Wikipedia:Teahouse

• @Walter Tau : There are many Citation tools that can help with this. Personally, I use ProveIt for most of my citations. It isn't perfect, but a lot faster than inputting everything manually. —Kusma (talk) 16:08, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

thank you very much for your reply. I suspected, that something like Citation tools existed, but I did not know, what they were called. I shall look the links you provided. Let's make wiki better together :) Walter Tau (talk) 16:14, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Walter Tau: I make heavy use of toolbars to input references using the DOI or URL. But for books I use a google books link, and I would have to manually add the page number. Then later I run citation bot to fix dates and fill some other identifiers. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:00, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Like @Graeme Bartlett, I have also found the toolbar to be sufficient for creating citations. — Mugtheboss (talk) 16:37, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your responses. I my real life outside wiki, I use EndNote to format references in documents. Unfortunately, Clarivate would not accept my request to make an EndNote reference style for wikipedia. However, if Wikipedia Foundation makes such a request (there is no fees involved), Clarivate would honor such request. How do I get Wiki to make such request?

Hello, Walter Tau. and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know if there is any way to do this, but the place to discuss it is at the village pump - not sure which section of it would be most appropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have also found that ChatGPT can convert a reference in text form to a templated wikitext form. However I do not know how reliable it is at that job as I have only done it a few times. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:35, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Th74/sandbox&redirect=no

Titled: Draft: List of Greek New Testament Print Editions (16th century)

I'm in the process of making a Wiki Page and I'm not quite sure how to handle 'Semantic Web Tags' and 'Wiki Mark Up'. I'm making a Bibliographic Index which is, basically, Bibliographic Citation Data, broken up into its components with each part of the citation in individual table cells so a person can search by any component. There is one citation per row. An example would be that a person can search by date, or by publisher etc.

I read that WikiData's web-bots crawl all the content of Wikipedia each night to extract usable data, especially links.

To cooperate with this goal, I took the trouble to add 'Semantic Web Tags' to all the citation components. After this was completed, I discovered that Wikipedia uses an entirely different method: 'Wiki Mark Up'.

My question is: Should I strip out all my Semantic Web Tags, and go with Wiki Markup exclusively, or should I leave the Semantic Web Tags in and use an alternate tag for the prohibited <a> tag?

Additional Facts:

I noticed that in the 'Edit Source' mode, the Wiki Markup, ignores the Semantic Web Tags, except for a few prohibited ones, such as the <a> tag but I could use an alternate tag for <a>.

Here is an example of my 'Editor' Cell with Semantic Web Tags [Oops!, when I copy and pasted it into this box, all my Semantic Web Tags are gone. Click on the 'Source' tab above to see them.]:

de Cisneros, Francisco Jiménez

(1436-1517)

|Wiki-ID

|OCLC-ID

And here is the Wikipedia 'Edit Source' cell content [Oops!, when I copy and pasted it into this box, all my Semantic Web Tags are gone. Click on the 'Source' tab above to see them.]:

|-

| <span property="foaf:person" resource="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Jim%C3%A9nez_de_Cisneros"><span property="foaf:family_name"><span property="foaf:givenname"><span property="schema:additionalName"><span property="gndo:dateOfBirth"><span property="gndo:dateOfDeath"><span property="schema:editor" resource="https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PBJvHhjFHYjM3PTRHJ6jpyd/">de Cisneros, Francisco Jiménez</span></span></span></span></span></span></span>

(1436-1517)
 [http://Francisco_Jim%C3%A9nez_de_Cisneros Wiki-ID]

 [https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PBJvHhjFHYjM3PTRHJ6jpyd/ OCLC]

And here is the same cell with all the 'Semantic Web Tags' removed:

|-
 | de Cisneros,  Francisco Jiménez (1436-1517)

 [http://Francisco_Jim%C3%A9nez_de_Cisneros Wiki-ID]

 [https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PBJvHhjFHYjM3PTRHJ6jpyd/ OCLC]

As you can see, a lot of detailed information is lost when I remove the Semantic Web Tags. I was thinking that if I can use a combination of Semantic Web Tags and Wiki Markup, then the WikiData bots will be able to harvest a lot more information.

Any advice and guidance you could provide would be appreciated.

sincerely Robert Crawford user: Th74

19 Sept. 2023 Th74 (talk) 02:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Note: wrapped code onto {{pre}} and nowiki 💜  melecie  talk - 03:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Melecie: I haven't read all that. In a Wikipedia article, you should never use <a href="...">. If the link is to another Wikipedia article, you should use a "wikilink", with double square brackets. If it's to a published source elsewhere, you should instead cite the source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.   Maproom (talk) 07:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maproom, Melecie edited the OP's post; they're aren't the OP. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 08:57, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Th74, Basically, you should strip them all out and use wiki markup. For a more nuanced description, please see Help:Wikitext, especially section Help:Wikitext#HTML. Mathglot (talk) 04:18, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's a sensitive subject.

On some pages I see a colony being "granted" independence. On other pages I see a colony "achieving" independence. Two points of view that subtly shift the focus of agency as being more with the colonial power, or more with the objectives of colonial inhabitants. There is another POV that external pressures play a part in decolonization, which neither "grant" not "achieve" quite cover.

There are a number of causal factors which have been said to have played a part in the process of decolonization:

- changes in British political attitude to empire, leaning more to the granted view

- rise of colonial nationalism, the achieving or demanding view

- state of the British economy after 1945, the external pressure, unable to maintain empire view

- by-product of the rise of American and Soviet powers, another external pressure

My personal opinion is that "grant" can seem a bit patronizing, but as the usage of "grant" is so widespread there's consensus for its use.

Would it be more neutral to be generally describing colonies as "becoming" independent?

If there is evidence/analysis in a particular case that one (or some) of the causal factors was (were) more important for a particular country, then use more specific language.

Or do I think too much about the subtleties of language?

I have also been trying a thought experiment, taking a statement from one page and imagining it being placed on another page, and thinking about how its neutrality might be received. It is also interesting to look at the same article in different languages. Is this the right way to be thinking about neutrality, or is neutrality context sensitive? Corsac Fox Kazakhstan (talk) 16:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Corsac Fox Kazakhstan One factor to consider is the wording used in the sources for a given article. In general, Wikipedia uses the same language as its sources, which of course may themselves not be neutral. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Corsac Fox Kazakhstan: I somewhat disagree with Michael D. Turnbull above. A reliable source that uses biased language is not a license for us to do the same. We can do better. There are plenty of biased sources that are nevertheless considered reliable by the community (Mother Jones magazine comes to mind). We cite the facts they report, not their bias.

As for wording, "became independent" or perhaps "gained independence" would be more neutral than "granted" or "achieved" independence, but if it's historically more correct to say "achieved" (say, a country actually did achieve independence through a bloody war) then we should use the historically accurate term. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mike, Anachronist thank you.

"gained independence" is a good alternative.

So in summary

• use the exact same wording as the source if it's unbiased (like substitution of a formula in mathematics)
• but take only facts from sources that mix fact & biased interpretation or point of view.

In the simple case where the exact same wording as the source seems OK to me, I've seen unnecessary translations into different wording. It irks when the meaning changes slightly. Perhaps there's a concern that wording has to change because of copyright (shouldn't be a problem for a few words/phrases). Or perhaps it's a habit instilled by teachers asking students to put things into their own words (and so display understanding/engagement with the material beyond copy-and-paste).

The substitution of a formula idea is what I have been doing with my thought experiments about whether statements judged to be neutral on one page would be judged to be neutral on another page. Corsac Fox Kazakhstan (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Right, if a reliable source uses biased wording, neutralize it. If you are using the same neutral terminology as the source, be careful you aren't plagiarizing whole sentences. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:02, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If the source is being credited then is it plagiarism? Thinking about the care I should be exercising when using a source's exact words has given me a new appreciation of multiple sourcing as a guard against using one author's words, which might run the risk of infringing copyright. It's also nicely aligned with protection against a single source's bias.

I've quoted long passages from sources on a talk page (now archived) to make a point about none of them supporting something the article was saying. I had not thought about the copyright implications. Should I do something about that? I see these references British_Raj#References have extensive quotations from sources. Corsac Fox Kazakhstan (talk) 12:23, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hi, article deleted? Eleven table tennis? Why? Acetylcholine (talk) 21:42, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Acetylcholine What? This one: Eleven Table Tennis? Could you explain your concerns a little more clearly, please? Nick Moyes (talk) 22:00, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is showing, but for some reason the links to this article in my talk page showing as RED, which means deleted.

I was surprised, I put a lot of effort to collect almost everything on Google to compile the information.

I have seen few more articles about VR games and they are less than half of it and still no one touched them. I hope that this eleven table tennis article does not meet any criteria for deletion.

I am not related to this game in any way. I am a Pediatric Surgeon by professsion. I just love this game.

This game can make our children more thin and active, instead of playing on the couch, this game is to be played like a real table tennis game and yet it can be played at home and in a limited space and it's a great fitness and entertainment duo for our next generation. Acetylcholine (talk) 22:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Acetylcholine. The link on your talk page is to the non-existent Draft:Eleven Table Tennis: you moved it to Eleven Table Tennis.

I have tagged it for tone and

peacock language, but I haven't investigated to see whether or not it meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability

.

Note that the existence of other articles is irrelevant: see

independent reliable source. ColinFine (talk) 22:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

@Acetylcholine: You should have waited for an experienced editor to review your draft rather than move it to main space yourself before it was ready. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

yes, that I admit was not a good thing, "in-experience". I uploaded the logo and the file would not upload unless I give associated article and the upload system would not accept draft version. So I moved it to article with the intention of reversing it to draft after the logo would upload. After upload I tried to revert it to draft status but I failed to do so because I guess my privilege was restricted and I could not do it.... Acetylcholine (talk) 01:44, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hi @

non-free content policy| for more on this. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

@Acetylcholine I've done an initial copy edit of your article, but I'd really recommend you explore a bit more to understand encyclopedic standards and tone before creating another article from scratch- phrasing like "you do this and then you can do that" is not appropriate here, that's more of a blog or manual style of writing. In addition about half of the sentences were fragments rather than sentences, and none of the proper nouns (company names etc) were capitalized. From the discussion above, I understand you didn't mean to move it out of draft right away, so no worries on this stuff- just trying to identify some of the bigger "themes" in the article's style that would've caused problems upon review, and which you'll want to avoid in future articles.

I left the final section "Reception" unedited, because it seems as though you were directly quoting reviews without actually using quotes. If you're borrowing the direct phrasing from a source, you need to put it into "quotes like this" to make that clear. When you get a chance, please check in that section to see where you've pulled direct language from the sources, and use quotes accordingly. If you'd like me to review that section once you're sure there's no copyright violation, I'm happy to do so! Or, if you want more time to work on it, you can have one of these more experienced editors help you move it back into "draft" status. Chiselinccc (talk) 13:06, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

thanks, i only used a direct sentence from gamesradar and i have placed it in quotes, rest of the reception is my own words. Acetylcholine (talk) 13:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi again @Acetylcholine, I think you still have some work to do on understanding what is appropriate to include in Wikipedia articles. I just had to revert your addition of the poorly written text blurb I had already edited for you, which you included in its previous form in the Virtual reality article. It was not only poorly written for an encyclopedia, but you were also taking the language "motivate kids off the couch" VERBATIM from the article, and now I'm starting to suspect that you are the owner of the website you keep linking with that review or something. Pasting that in more than one place looks a lot like link spam: are you affiliated with the site in question? Please pay attention to the quality of the writing you are inserting into the encyclopedia, because the content I just reverted is wildly inappropriate for inclusion. Chiselinccc (talk) 14:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh! No no. I am an advocate of this new technology. I am a Pediatric Surgeon by professsion. There are journal articles which are based on scientific research which has studied the topic of VR and it's effect on children from obesity and exercise perspective. These journal articles are too complex to link to, so I just googled an easy article and l linked to it.

My intention of writing this VR table tennis wiki is that anyone who is interested can have a general idea of what this is and can have good references to go and read. And people can explore more of it. The main website is too small. The faqs for the site exist but in a completely different place, the bug reporting is present built-in the game and also available in the discord server.

I have a question:

One of discord memebr/player of this game sent me a FAQ for this game:

How to use this in the wiki page?

https://11clubhouse.com/eleven-faq.html Acetylcholine (talk) 15:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i have added a talk page discussion to VR article. I have referenced multiple manuscripts, Please have a look and i suggest that the information should be part of main VR article.

Talk:Virtual reality#new heading in the main section suggested based on new studies: "Benefits for Health and Education" Acetylcholine (talk) 14:07, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Teahouse, I've recently encountered an editor who has taken it upon themselves to translate a large number of foreign-named film and television titles. While I've looked at WP:COMMONNAME and the MOS section on titles, in order to ascertain whether or not this is justified or recommended, as most of the titles in question aren't very common, I'm unsure how to proceed, especially as the editor in question has been somewhat reticent on the topic. I'm wondering if I should just leave it, or if this type of mass translation is frowned upon and further action should be taken. Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:43, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Revirvlkodlaku: Are they actually moving the pages to a new title? Or just adding the translation to the lead? – Joe (talk) 14:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, I should have been more clear: the editor in question is moving pages to an English title. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Without knowing the specifics, that does sound problematic to me then. Especially if they're doing the translating themselves rather than taking it from sources. If they're not responding to requests to stop (which should be enough to stop making the moves unilaterally, per

WP:BOLDMOVE), I'd escalate it to ANI. – Joe (talk) 15:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

Well, according to them, they are using sourced, or "official" translations, so that particular point doesn't seem problematic. My main area of concern around this issue is that I'm not sure what the protocol is, or if it is recommended to translate all, or most, foreign titles to English (unless the productions are specifically known by their foreign title rather than a translated one). Any thoughts on this? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The general rule (not just for films) is that we use the

Les quatre cents coups "); Seven Samurai (not: "Shichinin no Samurai", or "七人の侍"). Mathglot (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

Forgot to ping User:Revirvlkodlaku. Mathglot (talk) 00:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I understand that last point; that's what I meant when I wrote "unless the productions are specifically known by their foreign title rather than a translated one". My question is, if the titles are not well known, is it preferable to leave them in their original language, or is the English name preferred? Is there a guiding principle around this? In other words, is it a problem that this user is changing the names of a whole bunch of titles to English? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Joe, @Mathglot, I'm still hoping to get to the bottom of this issue. Do you have any additional thoughts that could help me figure out how to proceed? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:57, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@

consensus. Another possible venue would be WT:Article titles (pick just one page for the discussion, but you can point to the discussion with a brief, neutral notification at the other one). I'm not sure if this answers your question, because I'm not sure I understood it. Mathglot (talk) 03:29, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

@Mathglot, you're pretty much spot on, actually, and that is good advice. Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:32, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! I need your expertise. Can you please verify if these sources are reliable?

• University of Wollongong
• University of Sydney
• Broadsheet

Thank you. Impboi (talk) 15:30, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Impboi (talk) 15:26, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It would depend on what facts they are intended to be used to verify: many sources can be regarded as Reliable for some matters, but not others, and a City Guide and Cultural magazine (the third) likely has different degrees of reliability in different topic areas to a major University (which doubtless produces everything from scientific papers to student rag-mags), so a blanket affirmation (or denial), is not applicable. You will have to be more specific about what facts, intended for what Article(s) or Draft(s) (presumably), and what particular passages in what publications. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.107.25 (talk) 15:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for responding to my message.

By the way, here are the links. I am hoping I can

use these as references.

• https://www.uow.edu.au/media/2015/arts-graduates-recognised-as-women-of-influencephp
• https://www.uow.edu.au/alumni/outlook
• /2020/artists-as-imagineers.php

https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2019/04/10/turning-streets-into-art-galleries.html

• https://www.broadsheet.com.au/national/travel/article/curator-kat-roma-greers-favourite-hidden-art-spots-hong-kong

You mentioned previously that it depends on

the content. Do you thinkl can use them? 1'd

be grateful if you could response to this again.

Thank you. Impboi (talk) 16:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are some articles, like this one or this one where its obvious the article was created by the company as an advertisement. I’m not saying we should delete them, because knowledge is knowledge, and I’ve done by best to make them un bias, but I think that there might just be another IP address coming in and saying that they’re the best in the world. On some pages, I’ve seen edit restrictions for only admins or only accounts. How can I do this or ask for this to be done? Janlopi (talk) 17:37, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Janlopi, pages are protected so only admins (full protection) or users with over a certain number of edits (semi-protected), but only as a last resort. See Wikipedia:Protection policy. I will quickly look at these articles you linked now. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Janlopi, I have requested a complete rewrite of BridgeClimb Sydney and removed a bunch of promotional content from Richard Vaughan Badminton Academy also. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you so much man! You have been endlessly useful for me! 👍 👍 👍 Janlopi (talk) 19:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi no worries Janlopi, I appreciate that. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 13:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wanted to link to an external page and did that at first with the following source:

^[1]

But this is rendered in a strange way with square brackets enclosing a meaningless number. It links to the right page, but looks weird. How do I avoid this?

Dsiedler (talk) 18:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Dsiedler, welcome to the Teahouse. I assume you want the second [1] to be something more informative - is that correct? If you type: <ref>"The Beaver People” [https://www.nfb.ca/film/beaver_people/ Link to film]</ref>

You will get:

^[1]

Is that what you want? 57.140.16.29 (talk) 18:28, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Got it, thanks! Actually the icon signifying an external link would in itself suffice - no additional text needed. I found I can get what I want by entering an empty string as the text:

^[1] Dsiedler (talk) 19:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another option is to simply link the whole phrase, like so:

bare URLs", for various reasons. They're fairly easy to generate if you follow the instructions at Help:Referencing for beginners#RefToolbar. 57.140.16.29 (talk) 20:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

Many thanks for the great help! I agree with the advantages of using citation templates. I didn't do so because this is my first contribution to an article and I didn't want to rock the boat too much. The references in the article are a sort of dog's breakfast. If I do more with the article I will overhaul all the references. Dsiedler (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I started editing a page, but had to stop part way through because of other time comitments. How do I return to the that page and the place I left off? Telerana (talk) 21:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to Catholic University of the Most Holy Conception, you need only to revisit the page and edit it as you did the first time. 331dot (talk) 21:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Telerana, kindly let me know if I got this right or not. I am interpreting what you said as in "you start to type things in the visual editor / source code, but had to stop part way through, and you wonder if your editing progress in the editor can be saved".

If that is the case, I suggest that you make small-stepped edits in your sandbox. Hit "save" / "publish" every time you do it. When you think you've accumulated a cohesive paragraph / sentence, copy-paste it to the article.

Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 02:24, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I'm new at this and didn't think of using the sandbox. Telerana (talk) 03:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries! Welcome to the community. -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 15:54, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Telerana Another thing that you could do is copy-paste your current draft into a Google Doc or a Microsoft Word document or something like that, and the next time you want to edit your article, just copy-paste what you have in the document or Word back into the Wikipedia editor. You might have a bit of a problem with your citations with copy and pasting, though, so just be careful with those and save the websites or books or articles (or something) somewhere as well. It just seems to be a bit more convenient this way. ‍ ‍ Relativity ‍ ‍ 05:01, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

duplicate article (the draft you have created duplicates an existing article). In this case the title is a plausible redirect to the main article you have mentioned, Baanadariyalli, and so I will redirect that to the main film instead. Happy editing! — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 03:47, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

For your information, if you have anything to expand on that subject, you can always go to Baanadariyalli and make some improvements to that article. Happy editing! — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 03:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I created that article before the Baanadariyalli article. When my article moved to draft space then Baanadariyalli article created by someone. Arumobileworld (talk) 04:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@

WP:THEHINDU). I would recommend citing the claim in the main article that is pertinent to the article from The Hindu. Thanks for letting me know! — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 04:13, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

Thank You 3PPYB6 Arumobileworld (talk) 05:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@

WP:NFF criteria for unreleased films. There isn't enough in the article to show that the film production itself is notable. Generally articles like that are moved to draft space until they are released. I'm not going to bother pushing on this one, but please read and follow how it should be done. Ravensfire (talk) 03:57, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

Hello, Arumobileworld, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks as if you think that "This film is releasing on 28 September 2023.filming is completed" had some relevance to Wikipedia: it doesn't. An article is moved to Draft space because the mover believes that it is not at present suitable for the main encyclopaedia, but could be made so. This has nothing to do with dates, but about the quality of the sources, or the writing (or both) in the draft. ColinFine (talk) 11:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Teahouse hosts (even though I apparently listed myself as one)…
I was working with

Hello, 3PPYB6. As the Manual of Style says, the only place for curly quotes on the English Wikipedia is in direct foreign language quotations. Otherwise, they should be removed, including from references. Cullen328 (talk) 05:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Cullen328 – Thanks for letting me know! — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 13:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is an extended confirmed protected edit request here which nobody is responding to. Please do the needful.-2406:7400:98:1D35:AEC3:3AFF:FE2C:9622 (talk) 06:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Edit requests are performed by volunteers, doing what they can, when they can. Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 06:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A number of people seem to be discussing that edit request, and the discussion is ongoing. That you are dissatisfied with the situation is clear, but it's also clear that the change will not be made until a consensus for it is reached. Deor (talk) 14:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does

@Pottyantós WC: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest asking your question at the associated talk page: Wikipedia talk:Notability (music). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Teahouse Hosts, I am currently drafting a page on Shot Peen Forming and want to include references to published articles from a journal. The articles are freely available for downloads as pdfs but I'm not sure whether this makes it ok to upload them to Wikipedia / Wiki Commons. My alternative is to just give links to the relevant articles in the journal. However, this only gives very brief info - not really enough to function as a reference in terms of content. Would appreciate advice on how to proceed. CSK45Kays (talk) 11:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi CSK45Kays, welcome to the Teahouse. Copyright would usually not allow republishing of a journal article. Please give an example link to an article and describe how you got the pdf. It the link is like https://www.shotpeener.com/library/detail.php?anc=1970011&keyword=baughman%2C and you merely clicked "DOWNLOAD PDF" then interested Wikipedia readers can just do that on their own. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That helps a lot. Thank you! CSK45Kays (talk) 14:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, CSK45Kays, and welcome to the Teahouse. Off-line sources are fine, as long as they have been reliably published. The important parts of a citation are the title, author, date, publication, publisher: a link to an online copy is a convenience, not a necessary part of the citation.

If there happens to be an online copy that respects copyright, it is helpful to readers and reviewers to link to it; but Wikipedia should never link to a copyright violation in any circumstances.

If a journal makes its articles available as downloadable PDFs, it is fine to link to those downloads; but if a random person has scanned and uploaded them, then they are probably copyright violations and should not be linked to. (They are also an unreliable copy of the source, as there is a possibility that they could have been altered). ColinFine (talk) 13:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you! CSK45Kays (talk) 14:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm new here and getting the hang of things. If I were to create an article on a living person in a certain field I'm knowledgeable about, such as content marketing or holistic health, how popular should they be? What I mean is that if I can't find articles for reputable newspapers or journals on their work, are they still considered notable if their contributions to their community are recognized on other platforms? I'm trying to learn how to do research and not start writing on a topic that has no viable chances of being published here. Introvertedwriter1995 (talk) 12:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A living person merits an article if they receive significant coverage in independent

a notable politician). Sources do not specifically need to be a newspaper/media, but they do need to have a reputation of fact checking and editorial control(i.e. they don't just post anything they want, they check for accuracy). This disqualifies most blogs(though not all). 331dot (talk) 12:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

Do not confuse popularity with notability. A person can be popular but not notable, and notable but not popular. 331dot (talk) 12:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, introvertedwriter1995, and welcome. It is perhaps unfortunate that Wikipedia has chosen the word "notable", because it doesn't mean quite the same as the normal meaning of the word. I suggest thinking of it as a shorthand for "there is enough independent reliable material published about the subject for it to be possible to base an article on it" - remembering that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 13:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you direct me to specific criteria for notability.

I particular, I'd like to contest a rating of "not notable" with an article I submitted about a Lord-Lieutenant. This is a national position, appointed by HM The King (UK). Can you suggest why this would not meet notability criteria, as it has in the past? LWSimpson (talk) 12:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This appears to be about Draft:Christopher Andrew Crawford Simpson, which has been tagged for Speedy deletion for copyright infringement. David notMD (talk) 12:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The criteria for the notability of individuals can be found at

WP:NPEOPLE. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

Hello, LWSimpson. I haven't looked at the particular case, but I can certainly suggest why this would not meet notability criteria, as it has in the past: if the person has been appointed that recently, there simply might not be enough material published about him yet - simply a matter of

WP:TOOSOON. Even if there are announcements of the appointment, if none of them contain any substantial biographical information, then there are not the sources to establish notability in Wikipedia's sense. ColinFine (talk) 13:58, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

I had to move my draft Draft:The Glass Harmonica (film) and re-title the infobox in it. The title of the infobox is now in red letters and says "template" on it, which it didn't do before. Is this something I need to fix or will it resolve itself when the page is no longer a draft? Thanks! Welcome back bro (talk) 12:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Welcome back bro: Welcome to the Teahouse! To resolve your issue, I removed the unnecessary braces in the |name= field of the infobox. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:59, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I uploaded two photos for my draft Draft:The Glass Harmonica (film) which are screenshots of the film itself. As far as I can tell, they are not protected by fair use, and there are steps I need to take to ensure they are allowed. I recently got a message saying "This media file is a derivative work incorporating another work or works. While the source of this file has been identified, essential source and copyright information for all work incorporated in this file is missing. The author and source of all incorporated works must be given so that the copyright status can be verified. Edit the file description page to add source information" for each of the photos. What specifically do I need to do and where and how do I do it? Thank you! Welcome back bro (talk) 12:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@

Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, which provides prompts for all the information needed when uploading files. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 13:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

I see you have described File:Steklyannaya Garmonika.jpg as "own work". Unless you hold the copyright to the film from which it was taken, this is not acceptable. You may have made the screenshot, but the copyright in the original subsists. ColinFine (talk) 14:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi how I can report an upcoming paid article? The last time I reported a page by email to paid wikipedia but no one took any action. Is there anyone who can add the page in their watchlist and take action when created? I have evidence and all. 113.193.45.46 (talk) 14:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. No one can do anything about an article that has not been created yet. 331dot (talk) 14:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

331dot, thank you for replying. I was wondering if someone can add the page in their watchlist and take action as soon as it's created because it's coming from upwork. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.193.45.46 (talk) 14:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You will need to tell us what it is called first. Theroadislong (talk) 14:36, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theroadislong: Thank you. Can you join wikipedia-en at Wikipedia:IRC so I can share it privately because the screenshot might include private information? 113.193.45.46 (talk) 14:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We don't need a screenshot just the article's likely title. Theroadislong (talk) 14:54, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It could be under this or this. 113.193.45.46 (talk) 15:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll keep the article in mind and check at some point NotAGenious (talk) 17:12, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We have no article by either of those names. Same for this likely variant. DS (talk) 23:49, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How should I proceed to open the following page featuring a short bio/autobio? Thanks a lot for the support!

Prof. Dr. Enkelejda Miho is an Italian scientist working on artificial intelligence for personalized therapeutics and diagnostics.

She is a full Professor of Digital Life Sciences at the University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland, where she established the Master of Science in Medical Informatics. She is head of the Laboratory of Artificial Intelligence in Health since 2018 and a group leader at the Swiss Bioinformatics Institute since 2019.

Research. Her research focus is investigating personalized adaptive immunity and applying machine learning to discover antibody therapeutics and support personalized diagnostics through the development of clinical decision software based on integrated clinical, laboratory and multi-omics large-scale data.

Education. She did her master studies at University of Bologna, conducted research at Penn State University, completed her advanced studies at the University of Basel and her doctorate at ETH Zurich. Italdech (talk) 16:30, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This Draft:Dr. Enkelejda Miho has been deleted twice as blatant promotion. Theroadislong (talk) 16:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear @Theroadislong

Actually, deleted twice for:

15:58, 22 September 2023 UtherSRG talk contribs deleted page Draft:Dr. Enkelejda Miho (G3: Vandalism) (thank)

15:24, 22 September 2023 Jimfbleak talk contribs deleted page Draft:Dr. Enkelejda Miho (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: self written vanity page, see WP:COI, WP:RS, WP:Notability (people), name is wrong in title) (thank)

Can anyone advice on someone that can publish and edit the content properly? Italdech (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Italdech. The answer is all in

WP:YFA

. But to summarise:

• First, find several places where people who have no connection with Miho or any of the universities you mention, or that institute, have chosen to write in some depth about her.
• If you cannot find any examples of this, then give up, as she does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability.
• If you can find several such sources, then forget everything you know about her, and write an article based only on what those sources say, citing them as appropriate.

If you write a draft in that way, then it is likely to be accepted, and you can add further (referenced, neutrally described) material.

If you are associated with Miho, then you should declare this fact on your user page. ColinFine (talk) 16:52, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you, @Theroadislong sent the link that explained how to do this. The COI is now declared in my user page. Italdech (talk) 18:09, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Teahousers!

I wonder if I could get someone to look over a draft before I push the publish button. I am scared to push the button because I have lost all of my citations each time I tried. Thank you, in advance!

Best, Wabbity

Wabbitty (talk) 16:35, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you mean this

Draft:Sarah Boxer you have already published the draft but have not submitted it for review, if you do it would immediately declined because indeed there are zero sources. Theroadislong (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

That is indeed the article. The trouble is that the draft you are seeing is not the draft I am seeing. My draft shows 45 citations/sources, correctly formatted, but somehow they disappear every time I try to submit. Is there a way I can share my draft page so you can see all the citations? Can I share it without submitting it? Wabbitty (talk) 17:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can I send you a screenshot or a cut-and-pasted version of what my Drafts page, with all the sources footnoted properly, looks like? I saved it as a file on my computer, so as not to lose all my citations. My Drafts page for this article is not the Drafts page you're looking at! Wabbitty (talk) 17:36, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(

WP:INTREF3. Otherwise, you need to go and find reliable sources for your article. NotAGenious (talk) 17:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

Can I send you a screenshot or a cut-and-pasted version of what my Drafts page, with all the sources footnoted properly, looks like? I saved it as a file on my computer, so as not to lose all my citations. My Drafts page for this article is not the Drafts page you're looking at! Wabbitty (talk) 17:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The problem is - if you wrote the page and added the citations on your computer, you're gonna need to convert them to the code Wikipeda uses, in order for the inline citations to work.

WP:REFVISUAL tells you how to give the computer a link, and the citation will be generated. But sure, you can send a screenshot and I'll see what I can do. NotAGenious (talk) 17:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply

]

It's not submitting the draft (by clicking a "Submit" button in Wikipedia) that makes the sources disappear. It's whatever you do to get the document from Word, or whatever you're using, into Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 18:13, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you! I actually wrote the article in Wikipedia and put the citations in there. I only put a copy into my Chromebook when I realized that the citations (as composed in my Wikipedia Draft page) were disappearing. Here is the copy (which I put into my Chromebook as a safety measure) of what appears on my Drafts page. Is there a way that you can place this safely wherever it needs to go to get properly submitted?

Sarah Boxer

is a writer, cartoonist, and critic born in

Denver

, Colorado. Her critical essays and reviews have appeared in

The Atlantic

,

^[1]

The New York Review of Books

,

^[2]

The Comics Journal

,

^[3]

The New Yorker

,

^[4]

Slate

,

^[5]

Artforum

,

^[6]

Bookforum,

and

The New York Times Book Review

. At the

New York Times

(1989-2006), she was an editor for

The Book Review

and the Week in Review, a photography critic, a theater critic, a critic of arts and culture on the Web, and a culture reporter covering visual culture, philosophy, literature, psychoanalysis, and sex. She is the author and illustrator of four

graphic novels

.

== Education ==

Boxer went to high school at Colorado Academy. At Harvard College she earned an AB degree with honors in philosophy. Her thesis, on Aristotle's theory of time, was advised by Martha Nussbaum. After college, when Boxer moved to New York City to become a journalist, she studied drawing and illustration at Parsons, the Art Students League, and the New York Studio School.

== Career ==

=== Journalism ===

Boxer began her career in journalism as a science writer and editor, first at The Sciences, the magazine of the New York Academy of Sciences, then at Discover magazine. In the late 1980s she was a writer for Sports Illustrated and Sports Illustrated for Kids. In 1989, she became an editor at The New York Times Book Review, where she assigned and edited reviews of books on psychology, science, and nature. She also wrote a few essays for The Book Review, including "The Limp, Silent Type,"^[7] about the bog man in literature, and "Flogging Freud,"^[8] about the Freud Wars. In 1997 she became a reporter on the Arts & Ideas page of The New York Times, where she covered the visual arts, philosophy, sex, and psychoanalysis.

At The New York Times, Boxer practiced her own brand of

participatory journalism. She took the Mensa test in order to document the experience,^[9] for instance, and she once crawled inside the orgone box belonging to the cartoonist William Steig while interviewing him for his obituary.^[10] On the 75th anniversary of The New Yorker she penned a piece from the point of view of the magazine's famous pronoun, We.^[11]

Boxer was particularly known for making complex ideas comprehensible, such as opticality in Renaissance painting,[12] the nomenclature of military operations,^[13] and Freud's Seduction Hypothesis.^[14] Following the attacks of September 11, 2001 she focused on the photography and videos of that day and was one of the many reporters who composed short profiles of the victims, the Portraits of Grief. Her work for that year was nominated for a Pulitzer. While at the Times, Boxer also wrote some notable obituaries, including on the philosopher G.E.M. Anscombe,^[15] on the director of the Sigmund Freud Archives, Kurt Eissler,^[16]and on the cartoonists Saul Steinberg,^[17] William Steig,^[18]and Charles Schulz.^[19]

=== Criticism ===

Boxer's career as a critic began on the editorial board of The Harvard Crimson, where she reviewed the movie The Europeans and "The Exhibit of Perfect" by the conceptual artist James Lee Byars.^[20] Her earliest book reviews were for The New York Times Book Review and The Village Voice. Beginning in 1995, she was The New York Times's photography critic for nearly a decade and interviewed Robert Frank, Vito Acconci, and Helen Levitt. From 2000 to 2001 Boxer was also a theater critic at The New York Times. She began contributing to Artforum in 2001. Her pieces included an examination of the visual remains of September 11,^[21] a book review of Deirdre Bair's Saul Steinberg biography,^[22] an essay on Lewis Carroll's photography,^[23] and a consideration of "The Masters of American Comics"^[24]show, an all-male revue, from a feminist perspective.

From 2004 to 2006 she served as the New York Times's first and last critic of arts and culture on the Web, bringing readers a digital version of Christo's "Gates,"^[25] the confessional website PostSecret,^[26] a site devoted to onomatopoeia, Bzzzpeek,^[27] the topic of politically motivated online vandalism,^[28] especially on Wikipedia, the song mashups following Hurricane Katrina,^[29] and a new online religion devoted to the Flying Spaghetti Monster.^[30] After leaving the Times, Boxer edited the anthology Ultimate Blogs: Masterworks from the Wild Web^[31] (Vintage Books, 2008) and started writing critical essays and reviews for The New York Review of Books, The Atlantic, Slate, The Comics Journal, The New Yorker, The Los Angeles Review of Books, The Wall Street Journal, and Bookforum.

=== Essays ===

Boxer's essays often have a personal, quirky edge. At The Atlantic she detailed the experience of reading all of Marcel Proust's "In Search of Lost Time" on her cellphone.^[32] Her catalogue essay, "Ripped From the Headlines," which she wrote for "Shock of the News," a National Gallery of Art exhibition about the use of newspapers in art, homed in on the violence and envy often displayed in this art. In a piece for The New Yorker about Georgia O'Keeffe's and Robert Adams's photography of the West Boxer wove in her experiences of trying to capture the West with her Kodak Instamatic^[33] as a teenager.

A number of Boxer's writings have been anthologized. Her New York Review of Books piece on the creator of Krazy Kat, George Herriman, "His Inner Cat,"^[34] appeared in Best American Comics Criticism^[35] as "The Cat In the Hat." Her Atlantic essay "Why Are All the Cartoon Mothers Dead," which analyzed why kids' animated films so often kill off the mother figures at the beginning of the movie,^[36] was chosen for the textbook Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing. Her New York Times piece on the healing powers of New Yorkistan, a humorous New York map drawn by Maira Kalman and Rick Meyerowitz after September 11,^[37] was adapted for the book You Are Here: NYC: Mapping the Soul of the City. Her essay "The Exemplary Narcissism of Snoopy"^[38] which was called "stunningly good" on Bryan Garner's LawProse blog,^[39] was subsequently anthologized in The Peanuts Papers.^[40]

=== Comics ===

At age eleven, Boxer published her first drawing in The Englewood Herald in Colorado. Beginning in the 1990s, she drew occasional spot drawings for the Op-Ed page and the Week in Review of The New York Times.

Boxer's first book-length comic, In The Floyd Archives: A Psycho-Bestiary^[41] (Pantheon, 2001), which is based on Sigmund Freud's case histories and stars a cast of neurotic animals, was described as "part academe and part whimsy, a wildly clever collection"^[42] by The New York Times. In a review titled "Floydian Funnies," The Comics Journal noted that "Boxer belongs to the line of erudite, intellectual cartooning exemplified by Jules Feiffer, David Levine and Edward Gorey."

Mother May I?: A Post-Floydian Folly^[43] (IP Books, 2019), Boxer's second psychoanalytic comic, which Alison Bechdel described as "hilarious and terrifying ... so edifying and so absurd," was based on the life and work of Melanie Klein and Donald Winnicott. The Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association said that that Boxer "does nothing short of embodying -- in fact, giving animal bodies to -- a pantheon of iconic psychoanalytic characters and the love-hate relationships they bring to life."^[44]

In Boxer's first Shakespearean Tragic-Comic, Hamlet: Prince of Pigs, Hamlet is played by a little piglet, Hamlet's uncle Claudius, the murderer, "the bloat king," is played by a big fat hog, and Hamlet's mother, Gertrude, is played by a pig with lipstick. Boxer followed up with Anchovius Caesar: The Decomposition of a Romaine Salad, a comic in which Caesar is played by an anchovy, Mark Antony is a mock anchovy (a sprat), the Romans are leaves of romaine lettuce, and the Countrymen are crouton men. In an interview in Print, Steve Heller described Boxer's Tragic-Comics as "exposing the great William Shakespeare to the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune."^[45]

== References ==