Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 642: Line 642:


:just suggesting [[User:UnregulatedAmphibian|UnregulatedAmphibian]] ([[User talk:UnregulatedAmphibian|talk]]) 02:13, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
:just suggesting [[User:UnregulatedAmphibian|UnregulatedAmphibian]] ([[User talk:UnregulatedAmphibian|talk]]) 02:13, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
:What you are describing is vandalism and should not be encouraged. [[User:Weenis McPeenus|Weenis McPeenus]] ([[User talk:Weenis McPeenus|talk]]) 02:14, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:14, 1 August 2023

Skip to top
Skip to bottom



Higher quality version of a public domain single cover uploaded in Wikipedia

Hey! Is it okay if I can upload a higher quality version of this: File:Luiz Ejlli - Me ty.jpg ? GrafiXal (talk) 06:58, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GrafiXal. If an image is truly in the public domain, then is is always OK to upload a higher quality version of the image. Cullen328 (talk) 07:03, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Does it have to be in public domain in general; or does it have to be in United States? The image itself is automatically considered public domain in US due to it consisting of simply text (and a watermark logo LOL) as far as I know. GrafiXal (talk) 07:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
GrafiXal, we read: "This image is believed to be non-free or possibly non-free in its home country." Which, if I understand right, is Albania. Is it in the PD in Albania as well as in the US? Albania isn't mentioned within commons:Commons:Threshold of originality and the notion of threshold of originality isn't obviously mentioned within commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Albania. So I have no reason to think that it's in the PD there. If you want to pursue this matter, you should do so at Commons. -- Hoary (talk) 07:45, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is Albania. I am not really familiar with the Albanian laws regarding copyright and public domain, despite that I am an native Albanian, so I am not sure if it is or not. Does its status of copyright/public domain in Albania affect the right of the English Wikipedia hosting a higher version of this cover? GrafiXal (talk) 09:21, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, Wikipedia can host images in whatever quality if they are public domain in the United States. Wikipedia's uploads are often low quality due to copyright concerns, but here there are none. If you have a higher quality version available, feel free to replace it. ArcticSeeress (talk) 20:54, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ArcticSeeress Oh, okay! Thank you! :) GrafiXal (talk) 06:52, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What can I have on userpages?

I’m MintTea01, and I started editing few articles. I can use the sandbox. However, I created my user page with small introduction. I’m sure if you can add further detail on your user page too, but what things of feature can I really have on my user page? And what things of information are not allowed or forbidden on my user page? Can any userboxes be inserted? Thanks for replying. MintTea01 (talk) 08:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. You may read about what is acceptable(and not) user page content at WP:USERPAGE. 331dot (talk) 08:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @MintTea01 and welcome to the Teahouse!
Yes! You can add any userboxes that you like on your userpage. Adding very private information on your userpage such as your address is highly discouraged and is forbidden. For more information, please see WP:UP. Regards. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう!) 08:18, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Layah50: I don't beleive adding person information (e.g. your address) to your user page is forbidden per se (except perhaps in the case of minors) as long as its your personal information, but care needs to be taken because Wikipedia is part of the real world and there's no way for Wikipedia to prevent others from using such information in appropriately. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:33, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I 100% agree with @331dot.
Wikipedia is accessed by many people and you never know who looks at your userpage. Very personal information must be kept to yourself and should never be shared online. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう!) 08:55, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree 100% with 331dot too, but there's a difference between something being "highly discouraged" and "forbidden" by Wikipedia policy. The former is correct per Wikipedia policy, whereas the latter isn't. If something is "highly discouraged", it's not necessarily forbidden. If something is "forbidden", then it's more than just "highly discouraged". -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Layah50 Why adding very private information is highly discouraged? Also, why editing only in your userspace is not allowed and unencyclopediac? Asides from private info, what things I can not add to my user page after reading the policy of userspace? MintTea01 (talk) 08:35, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You should treat Wikipedia as if you were standing on a public street or other public area. If you would not post your address and phone number on a public street, you should not post it on Wikipedia. Anyone anywhere in the world can see it and use it for inappropriate purposes. 331dot (talk) 08:38, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your user page is a place for you to tell about yourself as a Wikipedia editor or user; it isn't a place to post anything and everything about yourself like a social media style page would be. If it's not related to Wikipedia, it probably shouldn't be on your user page. 331dot (talk) 08:39, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would note that most of your user page as it is now is fine, although people wishing to talk to you should do so on your user talk page, not your user page. 331dot (talk) 08:41, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh wow, I read the reply and know what not to post. MintTea01 (talk) 08:43, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot @Layah50 @Marchjuly Can I have unlimited userboxes on my user page similar to most of the editors? How can I make a most creative userpage to meet userpage hall of fame? Can it be excessively detailed? MintTea01 (talk) 09:22, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
MintTea01, I hope that your main reason for being here is to help construct an encyclopedia. If it is, then you'll find more pressing things to do here than adding gimmickry and prettiness to your user page. -- Hoary (talk) 09:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I might do so. MintTea01 (talk) 09:48, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MintTea01 One other small suggestion from me is not to add userboxes that mislead. I don't see any evidence of you working on producing Wikibooks (a defunct project now), so you are more likely to be believed and trusted if you only put userboxes there that are factually correct. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:49, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your primary goal here should be to contribute to this encyclopedia, not to have the best user page on Wikipedia. I am not aware of any restrictions on the number of userboxes. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MintTea01, Yes. You can add as many userboxes as you like. However, please be sure that you are here to build an encyclopedia.
  • Please note that if you do not contribute to any Wikipedia articles and are working on your userpage for a long period of time, you'll likely be blocked for WP:NOTHERE. Regards.
🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう!) 09:40, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MintTea01: Despite what's posted above, you're only going to be blocked for NOTHERE behavior if you start doing something that's causing some serious problems. Spending most of your time editing your user page isn't ideal, but it only really becomes something blockable when you repeatedly violate WP:UPNO or WP:NOT despite being warned not to do so. My suggestion to you is to first read WP:CONTRIBUTE, figure what kinds of edits interest you, and then just go about doing them. If you make mistakes along the way, then that's OK as long as you learn something from then. Put you're user page on hold until you have a few months of editing under belt. If you do that, creating an acceptable user page should just happen naturally and you should have lots of Wikipedia related information to add to it. For what it's worth, some experienced users editing for years have never bothered to create a user page; they just keep editing articles and try to make them better a little bit at a time. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Marchjuly Ok, but I need to find edits that interest me a bit further. MintTea01 (talk) 18:57, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Marchjuly @Layah50 One more thing, should I link my userpage to social media profiles and the personal homepage? Is this allowed too? MintTea01 (talk) 00:15, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MintTea01: I'm now beginning to wonder whether you're even bothering to read the replies you've received so far because the answer to this question has basically already been given. As myself and others have posted above, you're allowed to put some personal information on your user page as long as it's done so in accordance with WP:UPYES; however, the information you put on your user page is pretty much there for the entire world to see and possibly reuse in some way. All I can suggest is that you carefully take another look at WP:REALWORLD first before adding any such information to your user page because there can be some real world risks in doing so. Right now, people only know you as "MintTea01" from what you've posted on Wikipedia so far, but more people are probably going to be able to figure out your "secret identity" if you give them clues by making more information about yourself public. There's are lots of people in the world are really good in figuring out who someone really is just from their social media posts, and some of these people often try to use that information in inappropriate ways. What you reveal about your true self online is pretty much there forever and someone will always be able to find it if they look hard enough. So, you and only you can decide if adding such information is really worth the risk of any problems it might someday cause. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:24, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that. I’m going to decide in the future. MintTea01 (talk) 19:42, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who to ask for IP block exemption?

I get IP blocked every once in a while and can't edit to even ask for an exemption. My attempt to decipher IP block exemption didn't provide any result.(It was denied for some reason, which you can see on my talk page) How can I get this protection? Greatder (talk) 10:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Greatder, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not really familiar with this process but, if you read WP:IPEC, you will see a subheading (How to request) towards the bottom of that section stating:
Request IP address block exemption through the Unblock Ticket Request System. You must ask from your registered account. Requests posted to the user talk page of the IP address will be automatically declined. Administrators granting this right may sometimes need to consult a CheckUser to confirm the problem, or may wish to obtain further review by posting the request onto an administrative list or page for discussion if unfamiliar with the case.
I hope that following those instructions may help address your problem. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:42, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes Do you know of a willing CheckUser? I was told by the admin that denied my request to talk to a CheckUser which I either I cannot find or the one's I contact aren't active. Greatder (talk) 11:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Greatder Re-reading your talk page and the link I gave you, I still feel you need to follow the procedure there and click 'Submit an unblock request', then it's up to an administrator to seek input from a checkuser. I know @331dot suggested you contact a CU, but it looks to me like the UTRS volunteer should be doing that on your behalf. The unblock form allows you to explain in detail your reasons for your request. But I repeat: I know very little at all about the mechanics of this process. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:33, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes: @331dot: I don't understand why a checkuser needs to be involved. If an editor appears trustworthy, a net asset to Wikipedia, has a clean record, and is reasonably well established, then I have no problem granting IP block exemption, as I have done multiple times in the past. In this case, the editor has a clean block log, no serious warnings on the talk page except for a 3RR notice, and has met double the requirements for being extended confirmed. I would trust this editor with IP block exemption and would have granted it if 331dot hadn't declined the request. Is there any reason why I shouldn't grant it? ~Anachronist (talk) 02:51, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was simply directing them, not weighing in on the merits of their request. I've occasionally given out short term IPBEs but it was my understanding a checkuser needs to look at longer term ones. Greatder was also asing for a "global" one which I take to mean one valid across all Wikimedia projects, which seems above my pay grade to grant.
Looking at WP:IPBE it looks like the need for a checkuser depends on the reason, under "used to bypass an IP range block" it says "Administrators granting this right may sometimes need to consult a CheckUser to confirm the problem, or may wish to obtain further review by posting the request onto an administrative list or page for discussion if unfamiliar with the case" but under "used for anonymous proxy editing" it says the requester needs to "Email the checkuser VRT team at [email protected] ensuring your email includes your username, or contact a CheckUser directly, explaining why you need to edit via anonymous proxies." 331dot (talk) 08:07, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot So, what do I need to prove my merit? I have been able to get IP block exemption on bn.wikipedia.com thanks to @Al Riaz Uddin Ripon. If you require a recommendation. Greatder (talk) 10:50, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was simply trying to remove the middleman from the process and hook you up directly and thought I was abiding by policy, but if people are saying I can do this myself I don't have a problem with it. It's not about your merit. 331dot (talk) 11:45, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Greatder: The reason for a checkuser to be involved is probably because a checkuser can see what IP addresses you are using and have used in the past, while regular administrators like me cannot. This is relevant if you have a history of operating behind proxy IP addresses. Is that the case? Do you have a reason to use proxies? (Some people do if they are living in countries with tight internet control.)
Clearly you aren't blocked now, so it's possible that your service provider temporarily assigned you a blocked address or you attempted to access Wikipedia from someplace that's blocked. ~Anachronist (talk) 13:00, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Anachronist The reason is sometimes my mobile provider gets me blocked by Wikipedia and being behind a NAT. I also sometimes use Tor, though I cannot use it for editing Wikipedia. The Bangladesh government is going down the internet freedom ranking, so having a future-proof Tor accessibility would be helpful too, I guess. Greatder (talk) 13:36, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh. I can't imagine editing Wikipedia on a mobile device. I tried it and found it an unpleasant experience. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:54, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mobile data on laptop, though. Also, new editing tools at bn.wikipedia.com is very promising for the future of mobile editing. Thanks to both of you again! Greatder (talk) 03:19, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if off topic but maybe for try Wikipedia:Appealing a block Cwater1 (talk) 23:01, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Cwater1! But, after discussion with Anachronist and 331dot, I have received a global IP block exemption. Thanks, though. : ) Greatder (talk) 04:27, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thought I could help. Cwater1 (talk) 20:42, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

speedly deletion of my draft

Someone tagged my draft as criteria speedly deletion (G 11) in which I was making a page for a new celebrity and I had also taken that permission and they had approved me and I I was also writing after asking him, but did not know why my draft has been removed, it has been done by tag @YesI'mOnFire and has been removed by @Explicit. Pradeepkoli (talk) 11:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Pradeepkoli. Your draft was speedily deleted as it only existed to promote Nainika Anasuru. This is not permitted on Wikipedia. All articles about people must meet the Wikipedia:Notability (people) threshold, through finding multiple reliable independent sources. If you cannot find multiple, reliable, and independent sources then I am afraid that Nainika would not meet the notability threshold at this time and therefore cannot have a Wikipedia article. Remember that Wikipedia is not a place for any type of self-promotion or advertisement. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia: not an advertising platform, directory, or a way to promote a subject.
Hope that helps, Qcne (talk) 11:56, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to what Qcne said, Pradeepkoli, please note the following:
  1. The subject's approval is completely irrelevant to Wikipedia. If there are suitable reliable sources then there can be an article even if the subject does not want this. Conversely, if there are not suitable sources, then there cannot be an article, even if the subject wants one.
  2. 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.
  3. If I'm reading you correctly, you say that Anasuru approved your writing the draft. This implies that you have a conflict of interest. If you are intending to continue working on an article about them, you need to make your relationship with them clear.
  4. You refer to them as a "new celebrity". This makes it likely that it is WP:TOOSOON.
ColinFine (talk) 16:38, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Instragram, IMDb, etc. are not reliable source references. Same for published interviews. David notMD (talk) 21:44, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help. Can you please help me to understand wikipedia and how to write a article and which kind of sources will approved on wikipedia. Pradeepkoli (talk) 09:34, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the following carefully. It's important to understand that writing a new Wikipedia article is one of the hardest tasks a new editor can do.
- Help:Your first article
- Help:Referencing for beginners
- Wikipedia:Notability
- Wikipedia:Verifiability
Hope that helps. Qcne (talk) 09:43, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dates in biography of Yvonne de Gaulle, French person

Obviously, everybody knows who she is, but the problem I'm having, is a sudden doubt as to how I should write dates in her article. I have so far converted dates of the form "9 November 1970" into "November 9th, 1970" - but I suddenly began wondering about the difference between US and European/UK styles of such things, and being a foreigner to all relevant countries and languages, I figured out that I had better consult my cowriters while the havoc I have wrought remains within reasonable limits. So, of the doubtful alternatives (here including the forms "9 11 1970", "9 November 1970", "November 9, 1970", etc.), which are to be used in this and similar articles ? ("Similar" being a European subject matter, and a mainly British version language in the article...) Autokefal Dialytiker (talk) 15:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Autokefal Dialytiker, welcome to the Teahouse. General guidance is at MOS:DATETIES. The strongest national ties here seem to be to France (not an English-speaking country), in which case we move to retaining the existing format. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would also like to note that assuming that there were no other conflicts between dmy or mdy, 9 November 1970 would be preferred to adding the version you changed it to. ✶Mitch199811 20:50, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see that Charles de Gaulle has a tag at the top {{Use dmy dates}}, while the one on his wife doesn't have any such template. It seems logical to use the same style in both articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:09, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And the "-th" is never appropriate or necessary. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 21:49, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox help

It's my first time editing on enwiki after being blocked for a year and a half so I am very rusty with guidelines and wording, can somebody help me with my sandbox page before I move it to mainspace? It's a copy of an article I created on simplewiki, so it needs some wikifying. Thank you! Lallint 00:16, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lallint it already exists here Bradley Winslow.
Just cut and paste all the missing stuff, into the article which already exists. Danstarr69 (talk) 01:41, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The sandbox page was written in Simple English though, it needs to be converted into the standard english enwiki uses Lallint 12:36, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If that is the case then you have to do that yourself with the help of resources such as dictionary. Once you have done your part (changing words from simple English to standard English), another editor will come and fix other areas they deem fit. Volten001 13:04, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Lallint 13:10, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked on Wikisource

I know I'm asking in the wrong place but I'm hoping someone here also edits there. I have tried like six times to post a question to the help board on Wikisource. They have some kind of bot that flags my post as harmful for having a spam link and blocks my account before I can even post. How do you guys get through? What is the secret? Has this bot recently broken? I emailed an admin, they unblocked me. And the moment I went back their main help forum: auto-blocked. Rjjiii (talk) 07:55, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rjjiii: Your edits seem like they have been caught by the edit filter, but I cannot view the edits in question or the exact rules of the filter as it is private. You can view the log here - I would recommend looking at s:Wikisource:Administrators'_noticeboard#Odd_unblock_request as it appears to be related to your issue and making a new section on that noticeboard (and pinging the administrator who resolved the section linked above), or contacting a Wikisource administrator or edit filter editor directly. Tollens (talk) 09:02, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Tollens: thanks. They have repaired the bot and all is well. Rjjiii (talk) 15:18, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Format for Dispute Resolution noticeboard use

I am trying to initiate a dispute resolution here but it says "this page requires javascript to use the form tool" and does not let me do anything more. How do I initiate a Dispute resolution on that particular noticeboard? Is there a ready format I can use?-1Firang (talk) 09:30, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@EnigmaMcmxc, Robert McClenon, Buckshot06, JML1148, and Darker Dreams: Can you help?-1Firang (talk) 11:58, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's a button near the top, just where it breaks to two column text, that says "request dispute resolution," then takes you through a few pages to fill out the information for the request. If that isn't working for you, I don't know how the system is set up to help with technical troubleshooting. Darker Dreams (talk) 12:04, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @1Firang,
You must have JavaScript enabled on your browser, it's usually enabled by default but you might have changed it. The process depends on which browser you're using. On Google Chrome, see the hamburger menu on the top right corner, settings, privacy and security, JavaScript, and either enable "Sites can use JavaScript" or whitelist Wikipedia specifically. NotAGenious (talk) 12:43, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Darker Dreams and NotAGenious: It did not work when using my mobile but it finally worked when I used a laptop. Thanks!-1Firang (talk) 12:48, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The case has been opened at DRN. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:51, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

pgae deletion

why my wickipedia page has been deleted Mauryamanish123 (talk) 10:50, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Every sentence you add should cite a reliable source as per WP:RS or else the whole page can be deleted.-1Firang (talk) 11:17, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Mauryamanish123,
Thanks for coming to the Teahouse. I assume you are talking about the speedy deletion of your sandbox. Your talk page notes that the sandbox is deleted because "the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something."
To quote from Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not: "Wikipedia is not a place to promote things or publish your thoughts, and is not a website for personal communication, a freely licensed media repository, or a censored publication."
In particular, you should not use Wikipedia to promote about yourself or some other person/group, not even on your sandbox page.
If you are curious about what you are allowed to have on your user page, please see WP:UPYES. Please note that your user pages are not a personal homepage and they do not belong to you (see WP:UOWN).
Please be aware of these policies!
Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 13:17, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mauryamanish123, I am an administrator and was able to read your deleted draft, which was overtly promotional and utterly unacceptable for this encyclopedia. For example, you wrote With a deep appreciation for India's cultural heritage and its rich tradition of sweets, Manish founded Shree Ram Sweets, a renowned sweet shop known for its wide range of delectable Indian sweets. The brand has become synonymous with quality and innovation, taking the age-old tradition of Indian sweets to new heights. That is followed by many other promotional statements written in an unacceptable tone. That type of language belongs (perhaps) on the company's website, but definitely not in a neutrally written encyclopedia article. Please be aware that promotional activity of any type is not permitted on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 03:42, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They have now recreated the declined draft as another blatantly promotional page, ignoring the advice given above. I don't think that they are going to get the point. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 12:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Inquiry about CA.Pradeep Kumar Bhati or Pradeep Bhati page

Hi, 1. I wanted to know the current status of pages with name CA.Pradeep kumar Bhati or Pradeep Bhati on wikipedia? 2. Since how long the page is pending for any approval and the reason of the delay? 3. How this page issue could be resolved and it can be published as earliest? 4. If there are multiple pages than please verfiy and publish the right source page. 5. The information about the Official Spokesperson is available of Samajwadi Party website itself. There are over 50 debates available in different national channels of India. What else you want to check? please see all the links provided and these are all available in consolidation form (official page of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter accounts of the Pradeep Bhati)? CA. Pradeep Kumar Bhati (talk) 11:06, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:CA. Pradeep Kumar Bhati, the current status of both "CA.Pradeep kumar Bhati" and "Pradeep Bhati" is "doesn't exist". Nonexistent pages aren't awaiting approval (or anything else). Are they perhaps drafts? "Draft:CA.Pradeep kumar Bhati" doesn't exist, but "Draft:Pradeep Bhati" does. The current status of the latter seems to be "moribund": it was declined, but since then no attempt has been made to improve it (or resubmit it). As for your fifth question, are you familiar with the requirement for what Wikipedia understands to be "reliable sources"? -- Hoary (talk) 11:23, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dear CA. Pradeep Kumar Bhati,
Thank you for your effort. Besides what User:Hoary has said, I would like to point out that your username is very similar to "CA.Pradeep Kumar Bhati" and "Pradeep Bhati". If you have a conflict of interest, you are expected to disclose it–you may do it on your user page. Please see WP:COI for more information.
It also seems that you are writing about a person related to a political party. If you are paid to create or edit the articles you mentioned, you also must disclose it. Please see WP:PAY for more information.
Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 12:01, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Sir, Username resemble but I am neither paid or directly associated with him. I disclose and reassure that any information uploaded is based on facts and information available in public domain
Thanks CA. Pradeep Kumar Bhati (talk) 02:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

profile upload

hi, how can i upload my profile information here on wikipedia? Surenderjaglan14 (talk) 11:14, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Every sentence you add should cite a reliable source as per WP:RS or else the whole page can be deleted if ypu upload your profile without doing so.-1Firang (talk) 11:21, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Actually there are no profiles on Wikipedia. We have articles about notable people. Theroadislong (talk) 11:28, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@1Firang: I assume he's talking about his user page QuickQuokka [⁠talkcontribs] 11:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Surenderjaglan14: Hello! I assume you're talking about your user page. I see it was deleted due to being promotional.
Wikipedia is not a place for advertising or promotion. QuickQuokka [⁠talkcontribs] 11:28, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Surenderjaglan14.
Please note that we don't have "Profiles" on Wikipedia. Articles about living people must pass the Wikipedia:Notability (people) threshold. If you do not pass this threshold (it is likely you don't, as the requirements are quite strict!) then you cannot have a Wikipedia article at this time.
Remember, Wikipedia is not a place for any type of self-promotion or advertisement. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia: not an advertising platform, directory, or a way to promote a subject. Wikipedia is not a social media site like Facebook, Instagram, or LinkedIn.
You can however add some basic information to your Wikipedia User Page, see: Wikipedia:User pages.
Hope that helps, Qcne (talk) 11:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Surenderjaglan14, an auto-hagiography appeared on your user page. I have just now deleted it as a flagrant (if hardly successful) attempt at promotion. Don't think of uploading anything at all similar anywhere else. If you want to tell the world how wonderful you are, do so on your own website, not Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 11:30, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First article creation Gsequencer libre audio software

Hi all, I just created an article in my sandbox.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Joel2001k/Gsequencer

Would be great to obtain feedback and if possible assistance to put it into main space. Do you think "Advanced Gtk+ Sequencer" is suitable for wikipedia?

Joel2001k (talk) 15:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Joel2001k: would I be right in assuming that you are the developer of this product? If so, please see the message about conflicts of interest (COI) which I've just posted on your talk page.
You need to demonstrate that this product is notable, before an article on it can be accepted. Please see WP:GNG for the general notability guideline which applies to most topics. TL;DNR = you need to cite multiple secondary sources which are independent and reliable, and which cover the product in significant extent. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:41, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And, having found the sources which DoubleGrazing refers to, you will need to forget everything you know about the product, and write an article based only on what those sources say. 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) 15:48, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For more specific issues I see:
  • You should add a lead section.
  • Try to make inline citations. For help making them, you can switch to the VisualEditor or read wp:REF.
  • Your sources might be user generated or made my you. I could not find any authors mentioned but I might just be overlooking it. Also, while not necessarily an issue, other than archive.org, I did not recognize the other two sources.
I also couldn't find anymore sources related to the project. While probably a bit hurtful to hear, you might want to drop the draft for now. ✶Mitch199811 17:10, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question Re: Page up for deletion and credible sources.

There is a page up for deletion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Pastor that I am trying to get corrected. As explained on Wikipedia, RS is short for reliable sources, information about which is detailed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. The editor cites issues with that article is that it does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, that are independent of the subject. I am puzzled because the page reference sources list major News Publications notably The Las Vegas Review Journal (I believe the longest and largest daily newspaper in circulation since 1909 in Las Vegas) as well as The Las Vegas Sun. I assumed these would be sufficient to be deemed credible? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Pastor MFoskett (talk) 17:23, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The best place place to address this is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Pastor. Please read the comments on that page and address them. Shantavira|feed me 17:57, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MFoskett Whilst a deletion discussion is ongoing, you are free to find new and better sources and to add them to the article. If you do that, it may help to mention what you've added on the deletion discussion page to highlight any significant improvements since it was first nominated. I've saved quite a few articles that way. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:10, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article is not written in an encyclopedic manner. Why do you keep repeating Pastor's given name when it isn't necessary to eliminate ambiguity? Why are there so many words capitalized? Please read MOS:JOBTITLE.
I agree that the R-J and Sun are reliable sources. The question is notability. This is a weird situation in which two local newspapers with national reach are reporting on a local phenomenon in their capacity as local newspapers. It's comparable to multiple reports by The New York Times on some greengrocer in Soho: yeah, it's the NYT, but notability would be in doubt if the subject was in Lawrence, Kansas or Cullman, Alabama. It would be far better to demonstrate notability if you can find a non-Las Vegas-based reference. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 21:59, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, this helps a lot! MFoskett (talk) 12:29, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, this helps my understanding. MFoskett (talk) 12:30, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced biographical content added by IPs

Hi. The problem I’m having is, there are IP users who keep adding unsourced information to the page Coco Lee, the biography of a person who died recently (from new to old):

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]

All sources said the couple had planned to but didn’t really sign the divorce paper before she died, but the user just won’t listen. I have been following 1RR. Another user and I have explained in our edit summaries, posted on the user’s talk pages, and even added a hidden note in the article to remind him, but those are just useless:

[9]

[10]

[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Coco_Lee&action=history

It’s probably the same user, and the IP used in the first problematic edit is 82.18.103.22, which seems to be his real IP. There seems to be other disruptive edits that were made by that IP, but that user blanked the talk page to hide that: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A82.18.103.22&diff=1089963153&oldid=1089417252

What can we do? Please advice. Thanks :) --Dustfreeworld (talk) 20:02, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dustfreeworld Welcome to the Teahouse. An administrator has just semi-protected that page for a month to prevent further vandalism. In future, the best thing you can do is revert each bad edit, warn the IP editor (or attempt to explain what they're doing wrong on their user talk page.) Then, if after successive warnings (including any recent ones they have deleted from their talk page), they continue to disrupt a page, you can report them to WP:AIV. If multiple IP users are disrupting a page (but not just one single one), then you can request page protect at WP:RFPP. I hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:07, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That’s great. Thank you so much for the prompt action and detailed reply! --Dustfreeworld (talk) 21:25, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want to chat with John Allen Bradley

I want to chat with John Allen Bradley Beautifulascanbe1950 (talk) 22:04, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i would like to chat with John Allen Bradley. Beautifulascanbe1950 (talk) 22:05, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. This place is to ask questions about using Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 22:07, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Declined: Lack of reliable source and language and style

Good day everyone,i will need our guidance please. I submitted my article on a musical icon in Nigeria that has supported many musicians, institutions and youths, although behind the scene he is very renowned but he's not often in the spotlight. As a result, to celebrate his 3 decades of contribution to the culture I and my team thought of creating a biography of him. The problem is that there are not so much publication out there.

Here are the reasons for declining my request for approval :

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Can I please be guided to know how to correct my mistakes? I am open to corrections and guidance. Here is the article :

Draft:Edward Sunday Omotola Dorcas (talk) 23:23, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. Language like "Edward's mum had a great influence on his musical journey" is just marketing language. The text should be very dry, without embellishments. There are many unsourced passages.
If you are associated with this musician, please read conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 23:38, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To state, this is my first attempt at writing a biography on wiki, I'm open to the corrections provided. Omotola Dorcas (talk) 23:50, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You need to remove inline external links. If those things you linked aren't notable enough to have their own Wikipedia article, either don't link them at all or omit them. The article is not neutral. It is also unclear what inclusion criteria of WP:MUSICBIO the subject meets, or whether the awards he received are notable. As a minor issue, Wikipedia uses sentence case in headings, not title case (see MOS:HEADINGS). ~Anachronist (talk) 23:56, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thank you. This is noted. It will help with the edit Omotola Dorcas (talk) 23:57, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to what @331dot said, you have some issues with referencing: the Early Life, Education, and most of Career are completely unreferenced. Every single statement in your draft should be referenced, and the reference should be from an independent, reliable, secondary source. This is so that anyone reading your draft can verify that what you have written is true. See Wikipedia:Verifiability for more information. This is one of the fundamental pillars of Wikipedia and without good referencing your article will never get accepted.
However, your statement "The problem is that there are not so much publication out there" is actually a warning that Edward might not actually qualify for a Wikipedia article. If you /can't/ find good sources then Edward might simply not pass the Wikipedia:Notability (people) threshold at this time. Notability is one of the other fundamental pillars of Wikipedia: if Edward doesn't meet the notability criteria (and people usually meet the criteria by there being at least three strong, independent, reliable, secondary sources that discuss the person in detail or offer analysis / interpretation), then Edward cannot have an article at this time.
Finally I think your statement "to celebrate his 3 decades of contribution to the culture I and my team thought of creating a biography of him" is potentially contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. One of the other fundamental principles is that Wikipedia articles cannot promote a subject, see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Wikipedia articles should exist purely to summarise what those aforementioned strong, independent, reliable, secondary sources say about a subject. Wikipedia isn't LinkedIn or another social media platform, and isn't a personal webpage to advertise the subject.
I know my feedback is probably discouraging: writing a new article is one of the hardest things you can do on Wikipedia as we have all these stringent rules and requirements, and new editors often fall into the trap of writing an article Wikipedia:BACKWARDS.
I hope that helps, Qcne (talk) 01:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
wow, this is insightful. Thank you. There are a few publications especially from National platforms, my fear is repetition referencing articles that communicate similar information about an entity or event.
I appreciate your unbiased view point Omotola Dorcas (talk) 01:29, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friends, and Colleagues,

I am the Executive Director of the Nigeria Physiotherapy Network. I am leading a project to showcase distinguished and eminent Physiotherapists (physical therapists) of Nigerian ancestry who have life-long achievements and contributions to the field. I am currently working on the Wiki biography of Dr. Chukuka Sam Enwemeka, and the article draft have been rejected two times because despite what I would have considered significantly improvement based on initial rejection reasons of and providing additional independent references, and proper referencing formatting.

Kindly review, and help give me more specific recommendations. I have added additional refences, even after the second draft rejection.

Kindly advise: Draft:Chukuka S. Enwemeka

Sincerely,

WsdomCI Wisdomci (talk) 03:41, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wisdomci. Your draft has been declined, not rejected. This is an important distinction because a rejected draft cannot be resubmitted, but you can substantively improve a declined draft, and then resubmit it. There are many problems with your draft. For example, seasoned is inappropriate, because it is a promotional word lacking substantive meaning in this context. Similarly, you cannot call him one of the foremost authorities or say that he pioneered something, unless you provide references to reliable, independent sources that use similar language. The section "Board Appointments And Other Positions Held" is unreferenced, and therefore a violation of the core content policy Verifiability. Either reference this section properly or remove it. The section "Resignation as Provost, San Diego State University" is written in an argumentative, defensive tone, relying on something written by the subject of the article to refute the email claims. This violates the Neutral point of view, another core content policy. Please explain your relationship with Chukuka S. Enwemeka. Cullen328 (talk) 04:12, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Wisdomci, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please 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) 18:01, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Interview as source

I haven't been able to find a precise answer on this. If there is a military or war veteran that has information that is germane to an article, can I interview them in person and use it as a citable source? If so, is a Youtube video an acceptable format? Thornfield Hall (talk) 04:09, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thornfield Hall. The answer to your question as asked is "no, definitely not". That would be a violation of No original research, which is one of Wikipedia's three core content policies. On the other hand, if you write an article based in part on your interview, and have it published in something like a respected, peer-reviewed journal of military history, then that journal article could be used as a reliable source. Cullen328 (talk) 04:23, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Letter from prosecutor's office

I am in a situation I don't know how to deal with. On the article Warren Forest, an IP user is trying to redact a woman's name because they claim they have a letter from a prosecutor's office telling them not to use that name [12]. I don't think we accept requests like that, but I'm not sure if I should bring it to the article's talk page, the IP's talk page, or to an admin. I don't want to edit war, and I don't want to handle this as a new user if someone more important is supposed to handle something like this. Thanks. Closhund/talk/ 06:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Closhund: You're right to be cautious, and I recommend that you don't restore it (at least until more people have reviewed it). You're also right that we don't usually pay much attention to letters sent to other people, however, on the surface it does seem to be valid point. It's highly unusual to name people like this. Without delving into the merits too deeply, my advice would be to post at WP:BLPN where some highly experienced editors hang out. -- zzuuzz (talk) 06:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I found a similar situation in the WP:BLPN archive. I'll just correct the grammar, leave the name out, and read more about BLP. Thanks. Closhund/talk/ 06:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question about marriage template

If the subject of the article (who the template is on the page of) dies before their spouse, but the spouse died shortly after, would I not use "end=d."? What's the best way to deal with this situation? PARAKANYAA (talk) 06:32, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @PARAKANYAA: per the template instructions, "If the marriage ended because of the death of the article's subject, do not provide a reason". The d parameter is only used "if the marriage ended on the spouse's death". I don't think it matters how soon after the subject's death their spouse died. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:50, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Somehow I looked over that lol, maybe I read too fast PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:53, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and general advice on new article

Hi there, I have created a new article, currently awaiting approval. I logged in to add recent 'news' and noticed there was a warning sign that says: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL

I am autistic so I would really appreciate any help here. I find it extremely anxiety-inducing and challenging when I am trying to understand a new website/process. I can 'Find sources', but what does that look like when manifested into the article? There's a button for citations, that's very straight forward, but the instruction to add sources is a little vague for my neurodivergent brain. I hope someone cam help. I spent many days and hours creating this article. I have great respect for the Wikipedia community, although it's felt a little cold in terms of asking for help so far. I'd really appreciate anyone who might be able to help me complete my draft article. need some assistance. Here's hoping. Mx 23M23 (talk) 09:50, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed and accepted your draft here Super Connected, The "find sources" tag wasn't a warning it was helpful advice about where one might find sources, you didn't need it though because your draft was VERY well sourced. Well done! Theroadislong (talk) 10:01, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! 23M23 (talk) 17:51, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To reiterate what @Theroadislong said, this is genuinely an excellent attempt at a first article, well done. I've gone ahead and added it to the category Category:2023 albums and removed the 'no categories' tag. If you want to add more categories, you can do that via the article options. Qcne (talk) 10:08, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much. Still getting used to navigating this message thread and missed your message earlier. Really appreciate your feedback and help! 23M23 (talk) 17:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add to the compliments. Very nicely done. 331dot (talk) 10:51, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well done; and because it's substantial, you shouldn't be surprised or at all upset to learn that it does have little flaws. (If told that something I've written has little flaws, I'm happy. It more often has major flaws.) The article says: "[...] and includes a thrilling vocal cameo from Stephen Fry". (i) If you examine the sentence you'll see that the subject of "includes" has got lost. (ii) Without quotation marks, "thrilling" seems to be the opinion of Wikipedia. It mustn't be. You need something like "and includes what [name of music critic] has called a 'thrilling' vocal cameo from Stephen Fry". But these are minor. Good work! -- Hoary (talk) 11:54, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@23M23 And I'll add to the complimentary words and suggest this new article of yours is an absolutely ideal candidate for WP:DYK - the 'Did You Know...?' spot on the main page of Wikipedia. If successful, it can result in an article getting tens of thousands of views in just a 12 hour period. But, in my experience, understanding how to lodge that first 'DYK' nomination is actually harder (and more stressful!) than creating an article in the first place! But it's worth it.
There is a time limit of just 7 days to make a DYK submission from the point an article is accepted into the main part of Wikipedia (i.e. from today). Every DYK submission needs a 'hook' and I can see that Stephen Fry's involvement and Apple banning the album is spot on for an interesting 'Did You Know...?' Good luck if you decide to go for it! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:58, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Nick, that's very kind of you. It may be challenging for me to do that, but if i can, I will try. If I do try, I make be back for some tips! Thank you! 23M23 (talk) 16:59, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with @Hoary, it seems the Super Connected The Film section is written like an advertisement. Other than that, the article is really good and interesting! Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 17:27, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My apoligies, I missed this. Will look at it asap. Thank you 23M23 (talk) 17:38, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nick, I made the submission for DYK but I forgot to add an image. Does this make a difference? I have added the image to the main article now though. I tried to make the DYK again but it said it had already been submitted... 23M23 (talk) 08:59, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Reliable souces"

I created a draft article for Ibragim Suleymanov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ibragim_Suleymanov a recipient of the title People's Hero of Kazakhstan which is a clear and undeniable notability qualifier. I was more than a little worried because I know very well about Wikipedias anti-Central Asian bias and history of rejecting highly notable Central Asians for articles simply because they don't have English name recognition. None of the websites I cited in my article are prohibted, they are major Kazakh press entities. Just because you haven't heard of a source and don't know who to use google translate doesn't mean that a source is unreliable. This anti-Kazakh bias festering in Wikipedia is unnjustifiable. How would you feel if an article for Colonel Paris D. Davis was rejected in Kazakh Wikipedia on the grounds that American sources like CNN and Washington post weren't reliable and Kazakhs felt it wasn't worth giving him an article since he doesn't have Kazakh media about him? Wikipedia needs more anti-bias training. I knew it that the second I used the word Kazakh it would be treated differently than if I wrote about an American of similar status. Орта жүздің Ноқта ағасы Тарақты шежіресі is a reliable source and used in the Russian article. e-history.kz is cited often in english wikipedia and there is nothing unreliable about it. Жамбыл Жабаев творчествосы is a reliable book source for the poetry of Jambul. soviet-aces-1936-53.ru is cited in dozens if not hundreds of other Wikipedia articles about non-Kazakhs, but now that its in an article about a Kazakh it's not reliable enough? What about Aikyn.kz is unreliable? Should we declare the NYT not reliable because it isn't in Kazakh. I will share the news of this rejection on my social media, I highly doubt other Kazakhs will be amused by this. I would like to remind you how the Uzbeks feel about the time that another anti-Central Asian editor rejected Toshmuhammed Sarimsoqov's article because apparently being head of the national academy of sciences and recipient of the highest Soviet civilian honor isn't enough for an Uzbek to be worth an article. I demand a better expanation that "unreliable sources" because that is clearly not the problem here.--KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 12:08, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy pinging @DoubleGrazing who was the reviewer for this draft. Hopefully they can help explain the declination. I will just note, @KazyKazyKazakhstan, please don't make vague threats about sharing your grievance on social media- that isn't very constructive. Qcne (talk) 12:18, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not illegal to complain about article rejection on social media. The US constitution protects freedom of speech which includes the right to complain about unjust rejection of Kazakhs and wrongfully declaring many major Kazakh newspapers and books to be unreliable — Preceding unsigned comment added by KazyKazyKazakhstan (talkcontribs) 12:20, 30 July 2023 (UTC) Wikipedia does not have the legal authority to arrest people for complaining about Wikipedia on twitter Wikipedia is not owned by the American government at least not officially. It is completely legal under American and Kazakh law to complain about Wikipedia article rejection.[reply]

Firstly- please remember to sign your comments so we can track who is saying what.
Let's take a step back and breathe- this is obviously an important topic for you but I think we should Wikipedia:Assume good faith and be careful that you don't resort to personal attacks.
Your article was only declined, not rejected, which shows that it can still be considered! Let's wait for the reviewer to pass some specific feedback, and hopefully we can then understand why they declined the article and what you can do to improve it. Qcne (talk) 12:26, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would just add that "Freedom of speech" is irrelevant here. Like many people, you misunderstand what is meant by freedom of speech. To quote from that article: free speech ... prevents only government restrictions on speech, not restrictions imposed by private individuals or businesses such as Wikipedia. In other words, people can't write on Wikipedia whatever they like. Shantavira|feed me 12:50, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of constructive how is wrongfully declaring so many major and popular Kazakh newspapers and books to be unreliable not unconstructive? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KazyKazyKazakhstan (talkcontribs) How would you feel if Kazakh Wikipedia rejected an article about a really famous American like Desmond Doss because it felt that the major american newspapers and history books werent good enough for Kazakh Wikipedia?--KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 12:33, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KazyKazyKazakhstan: firstly, I would ask that you try to remain civil, and avoid wild accusations and baseless claims of bias and discrimination; Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, and such an adversarial attitude is not conducive to collaboration.
I didn't say that Kazakh-language sources are unacceptable. I didn't even say that all the sources cited in this draft are non-reliable. However, I would say that half of the draft content is not referenced in any obvious way, and a couple of the sources cited did not seem relevant and/or reliable, leaving a significant proportion of the information potentially unsupported.
But now that you have resubmitted the draft (without making any improvements, I might add), you have the opportunity to have it reviewed again by someone else. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:38, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@KazyKazyKazakhstan: as a tangent comment, now that you have re-submitted the draft, I encourage you to take off the first paragraph "This person [...] and historical books." It is better to put this paragraph in the talk page of the article. I believe that your draft is more likely to pass without this paragraph. Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 12:48, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But if I dont put it there somebody certainly will think that the title Peoples Hero of Kazakhstan isn't evidence of notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KazyKazyKazakhstan (talkcontribs) 12:49, 30 July 2023 (UTC) Uncited? Every paragraph has citations and I have added more citations now. Every statement of fact is verified by one or more of the sources I used. I fail to see how ANY of the sources are irrelevant because all of them mention Suleymanov by name. You still haven't said which of the sources I used are not reliable, and i reiterate that they are not samizdat but these are major sources used in many other wikipedia articles--KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 12:41, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you take a moment to stop ranting and complaining about perceived injustices, you will note that your draft has already been accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 13:08, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Don’t you just love it when, instead of trying to improve their article, an editor just tries to blame it on the “anti-Central Asian” editors? Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 17:43, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help I keep getting an annoying mesaage

I keep getting this, why:As an anti-abuse measure, you are limited from performing this action too many times in a short space of time, and you have exceeded this limit. Please try again in a few minutes. If you are attempting to run a bot or semi-automated script, please read and understand our bot policy, then request approval. Users who run unauthorized bot scripts may lose their editing privileges. TheTopRocketFan (talk) 13:41, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Red X User blocked User:TheTopRocketFan blocked as a sockpuppet of User:El Wikipedian. OutsideNormality (talk) 15:22, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Finding articles that are missing images

Is there a way to search for articles that lack images? Like if I wanted to find all the articles related to a particular topic or geographical area that don't have images is there a way to do that? Thanks. Adamant1 (talk) 14:27, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamant1, I don't know the answer to your exact query, but see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs and its subcategories for articles where users have flagged up a lack of photographs. —Kusma (talk) 15:04, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See also Special:Nearby. Shantavira|feed me 15:47, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding new pages

I Opened my Wikipedia account to add pages to few topics that interests me, but I got rejected. Did not know what exactly would count as a solid reference for the topics that I am writing for.

I am writing about Ivy (Machine Learning), it's a new framework that aims to unify AI, something similar to Keras, when I wrote the article, it asked me for reference but was not sure what reference would be accepted for that. Can you point me to some trustworthy resource? A0m0rajab (talk) 16:28, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello A0m0rajab,
Thank you for coming to the teahouse. It is the responsibility of you, the editor, to find reliable sources as references for any article you wish to create. The criteria of a reliable source can be seen here at Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability. For example, according to Wikipedia:Verifiability, "academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources on topics such as history, medicine, and science."
I am assuming that you are new to Wikipedia. Please then also see Help:Referencing for beginners.
Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 16:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @A0m0rajab,
Take a look at WP:RS on identifying reliable sources. I'd recommend creating a draft, and at the top of the page, you'll see a box with various tools, including links to find sources, see Template: Find sources. If you can't find reliable secondary sources, you should consider whether the article is WP:NOTAvle enough to have its own article. I'll see if I can find sources for you. NotAGenious (talk) 16:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your answers, my main issue is that, I might add a resource and it would be rejected. I will check the links you provided to understand the situation. Thanks. A0m0rajab (talk) 17:02, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A0m0rajab Draft:Ivy was Declined (not Rejected). Do not resubmit until after you add valid references. Given newness of Ivy, WP:TOOSOON may apply. David notMD (talk) 18:27, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unable to save my draft

Hi i was creating a wikipedia article page and when I was saving for the draft the draft button was missing. How can I save the draft article or who can help me to creat a Wikipedia article page? Thank you! Sterry777 (talk) 17:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you created was deleted as unambiguous advertising or promotion. You should use the WP:AFC process for creating new articlesTheroadislong (talk) 17:19, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Theroadislong, I don't see any deleted contributions by the OP. -- Hoary (talk) 22:21, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake Hoary I was looking at this Sterry Ks. deleted in 2020. Theroadislong (talk) 07:00, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sterry777, when you draft something, you won't be given the option "Save as draft", "Save provisionally", "Save for myself only", or similar. You'll just have the option to "Publish changes" (or of course "Show preview" or "Show changes"). In some situations, "Publish changes" means "Save as a regular article (one that will be indexed by Google, etc)"; but in others, "Publish changes" means no more than "Save (so that anyone can find this, if they know where to look for it)". -- Hoary (talk) 22:21, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting

Is there a way to make a table that is able to be sorted in a non-alphabetical way, instead a specified order? For example a list that when sorted goes:

Rank Name
Empire Austria
Kingdom France
Kingdom Prussia
Principality Orange

WikiWilliard (talk) 20:53, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWilliard, Help:Sortable tables suggests to me that yes it can, thanks to data-sort-value. But I've never tried this and confess to a lack of appetite for trying it now. Another editor may well step up to give you a better-informed response. -- Hoary (talk) 22:35, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiWilliard: Empire, Kingdom, Principality are already in alphabetical order´but suppose we want to sort Duchy after all of them. You can invent a data-sort-value which places it as wanted, e.g. data-sort-value="Q" | Duchy. The sortkey is not seen by readers so it doesn't have to be meaningful. Another option is to give numbered sortkeys to all values, e.g. data-sort-value="1" | Empire to data-sort-value="4" | Duchy. It's more work and makes no difference to readers but in some cases it may simpler to follow for other editors who work on the table. You have to give a sortkey in each cell which shouldn't sort as its content. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:11, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiWilliard I created List of species and habitats of principal importance in England which contains a single species list of a mixture of taxonomic groups, but is not sorted alphabetically. I used Excel to edit the data according to the reliable source, then converted it into a wiki format, and then enabled sorting on all the fields. Now, I could have included a 'sort order' number which would have enabled the table to return to its non alphabetically-sorted order, but decided just to let the user refresh the page if they want to see the data in its original arrangement. I'm not sure if this is helpful to you, but it does shows one simple way of presenting data which can then be sorted, but which can't be 'unsorted' without reloading the page. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you click the same sort arrow three times then the table returns to the original order. If there were rowspans then they are not restored. If there are sortbottom rows then they remain at the bottom. Reload is the only way to completely return all tables. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

afc declined

d Filmymusafir (talk) 22:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Filmymusafir,
Could you go into more details what you want us to answer? ✶Mitch199811 23:26, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Courtesy link: Draft:Patson Pereira  あやかなあ?  (talk) 23:28, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Filmymusafir Your submission has not been reviewed yet, so it hasn't been declined. Happy editing!  あやかなあ?  (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Filmymusafir, Draft:Patson Pereira has been submitted for review. One very obvious problem is the extraordinary number of words capitalized for no obvious reason. You might start by converting to lowercase. -- Hoary (talk) 23:40, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I just declined it. Most of the citations were to Wikipedia. Notability wasn't clearly established. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:30, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Filmymusafir. You start your draft article by stating Patson Pereira was born 13 August, 1992 but then, in the Early years section, you write he was born in 1971. You can only give one birth date, and there needs to be a reliable reference for that date. I suggest you take your time, find more good references, and rewrite your draft, followed by proofreading it to make sure there are no mistakes before resubmitting it for review. You may find it helpful to read Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners. Best wishes on improving your draft article. Karenthewriter (talk) 01:13, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You should delete the paragraph that starts with "He has worked as Sound Engineer..." as that removes all the attempts to use Wikipedia articles as references. David notMD (talk) 08:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thank you for your suggestion. i have just converted to lowercase. Also the year 1971 was a type error, which has been fixed. i have given all the references. added apple music, spotify, wynk music links to support the craft of the artist. kindly suggest any other changes and help me in publishing the page. Filmymusafir (talk) 14:11, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
hi @Filmymusafir! for a start, a lot of the citations are still pointing to Wikipedia and seem to be intended as internal links instead of references (and even if you did, you can't use those as references anyway as people above have said). you may link to them by enclosing their names with square brackets like this: [[London]] which makes London. once you fix those, it's best to check out the notability criteria for music and find some reliable sources that feature and focus on your subject (you may start by doing a quick google news search for them), since as of now none of the sources are focused on them specifically (instead on other things they've worked on where they get a passing mention). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 14:24, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to keep track of article lists/projects you want to work on

What tools do people here usually use to easily access the articles they are interested in editing? I am thinking of someone who may have particular editing interests that may be relevant to special pages, WikiProject article lists, etc. There doesn't seem to be a way to easily follow or create a link for yourself if you wanted to regularly check, say, WP:DEORPHAN. I find myself having to re-locate all the to-do pages for projects I am interested in, which is time-wasting. La Ovo (talk) 23:46, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@La Ovo: I use my watchlist most frequently to monitor the subjects that I'm interested in, or have interested me in the past. See Wikipedia:Watchlist. You can also maintain a section of links on your user page User:La Ovo (which is currently not being used for anything in your case). ~Anachronist (talk) 00:15, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
apart from the watchlist, one can also use their sandbox to store things like this. I inserted User:AnomieBOT/SPERTable and EPERTable in my sandbox as a template as well a small list of pages I will work on when I actually feel like adding content (mostly to distinguish them between the noise of my watchlist being 99% user talks, teahouse, helpdesk, and the aformentioned SPER and EPERTable). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:17, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User talk:La Ovo - In addition to the ideas above, another option may to add a subpage of a user page. For example, at User:JoeNMLC/Article cleanup, I have setup wikitables to track articles for Proposed deletion and AfD that I am working on or have worked on in the past. These are easy to setup and maintain as I track changes. Hope this helps. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 02:40, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

teddy bears North American bear co. Chigago illanoise

a teddy bear sacs fifth ave 2601:205:8201:74F0:C41C:7900:6855:264D (talk) 00:01, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a question about using Wikipedia, please phrase it more intelligibly. -- Hoary (talk) 00:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should I need to starting editing?

I know that some pages is semi-protected, can I help you get starting? Ares123893 (talk) 00:16, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ares123893, yes, some are semi-protected. No, you can't help me edit them, thanks. Or are you asking me to help you? Individual users don't need to start editing; they can websurf elsewhere, or of course they can turn off their phones and computers and enjoy the "real world". -- Hoary (talk) 00:22, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"real world" being in quotes implies it's not actually real /j
...jokes aside, if you mean you'd like help editing, I recommend you start with pages not at semi protection (and especially not ones at extended confirmed protection, ones with a blue lock) unless you're doing something like fixing obvious typos, as these are usually more controversial or harder to navigate. if you'd like some ideas on which pages to edit, check out some easy tasks to do at the task center or your editor homepage. you can edit semi-protected pages already, but for extended-protected ones you may create an edit request: check out Edit request to see how you can make one. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:04, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who is this "The Best Known For IP?"

What happened to him on Wikipedia that made him rage a war for nearly the past decade?

Do we know what he seeks to accomplished by making numerous accounts?

Do we know any details about him IRL like if he worked for Wikimedia?

Is there anything more we can do to stop him?

This rabbit hole goes so far it would take me hours to get a clear picture this. UnironicEditor (talk) 04:04, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, UnironicEditor. Please read Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP. Cullen328 (talk) 04:13, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of all Wikipedia pages?

How do I find a list of all pages on Wikipedia? Esoptron (talk) 04:41, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Esoptron, and welcome to the Teahouse! A list of all pages by namespace is available at Special:AllPages. Tollens (talk) 04:46, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
tyvm Esoptron (talk) 04:48, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review the Article

Hi, I would sincerely like to ask for the review by wikipedia editors on this article named Wibool Piyawattanametha. As I have COI tag, I no longer want to edit further. However, I have worked on some of the citation needed statements and tried to add more reliable secondary sources. Could anyone review this article and remove the poorly citated statements and unreliable sources?

I have previously encountered "This article is written like a resume" tag. So, now the necessary edits and citations are being added. I would appreciate if you could have a look at the article and remove those tags and remove the sentences which have failed to achieve wikipedia's policy.

Many Thanks! Aayushma Sharma (talk) 08:05, 31 July 2023 (UTC) "Al[reply]

Just one point, Aayushma Sharma. "Alumni" is only a plural form, I believe. (A singular male is an "alumnus".) -- Hoary (talk) 08:27, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Aayushma Sharma, it's not clear to me that Piyawattanametha satisfies Wikipedia's standard of notability. I've checked the first five sources cited, and none of those help to establish notability. Which three of the other sources, in your opinion, do most to establish notability? Maproom (talk) 09:42, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not remove citation-related maintenance templates from the article without resolving the issues they highlight, Aayushma Sharma. In this edit, you removed a note that the source cited for the claim about the subject's BSc doesn't verify it and the tag highlighting the need for a citation for his postgraduate degrees. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do we mean by 'encyclopedic context'?

This is not a pressing issue, but a non-substantive (I think!) tangent to an editorial issue I was working on this morning: WP:SALLEAD begins with the following sentence:

A stand-alone list should begin with a lead section that summarizes its content, provides any necessary background information, gives encyclopedic context, links to other relevant articles, and makes direct statements about the criteria by which members of the list were selected, unless inclusion criteria are unambiguously clear from the article title. (bold added)

In this context, what do you take 'encyclopedic context' to mean? I've searched for the phrase in other guidelines, where it seems to be used a little differently to mean something like: 'Place the paraphrased material in the context of Wikipedia as an encyclopædic project, in contrast to the context of the information in the sourced text.' Here, dealing with a list of article names from within Wikipedia, it seems to mean something a little different. Is this phrase clear to any of you? Much thanks. Pathawi (talk) 08:06, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does WP:TONE help? Shantavira|feed me 08:20, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe… That would make sense to me if what the guideline said were 'should be written for an encyclopedic context', but here the lead should 'give encyclopedic context'. (I'm really sorry: I'm not trying to be difficult!) Pathawi (talk) 08:25, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Pathawi. "Encyclopedic" means written in full compliance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially its core content policies of Verifiability, the Neutral point of view, and No original research. Cullen328 (talk) 08:30, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pathawi: if you were to create a list of notable red-haired dentists, it would need to start with an explanation of why red-haired dentists is a "thing". I think that is part of what WP:SALLEAD is saying. Maproom (talk) 09:47, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft rejected needs review assistance

I am currently working on the Wiki biography of Fela Akinse , and the article draft have been decline two times because despite what I would have considered significantly improvement based on initial rejection.

It hurts to see My draft rejected but feel he pass notability because He is a member of Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers should pass WP:NACADEMIC#3 See [[13] or [14] and they are good source for WP:GNG aswell along with [15] [16][17].And WP:CREATIVE #2 for his invention which received significant recommendations from Nigeria immediate past president see [18] and also a good potential for WP: Basic aswel.

Kindly review, and help give me more specific recommendations. I have added additional references and adjustments along with other experience editors, even after the second draft decline.Bruce954 (talk) 09:36, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bruce954.
Ironically I think you've now fallen into the trap of Wikipedia:Citation overkill. Could you give us just the three best sources which are independent of Fela, from reliable places, are secondary, and discuss Fela in detail or provide analysis / interpretation?
Note your draft has only been declined, not rejected. Qcne (talk) 12:32, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Qcne Thank you for your positive response, kindly see this as requested. [19] [20][21][22][23]. Please kindly note, I also have an argument above of him pass notability for WP: BASIC , WP: GNG , WP:CREATIVE, WP:NACADEMIC . Bruce954 (talk) 13:08, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bruce954, the first diff is to IEEE, which is affiliated with Mr. Akinse (because as you say he's a member). What we need to see are three that constitute all of the following:
  1. Independent (not affiliated in any way)
  2. Reliable (in general the minimum standard is evidence of editorial oversight)
  3. Significant coverage
Which three (and only three; if you provide five, and we check the first one, and it doesn't qualify, a lot of folks won't even look at the rest) constitute this? Valereee (talk) 22:40, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I Valereee appreciate your response, please kindly see [24][25] [26] and please, kindly note , I have an argument above aswel which can also be considered. Bruce954 (talk) 00:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep an eye on article

Hey

I'm at work so can't focus on this properly. Can someone keep an eye on List of IOC country codes. I'm on 2-reverts and can't see anything constructive from the IP (blanking, unexplained mass changes etc). Ta. doktorb wordsdeeds 09:47, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. The IP address vandalizing that article has been blocked for a month and everything has returned to normal. I've also added the article to my watchlist temporary if the IP user decides to evade the block. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう!) 10:15, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks :) doktorb wordsdeeds 12:04, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Providing references

I have had a draft rejected because, understandably, it did not have references but how DO I provide a reference for where someone went to primary school or did their first degree, apart from personal knowledge? Mfsstshr (talk) 14:33, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mfsstshr,
You may want to read WP:BACKWARD. In short, if you do not have a source that says some information, then do not add it. You also might be able to break WP:PRIMARY as that seems like basic enough information (though I would go for option 1). ✶Mitch199811 14:53, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mfsstshr, assuming this is about a WP:BLP (and if it isn't), you may have to conclude that for WP-purposes, you can't. Stuff like "where someone went to primary school" can maybe be "fixed" with a WP:ABOUTSELF source, but note that such sources do not help the case for WP:N. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Improving draft article on K-crossover music group CREZL

Dear Teahouse community, I have gotten very helpful comments from editors here on my Draft:Crezl. As I continue to improve the draft and wait for approval, may I get some additional feedback from experienced reviewers? Many thanks in advance. Echohk (talk) 14:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Echohk I can't read any of the citations, owing to my lack of language skills but one immediate issue is that you have included many external links in the body of the article. that's a no-no: WP:ELPOINTS. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:25, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it is standard practice to include the English translation of the titles of your citations, using the |trans-title parameter that's available in {{cite news}}, for example. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tone of writing

I have created the entry for Bridget Lancaster & am being told it is held up because of tone. It's confusing because I am not seeing the language that is 'PR' or promotional. Advise please. Geraldine Aino (talk) 15:08, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This presumably refers to puffery like Her commitment bringing people together and making a positive impact on society has earned her respect within the culinary world, which does not appear in the cited source. Shantavira|feed me 15:19, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Geraldine Aino The reviewers seem to think that Lancaster is notable as defined by Wikipedia, so you should persist with the draft but need to read WP:NPOV and WP:BLP to see the relevant policies which you must comply with in your re-write. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:22, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Geraldine, I went through and removed the promotional stuff, but on a quick spot check, source 5 doesn't even mention Boston or West Virginia? Am I missing something? Valereee (talk) 18:39, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Geraldine Aino. Let me start by saying that I enjoy cooking shows and am very familiar with this cook/performer. I think that she is probably notable and the encyclopedia would be better off with an article about her. But I want to raise another issue. Notability is established by providing references to reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic. Lancaster is a star on the PBS network, and the majority of your references are to PBS and to various of its member stations. Essentially, these sources are promoting their own broadcast content. So, I encourage you to provide more references to sources that are entirely independent of PBS. Cullen328 (talk) 21:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you ban this user or block him from editing?

The User talk:2.99.114.44 is threatening me. He told me to "kys" which means "kill yourself". Can you ban this user or can you block him from editing? He might be a troll. Flag Creator (talk) 15:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done EvergreenFir (talk) 15:31, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! If he continues to do this to me, I will inform you. Ok? And also, he tells that he's Ernest Khalimov, also known as "Gigachad". He even claims he's the super administrator of Wikimedia. Flag Creator (talk) 15:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Flag Creator, in the future, WP:AIV may be the place to go in such situations. WP has quite a lot of specific noticeboards for specific issues. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:17, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How do we design our usernames?

I see some usernames which are kind of designed with emojis, colors, fonts etc. How can I do the same thing to my username? Flag Creator (talk) 15:36, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hi @Flag Creator and welcome to the teahouse! that is the signature of a user, which you may decorate with some knowledge of Cascading Style Sheets: see Custom signatures for some guidelines and tips on this. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 15:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am getting confused. Everytime I do that, it's not working. Can you show an example? Flag Creator (talk) 15:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you scroll down in Special:Preferences, you will see a section where you can input custom signatures. Make sure to check the "Treat the above as wiki markup." button. If unchecked, your custom signature will appear broken. Ca talk to me! 16:09, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

get drafted

normally, images in a draft aren't something you should worry about uploading until after (translation: if) it gets accepted

but is there any real problem with adding an image that fits and is already available elsewhere (like a picture of two marketable plushies that previously only existed in the article about one of them)? cogsan(give me attention)(see my deeds) 16:19, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cog-san: if an image is on Wikimedia Commons, there should be no problem in using it in a draft. If it's on en:Wikipedia, it probably shouldn't be used in a draft. Can you give us a link to the image you want to use? Maproom (talk) 16:36, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
it's just a general question, for whenever this happens
thanks cogsan(give me attention)(see my deeds) 16:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

External Links - OK sometimes?

Inline External LInks

I am getting conflicting feedback re: external links. The Wikipedia Help pages provides examples of appropriate uses, but other editors have quite adamantly told me to never use inline links. I believe they should be used sparingly, based on my research of this site, but they are not forbidden. For example, a company should link to its corporate website: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking. Please chime in but provide links to Help pages that support your view Crystallake69 (talk) 16:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page you linked to is mostly concerned with internal links, i.e. to Wikipedia articles. External links normally should not be placed in the body of an article. Please read Wikipedia:External links. Shantavira|feed me 17:12, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pulling the first sentence from that page: "Wikipedia articles may include external links, links to web pages outside Wikipedia."And the page goes on to provide examples of value-driven links that are allowed.
Are others reading this infering the same thing? It's quite clear to this reader, but then I get so much pushback from others? Crystallake69 (talk) 21:57, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Crystallake69, yes, and the second sentence says "External links normally should not be placed in the body of an article." The body of the article is the text. External links normally go after the text, at the bottom of the page, in an external links section. A single link to an official website can go into an infobox. Other than that there are very few exceptions. Valereee (talk) 22:09, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Crystallake69, it's also about links inline; that is, links to external sites in the text of the article rather than in an external links section (or to the website in an infobox). If you could explain where you're having the discussion with the other editors, we might be able to help more. Valereee (talk) 18:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so maybe you're referring to this edit? Valereee (talk) 18:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Creating your page

Hi,

I really don't know how this all works, but I am losing out on work because I am not identifiable on Wikipedia, which is just crazy! There's so much about me online and on TV, how do I create a wikipedia page? EMILYEVANS88 (talk) 22:39, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

EMILYEVANS88, see WP:YFA. Creating a Wikipedia article about yourself has an almost guaranteed chance of failure, so I would personally wait until an uninvolved volunteer decides to create an article about you. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 22:51, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@EMILYEVANS88, in general trying to create an article about yourself is a losing prospect, per WP:AUTOBIO. I'm willing to look into it to see if it's possible.
There are a lot of Emily Evanses out there, so hard for me to check. What we need to see are three sources that each constitute all of the following:
  1. WP:Independent (not affiliated in any way)
  2. WP:Reliable (in general the minimum standard is evidence of editorial oversight)
  3. WP:Significant coverage
Can you bring us three links? Only three, please. Read the information at the links to understand what we're looking for.
Valereee (talk) 22:53, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Valereee.
So if you type in on google, Emily Evans Property. You'll see alot about me, please see below link:
https://www.google.com/search?q=emily+evans+property&rlz=1C5CHFA_enGB756GB756&oq=emily+evans+property&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j35i39j69i59j69i64j69i60l2.4171j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#ip=1
I don't really understand what constitutes a good source, so added a few more below:
https://www.evansestates.com/press/
https://ktla.com/morning-news/actual-brit-emily-evans-hosts-royal-roundup-challenge/ EMILYEVANS88 (talk) 23:00, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/news/18036629.bridgwater-estate-agent-emily-evans-gets-sneak-peek-britney-spears-hollywood-home/
https://thenegotiator.co.uk/bridgwater-to-britneys-mansion-letting-agent/
https://amazingwonderbirds.com/episodes/episode-109/ EMILYEVANS88 (talk) 23:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the subject, who take note of significant coverage of a topic in independent reliable sources and choose to write about it, showing how the topic meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Trying to force the issue yourself doesn't usually work. Wikipedia to be frank is not concerned with how the presence or lack thereof of an article affects someone. This is not social media like LinkedIn. Potential employers should be looking at your resume, not whether or not there is a Wikipedia article about you. 331dot (talk) 00:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are good reasons to not want an article here. Any information about you, good or bad, can be in an article about you as long as it appears in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. Anyone can edit it, not just you. 331dot (talk) 00:09, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Emily, I'm a volunteer. I work on what I want to work on. I offered to help, and I asked you to read the links to try to understand what we were looking for. I asked you for three and no more than three links. Instead you give me six, one of which has three links, only half an hour later, which makes me think you didn't actually try very hard to understand. You're asking me to do work -- for free -- so you don't have to, so you can earn money. Valereee (talk) 00:49, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I’m sorry you feel this way. I’m not at all tech savvy. And realised that I attached links that may have not worked. So added some more to cover them all. I personally don’t think I have the links that suit any criteria.
Also I didn’t realise you were a volunteer. Maybe I best just stay away from Wikipedia. It’s not my area of expertise at all. I give a lot of free advice myself to help people. So appreciate you also willing to help me. But please don’t worry. I need to find time to sit down and understand this all properly. 2603:8000:BD00:26:B048:482:BAF:4906 (talk) 00:55, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We're all volunteers here, every one of us. Valereee (talk) 00:56, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well thank you for offering. And sorry that I sent too many! 2603:8000:BD00:26:B048:482:BAF:4906 (talk) 01:00, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yeah you cant make a page about yourself, has to be a independent source UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 02:08, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

watchlist management

what is a good way to organize your watchlist in order to best use that thing, i don't really know what people use it for or how to organize it so it isnt just a mess Iljhgtn (talk) 23:57, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

guys wouldnt it be funny if like on april the 1st we all change some information on wikipedia so like everything is slightly wrong

maybe like change someone important (like bill gates) birthday so its a day ahead of their actual birthday or maybe change what city they were born in or something small that people wouldnt really notice but when you do notice it its like 'ohhh snaaap what a prank' UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 02:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

just suggesting UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 02:13, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What you are describing is vandalism and should not be encouraged. Weenis McPeenus (talk) 02:14, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]