Wikipedia:Teahouse

Skip to top
Skip to bottom



I had made a Wikipedia draft how can i send it for review

Sir, i had made a Draft name Draft: Rashtriya Secular Majlis Party. How can i send it for Publishing or review Iamamjad03 (talk) 07:04, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: Draft:Rashtriya Secular Majlis Party Maresa63 Talk 07:31, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
@Iamamjad03: Draft:Rashtriya Secular Majlis Party is far from being siutable for mainspace. See WP:YFA for more information. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:36, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Before you continue, Iamamjad03: Why do you write "you" and "we" in your draft? (As a start towards answering this: Who do you intend "you" to refer to, and who do you intend "we" to refer to?) -- Hoary (talk) 08:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Check it now. I had made citations.

I suggest that you check other articles of political parties. For instance, there is the case of Bahujan Samaj Party. This page should give you an idea as to the appropriate format, tone, and content acceptable in Wikipedia. I checked your draft and it appears you are yet to fill your sections with content. Regards, Darwin Naz (talk) 01:33, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Updating my village name in the globe and google map Pim Code 45705

This is 1000s of years old village of Nepal in Mahottari District with pin code 45705. is missing but the village is there in MAP with lebel that is Name. Its a land Mark Bardaha Got Bardaha Nepal (talk) 10:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Bardaha Nepal and welcome to the Teahouse. I can't tell which article you mean. If you are referring to a specific Wikipedia article, then the place to suggest corrections is the talk page of that article. Please include a reliable source for your assertion. --Shantavira|feed me 11:24, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
If you live in the village yourself then you might want to take a look at WP:COI. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 12:31, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Someone writing about the city/town/village in which they live is not typically a conflict of interest issue. DanCherek (talk) 13:06, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Sometimes it is. I'll continue this on your talk page @DanCherek: Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
[1] says 45705 is Matihani, is it near there? The only Bardaha I found on Google Maps is near Itaharwa 45600. (Ignoring the one in Bihar.) ... Oh, wait, OpenStreetMap has this (at 26.6510241, 85.8728466 degrees lat–long), about 5km NNE of Matihani, Mahottari (which is near the Bihar border), and 2km east of Dhirapur. OSM shows it within the Dhirapur local-government border. Pelagicmessages ) – (19:37 Sun 09, AEST) 09:37, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Oops, forgot to ping @Bardaha Nepal. Pelagicmessages ) – (20:43 Sun 09, AEST) 10:43, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Editing advice

Good day, my name is pieter de jong, and I create a wikipedia account a short while ago. I am very interested in the oil & gas industry, and the submarine sector. That is why I would really like to publish pages related to these topics. Unfortunately, my first page creation got declined. I would love to create pages, and start reviewing pages, but since my first page got declined, is there anybody that could help me out making sure my articles will be of good quality?

Thnx in advance! Dejongpieter (talk) 13:27, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Declined (what happened to Draft:Subsea Global Solutions), is not as severe as Rejected or Speedy deleted for being entirely promotional, but in glancing at your draft, so much of the content and referencing was about financial dealings. That contributes nothing to notability. From the reviewer's comments: "...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." One piece of advice commonly made at Teahouse is to gain experience by improving existing articles before trying to create a new article. David notMD (talk) 14:23, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Dejongpieter, you have made just two edits to mainspace articles, and then tried to create a new article. Creating an article is much harder than most of the things you could usefully be doing here, and often results in disappointment. If your purpose is to help improve Wikipedia, there are many better and easier ways you could go about it. Maproom (talk) 14:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
@Dejongpieter:, as Maproom says, writing an article on Wikipedia really is one of the very hardest things you can do here. It really does take a huge amount of time and effort, and many people's first efforts often fail. There is an English phrase 'trying to run before you can walk'. WP:Your first article is a good place to start. Also read WP:Referencing for beginners, WP:Notability, and WP:Reliable sources. As a guide to what you should be aiming for, have a look at some WP:Good articles and WP:Featured articles. Having said that, I agree with the other experienced editors here - start in little ways, for example adding information with reliable sources to existing articles, correcting spelling or other obvious mistakes, adding WP:Wikilinks etc. I started many years ago by putting lists in disambiguation pages in alphabetical order. Judging by your name, you may be from the Netherlands: it might be easier to start there if Dutch is your first language. Apologies if I'm wrong. Happy editing and best of luck, MinorProphet (talk) 18:55, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Editing...

Is it possible to make your article unediatable to the public??? Mox=mana (talk) 16:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Mox=mana, and welcome to Wikipedia! First of all, keep in mind that no one can own an article. Also, can you clarify what you mean by "unmediatable to the public"? Not sure I understand your question. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 16:57, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Oh ok good to know. Mox=mana

Mox=mana (edit conflict) Everything on Wikipedia is public if you knwo where to look at. While it is true that Google and other well-behaved search engines won't find anything that is noindexed, it still apepars on the recent changes feed, contribution lists, page histories and possibly elsewhere. See also Wikipedia:Wikipedia is in the real world Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:14, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

I am new and i was just asking i heard things about editing and i wanted to confirm. Mox=mana

You're perfectly fine! You came to the right place (also please remember to sign with your signature using ~~~~). There is no way to make it so no one can edit an article besides making it protected. The only articles I know of with a protection level that makes it almost like no one can edit it would be pages like the Main page. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
On that last note, editors can request that an article be protected (there are different levels of protection). Administrators decide on implementing protection requests. The most common reason to request protection is repeated vandalism. David notMD (talk) 20:49, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
A small naughty part of me really wants to try deleting the main page, but I manage to suppress such unclean thoughts. MinorProphet (talk) 19:09, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Aye, I feel ya MinorProphet. I just happened to come across a quite humorous page trying to stop us from ever thinking about delating the main page, but unfortunately, it only increased my curiosity. Although I doubt deeply that delating it is even possible for now. Alas. TheeChEese (talk) 23:00, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Changes on User Page

Is it necessary to write a edit summary for editing your own user page? I have writing a summary for each one, but I wish to know whether or not it is an absolute necessity. Thanks! InevitableOwl talk 18:19, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Not really since as long as it's just you editing your userpage and not someone else, people won't check the edits that much. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:32, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
(Also just a quick note, it would be a good idea to have the InevitableOwl part of your username link to your userpage) Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Hello @InevitableOwl, thanks for asking this question. Please it is always good practice to provide an edit summary no matter how insignificant you feel the change(s) were. Thanks. Celestina007 (talk) 19:16, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
@InevitableOwl:, I just put 'ce', short for 'copy edit', unless there's anything else to add. Plus, if you don't put an edit summary, you have to click 'Publish' again, which is somehow annoying. MinorProphet (talk) 19:14, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@InevitableOwl: I would do it more for my own benefit than anyone else's, in case I wanted to find something in my own history. Pelagicmessages ) – (21:00 Sun 09, AEST) 11:00, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Schierer von Waldheim

Dear Sirs, for many years my family had an English speaking Wikipedia Page on the century old history of the Schierer family. It was a subpage of the folder "Scherer" called "Schierer formerly Schierer von Walthaimb von Falkenau". As this family invented the blue coloring of glass in the 15th century and was purveyor for many centuries to royal housholds and had quite a number of notable members we were a little bit estonished to see this page disapear and kindly ask you to enlighten us on the circumstances or maybe reasons on deleting this page. We thank you very much for your kind attention and remain, Yours sincerely, The Schierer family Schierer von Waldhaimb zu Falknov (talk) 18:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

@Schierer von Waldhaimb zu Falknov: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. From looking at the page history, I saw you put a thing about the family's history and all that. Pages like these are lists, not like an article to write about the family.If you would like to put the members of the family, then put them on the page just like how the other people are placed on the list. Also, please only put links to the family members that have articles on the English Wikipedia. max20characters 🇺🇸 19:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
@Schierer von Waldhaimb zu Falknov: To add onto the above, keep in mind that writing an article about your family is an example of conflict of interest editing and is very strongly discouraged. You can learn more about COI editing at the plain and simple conflict of interest guide and more in-depth at WP:COI. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 19:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
@Schierer von Waldhaimb zu Falknov: That section on your family was removed [

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scherer&type=revision&diff=971182251&oldid=970184736&diffmode=source in this set of edits] by User:Klaus-Rudolf Ficker in August 2020. I tend to agree with the edits, and feel that the Scherer page as not the right place for all that extended content. If it is truly a notable family name, then one single link from that page (to help disambiguate the name) to a page entitled Schierer might be acceptable. The content has not been lost, just deleted, so you could retrieve it, construct a draft article and submit it to Articles for Creation. You do have a very obvious, undeclared Conflict of Interest, and I see you were the creator of a similar article on French Wikipedia. You should follow the guidelines at WP:COI for declaring that conflict issue. Our rules differ on en-wiki, so it's important that properly published and available sources are used to create an encyclopaedia page and that Wikipedia is not treated like an Ancestry.com entry, pulling all sorts of hearsay and unsubstantiated content together. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Compare w:de:Schürer (Glasmacher). Whereas the French article w:fr:Schierer (von Walthaimb zu Falkenau) says Paul invented the blue cobalt colouring, the German one says it was Christoph. —Pelagicmessages ) – (21:36 Sun 09, AEST) 11:36, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Can I get reliable citations from FamilySearch?

I am researching Jack Orrison in order to expand his article, but I can't find published sources for his birth and death dates. I went to FamilySearch, which has user-generated content, but also hosts primary source documents. I found data on Orrison, which I'm told comes from the 1910 U.S. Census (his birth date and parents), and from the California Death Index, 1940-1997, but I'm not able to see the actual documents, or get the page number or other details for a complete citation. Would it do any good for me to reference that his birth date came from the 1910 Census, and his death date from the California Death Index, or should I just leave those dates unreferenced? I can't afford to subscribe to websites that would let me see the actual documents. Karenthewriter (talk) 02:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Karenthewriter. I am always leery of relying on any secondary compilation of source data. Neverthelesss, I have no definitive answer for you, but wanted to just drop by to tell you that I was able to access the 1910 census itself through Ancestry.com, and, in fact, uploaded a relevant page from it for use in an article (see Kelly pool#Origins – which I am rather proud of; though it was not original research, but written from reliable sources (old newspaper articles), the details of the origins of the game's inventor I unearthed had been lost to modern billiards scholarship, e.g., a variety of billiard encyclopedias [though all written in an earlier time without access to digitized newspaper archives]). (The same article sheds light on the origins of the well known expression behind the eight ball.) Anyway, I digress, I don't have access to Ancestry anymore, but I am betting you might be able to get someone to get the relevant source material to you with a post to WP:RX. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:01, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
@Karenthewriter: Follow-up: prior discussions of family search at WP:RSN that may be of interest: here, here, here, here, here and here. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:40, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit sigh, that's what I was afraid of. At one time my local public library had Ancestry.com, but there's been budget cuts, and no fund-raising opportunities during the pandemic. I have a special interest in expanding online information on anything connected to the DuMont Television Network, thus my efforts to research an actor who costarred on The Plainclothesman. I'll keep looking for a good reference sources on Orrison's birth and death dates, as I collect properly sourced info on his early career.

Thank you for taking the time to comment. Karenthewriter (talk) 16:41, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Sure. But Karen, I just want to make sure one part of my response wasn't lost "...I don't have access to Ancestry anymore, but I am betting you might be able to get someone to get the relevant source material to you with a post to WP:RX." To expand on that slightly, I have made requests there for rather obscure matters, and been granted direct access, such as by emailing of relevant PDFs. In other words, I would not be surprised if a request there got you the actual source material – the actual, relevant page of the 1910 census itself – which is what I intended to indicate with my initial post. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:22, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit I did go to WP:RX and look around a bit, but since I'd never been there before it seems overwhelming to me. I'll need to remind myself how much I want to improve the Jack Orrison article, go way outside of my comfort zone, and try to figure out another portion of Wikipedia. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:08, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

@Karenthewriter: Ha. Okay. I suggest wading right into WP:ANI discussions then. No seriously, it might look daunting but it's not difficult. Not trying to push, but all you would need to do there is go to the bottom of the page (you don't need to use the "Click here to create a new request" button at the top, nor fill out the preloaded template provided there, which would not be geared toward requesting a page from the Census). Instead, once at the bottom, click on the side edit link for the last discussion; paste below the last writing there something like:
==Page from 1910 US Census (Jack Orrison)==
For purposes of locating and verifying the birth date of [[Jack Orrison]], can anyone possibly locate and provide to me the relevant page from the 1910 US Census that covers him? Thanks in advance--~~~~
I'm shutting up now.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit I left a request, did it all wrong, deleted what I put there, and did it all wrong a second time. I'm not trying a third time. I'll either get a response or not. Editors keep advising Teahouse visitors that writing a new Wikipedia article is the hardest thing they can attempt. I respectfully disagree. Requesting help at WP:RX is way more than I can comfortably deal with. I should not have pushed myself to attempt it. Karenthewriter (talk) 00:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

You did fine. The weird formatting comes from using the template I recommended you didn't need. These are kind people who don't care about some formatting issues. This is not formal; just a behind the scenes discussion help page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:54, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit (talk) I believe I was working on my WP:RX request while you were advising me how to make the request so I didn't see you post until after I had finished. I'm feeling a bit unwell, so it is rather confusing for me. Thank you for taking the time to write. Karenthewriter (talk) 00:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@Karenthewriter: Well, you certainly did get a whole load of help at RX, didn't you? It's no different from asking a question here. Be persistent, don't give up. As you can see, pretty much everyone here is willing to help. 'Please' and 'thank you' go a surprisingly long way. Best of luck with your enquiries and editing. MinorProphet (talk) 19:38, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

MinorProphet (talk) people were generous in replying, so I'll need to take the time to go through everything carefully to see what I did and did not receive. Unfortunately, I am having some health challenges right now, and get overwhelmed easily. I believe it was unwise to try working on my project, but since I started it I'll do my best to process what I received, and do all that is necessary to properly close the RX discussion. Thank you for taking the time to write. Karenthewriter (talk) 00:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@Karenthewriter: Very sorry to hear that. Please feel better!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:00, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

teapot teahouse

I want to be a teapot in the teahouse Big Bird Finder (talk) 12:33, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes, understood. -- Hoary (talk) 12:38, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Do you mean become a host? If so it's not really recommended until you have more experience. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
By teapot do you mean host? Get more experience before you can become a host. TigerScientist Chat 17:47, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Start at saucer and work your way up through the ranks of teacups. Being short and stout is an optional qualification. — Pelagicmessages ) – (22:03 Sun 09, AEST) 12:03, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Mmm. Dirt water. Panini!🥪 14:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

where can i get help on an ongoing article?

Im trying to write up an article about a japaneses school. I've got some stuff done but I would like to get somebody to look over it before submitting it for drafting. Its in my sandbox. I'd love to get some feedback, either here or on my talk page. Chefs-kiss (talk) 20:59, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

@Chefs-kiss, hello and welcome, I see your question has been left unanswered for a while now, sorry about that. Okay to answer your question, whilst some editors might agree to have a look at your article and offer you few tips on how to better edit before submitting it, one of the very essence of submitting an article (which you do by optimizing the WP:AFC process) is for questions such as the one you have just asked. If you submit your article it may be accepted and even if it is declined by an AFC reviewer(a group of editors knowledgeable about Wikipedia policies) a reason is given by the reviewer and if you follow their advice, invariably your article would be accepted. I hope this helps. Celestina007 (talk) 21:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
@Celestina007 So I should just go ahead and submit it as a draft to get it viewed? And optimize it via the WP:AFC? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chefs-kiss (talkcontribs)
@Chefs-kiss, hello there, yes that was exactly what I meant. Celestina007 (talk) 23:15, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
The History section needs references. David notMD (talk) 23:15, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
@David notMD Thnx! Will do — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chefs-kiss (talkcontribs)
@Chefs-kiss: As a reviewer myself, I have to advise you not to submit it just yet as I would certainly decline it in its current state. Of the four references you have provided, three of them are primary sources (the official website) and the last one doesn't really demonstrate the notability, as it is just a school review website. You will need to find multiple reliable sources that are independent from the school itself. If you can find these sources, I think the article has a good shot at being published. Hope that helps you, friend. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 00:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@EDG 543 Thanks. As a history person i thought that primary sources where the more reliable. thanks for the tip! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chefs-kiss (talkcontribs)
Chefs-kiss, primary sources can be good when used properly but, in this case, the primary sources are sources written directly by the subject in question, meaning they likely contain bias, intentionally or unbeknownst to the source. That is why we out an emphasis on including third-party sources as they don't have any financial motivation to promote the subject. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 14:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@Chefs-kiss:, please remember always to sign your posts with 4 tildes, ~~~~, as you did the fist time. Thanks. MinorProphet (talk) 19:56, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Is a image of Ethiopian artist Betty G searched via google allowed?

Hello i want to add a picture to the wikipedia page of Ethiopian artist Betty G, just a random picture using google search. The artist in question does not seem to fall under US/international copyright laws because she is from Ethiopia. Wikipedia:Non-U.S._copyrights , can i just upload a picture? Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 00:15, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dawit S Gondaria. According to the policy you linked to: it is longstanding Wikipedia policy to respect the copyright law of other nations, even if these do not have official copyright relations with the United States. What this means in practice is determined case by case, bearing in mind the goal of being able to freely distribute Wikipedia in the country an incorporated work originates from. You should be very cautious. I recommend waiting for a freely licensed photo. If you contact the performer or her management, they may be willing to provide one. Please read Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:26, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello Cullen328 thank you. I was actually hoping to add pictures for a dozen of notable Ethiopian artists. In a strict sense it doesn't seem to violate any copyright laws outlined in Wikipedia? So what are the consequences if i add pictures for several Ethiopian artists? Maybe this question deserves it's own section: but does anyone on Wikipedia knows the copyright laws of Ethiopia? Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 01:01, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Please do not try that, Dawit S Gondaria. Read this instead: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Ethiopia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:21, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Dawit S Gondaria. Regarding So what are the consequences if i add pictures for several Ethiopian artists?, I'm not sure what might happen in a WP:REALWORLD sense, and Wikipedia editors can't really give you any advice about that. In a Wikipedia or Commons sense though, the images could end up being discussed and then subsequently deleted if they're felt to be improperly licensed and there's no way to fix their licensing. What this means for you is probably not much since files are deleted all of the time, and people are going to assume it was a good faith mistake. However, if you make a habit out of uploading files with questionable or improper copyright licenses, then a Wikipedia or Commons administrator might determine that a blocking of your account is necessary. My suggestion to you would be to ask about this at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright since that's where you might find a Commons editor who knows a little bit about Ethiopian copyright law or similar situations. Providing as much information about the provenance of the files you want to upload will help in the assessment of their copyright status; so, the more specific information you can provide about an image, the better. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@Cullen328 thank you for providing the link to the copyright rules of Ethiopia! I have read it, and it's seems to be clear in this section> Copyright notes Per U.S. Circ. 38a., the following countries are not a participant in the Berne Convention or any other treaty on copyright with the United States: East Timor, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Iran, Iraq, Palau, Somalia, Somaliland, and South Sudan. As such, works published by citizens of these countries in these countries are usually not subject to copyright protection outside of these countries. Hence, such works may be in the public domain in most other countries worldwide. Ofcourse i could do the decent thing and take your advice by attempting to communicate with performers to be granted permission. Maybe not so decent, but it looks like i don't have to worry about copyright violations? Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 02:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Marchjuly for referring Village Pump, i will ask there! Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 02:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Dawit S Gondaria, You cannot use photos on Google taken by Ethiopian photographs on Wikipedia or Commons because pictures have to be out of copyright in both the source country and in the United States to use it. The only countries that you can take pictures from freely are the Marshall Islands and Somalia, which have no relevant copyright laws at all. Zoozaz1 talk 19:18, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Linking donation account with Wikipedia account

Hello,

I have a recurring donation set up but it does not appear there is a way to link it to my Wikipedia account (so I will still get requests for donations during fundraising). I don't mind it that much but I thought it would be nice if Wikipedia recognized I already contribute regularly.

I am a software engineer/architect so I would even be willing to implement this functionality (going through the steps outlined at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Technical_Decision_Making_Process and following all the procedures/rules from https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developer_hub) if it is not already available and submit a pull request. I just figured I'd ask here first before I go digging for it.

Thank you!

Brian

Bcbradley (talk) 05:28, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

@Bcbradley: Welcome to the Teahouse. You should be able to stop getting donation banners by going to your preferences while logged in and navigating to the Banners tab, where you can uncheck the "Fundraising" option. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:55, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Bcbradley. Note that the facility Tenryuu pointed you at is a way for logged in users to turn off the banners: it is in no way linked to whether or not they are donors. There is as far as I know nothing anywhere in the software that drives Wikipedia (and all the other Mediawiki projects) that has any information about donors. If there were even a possibility that being a donor could affect how the software treated a user, that would compromise Wikipedia's neutrality. --ColinFine (talk) 12:23, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@Bcbradley:, Just to make things clear: your kind donations are to the Wikimedia Foundation, which among other things provides the server hardware on which all the various language Wikipedias run. The English and all other Wikipedias are wholly separate entities, run entirely by volunteers who are unpaid. We have absolutely no way to work out who donates what, and little interest either. I suppose you could you could create a new userbox if you wanted to let other people to know, but you would have to create your own User page first. (Just click on your red user name, add some content like 'Hello, it's me' and click 'Publish'. Same for your Talk page.) Obviously we are grateful for everyone's donations to the Wikimedia Foundation since they allow WP to keep working. Thanks for your enquiry. MinorProphet (talk) 20:40, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Absolutely @MinorProphet and I'm happy that I'm able to do it. I totally get it - we don't want this to turn into a paid service of any kind and, again, it's a slippery slope from making a change for donors. Thank you for expressing gratitude. Bcbradley (talk) 01:26, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey @ColineFine, that's a good point, yeah. It's a slippery slope even if the initial change is merely changing the donation box to something like "thanks for your recurring donations". Bcbradley (talk) 01:24, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
As I understand it, the Foundation stopped showing donation banners to logged-in users, regardless of that setting. Other promotion banners, like Wiki Loves Earth, are a separate matter. Pelagicmessages ) – (22:32 Sun 09, AEST) 12:32, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Is the draft article ready for submission?

Hi, Is Draft:Gilbert Étienne ready to be submitted? Vhhhhjhgy (talk) 05:40, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Vhhhhjhgy. The answer is no. You have only three references. Goodreads is user contributed so not a reliable source. Then you have a memorial by the institution he worked for, so not an independent source. The book review appears OK but you need multiple reliable, independent sources devoting significant coverage to him. Or you need to show that he meets WP:NACADEMIC. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:26, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@Vhhhhjhgy: this almost never happens, but I was able to fix your draft for you and have published it at Gilbert Étienne. It turns out that the French government funded a database of journal articles called Persee, and it (amazingly) had dozens of reviews (example) of his work in quite obscure journals. Thanks for the article. --- Possibly (talk) 09:19, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@Possibly: Wow, that's some review you cite, in immaculate French. "...la Grande-Bretagne a créé un fantastique réseau de canaux d'irrigation" such as the Sukkur barrage. "Dans cette belle étude, Gilbert Etienne nous donne tout ensemble la perspective de l'économie nationale, comme celle de l'intimité villageoise." @Vhhhhjhgy:, you are indeed fortunate to have your draft waved through to mainspace in a single day. As Possibly said, this really doesn't happen much, although I once did much the same thing some time ago. Well done all. MinorProphet (talk) 21:24, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Continious edit requirements on article

I have my article in my Sandbox and have been editing it but the edit option is continuously apperaing what could be wrong with my article? Please help ChabbieCee (talk) 09:21, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

@ChabbieCee: I don't understand what you mean by "edit requirements". I can access and edit User:ChabbieCee/sandbox. The "edit" button on the top right will always be there, like on every article, because Wikipedia can be edited by anybody. Could you elaborate on what your problem is?  Ganbaruby! (talk) 09:36, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
If you are trying to find out what to do to your draft in the hope of having it published as a mainspace article, you ought to read the advice at WP:Your first article, and also read the WP:Manual of Style. When you have updated your draft into a state fit for submission to the AFC process, you can add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
I might have failed to express what i really meant in the question so may i request that somebody looks at my Sandbox article Susan Chenjerai . my questions is based on the topic Susan Chenjerai that needs an edit, Background and Music and acting career that also needs an edit. Thank hope I ma clear this time. ChabbieCee (talk) 10:49, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
I cleaned it up a bit, but still needs work. David notMD (talk) 12:18, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi ChabbieCee. I don't understand why this person is described as "of the 1950s generation" (whatever that means) and at the same time "believed to be in her 80s". Believed by whom? Anyway, if she was born in the 1950s she would now be in her sixties or early seventies.--Shantavira|feed me 12:56, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

hep to edit page

I am dentist who graduated from Government Dental College Mumbai. I was trying to write an article in honor of one of the legendary orthodontists who graduated from the college. Can some one help me improve the article so that we can honor him with his own wikipedia page. I have put what info I had, I'm sure there will be plenty contributions once the page is up for Dr. Hafizuddin S. Shaikh. Zorro14519 (talk) 09:27, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Zorro14519 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please note that the existence of a Wikipedia article is not meant as a way to honor someone or memorialize them; a Wikipedia article is only meant to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. You have submitted your draft for review and it is pending, but it reads like a resume and not an encyclopedia article, While you are waiting for review, please review Your First Article to learn more about Wikipedia, and you may wish to rewrite it to summarize what sources say about this person, instead of simply listing their (significant) accomplishments. 331dot (talk) 09:33, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Courtesy: Draft:Dr. Hafizuddin Shaikh. Needs to be completely revised into Wikipedia format, but first, need to consider if he qualifies as notable, as a well-composed draft about a non-notable person will not be accepted. It is up to you, as the creator, to make this a valid draft. Wikipedia does not allow incomplete work to be at article status, with the hope that other people will fix it later. David notMD (talk) 12:23, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Just to spell something out, Zorro14519, in Wikipedia's jargon, "notable" doesn't mean anything like "famous" or "influential" or "important" or "worthy". It only means "several pieces of significant length about the subject, written by people completely unconnected to him or her or it, have been published in Reliable sources which have good editorial standards." {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.135.95 (talk) 20:22, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

How to get someone to check the article

I have a draft that has been pending for a couple of months now and have worked on the changes that were sent previously. How do I get someone to check the article? Would love to get it published this time! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Flintoclass Moichatterjee (talk) 10:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Moichatterjee, and welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately, you'll just need to wait on that one. There are over 5,000 drafts in the queue and it could take 5 months or more for someone to get to yours. In the meantime, I'm sure there's a lot more you can help out with on Wikipedia at the Task Center if you'd like. Have a great day! Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 13:23, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Moichatterjee, there are nearly 5,500 drafts waiting for review. This backlog however is not a queue as drafts are reviewed in no particular order. It can happen after few hours, weeks or even take 5 months until a draft is reviewed. Draft Flintoclass has not been declined in a review today due it reading more like an advertisement than an encyclopedic article. It appears your interest here is mainly focused on Flintoclass and the related Flintobox. This raises some questions about conflict of interest and paid-editing. In case you have a paid relationship with the company or other forms of conflict of interest, you will need to disclose that. Thanks! – NJD-DE (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks David notMD for striking that "not". That must've been a mix-up of "has not been accepted" and "has been declined". Sorry for any confusion caused. – NJD-DE (talk) 20:42, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

help with new artical

Hi there. I've just made the following article, which was unfortunately declined. However, all the content was from independent, reliable, published sources rather than anything promotional. Do you have any tips on having this approved please? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Adore_Dance_London Joeadore (talk) 11:16, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Joeadore. Unfortunately your draft is rather promotional and fails to demonstrate 'Notability'and really has no place here on Wikipedia . It will probably be deleted shortly, I'm afraid. If every business were to claim an article on the basis that local papers mentioned it once or twice, we'd be snided out with entries, and this website would look more like Yellow Pages than an encyclopaedia. In future, please read this guide about determining businesses notability. I'm sorry to disappoint you on this occasion, but the failure to gain an article on Wikipedia is no reflection on your business itself. Good luck with it. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:37, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

geetha serial information not elaborated

I m senthil.Big fan of Colors Kannada serials.you didnt do detailed information of Geetha serial airing currently in Colors kannada channel.you did for all serials exccpt this.please do detailed information on this serial.like when I click on Geetha it should link to information page similar to other serials.please do it as early as possible. Sallu2000 (talk) 11:20, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Sallu2000. Unfortunately your post here has no context and is rather hard to understand, so nobody can act upon it. If you have concerns about information missing in an article, please post your request on the 'Talk page' of that individual article. That way, other editors interested in the topic will see it. It also helps if you can supply a link to any sources of any information you want adding. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:32, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

in colors kannada page.there is no detailed information on Geetha (no link for that name when i type.last edited by username Anij2443.trying to contact him but couldnt do.please help with my situation.as a fans request. Sallu2000 (talk) 12:04, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Sallu2000. If you are asking about an article on the Kannada Wikipedia, you will need to ask there. Each language edition of Wikipedia is an entirely separate project, and there is probably nobody here familiar with that Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 12:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Sallu2000, if you have a suggestion or request for the article Colors Kannada, then please post it at Talk:Colors Kannada. -- Hoary (talk) 12:34, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Can someone help me review my submitted article?

I have provided additional references and I would love to see the review. I would be glad if someone can help me trim the references to the standard of the Wikipedia and to help arrange the information template showing name, date, education, country, and occupation, please. Mountain120 (talk) 12:37, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Mountain120, if this is about Draft:Idegu Ojonugwa Shadrach, an obvious problem is that it cites no sources at all. Unless you can fix this before it's reviewed, it will certainly not be accepted. Please read Help:Referencing for beginners to learn how to cite sources. Maproom (talk) 13:16, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
I am a beginner and I lack the knowledge of fixing the problem. Can't you help me fix it or help me tell other editors to help me on that, please?Mountain120 (talk) 14:08, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
The problem is not that no sources are included, but rather how they are cited. For example, "Godwin, Onyemaechi (2021-05-01). “An exclusive Chart with Idegu Ojonugwa Shadrach”. thelaurelsmag.com.ng." doesn't help anyone who wants to verify the content, as it is missing a deep URL to the page, making a seprate google search nessesary. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:21, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Hello and welcome @Mountain120, please start by reading WP:YFA, the article in its current state would never be accepted into mainspace. Furthermore, I caught something else, which is, you are writing an autobiography see (WP:AUTO) immediately or in the very least you are writing about someone you are very close to, although i am positive the former is the case here. Writing about yourself or someone you are close to constitutes a conflict of interest see WP:COI and whilst submitting the article through the WP:AFC process is good practice declaring that a COI is present is required as well. Generally our stance for now is writing about yourself or a friend is ”very much discouraged”. Invariably, that is a bridge we’d have to cross if at all we make it there. For now, taking 5-15 minutes to read each of these; WP:YFA, WP:REFB, WP:RS, WP:COI, WP:NPOV, WP:AUTO, & WP:CITE might prove pivotal. Celestina007 (talk) 23:18, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Is making a wikipedia page for a friend a COI?

All, I'm still very new to the site, and I'm starting to get the hang of adding edits, but I haven't yet taken the plunge into creating a new page. I read the conflict of interest rules, and I wasn't quite sure if they applied to the situation where I want to create a page for a friend. He's not paying me, and in fact I sometimes donate to his non-profit, but I wanted to make sure our friendship wouldn't constitute a conflict of interest. His work has been featured extensively around the world in hundreds of news articles, so I think he definitely is notable enough for the page, but I didn't want to create it without checking. Would really appreciate any thoughts/guidance. NerdOfAllTrades42 (talk) 14:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello NerdOfAllTrades42 and welcome to the Teahouse. As stated at WP:COI "You should generally refrain from creating articles about yourself, or anyone you know". If you still want to proceed, please make sure you follow the guidance there, and remember that An article about your friend isn't necessarily a good thing.--Shantavira|feed me 14:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
NerdOfAllTrades42, you can use the Articles for Creation process, which is OK for an editor with a declared conflict of interest. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:57, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Nepotism

I am a fan of Indian rapper Emiway Bantai. So I searched on Wikipedia to make him, I got the protection by his main title administrators. It is normal that when an article can not prove its notice, the administrators protect him for some time or forever. Then I got a draft of Emiway Bantai Draft:Emiway. I made some improvements in it and submitted for review. An experienced user Dan arndt's contribution on the second day Draft got. He really did a lot of notable work. He added all the reliable and notable sources on the draft and made him notable. Then a NPR had also accepted the AFC but he took a shortage of sources in the discography section of the article so he moved back to his draft space. I did not feel bad about this. I put the sources to fulfill and back review. Later I talked about this topic, he told me that I would like to move it to its Man Space Emiway Bantai. Due to the protection by the main title administrator, he also made the administrator message (read talk message) to the administrator to reduce the protection level of the main title. After a while, a NPR made him dickel that it is read like advertising. Then I improved it and put it back for review. After a while, another user made him dickel that it recently discussed the deletion discussion that it is not yet to be formed. What is this reason? OK assumed that this reason is important. So it is not important that there were free and reliable sources on the draft and also cover musical notability? I again made a lot of time by improving it in it. After a while, he has rejected him as an experienced, great, scholar, wise man, that Topic is not a notable and is read. I got very angry at that time. When I talked to that great person on this topic, he refused to remove the reject notice and started accusing me why do you keep it so interested in making it? It happened many times so I have never made an account. I show you a lot of articles in which there is not a source that passes GNG. And are also approved by the critics. There is a question on them, but the questions are raised on it which gives strong and freely source. What is this nepotism? Many users will be angry with my words but I have told the truth. 2402:3A80:10CA:7818:4405:2454:998D:BEC8 (talk) 15:21, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

If a topic is not notable, then it is not notable. If other users say that something is not notable then you cannot just try creating the page again and again with no improvement, especially when it contains copyright violations and other issues. When you don't understand the feedback you've been given, you need to ask the people who gave you it. The few volunteers we have working in the area of approving/declining drafts have to manage hundreds to thousands of drafts, so they do not have much time, and if they ask you questions like "Are you associated with Emiway?", it's not an insult—it's because 9 out of 10 times they ask somebody the question, the answer is "yes". If you can name some examples of articles that you think do not pass GNG then I can look at them and see whether I agree, and if so, nominate them for deletion. — Bilorv (talk) 16:32, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Notability of city manager position

Is the bureaucratic position of city manager in a United States city a position of notability? Should the holder of such an office be counted as notable having only ever worked for such an office? All referencing (100%) is in local newspapers and magazines. Asking here as I am contemplating taking to AfD, but don't want to waste anyone's time there if the position is somehow inherently notable. GenQuest "scribble" 16:04, 8 May 2021 (UTC) GenQuest "scribble" 16:04, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Nothing is inherently notable, so ultimately it will depend on the quality, depth, and reliability of source coverage. That said, there is nothing inherently wrong with local sources if they meet the criteria for reliability and independence, and the coverage is substantial and in-depth rather than just routine blurbs. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@GenQuest: obviously I don't know which article you're referring to, but my gut reaction is to say that it's unlikely a city manager would be notable per se, and not if its only local media coverage of things he's done locally. Most coverage would be likely to be about his work, not about him, so wouldn't be that relevant. If such local coverage were acceptable, then I'd expect someone to rush to write a Wikipedia page about me - absolutely tons of local coverage in the press and media over the years about stuff I've done and said, but nothing apart from an hour long local radio interview about me, so I'm clearly not a notable subject. Though try telling that to my kids, as they'd go much further and simply say I'm a complete embarrassment and a total waste of space! But aren't all Dads? Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:14, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Why am I getting warnings for no reason?

I am get warnings from Throadislong saying I am ruining work on Teahouse. The only thing I was doing was answering questions. Can somebody tell me why Theroadislong is warning me? DavidPlayzYT (talk) 16:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

You have given incorrect advice and your edits have become disruptive, please stop. Theroadislong (talk) 16:54, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
DavidPlayzYT, you do not yet have the experience or the knowledge to answer questions here at the Teahouse. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:58, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Also, on your User page, you have posted that you have received eight Teahouse-related badges. None of that is true. Please remove false content from your User page. David notMD (talk) 20:50, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Including the Userboxes that state you are a Teahouse host and an AfC reviewer. Qualified AfC reviewers are needed, but given that most of your article edits were reverted and you have never created an article, it is also premature for you to be active at AfC. Among other criteria, reviewers must have a Wikipedia account at least 90 days old and a minimum of 500 undeleted edits to articles. David notMD (talk) 20:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

UPDATE: DavidPlayzYT: An editor removed the Teahouse badge icons. Up to you now to remove the AfC reviewer Userboxes. One hopes in time that you will become an experienced Wikipedia editor and you can consider becoming an AfC reviewer. David notMD (talk) 22:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

(talk) I shall delete the account instead. This is the last you shall see of me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidPlayzYT (talkcontribs) 14:15, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

How Many References Does One Need for a Biography of Living Person

I am curious to know if there is a minimum number of references for a biography of living person in Wikipedia as I have noticed how several times my drafts have been marked for insufficient references which I have compared to other approved articles which have lesser references but were approved. Is there a specific number of references required to get a draft approved? If yes, how many please? I have read the notability policy but get confused after finding articles with just 5 or less references approved while my drafts have more but is declined. Thanks for the response. Bibihans (talk) 17:04, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Bibihans Bibihans (talk) 17:04, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Bibihans. There is no magic number because the quality of the sources is far more important than the quantity. If a person is the subject of a book length biography issued by a major publisher and a ten page profile in a major magazine, then those two are probably enough. On the other hand, twenty passing mentions, name checks, instances of coverage in unreliable sources or sources that lack independence would not be enough. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:16, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you @Cullen328:. This is really helpful. User talk:Bibihans

Account confirmation

I want to know how many days does it take for the text account to be confirmed? Mahsaghazanfari20 (talk) 17:06, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Mahsaghazanfari20. A new account becomes autoconfirmed after it has been open for at least four full days, and has made at least ten edits. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:19, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

filter 1134 frequently triggering

Why is the private LTA filter 1134 showing up in AIV frequently? Dudhhr (talk) 19:20, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

I do not believe that this is likely to be answered here, for two reasons 1) You need special user rights to view private filters, and not all of the respondees here have them, and 2) talking too much about the filter contetns would be inappropiate due to WP:BEANS. In general, the most likely reason this frequently triggers on AIV is that whoever LTA this is talking is frequently disrupting there. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:38, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello Dudhhr, edit filters are tripped all the time - see Special:Abuselog. There is a bot that reports users who trip specified filters to AIV - normally those users require immediate blocks. Per Victor Schmidt, only administrators and a few non-admins (Edit filter helpers/managers) can view private filters, 1134 being an example, and private filters are usually private for a reason. Best, Pahunkat (talk) 20:30, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Bugged Afc template

So I have perms to instant create/move articles, but when I moved Colonial Pipeline cyberattack to mainspace, it added a Afc template saying "This article, Colonial Pipeline cyberattack, has recently been created via the Articles for creation process." even though I bypassed the Afc process with a direct instant move like I have done for the last year. I don't want to remove it and have one of my like 30 contribution watchers get mad, so can someone who had Afc ability review the new article and remove the tag? Thanks for the help in advance. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:30, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip: The template was not added when you moved the page. See the version you moved - it was there all the time, possibly just not displaying while in the Draft: namespace. --CiaPan (talk) 21:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
So weird. I never have seen that before in the dozens of articles I started in the last year. Good to note that it was there though. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:54, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Mohd Kaif Mewati

Why my page deleted again and again Mohd Kaif Mewati (talk) 22:07, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

See the notes on your talk page: User_talk:Mohd_Kaif_Mewati RudolfRed (talk) 22:36, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Mohf Kaif Mewati. When an article you have tried to write has been deleted six times it is a pretty good bet that it is simply not an appropriate subject for Wikipedia. As I am not an admin, I can't look at the deleted drafts; but since they seem to have the same name as your user account, it seems likely that you are trying to write an article about yourself. This is a thoroughly bad idea, because Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. To successfully write about yourself, you would need to find those independent sources, forget everything you know about yourself, and write based only on what those independent sources say about you: most people cannot do this. Please see Autobiography and notability. --ColinFine (talk) 22:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
As an admin, I can confirm that Mohd Kaif Mewati has been deleted 3 times and appears to be autobiographical in nature and this also applies to the twice deleted user page, based on the username of the account on hand. @Mohd Kaif Mewati: Please cease its recreation immediately at any location and review the advise given above by ColinFine before proceeding with further edits. Further disruption and failure to get the point could very well result in a loss of editing privileges; as is, Mohd Kaif Mewati has been restricted so that only editors who are extended confirmed can recreate it (as an addendum: do not try to get around this by gaming the system or I will increase its protection to admin only and you will be blocked).
However, with that said, if you have any questions about policy, notability, etc. we are more than happy to assist and help to answer them. I do remember how it was confusing to navigate when I first started editing Wikipedia in 2017 and the users who helped me overcome that hurdle; I do like to pay it forward when I can, as do most of us here. --TheSandDoctor Talk 04:57, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

RE: Book-maker

Where can I find the option to print in book form? Annie2021 (talk) 22:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Annie2021. I'm pretty sure that that function is still withdrawn, and hasn't been available for the last couple of years. I'll try and look into it for you, though in the meantime someone with more knowledge in this area might be able to update you. It is still possible to download a single article as a PDF via the link in the left side tool bar (under print/export). Nick Moyes (talk) 22:29, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@Annie2021: I went away and though at first I might have been mistaken, though I don't think so. See Help:Books and the discussion at the bottom of its talk page to mark it as 'historic' which was strongly opposed. Yet, clicking on the link to activate the Book Creation tool displays an update on its limited functionality. Yet, there is a big blue link there to start collecting articles to make into a book. I gave it a try, added four articles, but when I tried to print the book as a pdf (at Special:Book) I was told I couldn't. Yet, the link to PediaPress still functions, and so it's possible to pay for them to print articles for you in book form, but not to make a pdf of it of your won. Why that is I have no idea, I'm afraid. Note that there are also free online tools to join multiple pdfs together for free which you can then print yourself. I hope this rather waffly answer helps you a bit! Nick Moyes (talk) 22:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikilink

how do I use the correct '[' when stating a link? Example: How? Please, help --2601:901:4400:3900:7455:3507:6E9D:3634 (talk) 22:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)A user 2601:901:4400:3900:7455:3507:6E9D:3634 (talk) 22:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I don't understand your question: you have successfully put a wikilink in your question. What is the problem: --ColinFine (talk) 22:49, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Well, as you did, double brackets at both ends. And, as you did, with a pipe "|" if you want it to read different from what is the actual Wikilink. David notMD (talk) 22:57, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Peacockery

Can someone explain what peacocky is? I'm accused of it by another editor. Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 23:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

@Cheryl Fullerton: Check out WP:PEACOCK. In a nutshell, it means you are not using neutral language in the article. RudolfRed (talk) 23:58, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! I thought I was stating facts with reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheryl Fullerton (talkcontribs) 00:01, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Cheryl Fullerton, a source might be reliable, and present correct facts, but describe them in non-neutral terms that stem from a positive (or negative) judgement of the subject's qualities.
For example, if John Doe donates a million dollars to Charity X, a reliable source such as a reputable newspaper might refer to ". . . the generous and benevolent action of this selfless donor . . . ." The fact is that John Doe donated $1m to Charity X. The generosity, etc., is the newspaper's value judgement, which might be mistaken (it was secretly a tax dodge or money-laundering operation, and John Doe is a cold, cynical, self-interested crook).
Wikipedia strives to include only the bare facts, without the peacockery. My fictional example was extreme and exaggerated, but in more realistic instances separating the facts from the (often unconscious) positive (or negative) value judgements can be quite difficult. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.125.73.196 (talk) 21:26, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

How do I get out of the sandbox?

Hello - I am trying to get the write-up for my movie, "Music in Monk Time", out of the Sandbox and into Wikipedia circulation. I have been working on it for about 8 months and multiple edits. The film will finally be broadcast in the U.S. in a little more than a month. It is very important to me to get out of the Sandbox and into Wikipedia ASAP. Thank you! Thedevoutcatalyst Thedevoutcatalyst (talk) 23:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Thedevoutcatalyst Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You seem to have a common misconception about what Wikipedia is. It is not a place to merely tell about something, and has no interest in helping to spread the word about something like a film. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as such Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic(like a film), showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable film. Wikipedia is not interested in what a subject wants to say about itself. In addition, you have a conflict of interest. You may submit a draft, however, using Articles for creation. Please read Your first article. 331dot (talk) 23:51, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@Thedevoutcatalyst, you are definitely referencing this, unfortunately there’s going to be a huge stagnancy at this juncture. As 331dot correctly implied, Wikipedia isn’t an indiscriminate collection of every and all articles. There are so many problems with the article both fundamentally and technically. Many editors have to be involved with this question, if I may ask, in the said 8 months did you reach out to any editor for help regarding the article? because if you did, they might have told you that you were working with a wrong assumption. Celestina007 (talk) 00:00, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
I have a different assessment. This film was reviewed by renowned jazz critics Leonard Feather and Philip Elwood (somebody should write a biography of him). A Google Books search for "music in monk time" shows that the film was covered in at least 19 music magazines and books in the 1980s. This is clearly a notable documentary film about one of the greatest jazz musicians. The biggest problem is not notabity, but rather that the draft is full of unreferenced original research. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:16, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello again - I must say, for the uninitiated, Wikipedia is very difficult to figure out. A man named Alan1 helped me link the references for the reviews and I have many more of them, but I had no idea what the process was or how to contact an editor. I simply stumbled onto Teahouse. When I first started writing this, it was just to acknowledge that the film existed. The fact that "Music in Monk Time" finally about to be seen in the U.S. after 38 years is a strange circumstance due to COVID and the inability of SF Jazz to continue with live jazz shows. I NEVER considered this a vehicle to promote the film. I would be happy to comply with Wikipedia standards. I'm willing to devote the needed time, and I guess it will take as long as it takes. Now do I put the tildes in? Thedevoutcatalyst (talk) 02:23, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@Thedevoutcatalyst: I remember how confusing Wikipedia was when I first started editing in 2017. I have taken a look at the draft in your sandbox and have made a couple of edits to it to help you out, including fixing up the three references currently included. I have also added "citation needed" tags to the draft to assist with where citations are needed, but in short: they are missing in the vast majority of the draft. I may keep poking away at assisting with it. I would recommend reviewing this guide to referencing for beginners, this guide to creating your first article, and this interactive guide that shows the basics of editing. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to us. We are happy to help! --TheSandDoctor Talk 05:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

does the teahouse welcome new guests?

Does the teahouse welcome in their invites? Ollhg87 (talk) 01:37, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

It most certainly does. Welcome! This is the place to discuss all sorts of thinks about wikipedia. --Bduke (talk) 01:39, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

How to cite any source for any sort of information on wikipeida.

I read blogs and articles frequently, and use to add this information to wikipedia to help others too. But whenever I try to link that information to any source(website url), this work is counted in spammings. Can you tell me the right way to cite any information with reliable sources(website url or something like that) Bhavik Bansal 777 (talk) 05:00, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@Bhavik Bansal 777: You can go to the reliable sources noticeboard, but an easier way would just be to listen to what other more experienced editors are telling you. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 05:09, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Bhavik Bansal 777, so long as you continue to make inappropriate edits like this, you will find your edits reverted as spam. Since when is your website considered a reliable source on Wikipedia?--Quisqualis (talk) 06:25, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Blogs are rarely considered reliable sources. Stop adding jobsofficials as a reference. David notMD (talk) 09:43, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Also, @Bhavik Bansal 777, you shouldn't copy text verbatim from other web sites, it's against the law, even if you cite where you got it from. Pelagicmessages ) – (07:04 Tue 11, AEST) 21:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Law or just start with a band of friends?

I'm interested in helping revise the painfully shoddy articles on Indian law and caselaw as they stand. It's an incredibly rich field of material that has weird Sections, sometimes inaccurate information, and a terrible mass of missing articles with improper citations. I'm happy to fix this one article a day but I'm wondering whether there are any standards for these articles, or templates for law articles that are from India in particular, and if there are any reform projects of this kind that already exist that I can refer to. Thanks! Semanticz0 (talk) 05:11, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thank you for your interst in helping out with Indian Law and case law! As per your question, you will have to stick to wikipeida guidelines off course, furthermore you might want to look in the WikiProject law page for further info on standards! Have a good day Trains2050 (talk) 05:29, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I went ahead with some edits, and saw that the Infobox for SCI cases was listed for merging with the Infobox for Court cases. I went ahead and altered all the SCI case transclusions to Courtcase transclusions to make the merge possible. What's the next step? Who do I notify? Semanticz0 (talk) 12:53, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! I'll get on it. Semanticz0 (talk) 06:14, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
@Semanticz0: As is with real life, your best bet is to observe and learn and then if you feel you have anything to contribute, you can go from there. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 06:35, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
I'll keep that in mind, Tim Semanticz0 (talk) 06:41, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I went ahead with some edits, and saw that the Infobox for SCI cases was listed for merging with the Infobox for Court cases. I went ahead and altered all the SCI case transclusions to Courtcase transclusions to make the merge possible. What's the next step? Who do I notify? Semanticz0 (talk) 12:53, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

What to do if I want to use two different sources from same author, published in the same year

Hello admins, I have a question:

  • I am recently expanding the article Chandra, but there's one problem.
  • I want to use {{sfn}} but there are two different sources, written by the same author (Roshen Dalal). Surprisingly, both the books are published in 2010.
  • Now how should I use {{sfn}} for both the sources:
    • Dalal, Roshen (2010). The Religions of India: A Concise Guide to Nine Major Faiths. Penguin Books India. ISBN 978-0-14-341517-6.

Please tell me what to do. .245CMR.👥📜 07:28, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

What to do is explained here. It doesn't explain which should be "a" and which "b"; but this really doesn't matter (you can choose by flipping a coin, if you wish). -- Hoary (talk) 07:32, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
@Hoary: Thank you .245CMR.👥📜

Why is there so much adult content here

I was just browsing and reading through Wikipedia and I was shocked to see a male penis in Wikipedia.....in the page ejaculation....admins please pay attention to it... someone is vandalising and adding explicit content to Wikipedia...as there are many children browsing Wikipedia Perthirvin (talk) 10:39, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:40, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Help:Options to hide an image explains how parents can block images if they intend to allow their children to use Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 13:42, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Did you intend to read that article? If you did, it shouldn't be surprising to see such an image. As noted, you can suppress the display of images if you want to avoid seeing such things. 331dot (talk) 13:56, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Hehe. Panini!🥪 15:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

What format for footnotes is best?

When I began writing and editing Wikipedia articles, I inserted footnotes as I would in writing a hard-copy book or article, e.g. in the first footnote, a full citation of author's name, title, publisher, date, etc.; in the second and subsequent footnotes from the same source, author's last name, and page no. only.

A year or so ago, I began to use the sfn format, but I began to get error messages like this: sfn error: multiple targets (2×). The problem was explained to me by another editor, so I've conquered that problem (maybe).

My question is: what advantage is there to using the sfn format? Or any other format template? Why shouldn't I go back to the traditional hard-copy method of footnotes which seems simpler and less error prone than diddling with sfn or other templates. I'll stick with sfn if somebody can tell me why I should. Smallchief (talk) 10:53, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Your questions are reasonable, but there are a lot of them. I'll take one: Why shouldn't you go back to "the traditional hard-copy method" of "in the first footnote, a full citation of author's name, title, publisher, date, etc.; in the second and subsequent footnotes from the same source, author's last name, and page no. only"? First, because if I see in one reference "Barker 1998, 29", finding among the earlier references what "Barker 1998" is can be a bit of a pain. Secondly, because preceding the note saying "Alonzo Barker, Prolegomenon to the Morphology of Pali (Leiden: Brill, 1988; ISBN [blah blah])" with another reference to the same work would require shifting the full deets to the new place: a further complication. Thirdly, because articles are, in principle, created by many contributors, and many will be surprised, or worse, by your use of your preferred method. This is not to say that I'm a big fan of WP's preferred flavour of the Vancouver system. Since references appear in order of first appearances rather than order of authors' names, I've no idea why a reference should start "Marx, Karl" rather than "Karl Marx". Also, the system is poorly designed for references to different pages (or page spans) within the same long work. -- Hoary (talk) 13:05, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Hi, @Smallchief: Thanks for asking. <Mounts hobbyhorse> Short answer: there is no particular advantage. Both methods have equally good arguments for and against. Long answer: Manual ('hard copy') refs are simply easier to create and need no debugging. Likewise, bibliographies can be constructed by hand without {{cite book}} etc. On the other hand, the template-driven {{sfn}}s can connect automatically to {cite book}, {cite journal} etc, without all this <ref name="Wotevs"> malarkey, but you have to completely master the vast majority of the parameters of {cite}s and {sfn}s in order to make them work properly. There are huge numbers of failed {sfn}s all over the place. On the other hand, <ref name="Wotevs"> allows you to see at a glance all refs to one particular source: {sfns} can't gather all refs to one source like this. Learning {sfns} and [cite}s constitutes another order of magnitude of learning and effort, but if you have got this far, I strongly suggest you persevere.
In addition, the advantages of {sfn}s are sadly crippled by default. You need to go to Preferences → Gadgets and disable 'Navigation popups' and enable 'Reference Tooltips', and then all you need to do is hover your mouse over the inline ref/sfn to see the short footnote it creates and then the cite in the bibliography created by [cite book}. I think this is by far the best advantage of sfns: you don't have go hunting all the way down the refs and biblio to find the source. This is the thing that manual/hard-coded refs simply cannot do. (In truth they probably can, but I don't care.) Unfortunately, this combination of options in Gadgets is not the default, although I'm fairly sure most people would appreciate it.
Anyway, I have an incomplete and somewhat out of date how-to at User:MinorProphet/The joy of sfn, and a couple of sections on my talk page to do with the subject: if you'd like to continue this discussion there I would be most happy, but here's as good a place as any. <Dismounts hobbyhorse> MinorProphet (talk) 14:07, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi, @Hoary:, I agree with most of what you say. You said ...why a reference should start "Marx, Karl" rather than "Karl Marx". I would suggest that it's not a reference, it's a cite. Manual/hard coded refs like <ref>Marx, p. 285</ref> should point to an alpha-ordered bibliography, and I have never ever seen a biblio ordered by first name. If you are thinking of <ref name="Kapital"> {{cite book |last=Marx |first=Karl |title=Das Kapital |etc.}}</ref> well, that's what you tend to get the world over. Referencing on WP brings out the very worst in people, because there is no single agreed style. It's an unholy free-for-all, a horrendous mish-mash of whatever you like, and IMHO it does WP a great disservice. Through the {cite} templates, CSS1|2 implements what I call 'Wikipedia Style', an idiosyncratic mix of Chicago, APA, Vancouver etc, and for all its faults, it allows a consistent formatting of any source.
You also said "..many will be surprised, or worse, by your use of your preferred method." Obviously WP:consensus is needed for existing articles, but is there evidence of WP:CITEVAR? I haven't looked at Smallchief's contribs, but if he/she is creating new articles with {sfns}, that's obviously fine. I have converted a number of articles to {sfn}/{cite book}, but they need monitoring to keep reffing consistent. Many many editors just don't have the time or patience to master the parameters of the templates, or the patience to debug them when they go wrong. Regards, MinorProphet (talk) 15:04, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks guys (or gals) for the advice. I'll stick with sfn and benefit from your expertise.Smallchief (talk) 10:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

New article and redirs that I can't quite work out

Hi — another editor (@Clock at 13: courtesy ping) recently created an article on The High Fives Gang, plus a new redir from Black Jack Christian to existing article at High Fives Gang (rather confusingly titled that, but actually more about Black Jack Christian). There are also pre-existing redirs to the latter article, from variations of the gang name. I don't know whether I should propose a merger of the two articles, or just sort out the redirs, or something else? Part of the problem here is the mismatch between the title and content of High Fives Gang. Also, it's not obvious to me whether Mr Christian and his gang warrant two separate articles or should be merged. Anyone care to take a look and suggest a solution? Thanks, DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:11, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Adivse on the article

Draft:Tony Chittettukalam can you please give me some advise to improve the article. Also can you comment on the chances of getting approval for this article. Ajaysnair112233 (talk) 13:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

The genres may be various, but isn't it worth specifying them? If he does all these things, what has been said (in reliable sources, of course) about what he has done? The infobox says that he's "Known for Lifeline Group of Companies"; it's very odd then that this doesn't seem to be mentioned in the article text. -- Hoary (talk) 13:40, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

User sub page

Hello! I have a question. Is it possible to make a page in which I could have links to all the articles I have made? I know there is x.tools and my sandbox, but I was thinking of making a page called User:Paul Vaurie/Articles or something like that. Am I allowed to create this type of page? Paul Vaurie (talk) 14:28, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Paul Vaurie, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, you certainly are. You may create as many user subpages as you like, as long as they satisfy UPYES. --ColinFine (talk) 14:52, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! Paul Vaurie (talk) 15:06, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

How do I make my draft not to appear self promoting and conflict of interest

As a new member I have been accused of either my draft being self promoting or conflict of interest (paid editor) due to my effort to ensure my draft does not breach copyright of publications copied from primary and secondary sources, and adhering strictly to Wikipedia policies. I try to study other articles published on Wikipedia and it gets more difficult to clearly differentiate my draft from approved articles. What am I missing? Thank you for the patience in guiding us newbies. Bibihans (talk) 14:41, 9 May 2021 (UTC)Bibihans

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: Draft:Elijah Chinezim OnyeagbaBerrely • TalkContribs 15:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
First, if you are not being paid or otherwise compensated, state that on your Talk page, as you were asked to do. Second, don't copy. Your draft has been declined once for insufficient references, so while waiting for a new review, continue to improve on the referencing. David notMD (talk) 16:33, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
It is possible that it is WP:TOOSOON in his political career for him to be considered notable. David notMD (talk) 16:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
@David notMD|WP:TOOSOON Does this mean that no matter what someone has accomplished in his other career, it is only that which he/she becomes popular in that will be considered notable? For example, someone who had a robust career in business and then suddenly becomes elected a governor, minister or even president cannot be considered Wikipedia qualified and TOOSOON to be published? Bibihans (talk) 09:14, 11 May 2021 (UTC)Bibihans

Help on Article

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

My article has been rejected again and because of not enough reputable sources. Ido think that that is not the case since all the article I used as sources are from pubmed and other sources that can be checked. I did use definition of general items with Wikipedia and Iam not sure if that is what raising the flag. Any help is much appreciated. Mikip1015 (talk) 15:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Mikip1015, welcome to the Teahouse.
Your draft wasn't rejected due to the lack of reliable sources, but due to the lack of inline citations for contentious content. Wikipedia requires that all articles about living persons have a reliably sourced inline citation for every contentious claim. The subject appears to be notable, and all you have to do is either find reliable source for the content that does not have an inline citation, or just remove it. Hope this helps! — Berrely • TalkContribs 15:20, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Your draft has been declined NOT rejected, it could use some independent secondary sourcing, all your sources are to his own work also we don't use any external links in the body of an article please remove, some of them may be suitable for use as references though. Theroadislong (talk) 15:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)


Thank you! I will take a look and remove the inline citation or find reputable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikip1015 (talkcontribs) 15:35, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Mikip1015 - References to work conducted in his laboratory do not contribute to establishing his notability. David notMD (talk) 16:45, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

not able to post article

Arjun verma moved to draftspace An article you recently created, Arjun verma, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Arjunavish (talk) 15:39, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link to draft Draft:Arjun verma. Theroadislong (talk) 15:41, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Arjunavish. What is your question? The reasons for declining your daft are explained in the notice at the top of the page. This is an encyclopaedia of Notable things, and the following style of writing has absolutely no place here whatsoever.: "..at mere age of 17, is today a brand personality who considers his work as a divination of pure aura." In addition, please find good quality, reliable and independent sources (avoiding interviews with the subject themselves). And if you are connected with the subject in any way, please follow the instructions at this 'Conflict of Interest' page. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:53, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Profile picture

How to know if the author gives permission to use their work or not? I want to change the profile picture of some singers Defsshhxx (talk) 16:34, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@Defsshhxx: Wikipedia does not contain "profiles", Wikipedia has articles. Wikipedia assumes images are copyrighted and therefore cannot be used unless there is specific evidence otherwise and the license the image is under is one of the accepted ones. Because the subjects are still living (or at least I assume so), uploading them under Fair Use is not an option, because Wikipedia's fair use criteria require that no free alternate could be created, which is almost never the case for living persons, since theoretically someone can go and take one. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:42, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
@Defsshhxx: You can always contact them and ask them for a photo, and share this link. Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. I've been able to get photos for some articles this way, but don't be upset if they don't respond. The permission verbiage throws some people off. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:46, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Question

Why are you preventing me to edit on the sponge one the run page? Pizzafan300 (talk) 16:40, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge on the Run. Explained to you on your Talk page, including warning that you are risking being indefinitely blocked. The hosts here at Teahouse help editors who have question about how to edit, not about contentious content changes. David notMD (talk) 16:48, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
How about you stop trying to change the article to have it your way and focussing on the D part of WP:BRD now? You probbably are going to need to have some reliable sources ready for citing (amazon isn't) and should take a deep view into WP:AGF beforehand. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:58, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Hi, I have tried following the guidelines provided to my knowledge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:H._Balasubramaniam is denied for not having reliable sources. I have provided links including government of India site which has mentioned his name for receiving presidential award. I have linked his publications. I am not sure what else I would need to provide. Please help. Thank you 2600:8800:169C:8900:7D39:5D60:319F:E49C (talk) 16:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. "Mention his name" is not enough. (It might be enough for substantiating some particular information in an article when notability is already demonstrated). For sources to contribute to notability, they must be all three of reliable|, independent|, and containing significant coverage of the subject. --ColinFine (talk) 17:11, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Copyright/Plagariarism Inquiry

Hi! I am probably a tad too accustomed to Wikipedia to use the Teahouse, however, I have an inquiry. I have recently found an article which I believe constitutes plagiarism (it copies a substantial piece of text from a website - they even have the same typo, which is how I found the page.). However, the article does cite the website though it doesn't say it is the exact wording. If it is any use, the website ends in gov.au so it from the Australian government.

My questions: 1. Is this plagiarism, copyright infringement, something else or is it acceptable? 2. What should I do?

Thank you EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 20:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@EvanTaylor1289: It could be plagiarism but which content is the original?. See Wikipedia:Copyright violations#Dealing with copyright violations. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:40, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
@Timtempleton: Because it is from the Australian government, I'm going to hazard a guess that they copied it from the Australian government. Thank you, I will now follow the guidance from the link you have given me. EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 20:48, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Follow-up,note: turns out in this case that the government page is CC-BY, and the article gives attribution with {{NSW-SHR-CC}}. Pelagicmessages ) – (06:03 Tue 11, AEST) 20:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

What to do when someone doesn't engage in comments?

Hey there, I am trying to avoid an edit war. I am a relatively new editor and have been editing a local politicians page, particularly removing unsubstantiated information. Someone keeps reverting the page back after I make changes and hasn't engaged in any discussions on the talk page, or my messages on their talk page. Is there any other way to engage with them? The article in question is on Sam Cho

Thanks! Elah cix (talk) 21:06, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@Elah cix: Try using the template {{yo|User name here}} . For example, that is how I notified you. Note - I am not a Teahouse contributor, in fact I asked the question above, however I knew how to answer this question. EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 21:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

STATUS: Edit warring has been going on since 27 April 2021, first as IP, then as Elah cix. Opposing editor is Misoaqua98, who has been editing that article since September 2020. Elah cix started a discussion on article's Talk page in late April. Misoagua98 has not participated. David notMD (talk) 21:56, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Encyclopedia.com

Can encyclopedia.com be used as a reference for facts such as date of birth and education? David notMD (talk) 21:50, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: weird seeing you asking rather than answering here! Yes, Encyclopedia.com generally reproduces reliable, published works on license (as I understand it). It can take some effort to derive the sources sometimes so as to reference them as thoroughly as possible, but it's reliable. I used it most recently myself with ref 13 on The Scorpion God. If there's a particular case you have in mind I don't mind doing a bit of digging › Mortee talk 22:23, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Slightly surprised it's not on the perennial sources list. Perhaps others will weigh in › Mortee talk 22:28, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Olanzapine

My name is Dr abdikadir shaib I invented olanzapine how can I edit olanzapine and add my name ass the one who invented the drug Cadnan99 (talk) 21:59, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

You have been editing Olanzapine since 11 March and have been reverted, and warned on your Talk page for making edits at that article (and elsewhere) without providing citations or providing flawed citations. Given that you have a conflict of interest (see WP:COI), the proper path for you is to state your proposed changes on the Talk page of the article, with references. Other editors will decide what to do. David notMD (talk) 22:05, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
By coincidence, I noticed this Teahouse thread after I had add a section on the chemical synthesis of olanzapine to the article. My edit added a reference to the original Lilly patents, which clearly state the names of the inventors, not including anyone called Dr abdikadir shaib. To me, that makes it extremely unlikely that you, Cadnan99 had anything to do with it. If you did, please provide a reliable source for that assertion. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Save a draft...

Hello, I am creating a Wiki page for the first time. Is there a way to leave my page construction in progress? That is, can I save a draft and return to my efforts later? KGlad13 (talk) 22:59, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@KGlad13: Yes - you can save it in your sandbox. Click the sandbox link at the top of the page when you are logged in. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:01, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
What may well have confused you, KGlad13 is the lack of any obvious alternative to "Publish changes". But "publishing" in that context just means "saving (and allowing others to see this)". So when you want to save, you should "publish" -- and as Timtempleton says, while editing your "sandbox". That said, I'd strongly advise you to work on existing articles before launching a draft of your own. -- Hoary (talk) 23:29, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you kindly These comments were very helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KGlad13 (talkcontribs) 00:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

What's the process for upgrading an article?

I have been reading wikipedia for as long as I can remember and I have always wanted to know how does an article move from good, featured, etc? And how are articles downgraded alike? Caustic3 (talk) 00:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

@Caustic3: Copied from Wikipedia:Good articles/Summary:

The process for designating an article as a good article is intentionally straightforward. Any editor, preferably one who creates or contributes to an article, who believes that the article meets the good article criteria, may nominate the article for an impartial reviewer to assess. Another editor may review the article after selecting it from a queue of good article nominations then evaluating it against the good article criteria. If it is accepted by the reviewer, the nominated article is added to the list of good articles below. Anyone may nominate or review an article by following the instructions. Similarly, anyone who believes that an article no longer meets the good article criteria may propose to delist it by following the instructions for reassessment.

The process is mostly the same for featured articles:

Before being listed here, articles are reviewed as featured article candidates for accuracy, neutrality, completeness, and style according to our featured article criteria. ... Articles that no longer meet the criteria can be proposed for improvement or removal at featured article review.

Kleinpecan (talk) 01:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

eliminate a maintenance template

 Aguamiel94 (talk) 00:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC) I edited a page with the template: This article has many issues. I changed and neutralized it, using the VisualEditor, but I can not understand how to eliminate the template. Please if some of you know,explain me. thanks in advance.

Courtesy: You and another editor have been editing Marcos Santana. David notMD (talk) 00:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Aguamiel94. The maintenance template contains a link in it that reads as follows: "(Learn how and when to remove these template messages)". If after visiting that linked page you still need help, please advise. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi.

I am a new Wikipedia user, and I am being falsely accused of being someone else, even tho I’m not. What can I do?  Rui Beech (talk) 00:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Rui Beech The accusation was not created out of whole cloth. If it's not true, then think about why someone might think that and address it. Personally, I can't say I disagree. Better to be honest. 331dot (talk) 00:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Remember when Epictrex wrote this Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1104#What should I do if I am being falsely accused of sock puppetry on Wikipedia? Can I get into legal trouble for anything I do on Wikipedia?. This question, written so similarly to Epictrex, is literally even more evidence. For anyone interested, User:Epictrex is currently under a 3 month block, that they are nearly 2 days in to at this point. Heiro 00:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Accused of being another Wikipedia user

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
(Non-administrator comment) As pointed out by Mortee, this is currently being discussed at WP:ANI; so, there's not much more that can be done about it here at the Teahouse since trying to do so would fall outside of the scope of the Teahouse. The OP and Heironymous Rowe are both encouraged to further clarify or explain their respective sides of the story at ANI. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:48, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Why am I being falsely accused of being another Wikipedia user when I’m not? It’s all because I made an edit to a Draft Page? And everyone is blindly accusing me of being this user called Epictrex.  Rui Beech (talk) 00:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Rui Beech, welcome to the Teahouse. It looks to me like you're a new user whose first edits were to a draft, which is a little unusual. Because that draft was made by a user who has since been blocked, Heironymous Rowe suspects you're the same person. That's been brought up at WP:ANI. It seems to me that that WP:SPI is the likely next step, but if you just happened to come across that draft and felt compelled to edit it, explaining how that came about might be helpful just now. If this is somehow a misunderstanding then welcome to Wikipedia! It must be a dramatic introduction! › Mortee talk 01:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
EC. Fuck EC AGAIN. Look at the link I provided in the section above this one. It is now much more than those 2 edits to a draft that a brand new user shouldn't be able to find. If this isn't Epictrex, it's someone doing an awfully good job of deliberately imitating their manners, speech, and finding their favorite pages to post on. Heiro 01:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Re: HappinessFactor page

Hello, I created a page for Happinessfactor & got notified that it is getting deleted as its selling something but I am not selling anything in this page, just writing about he startup. I need help rewording it so it get published.

Thanks, HappinessFactor (talk) 00:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

You clearly have a conflict of interest, so leave it for someone else to write the article. You could list some independent sources here to assist other editors. --Bduke (talk) 01:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi HappinessFactor. Your choice of username and the fact that you're trying to create an article about a startup named "Happiness Factor" is giving a very strong appearance of a conflict of interest. Does this mean that you are prohbitted from trying to create and article about the app yourself? No, but it might mean that you're not really the best person to try and do so. Please take a look at the following Wikipedia pages: Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Notability, Wikipedia:Ownership of content, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. The first four pages will give you some basic information about what things are going to be expected from anyone trying to create an article about this startup, while the last two will explain some things about what the Wikipedia community expects from editors who are connected to the subjects they're trying to create or edit content about. Familiarizing you with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines will make it easier for you to figure out whether Wikipedia is the the best place to try and create content about this startup. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
@HappinessFactor: To emphasise a point made by Marchjuly, organisations that are startups are very unlikely to be notable as is. It could potentially become so in the future as it expands and independent sources talk about it, but that should be done by someone unaffiliated by the company. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 08:48, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, HappinessFactor, and welcome to the Teahouse. On Wikipedia, promotion is a wider concept than "selling something": it refers to any content whose purpose is telling the world about something. Perhaps paradoxically, Wikipedia isn't for telling the world about anything, unless the world has already been told about that thing - in other words, that the thing is notable. Amother way of thinking about this is to notice that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If there aren't enough such independepent reliable sources, then there is literally nothing that can go in an article. --ColinFine (talk) 08:54, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

how to change the redirect link?

I am doing "Deaf Gain" article since there is none of those on Wikipedia, yet the topic of "Deaf Gain" has been redirected to the page, "Deaf culture". I would like to change that redirect link to my article I created for specifically "deaf gain".

Thank you! Alanakay13 (talk) 01:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Alanakay13, you've got the right idea; but the timing isn't yet right. When you're ready to submit Draft:Deaf gain as candidate for article status, simply do so in the regular way. At the time of its acceptance, the matter of the redirect can be dealt with. -- Hoary (talk) 01:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
PS . . . and, Alanakay13, you do need to do more work on this draft, promising though it is. As an example, you have a lot of references to what you describe as Leigh, I., Andrews, J. F., & Harris, R. L. (2018). Deaf Culture : Exploring Deaf Communities in the United States. Plural Publishing, Inc.. Amazon quickly shows me that this extends to about three hundred pages. Which of the citations you make of this refers to which part (page, page span, or non-consecutive pages) of this book? Given the [fundamentally sound] way in which you've started referencing, I think that the best way to add this information is via the "rp" template; read about it here. (This isn't so widely used in Wikipedia, and other experienced editors may well chime in to disagree with me, suggesting an alternative.) A second problem is that the draft reads to me like a work of advocacy. It's phrased mildly and reasonably, but it does still seem to be making a point. Good encyclopedia articles don't make points. ("Why am I working on this? It's pointless!" Yes, if it's good, it is indeed pointless. Or the sole point is to enlighten readers, dispassionately.) They just summarize, describe and explain. All the best in editing! -- Hoary (talk) 02:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Ian (Wiki Ed) please take a look at this draft, it is not tagged with the course details. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Dodger67, the Dashboard can only find the article a student has assigned themselves, and will only tag articles in mainspace. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

New page, feel free to touch up on it.

Hello there, people of Wikipedia.

Is anyone good with grammar? I'm not, and I need this page touched up on (I just made it). Thanks!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Tuscarora_(FY_044) NorthernIdaho (talk) 02:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, can anyone touch up on this page? I just made it, and I'm not the best at grammar. Thanks!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Tuscarora_(FY_044) NorthernIdaho (talk) 02:15, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

You need to add some sources or the article will be quickly deleted. --Bduke (talk) 02:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi NorthernIdaho. While grammar is quite important, the fact that the article is completely unsourced is more of a concern. My suggestion to you would be to move this to the draft namespace where you could continue to work on it and add citations to reliable sources to support the claims made in the article. The longer is remains unsourced in the mainspace the greater the chance of someone tagging it or nominating it for deletion. Since this seems to be about a warship, try asking for assistance at Wikipedia:WikiProject military history or Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships for some information on the types of source generally considered to be reliable when it comes to military ships. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
@NorthernIdaho: I asked about this at WT:MILHIST#HMS Tuscarora (FY 044) and one of the members of that WikiProject named Dumelow was able to find a source and do a bit of cleanup. For future reference though, it's generally best to not create completely unsourced articles directly in the mainspace because there's a high risk of them being quickly nominated or tagged for deletion. Sometimes you may get lucky and someone will come along and add some citations to establish the subject's Wikipedia notability, but you shouldn't rely on that always being the case. If you're having a hard time finding sources or not sure how to find sources, it's better to start of with a draft instead to give you more time to work on things and then ask for help like you did above.
Finally, please also take a look at c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:HMS Tuscarora.jpg because there are some issues with the photo you uploaded to Commons for use in the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Marchjuly, I think we do not use so many Wikilinks to reply on the Teahouse. Lightbluerain (Talk | contribs) 12:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

family name sort

hello, I created page Jang_Minho. his family name is jang and first name is Minho. He's categorized with his first name. for example, 'https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Trot_singers' He's under 'M' not 'J' The other singers with family name Jang are under 'J'. How can I fix this? Vanilie (talk) 05:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Vanilie. Please read Template:DEFAULTSORT. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Vanilie: have a look at Template:DEFAULTSORT. Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Vanilie. I think you'll find the answer to your question at WP:DEFAULTSORT; basically, you'll need to tell the software to sort this person's name a particular way. try tweaking the {{DEFAULTSORT}} template's syntax from {{DEFAULTSORT:Minho, Jang}} to {{DEFAULTSORT:Jang, Minho}}. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! it worked! I changed {{DEFAULTSORT:Jang, Minho}}. Vanilie (talk) 06:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)


Hi....the controversy on anbumani ramadoss is fake

 Gagan.0024 (talk) 07:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

That information is backed up by reliable sources. What are your reliable sources for saying it is fake?--Shantavira|feed me 07:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
For interest, I've wikilinked the use of 'FIR' in the text of the section to First information report, since it's not explained anywhere in the article or the linked source, and will be unfamiliar to people (like myself) not from the region. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.125.73.196 (talk) 23:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

tips before second submission

Dear, my Wiki page was not approved because it has an informal tone. I am still working on the corrections but before the second submission I'd like to know if I can receive some more specific tips. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Veronica.Strazzari/sandbox thanks for your help,

VeronicaVeronica.Strazzari (talk) 09:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC) Veronica.Strazzari (talk) 09:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Here's just one sentence:
Deeply rooted in documentary and journalistic production, his work revolves around the ‘making’ of the future.

Depth aside, I suspect that it's him rather than his work that's so rooted. But what does it mean, to be rooted (deeply or otherwise) in this or that? (He's influenced by it as done by others? He has a lot of experience of doing it himself?). What does it mean to say that photography (if it is photography) "revolves around" something or other? How is "the 'making' of the future" different from "the making of the future"? And whatever this sentence means, which reliable, independent, published source says it? -- Hoary (talk) 12:09, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

The entire Life & work section has no references. David notMD (talk) 12:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Marwood van Straubenzee

Hi. I tried to submit an article and it has been rejected as not having reliable sources. But it does have such sources. Could you please tell me what the problem might be? My username is Delancey1815. Thank you. Delancey1815 (talk) 10:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

@Delancey1815 Please have a close look at Help:Referencing for beginners - you need to provide inline citations for the claims of your draft. Your "references" are not verifiable the way you listed them. CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:15, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Notability

Hello,

How is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:James_Colistro not a notable person? He has directed so many films and TV shows. Ngyundynasty (talk) 10:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

@Ngyundynasty You should read the entire message carefully (and follow the links inside) to understand why it was declined - it is saying that your submission does not prove sufficient claim for this director - I only checked the first three sources you have referenced and none of them are independent, significant coverage from Wikipedia:Reliable sources. CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

CommanderWaterford Are you saying that he is notable, but I can't prove it?

Ngyundynasty, CommanderWaterford has said, clearly, that you haven't shown that Colistro is notable. (Please read and digest WP:PERSON.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Anyone help me

Hello can anyone please help me how I can participate on Wikiproject Article For Creation ? Bengal Boy (talk) 12:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

TryingToDo, I suggest that you start by augmenting and improving the draft that's currently in your sandbox. When you think that it has a chance of being promoted to article status, move it to Draft:Turu Love. NB web series are extraordinarily numerous, and only a small minority of them merit articles; see Wikipedia:Notability (web). -- Hoary (talk) 12:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Well well, you'd already created the article. And it's the same. I suggest that you work on improving the article: as it stands, it's curiously uninformative: it doesn't even say what the web series is about. (Travel? Farming? Home maintenance? Make-up? Geology? Ballroom dancing?) When it's good enough to withstand an "AFD", embark on the draft for a new article. -- Hoary (talk) 12:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Hoary yea sure. I'll definitely improve the article. My question is if any draft is ready to on to the article space then should I go through afc process for participating AFC ? Bengal Boy (talk) 12:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Given that you have a history of creating articles directly, bypassing AfC, that have subsequently been deleted, or at least subjected to an AfD review before being kept, I personally recommend that you submit all future drafts to AfC until you have a better history of competently creating articles. David notMD (talk) 12:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
David notMD thank you. Bengal Boy (talk) 13:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Regards my business on wikipedia

Hi, I am a property dealer in India dealed over 1000 properties since 2000 in Gurugram DLF Phase3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.248.87.20 (talk) 13:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Being a successful businessperson in a Delhi suburb does not begin to make you article-worthy unless several people have written about you. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not social media. David notMD (talk) 13:22, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Article declined

I am grateful for the fact that my draft article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Josef_Josten was reviewed quite promptly. Reading the comments and reflecting on the text, I can see that my first paragraph was not written in neutral language, and that can be relatively easily changed. However, as an inexperienced writer, I would appreciate comments on whether the rest of of the text needs significant revision. I am also concerned to know if the sources that I quoted were inappropriate or insufficient: I'm not sure if the reviewer's comments were general or specific to my article. With thanks in advance, Honza Giles. Honza Giles (talk) 13:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

The article looks pretty good to me and certainly shows he is notable, so the main issue is the tone. Also, I think some of the references could be improved. I've added one alternative reference for his MBE. The London Gazette is fully online and so you can link directly to the page which refers to him. Good luck and happy editing. Honza Giles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:00, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Your Lead is full-blown hagiography. Lose all the adjectives. Move External Links to after References. David notMD (talk) 14:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Problem with archiving

So, I tried to archive my own page and mistakenly put other user's name on the code to bring in ClueBot III. I have deleted the content at here and restored them to my talk page. I also have changed the ClueBot III code so that it points out to SunDawn instead of Sundawn. Now how do I delete the "1" on the archive box on my talk page and redirect it to the correct page?

Thank you! SunDawn (talk) 13:46, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

SunDawn, I'll fix this for you. If you hover over the "more" tab, you'll see a button that says "move". Clicking that It'll bring you to a page where you can change the name of a page to something else. Every archive page needs to be named exactly the same with changing numbers ("User talk:SunDawn/Archive X") or else the archive template you have on your talk page won't work properly. Panini!🥪 14:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello Panini! Thank you very much! However, I restore Talk page content from May as I think there are some discussions that are not finished yet, is it good? Can you please check it again? Thank you so much! SunDawn (talk) 15:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
SunDawn, There is absolutely no problem with keeping some things unarchived. If you want to archive them, just copy and paste them back there. If it comes to the problem where your archive page is getting too long, you can simply make another one ("User talk:SunDawn/Archive 2", "User talk:SunDawn/Archive 3", and so on). You can view my talk page as an example of this. Panini!🥪 15:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Panini! Thank you so much for your help! SunDawn (talk) 15:37, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Roman Albertovich Alabin & Cheblyabinsk

Hi Kylietastic, I am new to making wikipedia articles but noticed a prominent figure from this Russian city was missing. I am only just learning how to format properly here, now. What can I do to rectify my addition of a Roman Albertovich Alabin page and to have him linked in the "notable people" section of Chelyabinsk? OffTheIsland (talk) 13:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

You should not link any person to a list of "notable" people in a Wikipedia list until they have their own live article (that's what we have here, not "pages"). I took a quick look at your Draft:Roman Albertovich Albalin and doubt whether it will ever achieve the standard required for him to be considered notable enough. A single Youtube citation certainly is insufficient. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
OffTheIsland, Hello! The Teahouse is not the best place to directly get into contact with someone. Most users have a talk page so you can message them directly. In this case, click here to go to KylieTastic's talk page. You can copy and paste your message over there. Panini!🥪 14:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Should the word VIRAL not be included.

If in an song article it is written "The song became viral on YouTube.", should the line be removed for the word viral. If yes, then due to which policy, WP:NPOV or WP:PROMOExclusiveEditor (talk) 14:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

ExclusiveEditor, Well if it's true there shouldn't be a problem with either guideline; it's up to the editor to determine that. To directly answer your question, if it should be removed I think it fits better under NPOV but there's no problem in citing both when explaining its removal. Panini!🥪 14:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
ExclusiveEditor You might want to see Viral_video#Qualification to determine whether a video may be considered to have "gone viral".--Shantavira|feed me 14:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Common licences and WP:OR with graphs

I've been here a long time but I've never brought anything to the Teahouse before. I'd like a verdict on whether I can combine two datasets from Commons to make a new graph, or whether that falls foul of WP:ORIGINAL or their licences. The aim is to show that while rates of plastic recycling are increasing, the amount of plastic waste produced each year is also still increasing, because global production is sky-rocketing. The graphs's data-points are also on Commons (linked below each image) and they are from the same source, so the combined graph should be accurate.

 Project Osprey (talk) 15:41, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

I take the advice at WP:OI to mean that creating the new combination would be fine. Obviously you'll acknowledge the sources you used and load the result back to Commons. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Cheers... any idea how I handle the licencing of the new graph? If it's made with open-access data I assume that must carry forward, with a citation to the original work? --Project Osprey (talk) 08:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Yes. The standard Commons license for a new work is CC BY SA 4.0, which translates as Creative Commons for use BY anyone with attribution to the original, provided their new version is given the Same license Again. In this case, you are the "BY" part, Project Osprey. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:03, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

How long can an article be approved?

I just recently created an article. How long before it gets to be published publicly? StratCom1080 (talk) 16:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Assuming the draft is good and is adhering to all the policies, well, the time is really random from a day to a month since the articles are reviewed randomly. TigerScientist Chat 16:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, StratCom1080, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer is "Never, if you don't submit it for review!". Assuming you're talking about Draft:Elmer G. Cato, I've added a header which will let you submit it. As it says there, it could be anything from an hour to several months until one of the reviewers chooses to look at it. --ColinFine (talk) 17:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Another question, how can I remove the Draft on his name? Is it automatically attached because it hasn't been approved yet? I submitted the article for review already. Thank you for your assistance. Much appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by StratCom1080 (talkcontribs) 17:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi StratCom1080. If and when the draft is accepted, the article will be moved from the draft namespace, to the article mainspace by the reviewer – meaning you will not need to do anything about this. By the way, the draft contains quite a bit of unsourced content. How do you know it? If it is sourceable, then the source(s) need to be cited. If it can't be sourced, then the content does not belong. In either case, those parts of the draft are an impediment, in my view, to its likely acceptance. --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, can you expound more about the unsourced content? I can add more sources but how can I add more and on which parts? Was it the 1st, 2nd or 3rd paragraph?

It was throughout – every paragraph not ending with a footnote – but it's irrelevant now, since every sentence was copied and pasted from previously written material and as such, was blatant copyright infringement and plagiarism. I will leave a more detailed note about this on your talk page. The long and short of it though, is that you must write in your in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase, citing sourcing for the information. As we often say: you may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. This could have been deleted entirely (under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion), but I decided to decline instead, revision delete the history and leave the structure and references to work from.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:2005 Tour de Corse

Can someone please review this draft and possibly submit it too? Excellenc1 (talk) 16:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: There are 5,335 pending submissions, so you will just need to be patient. While you are waiting, you can work to expand the draft so it is not just a stub. RudolfRed (talk) 18:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
@Excellenc1:, you might consider looking at the article on the 2019 running of that race for ideas on how to expand the draft while you're waiting. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Using Wikipedia

I want a page of my choice to show up when I enter Wikipedia. I know this is simple - I just can't find the button 2600:1700:89F0:1740:21E1:3E17:9398:4F15 (talk) 16:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Question already asked and answered at the Help Desk.--Shantavira|feed me 17:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Fake information on wikipedia

I just want to know what all this changes to the history of science mean? Law of Energy Conserbation was developed by Newton and Leibnitz - not by Émilie du Châtelet who was much more later "interptereter" of their law. By giving fake information you mislead wiki's auditory. Even from your source in becomes evident that Newton - Leibitz were the first who created classical energy conservation with all the subordinate laws.

Why not to start from Ancient Greece. May this law stems from Archemedes propositions.

All other logic in this article is distorted and violates logic of science evolution. Einstein and Poincare are cited together (and that is pretty new shift for wiki!) but Lorenz is not (bit strange choice). Data Scientist 0101 (talk) 17:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Data Scientist 0101, and welcome to the Teahouse. The place to discuss improvements to a particular article is on its talk page, in this case Talk:Conservation of energy. I see that you have edited the article, and been reverted: both of these are normal for Wikipedia - the next stage is to discuss it on the talk page and try to reach consensus (see BRD). A word of advice though: this is clearly something you feel strongly about, but your view will prevail only if you persuade others to change the consensus; whether you are right or wrong, coming in with all guns blazing about "fake information" is not conducive to building consensus. --ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Data Scientist 0101 I agree with the user above; please discuss on the talk page. One piece of advice for the future: when you make a change, it's really good to leave an edit summary that accompanies your change. You have less chance of being reverted if you leave an explanation that provides grounds and context for your edit. Generally speaking, the more fundamental the change, the more likely a good edit summary is to forestall a knee-jerk revert. Please note two other matters: Whether you're right or wrong about the issue here, your edit made the change while leaving in the existing citations that putatively supported the prior version. Your edit was problematic to that extent. On an aspect of the same issue, I strongly recommend to you that in any talk page post, you support your contention as to the correct facts by invoking a reliable source that corroborates its accuracy. Lastly I note your edit was pretty clearly made in good faith, but was reverted using rollback, which is, by policy, reserved for blatant vandalism. That should not have happened.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

how can i learn to make a story abt me im a small youtuber tryna make some ppl intrested in me

how can i edit it to seem normal? E v z x 6 (talk) 18:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

You don't.A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 18:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Meaning that Wikipedia is not social media, and the only way you could be the subject of a Wikipedia article is that you become so famous that someone else creates an article about you. Your draft has been tagged for Speedy deletion, and will soon disappear. David notMD (talk) 19:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
@E v z x 6: Have you considered creating an article about yourself on Wikitubia or Minitubia instead? Kleinpecan (talk) 19:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Need assistance - Wikipedia expert

I need to be referred to a Professional in South Africa to assist me creating a Wikipedia profile? Any mobile number or e-mail address you can provide me with.

Regards

Adri de Beer Amazecom (talk) 20:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

You don't need a pro to create a Wikipedia account. You've already done so! Congrats! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
@Amazecom: If you mean how to create one of these pages you often find on the first google page, these are called articles (not profiles). See WP:YFA for advice of your first one, and be advised that Wikipedia is not social media and msut not be used to promote or "enhance the search results" for somebody/something. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
I'll say the unsaid - Wikipedia does not prohibit articles written by paid editors, but it definitely does not promote nor refer people to paid editors. Using a paid editor in no way guarantees that what they produce will be accepted as an article. There are predatory businesses that promise results, but often do not deliver. P.S. Wikipedia also advises against attempting an autobiography (see WP:AUTO). David notMD (talk) 20:51, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Amazecom if you really do need specifically South African-related assistance you can post a request at the WikiProject South Africa talk page. I have noticed that your draft has several anachronistic terminology errors. One example, the SANDF did not exist before 1994. The previous iteration was the SADF, without the "N". However, that is all moot until you have provided sufficient evidence that the subject of the draft is actually notable. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Help publishing

Hi, we have a page that we were working on and we don't know how to get it published. Is there something dumb we're overlooking? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Yuman_Fong

Thank you! JoshJenisch (talk) 20:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

I have added the required code for you, you need to click the submit button. Theroadislong (talk) 20:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello JoshJenisch, on a further note could I ask you who is "we"? Per WP:NOSHARING, an account should represent an individual. Pahunkat (talk) 20:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @JoshJenisch: Be advised that Wikipedia cannot be used as a source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:37, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Why is this happening

I was accused of lying in teahouse on purpose. I did not lie, and I said what I thought the answer was. After this I wanted to leave wikipedia because I felt like a nothing and everyone wanted me banned. Now I have people screaming in my talk page for me to come back. Why do I feel weird about this. Can somebody explain to me the full story. DavidPlayzYT (talk) 21:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

You are on the steep parts of the learning curve, and have made a number of errors, also some edits that were not appropriate. Hence, the warnings, and most recently an indefinite block. You can appeal the block, but that requires that you clearly identify what you did that was wrong, and commit to not doing that type of stuff again. In general, Wikipedia tries to not drive away new editors. I will leave a more detailed reply on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 02:23, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
I don't see anyone on your talk page screaming for you to come back. Maproom (talk) 07:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
He did get a Keep editing from TigerScientist, but then screwed the pooch by adding content to an article with a deeply flawed attempt at a reference - more lack of competence than deliberate vandalism. I left some guidance because I have a soft spot for anyone with "David" in their User name. David notMD (talk) 10:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
David notMD, Nothing like support for a Granfalloon. (Not criticizing, I do it myself.) S Philbrick(Talk) 13:04, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Sphilbrick Likewise, the second annual "Josh fight," where hundreds of people gathered in April in Lincoln, Nebraska, armed with pool noodles, to take part in a friendly battle over the right to use the name Josh. (First year, the rules of combat were "Rock, Paper, Scissors.") David notMD (talk) 13:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
David notMD, That's hilarious. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Move to a protected deleted page

I created the stub article Daniel Holt (politician) on January 24 of this year and I just now noticed that there is no other article on Wikipedia named "Daniel Holt". When I went to move the page so that it would just say "Daniel Holt", it showed that the page had been deleted several times, in 2005, 2007, and 2009. The 2005 deletion was as a result of an AfD nomination of someone involved in the film industry. The deletions in 2007 were vandalism and the deletions from 2009 was for re-creating the page deleted in 2005, which led to it being fully protected. Who should I go to to have the protection removed so that I can move Daniel Holt (politician) to simply Daniel Holt? MainPeanut (talk) 22:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Ask an administrator. If it was protected in 2009, then it would have been admin-only creation as XCP did not exist at that time and wouldn't for almost a decade after. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 22:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
MainPeanut, Please file a request at the WP:RMT and an admin will take its care. ─ The Aafī (talk) 00:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey MainPeanut. I'm sure the RMT request would have worked, but I saw your post here so took care of it. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:15, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. MainPeanut (talk) 14:17, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Edit warring stop

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
As posted below, the OP has been indefinitely blocked which means there's nothing really more to resolve here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

 White hat hackerz (talk) 23:52, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Do edit wars end with 1 edit, or just a block of the edit warring people?

The questioner has already been blocked indefinitely by Bbb23: "Clearly not here to build an encyclopedia". -- Hoary (talk) 02:29, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
WHH indef banned within one hour of creating account for reason that all edits were misc stuff on other editors' Talk pages or reverted nonsense at articles. David notMD (talk) 02:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Speaking

Hi, is it possible for users who have a registered account in Wikipedia speak to other users? 74.77.96.43 (talk) 00:02, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Any two users may speak to each other, either on article talk pages or directly, on user talk pages. No account is required(though there are good reasons to get an account) 331dot (talk) 00:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

article keeps getting deleted

Hi there, I am trying to create an article about a Canadian sociologist and professor john o'neill, and it keeps getting rejected. I am wondering if someone could help me figure out what I am doing wrong? The most recent cause for rejection was that the sources are not reliable, but they are all from published books by reputable authors and scholars. Thanks. JohnDeeree33 (talk) 03:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: Draft:John O'Neill (sociologist) TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 04:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@JohnDeeree33: The entire draft is sourced with one book which appears to be a scholarly collection and discussion of his work. If you want to show notability, it would help to find things that have been written about him and his work. Also, long unsourced lists of papers and books without context are discouraged. See WP:NOTDIR. Here are the notability guidelines for scholars, which may also help. Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Criteria. Finally, if you have any connection with the subject, you will have to disclose it on your user page or the article draft's talk page. Please see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 04:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
[Edit Conflict] A point of Wiipedia special terminology: your draft has not been Rejected, it has been Declined.
'Declined' means approximately "this draft doesn't yet meet all the criteria necessary to become an article, but the subject is probably eligible, so keep on improving the draft in the ways the reviewers suggest so that it can be re-submitted." I'm pretty sure that this subject does indeed merit an article, so please don't be discouraged: writing a Wikipedia article is a bit like playing a piano concerto in public – it takes aptitude and practice, and learning by having one's mistakes corrected.
'Rejected', on the other hand, means roughly "this subject is not and will not in the forseeable future be eligible for an article, so don't bother trying to improve and resubmit (or recreate if deleted) the draft."
Your draft appears to rely on a single publication (and certainly on a single main author) for all of its existing references. At least two, and preferably more, separate and independent (of each other and of the subject) sources are needed to demonstrate any academic subject's Notability.
Nearly all of the draft seems to be a list or description of what the subject has written. What he has written does not demonstrate his Notability (though it may be acceptable content). Only what other people have written about him can do that. (It is quite possible for a person's writings to be Notable, but not the person themself.)
As an aside, since this subject is still living the parameters of WP:BLP also apply, which means statements about them are judged more stricktly than if they were deceased.
Can I suggest that you step back from working on this draft for at least a few days. (If nothing's done with it for 6 months it'll be considered inactive and be deleted, but I don't suggest leaving it nearly as long as that!) Instead, try finding some articles on other comparable academic figures, preferably ones that have been assessed as Wikipedia:Good Articles, and get a feel for how they are written in terms of prose style, structure and content. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.125.73.196 (talk) 05:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


Algerian descent

Hello. Quick question. If someone who has French parents (French descent) is born in French Algeria and has Algerian nationality + French nationality and has lived the majority of their life in metropolitan France, would they be classified as Algerian people of French descent? Paul Vaurie (talk) 03:34, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Paul Vaurie. If you're asking for Wikipedia reasons (i.e. to make an edit to an existing Wikipedia article), then you might want to pose that question on the article talk page for the relevant article, or perhaps try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject France, Wikipedia:WikiProject Algeria or maybe even Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups. If, on the other hand, your question has nothing really to do with Wikipedia, then you might try the Wikipedia:Reference desk instead. In either case though, you should understand that the best that any Wikipedia editor can do is give you their opinion or try and explain how relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines might apply; if your question has real world implications then you might want to seek real world assistance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:00, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Being told that my page is 'Almost certainly COI' and not sure how to proceed

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: Draft:Esoterica (Band)

Hello. I am attempting to help a band by the name of Esoterica to get a Wikipedia page made. I'm not a member of the band nor getting any sort of compensation - payment, merchandise, or anything. I'm doing this as a favor to them simply because I'm a fan and an IT guy who has worked with markdown language before and always wanted to create a Wikipedia page before, so I offered to help them.
My original post of the page was lacking in reliable sources and I've resubmitted the page adding several sources to confirm the information that I've updated on the page.
I've received a message back from an editor saying that the edits I've added are 'Almost certainly COI' and that I may have a conflict of interest. I don't believe that I do, but I'm not sure how to 'appeal' this declaration. As stated, I have no affiliation with the band and am just trying to help them get a page re-created. Their previous page was taken down for some reason (I don't know why - it was before I was involved) and I offered to help create this new one.
Reading through the list of issues given to me "that Wikipedia asks of me", the closest one that I can find that appeals to me is "disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles". Do I need to put a disclaimer at the top of the page that this page was created by a fan of the band? Can I get some more clarification please as to why the page I created was identified as potentially being a 'COI' so I can fix it accordingly? I was merely attempting to compile as much information from the many sites where I was able to find information about the band going back as far as I could find (2009 or so for certain) and organize it in such a way to conform to the requirements that were listed in the original requirements of "guidelines on the notability of music-related topics", specifically item 4 under "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" showing that they had been involved in two international tours.
I look forward to hearing back from anyone who can direct me to fix my issues to get this issue taken care of.
Thank you in advance!
 Cwbuege (talk) 03:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Cwbuege. Whether your connection to the band goes deeper that what you're describing above is something only you will know for certain, but you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest just to familiarize yourself (just in case) as to what kind of things the Wikipedia community expects from COI editors. For reference, COI editing is not something that is expressly forbidden, but it's something that is highly discouraged because it can lead to some serious problems. If feel that you don't have a COI, then others will likely take you at your word as long as your edits seem to be in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. If, however, you start to stray too far outside of the lines, then addressing the concerns of others is likely going to take up most of your time. So, the more transparent you're about any connection you may have, the less likely you're going to find yourself having problems with other editors and more likely you're going to find other editors willing to help you out.
Regardless of whether you have a COI, you should realize that writing a Wikipedia article from scratch is a pretty hard thing to do. You can find out a little more about creating an article in Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners, but it's going to make no difference as to how well you write or how perfectly you format an article if the subject doesn't meet Wikipedia's guidelines for notability. You can find out some more on this at Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (music). You might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Reliable sources because while you have cited a number of sources in the draft, quite a few of them aren't really what Wikipedia would consider to be reliable or represent the type of "significant coverage" that subjects of Wikipedia articles are expected to have. Since you're trying to create an article about a band, you might also want check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians because that's where you're going to find editors who have experience working on articles of this type.
Finally, not having a Wikipedia article written about it doesn't mean that Esoterica is a "bad" band; it could just mean that the time isn't quite right for one to be written. There are alternatives to Wikipedia that you might find easier to navigate and better suited to what you're trying to do for the band. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:51, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Cwbuege. I concur with Marchjuly that Esoterica isn't a "bad band." In fact, having just checked them out on A Well Known Video Platform, I'm thinking about getting a ticket for Bournemouth in September.
However, please understand that Wikipedia expressedly forbids promotion of any kind, which includes "attempting to help a band", regardless of whether the person doing so is being paid or even if the band (or other subject) knows nothing about it. Wikipedia only summarises what has already been published elsewhere by writers completely independent of the subject, in Reliable sources (i.e. reputable publications with good editorial standards). Whether or not you decide to persevere with the very difficult task of creating a Wikipedia article about the band, good luck to you and them. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.125.73.196 (talk)
Another perspective, Cwbuege: A Wikipedia article is not in any way for the benefit of its subject. Obviously, many subjects do benefit from Wikipedia having articles about them (in other cases they definitely do not, if it happens that the independent sources that the article is based on are critical or uncomplimentary). But if even part of your intention in creating an article about the band is to benefit them, then by definition that is a conflict of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 13:12, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Idi Amin confusion

Hello! I recently noticed that one of my edits to Idi Amin was reverted. In the edit I changed the formatting of "Butcher of Uganda" from quotation marks to boldface only to have it reverted. The thing is, in this article, "The Merrie Monarch" is emboldened, which left me scratching my head as I seem to be getting conflicting messages. Some clarification would be lovely; thanks! Flag icon darkblue.svg LittleMissDexterous (talk) 06:15, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@LittleMissDexterous: I can't find anywhere in the MOS where it says that nicknames are never bolded. On contrary, MOS:NICKCRUFT says:

Common nicknames, aliases, and variants are usually given in boldface in the lead, especially if they redirect to the article, or are found on a disambiguation page or hatnote and link from those other names to the article. Boldface is not needed for obscure ones or a long list, and those that are not well known to our readers may not need to be in the lead at all.

I guess you should ask them on their talk page why they reverted you. Kleinpecan (talk) 06:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Pinging User:Applodion.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 09:14, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
I admit that I was exaggerating when stating that nicknames are never bolded, but it is certainly unusual unless they are extremely commonly used and accepted. I have no idea whether that is the case for Kalakaua, but it is certainly not the case for Idi Amin. Amin had dozens of nicknames, and "Butcher of Uganda" is one more commonly used outside than inside Uganda. Not not mention that is a very POV nickname, and many Ugandans would still strongly disagree with it. Case in point, one of Uganda's most important newspaper, The Daily Monitor uses it only thrice overall since it has started releasing online articles over a decade ago. Amin's positive nickname, "Big Daddy", is actually far more commonly used. The Idi Amin article has a whole bunch of issues anyway (it was recently demoted from GA to C) and puts a stronger focus on his perception in the western world than his actual rule in Uganda. Applodion (talk) 12:56, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@LittleMissDexterous: It should also be bolded as a redirect destination, per WP:ASTONISH. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 14:17, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
I would instead recommend deleting the redirect. Bolding these nicknames would push POV narratives in the article which is the last thing we want to do. In addition, there are other individuals in Uganda who were also called "the Butcher", for example President Milton Obote and security official Peter Owili. Applodion (talk) 16:13, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Suggestions for Wikipedia

1. Let the website come in dark mode 2. Improve the logo of Wikipedia. 3. Add attractive images in the website Vanshu Mathur (talk) 06:30, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Vanshu Mathur. 1. Dark mode can be installed following the instructions here. Alternatively, go to your Preferences link (at the top of every Wikipedia page), and under the Gadgets tab, tick the box marked "Use a black background with green text". 2. Please add your suggestions for improvement here. 3. Wikipedia already has hundreds of thousands of images; you are welcome to submit better ones.--Shantavira|feed me 07:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Vanshu Mathur, If I may elaborate a bit, a very common plea sent into OTRS is a request for more images, often with a specific suggestion for a particular image for a particular article. In probably 99% of the cases, they are proposing a copyrighted image, and seemed to be under the impression that if you can find it on the Internet you can add it to a Wikipedia article. Some are surprised to learn that this is not the case. I've spent many hours arranging for permission for copyrighted images. It takes time but it can be done. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:01, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Adding images in translated wikipedia

I translated a Wikipedia article but the image didn't translate well. Here, is the article:

[2].

how can I add image there? AbhigyaDahal (talk) 08:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

We can't help with Nepali Wikipedia. (They're very likely to have different image policies than we do here at en.wp, so our answers are very unlikely to apply.) —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 08:18, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@AbhigyaDahal: To elaborate on this: that album cover is considered a copyrighted image. Per English Wikipedia policy, we may use these images for identification purposes under something known as fair use, but they're under a lot of restrictions. I do not know how Nepali Wikipedia works, but I do know that certain language Wikipedias don't allow fair use images at all (for example, Japanese). Please find out what the fair use image policy is on the Nepali Wikipedia and ask editors there if you have questions. Hope this helped!  Ganbaruby! (talk) 09:18, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi AbhigyaDahal. If it might help, the Nepali Wikipedia's help desk is at ne:विकिपिडिया:सहायता कक्ष. Best regards.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:56, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I need help neutralizing a page. Neutral Tone.

Hello,

I want to resubmit Draft:Massar Solutions but the admin said it's promotional, so can anyone help me with making it neutral? I have read it but it seems non-promotional to me. I don't exactly know what to change. Aztecwarriors (talk) 08:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Aztecwarriors Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm curious as to your interest in the draft, but in any event, the draft is promotional because it just tells about the company and what it has done. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. The sources provided mostly seem to be announcements of routine business activities, which does not establish notability. As an example, Microsoft merits an article not because they release new software or purchase a competitor, but because independent reliable sources have extensively written about Microsoft and its effects on its industry and society in general. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:53, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Aztecwarriors, Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. The text of an article should summarise what those independent sources say, not what the subject says or wants to say. --ColinFine (talk) 13:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I have created my Draft but it is not appearing on Internet

Hello I have created a new article. But first it said me to create a draft so I created it. Then i published it. But it is not appearing on the internet. What is the problem? Yeah and on the title it is showing Draft. Badassboy 63637 (talk) 09:29, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Badassboy 63637 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Drafts are not formally part of the encyclopedia until you submit them for review through Articles for Creation and have them accepted. In this case, if you were to do so, it would be rejected quickly as the draft is just advertising, and a long way from a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia articles must do more than just tell of the existence of a business and what it does. They must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the business, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business. Please read Your First Article.
If you are associated with this business, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 09:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Badassboy 63637. I have deleted the draft as its text was the result of copyright infringement and plagiarism. (It also could have been speedily deleted for being a blatant advertisement). I will leave a note about this on your talk page. You must not do this again.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

Natalie Portman: "the British Mandate of Palestine (now Israel)"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalie_Portman contains the text the British Mandate of Palestine (now Israel)

How can this obvious error be corrected? I would be surprised if there has not been some previous discussion of this point.

If there is any dispute that this is an error, I would simply refer to the maps at the two wikipedia links involved. At the very least, Gaza was part of the Mandate, but is not a part of Israel.

David Laughton Laughtond (talk) 09:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

FYI - Toward the end of the section 2007–2015: Expansion and critical recognition David notMD (talk) 10:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Laughtond, I see within the article "set in Jerusalem during the last years of the British Mandate of Palestine". I see no mention of Gaza, and don't understand what you are saying. Possibly your concern is something that's discussed somewhere within Talk:Natalie Portman/Jerusalem and Israel. Anyway, if you have a suggestion for the article Natalie Portman, please make the suggestion at Talk:Natalie Portman. -- Hoary (talk) 12:22, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Laughtond. The "(now Israel)" text was added on February 21, and was removed a short while after your post, in this edit. Hoary: in sum and substance the above post is saying that the parenthetical "(now Israel)" is factually incorrect because the geography within the ambit of the British Mandate referred to included a wider area than just Israel (including Gaza). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:18, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Improper "TONE"

PLEASE, I need help in identifying improper the improper "tone" of an article in my sandbox for a Registered Charity.

User:Noapplause/sandbox

Can anyone, super please, help me by identifying the subject materials that are improper, I appreciate and accept all criticism, I want the article to be better and accepted. Noapplause (talk) 11:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Noapplause Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft just tells about the charity and what it does, and is sourced to only announcements of the charity's activities. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the charity, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. "Significant coverage" goes beyond the mere reporting of the organization's activities and needs to be in depth reporting about the organization itself. 331dot (talk) 11:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Noapplauwse. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 13:18, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

An enquiry

Hello, I have an enquiry about Articles for deletion Can an article be deleted if the user who had created an article is proved a block evaded sockpuppet and if that article has no substantial contributions by any other user. Perthirvin (talk) 12:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Perthirvin, yes, per G5: Creations by banned or blocked users. Note that this only applies if the blocked user in question has not made any substantial contributions to other articles. It actually applies when the article has not received contributions from other editors. See WP:G5. Sungodtemple (talk) 13:11, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Sungodtemple, is that the case for everyone. Even if the editor has a 9000 edit count???? Still his article would be deleted if he is a block evaded Sockpuppet and that that article has no substantial contributions by others????(Perthirvin (talk) 13:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC))
Perthirvin, yes. Also note I strikethroughed my comment above; it was incorrect. Sungodtemple (talk) 13:23, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Sungodtemple, Okay so what about User:Kashmorwiki (A block evaded sockpuppet)??? He has created many articles where there has been no substantial contributions by others editors. Please go through them....Ernakulam Sivakumar, Guruvayur Valiya Keshavan, Kuttankulangara Arjunan, Mangalamkunnu Ayyappan, Paramekkavu Rajendran and Thriprayar Ramachandran....All of them are notable and we'll sourced but according to WP:G5 aren't they eligible for deletion. I have nominated them for deletion as there have been no substantial contributions by any other users in these articles. Please go through the edit history of these articles.(Perthirvin (talk) 13:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC))

Review Of Article : Virtue Clan

Hi, I am very happy today that my Article of Michel Rivera is showing up in Google. I would like to let me know the things that are needed (if) for the article Virtue Clan. I have re-submitted it and have removed most of it's part. Please do let me know!!! Thanks in advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 12:50, 11 May 2021 (UTC) Jocelin Andrea (talk) 12:50, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

To take just one sentence ans an example, we read that "The company is primarily focused on international relations, strategic development, immersion, connected collaborations, events and other public relations activities." That doesn't convey any meaning to me. "International relations" where -- between Moldova and Romania? "Development" of what, and in what sense is the development "strategic"? Is the "immersion" some kind of baptism? "Collaborations" between who and who, and can any collaboration not be "connected"? The whole sentence sounds like the kind of material that Harry Frankfurt has so eloquently written about: it seems intended less to convey meaning than to bring about some feeling of awe. Another thing: the prose style in this draft seems very different indeed from the prose style you use in this "Teahouse". It's almost as if the draft were written by somebody else. -- Hoary (talk) 13:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hello Jocelin Andrea, and welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately, Draft:Virtue Clan doesn't have enough reliable sources to qualify for an article (usually, two or three reliable sources are necessary). In addition, it needs a neutral point of view. For more information on the guidelines, you can visit WP:Your first article. Sungodtemple (talk) 13:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Your submittal was declined. Please stop editing Draft:Virtue Clan. This draft was created by an editor since indefinitely blocked as a suspected sock puppet and undeclared paid editor. Your means of finding and then deciding to edit and submit this twice-previously declined draft are suspect. David notMD (talk) 13:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Are these articles eligible for deletion

Hello, I have an enquiry. Are these articles eligible for deletion as these were created by a block/ban evading sockpuppet User: Kashmorwiki. And that these articles have no substantial contributions by other editors other than the creator. In regard with my knowledge about Wikipedia aren't these articles eligible for deletion by CDS G:5??? The following are the accused articles Chengallur Ranganathan, Kongad Kuttisankaran, Kottur Soman, Mangalamkunnu Karnan, Paramekkavu Rajendran, Thrikkadavoor Sivaraju..... These are the articles created by User:Kashmorwiki and has no substantial contributions by others. Perthirvin (talk) 14:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@Perthirvin: Look eligible to me, you can go ahead and tag them for deletion. If one isn't eligible, then an admin will just decline the request, so no biggie :) AdmiralEek Thar she edits! 15:24, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
AdmiralEek Thank-you....Actually I had tagged those articles for deletion but I was anxious whether what I did was disruptive so I made sure about it(Perthirvin (talk) 15:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC))
To clarify, these are articles about purportedly notable elephants, which you tagged for Speedy deletion. Does beg the question as to whether elephants can be notable (aside from articles created in apparent good faith by a sockpuppet editor). David notMD (talk) 15:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
  • To further complicate the fun, OP has been sock blocked. StarM 18:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
    • Nevertheless, a sockpuppet should not be rewarded, and my deletion is both according to policy and doesn't stop someone from creating a new article. Doug Weller talk 19:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
      • Yep, had no issue with your deletion, was just wondering if you'd be willing to reconsider since the tagging wasn't in good faith. I'm sure someone will re-create it if there's a passion for elephants. StarM 19:48, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes, individual elephants can be notable. Please see List of individual elephants. The 19th century elephant Jumbo comes to mind. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Indra Devi article. A photo there is said to be her, but is not her. How to correct?#

 Rishiyoga (talk) 14:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Indra Devi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) which picture are you referring to? MarnetteD|Talk 14:47, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

News Editor

Can we create an article on Newspaper editor? (Journalist) Powerful Karma (talk) 14:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@Powerful Karma: Yes, we have plenty of articles on journalists for newspapers. The criteria for whether a person should have a Wikipedia article written about them is known as notability, where we must have "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Please read WP:YFA carefully for instructions.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 14:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Help with list articles

(This is the same guy who posted the discussion about moving Mazda Demio to Mazda2 but on an actual account)

Can autoconfirmed users create list articles and just publish them or do they have to create a draft first? 1989ChevyVan (talk) 14:51, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@1989ChevyVan: You do not have to. The Articles for Creation process (draft, review, etc) is actually not mandatory, and you could just type any title into the searchbar, click the red link there, write your list, and publish directly. You could even create a draft in the draftspace and move it into the mainspace yourself. Note that new articles created using these methods go through a separate process known as New Page Patrol. AfC is strongly recommended for new editors because it allows a second pair of eyes to look at the draft before it goes live, which is why most experienced editors here keep funneling newbies into AfC. May I ask what topic you want to write a list about?  Ganbaruby! (talk) 15:00, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Ok thanks. I wanted to create more list articles about automobiles. 1989ChevyVan (talk) 15:10, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@1989ChevyVan: Keep in mind that we don't want too many overly-specific standalone lists, and that Wikipedia's content policies still apply (yes, that means you need to source your list to WP:RS). If possible, consider incorporating the list into an article about the topic. Also keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information, so keep the really technical details out.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 15:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Awaiting re-review

Hello, I have made all the suggested changes to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bahman_Panahi which is pending re-review. Is anything further needed for this, or is there a way for me to alert an editor to take a look? Many thanks Ukuser691 (talk) 15:01, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@Ukuser691: It is in the review queue, so be patient. The main issue right now is whether the subject is notable. Can you identify which of the artist notability criteria they meet? Or otherwise provide three quality, independent sources that discuss them in depth? AdmiralEek Thar she edits! 15:21, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Changing title of Article

I would like to change the title of my draft article.

Thanks. Marv Mmpm123 (talk) 15:14, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Mmpm123 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume that by "change the title" you mean you want to remove "Draft:" from the title. In order to do that, you need to submit your draft for review. I will shortly add the appropriate information so you can do that. However, you should work on it some more before submission, as there are some stylistic issues with it, and I don't think the sourcing is sufficient. Please review Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 15:19, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@Mmpm123 you can change draft's name from "Move" tab at the top right of the draft page. Ahmetlii (talk) 15:19, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) If you mean Draft:Randy Bishop, then there is no current need to do that. It can be changed when / if accepted. At present, it has no hope as the limited references don't back up the text. The doi doesn't work (refs 1 and 2 are identical) and ref 3 is to unrelated material. Please read WP:YFA and WP:MOS. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:23, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi. With regard to the comments:

"...you should work on it some more before submission, as there are some stylistic issues with it, and I don't think the sourcing is sufficient"

I went into the document and changed what I thought were the stylistic errors, and it would not allow me to "publish changes." I can't understand the information that apparently needs to be cleaned up

"...At present, it has no hope as the limited references don't back up the text." - how many references are required for authentication?

Also, the picture that I submitted that apparently has copyright infringement issues, was submitted to me by the artist himself.

Thank you for your help. Mmpm123 (talk) 16:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

As I commented on your draft there is rather a lot of unsourced promotional trumpery here, please hack back to what the actual sources say and declare any conflict of interest. The photograph would need to be uploaded by the artist themselves if indeed they took it and hold the copyright. Theroadislong (talk) 16:11, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Regarding this comment: Hello Mmpm123. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements.

- I have zero financial stake in this article. I am simply attempting to help a friend publish his bio on Wikipedia. Same thing goes with the photo I submitted that is being held in copyright violation. The artist sent me the photo and is the owner of the photo. Would appreciate some guidance here on what is wrong with my article ("Draft: Randy Bishop") and the photo.

Thank you. Marv 2604:3D09:1581:9F00:71C7:74D2:918D:806 (talk) 16:26, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

That's not how that works. You don't publish someone's bio on Wikipedia unless they have some significance. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 16:28, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Also, you're going to have a hard time that you are complying with copyright with just saying "the artist sent me the photo and is the owner of the photo" as for all we know, that could simply just be an excuse for uploading a copyrighted photo. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 16:31, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Also also, just something to note, it is possible to comment on the same post, you don't have to create a new one every time you reply. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 16:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
At present, the article has no valid sources. What little it does have are not relevant to the topic. By policy (for living people) every fact needs to be sourced. If the subject of the article is your friend, then you have a conflict of interest and should read WP:COI. While it is not prohibited for you to create such a draft, it s strongly discouraged since you are unlikely to be able to do so with the necessary neutral point of view. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:14, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Mmpm123 I've consolidated your comments here. Please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections, for follow up comments. 331dot (talk) 17:24, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Mmpm123. If you are truly not being paid, then you can disregard the warning. However, you should disclose your friendship on your now blank user page, since that is a conflict of interest. As for the photo, only the copyright holder can license an image for use on Wikipedia, because this is a legal transaction. You wouldn't ask a friend to sign legal papers for you, would you? In its current form, your draft is unacceptable for the encyclopedia, because it fails the core content policy of Verifiability. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes what published, reliable sources say about the topic, and those sources are presented as references in the article. Vast swathes of your draft are unreferenced and you must either remove all of that or provide references. It seems clear that Bishop told you all that stuff, and anything you learned in those conversations is Original research which is strictly forbidden from use on Wikipedia unless verified by a published reliable source. Remove all the stuff about famous bands he played on the same bill with. It is only relevant if he collaborated with those bands. Read Your first article and Referencing for beginners. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:02, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for all these answers to questions. Since it appears there is a 'conflict of interest' because I am familiar with the subject, Randy Bishop, through social medial, who would be a proper person to publish the article?

Marv

Mmpm123, editors with a disclosed conflict of interest can submit drafts through the Articles for Creation process, so you are the best person to write the draft. But you absolutely must take on board the advice you have been given, and remove all unreferenced content. Essentially, you need to forget everything you have learned through your friendship, and neutrally summarize only what the reliable published sources say about Bishop. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:37, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

La Liga TV: New official name and article expansion

Hello fellow Wikipedians: there have been many changes resulting from COVID19, especially those related to the Internet and digital. I would like to expand the article "La Liga TV" with all the changes of the last year. Likewise, the exact and official name of this digital channel is "LaLigaSportsTV" so I have the doubt about how to do it. Should I create a new article and merge it with the previous one or simply request the name change and then expand the article ....? Thank you very much for your advice AraceliLaLiga (talk) 16:10, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

You would have to have a reliable source to prove this name change. Also, see WP:COMMONNAME, if most sources call it "La Liga TV" then that's the article's name. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 16:22, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

delete my posts

I am trying to delete my posts in editing but there still saved, how do I delete all of the posts? Rmoniak (talk) 17:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Rmoniak Why are you trying to delete your posts. TigerScientist Chat 17:46, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
You don't. All questions that are asked will be automatically archived if there is no more activity on them within 3 days. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 17:46, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Rmoniak, all of your edits have been reverted, since they appear to be original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. They remain within the history, as a matter of policy. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Adda52 afc

I feel discouraged when people don't treat things properly. Adda52 is been rejected multiple times, but no one shares why. Before a month I got a little hope at Adda52 Discussion. Even AFC Helpdesk is not replying to me. I tagged & asked users also who rejected the request. Now, I don't trust the AFC Core team members after multiple issues. Please let me know what to do? Also tagging @Ritchie333: if he wants to guide. 1друг (talk) 17:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

1друг, The decline messages clearly state that reason that why it has been rejected. If earlier issues remain unaddressed, it means a next rejection. See WP:N. ─ The Aafī (talk) 17:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
[[u|1друг}} I left a message at its talk page. It is not notable enough. The reviewers have said their reasons. They have a lot of experience and know what they are doing. TigerScientist Chat 17:52, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Please see the above discussion links, i shared. I think you have not seen those. How come the subject is not Notable called as a reason, please explain why it is not notable,guide constructively. Let me know if I have to explain sources that how they are independent, significant and indepth. I can see the proper reason for other afc rejection but not for me and this makes me feel bad. Thanks but this is not notable is not a reason it is a final statement. 1друг (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
1друг, Sources don't mean everything. If a draft is promotional (it is G11 CSD criteria) for deletion. Ritchie333 didn't say the subject has became notable, but she said "this thing adds to its notability". If you want the draft to be approved, you need to follow WP:MOS and WP:N guidelines first. ─
The Aafī (talk) 18:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, so you are saying content is spamming but this reason is not given to me yet. I will check this new guide also. 1друг (talk) 18:18, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
  • This has been extensively discussed and spammed. See below:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adda52
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adda52rummy
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vierouchka/Archive

Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_122#Accusations_of_UPE_from_Investigator87

This has been a long term spam/paid for target with no meaningful notability or sourcing. YODADICAE👽 18:04, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Yes, all these are discussed long back and I have been guided about these links in last March discussion, as shared above. My only point is it is notable as of now if you see. Rejection should not be that this got deleted in 2017, so this is never notable.1друг (talk) 18:12, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
1друг just because the discussion happened three years ago doesn't mean it's not valid, but this doesn't address the questions about your COI either. YODADICAE👽 18:14, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
I saw the links again. I have no relation with the old guy. Infact, I learned poker in 2019 New Year Eve only.1друг (talk) 18:26, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Unable to access a lot of sources for a period

So... because my school heavily restricts where students can go on their chromebooks, during school hours I am unable to access a good amount of sources for the reason of being "Unmanaged" (which probably isn't true for a lot of sites but I'm not discuss that here). Is there some way I can declare this on my userpage because being able to access the sources you need is kinda a big part of editing Wikipedia. Also, just a small question here but, what does & nbsp; mean?  Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 17:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps you should wait until you're home and not at school for that? YODADICAE👽 18:01, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Nah. While I do pay attention in school when I"m actually doing stuff for class, sometimes I'll have some freetime and editing Wikipedia (constructively might I add) is basically the only thing I can do to entertain myself as basically all games are blocked (for obvious reasons). And usually when I get home I'm not editing Wikipedia and instead, playing games on my PC. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@Blaze The Wolf: If you don't have access to online sources where you're editing from, then simply don't add anything that would need a source. There's been a few points I've wanted to add, but couldn't, whereby the only sources are certain American websites which restrict access from Europe (something to do with seawater getting into the undersea cable, I reliably informed[citation needed]).
We simply can't have editors adding challengeable material with a get-out clause that they can't access sources to let it be verified. The onus remains on you to find and add those sources. A sort of workaround would be to post a suggestion on the article's talk page and hope someone else might find the point of sufficient interest to go and find a reliable source so they can add it. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@Blaze The Wolf: &nbsp; is HTML code for a non-breaking space. It's functionally equivalent to the Wikipedia template {{nbsp}}. Deor (talk) 18:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Ah ok. I've worked with HTML code a little bit, however not a lot so I know a little HTML but will still be confused seeing somethings that are HTML that I've never seen before. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
With regards to not having sources, I mean, I can do a lot of Wiking without sources. Copyediting, vandal fighting, formatting, pictures, that all can be done without sources. You can also download sources at home and then use them later. Or you can pay attention in class :P As a Wikipedian, I am thrilled to have you editing. As a teacher, I commiserate with your teachers who are probably very frustrated... AdmiralEek Thar she edits! 19:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
I do pay attention in class actually. It's only when I have free time in class when I"m editing Wikipedia. I'm trying to succeed in school, not fail. And that makes sense however I have no clue how I would download the sources Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:02, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Printouts of sources using the print interface, save as a PDF. PDF books, cached copies of websites. Google it, there are numerous methods to save websites for offline use. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 20:19, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Side help

Adding the song, It's Grim Up North by KLF to the culture/music tabs on towns, areas, villages and cities mentioned in the song...

It's just a small ask if some admin or editors would be okay to help me with just referencing the song in each article. A minor edit of sort. I have the titles from my sandbox here. Just a short paragraph as the song is well known and the band has high notability...

I have gotten as far as Wigan...could some others add to this with the following sentences:

The town is mentioned in the 1991 song, It's Grim Up North by the band. KLF.

The city is mentioned in the 1991 song, It's Grim Up North by the band. KLF.

The village is mentioned in the 1991 song, It's Grim Up North by the band. KLF.

The areas is mentioned in the 1991 song, It's Grim Up North by the band. KLF.

Many thanks...

RailwayJG (talk) 18:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC) RailwayJG (talk) 18:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't think that's something that needs to be added to the articles. For example We Didn't Start the Fire by Billy Joel mentions tons of topics throughout history and also some towns, however his song isn't mentioned anywhere besides the article about the song specifically (and also possibly the article for the artist but i'm not sure about that). Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:25, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@RailwayJG: Welcome to the Teahouse. Blaze The Wolf is spot on. Having got as far as Wigan, please now go back and revert every one of those edits. A one word mention in passing in a list of names in a song is not a cultural reference by any stretch of the imagination that needs to be added to Wikipedia - it's trivia multiplied by trivial to the extreme. Oh wait: no, I think this one of your is even more surprising. Please don't do anything like that again, and don't leave it to others to clean up your work - go revert them now, please. Hopefully you might find something more constructive you can contribute to. I really don't intend to be rude, but honestly, this is not a great use of your time. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Adding on to this, if the song specifically talks about the town and the town is the main topic of the song, it may be a cultural reference (it might depend on how the song talks about the town specifically). Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Yep, I agree with that too. You've prompted me to go and check the article about the Skunk to see if there's a cultural reference to my favourite singer songwriter LWIII, or whether John Betjeman is mentioned in Slough. The latter is; the former isn't. I wouldn't necessarily object to both - if done properly. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:44, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I was just trying to add some cultural references...sorry I made a huge troll contribution...I only contribute to add or remove things and always seem to be given a hard time yet some other times I am thanked...guess I am one of those who is only useful when others think I am...RailwayJG (talk) 19:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Please don't be disheartened, RailwayJG. Wikipedia is a huge beast, with a lot of baggage, and it takes time to about it. Your contributions are no less valuable than anybody else's; but people who have more experience often know about consensus that has previously been argued and arrived at. (You can find some relevant discussion to this case at IPC). It's an unfortunate fact that in something like Wikipedia, the edits that are the most valuable are usually ones that are not easy; for example, finding and citing reliable sources (and removing unreliable ones), or cleaning up non-neutral or promotional language. The corollary is that if a change is easy to make, it is often one not worth doing, because consensus has decided against it - especially if it is a matter of adding something to an article. This is not always the case, of course, and there are loads of minor changes such as spelling errors - see GCE. Have you looked at Community portal for ideas of where work is needed, to see what interests you? --ColinFine (talk) 20:11, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

It's fine I have asked about trivial authenticity on the Admin Noticeboard and found your remark (Nick Moyes) of "Hopefully you might find something more constructive you can contribute to" an insult. You clearly have not looked at my contributions since joining and how many articles I have made. Some deleted or merged but many still in situ. I worked on missing articles for the Cromford and High Peak Railway. Great Central Railway, GNR, Yorkshire and other BUA's... so please don't say something like that...I found it very rude and offensive...RailwayJG (talk) 19:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@RailwayJG: Well, like I said above I didn't intend to be rude (though I was becoming aware as I was typing that it might have come across as such) It obviously did to you, so I apologise unreservedly. So do please now go and revert those edits. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:11, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

3.2 vs pi

https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Gaal_Sandor/Area_of_a_circle

Gmac4247 (talk) 18:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Not something to ask here. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Indeed, Gmac4247: Wikiversity is an entirely separate project: this is the Teahouse for English Wikipedia only, not any other Wikimedia projects. Like Wikipedia, Wikiversity is not a reliable source (as it is user generated) and so cannot be cited as a reference for any Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk) 20:14, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Page review

Hi, I am a disclosed paid editor here. I recently submitted a page for review, Draft:Bahrain_Economic_Development_Board, which was rejected on the grounds of advocacy and failure to meet WP:GNG. However, a helper in IRC said that it is a notable organization and the draft is not bad either, and that I should discuss the matter here since he had to go somewhere. Can somebody please check the draft and see if it is notable and meets the requirements for WP:NPOV? Thank you! Hillster (talk) 19:02, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

You draft was rejected for the following reasons: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.
The first one is a big one, if the topic isn't notable it isn't going to be on Wikipedia. The second one another editor will have to explain as I"m not completely sure about it. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:09, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the swift response. The company meets WP:GNG as there are multiple independent and reliable sources with significant coverage. Please see: The Hindu Business Line, DT News of Bahrain, Arabian Business article 1 and article 2, US Department of State, and other references used on the draft. Hillster (talk) 19:25, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@Hillster: Welcome to the Teahouse. A speedy deletion tag was reverted by another editor, as it was considered not unambiguously promotional. It suggests that it's a tone issue more than one of notability. You may want to directly ask the reviewer where they believe a neutral point of view is missing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:47, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi @Tenryuu:, thanks for the suggestion. I've left a message for the original reviewer at the draft talk page and their talk page, as well. Hillster (talk) 20:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Council of Education Social Consolidation

Hello. How can you help me improve this article? I need your help because I am new to this job--Gülnar82 (talk) 19:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC) Gülnar82 (talk) 19:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Posting articles that will never have broad reference support.

I drafted an article for an artist who did not have a high-profile career and thus does not have a wide net of online or print references. Unfortunately, the referencing is not enough to pass muster.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Ron_Huebner&oldid=1003851333

My question is, will Wikipedia ever be able to post articles for minor subjects like this, or is Wikipedia simply going to exclude them? Derzak (talk) 20:15, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

This page is based on a Wikipedia article written by contributors (read/edit). Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses. Cover photo is available under CC BY 2.0 license.