Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1065

Archive 1060

←

Archive 1063

Archive 1064

Archive 1065

Archive 1066

Archive 1067

→

Archive 1070

Inviting Editors to Talk Page?

Greetings. How does one invite other editors to a talk page discussion without invoking WP:CAN? I've recently opened a discussion on the Famke Janssen talk page regarding including/excluding rowspans but I fear that discussion may have hit a roadblock already due to a similar issue being brought up in 2017 and no consensus was reached, likely due to a low number of editors on the article. Armegon (talk) 21:45, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Armegon, did you check the WP:APPNOTE section? Here's [1] an example. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:00, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Can I create my Personal Information profile?

I want to create my personal information profile in Wikipedia. I not want to create my profile for any self-promotional purpose or business purpose. I have a account on Wikipedia, If someone search me on google, so that he can find me and know about my self. For this I want to create my information profile on Wikipedia.

Thank you. Iftekhar Alam Murad Iftekhar Alam Murad (talk) 21:35, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Iftekhar Alam Murad: hello and wekcome to the Teahouse. The short answer is no: you cannot create a profile page here as you would on Social media. Wikipedia is for notable topics (see WP:N) and it cannot be user for WP:SELFPROMOTION. Hope this helps. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Iftekhar Alam Murad: If you want people to be able to find you and know about you because of a page they found here on Google, that's self-promotion. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:33, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Iftekhar Alam Murad: Not meaning to come across as rude, I think you can easily achieve that goal in better ways. I would recommend Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Blogger, Wordpress and a host of other sites that al you to tell the world about yourself. These are all free sites which can help you make your presence felt on the internet when someone searches for your name. Unfortunately Wikipedia is not here for that purpose. On that basis would you be agreeable to me deleting Draft:Iftekhar Alam Murad? Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:51, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

What's wrong with this article?

Hello everyone, I spent 3 weeks to source for sources to create this article- Draft:Tiwalola Olanubi in main space and has been there waiting for review for about 10 days but just discovered that this article has been moved to draft space and the reason provided by the mover is that the article is "under sourced". This article has 12 sources. Of the 12 sources 4 are from printed newspapers with 2 ISSN while the other two printed newspapers do not print their ISSN but Vol & No which I included in the citations. I work in a newspaper section of a library where we file newspaper pages based on their coverage, for instance political stories, business, oil and gas etc to make it easy for researchers. This makes it easy for me to have access to offline sources for this article I created.

But I'm so surprised that this article is moved to draft space. I know that to create an article you must provide at least 3 sources. If this article has issues why was it not flagged for those issues? If the editor that moved this article to draft space felt that the subject does not meet Wikipedia notability guideline why did he not flag it for notability issue? But I know that the subject is notable because it has independent media coverage. I spent days reading about Wikipedia general notability guideline before moving to create this article. So I think I have a little understanding of Wikipedia notability guideline.

I have checked through the edit history of the editor that moved this article to draft space and discovered that he has moved hundreds of articles with at least 7 sources each to draft space for "under sourced". But I'm baffled that most of the articles this editor created have average of five sources. Why is he moving articles with higher number of sources than his own articles to draft space?

The editor that performed this action describes himself as "deletionist" and he is truly deleting articles. This editor wrote on his userpage that he is disappointed in the editors that "ignore common sense in place of process". This clearly shows that this editor does not observe Wikipedia editorial policies but uses his own common sense. But if everyone here uses 'commom sense' Wikipedia will become a lawless place where people behave the way they want. And the result? Wikipedia will lose his reputation. If this editor continues this way a lot of new editors will turn away. Maybe this editor alone made Wikipedia what it is today. I urge you all to address this issue. Best regards. Maco Paco (talk) 12:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Whatever the editor (Lapablo) calls himself, he hasn't deleted your article. (But "Maybe [Lapablo] alone made Wikipedia what it is today" -- we should erect a statue!) I looked at the draft. It's very short. Your biographee is a businessman, but I have trouble discerning his notability. I clicked on one of the many sources: this one. It's really lightweight stuff, with a total of three sentences about your man. He works in advertising and he seems to be successful; but just what he's done remains a mystery to me. -- Hoary (talk) 13:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @Hoary:. This is an issue of policy. The notability guideline says independent media coverage of the subject and the subject of the article has same. Why did he not flag the article for notability concern? Does moving it to draft space confer notability on the article? Of the 12 sources cited you draw your conclusion from a single source? Did you look at these: [2] [3] [4]. You said that the article is too short but if I wrote more about him you would say it is promotional. He has won a reputable award, the company he founded has won awards too. Is notability no longer established by independent media coverage? Or the subject must be a governor, federal lawmaker to be notable? Maco Paco (talk) 15:11, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary, Maco Paco, and Lapablo: This is not the best sourced article that I have ever seen. But I think that it has sufficient sourcing that it would survive at an AfD, which is the standard for an AfC approval. Specifically:

• news-af.feednews.com's "Meet Social Media Strategist, Tiwalola Olanubi" has several paragraphs about Olanubi and seems to be an independent source, although it is hard to be sure, it could be based on a press release.
• The Nigerian Pilot article is not linked to, but seems to be about Olanubi winning a significant award.
• The BellaNaija article has more marketing Buzz-speak than I like, but devotes six (short) paragraphs to Olanubi , and I think must count as significant coverage
• The article "Three Individuals Reshaping The Future" from Guardfian Nigeria is not really in-depth coverage, but is more than a passing mention. I would count as 1/2 of a solid source for notability purposes. Saying that his company is ... arguably the foremost social media marketing company in Nigeria. is not trivial.
• The article "Disrupting the future" from Guardian Nigeria devotes 9 paragraphs to Olanubi . This is significant coverage by an independent and reliable source, IMO.
• The Business Day NG article "DottsMediaHouse CEO bags Future Awards nomination" devotes 5 full paragraphs to Olanubi, one of which is a quote. This is the same award the Nigerian Pilot article was apparently about. This describes the award as Recognized by Forbes as the “Most important awards for outstanding young Africans”. which suggests that this is not a trivial award, and contributes to notability. This article also seems to me to be solid coverage.
• Two other sources are about this same award, but the "12 outstanding youth nominated for Future Awards". article from Vanguard Allure includes four paragraphs devoted to Olanubi, and is IMO significant coverage.

All together I think this would be more than enough to support a Keep view at an AfD, so draftification was neither needed nor warranted. A maintenance tag requesting additional sources might have been justified. But draftication should mean that the alternative is speedy deletion, or at least an AfD where deletion is expected. Newither of thesae is in my view the case here. Therefore I intend to move thiws back to mainspace as it stands. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @DESiegel: for taking time to review the sources of the article and more importantly your action on the article. I'm now encouraged to continue contributing while learning here. I hope that this article will go live. Once again thank you. Maco Paco (talk) 19:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Maco Paco, the article is now live, that is what being in the main article space means. It is as live as any article on Wikipedia is. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:57, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Facebook photo use

I am working on the Columbia Daily Tribune article and wanted to add a newer front page image. The Tribune no longer posts PDFs of front pages on its website, but it does post them as images on Facebook. And the Tribune Facebook page allows photo downloads.

Can this be added to Wikipedia? Gangskew (talk) 17:57, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Gangskew, and welcome to the Teahouse. The current front page image on Columbia Daily Tribune is used under a claim of fair use. Any current issue would have to be under a similar claim, and satisfy all the conditions of WP:NFCC. Has the layout or appearance of the typical front page of that paper changed significantly since the current image was created? If not, I see no reason to update. If it has, an update is probably reasonable, but you would have to jump though the fair-use hoops. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:21, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Gangskew. Good question. I think it could, the argument would be that the frontpage has changed in 13 years. If you check File:Columbia Daily Tribune front page.gif you see it speaks of "fair use" etc, and a newer image should be possible per the same reasons. How to actually do it, I'm not sure. Pinging Marchjuly if they wish to comment. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:24, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gangskew. I think the points made by DES and Gråbergs Gråa Sång above are good ones. The infobox image is typically supposed to be a representative image for primary identification purposes; so, if the formatting/layout of the front page has undergone some major changes recently so it looks quite different from how it appeared at the time the current image was uploaded, then it might make sense to update or replace the image infobox image with a new one.

Perhaps the thing to do would be to see what some others think at about this at Talk:Columbia Daily Tribune. You're not required to do such a thing and can be WP:BOLD, but non-free content is required to be used in at least one article per non-free content use criterion #7; so, the minute you replace the current image with a new one, it will become eligible for speedy deletion per speedy deletion criterion #F5. Someone who might disagree with your change and who reverts it will then make the file you uploaded eligible for speedy deletion for the same reason. Since this type of back and forth trying to stop one of the files from being speedily deleted is not really helpful or to Wikipedia's benefit at all, it might be better to be a bit WP:CAUTIOUS here to see if others agree with changing the image.

One thing you should try and avoid regardless is simply overwriting the existing file with a new one except if you're just creating an "improved version" (a resizing, straightening, etc.) of the existing file; if the file is significantly different (i.e. a completely different front page), you should upload it as a new file instead.

Finally, Wikipedia's non-free content use policy is quite restrictive and limiting; so, while the use of a non-free file for primary identification purposes at the top of or in the main infobox of an article is often allowed, using the same file in other articles or in other ways can be much harder to justify. Using multiple non-free images in the same article is not expressly prohibited, but using one is already considered sort of an exception which means using more than one is not always warranted and needs to be a really exceptional case. So, don't automatically assume that moving the current image to some other part of the article and then adding a new one to the infobox is going to satisfy relevant Wikipedia policy. It may be the case that the use of only a one of the two images can be justified per relevant policy and the other one will need to be deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you all for your advice, Marchjuly, DES and Gråbergs Gråa Sång! I definitely will bring up on Talk:Columbia Daily Tribune. Gangskew (talk) 23:44, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Querry how to publish

I have put up certain material in my sandbox which has been edited 17 times. I hv tried to publish it after 10 edits. But i dont know wether it is published and avaialable in open source. How do check wether my document is open to people? If not what are the reasons? And how can i overcome it? Prachi.chopade (talk) 01:06, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

• Prachi.chopade, I cannot tell that you have ever tried to publish it. No one else has made edits to User:Prachi.chopade/sandbox. If you want to move that forward toward article space, the first thing you will have to do is--OK more than one thing--a. tone down the promotion (the membership, the projects, the whole "Prof. Bhagwat had a vast knowledge"), b. add secondary sources to prove that this person meets WP:PROF. Right now this looks like a kind of resume, like a tenure folder. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 01:12, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Prachi.chopade: Welcome to Wikipedia. What you have written at User:Prachi.chopade/sandbox reads to me like a resume/CV and not an encyclopedia article. Check out WP:YFA for how to create an article draft and submit it for review. RudolfRed (talk) 01:14, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Want to edit a page to make it full of information

I'm from Bangladesh and I really want to contribute to Wikipedia. I'm here to know some information. There is a page List of colleges in Bangladesh link:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colleges_in_Bangladesh But that page doesn't have much information. It's empty so to say. As I am a student and blogger from Bangladesh i have the list of names of all of the colleges in Bangladesh. And i also have a reference page from official website of "Ministry of education of Bangladesh" which have the list of all of the name of the colleges in Bangladesh. So I'm willing to edit that page and give the list of all of the colleges of Bangladesh. I want to know if it's there any problem doing that work? Md Maruf Parvez (talk) 09:12, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

List of colleges in Bangladesh is not an article, it's a list. It's not the place to put information about the colleges. If you want to add information about the colleges, you should add it to the articles on the individual colleges. Maproom (talk) 09:35, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

You hadn't understood my question. I won't give information about colleges. I will just give a list of all of the colleges in that page. Md Maruf Parvez (talk) 23:26, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Md Maruf Parvez, it appears that you want to use the lists you have to add further entries to the list article List of colleges in Bangladesh. Unfortunately, list article entries are limited to items about which Wikipedia already has an article. I am fairly certain that not all of the colleges on your lists are notable enough to have articles in Wikipedia, meaning that, if they are added to List of colleges in Bangladesh, they are subject to deletion.--Quisqualis (talk) 01:17, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Capitalization

F Is for Family. Attempts have been made to rename / move the title for this page to the correct capitalization of the word "is" in keeping with the show's title. When I went to move it, I received this dialogue box: "The page could not be moved, for the following reason: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask for the page to be moved. Do not manually move the article by copying and pasting it; the page history must be moved along with the article text." There is a consensus on the Page to correct the title; but I'm not sure how to by-pass the now redirect page that has been created for the title is for Family. Any advice? Maineartists (talk) 01:14, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Maineartists: Welcome to the Teahouse! It's hard to see on the red background, but the instructions "use Requested moves to ask for the page to be moved" has a link to Wikipedia:Requested moves, where you can request the technical move. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:21, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Note the suggestion (correct, IMO) is to move the article to the lower-case "is". (I originally mis-read it as wanting upper-case). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:39, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

 Done I have done the move. There was just enough history in the redirect to require an admin or page mover to do this. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:45, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Querry: what r a green/ red numbers point beside my edit

Querry: what r a green/ red numbers /point beside my each edits. Is it some kind of rating? Prachi.chopade (talk) 01:48, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Prachi.chopade: It is the number of characters added or deleted with the edit. It is not a rating. RudolfRed (talk) 01:52, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Article getting plastered by flood of events

It is List of monuments and memorials removed during the George Floyd protests, which has spawned Actions against memorials in the United Kingdom during the George Floyd protests. See Talk:List of monuments and memorials removed during the George Floyd protests. I and others have stopped trying to keep the table updated, as it has become technically complicated at the same time the list wobbles around typographically, conceptually, and organizationally.

This was where it was a week ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_monuments_and_memorials_removed_during_the_George_Floyd_protests&oldid=961244155

I don't know to fix it or get it fixed. Maybe someone here knows.@CaroleHenson: @Another Believer: deisenbe (talk) 02:24, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

What steps should I take in merging and formatting an article?

I am a relative newcomer to Wikipedia, but I am jumping in the deep end in my planned first major edit of merging Cosmetic surgery in Australia to Plastic Surgery. My major concern is about formatting guidelines for this kind of a topic. I like the way that the procedures under "Types of Cosmetic Surgery Available" are formatted in the Australia article, but am not sure how I can properly replicate it in the general Plastic Surgery article, or even if such formatting is appropriate for this section? I don't know if it would make the article too lengthy or complicated. (I don't think so.... but also I'm so new that this is all very daunting!)

Honestly, I envision "Cosmetic Surgery" as its own separate article that outlines the history of cosmetic surgery (as distinct from reconstructive plastic surgery) in modern times. This article, similar to the "Cosmetic Surgery in Australia" article would have lists of procedures, a brief description of their history and layman's explanation of the procedure, as well as indications, benefits, and complications of the procedure (cited from various PubMed articles and plastic surgery textbooks). The procedures may or may not link to individual articles about the procedure depending on if they already exist on Wikipedia and the information available about the the specific procedure. However, in the meantime as simply merging is daunting enough, I do not plan on doing this until I have a more robust list.

I suppose I have several questions.

1) What is the preferred formatting for a section of an article that is primarily a list and a brief descriptor? Should I use a bulleted list such as in the general Plastic Surgery article, or one with bolded subheaders (if that's the appropriate term) from the Cosmetic Surgery in Australia article?

2) How can I easily replicate this formatting when I merge an article? Are there templates available that I should use?

3) What steps should I take in merging an article with a section that will likely need to be split off in the future? Should I merge and then split? Or create a new article and then merge information from the two articles I have mentioned into it? Is my thought process appropriate for why Cosmetic Surgery should be its own article?

Thank you all in advance for the help. Marcia Barnett (talk) 14:47, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Marcia Barnett: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. As you are a new editor with only 21 edits so far, it's not really a good idea to attempt something as complicated as a merge in your first couple weeks of editing. Merging larger articles is also something that should probably be discussed with other editors first, in order to gain consensus on the merge. What I would do if I were you is propose the merge on the talk page of the article to be merged. This way you can get feedback on your idea, get suggestions from other editors on how to execute it, and gain a little more editing experience as well. You can see details on how to do this at WP:MERGING. Hope this helps. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: Thanks for your reply. I appreciate and share your hesitancy. I have also discussed the merge on the talk page though it's not particularly active (last update in April), which is why I have decided to jump in the deep end and learn by doing. Currently I have a draft page of the Plastic Surgery Article where I am slowly rearranging the content to be merged and attempting to make the article as a whole better. I do not intend to publish any final changes until gaining more consensus. (I hope this the right way to use a Draft article.) I agree that I should probably get more experience as well--I am learning about WikiProjects and WikiAdventure. Would appreciate any other resources you can point me to. Thanks. --- Marcia Barnett (talk) 01:31, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Marcia Barnett: I would suggest picking a section in one of the articles you are interested in, and working on that to start and gain experience. The current Plastic surgery article had about 5,000 edits over the past fourteen years; this is how Wikipedia articles are generally built: bit by bit. If you are planning on replacing that with your article that would need some consensus and would likely bring lots of editors out of the woodwork. It's generally a mistake to write up a large article until you have gained some more experience. I'm not sure what you will do with the draft, as these are generally destined for article space, and in this case there is already an article in the space where your draft would go. Going slowly,a small chunk at a time, generally draws fewer objections than large scale changes to a page. It's a process. That said, WP:BEBOLD is thing on Wikipedia: you should be bold and just change things. But be ready for some pushback if those changes aren't accepted by others; that is where WP:BRD comes in. (yes we have lots of contradictory policies). Hope that helps. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:26, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: Thanks for your very thorough reply. What you said makes sense. I am in no rush and want to take my time, hence the draft. I was planning on using the draft as a way to save my work in the planned merge process and as a place for me to make mistakes with formatting and content organization before ultimately copy/pasting it over to the Plastic surgery article, deleting the draft, and formally completing the merge process. (Should I do this in the Sandbox or in another format instead?) Thanks again--I will spend more time practicing and learning with other articles while I work on my merge draft. Hopefully some discussion about this merge will arise in the meantime. --- Marcia Barnett (talk) 03:45, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

"Draft space" (we have user space, draft space, article space, and so on...) is just fine. It;s not the usual place, but it will work. If you would like to improve the likelihood of discussion, then pasting the merge template into the article you want to eliminate via merge is the way to go. That lets people know what you are thinking. You could also go through the article histories and find the names of the most active editors of the page, then use the WP:PING template to get their attention. Being bold is often very effective at getting people's attention! You will generally draw lots of attention if there are many page watchers. You can see how many people are watching a page by clicking "page information" in the left hand panel on any page. Cosmetic surgery in Australia currently has less than 30 watchers; Plastic surgery has 266 watchers, and 26 of those have visited recent edits to check them over! If you have any editing questions drop me a line on my talk page. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:55, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Something

which are verified link as reference?

how to check whether a reference link is verified or not to add on a wikipedia page ?? Thanks Tipx20 (talk) 01:07, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Tipx20: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to check the sources. Please see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources for how to identify reliable sources you can use for citation in Wikipedia articles. RudolfRed (talk) 01:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Need help with a draft

Draft:People's Initiative for Technology Tipx20 (talk) 01:12, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

On the draft it tells you (twice, as you seem to have submitted it twice): "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 5 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,869 pending submissions waiting for review."

One of the things which you can usefully do is to read the WP:Manual of Style. One obvious problem is that you have many misplaced external links. You can address these problems while you are waiting for the review. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:02, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Ellipyzs request

can you send me any sample file ,which i can follow to make a new write up. Ellipzys (talk) 02:31, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're asking for. It is much more complicated than writing up the descriotion of a file. deisenbe (talk) 02:34, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: This appears to have been accidentally added without a new section header. I think it's a vague request for help of some kind. Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:48, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ellipzys: I'm not really sure what you're requesting. The contents of your user page were deleted on the grounds that you were using Wikipedia as a free webhost. I'm not sure I would have deleted the page myself, but it was not really an appropriate beginning to a Wikipedia article. It was more of a how-to guide. I'd look at existing articles in the categories Category:Petroleum engineering and Category:Petroleum technology to see what existing articles in this field look like. Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:54, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Why am I not allowed to translate articles?

I have created this account many years ago in the Spanish Wikipedia and recently moved it to the English Wikipedia. I am willing to translate content, in particular topics regarding Latin American literature, which is my academic background. Although I have already activated the translation feature in the "Contributions" section, I am not allowed to translate anything as I always find an "issue" that says: "Your translation cannot be published because publishing is only allowed to more experienced editors on this wiki." Could anyone please help me to solve this problem? Regards. WhisperingValley (talk) 20:02, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Currently only extended confirmed users have access to the content translation tool. Ruslik_Zero 20:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

WhisperingValley, honestly said I do not understand why you do want to make use of this tool - why not using Deepl for example (IMHO much better) and translating via copy and paste!? CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:41, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand why you'd want to use any translation tool at all. Your mother tongue is Spanish, and you've shown above that you can write good English. Maproom (talk) 22:41, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Additionally, please recall that machine translations are not allowed. See WP:TRANSLATE for guidance. RudolfRed (talk) 23:56, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@WhisperingValley: The content translation tool has been kneecapped compared to how it functioned years ago. Because they were so often misused, machine translation features (at least into English) were turned off. I actually liked the old tool--it wasn't quite as good at translating as other machine translators, but it automatically created appropriate Wikipedia links, which was a big plus. Contrary to others' comments above, I think machine translation is handy to save time as a starting point even if you're a competent translator, assuming it is reasonably accurate so you're not spending tons of time fixing it. Anyways... long story short, even when you have more edits and get access to the tool, the tool will likely be worthless to you (even if you liked it before). Calliopejen1 (talk) 07:09, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Can non-administrators give block warnings on talk pages?

I recently made an edit on Mount San Antonio changing the elevation from 10,046 to 10,064. I did this because most other articles referring to it said it was 10,064. However, I forgot to add a source next to it. The source on the original that stated 10,046 was from over 30 years ago, so I trusted the other articles on Wikipedia. In the future, I will remember to always find a good source beforehand and not use other Wikipedia articles as sources.

However, a user who does not appear to be an administrator (did not appear on the list of 1,141 admins) placed the 3rd-level Template:Uw-disruptive3 warning template on my talk page that I could be blocked due to disruptive editing. I did not intend for said edit to be disruptive, but I naturally am worried that I could be blocked. Even though only admin can technically block you, are non-admins permitted to leave warning templates on others' talk pages? Thanks. Rubberducky785 (talk) 05:51, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rubberducky785, and welcome to the Teahouse. To answer your first question, yes, non-admins can leave warnings. However, your edit surely would not warrant a level-3 warning. Most people use a level-3 warning only if it is obviously meant to mess up articles and is bad enough. However, you must remember to ensure that you do edits properly, using appropriate sources, and leave nothing that would make it look like vandalism. RedBulbBlueBlood9911Talk 06:07, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Repinging Rubberducky785 as something happened. :-p RedBulbBlueBlood9911Talk 06:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Rubberducky785: welcome to the Teahouse. Your previous warning for adding unsourced content was a level 2 caution, and that caution was followed by your discussing the issue with the editor who'd placed it on your talk page. Given that you then changed sourced information in a different article into information contradicting the existing source, a level 3 warning was appropriate – and as RBBB9911 says, any editor who reverts an edit can (and often should) place an appropriate warning at the other editor's talk page. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 06:43, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

RedBulbBlueBlood9911 Rubberducky785, I just read through your talk page and saw the phrase "I've observed..." multiple times. Perhaps you need to look closer at WP:SYNTH and WP:OR as the editor who left you the templated (and completely proper) warnings took the time to point out to you beyond the text of the templated message. I'll be blunt. We don't care what you have observed. Paraphrase your content from reliable secondary sources and cite them. You'll get much fewer warnings. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 06:56, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

John from Idegon, did you mean to ping me or Rubberducky785? RedBulbBlueBlood9911Talk 07:04, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Rubberducky785. Oops. Sorry. John from Idegon (talk) 07:21, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikiproject History

Hi, I want to know how to be a member of Wikiproject History. Thanks. Heyday to you Heyday to you (talk) 07:33, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Heyday to you: Most projects are fairly casual. You can add your name to the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject History#How to add your name and then participate in various activities suggested by and for its members. Discussions are at WT:HISTORY. Happy editing. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:56, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Change request to Suresh Raina's page

HI, i represent Suresh Raina, the cricketer. His page needs changes and if you could kindly guide me on how to go about it. HAd put in a request for a change earlier as well but could not action the change. If the team could kindly help? Artkonnect (talk) 08:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Artkonnect Your edit request at Talk:Suresh Raina wasn't actioned because you didn't give any reason for changing his name, you will also need to provide an independent reliable source for any proposed change. Theroadislong (talk) 08:19, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Artkonnect (edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, you will need to review and formally comply with the paid editing policy, a Terms of Use requirement. You should also review conflict of interest. You went about making an edit request in the correct manner, that is what you should do. It was responded to, please return to Talk:Suresh Raina and see the response. You will need to provide an explanation and source for the change you wish to see, we can't just take your word for it. 331dot (talk) 08:21, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Identical paragraphs in separate articles

I mostly participate to the French version of wikipedia and noticed there an automatic translation of two articles (First Silesian War, Second Silesian War) which include the same paragraph Methods and technologies. Is there any rule or recommandation about using the exact same text in different articles? I suppose there is a risk that over time they might diverge if not updated in parallel. Charlik (talk) 09:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Charlik. If the translation is something taken verbatim or too closely resembles content found on some external website, then it might be considered a case of WP:COPYVIO or WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE, neither of which are really allowed on Wikipedia if the original content at the original source is not licensed under the type of license Wikipedia accepts. On the other hand, if someone basically just copied and pasted content from one Wikipedia article into another Wikipedia article, then it's probably OK per WP:CWW as long as proper attribution is given. Even proper attribution, however, may not be needed if the editor who originally added the content to the first article is also the same editor who added to the second article, and the content added was not improved upon by anyone else editing the first article. If the content originated on French Wikipedia and was then translated into English to be added to English Wikipedia, then proper attribution is likely going to be needed as explained in WP:TFOLWP. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:43, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for making that clear. --Charlik (talk) 09:49, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

​ I just realized that your post might have actually been about content originating on English Wikipedia being translated into French and added to a similar article on French Wikipedia. There's no policy that I'm aware of that requires articles written on the same subject found on different language Wikipedias be the same. Each Wikipedia has its own policies and guidelines and while there's lots of overlapping, there are are also sometimes some important differences. Each Wikipedia community also can develop its own manual of style for their particular language which means article may not always be formatted and written the same way. It's completely acceptable to translate content found on English Wikipedia into other languages as long as it's done in accordance with WP:TRANSLATEUS. However, if you think that this might not be the case with respect to those two French Wikipedia articles, then that's probably something you will need to discuss on French Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:00, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

No, the question was not about translation but about having identical duplicate paragraphs (in excess of 250 words) in different English articles. Without even considering the authorship issues and assuming one single contributor adding the same text twice. --Charlik (talk) 10:06, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Archiving an article from a group that doesn't exist anymore

Hi, our research group has been given a new name (The Australian Artificial Intelligence Institute). There is an article referring to a previous institute with the same name https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Artificial_Intelligence_Institute. Could you please let me know if this page can be archived, or can we create a new page with the same name? Just wasn't sure what the procedure is here. Are you able to help? UTSAAII (talk) 10:39, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@UTSAAII: I believe the existing article will probably be moved to something like Australian Artificial Intelligence Institute (1988–1999). Assuming you use the WP:AFC process, which I recommend, the reviewer can handle that if/when your draft gets moved to mainspace. Please also keep in mind that Wikipedia accounts are to be used by one person only. If multiple people in your group are to access Wikipedia, they will need to create separate accounts. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:25, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

how to add pictures on a page?

I had a question regarding adding pictures to the articles? Bosch3503 (talk) 11:27, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bosch3503: What is your question? Have you read WP:IMAGES? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:46, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

WORLD CITIES DAY

Why does the page linked below open with talk instead of article when you search for it on google? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Cities_Day 197.237.51.180 (talk) 12:06, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

That sounds like a question for Google, rather than for us. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

As all other pages open the article once searched for on google - maybe there is something that needs to be done on my end? I am still new to wikipedia and assistance in this matter would be highly appreciated. Ofcourse there must be a reason that it appears that way, please see below how it appears:

Talk:World Cities Day - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org › wiki › Draft_talk:World_Cities_Day This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. (talk) 12:06, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

You didn't say that you were looking at the draft, rather than at the mainspace article which existed at the time of your question. I see that the draft had been submitted for review, was declined, but the page author (User:Sarah UN17, who may or may not be you) immediately moved the draft to mainspace despite the declined review. It was tagged as having a single source, but you removed the maintenance tag without having addressed that problem. Another article has now looked at the page and decided that it wasn't fit for mainspace so moved it back to draft. To get back to your original question, a new page is NOINDEXed until it has either been subjected to new page patrol or 90 days have passed, so we wouldn't expect Google to find it; it in't clear why Google found the draft talk page, as that too should have been NOINDEXed. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:32, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

---

How do you make a good article?

Hi! I did an article for Melissa de la Cruz's book, Alex & Eliza, and it got denied because it wasn't good enough. I was curious if you guys had anything that could help me make good articles. K0tiklams (talk) 12:24, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi K0tiklams. Welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, that question is a bit like someone who's just started driving asking how they can become an expert driver. The answer is by practice and by starting off slowly. Start too fast, or pick the wrong route, and you'll simply crash. Creating an article from scratch is the hardest task anyone here can do, but the absolutely key criterion of a subject being accepted here is whether or not it meets our notability criteria. So, take a long read through Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (books), all the time asking yourself "does what I want to write about really meet these criteria?" If not, you're wasting your time if you can't find independent Reliable Sources that show the world at large has taken note of it. In your draft (Draft:Alex & Eliza series) all that you sources show is that the book exists, and a link to a publisher simply isn't enough. By reading the links I've given you, I hope you'll appreciate that that's not sufficient at all. Then read Help:Your first article, but always take your time and learn how Wikipedia works before rushing to start a new article. Does that help?  Nick Moyes (talk) 12:51, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

K0tiklams, refs like [5][6][7] are what you're after. They're not enough, I think, but that's what you should look for. Consider using refs like that to expand Melissa_de_la_Cruz#Series instead of writing a new article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:24, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Citation keeps getting removed

Hello, and thank you for reading my question. I feel a certain Wikipedia user continually accuses my edits of being unconstructive and disruptive regardless of the content of the edit. The article in question is Blockbuster LLC in regards to the third paragraph of the lead. Over the course of a year, numerous edits by more than one user have continually skewed the factual accuracy of a sentence in this paragraph.

As you may know, Blockbuster LLC closed its corporate locations in 2014 but certain franchise-owned locations continued operating. The number of open franchise-owned locations decreased until early 2019, when the only one remained. The lead was continually changed to inaccurate dates following up to my edits which are actually unconstructive and disruptive.

I did not see the Wikipedia user in question talk to any of the users who made these erroneous edits. I tried correcting these edits by adding more accurate wording and including the source that originally reported the information. Less than a day later my edit was removed by this user, who I feel is watching my edits just to target me. I do not see why, in this wording, the edit need be removed or called unconstructive and disruptive. The citation was disputed approximately three years ago when it was used to support the factual claim being made in the article through a secondary source, since it is the only secondary source that was being continually updated and maintained. I feel personally targeted by this user and feel I cannot make any edits, even unrelated, in fear of reversal by them. KevinTheGuy (talk) 21:38, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, KevinTheGuy. Welcome to the Teahouse, and thanks for coming here with your question. At a quick look, I am sure you were editing in good faith. However, when you say your 'citation keeps getting removed', I can't actually see in this diff any evidence that you ever added a citation. What you appear to have done is change a statement which was supported by a citation, and left it as a different factual statement, unsupported by the original citation, and with nothing added that does support it. If I am correct in that interpretation, the reverting editor would have felt it was also unhelpful (i.e. unconstructive) to change content without supporting it with a new, valid citation.

Having got this far in my reply, I went to the article talk page and see you've tried - at great length, and over a long timeframe - to persuade other editors to include links to a 'Blockbuster Fan Club' page and that the consensus and other discussions elsewhere went against you. I also see you've raised it there again, but to no avail. I couldn't even find a functional link to any online fan club (and neither could I access the official Blockbuster website in External links - so I assume both are now defunct) But, either way, I hope you see that adding unsupported statements is itself not OK (especially if the source is a user-generated fan-run website), and that when consensus goes against you, sometimes you simply have to accept it if your attempts at changing opinion have failed. The transition from good faith editing to 'unconstructive' happens when someone continues to try to get their way against that prior consensus, and keeps on attempting to make the same edits. Sorry I can't be more supportive here.  Nick Moyes (talk) 22:47, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes:, Thank you for replying. The Blockbuster Fan Page is not defunct and can be found at the same link that was originally disputed. Blockbuster's official webpage is still up as well and shows factually inaccurate information on some pages. I apologize if I did not follow some Wikipedia protocols in properly citing the source in my edit, however, I feel the user's targets against me could never allow it to be used despite there being nothing wrong with the factual accuracy of the wording used. KevinTheGuy (talk) 23:02, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@KevinTheGuy: I'm sorry, mate, but http://cybernight.elementfx.com/buster.html isn't a Fan Page - it's a one man band webpage built in a few minutes in a basement, and I can see why we wouldn't allow it! I've never seen anything like it if it's really a 'Fan Page'. I presume you created it? I'm really sorry, but that'd never, ever get accepted here, nor can you use content from it. Whilst what little content there is there might well be 100% factual and accurate, I would also never be willing to regard it as an acceptable Reliable Source. I'm still unable to get anything to display at http://blockbuster.com/, so that looks like a dead domain to me, too. Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 23:55, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: The Blockbuster Fan Page has existed for four years and has had numerous continual updates in regards to the number of franchise-owned Blockbuster stores. There are captures available from the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. I did not create it and in no way maintain it. And like I said before, Blockbuster's official webpage is in fact up and running, and still shows factually inaccurate information. KevinTheGuy (talk) 00:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@KevinTheGuy and Nick Moyes: That blockbuster.com/franchise.html page has a modified date in 2014. If you try using https to access it, you get a certificate domain complaint because the cert is registered to dish.com (who apparently absorbed the Blockbuster brand in 2011), who didn't bother spending a few bucks for a separate cert. I don't think there is any value in 6+-year-old information about a defunct company, and would object to its use as a source. The elementfx.com fan page is obviously not a WP:RS. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:12, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@KevinTheGuy: Being archived on Wayback Machine doesn't mean that a grotty webpage suddenly becomes a reliable source. All the pages I sampled there still looks like a cheap and nasty webpage to me, written by one solitary fan. Sorry to be blunt, but I think you should WP:DROPTHESTICK with this one. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: You are literally judging a book by its cover. "Being archived on Wayback Machine doesn't mean that a grotty webpage suddenly becomes a reliable source." You're right, but you obviously don't see the point of the webpage. Whether or not information is artistic does not matter in terms of sourcing references. The Blockbuster Fan Page tracked the number of open franchise-owned locations and included an interactive map. There is only one location remaining, so the interactive map has been removed. I didn't make that choice. KevinTheGuy (talk) 00:29, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@KevinTheGuy: I am indeed judging the book, yes, but by its self-published url, its obvious one-man-band nature, and lack of anything that resembles a reliably-published source with editorial oversight. The content might be correct, but such a site has no place here. If you don't have better sources for this information, then the information can't be added. As I said above, it is now time for you to concede you are not going to get that source added and to WP:DROPTHESTICK. Continuing to try to do so will now be deemed as disruptive editing. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:45, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

You are not fit to be an editor, collaborator, administrator, or hold any position of authority in writing anything encyclopedic. Get the fluff out of your ears and realize that you need to serve up the truth. Sometimes your sources aren't going to be a damn Picasso. Fuck you. KevinTheGuy (talk) 14:12, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

How do I get my article approved?

 Dollychota (talk) 14:27, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft (incomplete, no refs) at User talk:Dollychota/sandbox. David notMD (talk) 14:37, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanu Padmanabhan

Some error is ruining the footer of the article Thanu Padmanabhan. Anybody up for fixing it? Thanks Shashank5988 (talk) 14:42, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Simple cure --David Biddulph (talk) 14:52, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Help fixing Soda Stereo article!

Hi everyone. I would like to ask for your help fixing the Soda Stereo article, given that it contains numerous problems including neutrality and encyclopedic tone. I outline most of these issues on my talk entry.

Grammar errors throughout the article can probably be fixed by monolingual English speakers, but further addition of sources or facts may need to be done by bilingual English-Spanish speakers, given that the article is about a very successful Argentinian band. As a fan of this band and English Wikipedia editor, I wanted to ask for your help in fixing this article, so that it can be renominated as a good article.

Thank you all. HandIsNotNookls (talk) 15:40, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

How do I revert edits on mobile?

 Spidersnakes (talk) 16:32, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Spidersnakes, desktop view should work. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Base: a philosophy is not CLEAR an ideology, but permaculture yes

Hi Teahouse, I work at a bigger article, in the Sandbox.
It is a garden/soil topic and touches the topic ´permaculture´.
After needing myself a longer time to understand it as an ideology, but hiding just this status, except of calling it just philosophy.
A philosophy - as permaculture - is able and does, (to) include things out from other topics and even back out of the past.
This kind to include technics out of the past, or other technics, which do not have to do anything with this ideology, is not OK, without clearly aparting it.
And permaculture does exact this not.
This is a basic problem, can be with other ideologies, too.
And from missing time, to do my article, and from not wanting to have some probably talk-fights about it, and not knowing a perhaps better place, so, please, just here.
But from being convinced, a knowledge data base will/can not support ideologies, in best hope.
Thanks for the reading and the interesst. --Visionhelp (talk) 11:48, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Visionhelp: hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Having looked at your message above and your sandbox draft It seems like you may not have a high enough competency in English to write on Wikiepdia. I don't think it would be advisable for you to contribute to articles on Wikipedia unless it is in the form of very minor edits to facts where you are sure the English is correct. Per WP:CIR, "the ability to read and write English well enough to avoid introducing incomprehensible text into articles and to communicate effectively" is a basic requirement. 15:34, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Visionhelp, and welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? I don't see one in what you have posted. But some things you said make me wonder if you are trying to write something appropriate to Wikipedia or not. Please have a look at WP:What Wikipedia is not. --ColinFine (talk) 15:30, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

OK. My english entire to disqualify I know from many opportunities. Even to my native german this happens, that this is no native german.
In this case I have to see my work, my effort, my interesst of some knowledge about the topic and therefrom seeing me able, to sort some important points to this topic. This CAN be seen, if one is in the topic, but appears to me to have fitting point of views as Wikipedia, which I cannot look through. Sorry.

(I am able to do mistakes, but I take kind notes, and with a senseful explanation. This I have to miss here. OK.) With this reaction I am not able to go on to do my work.
My way saying things is basically explaining and not offending.
Fot to say my things I do need the way I say the things.
This Your reaction says in one, if I do not write english, as english is usual written and spoken, than I have to let me teach it first, if I want to write this just one article. This I REALLY only can and have to deny.
Sorry, the "I work at a bigger article", I meant ´article with lots of work´.

Without one point naming, where "edits to facts" in my article does NOT happen, I would not have to take it just so rejecting. So what ? (My note is about the hiding of the ideology of permaculture. Labeling it exact as first at all as this, for that, that one, EACH, does not have to find it out just by him-/herself, if when being able to this.)
--Visionhelp (talk) 17:18, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Expanding Article

Infobox content for Arya Shah
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
(Redacted)

 AryaShahRail (talk) 18:16, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link:User:AryaShahRail

Hello, AryaShahRail

• First of all, you seem to have made an identical post to quite a few diferent pages on Wikipedia. Please don't do that, it wastes the tiem of volunteers when multiple peole give similar answers to the same question.
• Secondly, You didn't make it very clear what nhelp you wanted. I looks asa if you want to exband the info box into a full article. Is that correct?
• Thirdly, the place for a new article draft is not on your userpage, but in a sandbox, or in a userspace draft, such as User:AryaShahRail/AryaShah or in draft space, such as Draft:AryaShah
• Fourthly this seems to be about yourself. Please read WP:AUTOBIO which describes why writing an article about yourself is strongly discouraged.
• Fifthly, please read Wikipdia's Golden Rulke and Your First Article mwhich describe how to start a new article and the requirements, particularly Notability and reliable sources. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:40, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

How to write the names of the places in local languages

How to write the names of the places in local languages in the topic India??? MV1306 (talk) 17:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, MV1306 and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm no expert in this area, but I am aware that English Wikipedia discourages the use of certain language scripts in both the lead paragraphs and the Infoxboxes here. So the answer is that you do not. This is mainly, I believe, because there are various ways of spelling them in different languages, and this has resulted in backwards and forwards arguments and edit wars. Please have a look at WP:NOINDICSCRIPT for what, I hope, might be the answer you could be seeking. Bear in mind this ruling relates to India, and not other countries. Please also be aware that we do not welcome unilateral changes or deletion of style guidelines just because you or other editors happen not to like them. I note that you have already been warned about this, and also that you have been informed of WP:NOINDICSCRIPT. So, having read it through, please let us know if something is not clear to you, and do try to avoid going against agreed guidelines. We change things here by discussion and consensus, not by unilaterally changing things to how we'd like to see them. Kind regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:05, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Average Edit Size

Hello! My question might be a little irrelevant, that’s why I’m asking my fellow Wikipedians at the friendly Teahouse. How does the [XTools Edit Counter] calculate the average edit size? Does it use the absolute value of all positive and negative edits? Idell (talk) 15:58, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Idell and welcome to the Teahouse. You may be able to find that answer on the XTools documentation page, which also has a link to its source code.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:01, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

PS: this intrigued me so I had a look at the source code. You will need to dig a little deeper, but the function that returns the "Average edit size" is on line 1001 of this file.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:09, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: I just came here again after being unable to find the relevant code. (The documentations page does not provide such details.) I looked at the source code again but I’m still not entirely sure: I suppose it uses raw edit sizes (positive and negative, with their signs) for the calculation, and not the absolute values, is that right? Take a look at lines 1047 and the following. Idell (talk) 18:25, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Something like that! If you want an exact answer you could email or message the listed developers.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:25, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

{PLEASE READ} Question

Hello,

I want to know who to type four tidles without iy signing my SIG. Can someone provide me help? Thank you. -- Hamuyi (talk) 19:35, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Hamuyi If you want to display instead of use some wiki-markup, put it inside <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags. Like this: ~~~~ DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:40, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel:, thank you. --Hamuyi (talk) 19:42, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

How to to get better notability skillls

Hello. I want to write a article. But I don't have good topic ideas. Is there any way I could possibile inprove on that? Any info would be delightly usefull. Thank you in advanced -- Hamuyi (talk) 19:40, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

You have made 339 edits to Wikipedia so far, none of them to article space, there are many thousands of articles that require improvement, I suggest you try that before you begin creating new articles which is the most difficult task here. Theroadislong (talk) 19:50, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok. ·Hamuyi (talk) 19:55, 15 June 2020 (UTC)·

Hamuyi If you don't know what you want to write an article about, then I wouldn't worry about attempting to write one. Editors are not required to create brand new articles, and many thousands of editors spend years here and never create a single article. I did not attempt to create an article until I had something that I wanted to write about and felt comfortable doing so. Creating a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 19:56, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I will :think about it. -Hamuyi (talk) 19:58, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Userboxs

Hello. I am very curious and want to know what are userboxs, and what are they for. Are useful. Are they vandalism? How do you use them? Are certain people supposed to use it? Can you get blocked from using it?(or banned) Any info would be useful. Thank you -- Hamuyi (talk) 20:43, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

You added some to your user page 5 days ago, Hamuyi.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:02, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

That doesn't answer my questions. Can you answer those questions instead. Thank you. --Hamuyi (talk) 21:05, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

 210.14.97.181 (talk) 21:05, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)See Wikipedia:Userboxes, Hamuyi User boxes are small boxes containing text about a user's characteristics, skills, opinions or preferences. They usually also contain an image. They shouold be used to inform other users about the user posting them. Some of them can be contro9versial, but they are not vandalism when used normally. Some users use many of them, some none or only a few. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:09, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel Thank you, know I know what Userboxs are. How can they be used?--Hamuyi (talk) 21:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

OK, you're not getting the answers you want--but you gotta admit it's a puzzle. You added a bunch of Userboxes to your User Page--as many Users do, to share whatever they care to about themselves--removed them a few days later ... and then you're basically asking what they are, and what they're used for? I probably should keep my virtual mouth shut, but I'm just too puzzled. Uporządnicki (talk) 22:29, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Question about promotional content standards when editing Wikipedia articles

To whom it may concern:

The Community Options Inc. page on Wikipedia has been flagged with a notice saying it is written like an advertisement, with promotional content and inappropriate external links, and not written from a sufficiently neutral point of view. I am wondering how the information on the page can be edited to more clearly meet Wikipedia's editorial standards. Most of the information on the page right now seems purely informational rather than promotional, but I would be happy to make any edits necessary to meet Wikipedia standards, including adding more sources.

Any information you could provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Options 24.45.77.59 (talk) 17:40, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

The best place to discuss improving the Community Options article is the article's talk page: Talk:Community Options. If you are somehow associated with the organization, please read WP:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, and declare your COI on the talk page. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:45, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Help!

Hi! Why is article Draft:Elive rejected? i cannot figure it out. please help. TheTechRobo (talk) 16:27, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, TheTechRobo3641, and welcome to the Teahouse. The rejection, late in May, was by 1292simon and the stated reasons were external links in the body of the draft, and being promotional. Another editor seems to have removed all the inline external links in the last few days, and that should not be a reason for rejection in any case. In my view the draft currently does have a rather promotional tone. Such phrases as: allows the user to try it before actually installing., Press coverage stayed favorable nonetheless, with especially Linux Magazine and Linux Journal touting the tight integration of the E17 window manager. and The 64-bit release brings all the perks of a 64-bit OS... are more than a bit promotional. The draft should be rewritten to be morem Neutral I haven't looked into the cited sources and if they are enough to establish notability. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@TheTechRobo3641: I believe DESiegel meant to provide a link to Wikipedia:External links for you. GoingBatty (talk) 01:49, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, both of you! TheTechRobo (talk) 16:27, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Teahouse I am adding an article about a musician and I would like to add things like a table of contents and other various entries where can I find basic page add ons? Thanks

 Kurt Baagø (talk) 15:49, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: User:Kurt Baagø/sandbox ... ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:57, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Kurt Baagø, copyrighted material cannot be published as an article on Wikpedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 16:17, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Kurt Baagø: Welcome to the Teahouse! There is lots of helpful information at Help:Introduction and Help:Your first article. GoingBatty (talk) 01:51, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Categorization Related Question

I want to know how to make category, can someone help me. Any advice would be delightful. Thank you, (uhm, yeah it was. WHAT!-)-- Hamuyi (talk) 23:44, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Hamuyi: Right now, you don't need to know how to make Categories, and I don't plan to explain it to you because all you seem to be doing is playing around in your userpages since you've got here, and not actually contributing anything positive to this encyclopaedia. To date, You have made just 2 edits to mainspace article out of 384 edits in total. I would politely suggest that you come back and ask again once you have a valid reason to create a category for something you're working on, rather than create a pointless category for your sandbox that someone will then have to spend time delete. That might make some people feel you're WP:NOTHERE. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:52, 15 June 2020 (UTC)  

Okay (:/)--Hamuyi (talk) 23:54, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Hamuyi: Glad you appreciate why I say this. By the way, can we delete Draft:What The Teahouse Is (On Wikipedia) which you created a few days ago? It's got no chance of ever becoming an article, so I guess it was just a test? Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:57, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I guess so, delete it. I didn't know It was a good topic at all. I am not experinced.

Hamuyi Draft:What The Teahouse Is (On Wikipedia) could never be a valid Wikipedia Article, no. But it could possibly be the start of a Wikipedia essay or help page. Still it would be better to work on some actual articles before worrying about this. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:04, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Hamuyi: OK, thanks. Will do. Say, would you like me to drop by your talk page for a wiki-related chat, and we can try to get you focussed on some productive tasks? Say 'no' if you don't want me to, of simply don't reply - I'm just trying to help. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:08, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes:,"Yes", I need some tasks. I am not good at finding some tasks. (-whoop whoop-)-Hamuyi (talk) 00:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel:, what is a essay in wikipedia? (-thank you and always-)--Hamuyi (talk) 00:12, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hamuyi On Wikipedia an essay is a piece of writing which explains how somethign works, or gives an opinion about how things ought to work. Early in my Wikipedia career I wrote the initial draft of the essay Wikipedia:Process is Important, for one example. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel:Hm...okay. If you edit a essay, does that count as a maintance edit? And how do you make them? --Hamuyi (talk) 00:40, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

An essay is crested and edited like any other page, Hamuyi, the difference is in the name and location -- and the style o9f the content. I'm not sure what you mean by a maintance edit?. People have been advising y9ou to do main space edits, that is edits to articles. An edit to an essay does not count for that. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:29, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

By "a maintance edit" I mean edits to articles etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamuyi (talk • contribs) 01:33, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Hamuyi: Wikipedia essays are not articles - see Wikipedia:Essays. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 01:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok (Uhm yea it was - WHAT!-)--Hamuyi (talk) 02:13, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

inquiry about how to talk to someone over wikipedia talk

here Hello there! I am new to wikipedia.Somebody just restored the deletion i did in an article. Now how should I inquire him abut the reason of such restoration? Nahilhaayder (talk) 05:00, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nahilhaayder: You should start a new section on the article's talk page, and WP:PING the user who reverted your edit. In this case, I expect that would be at Talk:Forced conversions of Muslims in Spain and you would start your message with {{Re|Passengerpigeon}}. Note that according to the history (accessible from the "View history" tab at the top of the article), you did not provide an edit summary for your change, which is why Passengerpigeon reverted it with the summary "Unexplained removal of content". Please see WP:ES and also WP:MINOR. Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:44, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Nahilhaayder, you communicate on Talk pages the same way that you communicate on this page, by editing. Every editor and every article has a Talk page. Also be sure to tell the other editor why you removed that section from the article, since you didn't bother to leave an edit summary.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:52, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I have a question

Hi, I am new here at Wikipedia. I just want to ask, how do I make more languages for an article? I have 2 nations, American and Japanese. So when I write or see an English article without Japanese, how do I add Japanese? Thank you in advance! :)

-Kuro  Kuro the black dog (talk) 03:33, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

See this article:Wikipedia:Translation.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:57, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

How can I update my Wikipedia Page which is out of date?

We edited the page yesterday and I see now that almost all of what we did was disavowed. So - I'm not happy. I need this to be current and relevant for professional purposes.

Please advise. WestCoastCass (talk) 22:04, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@WestCoastCass: You can find the information you need at WP:COI and WP:PRESSRELEASE. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:18, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

WestCoastCass It is not "your" page, but an article about you. Please note that only a single person should be operating your account. You are welcome to make formal edit requests(click for instructions) on the article talk page, Talk:Robin Cass. While Wikipedia strives to be accurate, it is not meant to provide up to the minute current information, which is what social media is for. 331dot (talk) 22:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

WestCoastCass I must agree with the comments of 331dot above. I would also note that your recent edits to the article did not cite any sources for the changes, which is probably why they were reverted. Wikipedia articles do not exist to satisfy your professional needs, nor to make you happy. If you make edit requests on Talk:Robin Cass, as suggested above, please supply reliable sources which support the proposed changes. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:27, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

• WestCoastCass, where did you ever get the notion that you have control over what an encyclopedia article about you says? That really is a serious question. What would cause you to think that? Did the person you hired to write your biography tell you that? If that's the case, can you please provide their Wikipedia username so we can straighten them out? John from Idegon (talk) 07:16, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Idea Lab

Hi,

I have an fun idea for something user-page-related. It's basically a Myers-Briggs test but for Wikipedia philosophies as per [8]. It's not a change of policy, template, etc. but just a fun idea sort of like the Wikipediholism test. Does this sort of thing warrant an idea lab proposal or can I just create it in my userspace?

Regards, Giraffer (munch) 14:51, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Giraffer. Welcome to the Teahouse. Whilst we don't permit people to create content in their userpages that is unrelated to the workings of Wikipedia, I really don't see any problem of you working on this idea in a sandbox page in your own userspace. It's sounds like harmless but relevant fun for many editors to engage with, so your sandbox seems the perfect place to experiment and put flesh on the bones. It would be your choice whether to go to WP:VPI, depending on whether or not you wanted to gather other people to help you develop it. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:44, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I think I'll start off in my sandbox and see if it works. If after a while it still seems like a decent proposal I'll take it to WP:VPI to see if it gets any support. Thanks for your help, Giraffer (munch) 07:45, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Can some one help in verification of refs

Hi,

I don't know if it is ok to request such help here.

I am looking for if some one can proactively help out in long pending verification of refs of two edits: (+2942) & (+6368) and updating @ Talk:Islamic_feminism#Islamic Feminism Jagged 85 problem resolution analysis table.

I have checked for 17 out of 19 still two significant are remaining. And now feeling bit weary -also have other focus areas to work on- but still wish task gets completed, so decision making about content and article's other related tasks can breathe with little more ease.

(More details are mentioned in earlier section of the talk page

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 08:14, 16 June 2020 (UTC) Bookku (talk) 08:14, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bookku: You may find people with more specific knowledge and interest at the relevant WikiProjects, like WT:ISLAM and WT:FEMINISM. I'll note that those edits are from 2008, and the article appears significantly different now than then, with ~ 100 edits since. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:30, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

programming

Do I need to know programming to edit Wikipedia? Ppt2003 (talk) 12:17, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Absolutely, 100%, definitely NOT! Welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia, Ppt2003. We have two different editing tools for you to choose between. Beginners quit quite like Visual Editor because it has a WYSIWYG appearance. But in posting here, you're already using our other editor called Source Editor. It lets you do more complicated things more easily, and uses a tiny handful of character commands like three apostrophes either side of a word to make it bold. But the editing tool can do that work for you. The choice really is yours, and there are over 6 million articles here that you could help to improve. Let us know when you've done them all! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:34, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I think Nick Moyes meant "quite like" and not "quit like" so I changed it. Hope it's OK. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:46, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ppt2003: I'm a bit confused; did I misunderstand something in your question? I went away and found that you'd already made over 630 really useful edits to Wikipedia articles. Whilst IT skills are needed to write scripts, run bots and other stuff, I've been here over 10 years and still don't know a bloomin' thing about how they work! The clever programming types often hang out at WP:VPT if you ever need assistance. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:42, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

user:Nick Moyes, If I know programming language, does it give me additional advantage in editing some pages?Ppt2003 (talk) 12:41, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any significant advantage it would give in day-to-day article editing, except that if, like me, you've played with html elsewhere, you'll probably manage to more quickly grasp how tables, colours and stuff like that are set and adjusted in certain types of pages. My feeling is that not knowing a programming language affects my ability to edit in the same way as not knowing Swahili. They are both gaps in my knowledge and skillset, but neither impacts on my own Wikipedia editing. For advanced template editing and operating bots, it might just do. Maybe I can ask fellow Teahouse host, Tigraan, to comment, as I believe they've created some fancy tools or scripts to help others that I couldn't. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:50, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ppt2003: It often requires programming skills to edit templates and always modules but you can just leave that to others. Some things like adding links to navigation templates are usually easy. Most parts of articles can be edited without programming. However, making tables and calling templates with many parameters like {{Cite web}} or {{Infobox person}} may be considered programming by some. And it may often be easier to learn for people who know some programming. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:06, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

WHAT MAKES A SCIENTIST "NOTABLE"?

When I first looked at the article entitled List of biochemists I thought that it was extremely far from being adequate: many of those who created the subject (I counted more than 60), such Otto Warburg, were missing, but a fair number of people were included who have made no significant contribution. It was this realization that led me to think that I needed to register as a contributor. I have now corrected most of the most obvious omissions and unworthy entries, but now I've realized that there is another problem. For many entries about the only thing mentioned in the description is that the person is or was a professor in a particular university department. However, most such departments have many professors, of which only one or two are regarded as "notable", so it's clearly not where you work that makes you "notable" but what you did there. It's obviously valid to say that you have a Nobel Prize, as that's clearly noteworthy, and also that you're a member of the National Academy of Sciences. Otherwise I've restricted descriptions to what you did to make you notable. Having gone through the whole of the letter B I see that it's going to be a tremendous job to do the whole list. Before continuing, therefore, I'd be grateful to know if others agree with my criteria for noteworthiness. If you compare the letter B with any of the others you'll see what I'm getting at. Athel cb (talk) 12:49, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link List of biochemists. Theroadislong (talk) 13:34, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome, Athel cb. You may find WP:NACADEMIC helpful. Chetsford (talk) 13:54, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

If the scientists have their own Wikipedia article, as everyone on the list already does, then this is enough to satisfy notability. If red links are added, they should be very well sourced so as to indicate potential article material. Theroadislong (talk) 13:59, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thanks for expressing your interest and concerns, Athel cb. Not every person titled 'professor' is going to be notable, but I assume you have read Wikipedia:Notability (academics), and the criteria for notabilty (shortcut: WP:NACADEMIC)? These are the criteria we should be working to. You certainly appear to have drastically improved the relevant list of names in the 'B' section, and I mostly like what you've done . This link shows your combined edits to that page under letter 'B'. Personally, I like how you've mentioned their field of work, but not how you've removed which University they are work(ed) at. A really short combination of the two seems ideal, and entries should be as staccato in tone as possible, as befits a List, and less explanatory. I've taken two entries at random. The first pair for J Beckwith shows your brand new addition (top) with my (longer) suggestion beneath. The second set shows the original entry for C Ballou, followed by your changed version, then lastly my own suggestion. I do tend to agree with you that name; date; type of scientist; field of biochemistry contribution; major award/Fellowship is important, followed by job title and place of work if there's room. Getting them all in seems ideal!

• Jon Beckwith (b. 1935), American microbiologist and geneticist who made important contributions to the study of bacterial genetics.
• Jon Beckwith (b. 1935), American microbiologist and geneticist. Professor at Harvard Medical School. Contributed to the study of bacterial genetics.

• Clinton Ballou (b. 1923), Professor Emeritus of biochemistry at the University of California, Berkeley. He served as an editorial board of the Journal of Biological Chemistry. Member of the National Academy of Sciences.
• Clinton Ballou (b. 1923). American biochemist, whose research focused on the metabolism of carbohydrates and the structures of microbial cell walls. Member of the National Academy of Sciences.
• Clinton Ballou (b. 1923). American biochemist; studied the metabolism of carbohydrates and microbial cell wall structure. Professor Emeritus at University of California, Berkeley. Member of the National Academy of Sciences.

Of course, this is just my opinion, so the best place to seek confirmation of your approach is on the talk page at Talk:List of biochemists. There is almost nothing more demoralising than someone disagreeing with an approach you've taken to editing over many hours and days, and reverting it all with one mouse-click. Might I suggest you repost this question there, and I'll add my broad support as above for your approach. If you ask and get no further response by the end of a week, it seems fair to carry on with your excellent efforts. I'm delighted you've joined Wikipedia and want to see it improved. Just seek help or guidance here at any time. Because we work by consensus, one person's view isn't necessarily the right overall position that one should take. But we do our best! Nick Moyes (talk) 13:57, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for these comments, and apologies for not including a courtesy link (I'm new to this business). I shall restore information about where people worked (but briefly!) in the B section, and add such information to my own entries elsewhere.Athel cb (talk) 13:19, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Changing the title (and some content) of a Wikipedia page

I represent a public figure whose entry in Wikipedia is described by a former stage name which is no longer the name he goes by and has not been for some time. He is referred to throughout the article by the stage name, which is also incorrect. There are also some factual inconsistencies that need correcting. How to go about doing this? Sayakayaraya (talk) 12:49, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sayakayaraya and welcome to the Teahouse. As a representative of the article subject, you have a conflict of interest and if you are in nany way paid or compensated for your representation, you are also a paid editor. You should disclose this on your Wikipedia user page User:Sayakayaraya.

As a person with a COI, you should not attempt to edit the article directly. Instead edit the article's talk page and indicate there the exact changes you think should be made. Please cite one or more reliable sources supporting the changes. Use {{Request edit}}.

Please understand that Wikipedia follows the rule of common names for article titles. Thus the name a person is known most commonly by, not the person's legal ore preferred name, is normally used. For example we have an article titled Mark Twain, not "Samuel Langhorne Clemens". If your client is still widely known by a former stage name, the article title might not be changed, but at least the current name should be mentioned. But the exact actions to be taken will depend on the specific facts.

Is this about the article Mos Def? If so, the request should be placed on Talk:Mos Def.

I hope that is helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:52, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Как удалить ложную страницу?

 74.101.103.5 (talk) 13:49, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. This is English language Wikipedia, and all communication should be in English. I'm not sure what you mean by "false page" (ложная страница), but it looks like you have been trying to remove all the contents from a Wikipedia article by simply erasing the text, which is not appropriate. If you can try to say more (in English) about what the issue is, we can try to help you further. --bonadea contributions talk 14:06, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Incomplete Infobox on a translated page

Hi, I translated the Simon Gillham page from French to English, but I can't figure out how to duplicate the Wikidata Infobox on the page. The Wikidata page already exists, I followed the instructions from the Template:Infobox person/Wikidata page to create an infobox, but it only shows the name and pictures of the person, not the entire biography as it does on the French Wikipedia page. Could you help me figure out how to fix this issue? Thanks Xaintax (talk) 13:38, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Xaintax. Perhaps it might be easier to just repopulate the {{Infobox person}} parameters manually. You can add Template:Infobox person to the article and then fill in the blanks yourself.

Also, if you translated the article from French Wikipedia, please be advised of a couple of things. The first is that just because the article existed on French Wikipedia doesn't automatically mean it should also exist on English Wikipedia. The article is going to be assessed per WP:BIO and perhaps WP:NSPORTS; so, if you can find any reliable sources about Gillham in English that will help show that he meets the notability requirements for English Wikipedia. Please understand that I'm not saying he's not Wikipedia notable and that the French sources you've provided cannot be used (they can per WP:NONENGLISH), just suggesting that anything written about him in English would be helpful. The next thing you should look at is WP:TFOLWP because you need to provide attribution to the French Wikipedia article per Wikipedia's licensing requirements. You sort of did this when you created the article, but it might be a good idea to add a Template:Translated page to the article's talk page just it make the attribution clear. Finally, please take a look at WP:REFPUNC because English Wikipedia may do things differently when it comes to citations and punctuation. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:25, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

When is it appropriate to delete material with an irrelevant citation?

A few friends were recently very confused by a couple sentences at the end of the first paragraph in Imperfective aspect. After taking a look at these sentences and the paper cited to support them, I found that whoever added them pretty clearly misunderstood the cited article, which doesn't address imperfective aspect at all. I've added the irrelevant citation template to the article and raised the issue on its Talk page, but as I'm fairly new to Wikipedia editing, I'm not sure how long/if I have to wait before simply removing the two irrelevant/inaccurate sentences from the article. I don't want to be accused of unexplained removal of content, and though I think it's pretty clear to anyone familiar with the field that this paper doesn't address imperfective aspect, I don't want to get in trouble for removing it. I can find articles with guidelines about when to remove inaccurate unsourced content, but I'm struggling to find any indication of guidelines or a decision-making process for when to remove content that is only substantiated by an irrelevant source. Sparksbeth (talk) 14:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Sparksbeth: – I'll chime in on the article talk page, but basically I would say that having discovered something that is a blatant misinterpretation of the source (which this is, I agree), it is generally fine to remove it right away. --bonadea contributions talk 14:52, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Reminder to state in the Edit summary what you did, and why. David notMD (talk) 16:45, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Editing and contributing as an IP user

Hello and good day, I would like to ask. I've been editing and contributing here for quite some time already (probably more than 2 years) but I am unsigned. Everytime i edit, it is identified by various IP addresses (because it constantly changes everyday, when I stop edit for a time and returned) where they're all inactive already. I know something about sockpuppetry and it's against rules. Anyway, after quite some time, i can edit again (I've been blocked because my Ip address might be the same with the one whom they suspected to be a troll) and this is the only time I was welcomed. For some reason I choose to be anon, but if sometime (ex. tomorrow) I'll edit again, will the Ip address identified will be the same as the one I'm using right now or not? I choose not to sign up but maybe. Sorry if this is quite long. Thanks. 2001:4454:2FD:CC00:ADDE:686E:EF1A:10F6 (talk) 11:37, 16 June 2020 (UTC) 2001:4454:2FD:CC00:ADDE:686E:EF1A:10F6 (talk) 11:37, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. Your IP address is determined by your Internet connection and not by Wikipedia. Some Internet providers assign a new IP address every time you use them, even if you are using the same computer and modem. We have no way of knowing what your IP address will be tomorrow. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:15, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Also know that revealing your IP address is potentially less secure than registering an account, which hides your IP address from all but a small group of trusted admins (called "checkusers"). It also enables other editors to communicate effectively with you, an important part of the collaborative nature of the project. It also gives you access to a lot of customization, useful tools, the awesome Wikipedia Library, etc. Please do consider registering. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:01, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

One additional point, IP editor: given that your IP address is ever-changing, you have no easy access to your editing history or Talk page, which are unique to your IP address. If those features are of interest to you, an account would put them all on a single history or talk page.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:17, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Photo of wrong location

The page for Penmorfa, Ceredigion shows a photograph of St Bueno's Church. However, that church is in Penmorfa, Gwynnedd - different village.

The photo is used correctly in a page about the church: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Beuno%27s_Church,_Penmorfa

I work for an organisation that manages the church. How can I get the picture removed from the wrong Penmorfa page?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penmorfa Ckdray (talk) 17:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

The caption on the picture on the Penmorfa page gave a link to the church's page St Beuno's Church, Penmorfa which of course confirmed that it's a different village, so I've removed the erroneous picture. Thanks for letting us know. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:25, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Using images on a wikipedia article about a living artist

I am involved in writing more articles on Wikipedia about Australian women artists. I would really like to include photos of the artist and images of their artworks on their pages, but I am not sure of copyright/intellectual property for this purpose. I have read the Wiki instructions on how to upload an image to Wikipedia Commons then put it on a specific site, and have also read the article about US Fair Use. I don't know whether I have to get permission from the artist or their representative to use their photo and artworks on their Wikipedia page. How can I find out if the photos/images I find on the Internet are free or fair use? LPascal (talk) 12:23, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, LPascal, and welcome to the Teahouse. Images of living people generally cannot, under Wikipedia policy, be used under a claim of fair use, because it is always possible to replace then with freely licensed images. (The rare exception is historical photos that show what someone looked like at a particular moment of significance to the article.) To add an image of a living person to an article, that image must be released under a free license. This can be done by having an editor take a picture, perhaps at a public event where the person is present, and upload it as "own work" under a free license; or by asking the artist to release a picture, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The artist should be aware that such a release means not only permission to post it on Wikipedia, but for anyone in the world to use it for any purpose at all without payment or permission, provided only that proper credit is given. Also, normally copyright to a photo is held by the photographer, not the person photographed, unless arrangements have been made to transfer the copyright, so the photographer or copyright holder would need to consent to such a release. Does that help clear things up a bit? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:34, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

No photograph "is fair use". The use of a photograph in a particular article may be fair use, if a lot of requirements are met. Assume that any photograph you see on the web is (conventionally) copyrighted unless authoritatively described to the contrary. Some artists have websites that include a page that in turn contains photographs for use in/by "the media". For a minority of such pages, these photographs are explicitly marked as copyright under one or other of the few flavours of copyleft license that Wikimedia recognizes. If photographs are not so marked, assume that they are conventionally copyright and therefore unusable. -- Hoary (talk) 13:25, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

LPascal: nobody has answered about using artworks. It is not straightforward but there are some possible ways to do it:

First, if the artist wishes to license some artworks under a copyleft licence such as CC-BY-SA, then they can be uploaded to Commons, and used freely. It is unlikely they would want to do this, because it will give anybody at all to use them for any purpose (including commercial) or make derivative works, as long as they attribute the origin. However I recently heard that some artists have chosen to make low-resolution copies of their work available in this way. See donating copyright materials for information on how to do this.

Secondly, it may be possible to use low-resolution copies of some of the artworks under the non-free content criteria. The use must satisfy all these criteria, and personally I am dubious that such use would meet criterion 8 (or criterion 3, if more than one work is used). But I know that some editors have successfully done this: pinging Mianvar1 who has previously mentored an editor who wanted to do this.

Good luck --ColinFine (talk) 19:27, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hard to tell if this extremely large number of edits is constructive

Special:Contributions/24.159.60.138 has been making a very large number of edits on home video article to the point that it's really hard to keep track of what they've added. The first one I saw was unconstructive but I can't tell about most of them. Could I get a second opinion on that? Green Dragon Pride (talk) 18:16, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Green Dragon Pride, perhaps your post here has got some editors to go through those contributions, perhaps it hasn't (that happens most often, though perhaps not always). In case it hasn't, I am adding this comment mostly to acknowledge your post, but also, to share some general thoughts that will hopefully be helpful in some way. I would leave the edits you are not sure about to act on, for other editors. That doesn't mean you have an obligation to make sure someone else absolutely makes sure right away. One way these things get handled is, after a high volume of iffy edits, an article could degrade sufficiently that any experienced editor coming across it would realise what's happened and reset it to the last good revision from the article's history. Looking at some of the diffs, I think one thing you could do is contact them at their talk page (as it looks like this is a single person behind that IP) and ask them if they would consider explaining their edits with edit summaries. Their edits also seem limited to a small set of articles. So, you could leave a note at the talk page of one of the articles or the WikiProject that the articles belong to, such as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film asking other experienced editors to take a look. Teahouse is good with general Wikipedia advice, but if none of the experienced editors going through here have any interest or expertise in the "Year in home video" series, you might not get the help. The editors with interest and expertise in a particular topic you have a question about are likely to be found at the talk pages of the articles in question, the talk pages of WikiProjects they belong to, or you could even go through the history of the article and find out which of the recently active experienced editors has significantly edited the article in the past and contact them directly at their user talk page. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 20:19, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Editing Tables

Hello, I was trying to add exits to the exit list for this article. However, what I did not catch until after I submitted it was that some of the contents shifted to the left. How did this happen and how would it be corrected? Thank you! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_71 Hotpotato4134 (talk) 20:29, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Is this what you were trying to achieve? --David Biddulph (talk) 21:22, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, Thank you. If it is not much trouble, I would like to ask how this happened for future references? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotpotato4134 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Template:CAint says that usage instructions are at Template:Jctint/core. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Minecraft forge

Hi, i have a question. Is anyone an expert on Minecraft forge? If someone would help i would really appreciate it! Levthecooldude666 (talk) 22:13, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Levthecooldude666, and welcome to the Teahouse. If this is about Draft:Minecraft forge that needs cited sources before it can become an article. See Your First Article. Sources need to be Independent of the subject, professionally published, and reliable. Please follow those links for details. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:17, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Kristin Dattilo/ Edit page

Hi, I'm Kristin Dattilo and I am divorced from Jason Keller sited on my page. I have tried to correct this outdated info many times. We divorced in 2017.

Can anyone help me fix this?

Thanks, Kristin 2605:E000:141D:CF63:830:E9E:8761:D80C (talk) 19:39, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesty link Kristin Dattilo. Going on this [[9]], I updated the article. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Kristin! Wikipedia articles are supposed to be written supported by WP:Reliable sources. It seems none of the claims in that article cite any reliable sources. I could remove the names of both the spouse(s) per WP:BLP if you'd like. But I am reluctant to make any more additions without the sources. Would you consider making an WP:Edit request with a reliable source to support your proposed changes? Usedtobecool ☎️ 21:08, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Kristin Dattilo... ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I removed Timtempleton's ref (and some more) per WP:BLPPRIMARY. Per current references, the article should be deleted. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:16, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Article has lived for 10 years; will likely be kept per WP:NACTOR#1. Or it could be deleted, probably depend the most on who happens to see the WP:AFD.Usedtobecool ☎️ 21:25, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm a fan of Dexter, and will look for refs tomorrow. "Wikipedia of perv" [10] deserves it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:28, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I just read WP:BLPPRIMARY. I didn't know that public court records were not usable sources. I suppose some of them could have info that the person doesn't want to be part of Wikipedia. Goes to show you can still learn something new every day. Despite the poor current sourcing, WP:BEFORE turns up [[11]] and [[12]]. Seems to pass WP:NACTOR. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:37, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

BTW Kristin, if you want, take a selfie and "donate it to the world" here [13]. Unless it's too awful, we can then use it as a WP:LEADIMAGE in the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:00, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

What exactly makes you believe that this IP User is really Kristin Dattilo ??? Just my 2 cents, CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:02, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

CommanderWaterford, We are just having a conversation, we're not writing a cheque to the IP or changing the article based on their word. In other words, WP:AGF unless there's a good reason not to (the editor has done something to not merit AGF or the action we'd need to take is too consequential for AGF to be sufficient). Usedtobecool ☎️ 23:18, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

How do I cite IMDb and newspapers?

People keep removing notable names I contribute because I can’t reply or cite sources. Timothyjimothy69 (talk) 16:06, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Timothyjimothy69: Welcome to Wikipedia. IMDB is user generated content, so Wikipedia does not count it as a reliable source. For citing newspapers, check out the info at WP:REFB for how to do citations. RudolfRed (talk) 16:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Timothyjimothy69:, If you use the source editor, I suggest using the "cite news" template (available under "Templates" at the top of the editing window). I use it regularly to cite newspapers. Just fill in the appropriate sections and click the "Insert" button. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:50, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Archiving Referances

Should I archive the cited references manually? Or any automatic provision is there? बृहस्पति (talk) 22:49, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

 66.31.193.201 (talk) 22:50, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@बृहस्पति: I'm not sure I follow. Cited references (sources) in articles aren't archived. Posts are archived such as with the help desk and teahouse, and user talk pages. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:31, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Web pages can indeed be archived, Timtempleton, by the Internet Archive or any of a few other archive sites. and at the IA at least, one can request that a particular site/page be crawled and thus archived. This is useful, because if a site is changed significantly or goes offline, an archived copy can be linked to instead. It is not required बृहस्पति to request the archiving of a site or url used as a reference, but you may do so if you choose, you may use the IA's "Save Page Now" tool to obtain an archive url for a page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DESiegel (talk • contribs) 00:01, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@बृहस्पति:, You can save the step of going to the Internet Archive page to create an archive. IA provides bookmarklets and browser extensions that will let you create an archive while the original page is in your browser window. Details are here in items 2 and 3. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:57, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Curious about notablity policies?

Would a congressional candidate be considered a notable person? Abullen030 (talk) 23:54, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Abullen030: Consensus suggests that candidates running for office are generally not notable just for that, since for example for lower offices anyone can pay a nominal filing fee and become a candidate. The candidate should be known for something else as well to meet notability guidelines. The only as-yet unelected congressional candidate I know who has an article and is only known for running for that office is Gina Ortiz Jones. You can read the article and sourcing, and if you think you can find a similar amount of media coverage for the candidate you have in mind, you can give it a shot. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

User:Abullen030 - I will add to what User:Timtempleton has said. Political notability only applies to those in office, not those running for it. Candidates must be evaluated based on general notability. In practice, candidates for office, unless they were already notable before they ran for office, are often deleted after deletion discussions, and are almost always declined when submitted to Articles for Creation. So the answer to your question is no. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:51, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Types of sources/references to cite

What are the best or most reliable types of sources that one can cite (particularly when editing biographies of living persons)? AliceEdits (talk) 02:12, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, AliceEdits. The type of reliable sources that are preferred are published sources with professional editorial control and a reputation for accuracy and correcting errors. We are looking for in depth-coverage of the person as opposed to brief passing mentions of the person in the context of coverage of something else. We are also looking for independent reporting, not regurgitation of a press release. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:20, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

infobox website link

i am trying to add a personal website to an infobox. i got the site listed in there but i can't figure out how to make it a hyperlink. help please. thanks. wikipedia article: roy barth (former pro tennis player) The IT Girl, LLC (talk) 02:43, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello The IT Girl, LLC To make the external; link work, supply the protocol http:// or https:// as I hav now done. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:20, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Stacking two or more data tables.

I'd like to add three vertically stacked "Series overview" tables to an article. The headers are all similar, but the data rows show different information for related television shows and spin-offs. I'm also trying to keep the tables separate for transclusion coding between articles and different subsections. When the tables are stacked, the column lines don't line up at all. All tables would look more consistent if the column borders lined up. I've tried the coding with width%, px, and em, but nothing has worked across all tables. What's the best coding for this scenario? Any suggestions? Any samples that could be shared or linked? CYAce01 (talk) 09:34, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi CYAce01. Specifying width%, px, or em should all work if they are done systematically and the content fits within the specification and doesn't force a column to be wider in order to get space for the longest unbreakable line in a column. See Help:Table#Setting column widths for the code which should be the same in each table. If you link your attempt then we can see what goes wrong. I personally prefer to avoid width specifications but just let the browser choose, even if two similar consecutive tables don't line up. Specified widths are often optimized for the browser and window width of the editor who made them, and don't look good to many others. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:29, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@CYAce01: What PH said, but if you absolutely must specify widths, pixels are especially troublesome and should not be used. At least em widths should make it mostly font-independent. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:53, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: @AlanM1: I was able to get the results I was looking for using the style="width: XXpt;" coding (pt was about the only thing I hadn't tried yet!). It's not excessive—just enough to make the columns consistent. The tables look great with all the column borders lining up! Thanks for the suggestions and input. It's appreciated. CYAce01 (talk) 06:55, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Wording

There is this company (FIITJEE) that terms itself as a "coaching institute for competitive exams", but Reuters calls the whole industry a "cram school" without pinpointing the term at the specific company. Should the company be termed as a coaching institute or a cram school in its article? I’m asking this because the article is itself somewhat biased against the industry (despite Reuters being reputed), but another editor insists on keeping it. RedBulbBlueBlood9911Talk 05:06, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

RedBulbBlueBlood9911, this is a content dispute. I don't see that the talk page of the article has been used. That would be the first order of business, then would come other dispute resolution processes. In my opinion, and it would be just that, it seems "cram school" is kinda supported by the Reuters source, and perhaps, "coaching firm" is more strongly supported by the same source for this particular institution. We should give more weight to what reliable secondary sources say about a subject rather than what the subject says about itself. Wikipedia uses formal language, so any characterisation could be reworded to that end, as long as there is no change in meaning from what the cited source says. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 20:46, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, both terms actually have the same meaning (coaching institute is a redirect to cram school on Wikipedia) except that cram school is usually used in a pejorative sense (AFAIK, the only other place where "cram school" is used is a website that leaks answers to assignment books by FIITJEE), and hence seems to be negative… Is the fact that cram school is a more negative word enough to justify changing it? And by the way, I’ve started the talk page discussion at Talk:FIITJEE#Cram school or coaching institute? RedBulbBlueBlood9911Talk 06:27, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

RedBulbBlueBlood9911, the term does sound a bit pejorative and less formal to me, and there is at least one post on the main article's talk supporting that viewpoint (but I wouldn't be surprised if someone asked you to prove it, going by how contentious the very existence of the article seems to have been over the years). It also seems to me that cram school is more a slang, and also one which would be more familiar to British English (some other Englishes too?) than Indian English. On the other hand, cram school seems to have a well-established meaning which perfectly describes FIITJEE, while coaching institute or firm might need further elaboration, because at least where I am (near India), a coaching institute or firm could be coaching people of any background on any skill/activity. Since you've linked this conversation there, I don't see a need to repeat my very non-strong views on the issue on that talk page again. But you could cross-post to the talk pages of the cram school article and the Noticeboard for India-related topics if you'd like to seek wider participation. P.S. this discussion will get archived after three days of inactivity, so probably a good idea to add a WP:permalink. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

   The discussion here rightly concerns a specific article rather than setting policy for WP. Nevertheless, I find it unhealthy to overlook the fact that policies and formal guidelines do exist (even tho most editors get along without personally consulting them) seems harmful to suggest, in contradiction to both ‘’real’’ reality and legal reality. ‘’Casual’’ mention of policy would have provided a less misleading discussion. (It would probably also have avoided the need for I or another veteran to have harsh the mellow, as I just now have doneː the prior advice is sound, but IMdecidelyHO, the tone is “just a touch” too casual.--UserːJerzyA.’’ This damnable iPad won’t let me type consecutive tildes, despite tricks that shoulld slip past such crap assembler coding pesumably in its OS.Look at the damn aWP edit history instead, if ur cautious abt my bona fides. I am both userːJerzy and userːJerzyA Oh. Unless I have become not just a non-Adin, as I successfully rrequested About a year ago, buut also a ″cyber-non-person” TANSTAJ (in any of the real worlds)

in a wiki page while checking in google,the info showing first is incorrect but when we click the page and comes inside the apge the info is correct.so how to edit

 Parvathynair2020 (talk) 05:24, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Parvathynair2020. Google's Knowledge Graph, sometimes known as the "knowledge panel" is under complete control of Google, although that corporation commonly scrapes freely licensed content from Wikipedia. They also include images from their own Google Images search plus summary information from other websites. And this is all done by bots and algorithms. Sometimes, they mash up two people with similar names resulting in ridiculous results. You can contact Google at links at the bottom of the box, but Wikipedia cannot correct Google's errors. We are humans and that is robot written content, and bots frequently do foolish things. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:25, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I have previously had successes with their feedback feature. You can report what exactly needs correcting. Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:48, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

How to set up a company page?

I have a question and don't know how to get started. I want to create a page for the Aircraft Electronics Association that is similar in nature to the Experimental Aircraft Association. The example to follow is available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_Aircraft_Association

Can you please help me set up this page without deleting it? In the past, I've tried to do this, and your editors mark it for spam or advertising. This is frustrating, because there are several associations with pages from the aviation industry. I'm not sure how it's OK for those organizations to have a page, while the Aircraft Electronics Association has been prohibited in the past. I'm trying again to make this happen.

Please advise on the best guidance.Myoceantravel (talk) 21:26, 16 June 2020 (UTC) Myoceantravel (talk) 21:26, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Myoceantravel and welcome to the Teahouse. Here is a page detailing how to make an article. If you are related to the AEA, then you should also read the part of the page about conflict of Interest. The biggest thing is that you need very good sources in order to have an article here: independent publications have to have reported on the AEA in detail. I looked for available sources and what has been published does not seem to be enough for an article. You could try, but you will have to dig deep. Second, we don't do the comparison thing between pages, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The third thing is that the page for the AEA was deleted last time because it was promotional. If you want to write an article that sticks, you have to have good sources as above, and also write in a very neutral tone that does not promote the organization. Using Wikipedia for organizational promotion is against our policies. And again, if you are connected to the AEA, there are special rules for that outlines in the help link above and also at WP:COI (or WP:PAID if you are writing the article as part of any employment). Hope this helps.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:51, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Small correction: the page was deleted four years ago, but then you also restarted a draft after that, which got deleted as it was not worked on for more than six months. You should be able to get back the most recently deleted draft by following the WP:REFUND. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:57, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Myoceantravel. I'm afraid that your choice of words "set up a company page" indicates that, like many people, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. Translating that into Wikipedia terms, it comes out as "write an article about a company". Such an article will not belong to the company, will not be under control of the company (indeed, anybody in the world may edit it except people associated with the company, who are strongly encouraged to interact with it only by making suggestions on its talk page), it will not necessarily say what the company wants it to say, and for the most part it will not even be based on what the company says, but on what independent commentators have published about the company. --ColinFine (talk) 08:36, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

PUBLISHING NEW ARTICLE

I just did two new articles "Xsabo Lira Solarline" (Lira Solar Power Park) and "The Xsabo Group" and pressed the PUBLISH button. I don't see the articles in Wikipedia. Have I done something wrong or is their an approval process in-between? Tacarada (talk) 10:39, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tacarada and welcome to the Teahouse, looks like you did not submit the article for reviewing so far, I only do see Xsabo_Lira_Solarline as a published article, the other one still is in your sandbox and has not been submitted so far. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:45, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I see. So that means I have to go to my sandbox and then click PUBLISH? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tacarada (talk • contribs) 10:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi CommanderWaterford: I have pressed the PUBLISH button but the article THE XSABO GROUP still doesn't appear. How do I move the same from my sandbox to the public wikipedia step by step? Thanks!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tacarada (talk • contribs)

Tacarada "Publish changes" should be understood to mean "save changes". It does not mean "publish this to the main encyclopedia". It says "publish" to emphasize that edits are visible to the public(even on talk pages, sandboxes, and other pages not part of the encyclopedia). However, in this case, I deleted your draft as it was blatant promotion. Wikipedia is not interested in what any article subject says about itself, only in what independent reliable sources say about it, indicating how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability or in this case, the definition of a notable company. If you work for this company, you must read WP:COI and WP:PAID and make the required declarations. 331dot (talk) 11:46, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I am a new member, Vedika2020

Hai I am a new memebr, when i creating an article, wiki gives three option from where i have to choose ONE 1. paid editor 2. for my near ones 3. not subject to them

can you pls tell us the difference of these three. Vedika2020 (talk) 10:39, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Vedika2020: I haven't seen what you're talking about but it sounds pretty straightforward. You are a paid editor if you are being paid and creating an article as part of your job responsibilities. In this case, you must comply with WP:PAID. "For my near ones", I assume, means that you are creating an article about something/someone you are close to (but not necessarily paid by). If this is the case, you should read and comply with WP:COI. The third means you are completely independent of the subject of your article, with no COI. I've left you a message on your talk page with more information about Wikipedia and it's purpose and procedures. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:30, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1, probably this. Usedtobecool ☎️ 20:57, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

And to add to the above, if you are an unpaid intern or volunteer working for an organisation, company, or person, you are still required to disclose that relationship per WP:PAID. (That is a little confusing, perhaps, but it is explained on that page.) --bonadea contributions talk 13:23, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, {U|Vedika2020}}. The other piece of advice I would give is that for a new editor to try creating an article is like trying to play a concerto after your first music lesson, or write a paper in French after your first French lesson. New editors tend to have much less disappointment and frustration if they start by improving existing articles (we have six million, and many of them are in need of improvement) and learn that way how Wikipedia works. --ColinFine (talk) 15:26, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping for Vedika2020 on behalf of ColinFine. GoingBatty (talk) 02:17, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you all for your valid information. kindly support me with these kinds of tips. Actually i am triying to create a page for my firend and this is not my profession. just helping him thts all. i will go with the second option as ypou suggested — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vedika2020 (talk • contribs) 11:52, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I want to create a page for my company so people have more information about us

Hello, I am a part of a recently formed company in the fintech industry and wish to write an article about the history and what we do, however I noticed that I can request someone else to do it since they will be more objective. How can I do that or can I write the article and then have someone edit it? Thank you in advance! Yoana Pehlivanova at SEPA Cyber Technologies (talk) 12:42, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Yoana Pehlivanova at SEPA Cyber Technologies. If your company is recently formed, it is extremely unlikely that it has become notable (in the way Wikipedia uses the word) for Wikipedia to accept an article about it. Wikipedia is not for telling the world about anything: it is about summarising what has already been written about things. Furthermore, an article on your company would not belong to you, and would not necessarily say what you wanted it to say. Please see OUT for other places to tell the world about your company. --ColinFine (talk) 13:13, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Colin, thank you for your answer! The company was launched about 2 years ago and they are already talked about in Forbes magazine and Business insider, plus winning an innovation award, so the info can be sum up from these sources. Do not get me wrong, I do not wish to advertise our services and I do not wish the page to belong to me, or the company. Just to have the info that is already out there published. That's why I am asking if I can request an article to be written as to remain completely objective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoana Pehlivanova at SEPA Cyber Technologies (talk • contribs) 13:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Yoana Pehlivanova at SEPA Cyber Technologies. I think it's a good thing that you're asking about this type of thing first before actually going ahead and creating an article about your company. Many people in a situation similar to yours simply just go ahead and try and create an article themselves or (perhaps even worse) actually pay someone to do it on their behalf. While there might be some occasions where doing such things may possibly work out OK, most of the time it just leads to problems (sometimes some serious problems) that can be quite difficult and occasionally resolve to everyone's satisfaction. So, before you try you do anything else, my suggestion to you would be to carefully read through the following pages and make sure that Wikipedia is suited for the things you seem to be trying to accomplish.

1. Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything
2. Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
3. Wikipedia:Ownership of content
4. Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)
5. Wikipedia:Conflict of interest
6. Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure

Basically, Wikipedia articles aren't really intended to be written for subjects, but rather they are intended to be written about subjects; moreover, they are only intended to be written about subjects that are considered to be Wikipedia notable. In addition, articles aren't in any way shape or form controlled by the subjects they are written about and all content contained therein is going to be expected to be in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. So, if you want to create an article about your company so that you can let others know about your company, then Wikipedia might not be the right place for you because such an article won't be allowed to be used to promote your company in any way, shape or form and you will not have any real control over the content of the article. Only content (regardless of whether it's good or bad) which can be verified by independent or secondary reliable sources (as determined by the Wikipedia community) written in a neutral manner is generally going to be considered appropriate, but even then not every bit of information that can be reliably sourced may be considered appropriate. Wikipedia has quite a lot of policies and guidelines which some people may find to restrictive and too hard to work within to accomplish what they might be trying to accomplish. So, if after reading those pages I linked to above and this post, you come to the conclusion that Wikipedia might not be a good fit for you, perhaps one of these alternatives would be better for you. I'm not trying to discourage you from trying to create an article about your company on Wikipedia; just point out that it might not be as easy as it seems to be. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:25, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Seconding what they said. You have properly declared on your User page your relationship as paid, and you are not prohibited from creating a draft of an article and submitting it to the Articles for Creation process. (In theory, Wikipedia does have a means of proposing article topics for editors to write about, but in reality it is a dead pile.) I did a quick search on "SEPA Cyber Technologies" and did not find descriptions in reliable, independent sources. Keep in mind that publication of company press releases does not contribute to notability. This may be WP:TOOSOON. David notMD (talk) 13:29, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks guys for the input. I might wait then until we have more descriptions in reliable media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoana Pehlivanova at SEPA Cyber Technologies (talk • contribs) 13:35, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Gary Bric not a draft

Help needed. I am a Senior Wikipedia editor. I created Gary Bric as a new article (stub). Another editor moved it to draft. After adding more content, I attempted to move it back. Looks like another editor just deleted my page for Gary Bric. Perhaps I don't have the permission to move my article? SWP13 (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

If you look at the history you will see that in your second attempt you tried to move your draft not to mainspace but to the wrong namespace at Wikipedia:Gary Bric, which was of course deleted. I see that you have now submitted the draft for review. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:31, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

SWP13 There is no such thing as a "senior WP editor". Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:10, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Dodger67: Wikipedia:Service awards#Senior Editor (or Labutnum) is I guess what SWP13 is referring to. Gricehead (talk) 13:58, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

>>The problem still exists. I am aware that it was in the wrong namespace. I haven't move a page for a long time and forgot how. So, I have to submit for review. Waiting, waiting, waiting. Can someone just review it and help me move it out of draft. Thanks, SWP13 (talk) 15:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

page creation

 2401:4900:168E:5A10:188D:83CE:3ED3:496B (talk) 22:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP User and welcome to the Teahouse - what is your question? CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:13, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

If you are wanting to know more about how to create a page then please read this. It may help. If you have a different question or have more to ask once you have read it then feel free to ask me about it on my talk page. Cheers! REDMAN 2019 (talk) 16:18, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Opposed to my own merge

I am now opposed to a merger that I suggested, can I remove it from the categories of discussion. Also, no one has commented on it. (Oinkers42) (talk) 13:49, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Oinkers42: Yes, I think that seems reasonable - your proposal was only to merge one draft with another, so that would probably have been fine. But since then, another editor has created a redirect, so that we don't have two similar drafts. So just remove the merge proposal and explain why in a helpful edit summary. I suggest you simply just work on the one live draft. I'll leave it to you to decide which name was the most appropriate to use, but in case you can't find the text in the other version, it's here. If you ever find that you and another editor have been working on two separate drafts, it's often better to reach out to them and agree on collaborating on just one of them. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Thanks, but I was referring to Category:Amusement rides based on television franchises from the 15th of June, sorry for the confusion.(Oinkers42) (talk) 17:34, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Not to worry. A classic case of 'please supply a link'. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:48, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

-{PLEASE READ}- QUESTION

Hello, Is there a place where you can partol for vandalism? I feel like helping people with vandalism problems, like there behavior when editing articles and userpage, talkpages, or when someone doesn't join Wikipedia for what it was created for or to help make Wikipedia a better place or at least help. Someone might just join Wikipedia just because trolling or vandilsm. Any help would be useful, thank you. -Hamuyi (talk) 21:55, 15 June 2020 (UTC) Hamuyi (talk) 21:55, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Hamuyi: See Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism/Tools. Many of these require that you have a track record of contributions, though. (And so far you have not been editing articles.) Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:26, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. --°~|Hamuyi (talk) 22:30, 15 June 2020 (UTC)|~°

@Hamuyi: Please don't put anything after the timestamp as you did above. The timestamp needs to be the last thing in your post, just like everyone else's. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:22, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

You will also find help easier to come by if you use a more relevant header than "Please read Question". You have at least two sections here the same, so at the very least someone who would help you may think they have already read the section. Britmax (talk) 18:22, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Did my edits stick?

Hey! i was wondering , how will i be able to know whether my edits have been approved and added to the article or not? Bosch3503 (talk) 11:30, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bosch3503: Most edits to most articles are visible as soon as you publish them. Some articles have "pending changes protection" that will require another editor to approve a change first, but these are not common. Of course, other editors can and will, over time, choose to edit what you've written or other parts of an article, since none of us WP:OWNs an article. You can see the editing history of an article by choosing the "View history" tab at the top. You can see your own contributions across all articles from the "Contributions" link near the top right of every page. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:45, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

If an edit of yours is reverted, the recommended next step is to initiate a discussion on the Talk page of the article. This can include a ping to the editor that reverted you. Do not just revert the reversion of your initial edit. This can lead to what Wikipedia terms "Edit warring," and can result in a temporary block on editing. David notMD (talk) 14:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bosch3503: To 'ping' an editor the template {{ping}} (among others) can be used to notifiy them that you want their attention. Regards, 220 of ^Borg 18:23, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

How to add links with other name.?

So I have a question. Like when I do \[\[ wikiname \]\] it appears as link which is good. However sometimes I need the same same link under different name. Like there is wiki called Dextromethorphan however I want to appear as DXM but still make its link available as Dextromethorphan. How would I do that Machinexa (talk) 17:09, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Machinexa: Welcome to Wikipedia. You can do it like this: [[Dextromethorphan|DXM]] which shows as DXM RudolfRed (talk) 17:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Machinexa (talk • contribs) 17:12, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Try reading Help:Link#Wikilinks. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:13, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Machinexa, and welcome to the Teahouse. That is done with a Wikipedia:Piped link. See also MOS:PIPE. For example The wiki-test [[WP:SPAM|our guideline on promotion]] renderes as: our guideline on promotion. Follow the links for more details. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:15, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

The tricky bit--at least for me--is to get it the right way round (couldn't say how often I've had to go back because I did it backwards!). The format is [[Where you want it to link|What you want it to say on the page]]. And the "pipe," the vertical line, is Shift, and the reverse slash key (typically, far right above the return key). Uporządnicki (talk) 17:54, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Machinexa: If you can see the toolbar above the edit window, it has a linking tool, looks like a chain, fourth from the left. 220 of ^Borg 18:35, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok I got it

How to add rows for table in source code

Hi can you help me with adding some rows in the source code of this page Tanuku. I need to add info regarding the constituency and jurisdiction etc.  Thanks prime hunter Viswasri7 (talk) 16:52, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

There isn't a table in Tanuku. If there are edits which you wish to suggest, you can make proposals at Talk:Tanuku, but you would need to suuport the proposals by reference to published reliable sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:57, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Viswasri7, welcome to the Teahouse. If you refer to the box at the top right then we call it in an infobox with fields. The possible fields are limited to those with parameters at Template:Infobox settlement. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:02, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Casual Wikipedia editing

Hi! I don't want to edit "controversial" articles and get in fights, but want to contribute to the site, so I was thinking if there's something like a bot generated list of articles with bad grammar or ones in need of simple source verification, or anything similar to that. Like cleanup work? Or small things looking for consensus by regular editors? Or anything casual really that any new user can participate in without drama. Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 05:16, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Julia Domna Ba'al.That is an excellent question. Please take a close look at Wikipedia:Community portal which is a place that exists to direct you to articles (mostly uncontroversial) that need the kind of attention that you are describing. Happy editing! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:23, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Wow, thanks. Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 05:30, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

It sounds like you want to be a Wikignome, Julia Domna Ba'al. Welcome to the club. There are lots of things you can do to help in totally uncontroversial ways. Many broad groups of articles will contain common statistics that need periodic updates (besides the obvious sports articles, settlement articles need population demographic updates, school articles need enrollment updates, countries need GNP updated, etc etc etc. The nice thing about that kind of gnome work is that you can familiarize yourself with the workings of one source and from it, update thousands of articles. Everyone wants to write articles. But we've got most of the articles we need already. Gnoming is very important, and it's great to hear from someone that likes to do it. Welcome! John from Idegon (talk) 07:16, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Julia Domna Ba'al, an example of something you could do is add descriptions to pages. WikiProject Short Descriptions is a group of editors who are trying to add a short description to every page on Wikipedia. These are like the subtitles you see when you open an article. An example would be the 'Free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit' section on the article about Wikipedia. We at WikiProject Short Descriptions would always appreciate a hand in our work. If you're interested, click here to get started! Giraffer (talk) 09:43, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Giraffer this is awesome. I did a few and then people who had the pages followed saw what I did and now they're doing their own short descriptions on other articles. I think most Roman emperors have them now haha. Thanks. Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 19:15, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

infobox for traditional puppets

What infobox is suitable for traditional puppet such as Wayang ? Kawruhnusantara (talk) 18:04, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Kawruhnusantara: There's unfortunately nothing for puppetry, but you could use Template:Infobox performing art. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:17, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Creating new Wikipedia page

How do I create a page for a person who doesn't have a page made for them? Spinelli Nutelli (talk) 18:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Spinelli Nutelli and welcome to the Teahouse, please study close the following article: Help:Your_first_article. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:46, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Needing help to edit and re-submit my article

My submited draft article was declined and I need help from experienced editers. Please what do I do in order to re-submit successfully?

My draft is https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:St._Mary%27s_Seminary/Senior_High_School,_Lolobi#Notable_Alumni EssyDon100 (talk) 18:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@EssyDon100: I made some changes to the article to improve it. There are too many unnecessary sources, many related to the list of alumni who I'm not sure meet Wikipedia's definition of notability. You are also missing sources for the awards, many of them are also not notable enough to include, and which will get the article flagged for being advertorial. I think you would have been better off writing a smaller more concise article and then adding info that can be properly sourced. Nonetheless, I think if you resubmit it, it has a better chance of being accepted. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:50, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi EssyDon100, welcome to the Teahouse - the article was rejected because you used superlatives which are not indicated - furthermore you need to add references for the "won awards" and the best-performance recognitions -- you are just stating that the school received this award but you are not listing reliable sources which are proving what you are writing. If you do not have any sources/references just remove the statement - Wikipedia is not a place for promoting or advertising your school. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:56, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Creating new Wikipedia page II

How can i create a new wikipedia article about a group of people whose language information is already available in an existing wikipedia article Emmanuel okon269 (talk) 20:02, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Emmanuel okon269, welcome to the Teahouse - please have a close look at the following How To Article: Wikipedia:Translation - hope that helps, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:08, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

My Wikipedia page

I have created a new Wikipedia page called Draft:Dorotabō and I was wondering how does a new page get published and verified, and does a person need to check it before it gets officially published? Abe.molina (talk) 18:30, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Abe.molina I have added the appropriate information to allow you to submit the draft for review; if accepted, it will be formally placed in the encyclopedia (your draft is "published" in that it is visible to the public if they know where to find it, but it is not yet in the encyclopedia). 331dot (talk) 19:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

However, Abe.molina I think it is unlikely to be accepted in its present form, because one reference appears to be self-published, and another a wiki: neither of these are regarded as reliable sources, I'm afraid. --ColinFine (talk) 20:13, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Disclose on talk page

I am seeing this (below) when researching disclosures on Wikipedia. Can I see an example of a statement on a talk page?

Paid contributions without disclosure[1]

These Terms of Use prohibit engaging in deceptive activities, including misrepresentation of affiliation, impersonation, and fraud. As part of these obligations, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. You must make that disclosure in at least one of the following ways:

a statement on your user page, either custom-written or using {{paid}}, a statement on the talk page accompanying any paid contributions, or a statement in the edit summary accompanying any paid contributions. AnchourMaine (talk) 20:40, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@AnchourMaine: Here's an example of a talk page disclosure Talk:Citrix Systems. You can see the user's contributions to see how she follows the guidelines. BTW - I made some improvements to your Draft:Marden's. It has a better chance of being approved now. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:20, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Help me correct mistakes in my sandbox

Can you help me correct the mistakes in my sandbox and also submit my draft sandbox article for publication Emmanuel okon269 (talk) 20:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Emmanuel okon269: I think you're better taking the info in your sandbox and using it to improve Abi, Cross River, with a redirect. But you should learn Wikipedia first. Please visit Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure. Then visit Wikipedia:Redirect. Good luck. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:41, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Total Disappearance of Gade Language

Good day great editors, I want to know whether parts of my contribution to Gade language article in the Wikipedia page? I also need your help in citing authorities on the articles. GT Obadiah (talk) 21:38, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@GT Obadiah: You should discuss on the talk page, and ping the other editors who reverted your contributions.TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:45, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I am trying to add a line that shows ownership of the Cantinflas Show. I became confused when I got to CITR do I add the word copyright there ?

 Teonana (talk) 21:41, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Teonana: Please open a discussion on the talk page, and ping the editor who reverted you. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:47, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Article declined

Hi,

I wrote my first and only article about the company I admire and follow from their very start. I researched the information about them in the internet and added links to my text to provide credibility to what I wrote. Still, the article was declined for the reason I didn't quite understand nor meant.

Would you be able to help me to understand what I did wrong and how to make it right?

Thanks Max Shpuntz (talk) 22:25, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Shpuntz Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Are you referring to your draft that was deleted? It was deleted because "the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic." I can view the draft as an administrator, and I agree with the deletion, as it appeared to merely tell about the company, and not summarize what the independent reliable sources say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Please review Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 22:31, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Your draft -- titled Draft:Max Shpuntz but about a product named Hypervsn, from a company named Keno-mo -- depends on sources such as this, from a website ("Sign and Pop") whose "about" page makes it pretty obvious that it's in the business of disseminating what it's paid to disseminate. Wikipedia doesn't accept articles whose assertions are based on advertising. -- Hoary (talk) 22:45, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

2019–2020 Nigeria Professional Football League

My recent article for creation 2019–2020 Nigeria Professional Football League has been accepted but I'm having problems with it;

• I cannot find it on any search engine.
• I'm surprised there are not enough wikilinks to the article.

Josedimaria237 (talk) 00:28, 18 June 2020(UTC) Josedimaria237 (talk) 23:31, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237: welcome to the Teahouse. Your article was approved at New Page Patrol earlier today. So now you must wait for Google to do its magic joojoo by crawling and indexing your article. We cannot control when that happens. There actually seem to be many wikilinks to the article. What were your precise concerns over that? Nick Moyes (talk) 00:35, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I see that you have asked the same question at the Help Desk. Please don't ask the same question in multiple places, as it wastes the time of volunteers answering questions which have already been answered elsewhere. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Artem_Mishin&action=submit

What is a problem??? Bestinshow1917 (talk) 23:47, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bestinshow1917: Welcome to the Teahouse. What exactly do you mean by this vague question? If you are trying to ask why your submission of Draft:Artem Mishin was rejected, did you not read the rationale? It stated: "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you." As it stands, you've failed to give any citations to sources that allow another person to check this individual meets our minimum criteria for notability. See WP:NBIO and WP:RFB, which are two shortcuts to pages that explain what you need to do to add references about them. Having read them, feel free to come back to ask specific questions. Please also note that you are not allowed to copy/paste content from other copyrighted websites, so it was deleted. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:44, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Publishing an updated version of a Wikipedia page

My company has an existing Wikipedia page. Using my sandbox, I have recreated that page to make edits and updates. Can I delete the current Wikipedia page and replace with the edited version I just made or do I need to submit the sandbox to Wikipedia for review and approval? Mira Jeffrey-Craft (talk) 00:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Mira Jeffrey-Craft Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please review the conflict of interest and paid editing policies for formal disclosures you will need to make. Regarding your question, instead of writing a brand new article to replace the current one, you should make formal edit requests(click for instructions) on the article talk page of the existing article, detailing any changes you feel are needed. Please understand that Wikipedia exists to summarize what independent reliable sources state about a subject, not what the subject wants to say about itself. Your draft, to be frank, would be extremely unlikely to be accepted as a replacement, as it is very promotional in nature("Nue Agency is a Creative Music Agency located in New York City. Nue sits at the center of music, brands and technology, transforming the music business through its approach to talent development, deal-making, and brand building" being one example). 331dot (talk) 00:46, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Mira Jeffrey-Craft, I agree completely with 331dot. Your draft is highly promotional and unacceptable for this encyclopedia. Read and study the neutral point of view, which is a core content policy. You must comply with the mandatory paid editing disclosure. Do it right away. This is not negotiable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link NUE Agency. Current sourcing is poor quality, despite the quantity. Several broken links. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:00, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Automatic archive

I have my Talk page set up to regularly archive but there is one thing I would like to keep. How do I make an exception for that one thing? Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:22, 17 June 2020 (UTC) Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:22, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777: You can use the template {{DNAU}} to stop the thread from being archived. RudolfRed (talk) 20:56, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

RudolfRed Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I am doing something wrong. I copied and posted it and it says this template must be substituted. What am I missing? Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:22, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

You'll find instructions if you read {{DNAU#Usage}}. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:54, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

RudolfRed Thank you! It is often frustrating trying to find where to look for stuff here. Jenhawk777 (talk) 02:42, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

COI Drafts

Can COI drafts about an important person be approveed by Wikipedia editors. 183.83.13.7 (talk) 03:32, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Possibly, depending on their quality. NB whether a person is notable according to Wikipedia's criteria is not the same as whether that person is important according to an average person (e.g. me), and it's likely to be very different from whether that person is important according to somebody with a COI. NB if people really are important, it's likely that editors without conflicts of interest will eventually want to write them up. So why the rush? -- Hoary (talk) 06:28, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

So, what if the draft is properly cited and has no issues?171.79.51.77 (talk) 07:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.79.51.77 (talk) 07:16, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. When people ask general questions like this, without identifying the particular article, it is very hard to help them, because so much of Wikipedia runs on consensus, so general answers are often useless. Which article are you asking about? --ColinFine (talk) 08:50, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

This one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Shamsher_Singh_(journalist) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.79.51.77 (talk) 09:31, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

You talk of a draft with no issues. This draft has issues. Let's just look at the first sentence: "Shamsher Singh is a Senior Indian Journalist." First, the capitalization is strange. Secondly, "senior" isn't clearly relative to anything in particular (cf Seniority in the United States Senate), and thus appears to be mere puffery. So better make that "Shamsher Singh is an Indian journalist." But his noteworthiness isn't apparent; better make that "Shamsher Singh is an Indian journalist who [whatever]". And that's just the first sentence. There's a lot more in this draft that would have to be fixed. -- Hoary (talk) 10:27, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I have made a few changes in the article, so can you check it once again now.SinghPurnima72 (talk) 12:02, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I quote the top of the article: "Review waiting, please be patient. / This may take 5 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,985 pending submissions waiting for review." -- Hoary (talk) 12:23, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

That is why I am asking for your help in improving the article as I am new to this platformSinghPurnima72 (talk) 13:08, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Editors (including myself) have made changes to the draft to align it with Wikipedia style and format. While waiting for the review - which could be days to weeks, not necessarily months - you can continue to improve the draft. David notMD (talk) 13:17, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Also, because this discussion began about COI, you should declare the nature of your COI on your User page. David notMD (talk) 13:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

SinghPurnima72 (talk · contribs) Assuming good faith, I'll mention WP:Autobiography in case it applies. Regards, 220 of ^Borg 03:39, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

how to change the info on preview when you google

Hi How do I change the information on the preview which appears on the right hand side when you google the persons name? Iamyourdream1 (talk) 08:23, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Iamyourdream1. There's a "feedback" link at the bottom of each Google Knowledge Graph that you can use to report errors. This isn't something Wikipedia or its editors have control over though. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:38, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Someone should help me on this

Please, there's a little edit I want to do on my article 2019–20 Nigeria Professional Football League (maybe someone can help me do it). I want to note that the Kano Pillars 6–1 Kwara United match on the infobox was actually played by Delta Force, how will I do that? Josedimaria237 (talk) 09:10, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237: It is easy to change but you need to add citation also. If you have references for your modifications, you just have to click on "Edit Article" or pencil icon to edit. And find Kano Pillars in infobox which is in format like

{{Infobox football league season
| image                      = Nigeria Professional Football League logo.png
| competition                = [[Nigeria Professional Football League]]
| season                     = 2019–2020
| winners                  = 

| promoted              = {{ubl|[[Dakkada F.C.|Dakkada]]|[[Warri Wolves F.C.|Warri Wolves]]|[[Jigawa Golden Stars F.C.|Jigawa Golden Stars]]|[[Adamawa United F.C.|Adamawa United]]}}

| relegated                  = 
| relegation                 = 
| continentalcup1            = [[2020–21 CAF Champions League|Champions League]]
| continentalcup1 qualifiers =

| continentalcup2            = [[2020–21 CAF Confederation Cup|Confederation Cup]]
| continentalcup2 qualifiers =
| matches        = 246
| total goals         = 494
| league topscorer           = [[Ndifreke Udo|Ndifreke Effiong Udo]] (11 goals)
| biggest home win           = [[Kano Pillars F.C.|Kano Pillars]] 6–1 [[Kwara United F.C.|Kwara United]] (8 December 2019)

[[Plateau United F.C.|Plateau United]] 5–0
[[Adamawa United F.C.|Adamawa United]] (19 January 2020)

[[Heartland F.C.|Heartland]] 5–0
[[Adamawa United F.C.|Adamawa United]] (16 February 2020)
| biggest away win           = [[Adamawa United F.C.|Adamawa United]] 0–3
[[Sunshine Stars F.C.|Sunshine Stars]] (15 December 2019)

[[Dakkada F.C.|Dakkada]] 0–3 [[Nasarawa United F.C.|Nasarawa United]] (16 January 2020)

[[Abia Warriors F.C.|Abia Warriors]] 1–4 [[Enyimba International F.C.|Enyimba]] (17 February 2020)
| highest scoring            =
[[Kano Pillars F.C.|Kano Pillars]] 6–1 [[Kwara United F.C.|Kwara United]] (8 December 2019)
| longest wins               = [[Enyimba International F.C.|Enyimba]] & [[Akwa United F.C.|Akwa United]] (5 matches)
| longest unbeaten           = [[Kano Pillars F.C.|Kano Pillars]] (13 matches)
| longest winless            = [[Wikki Tourists F.C.|Wikki Tourists]] & [[Nasarawa United F.C.|Nasarawa United]] (8  matches)
| longest losses      = [[Adamawa  United F.C.|Adamawa United]]  (5 matches)
| prevseason                 = [[2019 Nigeria Professional Football League|2019]]
| nextseason                 = [[2020–21 Nigeria Professional Football League|2020–21]]
| updated                    = 09 June 2020

}}

See the blue text in the above code. You will find the same in the said article. To add Reference Citation just use

<ref>{{cite web|title=ADD TITLE OF THE CITATION HERE|url=ADD URL OF THE CITATION HERE |access-date=ADD CITATION ACCESS DATE HERE}}</ref> 

see WP:Citations for more. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 10:12, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@TheChunky: I am only trying to do something like this;

| note_KWA=This match was actually played by Delta Force. I don't think I need to cite it or is it a must?

Triggered a protection filter

Hi, I wrote my first Wikipedia entry with all the necessary links and citations, but when I clicked the blue button to publish, I got an auto reply saying that something triggered a protection filter. It showed a highlighted link which I copied and searched on the internet. The problem is that Google Search could not find the link. I do not know how to spot the problem in my article. Screenshots of my problem are shown below. I need assistance. Pls help.

@Tigmo9098: Your bottom screenshot shows a shortened link. 'goo.gl' is a shortened link for 'google.com'. Please ensure that the full URL is used. If that still doesn't work, then the site has been blacklisted by Wikipedia and you will need to find a different source.

Giraffer (munch) 06:09, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Autogenerated image1

Autogenerated image2

 Tigmo9098 (talk) 05:37, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your helpful reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tigmo9098 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Infobox for art fabric

infobox for art fabric like Batik? Kawruhnusantara (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:40, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Kawruhnusantara, I guess {{infobox industrial process}} or {{infobox product}} might fit some articles fitting your description. If neither does, please consider looking for one starting at Category:Infobox templates. It is possible that not all infobox templates that could, exist yet. Infoboxes are not an essential part of an article either; it is perfectly fine to have an article without one. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

My page was nominated for deletion. Help!  :(

Even when I argued in my User Talk that

"my page has reputable secondary independent sources, namely, Taiwan News which is established in 1949, Asia Power Watch launched in 2019 by Nicolas Michelon who is a 20-year veteran of Asia-Pacific business, finance and economic research, NTD News which is based in New York with correspondents in over 70 cities worldwide, Mr. Stephen Kevin Bannon's own Youtube Channel, etc.) --Tigmo9098 (talk) 21:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)"

still other editors (with bad behavior, imho) nominated my page for deletion!

Look here --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tigmo9098#Nomination_of_The_New_Federal_State_of_China_for_deletion Tigmo9098 (talk) 11:09, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Tigmo9098, you already know where the deletion discussion is taking place; indeed you are already participating in it. There are no authorities on Wikipedia who can override community discussions and intervene on your behalf. The only appropriate thing to do is make your case there, basing your arguments in the WP:Deletion policy. Posts like this constitute WP:CANVASSING, which is not allowed. And please remember to Assume Good Faith. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:11, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

New topic

How can i create a new topic in wikipedia Shehbazkandia (talk) 12:25, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Please see Help:Your first article. But I see that you've started already, with Draft:Muhammad Iqbal Shahbaz and Draft:Muhammad Iqbal (شہبازخیل). (The latter title is unacceptable. Articles in English-language Wikipedia must have titles in the Roman alphabet.) You have to show that this man is notable. Neither being a teacher nor having illustrious ancestors makes a person notable; rather, what has he achieved? Provide independent, reliable, published sources for everything that the draft says. NB if this person is related to you, please stop and pick some other subject. -- Hoary (talk) 13:30, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

LIST OF TRUMP'S DISMISSALS AND FIRINGS

How can I make a change to this article. All persons are listed by first & last name except Omarosa Manigault Newman. This is dismissive and demeaning. Can this be corrected? I'm new and don't know how to edit. Thank you 7843WIKI (talk) 11:36, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that's odd. The article is List of Trump administration dismissals and resignations and I agree that it there seems to be no reason why one person should only have her first name listed – it used to be her full name, but it was changed at some point (the article is so huge that it takes an age to load the history, so I haven't been able to see yet when and why that was done, but I don't see any obvious explanation of it). I'll make this change now. For the future, if you are not sure how to make an edit you should normally ask about it at the "Talk" page of the article (which you'll find at the top of each article). Thanks for the heads-up! --bonadea contributions talk 11:51, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

If this is a factor, the article about her suggests that she recently liked, or now likes, to be referred to by the single name. -- Hoary (talk) 13:33, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Mentioning an article

How do you mention/link an article in Spanish/Spanish article to an English page?

e.g. I want to link Feutcheu FC in Spanish to an English article. Josedimaria237 (talk) 13:50, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

The simplest way is: Feutcheu FC (made by [[:es:Feutcheu FC|Feutcheu FC]]), although the reader will expect a page in English and may be surprised to discover that it's in Spanish. -- Hoary (talk) 14:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

A better choice in my opinion, Josedimaria237 is to use the template {{ill}}. As long as there isn't an English article, it will display a red link and a blue "(es)" which links to the Spanish article. If an English article gets written, it will automatically change the display into a normal bluelink. --ColinFine (talk) 14:29, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I also prefer Colin's suggestion. It would render as Feutcheu FC. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:33, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Could someone please make a small correction to an article (I am not an editor and I don't need to be)

Regarding "Land of Confusion" and the video by Genesis, specifically this: "The video opens with a caricatured Ronald Reagan (voiced by Chris Barrie), Nancy Reagan, and an orangutan, going to bed at 4:30 PM" (and subsequent references to the 'orangutan'). The video clearly depicts a dark brown chimpanzee, and not an orange orangutan. In fact, this is supposed to be a nod to the movie Bedtime for Bonzo, which was released in 1951 and starred Ronald Reagan. Wikipedia has an entry for that film that can be hyperlinked once this article is corrected.

I am asking any editor to make this correction. I'm not set up to do it. Thanks!! 5.25.82.214 (talk) 07:10, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 5.25.82.214. What you're describing sounds like a "plot summary" for a video. So, much in the same way as Wikipedia would treat a plot summary of a film, TV show or a book, if you've seen the video and think the summary is incorrect, the you can correct the summary yourself; however, you shouldn't add any of your own interpretations about the video to the article such as whether the monkey is supposed to be a homage to "Bedtime for Bonzo" without citing a WP:SECONDARY source in support. In other words, the only fact that a primary source such as the video itself can be used to verify the video depicts a "brown monkey" instead of an orangutan per WP:PLOTCITE, but you'll need to cite a secondary source to support a claim that states which particular "brown monkey" is being alluded to in the video. Wikipedia editors cannot really make such a leap themselves because it will likely be considered a form of original research called synthesis. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:38, 18 June 2020 (UTC); [Note: Post edited by Marchjuly to change “can” to “cannot”. — 14:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)]

That said, this is an easy fix, since sources can be readily found, e.g. [14]. I'll change it. Regards SoWhy 07:46, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I assume you meant to write editors can not really make such a leap. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:35, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

​ Yes, that’s correct. Thanks for catching that mistake. — Marchjuly (talk) 14:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

David Clencie

David Clencie is an Australian Actor best known for his role as Danny Ramsay in the long running series Neighbours. Prior to he had the regular role of Steve Sullivan in the long running series The Sullivans, Joe Carmichael in the ABC mini series I can Jump Puddles and the Playbox and St Martins Theatre production The Kid directed by Rodney Fisher. He went on in 1986 to a long career in Real Estate and Advertising as Director of Point of Purchase Media sold to Actmedia Inc. He is now a major Voice Artist in Australia is unmarried and has a son aged 18 yrs.49.199.56.243 (talk) 16:44, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Start by reading about WP:NACTOR. Then you can go over to Wikipedia:Your first article. Note that creating a new Wikipedia article is one of the hardest tasks you can attempt on Wikipedia, and its often better to start by improving existing articles first. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:46, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Creating a page about a living person

Confused about how to create page on living person

Hello....I have long experience as a newspaper writer and editor so feel I understand about sourcing information, etc., but in working on a page about a prominent person in my community, I have had trouble understanding the simple technical aspects of creating a page and offering it to the community for editing review. Is there a step by step guide for how to create, code, upload a new page on a living person? Jacalyn Carfagno (talk) 15:03, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Jacalyn Carfagno, and welcome to the Teahouse. Have you looked at your first article? That's where I would start. That will guide you through finding sources, establishing notability, creating the draft, and submitting it for review. --ColinFine (talk) 16:31, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@Jacalyn Carfagno: I might have got the wrong end of the stick, but you appear to have tried to create a draft article in the sandbox page that anybody can edit. Unfortunately, this gets immediately overwritten by the next user, and the next, and so on. In case you feel disheartened that you work was wasted, you can find it here and copy it into your own, personal sandbox and work on it there at your leisure. The link for that is User:Jacalyn Carfagno/sandbox. You can also find the link and start to create and work on that page by following the 'Sandbox' link at the top of any page when you're logged in. Any of us here can sort that our for you if you're confused. I hope you don't feel put off by this - we need all the good writers we can get! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:13, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Can someone help me expand an article on a 2020 wildfire that's burned almost 30,000 acres?

Can someone help me expand an article on the Magnum Fire, a wildfire that's burned almost 30,000 acres (as of June 16, 2020) that began on June 8, 2020?

Seeing how it has burned a ton of acres, is near the Grand Canyon (a popular geographic destination in the US. It's very big, so in this case its burning near Grand Canyon National Park) in North Eastern Arizona, and is the biggest wildfire so far this year in the US by burned area I am aware of, I was suprised that upon looking it up on Wikipedia, there wasn't an article about it yet. Considering that, lots of people will probably search it up online and probably already have, in search of info on the fire, so I think it would be a good idea to expand it and provide more information. As this is for something ongoing and I am only one person, I'd appreciate if others would help keep it up to date as I am not able to do so all the time, until the fire is 100% containted. The article I created is at Magnum Fire Thanks to whoever helps edit the article or replies to this question, Greshthegreat (talk) 00:38, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Greshthegreat. I am pinging an editor known as Missvain, who has a lot of expertise with wildfire articles, and Wikipedia editing in general. By coincidence, she helped set up the Teahouse years ago, and is also a friend of mine. Maybe she can offer some advice. I helped expand 1978 Agoura-Malibu firestorm, but that was long after the fact. My advice is to find the current news articles that provide the most comprehensive overview of the fire, and cite and summarize those sources. Monitor the websites of the newspapers and TV stations of Flagstaff, Arizona and the other regional media markets. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:11, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Greshthegreat and Cullen328! Thanks for pinging me. I write a lot of Wikipedia articles about wildfires. I'll take a look (great start on the stub) in more detail tonight and see what I can do :) Also, feel free to join us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wildfire. Thanks for editing Wikipedia! Missvain (talk) 18:32, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Proper Name

Hello, I am cleaning up an article and throughout the article they refer to "People of Color" "Negroes" "Black's" and "African Americans" What does Wikipedia prefer in these types of articles to not offend anyone? Bakertheacre (talk) 17:46, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bakertheacre: Welcome to Wikipedia. The encyclopedia is WP:NOTCENSORED, and offending anyone is an impossible goal. The encyclopedia is a summary of what the reliable sources say, so use whatever wording is found in the sources. RudolfRed (talk) 19:06, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Thank you! Bakertheacre (talk) 19:16, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Need help learning Wikitext

Hello!

I just created a Wikipedia account, and I would like to know if any experienced Wikipedians would like to teach me the basics of Wikitext editing. I would greatly appreciate it if somebody was willing to guide me through my first couple of days on Wikipedia. My sandbox is at User:SuperGoose007/sandbox for reference. SuperGoose007 (talk) 18:16, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@SuperGoose007: Welcome to Wikipedia. Try the interactive learning game at WP:ADVENTURE. That should help you get started. There is also WP:TUTORIAL. RudolfRed (talk) 19:04, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Thank you! SuperGoose007 (talk) 19:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Respected Team, I wanted to edit Siddharth Nigam Wikipedia Page because I found some information in his career field is missing Such as musc debut, I have the proper information about this topic with proper reference. So please allow me to edit this page  Rikit9823 (talk) 18:40, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@Rikit9823:: I notice that you have marked essentially every one of your edits as "minor". This is your assurance that your edit is of such a nature that nobody should bother to review it. This is reserved for very limited types of edits, not just your personal belief that the edit is okay. There are no specific sanctions for improperly using the "minor edit" checkbox, but using it indiscriminately is bad behavior which cannot be ignored! Fabrickator (talk) 19:54, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Both of your edits to Siddharth Nigam were reverted because the references you provided were not considered reliable sources. Same for your 14 edits to Avneet Kaur. David notMD (talk) 20:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

And now indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 20:04, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Help Getting Bio Approved

Hello. I have been trying to get my first bio of a living person published for a few weeks now (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mike_Greenhaus). I have been denied before but tried to follow instructions in order to improve it. I have spoken with an editor who denied it and they confirmed that there is no conflict of interest. I have also pinpointed 3-4 independent references that are listed as best references at the top and bottom of the bio I am working on. Is there anything else you could recommend, based on the bio, that would help me get approved? Happy to rework it as needed. Caryplace7 (talk) 17:12, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

The feedback and comments which you deleted have been reinstated. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Caryplace7: do have a look at this how-to guide – right now I think only one out of your 44 references is actually formatted so that the reader gets all the necessary information (that's citation no 40, Gershuny & Smith). A bare URL is not enough, nor is a bare URL with the name of the website. (Though to be blunt, the three "best references" unfortunately do not actually show notability, so it may be a waste of your time to spend too much effort on this draft.) --bonadea contributions talk 17:43, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your note and wiliness to look over this article. I am curious, what about the articles "do not show notability?" All three of them are independent sources focused specifically on the subject of my bio. The subject of his bio is the Editor-in-Chief of a national magazine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relix) and cited as a source in a variety of national publications. As mentioned in my talk page comment, another editor has verified that they are OK. Just trying to figure out how to improve. Caryplace7 (talk) 18:50, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

That's not exactly what the other editor says here – they commented on the fact that the sources are independent of Greenhaus, but that does not mean they will count towards notability. The basic requirement for notability (as Wikipedia defines it) is defined here: "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." (Do follow the link, because several of the terms in that sentence have a specific meaning that you will be able to find out if you go there.) An interview is not a secondary source. An episode of a (non-notable) podcast in which the subject appears is not a secondary source. The Jerusalem Post article is a secondary source, and an independent one – it is arguable whether that article offers significant coverage since Greenhaus is not the main topic, but even if we accept that that source does meet all the criteria, notability requires multiple such sources. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 19:43, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you once again to for your willingness to discuss this mater this me. An editor approved these three sources as proof of notability here (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:1292simon&oldid=959809163#Draft:_Mike_Greenhaus) In terms of notability, I followed the link and looked at it closely and I believe the subject of this bio does meet those requirements. I have cited over 40 independent sources that either cite him, interview him or are written about him, including Chicago Tribune, USA Today, Folio and the Jerusalem Post article you mentioned (which meets the "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors" area of the link and the "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability" section) Of the top 3-4 sources I cited, Under the Scales podcast focused specifically on this subject is a top rated music podcast. The Glide Magazine feature I cited is also a independent profile specifically on that subject (where I got much of the info for the bio). In addition, the fact that the subject of the bio is the Editor-in-Chief of a nationally recognized magazine (with its own approved wiki page) and the cocreater of the media group it is part of should hit these points ("The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.") Please let me know if there are certain areas I can rework from the bio to help move it along Caryplace7 (talk) 20:26, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I see that the draft now helpfully lists "Here are the WP:THREE best sources regarding notability".

The first does not mention the subject. The second (numbered "2") is based on an interview with the subject, and so is not independent. The third is also based on an interview with the subject, and so is not independent. The fourth (numbered "3") does not mention the subject. Maproom (talk) 22:39, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your your willingness to look at these. All four links provided mention the subject and are specifically focused on the subject. They have also already been cleared as independent sources by a previous editor here: (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:1292simon&oldid=959809163#Draft:_Mike_Greenhaus) I also have over 35 additional sources cited in the bio that reference the subject I spent a lot of time working on it and want to improve it so that it is approved and I am willing to do what is needed by feel like I am going to circles by having sources approved and then rejected. Caryplace7 (talk) 00:36, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

"Independent" refers to several things, as you will have seen here when you read up on notability. The three sourced mentioned are neither self-published nor closely affiliated (though the Relix podcast, which is not one of the three I referred to above, is definitely self-published). But sources also need to be secondary, which these are not; since they are interviews, or based on interviews, they are primary sources, which means that they do not meet that part of "independent". I'm not sure why you would say that the Jerusalem Post piece is focused on Greenhouse? As already pointed out to you, you are likely to be wasting more of your time if you keep working on this draft – but if you are determined to go on editing it, please as a very minimum clean up the sources as described above. And remove the sources that just mention his name without saying anything about him, as well as the ones written by him. --bonadea contributions talk 12:29, 18 June 2020

(UTC)

Thank you for your reply. At times like this, I wish there was a more direct interface so it is easier to communicate. I am not sure if we are looking at different links, but that is not a Relix podcast; in fact, it has no association with Relix or Greenhaus. It just covers him and the magazine. If you read the bio I wrote and the Jerusalem Post piece, then you will see that the article is on an event he produces and talks about his involvement. They have also already been cleared as independent sources by a previous editor here: (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:1292simon&oldid=959809163#Draft:_Mike_Greenhaus)

As I mentioned before, NONE of the sources I included are written by the subject of this bio and all of them reference or quote him specifically. Would these be better sources: https://observer.com/2017/05/jam-bands-relix-live-music-conference/, https://www.jambase.com/article/gimme-shelter-in-place-incidental-animals-grateful-dead-bertha (the video interview included about how the subject of this bio formed the band profiled) or https://www.brooklynvegan.com/sinkane-talking-at-rockwood-playing-a-museum-touring-with-son-lux/

Caryplace7 (talk) 13:40, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

that is not a Relix podcast The casual visitor clicks on a link which has been pasted into the draft without any identification and gets to an anonymous podcast web page that says "RELIX" at the top. What are they supposed to believe it is? If you have any information about what the podcast actually is or why the content is relevant, you need to provide that in the reference – and note that we do not expect our readers to have to listen to a hour-long show to find a snippet of information. The reference has to be specific. They have also already been cleared as independent sources by a previous editor I think I'll stop replying now, since it doesn't seem like my replies are being read at all. --bonadea contributions talk 16:06, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I appreciate your feedback and know this is a volunteer effort and that I have a lot of work to do on this bio. However, when you say, "The casual visitor clicks on a link which has been pasted into the draft without any identification and gets to an anonymous podcast web page that says "RELIX" at the top. What are they supposed to believe it is" That is the title of the episode not a brand designation. If I did a podcast on Facebook that interviewed members of the organization and titled it Facebook it would not mean that the episode is created by Facebook Caryplace7 (talk) 23:24, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Notability

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I was looking around Snuggle and wikipedia's new users. I came to this user, and I determined that he was here purely to do self-promotion and to make autobiographical articles. This user have also uploaded multiple files/selfies that are not notable for sure. He is also drafting a autobiographical article in his user space. I would like to delete the non-notable files. Unfortunetally, I cannot csd because that there are not a criteria for non-notable files. Please help. The creeper2007^Talk! 22:36, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@The creeper2007: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for helping with cleanup. If the images are licensed correctly, I don't think they need to be deleted. Articles are subject to notablity, but I don't think that images are. RudolfRed (talk) 22:56, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, Thank you very much. I didn't work with files for over a year, so that I cannot remember the polices so well. The creeper2007^Talk! 22:59, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

The creeper2007, thank you. The Teahouse was rather an odd choice of pages in which to bring up this affair, but no matter: it's good that you did bring it up. During the last twenty minutes or so, I have deleted much of this user's contributions here. (Perhaps RudolfRed only saw the little that still remains here.) Unfortunately, more remains at Commons even now, but I've asked one or more admins there to take a critical look at it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:39, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

My talk page edit that was supposed to add a new section got mangled somehow, MediaWiki bug?

Don't know where I should ask for help, so I thought I could start here: this edit seems alright, but the end result is completely broken (look at the bottom of the page). Thanks. Notrium (talk) 20:51, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

The issue seems to be that the end-result does not correspond to the Wiki-source correctly. Notrium (talk) 21:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I've fixed it, Notrium. There was a missing closing </ref>. Not looked yet at how it got there. --ColinFine (talk) 21:19, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Wow, thank you! How did you figure this out, if I may ask? Notrium (talk) 21:22, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Notrium, I expected it would be something not closed - that's usually the explanation when a portion of a page disappears. But it's looking even stranger: in this edit, Rjensen introduced an unpaired <ref> in the material they added. But for reasons I don't yet understand, the effect of this was to display <ref> rather than to swallow half the page; and it carried on doing so until your edit (which didn't touch that part of the page, but apparenty knocked it into doing what it was supposed to, given the unpaired tag). Looking like a bug to me. --ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

OK, I see why your edit had that effect Notrium. Up until your edit, there wasn't a </ref> anywhere further down the page to pair with that odd <ref>, so it looks as if the software said "This isn't paired, so I'll assume it's not meant to be a tag". Your edit was the first one thereafter that did introduce a </ref>, so the sofware said "Oo, look, a pair of tags. Well, everything between them must be the ref". Don't know whether that's a bug or a feature. --ColinFine (talk) 21:45, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

That is how HTML tags in general work, so i would call it a feature, althoguh one that can produce surprising results in some cases. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:10, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Citation Needed flags on statements that are obviously factual to people in the industry?

Specifically concerning this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FlexNet_Publisher

FlexNet Publisher (formerly known as FLEXlm) is a software license manager from Flexera Software which implements license management and is intended to be used in corporate environments to provide floating licenses to multiple end users of computer software.

As an industry expert, I consider this statement to be self-evident.

I've read the Wikipedia policies concerning citations and agree with them. However, I often read articles with statements like this one, which are self-evident to people in the industry, and I know wikipedia is backlogged with these tags. These tags are added by people who are unfamiliar with the subject of the articles. Why are they editing the articles in the first place? Why would you cite this type of statement? Thanks for replies. Jsleonard (talk) 00:31, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Jsleonard, this being an encyclopedia, we can't simply publish what we consider to be "self-evident"; verifiability is a core policy here. What a software is "intended" to accomplish is a matter of opinion that cannot be stated in Wikipedia's voice without an accompanying source to support it.

While it is indeed a bit odd to find a {{citation needed}} tag in the lede of an article, what seems to be the larger issue here is that most of the information in that article is unsourced. That simply is not acceptable here, even if one "knows" it to be true.

In general, if a reliable source has not noted a particular fact, it does not belong in this encyclopedia (a tertiary source). Hope that helps, M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 00:42, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Jsleonar, you might find WP:WTC.helpful. What experts in the subject know is not a reason to leave something uncitted (or we would not cite anything). General common knowledge does not need to be cited. Neither does subject-specific common knowledge, but I don't know that we can expect even laypeople familiar with the topic of license managers to be knowledgeable about the specifics of this particular software. The above point that the article in general is poorly sourced is spot on.Meters (talk) 00:53, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Would it make a difference if the line was written like this: FlexNet Publisher (formerly known as FLEXlm) is a software license manager from Flexera Software which implements license management and is used in corporate environments to provide floating licenses to multiple end users of computer software.

I see your point as a tertiary source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsleonard (talk • contribs) 01:04, 19 June 2020 (UTC) would I be considered a reliable source since I do use this software? I am considered to be a expert in this subject in the IT industry. If I publish an article would it be considered a valid citation? Jsleonard (talk) 01:09, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, M Imtiaz, I found the answers to those questions in verifiability. Thanks to you as well, Meters for the link to WP:WTC. All of my questions have been answered.

Poor quality page

I came across Shaikhs in South Asia after a couple of anonymous users were deleting large sections of it. While I reverted a pair of them, I noticed that Shaikhs in South Asia was entirely composed of dubious sources (which one of the anonymous users subsequently removed), and now it's completely void of citations or references. I think it should be merged or deleted altogether. Do any of you have recommendations? Philotimo (talk) 00:10, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

@Philotimo: I'd merge and redirect to Sheikh (disambiguation). TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:43, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

How do I move an article to a new title?

While looking for pages to copy edit, I stumbled upon the page National argoforestry policy. The page's title is non-descriptive because it does not specify what country the argoforestry policy belongs to (in the case, India). Can a more experienced Wikipedian help me with moving the page to a more appropriate title? SuperGoose007 ^(Honk!) 23:48, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

It's the National agroforestry policy. You are free to move it yourself, perhaps to National agroforestry policy (India), although you should look for analogues to follow. I mean, the difficult hurdle is answering the question "How do I rename it? I can't see a 'rename' option!"; whereas you already know that it's a matter of "moving". Take a deep breath, go for it! -- Hoary (talk) 23:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@SuperGoose007: Welcome to Wikipedia. Correct link is National agroforestry policy. Unless there are articles for this policy for other countries, then the existing name may be OK, since the article lede specifies it is for India. You can ask at WP:RM for an article to be renamed, but perhaps start a discussion on the article's talk page first. RudolfRed (talk) 23:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@SuperGoose007: While you're at it, how about National Water Policy? If it were me, I'd move it to the title with "of India" at the end. No need to search and click thinking you're getting some global viewpoint only to be disappointed. Simpler and faster. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:40, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Placed relevant templates on pages discussed. SuperGoose007 ^(Honk!) 02:20, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Help with revising rejected article

Hello, I would like to obtain help revising a draft article that has been rejected. The reasons for rejection are explained here: "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. The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations." I made every effort to write the article in the most neutral language possible, and to support information included in the text with footnotes up to a reasonable number, short of peppering the document with repeat references. Any assistance in addressing these issues in order to bring the submission into compliance with guidelines would be much appreciated. I have since added further references and included one or two additional sentences, but not undertaken a major rewrite. In a couple of cases the URLs of sites referenced have been rejected by Wikipedia as blacklisted. Since one of them is a page of the Indian National Science Academy, I wonder if it is worth attempting to have them released from blacklisting. Lastly, when the time comes to resubmit, I would like to ensure that this is done through the appropriate subject channel rather than via a general submission queue. Perhaps someone could offer guidance in this regard. Thank you for your attention. The draft article is here: Draft:Amitabha Ghosh Thank you for your assistance. Mischievousgnome (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

For one thing, you have many hyperlinks in the article - all of these need to be remedied (some may be able to be converted to references). And the only channel is AfC. In practice, you could just move it to mainspace as an article, but this entails risk of it being reverted back to draft, or else nominated for deletion. David notMD (talk) 15:37, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Much obliged for the tips. Is this what the reviewer meant by "minimum standard for inline citations"? Mischievousgnome (talk) 16:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Mischievousgnome, the subject is a living person. Hence, WP:BLP, the policy for biography of living persons applies. Because a living person could be promoted or attacked, and also face highly consequential repercussions from the content of an article on them, the requirements are more stringent. Please read WP:BLP carefully and make sure you comply. The minimum standards for inline citations comes from, among a few other things, the BLP policy (one of the other things would be direct quotes, if there's any in your draft). In essence, any claim that is extraordinary, whether positive or negative, or related to privacy, and so on need inline citations to high quality sources, immediately next to the claim, no matter how many times they get repeated in the article. More details at the page that the bluelink leads to (just click that phrase on the notice that the reviewer left). Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:27, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks very much UTBC, I have begun to check through the policy on living persons to see if there are any issues needing resolution. As it now stands, there are only three actual quotes in the text, all from secondary sources. Two appear to be from student or university publications, and one is from a conference document. (Regrettably one of the links is blacklisted, but so is a link to one of the Indian Academies of Science.) The quotes might be construed to contain an element of opinion, so to be sure they were not attributed to me, I deliberately quoted the sources directly. Perhaps you can say whether this was the appropriate course of action. Otherwise, most of the information is gleaned from the numerous biographical notes on the subject that can be found on websites of universities and the academies/institutions with which he is or has been affiliated. Should this approach be cause for concern?

That said, one thing puzzles me about the prohibition on external links. Why, when the link tool is pressed, does Wiki present the user with a choice between Wikipedia article and external link? Regards Mischievousgnome (talk) 21:51, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Mischievousgnome. External links are not "prohibited" but their use is restricted. For example, external links do not belong in the body of an article, and external links should be in a dedicated section or infobox, and should be to websites or social media sites directly relevant to the topic of the article. For example, an article about a corporation can include a link to the corporate website. An article about a living person can include a link to their website or to their primary verified social media site. Loading up an article with peripheral or questionable external links or a lengthy portfolio of social media websites is considered promotional editing and is not permitted. Please read Wikipedia:External links for more details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:44, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Mischievousgnome – in addition to what Cullen328 says above, we also often use external links in non-article pages, such as here in the Teahouse, the Help Desk, the Reference desks, and the Talk pages of articles, where we are replying to queries with information not already found in an article, and/or are discussing possible sources for further information and citation to add to an article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.203.10.153 (talk) 07:23, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

FlyingNinja1's section

Is there a page where all or most major policies are present and how to find a policy just by its name such as "POV"? FlyingNinja1 (talk) 07:06, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

FlyingNinja1, you might start at the template {{Wikipedia policies and guidelines}} for a list of, or WP:PAG for explanation on, policies and guidelines. Usually you can type WP:[Insert common word here] after the en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ to find what you are looking for. For example, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:POV or simply WP:POV as a wikilink, takes to the page on the policy about the neutral point of view. If you start to wonder what a wikilink might be when reading this message, you could try the url en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Wikilink or as a wikilink, just WP:Wikilink, to get to the page that explains it, and so on. As expected, WP:Shortcut or en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Shortcut takes you to the page that lists shortcuts like these. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

FlyingNinja1, WP:5P is a good start. On finding a policy/guidline you are looking for, it is often helpful to start with WP:, As in WP:POV, WP:COPYRIGHT, WP:YOUTUBE, WP:BENICE etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:39, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Teahouse is so helpful FlyingNinja1 (talk) 07:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

creating red-link in company info-box

Hi

I have been trying to create a red-link to the name Chris Vogelzang mentioned under Key People in the right hand side company info box on the entry on Danske Bank

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danske_Bank

Embedding the name within double brackets just creates a reference to the above Danske Bank entry.

Any help? Caulfield9548 (talk) 07:16, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, Embedding a term within double brackets will create a red link to it if does not exist. Ruslik_Zero 07:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Caulfield9548, that's because the title is a redirect to the bank article. It can be linked from other articles except that bank, and will lead to that bank article. If and when the person becomes deserving of their own article, the article can be created by navigating to the page with a url that doesn't automatically redirect, like this one. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:45, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Two sources mismatch

If two sources give totally different result who should be believed. More info here : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Isoguvacine#HEY_THERE_IS_A_CONFUSION Machinexa (talk) 09:07, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Machinexa. It is not Wikipedia's job to decide between sources. If both appear to be reliable sources, then the article should say that they have different information, and not attempt to resolve the differences. --ColinFine (talk) 09:33, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

ColinFine I will leave it as is it. Other people who are chemist and intelligent than me might resolve the issue. Until then i will fill talk page of arecaidine with this information

Should the citation be before or after punctuation marks?

I put it before, but sometimes it looks weird especially when it's one sentence with multiple commas and different source for each. Doesn't flow well. What is better? Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 09:03, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Julia Domna Ba'al and welcome to the Teahouse - it should be after the punctuation mark. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:06, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Just to follow up by saying you can find this sort of information at MOS:CITEPUNCT.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:35, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Of course, I'm stupid. Thank you. Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 09:52, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Adding pictures to an article

How do one add pictures to an article? Josedimaria237 (talk) 09:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Josedimaria237 and welcome to the Teahouse - please read the instruction/step by step at Help:Adding_image. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:00, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Article approval

Hello,

I have submitted two articles to Wikipedia and am trying to figure out the process and a couple of other questions.

1. One of the articles appears to have disappeared from my Contributions box and I was wondering how to find it again. 2. The other article is this one. It has some comments but I am not sure how this will impact on the approvals process. I feel that it contains enough references.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Geoff_Blackwell

I would be grateful for any advice. SahminKilly (talk) 09:54, 19 June 2020 (UTC) Kind regards,

SahminKilly

Hi SahminKilly and welcome to the Teahouse - there is no other article you submitted, here is the log:

"08:56, 7 May 2020 SahminKilly created page Draft:Geoff Blackwell (created sandbox) (thank) 07:41, 4 May 2020 User account SahminKilly was created" ... Regarding your draft - you will need to insert citations correctly, just follow the links the Reviewer gave you in his comment, they explain exactly how to do so. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:04, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

The only draft (or article) ever edited by SahminKilly is Draft:Geoff Blackwell. (Nothing else has ever been deleted.) As for the draft on Blackwell, careful with such wording as "global figures and organisations": it sounds like puffery. You apply it to Nelson Mandela, and if the horribly overused notion of "global figure" is applicable anywhere it's applicable with Mandela -- but this is why it's unnecessary for Mandela. Or again, "renowned international photographers". Even if they are renowned (in the real world), the critical reader of WP will think: "If they are renowned, there's no need to say so; and if they aren't, saying they are is promotional." (And come on, however unjust this may be, several aren't really renowned. Though among those who don't have articles, Phillip Toledano certainly merits one.) -- Hoary (talk) 10:08, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Help me!

Someone should help me edit this article 2019–20 Elite One, at the categories region. Josedimaria237 (talk) 09:59, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Your error was that you had transcluded the category pages. I've corrected it in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:14, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Biography of Percy Riley 1880-1941 Motor Engineer

We, the Riley Cars Heritage Trust, have commissioned a Riley historian to write a biography of Percy Riley, the engineering genius of the Riley automobile manufacturing company. This is now complete and I should like to submit it for review for publishing under Wikipedia's historical pioneers section. How do I do this please? 79.76.166.119 (talk) 10:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

It would help if you linked to the draft in question, to give you better help. The person whom you have "commissioned" must review and comply with WP:COI and WP:PAID if they haven't already(as do you). 331dot (talk) 11:01, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not publish original research. If the subject is notable, based on significant coverage in multiple published reliable sources, then an article may be written about him, see the advice at WP:Your first article, but if you are looking for somewhere to publish the biography which you have commissioned then Wikipedia is not the place. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:07, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

लेख

article contributed by me marathi on Prof Bhagwat. Dont know if its in Sandbox or elsewhere! I tried to publsih it . Can someone help me with the status and a way forward? Prachi.chopade (talk) 03:14, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi,

is this the article you're looking for User:Prachi.chopade/sandbox?

You can see all of the articles you have edited at Special:Contributions/Prachi.chopade Pi (Talk to me!) 03:22, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

If you are ready to submit your article, you can add the template {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article, and it will then be reviewed prior to being published in the main article space of the encyclopedia Pi (Talk to me!) 03:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

But before you do that, Prachi.chopade, you should tone down some of the non-neutral| language. Most of the lead is written to praise him. For example, which independent, reliably published source has said that he is "the first qualified landscape architect in India", or that he is regarded as such? If there is one, then that needs to be a direct, attributed quotation; if there isn't, then it needs to be removed. An article should not make such a claim in Wikipedia's voice. Similarly, which independent, reliably published source has said that he "has a passion", or that he is "pioneering", or that a title has been "popularly conferred" on him, or that ISOLA was "almost entirely due to his endeavours"? --ColinFine (talk) 08:47, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Many of the sections have no references. Instead, all of the references are at the end of the article. The refs need to be at the ends of sentences in the text that are supported by those references. The Lead (top portion) is supposed to be a summary of the content of the article. What is there now is a lot of statements that are not extended and elaborated on within the text - with references. I agree with ColinFine that it is premature to submit this draft. David notMD (talk) 09:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I'd say that if a source said anything like "the first qualified landscape architect in India", I would have to discount the reliability and independence of the source. In other words, the statement is so extraordinary and subjective that it should be removed, and probably anything else based on the same source. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:15, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I NEED TO UPLOAD INFORMATION

Hello there, I need help to upload the details of a legendary company of all times based in Tanzania, East Africa. Please guide me to success, Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.75.222.154 (talk) 12:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

See WP:NORG, WP:YFA and WP:COI. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:30, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Malfunctioning YouTuber sidebar template

Hi :) The YouTuber sidebar template, which I am using for the current article I am writing, automatically links to a YouTube channel when the field allocated to the channel name is populated. However in my case it malfunctions, as it displays the text "Kyle Hill" as "Hill Kyle Hill", and automatically links to a YouTube channel called "Kyle" rather than "Kyle Hill". Any idea how this could be fixed? NB: I've already been told several times what my draft's flaws are instead of answering the questions I had, and I've taken note of them and will make relevant edits as I go before resubmitting the article. Please just answer the specific question I've asked here, thanks ^^ Regards AengusB (talk) 22:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

By the looks of it, the subject's channel name is "ScienceBasedLife", so you'd use | channel_name = ScienceBasedLife. If you want it to display as "Kyle Hill" you can use | channel_display_name = Kyle Hill. --David Biddulph (talk) 05:17, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I will add that referring to the documentation of that infobox template which is available at Template:Infobox Youtube personality can help you make sure you use it correctly. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:22, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi David Biddulph and Usedtobecool,

I did both of what ye said and in the end I found a solution: Inputting "ScienceBasedLife" did fix the issue of the right channel being linked, but then the infobox displayed it as "ScienceBasedLife". However, the template page did tell me that there is a dedicated field for displaying a different name than the one in the URL. People can now click on "Kyle Hill" and get redirected to the Kyle Hill channel. Thank you!

AengusB (talk)

If you read again what I said in my reply, I did say that if you wanted it to display as "Kyle Hill" you could use | channel_display_name = Kyle Hill, which is what you've now done. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:42, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Questions to the user who deleted my sandbox :)

Hi, ok so i find it all very bewildering and not an easy place to navigate or to simply find an answer. Might just be me of course. I had my sandbox deleted with an article i was preparing and due to the current situation I left it alone hoping to get back to it. When I did, it was gone. I tried to copy back in the content to start up again but was wasked to contact a "user" Liz who deleted it. I cannot find anyway of askign that person to review their deletion and reinstall it. Help please, i cannot find any way of getting in touch with the person. Thanks

18:50, 7 June 2020 Liz talk contribs deleted page User:Engblu/sandbox (G8: Redirect to a deleted or nonexistent page) (thank)

Steve Engblu (talk) 14:10, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Engblu Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Every user has a user talk page for communication with them, and it is usually linked to in their signature at the end of their posts.(for example, yours is linked to in your signature above). It is also linked to in places like page edit histories and many logs, including deletion logs like the one you copied the text from above. If you click the word "talk" in that message, it will take you to that user's user talk page where you can ask them directly about your question. 331dot (talk) 14:20, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I'll also link to that user's talk page here: User talk:Liz. 331dot (talk) 14:21, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Steve. Your sandbox was apparently a redirect to a draft page, Draft:Steve Lyon (Recording Engineer), which was deleted a week ago since it hadn't been edited in six months. You have already posted to Requests for undeletion to request the undeletion of that draft, and retrieving the redirect won't be helpful for you. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 14:23, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

How to add tables and pictures and section such as origins ?

How to add pictures and tables and sections such as origins ?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ayodhya_Mitra_Dynasty

This is my article when will it be available for other users Deepsingh 0611 (talk) 13:54, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Your draft is far from being an article. The first thing you need to do is to read Wikipedia's definition of notability. If you decide that the subject is notable, you would need to add the references. You'll find further advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:56, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Need help verifying an article

• Laurel Fork, Virginia

This article has a lot of problems, including unsourced material possibly indicating original research, but the biggest red flag is that the article does not have information about the community's population, leaving me to question if the information in the article is real or not. The first page on Google search for Laurel Fork, Virginia only shows websites showing the physical location of the community and tourism websites. Can somebody help find some reliable sources to make sure the statements in this article are actually true? SuperGoose007 ^(Honk!) 15:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

If you look at the history you will see that the bulk of the unsourced text was added in this edit, where the edit summary includes something that looks as if it was intended to be a reference. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:36, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Upload an image t a wikipedia page

I would like to change an image for Sanjeev Rajput page. How should I do it as the page was created by someone else? Kartik Pinakin Desai (talk) 15:59, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Kartik Pinakin Desai, and welcome to the Teahouse. It doesn't matter who created the article: most Wikipedia articles have been edited by multiple editors. The problem with your edit to Sanjeev Rajput is that you changed the name of the image file to a different name; but there is no image with that name either in Wikipedia or in Commons. An image has to be uploaded before it can be used. What is the origin of the picture you want to use? If you took it yourself, then you have the power to license it freely, and you can upload it to Commons. If you did not, then it is likely that it cannot be used, unless the copyright holder has explicitly released it under a suitable licence. Please see Help:Upload. --ColinFine (talk) 16:18, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Kartik Pinakin Desai: Nobody "Owns" a Wikipedia page, so you could yust change the image. The Page history will record that you have changed the image. Howewer, please note that images and other embeded content has a bunch of policies. I have added a bunch of information to your user talk page. Please follow the links there. If you have additional questions, please ask. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:20, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Mentor or suggestions

Hello again,

I changed my article after some very helpful tips from other editors. A few areas have been pointed out to me about it and I am dealing with them. One of of the suggestions is that I look for a mentor. Is there anyone around who might be able to do that?

Thank you

SahminKilly (talk) 16:38, 19 June 2020 (UTC) SahminKilly (talk) 16:38, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

@SahminKilly: Teahouse is always available to help you wherever you need. You just have to "Ask a question" and the hosts and the senior editors will be there to help you. In case of mentor, it is known as Adopt-a-user program where a single user will adopt you and help you. I recommend Teahouse, where multiple editors help you. With Best Regards — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 17:33, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Need help with adding "Reliable Sources".

I added several news articles links but still got declined for lack of "Reliable Sources". Can you please look at the page and advise what am I missing..Thanks! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sanjay_Aggarwal 2600:1700:BE80:C990:8997:93B2:7EBF:AB64 (talk) 17:47, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

You were told two and a half months ago that you needed to read Help:Referencing for beginners and cite your sources appropriately so that we can see which reference is supporting which part of the text. You also need to expand the citations, rather than giving bare URLs. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello, IP user, and welcome to the teahouse. There are three problems with the references currently in Draft:Sanjay Aggarwal. First, they're just floating at the bottom. They need to be cited inline, where the information which relies on them is mentioned. See WP:REFB for how to do that. Secondly, it looks to me as if much of the information in the article does not come from those citations. All information in a Wikipedia article must come from a reliably published source; (it is not always obligatory to cite the source, but, particlarly for biography of living persons, reviewers prefer that everything is cited): information that you "just know" is not acceptable in an article. Thirdly, four of them are transparently from press releases from the company, and the last one is directly from his company. This makes them primary sources: they can be used in a limited way, but the bulk of the content needs to come from independent sources; also, only independent sources can establish that the subject is notable (in Wikipedia's special sense). --ColinFine (talk) 18:02, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

A correction in a locked page

The page The Holocaust has the Hebrew name Shoah, but not the Yiddish name. As the Holocaust affected overwhelmingly the Ashkenazic community, please add the Yiddish name חורבן אײראָפּע or דער חורבן. --Shad Veyosiv (talk) 14:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Shad Veyosiv. If you wish to recommend a change to a protected article, please make an edit request, with a reference to a reliable published source, on the article's talk page. See edit request for how to do this. --ColinFine (talk) 15:59, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

@Shad Veyosiv: Churban Europa is already mentioned (and cited) in the Terminology section. I added the Yiddish script. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:40, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Anand Mahindra's recent investment

Anand Mahindra invested 1 million dollars in a company named Hapramp Studio. He tweeted the news and it became viral to the point that Hapramp was 5th most searched term on Google for that day. I was thinking about adding the information to his page. However, I am not sure about it. I would really appreciate some insight on it. I also thought of creating an identity for the brand. However, I could only find news articles that talk about investment. Shall I not work on it? Dippyreader (talk) 07:25, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Dippyreader. If you can find a reliable source that discusses his investment, you could add that information to the article about him (which is not "his page"). When you say "create an identity for", I take it that you mean "write an article about". The answer is that if you can find enough sources that discuss the brand specifically to establish that it is notable, then you could write an article about it. See your first article if you have not already read it. --ColinFine (talk) 08:53, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

@Dippyreader: Creating an identity for the brand is absolutely not what Wikipedia is about. Please see WP:NOTPROMO. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:29, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Dippyreader. Regarding Mahindra's investment, please consult WP:NOTNEWS and WP:RECENTISM. It's not worthy of being in the article at this point.--Quisqualis (talk) 20:31, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

What is the purpose of the rowspan class in this table?

In the "Koreanic languages" table on this page, the first td element in the last tr element, "Jeju", has a rowspan class equal to "2". What is the purpose of this class here? From what I see, that td element does not span two rows and the class should not be there.

The reason for the question is that I have an application that is parsing this table and this rowspan is breaking it. I'd like to edit the page to remove the rowspan but I don't want to do that if the class is necessary for some reason I am not aware of.

<tr> <td rowspan="2"><a href="./wiki.php?slug=Jeju_language" title="Jeju language">Jeju</a> </td> <td><span class="datasortkey" data-sort-value="South Korea"><span class="flagicon"><img alt="" src="//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Flag_of_South_Korea.svg/23px-Flag_of_South_Korea.svg.png" decoding="async" width="23" height="15" class="thumbborder" srcset="//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Flag_of_South_Korea.svg/35px-Flag_of_South_Korea.svg.png 1.5x, //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Flag_of_South_Korea.svg/45px-Flag_of_South_Korea.svg.png 2x" data-file-width="900" data-file-height="600">&nbsp;</span><a href="./wiki.php?slug=South_Korea" title="South Korea">South Korea</a></span></td> <td>official, in Jeju Island </td></tr> Tyephlosion (talk) 20:42, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

What you have given is the html rendering. The Wikicode is merely |rowspan="2"|[[Jeju language|Jeju]] |{{flagcountry|South Korea}} ||official, in Jeju Island. There doesn't seem to be any need for the rowspan, so I would suggest removing it. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:43, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Adding content to Bairnsdale Victoria Australia

Hello, could someone please add the Australian Women’s Cricketer Sophie Molineaux to the notable persons for Bairnsdale. She is a world champion cricketer and deserves the recognition. Cameron White is there- he’s a cricketer too. As a resident and one of Sophie’s teachers I would very much appreciate it. Many thanks, Andrea Savage 2001:8004:1282:6E8A:64DC:CB90:E13:41F1 (talk) 21:43, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I think you mean Sophie Molineux? (no "a" in the name). There is no apparent reason why you shouldn't add her to the list. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:48, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Is my draft article ready to be resubmitted?

Hi wiki people! Thanks for maintaining this nifty forum. I recently submitted an article for consideration that got rejected, and I would love it if someone could give me some advice/review my updates to it before I resubmit. The big things are: (1) Taking a look at the updated article and let me know if they think its sources have been updated sufficiently/meet criteria for reliability (I know some sources do not - ie, I cited some specific tweets by the band, even though I know blogs and social media are not generally reliable sources). Generally, is it looking okay, or are there any specific suggestions you'd make? (2) Explaining if there's a place where I can explain why I believe the group meets Wikipedia:Notability (music) requirements - I feel pretty confident that it does, but I understand why that might not be obvious at first glance, and I wondered if there was a place where I could explain that in more detail when I submit it for review #2.

Thanks so much in advance for any help. Cheers! Coffeespoons (talk) 22:14, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Forgot to link to the page in question - it's Draft:Good Luck (band). Thanks! Coffeespoons (talk) 22:16, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

As a starting point it might be useful if you were to explain, on the draft's talk page, which of the criteria at WP:BAND you believe are met. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:21, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Editing and Creating Pages

Making Parts of Topics. Ex: '2.1'

I was making a Wikipedia page, and when doing so, I wanted to make Hyperlinks in the Content page to parts like 1.1 and 1.2. Thank you. 41.46.72.33 (talk) 23:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP user. If you put a heading between two pairs of equals-signs (like ==Heading==) it will be a top-level heading in the contents list. If you want lower-level headings, you just use more pairs of equals signs; so ===Subheading=== will appear as a second-level heading in the contents list, and so on. --ColinFine (talk) 23:25, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

what happens when a company edits its own wiki entry to weed out accurate but perhaps unfavorable information, treating wiki like a PR outlet?

• Regent, L.P.

The private equity company Regent, LP is editing their wiki profile to remove basic reported facts about their business in order to "sanitize" their image. There is no rationale reported for the wholesale erasing of factual information, attributed and referenced to legitimate news operations. They're basically using their Wiki entry as a PR outpost, and this just seems wrong. They are using remoyte accounts to do the public relations editing of their Wiki entry. I believe that Wkki is to be a factual organization, and the entry for their company is not their own holding or ownership. Nothing that they erased that was written or referenced was in any manner subjective, just based on credible news reports. Woodrusher (talk) 19:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Woodrusher and welcome to the Teagouse. The answer is that volunteer editing normally replaces such COI deletions and changes. Users engaging in COI editing without complying with our policies can be warned and, if they persist, blocked. It is not a perfect system, but in tjhis specific case I see several expereinfed editros have edited the article recently. If you think that there are still important facts missing, and that there are reliable sources to support those facts, please do post on Talk:Regent, L.P. to point them out. Previous edits can be seen in the article history, and you can point out any that you think are improper or inaccurate. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:32, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Two editors, User:Beyoncenyc and User:W1london hav edited almost exclusively the article about Regent, L.P. and subsidiary companies and the article about Michael Reinstein, the founder. Neither have declared a conflict of interest or a paid situation. A query has been left on their Talk pages, asking to clarify. David notMD (talk) 00:49, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

How to make a page

I am thinking I should make the Neuriva page but how? Note: Neuriva is brand of medicines produced by Schiff Nutrition International, A Reckitt Benckiser Company. I do not know much about Neuriva, I saw adverts for it but that was a while ago. They don’t play adverts for it anymore but I can still remember the name as I checked RB’s website. How to make a page? MaxandRubyPeppaBlueyCuriousGeorgeFan2.0 (talk) 23:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Nueriva is a brand name for four brain function dietary supplement (not medicine) products. From a quick search, I did not find much in the way of independently written articles about the brand or its four brain function products. This strongly suggests the topic is not notable in the Wikipedia sense. If you intend to attempt this, please include Neuriva Nonsense, which refers to the products as utter nonsense. In answer to your question, see WP:Your first article.David notMD (talk) 01:02, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Barnstars

Hi,all I wanted to know is that when I was given barnstars by some anonymous users,I was accused of sockpuppetry. So in this case,what shall I do?

Heyday to you Heyday to you (talk) 04:37, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Your situation is under discussion at WP:ANI#Heyday to you's WP:CIR issues. Bringing the topic here might be regarded as forum shopping. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:59, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Editor of the week

How is editor of the week picked. Tbiw (talk) 09:27, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Editor of the week is an honor given by WP:Wikiproject Editor Retention. Anyone can nominate an editor. The criteria are listed on the award's page, linked at the beginning of my reply. Once an editor is nominated and someone has seconded the nomination, a very small group of editors vets the nomination and assuming the nomination was in good faith and that the nominee doesn't fail any of the criteria, they are put into a queue and will recieve the award in chronological order. Further details can be found by following the links in this reply. Thanks for the interesting and different question, Tbiw! John from Idegon (talk) 09:50, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Danish withdrawal from the European Union in Danish language

Know somebody in our Wikipedia World who can start this article in Danish language?

You can see here some first possibilities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_withdrawal_from_the_European_Union and https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danexit. Wname1 (talk) 06:09, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Wname1, consider asking at Danish WP, [15] may be as good a place as any. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:50, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Wname1, this is a help forum on and for en.wiki. Other than both being owned by the Wikimedia Foundation, we have no relationship with Danish Wikipedia. Each different language Wikipedia is an entirely independent organization. John from Idegon (talk) 09:57, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Name is spelled wrong; I keep updating and am asked to "brandish" a source

I have updated the spelling of a basketball player's name (it is spelled Allen, his actual name is spelled Alan.) An editor keeps changing it back, despite the fact that it is incorrect. The only internet source I can find that is publicly available is his wife's obituary (which I do not feel comfortable linking to on his page.)

The article name is "Chuck Terry" Jenmloo (talk) 04:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Jenmloo. Wikipedia summarizes what published, reliable sources say, and there is only one source cited in the article. That source,

Basketball-Reference.com, says that "Allen Charles Terry" is his full name. In order to change the Wikipedia article, you can either provide a citation to a reliable source for the other spelling, or convince Basketball-Reference.com to change their database. On another matter, it would be great if you could provide links to reliable, published sources that provide more details and insights into Chuck Terry's pro basketball career. It is sad that the current article is so brief. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:15, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Even if the name spelling is wrong, do not change it again unless you can provide a valid reference. Same applies to adding more content to the article. The content of citations does not have to be accessible via internet as long as the ref content can identify where published. David notMD (talk) 09:49, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm the editor you're referencing with "brandish," and you must include a reliable source when you decide to change an article (especially something as consequential as a name). If you want to, you could send his wife's obituary to Basketball-Reference.com and see if they change it. I spent a bit of time looking for a source to confirm his full name but came up empty. Philotimo (talk) 15:40, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Jenmloo, why would you be reluctant to provide a source if you have it? That makes no sense. Do you have some sort of personal or business relationship with the subject of the article? The undertone of your posting here seems to be that you have personal knowledge of this person's name and are trying to find a source to verify that. When you add something to Wikipedia, it is an absolute requirement that what you add be verifiable to reliable sources. Any edit you make here should be paraphrased from reliable secondary sources. Was this one? Note I am not asking if the source you are refusing to provide for whatever perplexing reason verifies the content; until you provide it, its existence is moot. What I am asking is for the source of your original edit, and note that you are required to provide the source or remove the content. John from Idegon (talk) 11:02, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey wikipedia

Hey Wikipedia is there any volunteer who can understand Bengali here so that I can get guidance from them on my draft:Laal Kothi Paak Darbaar Sharif— Preceding unsigned comment added by Majun e Baqi (talk • contribs)

Majun e Baqi Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If your preference is to converse in Bengali, there is a Bengali Wikipedia. You may find someone who understands Bengali at either the Bangladesh WikiProject or the Indian WikiProject. 331dot (talk) 11:20, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

How to join discord

How will i join discord. Tbiw (talk) 09:26, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

• Tbiw, what is "discord"? John from Idegon (talk) 09:54, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Presumably Discord (software), which seems to have jumped in popularity in the last couple of months following the release of a new version and by the social conditions resulting from Covid lockdown making it particularly useful. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.203.10.153 (talk) 10:01, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks 87 or 90! Assuming that is your question, Tbiw, it is beyond our scope here. We answer questions pertaining to how to edit en.wikipedia. That would be a question for the Reference desk. John from Idegon (talk) 10:43, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

• Hi Tbiw, if you want to join the Wikimedia discord server check out WP:DISCORD. SK2242 (talk) 12:07, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Why is my article contested and how do I get the draft approved?

Hi there, I created this draft about "Sklavenkasse"/slave funds and would like to have it published as I think it is finished. It is also not promotional, but a mere translation of the German Wiki article for the term.

Question1: The draft has been marked for "sppedy deletion" as you can see on my talk page. Who did that, why has that been done and how can I get this undone? Or at least: What is the reason why the draft has been marked as "unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view"? Because it simply is not - otherwise it would be the same for the term in the German Wikipedia.

Question2: Where exactly do I have to go to for the apporval of the article - or where do I find the responsible administrator in charge of the approval process?

Thank you very much. Mannikosblog (talk) 11:09, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Mannikosblog Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The speedy deletion tag was removed from your draft by another editor according to the edit history, so it will not be speedy deleted at least right now. There is no administrator in charge of approving or disapproving articles, if you submit your draft for review(which I will add the appropriate information to permit in a moment) any new page reviewer will look at it(and they are not just administrators).

Be advised that what is acceptable on another language version of Wikipedia is not necessarily acceptable here. 331dot (talk) 11:14, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

331dot Thank you for you help. How long do you think will it take to publish/reject the article? Mannikosblog (talk) 14:07, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

The draft Draft:Sklavenkasse has several paragraphs without references. Once existing references are properly formatted and more refs added, the draft can be submitted. The review process is typically days to weeks, but can be months. David notMD (talk) 14:09, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Help us from getting targeted!

Hi! We run a non profit for kids with cancer http://joinourfam.org and we are growing at a rapid pace. We recently did The Ellen Show, and have many big events coming forward. Due to the sensitive nature of the kids information we like to keep all of our stuff online as accurate as possible. Since getting this national exposure so many companies are in our inbox daily asking to make a Wikipedia page and charge us money. While we 100% want to be on Wikipedia and have had that on our goals list since 2018, we want to make sure we do it the right way. Any and all help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks 199.59.195.179 (talk) 13:43, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Whether an organization wants to be on Wikipedia or not is immaterial(there are actually good reasons to not want to be on Wikipedia). An organization does not get to determine if there is a Wikipedia article about it or not. Articles are typically written by independent editors, who take note of a subject in independent reliable sources and choose on their own to write about it. We cannot stop you from hiring someone to do so, but they cannot make any guarantees(such as writing an article that will not be deleted). You should not hand over one penny until you see the finished result. Anyone you hire will need to make the Terms of Use-required paid editing declaration and be familiar with conflict of interest.(you too will need to do this as you state that you run the nonprofit) If your organization meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization and you have significant coverage in independent reliable sources to support it, it would be best to simply allow independent editors to take note of your organization and write about it on their own.

Wikipedia is completely unconcerned with your "online presence" or helping spread the word about the good work your organization does. We're only here to write an encyclopedia. You are free to use social media or a website owned and operated by your organization to tell the world about what you do. 331dot (talk) 14:11, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

I found very, very little on-line about the organization other than what the organization says about itself. This may be WP:TOOSOON. If so, even a paid editor skilled in creating articles will not find the required references to make this work. David notMD (talk) 15:22, 20 June 2020 (UTC) No problem, thanks guys, appreciate you taking the time to respond! Time to work harder! Cheers to all

George Stinney

I seem to have unintentionally stepped into a series of edit wars on the George Stinney page. I think I was right in removing graphic content that isn't sourced but also don't want to step into the 3RR. What should I do? Astropiloto (talk) 15:37, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

I have requested page protection in this case, since it appears more like back-and-forth of unexplained removal of sourced content at best, and removing content if false edit summaries at worst. The edit today that contravened WP:V was more the drop that caused the barrel to overflow. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:23, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks so much! Astropiloto (talk) 16:26, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

How can I write about a new thing on Wikipedia?

 Nora nayeri (talk) 16:09, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Nora nayeri Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It depends on what you want to write about, but Wikipedia is not necessarily for writing about "new things". Wikipedia has articles about subjects that have significant coverage in independent reliable sources showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. A subject usually needs to be well established to merit an article, otherwise it could be too soon to write about it. 331dot (talk) 16:14, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Nora nayeri: You don't. Or better, you probbably should not, unless that "new thing" has significant coverage in reliable sources independent of that thing. In addition, please be advised that createing a new article is the absolute hardest task you can undertake on Wikipedia. If you still want to create an article, you can find advice at Your first article. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:16, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

 117.20.115.176 (talk) 16:21, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey Nora nayeri! I suggest looking at already written articles on topics related to those you are interested in and looking for red links. Red links are all without articles yet. Good luck! Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:49, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

I am going to contradict Jenhawk777. You have just registered as an editor. Your only article edits have been reverted. I strongly recommend you learn more about editing Wikipedia by working to improve existing articles rather than attempting a new article. On your Talk page I left some connections (blue wording) to tutorials and guidelines. Also, while some editors use their true name as their User name, Wikipedia advises young editors to not do this. Consider no longer using this account and registered a new one with a different User name. David notMD (talk) 18:58, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

David notMD Sorry. Mea culpa. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:44, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Wiki Article Declined "Statera"

Hello, I am new to wikipedia and submitted an article about Statera and index fund but backed by cryptocurrncies. it was declined due to not having "is submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any re submission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia." A third party audit is currently being conducted on stateras code and its project. Would this help as one for references. Would it be better to have this a sub heading on index funds page? Sort of as a subheading of another type of index fund. I know crypto currency is new. But it is gaining momentum. I was really interested in this project as i a am small personal investor and always liked index funds specifically vanguards voo then i saw this project and it caught my attention. I would really like help in the creation of this page or maybe as a subheading. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance Nottherealsatoshi (talk) 20:31, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nottherealsatoshi: I reviewed the declined draft, and agree with that action. You're going to have a hard time getting an article for a new unsourced cryptocurrency instrument onto Wikipedia, especially since you are an investor, and as a brand new editor have a clear conflict of interest. Please see WP:COI. Editors spend a lot of time and effort on Wikipedia trying to police investors in new companies and instruments who are trying to add unsourced industry info. While the general consensus seems to be that having an article will give their company or instrument more credibility, and command a higher asking price, without proper sourcing your efforts will not succeed. With a quick Google search, I had a hard time finding a web site for Statera, let alone reliable media coverage. Sorry I can't be more positive - I want to save you the trouble you are going through, and the time other editors will spend maintaining the encyclopedia. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:35, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Mr Templeton, I appreciate the quick response and honesty. Yes the website is called or google "Statera token" or Stateratoken.com . A third party audit is currently being performed on this code to clear up any uncertainties. I will gather more outside sources as the project progresses as stated by wiki. I am gathering as much as a can and hopefully with the audit more data and sources will emerge in the following weeks. As mention in my post, since this is a variation of an index fund, is there any chance this can be part of the index fund page or a variation of it, once the audit is complete or more outside sources emerge confirming its credibitly. Thank you, in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nottherealsatoshi (talk • contribs) 17:49, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Would this be considered a good outside reference, it is a third party audit on Statera's code and security, ensuring that it has no high or medium critical issues in its code or securty

Link to audit

https://github.com/StateraProject/statera-token/blob/master/Statera_SC_Audit_Report.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nottherealsatoshi (talk • contribs) 20:03, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Revision removed - but I can't tell what (not why)

I recently put a revision onto a site (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Peckett_and_Sons_railway_locomotives). It was one of several on that site that I have made. I am actively researching this subject and there are lots of errors on this particular wikipedia site. When I check the history it says one of my edits has been subsequently removed with the comment "identified as test/vandalism using STiki". It certainly wasn't vandalism. It may have been one where I was trying to work out how to achieve a particular change and wasn't sure how to but I was pretty sure everything I saved as a final edit was accurate.

Is there a way to identify which amendment was removed?

Thanks

David Daphne737 (talk) 18:18, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Daphne737, welcome to the Teahouse. Sure - have a look at this link https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Peckett_and_Sons_railway_locomotives&type=revision&diff=942739491&oldid=942739168&diffmode=source - there you will see the two different versions where Materialscientist reverted the Edit. Hope that helps. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:22, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Daphne737. The warning template (FYI, its boilerplate) you received in February gave you the best advice on this. By your own statement here, that was a test edit. Minimally, when you make a technical edit you are not sure of, be sure to inspect it when done and if it doesn't render how you wanted it, self revert and seek help. We do encourage our editors to WP:BEBOLD, but you need to keep in mind we are making a product, and we shouldn't leave it looking worse than when we started. User:Daphne737/sandbox would be the proper title for your sandbox. Test edit there until you figure out how to use the code. The article you edited is a really good example of when tables are effective, but in general we overuse them. Don't feel bad about being confused...I've made over 100,000 edits here and the only way I can create or expand a table is to copy the code from another entry or table and change the data. Happy editing! John from Idegon (talk) 18:40, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the link CommanderWaterford that is exactly what I needed - can't see why it was removed from that though nor why the system would have identified it as a test. There terminology used in the "boilerplate" response is either patronizing or aggressive depending on your sensitivity and not likely to encourage people to contribute. Glad to hear even the experts can struggle at times - I will perservereDaphne737 (talk) 18:55, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Daphne737. I'm sorry you have had that experience. I can guess what happened (though only Materialscientist could tell us for sure). Stiki is a tool to help editors find and revert vandalism - which, as you probably know, is a significant problem on Wikipedia. It identifies suspect edits, but a human editor decides whether to act on those or not. I guess that your edit looked like many examples of vandalism because 1) it introduced a strange word into an article; 2) there was no source given for the addition; and 3) there was no edit summary explaining the addition. (In fact, I notice that that entry is one of many in the table which is unsourced). A STiki user will typically be viewing dozens of suspect edits, and hasn't very much time to spend on each.

So in short - sorry it happened; but you can make it less likely to happen again by using an edit summary, and citing references where possible. --ColinFine (talk) 20:11, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

New Article: Raven (deity)

Hey Wikipedia -

I am interested in starting a new article to describe one of the most prominent deities of many of the language groups of the east Pacific coast, known commonly as "Raven" in English.

A quick search will reveal this deity doesn't appear to be recognized on Wikipedia, even though they are at the centre of the numerous cultures stretching from modern-day Alaska, through BC, to Washington state.

I would be depending on a handful of sources I am familiar with, and would necessarily start from the Haida perspective, as I am a Haida person. After the article's creation, however, I would very much hope to see the community start to add more and more information about this deity. "Raven" is recognized by numerous names along the coast, and has as many stories.

As a beginner, I just want to seek advice and direction before starting. Any feedback would be welcome.

Haawa! (Thanks!) Shoutsofvictory (talk) 07:08, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Shoutsofvictory, it seems to me the topic is already covered at Raven Tales and Haida mythology. Tsimshian mythology also seems to describe a possibly related or same raven myth. If those articles do not cover the topic sufficiently and there is information available on the topic that would be out of scope or undue for those articles, a standalone article may be deserved. If those articles are sufficient, one or more redirects may be created to make it easier for people looking for the topic to find those articles. You could help with that since you did look and concluded Wikipedia does not yet cover the topic.

I would recommend that you start this discussion at the talk page of one of those articles or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which are some of the places where editors more familiar with the topic are likely to see and respond to your proposal. You could also go through the history of those articles and find an experienced editor who has significantly contributed to the topic and happens to be currently active and reach out at their user talk page for advice. Looking at the history of those articles, @Finnusertop and David Condrey: just may be two such editors. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:16, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Usedtobecool Ah, yes I see. Yes, Raven Tales seems to represent more of what I believe would be a worthy and thorough description of this topic.

Now that I know this topic is under Raven Tales, could I ask the more senior editors their opinions on another question?

It just seems to me that the article might be better off to simply recognize the deity by it's anglicized name, for standardization's sake. For example:

The Dionysus article is called 'Dionysus', rather than 'Tales of Dionysus'.

The Guanyin article is called 'Guanyin', rather than 'The Stories of Guanyin'.

Haawa (thanks), and I will go ahead and follow through with your prompts to look at the talk pages and reach out to primary editors of the Raven Tales page.

Indeed you will have to discuss the article's title with the editors who are familiar with it and have edited it. You can propose a rename, but obviously, raven is already taken. You can start an informal discussion asking about the title first; or you can formally propose a rename yourself as a starting point of a discussion. The former would be best, as a new editor unfamiliar with previous discussions and decisions and reasons for them. See WP:MOVE (because renaming is done by moving articles to a new title) for guidance. P.S. Please remember to sign posts by ending each of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). The signature helps others know who posted the comment and when, and bots to know when to archive a discussion. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:11, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Aaah I see, haawa haawa. Very helpful feedback. Yes, I am looking through the article's talk page now, and am seeing that the article title is already a topic of discussion. Thank you very much for all your help, and for your pointers. Shoutsofvictory (talk) 18:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

One last question on another topic - which type of WikiLoves are appropriate to send to people who help you out? I don't know if there's some sort of wikicultural significance to the kittens or barnstars... a goat doesn't seem very flattering, but hey - I've spent alot of time on farms, so they might mean something different to me...haawa. Shoutsofvictory (talk) 18:25, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Shoutsofvictory, sorry I missed this one earlier. I would say it's more the message that accompanies the stuff than the stuff per se. WP:Barnstars lists and explains the barnstars; the rest (animals, food, drinks, etc.) are probably only a matter of personal judgement, because if they are explained somewhere, I have yet to find it. I was once given a goat and was indeed a bit confused as to how to feel about it. In cultures that have completely separated farming and slaughtering from mass consumption, they are probably the same as pets. For others, goats may be livestock, financial asset or even food. Yet others would see goats as symbols of the devil or other evil spirits. As to the wikicultural significance, wikilove is simple friendly gesture for comraderie and mutual appreciation; barnstars in particular are more valued though. Most users showcase the barnstars they've received and they are often cited as evidence of a given editor's value and contributions to the project. I have seen experienced editors refuse to accept barnstars they felt were not given in good faith or were undeserved. To get back to the top, other than not giving nonsenical stuff like an "admin's barnstar" to a non-admin or "writer's barnstar" to someone who only patrols vandalism, a sincere accompanying message explaining what you appreciate and why, is probably the part you should put the most thought into. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:02, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Shoutsofvictory and welcome to the Teahouse. What I know of Haida comes from The Emberverse series, not exactly a WP:RS. Anyway, have you looked at the articles Cultural depictions of ravens and Raven Tales? They seem to at least mention the topic you're interested in. Consider using the reliable sources you have to improve those articles. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:18, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång Haawa! Feels good to have so much feedback. I looked at Raven Tales, and it satisfies what I imagined this popular deity deserves. The title of this article has led to another question, which I have posted above. I've never heard of the Emberverse Series. Looks like just my thing. Jeez, it's reminding me of a whole series I read as a kid The Tripods. Emberverse looks a lot more advanced, tho. Shoutsofvictory (talk) 18:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Shoutsofvictory, my opinion on the current title: It seems to fit the current content, and "Raven" in this context is not that easy to define, "deity" doesn't seem to always fit, though sometimes it does. However, I don't think anyone would mind if you made Raven (deity) a WP:REDIRECT to that article, like Tlingit creation myth and Raven in Creation. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång That's actually a terrific idea. That way the article would appear in a disambiguation for users that just search "Raven", as I did to start. I'll set about figuring out how to set that up. Haawa! Shoutsofvictory (talk) 20:55, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

I guess this is the Raven portrayed at Justin_Trudeau#Physical_appearance?   Maproom (talk) 08:41, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Maproom Yes, this unlicensed use of a Haida designer's work is often considered a controversial example of cultural appropriation.

I almost wrote I found it in poor taste. The age old question of appropriation vs. appreciation; it's still a bit of a toughie. Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:11, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Hah! Ya, it goes on in on. In this case the design was completely lifted without permission from a Haida artist, so it's pretty cut-and-dry. Are you very familiar with northwest coastal formline traditions? Shoutsofvictory (talk) 18:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Shoutsofvictory, unfortunately, no. But I found there is an article on it, at Formline art. It's barely a start, and would surely benefit from attention of editors like you. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:30, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

{{u|usedtobecool} Great prompt, I'll keep this page open as my next project. Haawa! Shoutsofvictory (talk) 20:55, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Submission for Draft:Enyo Sam declined

Draft:Enyo Sam

I have provided reference to available sources of the draft which is legit. What should I do? Samsave (talk) 17:54, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

First: much of the content of the draft is a copy or close paraphrasing of ref #1, which makes it a copyright violation. Second: many of the references are not considered reliable sources by Wikipedia, including #1 (the artist's own website). Third: you have submitted this for a fourth time, with only minor changes from the declined third submission. David notMD (talk) 19:17, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

The thing to realise, Samsave, is that Wikipedia is basically not interested in what the subject of an article says about themselves, or what their associates say about them. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject have said about them (and been published in reliable places). The only one of the fifteen references which might meet that criterian is the Od7Music article (assuming that Od7Music are independent of Sam, and not, for example, his managers) - but there's not very much information about him in that. It would help establish notability, but is not enough on its own. None of the rest of the references contribute in any way to his notability. There's also the question of Fidarr: anybody can start a company and call themselves an entrepreneur. The complete lack of independent sources talkihng about Fidarr and his role in it say to me that even if sources can be found that establish his notability as a musician, his venture with Fidarr should not be mentioned at present.

So, Samsave, what you need to do is

1. Find at least three places where people wholly unconnected with Sam, and not prompted by an interview or press release, have chosen to write at some length about him, and been published somewhere with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking.
2. If you cannot find three such sources, give up: he is not currently notable by Wikipedia's standard.
3. If you can find them, throw away most of what you have written, forget what you know about him, and start again, summarising, in your own words, only what these sources have written.
4. When you have done that, you can add a certain amount of uncontroversial factual information from non-independent sources (see PRIMARY for details.
5. Drop all the citations to lyric sources, Apple Music, and Google
6. Citations to archived sites are fine, but they should have the original URL, and (much much much more importantly) information such as the date, title, writer if identified, and publisher or website directly visible in the citation. If the original URL is no longer valid, you can use archive-url = for the archive.com URL.

Finally: the fact that you have "Sam" in your username, and you uploaded the photo, claiming it as "own work" makes me wonder if you work for Sam Enyo. If you do, you are in breach of Wikipedia's terms of use until you declare your status as a paid editor on your user page and the talk page of your draft. --ColinFine (talk) 19:55, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Enyo Sam David notMD (talk) 20:55, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Do you think actor Jacopo Rampini is notable enough to have a Wikipedia page?

• https://en.everybodywiki.com/Jacopo_Rampini - Ignore all wikis/user created content
• https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5110245/ - Ignore all wikis/user created content
• https://blindspot.fandom.com/wiki/Jacopo_Rampini - Ignore all wikis/user created content
• https://www.broadwayworld.com/people/JacopoRampini/ - unsuitable source for notability- no in depth coverage
• https://www.tvguide.com/celebrities/jacopo-rampini/credits/1058623/ - unsuitable source - no content
• https://www.vanityfair.it/news/approfondimenti/2017/05/15/eta-del-caos-spettacolo-teatrale-rampini-spoleto - unsuitable source for notability - no in depth coverage2604:2000:1382:B94:5493:CEAB:C22C:888 (talk) 20:26, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. I'm afraid not, based upon the sources you've given and which I've annotated above. But maybe there are other, better, in-depth, reliable sources out there. You would need to find them to have any success. See WP:NBIO and WP:NACTOR for details of our notability criteria. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:09, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Status of submission

How do I track the status of my submission? How soon do I get to know whether it's accepted and published or not? AvinashBollywood (talk) 01:25, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

AvinashBollywood Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have not actually submitted your draft for review; you need to click the blue "Submit your draft for review!" button to do that. However, if you were to do so at this time, your draft would almost certainly be rejected, as you offer no independent reliable sources to support the content of the article. Successfully writing a new article is the absolute hardest thing to do on Wikipedia, it takes much effort and practice. Instead of submitting your draft, I would first suggest that you use the new user tutorial and read Your First Article.

In order to merit an article, this author needs to be shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources to meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable author. Social media accounts and a book listing are not such sources. 331dot (talk) 01:34, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Adding property ownership of Nehru Maidan

I have added names of the Nehru Maidan property owners who vested the property with city corporation. Is mentioning the name of title holders in violation? Please clarify Joelwin (talk) 02:56, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

@Joelwin: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you made an edit to the Nehru Maidan article, which was reverted by another editor, who explained the reason for the reversion on your talk page. Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, I suggest you start a discussion at the article's talk page - Talk:Nehru Maidan - and provide a reliable source for the information you would like to be added to the article. While the word "Altruistic" may be true, it's not the type of encyclopedic language we use in Wikipedia articles. Your edit also had improper capitalization and used "it's" instead of "its". Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:24, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello, Joelwin and welcome to the Teahouse. It would not be unreasonable to add a statement of the former ownership of the facility to Nehru Maidan, provided that you cite this information to an independent published reliable source.

I see that you added the information in this edit and SuperGoose007 reverted. In such a case, the best course ism to follow mthe Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle and start a discussion on Talk:Nehru Maidan. Please give your reasons for the edit and why you think it should be included in the article. I note that your edit did not provide any source, which may be why it was reverted by the other editor. I also note that it described the givers as an Altruistic Mangalorean Konkani Catholic family which is WP:POV and WP:PUFFERY, especially when unsourced. Please do not include such opnions in Wikipedia's voide in future. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:33, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

How to add picture in someone's page

How to add picture in someone's page Mugdho Dutta (talk) 04:48, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Mugdho Dutta, Welcome to the Teahouse. You can use the tool "upload file" from left hand side bar. Before uploading, please make sure the picture is not a copyrighted material(i.e. it should be free to use in Wikipedia). More information about this can be found at WP:UPIMG - Timbaaa -> ping me 05:07, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

@Mugdho Dutta: Welcome to Teahouse! You are also welcome to contribute Wikipedia and it's sister project. If you want to add a picture to any page, first you should be clear that the picture is important there on that page. You can read WP:Commons for uploading pics. And you can upload pic, audio, video files at this link . For adding them to Wikipedia article, you can see this page. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 05:07, 21 June 2020 (UTC)