notability (although perhaps moot since notability has been approved by the reviewer based on additional criteria such as independent publications)?

Also, the reviewer is unsure of the source of the two images I have provided. He did not ask for sourcing, but one (a photo of an artwork) is a digitized version of the artist's 35mm slide of the painting. The other (a portrait) appeared in a google image search, I believe from a publication at the university where he taught (I have not been able to relocate it yet). I could replace it in time with a portrait from the family's collection.

Thank you for your input. Buxtoni (talk) 16:18, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Buxtoni: Before you proceed, please read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and WP:PAID add {{UserboxCOI}} to your user page. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 04:01, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

I tried creating a page for myself as an musician. I am an international touring musician with credentials. My page was rejected for not having reliable sources, however all of my sources were written articles, journal entries from established/creditable sources? Can anyone offer some help. Maxmuscato (talk) 19:06, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest. Furthermore, your article is entirely lacking in reliable sources - they must demonstrate the notability of an entertainer in whole, not merely mention them in passing. --DawnDusk (talk) 19:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Maxmuscato: For information on Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability", please read WP:MUSICBIO. Also, please declare your conflict of interest by adding {{UserboxCOI}} to your user page. GoingBatty (talk) 04:07, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

 49.207.196.75 (talk) 06:55, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Wikipedia doesn't do profiles. You may be looking for social media sites like Instagram or Facebook. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:29, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Are you referring to a user account? Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 08:53, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey! As of today, when I hover my cursor over the "contributions" button at the top right end corner, I get a toolbar which shows three options; "contributions, translations and uploaded media". Any idea how I can shut this off? LouisAragon (talk) 16:57, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, LouisAragon, to do this, you can go to preferences > appearance > and then you can switch your version of Wikipedia to MinervaNeue, which will change your Wikipedia interface completely. That version is the only version that won't do this. Sadly, I don't think there's a way to remove that in the Vector (default) version of Wikipedia. versacespace (talk) 17:11, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace: Thank you! - LouisAragon (talk) 09:42, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I am trying to make some small edits to this entry - nothing reconstructive, just updating the opening paragraph to show two current roles, and putting the other roles in chronoligical order. I can't find a SAVE on the page when editing, so just click on Publish. Then I log out, have a look on line and it's reverted to the old entry. Could you advise please why this might be happening.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Baker_(British_businessman,_born_1962)

Thank you.

Kind regards,

Kim Allan PA to Richard Baker Richard Andrew Baker (talk) 11:31, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Richard Andrew Baker, please comply with our conflict-of-interest policy. An editor has left a message about this on your talk page. You shouldn't be editing the article directly, but you can propose changes for another editor to implement on the talk page. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 11:34, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Richard Andrew Baker Given that you are not the subject in question, please choose another username. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 11:47, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi all! I am new here and I was wondering how some company can be listed on Wikipedia (for example, I see 3M company)? I guess it has to be internationally known, big revenue and a lot of employees, so is there any standard, rules for that? Also, who can write an article, what is the procedure? Thank you very much in advance!

Dali Dape13 (talk) 18:17, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Dape13, in order to determine whether a company is notable enough for an article, read the notability guideline for companies. For help with writing your first article, Wikipedia:Your first article is a great place to start. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask! 777burger ^{user talk contribs} 18:25, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Dape13: If you work for the company or were asked by the company to create an article, please read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. GoingBatty (talk) 04:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, first of all, thank you VERY much for your help and guidelines, I really appreciate it! In that case, can I send an article to one of you admins to check it first or even to publish it, because I do not want to break any rules here? If that is OK with you, how can I send you an article (messages here on Wikipedia or e-mail)? Once again, thank you very much for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dape13 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Dape13 Once you have declared any conflict of interest or paid editing status you have(declaring paid editing is a Terms of Use requirement), you may use Articles for creation to create and submit a draft. That draft should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant, in depth coverage say about the company, showing how it meets the definition of a notable company. Press releases, staff interviews, and announcements of routine business transactions like the raising of capital do not establish notability. 331dot (talk) 11:48, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Because I am calling them out, I will give @Danielbr11: notice that I have fielded this question.

Danielbr11 is a long time user who recently returned from a substantial absence. Their edit count is low. Upon their return, they have concentrated their edits in some pretty controversial areas, Influences on Karl Marx, Capitalism, Christianity and abortion, and ultimatly List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll, where they caught my attention. Many, perhaps most, of their edits have ended up getting reverted. They do not participate in consensus seeking, and they follow that up with accusations of bias, and other editor attacks. They have followed that up with many noticeboard disputes, all of them premature, IMHO. They even took an issue very prematurely to arbitration.

Recently, they made this edit, which I reverted. [18]. It's an amazingly controversial edit on a controversial page, and it simply came out of the blue.

So, my question is this: At what point is this behavior disruptive, and should be reported? Also, given the huge absence from editing, and the sudden controversial edits, could this account be hacked, and I should report that? Or should I simply take a deep breath, and not bite the newcomer. Rklahn (talk) 00:39, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Rklahn: User is partially blocked. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Yes. I got notice of the block. This question and the block crossed the streams. Despite the block, I think there is still a valid question here. Is there a larger conduct line crossed? Is the account potentially hacked? Rklahn (talk) 00:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Rklahn: I don't think it's a hack - the editor was involved in editing religious articles earlier, just not with so much conservative leaning. Many people have been radicalized over the past few years. If you think it's a hacked account, you can always contact a Checkuser to validate that the editing is from the same IP address. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:23, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I think I used hacked too casually, more exactly, I mean compromised. Rklahn (talk) 01:44, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I think there are enough eyeballs on this now. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:59, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough. I do think there is enough to my suspicion that the account is compromised that I reported it on Administrators' noticeboard per compromised accounts. As far as Im concerned, this question is answered, and it can be archived/closed. Thanks for your help. Rklahn (talk) 02:21, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Oh rklhan. My work is done because even though i always provided sourced that were reliable, i am at peace knowing universities and most people know not to trust or source wikipedia because everyone can see theres no neutrality pov here. On google search most people can see the truth from the majority of other websites. Im suprised but glad you were "horrified" by the china abortion numbers as if you had never seen them.. So tutaloo now!Danielbr11 (talk) 13:35, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

• See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed ABAN and TBAN. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

How can I put a picture in a new page? Kenzie Abraham (talk) 13:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Kenzie Abraham. There's a useful guide to uploading images to Wikimedia Commons and inserting them into Wikipedia articles here. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:49, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

How do I put my name on? I want to accept my invitation! LuigiIsSuppreme989 (talk) 22:37, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

LuigiIsSuppreme989, not sure by what you mean by "put [your] name on", but you've made it to the Teahouse! There's no need to accept or refuse an invitation. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Ah, ok! Thanks! LuigiIsSuppreme989 (talk) 16:12, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

I have been getting some criticism for using a source that is from the creator of the subject or someone that is related to the subject. How do I find secondary sources? I have tried google, but no luck. Darubrub (talk) 15:30, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Darubrub, in the giant draft header box at Draft:LuaJIT, do you see "Find sources"? The links following it can yield secondary sources. If not, it may simply not satisfy our inclusion criteria at this time. In that case, you might try adding the material as a subsection of an existing article, as long as you comply with policy. For example, the sources need to be reliable, at the very least; the text non-promotional; and adding the text wouldn't lend undue weight. Hope that helped, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 16:36, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Can someone please fix the URL link to social psychologist Dan Gilbert in Elizabeth Dunn's wikipedia page? As of now, the Daniel Gilbert mentioned on her page is the billionaire, but should be the social psychologist. (See below for the correct figure.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Gilbert_(psychologist)

Thank you! 216.25.247.106 (talk) 16:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done Changed the link from Dan Gilbert to Daniel Gilbert (psychologist). Joseph2302 (talk) 16:21, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

I.P see Wikipedia:Piped link to learn about retargeting internal links. Zindor (talk) 16:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

I've drafted an article about an entertainer with a sizable enough cult following to have multiple reputable sources referencing it. Does this satisfy the criteria for WP:ENTERTAINER? --DawnDusk (talk) 19:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC) DawnDusk (talk) 19:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

You answered your own question. If there are multiple reputable sources then the entertainer is likely to be notable. Ruslik_Zero 20:13, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I disagree with Ruslik. It's not enough for the sources to to be reputable (though there is a frequently-used template that appears to say so). They must also be independent of the subject (not written by them, not based on an interview with them), and contain significant discussion of them. Maproom (talk) 16:49, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Bold textCan anyone explain why Draft:Nyerere Ogbonna fails to be accepted after including more than 9 third party independent sources which give the subject enough coverage to show his notability? I am beginning to see some ambush against this article and it is unfair to me. I have read and re-read Wikipedia policies and guidelines on notability and I have tried my best to improve on that issue, even seeking professional advice from senior colleagues, yet someone can walk up to decline the article for a flimsy reason. Can the editor just prove to us that no three or four sources are not enough to make the article's subject notable? What is wrong is citing print newspapers that has no online platform in order to buttress my article's subject notability. These print media from the reliable, verifiable and third party independent sources give the subject enough coverage, not just the passing. Even up to four online independent sources also do so. What else is Wikipedia looking for that this article fails to meet? This is disappointing!Nwachinazo (talk) 23:22, 10 February 2021 (UTC) Nwachinazo (talk) 23:22, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

From the draft, Nyerere Ogbonna is an appointed, i.e., not elected, politician in the Nigerian state of Imo. The referenced content is about him doing his job. I agree that he does not attain Wikipedia's concept of notability. The first reviewer Declined the draft, the second Rejected the draft. David notMD (talk) 23:52, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Nwachinazo: Oru East is an area that consists of six towns. So Ogbonna would be similar to a mayor in the US, with the scope of duties, except that he's appointed. Some of the sourcing is duplicated and also looks a bit unreliable. The following US mayor's discussion applies if you want to understand the notability challenge that Ogbonna faces. Draft talk:Hector Carlos Lora was declined four times, because the coverage is all about him doing mayorly things, and his city isn't big enough to make him otherwise notable. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:35, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Noted. Well, I shall review this issue later but let the article be restored for me to work on it. Right now, I am very busy. I SHALL BE BACK.Nwachinazo (talk) 09:45, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Nyerere Ogbonna exists, so nothing to restore. Only if it is not worked on for six months will it be deleted. David notMD (talk) 17:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I was wondering if Pooja Sund is a notable topic to merit its own article or not. It did get 3significanct coverage in my opinion. But, still wanted to be completely sure. Thanks. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 19:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

There is no mention of Pooja Sund at the page to which you linked. In any case, you would need at least two more references that discuss her in some depth for her to be considered notable.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:31, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Shantavira, I don't know how that news got linked. I was linking this one. And, I think I can get three sorces like this. I used another source as a citation to the page I was creating. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 18:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Mildred Benson

 198.27.150.118 (talk) 20:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

IP editor, you are best discussing this at Talk:Mildred Benson, as taking a brief look at the article's contents, it appears that she's gone by various names for different series. If you can find reliable sources that support your claim, it'll increase the likelihood that the title can be renamed. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello

A beginner's question: I've created a sandbox. It didn't ask me to enter a title. I didn't have a chance to enter what my entry is on. I'd appreciate your help on how to enter a title.

Thank you Pqowiieuryt (talk) 20:12, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Pqowiieuryt, welcome to the Teahouse. Sandboxes don't ask for titles, though you could get the same effect if you're using a first-level heading (= Example =; info at MOS:GOODHEAD). If you're thinking about creating a new draft, you might want to read Your first article, which includes an article creation wizard. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

If you do intend to create an article, be sure to have references that qualify as reliable sources before submitting your draft to Articles for Creation. David notMD (talk) 21:37, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Today I saw a radio station, it is very good, and decided to create an article in Wikipedia. Nikitasmirnovva (talk) 16:43, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Radio REDBOX. Created 12 Feb, Submitted to AfC 12 Feb, Declined 12 Feb for lack of references and lack of evidence of notability (but also lack of content, and non-encyclopeadic style). David notMD (talk) 17:36, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Nikitasmirnovva, and welcome to the Teahouse. Not everything and everybody is appropriate for a Wikipedia article. Since we require that nearly all of an article be based on published sources wholly independent of the subject, we will not accept articles about subjects for whom there simply isn't enough independent material to make an article from. The Wikipedia jargon is that the subject is or isn't notable. So the (much more difficult than it looks) task of writing an article begins with finding enough reliable, independent sources to establish notability. Please also read your first article.

Right. Now that I have looked at your draft, and seen the name of the founder of the station, and observe your deliberate misdirection above (why do people do this? Do you think we are stupid?) I will add that promotion of any kind is forbidden on Wikipedia, that you are strongly discouraged from creating an article about your own station, that if you do so, Wikipedia will regard you as a paid editor and it is mandatory for you to make the declarations specified in that page, that in order to write the article you will need to forget everything you know about the station, and write an article based only on those independent sources I mentioned above, and that if Wikipedia eventually has an article about Redbox,(whoever writes it) the article will not belong to you, will not be controlled by you, and will not necessarily say what you would like it to say (and might contain information that you definitely do not want said, if that information has been published in reliable places). ---ColinFine (talk) 17:52, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine is assuming that your User name and the name of the person identified as starting the radio station - Nikita Smirnov - are so close as to mean its the same person. David notMD (talk) 21:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

 MaNu Mz7 (talk) 23:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

@MaNu Mz7: If this is about User:MaNu Mz7/sandbox, you're going to have to wait. The content in your sandbox is not ready to be an article. Among other things, you need sources to establish the notability of a place. Please see WP:MFA. Also, I just reverted some of your recent edits to Keerampara and Kothamangalam. The content you added was unsourced and not formatted properly. Please preview your changes before saving them. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:15, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Our company, Synergy Science, I believe meets the requirements for a page to be created? Its recognized by the inc 5000, https://www.inc.com/profile/synergy-science, and linked to by other 70 different domains of varying authorities. What criteria am I missing if any? The goal is to provide as much information about the company, its history, and everything else so the public is made aware of its benefits. It would be strictly informational and aimed to clear up any possible misconceptions. So, from an informational goal, is this page allowed? TylerSkott (talk) 22:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

@TylerSkott: Welcome to the Teahouse. While you can start an article about a company that you work for, it will be heavily scrutinised as opposed to an uninvolved editor creating it and you submitting edit requests on the article's talk page. Please be aware that Wikipedia is not for promotional purposes, and the encyclopedia would not be interested in having the public be aware of [the company's] benefits. Make sure that reliable sources independent of the source report on it significantly. Finally, since you have a paid relationship with the company, please disclose it on your user page; you may use {{paid}} to do so. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:52, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

@TylerSkott: Please note that "informational purposes" is considered promotional on Wikipedia, as Wikipedia is not for merely providing information. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, not what it wants to say about itself. 331dot (talk) 23:09, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

@TylerSkott: I did a quick Google search and don't see any coverage of your company. Without sufficient independent media coverage in reliable sources, I don't think you should be spending your time trying to get onto Wikipedia. And quite frankly, companies that sell protection from 5G radiation or hydrogenated water are among the most scrutinized companies on Wikipedia. There's a lot of skepticism, which makes the notability bar quite high. You can read WP:GNG about notability guidelines. Sorry I couldn't be more positive. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:31, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I work for an Army public affairs office and we would like to suggest a few new passages to our entry, with direct references. If we are transparent (about who we are) in our user account, would it still be against Wikipedia policy/against good industry practice? There would be no changes made to the current content. Fortblisssocialmedia (talk) 21:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Fortblisssocialmedia, welcome to the Teahouse. It'd be fine, so long as one person was operating the account. There might need to be a username change, as it potentially implies that more than one person using the account, which isn't allowed per Wikipedia's shared accounts policy. You should also consider going on the article's talk page to submit edit requests to reduce the amount of direct involvement you would have with the article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

That sounds like fantastic advice. I'll proceed with both. Thanks!Fortblisssocialmedia (talk) 21:53, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Fortblisssocialmedia In fact, you should not just consider going to the article's talk page – you should absolutely not make any edits to the article but only suggest changes on the article talk page. Use the "edit request" template as explained above. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 21:56, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Given yours is a new account, consider permanently stop using it and start a new account with a different name, as easier than requesting a name change. Once done with that, declare on your User page that you are being paid and the name of the article you are being paid for, THEN, on the Talk page of the article, start a new section and in that, specifically describe the desired additions to the article. References essential. A non-involved editor will decide to incorporate or not. David notMD (talk) 00:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

That's extremely crucial to new editors. I have seen mist editors use VE for everything, like me. SoyokoAnis 14:52, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

AFAIK for technical reasons, mainly that you can only edit the full page, meaning that you will have edit conflicts en masse, especially if the page is a bit bigger, or heavely edited, for example on WP:ANI or User talk:Jimbo Wales Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:05, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! SoyokoAnis 17:01, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Note that technically it is available if you add "?veaction=edit" at the end of the URL. Zoozaz1 talk 02:19, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I believe that the WMF is still rolling out the new reply and discussion starter tools (which are active in some other Wikipedia projects). In the meantime, you may be interested in Enterprisey's reply-link script if the issue is placing where the reply should be. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:50, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I would like to change the main photo of actor Son Ho-jun's profile in Wikipedia. How should I select a photo? Is it okay if I get a still capture from a video of his on YouTube and upload it on the page?

Thank you. Son Shin Ae (talk) 05:10, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely not. As he's still a living person we would need a freely-licenced photo. See WP:Non-free content criteria for more details. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 05:25, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

@Son Shin Ae and Jéské Couriano: Just want to clarify that you can use a still image from a video if it was uploaded under a Creative Commons (CC) license. However, you should only use images from videos uploaded by the subject or another channel collaborating with them, as other unofficial videos sometimes use copyrighted footage belonging to the subject in their video and then incorrectly CC license it.

For example, I have used an image from the subject's CC licensed video on Kristen Hancher and an image from a collaborator's CC licensed video on TBJZL. SK2242 (talk) 02:50, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

How do I specify the link? GabesRouge (talk) 21:57, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, GabesRouge: you use a piped link. For example. [[John Doe (TV series)|John Doe]] displays as John Doe but links to the article about the series. --ColinFine (talk) 22:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) GabesRouge, welcome to the Teahouse. You are looking for Disenchantment (TV series). You are going to want to pipe the link so that it links to the appropriate page, as such: [[Disenchantment (TV series)|Disenchantment]]. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:04, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I'm guessing you mean this edit here, and as such the link to Disenchantment? If you look at the top of the article, you'll see a link to the disambiguation page. Following that reveals a link to Disenchantment (TV series) - which is what you want, I think. Create a piped link like this: [[Disenchantment (TV series)|Disenchantment]] and your link will point to the correct page, and look correct as well. Chaheel Riens (talk) 22:06, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

What am I doing wrong? I just tried that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GabesRouge (talk • contribs) 22:08, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

GabesRouge, it's probably because you did Series, not series; the former is likely not redirecting to the latter. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:13, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

That is what it was, thank you. Is there a coding guide, template, list available somewhere? I enjoy the editing and writing aspect, not so much the formatting.GabesRouge (talk) 22:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

GabesRouge, there's a cheatsheet that you can use as a reference for common formatting. I also find that the visual editor is useful, especially when adding wikilinks. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:26, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

GabesRouge You might also benefit from activating navigation popups. When you preview your edits, you can hover your mouse over a wikilink to see a preview, to determine if you are creating a link to the right destination. To do this, go to Preferences (top right on desktop) > Gadgets > and select Navigation Popups. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:20, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

"Enable page previews" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering has a similar feature and is enabled by default so you probably have that. You can only use one of them. Navigation Popups has additional features which are helpful for editors. You can enable "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. It wouldn't have helped with Disenchantment which is an article, but the orange stands out in many other cases. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:32, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

@GabesRouge: You might be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Bluelink patrol, a new team looking for corrections such as changing [[Disenchantment]] to [[Disenchantment (TV series)|Disenchantment]]. GoingBatty (talk) 04:40, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty I think I'm giving that team more work! haha 99.238.224.151 (talk) 05:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Is there a recommended order for the list of occupations/positions a person has held in biography articles? I have noticed that Google's infoboxes automatically pull the first occupation in the list, which leads to odd situations like Jared Allen being listed as an "American curler" although he's certainly more famous as an American football player, and Michael Burry being listed as an "American physician" although he's certainly more famous as an investor. I feel strongly that these should be changed, but I'm wondering if there is anything in the Manual of Style that I can reference. (I apologize if this is easily accessible in the MoS; I always find it impossible to navigate.) Thank you. Shmarrighan (talk) 07:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Not that I know of. I suggest that you use whichever order seems best to you. If some other editor finds that the order contravenes this or that in the MoS for no good reason, they'll be free to reorder it. -- Hoary (talk) 07:24, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

How can I get my story onto Wikipedia from the sandbox? How do I get it into HTML code? Sapporo1896 (talk) 08:35, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

The move (as it's called hereabouts) is easy. However, there's no point in moving User:Sapporo1896/sandbox/sandbox to Draft:Victor Thompson (pilot) or wherever as long as the draft is in anything like its current form. Currently it has no references. In order for any draft to be promoted to an article, every statement within it must link to a reliable, independent, published source. (Additionally, the article must show that its subject satisfies either WP:MILPERSON or something else in WP:PERSON.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:13, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: List of Uglydoll characters

Hello, I am new to editing Wikipedia. I received a warning that I had vandalized a wiki page from Larryzhao123. Can someone please help me? I am new to wikipedia editing. I edited the Uglydoll wiki page, as I actually own some of the handmade Uglydolls, as well as spoke to David Horvath (the co-creator of Uglydolls with Sun-Min Kim), to accurately add info to some of the characters on the page. I did add a reference to a photo, but then deleted it, due to privacy issues. Can you please tell me what I did wrong? I honestly did not intend to cause any harm. I am new to this platform. Any help would be greatly appreciated. If this is not the correct area to ask questions, please help and let me know how I can properly respond. Thank you. wadiefong Wadiefong (talk) 02:03, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Wadiefong, welcome to the Teahouse. It seems that another user has posted stuff to your user talk page. Unfortunately, Wikipedia looks for information from reliable (secondary) sources, which would not include personal communications between you and Horvath. It seems that Larryzhao123 reverted you for removing references to reliable sources. I strongly recommend trying out The Wikipedia Adventure that Tridwoxi linked on your user talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Tenryuu and Tridwoxi! I will read through the Wiki Adventure. Just for clarity, previous to my edits on the Uglydoll page, I added text info and then cited a photo page--there had been no references cited previous to my edit. I then went back in and deleted the photo reference (my original edit), due to privacy issues. If I originally cited a reference, and then decided to change or remove it, is this still considered a violation? Thank you both for your help, I really appreciate it Wadiefong (talk) 02:20, 13 February 2021 (UTC)wadiefong

Wadiefong Despite being reverted and warned, you have repeatedly removed existing refs and replaced with "Communication with David Horvath" or "Personal communication with David Horvath" as a ref. Stop this! David notMD (talk) 10:35, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Will this article fit the wikipedia rules? I just doubt it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Something_untrustworthy_(Book) Nikitasmirnovva (talk) 11:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm afraid not. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (books) and WP:YFA before proceeding any further.--Shantavira|^{feed me}

I noticed that Talking Tom and Friends (TV series) has been split into List of Talking Tom and Friends (TV series) episodes by one "DogetimeeAKABlueyFan" (I hope I spelled it right) about three weeks ago. While the page split was obviously done in good faith and would have been unanimously supported, there are a few issues I have with the way this was done:

• There was no talk page discussion
• There was no edit summary explaining why he/she split the page though the reason is obvious
• I had written about 15 to 20% of the article as on July 2020 as per Wikipedia's Page Statistics tool, mostly in the episode tables which were split. Now, more than 90% of the new article (where my work is) is attributed to the person who performed the split.

I would have given a "hey, I noticed that your page split was incorrectly done and you should have attributed everyone who worked on the article from which you did the split" message if I noticed this soon enough but I honestly don't know if it is appropriate to give such a message for a three-week old edit, and I've never given such a message. So can someone do the needful to inform this user and ensure that the attribution is done properly? 45.251.33.32 (talk) 07:32, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. The first step is to try to discuss the matter with the editor who carried out the split. It does not matter if it is three hours later or three days later or three weeks later or three months later or three years later. Try to discuss it with the other editor. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:39, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I've started a discussion but it seems that the other user hasn't edited since 16 January. So I suppose it'll take a while if he does return. 45.251.33.32 (talk) 10:50, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The attribution issue can be fixed by adding the {{Split article}} template to each article’s talk page. As for the other stuff, while it can be nice when editors are WP:CAUTIOUS, they aren’t required to do so per WP:BOLD. As explained in WP:PROSPLIT, bold splits without any prior discussion are allowed; so, not discussing beforehand doesn’t make the split inappropriate. If, however, the split is expected to be contentious, then it probably would be wiser to discuss it first. Unfortunately, you sometimes don’t know what is going to turn out to be contentious until it’s actually done. Finally, your contributions’ history shows no record of you having edited the article; perhaps, you used another account. If that’s the case you might want to remember to log in when discussing the split so that (1) other editors will know it was you who made the edits and (2) other editors won’t see your IP address. — Marchjuly (talk) 07:53, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Okie dokie, but could you please add the attribution templates? The copied text was from the last revision on January 7 in Talking Tom and Friends (TV series) but I don't know how to properly use the template. And as for the question about my contributions, I'm on a dynamic IP range and besides, my old account (on which I did 90% of my work in the article) was confiscated by my "AlL oNlInE cOmMuNiCaTiOn I dO WiTh UnKnOwN pEoPlE iS bAd" parents. :-p 45.251.33.32 (talk) 11:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

How do I edit the wrong information of this page. The venue for this event isn't the Bangkok Convention Centre but BCC Hall, Central Plaza Lardprao. A lot of people has been mistaken to the wrong venue as the Bangkok Convention Centre is the incorrrect information. I am the Board Director of the Billiard Sports Association of Thailand who organised this event. Twitath (talk) 11:21, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Twitath. Since you are the director of the association you not only have a conflict of interest, but Wikipedia also regards you as a paid editor, so you must make the declaration specified in that last link. When you have done so, you can then place an edit request on the talk page Talk:Six-red World Championship, specifying exactly what changes you are requesting to the article (eg "Change XXX to YYY" or "Add the following after ZZZ"), preferably citing a reliable published source for the information you wish to add, and attaching the template {{edit request}}. In time, an uninvolved editor will view your request and decide what actin is appropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 12:38, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I have seen many editors including contribution links in their signatures, like this:

Example (talk - contribs)

How should I include that link in my signature? AnotherEditor144 (talk) 12:33, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi AnotherEditor144. You're not required to include a link to your "contributions" in your signature; you're only required to have a link to either your user page or your user talk page per WP:SIGLINK. I think most editors used the standard 4-tilde signature which provides links to your user page and user talk page; if, however, you want to customize your signature, you should look at WP:CUSTOMSIG for more information on how to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:54, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I know that, but if I would like to include that link, what would it be? AnotherEditor144 (talk) 12:56, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

AnotherEditor144, something like this:[[Special:Contributions/AnotherEditor144|<sup style="color:#396">(contribs)</sup>]] Zindor (talk) 12:59, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! AnotherEditor144 ^{talk contribs} 13:00, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I was recently looking at Byron Nemeth and tagged a few phrases/paragraphs with Template:Peacock prose. I checked back in on the article and saw that a series of IP edits removed these without changing the content of the article itself.

This song went on to establish the band on the west coast hard rock scene as a stunning live performances act with a very strong stage presence. Rogue Society played great hard rock music with catchy melodies in concert that rocked the metal scene in Arizona.

Ignoring the clumsy feel of this extract (the article needs a good copy edit), does this constitute peacock prose? Was tagging it the correct thing to do?

Cheers, ritenerek^talk :) 12:15, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely, Rit3nerek. No Wikipedia article should describe anything at all as "stunning" or "very strong", or "great" or "rock[ing] the metal scene" unless it is in an attributed direct quote from an independent source. Since the other editor has reverted you, BRD says that the next step is to open a discussion on the article's talk page. Since the editor who reverted you was not logged in, it is not possible to ping them, so they might not see your discussion: that is not your problem. If after a reasonable time (say, a week) they have not replied and joined discussion, you could restore your edit.

Alternatively, you could remove the peacock language yourself. --ColinFine (talk) 12:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine, thank you for the speedy reply! ritenerek^talk :) 14:00, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Is it possible to bundle a source that is used twice in an article (has a refname) with other sources such that the twice-used source will be listed only once in the reflist? Also, is it possible to bundle if one of the sources has a reference page? I don't think these are possible, but just checking. Thanks Cartle R255 21:16, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, CartleR255, welcome. If I'm understanding you correctly, then yes it is possible. See WP:NAMEDREF and WP:OPCIT. Regards, Zindor (talk) 21:33, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

@Zindor: to clarify, I am referring to this: H:CITEMERGE. I would like to combine three inline citations that apply to the same sentence as a single note in the reflist. However, one of the sources is a named ref and also has a reference page (Template:Rp). I tried it but got a <ref> error b/c of nesting refs. Cartle R255 21:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Ah, I see, thanks for clarifying. I don't know the answer to that sorry, although someone else will. Zindor (talk) 22:06, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

@CartleR255:. I think that you can just remove the {{rp}} template from the instance where the page number template is used. Then the use of <refname=whateveritiscalled/> in the second and third places where the reference is used will all point to the same citation and, assuming that citation specifies the page(s), all will be well. Alternatively, if you have three citations that need different page numbers, you need to add a page number template to the two instances that don't currently have one — there will still be only one reference in the reflist. If you run into further trouble, post the article's name here and I'll take a look. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:59, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I took a look at H:CITEMERGE and now suspect I misunderstood what you are trying to achieve. If you are still stuck, I suggest we move the the Talk Page of the article! Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:09, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

 184.144.24.222 (talk) 14:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately we can only answer questions about using or editing Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Please I would like to know how to locate good sources for wikipedia articles needed citation. I would be very grateful if you can tell me the link where I can be trained on this aspect. I am a Librarian and I am so much interested in this aspect. Thanks. Neyo1964 (talk) 14:07, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Neyo1964. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Reliable sources.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Message from IiIa.1. Thanks for the message! I don't have any questions, but okay! 7u7 IiIa.1 16:53, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

How to use sandbox? When i make edits it’s telling me to use my sandbox? Harri6xc (talk) 16:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Harri6xc. There is a link to your personal sandbox at the very top of every Wikipedia page. It is a place where you can practice editing Wikipedia without disrupting article pages. For further information please see Help:My sandbox.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

What you were advised is that if you want to experiment with your editing skills, use your Sandbox. The real issue is that you changed an existing article four times and were reverted every time. Repeating edits is known as 'edit warring,' and can lead to you being temporarily blocked. The proper next step is to start a discussion on the talk page of the article in question. The awards table is set up so that it can be sorted in various ways. What your (reverted) edit did was remove the sort function so that the table is only in chronological order. That is worse, not better, than before. David notMD (talk) 17:50, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I know that viewer count is usually millions, but can it also be hundreds, thousands, billions or even trillions? WaussusBeaver (talk) 19:32, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Not a question for the Teahouse, but yes, it can be billions. List_of_most-watched_television_broadcasts#Records. Next time, please ask at WP:RDE RudolfRed (talk) 21:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

There is an article with a sentence that isn't sourced, and I can't find a source for it. Should I simply remove the sentence? Should I indicate that there's no proof of this? Or can I in some way clarify to other editors that that particular sentence is in need of a source? I know there's a talk page, but I don't really know how to use it, so if that's the best way to address it, how do I do that? TIA :) Aegis of Athena (talk) 21:40, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Aegis of Athena, welcome to the Teahouse. You can certainly remove the sentence if it's unsourced, or stick {{citation needed}} at the end to draw attention to it. Maybe someone else will be able to find a source that corroborates the claim. If you're going to use the talk page, you can click on "New section" at the top of the page to start a new section, where you can discuss the sentence, kind of like what you've done when answering this question. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Tic Taw Video WebLinks Can anyone watch these videos? WaussusBeaver (talk) 22:54, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

If YouTube simply tells you they're un-available then I'm afraid that's the answer. Zindor (talk) 23:54, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello everyone! I've been following a musician for a few years now and decided to write a page for them. However, the page has been reviewed and was not accepted due to following reasons. Can someone please help and assist me with this?

" This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia."

"This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published"

After all of the information I found I thought this would potentially be compelling enough, apparently not. Any help would be appreicated, thank you. TaylorMoore74 (talk) 23:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:KNO/WHY

Source 1 is an interview. Source 2 is a ticket vendor. Source 3 is a name-drop. Source 4 is a Google search. Source 6 is Soundcloud. Source 7 is a Wordpress blog. Source 8 is incredibly short. None of them are viable sources. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 23:56, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

What is the minimum amount of reliable references for a draft article to be published? WaussusBeaver (talk) 18:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Enough to source all the content you added in the article. Not sure if there's a policy to answer this but generally at least three. Depends on the amount of content in your article. versacespacetalk to me 19:05, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

VersaceSpace, you may be thinking of the essay WP:THREE. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:20, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

WaussusBeaver may I have a look at your draft? versacespacetalk to me 19:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I think the minimum amount would be 50, as the article needs to be proved by multiple sources. If less, then the article is probably not suitable for Wikipedia and/or fake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WaussusBeaver (talk • contribs) 19:30, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

That is certainly not true, WaussusBeaver. Some very fine articles are based on a handful of good sources; and conversely, many failed drafts have dozens of sources, apparently on the principle that if they can only get enough bad sources, these will somehow add up to a good one. The number depends, as VersaceSpace suggests, on the amount of material in the article that needs to be supported: a longer article will typically have more references than a short one. --ColinFine (talk) 19:35, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Am I allowed to upload pictures from games I find from the internet or I have to take pictures of them? JennilyW (talk) 00:37, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

JennilyW, depends. If you're taking screen captures of something it is possible to upload it if it meets all of Wikipedia's fair-use criteria, as the developers generally hold the copyright to the intellectual property. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:40, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Chris Petzold

Hi, friends: I'm legitimately confused about what is meant by reliable sources. A recent piece of mine was rejected because it didn't use reliable sources, and yet my sources were the Seattle Times and the Seattle Weekly, as well as a citation from a book published by Simon & Schuster. If those don't qualify as reliable, I'm at a loss as to what would. Can someone kindly help clarify? Many thanks. Stephancox (talk) 00:06, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Stephancox, welcome to the Teahouse. Looking at the draft, the issue is that the references aren't being cited properly; external links are not used in the body of the article. CommanderWaterford has provided links to WP:REFBEGIN and WP:MINREF in their comment. There is also a difference between a draft being rejected and declined—the former means that the subject will have no way of making it into articlespace, while the latter still has a chance if issues are fixed. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi, Stephancox. The references need to be not only reliable, but independent of the subject, and to contain in-depth discussion of him. There's a template that misleads a lot of contributors about that.

But that's not relevant in this case. Draft:Chris Petzold cites no sources at all. It does contain direct external links, in contravention to Wikipedia policy. You will need to convert those to references, as described at Help:Referencing_for_beginners. If enough of them (four should do) are reliable and independent and have sufficient discussion of Petzold, that should do the trick. Maproom (talk) 00:20, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Stephancox. In addition to what the others posted above, I'm wondering whether you have any connection to Petzoid. Your account is quite new and the only edits you've made so far have been related to creating a Wikipedia article about her. Often when a new account appears and seems so focused on achieving a single goal, it's often because there is some kind of connection because the account and the subject it's trying to create an article about; so, if you're connected to Petzoid in any way, I think you should take a careful look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (particularly this, this and this), Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Many new editors think that only good things can happen from creating an article about someone or something, but there can be a serious downside to it as well. Article subjects and those who create articles about them have pretty much zero control over article content; there are ways for subjects to express any concerns they may have about what's written about them on Wikipedia (like this), but for the most part article content (positive or negative) is going to be assessed on whether it satisfies Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and not whether it satisfy the subject of the article; moreover, any disagreements over this are going to be expected to be resolved per Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and Wikipedia:Consensus, even if the end result ends up being something that the subject of the article might not desire. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:35, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Duly noted on all. I thank you kindly for your prompt and thoughtful responses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephancox (talk • contribs) 00:45, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Has the main page ever been vandalized before? SoyokoAnis 20:25, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

SoyokoAnis, yes in the past it has been. Nowadays it's no longer possible because of cascading protection. Zindor (talk)

SoyokoAnis, I'd assume it has been when an admin's account has been compromised. I'd guess it lasted only seconds because of how heavily the main page is watched. There's also WP:Don't delete the main page. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:06, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

This IP user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/174.254.192.112 is editing draft's that isn't there's. I was wondering if this is allowed? JennilyW (talk) 03:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

User:JennilyW - Drafts are collaborative and are freely editable by any editor. An editor who wants to work on a draft and not have it edited by other editors can create and edit it in user space. (It is editable by other editors in user space anyway, but there editing it is discouraged.) If you think that the edits made by the unregistered editor are disruptive, you can revert them or restore the deletions. Most of the same rules apply to the editing of drafts as to the editing of articles. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:08, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I have noticed that many shows seem to be quite popular on YouTube and already have their own article but somehow have never been reviewed by any critics. So, I was wondering: suppose I ask a reviewer employed with The Guardian or some other reputable newspaper on Twitter (I first double-check whether the Twitter account matches the one shown on his "author's profile" at the news site) to review a show and he agrees, but he can only post it on his personal blog or on Twitter because it's a personal request. Does the review remain reliable and significant enough to be added in the "reception" section of the article? 45.251.33.57 (talk) 05:08, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Our definition of a reliable source generally means one that has editorial oversight, so it might not. If the reviewer were someone highly established, though, it might. It'd probably be better to use a blog post from a professional critic than to have nothing. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:29, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

The policy on self-published sources explains this pretty well. If the person has an article - which explains that they're considered an expert in the field (and that needs to be backed up by RS, of course) - they're probably a decent source. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 05:37, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, all. I was looking up something about actor Zoie Palmer, who played the android on Dark Matter. I noticed that her date of birth wasn't in her Wikipedia article, even though it is easily available elsewhere. I tried several times to add it in, with at least one source each time, but someone kept following me and deleting my update. I even tried citing Palmer's own Twitter feed, to no avail. I finally gave up. Palmer's DOB is October 28 1977, if anyone with more skill and/or patience than I cares to give it a go.

I did notice that neither person who kept deleting my update cared to do anything about updating the Palmer article themself. Professor Bubba (talk) 21:08, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Professor Bubba I'm sorry that happened. I will look into it, and try to fix it. DestinationFearFan (talk) 21:12, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Professor Bubba, welcome. Have you read WP:DOB? It might explain why your edits were reverted. I'd also add that a Twitter Bio is a primary source and also not a reliable. Zindor (talk) 21:17, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! BTW (and I'm sorry I neglected to say so) my Twitter cite was Zoie Palmer herself mentioning her birthday, and not a bio.

Thank you again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Professor Bubba (talk • contribs) 21:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Professor Bubba: Yes, that's the point. Actors, whose age can affect their livelihood, have a clear COI and therefore we cannot accept their own statements as a reliable source of their age. It has to come from a secondary source, as described in the pages linked above. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:52, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

AlanM1, however, there is also WP:BLPSELFPUB/WP:TWITTER. It is not unusual on WP to use a decent SPS, like a Twitter with blue checkmark or official website for DOB, as long as it clearly states the DOB. Even for actors, as long as there aren't any contradictory secondary RS. However, again, assuming this [19] is the tweet in question it doesn't mention a year, so it's pretty useless. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:17, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

And Professor Bubba she doesn't say it is her birthday. She just thanks people for birthday wishes. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

That too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

@AlanM1: we're allowed to use self-published sources for non-controversial self-descriptions. In the vast majority of cases, someone's age is a non-controversial claim they can make. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 05:39, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello everyone, not sure I'm at the right place for a question. I've just translated this page from German. Can someone please tell me if it's worth opening a procedure to raise this new article to the "Good article" status or I better forget the idea ? Also, I haven't the faintest idea about how to proceed. Thanks. LouisAlain (talk) 21:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

@LouisAlain: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for adding to it. There is lots of text in the references section which may be misplaced, and at least one broken ref tag error. After you fix that, you can look at the criteria at Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria for what else to improve to get the article to GA status. RudolfRed (talk) 22:25, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick answer. I didn't expect the page to be acccepted as it is but Wiki being a collaborative encyclopedia, I hoped some others would be glad to participe to the bettering of the page. Thanks again LouisAlain (talk) 07:02, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I created a page back in 2010 and have made occasional edits since. Last night I went to make an edit and noticed it has completely disappeared! Can anybody advise why and how to recover it? It is about the British actor James Merry. Thanks. Frankcable (talk) 08:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Frankcable Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. James Merry (actor) was deleted a few weeks ago per the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Merry (actor), a deletion discussion. 331dot (talk) 08:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, can you advise how I can appeal and reinstate the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frankcable (talk • contribs) 08:23, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Frankcable Please review, if you haven't already, the deletion discussion and reasons for the deletion. If you have new or previously unmentioned information to consider that addresses the reason for the deletion, you may offer it at Deletion Review- but you may not use Deletion Review if you merely disagree with the outcome of the discussion. It seems that the article was deleted due to Merry not meeting the Wikipedia definition of a notable actor, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Are you allowed to request that a article nominated for GA-status be reviewed? I do have a article I have nominated for GA status that I would like to be reviewed. AlabamaFan101 (talk) 03:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@AlabamaFan101: all articles that are nominated are "requested to be reviewed" - that's how nominations pass or fail. Unless you're referring to some other process.

Asking individual editors to review your GA isn't a common thing, though it's not in violation of any policy to do so. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 04:01, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Elliot321: Regarding my question, I was referring to asking individual editors to review it. Would it be a good idea to do so? —AlabamaFan101 (talk) 04:46, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@AlabamaFan101: Generally I would say no, unless you already have a decent relationship with the particular editor you'd ask. Given that there's a queue, asking others might be viewed as attempting to "jump the line". Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 04:47, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Not as a formal review, but you could see if there were editors who had made significant contributions to the article in the recent past - and are still active editors - and invite them to look at the article. David notMD (talk) 11:06, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm trying new to making edits to Wikipedia content on the Scrum (Software Development) wikio page, but a Wikipedian who goes by NJD-DE deleted several of my attempts to edit the page: Scrum (Software Development)

I'm very frustrated by his/ her handling of this situation. I was simply posting that there are multiple variants of Scrum that support scaling Scrum concepts across large products teams and on an enterprise scale. Yes, I did initially try to list my book as a reference source - which is a scholarly work of 609 pages, and published by PACKT Publishing- a leading book publisher that specializes in books for IT specialists.

What's strange to me is that other Scrum advocates have their materials in this wikipage, and even make clarifying comments. Heck! I know and have communicated with most of the folks who are listed on the Scrum page - in collaboration as I wrote this book and several of my previous book projects.

But, even when I took my book out as a qualified reference source, NJD-DE still deleted my post that was simply commenting about modern Scrum scaling methodologies. Then, instead of giving me advice on how to better frame my edits, NJD-DE threatened to block me. He did mention you folks, so hopefully you can help me out.

Here's what I was trying to post. How can I make it acceptable?

Over time, a number of Scrum scaling strategies have evolved to support implementation of Scrum-based agile practices in large product team organizations and also to support enterprise-wide business agility initiatives. Some scaling strategies deal strictly with large software development programs or projects requiring multiple development teams. Others incorporate systems thinking and lean development practices to implement business agility across all value creation and value delivery activities on an enterprise scale.^[1]

A shortlist of leading scaled Scrum and Lean-Agile practices include the following:

• Scrum-of-Scrums
• Scrum-At-Scale
• The Nexus Framework
• Large Scale Scrum (LeSS)
• Disciplined Agile (DA)
• Scaled Agile Framework® (SAFe®)

 2601:283:4103:DF30:C1ED:1A4E:52DF:310F (talk) 01:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, what's your question? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:51, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Tenryuu, above is what the IP was trying to post in an article; how can they make it acceptable? -- Hoary (talk) 02:07, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

The serial reverter is Njd-de, who may wish to comment. I can't comment much further, as (just considering the snippet above) I can't derive any meaning from "agile practices", "business agility initiatives", "systems thinking", "lean development practices", "value creation", or "value delivery activities". (I'm not saying that they have no meaning -- although this suspicion does occur to me -- just that they have none in my little cranium.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:22, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Hoary: Thanks; I may have glanced over it in my edits to restore the Teahouse from a misplaced ref tag.

IP editor (whom I assume to be Cgrupp55, as the aforementioned discussion seems to be on User talk:Cgrupp55), Njd-de appears to have taken issue with the reference provided, which links to Amazon. If it were cited differently, like with the book's ISBN, that might be a different story, but it's best to discuss on the article's talk page as part of the bold, revert, discuss cycle. The content added probably required a reliable source in Njd-de's eyes, and in the absence of one, they went and reverted it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:26, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

The serial reverters, if one wishes to call us that, were MrOllie and me. As I also tried to explain on the user's talkpage the nature of the edits looked clearly promotional:

First IP tries twice to add a book as reference/further reading material (Special:Diff/1006406156, Special:Diff/1006409403). This was reverted by MrOllie with edit summary Rm apparent refspam. Then an account was created, a new section added to the article and referenced with their own source. (Special:Diff/1006410518/1006427139). I reverted this as it looked promotional, and lacked a reliable and independent source. Despite edit summary (Using Wikipedia for advertising and/or promotion is not permitted.) and a talk page message, they attempted at adding the section again without any source (Special:Diff/1006429927). It got reverted by MrOllie (This isn't a place for you to promote). After that another attempt was made at adding the book as reference under Further reading (Special:Diff/1006439023). By now it had been clear that someone was trying everything possible to get their book into this article, so I reverted it (unclear what should be referenced here; oh and we're still not going to use WP to promote books). My talk page warning message then included a standard remark about our blocking policy regarding usage of Wikipedia as a soapbox.

If other book authors are using the Scrum article for promoting their work, then this should be acted upon. Just because other stuff exists is not an excuse for turning an article into an advertisement though.

@Cgrupp55:/IP: I suggest that you propose your edits on the article talk page, and let independent users decide whether the section is relevant, and if your book should be used as reference/added as further reading material. In the meantime I would recommend having a look at the not a soapbox policy and the conflict of interest guideline. – NJD-DE (talk) 11:09, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Again, thank you all for your previous responses and guidance. After recently posting some small contributions to a few pages, it became even more apparent that others with significantly more qualifications and experience are best to take on the task of creating the actual “new” pages relating to Anna Morris Holstein. (As well as editing / improving my recent layman attempts at edits to existing pages).

Hoping that the minor contributions made today to the existing 5 pages (Washington Memorial Chapel, Washington’s Valley Forge Headquarters, Valley Forge National Historical Park, Daughters of the American Revolution (D.A.R.) the Patriotic Order Sons of America (POS of A), may help offer some background on this incredible woman, while also generating some passion for others to lead the task of creating an actual high-quality Wikipedia page for Anna, as well as one for The Centennial and Memorial Association of Valley Forge.

Anna’s creative leadership, passion and dedication in efforts to save, preserve, restore General George Washington’s Valley Forge Headquarters, as well as the initial surrounding acreage that today is known as Valley Forge Park, seems far past due for Wikipedia recognition. In addition to her efforts saving Valley Forge HQ, she served over three years during the Civil War as Nurse / Matron-In-Chief, fund raiser, donor, from Gettysburg to Virginia etc… as founder and first regent of the Valley Forge Chapter of D.A.R., support and fund-raising with the Mount Vernon Ladies Association helping to save and preserve President Washington’s VA Home, Regent for Pennsylvania House at Chicago World’s Fair she also led many other large and small national, regional and community efforts.

Apologies for the rookie attempts at page edits, but hopefully this can at least help jump-start one of your incredible ongoing efforts you have previously led to educate and spread the word to help honor these tremendously deserving women. Hopefully links to the many various historians and historical societies / organizations that have factual data have been referred to correctly. In addition to the ones used today there are still dozens of other reputable sources that document details about her many contributions. Including the Library of Congress, The NPS, Historical Authors and contemporary journalists.

While prior to these initial raw additions I just made to existing pages made today there was no mention of Anna Holstein at all, anywhere on Wikipedia, hopefully as you provide your expertise people will be able to see as many of her great contributions as possible in the coming weeks, months, years…. Thank you again

Below are just some of the links to credible sources that were used today, dozens more exist:

Historian Lorett Treese - History of Valley Forge Park; Making and Remaking A National Symbol: https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/vafo/treese/treese2.htm Daughters of the American Revolution Magazine - Ceremony to Dedicate Prayer Desk at Washington Memorial Chapel to Anna: https://books.google.com/books?id=ZnwmAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA44&lpg=PA44&dq=daughters+of+the+american+revolution+magazine+anna+holstein&source=bl&ots=6CusigPp2t&sig=ACfU3U2QHntFYHyKBuOAPBLC3rgty9ezTg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwijnKnNmbHuAhUqFFkFHfiVAp4Q6AEwCXoECAkQAg#v=onepage&q=daughters%20of%20the%20american%20revolution%20magazine%20anna%20holstein&f=false Obituary: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/31433481/obit-anna-morris-holstein-died-jan-2/ Hosting DAR and others at Valley Forge, as she was leading efforts trying to save it, Philadelphia Inquirer: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/11245388/patriots-visit-valley-forge-nov-18/ Philadelphia Inquirer Article, The Woman Who Saved the Shrine: http://www.kophistory.org/the-woman-who-saved-the-shrine/ One of the Books She Authored: Three Years In Field Hospitals In The Army of The Potomac - https://archive.org/details/threeyearsinfiel00hols Library of Congress: Minutes and History of The Centennial and Memorial Association of Valley Forge CBrookUM (talk) 03:45, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Instead of citing Amazon, you need to cite the book itself. Instead of citing newspapers.com, you need to cite the newspaper. Instead of citing archive.org, you need to cite the book. You can also give those URLs in your citations, but as an aid to the reader, not as the source itself. Maproom (talk) 08:39, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

CBrookUM Now that you are developing some expertise in adding text and references to existing articles, I recommend that you take on the project of creating an article about Anna Morris Holstein. A little thing: no space between punctuation and references. Good luck and Godspeed. David notMD (talk) 11:21, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

It’s Valentine’s Day in the US, and I want to start my latest Tea House request with this:

Hi, I’m DrMel and I am profoundly, profoundly grateful that you, whomever is reading this at the Teahouse, have been putting in allllll the hours you have to help with these insane and beautiful wikiworlds we’re part of.

I’ve been working on wikiprojects since 2004, but we may have never yet connected. I’m happy to connect now. And very grateful for all your help with this work on the “sum of all human knowledge” stuff.

I / We have a bunch of ways we want to help make it easier to show appreciation.

It’s a maze of twisty passages all around here. Sometimes it’s hard to feel appreciated. This Heart-shaped Labyrinth is to say Thank YOU, Wikipedian, for all your hard work!!! from Me to YOU. I appreciate your work. I really do.

and my Teahouse request is: how do we make things like this easy to share and remix so people can spread some more wikiLove and wikikindness around here? Grateful for your help with possibilities. What makes #wikilove go viral?

What the world needs now is love, sweet wiki love it’s the only thing that there’s just too little of

DrMel (talk) 06:31, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Go to your Preferences, click the "Editing" tab, and then click "Enable showing appreciation for other users with the WikiLove tab". Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:22, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Ah, I see that you are aware of that. Apologies, I did not intend to editorsplain something you already know. In that case, I have no idea – I'm not sure what would be simpler than the current wikilove tab. --bonadea contributions talk 11:29, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Esteemed Editors. I have created a new page on a prominent businessman located here. I created the page before I became an auto confirmed user. Now the page is waiting for approval, which I understand can take four months or more. Is there any way to either speed up the approval process or create a new page as an auto confirmed user that will go live immediately (if I understand the process correctly)? FYI all of my citations are from independent news websites and I am a former professional journalist. I have also disclosed my COI. Thanks for any guidance you can provide. TennGal TennGal (talk) 20:15, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

TennGal. Hello. There is no way to speed up the process. You are now autoconfirmed, but I would advise against moving the article yourself, as I'm not sure the sources are appropriate. I don't see where you declared your COI. 331dot (talk) 20:31, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Dayakar Veerlapati is current version. Can also be days or weeks. Be patient. First time article creators are strongly advised to go through the AfC process. Moving your draft to mainspace without AfC means that it will run risk of new article reviewers either kicking it back to draft or nominating it to Articles for Deletion. David notMD (talk) 21:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

331dot Thanks for the kind and quick response. I tried again to post my COI. I'm not sure I did it correctly. I'm also not sure that I posted my original COI in the right place. I'm REALLY trying to do this right but it's so confusing. TennGal (talk) 21:12, 13 February 2021 (UTC)TennGalTennGal (talk) 21:12, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, TennGal. I looked at the sources in the draft, and couldn't find a single one that is independent of Veerlapati. (I didn't look at all of them, but the titles of the ones I didn't are not encouraging). Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. An article that is transparently based on an interview or press release does not meet these criteria. At present, in my view, the draft does not establish that Veerlapati is notable. If in fact he is not, then you are wasting your time (and ours). And like 331dot, I do not see anywhere where you have declared your COI. If you are in any way paid for writing this, then you are in breach of Wikipedia's terms of use if you don't make the required declaration. --ColinFine (talk) 21:13, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Either COI or PAID go on your User page. David notMD (talk) 21:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine. Thanks for this guidance. Respectfully, nine of the 16 sources that I cite for this article are from independent news sources such as the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and Inc. magazine. Veerlapati has been featured in multiple independent news outlets over the past two decades. Wouldn't that make him rise to the level of prominence to be the subject of a Wikipedia page? TennGal (talk) 21:48, 13 February 2021 (UTC)TennGalTennGal (talk) 21:48, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

TennGal You posted a notice on the draft talk page, you should post one on your user page as well, User:TennGal, or at least a simple statement regarding your COI and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 21:54, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

331dot I have posted the COI on my User Page now. If you have a moment and can take a look to confirm I did it correctly, I'd be most appreciative. TennGal (talk) 21:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)TennGal

That will work. Thanks 331dot (talk) 22:09, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello again, TennGal. I don't see a single reference from the St Louis Post-Dispatch. There are a couple from the St Louis Business Journal, and that may be a fine reliable independent journal for all I know, but the articles are not. 'Said Dayakar "Day" Veerlapati, president and chief executive' in the third paragraph means that the article is basically his words, not the reporter's. Not independent. --ColinFine (talk) 22:50, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

HeyColinFine STLToday.com is the website of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the major daily newspaper serving St. Louis, Missouri, so I can see why you didn't think there wasn't a reference to it. The newspaper and the St. Louis Business Journal are both independent newspapers that employ professional journalists, similar to the Guardian or the New York Times, which would certainly quote the subject of an article in the process of their reporting. Surely quotes in independent media aren't a basis for disqualifying citations from a major media outlet? Thanks again for taking the time to help. TennGal (talk) 23:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)TennGalTennGal (talk) 23:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello again m, TennGal. Whne a newspaper quotes the subject, they are reproducing the subject's words, and this is a primary source, and does not contribute in any way to notability, which depends on independent commentary. --ColinFine (talk) 12:36, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

The draft starts: Dayakar "Day" Veerlapati (born July 25, 1958) is an Indian-American businessman and philanthropist. He is the founder, president and CEO of S2Tech, headquartered in Chesterfield, Missouri, and of S2Tech.com India Private Limited in Hyderabad, Telangana, India. I infer that his primary claim to fame is in connection with S2Tech; and as I continue reading the draft, my impression doesn't change. However, S2Tech doesn't have an article. If S2Tech isn't notable, it would be surprising if Veerlapati were nevertheless notable. If S2Tech is notable, then I would expect that somebody with no conflict of interest would want to create an article about it. -- Hoary (talk) 02:31, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Help: I don't know how to merge my wikipedia accounts TicTawCentral and WaussusBeaver. help. WaussusBeaver (talk) 23:55, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

You can't. Merging accounts is not technically possible. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 23:56, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

But what you should do, WaussusBeaver, is to put a note on both User pages (replacing the fake article in User:WaussusBeaver and creating the non-existent User:TicTawCentral) to explain that both accounts belong to the same person. See the last sentenceo WP:SOCKLEGIT. --ColinFine (talk) 12:42, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I'd like to translate some pages into English-- should I try to find English language versions for the links/citations, or is it okay to re-link the same ones? Thank you! CharlieCandide (talk) 09:13, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

CharlieCandide, welcome to the Teahouse - please have a look at Wikipedia:Translate us and Wikipedia:Translation, there you will find anything you need to know about how to translate. CommanderWaterford (talk) 12:54, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Caroline Le Souef

Hi there - I am writing an article about a lady's grave I found at the cemetery today - an artist that depicted Australian Aboriginal life in the nineteenth century. While it doesn't look like her role was particularly controversial, I wondered if there are protocols about writing articles around this sort of subject? For example her use of terms that are not appropriate now etc. Thank you Very neant (talk) 13:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

hi, please help me to publich my 1st article? Thanks Delia Dykes (talk) 06:19, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Delia Dykes, what exactly would you like help with? To start an article, I'd recommend creating a draft by using the guide at Wikipedia:Articles for creation, then getting it published through the process listed there. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 06:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Delia Dykes, also it might helpful to have a look at WP:YFA. CommanderWaterford (talk) 12:55, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi I have created a page, but it is now appearing in WIKI search... Can you please help me? many thanks Delia Delia Dykes (talk) 07:13, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Delia Dykes looking at your contributions, I don't see your page, have you saved it? If so, can you link to it? Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 07:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

my page is here: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Delia_Dykes" ..... how do I save it? there is no SAVE button Delia Dykes (talk) 07:19, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Delia Dykes the "publish page" button should work once you've finished.

It looks like your page was originally deleted due to it looking like you were using Wikipedia as a web host. I can't see the page, so I don't know if this was accurate - but if you'd like to draft an article, I would recommend doing it either as a subpage of your userpage - like at User:Delia Dykes/article name or in the Draft namespace, like Draft:article name.

If you're planning on writing an article about yourself, please read the policy on it at Wikipedia:Autobiography first. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 07:22, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

hi, so I have re-entered the page.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Article_name Delia Dykes (talk) 07:26, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I can already tell that this will go nowhere. Article_name is not the actual name for the article, massive MOS issues, no WP:RS, a lot of WP:NPOV violations, and I can see signs of Wikipedia:Copyright violations and copy-pasting (see here) and a ton of other issues I'm sure other editors can point out. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 07:32, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

To be clear: it is impossible that what you have created as that draft can become a Wikipedia article. It has been nominated for Speedy deletion. Very soon, it will be deleted, along with any history that it existed. David notMD (talk) 11:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Delia Dykes: welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. I think it is a great pity that so many people come to Wikipedia with the laudable ambition of creating an article, and appear to think that, because it is the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit, they can start straight in on doing so. I think this is a bit like somebody who hears a violin concerto and wants to play it, buys a violin, and starts trying to play this master-work: it doesn't work, and it often leads to frustration and disappointment. The analogy is perhaps a bit exaggerated, but not that much: creating a Wikipedia article today is much harder than it looks (and also much harder than it was in the early days, which is why we have tens of thousands of really terrible articles, many of which should be deleted: we have higher standards now). I urge you, for your own satisfaction as well as for the benefit of Wikipedia, to put your wish to create an article aside for the moment, and learn the craft of editing Wikipedia - and its criteria for notability, neutrality, and all the other policies - by spending some weeks or months improving some of our six million existing articles before you look at your first article and return to it. If you're not sure where to find articles to work on, you can have a look at Community Portal, or find a WikiProject that interests you, or just pick Random article until you find something interesting. --ColinFine (talk) 13:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello I will be happy to know ahy my article about Shalev Alon was declined Thank you very much! S.A Mixing (talk) 13:34, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

S.A. Mixing Hello. You asked this at the AFC help desk; please only use one method of seeking assistance to avoid duplication of effort. 331dot (talk) 13:37, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

The photo at the top right of the entry on Pietro Aretino states that it is Titian's first portrait of Aretino. In fact, it is not by Titian and it is not of Aretino. How do I replace it with the correct photo? Maurice Magnus (talk) 14:05, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Actually, instead of telling me how to do it, would someone else do it? The correct photo is at the top of the article linked to in note 9 of the Pietro Aretino entry.

It says otherwise here. Whatever be the truth, at any rate, I suggest that you raise your concern at the article's talk page. - Abdul Muhsy talk 14:19, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you; I will. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maurice Magnus (talk • contribs) 14:26, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Is there any guideline or essay for how long to let a Talk page proposal/!vote run? Thought I'd seen that somewhere before, but not finding it in several searches today. For example, I don't see it here: Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Cheers. N2e (talk) 14:57, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm reaching out to get feedback on the draft of a new page for "General Collective Intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:General_Collective_Intelligence

An editor who reviewed the draft said that the page on "General Collective Intelligence" should be merged into the page on "Collective Intelligence". I disagreed, stating that General Collective Intelligence (GCI) as a platform is to Artificial General Intelligence what Collective Intelligence is to Artificial Intelligence. In other words GCI describes a technology with "general problem-solving ability". While groups might have some innate general problem-solving ability described by a general collective intelligence factor (c), any collective intelligence solution used as a decision-making platform by groups has narrow problem-solving ability where it is not able to address any problem in general. My argument is that if the analogy between AGI and GCI is valid, then if AGI and AI have separate wikipedia pages, GCI and CI should have separate wikipedia pages as well. The editor requested that I get consensus from editors of the Collective Intelligence page. I reached out to a number of editors but the only response I got was from an editor who said they didn't know anything about the subject and only edited the page for grammar. I'm looking for next steps. CognitiveMMA (talk) 15:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

You should post your concern on the Collective Intelligence talk page. Further, in case no one responds there, or there is an insufficient discussion, you could request a comment from the general wikipedia community using WP:RFC. - Abdul Muhsy talk 15:27, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Not sure what to do here. I've made Draft:Feiseen and it seems okay to move to mainspace at the moment (although it could still be improved) however there is a redirect currently at Feiseen. How would I move this? I don't think WP:RM is the correct place to ask this? FozzieHey (talk) 13:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Edit the redirect page and place your text there. - Abdul Muhsy talk 14:14, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, FozzieHey, you'll find the answer at WP:MOR and WP:UPT. Whatever you do, don't copy-paste it. Zindor (talk) 14:21, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Zindor: This doesn't seem to have any information about moving a Draft into mainspace where there is a redirect. WP:RM specifically says you shouldn't use it for "Moves from draft namespace or user space" too. FozzieHey (talk) 14:27, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Zindor: What is the specific problem with copy-pasting the content? Thanks- Abdul Muhsy talk 14:30, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Abdul Muhsy: Replacing content will not move page histories or the talk page. Yes, you could then copy the talk page in and request a merge of histories but surely there's an easier way to achieve this? FozzieHey (talk) 14:34, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Zindor:The concerned article is currently a draft, of which there obviously there is only editor till now. So I don't see the problem regarding page history. The easiest way is to simply edit Feiseen and replace #REDIRECT Water speed record with the text in the draft.- Abdul Muhsy talk 14:39, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

While technically you're right Abdul Muhsy, recommending copy-paste to users at the Teahouse isn't a good idea. They could later apply the same method to a different draft, or an article, and it causes problems. Or another user with a similar question reads the responses here and thinks that copy-paste is a good idea.

FozzieHey, I can't see a problem with you moving your draft. Id have done it for you but I'm not versed on notability of water vessels, so couldn't back up my decision. Regards, Zindor (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Zindor: That's fine, I've requested it at WP:RM for now, if that's not the right place to ask then hopefully they can direct me to the correct place! FozzieHey (talk) 15:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I don't know if anyone else has been having this issue, but the past two days when a sign into Wikipedia, and then I hit backspace to an article I was reading before I signed in, I am automatically signed out. It's never happened to me before and I don't know if it is something with the settings on my computer or something along those lines. I have recently been editing both on my phone and my computer, which may have some role to play. Thank you in advance! Inter&anthro (talk) 16:36, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Inter&anthro. Normally if you hit the back button you will see the page as it was when you last looked at it. It will not be updated with your login unless you refresh the page, eg by hitting f5. Hope this helps.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:05, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm just curious but which category for peer review would a American football player like Marlon Humphrey be in? AlabamaFan101 (talk) 07:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Even before your edits this was far better than Start class. I upgraded to B-class. David notMD (talk) 11:30, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Just nominated the article for GA-status, User:David notMD. —AlabamaFan101 (talk) 18:08, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi,

I have edited my page Henk Borgdorff, following the instructions I received: adding a statement of CoI, and adding references to external resources: ORCID-iD and Google Scholar. Do I now answer the objects made to my draft page: Henk Borgdorff ?

Kind regards, Henk Borgdorff Henk Borgdorff (talk) 12:57, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Henk Borgdorff Declined twice in one day. Still no references. Listing articles and books written by Borgdorff does not count as references ABOUT Borgdorff. Putting stuff in External links does not count at references. Do not resubmit until you understand reference requirements and methods for creating same. COI statement belongs on your User page ("I wrote Draft:Henk Borgdorff about myself.") David notMD (talk) 18:35, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I’ve been up for a very long time. I need to go to sleep. I would be interested in discussing things in this environment. BiliousBob (talk) 15:03, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi BiliousBob. Wikipedia is not really a discussion forum, but you are welcome to ask questions about Wikipedia here or suggest improvements to articles on the article talk pages.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:25, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@BiliousBob: Another place for discussions is Wikipedia:IRC. GoingBatty (talk) 19:58, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I began an article on Evangelos Frudakis and would like to complete it. It accidently got published while I was still working on it and the editors did not like it. I understand this as it was not complete. However, I think the article could still have value (if completed correctly) and I have additional research and resources. The artist is dead but is known for his sculptures in national parks and buildings. He is respected for his work, national and international awards, inclusion in art registries such as at the Smithsonian Art Museum, and education of other noted sculptors. When working on the article, I contacted the family to see if they had photos that could be used, and they said "yes." They mailed me a small check but I returned it to them as I do not want to have a conflict of interest. The editors said that I had to claim that I worked for him or I would be permanently banned from Wikipedia. So I claimed that I received a check and returned it. I have not worked for him ever, nor been paid by him, and he is dead. How do I clear this up? How can I complete the article and submit it? Is there someone I can work with to be certain I do everything correctly? Should I try to contact the sculptor's family and have them write to Wikipedia? They would like to contribute some photos and do not understand why you are claiming I worked for the sculptor. I think the confusion is that I did work for a sculptor by the name of Zenos Frudakis and have claimed that. I wonder if the editors are getting the two people confused. They are not the same artists. There are a number of sculptors with the last name of Frudakis. Please advise as I am trying to do the right thing. Thanks so much! Cher Skoubo (talk) 10:55, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Draft:EvAngelos Frudakis exists, and as you have properly declared COI (not paid) on your User page, you are permitted to work directly on the draft. Be as complete as possible befoer submitting to AfC, because once accepted as an article, the advice to COI editors is to limit further action to requesting changes on the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 11:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Cher Skoubo: Consider shortening that list and changing title to Selection of portrait busts. Each monument and bust needs a ref. David notMD (talk) 18:45, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

David notMD: Thank you for your advice. I will return to the draft for further editing. Thanks! Cher Skoubo (talk) 20:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 ShakeZula2000 (talk) 23:35, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@ShakeZula2000: You should be able to create User:ShakeZula200/sandbox (I've created it for you just in case). Alternatively, you can try WP:SANDBOX. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:37, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Can't you guys do some thing about the reading list? I think it will be better if the reading lists have the update of making another co- reading list in a reading list.Can you guys updae wikipedia with this facilities????????? 103.124.52.4 (talk) 16:39, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Could you please explain what you mean by "the reading list"? GoingBatty (talk) 20:00, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

GoingBatty, I'm going to assume that the IP editor means the reading lists that the mobile Wikipedia app offers, which I know almost nothing about. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:02, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Thanks! The IP poster could go to List of Wikipedia mobile applications to determine the correct place to post their suggestion. GoingBatty (talk) 20:15, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

This is a page for help with using and editing Wikipedia: hardly anybody here has anything at all to do with developing the software, so no "you guys" can't do anything about that. The general place to ask about the software is the technical section of the Village Pump it has been asked there several times, such as WP:Village pump (technical)/Archive 161#Add Reading List to the Desktop, which in turn contains links to where it has been discussed in the Mediawiki software wiki, and to a related feature request for the software. --ColinFine (talk) 23:48, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi - I want to improve and increase the number of articles on cat health on Wikipedia - I want to write a piece on Feline Urethral Obstruction. Does it have to be fully referenced before I submit it or can I submit it as a stub and continue to improve it while it is live? AlbusHaversham (talk) 23:53, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@AlbusHaversham: For your first article, you're better off following the process at WP:AFC. If you do no want to go through that process, you should have at least a few references that substantiate your subject, per WP:V. Since you're interested in cat health, I'd also recommend seeking guidance (once you have completed a reasonable draft) from the editors at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cats and Wikipedia:WikiProject Veterinary medicine. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:05, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Can you add pages related to Baggie? (A Different one, to say the least.) Now, If you don't know who Baggie is, I don't blame you, it's obscure, and guess what? I actually made the character! I'm known formally as "SonicFan2016YT" And if you You Need anything to learn about the character(s), Look at this wiki I made: https://baggie.fandom.com/wiki/Baggie_Da_Wiki See you soon!

Best Regards, chilldeud. Chilldued (talk) 00:24, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Chilldued: Only if independent, reliable sources have given significant coverage. For instance, if a few reputable gaming publications like those listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources had discussed it at length, it would likely be notable. Note that blogs and wikis aren't sufficient for this, nor are brief mentions. However, even if it is notable, as the creator you would have a conflict of interest and thus be strongly discouraged from writing about it yourself.

If Baggie doesn't yet meet those criteria, then by all means keep developing the character and talking about it, but it's not ready for Wikipedia. Vahurzpu (talk) 00:44, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I found this IP User https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/70.93.156.228 removing stuff from the Sanford M. Jacoby article without stating why in the Edit Summary. I left a alert on there talk page, and they told me that they were Sanford M. Jacoby. I think It's a lie. Are they liying or they are actually Sandord M. Jacoby? JennilyW (talk) 23:31, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@JennilyW: Reverted and warned about COI editing. If they continue in the same vein, this is bog-standard persistent unsourced editing and you can keep warning them and then report at AIV. There's something somewhere about impersonation, but I think that relates to account names not IP editing, so can't be bothered to start looking for it now. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:42, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@JennilyW: It generally doesn't matter who they are. If they are removing material that should not be removed, it's treated the same way – WP:BRD, report edit-warring, etc. Policy is designed to reflect the fact that we don't generally have a way, as regular editors, of verifying identities. Besides, if anything, being the subject of an article means they should not edit it directly anyway (they should post an {{Edit request}} on the talk page). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:51, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

The name of Nathanial Pierce should be added to your site. Nat played on the same team as Vince Lombardi as one of the seven blocks of granite. I knew Nat Pierce and I am dismayed to see his name missing 2600:8802:1400:830:8D2F:A0A3:7A15:2E4 (talk) 00:23, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! You can suggest improvements for an article on the article's talk page, such as Talk:Fordham Rams football. Be sure you include a reference to an independent reliable source with your suggestion. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:02, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP 2600:8802:1400:830:8D2F:A0A3:7A15:2E4. I'm assuming you're asking about Fordham Rams football#Notable players. Is that correct? If not, perhaps you can provide the name of the article you want Pierce's name added to. Since there doesn't appear to be a Wikipedia article written about a Nathanial Pierce, you're going to need to cite some reliable source that verifies that Pierce played football for the Rams. If you fnd such a source, you can be WP:BOLD and add the information yourself as explained here. If you're not sure how to do, you can propose that the name be added by posting about it the relevant article's talk page; someone else can then assess whether his name should be added to the list. For what it's worth, there is a Natty Pierce mentioned by name in Seven Blocks of Granite. Perhaps that's the same "Nathaniel Pierce" you're referring to? -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:04, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi again IP 2600:8802:1400:830:8D2F:A0A3:7A15:2E4. I've gone ahead and started a discussion about this at Talk:Fordham Rams football#Nat Pierce; so, feel free to comment there is you like. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:22, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

how do i format my userpage correctly so it looks cool and i dont look like a noob Skunkiix (talk) 00:11, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Skunkiix: Generally, it's best to wait until you get some experience editing articles and become familiar with Wikicode before trying to build your user page. You can always look at the code of other editors' pages that you like by editing them (don't save any changes). Keep in mind that user pages are totally optional – some editors have been here a long time and are quite active but have little or no content on their user pages. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:00, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Skunkiix, welcome to the Teahouse. In my experience, the best and most efficient way of learning Wikipedia is to watch other people. That's true in every aspect – learning syntax, style, etiquette, local norms, is all best done by seeing what other people do, deciding what you want to emulate, and then adapting it to your own goals and specialities. Perhaps you could look at the talkpages of a few articles you're interested in, see who's commenting that looks experienced and worth listening to, take a look at their userpages and see what that prompts you to change about your own.

Userpages aren't important in the big picture – we're really here to build the articles not talk about ourselves – but I guess they make a difference in that how people interact with you is partly determined by what they think of you, and that's partly determined by how you present yourself on your userpage. Capitalising the first letters of sentences and the pronoun 'I' would be a good start. Describing yourself as a 'conlang hoe' will split people three ways: some will see it as vulgar, some will see it as charming and irreverant, some will think "hang on, shouldn't that be 'ho'? Isn't a 'hoe' a garden implement? Wait, if it's short for 'whore' does it need an apostrophe? Let me look this up, just a second". It's entirely up to you, but you might choose to save them the trouble by rephrasing.

Generally, my advice is to keep it quite straightforward and not aim for glitz or wow; what you write in articles and say in discussions will make a vastly bigger difference than your userpage. I hope this helps › Mortee _talk 01:09, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Skunkiix: A little thing: The Asian Dragons box is slightly taller than the others, so it causes a gap in your list of Userboxes. Move it and any other tall ones to the bottom of your list. David notMD (talk) 03:34, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I've been writing an article, and I noticed how it's a draft. Are there any required things I have to do before I can write directly in the namespace? I am an auto confirmed user. Brigantics (talk) 03:44, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

New editors are strongly recommended to use the Articles for creation (AfC) process rather than putting their creation directly into mainspace. I can tell you that your draft Draft:Rebecca Parham, if submitted to AfC, will be declined. If you bypass AfC, it is very likely that it would be quickly submitted to Articles for Deletion due to multiple shortcomings, as described in the commentary at the top of the draft. David notMD (talk) 03:52, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

See List of animators for examples of how to crate an article. David notMD (talk) 03:55, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

For an entry on a person, for whom a biography is included in the bibliography, should there also be one or more references to the biography in the text of the entry, or is it assumed that it applies to the whole entry ? Heagy1 (talk) 04:15, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Heagy1, you should ideally cite multiple sources. Also, sources should be cited inline, so it is easy to determine what text is sourced from what. Regards, Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 11:37, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Heagy1, that would depend on whether the person is living or historic. If the person is living (or recently deceased), WP:BLP will apply, and it requires inline citations. 174.254.192.112 (talk) 04:00, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I have an article on Joseph Conforte and a draft of Sally Conforte that has been denied: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Sally_Conforte As biographer, I've taken a chronological approach to writing the articles. In Sally's case, I went the extra mile to explain her. Proving facts is always an issue of murky underworld characters. Related Wiki articles are ripe with omissions and bad or incorrect facts: Harry E. Claiborne, Oscar Goodman, Oscar Bonavena, Bernardo Mercado, Vinnie Curto, and many more as they relate to Joseph or Sally Conforte.

I'm not the best at encyclopedic writing. I think an issue with my work is about structure. It comes down to a chronological narrative versus specific events or accomplishments. Please, I seek your advice and contributions. Owilli2019 (talk) 03:07, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Owilli2019: I suggest reading Wikipedia:Other stuff exists - your help improving those other articles would be appreciated. In the "Second female boxing manager" section of your draft, it's not clear where the quote from The Last Mafioso ends - you may want to use a quotation template. Also please review WP:ITALICS and ensure the prose contains complete sentences - I fixed what I could. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering if I could get back to RCP now. Firestar464 (talk) 04:08, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Firestar464. Can you explain what you mean? RCP here usually refers to recent changes patrol, which is entirely voluntary and something you can do anytime, without advanced permissions or rights.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit I have previously been advised against said patrol, but want to get back to it. I'm now asking for the feedback of other editors before doing so, just to be safe. Firestar464 (talk) 06:00, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Firestar464 what were the reasons for being advised against said patrol? Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 06:50, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User talk:Firestar464 § I see you've been having a hard time on here lately.. --ColinFine (talk) 12:48, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

ColineFine, there is a bit more to the story. I'm glad I just happened to be browsing the Teahouse. Due to a rough start, Firestar464 was strongly advised by at least two administrators not to start RCP again. I initially did not want to mentor Firestar464 because I did not have the mental capacity to do so at the time. However, I am now feeling much better. I was wondering if Firestar could resume RCP, but I would check his reverts and comment if I find them objectionable. I could also tell him how to improve in the future if he makes a mistake. However, I would not recommend that he starts again until he gets approval from the administrators in question. @Valereee:, what do you think? I personally think it is a bit too soon, but if my solution works, I am fine with it. Scorpions13256 (talk) 19:52, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Scorpions13256, thanks for the ping. If you want to work on helping FS learn how to productively contribute in that area and feel you can help, I have no objection as long as you're checking everything and will continue to do so until we have further discussion. As always one of our main concerns is that when a newish editor gets accused of vandalism when their edits were good-faith but simply not necessarily a clear improvement, it can drive them away for good.

I think it might be a good idea to open a section on FS's page that notifies other editors that you're working to mentor FS on this (and link to this section), so that if someone has a concern they'll know to pull you into any discussion. I appreciate you stepping forward to help here! —valereee (talk) 21:05, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Excellent idea. However, I'm unsure of how to put a template at the top of his talk page. That is one thing I have yet to learn how to do. I'll do it as soon as possible. I do agree that WP:BITE drives away many new editors these days. I'm occasionally guilty of that myself. I will try to create the template as soon as possible. Scorpions13256 (talk) 21:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

The template is on his talk page. Scorpions13256 (talk) 21:31, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot guys. So what is the best course of action for me now? Firestar464 (talk) 04:48, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

In my opinion, I would recommend starting out reverting no more than 10 edits per day during RCP. That way I can assess your edits more thoroughly.

Tips I have:

1. Do not edit people's userspaces unless it is obvious vandalism or they specifically authorize you to do so. That includes that talk page to the humorous userbox you just visited.
2. If you are unsure what the best action to take is in a given situation, sometimes it is best to leave someone else to deal with it. If someone edits a page during RCP with an WP:UNDUE violation or any other unconstructive (but good faith) edit, do not revert it if you are unsure you are doing the right thing. As a matter of fact, do not do anything at all. Most articles have watchers who are experts on the subject that can make more accurate judgments than most people, including some administrators.
3. Do not report any users who have been editing longer than a couple of weeks to AIV or UAA (not counting IPs). You did this a couple of times, and the users were editing in good-faith. Odds are someone else would have reported them too if there actually were violations. I have only had to report one old account to AIV, and that was an LTA masquerading as an anti-vandal. Also, do not report anyone who has not vandalized within the past 12 hours.
4. Do not remove any content from articles unless the content is copyrighted, inaccurate, or is an unsourced defamatory claim directed towards a living person. Do not remove any WP:OR or WP:UNDUE violations at all. I do not think you have the experience just yet to make those calls.
5. You do not have to hit the undo button if you are unsure whether the edits you are examining are constructive.
6. Do not be afraid to message me on my talk page. Scorpions13256 (talk) 05:20, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I've misspelled a redirect name (a capital letter inside the name), and now I'd like to remove it altogether. It's here. I've created the correct redirect, this one is useless now. I tried redirecting the wrong redirect, but a bot moved it back to the wrong form - apparently double redirects are not accepted, or that bot has a glitch, doesn't matter, fact is the trick didn't work. Thanks. Arminden (talk) 05:25, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Arminden: I suggest adding {{db-g7}} to the top of the page, and use the |rationale= parameter to explain why it should be deleted. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:31, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Return to forever album missing. 1975 Electric Lady. https://www.discogs.com/Return-To-Forever-Electric-Lady-Studio-NYC-June-1975/release/7248631 please add 2601:644:0:F330:CCE:C48B:8961:9EBE (talk) 05:01, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Assuming you're referring to Return to Forever, you are more than welcome to add the information yourself to the article. If you need help with referencing, you may want to see WP:EASYREFBEGIN. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:10, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Actually, after checking the list of perennial reliable sources, do you have any other source that has this information? Discogs' content is user-generated and thus unreliable for Wikipedia's purposes. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:40, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

It might not be included because Discogs lists it as an "Unofficial Release". You may want to discuss it at the article's talk page: Talk:Return to Forever. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:14, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Wikipedians,

I'm gathering information for a school assignment. It would be tremendously helpful as many of you as possible would answer some or all of the following questions.

Your role

• What exactly do you do (most specific user group)?
• How long have you been an editor/admin/user of Wikipedia?
• How active are you in that capacity?
• Do you consider this your primary occupation or only a hobby (regardless of pay)?

Your thoughts

• What do you think of Wikipedia as a project?
• What do you see in the future for the site?
• How might the subjects covered by Wikipedia be expanded?

Your experience

• What have you seen, do you have any stories?
• How big a problem is vandalism?
• How easily is vandalism dealt with?

Please direct your answers to User:Timbktoo/Survey thank you! -Timothy Baker Timbktoo (talk) 01:00, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Timbktoo: I took the liberty of fixing your bullet points for easier readability. Per Wikipedia:About, "Wikipedia is written collaboratively by largely anonymous volunteers who write without pay." You might also be interested in Wikipedia:Books (compiling articles, which may be similar to your idea about "courses") and Wikipedia:Vandalism. GoingBatty (talk) 01:17, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Timbktoo, you're right, there are some very broad questions here! I wonder if there's a better place to collate the answers than directly at the Teahouse, since it could get very long. Perhaps you could make a sub-page of your userpage (User:Timbktoo/Survey, maybe) and ask for people to respond there? If there's one question you're particularly interested in, that might also help to get more people replying. Wikipedia is big and complicated, so it might be difficult for people to answer such a comprehensive set of questions in anything shorter than a small book! All the best with your assignment › Mortee _talk 01:21, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Timbktoo: Do you know if your instructor is going thru WP:School and university projects for this course? —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 05:07, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano: I don't believe that they are, I chose Wikipedia as a topic.Timbktoo (talk) 05:17, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Mortee: I've done as you suggested and created a page for responses. Any responses should go there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timbktoo (talk • contribs) 06:19, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I've been trying to see if there is a way to change the "tag: twinkle" that is affixed to any edit made using twinkle, but it doesn't seem that's possible. Is there any way to change or remove that? —FORMALDUDE^(talk) 08:03, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@FormalDude: Imo, WT:Twinkle is better place to ask the question since the developer are there. — Paper9oll (📣 • 📝) 08:17, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Is it okay for the infobox to have no spaces and each parameter not on new line? Imo, it isn't okay even though it still render fine but it's horrible to look at when editing, however I'm not sure which guidelines it's violating. — Paper9oll (📣 • 📝) 08:15, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: While other types of templates usually have their parms inline, the typical infobox has a much larger number of parms, so editors have pretty much universally adopted the "vertical" layout for readability in edit mode. I doubt there is (or even should be) a specific policy or guideline – it's a matter of playing nice with others in this project that relies on collaboration. I suppose it could be regarded as disruptive. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 10:20, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Hi, thanks for the reply. Understood. — Paper9oll (📣 • 📝) 10:36, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hannah Elsy is a retired British rower, now a sports sponsorship consultant with the surname Burkitt (from Hannah Burkitt (née Elsy) in LinkedIn).

Hannah Elsy (Producer) is a theatrical producer based in London and active since 2014. I recently created the Hannah Elsy (Producer) page, and I have added notes at the top of each 'Hannah Elsy' page to link to the other.

The Hannah Elsy rower page is sparse and marked 'This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification ...'. There is no page for Hannah Burkitt.

Google searches for 'Hannah Elsy' currently mix bio details for Hannah Elsy (the rower) with photos of Hannah Elsy (the producer) and social media links for Hannah Elsy (the producer) in the knowledge panel at the top of search results.

The current situation - the pages for Hannah Elsy and Hannah Elsy (Producer) have links to each other - works to a point but as the rower page looks moribund and the rower is now active with a different name, is there a better way forward? If so, what?

If I were to move the rower Hannah Elsy to a new page, what would the best new name be? Hannah Burkitt? With birth_name=Elsy added in an infobox? (I would contact Hannah Burkitt first. I just want to be confident in what I suggest.)

If a move like that went ahead, would the original address https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Elsy have to auto-redirect to the new page, or could it become a disambiguation page? Or could Hannah Elsy (Producer) be moved to it (as she is the only 'active' Hannah Elsy)?

I know I have asked several questions. Thanks for your patience, and thanks in advance for any advice. Grantem2000 (talk) 12:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Grantem2000. I'd honestly leave them where they are. The rower appears better known by her maiden name, and is arguably the primary topic compared to the producer, whose notability is debatable at best. Regards, Zindor (talk) 14:00, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Zindor: Many thanks. In the meantime the page for the producer has been moved back to draft. Should it be published again I will follow your advice and just leave the 2 pages with links to each other. Regards, Grantem2000 (talk) 17:15, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Given that Draft:Hannah_Elsy_(Producer) is draft, will be draft for some time, and may never be published, what options are there to clarify that Hannah Elsy, who retired from rowing in 2008, is not Hannah Elsy, the active theatrical producer? What would be allowable on the page for Hannah Elsy the rower to cover this? Regards, Grantem2000 (talk) 11:44, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

You could add the WP:HATNOTE template {{About}} or {{Distinguish}} to the top of the article if you believe there's a real concern that some readers might mix the two Elsy's up. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:52, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

And I'm a programmer I'm busy working with the Tox Protocol, So Please I need your assistance to put the name Tox, as a developer of this software, on the Tox developer side!  Gkmw (talk) 01:11, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Gkmw: Hi there! The Teahouse is a "friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia". We can't help you with software creation or development, but let us know if you have a question about Wikipedia. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:18, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Can you please, put the name Tox? As a developer of this software. On the Tox Protocol? If possible thanks so much. Gkmw (talk) 01:21, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Gkmw: If you have a suggestion for the Tox (protocol) article, you can post it on the article's talk page, Talk:Tox (protocol), with a reliable source that can be used as a reference. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:27, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

How can I edid that page? Please I need your assistance! Gkmw (talk) 01:25, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Gkmw: Please don't create a new section header to continue the same conversation. To learn how to edit, you may be interested in Help:Introduction to Wikipedia and Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure. GoingBatty (talk) 01:29, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Gkmw: If you're a programmer busy working with the Tox Protocol, you should refrain from directly editing the article, as you would have a conflict of interest. You can go to the article's talk page and submit an edit request with a reliable source. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:12, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Aare you saying that there is a person named Tox, and that this information belongs in the History section of the article? Is there a reference to confirm that? David notMD (talk) 03:43, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Gkmw, and welcome to the Teahouse. If your software is not yet developed, then it is almost certainly TOOSOON, and probably does not, at present, belong anywhere in Wikipedia. If you are trying to get your name (or the name of your software) into Wikipedia, then you are engaging in promotion, which is not permitted anywhere in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 14:16, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

How to get another subpage to my userpage? I would like to have another sandbox (whatever you them). Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?} 13:55, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Ken Tony Peter, welcome to the Teahouse. You can create new subpages by appending a text string after your user page.

For example, if you're doing it in your browser's address bar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tenryuu/Example

or as a wikilink: [[User:Tenryuu/Example]] —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Tenryuu Thanks dude. Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?} 14:48, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I have added New User Template on my account. However I am unable to write anything in that. Would request someone to explain me how it works and how to use it. Thank you. Stanford113 (talk) 14:47, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Stanford113, welcome to the Teahouse. {{New user}} only asks for an image (which is optional) in its parameters. Anything you add after it will appear under the "About me" section. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:20, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I am wondering if anyone would have insight as to why the numbers on citations would change when switching from read view to edit view on an article? I would like to suggest the removal of a source on the Peloton (company) page because the source is not accessible without a paid subscription (sidebar: is this a rule about sources?). The source is number 45 in the read view of the article, out of 46 total references, but when I switch to edit view the number changes to 43. Also, in edit view there are still 46 total references in the references section, but the highest number is 44 in the body of the article. Any reason for this discrepancy? Thanks! Let me know if further clarification is needed. Mcooley509 (talk) 07:38, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mcooley509. Just for reference, as long as a source is considered to be reliable, is published and is used in proper context, it can still be cited in an article even if it requires a paid subscription to view it; so, you shouldn't simply remove the source for that reason alone. As for the rest of your question, the references aren't changing per se; the same number are being cited in both view modes. It's just that some of them are formatted as WP:REFNAME; so, if you search the edit mode for "<ref>" using Ctrl+f, you're only going to find the references that are formatted that way; try searching "<ref" or "</ref>" instead and see if the numbers don't match up. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:50, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Mcooley509 (talk) 08:02, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Mcooley509: Basically ignore the numbers. They are assigned automatically by possibly different software between preview and read mode, which may process them in a different order. They will routinely change with edits that add or move refs, or even changes to templates that are transcluded by an article, which may add their own references. Refs are also numbered differently if you edit and preview just a section instead of the whole article (or even emit an "error" if the ref is defined outside the section). So, if you want to mention a cite on a discussion page, you generally have to give the title or something else unique about it instead of the number. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 10:33, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Mcooley509: You use VisualEditor and most experienced editors don't so the previous posters couldn't see what you refer to. You have spotted a bug in VisualEditor. After two references in the infobox parameters of Peloton (company), VisualEditor starts over the count at 1 in the article body, so reference number 3 to 46 are incorrectly numbered 1 to 44. VisualEditor displays the correct number in the references section so the bug is confusing. I don't know whether the bug has been reported somewhere. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Dear Teahouse Unfortunately my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Yu-Chen_Wang has not been accepted. I can't see why it wouldn't not show enough significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. There is still more to be written about this artist, of course, but I thought there were enough references to proof they qualify for a Wikipedia article. What is missing? Kind regards, thanks for your help! Sabine Hagmann (talk) 15:03, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Sabine Hagmann, welcome to the Teahouse. I did not a review bc I am personally not confident with WP:NARTIST but I saw directly for example given sources like Facebook which are none at all - you can also ask the Reviewer directly what their reasons might have been MurielMary. CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:44, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I am a new user to wikipedia, and I had a question about new users registering. Does wikipedia automatically send an new registered user an message in there talk page when they have registered, just an question. Thanks. 10-Is-Lucky (talk) 07:46, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. -- Hoary (talk) 07:52, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't. I see you started going through The Wikipedia Adventure, which auto-generates a message on your user talk page, but other than that, welcome messages are given by volunteers who take it upon themselves to welcome new users. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:07, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuuu: Thanks, I'll welcome users. Lucky10 🧊 Userpage 🦜Talk 17:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)