Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1137

How to make an article Lizstomania716 (talk) 11:25, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Lizstomania716: and welcome to the Teahouse! Creating an article is perhaps the most difficult task on Wikipedia. First things first you must ensure the subject is notable and you have reliable sources. A good place to start is by reading Your first article. I suggest new editors spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making edits to the many millions of articles on WIkipedia first! Happy editing! Tommi1986 ^{let's talk!} 11:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new article from scratch is extremely challenging, and new editors are strongly recommended to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works, by making improvements to some of our existing six million articles before trying it. When you do decide to have a go at a new article, you are highly encouraged to read

WP:TUTORIAL; it's a lot of fun! Happy editing!  ― Qwerfjkltalk

21:44, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, everyone, I am starting a new article and I need help in understanding a few things before that so if anyone could suggest which link to refer to, before starting it would be of great help. thankyou Stobene45

Hello, I would suggest reading your first article. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 14:43, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Given your earlier creation of Departmental Council of Aude, this appears to be an attempt to create your second article. Perhaps Wikipedia needs a guideline titled "Your second article." David notMD (talk) 16:03, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

In a nutshell, you can add anything about your topic till you have reliable, secondary sources. Also,

Wikipedia:Article Wizard is a great help, it gives you (almost) all the important guidelines before starting. Excellenc1 (talk

) 16:50, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you meant to say there Excellenc1, but what you have said doesn't make sense. Did you mean to say "you should not add anything to your draft until you have reliable, secondary sources"? --ColinFine (talk) 17:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

ColinFine That sounds wrong, but maybe that's what I meant, because when I used to submit drafts, few of them got rejected for the same reason. Excellenc1 (talk) 18:48, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Excellenc1, I'm still not getting what you mean. Your sentence conveys to me "You can add anything you like up until the point when you have RS", with the implication that after you have the RS you can only add certain things, or perhaps nothing. I would say that there is no point writing so much as a single word of a draft until you have RS. --ColinFine (talk) 20:59, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Guys we are getting a little off topic here lets focus on her question. The last three/four responses did not do much to help answer the question. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 21:03, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new article from scratch is extremely challenging, and new editors are strongly recommended to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works, by making improvements to some of our existing six million articles before trying it. When you do decide to have a go at a new article, you are highly encouraged to read

WP:TUTORIAL; it's a lot of fun! Happy editing!  ― Qwerfjkltalk

21:47, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks in advance! Caleb Stanford (talk) 22:41, 2 January 2022 (UTC) Caleb Stanford (talk) 22:41, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@

MOS:ORDER. GoingBatty (talk

) 23:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Regarding BBC controversies#2021: Coverage of antisemitic incident in Oxford Street

On the talkpage, user Sweet6970 claims that this should be referred to as an "alleged" antisemitc incident and that the children in the bus should not be referred to as "victims". Sweet6970 claims that since no one has been convicted of a hate crime, it should not be referred to as such. However, the evidence that it was antisemitic (the perpetrators make Nazi salutes at a van full of obviously Orthodox Jewish youths) is WP:SKYBLUE and since no-one one (AFAIK) has been arrested in connection with the incident, the matter is not (yet) subjudice. As for the character of the assaults, it is beyond reasonable dispute that Jack The Ripper's killings were murders even though the Ripper was never caught and by now is certainly long dead. The nature of these crimes remains unchallenged, it is only the identities of those responsible that remain in contention.

Does Wikipedia have any policies with regard to describing criminal acts at this stage of investigation or which are never solved satisfactorily? Romomusicfan (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Romomusicfan, Wikipedia doesn't need a specific policy on this, although it may have one somewhere. The overarching policy is that we report reputable sources. Therefore if the Times, the Guardian and the BBC call this an antisemitic incident, we should do so too. If they call it an "alleged antisemitic" incident, then so must we, because presumably they believe there's an element of confusion. I don't think we need be confused by legality here: Of course when someone is accused and stands trial, but has not yet found guilty, we're correct to call them the alleged perpetrator, but even at that stage, we don't need to think about it, because the reliable sources will already be taking great care in their language not to prejudice or to pre-judge a trial. Elemimele (talk) 18:28, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Differing sources take differing stances on the issue. The BBC - in an article that was itself controversial owing to the non-wthdrawal of the allegation of anti Muslim smears from the bus passengers despite this claim being rejected by the police, which was the reason for including the incident on the BBC Controversies article - uses "alleged" etc heavily, but the Jewish Chronicle refers to it clearly as a "hate inciden" and "antisemitic abuse incident" and the children in the bus uunambiguously as "victims" in their coverage. Likewise the Daily Telegraph have referred to the bus passengers as "abuse victims" unambiguously in their headline (NB the Jewish Chronicle and the Daily Telegraph are both listed as Reliable Sources on

WP:RSPSOURCES.)Romomusicfan (talk

) 18:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I apologise, I had failed to notice that the article is about BBC controversies, and therefore in this case the BBC is directly involved, or at least it's not eligible as a "vote" amongst reliable sources, because by definition, it's in conflict with everyone else. Hence the controversy. In this case, you have to go with what most reliable sources excluding the BBC say about it. And in this particular case it's not hard to find good sources using the term 'anti-semitic', and the police themselves give the contact details of an anti-hate-crime unit. I've put a note in the talk page. Elemimele (talk) 21:08, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I originally included the disputed BBC story as a primary source relating to what claims the BBC made. It is also worth mentioning that any questioning in their article of the victim status of the bus passengers is done in the context of the allegation of anti-Muslim slurs, an allegation rejected by the Police. As of present the text remains unaltered and the BBC are sticking to their guns, possibly hoping that it will all blow over, but it will be interesting to see if, in the event they concede on this issue, they change the status of the passengers to undisputed victims.Romomusicfan (talk) 23:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

P.S. My last comment was posted here in error and meant for the Talk:BBC controversies page but I'll leave it up as it applies equally to your reply here.Romomusicfan (talk) 23:27, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

FYI

 – Added section header. GoingBatty (talk) 23:22, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

What are some basic things that i can contribute to? Ashlyn113 (talk) 23:21, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@

The Wikipedia Adventure. Then you could visit Wikipedia:Community portal to find ways to contribute. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk

) 23:27, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP 85.164.183.189. This might be a good question to ask at the

it might be wise to ask those who edit such articles regularly about this before trying to change things from as they might currentley be, particularly if you thinking about changing lots of articles. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 23:47, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I'm just wondering how do you link a template? I recently join a few days ago and I'm starting to get things together. User101798s (talk) 19:01, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:TEMPLATE it explains how to accomplish this. Celestina007 (talk

) 19:29, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Alright, I know how to make a template link now, thanks! Stay safe, User101798s (talk) 19:44, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

We are happy to be of assistance. Celestina007 (talk) 20:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

I also love using Template link {{

Template:TL instead then. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk

) 00:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I just received a comment on my draft article on Didwho Welleh TweDagbayonoh (talk) 23:31, 2 January 2022 (UTC), but I cannot find where I can reply. Please show me where the reply section is. Thanks

--Dagbayonoh (talk) 23:31, 2 January 2022 (UTC) Dagbayonoh (talk) 23:31, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Draft:Didwho Welleh Twe, you could click the "Edit source" tab and add your reply on a new line under the comment. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk

) 23:35, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Much higher priority: learn how to create references. See Help: Referencing for beginners. Ref are made using a ref format and inserted into the text of the article after the facts the refs are supporting. The software replaces the ref with a superscripted number, and the ref itself appears in References. No proper refs equals an automatic decline of the draft. David notMD (talk) 02:26, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

As per the heading. I have created a page and I have used pics owned by the person who has asked me to upload them. He is giving over some pics of his own, they aren't copyrighted. What do I put as the status? Stevehogan1605 (talk) 22:53, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Stevehogan1605.The vast majority of photos gain copyright protection automatically as soon as they are published. In most cases, the copyright is held by the photographer. So, what evidence do you have that the photos are not copyrighted? Cullen328 (talk) 22:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

This seems to be about

Tom McCabe (Rugby League player). I removed one of the photos because it was watermarked Getty Images and therefore a clear copyright violation. I suspect that the other images are also copyright violations. Cullen328 (talk

) 23:05, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi, yes, I spoke to the person involved in that picture. I mentioned about the Getty images and he told me he was buying the picture, so once he has done so it will be his and we can upload it back up.

Learning as I go here so any help to stop me making errors very much appreciated. Cheers, Steve — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevehogan1605 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Stevehogan1605, I do not mean to be disrespectful but it is clear that you do not understand copyright at all. Buying an image from Getty does not mean that you acquire the copyright to the image, and can freely license it for usage by everyone in the world. Getty allows the purchaser to use it, not everyone. That image cannot be used on Wikipedia. If you are correct that McCabe is the copyright holder for two of the photos, then McCabe will have to upload those photos himself. You cannot do it for him without completing some very complex legal paperwork that would need to be signed by both of you. As for the photo where everyone chipped in on the surround, it may be that "everyone" who participated may have a share of the copyright. It is essential to get the copyright correct and what seems clear is that you are not the copyright holder for any of these images and therefore should not have uploaded them. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Cullen328 (talk) 00:08, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

@

Tom McCabe (Rugby League player). Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk

) 00:40, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

@

Tom McCabe (Rugby League player). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk

) 00:48, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi

if you're connected to McCabe and are creating content about him on Wikipedia per his request or his behalf, please take the time to carefully read through Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and make sure you're familiar with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines related to creating or editing content about subjects you're connected to. The more you know about this king of thing, the less likely you're going to find yourself running into problems. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 00:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Stevehogan1605, from what I have read here (at WP) if person A hands his camera to person B, and B then takes a picture (of person A, or anything else), then person B owns the copyright to that picture -- B is the photographer. A does not hold the copyright. Yes, these rules are weird. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 00:56, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

In such a scenario Person B is probably at least a joint copyright holder, but may also possibly have no claim of copyright ownership at all. I don't think copyright is necessarily established because Person B took said photo, but rather based upon whether Person B added any individual creativity when taking the photo. If Person B is simply acting as verbally instructed (i.e. as nothing more than a human tripod) and the act of taking the picture is nothing more than a mechanical pushing of a button without any creative input at all, then the copyright holder is probably going to be the person who set up the camera and the shot. Of course, it can be quite hard to determine what if any creativity has been added in the taking of the photo, which is why it's probably easier after the fact to claim there was creative input than to claim there wasn't absent any

WP:CONSENT of everyone involved. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 02:21, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

So if I put my camera on a tripod, and use a remote control to trigger the shutter, who owns the copyright: the tripod or the remote control?--Gronk Oz (talk) 03:12, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Gronk Oz, I assume that you are joking. If you aren't, then let me point out that, currently, cameras, triggers, tripods and remote controls are not yet able to engage in independent creative control. Accordingly, the photographer (or the camera owner if the photo was taken by a casual shutter clicker) is the copyright holder. Cullen328 (talk) 07:03, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: - unfortunately, jokes don't always come across that way in writing. Mine don't, anyway.--Gronk Oz (talk) 10:53, 31 December 2021 (UTC) Fix ping @Cullen328:--Gronk Oz (talk) 10:55, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Well, {u|Marchjuly}}, what you said doesn't match what I have read here on WP, in other similar cases. But I am not a copyright expert. If i can find the other cases I have read about, I'll post them here or on your talk page, if that's OK. (If a camera is on a tripod, I'm sure the person who used the remote is the copyright holder.) Thanks. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 10:34, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Fixing ping to Marchjuly 73.127.147.187 (talk) 10:36, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

There's no need to post anything on my talk page. I'm not a copyright expert either, but copyright seems to focus more on the amount of creativity added to something as opposed to the mechanical creation of something. There's more about this kind of thing at meta:Wikilegal/Authorship and Copyright Ownership#The Example of the Third Party Photographer. Anyway, I may be wrong here which I why I sugessted that the safest thing to do is to take your own photos with your own camera if you want to upload them here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:23, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

I have removed all the images as they are tagged for deletion, I have also sent the article to

WP:AFD as it doesn't have a singlesource to support any of the content, the only previous sources referred to a vague connection to a rugby playing family member. Theroadislong (talk

) 11:23, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Horrible flashbacks to the Monkey selfie copyright dispute.  Card Zero  (talk) 04:11, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Card_Zero, no non-human living creatures are involved in this matter. Cullen328 (talk) 04:16, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

How should I be handling red links when cleaning up/copyediting an article, especially when there are a lot present? Should I be removing the link completely and leaving the text, or should I be looking at each to try to determine if an article will/should be written, and leaving the link there in that case? I've come across some articles and lists that are a sea of red links and have mostly just been deleting the links but wanted to check if that's the best route. Thank you in advance! RDvor (talk) 03:03, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@RDvor, generally other editors make redlinks because they're trying to signal to other editors that they think this might be a notable subject. Unless you have investigated and actively believe this is definitely not likely to be notable in the near future, leave the redlink in place. Redlinks are valuable. If you come across a sea of redlinks, bring the page here and people can take a look and advise. Sometimes even a sea of relinks is valid. —valereee (talk) 03:20, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

If you're talking about stuff like this, then it's quite possible those redlinks are valid potential articles. —valereee (talk) 03:28, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Valereee: Thank you! I was referring to things like that as well as some "list" articles I've seen. Another question -- I clicked on the diff you linked and above the diff with my edits, there was a "vandalism" link -- I clicked it thinking I had been reverted for vandalism but it looks like by clicking that I reverted my own edit for vandalism! Will this result in some kind of flag on my account? Should I reverse it? RDvor (talk) 04:46, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about it. I'm not sure which edit you're referring to, but if it was a problem, someone will revert, and for someone with fewer than 100 edits who otherwise seems well-intentioned, other editors are quite likely to assume it was an error rather than vandalism. —valereee (talk) 05:28, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi

only those who are might have a good claim for being Wikipedia notable. As for red links in in-body prose, those might be a bit harder to assess since removing the text might affect the reader’s understanding of the relevant content. In such a case, you might have to make an editorial decision as to whether the red-linked text is essential or can be removed (or rewritten) in a way that isn’t detrimental to the reader’s understanding. — Marchjuly (talk

) 03:23, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Valereee and @Marchjuly: Thank you for the speedy response! I will do my best to make these assessments and leave redlinks alone by default, only deleting them if it's clear the subject isn't notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RDvor (talk • contribs) 03:32, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:Interlanguage link might be the best option. — Marchjuly (talk

) 03:40, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I know that people that are not logged in vandalize Wikipedia for good, but they get reverted by users. Some people can get blocked from editing due to Vandalism. Everyone knows that vandalism is a bad thing, but why do people that are not logged in do it? 2603:8000:F400:FCEA:E0A6:5A50:B03C:71AA (talk) 3 January 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user and welcome to the teahouse! presumably the reason why people vandalize wikipedia through ip addresses is precisely because they're anonymous from there, they can't be identified by any editor. happy editing!  melecie  t - 23:14, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

IP editors are often less anonymous than they might believe as explained

geolocated to a specific-enough location to help identify the person doing the editing to a fairly accurate degree. Out in the real world, people editing from their company, their school or other computers on some public network sometimes find out about this thing the hard way. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 23:29, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@

talk

) 06:49, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes I know that, but it's not publicly visible (i.e. not visible in a page's edit history). The fact that some editors can "see" the IP addresses of registered accounts is explained

within the page I linked to in my prior post. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 06:53, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Can any helpful editor search for a copyright free image of Mohammed Shami other than the two already used in the article? I am asking so for the development of the article.--Michri michri (talk) 17:31, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

There is something called Free Image Search Tool. It's not very user-friendly, but might be worth a try. —2603:6081:1C00:1187:1E8:92A1:1E50:D2B (talk) 18:44, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

2603:6081:1C00:1187:1E8:92A1:1E50:D2B, not opening due to security problems. Michri michri (talk) 12:25, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Michri michri I tried Google image search. You may not be aware that the output has a "Tools" option that shows only those images with a Creative Commons license. Unfortunately, in this case the only useful hits were the two images on Wikipedia Commons that you already know about. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:32, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Ok, thank youMichri michri (talk) 10:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Greetings.

I wanted to update Magnus Carsen's rating as per the official January 2022 rankings. However when I try to do so in the source editing, the section appears empty but when I try to update it, it seems as if I'm adding more content rather than editing it. If you can update it instead on my behalf, that would be awesome.

Someone help me understand the whole thing. The same is evident in the ranking section.

Thank you 

Hi

WT:CHESS (second choice) because it appears FIDE ratings for professional chess players are added to Template:Infobox chess biography and other parts of articles about such players in a particular way. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 06:45, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Marchjuly,

Thanks for the advice. Yeah there seems to be some technicality involved. I'll definitely do one or both of the suggested actions. Good day— Preceding

talk • contribs

) 07:17, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Volten0001, since I'd already drafted this comment, to add to what you've been told there, that page uses the template {{Infobox chess biography}} which automatically adds FIDE rating from the FideID parameter. You don't need to edit it. Hemantha (talk

) 12:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

• &^% Llew8 (talk) 23:49, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Llew8. You reply by editing the section that you want to reply to. If you start each pagraph with a colon (or if the previous paragraph already starts with a colon, one more colon than that one), it will indent your reply to make it easier to read. --ColinFine (talk) 23:56, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Two colons indents more. You do your reply at same place, so if on your Talk, reply on your Talk page. As ColinFine did, there are ways to 'ping' the other person so they know where to look. David notMD (talk) 02:38, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Llew8, another way to do this is by enabling 'Discussion Tools' at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. It adds a 'reply' button next to posts. Hemantha (talk) 12:50, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Greetings, this site >> https://www.hugedomains.com/domain_profile.cfm?d=durame.com can no longer be used as source for Teddy Afro, supposedly it contained biographical info. Is there an old version stored somewhere in Wikipedia/Webarchive, if so how to search for it? I'm getting zero results at webarchives.  Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 13:20, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria Welcome to Teahouse! I found this by searching archive.org [1], hope that helps ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 13:36, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria: WHile searching in the web archives I found this from July 5th 2020 (three months before the access date). I have tagged the source #3 as dead in the article, though I haven't yet added the archived copy. I unfortunally also had to mark two sentences as failed verification, because the sources didn't statet what they are cited for. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:52, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Shushugah: Thank you! it def helps. @Victor Schmidt: Good eye! i will add the archived source and update the article, thanks! Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 14:08, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Resolved

Please bare with me on my long winded question for help.

I am completely new and want to edit content on these pages:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_of_benediction
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_eye
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hierophant

And/or create a new page on the topic of "The hand of benediction" as it relates to religion, divinity, occult, the evil eye, superstition, voodoo, folklore and superstition.

on the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hierophant There is text "the Hierophant is represented with his right hand raised in blessing or benediction, with two fingers pointing skyward and two pointing down, thus forming a bridge between Heaven and Earth" and "Hierophant is thus a true "pontiff", in that he is the builder of the bridge between deity and humanity."

These text represent "The Hierophant" as the builder and "the hand" as the bridge. This hand sign "The hand of Benediction" also referred to as the "Hand of blessing" on some Judeo-Christian forms. It also a protection sign against the "Evil Eye" as I have found in a book called "the hand of destiny folklore and superstition for everyday life" by author: C.J.S. Thompson, it is described as "Mano Pantea", its on page 71, if you care to research. It says this symbol was used long before the Christian era.

• https://archive.org/details/handofdestinyfol00thom/page/n311/mode/2up
• please see page 312 at the very end, photo of book jacket.

I myself have a passion for the mystery behind this hand symbol and it's true origin. I have theories or hunches that it may have been originated in Hinduism, but that is purely a guess. I have theories of its effects and actions with concern to metaphysics and the "unknown world", but we can't just write or edit based on theories of the unknown, CAN WE?

On the jacket of the book I mentioned above there is a picture of a sculpture" the hand of benediction" and that sculpture is of a hand and also symbols and an odd looking serpent. I went to libraries and museums to find people to help me research it and came up empty. I have also created a personal copyright image of my version of "The hand of destiny", I have my pictures on my computer and would like to share them on Wikipedia if allowed.

How can I share those pictures and how can I get help with research and edits?

I was hoping Wikipedia editors may be the help I need to find more information on the subject!!

• https://archive.org/details/handofdestinyfol00thom/page/n311/mode/2up
• please see page 312 photo of book jacket!

Dewsters (talk) 22:11, 1 January 2022 (UTC) Dewsters (talk) 22:11, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

reliable source

, you may summarise it (but not go beyond what the source says), but otherwise, no.

On the picture: if you have created a picture (and not simply copied a copyright picture or sculpture), and are willing to license it in such a way that anybody may reuse it for any purpose as long as they attribute it, then you may upload it to Wikimedia Commons, licensing it as you go. But if you do not hold the copyright, then in most cases you may not use it on Wikipedia: see image use policy.

As to your main question: I have no idea, but you may find people at WP:WikiProject Folklore who can help you. --ColinFine (talk) 22:23, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Your bronze hand is in the British Museum, see Sabazios.  Card Zero  (talk) 14:17, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Repeatedly editing in wrong wikilinks?

User repeatedly inserts wrong wikilinks to 2022 GB3 Championship and doesn't seem to want to discuss those with me in the talk page, is there anything I can do?

Can anyone look at the article and maybe tell me if I am the one who is wrong?

EDIT: A third user came in and now the first one has given up, so the situation might be resolved now. H4MCHTR (talk) 18:15, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

I got messages saying my edits to "Boofzheim" and "Chuck E. Cheese" were rejected for being unconstructive and vandalism. I did not edit these pages; I haven't even read a Wikipedia page in the time that it says "I" edited those pages (the only actual edit that I did was from 2018 and it was fine and got approved). I don't really understand how IP addresses work to be honest: is someone else using my IP address to write dumb stuff on random pages? Is this something that I should be worried about for the privacy of my computer in general, like a hack of some sort, or is it just a benign annoyance? Thanks. 45.37.114.19 (talk) 15:33, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. No, don't panic. If it wasn't you - or a family member- who made that edit, then be aware that IP addresses get re-allocated on a dynamic basis all the time, and the message you got made this clear, I would have hoped. As it says, the best way is to register for a free account here and you will not only hide your current IP address, but also be able to see every single one of your past and future edits that you may make here. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:46, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

This can happen as an IP editor. If you are considering editing more than five pages, I recommend getting a Wikipedia account. It's free and you won't have to worry about your IP address being shown. Urban Versis 32 (talk) 18:12, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Please note the line that comes immediately after the user warnings: If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Basically, sometimes your ISP will assign your IP to multiple people, and those people can vandalize Wikipedia, causing you to get irrelevant warnings. Although I'm not exactly in favor of making an account, sometimes you have to. --67.183.136.85 (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Wikipedia fam! I'm new to writing wikipedia pages. I'm the personal assistant of a semi-known musician and I'm trying to write a wiki page for her. The problem is there aren't a ton of third party sources out there to verify certain things like where she grew up, aspects of her early life and career, and certain achievements she's made. Do I need to cut her page down to only the things that are 100% verifiable or is there a way that I, as her assistant knowing everything about her life, can make the reviewers know the info is true. Very confused, grateful for help! Curt Obernik (talk) 15:09, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:MUSIC

.

So your first job is to gather the best, most reliable, independent sources - the books that have been written about her, the national and international magazines that have run in-depth articles about her, the major awards she has won, etc. The see how they stack up against those criteria. If in doubt, feel free to ask here at the Teahouse.

Then in, and only if, she is notable should you write the article. And yes, it should only include information that can be verified in published, reliable sources.--Gronk Oz (talk) 15:27, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

If this is about

WP:PAID. David notMD (talk

) 15:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

neutrally. 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

) 20:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I've been dipping my toe in the world of Wikipedia by doing some basic copyediting and this has led me to look at the talk pages of articles I've edited. Unfortunately on some of them I've come across nonsense and/or spam that is clearly irrelevant to the article - for example the anti-mask content and keysmashes on the talk page for Cayenne.

Is it okay to just delete that sort of content, or is there some sort of reporting process we should follow? Or just assume that everyone else who reads it will also recognise it as nonsense and ignore it?

Thanks in advance! CameronVictoria (talk) 14:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:TALK.--Shantavira|^{feed me}

14:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello @CameronVictoria and welcome to the teahouse. To add on what @Shantavira said, you should also report the spammers for a possible block. _Signed,Pichemist ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 17:09, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Amazing, thank you both :) --CameronVictoria (talk) 20:31, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I've been working on writing a page, [[2]], and I was wondering if anyone could give me some guidance on how to improve it so it meets the necessary criteria. Many Thanks. Cessnabroon (talk) 19:50, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

significant coverage of them. 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. It follows that most of your content is not cited to a suitable source and should be removed. --ColinFine (talk

) 21:22, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks ColinFine, I will attempt to find better, impartial sources, and if I can't, I will go and do it on Fandom. Most of the evidence I have isn't technically written, but is from my past experience, so I will try my best. Thanks again. --Cessnabroon (talk) 22:11, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm afraid that information from your experience is

original research unless it is corroborated by reliable published sources, and may never be used in a Wikipedia article, Cessnabroon. --ColinFine (talk

) 22:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I would like help in adding an article about Los Gemelos, the two brothers who accompanied the great Spanish singer María Dolores Pradera for many years. They cannot be found in the wikipedia! 77.249.21.136 (talk) 20:51, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. My advice to inexperienced editors who want to create an article is always to put the idea aside for a few months while they "learn the trade" by making improvements to existing articles. Then read

notable, and any further work you put into it is likely to be wasted. --ColinFine (talk

) 21:27, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

There may not be enough published about them - in English or in Spanish - to warrant an article. They are mentioned by name in María Dolores Pradera. David notMD (talk) 22:32, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

How to reply on talk pages

There seems to be no 'reply' buttons like traditional forums, are we just supposed to edit the discussion source? MothiMediocreJoker (talk) 22:41, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@MothiMediocreJoker: Welcome to the Teahouse. Pretty much. You can also enable the Discussion tool beta feature in Preferences → Beta features → Discussion tools to add a small reply link at the end of each comment to reply to them. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:51, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

• @
  ping}} function to notify the relevant editors. Celestina007 (talk
  ) 22:57, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@

reliable sources for the proposed subject. In fact, I'd suggest editing existing articles to get a feel as to what editing Wikipedia is like. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝

 ) 22:52, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:RS if you can read and internalize both to satisfactory status you would have solved at least (IMO) 90% of your hurdle, other errors can be easily cleaned up for you, having said it isn’t what you want to rush into, no, might I suggest bookmarking the url to this very venue? You may find it beneficial to read the questions of others and reading the responses also. Celestina007 (talk

) 23:06, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I am Japanese and frequently try to improve articles on Japanese topics. However I frequently run into the problem of misinformation being pushed, justified by anglocentrism. Even if something is outright wrong, people tell me that it is right because people (erroneously) refer to it that way in English. Sometimes there is a a more appropriate word, either Japanese or translated for a thing, but the English article uses a completely different and wrong word for it, and when I try to change it to a correct word (of course explaining the reasoning why) people block my attempts to correcting misinformation saying things like "English speakers would not understand it" "that term is unknown to English readers" "the current (wrong) English term is good enough" "it is already known as this in English". Sometimes it is not just a term, but an entire article based on a misconception that is justified this way. Is this Wikipedia policy, and if so, how far does it go? If a misconception is widespread amongst the English-speaking parts of the world, is it Wikipedia policy to perpetuate the misconception instead of stating facts? 2404:2D00:5000:701:2CA6:8376:22F9:67D8 (talk) 08:55, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Can you give an example of what you're describing? I'm aware that the mountain generally called "

Fujiyama" in English is known as (something transliterated as) "Fuji-san" in Japanese. But this is English Wikipedia, so it uses the English name for the mountain. Maproom (talk

) 17:06, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

In Japan there are events called "sokubaikai" which are for people to sell items. Due to a fundamental misunderstanding of the events, people in the west frequently called them "fan convention" linking to the article which states "an event in which fans of a particular topic gather to participate and hold programs and other events, and to meet experts, famous personalities, and each other": None of this applies to sokubaikai and it is completely wrong to define them in this way. Even though I have extensively explained how this is wrong, people have blocked my efforts to improve articles and reverted my edits saying, basically, that it is because "they are known as fan conventions in English". This is even when I write it in a way that states this is what they are called in Japanese, which is an undeniable fact, and I have been accused of "POV pushing" for this. 2404:2D00:5000:701:2CA6:8376:22F9:67D8 (talk) 20:46, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Looking at the discussion at Talk:Doujinshi convention, I can see that you've put the case for not using "convention" in the title, on the grounds that the subject isn't a fan convention. However, to call something a convention isn't to say it's a fan convention per se. A convention is just a large meeting. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:51, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

People have persisted in reverting my edits for "POV pushing" on other pages like Comiket as well, insisting on including references to fan convention (not just "convention" but "fan convention" specifically, which is wrong) in. Fan convention is also wrong in this context because a lot of content at such events is original, not based on anything. There are also entire such events devoted entirely to original content. Additionally, I found accurate (Japanese) sources for information and people claimed they are "not reliable" and replaced it with bad western sources written by people who know nothing about the topic. Thank you for your replies but I have given up on this entirely, at least for now. Every single attempt I have made, as a Japanese person who has more than 15 years of first-hand experience and knowledge, having participated and exhibited in multiple such events every year, to correct mistakes and add accurate information has been blocked by people from the west who know nothing about the subject and insist on perpetuating misinformation on the sole basis that other people like them who likewise know nothing said it before. Wikipedia has severe fundamental problems. 2404:2D00:5000:701:C9DC:9734:2BA1:C3C5 (talk) 22:55, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

It is the English Wikipedia. I'd say the world has fundamental problems bringing cultures and languages together. Maybe a start (for you) would be getting a Wikipedia account and use it on all the language versions you edit. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 23:24, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure that cursing and making racial attacks will help your case, please try to

stay mellow

.

I suggest that you try to open a discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga. --Thibaut (talk) 02:17, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

.

2404:2D00:5000:701:2CA6:8376:22F9:67D8 (talk):

.

Greetings, and thank you for your persistence in helping to improve Wikipedia!

.

First, please accept my apologies that you have had to deal with this.

.

Language is unfortunately complicated (as are humans 🤷), more still with a language as complex, widespread, and varied as English.

There are many terms that have quite different meanings depending, for example, on whether the listener was raised in New Zealand, The United States of America, Great Britain, Kenya, or India.

.

(I did not spend much time in Japan, so please excuse the following generalization; it is only indicative of my personal experience and opinion): My impression is that the average English-speaker (especially on the Internet) is more rushed and less careful with their words than the average Japanese-speaker. In the United States, for example, the concept of allowing others to ‘save face’ in public is much less common than in some other parts of the world. In summary, you’re facing both(at least!) language and cultural barriers; sadly, the later are often much less apparent.

.

Regarding your specific example:

Based on the way you describe the ‘sokubaikai’ type of event: in parts of the United States, this sounds like something that possibly could be described (I’m not sure we have an exact analogue) by several terms other than ‘convention’, such as: ‘fair’, ‘exposition’, ‘exhibition’, ‘meet’/‘meetup’, ‘event’, ‘market’ or ‘conference’.

- Some of the nuance between them relates to the physical setting (i.e. indoor vs outdoor), degree of commerce, socialization, training events, presentations, entertainment, length of event, etc.

- Some require advance registration or an admission fee, and others are open to the public for no cost.

- Some are restricted to members of a specific trade, business association, or social organization.

.

The meaning of each term also can vary depending on the traditions of the region in which it is used within the same country, let alone internationally! Examples:

- Art fair /

Trade fair / World's fair

-

exhibition hall

- Show (example: Chicago’s ‘One of a Kind Show’)

- Craft exposition / craft expo

-

swap meet

(normally for sale of used or commercial items)

.

There are many types of ‘

fan conventions’ (see Convention (meeting)

).

In mind own peculiar mind, ‘convention’ without a proper noun (e.g. “I am in town for a convention.”) or without further elaboration first suggests a multi-day art or business/trade event requiring travel from many attendees (unless the speaker is costumed or quite young, since young people don’t travel alone in the United States as much as they might in Asia or Europe—due to a general lack of frequent and affordable passenger trains), but I do understand your concern.

.

Conclusion:

I don’t expect anyone to know all of this; as a native (and old) English speaker, even I had to verify many of the terms I used above and their is no guarantee that I used them as precisely as intended.

.

My best advise is to avoid argument and instead describe as completely as you can why you feel something is worded incorrectly, and explain that you are seeking a shared understanding. As Ariconte implied above, this is the Internet, and sometimes humans are unkind or rude for reasons that have nothing to do with you. Some (myself included) are even ignorant at times, and don’t like to publicly admit we were wrong, especially if someone is publicly accusing us of being wrong. It can be hard for humans to understand that others may have different experiences (or understandings of language) - over the millennia many wars have been started and marriages ended over misunderstandings, after all.

.

Feel free to come back here, ask for advice elsewhere (e.g. english.stackexchange.com), or enlist the friendship of a native Anglophile ally that might share your interests on a forum or social networking site such as Twitter[3].

.

Kono ichinenga subarashii toshi ni narimasu youni!

Jim Grisham (talk) 00:31, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Can, I seek my technical logs to some checkuser? Would they give it to me? Is it legal? I think there was some attempt to log into my account. Thanks. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 04:58, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Itcouldbepossible. Please read Help:Log. Checkusers are simply not allowed to use their powerful tools to investigate vague suspicions. Solid evidence is required. Do you have evidence? Cullen328 (talk) 06:02, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Well, Cullen328, I had this suspect, because, I had got a notification, that someone, was trying to log in. That's why, I want to know from which IP address it is occurring, and also if any Wikipedian is involved. You know, some people don't like me, because I revert vandalism. Maybe that's why they try to do all such crazy stuff. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 04:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Itcouldbepossible Over the course of a couple of weeks last year, I had daily emailed reports of multiple tens of attempts to log in to my account. I changed and further complicated my password (making sure I had provided an email in case of forgetting the new one). Apparently, it's not hugely uncommon, but Cullen is right in what he says, too. Just treat the notifications as a prompt to ensure your password is secure (and not used on any other platform). Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:27, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes Yes, howstrongismypassword.com says that it would take a computer 2 million years to crack my password. So, I think that won't be easy. And moreover, because of the captcha, I don't think dictionary attack would be possible. I hope so, I am not sure. I am not a cyber security expert. Thanks. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 04:49, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

.

The “Your rights” section of the WikiMedia Foundation privacy policy (which Wikipedia appears to incorporate by reference) suggests that one may be able to request data relating to their account by via e-mail or via the Foundation’s

GDPR representative (contact details are listed later on that same page). Jim Grisham (talk

) 01:54, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

 HassanHussainOfficial (talk) 01:31, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@HassanHussainOfficial: Welcome to the Teahouse. No, sorry, your draft is totally unsuitable for this encyclopaedia. The decline notice (amongst many other things) says:

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

notability of people

). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Basically, you need to find independent sources that show this person (presumably yourself?) is notable, and there is absolutely nothing that demonstrates this at the moment. Wikipedia is not for

WP:PROMOTION. Without three good sources (not your own YouTube videos) your draft stands no chance - sorry to disappoint you. Nick Moyes (talk

) 01:55, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Your draft is about a child who will be ten years old later this month. None of the content, even if you managed to create references, suggests that he can be notable by Wikipedia standards. I recommend you stop all work on the draft, and then it will be automatically delete six months from now. David notMD (talk) 03:36, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

The subject says it all really. If I'm not logged in math formulas display normally, If I am logged in, math formulas display as raw TeX code.

How do I turn this off (or on) as needed? CJ7903 (talk) 07:46, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:FORMULA or Wikipedia:Rendering math. The difference is obviously affected by how logged in/non logged in users see the content rendered, but all I can suggest for quick switching is to ask you to try switching between source editor and visual editor, using the obvious pencil icon. Nick Moyes (talk

) 08:10, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@CJ7903 In Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering, scroll down to "Math". -- AxG / ✉  12:41, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@CJ7903, Go to Appearance preferences page, scroll down to 'Math' section and select MathML. Hemantha (talk) 12:42, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@AxG @Hemantha Thanks for those replies. I've learnt something new today, too! Nick Moyes (talk) 16:46, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Hemantha Thanks, that works just fine. My setting was LaTeX. But I'm curious .. can you (or anyone) explain why LaTeX was a dud setting? CJ7903 (talk) 00:52, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@CJ7903, As you can see from the photo on Text-based web browser, pics/svg break text flow and users with those browsers wouldn't prefer that. The setting is for them. Hemantha (talk) 03:39, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

How many such articles exist in Wikipedia. Is it only for Abraham Lincoln? Then such articles can be created for other popular person also, not just Abraham Lincoln. --Yelena Vasilisa Marya (talk) 02:30, 4 January 2022 (UTC) Yelena Vasilisa Marya (talk) 02:30, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

For some, it is Sexuality sections within articles: {Henry David Thoreau]], Walt Whitman. For people who are confirmed in their sexual orientations, see List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people David notMD (talk) 03:46, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello @

WP:CONSENSUS is likely to favour deletion or merger to the main article in case of living people. So, for a new editor, I would advise not even attempting it. I can't think of any living person for whom this would be an appropriate article, but if you have someone in mind, you are better off asking specifically about that person here, before attempting such an article. Hope this helps! Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️

03:47, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Yelena Vasilisa Marya. I am a bit of a Lincoln buff and according to what I know, it seems that he had an early powerful heterosexual romantic relationship with Ann Rutledge that did not work out. Modern speculations about Lincoln's possible homosexuality seem to be based on a cultural misunderstanding of how male friendship was expressed in the early 19th century, and about how sleeping arrangements among poor young men of that era played out. Very good friends? Absolutely. Proven homosexual lovers? Challenged, speculative and unproven. Cullen328 (talk)

I would like to know how a person would go about having their business name or personal information added to Wikipedia?

Wendy Vincent Vincent Bookkeeping www.WendyVincent.com 2600:1010:B06A:39FC:9C2F:2E5B:99C7:7F46 (talk) 03:01, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Not. Wikipedia is not the equivalent of Yellow Page or LinkedIn, or any social media platform. It is an encyclopedia. When people are so well known in their professions that strangers write about them, then an article may be plausible. Deloitte is an article. You - No. David notMD (talk) 03:52, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You may have misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia, like many others: it is not a place to advertise a business, nor does it keep a listing of businesses. If a business has an article, it must be of encyclopedic value. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm writing an article on an online poker site Natural8, but it was rejected over and over again for being promotional. I have tried to amend the wordings, as well as information on it, but I keep getting the same reason for rejection. This is after I checked on a few other online poker articles. Can someone please advise me on this?

Would it help if I use articles from Pokernews, which is one of the biggest news channel for online poker?

https://www.pokernews.com/operators/natural8/ Theonlysamantha (talk) 02:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

notable enough for Wikipedia. To prove that Natural8 is notable, you will need to use reliable secondary sources and not promotional sources like [4] and [5]. This is one way you can improve your article. And if you reflect on what is being said in secondary sources and then rewrite the article, it is typically more neutral, because the people writing the articles aren't trying to promote the company. Thanks, --Ferien (talk

) 09:46, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I have seen many editors use the word 'backlog'. May I know what it is? And it sometimes also says 'page has not been backlogged', what is that? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 13:51, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:AIV is often said to be backlogged during daytime, for example, because there are too many reports sitting to be reviewed. Victor Schmidt (talk

) 13:58, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Itcouldbepossible That's a good answer. I often find I have a backlog of things I need to do at home because I spend far too much time on Wikipedia! See also this Wiktionary definition. A close-sounding (but very different) term you may sometimes encounter is 'log-jam', whereby a normally smooth-running process gets blocked up. I believe that derives from the literal use of rivers to transport felled timber (logs) downstream to timber yards and which can sometimes 'jam up' and stop the movement of any of them. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:12, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Appears "backlog" origin dates to 1600s, when a large log was added at the back of the hearthfire in the evening, with the idea that this would be the last to finish burning, providing night heat and leaving embers that the next morning were utilized to start the morning fire. David notMD (talk) 15:30, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

And yes, Nick Moyes had already found the hearthfire origin. David notMD (talk) 19:32, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD@Nick Moyes@Victor Schmidt Ok, can I get some examples of Wikipedia backlog examples? I have seen a editor seeking a backlog of dead links to work on? I don't remember where I had seen the edit, but I had surely seen it somewhere. So what is that? And is there something like that really available. I would love to correct all the dead links, by replacing them with their archived versions. Thanks and Regards. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 10:27, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

For more information on backlogs, see WP:Backlog, including a link to Category:Articles with dead external links (where the 300 thousand examples should keep you busy for a while, but of course those are only the dead links which have been tagged). --David Biddulph (talk) 10:34, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I want to check something about bot notifications. Please do not reply to this thread or the next. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:42, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I want to check something about bot notifications. Please do not reply to this thread or the previous one. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:43, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

My article was declined and the reason basically was referencing. I don't know if you could look through and guide me. It is my first.

Thank you Felixshammah (talk) 11:08, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Referencing for Beginners. Please also review the comments left by reviewers on the draft. 331dot (talk

) 11:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: c:File:Sddas.png

I have mistakenly noted this image as my own work. Please speedly delete it.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michri michri (talk • contribs) 08:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

There is no record of you having uploaded any images to enwiki. If you are referring to a file on Wikimedia Commons, you need to ask there. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:42, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

David Biddulph, kindly see the most recent image uploaded by me in the article Mohammed Shami. Instead of uploading through creative commons license, I have uploaded it as my own work. It is actually a screenshot taken from a video of CRICKETNEXT youtube channel. Now, please nominate the image uploaded by me for speedy deletion and add it as Wikicommons (The channel states reuse allowed). ThankyouMichri michri (talk) 09:40, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Michri michri: Could you pelase give the exact youtube video link, preferably with a timestamp? Also, this is not the first time I have to speedy delete a picture upload from you. Would you pelase take more care in the future, and Actually use the upload wizard? It would help all of us. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:36, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Victor Schmidt, really sorry. I don't know why but I can not post the youtube link here. I have tried it earlier. Whenever I am trying to do it, the edit is not getting published. Anyway, after the deletion of the file, I'll upload it in the Upload Wizard with proper CC licence. Gracias Michri michri (talk) 10:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:MCQ. Victor Schmidt (talk

) 10:55, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt As the article has only two images of Shami, I'll definitely add the image of course with CC license through Common Wizard. Btw, if you can find any copyright free image of Shami in the jersey of his IPL team, please add it to the article. Another request (out of context)- As the report left by the reviewer in the Draft:Sadashib (Fictional Character) states, the draft violates plagiarism issues. Now, it is not possible for me single-handedly to rewrite keeping the content same. I'll be glad if you,Victor Schmidt, kindly help me in this context. The request may sound strange, but please help me as this my second draft, with the first one not getting published. I have requested the same to other two users, but they didn't respond. Now, you are perhaps the last one, whom I am asking for. Thank you in advance. Michri michri (talk) 12:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Is there a way to color code the source editor to separate stuff like references or templates? Or, alternatively, would this be possible through scripts? – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 12:02, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@AssumeGoodWraith: yes there is. Press the pencil icon in the toolbar left of "Advanced" to activate (or disactivate again). Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I was thinking about this because of the size of references but it honestly doesn't look much better. Back to normal. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 12:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@AssumeGoodWraith Have you also considered switching between Source editor and Visual Editor if Victor's advice hasn't helped you? Nick Moyes (talk) 13:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I prefer wikitext. Although I'm not using that colour code thing, all it is is that it takes a bit longer to find text in the middle of refs. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 13:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC) .

No worries. Funnily enough, I can't manage without the colour code thing. I find it really useful just having to look for black text as real page content. But each to their own, of course. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:02, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm trying to create a new page for an individual but the draft keeps getting rejected for citations not being reliable enough (even though these are mostly interviews in big music magazines). They are credited across Wikipedia on multiple musician's pages and I want to link those pages to a new page with details about the subject. What else can I do to make it more reliable? Can I upload photos of physical record sleeves / printed interviews / articles without them being public (or should these just be in the references list, even though they are not citations?)? Kateewilliamson (talk) 14:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Is the draft in question Draft:Jolyon Thomas (Producer)? - X201 (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

It would appear that you are being paid to create an article. The problem is not so much that your sources are unreliable but that they don't show this person is

significant coverage in outlets completely unconnected to Thomas. If these don't exist then neither can an article. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 14:37, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

That's fine,

Ctrlwiki. There is no obligation to create any archive. All previous contributions to your Talk Page are in its history if anyone needs to look and you can start archiving from now. Archiving just makes searching a bit easier. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 14:42, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Who rates new articles? (A, B, C, Start, Stub) Is it a specific set of permissions that are granted? TIA. Jmaxx37 (talk) 18:33, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

@Jmaxx37 welcome to Teahouse! There's more information in Wikipedia:Content assessment, the short version though is anyone can make the actual assessment for A, B, C, Start, Stub including the article creators, however for GA/FA (Good/Featured Articles) there is a formal nomination process. Happy editing and rating! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:01, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

@Shushugah @Jmaxx37 I believe A also requires nomination. ― Qwerfjkltalk 21:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

according to the already-referenced Wikipedia:Content assessment, this is incorrect.~TPW 17:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I had an article that had some copyright issues which have now been resolved yet I cannot get to the article in question anymore. Here's the info I do have. I also reached out to the user who deleted it but no reply as of yet. What else can I do?

Aamat-webeditor (talk) 14:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

A page with this title has previously been moved or deleted.

If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the user(s) who performed the action(s) listed below.

20:10, 29 December 2021 Amortias talk contribs deleted page Draft:Emtrain (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://emtrain.com/founders-story/, https://emtrain.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Emtrain-Press-Release_Workplace-Culture-Report-1.pdf, https://emtrain.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Emtrain-Press-Release_2021-Workplace-Culture-Insights-Report_Respect.pdf) Tag: Twinkle (thank) Aamat-webeditor (talk) 14:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

The draft was here: Draft:Emtrain. As for reaching out to Amortias: I can see no message from you to them on-wiki, so @Amortias:. Lectonar (talk) 14:37, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

That is the current version. Any content that was copyright infringement has been removed from the editing history of the draft. David notMD (talk) 18:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

The period has always been inside of the quotation marks. Recently, just about every article I read on Wikipedia has the period outside of quotation marks, including directly quoting someone else's words or speech:

Example: accusing them of "violating his rights". Instead of: accusing them of "violating his rights."

Example: calling him "a moniker of some guy who knows of nothing but swinging a sword". Instead of: calling him "a moniker of some guy who knows of nothing but swinging a sword."

For references, you can read more about this on Purdue University website: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/quotation_marks/more_quotation_mark_rules.html

Is this the new writing style Wikipedia employing? 50.35.23.240 (talk) 11:13, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. I'm not sure I can agree with your first assertion, nor did you give any links to articles as a demonstration of your concerns. The guidance on quotations can be found at

WP:LQ

)

So, imagine if you wanted to quote a few words from a publication which contained the following text: "...the defendant, Mr Smith, claimed the police were violating his rights by holding him in custody for two months."

• You should write on Wikipedia: Mr Smith accused the police of "violating his rights".^[ref] - that would be valid whether or not he said or wrote those words at the very end of a sentence
• You should not write on Wikipedia: Mr Smith accused the police of "violating his rights."^[ref] - by putting a period inside the quote you would be falsely and misleadingly be suggesting that that was the end of what he said when the source shows it clearly was not.
• If you wrote: Smith accused the police of "violating his rights.".^[ref] that would look very messy, even if it were his final words.

As with so many things, context is everything, and sometimes an individual case should be discussed on an article's talk page after consulting the original source. Does that help, or make things worse? Nick Moyes (talk) 11:45, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] :This might be an example of

WP:ENGVAR

. While the US default is (I understand) always to place punctuation within the quotation marks, in (for example) the UK (where I am) this is not so – rather, punctuation that is part of the original quotation is so placed, but punctuation added as part of the text containing the quotation is not.

For example, If A wrote of B that B Was a poor painter and an adulterer to boot, and one wished to quote only the artistic opinion, in the UK one would write – A wrote that "B was a poor painter".

If however one wanted to quote the whole sentence, one would write – A wrote that "B was a poor painter and an adulterer to boot."

Wikipedia – a global English-language encyclopedia – tries to apply the principles that (a) a subject with connections to a particular variety of English (whether US, British, Australian, Indian, etc.) should be written about in a style conforming to that variety; and (b) for a subject with no affinity to any particular English variety, the original creator's choice of style should be followed. The consequence of this is that the punctuation and other conventions to be followed are highly dependent on the subject and/or the originator of the article. A good deal of trivial edit warring results from editors failing to understand and follow these principles. At any rate, It's a good idea to become thoroughly familiar with the whole of

WP:MoS. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.120.67 (talk

) 11:57, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Could I offer my €0,02-worth on this point, as a professional writer and editor (retired). This is one of those questions that is usually determined by the individual publication's style manual. In general, UK and Australian publications expect the period/stop to go inside the quotes if the quoted text is one or more complete sentences; otherwise it goes outside. American publications on the other hand favour the period always going inside the quotes. But there is no absolute rule, and I suggest that it is not something to be overly concerned about. Mike Marchmont (talk) 12:09, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP 50.35.23.240. This is covered in

MOS:LQ. In principle, Wikipedia uses the “logical quotation” style regardless of national variety of English, except in certain cases. — Marchjuly (talk

) 12:40, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:FA status. The problem comes when an individual decides they're going to change everything to their preferred way of doing things, and so for that reason we do have these relatively obscure sets of guidelines on such seemingly trivial matters to ensure we can show a reason for making the alterations that we do, and to work towards the uniformity we ideally want to see across all 6.4 million+ articles here. Nick Moyes (talk

) 13:45, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP (or anybody else who might be interested). Please try Geoffrey K. Pullum's "Punctuation and human freedom". -- Hoary (talk) 13:16, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I think this is partially covered in Wikipedia:Lies Miss Snodgrass told you. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:15, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I added a succession to

Never mind I figured it out you had to add

| reign-type = Tenure

— Preceding

I am a recognised authority on crime fiction and added information based on research in the British Newspaper Archive and the British Library Catalogue. While sources are not provided for the vast majority of information on the webpage I am being asked but how can I prove that books exist? 77.97.74.107 (talk) 08:05, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Are you asking how to prove whether specific books exist, or whether a source you cite from the British Newspaper Archive exists? (So for instance, you want to know how to prove that the December 14, 2012 issue of the Yorkshire Evening Post exists.) Fabrickator (talk) 08:29, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

The place to discuss a particular article is on its talk page, in this case

curly quotes, despite the warning which you were given in November; please correct your errors in this regard. --David Biddulph (talk

) 08:34, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

It would be useful if you registered an editor name, rather than editing under an IP address as an unregistered editor. If someone challenges the existence of a book, a link to the BL catalogue record is useful (for more recent books, a formatted ISBN verifies). If you use a newspaper article as a source, show it as a reference: it does not have to be freely available online, but your ref should include newspaper title, date, page, article title, author if any. And, yes, the article talk page is the place to talk about an article: adding comments into the article itself might be considered vandalism. PamD 09:50, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

The reason you are constantly getting reverted and warned for making non-constructive edits is because you have so far refused to engage with other editors. You have been told multiple times that references are required, and you have simply refused to countenance it. I offered detailed help (see the section Helping you with the AEW Mason article on your talk page), and your response was "I dont have time for any more of this. If you dont like the information delete it."

It's clear that you are a knowledgeable editor, and that with a very little additional effort on your part you could be welcomed with open arms here. Instead, you are at real risk of being permanently blocked by an admin any day now for continuing to make disruptive edits. Please, please, read

WP:SAYWHEREYOUREADIT

and make sure you add full source citations (including page numbers, and whether you have looked at an original hard copy, an online image, or a secondary index). As you've seen, many pages are still not fully sourced, often because they were created some time ago when sourcing requirements were much laxer than they are now, but that's not a valid reason to add more unsourced material. Once you've learned how to add a reference they are pretty easy to include, and even if you make good faith mistakes initially that's perfectly OK.

Although you weren't ready last time, let me once again offer to help with these citation issues. With your knowledge, you are capable of making significant improvements to many fiction articles and it would be a shame if your editing career were to end with a block. I warmly welcome you to follow up on my talk page. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:28, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

As I indicated on your talk page, for a "recognised authority" you're being so sloppy, both in the formatting and in the content of your edits, that you're making it a lot of work for other editors to clean up after you. Sometimes I've spent the time to do so, but sometimes I've become so frustrated that it seemed better just to revert you. In the Jepson article, for instance, you listed among his works "Miss Timmins and Lord Scredington (1940)", when sources such as this and this, show that the work in question was published in 1927, not 1940. When all of your contributions have to reformatted and every bit has to be double-checked for accuracy—and when you can't be bothered to learn the difference between titles that should be italicized and titles that should be quoted (to say nothing of single quotes vs. double quotes or curly quotes vs. straight quotes)—how can you expect others to recognize your edits as the fruits of profound expertise? Deor (talk) 18:10, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

The BL confirms the 1927 publication date. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:40, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

For reference, this IP editor is continuing to edit without any change in behaviour whatsoever: see further warnings I have posted at User talk:77.97.74.107. MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:15, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Good afternoon, actually I am here because there are some articles that have been deleted so many times and still I don't understand why. For example, Nicolás Atanes, I see the article has been deleted many times, I don't know him personally, nor I haven't met with him, but I think he has as relevance as Kikas_(Angolan_footballer), Jake_Bickelhaupt, John_Ryan_(Australian_politician) (as random selected). I think Wikipedia should admit articles like this, relevant grassroots people doing something, I mean, to post about encyclopedic people. I say Nicolás because I have read about him recently, but many others happen the same. Atanes is author on Diario 16: https://diario16.com/author/nicolas-atanes-santos/, is relevant in Spain: https://www.elmundo.es/madrid/2020/07/29/5f205975fc6c83cb478b4644.html https://www.diariodenavarra.es/noticias/navarra/2021/07/28/el-virus-extendio-navarra-495529-300.html https://www.rtve.es/play/audios/las-mananas-de-rne-con-inigo-alfonso/matematicas-coronavirus-salud-espana/5731358/ https://www.eitb.eus/es/television/programas/navarra-directo/videos/detalle/7004935/video-nicolas-pie-guerra-impulsar-aprendizaje-matematicas/ has been nominated for a local prize https://www.navarratelevision.es/noticia/Z01842D7D-B1D5-1977-50E0EE09CE98E0A5/La-juventud-un-valor-primordial-para-Navarra-Television organized several initiatives https://cadenaser.com/emisora/2021/07/27/radio_pamplona/1627390029_693321.html https://www.cope.es/actualidad/noticias/juegos-matematicos-ocuparan-las-calles-ciudades-espanolas-julio-20210723_1417895 and created a social movement https://www.abc.es/ciencia/abci-virus-matematico-extiende-desde-pamplona-no-deja-crecer-202107292028_noticia.html. He started in 2020 with a mediatic protest: https://www.laopiniondezamora.es/zamora/2020/01/22/pasion-numeros-2498974.html and met with senior officials https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/eusciencehubnews/item-detail.cfm?item_id=703538. I have just made a quick search and I founded all these. Last week I posted a text on the discussion of Atanes and it got deleted. Don't ask me why. I have made a research on this, and I am aware of sockpuppets doing vandalism on Wikipedia, people creating and others deleting pages without relevance, but, I think that we should start creating articles like this one, (check relevance, links, coverage...) to improve Wikipedia. Although this article I mention has been many times deleted, I think it's because of something. Can anyone start the article?--2A0C:5A80:1B0B:3F00:6C2D:BEAB:6234:9B37 (talk) 14:55, 4 January 2022 (UTC) 2A0C:5A80:1B0B:3F00:6C2D:BEAB:6234:9B37 (talk) 14:55, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

This is the deletion discussion: WP:Articles_for_deletion/Nicolás_Atanes_(2nd_nomination) It would appear that spammy articles about him have been created and deleted even more frequently on the Spanish-language Wikipedia, which is the first place I'd expect an article on a Spanish person to appear if they were notable by Wikipedia standards. He clearly isn't. To answer your question, only extended-confirmed editors will be able to try creating that article in future, to avoid anonymous folk wasting all our time. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:41, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

There have been multiple attempts at creating this article by

G5 of the speedy deletion criteria. Pahunkat (talk

) 15:56, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I understand all this you are saying, but I think some Spanish people do not have English Wikipedia (

Consuelo Martínez López). I personally think someone should fix this, not just because of Nicolás, I say Nicolás because it surprises me that even all his coverage (in academical societies of Spain, on other encyclopedias, on websites, blogs, news articles, his activity, he has no Wikipedia. And I do want to fix that. What has a person has to do to have relevance? Kill 100 people? Solve a hard math problem? What Nicolás (as example) has made is even more important than what Sjeng Schalken did. Sorry, Sjeng, but relevance goes as example.--2A0C:5A80:1B0B:3F00:6C2D:BEAB:6234:9B37 (talk

) 20:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

To have relevance (we call it

subject of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Cordless Larry (talk

) 20:45, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

And he isn't?--2A0C:5A80:1B0B:3F00:6C2D:BEAB:6234:9B37 (talk) 21:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

• IP is now blocked. Drmies (talk) 21:18, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering what the normal procedure is for dealing with disambiguation pages that only link to one page? I just deleted an entry from the disambiguation page "Qult", leaving the page with only one entry which links to Wiktionary. Would it fall under the criteria for speedy deletion, or should it be turned into some sort of redirect? I did notice that although it appears to be a disambiguation page, it doesn't actually have "(disambiguation)" in the title. Admittedly, I'm also a little skeptical of how much the term's been used, but I'm not familiar with Wiktionary's inclusion criteria. Thanks, Darth Coracle (talk) 22:17, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Darth Coracle: The point of a disambiguation page is to distinguish between similarly named Wikipedia articles. If none of the entries are dominant, you might not need to use the word disambiguation in the title. I looked up Qult and it doesn't appear in the QAnon article. I can't find any reliable sources referencing the term, or I'd add it to the QAnon article, bold it, and redirect the term Qult to that section. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:10, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Today I learned Wiktionary is as useless as wikiquotes with dubious policies for inclusion of material.Slywriter (talk) 01:54, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:G14 might be applicable, and if so, do I just add the tag? Darth Coracle (talk

) 22:48, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@Darth Coracle: That’s what I’d do - add {{Db-g14}} or {{Db-disambig}}. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:36, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Alright, that's what I'll do. Thanks for the help! Darth Coracle (talk) 23:57, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, how can I report a disruptive editor? and how can I protect some articles from him/her ?

Thanks Lasouhq (talk) 07:42, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@

notability is not inherited). Please do not remove the AFD notice from the article, it will not prevent the AFD discussion from taking place. Instead, you are welcome to make a policy-based argument at the casepage

. The original nomination was 5 years ago, so consensus and the currently established policies might have changed during that time.

Protecting articles based on

admins have, which can only be used in certain cases. There doesn't seem enough disruption in the article history to warrant protection. Victor Schmidt (talk

) 08:56, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Depends on what kind of disruption it is. If it's outright vandalism, you can report it at

WP:RPP. — Czello

08:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Note also that you must not edit-war to reinstate material which a user has removed from their own user talk page, see

WP:BLANKING. If the editor removes a warning, it is assumed that they have read it. --David Biddulph (talk

) 09:02, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

At Falah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, I see two recent disruptive edits, both by Lasouhq. One removed material which said "do not remove", and the other added a reference unrelated to the preceding content. Both have now been reverted. Maproom (talk) 11:18, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Dear Teahouse folks, thank you all for your assistance here. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Is my use of a footnote (fn 1) inappropriate in Woody (Toy Story). ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 01:01, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

storm28

01:14, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Severestorm28 But is it good for a "source"? ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 01:15, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

storm28

01:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Severestorm28 Wait, but there is no reference after fn 1 ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 01:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

storm28

01:45, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

storm28

01:49, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Severestorm28: Thanks for the help, I think Im going to keep it and if the GA reviewer says get rid of it ill do so. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 01:54, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

I've added new info on the cast list of a film, but after twice editing it and publishing it, nothing has changed. How long does it take for new info to be published? LLew8 &()^ Llew8 (talk) 23:21, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@Llew8: Welcome to the Teahouse! For almost all articles, published edits should appear immediately, just like your post here. However, your post here is the only post you have published on Wikipedia. What article were you trying to edit? GoingBatty (talk) 23:30, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Is this how I reply? I was trying to add a cast member to the film First Knight.

• &^% — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llew8 (talk • contribs) 23:51, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

WP:BRD. --ColinFine (talk

) 23:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine very much. Grateful. &^%$ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llew8 (talk • contribs) 23:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Llew8! According to the 'View history' tab of the article, the last edit made to the article was on 30 November 2021. If your edit had gone through and then been reverted, those edits would be recorded, so it looks as though something went wrong when you tried to save ('Publish') your edit. Don't worry, we all learn here by making mistakes and trying again.

I notice that no reference at all is cited for the cast list. It should really be sourced, but be aware that Wikipedia does not recognise the IMDb as a Reliable source because its contents are user-generated: something like an authoritative movie industry journal would be preferable. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.120.67 (talk) 11:27, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@

The Wikipedia Adventure. Happy editing! {[please}} GoingBatty (talk

) 03:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, after a discussion with the wikipedia help desk, it seems that the artist wiki article that I have requested for submission may not eligible for a notable musician yet and may be nominated for deletion. Is there a way that before its deletion that I can change it back to a personal draft inside my own account so that I can go back and work on it again when there are any changes in the artist's activity in the near future (about 6-12 months)? Please advise. Thank you. DKingWorldwide (talk) 21:55, 4 January 2022 (UTC) DKingWorldwide (talk) 21:55, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

No one owns Wikipedia content so there really isn't a need to move it. 331dot (talk

) 22:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I think you have chosen the wrong action, even if that (Sandbox it) was advised above. The bio was once an article, long ago, but resurrected by you as a draft in June 2021. Drafts do not get AfD'd (although an Admin may decide that a draft is so promotional that it has no potential, and so delete. The problem now is that the draft Draft:Kim Dong-hyuk exists AND your Sandbox copy exists. Pick one and get rid of the other. David notMD (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

A draft page "Systogram" was removed by an editor called Diannaa citing that a similar piece of work was found in a blog and that somehow I have infringed copyright issues. BUT I have tried explaining to her that the blog is mine and if only she bothered to look at the title/author of the blog she would see it's mine. Now she's not even replying to my emails/messages. Jack Dikian (talk) 00:29, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Jack Dikian. Copyrighted material cannot be copied and pasted to Wikipedia even by the copyright holder unless the material is freely licensed. Have you read the messages that Diannaa left on your user talk page, including very recently? She explained things quite clearly and she is probably the leading copyright expert on Wikipedia and is highly respected. Cullen328 (talk) 00:35, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

What you might think of doing,

reliable sources, your contributions can perhaps be added to Wikipedia by a third party. -- Hoary (talk

) 00:49, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

reliable sources for information on what kinda sources to use. Also like Cullen said please read what Diannaa has said. you can read the here. Happy editing! ― Kaleeb18^Talk

_Caleb 01:14, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Another problem is that the draft contains a figure that appears to be original research, i.e., your creation. OR is not allowed. David notMD (talk) 03:47, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, fairly new here, but slowly getting the hang of it! I sometimes go in and update the "post-show careers", such as cookbooks/TV appearances of previous contestants on shows like the Great British Bake Off. Is it appropriate to use a contestant's own website or amazon page as a reference? I've used these sources only to reference things like a list of their published cookbooks when I cant find an article or independent third-party website that lists them. Is this appropriate given the rules around reliable sources and NPOV? Its a bit of a basic question but want to ensure I'm doing this right before I go in and do too much of it! Thank you! Schwinnspeed (talk) 14:05, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

You can as long as it's only about the person themselves e.g. "I was born in Bilston and have two children". Whilst the book list wouldn't be a controversial claim per se, you'd need to double check it with a reliable source, because what if they published a book that was an absolute stinker and "forgot" to mention it on their website? - X201 (talk) 14:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Schwinnspeed (talk) 14:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@Schwinnspeed: You don't need to have a web site URL to cite a book - you can use {{cite book}} without it. However, having an independent review of the book helps to demonstrate notability, whether it's online or in a respected magazine. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:29, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Cited source behind log in Hello, I was recently reading EMD SD90MAC and saw that it cited an extrnal source. The source led me to log-in portal. I would either like to replace this or place some sort of notification, but I couldn't find the correct template. Any particular guidelines? Thanks in advance. Sethcampbell7293 (talk) 04:03, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Sethcampbell7293: Reference #7 has a note stating "(subscription required)", which is sufficient notification. Is that the external source you referred to? GoingBatty (talk) 04:44, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:PAYWALL. There is no policy requirement that says that any reader can access the source with a click. I have sometimes cited books that were issued by major publishers in the 1950s, and have little or no online presence. When ample high quality, readily available online sources are available, they should be preferred. But more obscure yet still notable topics may be referenced to less accessible sources, and there is nothing wrong with that. Cullen328 (talk

) 04:57, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Mvcervi (talk) 10:38, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Mvcervi Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There is unfortunately nothing that you can do to speed things up. Reviewers are volunteers, conducting reviews on their own time based on what they choose to review(the pending reviews are not a queue). 331dot (talk) 10:41, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Your request was granted.

Draft:Oil Tank Culture Park, that one is still waiting for a reviewer. David notMD (talk

) 11:54, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

.... the latter accepted today (not by me). Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:17, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you~ Mvcervi (talk) 06:53, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello everyone. Before I create a new page on Wikipedia I want to check if the topic is notable enough.

I would like to create a page about The Rowling Library, which is a publisher of a monthly magazine and books about Harry Potter / JK Rowling. The Rowling Library has been cited by large media (from The Independent and Entertainment Weekly) because it published exclusive news in the past (such as the publication of the eight Harry Potter film), it has been recognized by JK Rowling herself on Twitter, and I said before, it publishes a monthly magazine and books about those topics.

I had this idea because I found out that The Rowling Library is mentioned in this article as a source (2nd reference): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potterless. If The Rowling Library has its own Wikipedia article, it wouldn't be the first Harry Potter fan project / fan site to have its own Wikipedia article.

Thank you very much for your time. 190.231.95.115 (talk) 21:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new article from scratch is extremely challenging, and new editors are strongly recommended to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works, by making improvements to some of our existing six million articles before trying it. When you do decide to have a go at a new article, you are highly encouraged to read

WP:TUTORIAL; it's a lot of fun! Happy editing! I myself couldn't easily find 3 independent sources about the Rowling Library. What are the three best independent sources you could find? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk

) 21:55, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Shushugah, thanks for taking the time to reply. There are a few sources that mention The Rowling Library: BBC Radio 4 (https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/proginfo/2020/45/can-i-still-read-harry-potter and https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5DdBBnrBnQt6vD2pVjZFs1Z/is-it-still-ok-to-read-harry-potter), Harry Potter Wikia (https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/The_Rowling_Library), HogwartsProfessor talks about the new projects by The Rowling Library (https://www.hogwartsprofessor.com/book-review-secret-history-of-the-wizarding-phenomenon-tarantino/), Entertainment Weekly mentiones an article by Rowling Library as well (https://ew.com/movies/2018/11/17/fantastic-beasts-credence-dumbledore/) among otheres. Are these indepedent sources enough? 190.231.95.115 (talk) 00:15, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

The first BBC article doesn't talk at all about Rowling Library, merely mentions a person is affiliated with it. That's not

WP:Wikipedia is not. I appreciate you asking though before creating the article. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk

) 00:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Significant coverage by reliable independent sources of The Rowling Library would be required. Passing mentions are insufficient. Wikia is not a reliable source. It does not appear to me that any of these sources devote significant coverage to The Rowling Library. Cullen328 (talk

) 00:25, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

I understand it is not significant coverage. I appreciate your help. Just to clarify so I don't look like crazy people, the first link is to a BBC Tv Show where The Rowling Library is mentioned. The second one mentions The Rowling Library, but they did a typo so it reads "The Rolling Library", lol. Again, I appreciate your time. Happy new year to both of you! 190.231.95.115 (talk) 02:36, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

190., based on their press page, the cupboard is pretty bare. Seems

WP:TOOSOON atm. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 09:36, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

On occasion I come across a Wikipedia article that has what I consider to be References that are categorized as Notes. For example, I was just looking at Queen Anne style furniture, and all of the article sources are found under Notes, and References consists of one book that, I'm assuming, one editor found to be especially useful. In the past I have edited similar Notes' sections by changing the heading to References, but I thought I should check to see if there is ever a reason for categorizing article sources as Notes. Karenthewriter (talk) 15:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC) Karenthewriter (talk) 15:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

MOS:NOTES says we shouldn't worry much about this. Personally, I'd rename them "References" and "Sources" but article styles do vary and many have all of notes, references and sources. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 16:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Am I correct in assuming that you meant

MOS:SO? _Signed,Pichemist ^{(Talk | Contribs}

) 16:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

No, I was indeed thinking of

MOS:NOTES, which is listed as part of the "Main article" linked at your shortcut. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 18:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@Karenthewriter Hello and welcome to the teahouse. As far as I know, references are usually categorized under a References header, but sometimes authors switch them around a bit. For example, I've seen "Bibliography", "Citations", "Notes" amongst others. Before changing them, (which I recommend), I suggest you contact the author on their respective talk page to see if there was any specific reason behind their edit. _Signed,Pichemist ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 16:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@

MOS:NOTES says it doesn't matter - I think it does. So personally I'd prefer to change Notes->References, and References->Further reading, though I'm not giving you specific advice to actually go and do so ...unless you were making major edits to improve the article. Nick Moyes (talk

) 16:30, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Nick Moyes! Wouldn't the problem with changing the name to References be that they would then fall under the much more stringent rules governing what sites can be cited as sources? Like the extensive prohibited list in Sources. Whereas Notes seems to be for things that don't have to fall into that rather strict category, somewhat akin to External Links. So Notes would be supporting non contentious topics raised & References would be for citing reliable sources to back up possible contentious things. Not that I'm saying the specific case mentioned above, Queen Anne style furniture, is wrong to change to References. I'm just honestly curious about whether Notes can be used as less strict supporting material links. The strict rules for References are fine for contentious things but prove overkill when one wants to support a cast listing or plot point. You are right about it being something of a mess as References & Notes is frequently written about interchangeably in the lengthy rule pages on the subject. LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 17:47, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@

this article, I initially grouped everything under References but a prominent GA reviewer Goldsztajn would specifically categorize and classify meticulously each source more appropriately. Celestina007 (talk

) 18:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Celestina007, thanks for replying! To be clear, I wasn't intending to impugn your sources in any way. I was wondering more broadly about how Notes tend to be used as compared to References around Wikipedia and that changing the name could open them up to the stricter rules for Sources that may not have been the original Editors intent. I noted Nick Moyes was a very experienced Editor &, as a newbie, was curious for their take. There so often seems to be many different takes here. :) LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 18:26, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

(

WP:SOURCES applies equally to either word being used as a References title. Personally, I would always use 'References' for, well, references, and a Notes section for, well, notes. By 'notes' I'd mean annotations that don't directly support a factual statement, but help a reader understand something about the article's content that is perhaps too trivial to include as article text. By way of example, see Mont Blanc massif#Notes

for how I have used them.

But now you see the problem: we are all different. We have all been taught different ways of doing things, or different meanings for something. We even come from many different cultures. So that's where a rigorous

Manual of Style needs to work across all articles and be accepted by all Editors, irrespective of what they would do on another site. (I, for one, would and do capitalise the first letter of all commons names of species in publications I produce, but I'm not allowed to do that here. I have to accept that the consensus is against me on that. )So understand that I'm giving you my views, not advocating mass changes that go against what the consensus in MOS has ruled or, indeed, has not ruled. Nick Moyes (talk

) 18:18, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Nick Moyes, thanks for your reply! Though it's still a little unclear, Notes & References are the same except when they are not. :) As for less reliable, I'd certainly never use a site that I believed unreliable. It's just that the Sources listing has cast a wide net on many useful sites, that are understandable when citing something contentious but less so for more basic obvious things such as episode info. When I said less strict I simply meant more along the lines of External Links rules. For instance some sites are fine & indeed standard to include in External Links but considered no go for References. I was simply wondering if Notes were sometimes used for these less stringent links. I guess one could reference External Links, just Notes would feel more accurate. Probably stretching the scope of this conversation, so thanks for taking time to reply! LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 18:41, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

It seems as though I've asked a question with a lot of gray area and opinions. So my plan going forward will be that, if I'm just going to an article for some quick research, such as Queen Anne style furniture, I'll leave the references headings alone and move on with my life. But if I'm putting a lot of time and effort into researching and improving an article I'll probably change the reference heading to References. Since I tend to specialize in non-controversial subjects, such as 19th century children's magazines & mostly-forgotten actors from rather obscure old TV shows, there's little chance of problems stemming from whether my sources should be divided into Notes and References. Thank you for all the input. Karenthewriter (talk) 18:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Karenthewriter! "It seems as though I've asked a question with a lot of gray area and opinions." Don't worry, I think that's pretty much any question on Wikipedia's workings. :) Your question was an interesting one, it's quite fascinating to see the subjects raised here. My apologies if I strayed it off your topic a bit with my question. Mostly forgotten TV shows, sounds like my cup of tea! take care and best of luck in your endeavors! LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 18:48, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

LooksGreatInATurtleNeck to me "gray area and opinions" means stress, and that is one thing I do not need more of. I'll spend weeks researching an obscure topic without a care in the world, but when it comes to Wikipedia protical, if a topic isn't covered in Help:Your first article or Help:Referencing for beginners I become cautious, and tread lightly. I had what I thought was a simple question, but received various "it depends" answers. Time for me to walk away. Karenthewriter (talk) 19:42, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

It's 'grey', not 'gray'. Shall we have a philosophical discussion on how we deal with that one? Nick Moyes (talk) 00:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

I apologize for using 'gray' instead of 'grey'. If anyone wants to philosophically discuss this they may do so, but my (supposedly) simply question has become too confusing for me to deal with, so I don't plan on taking part in further comments. Unfortunately, I have difficulties in life, and come to Wikipedia to work without encountering complications. Karenthewriter (talk) 01:49, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Karenthewriter! You've nothing to apologise for! American English vs British English. Hopefully Nick Moyes was just joking in their response. It can be tricky to tell here sometimes. Sorry to hear about the difficulties & truly hope we did not add to them. I too had hoped to just quietly edit here. Take care. LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 08:42, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Weeeelll, it depends on which side of the pond you're on. a for America and e for England. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:16, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Nick Moyes! I was quoting Karenthewriter, who is quite correct in the use of "gray", it's just the preferred American English spelling of "grey" which is the preferred British. There's even a Wikipedia page including that info. Since Wikipedia has that page, I feel we can avoid a philosophical debate on it. :) LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 08:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@LooksGreatInATurtleNeck Just to be clear: that was my attempt at humour/humor! Nick Moyes (talk) 10:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Nick Moyes! Thanks for clarifying, I figured it was in jest as I noted the smiley at the end. :) Though I have seen some people genuinely get heated about American vs British spellings, usage of z vs s seems to be a particular bugbear to some. I've always been chill about the subject myself. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 11:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

ask for advice about the

the Teahouse

.

ask for advice about the

the Teahouse. फ़िज़ा3 (talk

) 07:04, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse. Are you looking for guidance regarding one (or more) of the musical notability criteria? Pichemist (talk) 08:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Oh dear - editor blocked as a

WP:SOCKPUPPET! Nick Moyes (talk

) 10:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Seems to still be created more sockpuppets. Started an investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Support2022 _Signed, Pichemist ^{( Contribs | Talk )} 11:53, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Weird request, but...

Can you teahouse people answer this person's question?

"Hi, I want to start by saying i am no tech savvy in the least and I just didnt know how else to contact you, I dont understand the Talk Page because I can't seem to add to the conversation :(

My name is Sabrina Pires and I'm June Preston's daughter. She was a child start in the 1930's onward and then an Opera singer in the 50's onward and there was a wiki page on her. I feel I have really messed things up but dont know how.

i just wanted to keep my mom's legacy alive through wiki and I thought I did a good job backing up information with proof with photos and newspaper articles from the 30's and 40's.

Now I just found out i have 3 accounts on wiki and have no idea how i did that (brokenmeow is my email address and is an account) Pires is my last name and apparently that's an account but I thought I only had one account. I don't know how to delete the other 2 accounts. I only need one account and feel I did something bad/wrong without knowing.

I'm so sorry... Now my poor mom's page is devoid of all information i worked so hard on. Even her birthdate and birth pace is wrong on there. What can I do to help fix things? I can send you a copy of her birth certificate to prover her dob and place of birth and any type of proof you need to back up all that is said on her page. I can scan and email it to you.

I just want her page back up the way it was, i dont know what i did to have all her info stripped from her page... i'm so sorry can you please help me? I can't tell you how excited she was when she saw her name on the wiki page and not he web in general again, she is 93 now and feels forgotten, this was my way of giving her her legacy back in a small way.

If you would like to speak, i can give you my cell.. or you can email me directly... just please help me get her page to look the way it did before. I'm not sure what to do at this point but I saw you name int he talk page and hope this reaches you and that you can help me. I'm really sorry for all this confusion.

Thanks so much, Sabrina P. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Idoonie (talk • contribs) 21:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC) "

Make sure to ping Idoonie instead of me. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 01:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

reliable sources. ― Kaleeb18^Talk

_Caleb 01:48, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Also a birth certificate would not help as a source and would be considered original research and Wikipedia cannot use that information, ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 01:56, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Last thing i have to say is your use of multiple accounts is fine if you follow the instructions at

sockpuppet. If you want to delete two of the accounts you can ask somewhere but I cant find where right now. I hope this helps. ― Kaleeb18^Talk

_Caleb 02:10, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Kaleeb18, we all make mistakes at times, but when you realize that you don't have a clear idea of what it is that you might talk about, it's often better not to talk. Accounts cannot be deleted. -- Hoary (talk) 02:57, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary My bad I could have sworn I saw that one time thanks for telling. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 03:00, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hoary - Accounts cannot be deleted.. Soft block the alts?--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Rocknrollmancer, that's possible; but it's not obvious that doing so would benefit anyone. -- Hoary (talk) 07:13, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Sabrina - As June's daughter you created the article in 2007 using account Piress, edited 2011-16 using Brokenmeow, and 2012-2022 using Idoonie. Going forward, I recommend that on your Talk page you promise to never use the two older accounts again. Per the reply above and all the comments on your Talk page, as June's daughter, you are to not edit the article directly because you have a conflict of interest. I took the liberty of putting the standard COI declaration on your User page. David notMD (talk) 03:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

As for the content you added to June Preston, subsequently removed, all of it may be true, but none of it was referenced. The proper step is to on the Talk page, propose some content to add, providing references in proper reference format at the same time. See Help:referencing for beginners. Pinterest is not a valid reference format. Posting Pinterest images of documents is probably a copyright infringement. David notMD (talk) 04:09, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

reliable independent sources are keeping her legacy alive, then Wikipedia can summarise those sources, but not otherwise. --ColinFine (talk

) 12:16, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Feedback about Ingrid Carbone’s draft page

Hi, everybody! The user @Tamingimpala: suggested me to write you because I made my first draft in the English version of Wikipedia and I need some help. My draft is about the Italian pianist Draft:Ingrid Carbone For the notability of the page, I followed the guidelines for musicians and I thought that there were enough reasons to create it. In fact, as I underlined, she and her work have received independent international reviews, such as Pizzicato magazine and Belgian magazine Klassiek Centraal.

Speaking about the point no. 12 of notability guidelines, she has been interviewed or has been the subject of radio program of the Swiss national radio in Italian RSI Rete Due (ReteDueCinque program) and the Italian national radio Rai Radio 3 (Primo Movimento and Piazza Verdi programs) At the same time, she has been awarded in the 2015, 2016 and 2017 editions of the IBLA International Competition with the Scarlatti Special Mention and the Piano Special Mention. In 2021 her last cd has been nominated by the International Classical Music Awards, the music awards sustained by many important music magazines and public institutions, such as the MDR Kultur (Germany). In the same nomination we could find Beatrice Rana, Maurizio Pollini and the Berliner Philarmoniker Orchestra. In fact, this is the main reason for my submission. Any further references about what I've wrote are in the draft page. Please, could you tell me constructive feedback to improve the page and, hopefully, to make it published? Thank you very much in advance! --Fedeflute (talk) 13:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC) Fedeflute (talk) 13:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

To bring context: The message I left on the user's talk page: Hi. Hope you're doing well. Looking back at your draft again, I noticed even bigger problems than the notability established. The draft needs to rewritten to comply with Wikipedia's encyclopedic tone. Please see: Wikipedia:Writing better articles. The lead is a single line. There are poor grammatical use, lot of original research. Unsourced materials. For example, the entire early life and education section is unsourced. At wikipedia, we do not accept statements without proper sourcing. And also it has NPOV issues. Some lines are not suitable for a neutral encyclopedic entry. The draft currently reads like an essay. There are use of puffery sentencing and wording to promote the subject. For example, in the Critics section: "Among the most prestigious, we find the Belgian magazine Klassiek Centraal which awards her five stars and where Ludwig van Mechelen says about her in 2020." That doesn't by any means read like an encyclopedic statement. There are problems in the discography section (unconventionally written). There are problems with punctuations, for example you used ":" a lot, which were unnecessary. I thank you for your efforts to contribute on the wiki and making it better, but unfortunately, I or no other reviewer can accept the draft at its current form. You need to make substantial amount of changes before re-submitting it again. I recommend requesting editors from teahouse to help you out. Have a great day!. Tame (talk) 13:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Uploading Mistake

I was uploading an image for Unorthodox (podcast) and accidentally overwrote a file located here. I tried to undo my edit, but I'm not seeing any changes. Is there an easy way to fix this mistake? TipsyElephant (talk) 13:45, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

I think I figured it out, but it would probably be good if someone double checked my work. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:47, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, I'm seeing the original version so I think your revert did the trick. --ARoseWolf 13:55, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Archive Talkpage

Pretty basic question, I just want to know how to archive my talk page. I would research it myself but I have never been to good with the technical side of things. Thanks in advance. 

talk

) 13:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Gandalf the Groovy, you could try this: Help:Archiving (plain and simple). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 14:03, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Gandalf the Groovy, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I totally understand your predicament whilst I’m proficient with/in wiki coding, I’m absolutely no good at other core technical areas, courtesy ping to Buidhe who is beyond proficient in coding and all things technical no matter how difficult, hopefully they can assist you. Celestina007 (talk

) 15:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Email can't be reached

Email! 66.189.107.222 (talk) 15:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

You are going to need to be more specific. Are you referring to an account? 331dot (talk) 15:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

FOI Requests as citations

Hello!

I don't know if im just terrible at searching the Wikipedia guidelines, but does anyone know the view about using government responses to FOI requests as citations? Im planning to work on a section of the article about Ely, and the only way I can really get the full record from the council archives is with a FOI. If I use what do they know, I can have the response left on the internet and thus easily citeable, but im not sure of the policy here.

Cheers Apparently j (talk) 00:21, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Reliable. My concern could be more to do with what you were using those government responses for. I would certainly wish to use it sparingly as a source, and in support of other sources such as newspaper outlets, and definitely avoid any campaigning or NPOV issue-raising. Others might take a different view, but I hope my answer is at least of some help to you. Nick Moyes (talk

) 00:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

What they know is a non-profit charity which is, at its core, just an email forwarding service which then makes the emails publicly available, so I reckon that satisfies reliable. Unfortunately my request is rather mundane: I just want a list of people awarded the freedom of the city award, which the council has on record. I could visit the archive myself but then citing it as "a book I found in a council basement" probably wouldn't satisfy reliable.

Cheers for the quick response!

Apparently j (talk) 00:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:PRIMARY source, although that can be used in limited cases, for non controversial claims, especially about other subjects than itself. Some FOI requests may include scholarly analysis, but rarely. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk

) 15:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

My article

Hi, I made my new article Samsung Galaxy M31 . How is the article? Should I improve it more? If yes, so what should I improve? Blue Mango Juice (talk) 08:53, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

One obvious point is that the references are

bare URLs which need expanding. A smaller point is the syntax for images in the infobox template. Other editors may have further comments. --David Biddulph (talk

) 08:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

MOS:REFPUNCT. You've got this right in places but wrong in others. Cordless Larry (talk

) 10:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Also, references should appear where they are associated with the statement they support - not all in a group at the bottom of the Infobox.--Gronk Oz (talk) 10:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC) - Forgot to ping Blue Mango Juice--Gronk Oz (talk) 10:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Commons speedily removed the file of the phone itself while I was editing the page. I do not know the reason (the public Wi-Fi I'm on has Wikimedia Commons blocked), but it seems like you might need to take a picture of the phone itself. Explodicator7331 (talk) 16:04, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations on getting past your earlier frustrations. David notMD (talk) 14:07, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Visual editor for WP: and H: namespaces.

I'm currently looking to enable VisualEditor on the Wikipedia: namespace. Is it possible? And if so, how? _Signed, Pichemist ^{( Contribs | Talk )} 15:50, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Pichemist: The visual editor doesn't work very well on non-article pages, and hasn't been made to use it, so it's not an option by default, though you can manually enable it. To enable it, you can go to any project page and type "?veaction=edit" after the url. For example, to edit this page, you would navigate to "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse?veaction=edit". Note that as I said earlier, it's not made to work well on these pages, so there might be some visual errors / discrepancies in how it appears. ― Levi_OP^Talk 16:19, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated. _Signed, Pichemist ^{( Contribs | Talk )} 16:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Images

How do I upload an image on wikipedia. Can anyone please help me with this problem. Ijick (talk) 05:19, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

It is hard to claim "fair use" for images that are neither in the public domain (as the term is used in IP discussions, not as in everyday conversation) or copylefted under one of the licenses acceptable to Wikipedia. Assuming that the image either is in the public domain or is copylefted under one of the licenses acceptable to Wikipedia, you go to Wikimedia Commons and click on the link to "Upload file". Once it's at Commons you can use it in Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 06:25, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ijick Can you provide a link to the image you want to upload? If so, we can then guide you a bit more - especially as you look to have been getting into trouble with uploading images incorrectly in the past. If it's one in your camera that isn't just a photograph you've made of of somebody else's work, such as a film poster, then Hoary's advice above should be followed. The more information you tell us about what you want to do, the more we can help you avoid understand if there are copyright issues involved.

Perhaps one key thing to tell you: Wikimedia Commons will only host images where the owner of the copyright has released it under a licence that permits free use, even commercially. It cannot host 'fair use' images (although Wiipedia itself can, providing you clearly justify why it should be retained. To avoid all the complexities, only upload images that you have taken yourself (but nt of anyone else's work as they still own the copyright in their work even if you re-photographed it) Does any of this help? Looking forward to hearing back from you. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:46, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes Thank you. The link to the image I want to upload is https://twitter.com/BayViewProjOffl/status/1478387292226138125. The second image.

Ijick, I don't suppose that you are the author of that file, and I'll assume for now that you are not the author. There is no reason to think that the file either is in the public domain or is copyleft. Therefore it may not be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Would you like to claim that addition of this image to a particular article would be "fair use"? If so, which article? -- Hoary (talk) 12:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hoary By which article do you mean which article do I want to put the image in? Assuming you're talking about that, I want to put it on Valimai.

The article already contains

WP:NFCC #3.b.) Adding a second poster is probably not acceptable, unless the article has some critical discussion of the differences between the posters (which would need to be sourced of course). I would not expect such a critical discussion to exist, but then I am no expert of cinema much less Tamil cinema. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)}

16:01, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:CSD F7 rationale), and then you could upload the alternative image under a fair use rationale. Does that seem reasonable?Nick Moyes (talk

) 17:12, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Allan Maraynes

Here is the confusion. There is (was) an article posted about me 7 years ago by someone named Dylan (can't locate him). I have since had editing capability. No issues for seven years. Then --- request for citations. We have added 40 plus that validates the veracity of all content. Now- those citations have been questioned. For instance "CBS Connected." Not sure what that means - CBS would be the source that validates my association with the company. In any event, some have looked at pages for other "American Journalists" and found far fewer citations/references. If I am suddenly no longer considered "notable" (which is fine) then please erase/delete all traces of the page. I am all ears for anyone willing to help. Thank you for your valuable time. Amaraynes (talk) 15:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:NJOURNALIST. I haven't had time/interest to look into the specific claims of notability though. Regards ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk

) 15:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Shushugah Someone can create and or edit a draft about themselves, that's how they are supposed to contribute about themselves. 331dot (talk) 15:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

other stuff exists

; it could be that these other articles are also inappropriate but have not yet been addressed. As this is a volunteer project, people do what they can when they can.

Drafts are deleted after six months of inactivity. As you are not the main or only contributor, you can't request immediate deletion as the main author. If you think that there is little to no prospect that you would be shown to meet the definition of notability, it would need to be proposed for deletion as a

deletion discussion. 331dot (talk

) 15:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@331dot FYI it was in the Article namespace and then moved on December 15 2021, with a redirect deleted. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:35, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, I was wondering why a draft had existed for that long. 331dot (talk) 15:46, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

BIG PROBLEM: As Amaraynes, you have been editing this article about you (presuming Amaraynes is Allan Maraynes, no proof), which you should stop doing, as you have what Wikipedia calls a conflict of interest. See

WP:PAID. David notMD (talk

) 16:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

BIGGER PROBLEM: Most (All?) of the references that Ash3684 added are completely worthless. Either there is no mention of Maraynes at all, or a name-only mention. David notMD (talk) 17:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Amaraynes UPDATE: Draft has been undraftified, so now at Allan Maraynes. And nominated for deletion review. That process involves a period of 7-14 days for Keep or Delete recommendations being left by anyone who wants to evaluate the article, followed by an Administrator making a decision. Unless all the horrific references are removed, and real, independent refs to content written ABOUT Maraynes can be found, I agree this should be delete. David notMD (talk) 17:17, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Even check?

Hi, I was Wondering if admin even check This, Please review the requests. Thanks! Yodas henchman (talk) 17:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Yodas henchman I was a bit confused by the link you gave, but assume you meant this, didn't you? You only posted there yesterday and there are still a few others to review that were made before Christmas. You do look to have the necessary experience, but give it a few more days before 'jumping the gun' like this. Best wishes. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:20, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Alright, thanks! Yodas henchman (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

No response from Article Creation Help Desk (later inquiries from others have been answered)

Hello! I posted my question to the Article Creation Help Desk, and as near as I can tell, most if not all questions posted after mine have been addressed, but I don't see a response to mine. Is there any way to know if it is likely to get an answer, or do older, unanswered questions get buried as new ones come in?

My question is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk#00:03:34,_4_January_2022_review_of_submission_by_Amysisson

Thank you in advance for any assistance! Amysisson (talk) 19:19, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Amysisson Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. All discussions are responded to by people who choose to respond with the ability to respond. Please be patient. I will look at it in a moment. 331dot (talk) 19:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Adding voice sample in article?

I was looking at edits made at Destiny (streamer) and I saw that someone had added a section in the userbox that said "Destiny's voice". (diff) It is a file in which you can hear a clip of him talking from a video on his YouTube channel. Is this is normal/commonplace thing to do? I've seen parts of songs be in articles about albums/singles, to show what part of it sounds like, but I don't think I've ever seen someone just putting a clip from one of their YouTube videos in the userbox of the article. Should this potentially be removed? File deleted? Thanks a lot, ― Levi_OP^Talk 16:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Levi OP, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you click on the voice file, it will take you to File:DestinyGender.ogg, which says that This video, screenshot or audio excerpt was originally uploaded on YouTube under a CC license. Assuming that licence is compatible with Commons' rules (which I think it is), then uploading and using the clip in a Wikipedia article is acceptable. And it would seem to me that a clip of his voice is a reasonable thing to put in an article as well. --ColinFine (talk) 16:53, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

MOS that says this is normal? Thanks, ― Levi_OP^Talk

17:03, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Levi OP: I am afraid I have to correct you in one point: Most YouTube videos probbably won't have a CC-license. Publishing a YouTube video under a CC-License is not the default option and has to be explicitely selected by the creator. The default YouTube license, which is described in the YouTube T&C, is more restrictive and not allowed on commons. To find out wether YouTube video is under a CC-license, read its description. The license is always included at the bottom of the description. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

To put it simply: Yes, I know. I wrote that out quickly and wasn't too worried about how correct that was because it's not the focus of my question. Thanks for the correction anyway for any others reading. ― Levi_OP^Talk 18:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

I've no idea why you would want to delete it, Levi OP: to my mind it is a bit of decoration in the article like a photo. But if you think there's some reason not to have it, by all means either remove it or open a discussion on the talk page. I've no idea how common it is to include, but I suspect that it is the lack of freely licensed clips that limits this rather than policy. --ColinFine (talk) 19:29, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Is there a way to get wikipedia watchlist updates sent to your email or phone?

Thanks in advance for your help Aleena98 (talk) 21:33, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Aleena98 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you saw my earlier reply, please disregard it, you may go into your account preferences and under the "User profile" tab you may check the box which says "Email me when a page or a file on my watchlist is changed". 331dot (talk) 21:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

I forgot about that option at first because I turned it off, as I would get a massive number of emails. However, if you have a small watchlist, that is no problem. 331dot (talk) 21:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Got it and done, thanks for your help Aleena98 (talk) 21:45, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Contributions lag

Hello,

when I click contributions at the top of the website, it shows that I have no contributions. I had 2,909 edits, however, it was all erased, and the only words read "No changes were found matching these criteria." Can someone help with this? Thanks. 

storm28

21:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

It is fixed, but if it happens again, what steps do I take to fix the problem next time?

storm28

21:54, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

You could make sure that you're logged in as Severestorm28 when you look for your contributions. -- Hoary (talk) 23:17, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

"abbot and costello meet the creature from the black lagoon"

I don't understand this. I am VERY knowledgeable about film history though, especially horror films. I have seen all 3 "Creature From the Black Lagoon" films from Universal Studios. I have also seen all the Abbot and Costello Meets..... movies. I bought this DVD on Ebay and can send you a picture of the cover. It is not on IMDB or Wikipedia, so now I'm really curious!

e 2600:1700:3C60:6920:164:700C:3ABC:C417 (talk) 00:33, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome, IP editor. Looking at this and this review on eBay, it sound like this is a DVD carrying a short TV 'skit' by Abbot & Costello, rather than a proper movie. That's why its not on IMDB. If you can find

reliable sources that talk about it, you could briefly use them to expand that entry, or maybe the one at Cultural impact of Creature from the Black Lagoon

.

Because editing Wikipedia can seem a bit scary for a complete novice, I'll pop over and leave you a welcome message on your talk page with a few helpful links in case you decide you want to improve the content already here. Don't write from your own knowledge - but find good, published sources that you can use to support additional material. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 00:45, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject

Hi, I would like to know how to make my own Wikiproject, and if possible send a link to a tutorial, thank you! Yodas henchman (talk) 02:17, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Yodas henchman: Yes you can, but make sure there isnt already one similar to the one you want to make. read Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide this will give you all the info you need on Wiki projects especially read this part. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 02:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Yodas henchman As, I see from your user account, you are quite new here. I suggest you to focus on other things like creating new articles, or improving the once that already exist, becoming familiarized with the Wikipedia policies, and using that knowledge to join in community discussions. The thing that you are asking is quite complex. You can join other wiki projects, but please wait before creating one new yourself. As you may see, the other Wiki Projects had been made by really experienced users, so first become experienced as a Wikipedian, and then you can think of making your own wikiproject. I am saying all this, because the community might not accept your new wikiproject idea, and that might as well get deleted. So, please be acquainted with the community, then you may think of making something new. Thanks.

PS: Just wondering, what new Wikiproject do you want to make? Would you mind telling me? I would be happy to help. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 04:16, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

One that talks about Conscription and Military Policies in Countries Yodas henchman (talk) 16:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

When I looked quickly at the list of your non-minor edits to articles, Yodas henchman, I didn't notice edits to articles about conscription or military policies. But perhaps I didn't look carefully enough. Do you have much experience in this area? -- Hoary (talk) 01:29, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

How-to for Article Pictures, and Article Formatting

Hello there! I've just recently joined in editing articles for Wikipedia, and I have a question concerning how adding pictures for articles work.

I can see that, if I type in a keyword into the search box for "photo" when editing an article, tons of jpegs and images come up. How can I add a photo that hasn't been added so I can use it in the article?

Additionally, I've come across some articles that don't have all that much information to them, and the need for sections and whatnot are unnecessary. Is leaving the majority of the information on the introduction page fine, or would I be better off just creating a new section for the information despite it only being a few sentences? I'll refer to this page as an example.

Thank you! Lucalogy (talk) 18:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Lucalogy and welcome to the Teahouse.

• I assume that you're using VisualEditor for inserting pictures into articles. I find that it's easier to go directly to where the images are hosted, which is at Wikimedia Commons (commons.wikimedia.org). The search bar there will show a lot more pictures than the limited ones VE shows. Also consider digging through some categories, where you'll see a button that says "Good Pictures" on the top right that will display the better pictures that are identified by the community. On a separate note, I suggest that you learn how to edit Wikipedia through source editing when you're comfortable; it gives you a lot more control over what you want to do.
• Generally, anything that is longer than a
  stub
  (5 sentences ish) should have sections because they help readers locate information. The introduction is supposed to be an overview of the subject, highlighting the most important aspects, and leaving less important information to the body. Your example should definitely have sections, by the way.

Hope this helps! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 02:35, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Why is the article not getting published in Wikipedia?

I tried uploading this page on Wikipedia. But it is getting deleted many times. Can you help me out as to how to get my article published in Wikipedia.

Streaming Online". OTT Raja. 2021-10-16. Retrieved 2021-11-29.

External links[edit] Instagram Htnahsarp2021 (talk) 17:25, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Articles for Creation

. You can add the code {{subst:submit}} to add a big blue button to submit it when it is ready. BUT, it it nowhere near ready right now. Where did you get all the factual statements about Sheriina Sam from? They certainly aren't in the one reference that you cited.

As your sandbox draft states, she appears to be making her acting debut in 2021, so I doubt an article about her would be acceptable at this time as she would not meet our notability criteria, found at

WP:TOOSOON. Nick Moyes (talk

) 18:10, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

You have drafts at too many places. Your Sandbox is a good place, but delete the content at User talk:Htnahsarp2021/sandbox and User:Htnahsarp2021. David notMD (talk) 03:02, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Singapore 2020 Revised Edition of Acts

Singapore published the 2020 Revised Edition of Acts last week. All chapter numbers were removed and the years of enactment were added to the short titles. Should we add years to the articles in Category:Singaporean legislation? (e.g Women's Charter→Women's Charter 1961) Some Acts extended from Malaysia may have the same title to their counterparts (e.g Internal Security Act (Singapore), Internal Security Act 1960) Mike Rohsopht (talk) 16:57, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mike Rohsopht Sorry Im kinda confused on what your asking, but I know the article's name for Women's Charter should not be changed to Women's Charter 1961 because thats not the name of the charter. the only reason it would need to be changed to that is to distinguish it from another article with that same name. Even then 1961 would be put in parenthesis. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 02:30, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

short titles (Like UK, be unlike Canada). Before the 2020 Revised Edition, the year in the short titles would be omitted in revised editions. Women's Charter was originally enacted as the "Women’s Charter, 1961" It became the "Women’s Charter" from 1970 Revised Edition.[6]. But it is now the "Women’s Charter 1961" in the 2020 Revised Edition. Most article titles in Category:Malaysian federal legislation and Category:United Kingdom Acts of Parliament by year contain the year regardless whether they are distinguishable.--Mike Rohsopht (talk

) 03:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Requested controversial moves. I hope this helps. ― Kaleeb18^Talk

_Caleb 13:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18:, OK, Thank you.--Mike Rohsopht (talk) 04:01, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

review time

 Vinitraj (talk) 04:58, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Vinitraj Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. What do you want to know? If you are talking about the time that it takes to review articles, then let me tell you that articles are viewed in no specific order. It could take as well as months. So, what you have to do is wait, until someone reviews your draft. Thanks. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 05:11, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Creating Authority Control

Hi expert editors, I'm new here and I need help on how to add an Authority control to an article. I also need tips on how to include categories so that more people can see this article. Here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Davidson_Evanega

Thank you in advance

Modestannedi (talk) 04:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@Modestannedi, it appears someone has  Done this for you. Celestina007 (talk) 06:56, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @celestina007. It seems the template was removed and I'm hoping I can learn how to create one like inputing ISNI code, etc.

Modestannedi (talk) 17:56, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Modestannedi

Have you looked at the documentation? There's Wikipedia:Authority control, and Template:Authority control. To summarize, the {{Authority control}} template will generate a box if it knows of any relevant identifiers, which it can pull from the Wikidata entry (Sarah Davidson Evanega (Q110227178)). You may also add the identifiers as template parameters, but it's better to put them on Wikidata so that all languages of Wikipedia can use the information. (The template is invisible if no authority control identifiers are provided, locally or on Wikidata.) I've just added VIAF and GND IDs to the Wikidata entry, so they should now appear. – Anon423 (talk) 06:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

How can I contribute to Wikipedia?

 217.180.250.162 (talk) 01:41, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Try the

WP:ADVENTURE. After that, check out Wikipedia:Task_Center for some ideas. RudolfRed (talk

) 01:51, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

You can also create an account yourself. There are lots of benefit when you create an account. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 06:22, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Iam a New user.

Not a new user (socking). Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 11:16, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion 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.

---

 Curassow (talk) 10:14, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Curassow: Do you have a question? – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 10:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@AssumeGoodWraith: how can I help wikipedia, suggest me...

@

The Wikipedia Adventure

and see if you can collect all 15 badges whilst gaining experience.

But if you fancy simply trying to help by improving articles that have been identified as needing a bit more work, check out section 3 (Help Out) at Wikipedia:Community portal. Some tasks there are quite simple, and others are more complex. I hope you find something that interests you. Fixing grammar and spelling, or finding and adding references to support uncited statements are two good ways to start slowly and get the feel of things - a bit like driving a car for the first time. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:35, 5 January 2022 (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.

Vandalism

User asking the question is a sock. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 11:25, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion 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.

---

Hello. What is vandalism on Wikipedia? Normally, it means the action involving deliberate destruction of or damage to public or private property. (Vandalism). Thank you. Jellybread (talk) 14:45, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Jellybread: it's somewhat similar, specifically: "editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia, in a variety of languages, presenting the sum of all human knowledge." Nosebagbear (talk) 14:57, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Jellybread: The sentence kindly provided by Nosebagbear came from Wikipedia:Vandalism. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:49, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:AGF for more on good faith editing) ― Blaze Wolf^Talk

_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:32, 5 January 2022 (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.

Need help undoing a move by a disruptive editor

Tiky (soft drink) and then turned Tiky into a disambig page to promote some shitty, non-notable Newgrounds meme. I've moved the content back (though I haven't yet moved the talk page content), but unfortunately, I can't do so while preserving the article's revision history and that of its talk page. Is there an administrator who could help with this? And maybe block Chuyuiman in the same breath because they're clearly a troll? TheTechnician27 (Talk page)

07:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Also, they moved '

Sussy baka' (a redirect to Among Us) to 'Sussy Baka' for no good reason. Once again, however, I can't move it back since "a page of that name already exists". TheTechnician27 (Talk page)

07:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Update: They just swapped my name with theirs because they lack the requisite 50 brain cells to come up with something more clever. 331dot, ColinFine, Cullen328, Lectonar, Cordless Larry, or Writ Keeper, if any of you are around, would you be able to sweep the trash out the door really quickly? You can check the Teahouse's edit history if you don't know what I mean. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 07:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

I reported the editor at

moved. --David Biddulph (talk

) 11:45, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Following requested move of foobar to foo best may to raise an alternative move to bar

A use case has come up where I have proposed a move of FOOBAR to FOO using {{requested move}}, but their appears to be strong desire for a more to BAR instead. What is the best and quickest way to being up the alternative proposal?

The use case is at:

Talk:Locomotive Services#Requested move 5 January 2022, where Locomotive Services Limited has gathered a following as an alterntive move target? Thankyou for any suggestions. Djm-leighpark (talk

) 13:11, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:OTHEROPTIONS says, "If you as a closer are in doubt because too many titles have been proposed and there's no real consensus anywhere, it is generally best to close as no consensus and allow someone to re-propose the move to a more specific or better title." That also means, if there is consensus for one of multiple possible targets, you can move it there without a new discussion. Regards SoWhy

13:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Book Page

Hello! I'm new to Wikipedia and I'm sad because my first article just got deleted :( I practiced editing and thought that my first page could be about a book. I searched other books, saw tutorials and guidelines and I thought that it was a good contribution. It was deleted very fast because it was seen as promotional. I am lost and need help on how to work. I don't want to be discouraged I was very excited to start contributing to this encyclopedia. Can you give me suggestions on what to do? Marianti21 (talk) 06:44, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Marianti21: I'm sorry that happened to you at the start of your Wikipedia career, and I am happy to read that you're determined not to be discouraged. That attitude, and the willingness to learn, will take you far.

Creating a new article from scratch is one of the most difficult things to do. You might find it helpful to start out small - fixing typos, adding good references, etc. Build up to the big stuff like a whole article. (That is just my personal suggestion, not a rule.)

Because the article has been deleted, I can't see it to make any specific comments. If you check your User Talk page, as well as helpful guidelines, there is the notice of this deletion by Admin 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. If you contact them directly, they may be able to do a couple of things to help. First, if you ask they can restore the article back into User space so you can work on it without having to start again from scratch. Secondly, they might be able to give you some specific indication of the kind of thing that was problematic.

I also fixed the "help me" template on your User Talk page, so that may also attract other advice.--Gronk Oz (talk) 07:16, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Thanks so much for your feedback. I am worried because two related articles that I used to reference my article were deleted too at the same time. Is this right? These articles have been there for a long time and they were deleted. I read the guidelines and an article that is on wikipedia can't be deleted unless its candidate for deletion in all its history, if not the edits should be discussed. One of the pages is the author's page of the book I was making an article about. I feel terrible. I had a hard time making my mind to contribute and now I feel that other valuable articles were deleted too. Today I didn't make any edits on them. One of them I added a last name and actualized some verified info with citations that was wrong and that I found while creating my article. Do you know who can I talk to to restore these two pages? This doesn't seems right! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marianti21 (talk • contribs)

WP:NBOOK? Say the best 3-5 you know of. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 09:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: I'm sorry I explained it wrong. I didn't use those pages as reference but the name of the author in my article was linked to her wikipedia page. I read in the guidelines that this prevents a page from going orphan and that should be done when topics or people mentioned have their own page. Thanks for all your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marianti21 (talk • contribs)

Marianti21 fixing ping. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Marianti21: Again, I'm sorry this has all happened to you at the start of your Wikipedia career. One day you'll look back on it and say "that was weird". I would need to know what the article names are, to look up the deletion log and see who deleted them and why. So either put them here or if you prefer, you could check the log yourself and see who deleted them - it is at Special:Log?type=delete and you can specify various criteria to find the one(s) you want.

Then similar to your own article, they can be restored to User space (or to Draft space) if the Administrator thinks there is scope for them to be improved and whatever their problem is can be fixed. Once we know what happened and why, we can look at what the next steps are.--Gronk Oz (talk) 09:42, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

CORRECTION: The deleting Admin was Athaenara.--Gronk Oz (talk) 10:43, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Athaenara courtesy ping. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

SITUATION: The Official Bright Line Eating Cookbook: Weight Loss Made Simple was Speedy deleted for being promotional, so there is no chronological history of it being created by Marianti21. It appears that there were also articles about the author Susan Peirce Thompson and her program Bright Line Eating, not by Marianti21, also Speedy deleted on 6 January 2022. Marianti21 denies COI. David notMD (talk) 14:21, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Now, Susan Peirce Thompson has some WP-useful coverage like [7]. I'm not saying there's enough to satisfy

WP:BASIC, but there may be. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 14:30, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Regarding Submission of Sandbox Article

Regarding Submission of Sandbox Article

I wrote an article on a company (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chakraborty_Saikat/sandbox) in the sandbox that was rejected along with a comment as to why it was rejected. I modified the article based on the given comments but I'm now unable to resubmit it. How can I submit this article again? Chakraborty Saikat (talk) 09:48, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

First, you will need to fix the article so it does not read like an advertisement. Phrases like "the unique strength of deploying technology in all its services" or "CIEL couples its subject matter expertise in Recruitment with Natural Language Processing based machine learning methods to find talent" etc. have no place in a Wikipedia article.--Gronk Oz (talk) 10:49, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Once that is done, and ONLY once it is done, you can add the code {{subst:submit}} to the top of your draft (remember to switch to the source editor first). This will add the button "Submit for review" button, which you can click.--Gronk Oz (talk) 10:53, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@

notability. The article should contain hardly any statements which are not supported by reliable sources unconnected with the subject. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk

) 15:24, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

{{Cite book}} use page numbers

I am working on

Draft:Jacqueline Hick and trying to figure out how to cite different pages in a book. I know this is possible, but now I cannot find where on Wikipedia has the information I need. In the current page, citation #6 is to the book as a whole. However, later on I want to cite a specific page, but then I end up with a duplicate citation (now marked as reference #22). Can you please point me to the place where I can find how to write this up correctly? Thanks. DaffodilOcean (talk

) 14:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Just passing and not a regular helper here but you may wish to check out Help:References and page numbers & Wikipedia:Citing sources#Citing multiple pages of the same source. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@DaffodilOcean, of the alternatives at Help:References and page numbers, I prefer the Inline page numbers method, but it's an aquired taste, some people consider them ugly. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:43, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

In cases like this, the simplest solution may be to use the template {{rp}} with a named reference such as the entire book. Read the linked documentation and you'll see it is quite easy to implement. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Perfect. Thanks everyone for getting back to me. I will poke into these options and see which I like best. --DaffodilOcean (talk) 15:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

CheckUser blocks

If an administrator who is not a checkuser unintentionally reverses a checkuser block, but then realizes their mistake and puts the checkuser block back in, can an admin lose their admin rights even if this were their first offense? If so, why not implement a three strikes and your out rule here? Would a system like that work? Interstellarity (talk) 14:57, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:AN. --ColinFine (talk

) 15:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Random Questions

1. Does capturing an image from TV by mobile breach copyright issues?

2. How can receiving messages from bot that 'your thread has been archived' be stopped?

3. Can anyone help in rewriting the Draft: Sadashib (Fictional Character) keeping the content same in order to avoid plagiarism issues as reported by the reviewer?

Please answer in the order asked.

Thank you Michri michri (talk) 04:55, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, answering your questions in order:

1: It most likely would fall under Wikipedia:Non-free content. Read that page for some details on what is eligible for uploading on Wikipedia that isn't freely licensed.

2. Per the bot's documentation, you can put {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on your talk page.

3: Interested editors will participate eventually, however, I strongly recommend trying to reword it yourself first.

Cheers!

talk

) 05:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

🐶 EpicPupper.--Michri michri (talk

) 11:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Michri michri, and welcome to the Teahouse. Well done for contributing in a language which is not your own! In answer to your question about images: no, those would almost always be copyright violations, and so not permitted on Commons. This is why so many articles about living people have no image, unfortunately. In some cases it may be possible to upload them to Wikipedia itself (not to Commons) as non-free images; but all the criteria in the non-free content criteria have to be met, and one of them ("Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose") is hardly ever satisfied for living people, because it is usually possible that somebody could take a picture of them and upload it themselves. --ColinFine (talk) 11:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

ColinFine, so you mean that adding images of a not so well-known cricketer is virtually impossible? Anyway, gracias.--Michri michri (talk) 17:18, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

The More Menu (to find logs and analytics) appears blank

The MORE MENU gadget is not working. Is there any bug ? or any troubleshoot ?  Onmyway22 talk 14:57, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Pinging MusikAnimal, who may be able to assist! Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:46, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi

_Guestbook

17:20, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Vukky: It is enabled ! And I had been using it, but now empty Onmyway22 talk

17:24, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Is it empty regardless of what page you're on, Onmyway22? The "more" menu is empty for me at the Teahouse (though things appear on the "page" drop-down) but not when I'm viewing an article. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: It is empty everywhere ! On articles, user pages etc. Onmyway22 talk 17:33, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:JSERROR. Thanks, — MusikAnimal ^talk

17:49, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: Yes was working for me. Using Windows 10, G Chrome, vector skin Onmyway22 talk 17:52, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Solved !! Thank you everyone!! Cleared cache !! Onmyway22 talk 18:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Trindad and Tobago

why is there no site in wiki called (Trindad and Tobago) ? Uknown100 (talk) 15:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Uknown100. We have Trinidad and Tobago. Are you looking for something else? --ColinFine (talk) 15:30, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Trindad and Tobago is a misspelling (it's Trinidad and Tobago, with the i). Joseph2302 (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Trindad so it is now a redirect to Trinidad. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk

) 18:45, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

donation

How can I stop my monthly donation to wickapedia? 2603:9000:DB07:C561:A935:A3AD:DC87:4F3F (talk) 18:39, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! See https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cancel_or_change_recurring_giving GoingBatty (talk) 18:49, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

I Need A Review & Feedback On Page Build

Hello, I'm new here and still trying to get the hang of things. If anyone has a second can you do a review of a test page build I did? I would greatly appreciate any feedback or pointers you have. Thank you!!! -— Preceding unsigned comment added by TylerIrons (talk • contribs)

Please do not copy and paste, a link is sufficient and less disruptive

As to your article, Wikipedia strongly discourages

WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY

. Writing about yourself in a neutral manner is virtually impossible and an inherent conflict of interest. Plus should an article ever be published, you will not have any control over the content.

Also, if you wish to continue working on a draft of the article, it will need to be moved from your userpageSlywriter (talk) 14:32, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:YFA for process. That said, if you are article-worthy, it is because people with no connection to you have published content about you, so that you can use those publications as references. All content requires references. True information about you cannot be used unless verified by references. David notMD (talk

) 16:18, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback! The intention was not to publish the article about myself. I used it as a practice template. I didnt realize it published it from my user profile page. Absolutely makes sense that you can't do an Auto Bio. Trust me I'm not worth a page. My main reason for coming on is that I get to travel the country seeing new real estate technology and companies. That is where I feel like I can provide a lot of value. Thank you again for the feedback I really appreciate you taking the time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TylerIrons (talk • contribs)

TylerIrons Every entry at Wikipedia is "published", as in, others can see it if they know where to look. As in going to a person's User page and clicking on Contributions to see their contributions, chronolgically, EVERYWHERE. Including contributions later 'deleted.' There are a few exceptions, as in copyright content and Administators' Speedy deletions. Only actual articles are found by searches within or outside of Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 19:53, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Articles about companies are hard to create because those tend to come across as promotional. Common advice here is to spend months attempting to improve existing articles before essaying a new article. David notMD (talk) 19:53, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Waldensian Museum Balziglia

•  Courtesy link: Draft:Waldensian Museum Balziglia

i submitted this article but has been refused, i am asking for help to understand exactly what i need to correct because i always get the same general comment but i am unable to find out where exactly is the mistake in the text ThankYou Michele Miegge (talk) 16:32, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Michele Miegge and welcome to the Teahouse, The comment itself is pretty straightforward; formality seems to be the main issue you're struggling with. I recommend that you first complete some edits on articles before creating pages. Your references should also be from other sources like books, news articles and the likes rather than random wikis. _Signed, Pichemist ^{( Contribs | Talk )} 16:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

It's written like an ad. Yodas henchman (talk) 16:45, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

significant coverage of the museum, then you should give up, because you cannot establish that the museum meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. --ColinFine (talk

) 16:49, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Michele Miegge, I hope you don't mind if I make some changes to this draft for you? You can revert them if you would rather do this yourself and I won't be offended. I will explain why I am making changes in the edit summaries. Hopefully this will make things a bit clearer than just discussing in Teahouse or Articles for Creation comments. -- asilvering (talk) 20:00, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

yes that would be great , thankYou — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michele Miegge (talk • contribs) 20:09, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Where to ask a question about a specific entry (e.g., "Apostles' Creed")

Hello! I'm a neophyte to editing Wikipedia pages, and I was wondering if there was a place / procedure for asking a question about an entry prior to suggesting an edit.

To give the specific example that led me to ask, I noticed that the entry entitled "Apostles' Creed" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles%27_Creed) begins with the seemingly odd claim that the Apostles' Creed is "the most ancient Christian statement of faith that remains in wide use today," which seems dubious. As I am nothing resembling an expert on this topic, I wondered if there was a place / procedure for asking for clarification before I suggest an edit.

Thanks! Raumschwein666 (talk) 11:53, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Raumschwein666 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Every article and page on Wikipedia has an associated page that we call a "talk page" which is for discussion of the associated article. If you are viewing Wikipedia on a computer or otherwise in full desktop mode, there is a "Talk" tab at the top of the article that you can use to access the talk page. In this case, I will link directly to Talk:Apostles' Creed. 331dot (talk) 11:56, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Raumschwein666 That is a very good question. The "lead" section at the top of each article should summarize the key points of what is in the body of the article, and they in turn should be supported by references. But in this case, I cannot see in the body of the article where that claim comes from. So asking the question in the Talk page could be very interesting.--Gronk Oz (talk) 12:39, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

That wording was added in this edit only a few days ago, so you may wish to ask the editor concerned. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:50, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to @Rsquire3. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

I have undone the edit because it is unsourced and restored the prior wording. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:49, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Raumschwein666 There's also WP:Reference desk/Humanities, if you have a similar kind of question in the future and using the Talk page and contacting the editor responsible doesn't get you any response. Do give them some time to respond, though, and mention that you did that in your refdesk comment. (Asking the same question in many places at the same time irritates people, and it can lead to people wasting their time by answering questions that have already been answered.) -- asilvering (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Submission

Hi, goodafternoon everyone, my article Ahmed Al-Harrasi is still in AFC area, i made all possible changes. can anyone please review it ?

talk

) 11:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Ahmed Al Harrasi Hello and welcome. As noted on your draft, "This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,555 pending submissions waiting for review." Please be patient. 331dot (talk

) 11:08, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

If you haven't already, please review

the autobiography policy. While not forbidden, writing about yourself is highly discouraged. 331dot (talk

) 11:09, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:DISCLOSE for templates you can place on the talk page and your user page to express that you have a conflict of interest. -- asilvering (talk

) 21:35, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up to Didwho Welleh Twe

What do you mean that my tread has been archived because there was not a follow-up discussion for days. I was not feeling well and could not keep up with Wikipedia. Is there anything I can do now to correct the situation?

Dagbayonoh (talk) 20:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC) Dagbayonoh (talk) 20:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dagbayonoh. It just means that, to avoid the Teahouse page getting unusably long, items on it are archived. You've seen where the archive is, and you can read the answers that people gave you; but if you want to reply to them or ask further questions about the draft, don't edit that archive page, but start a new section here exactly as you have just done, linking to the old discussion, and explaining that you are continuing that discussion. --ColinFine (talk) 20:56, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Colinfine for your reply explaining the process.

Dagbayonoh (talk) 21:56, 6 January 2022 (UTC) Dagbayonoh (talk) 21:56, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Making a WP:Project

Is there any tools into how I make a Wikipedia Project?
Thanks! Tailorbird134 (talk) 16:49, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Tailorbird134: See Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Tailorbird134 Welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know if you are genuinely thinking about proposing a new WikiProject right now, but I think you would get a lot more 'traction' if you waited a while so that you could demonstrate your own commitment to editing within that sphere before you approach other editors. You've only made 32 edits in total since you joined us last month, and people are far more likely to support any proposal you make if they can see your existing commitment to any given topic over a number of months first. Of course, if you're just thinking about things for the future, then GoingBatty has definitely pointed you towards the right page to read. Either way: good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 17:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes (talk) Yes I am planning in the future. Cheers! Tailorbird134 (talk) 22:03, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

• Socks don't have the privilege of starting a WikiProject.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Updating copyright information

Your page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Spring_torrents.jpg shows a picture of a Hemingway novel and I believe this page has not been updated for 4 or 5 years. It is showing the image being under copyright protection, which it was in 2017. However, as of 2022, the image should be in the public domain as it was published in 1926. How can I get this page updated so it shows the fact that the image is in the public domain?

Thanks in advance. Bethered (talk) 20:37, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:Commons, which can now be done since it is public domain. ––FormalDude ^talk

20:48, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Bethered: - Not necessary. There's a much larger, higher-resolution version on Commons already. DS (talk) 23:43, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism (Dilar Dirik)

Hello, someone vandalized the article Dilar Dirik, i already did the restauration to the original version, but i dont know where to report the account - 2A02:908:160:E560:6C0D:B545:7B0E:E310 JoaquimCebuano (talk) 00:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

storm28

01:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I've retitled this thread, as its previous title duplicated another, higher up. What you're complaining about seems less like vandalism, more like impatient, unthinking, and careless deletion. It has been done by two IP numbers. What should be of most concern to you, JoaquimCebuano, is to demonstrate that Dilar Dirik meets either Wikipedia:Notability (academics) or more generally Wikipedia:Notability (people). (Most academics do not.) Because I haven't even started to look for her via search engines, I have no opinion on whether she does or doesn't; however, I don't see evidence for this in the article. -- Hoary (talk) 01:59, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

WikimediaMapsBeta

Is there anyone out there familiar with the WikimediaMapsBeta project and where it went following the Hacker News blog at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10236057, which tailed off in September 2017?

One of the comments – from emw on Sept 18, 2015 reads: "There is a ton of potential for awesome applications involving geotagged images and geographic maps. I'm glad to see the Wikimedia Foundation stepping up its investment here." However, https://maps.wikimedia.org/ returns the following error message, which doesn't look promising at present

Help with this would be greatly appreciated so we can crack on with a

User Story

Maps Beta Project for the Silicon Fen-Edge Villages of Cambridgheshire UK, under threat from rising sea levels.

Caerhys (talk) 23:26, 5 January 2022 (UTC) Caerhys (talk) 23:26, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Caerhys: I followed some of the links in the ycombinator post you linked to. I think this is the page you want: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Maps. It links to several map related pages. Also https://maps.wikimedia.org/ works fine for me. If it gives you errors, try asking at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Support_desk RudolfRed (talk) 01:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC) RudolfRed (talk) 01:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@RudolfRed {re|Caerhys}} Thanks, Rudolf. i'm on the case this morning and have cc'd our resident mapping wallah, Andrew Zolnai. Get back to you shortly...Caerhys (talk) 04:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

create article button

why don't you make a create article button to create an article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ram buddharaju (talk • contribs) 20:48, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

new user tutorial and editing existing articles first. This will reduce the chances of frustration and anger that may come with efforts to create a new article. 331dot (talk

) 20:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

And if the editor wished to create Draft:Hairlice in article space instead of draft space, well, that's a good example of why new editors cannot create new articles directly. We already have an extensive article on the topic, Head_louse. Meters (talk) 21:03, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:A10, or is that strictly for articles? TheTechnician27 (Talk page)

02:43, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

The A criteria only apply to article space. Meters (talk) 02:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

And speedied

WP:G3 Meters (talk

) 06:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

References

I need help adding references Wesbie (talk) 21:02, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Wesbie, welcome to the Teahouse. I see you're working on Draft:Robenson Lauvince. There's already some references in the article, are you wanting to add more? If so, can you provide the URLs? It looks like some of the existing sources are in French, which I unfortunately don't speak, but it is still acceptable for English Wikipedia (so long as it also meets our reliable sources policy). ––FormalDude ^talk 21:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Additionally,

puffery throughout the article, the fact that this is your first and only contribution to the project, the way you refer to him as "Mr Lauvince", and the dubious notability of this living person, that seems likely. Please see your talk page. TheTechnician27 (Talk page)

21:22, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

I moved the two references into the body of the article. The software automatically adds superscript numbers and shows the refs under References. Some of your External links may be valid as more references. You need more to confirm notability. David notMD (talk) 08:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Moving a Page

Hello, I work for The YP Foundation and have been trying to move the wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Youth_Parliament to rename it from "The Youth Parliament" (which is not our proper name) to "The YP Foundation". Our organization does not provide or have a dis-abbreviation for YP, it's a bit quirky but that's how it is. Since we are a non-profit, in India it is illegal to have the word Parliament in our name, so having this error could cause us unnecessary issues. Please help me move/rename the page to The YP Foundation, thanks! TYPF (talk) 05:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Done. Although TYPF sounds like a most worthwhile organization, I have to put that aside and say that The YP Foundation is most problematic as an article. Wikipedia isn't interested in what the foundation says about itself; it is interested in what reliable sources say about it, and this is absent from the article in its current state. Please make suggestions on its talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 07:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

This article has existed since 2007 without references. David notMD (talk) 08:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Given that you work for the Foundation,

WP:PAID applies. This means you must declare your connection on your User page and stop editing the article directly. Instead, you are limited to proposing changes on the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk

) 08:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for moving the page and also for the guidance on proper way to edit the article as someone employed at the organisation. I will stop editing the article directly and suggest changes in the talk page. As for the disclosure, do I mention this on the talk page of the article or on my user page? Sorry, I am totally new to editing on Wikipedia, thanks a lot for the assistance! TYPF (talk) 08:27, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Standard is on your User page. Urgent you try to find published content about the organization, that can become references. See Help:Referencing for beginners for format advice. Refs get inserted into the text. The sofeware places a superscripted number there and shows the ref under References. David notMD (talk) 08:38, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Requesting Undelete. Where do I start?

In 2017, I edited and posted an article on Wikipedia. It was deleted today with reason code G11. I've located the code, found the user name of the deleting admin, read the undelete guidelines, believe my next step is to contact the admin directly (true?), but am not sure how. I'm really struggling to work through this, but don't seem to be making headway. Thank you. The article title was Bright Line Eating, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bright_Line_Eating.

 Sursum.corda (talk) 21:35, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@

storm28

21:44, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Severestorm28, unlike promotional content, vandalism or disruptive editing to an existing article shouldn't result in its deletion - they should just be reverted. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:56, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

 

talk)Thank you. I see that you cannot use WP:RFU to request un-deletion for reason code G11 (the code applied to my article), and need instead to contact the admin who deleted. I've identified the admin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Athaenara :@Athaenara: but don't know how to reach them (unless, of course, my newbie attempt just now to use the ping function has accomplished that). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sursum.corda (talk • contribs

) 22:24, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

Your First Article. (Your ping of Athaenara won't work because you didn't sign your post, but this one should). --ColinFine (talk

) 22:29, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

@

sign your comment, which is required for the ping function to work. I'd recommend leaving a message at User talk:Athaenara in order to reach them. ––FormalDude ^talk

22:30, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

The article has been deleted twice. In its latest version, it has a section on the "reception" of the book. This turns out to be its reception by just one source, a website named foodrevolution.org. It appears that the only mention of this website in English-language Wikipedia is that one of its blog pages is referenced thrice in the article "Foodscaping". As for Bright Line Eating itself, it doesn't seem to be mentioned outside the article on Shelly Flagel. Maybe the book is, like most books, un-notable. -- Hoary (talk) 00:13, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

In addition to an article about the program Bright Line Eating, on same day. Speedy deletion also conducted for The Official Bright Line Eating Cookbook: Weight Loss Made Simple and for Susan Peirce Thompson, the creator of the program. User:Marianti21, who created the book article, has left a message on Athaenara's Talk page. David notMD (talk) 08:27, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

How to start with transations?

Hello,

I am confused as to how to go about creating translations for articles as a new user. All of the youtube videos on the subject are using the content translation tool, but this is disabled for new users translating non-English articles into English. I can't seem to find any concrete guidelines for the other way to go about creating a translated article. The other method seems to be to create an entirely new article and copy and pasting a translator template, but this does not provide a side by side view of the original text for translation that the content translation tool provides.

My ultimate question is, if I continue to create translations using the translation tool will this still contribute (pending review of course)? Or would I have to create my first few translations via creating a new article, linking it to the original article and pasting in the translation template? Sokenroken (talk) 20:00, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Sokenroken, see Help:Translation if you have not already. While the content translation tool gives you a side by side view, it doesn't do machine translation on en.wiki for any users. You have to do the English translation yourself. There are other ways of getting a side by side view of the original page and the page you are writing, such as using two windows if you are on a desktop computer. Template:Translated page goes on the talk page of the article here, not on the article. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:36, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Pages needing translation into English. There you can look at articles which already have been translated (often machine-translated) and improve them, and you can also gather experience in formatting and copyediting. Lectonar (talk

) 09:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Proposal to block media from rogue website

A specific website is being used to support a particular hoax. For purposes of discussion, I'm going to say that this website has been created for this specific purpose. The website hosts media content to support the hoax along with legitimate media content. By failing to block this site, we would be legitmizing the site (i.e. when they provide non-hoax content), thus also enabling them to add content to suport the hoax that they're perpetrating. How would we go about blocking content from this site? (The site in question is romanovempire.org.) Fabrickator (talk) 08:59, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I wonder what the hoax is. I've just been looking at images of several hundred pre-revolution Russian beer bottle labels – do you think someone created all those in support of the hoax? Maproom (talk) 10:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:RS/N. Without knowing which sites you're referring to it's hard to comment further and, to be frank, it's out of the normal remit of the Teahouse to pass judgement in anything but clear-cut cases, but I hope this helps you a bit. Nick Moyes (talk

) 11:16, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Fabrickator I have just debunked your hoax theory over an uncited factual statement about the Sagebrush lizard (see here). Or is this about a completely different conspiracy theory? Nick Moyes (talk) 15:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Maproom: @Nick Moyes: This is not about Sagebrush lizard, it's about "Imperial Silk Crown of Russia" listed under the "Extant for 4–7 years" section of Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia § False statements in articles. A google search of site:romanovempire.org "silk imperial crown" returns over 200 hits, and while the page summaries displayed by Google include this text, it does not appear that any of the hits are valid matches. Fabrickator (talk) 21:55, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Fabrickator OK thanks. I took a quick look, but have rather had enough of 'hoaxes' for one day. The blog link on silkimperialcrown.com site is a bit of a giveaway, as is the Whois entry and the 'donate to us' link, and lack of 'About' information. This one does have all the hallmarks of a hoax, possibly using Wikipedia as backup for ridiculously priced gift posters (and cards on Ebay) on an unidentifiable website, or perhaps they were unaware their site's images hsd been uploaded to COMMONS. It looks like the site's owner lives in Houston and claims to be a "Cultural Investigator at RICA" (Russian Institute of Cultural Affairs) whatever that is meant to be, as there's no such organisation that I can find, but he is linked to www.1896coronation.com. This person also appears to live here, although another more upmarket addresses for them can also be found. All very odd, I'd agree. Good luck with your investigations. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Upon further examination, I've determined that although the romanovempire.org website comes up in a google search for silk imperial crown, it appears that it doesn't actually return any visible content pertaining to silk imperial crown. So although it's operating roguishly, the solution I was proposing would stop them from doing something that they aren't actually doing and hence would be pointless. Please consider the proposal as withdrawn. Fabrickator (talk) 03:31, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Fabrickator OK, that makes sense. You'll be pleased to know I've added my support to the image deletion nomination on Commons, though. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Homepage

Hi, how can I remove the homepage which suggests me about various things? Best, 

talk

) 10:37, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:MAINPAGE any time soon (!), so what exactly do you mean, please? Nick Moyes (talk

) 10:44, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 10:53, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Go to Special:Preferences & at the foot of the "User profile" tab uncheck the "Display newcomer homepage" option. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks

Hazedon for my pretty rubbish reply. The feature was added to encourage and prompt brand new editors to make small, useful changes here. I can imagine that, like anything, it can be irritating if you're not interested in it. Hope you find deactivating it makes things better for your experience here. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk

) 11:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for both -

talk

) 11:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Hazedon Well, are you talking about the welcome message that was placed on your talk page? Itcouldbepossible^Talk

12:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

talk

) 12:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Hazedon Well no problem, always happy to help. Itcouldbepossible^Talk

12:57, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

2019 BNP leadership election draft

Hello. My article draft of the BNP 2019 leadership election was declined by Bkissin, who falsely claimed that it only contained links to the BNP website, despite the fact I already included a link to a Hope not Hate article about the leadership election. I have resubmitted it and told Bkissin about this situation on his talk page but I haven't got any response yet. IncognitoGuyFawkes (talk) 11:53, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Draft:2019 British National Party leadership election. Nothing to do with BNP Paribas. Maproom (talk

) 12:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I think you should probably consider finding further sourcing on the article as Bkissin suggests. All four references are indeed to the BNP site or its YouTube. I see there is an external link at the bottom to HNH, but that won't be enough unfortunately. While HNH isn't prohibited as a source,

it's not the most reliable. If you want to get this article approved (and it does have the potential to be), you should find some more independent and less-biased sources (news articles such as BBC, Sky News, or mainstream newspapers are your best bet). Probably best to do this before re-submitting the article. — Czello

13:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Please give some reviews or comments about

Draft:Pixelfed

Hello, I am editing a draft abiut Pixelfed since I am a user of it. Pixelfed is a open source alternative to Instagram and since the beginning of the year, I have been trying to improve the draft, but since there are rooms for improvement. I would like to ask for help to improve the draft by telling me what I should add or you may just go to the page of

talk

) 13:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

SITUATION: Declined six times since Bertverse got involved, five days ago. Submitted again. Latest Bertverse edit was addition of three non-English refs. David notMD (talk) 14:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Translation approval process

Is the translation approval different than the approval of regular new pages? I just translated a

page from the German Wiki around 12 days ago and ran into quite a lot of confusing info in the translation tool but managed to get it published as a draft. I have been waiting to see what would happen next. Hence, nothing has changed so far started wondering whether I messed something up during the process leading to the new translated page not being reviewed by/shown to any trusted Wikipedia member? Please help me comprehend this. Regards Ecosyst (talk

) 01:23, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

The process to get your draft approved is the same for translations as for other drafts. To submit it for approval, add {{subst:submit} to the top of the draft. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Occasional editor here. I thought that adding {{subst:submit}} to a page would provide the "submit" button, which the editor can then press to submit the article. If that is true, David Biddulph, then saying "To submit it for approval, add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft" is not quite correct -- a new editor might not know that they have to then push the button -- and this could mislead new editors who will wonder why their article has not been reviewed a few months after doing what they were told to do. But I could be wrong... 73.127.147.187 (talk) 14:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

IP, I'm actually fairly sure {{subst:submit}} automatically submits it instead of adding a button for the user to click (in fact I Think the button just add that template to the page) ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:13, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: You are correct. The IP may be thinking of {{AfC submission|T}}, which provides the button for later submission. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Low rating articles

• talk
  ) 18:20, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  To save anyone else the trouble of checking: these are all stub-size articles and are not under-rated. -- asilvering (talk) 19:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

Станислав Савченко, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure what your question is about RU.TV. Are you talking about messagtes at the top of the Talk page? In general, any editor can alter these if they think the article is misclassified: see WP:Content assessment. However, I suggest you don't worry about those, but (if you're interested in it) worry much more about the fact that the article has not got a single independent source. (I haven't looked at the other articles you mention) --ColinFine (talk

) 18:33, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

talk

) 15:40, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Corporate notability / COI: What should I do?

Hello everyone,

I actually have two questions: about corporate notability and conflict of interest.

I was trying to submit the page about the company that is known locally and internationally but submission was declined for the reasons that first, draft does not establish corporate notability, and second, there is a conflict of interest. So I wanted to ask for advice here, maybe someone can help me in this situation. Thanks in advance. Con3butor (talk) 16:02, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:THREE sources that you believe show notabilty has been met.Slywriter (talk

) 16:11, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Video game screenshots and fair use rationales

Hi! I am a contributor for the Wikipedia page on the 2021 video game

talk

) 09:59, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:WPVG to seek other editors views of whether your rationale and use is, indeed, valid. That might attract the attention of any admin who watches that particular discussion stream. Sorry I don't feel able to help you further myself. Nick Moyes (talk

) 10:40, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

talk

) 11:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

style guidelines is actually a very good way of checking whether what you're hoping to do is likely to be OK. I really appreciate your question and hope you can resolve it. The worst that can happen is that an image gets deleted on policy grounds. That can be really annoying (even upsetting at times) but it's no reflection on genuine efforts to improve an article by any editor through good intent. It's the repeated attempt to add inappropriate content that we get shirty about, and that clearly is not the situation here. Good luck. Nick Moyes (talk

) 11:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

With no familiarity with what does and does not pass as

WP:NFCC#8 ("contextual significance") in video game context, I am not really sold on picture #1. OK, the game has a system to make permanent decisions, but it is hardly the only game to do so, so I do not think it is such an arcane mechanic that a screenshot is required to significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic. I am more positive about picture #2, since it is tied to a plot point / character that obviously is not replicated in other games. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)}

17:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Large-scale removal of material

At the Names of the Serbs and Serbia page there may be an edit war brewing. Against my better judgement, I have become involved in most recent push-pull (with latest, first):

• my revert
• Insistent IP 's revert
• revert of Insistent IP by another user
• Insistent IP's revert of my revert
• my earlier (my first) revert
• first in recent batch of Insistent IP's large deletions,

but it was on a slow burn before:

• Soundwaweserb's reversion of Insistent IP's large-scale content removal of 5 Dec
• September content removal by Insistent IP and Cluebot's reversion of that

"Insistent IP", as I call them, appears, from their latest ES, to be objecting to this edit in July 2021.

Myself, I have no idea if that July edit is sound, with good sources, etc., or if it should be expunged forthwith. But the Insistent IP's blanking seems high-handed, which is why I reverted. Won't go there again now, though, as I do not wish to cross any lines, nor earn more opprobrium. (I mean, how do you long term Wikipedians do it? It's so disheartening.) I cannot discuss on the article's Talk page either, as I am ignorant of the topic, but I thought I should let some other editors know, who might know if any action or precautions are needed. My thanks. AukusRuckus (talk) 06:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:Administrator's Noticeboard. And, don't get WP:Wikistressed about it. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs

) 18:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Lightbluerain. I am grateful for your reply. I do not know enough to report the IP user - was not sure if that would be justified, even; I just felt that deleting 17,475Kb of material that had been in the article for c. 6 months, might be a bit precipitous, and that a "heads-up" could be useful. One or 2 others undeleted, before I did, yet still the IP user would not engage on talk page. Looks like an Admin noticed and decided to protect, anyway.

I am on the new side, but I have seen enough attack dogs on WP to be very, very wary. The post below is a case in point, where clearly the user did not even bother to read what I had said. One can only assume something like a red mist descends and clouds deep cognitive processing for some people when they are challenged, even mildly. Of course, this kind of thing can happen to most, if not all of us, on occasion! For all I know the IP user is correct, though, in wanting to remove the material. That they did not wish to go to the trouble of explaining anything, rings alarm bells.

Good tip about the WP:Wikistress: Not too bad for me, just my mind boggles at how the long-termers maintain their equanimity. I just go somewhere else for a few days! Thank you for your time, (and for all of the great volunteers here on the Teahouse!) AukusRuckus (talk) 03:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy to help. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 18:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

That extensive original research and pseudoscience were added by an IP on 17 July 2021. The same IP also made an extensive edit on the article on Polabian language where was removed simply because of being "shit". AukusRuckus is incapable of discerning obvious original research and shit of an edit or is the same IP who made the edit and is trying to keep this shit on Wikipedia. There is no blanking, it is a removal of an extensive shit. --93.137.145.118 (talk) 20:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Is Steam credible?

Is Steam a valid source? For a game article, can I quote steam for a planned future release date, due to the game-devs themselves putting that date there? Isro! (talk) 17:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

• If the source of the information is ultimately the devs with no editorial fact control between them and the public, the medium used (Steam, Twitter or wherever else) is immaterial. It should be taken is a
  self-published source
  , and therefore used only for simple non-controversial statements.

Whether a release date is a simple non-controversial statement is highly debatable. I would say it is not (or at least it should be attributed to the source e.g. [studio X] plans to release the game at [date] [ref]). With the current trend of pre-release financing of games (whether via Kickstarter, early access, and whatnot), announcing an imminent release date might be a way to grab some quick cash before the company folds, so the studios do have some financial interest in lying about release dates. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 17:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

(forgot to ping Axisroi) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 17:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

In addition to the above, if the devs confirm elsewhere that the release date that's on steam is the current planned release date then it would be better to use the source you found elsewhere, rather than Steam's. Sometimes they might simply just put a release date that's completely wrong in there because they have no planned release date and are putting it there as a placeholder (Amazon does this a lot with games that have no release date yet, they put the release date as the end of the year and put it up on the site as a placeholder so people are less likely to get scammed by people claiming they have the game when in reality, it's either a completely different game or nothing). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:59, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Forgot to add, I would say the confirmation is either the website or a reliable source (possibly also a social media site but I"m not so sure on that one since social media isn't really all that reliable). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you both for the feedback it's very helpfulIsro! (talk) 18:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Wanting to add content about myself?

 Courtesy link: Wade Schalles

I have tried to change what you have listed for me several times. But then the next day it's gone again. To verify what I've been writing, here is the EXACT verbiage that is written about me at the National Wrestling Hall of Fame. The Hall is the ultimate source for amateur wrestling. Why can't this be used??? _________________________________________________________________________________________

(redacted)  2603:8001:B607:A500:C5EA:8D6E:3D24:149D (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Pinging @Diannaa: --ARoseWolf 18:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Your edits were reverted by

conflict of interest. You may make suggestions for changes, with acceptable sourcing, on the Talk Page at Talk:Wade Schalles. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 18:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Wade, it would be easier to communicate with you about this if you created an account. Please do not post the content from the Hall of Fame here, doing so is a copyright violation. Whether you create an account or not, please use the article talk page,

reliable source to support them. 331dot (talk

) 18:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

You also copied the same content here. Please see

WP:BLP for our policy on biographies of living people. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk

_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:23, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Request other users to look at article for neutrality concerns

Hello! SO after I learned that Chevy is creating electric version of the Silverado, Equinox, and Blazer, I checked the articles to see if anyone has added info about the EV version of those vehicles. Currently it only appears that there's info (not available info, just info that's on Wikipedia) for the Silverado (located at

Chevy Silverado EV) and the Equinox (although the information here is unsourced and possibly promotional). When I looked at the Equinox article, I noticed that there were concerns for the neutrality of it and that it's possibly written like an ad. I'm wondering if there's any place where I could request assistance from other users to check the entire article and see if those concerns have been addressed in the past and the templates were just never removed, or if those concerns are still valid and help me address the concerns so that the article is neutral and non-promotional. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk

_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:41, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

There is the Neutral point of view noticeboard, but you should start by bringing it up on the article talk page. (As an aside, it's a good idea to avoid jargon when posting on general noticeboards such as here or the NPOVN – "Chevy is creating electric version of the Silverado, Equinox, and Blazer" is so much Greek to people who don't know specific cbrands of cars. You included a wikilink to an article which helped me figure out what the topic was, but it's usually easier to get help if the request is clearly presented.) --bonadea contributions talk 20:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

It's already been brought up on the article's talk page years ago. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:34, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Trying to create a Wikipedia Page for someone who is notable

I am trying to create a page for Francia Russell, former co-Artistic Director of Pacific Northwest Ballet, former dancer with New York City Ballet, Author and former Director of Pacific Northwest Ballet School. First of all, I have watched the tutorials and I am finding this incredibly confusing. My questions are 1. How do I know I am creating the page in the right area? I got a message saying my "article" may not be notable? 2. Are there templates to write a Page about a person? 3. Who do I inform once the Page is done and where do I submit it? `^`^ Melanie Skinner [[User:Melanieskinner|Melanieskinner]] ([[User talk:Melanieskinner|talk]]) (talk) 17:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Apmh

17:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

The Tips of Apmh The user attempted to edit a redirect into an article, and did not have the submission template. 331dot (talk

) 17:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

Apmh

17:58, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

new user tutorial

. But you are here now, so that's okay.

The proper means to create and submit a draft is at

a notable person. My advice would be to not attempt to summarize every possible independent source out there right now, just use the three best sources with the best coverage of Russell. 331dot (talk

) 17:23, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

The Wikipedia Adventure

. I suggest then spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills.

After reading your bio on your user page, it appears you may have a

declare it

on your user page.

If you wanted to create an unbiased article, you would gather

notability". If so, you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article, and be prepared for a process that may include months of waiting, rejections, and rewrites, before an article is created. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk

) 20:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Image resolution issues and how to resolve them.

I'm working on an article about a related topic and during my research I came across this image, used on wikipedia under a fair use rationale. Sadly it has been compressed into near-uselessness at some point, looking at the image description page this seems to have been done to safe space on the servers. Are there exemptions to this rule and if so how (if applicable) can I apply them to this image? I've found the original source fairly easily and they have a much higher resolution version available, So it should be fairly easy fix otherwise.-- Licks-rocks (talk) 21:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:IMAGERES. When I visit the Contourite article, I can click once on the image to view it by itself, and then click one more time to see it full screen, which is blurry but readable. Back at the article, the image caption has a link to reference #14. If I click on the doi link in that reference, I am taken to the same geoscienceworld.org URL you provided, which provides me the option to "Buy This Article". Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk

) 22:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

That's a horrible rule and I hate it with every fiber of my being, but since changing it would mean changing copyright law and that is about as likely to succeed as trying to douse the sun with a fire-hose, I guess I'll just settle for a blurry mess instead. Thank you for the explanation. Licks-rocks (talk) 22:20, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Licks-rocks Amen to all of that! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:34, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

No943

How do you block people? No943 (talk) 17:27, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

• @No943: You don’t. However, if you continue to make unconstructive edits such as placing Arizona in China, your request to be blocked is likely to be granted.

If you do not want to edit Wikipedia anymore, there is no need to get blocked - you could simply stop editing and save everyone involved time and hassle. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 17:36, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

k i'll stop No943 (talk) 17:47, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

User has stopped because they have been blocked by an admin for vandalism. It's always nice to have a real world example! Nick Moyes (talk) 23:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Time from first edit (reverted) to indefinitely blocked for vandalism was two hours and four minutes. No a record, but fast. David notMD (talk) 01:00, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Adding a template

I'm going to add the "Uncited category template" to several article pages. I did a dry run, and although I used the appropriate code

This article contains unreferenced categories ( adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced categories may be challenged and removed. (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

(See, I typed in the code to show you, and it brought the template up.) The template says "This article contains uncited categories," plural. That's a small concern. More importantly, I intend to document my reason for the template on the talk pages of the articles. Do I need to do anything else? What happens next? The template says "Unsourced categories may be challenged and removed." Isn't placing the template the challenge? If not, how does the challenge work, and who does the removing? I have elaborate reasons why I think the category shouldn't be there in the first place, but I assume that has no place in this procedure.Pete Best Beatles (talk