Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1186

This is an current talk page .

I have the Wikipedia article WebAssembly(WASM) on my watch list and saw an edit that adds a list of examples of where WASM is used which I don't see any problems with, maybe besides the citation style of raw links. But the text introducing that section has a non-encyclopedic "vibe"/tone as well as some speculation that probably should be replaced to fit into something more encyclopedic. One other thing is that the edit summary says that the list was given by GPT-4 witch is something to take into consideration.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WebAssembly&diff=prev&oldid=1149510377&diffmode=source

Wasm's portability, security, and performance have made it an attractive choice for various use cases and platforms. As a result, its adoption is likely to increase in the future. Here's a list of places where Wasm currently runs:

What do you all think about this? I'm a new editor and would like to get an insight into what more specifically is a non-encyclopedic tone and how to rephrase things to make a non-encyclopedic text into an encyclopedic text, as well as the community's current opinion is on LLMs. CoderThomasB (talk) 01:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:LLM. Happy editing or learning ;) ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk

) 02:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@

wikivoice, which generally should not be done. If sources have discussed the probable future rise of WebAssembly, then their predictions should be cited and attributed to those sources.

With regard to the reliability of AI chatbots, it is my understanding that those currently available are prone to hallucination; they should not be trusted to produce accurate text. They will actively give wrong answers because there is (to my knowledge) no technology currently able to verify the accuracy of their output. Shells-shells (talk

) 05:22, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Chadoh has posted a comment on my talk page that is relevant to this discussion. I have referred them to this discussion on the tree house, and if you want to, feel free to reply to them on my talk page here with a more specific critique of their edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:CoderThomasB#When_is_it_appropriate_to_use_content_initially_generated_by_an_LLM CoderThomasB (talk) 00:49, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

How do I ask that an article be created? Is there, like a special page for it or...what? Faith15 15:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@Faithful15: Welcome to the Teahouse! There's Wikipedia:Requested articles, but there's no guarantee that any of Wikipedia's volunteer editors would choose to write the article. GoingBatty (talk) 15:25, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay. Understood. Thanks for the help, @GoingBatty. Faith15 15:28, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

If you want to write an article yourself, you can use the

article wizard to help you. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)

🔥 01:41, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I was editing in my sandbox but I noticed that some of my recent edits were not displaying in the preview nor in the final result. The preview seems to be working fine in the teahouse, though. My edits are maintained in the edit box itself, they simply never affect the final result itself. Has anyone encountered this problem? I am going to restart my computer and see what that does. I will not respond to this post within 5 minutes of posting if restarting does nothing for me. Thank you! Non-pegasus (talk) 03:32, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello Non-pegasus and welcome to the Teahouse.

You asked much the same question with a {{help me}} request on your user talk page User talk:Non-pegasus where I found it first and answered it. In general, it's best not to ask a question in two different places; make your best guess as to the right place and ask there. Only if there's no response after a considerable time would it make sense to try asking in a different way and a different place. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:15, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I do not know why, but I cannot undo my own edit. When I do so, a text appears and says The editor will now load. If you still see this message after a few seconds, please reload the page[,] with reload the page linked in blue. I have done so, but the undo still does not go through. Any solutions? Thanks, Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 03:50, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I had this same problem today attempting to undo some vandalism on an article I watch. I had to switch to desktop mode for the edit to publish. I see you also usually edit via mobile, so it may be related. Folly Mox (talk) 06:50, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm writing this entry and looking for some feedback before I move it to trash space. I mainly want to make sure that this is viable and I'm not wasting my time👍

User:Geraldine Aino/sandbox

I also would like to do an article for her parter as well...TIA Geraldine Aino (talk) 14:12, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Geraldine Aino, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sure someone else will come along with more pointers, but I'll give the obvious one: don't cite IMDb. There's an essay about it at Wikipedia:Citing IMDb if you'd like further reading. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:24, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

To improve Bridget Lancaster, I added a wikilink and two categories. JoeNMLC (talk) 14:27, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@JoeNMLC, you forgot to disable the categories (the article is not in mainspace, it should not be included in categories yet). I've done that. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:38, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@

notability we require sources that are fully independent of the subject. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 15:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps the query was about moving from Sandbox to Draft? David notMD (talk) 08:07, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I need to insert fair use license logo of an organization whose page is available in English wikipedia into Hindi translated page. How can I do that? 42.105.76.3 (talk) 05:26, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

It might be possible, but it isn't easy. Each language edition of Wikipedia is a seperate project; Each Wikimedia Project can only use images which have been uploaded to that specific project or Wikimedia Commons. Since Wikimedia Commons doesn't accept Fair Use, your only chance would be to have the image uploaded locally, if the Hindi Wikipedia allows Fair use. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:36, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello IP user, I searched

WP:Non free content and did not find a corresponding Hindi article. There is however hi:विकिपीडिया:Logos (WP:LOGOS) and an example like hi:चित्र:Real Madrid CF svg.png

real examples of fair use imagery on popular Hindi articles.

Your questions about Hindi Wikipedia are better asked at the Hindi equivalent of Teahouse hi:विकिपीडिया:चौपाल ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 08:02, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

To be clear, this is a matter entirely within the purview of the Hindi Wikipedia, and the English Wikipedia has nothing at all to do with it. Some people seem to think that the English Wikipedia is somehow the "boss Wikipedia". This is not the case. Each language version is fully autonomous. Cullen328 (talk) 08:10, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

i created and publish an article about someone with any refernce but it was rejected so if any one can help me publish the article it would be very helpfull

Harshin153 (talk) 16:00, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @

notable by Wikipedia's standards, perhaps someone else will create an article about you. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 16:15, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I believe 199.208.172.35 meant to link to

WP:42 Victor Schmidt (talk

) 17:06, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I did. Fixed. Apologies to galactic hitchhikers everywhere.199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Harshin153, you are not notable as Wikipedia defines that term, therefore you are not eligible for a Wikipedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 20:56, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

too soon. I strongly recommned you put DB-author inside double curly brackets {{ }} at the top of the draft. This will request an Administrator to delete the draft. David notMD (talk

) 08:29, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello there Wikipedians. I'm here to ask a question: Why the f*** did my edits about Pink being a shade of red and Magenta being a color get reverted, even tho IT'S TRUE??!! Like, the RGB/CYMK color scheme proves that Magenta is a color and the "category" of colours Pink appears in is in the Tertiary colors, which is basically pushing the line of "Is it a color or a shade" to a whole 'nother level, ESPECIALLY with the Gauter-something and Spring Green... So yeah, I think Pink should be considered a shade of Red and Magenta be considered a different color. Goodbye fellow Wikipedians! 2001:8A0:DF58:401:AD25:4D6B:E599:6BF8 (talk) 14:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I meant Chartreuse and Spring Green btw, just searched that up, anyways, bye again! 2001:8A0:DF58:401:AD25:4D6B:E599:6BF8 (talk) 14:04, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. Your edits were reverted because Wikipedia articles are not based on the personal opinions of editors. They are summaries of what is published in reliable sources. If you can produce sources to back up your argument, feel free to start a discussion on the talk page of the article. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:05, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Many words, like "color", have several (overlapping) meanings in English. I don't think there is one hard and fast answer as to whether or not "magenta" is a color. It depends on context. But, yes, you need sources to back up your assertions. I predict that there are sources for either answer. David10244 (talk) 08:32, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Wikipedia.

I am a new user, and I randomly stumbled upon Cluster Observatory article (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custer_Observatory), winch looks like and adverstiment, because it has too much about the history of it. And yet, history of that observatory can be interesting to some people. So, how exactly in that situation do I make the article less advertising without making the article worse?

Sorry if it's a dumb question,

NuclearFish RealNuclearFish (talk) 06:39, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

The main problem with the article

good sources about the subject, then match the assertions with the source, and try referencing at least some parts of this article. -- Hoary (talk

) 06:56, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

RealNuclearFish, another serious problem is that the lead section of a well-written Wikipedia article is supposed to summarize the body of the article, and this article has plenty of content in the lead that isn't even mentioned in the body at all. I agree that the lack of references to reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic is the biggest problem. Cullen328 (talk) 07:10, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328, thanks to both of you, I understood and I'll try find reliable sources for that article. RealNuclearFish (talk) 07:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:BACKWARD. David10244 (talk

) 08:42, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I understand how to write an interlanguage link to link to an article in another Wikipedia, but I cannot for the life of me work out how to add the information to a complete article to allow the reader to find the corresponding articles in other Wikipedias (i.e. what feeds languages to the "languages" thing at the top right of the article). If I click on this, it comes up with some comment "No languages yet. Add a new one?", but it doesn't seem to provide any way to do so! Is there any help on this anywhere? I'm sure this is just my stupidity. Elemimele (talk) 11:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

@Elemimele welcome to Teahouse! I also find the interface confusing. It's located elsewhere, search for the button Add interlanguage links. It should be easier to find imho, as you point out. The other way is to find the Wikidata item if it exists, and directly add it there. Happy linking! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:23, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I found T329570 to make it easier to track this issue. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:27, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Oooh, thanks, yes, found it! That works! Elemimele (talk) 11:48, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

What to do with a user who is

What kind(s) of edits to their user space, Dancing Dollar? -- Hoary (talk) 07:53, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dancing Dollar. New editors who fool around in their user pages have four possible trajectories: #1 They continue to goof around in their user pages, doing no harm. #2 They lose interest and go away, causing no harm. #3 They gain confidence and begin contributing positively to the encyclopedia. #4 They begin engaging in vandalism and disruption. Only #4 requires action. Cullen328 (talk) 07:56, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary: You know, adding and removing userboxes, designing anime characters in their sandbox and adding personal info on their user page. @Cullen328: I don't think this user falls under any of those categories, they seem to love anime and they think Wikipedia is place to design characters or show such imagination in their user page. They are not causing any harm. Dancing Dollar ^{(let's talk)} 08:05, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Consider making a statement on the editor's Talk page. Include

WP:UP. What you described verges on using User page and Sandbox as a website. David notMD (talk

) 13:51, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, please help me and upload the logo of this organization in Wikidata. (Islamic Republic of Iran Police Intelligence Organization) Like the logo of this network that is available in Wikidata. [1] Thankful CaesarIran (talk) 10:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikidata, while a "sister project" of Wikipedia, is a separate entity, and the userbase here will not necessarily be able to help with a problem your having there. You can try this page, which seems to be the general help desk/discussion forum at Wikidata. That's probably the best place to ask. --Jayron32 13:42, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@CaesarIran:  Done, with the following steps:

1. Go to the Islamic Republic of Iran Police Intelligence Organization article
2. Click on the logo in the infobox
3. Click on the "More details" button
4. Copy the URL of the image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IRIPIO.png
5. Go back to the Islamic Republic of Iran Police Intelligence Organization article
6. Click the "Wikidata item" link to go to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q117623167
7. Click "add statement"
8. In the property field, type "logo image"
9. Paste the image URL in the field
10. Click "publish"

Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:42, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for the explanation, but the editing option does not appear for me to place the photo, please add the current logo of the Iranian Anti-Narcotics Police page to its wikidata, thanks. CaesarIran (talk) 18:52, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@CaesarIran According to c:COM:TOO Iran, logos for Iranian organisations are not suitable for Commons and hence can't be used in Wikidata either. That particular logo c:File:Islamic Republic of Iran Anti Narcotic Police Logo.png was uploaded by Tahalone yesterday and tagged CC BY SA 4.0 but I don't see on what basis they have released the copyright under a Creative Commons license. The same editor uploaded the logo you discussed above and IMO it suffers from the same issue. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:18, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I modified the license, is the license problem solved? If it should not be in wikidata, then there is no need to upload it in wikidata. Thanks CaesarIran (talk) 13:09, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

@CaesarIran On what basis did you modify the license on the two files? The licensing now says that "[the image] consists entirely of information that is common property and contains no original authorship." That is obviously incorrect as there are several original design features. Did you read c:COM:TOO Iran, which says "The level of originality required for copyright protection in Iran seems very low." I am not an expert in the copyright law of Iran but it would be prudent to ask those who are more likely to be: see c:Commons:Village_pump/Copyright. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:00, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi folks. I've come across a file format that doesn't currently have an article, and is not listed in the List of file formats or List of filename extensions pages. It's the extension "rhr", produced by an app called Script Rehearser and supported by some others.

Would an article on this format be notable enough? It would cite mainly the primary source on the vendor's website, and include things like supported data categories, history of versions, and supporting applications. Wilkinson3 (talk) 15:59, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:Original research ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk

) 16:25, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

OK, thanks for letting me know. And stopping me wasting my time! Wilkinson3 (talk) 17:01, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Parade Technologies

I have submitted a new article on a publicly traded company, a mid-size technology chip manufacturer. The article was rejected by articles for creation.

I disclosed my status as a paid editor in my profile. The article itself includes corporate history and short outline of products. It has citations throughout. It is very similar to many other articles about other corporate entities that can be seen on wikipedia.

Any advice on improving this article to satisfy wikipedia editors? SVtrustee (talk) 21:03, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

@

Wikipedia:Golden Rule for an overview of what is expected. ~Anachronist (talk

) 21:20, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

The company is notable, and several citations confirm that fact from 3rd party sources. It is not a household name, but notable within its industry.

I have removed citations from press releases, and removed language that could be considered promotional. It is a 100% fact-based recitation of company history, affiliations and product offerings. SVtrustee (talk) 21:42, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, SVTrustee, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is not enough to assert that "the company is notable": an article must demonstrate that its subject meets Wikipedia's special definition of

notable

. Which three of your citations each meets the three separate criteria listed in the link that Anachronist gave you? (Hint: none of the first ten do).

"100% fact-based" is also not enough: we need "100% reported in

independent sources

.

Basically, you're making the mistake that most inexperienced editors do when they first try to create an article: they write what they know, rather than what the independent sources say. ColinFine (talk) 22:04, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your response.

The following citations identify the company as notable (again not famous or a household name, but well-known within a specific industry or environment):

[6] https://www.forbes.com/lists/asia200/

[7] https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20171208005001/en/Global-Semiconductor-Alliance-Announces-2017-Award-Recipients

[8] https://www.gsaglobal.org/2020-global-semiconductor-alliance-award-nominees-announced/

Several citations are from independent 3rd party market research firms that list the company as an important product vendor (worthy of analysis and coverage) within a specific market segment:

[9] https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220330005730/en/Taiwan-ICT-Industry-Outlook-Report-2021-and-Beyond---ResearchAndMarkets.com

[10] https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190404005301/en/Global-DisplayPorts-Market-Analysis-Trends-and-Forecasts-2016-2019-2024---Expanding-Market-for-AR-VR-Devices-Unfurl-New-Opportunities---ResearchAndMarkets.com

[11] https://www.motorsportbayern.de/2023/03/16/retimer-redriver-markt-2023-globale-einblicke-und-geschaeftsszenario-astera-labs-parade-technologies-texas-instruments-intel-analogix/

In what way are the sources cited "not-reliable"? They are not the NY Times, but they are indeed reliable sources within the technology industry.

I appreciate your honest feedback. SVtrustee (talk) 22:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

None of the sources you cite above (numbered from 6 t0 11) has any discussion of Parade Technologies, let alone the "in-depth discussion" that is needed to help establish

notability. Please click on that blue link, and read what you find. Maproom (talk

) 22:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I do not understand your response Taproom. Every single one of the citations listed explicitly includes mention of Parade Technologies. How can you claim there isn't "any" discussion? Are we looking at the same links? SVtrustee (talk) 22:41, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

@

significant coverage of the subject. The sources you've given mention the company, but just that. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝

 ) 23:00, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I am truly trying to understand the criteria that reviewers are employing.

This article TouchWave is cited by wikipedia as a Wikipedia:Good articles/Social sciences and society. The citations for this article are a combination of company press releases and citations in obscure technology journals (each one with but a single mention of the subject of the article). Indeed many of the citation links are broken.

I am having difficulty understanding how this exemplary article is qualitatively different from my submission on Parade Technologies. Any and all guidance is appreciated. SVtrustee (talk) 23:08, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. You're free to help clean up articles that no longer meet our standards, but most editors have little interest in such work, so they remain. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 13:57, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

@SVtrustee: It apears that you failed to comprehend my first reply to you, or at least you failed to read the extremely relevant links I provided. I am providing them to you again:

• Wikipedia is the wrong venue
  for publicity.
• WP:CORP
  gives requiremens that a company must meet before it merits an article here. Your sources are what provides evidence of notability, and your sources so far have not.
• Wikipedia:Golden Rule
  provides an overview of what is expected of your sources. Most of your sources must mee all three criteria simultaneously. Those you have given don't make the grade.

The disucssion above suggests you have not understood any of those three things. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:52, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you User:Anachronist for your continued interest in this topic. Your assessment of my comprehension skills above is the very model of civility and decorum.

In fact I have incorporated many of your original comments into the latest draft of my proposed article. Specifically, I have eliminated almost all citations that link to the company website and company press releases, and eliminated any language that could possibly be construed as lacking in neutrality. These changes, however, are not reflected in the "discussion above" that you refer to; they were made to the original article draft.

Allow me to respectfully address your bullet points above:

1) The proposed article contains no advocacy, propaganda or recruitment as defined in the WP link you provided. The proposed article only contains a simple recitation of facts. I challenge you to specifically identify any advertising or self-promotion in the proposed text. Where reference is made to award nominations, it is backed up directly by citations of public statements made by the independent 3rd party organization that made the award nomination.

2) The talk page of the draft submission now identifies multiple citations from reliable secondary sources, including articles by media outlets that cover the global technology industry (e.g. Digitimes Asia, eeNews Europe). Granted these media sources are not as widely known as The NY Times, but they are well-known within the technology industry. The full text of some of these articles must be accessed behind a paywall, just like copyrighted content from the NY Times, Washington Post and most major media organizations. However the explicit inclusion of the subject company by name in the headlines of these independently-sourced, editor-vetted articles is clear indication that the full article devotes significant space to a discussion of the subject named in their headline.

If your true objection rests on the fact that there is no coverage of the proposed subject in popular mass market magazines or daily media, then it is true that my submission cannot meet that criteria. However if such a standard were uniformly applied across wikipedia, then it would prevent any articles on obscure, specialty or niche topics, rendering wikipedia a rather limited and sterile place. I do not think that is the goal of WP. SVtrustee (talk) 16:51, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:Golden Rule references, and they are harder to find among a soup of citations that provide only mentions. I suggest fixing those issues and resubmitting for review. ~Anachronist (talk

) 18:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I have edited the citations further per your suggestion above, and re-submitted for review.

Thank you for your input. SVtrustee (talk) 18:20, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey, several months ago I wrote an article directly in the main namespace (currently located at Draft:Philip Lintilhac). A community member moved the article to the draft namespace, and left comment/explanation on my talk page, explaining that there was a concern regarding conflict of interest or paid editing. I asked them for help in better understanding how to address the situation, but they stopped responding. Recently I reviewed the WP:COI policy and concluded the following:

• Though I have met the subject in person (I attended one of his lectures, asked him some questions about his work and life, and took a photo of him), I wrote the article from an unbiased, neutral point of view, and therefore my editing in this case is not in violation of WP:COI.
• I added a message on the talk page of the article stating my relationship to the subject, per WP:COI

I then moved the article to the main namespace (which, these days, I have permission to do). And now the cycle seems to have begun again: the same community member (who originally moved it to draft, and commented about COI) has moved the article back to the draft namespace, and added nearly the same comment/explanation on my talk page.

I feel like I'm stuck in a bit of a circle here. Can anyone help me understand what options might exist for this particular article?

Thanks very much for any help you're able to provide Hold your horses (talk) 16:34, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Hold your horses. As an encyclopedia we don't have articles about every professor, only those who have made a large impact in their field. The article as it stands doesn't show that. Take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (academics). StarryGrandma (talk) 18:10, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Hold your horses. Press releases about grants made by his family foundation that do not mention Philip Lintilhac, or mention him only in passing, are of no value in establishing his notability. You are trying to write a biography of Lintilhac, not an article about the foundation that his mother established. Cullen328 (talk) 18:57, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I've been using a registered account for many years and it doesn't have any bans or anything. Unfortunately the username and early edits have some personal details and I'm worried about them getting dredged up. I'd like to continue editing Wikipedia in my areas of interest, but

Hello. A sincere wish to protect personal privacy going forward is a valid reason to set up a new account. Please read

Arbitration Committee explaining your need for privacy. Your email will be kept confidential but will be very useful if you are ever falsely accused of sockpuppetry. The address is [email protected]. Be sure to add an informative header so that your email is not deleted as spam. Cullen328 (talk

) 06:50, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Another thing you can do is request that the earlier edits on your account that revealed personal information be oversighted. See

WP:OVERSIGHT, which specifically notes that personal information is one of the things that can be removed from past history. That's a route you maybe want to explore. Also, as long as you genuinely abandon the prior account, and don't plan to use it ever again, AND you don't use the new account to do anything untowards (like voting in the same specific discussions, further an edit war, give the illusion of more support for something) you're probably fine. If you're just using your new account to edit the same articles in an innocuous way, you're probably within policy on that, though as Cullen328 notes above, emailing ArbCom explaining the situation is a great idea. They will keep your details fully private, but if you do ever get accused of illegal sockpuppetry, you can refer your accusers to ArbCom, who can use your email to confirm that you're operating fully within policy. --Jayron32

16:27, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

If you want to keep most of your editing history but hide just a few edits that reveal personal information, the best approach is to go to

WP:CHU/Simple to request renaming your account, and then contact an administrator like me in email to identify the edits you want to hide. I can hide them from public view but not from other administrators. If you want them hidden from other administrators, you need to find one with Oversight permission. ~Anachronist (talk

) 18:49, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen328, Jayron32 and Anachronist for your advice. (my different IP address now isn't intentional, maybe it's because I'm doing these edits from my phone)

I think that I'll take the option of emailing Arbcom, abandoning the old account and being careful not to imply that it's a different person. Presumably the other option of just renaming the account would mean that my old account name would still appear as the signature for old Talk posts etc?

Thanks, 49.184.134.119 (talk) 22:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I only recently discovered a redlink and created an article. I think they are a fantastic idea. My question is: On Wikipedia, is there an easy way to find out what redlinks for a specific subject are awaiting creation? If there are redlinks in chemistry for example it would be a nice challenge for me to write a few articles. GRALISTAIR (talk) 15:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

GRALISTAIR, I'm not aware of any way we could categorize red links in that way. Wikipedia:Most-wanted articles provides a list of the most common red links, for example, but red links do not have any inherent qualifiers that we could determine their subject from. Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry, however, does have a list of "open tasks" which includes Chemistry articles requiring clean-up, meaningful expansion, or other things you can help with. I hope this is helpful and wish you good luck editing in the topic area ^u^ — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. 15:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@GRALISTAIR: See also Wikipedia:Requested articles/Natural sciences/Chemistry. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:13, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@GRALISTAIR: Should you be interested in helping to redress the gender imbalance here on Wikipedia, you might like to consider whether any of the redlinked women at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Chemists could be suitable subjects for you to write about. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:37, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hmmm - plenty to go at. Establishing notability may be the biggest challenge GRALISTAIR (talk) 22:16, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I was looking through the WikiProject Military History task list and decided to make one of the requested articles (Draft:December 2009 Shabwah airstrike). While awaiting a review, I would like to know if it's notable enough or falls under another article, and also if it's properly sourced. NotDragonius (talk) 22:57, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, NotDragonius. You should update the draft to reflect that Nasir al-Wuhayshi and Said Ali al-Shihri and Anwar al-Awlaki were not killed in that air strike, despite the Yemeni claim. All three of these men were killed in United States drone strikes years later. So, a major question is how significant this air strike really was. Cullen328 (talk) 23:46, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I have updated the draft. NotDragonius (talk) 00:04, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

While researching the actor Louis Guss, I happened upon the WP article here. The image in the infobox really does not represent the actor considering anyone who is familiar with his work knows him post 1970s. In comparison, a Google search clearly shows that the image that WP renders alongside multiple images of the actor in various well known roles are not in keeping: Google images of Louis Guss. I'm wondering if there is a way to upload a better image to represent this subject. I'm not savvy enough to maneuver around all the copyright policies here. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 22:36, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Maineartists, there probably isn't. And really, the article on Guss is so feeble overall that I think your time and effort would be better spent augmenting (and of course referencing) its text than fretting over an image. (And why is "post 1970s" more important than 1958?) -- Hoary (talk) 00:17, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I will be improving the article. That's why I am requesting assistance. Not agreeing with your "probably isn't" for a helpful response here at WP. Post 1970s roles are more representative an image for readers to identify with the actor. Please see above linked reference. Maineartists (talk) 00:22, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Maineartists. When Hoary wrote "probably isn't", that comment was based on the facts. There are only two photos of Guss on Wikimedia Commons, and the other one is much worse. Copyright can be incredibly complex but here is a simplified version applicable to this situation: Any new photo must either be in the public domain which means entirely free of copyright restrictions, or it must be freely licensed for re-use with an acceptable Creative Commons or equivalent copyleft license. We cannot use a copyrighted fair use image to replace a public domain image. That simply is not going to happen because it would be a policy violation. If you want to add a better photo, it is incumbent on you to find one that is not restricted by copyright, since you are the one who cares most about replacing this image. Cullen328 (talk) 01:13, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I endorse Hoary's advice, which I will summarize as "Significantly improve the article first, and only then start worrying about a better image." Cullen328 (talk) 01:23, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I have put an article in draftspace Draft:Aliasing_(factorial_experiments). What is the simplest way for a colleague to find it? Is there an easier route than that indicated in Wikipedia:Drafts#Finding_drafts, which I actually had some difficulty using at first. Johsebb (talk) 04:31, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

If it's a particular colleague, Johsebb, you can of course just link to it, as you would to any web page. If you instead mean people in general who are likely to be interested, then once your draft has been adopted as an article, other articles can link to it and it can be categorized. You've already submitted it for review; please be patient. -- Hoary (talk) 04:38, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@Johsebb: The normal web page link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aliasing_(factorial_experiments), but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aliasing_%28factorial_experiments%29 is safer if you send the url as pure text and not a formatted link. If you only speak to them then you can tell them to write draft:aliasing in Wikipedia's search box. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:50, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you both. I see that searching on draft: aliasing works as long as there's a space after the colon. But other than that, this is just what I want. Johsebb (talk) 02:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Will this account that I signed up on here on the English Wikipedia work across all websites that use MediaWiki or only Wikimedia Projects. Onion1981 (talk) 04:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Onion1981, welcome to the Teahouse. Accounts only work on Wikimedia wikis. That is still around 1000 wikis at Special:SiteMatrix (a few of them are not part of the unified login) PrimeHunter (talk) 05:21, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

To clarify further, Onion1981, any website can choose to base itself on the free MediaWiki software, but only those hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation will have unified logins. Cullen328 (talk) 06:48, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

In the Wikipedia page for US Sodomy laws, I was asked to provide a citation for the source of an addition about an effort in the Texas legislature to repeal their sodomy statute. I don’t know how to do this. The link to the news article with this information is below.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/apr/06/texas-sodomy-law-repeal-bipartisan-support TarzanJohn (talk) 08:20, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Referencing for Beginners. 331dot (talk

) 08:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

A suggestion - work on creating a ref in your Sandbox and only pasting it into the article when it's right. David notMD (talk) 08:44, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Dialuanny0 here again! I may do a GA Review for an article, and I want to know if this websites would be appropriate to use as citations:

https://royalcentral.co.uk/features/murdered-royals-queen-blanche-of-navarre-145083/

https://theroyalwomen.com/2021/11/21/blanche-ii/

https://www.historyofroyalwomen.com/blanche-ii-of-navarre/blanche-ii-navarre/

Dialuanny0 (talk) 03:10, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@

reliable source, either. -- DoubleGrazing (talk

) 06:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dialuanny0, and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is a place for general questions about editing. For particular kinds of questions where there is a specific page, it's much better to ask there: in this case,

WP:RSP before asking: that's where DoubleGrazing got the information about royalcentral). ColinFine (talk

) 09:53, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Does anyone else see suggestions to translate the page you are looking at into different languages in the language section? I don't want to see those, I only want to see the other languages the page is already in. Jag1762010 (talk) 03:20, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Vector-legacy is on the left of every page, while vector-2022 is a little bit terrible for finding these cross-language contents. It's on the upper-right of a page. -Lemonaka‎ 09:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Jag1762010, and welcome to the Teahouse. No, I only see a list of languages and then a single line "Add languages" at the bottom. Which article are you looking at, and how are you viewing Wikipedia (browser, phone, app, etc)? ColinFine (talk) 09:56, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Jag1762010 Welcome to Teahouse! This is a known issue in Vector 2022, see phab:T329570 ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:31, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Do you think my edits to List of English monarchs are good? The reason why i'm asking this question is because my edits to Flags of micronations got reverted. So I don't want that to happen at List of English monarchs. Flag Creator (talk) 10:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

For a start, I see you have provided no edit summaries, so it is impossible to know why you thought your edits were necessary. Please read Help:Edit summary. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@User:Flag Creator I looked at your last edit on that page, and it looks like you swapped the picture of Henry II for another--same painting, but a different photo, rendering the colors a bit differently. Is that generally what you did throughout? Shantavira suggested that you use edit summaries; I'm kind of obsessive about those, myself, adding them for trivial fixes of spelling or typos (I don't think I've EVER just clicked one of my article edits as "minor"). In this case, if I'd undertaken such an involved and multi-step project, I might have considered opening a discussion early in the project on the talk page for that article. You're asking here if people think your edits there are good; you say you're asking because you don't want them to be reverted. Based on the one I've looked at, I have no opinion on the matter. If someone thinks they should be reverted, I doubt that your asking the question here (or there, for that matter) is going to affect someone's decision. My guess is, anybody who goes to the trouble of looking them over MIGHT decide on a case by case basis. Uporządnicki (talk) 11:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

When I submitted a new article for wikipedia consideration, I received a response that new articles were in a queue that might take as long as 4 months to review. And yet the same day I received feedback on the article from AfC editors / reviewers.

Are these separate processes or tracks toward final review (acceptance or rejection) of a new submitted article? If they are part of the same process or track, how are they related?

TIA for guidance. SVtrustee (talk) 14:08, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi again @SVtrustee. They are not separate tracks. Anyone is free to leave feedback on articles that have been submitted, usually in hopes that the submitter will read the comments and address the issues, thus improving the draft during the time it sits in the queue (and perhaps improving the chances it will be approved, while saving the ultimate reviewer a bit of time and effort). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:18, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you this was helpful.

Feedback from an AfC reviewer says "submission declined" indicting not just commentary but a determination of suitability. SVtrustee (talk) 14:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

@SVtrustee, yes, a reviewer both commented on your draft and declined it. Some reviewers will just leave comments and not decline a draft, leaving that to someone else. Some will do both. Some non-reviewers may also leave comments. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:31, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

so reviewers do have the power to decline drafts?

Is it possible to communicate with the reviewer that declined my draft, to solicit explicit feedback or communicate additional information / context?

TIA SVtrustee (talk) 14:35, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

@SVtrustee, yes, that is the role of a reviewer (which is a role folks have to apply for - not just anyone can review drafts). The person who reviewed your draft was AngusWOOF; their talk page is at User talk:AngusWOOF. Note that reviewers are not required to respond to inquiries, though many do. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:45, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Actually if a reviewer makes a habit of not responding to inquiries about their reviews they could lose their reviewer rights. However, I have full confidence that AngusWOOF would respond appropriately. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:18, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

AngusWOOF has in fact responded and provided many helpful suggestions. SVtrustee (talk) 16:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Also, newly submitted articles with obvious issues tend to get reviewed - with a decline - more quickly, because they're easy to deal with. It's the middling cases that take a long time; very good and very bad drafts are the ones which get "fast-tracked". 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:22, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

@SVtrustee: this may sound like nit-picking, but the AfC 'queue' isn't a queue, it's more of a pool. Meaning, drafts aren't reviewed in any particular order, reviewers pick up whatever they want to review, or whatever they randomly come across. Therefore, sometimes you get a draft sitting there for weeks or months, sometimes one is reviewed within minutes of being submitted.

Note also that comments are just that, messages posted by reviewers and others on the draft. Only actual reviews are reviews, and result in either decline, rejection or acceptance, for which you will receive a notification on your user talk page. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

I will add that you can address the reason why a Reviewer declined the draft, and then the next Reviewer may have different reasons. David notMD (talk) 02:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

thank you for that distinction David.

How should I understand the difference between reviewers who comment on my draft in Teahouse vs. the single reviewer (so far) that initially declined my draft article? SVtrustee (talk) 12:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@SVtrustee, I'm not sure what you mean - some folks who answer questions at the Teahouse are AfC reviewers, but not everyone is. Dodger67, for instance, is a reviewer (and an admin), whereas I'm an IP editor with no special roles whatsoever. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:18, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

While I have received feedback from multiple reviewers in Teahouse. only a single reviewer rejected my initial draft (we have since communicated about improving the draft).

Is this because the Teahouse reviewers did not have authority to reject the draft? Was the single reviewer that rejected the draft 'assigned' to my application, so they were the only one authorized to make a binding determination? SVtrustee (talk) 14:23, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@SVtrustee, the Teahouse is a place to ask questions about using Wikipedia. Since reviewers have expertise in certain aspects of using Wikipedia, they may draw on that expertise when answering questions here. They are not acting in their "official capacity", so to speak. They could have reviewed and declined your draft if they wanted to (assuming it hadn't already been declined), but they did not want to. No one is assigned to review drafts - reviewers review what they want, whenever they want. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:29, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

thank you for this further clarification! SVtrustee (talk) 14:30, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@SVtrustee Having a single reviewer repeatedly returning to the same draft is actually not a good idea. If a draft required multiple rounds of reviews, it might end up skewing the draft towards the personal opinions and biases of the reviewer. Multiple (random) reviewers tend to average out any such biases. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:50, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I was looking at the history of the only template (EnzExplorer) that I have created, and saw that there was a tag asking me to add Categories. So I added Category:Enzyme. That seemed OK until I saw that it displayed as a red link. After I changed it to Category:Enzymes it became blue. OK, but I noticed that there are hundreds of articles (not created by me) that display the Category Enzyme as a red link. It will be a lot of work to change all these to Category:Enzymes, so, is there an automatic way to do it, in other words can one do it with a simple redirect? Athel cb (talk) 17:38, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

@Athel cb: There are no articles currently in Category:Enzyme. When you added this incorrect category to Template:EnzExplorer, articles with the template were added to this incorrect category. When you changed the template to use Category:Enzymes instead, articles with the template were added to this category. I don't think the template should be categorizing the articles, so I've moved the category inside the <noinclude>...</noinclude> tags. GoingBatty (talk) 17:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Athel cb (talk) 07:21, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I've changed Category:Enzymes to Category:Enzymes templates, as templates do not belong in content categories. – dudhhr ^talk _contribs (he/they) 17:23, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, I am getting a bit confused while editing and I cannot find a clear answer to this apparently stupid aspects which is bothering me. Does Wikipedia has a standard when mentioning multiple references? E.g. "something something.[1],[2]" or "something something.[1][2]"? Do we use punctuation within refences? Sometimes I see these styles mixed within the same article. Without saying that often people put citation before the punctuation of the main text as "something, something [1][2]." Didiogiorgio (talk) 09:46, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:CITEVAR. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk

) 10:23, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Didiogiorgio! <ref> tags should be placed after punctuation, and there should be no punctuation between them. Wikipedia has a Manual of Style ("MOS" for short) that covers different ways to format information. The specific section for how to format and place reference tags can be found here:

MOS:CITEPUNCT. Feel free to ask if you have any more questions 🙂 ReneeWrites (talk

) 10:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

thank you. I just want to share that even if there might be this reference. Many articles are not respecting it. Next time I will see it I will follow though. Didiogiorgio (talk) 18:44, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi there,

There's this one page on a Wikipedia article I frequent and the page has a slight mistake and obvious mistake in it that's bugging me. I'd love to just move the page to something more precise yet there is no option for moving the page.

All the guides about moving a page involve going to the "more" section near "edit" and the star yet this more section simply does. not. exist. It is very strange. It just doesnt exist. AmandaZu1997 (talk) 16:11, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Have you got a menu to the right of the text, with "Tools" and "Actions" at the top? If so, the next item should be "Move". Try that, if it's there. Elemimele (talk) 16:20, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi there,

The "tools" dropdown does exist next to the star but there is no "Actions" bit. Just the usual "What links here", "Related changes", "Special Pages" etc that was already on the sidebar.

Is there some other issue? Would like some help with this. Thanks AmandaZu1997 (talk) 16:32, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

@AmandaZu1997 which page is it? Some pages cannot be moved due to editing restrictions. What skin are you using? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 16:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Literally every page on wikipedia i go to doesnt allow me to move, and I checked the page I was using and it said moving was allowed to all in the page info. Hmm. The skin I am using i the 2022 vector thing AmandaZu1997 (talk) 16:38, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

You are not autoconfirmed yet(account is four days old with 10 edits or more) so you cannot move pages yourself. 331dot (talk) 16:43, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I see! In that case I'll just make some edits and wait a little while.

Thanks again for the help! AmandaZu1997 (talk) 01:21, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Two further possibilities: (1) tell us what the page is and why you want to change it (2) leave a note on its Talk page saying why you want to change it. Hope that helps. Feline Hymnic (talk) 21:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello there, I am a new editor, and trying to post translation of an existing article, who can help me? Grigor Khachatrian (talk) 15:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@

verifiability, so it's very unlikely that an article from another language will be perfectly translated here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝

 ) 16:37, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Grigor, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please start by reading

WP:42. ColinFine (talk

) 16:37, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey ColinFine, Thanks for your answer, I am going to update the references of the Armenian article with some reliable sources which are internationally known. But in any case when I am trying to submit the translation, it notifies me that I cannot submit it, as I do not have enough experience with translations. Thanks in advance Grigor Khachatrian (talk) 16:45, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello Grigor. That message is I think related to the

backwards. ColinFine (talk

) 22:11, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I assume it's some kind of grade, but I don't know what it means. Would someone please explain? Whaledancer (talk) 23:51, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Whaledancer: Those numbers simply show the net change of length of the article in that edit. Positive means your change made the article longer, negative means you made it shorter. The red or green colors are indicative of positive or negative. The numbers are displayed in boldface for larger changes. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:55, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I clearly have spent too much time on social media, lol. I feel so much better now. 😄 Whaledancer (talk) 00:39, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Whaledancer, further to Anachronist's excellent reply, "indicative of positive or negative" has nothing to do with somehow gaining or losing points or credit of some kind, somewhere. There is a lot of flabby wording in very many Wikipedia articles, and your careful removal of this flab would be a "positive" for Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 00:05, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

That's right. Both vandalism and good edits can have either positive or negative numbers. A green boldface positive number could mean anything, like good sources were added, bad sources were added, a long-winded unsourced screed was added, good content was expanded, or content was replaced with longer vandalism. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:23, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I am stuck and have trouble creating my first Wikipedia article. Where do I start, and how can I help create my first article on Wikipedia? Injury Attornies (talk) 17:23, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

In your edit history there is no record of any attempt to create an article. Did you try? What name? What happened? In general, new editors are advised against attempting to create an article, as lack of Wikipedia expertise makes this harder. If you intend to try, see

WP:YFA on how to create and submit a draft. David notMD (talk

) 18:17, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello Injury Attornies, is there where you started: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Injury_Attornies/Lollypop_Farm ?

Wikipedia's requirement for an article is what's called notability. You'll see the policy covered in the page that

Rjjiii (talk

) 01:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I am not new to Wikipedia but I was gone for years and can't keep up with what's happening here now. So, there is an article I was looking after before my hiatus and I just found out yesterday it was redirected. I learned that it failed the

Yes,

reliable sources about the school. One factor in reliability is independence of the school. Summarize what these reliable sources say. ¶ However, this approach is likely to take a long time and, I'd guess, in the end go nowhere. And therefore: Here, in this message thread, present links to three informative, reliable sources about the school. Experienced editors here will comment on whether they seem likely to support an article. If they seem so, go ahead; if they seem not, stop. -- Hoary (talk

) 01:52, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello Hoary, thanks for the quick reply. I just copy-pasted the one in my sandbox from the history of the article and yes, I would be looking for reliable sources about the school. So I need to know now what supports a notable school (I've read the school outcome notability but it's just over my head now). Maybe if I can find editors who are experts in helping improve school articles, that would be great. Again, thanks! Brother Allen (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Brother Allen, you don't have a draft for improvement -- unless, perhaps, you want to spend a great amount of time, probably to little effect (see Wikipedia:Writing Wikipedia articles backward). You have tabula rasa. So just look for reliable sources about the school, and present them here. (Actually they don't need to be online. The three could include a book chapter or similar.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:26, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello once again Hoary, that's all the advice I need. I have fresh start from now. Cool! Will start to work on it once I set a time for it. Again, thanks! Brother Allen (talk) 03:46, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I've been editing this Draft of Sanket Goel (

@

WP:GNG. In some cases I see your draft focuses more on his teams accomplishment, which is fine, but for establishing notability the article subject Sanket Goel must be the focus. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk

) 11:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @

WP:NPROF, as Shushugah pointed out, and in fact nothing else is necessary to demonstrate his notability. He does not need secondary sourcing to be notable, his highly-cited work is sufficient in itself. BUT, I think you've responded to the reviewers' requests for sourcing by putting a lot of stuff in about his citation rate, h-index etc., which makes the article look very promotional. The citation-rate and index are relevant, but behind the scenes in arguing notability, not up-front in the article (besides which, they are statistics that are impossible to keep up to date, and not defining of his career). I would suggest taking out all the stuff that looks promotional, and convert the article into a straightforward statement of where he's a professor, and what research he has done, listing a few of his highly-cited works. Then comment separately to the reviewers that you are claiming notability based on NPROF high-citations. Do not make the article look promotional. This really rubs reviewers up the wrong way (to be honest, as a general rule, a picture of an academic smiling in a suit, with a mention of the dreaded word "Forbes" is more-or-less a guarantee of rejection). Have a look at the articles on other academics who've been accepted; for example Alison Mary Smith and Alison Gail Smith; these are well-sourced where they need sourcing, give restrained key-literature lists, and they're relatively low-hype, factual articles (despite the undoubtedly glowing achievements of both scientists), which is what you should aim for. Elemimele (talk

) 12:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh, and he's got thousands of citations, not thousands of publications; you need to correct that! Elemimele (talk) 12:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks a lot @Elemimele. I worked on the image and changed it. I've also tried to make the article a bit less promotional. Is there anything else that can be made better. I'm really new to this so please pardon me if I'm not up to the mark. Shashy 922 (talk) 15:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Shashy 922, small points. He's not an alumni. Nobody is. Being singular and male, he's an alumnus. Italicize the title of the book that he edited. In for example {{Cite web |title=Japan Society of Promotion of Science Short-Term fellows 2021 |url=https://www.jsps.go.jp/english/e-inv/adoptlist/data/FY2020/2020_short_2_e.pdf |url-status=live |access-date=1 April 2023 |website=Japan Society for Promotion of Science}} you have a syntax error. Delete |url-status=live unless you also provide the address of an archived copy. HTH! -- Hoary (talk) 23:58, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks a lot @Hoary. I made the changes and deleted |url-status=live in most since there wasn't a

archived address. Shashy 922 (talk) 03:50, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

The name of Aurangabad is Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar why it has been not changed yet? Octahedralnuke (talk) 04:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Octahedralnuke, please see, read, and digest what's written in Talk:Aurangabad. -- Hoary (talk) 05:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I am trying to get a page up called DamnN Hunt but is not happening. This is what i got yesterday. But there are 2 ref that have articles about DamnN hunt. 1 is a newspaper that sells over 50,000 copies a week and the other is a social media website. I don't know what to do ...... can someone please help me. Thanks

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject) reliable secondary independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. Needhelp16 (talk) 23:35, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Needhelp16, you have a number of uses of "ref" tags, but you only have two references. One is to https://myyaak.com/pages/7/ , which currently has no content whatever. Obviously, it's worthless. The other is from something titled The Northern Rivers Times, and it's based on an interview with the creator of the subject of your draft. It's near worthless. Above, you have for some reason parroted the draft needs multiple published sources that are: in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject), reliable, secondary, independent of the subject. This means what it says. Which part of it do you not understand? -- Hoary (talk) 00:04, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

WP:BACKWARD. Cullen328 (talk

) 00:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Needhelp16. I've had a lot of articles deleted here, so I know the pain. Basically, you need at least 3 mainstream sources that aren't affiliated with the subject where the subject is the focus of the article. Google Books and newspapers.com could be of use. If you could find some major newspapers, television shows, books or websites that covered this game, it would your chances immensely. Otherwise, the article is probably going to be rejected. Personally, I don't think the sources are going to be there for this from what I could find.KatoKungLee (talk) 00:38, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I concur that as is, this should be Rejected, meaning that it has no hope of becoming an accepted article. The essential weakness is that the game was launched at one location in March 2023, so it has no public awareness piblished. Given newness, I have to assume you have a personal connection to the game launch, but you have not replied to the query on your Talk page about your COI or PAID relationship. David notMD (talk) 08:52, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Needhelp16, @David notMD Also, most of the article is a how-to. David10244 (talk) 07:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Just to let you know that there has been I suspect an unauthorised deletion proposal on the article Abby Donnelly, probably from the same person previously. Dickie-bow-tie (talk) 22:13, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I believe that anyone can propose an article for deletion if there is an issue. If you do not think that the article should be deleted, go to the deletion discussion page and state your reasons.

199811✶

22:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Dickie-bow-tie, if you want to save that article, then bring forth published, reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to Abby Donnelly. If such sources cannot be found, then it is likely that the article will be deleted. Cullen328 (talk) 01:15, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:GNG. ~Anachronist (talk

) 01:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

subject-specific notability guideline is not a guarantee that an article will be kept. Instead, it indicates that appropriate sourcing likely exists for that topic and that such topics are presumed to merit an article, though articles which pass an SNG or the GNG may still be deleted or merged into another article, especially if adequate sourcing or significant coverage cannot be found. (emphasis added). In the end, it all comes down to the quality of the identified sources, which are mediocre at this time. Cullen328 (talk

) 02:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

In other words, meeting a subject-specific notability guideline is not an end run around the GNG, with the single exception of

WP:ACADEMIC. Guidelines that do not accurately predict compliance with the GNG end up getting discarded, such as WP:NFOOTY and WP:PORNBIO. Cullen328 (talk

) 02:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

+1. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:07, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello I have recently been accused of muddling a wikipedia page by a user who deleted entries of life changing events of a living person, knee surgery which has led to his marriage, as well as refusal of the addition of a counterstatement, after the user has added a statement that alleges abuse. I do hope you could help me in a way where I could edit the page. The user refuses to keep any changes unless biased to one view point, there hasn't been attempts on my side to remove their point but to simply bring an unbiased approach where all sides are heard. There is definite refusal to add anything more than what said user has added. Adding to the fact that both sources provided by myself and the other person are the same, most of it by the mouth of the involved parties and from news sources not unlike the sources used by the other user.

Is there a way I could add all the information without it being permanently deleted to represent one side?

Here is the link to the message: User talk:Adam4R4O Here is the link to the wikipedia page Bob Morley Here is the link to the Adam4R4O (talk) 04:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

EXTENSIVE discussion of Personal life section at Talk:Bob Morley, so best hope is that a consensus can be reached there. David notMD (talk) 09:12, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Last/oldest living polio survivor, last to live in an iron lung. I BELIEVE THIS IS WRONG SINCE I’M TWO YRS OLDER THAN MR. ALEXANDER AND THERE MAY BE OTHERS. I was born in 1944 and had polio at the age of 9 in 1953. I caught Bulbar polio in San Francisco City Hospital where my sister and I were recovering from TB. I had a tracheotomy, was in isolation and lived in an iron lung for several months. I survived to become a broadcast and print journalist,teacher, mother and grandmother. Annenews66 (talk) 08:00, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment, but this page is for asking about how to use or edit Wikipedia. If you wish to make a suggestion on how a particular Wikipedia article might be improved you need to do that on the article's talk page, as we have no way of knowing which article you are referring to. Also you must provide a reliable published source for your assertion, and please refrain from SHOUTing. Thank you. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:12, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Annenews66 The article Paul Alexander (polio survivor) appears to be about continued use, not the oldest person who was ever in an iron lung. The article Iron lung also has a section on continued use that mentions Paul Alexander among others. David notMD (talk) 09:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

help me i dont know what to do...please set all my settings automatically HAMI450z (talk) 23:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Are you having a problem that is specific to Wikipedia? (The message that you have splattered across Talk:Name server suggests otherwise.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:41, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

If anyone's wondering, this (which I have removed). -- Hoary (talk) 09:32, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Are you looking for the preferences at the top of the screen? Depending on the skin it is either in a row or under a person icon.

199811✶

23:45, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, this is my 4th request regarding changing the topic name and the title.. Please we need to:

The Clock Towers instead of أبراج البيت In Arabic the name The Clock Towers to be placed أبراج الساعة Salembahamdain93 (talk) 12:38, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Salembahamdain93: I am not clear what you are asking for. There is no article called either "The Clock Towers" or "أبراج البيت". Please link to the article, and state clearly what change you want to make to it. Ideally, provide a reference to justify the change.--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:02, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Salembahamdain93, maybe your request is about an article at Arabic-language Wikipedia? This Teahouse offers help with problems at English-language Wikipedia. The two Wikipedias are different projects. Maproom (talk) 14:23, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@

non-English sources if there aren't viable ones). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝

 ) 16:34, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@

clock towers, I don't see how any further changes could be justified. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 10:53, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

while browsing the backlog, i discovered that file:ACE2012 table 2 extended.png should not be an image. in this case, it should be replaced with a wikitext table. however, the sole page it appears on, Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2012/Archive 2 is explicitly marked as an archive and should not be edited.

what should happen here? should the image be replaced with a wikitext table, violating the archive's no-edit status; or should the tag be removed from the image itself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antimoany (talk • contribs) 05:20, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Antimoany, you ask three questions. They're not unreasonable, but my answers to them are, respectively: nothing, no, no. This is a non-issue. -- Hoary (talk) 09:26, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hoary i appreciate that it's not exactly a big problem, but this answer raises further questions for me. if the named problem in this case (image should be transcribed into its included article as text) is not a problem, why shouldn't image be untagged? i went into the backlog with the goal of reducing its size. if items that should not be fixed are going to be knowingly included, that's a lot of clutter that makes the job of reducing the backlog, and of judging how large a given backlog is in terms of work that needs to be done, much harder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antimoany (talk • contribs) 11:34, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Antimoany, I interpreted "should the tag be removed from the image itself?" to mean "Should anyone feel obliged to remove a tag that very few people are likely to take seriously and is attached to a file that's very unlikely to be noticed by anyone?" My answer to that was no, and my answer to your question was therefore no. If you're now asking "Should anyone now feel obliged to retain this tag, which very few people are likely to take seriously and is attached to a file that's very unlikely to be noticed by anyone?", then my answer is again no. -- Hoary (talk) 12:06, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, just wanted to ask one question: is it OK to put an AfC draft directly into mainspace without passing review or something? In case you're curious, said draft I am talking about is

@

notability. That particular draft was already re-draftified after another ediitor placed it in mainspace when it was obviously not suitable but it looks better now. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 13:56, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

If you're serious about this, you should start by registering and using an account. One advantage is that it will preserve your anonymity: your IP address suggests that you're in NY State, maybe Fairport; but your username won't be traceable except by a small class of admins. Then you should find a subject that is

notable, in Wikipedia's idiosyncratic sense of the word (click on that blue link to learn how it's used here), and doesn't already have an article on it. Then assemble some references to reliable independent published sources with extensive discussion of the subject, and write your draft basing it on what those sources say. Maproom (talk

) 21:10, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

First, STOP SUBMITING OTHER EDITORS' DRAFTS TO AfC. Yes, I yelled at you. You submitted four other editors' drafts to AfC and all were declined. As you already appear to know, there is a guide for creating and submitting your own draft. It is at Help:Your first article. Per Maproom, first confirm you have valid references, then compose with content sourced by those reference. David notMD (talk) 01:07, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I acknowledge that 74.65.0.58 is an IP account, and it is possible that the submitting of AfCs was done by a different person. If so, I apologize for my accusation. David notMD (talk) 14:50, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I’m confused about the presence of a warning flag on the Pinduoduo article and I thought maybe you could help. I’m an employee of Pinduoduo’s sister company Temu, so I want to ask independent editors here for their feedback.

I understand why the label was first put up, but in the past few weeks there have been many edits made on the article which addressed the issues by cutting more than half the article. I actually made a list of all of the problems with the article that I could spot and submitted them for correction at Talk:Pinduoduo#Request to remove flag. Someone removed all the problematic content (such as paragraphs missing citations) without bothering to address the suggested fixes (such as providing citations or rewrites with a neutral point of view) or removing the flag after the problematic content was removed.

My understanding is that according to

Snowy2000 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It is true that maintenance tags/flags are not meant as permanent badges of shame; in this case, it will be removed when an independent editor evaluates the article for things like tone and content. Editors have done work on the article as you noted, but are under no obligation to remove the tag; perhaps they want other eyes to look at it, or feel more work should be done. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it may take time, please be patient. 331dot (talk) 16:29, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Snowy2000 Article reads like an advert from your marketing department eg. " leverages technology to promote and enable the traditional agriculture industry" and "transitioning to a third-party platform model connecting merchants and consumers across multiple product categories" and "Pinduoduo worked with rural communities to sell unsold produce directly to consumers" and "The logistics system laid the foundations for a next-day, click-and-collect grocery service". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theroadislong (talk • contribs) 16:38, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: There was a proposal to fix all these issues at Talk:Pinduoduo#Suggestions for article improvements to resolve NPOV and Advertising issues. Can you take a look and let me know what you think? An independent editor apparently went through this proposal and most of the cuts but did not address all the suggested new language to fix other issues. The request is now closed because it no longer reflects the current state of the article. Are you suggesting I re-open it or do a new one or something else? Snowy2000 (talk) 18:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Look at my signature: Thank you. User page. Talk. 17:53, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Rgeqgqerg. Your signature is confusing. I recommend that you change it. Cullen328 (talk) 17:58, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Rgeqgqerg, edits like this one, among others, are not at all helpful. If you want to test your signature, you can do so in your sandbox. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Rgeqgqerg: Hello Rqe! As Cullen said above you should change your signature. The custom signature policy specifically states "A customised signature should make it easy to identify your username" which yours does not. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

ok i will change it Thank you. User page. Talk. 18:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I have added my name in small Thank you. User page. Talk. Rgeqgqerg 18:02, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

is it correct now? 18:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)18:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Thank you. User page. Talk. Rgeqgqerg 18:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)?

It still violates the custom signature policy as it is confusing since it doesn't immediately make it clear that your user name is "Rgeqgqerg" but instead that your username is "User page" ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:09, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

It's better, but I think it needs more fixing! Can you change your name "User page" to "Rgeqgqerg", your username? Then you can remove your small username thereafter! Tails Wx 18:11, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

fixed Thank you. Rgeqgqerg. Talk. 18:13, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

what is list of articles needing fixing? Thank you. Rgeqgqerg. Talk. 18:14, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Good job on fixing your signature! Can you specify what articles you want to fix? There's a whole lot of them, like unsourced sections or copy-editing fixes! Tails Wx 18:15, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

If you go to Special:Homepage, you can find suggested articles for you to edit. Thanks, Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 18:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

it says:To enable the newcomer homepage, visit your "Newcomer editor features" settings in Preferences.

Return to Main Page. Thank you. Rgeqgqerg. Talk. 18:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Well that was quick. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:25, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

As in, indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 18:27, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

For discussions around moving, splitting, and disambiguating articles, it's helpful to look at the list of incoming links. If page X is on one or more navigation templates, the "What links here" results for page X can be overwhelmed by articles that link to page X only because they have a navigation template that contains page X. Is there a way to filter Special:WhatLinksHere to exclude links from transcluded templates? Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 14:39, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

For difficult questions like this

WP:VPT is usually a better bet. As far as I'm aware, there isn't: this came 6th on the community wishlist in 2022: https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Results. —Femke 🐦 (talk

) 17:10, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Femke, this is very helpful. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 17:59, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Clayoquot: See User:PrimeHunter/Source links.js. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

PrimeHunter that script is absolutely brilliant. Thanks so much! Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 19:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I am heading a project called Wikipedia Dyslexia Representation Project. The project's goal is to document famous dyslexics and dyslexia representation in the media, in an effort to showcase a greater diversity of dyslexic experiences and increase positive dyslexia awareness. Read more about it on my user page.

Very new to wikipedia and I am wondering where can post to get the word out? What can I do to increase the number of fellow collaborators? Thanks in advance! dysreadingcircuit (talk) 20:18, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Dysreadingcircuit, welcome to the Teahouse. Efforts such as these on Wikipedia are typically organized under the auspices of one or more relevant WikiProjects. Looking at the talk page of Dyslexia (Talk:Dyslexia), I see eight WikiProjects listed as relevant. WikiProject Dyslexia is apparently inactive, but WikiProject Disability is not, and some of the others also might have people willing to help. You could try leaving a post on the talk page of any project you think looks useful, or just outright join one of the WikiProjects and run your own project as a taskforce within it. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:27, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Dysreadingcircuit Just a quick thought: your userpage mentions List of people with dyslexia, but have you also checked the category Category:People with dyslexia and it's many subcategories? Sometimes people not on one of those list articles are still allocated a category at the bottom of their article page. You could check and ensure these are rationalised. Plus, you could also post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red and encourage their participation in writing about women with dyslexia. Hope this might help a bit, too. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:59, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, dysreadingcircuit, and welcome to the Teahouse. While what you are trying to do is laudable, I'd advise you to take care that you stay within the purposes of Wikipedia. You say in an effort to showcase a greater diversity of dyslexic experiences and increase positive dyslexia awareness - and that sounds as if it could veer into

notable subjects, nothing more. Of course you are entitled to choose to concentrate on particular subjects, like any editor; but the subjects still need to meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (which is why List of people with dyslexia is certainly not comprehensive: like most list articles, it is a list of articles, and hence only contains people who are notable in Wikipedia's sense. It is refreshing to see that it is fully referenced, unlike many such articles). ColinFine (talk

) 21:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Specifically: https://patch.com/connecticut/thelymes/east-lyme-native-john-mcdonald-retires-major-league-baseball

I would like to use the claim made in the article, "McDonald graduated from East Lyme High School in 1974." However, the link the Patch article uses is dead, and even that original article (which I tracked down here: https://nationalpost.com/sports/baseball/mlb/former-toronto-blue-jay-john-mcdonald-ready-for-new-chapter-after-memorable-career-im-excited-for-whatever-comes-next) makes no mention of his high school at all.

Thanks for the help!

I would consider the patch.com article a sufficient reference even though the link within that article supposedly to a website that confirms he attended ELHS is dead. Thus, the patch.com ref can be added to John McDonald (infielder) and as a ref for him in Notable alumni at East Lyme High School. While there, consider that the ref for Evan R. Bernstein does not confirm he went to ELHS, only that he "grew up there." Same for lack of confirmations that Sanford, Toth or Walker attended ELHS. David notMD (talk) 02:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice regarding the Patch article!

In the ref for Evan R. Bernstein, the article cited says, "“I grew up in East Lyme, Conn., in a very non-Jewish environment,” he said, noting that he attended the local public school..."; since East Lyme High School is the only high school in East Lyme, is that enough evidence?

I'm working on the other people though :D

Thanks again!

talk

) 20:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@

talk

) 14:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Good enough? Or not? Bernstein is quoted as having attended the local public school. Per the Wikipedia article about East Lyme, "The school district consists of one high school, East Lyme High School; one middle school, East Lyme Middle School (grades 5–8); and three elementary schools." In a strict interpretation, there is confirmation he attened school, but not necessarily the high school. David notMD (talk) 14:41, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I see! I ought to be more careful.

Thank you!

talk

) 22:24, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I'm new to editing and can't decide wether https://tranco-list.eu is notable enough to require an article. It is referenced in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.org , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux ,and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.eu ; It is also linked to in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_authority (though as stated previously, the page does not exist).

Is this notable enough? if not I'll remove the link in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_authority for consistency. :> RSkanin (talk) 22:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

Notability criteria. Nick Moyes (talk

) 22:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Agree with Nick, I really don't think it's notable. A quick search only returns 1 news article which only mentions it once.

https://www.ripplesnigeria.com/similarweb-tranco-others-to-gain-prominence-as-alexa-retires-service-after-25-years/

talk

) 22:37, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, all I found was that and a research paper written by the creators. as this doesn't meet the criteria, I'll edit out the red link from the certificate authority article. Thank you both! RSkanin (talk) 22:39, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

^ and that paper would count as an inside source* RSkanin (talk) 22:41, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I saw some articles with some "In a nutshell" message. How does that work?

JustDoingStuff (talk) 22:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@JustDoingStuff: It is a template you can add to pages. See {{Nutshell}} for the instructions. RudolfRed (talk) 22:42, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Thank you! JustDoingStuff (talk) 22:44, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

JustDoingStuff, maybe you're using "articles" loosely. If so, fine. But NB what the template doc says: "This template presents a concise summary at the top of administration pages." Administration pages: simply, those named "Wikipedia:XYZ" where the XYZ is something or other. Not at the top of articles. So you'll find it atop Wikipedia:Search engine test; but even though Search engine is long and might benefit from some kind of nutshelling process, we won't find the template there and you shouldn't add it there. -- Hoary (talk) 23:14, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I've noticed that there are some editors who are currently editing transgender topics who appear to express certain beliefs that go against mainstream understandings of transgender people - for example, noting on their pages that they are proud of having certain chromosomes and being born a certain way, wholesale reverting good faith edits to transgender related articles, chatting on each other's pages about plans to silo off transgender people's relation to certain topics even when it seems to make no sense, implying being transgender is violent or dangerous, etc. It seems an effort is being made to present minority opinions about transgender issues as fact on a large number of pages.

Are there any sort of standards other than calls for good faith to counter these fringe claims? I have no desire to single out any individuals (or even to spend the majority of my time editing articles about transgender medicine/politics) but it seems to me like people are spending a lot of time on talk pages and article edits simply trying to counter genuinely fringe ideas rather than being able to spend time building out good articles. Is there a sitewide consensus about appropriate ways to talk about transgender people that are in alignment with history and science? Computer-ergonomics (talk) 05:10, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi

it needs to be addressed by administrators, it's probably best left out of the discussion whenever possible. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 06:06, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate the advice. Computer-ergonomics (talk) 06:09, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Computer-ergonomics, according to Wikipedia:Contentious topics, a contentious topic is one that has attracted more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project. Administrators have enhanced powers to deal with any disruption in these topic areas. One of these identified topics is gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. As Marchjuly notes above, Wikipedia welcomes editors with a very wide variety of backgrounds, ideologies and orientations. All editors need to focus on producing neutral, well-referenced, policy compliant encyclopedia content, and that is what should be discussed, rather than the personal beliefs of other editors, unless overt hate or or outright bias against other editors is involved. Cullen328 (talk) 06:36, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia editing is a very complicated why? Vittoria Alessandrini (talk) 08:07, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

It isn't,

reliable sources about a subject. You read these, you digest them, you understand them. You summarize them in your own words, and add the summaries where appropriate, citing the sources. -- Hoary (talk

) 08:35, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

This isn't something you need worry about, Ddanielff. The reviewer who accepts the draft as an article will (or anyway should) also perform this minor chore. -- Hoary (talk) 08:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Is citing a tweet acceptable as a source given that the person tweeting is a notable figure, speaking about himself? under WP:ABOUTSELF and WP:TWEET and WP:TWITTER? Or does there need to be an addition? Adam4R4O (talk) 01:38, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

The reason I ask this is that information has been deleted from a wikipedia article stating that citing a tweet isn't enough, I lined to news sites like Eonline but that was deleted as well so I do need guidance, thank you. Adam4R4O (talk) 01:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:ABOUTSELF gives a general answer to your question. If you provide more details, we can give a more detailed answer. GoingBatty (talk

) 01:47, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Well according to WP:ABOUTSELF this can be cited, as long as the person is talking about themselves, and as long as it's not the only cite. My question was regarding an actor having a knee surgery. He tweeted about it but this is also backed up by CBS news and Eonline, would this be enough to cite as sources? Thank you. Adam4R4O (talk) 02:07, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Adam4R4O: I don't understand why knee surgery would be notable enough to include in an article about an actor. But presuming it is, why not use the CBS News source instead of their own tweet? GoingBatty (talk) 02:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

E! Online. Cullen328 (talk

) 02:35, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

1- It was talked about in CBS news as well, would that be a good source? and if it then do I add the tweet and Eonline.

2- Also following up to that, would popculture.com and daily dot be considered good sources? Since allegations that were covered to that used those sources and said they were reliable good sources. Adam4R4O (talk) 02:39, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

It was a surgery that eventually led to public lashing (fat shaming) as well as led to affect filming. Unfortunately every edit made on this article is deleted as not a reliable source (CBS news, Eonline and Hollywood life), otherwise dailydot and popculture.com are taken as a reliable source and kept, so I was checking. Adam4R4O (talk) 02:36, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Adam4R4O If your edits are being deleted, then I suggest you follow the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle and start a discussion on the article's talk page. GoingBatty (talk) 04:59, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I have attempted that, unfortunately the person editing seems to have bias against the person in the article and with another person they are facing allegations against. They've refused multiple sources such as cbs, or eonline, or tweets or multiple other sources while citing sources similar to those, they've also refused the addition of important videos of the character A defaming character B, while insisting on keeping the baseless accusations of character B being defamatory and refusing to accept the response to that accusation. I did hope there was a way to make it work other than the talk page but that person just edits everything or reverts (within rules) rejection any other additions, that's why I have been trying to learn more as when I resorted to talking I was told that my sources were awful, I was using interviews, conventions of other people as well as Hollywood life and Eonline and CBS (I am not sure if those are awful or not) the other person has used youtube (interview) and daily dot and popculture.com, saying these were perfectly reasonable sources, so I wasn't sure which could be a reliable source or not but there felt like there was inconsistency in what was being said. I apologize for writing for too long. Adam4R4O (talk) 05:17, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:BLPN#Bob Morley & Arryn Zech, then I suggest you continue to participate in that discussion and try to resolve things there. Try to concurrently hold two discussions on essentially the same topic on different noticeboards is counterproductive and confusing. The Teahouse is fine for asking general questions like the one you asked at the beginning of this thread, but your last post has moved beyond that into commenting on the motivation of others involved in the particular content dispute you're having. That kind of approach very rarely gets you very far on Wikipedia, in general, but it's not really something that can be resolved through discussion here at the Teahouse. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 05:34, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I apologize if it's not allowed here, I was just wondering what would happen if talk page didn't reach a consensus. Thank you for referring me to the other talk page I wasn't aware there was a discussion going there. Adam4R4O (talk) 06:00, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I realize now I have posted in it but wasn't aware of the name of the page, thank you. Adam4R4O (talk) 06:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

It's not so much that such a thing can never be discussed at the Teahouse, but rather that the Teahouse isn't really the best place for resolving such discussions. As for what happens if a consensus is never reached, the

drop the stick and move on if pretty much everyone seems to be in agreement that the content shouldn't be added. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 06:16, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Adam4R40: I think the initiation into the Wikipedia community is to propose a change to an article that looks obviously good, have it rejected by everyone else for absurd reasons, and manage to stay and drop the stick (without quitting the project out of frustration or getting blocked for defending your suggestion too zealously). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:42, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Not rejected by everyone. by one person who rejects most (if not all) of suggestions. Adam4R4O (talk) 13:25, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(books)#:~:text=Other%20considerations-,Threshold%20standards,has%20such%20a%20national%20library). Here it is mentioned that "a book included in Project Gutenberg or an analogous project does not need to meet the threshold standards" Does this include the self publishing platform(http:// self. gutenberg.org/) recommended by Gutenberg project too? JaffersonianDude (talk) 07:18, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it includes all self-published works. See

WP:SELFPUB. Shantavira|^{feed me}

08:14, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Specifically in regards to notability, Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Self-publication, just a bit further down the page linked above. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:59, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

what is math YoZhinc999 (talk) 15:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@YoZhinc999: See the Wikipedia article Mathematics. GoingBatty (talk) 15:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Can this draft, Draft:Erin & Aaron, be redirected to the article Erin & Aaron since the article exists? It appears that article was created without knowledge a draft existed. I wanted to do it myself, but I was concerned about any errors. Cwater1 (talk) 05:48, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Cwater1. Any well-referenced content that appears in the draft but not the article can be copied over to the article, attributing the draft in the edit summary. Once that is done, the draft should be deleted, since it would serve no useful purpose at that point. Cullen328 (talk) 05:59, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

How do I request for deletion of the draft? Thank you for helping me so far. :) Cwater1 (talk) 06:05, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Cwater1, please use Template:Db-g7. Cullen328 (talk) 06:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Done. Thank you! Cwater1 (talk) 15:28, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

I am making the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pau_Mueller and I have to improve it.

In one of the prompts, the expert who did the review asks me to put source to the date of birth, so I want to consult you if the social networks, for example, of Pau Mueller could be considered a reliable source for his date of birth or if I should obtain and publish a link to his birth certificate.

In one of the articles that are references to this article I made it is mentioned that she was born in December 2005, but it is true that it does not say the exact date.  Therefore, I would like to ask you for the options I mentioned in the previous paragraph.

Precisely, today I had entered to update the draft, because Pau Mueller has released new singles in these months and also appeared in other media... But regarding the birthday date I still have this doubt and for that reason I thank you because you can tell me what is the most appropriate way to reference the date of birth.

Best regards and thank you! WhiteDog2023 (talk) 14:19, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @

WP:ABOUTSELF. Verified accounts are much preferred. Definitely do not link or cite a birth certificate. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 14:37, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your guidance!

I will update the draft with this reference and new sources. Best regards! WhiteDog2023 (talk) 15:18, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@

this essay. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 16:50, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

How do you edit Wikipedia? KittyCat68 (talk) 17:13, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:TUTORIAL is a good start. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 17:22, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@TitanicSankUnderWater You can try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains. I assume you mean finding reliable sources. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:30, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello there, Is there a place where you can ask for help with finding reliable sources on a topic or is it here? LeGoldenBoots (talk) 14:23, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi again @

Reference Desks. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 14:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. LeGoldenBoots (talk) 14:43, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@LeGoldenBoots - If you meet the criteria, you can use newspapers.com for free with wikipedia credentials. It has access to millions of newspapers and is a major source. Google also has Google Books, which sometimes may have info on what you need. If your article is foreign, try searching in that language and if your article has a foreign wikipedia page, you can check the sources there, which may come of use. You can also check local libraries and local book stores. And of course, various websites might be able to be used and official youtube links could also be a source.KatoKungLee (talk) 18:03, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I wanted to add information to the Cannabis in Uruguay page. I wanted to add, in the commercial distribution section, firstly that originally it was 9% THC in the bag (since it only says it had "relatively low THC content"), and secondly that since 2022 legal cannabis sold in farmacies accross uruguay now has a THC level of 15% which is average (after all this change was made to match the levels found in clubs throughout uruguay) and no longer "relatively low". I also looked forward to adding a picture of the bags it comes in, since the Cannabis in Canada page provides an image of the container cannabis comes in for them.

I'd appreciate help understanding if these are even worthwhile contributions, how to make the edit, add the picture (which I could take myself), and how to provide the source. I have [2] this news report. Jackstone66 (talk) 20:12, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@

talk

) 21:55, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I added a comment of concern in the talk section of the

I'm looking at it now. I would say, if it is only that sentence, let it go. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:38, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I want to write an article about a startup. I attempted to write one from a neutral point of view but as soon as I submitted the draft it was marked for "speedy deletion". Is it because there are not enough third-party sources? Is it too early to create a page for such a startup? Does it have to be in the news? funded? show revenue? etc. Abdul Karim Syed (talk) 23:41, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

reliable sources. Reliability has a number of components, and one of these is independence from the subject. Well, let's take a look at a draft deleted for being promotional: URDER was founded in 2022 with the goal of improving the online shopping experience by making it more accessible, convenient and sustainable. The platform supports local economies and meets customer needs by offering products from a wide range of categories, providing service to customers. My guess is that the name isn't pronounced "You arr dee ee arr" but instead, perhaps rather unfortunately, rhymes with "murder"; if so, it's "Urder". Was/is a major goal not to make money for the people heading it or investing in it? (But anyway, corporate goals are of little concern to an encyclopedia.) Is "the online shopping experience" somehow different from "online shopping", and if so, how? Does "platform" mean company, or website, or what? Which reliable sources say that it supports local economies and meets customer needs, etc? And anyway, why the rush to create an article about a company that might not even be a year old? -- Hoary (talk

) 01:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse @Abdul Karim Syed! Your draft was tagged for deletion because it read like an advertisement. I would create a new draft filling what Hoary said above and not making it very promotional. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 01:03, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

We posted a deletion notice to a very out of date page about a movie that we own, but 7 days have passed and the page has not been removed. What do we need to do? Montana Amazon Redux (talk) 18:42, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Montana Amazon Redux: Who is "we"? Accounts used by more than one person are not permitted. Additionally, this post to the Teahouse is your account's only edit. What movie are you referring to? – dudhhr ^talk _contribs (he/they) 18:48, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm guessing this is about The Misadventures of the Dunderheads, where there has been some interesting recent activity. Specifically, it was PRODded on March 28th by Audiblefeast, and the notice was removed the same day by Donaldd23. This process is outlined at Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Proposed deletion. The next step would be to propose the article for deletion per the instructions here. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:05, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @

WP:PAID - as your post implies that you have some kind of business stake in this topic. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 18:49, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Also, Montana Amazon Redux appears to be a movie title; specifically, the name of a remake of The Misadventures of the Dunderheads. @Montana Amazon Redux, this is not appropriate per our username policy. I highly recommend either abandoning this account or applying for a change of username - I've left instructions on your talk page. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:00, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

In addition to what other people have said, please note that, though you may own the movie, you do not

Deletion (which it may well do: at present it has no independent sources, and there may be none to find) then it can be deleted, but it will not be deleted just because you want it deleted. ColinFine (talk

) 09:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

What's the Wikipedia consensus for what defines a country? Is there even a clear criteria or is it simply something that's voted on and consensus override international majority views? I see Wikipedia call Taiwan a country but Palestine isn't labelled one but instead just called a state. But I know most of the world doesn't recognise Taiwan as a country. Even less so than Palestine. Yet when I look at wiki article on Taiwan and Palestine, the difference couldn't be more stark. Also Taiwan isn't even a full legal state when you really weigh the legal requirements [3] just like Palestine. But they are labelled so differently on Wikipedia. So why can't Palestine also be called a country in wikipedia like Taiwan? What is the rule there?Tudor89manners (talk) 08:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Tudor89manners Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to discuss what Palestine is referred to as, the best place to do that is its article talk page, Talk:State of Palestine(which is the name of the entity that claims Palestinian territory, the name of the entity that controls Taiwan is "Republic of China".). I would highly advise you to review the archives of that talk page as I'm sure you aren't the first person to bring this up. I will also notify you of special rules with regards to contributing about topics related to the Arab-Israeli dispute. 331dot (talk) 08:20, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Judging by the user's edits, I think they're more interested in Taiwan not being called a country. - X201 (talk) 09:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

This page does not exist. The deletion, protection, and move log for the page are provided below for reference. 11:23, 18 April 2023 Fram talk contribs moved page John Samuel Malayalam Writer to Draft:John Samuel Malayalam Writer without leaving a redirect (Unsourced BLP, autobiography, lots of unverifiable info) (revert) Tag: Disambiguation links added (thank) [[John Samuel Malayalam Writer|John Samuel Malayalam Writer]] (talk) 06:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

Policies and guidelines. At present, you are nowhere near close to complying with the relevant policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk

) 07:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

The draft exists here, if that helps: Draft:John Samuel Malayalam Writer. It's not an acceptable WP-article at this time. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:16, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

OP has now moved it back to mainspace. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:30, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, John Samuel. Please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. An article must be based almost entirely on such independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 09:18, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

John Samuel Malayalam Writer I hope you have all content of Draft:John Samuel Malayalam Writer saved on your computer, as it has been nominated for Speedy deletion. If an Administrator agrees with the merits of the Speedy, it will be deleted without leaving a means to salvage the content other than to petition the Admin. The reasons are promotional in tone and complete lack of references. You will be able to try again, perhaps with title "John Samuel (author)" but only if you understand the requirement that all information in a biography of a living person must be verified by reliable source references, meaning what other people have written and published ABOUT Samuel. David notMD (talk) 10:49, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Is it possible to link other X-pedia pages to a real Wikipedia pages? For example, if I want to link a coding-based-pedia to a regular page of this site. I feel this might help people with finding pages with more detail on other X-pedias. I am unsure if this is against the rules to to the fact most pages have linked to other X-pedias that are owned by the same people. 2600:1700:7668:8010:7583:F09B:734F:8165 (talk) 01:19, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I can't tell if you want to edit a Wikipedia article to add a link to an "X-pedia page", or if you want to edit an "X-pedia page" to add a link to a Wikipedia article. It's also not clear what "X-pedias" are. Could you please give a specific example? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:50, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

If you mean like in an "External links" section, see

WP:LINKSTOAVOID #12. For example, articles on Star Trek topics sometimes link Memory Alpha. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 06:52, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I believe the OP is talking about other wikis, which, in that case is a no. As all wikis are edited by everyone, they cannot be used as a reliable source.

(talk)

15:03, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

But a link in the other direction might be OK, depending on the policies of the other site. David10244 (talk) 11:50, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

me want make one of me 207.228.111.53 (talk) 19:44, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

It is strongly advised that you don't. See

WP:YFA for creating a draft article for review. RudolfRed (talk

) 19:53, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

You may want to read:Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Also read

WP:42. If other people are not writing about you, not going to happen. David notMD (talk

) 02:06, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Fluency in English is very helpful when writing a draft about anything at en:WP, but as mentioned, please don't write a draft about yourself. David10244 (talk) 12:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Asking for a friend...no really. Interested in submitting/creating a listing for a semi-well-known author and celebrity in the Asheville NC area. 69.77.138.82 (talk) 01:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi 69.77.188.82. Wikipedia doesn't have "listings" per se; rather it has

Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Try taking a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for some general information on Wikipedia. You might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing since those also contain information that you might find helpful. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 01:31, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

69.77.138.82, your friend should read

WP:AUTHOR; unless the "semi-well-known author and celebrity" meets at least one of those, an article about him or her is unlikely to be accepted. Finding and citing a number of reliable, independent sources about the person is the most crucial step, as these are the backbone of any article and no successful article can exist without them. Deor (talk

) 12:15, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I am a first time user and used sandbox to write a new article. When I was finished I press publish which I believe sends it to the editors for checking. I now cannot find the article anywhere and have not received any notifications about it. I'm not sure if it has been rejected or lost. RockyHistory (talk) 04:30, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi

page history. If you find what you previously created, you can copy-and-paste that content into a new draft, and you can then submit that draft for review when you think it's ready. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 04:54, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I think the OP is talking about Draft:Benjamin T. Jones, which has been speedy deleted by administrator Jimfbleak. Lectonar (talk) 12:45, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

• autobiography policy. To write about yourself you must set aside everything you know about yourself, all materials you and your associates put out, and only write based on the content of independent sources. 331dot (talk
  ) 12:57, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I need help to create a wikipedia page, yesterday I did create a TALK page I PUBLISH IT and today I got a message that the page doesn't exist, that it was EREASED I got a kind of message but I don't understand what does it means. I did try to create the page again and I got a warning message about trying to create again a page that was EREASED. Can somebody help me? Contact Aesus (talk) 13:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@Contact Aesus This Teahouse edit is the only one this account of yours has made and there is no associated Talk Page where messages to you would be posted. Were you not logged in when you saved/published your draft: and where was the warning message posted? Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:17, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Aesus Packaging Systems was the deleted page. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:20, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Contact Aesus, welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately, there are a few problems I see here. First of all, you tried to create an article in the Talk: namespace, which is only for discussing improvements to existing articles. Your new article would be better placed in the Draft: namespace, at Draft:Aesus Packaging Systems, for example. This is why your page was deleted.

However, I do not recommend that you try to create your article there. Looking over the content of the deleted page (at Talk:Aesus Packaging Systems, for those without admin vision), the tone was entirely promotional, which is not acceptable for Wikipedia. It reads as a product directory for your company, not a neutral encyclopedia article. There are more problems relating to your username and the like, but I'll move that conversation to User talk:Contact Aesus for now. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:22, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey guys, My friend made an edit to a page but there was a COI and the edit was removed how to address it? Women in the workforce edit date 16:03, 20 March 2023‎ Kholizio (talk) 13:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Kholizio, welcome to the Teahouse. If your friend has a conflict of interest and wants to add information to an article, the proper thing to do is to make an edit request on the talk page of the article. They can use either the {{edit request}} template or the Edit Request Wizard. An uninvolved editor will then look at the information and decide whether the edit should be made. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:27, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @

WP:PAID policy, which says that editors should not add material if they have a conflict of interest but should instead make an {{edit request}} on the Talk Page of the article so that others without such a COI can judge whether the material should be incorporated. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 14:28, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

<Potential copyvio removed> Rlfictionbook17 (talk) 14:42, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @

here. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources

.

If you are the subject being discussed here, you should also read

WP:AUTOBIO. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 14:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Rlfictionbook17 (talk) 14:49, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@Rlfictionbook17, unfortunately, it seems you copy-pasted the above from the subject's website, with minimal rewording. It's very likely a copyright violation. I'm afraid I'll have to remove it (and go refresh my memory on how to request revdel). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:00, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

That's mine! Again an interest conflict? I'm contributing facts to the conversation. My first book was published in July of last year, yet Wikipedia has not yet included it. What happens once two more follow? Please let me know who I'm up against. Wikipedia ought to be used to promote knowledge, right? Rlfictionbook17 (talk) 15:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@Rlfictionbook17, please re-read what I posted above. Wikipedia hosts articles on notable subjects. If either you or your books become notable by our standards, an article will then be warranted.

Also, read

Donating copyrighted material to get an understanding of how to donate copyrighted material to Wikipedia, including text. The website has an incompatible copyright notice; that can't be circumvented by signing up for an account and declaring yourself to be the copyright holder. This is a legal issue. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 15:18, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, is there any wikiproject that contains users looking for collaboration for ce? 456legend(talk) 06:35, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello 456legend. What do you mean by "ce"? Combustion engineering? Common era? Continuing education? Cheat engine? The element Cerium? Consumer electronics? Or possibly copy editing? You need to be unambiguous when you ask a question. Cullen328 (talk) 06:48, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328.Oh I am really sorry for the confusion. Here ce was supposed to be copy editing. I usually use this term in my edit summary, so that was carried here. Sorry for that. 456legend(talk) 07:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

In my own edit summaries, I prefer things along the lines of "Fixing grammar abomination." Uporządnicki (talk) 14:44, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@AzseicsoK - If I were you, I would not use such an edit summary, as it's overly negative. (If I were you, I would also make it so my signature contains my username, making it easier for people to identify me in discussions.) casualdejekyll 15:48, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

In that case, 456legend, I suggest that you check out the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. Cullen328 (talk) 07:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @Cullen328 for the input. Hopefully this will help. 456legend(talk) 07:24, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, this is my first time editing Wikipedia and I decided to edit the Okawa Elementary School page because it looked like a lot could be added to it. I want to add an info box that lists the deaths (and other things such as the location) that resulted from the tsunami hitting the school, but I don't know if it would be ok to list the deaths since the article is about the place and not the event and that wouldn't be fit.

Would it be ok if I added it anyways? Or should I instead change the article title and writing for it to cover the event instead of the school, such as "Okawa Elementary School Tragedy"? The event that happened to the school is referred to as a tragedy by many sources. I also feel like the main focus of the article is about the tragedy instead of the elementary school itself, so it would be more fitting. Or should I just not add the deaths to the info box? Thanks. Igor60e (talk) 05:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Igor60e, few would dispute that the school's destruction was tragic, yet "tragedy" is a subjective matter. I think it would be better to use another word ("flooding", perhaps?) if this is moved. In its current state, the article tells us: "74 of its 108 students [...] were killed in the tsunami". Are you proposing to list the 74? Ninety-seven died in the Hillsborough disaster (itself a surprising title, come to think of it); but they aren't listed. -- Hoary (talk) 05:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Igor60e, changing the title of an article and rewriting it to be about something else is regarded as hijacking, and is not accepted. Maproom (talk) 09:15, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

But Maproom, if an editor believes that the overwhelmingly major notability of a school is that on one occasion most of its pupils died within that very same school (and not a namesake elsewhere), then rewriting and retitling the article accordingly doesn't seem what I'd call hijacking. It's not necessarily the right thing to do, and this probably isn't the best place to propose doing it, but I don't find it an outrageous proposal. Igor60e, what you might do is create an expanded section about the flooding in your sandbox, and when you think it's more or less done, ask if (A) it should be added to the existing article (and if so, whether it should retain the current title or get a new title), or (B) be spun off into a separate article. -- Hoary (talk) 12:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

But the article isn't really about the school, it's about fallout from the event, which is covered at 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. I'm not sure this shouldn't just be merged into that article. Valereee (talk) 13:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I can see why the drastic change to the article can be seen as controversial, so I will follow Hoary's advice on working on the article in my sandbox and I probably wont revisit the issue for simplicity sake. As for merging the article, the article as of now is definitely in that state where it would be considered but in the future I'm planning on adding more to distinguish it from the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami article. Thanks for the discussion Igor60e (talk) 17:32, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I am searching for a editor to help me to improve my article, enabling me to submit it for revision. Thanks in advance. Noobsaiboth (talk) 14:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Noobsaiboth, welcome to the Teahouse. Since Draft:Ararat Aleksanyan is about an Armenian artist, the folks most likely to be interested are those at WikiProject Art and WikiProject Armenia. You're free to leave a note on the talk pages I've just linked. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:49, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Article now deleted for blatant copyright infringement. Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:12, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh dear. @Noobsaiboth, please don't copy text from other sources into Wikipedia, except in very limited cases. You should build an article by finding reliable sources, summarizing them in your own words, and citing them. Maybe this section from the essay on close paraphrasing will help. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

I have requested changes to HE Justin Suns wikipedia page for awhile now and I have not gotten any response. It is a closed wikipedia page so is there anyway we can speed up the approval process or I can get feedback. I am just trying to update the page to better reflect current events surrounding him and add picture. Thank you so much and I am looking forward to hearing back. MelfarraTron (talk) 17:36, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

You already got a response that the image was copyrighted. They responded after 20 minutes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Justin_Sun#Extended-confirmed-protected_edit_request_on_17_April_2023

talk

) 17:42, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@

PalauanReich, they have two other, open ones further up the page. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 17:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't see that. Do you think we should unprotect it. Why was it protected in the first place

talk

) 17:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @MelfarraTron, welcome to the Teahouse. There's not really a way to speed up the process, but what could help is to pare down and/or split up the two edit requests you still have pending so that they're more manageable by volunteers who stop by to check. If someone only has, say, ten minutes to work on edit requests, they'll probably choose to fulfill five two-minute requests rather than a single ten-minute one. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:45, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

e/c Your edit requests amount to completely re-writing the article, you are more likely to succeed if you make a smaller number of edit requests at a time. Theroadislong (talk) 17:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@

talk

) 17:54, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@

PalauanReich, that is probably not something they should be doing, since they are a paid editor. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 17:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

As long as he follows the guidelines, I think it should be fine. The edit requests don't look promotional

talk

) 17:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I strongly disagree User:MelfarraTron has a conflict of interest so should NOT edit the page directly. Theroadislong (talk) 17:58, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't mind if I am allowed to directly edit it or get approval. I just would like my requests to have some sort of response and input or be approved. They have been at a stand-still for nearly 2 months now. They aren't promotional either and are backed by valid sources so directly applying edits would be great.

I will wait the 3 days though and see if I am allowed to make direct edits, regardless I am fine with whatever process is given to me. As long as that wikipedia page is being properly updated. Thank you for the responses everyone! @

PalauanReich@Theroadislong MelfarraTron (talk

) 18:17, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:NYC_Care&oldid=1146299375

I would appreciate your time and patience on this little problem. If I have not submitted the new version, what can I do in order for you guys to review it? If it is submitted, what is the rough timeframe for it to be reviewed and published?

Thanks again. Yumisebasara (talk) 18:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @

Draft:NYC Care has not been submitted for review. I'll place the appropriate template on it for you, if no one else beats me to it. Confusingly, there's a copy of the draft on your talk page, User talk:Yumisebasara; I'd recommend removing that. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 18:15, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

All done. I've also added a References section and the {{reflist}} template. One nitpick, @Yumisebasara - references should be placed after punctuation, not before. The current wait time at AfC is about four months (at the most, not average). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:20, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

If there is a better section to raise this concern then please refer me to it. Thank you.

I read the ‘did you know’(dyk) section daily. I’m seeing some “Facts” that look to me as their purpose is promotional and manipulating the dyk intention.

Example today: “…that the 2018 book The Longevity Diet claims that a "fast-mimicking diet" increases lifespan and healthspan?“

Basically a ‘claim’ is made in a book about increasing lifespan… better rush out and buy?

There are other ‘dyks’ that seem to be subtly drawing attention to a side of current political situations.

Example: ”…that Rihanna and Dua Lipa participated in #BlueforSudan to bring attention to the 3 June 2019 Khartoum massacre?“

The hashtag really stands out, and this looks to me like it’s associating desirable celebrities with a political topic to add favourable weight… or promote as you might say.

@Link to screenshot of todays ‘did you know’ Niveknage (talk) 19:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Niveknage, welcome to the Teahouse. Discussion of the DYK process takes place at Wikipedia talk:Did you know. If you're curious, you can take a look at Template talk:Did you know to see all of the current nominations and the discussions taking place about them. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:17, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Should names of songs , i.e.

@Adeeta, song titles are styled with quotation marks. See this section. When guidance is confusing, another trick is to find a featured article and see how they did it. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:23, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks so much random IP human! Adeeta (talk) 21:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello Teahouse,

I am currently writing an article and I have gathered multiple sources. Some of them are books, some of them are journals, and some of them are websites.

Right now, I use sfn (in-line citation) and cite book (at the end in the "References" section) for the books I used, and <ref name = .../ > (in-line citation) for the journal articles and the websites. Am I doing this correctly?

This is my very first "long" article, and I am not sure if I am describing my problem clearly. I wonder if there a place where I can request other Wikipedians to read my draft in my sandbox?

Many thanks! -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 19:41, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Clarification: I am putting all the books in the "Bibliography" subsection under the "References" section, and I am putting all the in-line citations of the book together with the in-line citations of websites and journals together in the "Citations" subsection under the "References" section. I am not sure if I am doing this correctly, it feels weird to me. TheLonelyPather (talk) 19:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@TheLonelyPather: Welcome to the Teahouse! Are you referring to User:TheLonelyPather/sandbox2? In general, it looks OK to me. The page is included in Category:User pages with reference errors, so there's something that's not quite right. I also suggest using |language= and |trans-title= for each reference that is not in English. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi GoingBatty:

Thanks for getting back to me! Yes, I am referring to User:TheLonelyPather/sandbox2. Thanks for letting me know! TheLonelyPather (talk) 19:53, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: I have one more question. If I am referencing a journal article for *multiple* times (like, 15+), should I put it in the "Bibliography" subsection along with the books and do a sfn for each time I reference it, or should I just use the inline <ref>{{cite journal|... and leave it be? TheLonelyPather (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@TheLonelyPather, neither one. The biblography section and "sfn" are used to cite different pages within the same long source. Journal articles are usually short enough so that isn't needed. Instead just reuse the citation as explained at Wikipedia:Citing sources#Repeated citations. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:35, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! TheLonelyPather (talk) 21:57, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

One thing I want to say is that there are several anonymous people out there my theory was that anonymous people are either a bunch of idiots who don't understand or an underaged child since I revert things in good faith from the wrongs that Anonymous have done like the short "Bring Me The Head Of Charlie Brown" where an anonymous put MGM IN THE DISTRIBUTOR, Anonymous put the opening of the movie "Weird Science" on the cut out page even though the opening uses traditional animation, someone put up a fake company called "Toshiba Vestron Video" in the OLM Inc article (an anime company that made pokémon) and etc. also that anonymous people access wikipedia more than an account created, they make me angry for doing nonsense things and now what are you going to do with anonymous people? LeronJomes (talk) 14:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I need to stop them too! what are you going to do? LeronJomes (talk) 14:41, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, LeronJomes, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please don't fall prey to prejudice: while some anonymous edits are disruptive, many are not, and there are some long-term contributors who do good work, but who choose not to register an account. Conversely, if you look at

WP:AIV, and through its history, you will see that there are many registered accounts that get blocked for vandalism. ColinFine (talk

) 16:32, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@LeronJomes - Inquiring minds want to know - are you over 18? You don't have to say if you don't want to, but the reason I ask is that I feel like you might be interested in reading our guidance for younger editors. casualdejekyll 16:48, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Additionally, you say that your home wiki is Portuguese, but you don't appear to have ever edited the Portuguese Wikipedia - have you tried contributing there? casualdejekyll 18:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm Brazilian I've never done any Portuguese Wikipedia editing but in the near future I might do LeronJomes (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I usually edit wikipedia in English LeronJomes (talk) 22:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi again @LeronJomes. There have been many proposals to ban IP editing on English Wikipedia (which I think is what you mean by "anonymous"), but none have been successful. So far, only Portuguese Wikipedia has passed such a proposal. See here for a summary of past discussions on English Wikipedia, and read the instructions at the very top of the page if you want to try such a proposal again. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

WHOA this was pretty tense when I found out that anonymous was never extinct on wikipedia LeronJomes (talk) 15:19, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

except that it was extinct in my language wikipedia (portuguese) LeronJomes (talk) 15:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

What is COI stance on surname articles like Kellerhoff 122.59.183.243 (talk) 20:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. Unless you're creating the article so that you can cram it full of the names of your immediate relatives, I think COI concerns are minimal. You're always free to simply put a COI statement in your edit summary, though, and let others decide. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:28, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. I'm not quite sure what you are getting at. If someone with that name edits an article about themselves, that would be a strong

Reliable Sources, and not blogs or other user-generated sites lacking any form of editorial oversight. Does that help address your question? Nick Moyes (talk

) 21:28, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes both of you have helped with addressing the question, thanks! 122.59.183.243 (talk) 22:22, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

what is your name Trevor Maqashalala (talk) 21:53, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Trevor Maqashalala. I cannot understand what you are saying. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Please clarify. Cullen328 (talk) 22:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Trevor. I too do not know what you are asking. But I can tell you that the sandbox that you have submitted for review has zero chance of being accepted. Please read

WP:YFA, WP:notability and WP:autobiography. ColinFine (talk

) 22:23, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I think you can be more successful if you contribute in other language that you speak. English Wikipedia is not the only Wikipedia. There are other language Wikipedias as well.

talk

) 22:34, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I am a member of the Baha'i Faith, which forbids viewing images of our Prophet, Baha'u'llah. While I was able to use a provided line of CSS to block all images on Baha'u'llah's page, the image still appears when I mouse over the link, or search for it in the search bar. Is there any way to stop it from appearing (apart from removing the image or placing another above it, which would fall under vandalism)?

Sorry if this is not a good place to ask Education-over-easy (talk) 23:27, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Education-over-easy. You can hide links to the article with this in your CSS:

body a[href="/wiki/Bah%C3%A1%CA%BCu%27ll%C3%A1h"] {display: none;}

If there is no link to mouse over then you don't get a popup with the image. The image in search results is linked to the article so it also hides the image there. If you actually want to read the article then you can for example enter its exact name in the search box, or a redirect like

Bahaullah. PrimeHunter (talk

) 00:07, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Why many Reverted Vittoria Alessandrini (talk) 08:08, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Which ones do you have questions about? I see this edit was reverted:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Flood_geology&diff=prev&oldid=1148143141&diffmode=source

But I'm not sure what you were aiming for with the edit? Regards,

Rjjiii (talk

) 08:32, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

WP:BRD may be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 08:42, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

The great majority (all?) of your edits consist of changing sentence structure gramatically, often to no better, many to worse, and so you are being reverted by many different editors. If the meaning of content as written is clear, do not continue to make changes to your preferred sentence structure. Instead, consider adding referenced content to articles in need of improvment. David notMD (talk) 08:48, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

You also seem not to be filling in the "edit summary" for your changes. These summaries are important to us. But they are also useful to yourself: they help sharpen your own mind as an editor about describing what you are trying to achieve in the edit. You might even consider writing the edit summary as the first thing you do in your edit, and only afterwards doing the edit itself to achieve your described purpose. Hope that helps. Feline Hymnic (talk) 09:32, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

You also substitute words. "Compliance" and "cooperation" (for example) are not identical in meaning. David notMD (talk) 12:56, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@David notMD Working to build edit count, I'm sure we can all guess... weird edits. David10244 (talk) 11:57, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@

probably just thinks that they're making corrections. Nothing wrong with grammar edits, as long as they're actually grammar edits. Not every editor has a perfect grasp of English - I think that's what's happening here, personally. casualdejekyll

13:31, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@

Casualdejekyll You're right; I apologize to @Vittoria Alessandrini. Sorry. David10244 (talk

) 06:25, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I had written a contribution on this Welsh writer, who has had international success and whose most recent work Lost Boys and Fairies (for BBC) is currently filming in Cardiff and has had widespread media attention. I have extensively sourced the article with 42 external references, however the rejection states not of significant coverage or lack of references, neither of which is accurate. Look forward to hearing more on why this article was rejected. Caerdyddcymru (talk) 05:51, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Please don't post the same question in multiple places – this has been answered at the AfC help desk. --bonadea contributions talk 06:57, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Also, a case now open at

WP:DRN. -- DoubleGrazing (talk

) 07:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Apologies for this, and thanks for highlighting. :-) Caerdyddcymru (talk) 07:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Long time reader, first time making an account. I was wondering if it would be an issue editing articles at my school on my school computer (with this account) as the IP address has been blocked for vandalism (as you can imagine many high schools are). Thank you! Oddvio (talk) 02:17, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello. You're good. Making an account like you've done is exactly the right thing to do in your situation. Take care,

Rjjiii (talk

) 04:22, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@Oddvio - You are most likely fine, but sometimes in severe cases IPs can be "hard-blocked", which would require an IP-block exemption for your account if you wanted to edit under. Therefore, if you encounter any issues with being unable to edit at school with your account, you should request an exemption using the Unblock Ticket Request System - however, if you don't have any issues right now, then it's probably not necessary. casualdejekyll 17:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Should be fine, most IPs are only blocked from editing as a non-account user, so using an account should be fine. FusionSub (talk) 09:31, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

My best guess is that accounts would be allowed to edit, but if someone with an account vandalised, you may be blocked for 24 hours as you share the IP of a vandal account. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 10:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I am trying to add "Matthew McAdow" as a page on the website (Cincinnati Sports Writer in 25+ newspapers across Ohio). How can I get this added? Matthewmcadow (talk) 11:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't have pages, it has articles on

WP:AFC, being a writer for 25+ newspapers doesn't necessarily make them notable in Wikipedia terms though. Theroadislong (talk

) 11:33, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Your First Article. 331dot (talk

) 11:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

talk

) 13:01, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia tags all external links as nofollow. You will not get 'quality backlinks' here. Adding links to your site will not help your SEO efforts.

MrOllie (talk

) 13:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

How would I cite the same source twice in the source editor? LeGoldenBoots (talk) 14:21, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

WP:REFNAME. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs

) 14:23, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. LeGoldenBoots (talk) 14:24, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

My understanding of SNGs is that if a subject meets the listed criteria, it would most likely also pass GNG. But I also read that it cannot override GNGs. So what is the point of these guidelines if it is made redundant by GNG. From what I know, SNGs are just

@

WP:NACADEMIC, that actually "overpowers" GNG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 07:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:NBUILD by virtue of that listing alone. -- DoubleGrazing (talk

) 07:51, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

Carpimaps the point about SNGs not overriding GNG actually works in the reverse direction. If a subject passes GNG then not passing an SNG cannot block the article's existence. A fairly frequent example is if a person becomes a candidate for political office, that is usually insufficient to pass the SNG for politicians. However if the person is already notable for some other reason that passes GNG then the fact that they don't pass NPOL is irrelevant. Roger (Dodger67) (talk

) 12:56, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

One example: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kathy Barnette (3rd nomination) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for all the answers! So my new understanding is that if a subject meets SNGs, sources are almost always guaranteed to exist, removing the need to look for sources.

talk

) 13:56, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

Carpimaps, you'll need to look for sources eventually, to base the article on, but at least you know in advance that sources are likely to exist. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 14:09, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

If it comes to an afd, saying "there's probably sources somewhere" doesn't usually cut it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:31, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm thinking about having an article about Dulce Cine www.dulcecine.com since we're doing works that are having impact locally in Uruguay but also internationally (the best example is our short film "Antes de Madrid" that had its international premiere at the Berlinale, and now is having a very good distribution route worldwide.

Would you please help me with how may I approach this? Thank you UP.FACUNDO (talk) 12:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

conflict of interest

you present, you are not necessarily the best person to write about your company.

Please read the

paid editing policy. 331dot (talk

) 12:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

You will find advice on notability of organisations at

WP:NCORP, and you also ought to read about conflict of interest. - David Biddulph (talk

) 12:17, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:PAID

and make the mandatory disclosure.

The first step to any Wikipedia article about any subject is to find sources that are (1) independent of the subject, (2) reliable, and (3) deal with the subject at length. I did a quick online search for "Dulce Cine" and found no such sources, but I cannot speak Spanish and I am not familiar with reliable sources in the cinema industry, so I would not be surprised to learn I missed something. For "Antes de Madrid", I did not find anything myself, but there is a page on German Wikipedia. That does not guarantee an article would be acceptable on the English Wikipedia (guidelines vary across projects), but it does include one potentially-useful source: [4] (it is not perfect by any means, but at least it’s a start).

Could you share with us the three best sources you can find that meet the criteria above for either the company or the film? (See

WP:BACKWARD). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)}

12:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for replying and all your comments, I think I can do that but for sure those sources aren't going to be ideal and I also read the comment made by David and I'm realizing that it may be better to not write about Dulce Cine myself and wait to get that done by others like it happened with the short film. The thing about that article you found is that it doesn't mention Dulce Cine as its production company neither the associated production companies, and I have the fear that it gets abandoned only in the German language and without being properly updated (now the short film has more international recognition) Thanks again for replying both of you and I hope there is an easy solution for this... even if I cannot write Dulce Cine article, at least I would want Antes de Madrid to be a better article... UP.FACUNDO (talk) 16:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I have a UN spreadsheet of all the Lebanese municipalities with their updated coordinates. Instead of all 1000+ coordinates individually, is there a program or bot that would help me with this or speed up this process. Also, is this even a good edit to all these pages? Here is the spreadsheet.

@

PalauanReich With the caveat that I have no idea if this is a good idea or not, you can try asking at Wikipedia:Bot requests. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 17:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:BOTREQ

. Here’s my $0.02 anyway.

First, you should get consensus for the changes - adding the coordinates is likely not controversial, the only question is whether the UN spreadsheet is a reliable source for it. Note that we do not care that those are the "official UN coordinates" - if anything, we would rather take the coordinates from the Lebanese government, unless there are border disputes etc. The spreadsheet you linked is from the refugee agency and it gives "UNDP / Arabia GIS" as the source of its geoloc data. Given that arabiagis.com is an expired domain and UNDP is another UN agency with no clear place to look for the geoloc info, I am not sure that’s reliable. You could ask at

WP:RSN

.

Assuming you obtain that consensus, the part of the bot that reads the spreadsheet would probably be trivial to write (well, trivial for anyone with some data science background at least). The hard part would be (1) mapping the municipality name in the spreadsheet to a Wikipedia article, and (2) deciding how to edit that article. One possibility would be to only edit articles whose name matches exactly the Municipality Name_EN column, and of those only edit those who have an {{infobox settlement}}, to add or modify the parameter coordinates. I have no idea if that covers almost all articles, or just a tiny fraction of them - a dry run (i.e. having the bot tell which articles would be edited, but not actually performing the edits) would be a good idea. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 17:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice

talk

) 17:18, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

I wrote Miss All Nations. The page was up for close to a week with no issue and was fine this morning. I went away for a few hours and the page was speedily removed before I could even see it.

Where can I discuss this or at least see what the page even had on it? I have no idea what the actual issue was because I can't see the article and I don't want to re-create it and have the same issue again.

Thanks KatoKungLee (talk) 16:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@KatoKungLee, you've already asked the deleting admin and the person who posted the notice on your page about it. That is the correct thing to do. Give them some time to respond. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @199.208.172.35 KatoKungLee (talk) 16:40, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@KatoKungLee: In addition to the other (correct) replies, clicking on the red link for the deleted page brings up the deletion log entry, which says it was a copyright violation of this link.

If you indeed copied large swathes of that external page into the article, but you don’t understand how that’s a problem, feel free to ask here.

Sometimes, external websites copy from Wikipedia (which is allowed under certain conditions) and the original Wikipedia article can be flagged as a copyright violation. However, here, I see that the Wikipedia page was created in April 2023, but archive.org has a copy of the external page from February 2022 with (at a glance) the same content. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 16:49, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Tigraan - I did not copy anything to my knowledge and I have no idea what line or lines were problematic. I also cannot compare the two pages because there's no way for normal users to see the original deleted page. The other issue is that a lot of my sources were foreign, and are going to require some work to track down due to being in different languages.KatoKungLee (talk) 16:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

In that case, let’s wait what the deleting administrator has to say. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 17:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Ping to @Jimfbleak who deleted it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:34, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, KatoKungLee. The article you wrote violated the copyright of this Wordpress page. Cullen328 (talk) 16:49, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328 - I did not copy anything to my knowledge and I have no idea what line or lines were problematic. I also cannot compare the two pages because there's no way for normal users to see the original deleted page. The other issue is that a lot of my sources were foreign, and are going to require some work to track down due to being in different languages.KatoKungLee (talk) 16:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

KatoKungLee, I am an administrator and can read the deleted article.

The Wordpress page begins Miss All Nations is a female beauty contest created by Charlie See and in 1989 onwards the pageant License been transfer and manage by Mr. Alex Liu. The event on 1989 took on great proportions and a second edition was held in 1990 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia but soon it was discontinued. Until in 2010 – 20 years later – the organization of ERM Marketing (ERM) own by Alex Liu and Sean Chia took over the franchise and re-launch the Pageant. This page is dated November 22, 2021.

Right before it was deleted, the Wikipedia article began Miss All Nations is a female beauty contest created by Charlie See and in 1989 onwards the pageant License been transfer and manage by Mr. Alex Liu. The event on 1989 took on great proportions and a second edition was held in 1990 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia but soon it was discontinued. Until in 2010 – 20 years later – the organization of ERM Marketing (ERM) own by Alex Liu and Sean Chia took over the franchise and re-launch the Pageant.

The copyright violation is quite clear. Cullen328 (talk) 17:13, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 - Cullen, I did not write that. Are you absolutely 100% certain it says that was written and that I wrote it? Because it it does, then I need to contact wikipedia security. I'm being 100% serious here. All I wrote was one line in the intro about it being an irregular comp since 1989 and I wrote about it being held in 1989 and the winner getting dethroned. The last edit I did over it was either a screw up with Maria Fernando being from Venezuela or an addition of a russian source. KatoKungLee (talk) 17:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

KatoKungLee, the copyright violations were added by Gharusa Latonia earlier today. This is not your fault. Cullen328 (talk) 17:24, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 - THANK GOD. What would be the next step? I'd obviously like to get the page back.KatoKungLee (talk) 17:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328, FYI, based on what you posted above, looks like there are also copyright violations in the history of User:Gharusa Latonia. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I am not an expert in dealing with copyright violations. It would be good to get another administrator involved. Cullen328 (talk) 17:50, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I have requested assistance at WP:Copyright problems. Cullen328 (talk) 17:58, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. @

WP:DRV, or you could ask one of the admins mentioned at Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles if you're not willing to wait, though the copyright issue will complicate things. Maybe try either User:Moneytrees or User:Sphilbrick, since they're also listed at Wikipedia administrators willing to investigate copyright matters

.

I don't know what other violations might be in that user's page history, but if someone is reading this with eye toward cleanup, the specific text mentioned above was added here and removed today, in the latest edit. I'd request copyvio revdel, but I can't edit the page. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

And as I was typing this up, they reappeared and did restore the earlier version. Hopefully that's all taken care of. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

This is now moot, correct? S Philbrick(Talk) 18:36, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

All except the identical violations in the user page history, @Sphilbrick. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I got my edit reverted on Gen 3 Pokemon to add some filler in text, yet Diannaa who said to be an administer, reverted it saying it not compatible with Bulbapedia which it thinks i got it from, which i didnt as i have a google docs page of all the Pokedex entries but in my own words. What does that mean and is there a way to revert it? UB Blacephalon (talk) 16:38, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Blacephalon, welcome to the Teahouse. Information added to Wikipedia should be summarized from reliable sources. This means both that you can't copy/paste in Wikipedia from your source and that your source must be reliable. Google docs you have created for yourself are not reliable (and neither is Bulbapedia). You should find a reliable source which contains the information you want to add, summarize it in your own words, and cite the source. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:55, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hmm I'm also confused on that. If I go to any website that popular and I cite that, is that a reliable source? What do I look for as a reliable source? What counts/doesn't count as one? UB Blacephalon (talk) 17:00, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:RS/PS if you want many examples of good, middling and bad sources, with explanations of how those rankings came about. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 17:03, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources for a long but incomplete list of source assessments. After glancing at your talk page, it looks like you are trying to mentor new editors. That is unwise if you do not fully understand Wikipedia's core content policies. Cullen328 (talk

) 17:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

While that is true I can help people in other ways as well. I know what to do but not how to do it. UB Blacephalon (talk) 17:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

So if they use Bulbapedia and its a reliable source, can I use it? UB Blacephalon (talk) 17:51, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@Blacephalon, if a reliable source reports some information and then says "We got this information from Bulbapedia", you can summarize the information and cite the reliable source (but not Bulbapedia). Part of what makes a source reliable is that the folks in charge do some checking to make sure what they report is accurate, and retract what they've reported if it isn't. So if they decide this particular piece of information is okay, we can rely on what they say, and cite them as our authority on the information being okay. If they find out later it's not okay, they'll correct themselves and we should then correct Wikipedia. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:59, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

So if they do it it's okay. If it's on the list of reliable sources. We should update that too... UB Blacephalon (talk) 18:32, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:RS/PS? Keep in mind that the list doesn't usually include sources that are obviously unreliable, like wikis - it only happens if they've been discussed very frequently (IMDb, for instance, comes up all the time). I only see two past discussions which mention Bulbapedia (here and here). 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 18:37, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Well someone did say that the list isnt complete, though I don't know if that's true or not. UB Blacephalon (talk) 18:52, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328 said that, @Blacephalon, and it's quite true. But the list isn't meant to be complete. It's mostly a convenience. See this explanation on the page itself. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:57, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hmm I mean I get that more can be added or removing but could it be up to date? UB Blacephalon (talk) 19:40, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:RSN. See this section of the page. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 19:44, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@UB Blacephalon - to summarize, Bulbapedia is not a reliable source, because anyone can edit it. A source is a reliable source if it is published under editorial oversight with a reputation for fact checking. Wikipedia:Reliable source examples and this reliable sources quiz are examples of pages with more information about this. casualdejekyll 22:35, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Ahh I should try again with the cites. UB Blacephalon (talk) 01:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

@Blacephalon It's pretty much impossible for a list of sources to be "complete", if that means listing all reliable and non-reliable sources that exist in the world. That list itself is never static. David10244 (talk) 08:39, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

True, I just don't want it to be out of date. UB Blacephalon (talk) 16:49, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

@Blacephalon If you are talking about a list of sources being out of date, that is my point -- a list of sources will, pretty much always, be out of date. David10244 (talk) 07:01, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Huh. So the status of the validity wont change? UB Blacephalon (talk) 14:06, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm saying that if you consider the whole world, new sources probably appear every day. Most of the editors in the English language Wikipedia don't have much visibility into the press or reporting in other countries, so it takes time to discover whatever new sources may appear in the world. And while we are discovering and evaluating one new set of sources, new ones are appearing. The task can never be done. We can stay close, though, as long as we keep updating David10244 (talk) 07:24, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

They certainly do change, @

WP:CNET goes to the third and latest entry). It had quite a fall from grace. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 17:48, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, you're right. So another question: If I need sources to put in info, how do I do it, like wikitext. How do I type it? UB Blacephalon (talk) 23:32, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:CITE. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝

 ) 01:41, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm still confused. Doesn't it have the <ref>...</ref> kinda thing? Is that how you use sources? UB Blacephalon (talk) 04:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that's how you cite them. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh Nice! UB Blacephalon (talk) 16:55, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Just a general comment, while Bulbapedia tends to be pretty accurate with a lot of things, they do still get things wrong (such as the Romaji for some Pokemon like Eevee) and often don't cite sources unless its an extreme claim that is hard to back up. Due to it being an editable Wiki the articles could be wrong when a user attempts to verify any information its cited to. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:53, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

But don't they tend to revert it like Wikipedia? UB Blacephalon (talk) 23:33, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

What exactly do you mean by that? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 23:38, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Since Bulbapedia is just Pokémon Wikipedia, why don't they revert edits like Wikipedia does. They use the same kind of platform right? UB Blacephalon (talk) 23:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes. However their policies and guidelines are different than Wikipedia's. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Huh, that makes sense. So how do i type out references? UB Blacephalon (talk) 00:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

What do you mean? There are many ways to do so. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:38, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

If I want to reference my sources, how do I write that in the code? UB Blacephalon (talk) 04:09, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@Blacephalon, Help:Referencing for beginners goes through the basics. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:55, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

so I just do <ref>*Insert website here*</ref>? UB Blacephalon (talk) 16:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

That is the most basic method, yes, @Blacephalon. Even better is using citation templates (like {{cite web}}). I see you mostly edit on mobile, so I don't know if there are any citation helper thingies available to you; on desktop there are some tools/buttons which will let you select from a list of citation templates, then pop up a little box in which you can just fill out the information. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:58, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

It's also possible to enable desktop mode on mobile to get what every other desktop user sees. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:47, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Really? How do i use that? UB Blacephalon (talk) 18:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

There should be a link that says "Desktop" at the bottom of a page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:45, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Omg! What can i do with this? UB Blacephalon (talk) 19:45, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Do you know A Mr. Schumann Jshoes1976 (talk) 16:13, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Well I thought I did. Jshoes1976 (talk) 16:13, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Jshoes1976, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:17, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Schumann is a common name. Take your pick from this list. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Not a host, but I believe OP is referring to Draft:Mr.Jason Eric Schumann on eIn St. eIn. Schumann, which was speedy deleted as a test page (G2). Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited) 20:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I've submitted a draft of a new article. I'm curious as to how the editorial process works, and the process seems a bit obscure. Who is allowed to be an editor? Are certain people given the authority to make a draft public after review? How do I know when a review is complete?

I've asked (on the talk page of my article) that editors give me their comments rather than making wholesale changes directly (except for small technical fixes). Are they bound to this?

Will I receive notification when an editor has commented (or made a modification), or do I need to revisit the draft space daily? Johsebb (talk) 16:13, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Johsebb, welcome to the Teahouse! A lot of things about Wikipedia are pretty obscure, so hopefully these answers help:

1. Anyone can become a Wikipedia editor, and the term "editor" doesn't imply any formal editorial authority. Indeed, it might be better to think of it as "contributor", rather than editor. As such, there aren't any specifically-authorized people who go through and publish drafts; it's whoever feels they understand Wikipedia policy and standards, and wants to help out. Wikipedia is intended to be a flat hierarchy, with no one editor having primacy over anyone else in content matters.

2. Because of this lack of hierarchy, *you* also don't have any special power or authority over the articles you create. As such, no, nobody is bound to your request, and anyone can freely edit your draft.

3. You'll know your draft has been reviewed when the big yellow box at the top changes, indicating its new status post-review. I believe it's standard practice for the reviewer to notify you on your talk page, so you shouldn't need to check the draft itself every day or anything like that. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

A nitpick: while anyone can accept/decline/reject drafts which have been submitted to AfC, if they do so without being an AfC reviewer, they're going to come under a lot of scrutiny. They'd better know what they're doing. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:32, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Fair, 199, thanks for the correction. I'm perhaps not as up on the AfC process as maybe I should be. :P Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:35, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Johsebb: See also Wikipedia:Articles for creation. GoingBatty (talk) 16:41, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks to you as well. Johsebb (talk) 20:54, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you -- that's very helpful. Johsebb (talk) 20:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@Johsebb, if you add the draft to your watchlist and then set your preferences as explained at Help:Watchlist#Email notification, you can get email notifications when edits are made to the draft. However, if you have any other pages on your watchlist, you'll also get emails when those are edited - it's all or none, unfortunately. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:41, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Johsebb (talk) 20:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Some people have barnstar-ribbon things. What are they for?

~~JustAnotherUndertaleFrantic~~ JustAnotherUndertaleFrantic (talk) 21:44, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, JustAnotherUndertaleFrantic. Please read WP:Service awards and WP:Barnstars. Cullen328 (talk) 21:50, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I am editing a Wiki article about a prolific author. Two PhD students have chosen to focus on him and his writing in their dissertations. Since it's an honor to be selected in this way, I want to mention it in a section on miscellaneous honors he has received. I don't plan to cite findings from the yet-unpublished research, just the fact that there are two dissertations under way that focus on him.

Can I do this in a Wiki article? Here is what I had in mind:

"His stature as an author is reflected in the decision by two students in Ph.D. programs to include him and his writing in their doctoral research" ... then I would go on to name the students, their dissertation topics, and their universities.

Augnablik (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

You cannot obviously cite or even mention unpublished works. Ruslik_Zero 20:23, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Augnablik, just in case you're thinking "Uh, OK -- I'll cite them, but not obviously", I'll reword Ruslik0's warning: "Obviously, you cannot cite or even mention unpublished works." If both are eventually published (and not just by Edwin Mellen Press, OmniScriptum, or similar), then the resulting books can be cited. But there'd still be no need for the "His stature as an author is reflected" kind of stuff. -- Hoary (talk) 22:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I'm thinking of improving German Empire to good article status, and I'm planning on expanding some sections. Is there anything else I need to do on that page? Also the translation template may be outdated, plus the German Wikipedia article barely cites any sources or only cites primary sources.

P.S. How do you check how many megabytes a page is? Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited) 20:41, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Vamsi20, welcome to the Teahouse. The answer to your last question is: click on the Page information link. For me this is located in the dropdown Tools menu at top right. Page length (in bytes) is third from the top. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

talk

) 21:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

talk

) 21:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

PalauanReich, I don't see it on the revision history page - where should I be looking? 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 21:09, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh, next to the edits themselves. Quite right. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Alright, what sections could be added there? I have an idea for subsections (and I do have to add a large amount of text to qualify as a non-drive-by nom) but not full sections. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited) 21:20, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't know much about the topic so I couldn't tell you. Maybe ask on the

talk

) 22:50, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey I'm writing Wikipedia About GMT Token but is was declined, i can't understand reason Wequant (talk) 23:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Good day,

199811✶

23:41, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Recently I edited an article that was referencing the wrong link to an actor in a cast list because the name of the actor was the same as a writer. The actor was distinguished in their article with an (actor) specification after their name which when specified provided a proper link. However having a cast list with only one actor specified visually with (actor) looks odd. Is there no way to uniquely reference a wiki article with a unique identifier to the page while using a more generic text description for the link? Thanks. Corvus1313 (talk) 01:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Corvus1313, welcome to the Teahouse. [[Graham Greene (actor)|Graham Greene]] produces Graham Greene. It's called a piped link. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks much PrimeHunter. Thats much better. Corvus1313 (talk) 02:17, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I am accessing here for the first time from Japan.　I couldn't get a response on #wikipedia-en-help, so I came here.

I have written an English version of a wiki introducing a certain hospital and doctor in Japan, but I have been told that it is advertisement-like. Which points should I rewrite or delete in order to get permission to publish it? I am a beginner and would appreciate a detailed explanation. I'm in a bind and it would be really helpful if you could get back to me.

- Kuma Hospital https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:KumaHospital

- Dr. Akira Miyauchi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:AkiraMiyauchi,MD,PhD Sayuri8934 (talk) 22:01, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Sayuri, and welcome to the Teahouse. I think you might find it helpful to read

WP:BACKWARD. Also note that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk

) 22:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Sayuri8934. An article about a hospital needs to summarize the significant coverage that reliable, published sources that are entirely independent of the hospital say about the hospital. What the hospital says about itself is of no value in establishing notability. Cullen328 (talk) 22:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

For Draft:Akira Miyauchi, delete the entire Achievements section. For researchers, it is appropriate to have a Selected publications section which for journal articles shows the title, the year, and a reference to the articles. A detailed description of the research is not required, as readers can follow the refs to the abstracts. David notMD (talk) 02:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

If you click on the links on the left side of the chart. You will see the banners pop up. Such as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia?banner=WMFOnlineFR_dsk_sm_control_example

talk

) 01:27, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I see that but would prefer a page since it would have clearer authorship and date information. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Good morning friendly people of Wikipedia! =) As some of you may have had the misfortune of finding out I'm working at cleaning up the comics pages through a mixture of unsettlingly obsessive behaviour, procedural clumsiness and flagrant overuse of the phrase "struck a deal". This has involved a lot of fun research but I'm a selfish person, so this research has largely been put to use on stuff I'm interested in. However, it's also turned up a lot of potential sources for stuff I'm either never going to get around to doing or have no interest in doing myself. I feel a bit bad just not using this information based entirely on my personal tastes, especially when a lot of comics pages have notability and/or referencing issues. Would a user page listing some of these sources, maybe flagged on the appropriate talk pages for anyone who is interested, be a good idea? Or would that be an irritant? BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 10:28, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@BoomboxTestarossa perhaps an appropriate WikiProject might be the best venue for discussing your idea. It's not a topic area I'm familiar with at all so I can't point you to any particular page, but you should find links to relevant Wikiprojects on the talk pages of the articles you are working on. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:46, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@BoomboxTestarossa, Template:Refideas may be something to look at. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:36, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Ooooh, new toy! =D thanks! BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 15:40, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@BoomboxTestarossa: in case you haven't found it by yourself in the meantime, we have a Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics. Might be a good starting point. Lectonar (talk) 06:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello. The following address is for “Stalag Luft I,” which needs an edit I cannot make because I don’t know who is “Greening.” I would contact the page creator if I knew how, but I don’t. I see that someone else also edited the page, but I don’t know what they edited. Would someone please advise the page creator to come up with the full name of persons he/she quotes on the page before using only their last name? It would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Here’s the web address of the page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stalag_Luft_I&action=info

Quietwriter58 (talk) 03:52, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Quietwriter58 I am not quite sure what you are asking for. There is a list of references at the bottom of the page that coincides with the article. Can you please be a little more specific with direct examples in the article (not on the summary page)? The author Greening is an editor. You can also make edits yourself to an article as that is what Wikipedia is all about. ~~~ ThatFungi (talk) 04:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Quietwriter58, 120 different editors have contributed to that article in the last 15 years. What, exactly, are you asking? Be specific. It is really unclear. Cullen328 (talk) 05:58, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

reliable sources, you'd consider improving it here and there? -- Hoary (talk

) 07:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary My bad. I thought they meant as an editor not an author. ThatFungi (talk) 07:59, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Also,

nobody "owns" articles on Wikipedia. If you think you could improve something, the best way is to do it yourself. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH

) 09:19, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey, just asking if anyone changed the pages of the voice actors and developers of Minecraft Legends so their career page says that they worked on the game. Thanks Irindu10 (talk) 09:03, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,

WP:EDITREQUEST. But either way will need proper sourcing to justify alterations. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk

) 10:13, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I sometimes come across contribution histories where I suspect the user is building an autoconfirmed account to be used solely for later vandalism: add-a-space, remove-the-space edits, exactly ten edits. I realize there is also a requirement for a few days to pass before autoconfirm is autogranted, so I will check in on the editor some time later; but I've seen autoconfirm accounts lay dormant for months, even years, before the vandalism starts. Are there any preventative measures available to block the account before vandalism occurs? _signed, Willondon (talk) 04:57, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't think there's anything that can be done about a

behavioral evidence, and the account may be blocked for that reason (I guess). This, however, seem to be more of an exception than the norm, and the evicence needs to be pretty strong. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 05:50, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

For accounts which seem to be gaming

autoconfirmed is not actually a usergroup but rather the mediawiki software checks every autoconfirmed-restricted action to see whether the user has reached the required 10 edits/4 days threshhold, that isn't possible for autoconfirmed. Nor do I expect it would be particularly workable. Erroneously blocking goodfaith users on the basis of ten innocuous edits seems like a much worse outcome than a few possible vandal edits possibly years down the line. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk

) 09:39, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your responses. I realized any approach would have a creepy Minority Report pre-crime feel to it; just thought I'd ask. I have had some success with issuing a "final" warning on the first offense (assuming there are zero good edits), and reporting at AIV on the second offense with a note pointing out the "ACAB" (auto-confirmed account builder) behaviour. Cheers. _signed, Willondon (talk) 12:16, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

My company recently launched a new vertical "Economic Times Grandmasters" I need your guidance to create the wiki page for this Neerajjoshioffpage (talk) 05:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

notable companies. How does your company meet that standard? Cullen328 (talk

) 05:53, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

UPDATE: The editor has been blocked for using more than one account, not declaring paid, and Draft:ET Grandmasters has been Speedy deleted. David notMD (talk) 13:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, you all... does one name a person also, if she is not born in the special city, but is the director of a museum there? I'm not quite sure about how to handle this. Naomi Hennig (talk) 13:12, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Naomi Hennig no. 'Notable people' generally refers to people that were from that city. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 13:20, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this quick answer!!! Wonderful! --Naomi Hennig (talk) 13:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:NLIST." Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk

) 13:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree that working in a town or city does not qualify that person as a notable person in that place. David notMD (talk) 13:27, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Perfect! :-). Thanks! --Naomi Hennig (talk) 13:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello...who can help me discover why the wikipedia article I wrote this morning was unilaterally deleted when I requested review and if I can get a re-review, and some understanding why this happened.

This is honestly...a truly awful experience for a first time editor...so folks, here is your chance to correct a horrific first impression. Danbrotherston (talk) 13:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

(The page was todo.txt by the way) Danbrotherston (talk) 13:15, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

The reasons given for deletion is Unambiguous advertising or promotion: no proper references (criteria

notable subjects. If you read Help:Your first article, you'll get some idea of what went wrong and where to go from here. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 14:33, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I am aware that is the reason as I stated it in my title. The article was clearly not advertising. It may not have had a neutral tone or sufficient references to satisfy the editor. But deleting it does not allow me to correct those deficiencies.

I now understand very well why wikipedia cannot recruit new editors. Danbrotherston (talk) 18:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Tagging @Jimfbleak, the person who deleted Draft:Todo.txt - I assume there's probably a good explanation here, @Danbrotherston, and I hope that you don't give up on Wikipedia because of a bad experience! casualdejekyll 13:35, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@Danbrotherston, I don't mean this to be unsympathetic and unkind, and I hope it won't come across that way. But a first time editor plunging in and writing an article strikes me as sort of like someone who's never been on a ski before strapping on a pair and launching himself down an Olympic ski jump. It's likely to be a horrific first--and quite possibly last, of any kind--impression. Sure, it's sad. But don't blame the institution. I have no special access to things, so I have no way of knowing what you were trying to do. But a lot of people come into Wikipedia and try to do big things, with erroneous and incomplete impressions about what Wikipedia is, and--perhaps more importantly--what it isn't; how it works and how it doesn't. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@

Casualdejekyll and AzseicsoK:, thanks, I replied on Danbrotherston's talk page Jimfbleak - talk to me?

15:15, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

There was a topic that I was surprised did not exist. I wrote an article for it. This is the whole concept. I expected comments on my article, suggestions, improvements, reviews, not unilateral deletion of my work.

Frankly, I won't be contributing again, and that is a shame. There are a number of articles about wikipedia struggling to recruit new editors. I see clearly why this is a problem given how they treat new contributors.

I am happy to work and improve my work, but I cannot do that now, it is deleted. Danbrotherston (talk) 18:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately @

Casualdejekyll

I won't be contributing further. I can certainly see why there is difficulty recruiting new editors.

I had hoped that there was a good reason, missinterpretation, working too quickly, or something. It appears that is not the case. If Wikipedia wanted to recruit new editors, they should give feedback and give an opportunity to improve. Danbrotherston (talk) 18:28, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:BITEy to delete someone's first draft without ever touching their user talk page. Dan here did not even know which admin deleted the draft until I checked the deletion logs for them, which as you may be able to guess results in plenty of confusion and frustration. As such, I really can't blame them for freaking out about it. In future, could you make sure to at least drop a welcome message, or something? casualdejekyll

18:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@

Casualdejekyll

Those are good reasons for not accepting a page or for requesting edits, not a good reason for deletion.

I can no longer work on the draft at all. In fact, I do not even know what I wrote that was so offensive that it needed to be deleted immediately. Danbrotherston (talk) 18:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@Danbrotherston, you're free to start a new draft, but - this is key - first you should make sure that you have the reliable, independent, secondary sources which are required. If you can't find any, it's best to not proceed further. If can find some, then start building a new draft by reading those sources, summarizing in your own words what they say, and citing them as you go. Again I recommend reading Help:Your first article. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks anonymous commenter. But I think I'll pass. Danbrotherston (talk) 19:06, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

The cited reason is

Deletion review, but I don't know what was in the draft and therefore do not know whether or not it was promotional. casualdejekyll

19:22, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the link and suggestion. I was not even aware such a review could be requested.

I personally don't think it read like an advertisement. I certainly do not think it was "exclusively" promotional as the G11 criteria suggests. I had a section specifying the format of the file, and I really don't see how that could read as "promotional" as it was a description of a file format.

But, again, I can't even review what I wrote, so I can't make an assessment.

Jeff did give a list of specific (and valid) issues with my work. But they also noted copyright infringement which absolutely does not apply. Then Jeff offered to see what he can "salvage" from my draft tomorrow. No thanks.

I really do appreciate you taking the time with me, but this experience has been extremely negative. You're right, I did "freak out" about it, I'm confused and frankly hurt. So I'm not going to bother asking for a review, mostly because it would be out of nothing more than spite, I won't be contributing even if the deletion was reverted.

Please. I love wikipedia...it's an amazing resource, I hope the next potential contributor gets a better experience. Danbrotherston (talk) 19:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@Danbrotherston - Jim declined my request to see the deleted material, so I cannot help you further. I hope you come back some day, though. casualdejekyll 12:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate the efforts and sentiment. Honestly, I find this whole situation very weird. I work in software, but not with Wikimedia specifically...is there some cost to reverting something that I'm unaware of? Like, resource wise? Process wise? My assumption would be that it would be a push of a button, am I missing something? Danbrotherston (talk) 14:09, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:DRV. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 14:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Jeff is an admin I assume...they are the persona we are talking about, they unilaterally deleted the page under the WP:G11 quick deletion criteria as we have discussed in this thread, I assume reverting the deletion would be equally as straight forward, but they have resisted doing so. Danbrotherston (talk) 14:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@199.208.172.35 Danbrotherston (talk) 14:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:DRV, as that page says. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 14:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

The initial message you received on your user talk page contained a 'one size fits all' template message. The information about copyright was part of that.

MrOllie (talk

) 14:34, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

MrOllie

The message contained actual quotes from my article, every single point, except for the copyright point directly referred to my article, in some cases explicitly to issues I now see that I have like incorrect linking. It clearly wasn't a template. The message might have taken snippets of text from existing sources, but the specific points to copy were clearly selected.

FWIW if the admin had sent me that message instead of simply deleting my article as "spam or advertising" without comment, we wouldn't be having this conversation and I'd be happily improving my article. Even if the admin had restored the draft so that I could improve it after giving me their comments I'd probably still be open to contributing. But that is not what has happened. Danbrotherston (talk) 14:47, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, they added some personalized stuff to a form letter. The copyright stuff was part of the form letter.

MrOllie (talk

) 14:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

MrOllie

Maybe...it seems an oddly specific set of criteria that happen to all but one apply directly to my work.

But that wasn't really my main issue here. This has clearly been a problematic and hostile interaction for me. Deleting my article off hand, on what I feel are incorrect basis. Being unwilling to restore the draft even after providing feedback. Danbrotherston (talk) 14:55, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:DRV. There's no way to force an admin to restore an article they've decided should be deleted, or even to apologize. They can only be dragged to "court", so to speak, and desysoped for bad behavior. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 15:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

You folks have done more than enough. Everyone here has been extremely helpful. But ultimately I don't think there's anything to be done. I could go to deletion review, but I'm already put off here, and I don't think I'd be interested in continuing. Certainly not enough to get involved with some significant process for which I don't fully understand, and cannot effectively leverage.

I appreciate the help from everyone. They've given great advice to engage with the original admin, or to consider a deletion review, but I've gone as far as I'm willing to. I'm not asking for anything further. But I think it's worth understanding what went wrong hence, I'll reply to any comments here. Danbrotherston (talk) 17:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

• Danbrotherston I'm sorry to hear that you have not had a good experience. I must agree with some of the analogies that other users have offered- you dived right in to creating articles- the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia- and are upset with us that it didn't go perfectly on the first attempt and want to quit. There is a definite learning curve here, but there is also people willing to help you understand if you are willing to hear it. I can certainly understand being upset and having frustration at something that you likely spent a long time on being deleted. We usually recommend that to avoid frustration and anger that new users not dive right in to creating articles, and instead first spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content.

As an admin I can examine the draft; it just documented the existence of the topic- that is considered promotional here, you don't have to be soliciting or selling something. Wikipedia articles summarize what independent

notability. Do you have independent reliable sources that discuss the importance of your topic? 331dot (talk

) 15:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@331dot "didn't go perfectly." Is an understatement. My draft was unilaterally deleted with almost no feedback. That's well beyond "didn't go perfectly". As I've said a few times, I was happy and eager for feedback. It was what I expected. It's what I understood of the process. I was happy to work and anticipating working on it further. I didn't even understand how it came to happen at first. I assumed it must have been a mistake. I was given feedback after the fact, but the draft is still deleted, so I cannot act on that feedback.

Certainly this is not the only article to document the existence of something. For example this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_To_Do basically documents the existence of MS Todo and it's history. My article more or less does the same thing. If more comprehensive citations are needed, great, I was happy to do that, todo.txt isn't exactly an unknown format, it's supported by several major open source todo apps like Gnome Todo, as documented on those pages and on open source articles.

But again, this isn't really the point. I cannot improve my draft, because it is deleted. I appreciate that the tone, and citations were not up to standards. I definitely appreciate the help others have given me here (and in the IRC). I followed their advice and engaged with the admin who deleted, and I got feedback. You can read the exchange on my talk page, the admin Jeff didn't revert the deletion. He made the "conciliation" of maybe tomorrow seeing if there is anything that he could "salvage". Not exactly encouraging I would say.

It seems I can request a review of the deletion, but I'm not inclined to. I'm (relatively) new here, I don't want to get involved in a process like this...I don't want to try and lawyer in a system I have no familiarity with. And ultimately, it would be out of spite. After this experience, I have no interest in contributing further. I certainly would never write another article, I wouldn't risk having my work deleted.

Again, I appreciate the help given here, folks have done a great job. But in the end there is no further resolution. Fix the processes so this doesn't happen to the next person, or make peace with the fact that deleting article in this manner will bully away new contributors (biting I take it is the term used here). Danbrotherston (talk) 17:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

If it would help, I can email you the deleted text. Please note that

other poor content existing does not justify adding more poor content. In looking at the draft, I would have made the same decision. I will restate that you are like a beginner skier deciding to go down the Olympic slalom course or ski jump, you did so, crashed, and now want to quit- where if you had instead taken a class and gone down the bunny slope first, you would still want to ski. If you'd take things slower, read some guidelines, hear our advice, edit existing articles and the like first, you would now be happier. I urge you to reconsider, but if not, I wish you well. 331dot (talk

) 17:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@331dot I would actually urge you to reconsider. A policy of deletion is harmful to your goals. Deleting a page without feedback or action items does not accomplish encourage or welcome a new contributor and not deleting the page would seem to costs nothing. It also assumes bad faith. It assumes that I intended to write an advertisement and have gotten caught. If I wrote the article in good faith, which I did, then a path to improve it should be given.

And frankly I have read many of the guidelines now. In fact, it seems like deletion in situations like this does not really comply with policies. Specifically https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers#How_to_avoid_being_a_%22biter%22 seems to explicitly advise against doing this under number 14.

Unfortunately, I am not going to reconsider. I wish you folks well, wikipedia is a fantastic resource, I use it extensively, and it's clear there are many great people working on it. But this has also been a hostile unpleasant experience and I'm not willing to subject myself to that, at this point, it's going to be a sore spot any time I use wikipedia as a resource again...and I regret ever getting involved. Danbrotherston (talk) 18:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@331dot For example, compare this interaction to how my experience has gone...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse#Hospital_and_doctor

This is what a positive interaction looks like. Danbrotherston (talk) 05:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Well, if you want to change how policies are applied, the way to do that isn't to quit after your first and only attempt at editing. Even if you don't want to change policies or work to change them, you could approach the deleting admin and say "hey, this kinda bothered me and here's why". Jimfbleak did leave an explanation on your user talk page, and you responded to it, and Jim said they would look at the draft again. I've offered to send it to you- both of which would let you work on it. Deletion is easily reversible and not written in stone. Also, try to look at it from our side. We see literally hundreds of efforts a day to advertise or promote here. 331dot (talk) 08:23, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@331dot I know deletion is easily reversible, that's why I'm shocked at this situation. Jimf was pretty harsh, he suggested he would look to see if anything was "salvageable", that is not encouraging or helpful.

And I am absolutely conciliatory to your position.

And I'm in no position to change policies. But from what I've read it wouldn't matter, they aren't even being followed.

I'm not interested in working on it just to have it deleted with zero feedback again. Danbrotherston (talk) 09:44, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't see where Jim was "harsh" but it may be a matter of perspective. They seemed polite and civil to me. Yes, you disagree with their action, but they weren't uncivil with you. You are in a position to change policies, but it requires work and engagement. No, it's not easy, and shouldn't be. You can also challenge the application of any policy to you. If you don't wish to, that's certainly your option, and there's nothing wrong with not wanting to put in that effort. But the path is open. You were given feedback, "Bear in mind that whatever is restored, it will not be accepted without independent third-party sources supporting evidence of notability as linked in my initial reply. You could work on that in the interim, and see if restoration is worthwhile". I'm sorry you won't be editing. 331dot (talk) 10:01, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@331dot Do feel that referring to someone's work as maybe "salvageable" and strongly urging them to see whether it's even "worthwhile" is a neutral tone? That's to say nothing of being welcoming or encouraging. Just because someone speaks politely with a civil tone does not mean what they are saying is not harmful.

That is not a welcoming or encouraging experience. I have been given the impression (and frankly, by you as well) that I should not attempt to write an article. Deleting the draft without feedback (in apparent contradiction from the guidelines) was only the beginning. When I say I have been conciliatory, that's what I mean, I was open to engaging at that point. Danbrotherston (talk) 10:15, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Not a host, but I agree with 331dot here...all the interactions I've seen on OP's talk page and here seem like normal Wikipedia behavior and execution of policies. If the article itself was deleted as advertising, it probably had puffy language (example: "He was a trailblazer and is currently working hard on a mission to change the world") or was not notable really. Your argument sounds like

WP:WAX to me here. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited

) 14:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Look, I'm going to be blunt here @Vamsi20 maybe my draft is absolute garbage and offends the eye of anyone who reads it. I don't know, I haven't read it in two days.

But Jimf deleting it without any explanation and refusing to revert it even after providing feedback has wasted everyone's time. If you don't care about my feelings, fine, but ya'll are wasting your own time.

The

WP:NEWBIES

(look, I figured out how to do the links too) doc says newbies should be bold, it suggests introducing yourself first and being encouraging. It explicitly recommends against deletion. I didn't see any of that practised in my initial interactions here.

Learning a bit of empathy and being constructive with people (as you know, is supposedly a guideline here) is far more effective than this which is a bad experience for everyone.

I'm not sure why you think I'm offended by the criticism of my draft. I've said a dozen times, I welcomed feedback. That isn't my issue. Danbrotherston (talk) 15:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Danbrotherston, this seems to be going in circles. You don't like how you were treated. We understand that. You've been told what our policies are, and how to change them. You've been told what was wrong with your draft, and how to fix it. You've been told that we don't see any egregious behavioral problems here, but that you're free to lodge a complaint in one of the places set up to handle them if you wish.

You've now been posting here at the Teahouse for three days. This is rapidly becoming multiple times longer than any other section on the page, with no resolution in sight.

Do you have some other question we can answer? What is it you want? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:18, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

No...I have no other questions. I'm not the one posting here. I'm simply answering replies I'm getting.

I'm sure there's some other process that I'm getting wrong here, on how to end the issue...

FWIW...the "advice" on "how to fix" my draft, has been to...not try to write an article. Which is the advice I'm taking. Danbrotherston (talk) 15:30, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

The way to end this issue is to simply stop posting here, even if someone else replies.

MrOllie (talk

) 15:33, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough...to me it seems rude to not answer when someone takes the time to reply. Danbrotherston (talk) 15:34, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

By the way, it is worth pointing out AGAIN. The changes I would make to the policies to improve things are ALREADY present. The actions taken here are explicitly in convention of the guidelines I've read. Danbrotherston (talk) 15:33, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Then go to

WP:ANI with your evidence, and see if you can get consensus for a formal sanction. No matter how times you point that out here, "here" will still not be the right place. Nothing will get accomplished. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 15:57, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

The advice that hosts give here for new editors whose first goal is to get an article on mainspace is to put that idea on a back-burner and get an idea of what is considered acceptable (or even exceptional) by policy, because what many of these new editors want don't align with Wikipedia's objectives. The best way to do that is to look at and absorb

good articles, which have gone through a rather extensive vetting process for things like encyclopedic tone and source analysis. While one does that, I'd suggest checking common maintenance issues that can be found at the community portal, like fixing typos or finding better sources.

I see 331dot has offered to send the content to you off-wiki already. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝

 ) 15:41, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:ANI. No matter how much you talk here, it's likely going nowhere. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited

) 15:58, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Blocked by Example
Block will expire in ---- 
Reason ----- which pressing View source, Log in, OK.

2001:44C8:4523:1D54:852:17FE:F2CB:644B (talk) 00:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I cannot understand what you are trying to say. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Cullen328 (talk) 00:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! If your username has been blocked, please tell us your username. If you're having another issue, please provide more information detailing how we can duplicate your issue. GoingBatty (talk) 01:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

From a look at their contributions, it appears that they dabbled in some vandalism and had to face the consequences. Perhaps they were blocked for that?

(talk)

17:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Any thoughts on the summary of the Jodi Arias case at :

https://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/2022/11/113-22-reasonable-doubt-thread.html?fbclid=IwAR3jDY-fUhVQ7weU74Yf5um3rB_X9VFh8kdvYe6WgT43Vva0mrRulZqXJ08 Jodiariasproject (talk) 12:26, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey, @Jodiariasproject -- WP is only interested in what WP:reliable sources say. We don't source to blogs. Valereee (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

so how would the discussion on the blog fit into wikipedia or is discussion another website within wikipedia ? Jodiariasproject (talk) 16:56, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@

notable subjects. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 17:12, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

my article reference has no claim of significance Radhey8 (talk) 20:01, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

(Context for hosts) The user has created an article about themself with no credible claim of significance, and they also have a COI. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 20:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I am on the verge of whether it’s significance or notability, I would go towards significance, but I would like some opinions. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 20:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

This is about Draft:Krishna Kant Singh Bundela. David notMD (talk) 21:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@Zippybonzo - I'd say "well known" is a pretty unambiguous claim of significance, but the draft as submitted does not even come close to GNG, so I've declined it for now. casualdejekyll 21:57, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I just added his YouTube links from official accounts as reference uploaded on official channels, and I have many such of his work.Will this work.It was his mistake when asked for interview, He always denied. It's ok I will soon provide such references also. Radhey8 (talk) 03:41, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm afraid that YouTube links will not suffice as sources. Everything cited in the article must be from an independent, reliable sources, and only simple, uncontroversial claims can link to something like your personal YouTube channel or social media page.

(talk)

16:56, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I understand this. But as I read about reliable sources regarding YouTube, if it's from official channel it's reliable. And all the links refered are from official and authentic source.just click the link to see the channel.Every link is geniune and shows the work of artist. I asked the party to produce some articles about him. And soon it would be provided. But I saw YouTube and other video sources in other approved pages of artist. So i cited them. Not sufficient but with suffix.Thanks Radhey8 (talk) 17:02, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

As it stands currently, the links in the draft all point to videos or discussions of things in which you have performed. These are not sufficient, @Radhey8; we need sources that are about you, not links to your performances. Interviews would also not have been sufficient, even if you had given them, because they would not be independent. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:00, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

First I want to clear it's not me ,whose page is this. He said and I informed here.As an artist authenticity is if he is really an artist and performing.Articles that talk about him will also be provided.But I feel for an artist authenticity is he is in market and working.He is in verge of independent sources to be cited soon.The page is a biography which includes all his works.And he has all reliable sources of his work.Only he is lacking is some sources that talk about him independently,that he is an artist...vow that's great. Will be getting to it soon. Radhey8 (talk) 17:18, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@

notability. Concentrate on that. Also, please answer the questions I posted on your talk page. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 17:23, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Got it. Will concentrate in this process Sir. Trying to answer your questions Radhey8 (talk) 17:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Coolness. By the by, I am not a sir. I know it's customary and polite to address strangers that way in some cultures, but you should try avoid it on English Wikipedia. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:34, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

The way u guided, 'Sir' came out of my heart. But professionally will try to avoid such things on English Wikipedia. It's great learning here from all experts like you. Thanks Radhey8 (talk) 17:38, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm glad that my first article (ESPNcricinfo Awards) has published smoothly. Thanks to everyone who were part of this Draft/Article.

Now, I'm looking for this article(

Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 09:35, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto Notability doesn't depend on whether something is currently active and still being published, but on whether independent sources have written in detail and in depth about it. Your draft is in review, so will be dealt with in due course. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:10, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@

talk

) 11:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

A draft is also good if you want to take your time in peace in peace and quiet to get something ready for mainspace. There is no particular advantage with starting in mainspace directly, moving is easy. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:04, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

My opinion differs from PalauanReich. Given that you are relatively new to this - have had two drafts accepted and two declined - I see no reason yet to skip AfC and go directly to mainspace. David notMD (talk) 17:58, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Alegría cortes 85.62.34.127 (talk) 18:06, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? About Alegría (Mexican candy)? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:09, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello to whom this may concern. I work directly with Loral Langmeier's marketing team and was tasked to update the wiki page Loral Langemeierwith a new photo and more current information. I made the changes on Monday April 17th 2023 which included a better headshot, a bio of her life and some media articles that she has written or been featured in. At some point on Tuesday April 18th 2023 the entirety of my updates were reverted back to the empty page and old picture. There was no information as to why the reversion, no explanation and no mediation? Can someone please reach out and let me know why the page was reverted and what steps need to be taken in order to update the Loral Langemeierpage. Thank you in advance. @Askloral Askloral (talk) 17:31, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @

WP:PAID for more information and instructions. After that, you should make edit requests on the talk page, Talk:Loral Langemeier. It's best to keep the requests short and simple, and be sure to provide reliable sources to back up the information. You can add your requests to the edit request queue by either tagging them with {{edit request}} or using the WP:Edit Request Wizard to do everything automatically. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 17:36, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Also, @Askloral - are you the photographer who took this photo, which you've uploaded as "own work"? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:38, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello thank you for your response and for the question. Yes Loral Langemeier owns the photograph in question, it was taken at a paid agency photoshoot. What do we need to provide from you from Loral Langemeiers company to verify ownership? Askloral (talk) 22:31, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Askloral: I posted information about the photo at User talk:Askloral#File:Loral headshot.jpg and it explains what needs to be done. I also suggest you take a look at User talk:Askloral#Your username as well since you choice of username may also not be in compliance with relevant Wikipedia policy. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:10, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Askloral Take the time to read Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. You inserted "an American money expert, sought-after speaker, entrepreneurial thought leader and six time Bestselling author." cited to her own book. You can do that on her websites and social media, not here, WP is neither. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Paid contributions disclosure immediately. Cullen328 (talk

) 18:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

See also

WP:COPYPASTE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 18:13, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, an overt

Copyright violation. Cullen328 (talk

) 18:23, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

The thing to understand, Askloral, is that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 21:07, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hyperlinking to Amazon for her books is wrong. David notMD (talk) 21:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello all,

I would like to have an Wikipedia article about my music carrier so people that enjoy my work and new listeners coud know more about me. Anyone knows how can I do this and what I shoud do to be approved? NOXIN (talk) 01:42, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Simply, NOXIN, you can't. That's not what Wikipedia is for. Simply create your own website about yourself. You can write whatever you want there, and people who google your name will read what you choose to say. -- Hoary (talk) 01:55, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

NOXIN you may want to read Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. If an article about you is published in Wikipedia that article won't belong to you, you won't be able to edit it after it is published, and anyone who finds a reliable reference can add information to the article, even if it is something you would prefer not to have known about yourself. I suggest you take Hoary's excellent advice and start your own website. That way you will have control over the content of your own site. Karenthewriter (talk) 02:11, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Your attempt at User:NOXINPT/sandbox has been declined three times. With no references of what people not connected to you have written about you, there is no potential for this becoming an article. The criteria for musicians is at Wikipedia:Notability (music).

Hi! Should citations be exclusively in the language of the page? I have some sources in a foreign language that would be relevant in a page in English Jeansidharta (talk) 01:18, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Jeansidharta, if a source in a language other than English is reliable, and if there's no alternative in English that's just as good, you are very welcome to cite that source to support what's said in an English-language Wikipedia article. For the relevant policies of a Wikipedia of another language, you'll have to look (or ask) there, not here. -- Hoary (talk) 01:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:FOREIGNSOURCES for further guidance. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk

) 10:07, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm hoping for opinions on my comments at

User talk:NmWTfs85lXusaybq#Warning. Johnuniq (talk

) 06:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

NmWTfs85lXusaybq, I am an administrator and I recommend that you follow the excellent advice that Johnuniq gave you on your talk page. Stop following Beyond My Ken around, or you will be blocked. I hope that's clear. Cullen328 (talk) 07:13, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Combining Admin comments on your Talk page and here, the total is three Admins clearly stating that what you have been doing is hounding, and to stop or be blocked. David notMD (talk) 12:11, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, recently on the Jordan Desalination Plant page I deleted a set of coordinates due to me not being able to find any sources to back them up and after checking satellite images and going there in real life (can provide images if needed). Ever since then a big glaring error has appeared on the map (Luna I think?). I've been trying to remove the map entirely from the column, but I have been unable to without deleting the whole info column. Any help would be greatly helpful. Ty Chacabangaso (talk) 11:09, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@Chacabangaso: I removed "Jordan" from the |location_map= field in the infobox, because that field works only if there is a {{coord}} template in the |coordinates= field. That got rid of the error message. As for the interactive map in the infobox, that depends on the coordinates in the Wikidata item for the plant. To remove that map, one needs to remove the coordinates from the Wikidata item. (The article says that it's a planned plant, so it's not surprising that there's nothing to see there now, and I don't know whether the coordinates were correct or not.) Deor (talk) 12:28, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@Deor that is one way, but I found another solution. The presence/absence of data shouldn't always impact the visual layout/usage on a Wikipedia. Updating wikidata can have negative consequence on other clients/wikipedias, so only edit wikidata when the information is absolutely incorrect. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:32, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Ah I see, seems to be solved now but will definitely look out for the future. Coords in case needed: 29°27'19.0"N 34°58'22.0"E Chacabangaso (talk) 12:33, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@Chacabangaso welcome to Teahouse! I was not familiar with {{Infobox desalination plant}} so I visited the template page and found documentation that said to set mapframe=no which solved it. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:31, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Alright! Tysm Chacabangaso (talk) 12:32, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I found that a English wiki page consisted a page already in other language wikipedia and it was not linked together, instead the other language wiki page consisted of a separate wikidata item. I removed the page from that wikidata item and linked the page to the english wikidata item. Now the wikidata is empty. What am I supposed to do now? just don't bother about it or what is my next course of action that I am supposed to do? 456legend(talk) 12:06, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@456legend welcome to Teahouse! See wikidata:Help:Merge for merging Wikidata items. This is helpful if both items have a lot of useful properties/content. Happy merging! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:27, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the inputs!! 456legend(talk) 12:56, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I want to search article talk and project talk pages for intentional linked mentions in conversation threads of a particular policy-related explanatory essay (including mentions using linked shortcuts to the essay), but the vast majority of the pages that come up in "what links here" are to talk pages that transclude a template that links the essay, rather than specific conversational mentions of it. Is there any way to exclude talk pages that merely link to the essay because of the template's inclusion? (Is there maybe some search function to utilize, rather than what links here.)--2603:7000:8841:7600:2040:290A:9759:31D6 (talk) 13:03, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

You can use User:PrimeHunter/Source links.js if you have an account. Without an account you can preview {{Source links}} with the page name, e.g. at Wikipedia:Sandbox. Neither finds shortcuts and other redirects unless you search them one at a time with their name. We can help more if you give the name of the page of interest. It's always best to be specific. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:21, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

That's very helpful. Worked like a charm and exactly what I was seeking. Thank you!--2603:7000:8841:7600:2040:290A:9759:31D6 (talk) 13:57, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

There is a draft Page of Gujarati Movie Called "BaagadBillaa". So we made edits on that page and submitted for a review however it was declined and Comment written by Modater was "It is not necessary to add citation in every word" so as a result we've made amends on the page. Can anyone see that it's good to go now? Below is the link of draft;

Draft:BaagadBillaa PragneshUpala (talk) 12:19, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:NORUSH. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk

) 12:25, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

This is the Teahouse, not the help desk. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:07, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:PAID and follow the steps there. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited

) 15:47, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello. There is an error in the bio for Ed Farmer, former major league pitcher and MLB broadcaster. While he did indeed suffer from kidney disease during his life and would have died decades earlier without a lifesaving kidney transplant, Ed Farmer's cause of death (per his sister) was Idiopathic Cardiomyopathy (heart disease). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Farmer 172.8.246.199 (talk) 14:00, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, and wecome to the teahouse. The place to suggest improvements to a Wikipedia article is on the article's talk page, here Talk:Ed Farmer. However "per his sister" is not an acceptable source for Wikipedia.

I find that the source cited for his death does not say that he died of kidney disease (though it talks about his advocacy work for kidney disease, so it is an understandable assumption) and I have therefore removed the cause of death from the article. If you have a reliable published source for idiopathic cardiomyopathy, please cite it on the talk page. ColinFine (talk) 14:14, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Isn't that too strict though? I think it should be fine if it is phrased like "Farmer's sister said that the cause of his death is Idiopathic Cardiomyopathy". I doubt a news organization would do more research than just an interview with Farmer's family members.

talk

) 14:33, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree this sort of thing can be frustrating, but all information in Wikipedia should be verifiable, which means available in a reliable published source. However, that sort of diagnosis is not particularly remarkable, so it doesn't really add anything useful to the article. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:55, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. Again, per his sister is not a reliable source, however if there is a reliable source stating it, then it's okay to put it in. See

WP:RSPSS for a list of common sources and if they are notable or not. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited

) 15:51, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

A news organisation may indeed do no more than an interview with the family; but a reader next week in Birmingham or next month in Boston or next year in Brisbane can find the story and check that it least it was published, and also see what organ published it and make their own evaluation of the likely reliability.

An anonymous (or even named) editor on Wikipedia saying "his sister said so" is not something that anybody can verify. ColinFine (talk) 16:09, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi everyone. I created a page in another language than English and I had like to connect it with the English one. Could anyone tell me how to do ?. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghkkj (talk • contribs) 22:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ghkkj, and welcome to the Teahouse. That is done through Wikidata. Please see

WP:ILL. ColinFine (talk

) 22:49, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for reply. I'm actually stuck in the first step : Scroll down to the box marked "Wikipedia" and click on "edit" at the top of that box.. In Wikidata, I don't see any "edits" link in Wikipédia section of any wikidata's pages. Check it out by yourself, no "edit" appears. Please, I really need help, I've been looking for a solution for hours. Ghkkj (talk) 23:09, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I finally succedd to process, I found the link (the link is definetely no available in the computer version, had to do it on mobile to finally find this link). However there is still a problem for my case : when I try to create the interlink, this message appears : This page has been protected to prevent editing or other actions.. And its the same for every Wikidata's pages. Are Wikipédia users able to add interlink ?. Ghkkj (talk) 23:16, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

You should be able to log in to wikidata with the same credentials that you use for Wikipedia. -- asilvering (talk) 00:15, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Ghkkj, having created an article in a language other than English, (A) do you want to show its readers that there's also an article in English on the same subject? Or, (B) does this article mention some place/event/thing/illness/gene/organization/person etc about which there is no article in that language but there is an article in English, to which you want to point readers? If it's (A), then what's the Wikidata item ("Q" and then a number), and what's the language and title of your new article? -- Hoary (talk) 23:36, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

hello yes I want to show readers there is the same article wich exist in another language. The article concerned is Vesoul, a french town, and I created couples of article in foreign languages, please could you help me how to process, the Wikidata page says This page has been protected to prevent editing or other actions., but it says the same for any other Wikidatas pages, I'm stuck. The number is Q203309 and I created pages in different languages (interlingua, corsu etc) Ghkkj (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, you have to edit Q203309. Ghkkj, you appear never to have made any edits to Wikidata; see its explanation of "User access levels" about what you can and can't do there. If you were asking about the addition of a link to a new article in French or English, I'd volunteer to do it for you, but I'm not volunteering to add links to articles in languages that I don't understand, and thereby take responsibility for their accuracy. (Frankly, your range of languages alarms me.) So I suggest that you work your way up to a slightly higher access level in Wikidata, and then do the work yourself. This should only take a few days; there's no rush. -- Hoary (talk) 00:22, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Ghkkj, this is all looking increasingly screwy. Above, you say "different languages (interlingua, corsu etc)". But guc.toolforge.org has nothing about either of those two. Instead, it lists crh (Crimean Tatar Wikipedia), sco (Scots), sc (Sardinian), sq (Albanian), and vep (Veps). I'd never heard of Veps, which Wikipedia helpfully tells us is "a Finnic language from the Uralic language family". Crimean Tatar is Turkic. Your linguistic prowess is incredible, and I mean this literally. -- Hoary (talk) 00:40, 22 April 2023 (UTC) typo fixed Hoary (talk) 01:20, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Guc.toolforge.org does however show articles (mostly sub-stubs) on Vesoul in Interlingua, Corsican, and, I think, twenty-two other languages contributed to (and, mostly, created) by a single IP number (also, the creation of fr:Hôtel de Salives). -- Hoary (talk) 03:33, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@Ghkkj If you do know those languages, it is incredible, considering how unrelated they can be. I do have a doubt about you using translation, but I haven't seen a website for auto-translating Veps. Anyways, yes, you have to edit Q203309 on Wikidata. It appears to be in a wide range of languages, it would be helpful if you told us what languages you created the page in. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited) 19:16, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I have recently being working on improving this page as the previous version was poorly written, cited no sources, and had remained unchanged for nearly 7 years. I believe that I have now added enough information and sources, (practically any useful source I could find,) for the article to no longer be classified as a stub, but I do not know how I can nominate it for an upgrade. Does anyone know how I can do this or do this for me? I also removed the 'cite more sources' banner as I completely rewrote the article with lots of citations, references and sources, but could some please tell me if I was right to do so?

Cheers WikiHmmmm... (talk) 18:17, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello @

WP:LIECHT

and they may be able to change the rating. You can go ahead and remove the stub thingy at the bottom of the page (which I see, you have).

The talk page seems dead considering it is a rarely visited article, so I don't see any purpose in putting anything there for now. Also see

WP:WPFA. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited

) 19:10, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

And you definitely did the right thing by improving it, by the way. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited) 19:10, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, but I believe the Lichtenstein Project is well and truly dead. I'm not really sure how I put in a request for someone from the Football Assesment department to assess my work, so would you mind assessing it for me? WikiHmmmm... (talk) 19:15, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Nevermind, I found it! WikiHmmmm... (talk) 19:16, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@Vamsi20, it looks like no one has asked to have a project assessed in over 6 months. Should I still proceed? WikiHmmmm... (talk) 19:19, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

WikiHmmmm..., you do not need anybody's permission to upgrade what is clearly no longer a stub. Go to the article talk page and edit the Wikicode at the top, changing stub (which occurs twice) to start, C or B. Good work expanding the article. Cullen328 (talk) 19:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, what level do you think it deserves? WikiHmmmm... (talk) 19:28, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I feel it's a C, isn't that well-written for a B, but again the topic doesn't really have much around it. I think the article could use some more expansion and splitting into sections, and the lead area doesn't have that good of writing. See

WP:MOS for the style guidelines and you can get it to a B soon. (LIECHT is dead basically so you're on your own in improving it) Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited

) 19:33, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

After reviewing the page a bit more, I think the lead should be formatted like this: "The 1934 Liechtenstein Football Championship was the...". And you should write a new lead section (see

MOS:LEDE) instead of jumping into the backstory at the beginning. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited

) 19:42, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, baring in mind there is only me trying to improve these articles, and my time is limited, I may just work towards a C for all articles WikiHmmmm... (talk) 20:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Sure, I'll try to improve the article when I have time later because there's a number of flaws I could find. And yeah, there's basically no interest in improving these old low-quality articles, especially about obscure topics, so you'll be on your own for a while. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited) 20:21, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for showing interest by the way, I honestly thought no one else would care about my mini project. Let me know if you would perhaps like to start a 'wikiprojec microstate football' to focus on making stub articles relating to football from microstates at least C's across the board? WikiHmmmm... (talk) 20:40, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Honestly I don’t really know much about football into the technical stuff, I just like helping improve really neglected and low-quality articles. I haven’t done copy editing in a while but I’m planning to start doing that again considering there’s a bunch of new low-quality articles. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited) 21:32, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

It seems LIECHT is inactive actually, you can try at

WP:FOOTBALL though. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited

) 19:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Isn't the stub rating meant to be decided by the WikiProject or the WPFA? If not, there should be a criteria so just follow that and you should be good. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited) 19:24, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I checked the sources and two appear to be to Wikipedia itself (one to this Wikipedia, and the other to the German one). Wikipedia is not a reliable source and is not supposed to be cited, I suggest you find other sources. Also see

WP:RSPSS for a list. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited

) 20:15, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and removed the Wikipedia citations for you and replaced them with a citation needed template. Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited) 20:20, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I find new reliable sources (thanks to the folks in the German wiki who I kindly stole the source links from) WikiHmmmm... (talk) 20:35, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

found* WikiHmmmm... (talk) 20:36, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Heh…this reminds me of when I found sources from the German wiki on Anton Schaaf…heh I need to recheck those sources Vamsi20 (ask me questions) (see what I've edited) 21:54, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

FYI

 – Sections split. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:10, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello experienced editors,

I am reaching out for your guidance and assistance regarding a situation I am facing while trying to update the article about myself, Peter Levashov. I have disclosed my conflict of interest on the talk page and have been careful to only add well-sourced and accurate information to the article.

However, a politically engaged editor, @HouseOfChange, has been reverting all my edits, despite my efforts to follow Wikipedia guidelines and work collaboratively. I would greatly appreciate it if someone could review the situation and provide guidance on how to proceed or offer a neutral perspective on the edits I have made.

Here is the link to the diff of the reverted changes: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Levashov&diff=prev&oldid=1151099906

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to receiving your valuable insights and advice.

Best regardsLevashov.peter (talk) 12:29, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Levashov.peter I think it's best if you refrain from editing your own Wikipedia page, as it may seem to others that you're promoting your point of view since the article is about well, yourself. It's a biography of a living person, so the article should not be edited by the person the article is about. Dancing Dollar ^{(let's talk)} 13:34, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello DancingDollar,

Thank you for your guidance on the proper way to suggest changes to my Wikipedia article. I have followed your advice and submitted several edit requests in the "Talk" section of my page, ensuring that they are based on reliable, unconnected sources and maintain neutrality.

I kindly ask you to review these suggestions and consider implementing them in the article. Your attention and assistance in maintaining the integrity of the content are greatly appreciated.

Best regards,

Levashov.peter (talk) 22:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Levashov.peter, and welcome to the Teahouse. Dancing Dollar rightly told you what you should not do, but didn't tell you what you may do: please use the

edit request mechanism to suggest changes to Wikipedia's article about you. Note that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk

) 14:07, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello ColinFine,

Thank you for your guidance on the proper way to suggest changes to my Wikipedia article. I have followed your advice and submitted several edit requests in the "Talk" section of my page, ensuring that they are based on reliable, unconnected sources and maintain neutrality.

I kindly ask you to review these suggestions and consider implementing them in the article. Your attention and assistance in maintaining the integrity of the content are greatly appreciated.

Best regards,

Levashov.peter (talk) 22:22, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:ASFAQ for a much more complete guidance for the subjects of Wikipedia articles. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 21:31, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello Mike Turnbull,

Thank you for your guidance on the proper way to suggest changes to my Wikipedia article. I have followed your advice and submitted several edit requests in the "Talk" section of my page, ensuring that they are based on reliable, unconnected sources and maintain neutrality.

I kindly ask you to review these suggestions and consider implementing them in the article. Your attention and assistance in maintaining the integrity of the content are greatly appreciated.

Best regards,

Levashov.peter (talk) 22:22, 22 April 2023 (UTC)