Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1196

This is an current talk page .

I created a draft article for Ibragim Suleymanov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ibragim_Suleymanov a recipient of the title People's Hero of Kazakhstan which is a clear and undeniable notability qualifier. I was more than a little worried because I know very well about Wikipedias anti-Central Asian bias and history of rejecting highly notable Central Asians for articles simply because they don't have English name recognition. None of the websites I cited in my article are prohibted, they are major Kazakh press entities. Just because you haven't heard of a source and don't know who to use google translate doesn't mean that a source is unreliable. This anti-Kazakh bias festering in Wikipedia is unnjustifiable. How would you feel if an article for Colonel Paris D. Davis was rejected in Kazakh Wikipedia on the grounds that American sources like CNN and Washington post weren't reliable and Kazakhs felt it wasn't worth giving him an article since he doesn't have Kazakh media about him? Wikipedia needs more anti-bias training. I knew it that the second I used the word Kazakh it would be treated differently than if I wrote about an American of similar status. Орта жүздің Ноқта ағасы Тарақты шежіресі is a reliable source and used in the Russian article. e-history.kz is cited often in english wikipedia and there is nothing unreliable about it. Жамбыл Жабаев творчествосы is a reliable book source for the poetry of Jambul. soviet-aces-1936-53.ru is cited in dozens if not hundreds of other Wikipedia articles about non-Kazakhs, but now that its in an article about a Kazakh it's not reliable enough? What about Aikyn.kz is unreliable? Should we declare the NYT not reliable because it isn't in Kazakh. I will share the news of this rejection on my social media, I highly doubt other Kazakhs will be amused by this. I would like to remind you how the Uzbeks feel about the time that another anti-Central Asian editor rejected Toshmuhammed Sarimsoqov's article because apparently being head of the national academy of sciences and recipient of the highest Soviet civilian honor isn't enough for an Uzbek to be worth an article. I demand a better expanation that "unreliable sources" because that is clearly not the problem here.--

Courtesy pinging @

KazyKazyKazakhstan, please don't make vague threats about sharing your grievance on social media- that isn't very constructive. Qcne (talk)

12:18, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

(Am I the only one who has no idea who Colonel Paris D. Davis is?) FeRDNYC (talk) 20:33, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

It is not illegal to complain about article rejection on social media. The US constitution protects freedom of speech which includes the right to complain about unjust rejection of Kazakhs and wrongfully declaring many major Kazakh newspapers and books to be unreliable — Preceding

Firstly- please remember to sign your comments so we can track who is saying what.

Let's take a step back and breathe- this is obviously an important topic for you but I think we should Wikipedia:Assume good faith and be careful that you don't resort to personal attacks.

Your article was only declined, not rejected, which shows that it can still be considered! Let's wait for the reviewer to pass some specific feedback, and hopefully we can then understand why they declined the article and what you can do to improve it. Qcne (talk) 12:26, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

I would just add that "Freedom of speech" is irrelevant here. Like many people, you misunderstand what is meant by freedom of speech. To quote from that article: free speech ... prevents only government restrictions on speech, not restrictions imposed by private individuals or businesses such as Wikipedia. In other words, people can't write on Wikipedia whatever they like. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:50, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Speaking of constructive how is wrongfully declaring so many major and popular Kazakh newspapers and books to be unreliable not unconstructive? — Preceding

@

KazyKazyKazakhstan

: firstly, I would ask that you try to remain civil, and avoid wild accusations and baseless claims of bias and discrimination; Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, and such an adversarial attitude is not conducive to collaboration.

I didn't say that Kazakh-language sources are unacceptable. I didn't even say that all the sources cited in this draft are non-reliable. However, I would say that half of the draft content is not referenced in any obvious way, and a couple of the sources cited did not seem relevant and/or reliable, leaving a significant proportion of the information potentially unsupported.

But now that you have resubmitted the draft (without making any improvements, I might add), you have the opportunity to have it reviewed again by someone else. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:38, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

@

KazyKazyKazakhstan: as a tangent comment, now that you have re-submitted the draft, I encourage you to take off the first paragraph "This person [...] and historical books." It is better to put this paragraph in the talk page of the article. I believe that your draft is more likely to pass without this paragraph. Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk

) 12:48, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

If you take a moment to stop ranting and complaining about perceived injustices, you will note that your draft has already been accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 13:08, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Don’t you just love it when, instead of trying to improve their article, an editor just tries to blame it on the “anti-Central Asian” editors?

(talk)

17:43, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I am writing an article about a recent video game, and I need some help to make sure these sources are reliable enough to be included in this article, right over here. Any constructive criticism is welcome. I am hoping this reaches GA status someday.

Here are the sources I've found:
1. https://raritysniper.com/news/goblintown-nft-art-takes-twitch-by-storm-in-only-up/
2. https://dappradar.com/blog/goblintown-viral-game-only-up-nft-trading-impact (this is a blog, which I'm very sure it's unreliable and an SPS)
3. https://guided.news/en/gaming/dayz-only-up-server-with-reward/ (this doesn't contain info about NFTs and their involvement in this game, but it lists an additional adaptation)
4. https://sportslumo.com/esports/only-up-in-fortnite-how-can-you-play-it/ (Fortnite adaptation)
5. https://www.binance.com/en/feed/post/649340
6. https://nftplazas.com/goblintown-nft-collection-twitch/
7. https://fagenwasanni.com/ai/veteran-fps-devs-form-new-studio-to-make-games-inside-fortnite/64370/
Tarantula^TM (speak with me) (my legacy) 19:26, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:RS ToadetteEdit ^(chat)/_(logs

) 20:20, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't think it's very helpful to tell TrademarkedTarantula to "make sure that [these sources] are reliable", ToadetteEdit, when their question is whether they're reliable! Cordless Larry (talk) 20:23, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

none of them are mentioned in the list of sources, but i'm a bit iffy on considering binance reliable for reasons surprisingly unrelated to wikipedia

the rest, i'll check in an hour to be sure, because i haven't heard of them before

dappradar being a blog automatically disqualifies it though

(give me attention) • (see my deeds)

20:29, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Blogs can be considered reliable for some claims if the author is a subject-matter expert (I'm not expressing a view on whether that's the case here). See

WP:BLOGS. Cordless Larry (talk

) 20:40, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

@ToadetteEdit, I've already checked the article for copyright violations using Earwig's Copyvio Detector, linked here. Tarantula^TM (speak with me) (my legacy) 20:56, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I will cross off the sources as we go. Tarantula^TM (speak with me) (my legacy) 20:54, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

@

reliable sources noticeboard may be better equipped to help you evaluate if those sources are considered reliable enough to be used for the encyclopedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝

 ) 21:28, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @

significant coverage of the center itself, since there's only minimal mention of the center itself. Best, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk

22:48, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Sdkb! I believe the three sources below could be appropriate:

1.Jones, Kellie (2017). South of Pico: African American Artists in Los Angeles in the 1960s and 1970s. Duke University Press. p. 172.

ISBN 978-0-8223-6164-0

.

2. "African-American Artists of Los Angeles: Cecil Fergerson". www.oac.cdlib.org. Retrieved 2023-07-25.

(the above is an interview -- would interviews count as sources, even though they may not be considered independent sources?)

3. "William Grant Still Art Center". LA Sentinel. March 17, 2011. pp. A2.

The above is a physical newspaper article. I've paused on adding citations as I also wanted to inquire about citation overkill, but if this citation would contribute to the article's notability then I will add it. Tempe Stewart WGSArts 23:11, 1 August 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Memorywrker (talk • contribs)

For the first source, I don't have access to it, but

offline sources can count. What sort of discussion is there on page 172? If the entire page is about the arts center, giving its basic history, then that probably counts. If it's only an trivial mention

of the center in the course of a discussion about e.g. an exhibit held there, then it probably doesn't count.

For the second, interviews

normally do not count

, because they're primary rather than secondary sources.

For the last one, that looks promising, but again I'd need to see it to be sure. What sort of article is it? Does it have a reporter's byline, or is it just an event notice? Again, offline sources are permissible, but in practical terms, you'll have an easier time getting the article published to mainspace if you can find a link to it (maybe check Archive.org versions of the LA Sentinel's website from around the time it was published; I came up blank trying

Newspapers.com

archives).

Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:15, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello Memorywrker!

Now that Sdkb is dealing with the sources, I am happy to give some feedback on the content and structure. I understand that it takes a lot to create a draft, so I thank you first for your effort put into this project. That being said–

1. Please do not list "WGSAC" in the title of the article. The title of this article, in my opinion, should be "William Grant Still Arts Center". The simpler, the better. You may put the abbreviation "WGSAC" in the lede section (the very first paragraph of the article) and bold it using ''' marks.
2. You have created a list for the "Black Doll Show Exhibitions" and other exhibitions. Please note that Wikipedia is not a database (see
   WP:NOTDATABASE
   for more details). Long lists like this reduce the readability of the article and deviates the attention of the reader.
3. The entire "Educational Programs" section is unsourced. If you cannot find good sources for this part, please consider leaving it out.
4. Please use
   MOS:HEADINGS
   for more details). For example, the section "The WGSAC Annual Black Doll Show" should be capitalized as "The WGSAC annual black doll show".
5. Please do not use <big> </big> for the section headings. I assume you didn't intend to–could this be from visual editing?
6. Similarly, please do not bold the section headings.

You are off to a good start. Please be patient and have courage. If you're uncertain how to format something, please check Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Regardless of the outcome of your review, I hope this is a helpful learning experience for you. Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 23:59, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I have noticed that nevada-history.org has been hijacked, and it's used for a few citations. Should we just add the archive-url parameter and mark the url as dead, or something else? Kk.urban (talk) 06:22, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Kk.urban: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1196. It'd be best marked as usurped. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Does that mean "url_status=usurped"? Kk.urban (talk) 06:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Yep. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Kk.urban (talk) 06:36, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

So I heard

@

WP:MOVE. However, before doing this, I would add some more information about the change of school name first. JML1148 ^{(talk | contribs}

) 08:33, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source for this? The Broomfield School website says nothing about a change of name, and the website for Laurel Park School says it doesn't open until September. Please discuss this on the article talk page, include reliable sources, and gain concensus. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:47, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I was curious to know if the the whole draft met the requirement for the Wikipedia. I aIso wanted to make a follow-up on the article Rachel Tugutu to know if there's anything I should correct.

- Thank you. Bleiomo (talk) 03:11, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @

subst:Submit}} at the top of that page. You may then need to wait a while for it to be reviewed. Best, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk

03:45, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

The draft is also very unlikely to be accepted if you do not demonstrate the

notability of the subject. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk

03:46, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

notability. -- Hoary (talk

) 04:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:Golden Rule for guidance. Anything you cannot cite to a reliable source should be removed. ~Anachronist (talk

) 04:31, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification, I will go ahead and correct any errors before submitting it for the review. Bleiomo (talk) 09:07, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I am currently working on the Wiki biography of Fela Akinse , and the article draft have been decline two times because despite what I would have considered significantly improvement based on initial rejection.

It hurts to see My draft rejected but feel he pass notability because He is a member of

Kindly review, and help give me more specific recommendations. I have added additional references and adjustments along with other experience editors, even after the second draft decline.Bruce954 (talk) 09:36, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Bruce954.

Ironically I think you've now fallen into the trap of Wikipedia:Citation overkill. Could you give us just the three best sources which are independent of Fela, from reliable places, are secondary, and discuss Fela in detail or provide analysis / interpretation?

Note your draft has only been declined, not rejected. Qcne (talk) 12:32, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Qcne Thank you for your positive response, kindly see this as requested. [7] [8][9][10][11]. Please kindly note, I also have an argument above of him pass notability for WP: BASIC , WP: GNG , WP:CREATIVE, WP:NACADEMIC . Bruce954 (talk) 13:08, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

@Bruce954, the first diff is to IEEE, which is affiliated with Mr. Akinse (because as you say he's a member). What we need to see are three that constitute all of the following:

1. Independent (not affiliated in any way)
2. Reliable (in general the minimum standard is evidence of editorial oversight)
3. Significant coverage

Which three (and only three; if you provide five, and we check the first one, and it doesn't qualify, a lot of folks won't even look at the rest) constitute this? Valereee (talk) 22:40, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

I Valereee appreciate your response, please kindly see [12][13] [14] and please, kindly note , I have an argument above aswel which can also be considered. Bruce954 (talk) 00:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I would say that the Nigerian Tribune is a good source, but The Nation seems a bit promotional in nature- especially the list of random facts at the bottom. I wonder how or why that article was created? Vanguard could be a good source too, but is a little short. Ideally you'd want to see some interpretation and analysis of Fela's activities- these three sources have a hint of promotion about them. Qcne (talk) 11:04, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

• I Qcne appreciate your kind response, please kindly see this additional source. [15][16] [17]. Please don't forget my argument above. Thank you.Bruce954 (talk) 08:12, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

  The Sun and Tribune again seem a little promotional, but might be okay as sources. Add them and see what the reviewers say. ClimAccelerator seems to just be a promotional interview so wouldn't meet the Wikipedia:Independent sources threshold.

  You still need to be careful about your citation overkill.

  Looking at your arguments above:

  - I don't think Fela passess Wikipedia:Notability (academics) just by being a member of IEEE or getting one of their awards: the award criteria mentions "highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level". I'm not sure the IEEE Entrepreneurship Stars award is this- but happy to defer to an Editor with more knowledge.

  - Fela doesn't pass

  Wikipedia:TOOSOON. Qcne (talk)

  09:09, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Can anyone help me resolve this error message? ⧼No stashed content found for 0/0d43e0c8-2f7e-11ee-9db0-c45ab19b09d4⧽ Joshbonat2580 (talk) 05:09, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Joshbonat2580, hmm, I'm not sure exactly what might cause that message. Have you gotten it multiple times? And what are you doing/trying to do when you get it? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:19, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I am trying to publish a new article- -- Draft creation using the WP:Article wizard -- Created an article on Elle Blink.

This is the exact error message ⧼No stashed content found for 0/0d43e0c8-2f7e-11ee-9db0-c45ab19b09d4⧽

Yes, I have gotten it multiple times. Joshbonat2580 (talk) 05:23, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Joshbonat2580. Where are you trying to upload this content? If this has anything to do with the deleted Draft:Elle Blink, that was overtly promotional content. Promotional activity is simply not allowed on Wikipedia, so do not try again. Cullen328 (talk) 08:22, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

However, while Cullen's advice is good, the error you are getting is a technical one, and nothing to do with the content of your draft. If it keeps happening, ask about it on

WP:VPT. But, as Cullen says, it is a waste of time trying to submit (or even save) promotional content. ColinFine (talk

) 09:46, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Is there anyone here who can check and review Millac Foods? The page was created over a month ago. Any feedback is much appreciated. Thank you. Stkhiz (talk) 06:25, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @

Mainspace so not sure what you need reviewing? Qcne (talk)

09:12, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

On 26 June you moved the draft from your Sandbox to Mainspace, thus bypassing the AfC review process. As a new article, this will now be reviewed by New Pages Patrol (

WP:NPP). NPP will either accept, revert to draft for more work, or Speedy delete the article. Only after a NPP review (or 90 days if a NPP reviewer does not get to it), will the article be moved so that search engines such as Google can find it when a search is conducted on Millac Foods. David notMD (talk

) 09:17, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

In the meantime, Stkhiz, I advise you to look at each of your sources and consider whether they meet

notability. Remember 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

.

I also observe that every single edit you have made since you created your account (apart from this one) has been to your draft, which immediately makes me suspect that you have a conflict of interest. Please clarify whether you have a relationship with Millac Foods. ColinFine (talk) 09:56, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I am trying to upload image of File:LMR Piggyback Carriage Truck.png which is a postage stamp but am having trouple. The stamp commenorates the opening of the line in 1830. ----MountVic127 (talk) 07:25, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

File:LMR Piggyback Carriage Truck.png

Image:LMR Piggyback Carriage Truck.png

Hello,

non-free content criteria for images. Each country has its own copyright standards. Non-free images cannot be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, but must be uploaded (if acceptable) locally on English Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk

) 08:02, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MountVic127, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have successfully uploaded the image to commons:File:LMR Piggyback Carriage Truck.png, but you have not provided the required copyright status, so it will shortly be deleted unless you do.

Unfortunately, commons:COM:United Kingdom#Stamps makes it clear that such stamps may not be uploaded to Commons. As Cullen says, if you can establish that the use meets all the criteria of the non-free content criteria, then you may upload it to Wikipedia (not Commons) as non-free content; but I think it is unlikely that a commemorative stamp will meet criterion #8. ColinFine (talk) 10:04, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I have made some progress by finding the link to File:

Hi Team, I Want to Create a Wikipedia Page for the name of " Vision IAS " . I am having reliable source for it, such as

1. Times of India 2. Hindustan Times 3. Jagran Josh 4. Livemint 5. OP India 6. Navbhratimes 7. Indian Express

We are also doing the social work for the societies through the help of our organization names as " Paras India " ( https://www.parasindia.in/).

Also having a School in rural India named as " Global Village Foundation ( http://globalvillagefoundation.in/rdgvschool/index.html ) Infinityvision02 (talk) 06:47, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Have you read

WP:TASK) before creating a new article. NotAGenious (talk

) 07:04, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Yss, I have read and understood Infinityvision02 (talk) 07:50, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Also,

WP:TOI NotAGenious (talk

) 07:09, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Infinityvision02, what makes you say "We are also doing the social work for the societies through the help of our organization names as " Paras India " ( https://www.parasindia.in/)"? -- Hoary (talk) 07:27, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Please check here are our credentials or also can go through this link ( https://www.parasindia.in/ )

PARAS INDIA was established in 2007 with the aim to transform society by uplifting and dignifying the marginalized sections of the society. With our efforts, we aim to empower the society in line with the tenets enshrined in our Constitution. We are a national level non-governmental organization which is currently working in five states in India, namely, Delhi-NCR, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Bihar . Our focus areas include education, gender, counselling, awareness generation, livelihood, healthcare and disaster management. It’s our prime endeavour to bring into mainstream those who have been historically and socially sidelined. To make them an active participant in the democratic process and bring dignity to their lives.

Note: Please check our above given notable link, I hope you find it valuable for Wikipedia page creation.

Thanks Infinityvision02 (talk) 07:54, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Infinityvision02, the aims of your organization are of course admirable, but you are demonstrating a profound lack of understanding of this encyclopedia. For one thing, what an organization says about itself is of little or no value for an encyclopedia article about that organization. -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Infinityvision02, please also stop copy-pasting news headlines into articles, as you did with Pawan Munjal here. Article text needs to be written in full sentences, not in the form of newspaper headlines. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:17, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Noted Infinityvision02 (talk) 09:26, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Noted your points, but what do you think about credibility for " VisionIAS "Page Creation.

1. Times of India

2. Hindustan Times

3. Jagran Josh

4. Livemint

5. OP India

6. Navbhratimes

7. Indian Express

Note Please check and let me know your opinion

Thanks Infinityvision02 (talk) 09:31, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

The list of medias from India isn't enough. I would suggest doing the following

1. Carefully review

WP:NOTA

to determine whether you should create the article. Articles without reliable inline citations can and will be deleted.

2. Either request an article creation at

WP:AR

, or

3. Create a draft using the

WP:YFA

and write the article.

Also, if you have a

WP:COIE NotAGenious (talk

) 10:36, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Please note that The Times of India is usually considered unreliable and not independent, as they accept article submissions for payment. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources for more information. Qcne (talk) 10:57, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

As you told me times of India is not a reliable source, so please also confirm me from this list which are notable or not.

Hindustan TImes

Jagran Josh

Livemint

OP India

Navbhratimes

Indian Express

MID Day

Newspatrolling

PKBnews

Rising Kashmir

Daily

Daily Excelsior

The Logical Indian

TFI Post

Newsroom Post

MP Breaking News

News Track Live

Thanks Infinityvision02 (talk) 05:48, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

The place to ask about reliability of sources is

WP:RSP

, but you should also search the archives of RSN.

Note that reliability is only one of the three independent criteria by which the value of a source is evaluated: you also need to consider whether the particular item you are citing is

significant coverage of the subject. Sources that don't meet these latter two requirements may sometimes be used, but they do not contribute to establishing notability, and the bulk of the sources cited should meet those criteria. ColinFine (talk

) 10:35, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi There, I didn't logged in long time, but from now I'll try to be more active :) Zoltan Pasztory (talk) 06:05, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Zoltan, and welcome back. Is there some help you are looking for? ColinFine (talk) 10:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello folks, I'm new here and have a beginner question. If I edit an article in English but it has several languages, should I tend to try to apply the changes in the other languages ​​as well or do the native wiki users of the country do it themselves? Aritonoko (talk) 07:25, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Aritonoko. Each language version of Wikipedia is its own autonomous project with its own policies and guidelines, although there are similarities. There is no expectation that an English Wikipedia editor will make edits in other versions. On the other hand, if you speak other languages well enough, you are welcome to also contribute in those languages. But it is not required. Another thing to keep in mind is that they are language versions, not country or national versions. Far more people speak Portuguese in Brazil than in Portugal, just as far more people speak English in the United States than in England. There are competent English speakers in every country on earth, and they are all welcome to edit the English Wikipedia, within policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 08:14, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Cullen328

Thank you so much for your prompt and informative response! I really appreciate your clarification about each language version of Wikipedia being its own autonomous project with its own policies and guidelines. I'll definitely keep that in mind while contributing.

I do speak a few other languages, so I'll try to contribute in those languages as well when I feel comfortable doing so. But as you mentioned, it's good to know that it's not expected of me.

Also, your point about language versions, not being country or national versions, is well taken. I'll be sure to remember that too.

Once again, thank you for your guidance. I look forward to being a part of this wonderful community and contributing positively.

Best regards, Aritonoko (talk) 08:22, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Aritonoko: If you got a mind to, you could also pitch in at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English. Help always appreciated. Lectonar (talk) 11:07, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Zigzag theorem.pdf

I created a figure using TikZ, but I couldn't remove the margin. Would you mind helping me ? SilverMatsu (talk) 11:40, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, SilverMatsu, and welcome to the Teahouse. I suggest you look at

WP:Image tutorial. ColinFine (talk

) 11:56, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. Thanks to you, I fixed an figure. --SilverMatsu (talk) 14:17, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I have created the entry for Bridget Lancaster & am being told it is held up because of tone. It's confusing because I am not seeing the language that is 'PR' or promotional. Advise please. Geraldine Aino (talk) 15:08, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

This presumably refers to puffery like Her commitment bringing people together and making a positive impact on society has earned her respect within the culinary world, which does not appear in the cited source. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:19, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:BLP to see the relevant policies which you must comply with in your re-write. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 16:22, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Geraldine, I went through and removed the promotional stuff, but on a quick spot check, source 5 doesn't even mention Boston or West Virginia? Am I missing something? Valereee (talk) 18:39, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Geraldine Aino. Let me start by saying that I enjoy cooking shows and am very familiar with this cook/performer. I think that she is probably notable and the encyclopedia would be better off with an article about her. But I want to raise another issue. Notability is established by providing references to reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic. Lancaster is a star on the PBS network, and the majority of your references are to PBS and to various of its member stations. Essentially, these sources are promoting their own broadcast content. So, I encourage you to provide more references to sources that are entirely independent of PBS. Cullen328 (talk) 21:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for that Cullen but seems PBS stars are not that publicly covered. I cite her colleague Christopher Kimball's page, who was also a founding member of the shows. It is difficult for me to understand the policy of determining notability strictly based on independent press. This is an example of where this policy is flawed IMO. Geraldine Aino (talk) 14:23, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I added a question to Talk:Flatland and then thought of reading the talk page to see if the answer was already given or implied. I stayed reading down the long list of comments, but when I navigated to another page, probably the article, I couldn't get back to the talk page to read it: I only got brief lists of maybe the last 5 modifications, all of them iirc changes of status, not actual Talk comments. Even after many tries, I haven't been able to see the Talk page itself. Help, please.

Thnidu (talk) 14:11, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Thnidu According to your contribution history, the comment you added was at Talk:VAS: An Opera in Flatland, not Talk:Flatland. Both links work perfectly well for me. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:19, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Ahh, thanks!

Thnidu (talk) 14:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm struggling with this question because it seems initially silly to me, but I assume and hope there's no stupid questions here. I haven't found a clearly legible answer in WP:TELEVISION, but that may be my reading error. One of my most frequent uses of WP as a casual user has been looking at TV episode summaries mid-episode, especially if I need to pause and resume at a later time. For many shows I've watched, I find that episode summaries are not available for any season. I've wondered many times if adding a summary myself (when I feel confident about the content, of course) is the right course of action. I usually question it in the following circumstances, which can overlap: 1) There are no other episode summaries available. 2) I have not seen the full season. 3) The TV show is an adaptation of source material I'm not familiar with. 4) I can't commit to writing summaries for a full season and can only write for one episode. SO: Should I write them anyway and hope for the best? Is a sole summary among a full season without them too disorienting/confusing for readers? Am I way overthinking this? Thanks :^) 0ghostlight (talk) 10:31, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Anything is better than nothing. Just stick to the guidelines about them, especially the main one, that it must be written in your own words and not copy and pasted from a TV guide. Close paraphrasing is also a big no-no. As regards point 3 above: You don't need to know the source material.Your episode summary should be based wholly on what you saw in the episode. You're not writing a review. Other than that, just do it. - X201 (talk) 12:11, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:PLOTSUM. Note especially the bit in the box at the top about policy. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 15:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I want to create a wikipedia page for a non-profit organization I'm part of. Please let me know how can I do it without getting any issues. Ramaitha (talk) 22:33, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:Conflict of interest editing. After that, see Help:Your first article — the short of it is that if the nonprofit has not received significant coverage in independent reliable sources, it cannot have an article. Best, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk

22:42, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

included in

notability for organizations subpage is also relevant and you may read that as well) and Reliable sources covers the kind of resources or websites you can use to back up the claims made in your article (which is required for just about every statement on Wikipedia). even if your organization does count under one of the notability criteria, it won't count unless there are reliable sources to back that claim up. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk

- 00:14, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I am a co-founder of the non-profit organization and wish to create a wikipedia page for the organization Ramaitha (talk) 05:38, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi

here, there's not chance of viable Wikipedia article being written about it. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 05:51, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@

articles here are not always a good idea. A brief Google of your organisation's name suggests to me that very little exists about it in reliable sources and you would therefore be best to stick to doing your good work and allow the world to take notice in due course, at which point some volunteer is likely to write about it on Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 15:49, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, AKSHADEV. You might have more luck in getting help if you gave us some clue what you are talking about and where to "read everything". (I could probably find it by looking through your contributions, but, as a volunteer here, I don't feel particularly motivated to do so). If you want people to help you, please help them to do so. ColinFine (talk) 10:11, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@

not-vote formatting changes which Akshadev did in a different talk page but was warned for (diff) because they believe it's unfair for Akshadev to get warned while Shaan and Silver don't. 💜  melecie  talk

- 11:11, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Melecie: You got it right! Respect for you (wholeheartedly). @ColinFine: dear editor, If you don't feel motivated to help me out, it's absolutely fine. Thanks for your kind words. Have a great time! — AKSHADÉV™ 💬 11:22, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Akshadev, I (somewhat) understand your frustrations, but no editor is obligated to warn for every transgression they see, and a lack of warning other editors is not an endorsement of their behavior. In my humble opinion, your response on your talk page and especially this post on the Teahouse are quite inappropriate. WPscatter ^t/_c 15:33, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Wpscatter: I aslo (somewhat) understand that my response could have been inappropriate but my only point is that I feel like I'm the one being warned for my mistakes and the others aren't. Anyway I know it's pointless to pointing things out, I'll be careful with my behaviours/responses. Have a great time! — Akshadév™ 💬 15:48, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Now I'm feeling good. @Wpscatter: Thanks for your kind words. @Melecie: Thanks for understanding what I meant (even though I briefly explained). If I face any problem in future, I will consider discussing them with you first . Wishing you both a great time! शुभरात्रि (ShubhRātri, means goodnight in Hindi) — Akshadév™ 💬 16:15, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi team, I have a query regarding one thing. Currently I joined in a company as the social media manager. My first task is to create a wikipedia page by searching the relevant sources from articles. But my doudt is if I login from my company wifi to my wikipedia account will there be any ban. Because multiple users tried to login from this wifi. Can any one help me how to make my account safe from ban while connecting to the company wifi.

Also is there any issue if I create a wikipedia page for the company I joined. I will create it by following all tge rules and by providing reliable sources I get. Paavamjinn (talk) 12:20, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Paavamjinn.

Please firstly follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure immediately. It is highly discouraged from creating an article in which you have a clear Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, as it is likely you won't be able to create the article from a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

You should also read

Wikipedia is not a place

for any type of self-promotion or advertisement. Wikipedia is not a social media site like Facebook, Instagram, or LinkedIn.

Once you have read all that, you need to read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) in detail. All subjects on Wikipedia must pass the notability threshold, detailed in that link. Only organisations that meet the criteria set out there can have a Wikipedia article.

If you are absolutely sure that your organisation passes the strict notability criteria, you can then create a draft article via the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process.

Let us know if you have any more specific questions, hope that helps. Qcne (talk) 12:30, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

And to answer your original question, @Paavamjinn, as long as you have a registered user account (you do) then you should be fine logging in on company WiFi. Qcne (talk) 12:33, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I understand that. But kindly note that I will create the page as per my findings and the reliable sources I get. They asked me whether its possible to create the article. There are some intresting facts of there success and i will add the article as per the sources I get. Any way I will go through the articles you shared regarding the paid service and act accordingly. Thanks for the response Paavamjinn (talk) 13:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Paavamjinn. Remember 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) 17:05, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi, everyone! I hope you are all doing well as you read this post. By the way, this is regarding my User Talk. I was just wondering if I could delete the old tags on my user talk? I just want to keep things tidy. That's all.

Another thing is about the page I created before for Athena Vas. Initially, it was reviewed by @Onel5969, but it was moved back to draft due to COI. After the resubmission, it got declined. As per the editor, Athena Vas has not yet shown to meet notability guidelines. I believe she has, as she was named the grand winner of The Bachelor (Greek TV series). Please review and advise. Thank you. Bmjc98 (talk) 16:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:BLANKING. It is preferred that you archive old discussions (and there is an automated bot that can do this for you), but you can simply delete things. See Help:Archiving a talk page

.

As for

WP:NACTOR are met. ~Anachronist (talk

) 16:57, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for responding to my post. I'll check these pages later. Please don't remove this thread yet for later's reference. Also, I really thought being a part of a TV show can make someone notable, especially if the person wins. Just like to the ones I previously wrote: Nigel Xavier, Angel Chen, and Daniel W. Fletcher. Anyway, thanks again. Bmjc98 (talk) 17:10, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Bmjc98. Being part of a TV show makes someone notable only if their participation results in several reliable, fully independent sources devoting significant coverage to the performer. There are countless participants on reality TV shows who are not notable. Cullen328 (talk) 17:51, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Okay. I understand. The sources I have for Athena are mostly in Greek. If you could review it, that would be much appreciated. Thank you. Bmjc98 (talk) 22:44, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Please don't remove this thread yet for later's reference
Sections that haven't been responded in two or three days will be automatically archived by a bot. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Bmjc98 (talk) 22:44, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

This is a problem I'm having with Commons, but I'm asking here since it's just a general wiki question.

Why isn't #REDIRECT [[Commons:Deletion requests/{{CURRENTYEAR}}/{{CURRENTMONTH}}/{{CURRENTDAY2}}]] a valid redirect? It shows up as a numbered list. The link itself is valid, so are templates just not supported in redirects?

Is there/should there be a Phabricator ticket about this? QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 00:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: According to Help:Redirect "Note that the redirect link must be explicit – it cannot contain magic words, templates, etc." RudolfRed (talk) 01:21, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

hello, please i am confused why this article was declined after correcting all i was asked too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mr_Henry_Agbai Asiwanju (talk) 16:35, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:Golden Rule requirements. ~Anachronist (talk

) 16:48, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

thank you. I would glad, if we can work on this article together. for better understanding and mentorship. thank you Asiwanju (talk) 00:04, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Anachronist Asiwanju (talk) 00:14, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:MENTORSHIP. Sorry, I have no interest in that article subject. When it has failed to be approved so many times under different titles, it is likely not worth spending more effort on it. Some article topics are simply not suitable. ~Anachronist (talk

) 00:24, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Anachronist Thank you. I would still want to come under your mentorship on this space. to improve and enhance my abilities here. Asiwanju (talk) 00:51, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Asiwanju: I have no time to mentor anyone. Please see Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area/Adopters for a list of people willing to be mentors. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:51, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Does it exist? 193.207.198.242 (talk) 13:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Not that I know of. NotAGenious (talk) 13:35, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

You might be looking for

WP:CVU NotAGenious (talk

) 13:37, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, thank you! 193.207.198.242 (talk) 13:37, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

We also have an arbitration committee for extreme cases. Pablothepenguin (talk) 21:24, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:ARBCOM is a higher level up, but, as you correctly say, it is indeed reserved for the extreme cases. Nick Moyes (talk

) 21:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

With no idea what the crime would be, I would caution taking something to

Rjjiii (talk

) 06:01, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I'd recommend taking a look at WP:RAA if you need help from admins. NotAGenious (talk) 07:36, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi, My page was getting declined; whether there are any changes that should be made, may you suggest with that? [ Scottwilliam2609 ]THIS WAS MY USER NAME Scottwilliam2609 (talk) 09:02, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

There are numerous problems with your draft, many of which are detailed on your talk page. Please follow those links and read about the relevant Wikipedia policies. If there is a specific policy you don't understand feel free to ask here. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:15, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

paid editing

; declaring a paid editing relationship is a Terms of Use requirement; I note that you claimed the logo of the company as your own personal work. This was improper; by claiming the logo as your own work and uploading it to Wikipedia you made it available for anyone to use and even potentially make money off of as long as attribution is provided. Company logos are the work of the company, and must be uploaded under "fair use" to this Wikipedia directly and cannot be on Commons(which only host "free"(in terms of copyright) images. Logos cannot be in drafts until the draft is accepted and placed in the encyclopedia.

Please review the advice left by reviewers. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell about themselves and what they do. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent

Your First Article. 331dot (talk

) 09:16, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Please see your user talk page for more information. 331dot (talk) 09:18, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

What is the usual procedure for finding what is causing lint errors in an article? Mtanti (talk) 20:14, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Lint errors? Pablothepenguin (talk) 21:23, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@

Linter errors. 💜  melecie  talk

- 21:26, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Do you have software for lint errors? Pablothepenguin (talk) 21:29, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:LINT information page already indicated by Melecie. That includes information on some bots which work on these errors and also how the individual errors are logged, categorised and prioritised for attention. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 10:10, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

is it ok to use "staff writer" for the author of a citation? ltbdl (talk) 07:36, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Seems like inserting <!--Not stated--> or <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> is the standard procedure here; the former is mentioned in Help:Citation Style 1#Authors, while the latter is mentioned in the talk archives for that page a decent amount. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 07:54, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Nope. It will look like "a friend of my said xxxxx", to improve the skill of citing, please have a read on

WP:PROVEIT, the latter is a helpful tool for providing citation with correct formats. -Lemonaka‎

10:13, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

For written documents, you have templates like these: [1]^: 10 or ^[1]: 10. They let you point to a different page of the same document without creating a new reference each time, but I can't seem to find an equivalent that would let me point to different times of the same audio or video document. Thanks in advance for your help. Redacwiki (talk) 14:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Redacwiki! Maybe use {{sfn}} and specify the loc parameter? TheLonelyPather (talk) 14:32, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Redacwiki The template {{rp}} takes any text as its parameter, so you can use it just the same way: ^{: 5min. 3 sec.}, for example. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I used {{rp}} like Mike suggested above for the article Apetor, e.g ^[2]: 3:09 and ^[2]: 8:21. I'm not sure if there's any other method better fit for this purpose. ArcticSeeress (talk) 15:16, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Alright, I wasn't sure it was authorized as the template explicitly refers to pages, but I'll do that. Thanks everyone.

Redacwiki (talk) 23:13, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Redacwiki Just for clarity in case others read this thread, the template documentation at {{rp}} says Other in-source-location information can also be used for non-numeric pages, for example: "f. 29", "A7", and "back cover", etc., and can also be used for non-paginated sources, e.g., "0:35:12" for a video source. (my emphasis). Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:15, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Could someone please archive the discussion on the talk page of Emily Austin (journalist) regarding the page move. Thanks. MaskedSinger (talk) 13:55, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@

H:ARC Mike Turnbull (talk

) 14:05, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

ok thanks! MaskedSinger (talk) 14:07, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

I found an article: Daily Hive and there is no website. I added the website but realized that the website was not linked (can't click it to go to it). So then I undid the edit. How do you link the website? Myrealnamm (talk) 14:25, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Myrealnamm This is one of these things that's handled at Wikidata. If you add the template {{Official URL}} as part of the |website= parameter in the infobox, it will work. Some cases don't if Wikidata doesn't have the information. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:33, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I was using the visual editor and clicked on the info box and edited and added the link. I will try it Thx! Myrealnamm (talk) 14:38, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

By the way should I add https://  ? Myrealnamm (talk) 14:41, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I added https:// and it seems to be linked up. Myrealnamm (talk) 14:43, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull I found the link on wikidata here:

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q39087049

in the third column. Does that count? I tried source editor and switched back to visual, but the link was still in black letters, not in blue as a link. Myrealnamm (talk) 14:42, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Myrealnamm You don't need the link as such. Just place the template in the infobox using the source editor and it all works like magic! (I've done it now on Daily Hive). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:07, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

OK, I understand now! Thank you! Myrealnamm (talk) 15:28, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I just opened an account here. I followed directions to this page so hope I am in the right place. I have made some edits already, a few minor amendments and correcting typoes and the like, but seeing all the membership recommendations I agree it would be wise to hide my IP address. I use XML at work so I have no problem with your source editor but, that being so, do you think I should use the source editor or the visual one? Is the visual one for people who don't know markup? I really need to know if there would be any advantage for me using visual. I did a newcomer prompt edit earlier using the source editor. Thanks. ManGoBangla (talk) 06:35, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @ManGoBangla and welcome to the Teahouse.

There is a few advantages using the visual edit as it is a new way to edit without the need to understand any code or markup compared to the source editor. Either which editor you use, the choice is up to you. For more information please see

話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！

) 07:30, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, ManGoBangla. I will give you my opinion, which is not the "Official Wikipedia" opinion, since there is no such thing. I highly prefer the source editor. I am no computer geek. Instead, I am a long time self employed construction worker who has been editing Wikipedia as a hobby for 14 years. I have been trained to use the best tools for the job. In my opinion, the Wiki markup language is exceptionally easy to use for any editor willing to spend an hour or two or even half an hour learning it. I learned it rapidly by looking at the underlying code of pages that displayed things the way I wanted. Just as if I had purchased a new power saw or sander and wanted to try it out, and asked for advice from craftspeople who had already accomplished things similar to what I wanted to do. There are many people, paid (understandably) and unpaid (mostly out of idealism), who deride the source editor. On the other hand, I love it because it works well on every platform, and facilitates collaborative editing, which is the key to Wikipedia's success as a worldwide Top Ten website. If something better comes along, I will happily adopt it, but that day has not yet come. Cullen328 (talk) 07:55, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@ManGoBangla, you may find something useful at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1195#Visual_Editing_vs_Source_Editing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:28, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

And note particularly that the source editor allows you to edit individual sections, VE does not. Personally I really dislike VE because it so often doesn't do what I expect it to do. Doug Weller talk 15:49, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi, each of you, and I appreciate your interest and advice. I feel comfortable with the source editor so I will use that. There are obvious advantages too. I have been doing a lot of research and there is still much to read and to learn, but I think I have made the right decision by opening an account. I will have to decide what to edit now, but I have many interests. I have found this forum very useful and I am grateful for your help and kindness. I will certainly come here again if I need help and I recommend the forum to other new members. Thank you, all. ManGoBangla (talk) 15:58, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

How should I proceed? I want to correct an article on Wikipedia that's historically inaccurate. I have the public documentation to prove it.

Thanks for taking my question. Ed Morykwas (talk) 14:15, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Morykwas, welcome to the Teahouse.

You can only change or add information to a Wikipedia article if you have a reliable published source. See Wikipedia:Verifiability. You shouldn't add any material for which no reliable, published sources exists. This is Wikipedia:No original research, which is against Wikipedia policy.

If you are unsure- let us know the name of the article, the changes you want to make, and the source of your information (this could be a book, a webpage, a journal article, etc as long as it is Wikipedia:Reliable sources). Qcne (talk) 14:39, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello Ed Morykwas,

In addition to what User:Qcne said, you may also discuss the information you want to change on the talk page of the article, before actually making the change. This would let other editors know that you are about to change the information, and you can reason with them using the sources you have. Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 14:51, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Okay, here's the page I'm talking about:

Famous Birthdays

The article states that the Famous Birthdays website was founded in 2012 by Evan Britton. This is absolutely not true. I created the website in 1996 and sold it to Mr. Britton in 2011. I would like to amend the "Background" section of the Wikipedia article to reflect that fact.

Here's my proof:

The Internet Archive has a copy of my site from December 12, 1998 -- fourteen years before it was supposedly founded.

The Internet Archive has many captures over the years, showing when I owned and maintained the site. The most interesting one is from January 3, 2012, after Mr. Britton took over the site. The headline at the top says "Over 20 Million Visitors Since 1996" which definitively proves that it wasn't created in 2012. The copyright notice at the bottom also refers to 1996.

It was named "Site of the Week" by the Detroit Free Press on February 4, 2001 -- eleven years before 2012.

It was also featured on the front page of our local newspaper on February 22, 2001.

All I want to do is revise the Wikipedia article to tell the truth. Here's my recommended revision of the "Background" section:

Background

Updated to its current form in 2012 by Evan Britton, who has since described the website as "Wikipedia for Generation Z",[1] Famous Birthdays originally focused on more traditional celebrities (such as actors, athletes, musicians, etc.), but has since expanded to also feature internet personalities.[3] This shift came after Britton discovered that visitors were searching for individuals unfamiliar to him; at first mistaking the traffic as spam, he realized that the searches were of people with online followings such as Cameron Dallas.[5]

The website was originally created by Ed Morykwas, a Michigan schoolteacher, in the early days of the World Wide Web. A version from December 12, 1998 can be seen at the Internet Archive [6]. It was chosen as the Detroit Free Press Site of the Week on February 4, 2001 [7]. It was also on the front page of Ed's hometown newspaper that same month [8]. He maintained the site for 15 years before selling it in 2011.

6. INTERNET ARCHIVE - SEARCH IT FOR THE WEBSITE URL (Apparently, I cannot mention a new external link to a site registered on Wikipedia's blacklist or Wikimedia's global blacklist, but it's easy to find.)

https://web.archive.org/

7. DETROIT FREE PRESS

https://www.newspapers.com/article/detroit-free-press-free-press-site-of-th/128501189/

8. TROY ECCENTRIC NEWSPAPER

https://riveroftime.net/troy-eccentric.jpg Ed Morykwas (talk) 16:27, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

This sounds like information you should give to The Atlantic and other sources that differ from your claim, to get them to issue corrections. You may wish to discuss the sources you have in support of what you say on the article talk page, Talk:Famous Birthdays. 331dot (talk) 16:48, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, done! Ed Morykwas (talk) 17:43, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I wrote an article that was an article requesting to be created. However, the complete subject matter would necessitate changing the title of the article. It is a biography, and the person's main career was much different than the career in the original request for article creation. Starlighsky (talk) 23:52, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Starlighsky. I'm confused whether you are talking about one of the two articles you have personally created, or something your requested to be created, but have not worked on yourself. Either way, we can move articles to better-fitting titles if needs be, so it's not a big issue. You would need to be more explicit and give us a link if you wanted more detailed advice, I fear. I hope this helps a bit. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:00, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I am glad to learn how to change the title before creating a new article.

Here is the article that I am working on...I was a requested article about a lyricist.

However, he had made a drastic change in careers:

Michael Grace (lyricist) Starlighsky (talk

) 00:06, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I will move it to a new title. Again, thanks! Starlighsky (talk) 00:16, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I am not sure how to move the article to a new title. I would think the following would be a better title, though:

Michael P. Grace II (songwriter, Broadway producer, and oil and gas producer) Starlighsky (talk) 00:35, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello Starlighsky and welcome to Wikipedia. Sorry to say this but per

talk • contribs

} (she/her) 01:48, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

The name used for the portion before parenthesis (the disambiguator) should be the name he's most-known by; unless the P. and/or II are often used in sources, it should just be Michael Grace. If the title before the disambiguator is not ambiguous with any other article, the disambiguator should be dropped. For example, there's no Michael P. Grace II article, so if that were the name he was most commonly referred to by, there should be no disambiguator. Alternatively, there is a Michael P. Grace article, so if that is the name he's most commonly referred to by, there needs to be one.

Disambiguators are supposed to be as concise as possible, not descriptive, and the one picked should be the thing they're most known for. This is a more complex case (I don't really know what he'd be most-known for), but I'd probably go with (musician) here, per

WP:NCMUSIC; there are many naming conventions at hand for specific topics, and it can be hard to keep track of them, but the navbox at {{Naming conventions

}} has a good index of specific naming conventions.

Hopefully that was helpful. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:03, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. As I understand it, he could be Michael P. Grace ll. Many references use that name. Starlighsky (talk) 03:23, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Would I have to create a new article to use that name? He started his career as a lyricist, but spent most of his like running a business that had nothing to do with music. Starlighsky (talk) 03:26, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

There's a move button – I think it's on the right side under Tools in Vector 2022 (the default look for Wikipedia), and if you've switched back to the old look (Vector 2010), it'll be in a dropdown menu near the top under More. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 03:47, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Starlighsky (talk) 04:32, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

You can change the title of an article by moving it; see

WP:RS to learn about what types of sources are needed. CodeTalker (talk

) 03:49, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I am working on the references. The person did create a Broadway hit as a producer and songwriter which helped African Americans in the entertainment industry. Harry Belafonte was a main character in a 1950s production that made fun of politics and the "red scare". I am working on the article as time permits. I am doing the best I can. Starlighsky (talk) 04:31, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Starlighsky. I'm afraid that "I am working on the references" is a sure sign that you have written the article

BACKWARDS

(as most inexperienced editors do), and made your task much much harder thereby.

Note also that what a person has done has little directly to do with what we call

golden sources. ColinFine (talk

) 16:44, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I added the references. There were published reference before, and I recently added more now that I had the time. The notability was written about, especially in terms of the Broadway production and the music, of which some was written with famous composers of that time:

Michael P. Grace II Starlighsky (talk) 17:22, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@

primary sources and do not demonstrate notability. Finally there's a reference to Notre Dame News but you merely linked to the front page rather than to any specific article about Grace. CodeTalker (talk

) 17:51, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I work on these issues. Starlighsky (talk) 18:08, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Why I'm not notified when someone has replied to my comment(s) on the talk page of an article? Every time I have to open "user contributions" page and click every single of my contributions to find out if I have replies or not! Aminabzz (talk) 11:00, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:WATCHLIST is another way to keep some track of things in general. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 11:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have articles you are monitoring watchlisted? Then edits to the articles and their talk pages will appear in your watchlist. 331dot (talk) 11:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Aminabzz: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1196. Are you sure that they're not showing up in the icon at the top of the screen? You can check to see if Preferences → Editing → Discussion pages → Enable topic subscription and Preferences → Editing → Discussion pages → Automatically subscribe to topics are checked. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:49, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I can't say I'm never get notified. But a few times Aminabzz (talk) 18:13, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Can I add something then it will be checked before it is added? The paragraph I want to edit comes up empty but I can still type... JayElk33 (talk) 19:57, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@JayElk33 welcome to the Teahouse! Please could you link to the article you are talking about so we can see what exactly the issue might be? There is a type of protection called Pending changes whereby edits made by unregistered editors, or those who are so new that they are not yet auto-confirmed, do not appear until they have been reviewed and accepted by an experienced editor. But your account is past the point where that applies to you. So all edits you make should appear immediately once you publish them. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:15, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I just added to the section but when I hit 'publish' a message saying there was a conflict came up. That section looks blank now...

I'm trying to add a paragraph to January 6. Wait. I just looked and my paragraph is there...Ok. Forget about it...Thanks. JayElk33 (talk) 20:26, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi, you can have a try for

H:EC for more information -Lemonaka‎

21:05, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

On the page Bradley Winslow I've used a fiction book as a source for a description of his appearance. It seems accurate, but I'm wondering if that would be considered a reliable source? I've emailed the author about where he sourced his description, because from pictures it does seem accurate. I'll remove it if he based it solely of of pictures. Lallint 16:56, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

On the sixth page it states ‘This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, organizations, places, events, and incidents are either products of the authors imagination or used fictitiously. So I'd assume that means that he based it solely off of pictures? The description in question describes him as a "tall, somewhat portly man with short brown hair and nose ruddy with veins". Lallint 17:00, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

No, a work of fiction is not a

WP:RS for a WP-article about a real person. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 18:16, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

No, and I've gone ahead and removed the claims. I'm not sure what grounds there could possibly be to use a work of fiction as a reliable source for a non-fictional subject—even if it is broadly accurate, it still is obviously written to suit the goals of the author rather than for the purpose of being descriptive. I see the argument where it's a description of a physical appearance that seems to match photographs, but you also added a blurb from the novel which described his mannerisms, which doesn't strike me as even having a decent chance of being accurate. WPscatter ^t/_c 18:19, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I thought so. I've removed it on the simplewiki article, too. Lallint 20:09, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Concur with the above. Works of fiction are not sources for anything except for direct quotes and synopses of the work themselves. For statements of fact, even attributed statements of fact, there's no way they should be used as such.--Jayron32 18:23, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I agree that this is an inappropriate use of a work of fiction. In this case, the article contains three photos of Winslow, one taken during the American Civil War in the early 1860s, one taken in 1880, and one taken in 1898. There is no need for a written description of his appearance. Cullen328 (talk) 21:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I've been writing this article about an artist that interests me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fastrose123/sandbox - some of my citations though are from galleries showing her work - is that considered unreliable? Also let me know if anything seems unbiased that I should change before I move it to mainspace. Any advice appreciated! Thanks! Fastrose123 (talk) 20:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:NARTIST

for details) You've included far too many sources for me to want to wade through to look for those.

What I would, however, urge you against doing is using quotations as a lame excuse for copyright violations. You can't simply put quote marks around a sentence such as "capturing the essence of the human form in all its nuances" without explicitly naming the person or body who said that. That's just text lifted from a website, not a quotation.

Does any of that help you? Nick Moyes (talk) 20:59, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for that information! I did not realize about the copyright so thank you and I'll look to see if there are more in-depth articles or notable museums! Fastrose123 (talk) 21:22, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Could anyone come and help with Draft:Vikingskool

Fan Of Lion King 🦁 (talk) 20:08, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, welcome to the teahouse. As commented from SlySabre , you need some more reliable source for this article. DisneyTVANews and What's On Disney are not reliable source. For the list of reliable source, have a read on WP:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. -Lemonaka‎ 21:03, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Fanoflionking, please be aware that the list of perennial sources, while quite long, is not comprehensive. It lists sources that have been often debated. Obviously reliable sources and obviously unreliable sources are not discussed. Cullen328 (talk) 21:45, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

How does one use this <ref name="TFC"> and make it show up right? Source for The Futon Critic. See my edit on Mama June: From Not to Hot. Cwater1 (talk) 02:17, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@Cwater1: The name attribute of the ref tag is used to reference previous citations. So the first time a citation appears in an article, you need to fill it normally, and add the name attribute to the ref tag. That would look something like this: <ref name="TFC">{{cite web|blah blah blah}}</ref>. Then later in the page you can type <ref name="TFC" /> and it will link to the same reference with the same citation number. WPscatter ^t/_c 02:35, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @Wpscatter and @Hoary. I got the article fixed. Cwater1 (talk) 02:57, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Cwater1. You have two or more references to the same one web page, newspaper article, or whatever. For any one of these (by convention, the first), you write all the details, e.g. <ref name="TFC">Paris Waldorf, "Tetrafluorocarbon and me: A love story", Vague, October 2024, pp. 17–19</ref>. For each of the others, you simply write <ref name="TFC" />. -- Hoary (talk) 02:37, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Advice, please, over a little war that has been raging on the WikiTree article (in which I have in the past been a participant but do not really want to resume).

WikiTree is a free genealogy site that generates very mixed feelings among users and ex-users. The latter tend to be disillusioned, particularly if they have been arbitrarily blocked, and to express themselves in at times non-encyclopedic ways. The former defend themselves by regularly manipulating the text of the article to plug their site and forestall criticism.

Do we just accept this to-and-fro as part of the rhythm of the universe, or is the apparent ownership of the article veering towards a breach of Wikipedia standards? If those who slant the text in their favour are actually employees of WikiTree, that would I think be wrong. But if they are just fans, what can be done? Keep countering their claims and continue the war? Belle Fast (talk) 15:57, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

If there is evidence of disruptive behavior, gather a list of

the Incidents Noticeboard. That's the usual way to handle people disrupting the productive work environment at a Wikipedia article. --Jayron32

16:50, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Belle Fast (talk) 07:27, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I am back again with another question. Is it necessary to give edit summary and briefly describe my changes? Charsaddian (talk) 19:04, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Charsaddian Edit summaries are not mandatory, but are highly encouraged. I would recommend their use in order to better communicate the purpose of edits to other users. 777burger ^{user talk contribs} 19:08, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I fully concur - as an example - if you delete something without explaining why, many (if not most) experienced editors would revert your edit with the reason "unexplained deletion" - Arjayay (talk) 19:13, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Arjayay Thanks for the response. I got your point. Charsaddian (talk) 19:40, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@777burger Thanks for the response. The summary should be detailed or explaining it in couple of words is fine? Charsaddian (talk) 19:40, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

WP:BLP violations". Edit summaries are not the place for lengthy debates or deep details. Take that to article talk pages. Cullen328 (talk

) 21:19, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Thank you very much. This is really helpful Charsaddian (talk) 10:51, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I would like to say I am very disappointed and upset about the racist attack of the Honorable Judge Upadhyaya who is clearly being attacked and slandered only due to the fact that she was born in India and that she is a woman. I hope people will see this attack for what it is and put an end to it. Wikipedia should be about equality and diversity and not stand for such attacks against people based on their birthplace, we've all seen that before. Here is the link to where Ms. Upadhyaya was attacked: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moxila A. Upadhyaya 2A01:CB10:9C1:B00:19FB:C740:1AB2:F46 (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Grievances about user behavior are not handled here, that should be done at

WP:ANI. 331dot (talk

) 19:26, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

This page says it cannot be edited because it is protected. 2A01:CB10:9C1:B00:1979:9196:7C33:303A (talk) 19:28, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

That's probably just as well. Accusations of racism in this case are completely baseless, and you would likely find yourself blocked if you continued making them at ANI. I'm not convinced this isn't trolling. But it needs to stop now. Floquenbeam (talk) 19:36, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I can assure you it is not trolling. I do not wish to upset your rules so if you say this is a blockable offence I will not continue this discussion any further. Just to conclude I invite everyone here to take a close look at the discussion and ask themselves whether they really believe it would have been held if the judge was not from where she is. Ill leave it to you folks, thanks. 2A01:CB10:9C1:B00:1979:9196:7C33:303A (talk) 19:47, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

She's a magistrate judge, and only in the news because of a duty she will soon undertake. It's doubtful that she's

notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article, so its deletion is now being discussed. Her birthplace and gender are irrelevant, and I have no reason to believe that anyone here thinks otherwise. If you have any evidence for your accusation, please provide it. Maproom (talk

) 20:19, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I would happily !vote for deletion of a magistrate judge born in Boston of Irish ancestry or born in New York of English ancestry, if there was a lack of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Her birthplace is irrelevant and has not been mentioned or even hinted at by any experienced editors. Nobody is trying to delete

Tanya S. Chutkan, another judge assigned to a Trump case who is Black and Asian, and born in Jamaica. That is because many reliable independent sources have devoted significant coverage to Chutkan, plus she is a more senior judge. Cullen328 (talk

) 21:35, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

She is not the subject of a racist attack, nor slandered. The article was nominated for deletion because it is being challanged as not establishing Wikipedia notability. David notMD (talk) 01:43, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Dear IP User,

Thanks for coming to the teahouse. Besides what everyone else has said, here are a few points for your consideration:

1. "This page says it cannot be edited because it is protected." Yes, as an IP user you are protected from AN/I, the admin noticeboard. If you really wish to raise this grievance there, you must become registered.
2. Per your editing history, you added unsourced information to the article Moxila A. Upadhyaya. This is discouraged. Please provide the related sources if you wish to put more information on her page, which you are more than welcome to do so, as it could potentially result in a keep from the AfD.

Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 11:20, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

the article is

@Stevannus rua I think you would be more likely to attract interested editors by posting at an active Talk Page within one of the Projects mentioned at Talk:Library (computing). Most readers here at the Teahouse are new editors and people like me who try to provide help to them. This is not therefore a good venue for what you need. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:30, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

good day,

I had a small question about adding a source for citation. The source in question i want to use is an official government document that i can link, but it has the actual residential adress of the person who the wikipage is about on it as well. I hereby wonder if it is allowed to use it as a citation since although residential area is protected by privacy, everyone can go on that government website and ask the document in question up?

How best to approach this? Cause the info i need for the reliable source citation requirement is on it as well. Linking to it will show it in its whole Ubdead575 (talk) 23:42, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

The link will be to the document on that government website Ubdead575 (talk) 23:44, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Ubdead575: If the information is publicly available, then you can link to it. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:52, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:BLPPRIMARY: Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses. It is better to find where a newspaper or similar secondary source has written an article that included the information in question. —C.Fred (talk

) 02:16, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. What if no other source can be found? Do i just post the information then without linking to the reliable source? Ubdead575 (talk) 08:39, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:V). If there is no secondary source, then you have to wonder if the information is really that important. I can't judge that without more context but the best place to discuss the issue would be on the Talk Page of the article in question. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 11:37, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I recently noticed that in my contributions page, on each contribution I made there are numbers in green brackets or numbers in red brackets. What do they mean? Myrealnamm (talk) 14:20, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Myrealnamm They are the size in bytes that you added (green) or removed (red) in your edit. The value can even be 0. The same numbers appear on Special:Watchlist where there's an explanatory box on the right. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:26, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

This is how many bytes your edit has added (green) or removed (red) from the article. You can hover over the "points" and see the bytes. Qcne (talk) 14:26, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull@Qcne

Thank you! Myrealnamm (talk) 14:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

^{Though I'd rather like it if they were karmatic points a lá The Good Place...} Qcne (talk) 14:30, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

😀 Myrealnamm (talk) 14:32, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

That does not sound too good to me, Qcne. The folks on that show were in hell and I'm pretty sure in hell you can only edit contentious articles on mobile.

Oh and also,

Rjjiii (talk

) 05:58, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@

Rjjiii Hi, Do you mean the diff and hist? I tried hovering over them but nothing showed up. Is it because that no bots, minor edits, etc. edited the article after I edited? Also what does diff and hist mean? Myrealnamm (talk

) 14:09, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

"difference" (as in comparing any given edit to the previous one) and "history" (as in the edit history for any given page) respectively

so for example, if someone removes a paragraph or two of text in an edit, you can click on the diff button next to it to see exactly what got removed in that specific edit

(give me attention) • (see my deeds)

12:12, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Myrealnamm (talk) 14:15, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

My article is ready and has been written in plain Word. How can I submit it for publication in Wikipedia? Aut1945 (talk) 21:23, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Aut1945 Please do not ask the same question here and at the Help desk - I suggest editors only answer at the Help desk. - Arjayay (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Arjayay No. We'll deal with it here! I have already told the editor that at the Help Desk. This forum is for new editors, and this one is clearly inexperienced and needs our guidance. Thank you. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Aut1945 An article already drafted in MS Word will need to be copypasted into Wikipedia and all references used to write it put into the correct format. (You must have used your own words for this, and not taken copyrighted text from somewhere else).

You can create a draft article and work on it on Wikipedia until you believe it is ready for submission and review by using the 'Articles for Creation' wizard which you can find (alongside some valuable guidance)

HERE

.

I must advise you that creating a brand new article from scratch is a pretty hard task for a complete newcomer to Wikipedia editing. I would always suggest someone gains a little minor editing experience here first. It's essential you understand that nothing gets into Wikipedia unless it meets our

Reliably Published sources are used as the basis for writing the article. What is the topic you propose to create the article about, please? Nick Moyes (talk

) 21:36, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

The title of the article would be TODIM. This a mathematical method for helping people and organizations to make decisions under multiple criteria. Other equivalent methods such as ELECTRE and Analytic Hierarchy Process have articles in Wikipedia. TODIM has been extensively used in practice as well as in applied decision research since its appearance in the international literature in the early 90's. Therefore I do believe this new article can be quite useful to decision makers and students of the field. The article I wrote describes the main features of TODIM in less than one page and provides 15 references for those would would like to learn about the method. Aut1945 (talk) 22:10, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Aut1945 Goodness, that sounds technical. I assume TODIM is the Portuguese acronym for Interactive Multi-criteria Decision Making? If so, there do seem to be a number of papers on the subject, so it could well be a notable topic - but it's beyond my small brain to comprehend them, I'm afraid! It is, however, very refreshing not to have someone come here seeking to write a biography on some unimportant TV actor, sportsperson, or anime character!

I can only repeat my suggestion to create a draft article for review. Trying to add something directly into Wikipedia when you aren't experienced in our policies and guidelines is a recipe for speedy deletion, I'd suggest. You could always pop back here and ask for comments.

Finally, if you are one of the authors of papers on this topic, you probably have a

WP:COI. It doesn't stop you editing, but it does ensure openness and clarity. I hope this helps, and 'good luck'! Nick Moyes (talk

) 22:28, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I will try to follow your suggestion, Nick. By the way, the article is not technical at all, in the sense of having math formulas or anything similar. I happen to be the person who created the method in the early 90's, but I am not having any personal advantages or promoting the method from trying to publish this article and I really see it as a service to Wikipedia readers. The method continues to be very much used (particularly in China and the Far Eastern, I should say) regardless of the existence of such article. You are right: TODIM is the Portuguese (my mother language) acronym for Interactive Multi-Criteria Decision Making. I therefore consider that I can declare having no conflict of interest related to the possible publication of the article. How do I go about this? Aut1945 (talk) 22:42, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Aut1945 There is no shame in having a 'conflict of interest'. From your answer, I feel you very definitely have a such a conflict (in the same way that I am the co-author of a serious and well-researched academic book about which I believe there is the possibility to create a valid article on the overarching topic covering the last 125 years. However, I know I would have a conflict of interest if I were to take this idea forward, and would 100% need to declare that connection. You do too!)

I would ask you to read through the

WP:DISCLOSE. regards, Nick Moyes (talk

) 23:14, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Aut1945. The crucial thing is that the article needs to be based on reliably published sources wholly unconnected with you. Anything by you, your colleagues, your institutions, your collaborators would be non-independent sources and usable only in very limited ways, and certainly not the main sources for the article.

You say that your draft "describes the main features of TODIM": that information, in particular, must come from independent sources, not from your own knowledge. If there is a feature that you know because you put it there, but you cannot find an independent sources that discusses it, then you should not put it in the article. verifiability is a core policy of Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 14:17, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I'm working on a AWB bot in Vietnamese Wikipedia and I don't know how to create a list with articles from a category in another languages' Wikipedia that have a Vietnamese version. Tried reading the manual of AWB but that doesn't help. How to do this exactly? Do you have to create a script for this? Hermioneswift (talk) 09:03, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:VPT). But try to avoid posting on more than one help page at once unless you clearly link to where you want people to answer, so as to avoid duplication of volunteer effort. Nick Moyes (talk

) 14:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people, the information in the articles cannot be supported by tabloids. All information in this article (https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduardo_V%C3%ADtor_Rodrigues) is supported by tabloids. Furthermore, the content on this page only concerns court cases. This content is biased and, once again, goes against the policy on biographies of living persons, more specifically against the principle of impartiality. The content should be deleted. Almeida Luísa (talk) 16:06, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello Almeida. This is the English Wikipedia. The Portuguese Wikipedia is a separate project with its own policies and rules, so you need to raise your concerns there. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:11, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

... and just to comment that pt. is the only language version to have such a biography. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:13, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I have left a couple of discussion on Talk:List of best-selling video game franchises and wondering if anyone would like to get involved P+T Fan Of Lion King 🦁 (talk) 16:20, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@Fanoflionking, you can try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:27, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Already ask thereFan Of Lion King 🦁 (talk) 18:50, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I am trying to add the 2023 class to the Philadelphia Baseball Wall of Fame. However, it is not letting me add Scott Rolen into the column. Please help. Thanks. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 19:24, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Pennsylvania2. I fixed the table layout by removing a wrong row start.[18] PrimeHunter (talk) 19:39, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you!!! Preceding unsigned comment added by Pennsylvania2 at an unknown date/time

I have an existing Wikimedia installation. One day I upgraded my system. Then I got a message:

 You are missing a required extension to PHP that MediaWiki		requires to run. Please install:

intl (more information)

It had been installed. So I checked my system to see if any change had occured. The extension is enabled:

 cave% grep intl php.ini
 extension=intl.so
 [intl]
 ;intl.default_locale =
 ; happens within intl functions. The value is the level of the error produced.
 intl.error_level = E_WARNING
 intl.use_exceptions = 0

The file is in place: /usr/lib/php/modules/intl.souuuuuuuuuu

My questions: How does MediaWiki check for the presence of extention? Ideas on what I need to do to enable(?) intl?

for the record, this runs on an Arch system, the upgrade was part of `pacman -Syu` MichaelRpdx (talk) 17:04, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MichaelRpdx. You are unlikely to get people here who are familiar with running their own Mediawikiinstallations. I suggest looking at mw:Manual. ColinFine (talk) 17:14, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

thank you.that helps a bit. well more than others. :) MichaelRpdx (talk) 18:48, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@MichaelRpdx: This page is for help with Wikipedia. You can ask general MediaWiki questions at mw:Project:Support desk. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:44, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

What happened with the bot that made link-suggestions and that we just had to approve or decline? I really liked doing those   CharlesWritesOnTheInternet2.0 (talk) 22:33, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:LINKDD first. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 11:45, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull I did this but Wikipedia gives zero suggestions concerning adding links. In the easy edits, I can select both options (copyediting and adding links) but only the first one gives suggestions (so no Wikilinks) even if I select all the topics. Is it possible the option got deleted or something?

CharlesWritesOnTheInternet2.0 (talk) 16:20, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:TASK. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 16:32, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! I am writing my thesis about Wikipedia and needed to screenshot something concerning the link bot. Well, too bad! Thanks for the help though CharlesWritesOnTheInternet2.0 (talk) 21:12, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

Thank you experts for helping me with this question.

In the simple wikipedia, the article macOS is out of date. For example, the latest release and the list of releases are not updated. I would like to add the "This article needs to be updated" template message, but where do you add it? Myrealnamm (talk) 14:47, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Simple English Wikipedia is a separate project, but assuming it can use the same templates as en.wikipedia you can add Template:Update at the top of the article, or Template:Update section at the start of the section that needs updating. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:37, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! It seemed to work Myrealnamm (talk) 15:48, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Wouldn’t it be easier to just perform the update yourself, or am I missing something…? Pablothepenguin (talk) 21:13, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

how i create wikipedia from my self SHASHWATPRAVEEN (talk) 12:26, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Basically, you don't. For a subject to qualify for a Wikipedia article, it needs sustained in-depth coverage in reliable secondary sources. Otherwise, it's probably more appropriate for a different venue like social media. GMG^talk 12:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello. One does not create "a Wikipedia", but a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is not a place to write about yourself, it is a place to summarize what others choose to say about you showing how you

reliable sources write about you, you cannot have a Wikipedia article. You should use social media to tell about yourself instead. 331dot (talk

) 12:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

If you don't find the previous replies clear: writing about yourself is strongly discouraged. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:42, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

If you are in fact a big celebrity, then surely someone will write your article eventually. If you are that famous. Then lots of other people must know of you. Also, are you that famous? Pablothepenguin (talk) 21:16, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I am a little confused is User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors.js installed correctly to my User:Govvy/common.js? Govvy (talk) 17:52, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@Govvy There is a page of test cases at User:Trappist_the_monk/HarvErrors/testcases which should help you decide. If they don't work, you would probably be best off consulting TtM directly on their Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:44, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Help? (the following is a re-try of a prior inquiry) There is a Finnish language Wiki article about , Jallu Honkonen. For now the only thing I wanted to edit is his Date of Death. It’s January 3 1969, NOT May 3 1969. I know he died in January because I attended his funeral. An obituary from the Fitchburg(MA) Sentinel Enterprise will support this. But I can’t seem to access an editable English version and I myself don’t read/speak Finnish. Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 04:32, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

hi @Eldyr88PHy$N and welcome to the teahouse! unforrunately different languages of Wikipedia are separate projects and not just a single unified project where English is the main source and all other languages translate its articles, so not everything that has an article in another language also has one in English, and Honkonen may mot have an article here at all. this also means that other wikis may have their own policies from sourcing different from that in English Wikipedia, so we cannot really help you with editing that wiki. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 04:47, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Pinging @DoubleGrazing, a native Finnish speaker who offered to help you before. @Eldyr88PHy$N, do you have a reliable source for the DOD? One of the obituaries you mentioned, perhaps? WPscatter ^t/_c 05:03, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, @Wpscatter. I actually tried looking into this the last time, but couldn't find a definitive source. The sv.wiki article cites a Finnish not-entirely-RS website which gives May as the DOD; even the Finnish National Library goes by this [19], by way of Wikipedia (!). So I think the onus is on anyone wanting to argue otherwise to produce evidence which trumps that source. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:15, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. So…. You mentioned proof, right? Ummmm…. You see the first time I went through this I thought I had provided enough evidence with SSDI records showing this person had died in January 1969. I also mentioned the same obituary source I did in this second request. {It would seem apparently that was the “wrong” thing to do, as one of your “colleagues?” said I shouldn’t share personal information …(Mr Honkonen was my grandfather) and redacted the data} So I find myself at an impasse. It would seem that if I am able to access the aforementioned obituary and post it as the proof you need the same thing would happen. Any new hints?

AND ….. I mean I was at his funeral. At 13 y/o it was my first …. something one doesn’t easily forget. Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 13:35, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@

original research, but I have to imagine your firsthand account is not enough to update the date (especially in the face of extant conflicting sources), unfortunately. WPscatter ^t/_c

13:46, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Eldyr88PHy$N, a direct link to the Sentinel Enterprise obituary you mentioned would be ideal, but if it's not available online, then the date of publication and the title of the obituary itself would be sufficient, so someone can try to look it up. Do you have those? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:50, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Let me check into that. The Sentinel might not be the ONLY source. I may need a little time so ... can anyone tell me how long this discussion will "stay awake" before it gets archived? Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 14:21, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Eldyr88PHy$N the archiving is set at 2-3 days from the date of the last post. When you find the information, it might be better to just post it on DoubleGrazing's talk page, since they're the one who's offered to do the update for you. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:37, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Eldyr88PHy$N: always a pleasure to help those who appreciate it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:24, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hopefully I'll find the appropriately valid info and then post to your 'talk' page. Though to be frank I don't clearly understand talk vs reply. (it's an age thing!!) Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 22:21, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I left some info on your talk page. Will I need to create my own talk page to see a specific reply? Thanks for helping. Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 22:09, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, sometimes when I'm scrolling on user talk pages that I see someone say something like "Hello User, we appreciate your contributions, but if you..." etc. They always have an icon and they sound so generic, like a normal Wikipedian would not sound that generic right? Are they using a template or what? Waterard ^water?(talk | contribs) 06:50, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Waterard. You may possibly be talking about a notification left automatically by a bot telling the editor that they have accidentally linked to a disambiguation page instead of the correct article. I have received such notices from time to time over the years. Cullen328 (talk) 06:58, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah but many of these are left by real Wikipedia editors. And there are lots of these messages like conflict of interest ones. Waterard ^water?(talk | contribs) 07:03, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@

here. ltbdl (talk

) 07:13, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Waterard ^water?(talk | contribs) 07:39, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@Waterard: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1196. That's because the users are leaving templated messages that are recognised as standard warnings. The full list can be found at Category:User warning templates. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:24, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I use Wikipedia:Twinkle which allows me to add those User templates to a User Talk Page with the click of a button. I'd really recommend Twinkle if you ever want to get involved in New Page Patrol, Recent Edit Watch, etc. Qcne (talk) 08:25, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

There are also welcome templates (Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates). Yes, they are quite generic. However, they provide quite a lot of starter information, links to gudelines and policies among them, so even if they sound somewhat non-personal they are much more useful than just 'ignoring' New users. --CiaPan (talk) 08:18, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

• For an alternate view of templated messages (and one to which I subscribe), please read
  WP:DTA. --Jayron32
  13:21, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

There's a draft for a new help page here, intended as an improvement to Help:Your first article, prompted by this discussion.

Since this venue is frequented by newcomers and the people who field their questions, I thought this might be a good place to ask: which version would you rather point a newcomer towards / read as a newcomer? (current, draft)

If both pages end up in the Help: namespace, what titles should they be at?

Feel free to respond here or here. (COI note: I've edited both versions and haven't had a strong opinion since July). Folly Mox (talk) 22:23, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Looking into the nutshell: "The topic of the article must be notable, and have in-depth coverage in reliable sources." This suggests to me that being notable and having such coverage are two different matters; but actually the latter constitutes the former. -- Hoary (talk) 23:08, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Glossing over it, the newer one seems more friendly(?) than the old one. Honestly I don't know which I would prefer as I prefer less human articles if they get me more info. If you want extra you may want to bring this to

199811✶

02:03, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

The list of aircraft displayed at the Wings over the Rockies Air & Space Museum at Lowry airfield is terribly lacking, particularly in the civil section, and I have tried to complete it since I visited in April, and have a widely aviation knowledge. For each addition I generally used the 'own observation' reason, but for whatever reason you have taken them down. I also completed existing entries where tail numbers were lacking. I am terribly disappointed, but am willing to try again if I know where I am going wrong. For the most part I have photographic evidence. Better still, you could possibly restore what you have deleted. Thank you Alan Lathan 2003:C9:EF0E:8695:50A2:1B1F:7233:7E44 (talk) 02:13, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Alan Lathan. Thank you for trying to improve Wikipedia, but your "own observation" contributions are a classic violation of

No original research, one of Wikipedia's three core content policies. Our content must summarize what reliable, independent published sources say. Personal observations are not permitted here. I believe that you probably have wide aviation knowledge, but that gives you no special privileges. Any anonymous editor could claim to be both a neurosurgeon and and an astrophysicist, and how could anyone check? All that matters here on Wikipedia is an editor's ability to reference and summarize published reliable sources. As for the photos, you can upload your own photos to Wikimedia Commons under a free license and then add them to the article. Cullen328 (talk

) 02:34, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

The article in question is

Neutral point of view, another core content policy. Jokes and personal observations and personal commentary do not belong in Wikipedia articles. Cullen328 (talk

) 02:44, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@

You don't need to cite a source that says the sky is blue. Going through an aircraft museum and recording tail numbers is no different than going to a library to verify something. Facts like tail numbers are verifiable by anyone who goes to the same museum, as other facts are verifiable by going to a library and looking up a publication that isn't online. If an observation of a fact clearly demonstrates the cited source is wrong, then that source should not be cited. Verifiability is what matters, not the manner of how something is verified. ~Anachronist (talk

) 05:07, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

To say that I disagree would be an understatement, Anachronist. Wikipedia relies on summarizing what reliable, published sources say. The recollections of an individual Wikipedia editor who visited a museum earlier today or earlier this decade are of no value, except to the extent that they motivate the editor to search for actual reliable sources. I am a devoted museum attender. If I was a troll, I could add a claim to my own observations that some small town art museum displays two Van Goghs and three Picassos, and a spectacular da Vinci. Should our readers place any confidence whatsover in such an assertion referenced to my personal observations? Of corse not, but you are arguing that they should. Notable museums publish catalogs, which are reliable sources for items in their collections. Notable museums attract coverage from reliable, independent sources that describe items in their collections. No contested text content that is not referenced to reliable sources should appear in this encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 06:10, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I agree with a lot of what you say though your museum piece is a straw man. Walking through a museum to take tail numbers is very different to *claiming* ownership of a Picasso. It may be that the tail number information is not recorded anywhere else. We have a duty to consider how to be accurate and realistic. doktorb _words^deeds 06:36, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

True does not mean verified. Wikipedia requires the latter. David notMD (talk) 09:17, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Things need to be true and verifiable insofar as they are published. Sending people to said museum to "see for themselves" that it is correct is not acceptable. Things need to be verifiable by checking reliable published sources. In this case,

self-published source for such an article, but it needs to be verifiable somewhere published. --Jayron32

16:56, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:BLUESKY situation, it would have been completely uncontroversial if he had taken pictures of each aircraft and uploaded them along with the edits. ~Anachronist (talk

) 17:22, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't mean to be curt, but you're just wrong here. The specific aircraft in a specific museum is not

WP:BLUESKY by any reasonable means, no matter how many times you say it, and no reasonable meaning of the word "published" includes a number painted on an object. To stretch the definition of such concepts as far as you have makes them meaningless. Please stop confusing the new users here, and if you can't speak knowledgeably on this stuff, please stop. They need to find the list of aircraft written down in a book, magazine, catalog, or website somewhere. It can even be on the museum's own website, but that is at least published. A hard to find book is still a published source. An object in a museum is not a published source. --Jayron32

17:35, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Just to be clear, this took 5 seconds to find. Citing the information on that page and pages that link from it are not onerous. And it's a better source than "Go to the museum and look at it yourself". --Jayron32 17:38, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

After reviewing WP:Verifiability, I was surprised to find that I (partially) agree with you Anachronist. That is, you say "The manufacturer of the aircraft published the tail numbers on the aircraft." This does seem consistent with a passage on WP:V stating

> Source material must have been published, the definition of which for the purposes of Wikipedia is made available to the public in some form.

which has footnote claiming,

> This includes material such as documents in publicly accessible archives as well as inscriptions in plain sight, e.g. tombstones

However, your claims, "They are verifiable by anyone who goes to the museum to look at them. Wikipedia's requirements are therefore met. Verifiable sources are emphatically not required to be available online. It isn't unreasonable for verification to require a visit to a museum." seems to be in tension with the WP:V passage

> All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists, and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material. Any material that needs an inline citation but does not have one may be removed. (bold emphasis mine)

So I have a quibble (with your original quibble with @

You don't need to cite a source that says the sky is blue." While this is technically true, it appears neither relevant nor applicable to the current case of tail numbers. Why? Because the material has clearly been challenged (which is what lead Alan Lathan to post here). Thus, it is required to cite an inline citation (such as to the museum exhibit that @Jayron32

was kind enough to provide).

In any case, I'd like to express gratitude to you, Anachronist, for making me learn more today about WP's core content policies. 🙏 Philogicatician (talk) 08:26, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

is there any particular reason you can't edit policy pages with the visual editor?

Are these pages semi-protected by any chance? Pablothepenguin (talk) 21:06, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

i at least can edit the one that led to this question

but considering its contents, there's no actual need for any edits, it's pretty good lmao

(give me attention) • (see my deeds)

21:30, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:VisualEditor#Limitations the visual editor is not available in the Wikipedia namespace. RudolfRed (talk) 21:11, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Cog-san. Policy pages are in the Wikipedia namespace which means page names starting with "Wikipedia:". This namespace is often used for discussions, e.g. this Teahouse page. VisualEditor is poorly suited for discussions so most or all normal interface links to VisualEditor are omitted in the Wikipedia namespace and some other namespaces. You can still use VisualEditor by starting a source edit and then manually changing action=edit to veaction=edit in the url. PrimeHunter (talk

) 21:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

oh yeah i guess that makes sense, some of the things there look pretty hard to get right with the visual layout

thank

(give me attention) • (see my deeds)

21:28, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Novem_Linguae/Scripts/VisualEditorEverywhere NotAGenious (talk) 08:52, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Shark_cage_diving § Self-propelled_version

How do I respond when someone tags "clarification needed". Can I talk to the person who placed the tag and how do I explain the answer. Am I on the. Wiki project Adelaide. site Regards margesson Margesson (talk) 10:15, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:SIGN your post before clicking "Publish changes", the other person should receive a notification about your post. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 10:34, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

(e/c) It doesn't really matter who added those flags. Clarification of jargon expressions are needed to help the general reader to understand the article. You can discuss this on the article talk page as I see you are already doing. And please always provide a link to any article about which you are asking. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:35, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello! (my first time on Teahouse!)

This week I drafted an article for an early 18th century pirate named Dennis McCarthy (primarily notable for his involvement in a 1718 trial that marked the end of the golden age of piracy). My main primary source was http://baylusbrooks.com/index_files/Page4550.htm, a site that hosts transcripts of original records, including Dennis' trial (linked). My draft was rejected because this source - the website at least - is not reliable enough and therefore a WP:NOR violation. I was asked to clarify the sourcing. This is fair, but how do I do that? What is the proper citation format for such a unique trial document?

here's a link to the draft: Draft:Dennis McCarthy (pirate) Cleophelps64 (talk) 13:56, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

The problem is not the reliability of the source but its independence. Trial records are

primary sources, and while uncontroversial factual information may be cited to them, the bulk of an article, and the notability of its subject, must depend on secondary sources. ColinFine (talk

) 14:34, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:CHUN for how to ask for a change. RudolfRed (talk

) 23:56, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

AvisCulta, an alternative is to simply abandon your current account and never use it again. Open a new account and move on. Cullen328 (talk

) 07:22, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

I see that AvisCulta now redirects to User:Ala culta. Is that the name change you want? David notMD (talk) 12:47, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes. It worked. Ala culta (talk) 14:47, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Cpeir asked me off wiki for advice surrounding Draft:Dalia Dippolito, the mainspace page currently redirects to Cops (TV program)#Impact on the Dalia Dippolito case.

I think while a mainspace article surrounding Dalia Dippolito would not be possible due to

However I'm really unfamiliar with the relevant policies surrounding the subject and would like to make sure that I'm not giving the wrong advice, am I wrong about the above and is there anything else that I might have overlooked? Justiyaya 17:38, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

• @Justiyaya @Cpeir - I've run afoul of BLP1E many times and often disagree with it. It sucks when it happens. I don't have any knowledge about this particular case, but Dalia doesn't really seem notable for anything else but this incident. She wasn't a celeb and didn't do anything newsworthy before or after. My guess as to why it was redirected/merged is that the merge sums up the whole thing enough to where it doesn't need its own standalone article. Obviously, that was an opinion and it could be challenged (just like anything else here), but that's my take as someone not involved in it. KatoKungLee (talk) 15:24, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

I am interested in creating a page about a band that has a unique place in history. I am the ownner of the record company that the band has been signed to for 50 years. But I am also in the band. I have a collection of public records (magazine articles, etc.) as well as the archives of my record company. Band members, roadies, etc, have asked me to create a page, which we belive to be historically relevant. How can I (or we) go about creating such a page within your guidelines? Thanks! Mdancik (talk) 17:58, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Mdancik. Welcome to the Teahouse!

Thank you for asking- it is definitely important to approach topics you have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest with very carefully.

Firstly, you need to make a Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure: this is a requirement of Wikipedia's Terms of Use. Instructions for how on that page.

To produce the article, I would suggest going via the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process. This allows you to work on a draft and submit it for review by selected experienced volunteers, who will give you feedback.

It might be worth reading

Wikipedia:Your first article which gives you the dos and don'ts of creating an article, and Wikipedia:Five pillars

which detail the fundamental principles of Wikipedia.

The most important thing to know is that only subjects that pass the notability threshold, in your case Wikipedia:Notability (music), are permitted to have an article on Wikipedia. The notability requirements are stated on that link, but in essence you need to find reliable, independent, secondary sources that cover the band in detail, and then summarise them in your own words. That should make up the content of your article draft. Note that the sources must be:

- Reliable: Your article should rely on strong, reliable sources that are published by reputable institutions. Primary sources can be used for basic facts (such as a date of birth), but they should be supplemented with strong secondary sources that offer analysis or interpretation.

- Independent: Your sources should be independent of the subject, for example not self-published or from the subject's own website.

- Show significant coverage: Your subject should be discussed in detail in the sources you find. The sources should provide in-depth information or analysis about the subject, going beyond basic facts or promotional material.

- From multiple places: You should find at least three separate reliable, independent, secondary sources that discuss your subject.

- Not original research: Wikipedia articles should summarise existing knowledge about a subject, not present new research. This means you should avoid drawing your own conclusions or analyses from the sources. Stick to summarising what the sources say in a neutral tone.

Remember that your article should be written from a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

Writing an article is probably the hardest thing a new editor can do on Wikipedia so I understand it is daunting. If you read and digest all the above links you will have a much better chance of writing an article that passes our requirements.

Hope that helps, let us know if you have further questions! Qcne (talk) 18:06, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Oh, lastly, just be aware that Wikipedia accounts can only be used by one person. More than one person can work on a draft or article, but each will need their own separate account. Qcne (talk) 18:08, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Talk page : MURULE is still not published or has been re-directed to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawiye

We want to remove redirection of MURULE, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Murule from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawiye because MURULE is a separate clan of HAWIYE. We couldn't do this every other time. pls make the changes.... Dalahow (talk) 16:21, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello

Rjjiii (talk

) 17:36, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

@Dalahow: I looked into it a bit more and see that you previously did a Murule article draft that was not approved because of the sources. Mcmatter declined the draft and I won't speak for them, but the sources look off to me as well. Wikipedia's standard for a standalone article is usually summarized as: at least 3 independent and reliable secondary sources. Because the sources in your draft are self-published, it would likely be reverted. Here are a few potential sources that I have come across in a brief search online:

• https://www.the-star.co.ke/counties/north-eastern/2016-10-17-manderas-murulle-clan-inaugurate-their-sultan-in-a-colourful-ceremony/
• https://resilience.igad.int/improved-conflict-management-between-the-murule-and-marehan-clans-in-mandera-triangle/
• https://nation.africa/kenya/counties/mandera/murule-clan-powerful-leader-word-final--2464292
• https://web.archive.org/web/20070203141815/http://www.civicwebs.com/cwvlib/africa/somalia/1995/reunification/appendix_4.htm
• https://www.slideshare.net/Johanwesterholm/accord-reportclansinsomaliarevisededition20091215
• https://www.google.com/books/edition/Islam_Ethnicity_in_Northern_Kenya_Southe/s2h5Lb6obkkC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22murulle%22+somalia&pg=PA141&printsec=frontcover
• https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Economic_Review/vNc0AQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=%22murulle%22+somalia&dq=%22murulle%22+somalia&printsec=frontcover
• http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/11295/8927/Hussein_Inter-clan%20Conflict%20in%20Mandera%20District%20a%20Case%20of%20the%20Garre%20and%20Murulle%2C%202004-2009.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

And to be clear this is not an issue with the content or body text of your drafts. The issue is that Wikipedia requires a higher quality source so that other editors can better verify the content. Regards,

Rjjiii (talk

) 18:35, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Am I allowed to upload my screenshot of a video game? Where do I have to do it? LegoZols (talk) 20:32, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, LegoZols Probably not, is the answer!

On the assumption that there is already a screenshot in an article you want to work on, then you would not be permitted to upload a second one. The reason is that, unlike a photo you took yourself, a screenshot contains copyrighted content that you have no rights over. That rules out any upload and release under a Creative Commons licence to Wikimedia Commons (because you aren't the copyright owner so have no powers to release it).

However, a screenshot is permitted here under a 'fair use' policy on English Wikipedia (see

WP:FAIRUSE

) to serve purely to identify the software. It still needs an appropriate rationale to be included to justify its use in the article. And a second screenshot under 'fair use' just won't cut it, I'm afraid. Click a screenshot image in an article to see how an existing screenshot has been justified, and never try to use a 'fair use' image anywhere else - such as on your own userpage.

Oh, and whilst I'm here, just a note to say please don't base any editing you do on other people's social media posts like you did here. Even if what they say might be 100% correct, we do not accept them as

Reliable Sources or as the basis for making content changes. So, you'd need to use what you read purely as inspiration to go off and search for properly published sources to support what you say, and then insert those as inline citations into the article. Hope this all helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk

) 20:59, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

An AfD discussion has a Keep comment from an IP user. A significant edit to the subject article was recently made from the same IP. WhoIs on the IP traces back to a Comcast server where an editor with an undisclosed COI for the subject article lives. The writing style in the AfD comment closely resembles that of the COI editor. I am fairly certain, but can't prove, that the COI editor posted the Keep comment. What's the best course of action here? Thanks! MundoMango (talk) 20:20, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, MundoMango. I don't know which AFD you refer to, nor how you know there's an undisclosed COI. But the simple way is to respond on the AFD discussion by politely asking whether the IP is connected to the subject or the editor, and let them respond. (It's also quite possible they simply forgot they were logged out, hence the IP address appearing. So allow them the benefit of the doubt.)

You could, of course, add a COI template to the article in question if you seriously feel it's an issue and suspect a

WP:SPI and for a block if they're intentionally doing that. Does that help? Nick Moyes (talk

) 21:19, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Nick Moyes, that does help. MundoMango (talk) 21:33, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

My mind insists on an explanation for cases where what I read at one point disagrees with or is inconsistent with what I read at another point. I stumbled in reading the above-named article about BSA when I came to the second-to-last paragraph before the subtitle "World War I and Beyond." That paragraph ends with the phrase "West stopped his campaign to rename the Girl Scouts." The problem is that nowhere earlier does it say that West tried to rename the Girl Scouts. I assume that the last phrase is using as its antecedent the sentence, "When the Girl Guides of America started, West discouraged the program." It may just be picky on my part, but, as I say, I stumbled because earlier it was not made clear that "Girl Guides o America" is synonymous with "Girl Scouts." And, as a follow-up note, SOMEBODY must have renamed "Girl Guides of America" as "Girl Scouts of America." Sharethegrass (talk) 23:43, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

Girl Scouts of America was an entirely different group which is long defunct. You should feel free to remove any ambiguous, confusing, unreferenced language. Cullen328 (talk

) 23:57, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

If signed in, and editing is Visual mode, do we absolutely have to use the 4 tildes for our signature? I didn't know to use 4 tildes to sign my name in the talk section, and yet, my name automatically posted as my signature just from being signed in and hitting "post" anyway. Is this true? Am I missing something? Lilaponi (talk) 06:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@lilaponi: the "new section" and "reply" tools do indeed automatically sign comments. ltbdl (talk) 06:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Lilaponi (talk) 07:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Should I throw in the towel for

Welcome to the Teahouse, Geo Lightspeed7. An article is only deemed "impossible" if you fail to come up with at least three independent, reliably published articles that talk about a subject in some detail and depth. Have you found those?

To be frank, I'm not willing to look through over 70 references to check for you. So please tell us what you think the best three are? Just three; no more, no less.

If we can assess those, then we might feel this person meets our

Notability Criteria for Biographies. My quick look over your draft left me with the impression that you have tried far too hard to squeeze everything about this person in. There's far too much trivial mention of things they may have done, and lots of irrelevant imagery. So, if we can meet the notability criteria, it might not be so impossible. But I'd probably expect to see two thirds of the content trimmed out to get rid of the trivia, and for you to follow the guidance given on the decline notice. I hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk

) 21:10, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Nick Moyes. Thank you for welcoming me to Tea House! I didn’t know that regarding the three “independent, reliably published articles that talk about a subject in some detail and depth.” After it was declined the first time, I thought it’d be beneficial to cram in everything that I could find about the subject. Anyhow, let me go over it again sometime this week and I’ll see if I can make it work with what you mentioned. Thank you @Nick Moyes for your expert advice! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 01:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Cut some, but still so much more to cut. David notMD (talk) 02:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @David notMD. Thank you very much for your help! I really appreciate it! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 12:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Geo Lightspeed7 the decline notice says significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. You might start by removing absolutely everything that doesn't come from a source that meets those criteria - just cut it, don't attempt to rewrite or anything. (You can always go have a look at the draft's history to find anything you cut out, so don't worry about cutting something "important"!) That will help you see what in your draft is actually likely to contribute to "notability" as wikipedia understands it. It will be easier to edit and rewrite from that point than from trying to pare down less important references bit by bit. There's nothing wrong with using some of these less-important references to fill out the article, but make sure you've got a core argument for notability first. Remember that reviewers are volunteers who want to help but probably don't know or care much about your article subject, and are staring down a 4000+ article backlog. The easier you make it to read your article, the more likely reviewers will do so instead of skipping it in favour of one of the other 4000+! -- asilvering (talk) 02:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Asilvering. Wow! Thanks very much for the extremely helpful information! I see where you’re coming from. I will follow your expert advice and see what I can come up with. I did find about five articles that seem to qualify regarding her notability, so I guess I will start with those first. It might take a few days for me to rework it all, mainly cutting the fat, so to speak. Anyway, thanks again! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 13:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

I want to create this page. Skyangel15 (talk) 01:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

You have created Draft:Adrenaline Rush (stable professional wrestling). It needs content and references before being submitted. David notMD (talk) 02:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@

reliable sources. Your draft will not be accepted if it has such content. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 13:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

2014 Winter Olympics medal table - Wikipedia In this part I found a error about Aleksandr Kasyanov. It is said about this part that he is a composer amd died in 1982. It doesn't make sense. Can you change this part to the right person? 116.45.228.142 (talk) 13:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for letting us know. His name was misspelled and I have corrected it. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Blackout gag

• search: "Tex Avery" "blackout gag"
• search: "Ernie Kovacs" "blackout gag"

....0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 15:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

So what? Even if it wasn't NSFW content, it still has to be reverted for its meaninglessness. ☀DefenderTienMinh⛤☯☽ (talk) 15:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Okay...I'm not sure why this is at the Teahouse, rather than at a dispute resolution forum. I don't see the point of 0mtw's post to the talk page, either, but nor do I see any particularly pressing need to revert it, either, or to label it as disruptive editing. I'd say it'd be best if y'all just leave it, and each other, alone. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

ok I'll ignore that. ☀DefenderTienMinh⛤☯☽ (talk) 16:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

I read this part in Wikipedia sockpuppetry and it said: “Contributing to the same page or discussion with multiple accounts: Editors may not use more than one account to contribute to the same page or discussion in a way that suggests they are multiple people.”

Could you please explain why using multiple accounts to disguise as multiple people is forbidden. Why it is against the policy to use multiple accounts to contribute to the same page? How can using multiple accounts to contribute to same article suggest that there are multiple people? Is there a legitimate way of contributing that same page with multiple accounts? Why can not you use another account to pretend to be different person? How? And can you please give me examples about this reasoning? 174.236.224.237 (talk) 17:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse!

Let's say you go to the Talk page of an article on Wikipedia, perhaps to suggest removing a part of someone's biography. Another Wikipedia volunteer responds and doesn't agree with your idea. In response, you create some extra accounts and use them to back up your initial suggestion. Now, it seems like lots of users are in favour of your idea! But in reality, it's just you and the other volunteer who disagreed with you. This is manipulation. Wikipedia relies on a system of agreement or consensus, so pretending to be multiple people to sway the conversation is not allowed.

Hope that explains it? Let me know if you have any further questions, Qcne (talk) 17:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Qcne Apologies if my IP changes, but can you give me more information on multiple accounts to look more than one person contributing to this article? 2600:1010:B193:5833:D57A:88E0:EF64:685A (talk) 17:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi again,

There's no rule against one person using multiple accounts to constructively edit articles (see

Wikipedia:SOCKLEGIT

).

The issue arises if you have multiple accounts and use those multiple accounts in a way to deceive other editors or make unconstructive edits. That is not permitted. This could include:

- using multiple accounts to evade blocks

- using multiple accounts to sway consensus in your favour

- using multiple accounts to make it purposely difficult for other editors to check your edit history, in order to conceal vandalism

Note that there's nothing wrong with stopping using an old account and starting afresh with a new account, plenty of editors have done this. It's called Wikipedia:Clean start.

Your best bet is to read the policy closely at Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry - it explains it well.

If there's anything you don't understand about the policy let us know. Qcne (talk) 17:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Qcne What does it mean if it says: “using multiple accounts to make it purposely difficult for other editors to check your edit history, in order to conceal vandalism”? 2600:1010:B193:5833:D57A:88E0:EF64:685A (talk) 17:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

All edits on Wikipedia can be seen by anyone. You can easily look at my, or any other user's, contributions.

Sometimes, a person might have two accounts. They use one account to make helpful edits, and another to vandalise Wikipedia. Other volunteers might not realise these two accounts are owned by the same person. This way, they can behave badly with one account while still making good edits with the other. Qcne (talk) 18:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

how do I know what level of classification I have for editing? Momgamer09 (talk) 18:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Enter your name in the box at Special:UserRights. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Momgamer09. Please read Wikipedia:User access levels section 2.1.3. You are autoconfirmed. Cullen328 (talk) 18:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Social media is not allowed as a source in articles. That includes comments too. But however, can you please explain why social media is not a reliable source? And can you please give me more information about this? Can you provide examples of why it is not very reliable? How though? 2600:1010:B193:5833:D57A:88E0:EF64:685A (talk) 16:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

It's very simple. Anybody can write more or less whatever they like on social media, which is jam full of scams, urban myths, fake news, and complete bullshit. Don't believe anything you read on social media. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:39, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Examples of this? 2600:1010:B193:5833:D57A:88E0:EF64:685A (talk) 16:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Social media is a place where people, by definition, spew out whatever they want. We could try to create a list of social-media-propagated scams, urban myths, fake news, and complete bullshit, but it would be so big as to probably crash our servers.

talk

] 18:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Maybe check out [20]https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ for an ongoing list of social media fake information. Qcne (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP Editor, welcome to the Teahouse!

I could write a Facebook post proclaiming myself President of Antarctica, and then use that as a source for my new Wikipedia article Qcne, President of Antarctica. Hopefully you can see why that would not be appropriate for Wikipedia!

Anyone can write anything on social media and it's usually very hard to verify that the information is true. And usually anything posted by official (e.g. news organisations, government departments) accounts can be found directly on their website instead.

Have a read of

Wikipedia:User-generated content, which goes into a lot more detail. Qcne (talk)

16:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

PlantPoet (talk) 19:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

A redirect is certainly justified for every name she published under, or used herself in other contexts. (Two redirects is not clutter. You are unlikely to get to the amount of redirects to J. R. R. Tolkien!) -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 21:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Is one able to edit the Lead Section of an article w/o generating negative points for editing the whole page. See for example Vesna Goldsworthy . The Lead Section includes biographical information which should be amended. Even if a Biography section is added some information in the Lead Section is incorrect. Oldsilenus (talk) 18:41, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Oldsilenus. There is no such thing as "negative points". If you remove poor quality content for a valid reason, a negative number will appear in the edit history, shown in red, just as adding content shows up as green with a positive number. These are not "points". They are simply an indication of how many bytes were added or removed, and are in no way evidence of "good" or "bad" editing. Cullen328 (talk) 18:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Many ThanksOldsilenus (talk) 18:57, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

If you go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets, and scroll down to Appearance, you will find an option to add an Edit button to the lead section of each article, allowing you to edit the Lead on its own.. This button will appear next to the title of articles, where you may confuse it with the Edit button for the whole article, as I often do. It's useful, once you get used to it. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 21:38, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

I’m trying to start a page about an old Chicago Irish band that my father in/law was a member of in the 1970-1990’s called The Irish Minstrels. ChicagoCymru (talk) 07:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

You have begunm and can continue, at User:ChicagoCymru/sandbox. You have the same content on your User page, which is the wrong place and needs to be deleted. However, keep the conflict of interest statement. Others here may be able to advise on music notability. David notMD (talk) 08:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Currently no article is titled "The Irish Minstrels"; so if your draft becomes an article, it can be so titled. (The complication in "The Irish Minstrels (Chicago)" is unnecessary.) Remember that everything the draft says must be based on

what Wikipedia regards as "reliable sources". -- Hoary (talk

) 08:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure if anyone has already given this to you, but in addition to

Your first article to guide your editing. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk

- 11:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello ChicagoCymru, and croeso i'r tŷ te. Besides the good advice others have given you, I would suggest you also look at

reliable independent published sources is like starting to build a house before you have surveyed the site to make sure it is suitable: there is a distinct possibility that all your work will be wasted. ColinFine (talk

) 17:16, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

ChicagoCymru, the Chicago Tribune published an article on July 21, 1979 called "MICHAEL DUIGNAN, 49, LOCAL IRISH SINGER". I can't read the whole article because I am not a subscriber, but the snippet view says, Michael Duignan, 49, an Irish tenor, had been lead singer for the Irish Minstrels in the late 1960s and the 1970s. That's a start for you, if you can locate the whole article. Cullen328 (talk) 00:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, I just wanted to know that are all formal words and vocabulary be added to articles. And is formal writing style required on Wikipedia? What about the word, “utilize”? Is it allowed? Thanks… 2600:1010:B193:5833:D57A:88E0:EF64:685A (talk) 21:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1196. You are going to want to read

WP:TONE, which describes how content should be written as neutrally as possible and that it should read somewhat academic. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝

 ) 01:23, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

The word "utilize" is perfectly cromulent to use in Wikipedia. The word "cromulent" is not as it is informal. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:43, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

my Sandbox contains an old version of an article that has been updated. I don't believe that I can clear it because contains an illustration used in the original article. Will one of the administrators in

Hello, Oldsilenus. You can clear your sandbox. All images used anywhere in Wikipedia are hosted separately (either on Commons or sometimes on Wikipedia itself), and removing a use of an image does not affect the image. ColinFine (talk) 19:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks WP:ColinFine . It worked properly. I may have been confused about another page removal situation.Oldsilenus (talk) 20:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

pings them), you input [[User:Example]], which will display as User:Example and ping them. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk

- 08:50, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

I created Jeremy Leibler and it was showing up in Google search but doesn't appear to be doing so now. Did something happen to cause this? It's showing up in Bing which makes me think its some sort of google issue. Has anyone seen something like this before and can shed some light on it? Thank you. Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 06:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Whitemancanjump23. The Wikipedia article shows up as the #2 hit on my Android smartphone Google search in California. Please be aware that Wikipedia has no direct control of how Google indexes Wikipedia articles. The only known path here on Wikipedia to improving Google search results is to expand the article, add relevant images, and improve its references. The Google algorithms, though imperfect, are generally biased in favor of higher quality. Cullen328 (talk) 07:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Really appreciate it! Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 07:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

neutral point of view. Cullen328 (talk

) 07:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

ok. but what do you do when someone is a thought leader? is there an appropriate way to say it? Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 07:27, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Does it mean anything more than "people sometimes listen to what he says"? Maproom (talk) 07:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Whitemanjump23, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer to questions like "what should we refer to him as" is always "how do the (independent reliable) sources describe him?" ColinFine (talk) 17:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Google search results are not the same for everyone. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

What's a "roof body"? -- Hoary (talk) 09:03, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Roof body appears to be a term used by some Jewish umbrella organizations. I wouldn't use that term without explanation in a general encyclopedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Seems to be a literal translation of the German "Dachverband". Lectonar (talk) 11:18, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

I have a template stating that the page is too promotional. I have made the copy more neutral, removed links to websites owned by the subject and explained in the publishing comments. Yet the tag persists. Can anyone help? PR556667 (talk) 01:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

If you have made the article more enough neutral and removed the promotional links or other things , then the tag will be possibly removed soon, when any experienced editor visit the article. Happy editing and Thank you WikiAnchor10 (talk) 02:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:INDEPENDENT coverage: and the website link used in citation #2 currently gives a "Page cannot be found" error! Mike Turnbull (talk

) 12:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

SpicyMemes123 (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2023 (UTC) SpicyMemes123 (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

You can

WP:RCP works especially on reverting vandalism and edits that are wrong, but made in good faith. You can discuss edits to the page further in the article's talk page, if you would like to ask something from the people who regularly edit it. NotAGenious (talk

) 17:49, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Personal identity

Hi

redlinks in the References section? An editor will need to manually edit each problematic reference and remove the wikilink to the non-existent author. ContributeToTheWiki (talk • contribs

) 17:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

I would like to create a page in the English wiki, translated and possibly improved from the Hebrew page referenced above. Accelerator-physicist (talk) 13:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@

notability guidelines here are likely to be more restrictive. As I don't speak Hebrew, I can't judge how good the sources used there will prove to be. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 14:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Mike. I will look up the WP:TRANSLATE page. As a bilingual English-Hebrew person, I can evaluate the quality of the sources. However, many of these may be available only in Hebrew.

My intention for follow up action is to link this page to other English wiki pages such as Rishon LeZion, where I noted significant omissions, such as the names of the ten founders of the town. Accelerator-physicist (talk) 14:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

English refs are preferred for English Wikipedia, but non-English refs are allowed, even to the point that those are the only refs available. However, this may cause a delay in a draft being reviewed, a reviewers tend to select drafts for which they have competence. David notMD (talk) 14:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks David notMD.

Would a reference to "Geni" be acceptable? Please see

https://www.geni.com/people/Aharon-Freiman-Dror/6000000003784280830 Accelerator-physicist (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Accelerator-physicist, based on our Geni.com article, it does not seem to be a reliable source - apparently it is a wiki and its content is entirely user-generated. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:17, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Accelerator-physicist, and welcome to the Teahouse. While writing articles in English encyclopaedia about those people would be welcomed (providing they meet English Wikipedia's criteria for

redlink, showing that the article does not exist, together with a small 'il' link to the Hebrew article, so that readers who can read Hebrew will be able to click that and go straight to the Hebrew article. ColinFine (talk

) 17:25, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine. I prefer to get this biography done on WP before linking to it.

As to notability, I found a mention of Aharon Mordechai Freeman in the English WP page Haviv Elementary School. Now, that is not a lot, but the town of which he was one of ten founders, Rishon LeZion, is definitely notable, and in that town he was an important figure, and appears well in the Hebrew WP. Do you consider that he meets the criterion of notability in the English WP? Accelerator-physicist (talk) 19:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:NPERSON; there are some more specific guidelines for academics and athletes. 199.208.172.35 (talk

) 18:21, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Can you clip an image? Like if I wanted a circular cutout of a picture, do I have to upload a new picture? QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 06:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Also, another styling question:

Why is the following so goddamn tall, and how can I make it shorter?

Err, I know Charles used to talk to trees, but I don't think he ever was one. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 12:07, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Haha - that's brilliant. Dare I say Ace(r) LOL. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:38, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

<div style="display: flex; color: white;">
<div style="padding: 0 15px; background:linear-gradient(#c9dae9 10%, #c5d7e6 50%, #8ba2b9 55%, #adc3dd 100%); border-radius: 0 0 0 10px;">
[[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]]
</div>

<div style="padding: 0 15px; background:linear-gradient(#c9dae9 10%, #c5d7e6 50%, #8ba2b9 55%, #adc3dd 100%);">
[[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]]
</div>

<div style="padding: 0 30px; background:linear-gradient(#ddaca8 10%, #c87d74 50%, #b94635 55%, #d2836e 100%); border-radius: 0 0 10px 0;">
[[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]]
</div>
</div>

hi @QuickQuokka:! to answer your second question, it seems that it's in part due to the line breaks in your code. unlike usual HTML, <div> does not really hide line breaks coming directly after it and considers it like any other line break in the code, so everything has to be in one line (or if you would have to add a line break, it has to be inside the <div> tag, not outside). the rest of the size seems to be because the image is 10px high (and there is whitespace in the image), and there seems to be no way around it unless you resize the image. here's the output and corresponding code:

<div style="display: flex; color: white;">
<div style="padding: 0 15px; background:linear-gradient(#c9dae9 10%, #c5d7e6 50%, #8ba2b9 55%, #adc3dd 100%); border-radius: 0 0 0 10px;">[[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]]</div>

<div style="padding: 0 15px; background:linear-gradient(#c9dae9 10%, #c5d7e6 50%, #8ba2b9 55%, #adc3dd 100%);">[[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]]</div>

<div style="padding: 0 30px; background:linear-gradient(#ddaca8 10%, #c87d74 50%, #b94635 55%, #d2836e 100%); border-radius: 0 0 10px 0;">[[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]]</div>
</div>

happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 08:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Melecie: Thanks a ton! This really helps! This is designed to look like the Windows Aero window buttons, I made this for Uncyclopedia, if you'd like to take a peek at that page. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 08:59, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Q1: See {{CSS image crop}}, for rectangular crops. Note that this requires the original image to be downloaded every time, so not really suitable for picking out a small part of a big original - it's best to create a new cropped image, upload it to Commons, and reference that. Also, it can't do non-rectangular shapes. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 09:07, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Is it discouraged to ask Wikipedians on their talk pages for their links on other websites besides Wikipedia? I know Wikipedia isn't social media, but there are some Wikipedians that I would like to know better and maybe talk with outside of Wikipedia.

@

ABeeperPerhaps: Go for it! In my opinion, that policy (Wikipedia is not a social networking site

) is about actual discussions.

I think that asking for other users' socials to take persona; discussions off-wiki is actually in the spirit of that policy, since you're not having them on the wiki. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 07:02, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@

ABeeperPerhaps You can contact most long-term editors by using email, so you don't even need to use their Talk Page. Just navigate to their Userpage and use the "Email this user" link. Beware that your own email address will be included as the reply-to address in the message they receive. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 12:22, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@

ABeeperPerhaps: You have to enable email at Special:Preferences before you can mail other users with email enabled. PrimeHunter (talk

) 12:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Also, @

talk

) 19:46, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Another editor correctly noted that Vesna Goldsworthy is a winner of the Crashaw Prize. There is no Wikipedia article on this prize, but it is defined in the Richard Crashaw entry (in the Legacy section). Would it be acceptable to create a redirect from Crashaw Prize to Richard Crashaw? The legacy section might be later expanded, or another article written about the prize. Oldsilenus (talk) 17:10, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Oldsilenus, yes, that seems appropriate. The redirect should go to the Legacy section. Cullen328 (talk) 18:10, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

As always thanks. Oldsilenus (talk) 20:53, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Moved from #Broken links on philosophy pages casualdejekyll 23:09, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

So what can i do in an edit? 2607:FB91:447:20C2:FD59:FD62:2F8F:880B (talk) 23:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

hi ip user! you can do anything that helps the wiki out, but some things you can do are present over at

Task center. I recommend starting with something simple like copyediting or adding categories. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk

- 23:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Je ne suis pas en mesure d'ajouter la traduction française pour Jonathan Mark Kenoyer. J'étais capable de traduire un article français en anglais, mais pas l'inverse. Quelqu'un peut-il aider? MERCI Aishe2111 (talk) 16:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Aishe2111: Cette page est destinée à obtenir de l'aide sur Wikipédia en anglais. Si vous essayez d'ajouter une traduction à Wikipédia en français, vous devez demander à quelqu'un là-bas. (This page is for getting help with the English Wikipedia. If you are trying to add a translation to the French Wikipedia, you need to ask someone there.) ~Anachronist (talk) 16:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I am unable to log in to FR wiki or may be it I am doing something wrong? Aishe2111 (talk) 09:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

From looking at your account, it appears you have not even accessed the French Wikipedia with your account- this account should work there. 331dot (talk) 09:23, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Just wondering what's the consensus on how often you should be publishing new edits when making changes to a page? For example, should it be every sentence? Or every bit of content made using one reference? Or every paragraph? I'm a bit confused, especially as edit counts seem so important but one edit could consist of any amount of content. (I've tried researching this but couldn't find an answer). Thanks! Madeleinehales (talk) 09:01, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Madeleinehales, welcome to the Teahouse!

It's really up to you. I swing from really tiny edits at a time (spotting spelling mistakes, etc) to 2000+ byte changes which could be whole sections. The only two issues to watch out for are if you try and hide vandalism by burying it in edits (I am sure you won't do this!); and the editor/browser/computer could crash, loosing all your work, so you may want to do editing in chunks so it publishes regularly. Qcne (talk) 09:09, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I would add that if you are going to extensively edit an article and it will take some time to do- be it all at once or in a series of edits- you may want to consider adding {{inuse}} to the top of the article, to alert other editors that active work is being done on the article. 331dot (talk) 09:11, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I'll also note that it may make sense to publish your edits after every major change just so that you can succinctly summarise it in the Edit Summary. It may be harder for other editors to work out what you've changed if you just have One Big Edit, whereas breaking it into logical steps with brief Edit Summarys makes it easier to track changes. Qcne (talk) 09:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Madeleinehales firstly, edit counts are NOT important (other than giving you additional rights after 10 and 500 edits).
As for the question, I tend to edit by section, although if the page is being heavily edited, or your internet connection frequently drops out, you might edit in smaller sections, to avoid edit conflicts with other editors, or loosing your edit in an outage. The one thing I would avoid is making a lot of changes / additions in one large update, as, if another editor disagrees with part of it, they will often revert all of it. - Arjayay (talk) 09:16, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Qcne, @331dot, @Arjayay for providing some clarity! I will use all your advice moving forward :) Madeleinehales (talk) 09:23, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Madeleinehales Looking at your string of edits on LHCf experiment I consider that a good approach, especially as your Edit summaries indicate the place and nature of your edits. David notMD (talk) 10:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Adding >70,000 bytes in one edit. But I wouldn't recommend this approach for novices. -- Hoary (talk) 11:47, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

What is the mistake or error with our article ?? Could you explain clearly. We are production house , we are creating for our movie team members Trimatis (talk) 05:08, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Thanuja Theethira is probably the draft article Trimatis is referring to. Karenthewriter (talk) 05:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi

declare any connection you might have with Thanuja Theethira. Once you've done those things, it will be easier for you to continue to work on your draft to try and bring it up to Wikipedia's standards. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 05:42, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I removed peacock and puffery wording. Before any more work on the article, declare your PAID status on your User page. After that, provide references for all facts before submitting again. David notMD (talk) 10:16, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

If you are new to Wikipedia reading Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners will be useful. Every piece of information in an article needs to have a reference after it so readers can see where your data comes from. Many sources have user-generated content, which may not be accurate, so checking your references at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources is helpful. Remember that Wikipedia is not a social media site to be used for promotion. It is for well-referenced articles on notable subjects. If a draft article is rejected by a reviewer, and it is then resubmitted for review without correcting all the problems, there is very little chance of the article ever being accepted. Do not submit your draft article for a third time unless you understand all the problems, and have done what is needed to get the article up to Wikipedia standards. Karenthewriter (talk) 14:23, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I am concerned that a user might be engaged in sockpuppetry. What is the proper course of action for me to raise this concern? Many thanks in advance! -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 14:04, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I suggest you follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Shantaviral! I have made a claim at WP:SPI. TheLonelyPather (talk) 14:26, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I have been hunting for projects or websites related to wikipedia visualization, I am asking here in case anyone can recommend some or point me toward where I can find more of these projects?

resources I found so far:

https://seealso.org/ (curated visualization)

https://github.com/densitydesign/strumentalia-seealsology (very cool semantic area visualization of related wiki pages)

https://www.wikiverse.io/ (pretty but kind of useless)

thank you! 2001:FB1:EC:57DE:5959:DBE3:673D:E1E3 (talk) 13:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. Thanks for the links. The first one is especially interesting. There are official Wikimedia statistics at this link (and linked from there) but none as visually striking. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:49, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

I am trying to submit a request for a Paige for a book series that has been around for about ten years now. But I am not sure how to find appropriate references for this book series. Like, I can find a bunch of sites that sell the books, and blog posts about it. But how does one find 'objective, notable, etc.' references for a book series. Draco1629 (talk) 16:20, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Draco1629! It's great that you are creating a page for something you find notable. I hope you'll believe me when I say I completely understand where you are; the first article I ever created was for a TV show called The Stanley Dynamic, and I struggled a lot with the reliable sources requirement. You can check out the sources on that article to see what I managed to find, and see if you can find similar sources. The Wikipedian who was assessing my article all those years ago referred me to a page they made, User:Joe_Decker/IsThisNotable, which gives an easy guide to understanding notability.

Here's one article I found online from the Idaho State Journal. I found it by searching an online document library called Proquest. You might have access to something similar through your library or school, if you are part of any. Otherwise, you can go through Google or other search engines, or explore the Wikipedia library (I haven't used it, but it seems great!). If you need more help, you can reply to this or ask me on my talk page. Good luck! Aamri2 (talk) 17:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Draco1629 I couldn't either (Draft:The McCracken Adventures), searching google-news only gives me Amazon. One reason for that may be that these books are self-published, and that often means less coverage. So the sad conclusion may be that atm you can't make an acceptable WP-article on this book-series. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I have entered 2 inquiries about some misinformation regarding J Honkonen; the 2^nd entitled DOD retry. Without going into exhaustive detail I’ll just say that “”DoubleGrazing”” has offered to help. I sent information on this person’s talk page. I’m more than willing to wait for a reply but if I didn’t “talk” correctly I’ll need some guidance?? eg do ""I"" need to create a talk page? Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 04:14, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Eldyr88PHy$N, and welcome to the Teahouse! To answer your question, no you don't need to create a talk page for DoubleGrazing to reply. Your talk page request was fine and was entered correctly, so they probably just haven't seen it. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 04:32, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

P.S. I've made you a talk page with my talk-back notification. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 04:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, @Eldyr88PHy$N, got sidetracked onto other things.

I'm copying the below message here from my talk page, to keep the discussion in one place, and in the hope that others may contribute:

So… an online copy of his obituary is apparently unavailable. But I did locate the newspaper clipping my mother saved. I do not have the page or publication # but the date of the obit is January 4 1969, the day after he died. In addition I also have a copy of the death certificate; rendered by the city clerk of Gardner MA. (He expired in a hospital there following complications of an accidental fall). It also lists DOD as 1/3/1969. The DOD copy is dated 1/6/1969. Both of these list him as John J Honkonen. Sort of an Americanization of his Finnish name as he was more widely known as Jallu in his Finnish ‘circle’. If necessary (and with some direction) I could photo either of these and upload to you. (?) Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 02:53, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

My take on this, FWIW, is that January does look like the correct DOD; the question now is, how to evidence that? If we knew the newspaper where the obit appeared, that could be cited as an offline source, even if we don't find a digitised copy online. Otherwise, would scanning the death cert and uploading that be acceptable? I realise it's not a published source, per se, but it would at least provide the necessary evidence. Of course, given that this edit would need to be made to the Finnish Wiki, the real question is would fi.wiki rules accept that as evidence. Views, anyone? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:15, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. So… you’re not going to believe this; or maybe you will. I tried again and found the obituary via a newspaper archive. I’ve PDF’d a clipping which clearly shows the obit published on page 2 of the Fitchburg Sentinel, Saturday, January 4 1969. (is this information enough… and/or how do I send the PDF itself to your talk page? Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 13:45, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @Eldyr88PHy$N, based on that information I have managed to locate the obit via Newspapers.com, and it does indeed confirm the DOD as 3 January. On that basis, I have corrected the date on the Finnish Wikipedia. Glad we got to the bottom of this! :) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much!

In other websites it’s still listed as May but as long as one( eg Wikipedia) is corrected that’s good enough for me. I guess now we’ll see if someone else (perhaps from Finland or Sweden) tries to change it back. Since this was my only project I don’t know if I’ll be back at the Teahouse although checking in to see what is being discussed might be fun. Anyway thanks again! Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 14:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Well I’m back. It occurred to me to take another step. Would it be possible to actually create an English Wikipedia page with this information?  Other than the DOD date error the information on the Finnish Wiki seems to be correct. I did however want to include 2 additional tidbits. Mr Honkonen directed the New York Laulumiehet choir on Finland Day June 23 1940 at the (1939-1940) New York World’s Fair. (and) again he directed the aforementioned Laulumiehet choir during a benefit concert for Finland in honor of Sibelius’s 75^th birthday. Sibelius turned 75 in 1940. The concert itself was on Sunday May 18^th 1941 at “The Town Hall” 123 W 43^rd St NY,NY. (I have the actual program guides for both of these) Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 16:04, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Eldyr88PHy$N: I thought about that, but unfortunately the Finnish (or Swedish) Wiki sources aren't enough to establish notability here on the English-language Wiki, and without that we cannot create an article. If you can find multiple secondary sources that are both reliable and independent of the subject, and provide significant coverage (not just passing mentions) of Honkonen, then it might be feasible. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:02, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi and thanks. I don't think I can provide enough sources to 'meet demands'. It was a thought I had to toss out there. Thanks for updating as you did. Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 18:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

PS: I've made the same corrections to the Swedish Wiki. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:33, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I spent 10 seconds asking how I missed the Swedish Wiki. Then decided not to worry anymore. Thanks for fixing that as well!! Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 18:34, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

I'd like to make a protected edit request arguing that a certain wording choice in an article deviates in meaning from what is supported by the references, and that this should be fixed by rephrasing that wording to stick to the references' word choice.

What is the wikipedia policy I should reference when making this sort of argument? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources is quite long, I wasn't sure what phrase to use to search for this particular policy.

Many thanks in advance!

@

Eyal3400: I don't know if there is such a policy. Wikipedia editors should be writing the articles in their own words, paraphrasing what the source says. RudolfRed (talk

) 18:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

In my view,

Eyal3400, the applicable policy is Wikipedia:Verifiability. You should propose specific alternate wording that you believe more accurately summarizes the source. Cullen328 (talk

) 18:34, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Will do.

talk

) 20:03, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

The problem I have with the current wording is that I believe that it is too heavy handed/general, and means things which none of the references imply.

talk

) 20:04, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:EDITREQUEST

which explains your concerns and offers a better alternative form of wording along with your reasoning.

If you're still struggling, consider that it might possibly be appropriate to use the original phrasing from the source within a quotation. For example: 'The Times newspaper reported the incident in 2020, describing it as "sheer bloody mayhem".[ref]. Not sure if this will help much, but 'good luck'! Nick Moyes (talk) 20:39, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi there,

I am new here and I face an issue with my first entry, that is a new object invented and not known very well of public, and was criticized because was considered "promotion or advertisement" a mere spam that is not the case. I would like to open a reflection about this in order to solve the difference of promote and inform. 2804:7F0:BC01:CE76:C17E:CD48:1EA7:8AD5 (talk) 02:14, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

reliable sources about it, it has been either written by disinterested editors or at least had its neutrality checked by disinterested editors, etc. Draft:Manuzela was about "an innovative fan item invented by Roger Yokoyama in Brazil". It certainly looked promotional to me. "The wide acceptance and success of the Manuzela led Yahoo Sports to declare that this innovative item is the future of fan items." Where was or is this declaration? We weren't told. The entire draft had but a single reference: to Facebook. -- Hoary (talk

) 02:43, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Hoary for reply.

You are right, I did not perceived that point of view, for sure I was not imparcial when I tell the story about this invention. There is a similar product, older that has a page here,and I would like to know what exactly is expected to be a deserved information to be here.

Otherwise, I agree that the article has only one reference, I just did not know how to do that, but in the discussion I provided more references of notable newspaper, sports platform, patents, magazines that the object appear and was noticed, and was the official item of the most important sports event in the world, the Olympics.

I will find a neutral editor, or if you can help me will be amazing.

If thundersticks has a page why not Manuzela I guess. Thanks Roger Yokoyama (talk) 03:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Roger Yokohama: The criteria for inclusion is basically Wikipedia:Notability. Wikipedia isn't to be used for "exposure" or publicity or "getting the word out". A topic has to become notable on its own, by virtue of getting significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. If no such sources can be found, then the topic cannot have an article here. Thundersticks has citations to multiple sources that are independent of the product or inventor. It isn't much, but it's enough to squeak by. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:13, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Anachronist for reply.

The notability wasn't the deletion cause, because I post more references in discussion that you can check with newspaper, magazines, international granted patents, video from an authority in the area, was the offical item of the most important event in the world.

But it is not my point, the notability, the point is what is the difference of promotion and information, that is my topic, and when and why it should or not be in an encyclopedia? Roger Yokoyama (talk) 03:34, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Dear @Hoary

Sorry I forgot to clarify the reference that you did not find, the declaration that "Is the future of sports Fandom" was in the video of Yahoo Sports that has in facebook only for now available, the original page of Yahoo exists but the video has some issue.

There is another page of Yahoo Sports with comments about that I will shared with the editor.

Thanks Roger Yokoyama (talk) 03:43, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

notable inventions that have received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk

) 06:21, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks a lot @Cullen328 noted. 2804:7F0:BC01:E57A:1C64:1A4:95DA:D200 (talk) 07:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Roger Yokoyama, the last sentence: The Manuzela represents a milestone in the fan experience during sports events and demonstrates the potential of creative and functional ideas to captivate audiences worldwide. -- Hoary (talk) 05:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary

I agree that the text is not neutral, noted, I will review and better, wait or ask for someone(editors) to know the story and be interested to tell to the world.

But my question isn't answered, an invention should or not be in an encyclopedia as soon as possible?

Inventions are made to the world, we have a short period of exclusivity respecting all patents laws worldwide. But essentially is a collective benefit, like a book, an encyclopedia or the Higgs Bóson.

I ask for you guys to tell me if we think the pertinence of a new object be available or not in the free and collaborative platform of information about everything in human society? Roger Yokoyama (talk) 05:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@

There are no deadlines on Wikipedia. A new invention is not inherently notable merely because it exists. Therefore, it does not automatically merit an article here. Wikipedia publishes articles on notable topics only. An invention merits an article on Wikipedia only after it becomes notable. And it becomes notable, as Wikipedia defines "notable", by being written about in reliable sources that are independent of the invention or its inventor. ~Anachronist (talk

) 06:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

I see @Anachronist

Thanks for clarify the process and policies.

I understand in the discussion that the problem of deletion was because the promotion and advertisement interpretation of the text that I agreed already, in this talk I understand that a invention per se is not automatically promoted to be in WP and I also agree.

In terms of notability I am taking more sources including in wayback machine to provide for review and consideration once solved the neutrality and promotion issue of the article maybe it can be accepted finally. Thanks again, of all community for the patience and consideration of a new wikipedian. 2804:7F0:BC01:E57A:1C64:1A4:95DA:D200 (talk) 07:38, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Roger Yokoyama Above, you wrote: "If thundersticks has a page why not Manuzela I guess." The Thundersticks article identifies the first use of this item as a sports event in 1994. The Wikipedia article was created in 2007. If you are willing to wait patiently for 13 years, Manuzela may become popular enough and written about to warrant an article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; it is not a "platform of information about everything in human society." David notMD (talk) 12:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Dear @[[User:David notMD|David notMD],

Manuzela has since invented 10 year of existence, proved and recognized, I think that I can wait more 3 years.

I heard the inventor of Wikipedia saying that WP is exactly that, a platform with all human knowledge, in his words 2804:7F0:BC01:E57A:181D:36B6:1CF1:2D20 (talk) 16:39, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Nevertheless, by policy set by its community of editors, there are many things that

it does not cover. Mike Turnbull (talk

) 16:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Michael D. Turnbull

Finally the answer that I inquired for this community. I think how many thoughts and inventions that we loose, we have some kind of judgements about what is important or not to know, what is dump and weak enough to be ignored, and how we will filter and just dictate the policies and blindly agree and follow as a good person. Is it not looks like with some other place that it replicate, or we replicate them? The first result of google isn't the best one all the time, relevance is quite questionable, what is worth or not the same, I invite you to search for this 3 similar products(thunderstick, caxirola and manuzela) and decide which do you think that is more encyclopedic in terms of state of art and bring more benefits to users. It is just a reflection. 2804:7F0:BC01:E57A:181D:36B6:1CF1:2D20 (talk) 22:25, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

A potential subject's "state of art" and its potential to "bring more benefits to users" are not considerations that Wikipedia uses to decide on whether or not to have an article on that subject. The only qualifying criteria are – "Is there enough information already published about it, independently of it, in multiple and reliable sources?", which we summarize as "Is it

Notable?" {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk

) 21:59, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Asking if someone can reconsider the pictures that accompanyCathleen Mannbio. I was looking her up and noticed there is painting OF her painted by her father but no paintings BY her. That seems… outdated? Cheers. 24.1.32.126 (talk) 15:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia can generally only use pictures that are not subject to Copyright, which is a very complicated issue, subject to laws which often differ between countries. Since Cathleen's father Harrington Mann died in 1937 (94 years ago), all paintings by him are likely now in the public domain: Cathleen died in 1959 (64 years ago) so her own pictures are likely still in copyright. An expert of this topic would be able to give more and accurate details, which however are beyond my ken.

(To clarify a point that others may otherwise raise. If a person is dead and no public domain pictures of them can be found, we are allowed to use one in-copyright picture of them to illustrate their article on this Wikipedia only (but cannot place it on Wikimedia Commons for use on other-language Wikipedias). If they are still alive, we cannot because in theory someone could visit and photograph them, and then donate that photo to Commons.)

The only way to legally include pictures by Cathleen Mann in her article would be for someone (presumably her heir) who owns their copyrights (not merely the paintings themselves) to voluntarily release them using the correct legal forms (which I will not bother to link) to Wikipedia unpaid and for unrestricted re-use on Wikipedia and elsewhere, for any purposes. It is unlikely that the copyright owner of such works would do so. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 16:31, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

It is likely that her earliest paintings, exhibited more than 95 years ago, are in the public domain. If a careful copyright check confirms this, then images of those early paintings can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and added to her biography. Cullen328 (talk) 18:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Nope - these are likely to be death + 70 years, & she died in 1959, so some years to wait. Johnbod (talk) 22:20, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

New here. Got help and reminders from experienced members who directed me to WP: ____ pages to get further guidance. I found those WP pages have excellent instructions. I wonder if there is an index of all WPs that I can browse. Sorry for my limited understanding of the structure. Thank you. Path2space (talk) 02:23, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Path2space: There are hundreds of such pages. You could start with Wikipedia:List of policies and Wikipedia:List of guidelines. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:10, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. This is very helpful. Path2space (talk) 02:30, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, is there a way to work on a draft or severalpriv drafts privately? For a while, i thought my sandbox was a private draft workspace and just learned it was not. Thank you. L'Hommedusud (talk) 17:45, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @L'Hommedusud, welcome to the Teahouse!

You can use the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process to create multiple independent 'Draft' articles, all of which can be worked on simultaneously. Qcne (talk) 18:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, but if you're asking if these can be worked on privately, i.e. hidden from other users, then no; you'd have to work on the drafts in a word processor on your computer and then transfer them to Wikipedia when ready. Qcne (talk) 18:20, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Just to clarify, L'Hommedusud, every draft page and every sandbox page on Wikipedia is visible to everyone, if they know where to look. Cullen328 (talk) 18:28, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

understoood. Thank you guys L'Hommedusud (talk) 18:31, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

i see,the problem with word it doesnt show how things would look on wikipedia and i cant test tables, infobox , etc. , what about creating a draft to eventually submit it for approval, is this also accessible by other users? L'Hommedusud (talk) 18:28, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Yep, sorry- basically everything on Wikipedia is public by design. Qcne (talk) 18:33, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, L'Hommedusud, this is a collaborative project by design, and any editor can take a look at any time at what any other editor is working on. Cullen328 (talk) 18:35, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

no worries thanks again L'Hommedusud (talk) 18:40, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@L'Hommedusud One suggestion is to place your draft text into your sandbox but only ever "Preview" it, never publish/save it. To be absolutely certain you don't accidentally save work-in-process you can set Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing so that the software won't allow you to save unless you have also added an edit summary: which in this case I deliberately don't do! I copy/paste the growing Wikitext to and from an editor on my PC. Word is not good for this as it has the annoying habit of, for example, converting two single ' (for italics in Wikitext) into ". So I use WordPad instead, saving as rich text. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:54, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Mike Turnbull's suggestion is a good one,L'Hommedusud. However, you will lose your work in progress if you experience a power failure. Cullen328 (talk) 22:41, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

From memory you can create a sub-page from your sandbox that you do not link to from anywhere - that way it will most likely never be seen by anyone else. You will have to remember the path though! Tony 1212 (talk) 23:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

That would not guarantee that no one would see it, as edits to it would still appear in the Recent Changes feed. 331dot (talk) 23:12, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Aha! Thanks for that. Tony 1212 (talk) 23:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

That'd also show up in the user's contributions as well. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:19, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

You can create

talk

] 13:30, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Even editing on the main sandbox will be visible to other even though it cleared daily. They can look through the edit history. Cwater1 (talk) 03:46, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

When is it not appropriate to tag a page for speedy deletion? signed,

Hi @

64andtim

,

WP:NOTCSD appears to have some information you might find useful. NotAGenious (talk

) 07:05, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi guys, i would like to add a picture on the following Wiki Page: Dadvan Yousuf

But i dont know how - if anyone here could do it, that would be cool. Lupin6PainTendo (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Files for Upload to work with someone on uploading an image. 331dot (talk

) 09:02, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah heavy,i didnt know that. - ok thanks very much dor reply Lupin6PainTendo (talk) 09:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

please advise how to retrieve the deleted page. I am a new user, I 'd like to get back the material from the deleted page, so that I can use it to learn my mistake and to make improvement. Pande Dewi (talk) 07:55, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

WP:REFUND might be able to help. NotAGenious (talk

) 07:59, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Would it be possible to send me the material via my email? I do not have the back up of the sources in my page. Thank you Pande Dewi (talk) 19:29, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

neutral point of view. Cullen328 (talk

) 08:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

I understand my mistakes, the language used was promotional. I don't have the back up of the data in the deleted page, therefore I hope you could send the material via my email. Thank you Pande Dewi (talk) 19:37, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Pande Dewi. I am not an administrator, and can't see the deleted draft, but if it was deleted as overly promotional, it is unlikely that it will be of much use to you, as you almost certainly creatd it

BACKWARDS

.

The place to look for material is not in your deleted drafts, but in the

independent reliable sources which it is your first job to find. ColinFine (talk

) 11:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

A bit over a month ago I came across <a page> from an edit filter flagging of a possibly inaccurate edit summary - I initially reverted it, but completed the removal after some searching around and coming to the impression that the part that was removed (a supposed Māori name for the team) was quite possibly a hoax.

I was reverted, so I made a talk page discussion and tagged the source as possibly unreliable after briefly trying to discuss with the person who reverted me and that seemingly reaching a stalemate.

Now more than a month later and not a single person has shared any opinion on the talk page (the last edit is still just my initial edits adding the topic), despite the discussion being mentioned in the unreliable source template message.

What is the proper method of attracting more attention to this issue? – 2804:F14:80A4:9701:1D6:F010:8C78:AF6D (talk) 04:09, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

The best thing to do is to get some friends to register accounts on Wikipedia and ask them to participate in the discussion on your behalf. Having multiple other editors agree with your proposal is basically what we mean by establishing a consensus, which is essentially what’s needed in order to make any changes to articles. Mrffcknt (talk) 04:22, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:MEAT). – 2804:F14:80A4:9701:1D6:F010:8C78:AF6D (talk

) 04:28, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Mrffcknt is simply continuing to amuse himself here, in a series of messages that started with advice on how to make copyright violations less easily detectable, and have proceeded in a similar vein. Ignore. -- Hoary (talk) 04:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mrffcknt Has now been indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry and being disruptive. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

I'd post a message on Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board, inviting people there to join the discussion you've already started at Talk:Crusaders_(rugby_union)#Maori_name. -- Hoary (talk) 05:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary: Done, thank you. I was vaguely aware these central pages existed, but I guess I just haven't ventured in those directions to know where to find them. The entire concept of WikiProjects is a mystery to me. – 2804:F14:80A4:9701:1D6:F010:8C78:AF6D (talk) 05:24, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

The heyday of Wikiprojects was a long time ago, back when the majority of subjects one could immediately think of either had articles that were obviously feeble or no article at all. (Example: "Kiev" (December '02).) Editors could suggest priorities among the "to-do" lists, and generally encourage each other. Now, most Wikiprojects (and "task forces") are more or less moribund, but not all. -- Hoary (talk) 05:46, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary: For what it's worth, the New Zealand wikiproject is quite active (maybe because we're a small community of editors and New Zealanders tend to have a strong interest in editing New Zealand topics?), so your suggestion was a very helpful one. :) Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 07:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Chocmilk03, I hope it didn't seem as if I were saying that the NZ project was moribund: it very obviously is not. -- Hoary (talk) 08:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

I want to update the photo of article named Sunny Deol and I found a good and clear portrait on Aaj Tak News Site on this link

https://www.aajtak.in/amp/entertainment/bollywood-news/story/sunny-deol-gadar-2-seema-haider-anju-interview-seedhi-baat-show-sudhir-chaudhary-shares-acting-journey-tmovk-1751509-2023-08-05

Should I upload this photo of sunny deol on Wikipedia page because these images are non-copyright. WikiAnchor10 (talk) 02:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

WikiAnchor10, what is your reason for inferring that the images aren't copyright? -- Hoary (talk) 05:28, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

WikiAnchor10, every contemporary photo that you find online must be presumed to be restricted by copyright, unless you have solid, specific evidence to the contrary. Cullen328 (talk) 16:44, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

i think that there are many articles published daily on news website, did they have copyright of each and every photo thay upload on their site. WikiAnchor10 (talk) 17:54, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, @WikiAnchor10, they very likely do. Please do not upload anything to Wikipedia on the assumption that it is compatibly licensed - you must have proof. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:26, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

You should screen shot the picture so any picture data that might offer hints about copyright status doesn’t show up. You can also make it less likely to be detected on a reverse image search by adjusting things like hue, contrast, aspect ratio, etc. Mrffcknt (talk) 02:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

No. The idea, Mrffcknt, is not to contravene copyright but to respect copyright. -- Hoary (talk) 08:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Mrffcknt is being intentionally disruptive and can be ignored. They have been blocked from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:11, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

in the case of an article not knowing which variety of english to use (as opposed to using one from a place it's not actually that prominent in, like writing the article on

Hello and welcome. If you are editing an existing article, you should stick with the variety of English that the article currently uses, unless you establish a consensus on the talk page to change it. If you are writing a new article, and it isn't obvious as to if a particular variety should be used, you may use your preferred variety. Please see

WP:ENGVAR for more information. 331dot (talk

) 13:15, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

And if you're adding text to an existing article that doesn't have clear evidence of being written in American or British English (or some other national variety), it's probably a good idea to avoid introducing usages specific to a particular variety. See

MOS:COMMONALITY. Deor (talk

) 13:24, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

in that case, since the article i'm trying to edit (

(give me attention) • (see my deeds)

13:42, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

According to

MOS:RETAIN, "When no English variety has been established and discussion does not resolve the issue, use the variety found in the first post-stub revision that introduced an identifiable variety." In the case of Mockbuster, the first revision seems to be in British English, judging by the use of "film" rather than AmEng "movie". Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk

) 13:56, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

oh yeah that could work

so until someone else tries to discuss a change, british it is

thanks

(give me attention) • (see my deeds)

14:00, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

I can? I'm an administrator and I've never noticed any option to mark an edit as a bot edit. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

See

chat

) 00:43, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@

64andtim: I think it's only possible for rollbacks made with the API which is used by bots and scripts, not manual edits. mw:API:Rollback#rollback:markbot mentions the option. Users can hide bot edits at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-watchlist. Administrators and global rollbackers are scrutinized more than rollbackers before getting their permissions. PrimeHunter (talk

) 14:50, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Can I cite content behind a paywall of a notable newspaper source that I can see in detail because I am a subscriber? (Non-subscribers can see the article headline only). It makes it difficult to verify the content, but no different to content I cite in a book I own giving the page number, publisher etc. This can't be verified unless you "subscribe" to the book by owning it or borrowing it from a library you subscribe to. Walton22 (talk) 20:08, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A paywall is not a barrier to using a source on Wikipedia, see

WP:PAYWALL. There is no requirement that a source be easy to access or free to access. A book in a library can be cited even if someone has to travel to the library to review it; a book in a foreign language can be cited too. 331dot (talk

) 20:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Walton22 Welcome to the Teahouse. The simple answer is ABSOLUTELY, YES! We require factual statements to be referenced to sources that allow verification. We do not stipulate that they have to be in English, or available for free. Anyone with access to a library, bookshop should be able to find that published source from the other side of the world - but they might have to pay to do so. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick answers. Much appreciated. Walton22 (talk) 20:33, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

[Note: this edit has been deleted by an administrator. The advice, from a sockpuppet account, was intended to mislead.] Nick Moyes (talk) 13:21, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

imo, this is not really a good idea? you're better off with dispute resolution rather than ironcladding your sources with paywalls and access restrictions, because that actually solves the issue regarding people not wanting certain content in the article instead of just hiding it. resources like The Wikipedia Library and 12ft exist anyway (and some people may be institutions that grant access to more journals and sources) so paywalled sources aren't really that ironclad as I feel you think they are. 💜  melecie  talk - 02:00, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Mrffcknt my motivation in using a paywalled source is not remotely like what you describe.Walton22 (talk) 05:14, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@Walton22: You can completely ignore the silly comment by this person (which I have now deleted lest others read and consider it well-intended). They simply came to cause confusion, and they have now been indefinitely blocked from editing because they have used multiple accounts to be deliberately disruptive. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:21, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Nick Moyes (talk) thank you for your care Walton22 (talk) 15:37, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Can someone help me create a biographical page? Pjanvi1008 (talk) 12:20, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello Pjanvi1008,

Welcome to Wikipedia, and I assume you're trying to create a biographical page for another person. Generally, it is good for a new editor to try to edit some other articles to strengthen their editing skills and their knowledge of Wikipedia before proceeding to create a new article.

Before you create a new article, please note the following things:

• Read
  WP:BASIC
  is an essential guideline. For your reference:

People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

• If your subject belongs to a certain sector, there might be more specific notability requirements. For actors, see
  WP:NACADEMICS
  , etc.
• It is highly discouraged to write about yourself. If you are writing about someone you are related to, you must declare a conflict of interest. If you are paid to edit, you must declare paid-editing. You should declare them on your user page.
• If you have determined that your subject satisfies notability requirements, please then proceed to
  Wikipedia:Articles for Creation
  and create a draft. Another volunteer will go through your draft. You may need to improve your draft until it gets accepted.

I hope this makes sense. Other Teahouse people, please feel free to chip in if I missed anything.

Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 12:32, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Please also read Wikipedia:Notability (people). This would be helpful in determining the notability of your subject. TheLonelyPather (talk) 12:37, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I think it is worthy to point out that the article should comply with Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons if it is about a living person. Cwater1 (talk) 16:34, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

On basically every wiki I try to edit now, I get the following error:

This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: Abuse 23

When all I'm doing is changing trying to change File:Encyclopedia Dramatica (logo).png → File:Encyclopedia Dramatica (logo).svg, as the latter is a vector version. (thanks again to the incredible work of @MingoBerlingo).

Why is it not allowing me to??? QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 14:56, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Looks to me like that edit went through? DS (talk) 15:34, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi QuickQuokka. Please always include an example when possible. Many users incorrectly say "wiki" about Wikipedia articles but I guess you do mean real wikis. With some work I found [21]. It's a global filter. Based on [22] it's meta:Special:AbuseFilter/214. It's private and I don't have access to view private filters at meta. Maybe Tamzin can help. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:39, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I can confirm that that is a 214 false positive. (Thanks for the chance to use a hat I don't get to use much. :)) @1234qwer1234qwer4: Can you add a one-off exception to the filter for QuickQuokka? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 15:45, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

I've changed the filter and the edit should now be possible. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:37, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

I observe that File:Encyclopedia Dramatica (logo).png on en-wiki has the template {{restricted use}}, added by Cyberbot in 2019; but there is no corresponding tag on the Commons page, and the file does not appear in MediaWiki:Bad image list. Something out of sync perhaps? ColinFine (talk) 15:46, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Yeah, I also noticed that. The only logo on the list is for Stormfront, which I recently updated the other logo of. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

No, everything is working as intended. enwiki is not subject to global filters, and all of the filter hits for QQ have been global filter 214, on wikis where global filters are enabled. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 16:09, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

It's two unrelated issues. The global filter is unrelated to the use of {{restricted use}} on File:Encyclopedia Dramatica (logo).png, but it does look wrong to have the template there. The entry on MediaWiki:Bad image list was the redirect File:Ed logo.png but that entry was removed by Zzuuzz in February.[23] PrimeHunter (talk) 16:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Does {{restricted use}} on a file page actually do anything on a technical level? QuickQuokka successfully made the edit on enwiki before starting this thread. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 17:01, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

It merely informs editors what to do, and it does indeed usually serve that purpose. The syncing of list and templates is a bit um fragile, especially when it involves commons redirects. I'll tweak the description page manually. We currently have no need to blacklist the ED logo. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 17:17, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

I checked the

Hi Oldsilenus. }} terminates a template call. A table is terminated with |}. If you want }} or other wiki code to be displayed in the rendered page and not treated as code then you can place it inside <nowiki>...</nowiki>. If you do want }} to be treated as code but it isn't working as you want then you have to link a saved page with the broken code so we can see what is wrong. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:03, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks I will try that. Unfortunately using HTML table markup I was unable to add the braces. I assume that Wiki code takes precedence. Oldsilenus (talk) 18:08, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@Oldsilenus: Either one works if coded correctly. If you want help with broken code then please always post or link the code. When users have a specific problem but try to post a general question, they usually omit essential information about the problem. It's far easier to help if we can see the problem than have to guess about it. It looks like you were trying to display a template call without nowiki around the initial {{. That only works (but is still very poor coding practice) if there is no terminating }}. When }} is added, the template is called instead of displaying the code of the call. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, but I deleted the table that I created, and your <nowiki></nowiki> suggestion worked fine. I just wanted a list of things to enter for an encyclopedia citation, and I was afraid that I would forget the terminal braces. Of Course, if you just add the blank elements in your sandbox you get an "Empty Citation" error. The <nowiki></nowiki> worked fine for pipes also. I did see another discussion on how to handle pipes. Oldsilenus (talk) 19:31, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I just created an article in English but I'd like to make it so Japanese audiences can find them. How do we go about creating articles in different languages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Songuitar333 (talk • contribs)

Songuitar333, I suppose that your question is this one. I infer that the commonest form of her name in Japanese script is テリー・スーザン. (I haven't investigated this thoroughly and could be wrong.) You might try making an article about her, so titled, for ja:Wikipedia. You would do that there, not here. You'd have to comply with ja:Wikipedia's standards. (If you have questions about those, you'd have to ask about them there, not here.) Additionally, if you're proposing to translate the English article, you should digest Wikipedia:Translate us. -- Hoary (talk) 23:39, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

If I were you I would just put your English text through a translating program and copy whatever comes out to an article on Japanese wiki. Mrffcknt (talk) 03:49, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Please don't do that. The output is usually quite poor in quality EvergreenFir (talk) 04:00, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Will do! Songuitar333 (talk) 19:40, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) § Broken interwiki links

Yesterday I was just browsing Special:Interwiki just because I was bored, and I noticed that one of the wikis in there, schoolswp (Interwiki example, External example) is broken.

So I did the only logical thing: Make a JavaScript program to get all the base domains from the table, and then (through a CORS proxy) see which ones are broken.

After some manual sifting to see which ones false positives, I have results. Note that https://www.socialtext.net and https://www.wikimediachile.cl do work, but they give an SSL error and I don't know the former is in the interwiki table in the first place. --QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 19:49, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:VPT? I'm really not trying to be rude, but the folks over there understand much the same sort of stuff that you seem to. Me on the other hand: nah! Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk

) 20:30, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah I was basically just looking for answers as to why they're there. Are they supposed to be there? I don't know. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 20:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes:  Moved --QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 20:39, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka Great stuff. Looks like you've already got an answer there.

You know, when I read someone nonchalantly saying stuff like: "So I did the only logical thing: Make a JavaScript program to get all the base domains from the table, and then (through a CORS proxy) see which ones are broken." I smile inwardly and try to feel better by saying to myself that I built my first website probably before they were born. But actually I just hate you for knowing stuff that I don't (and never will!) Nick Moyes (talk) 20:50, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Don't worry I just """adapted""" some code from Stack Overflow (but I am taking programming classes, tho). QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 20:54, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Is there a a specific place for it? (I dont know why this is in a box) -- MercuryOxide 8:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MercuryOxide (talk • contribs)

@MercuryOxide: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! You can see here how the welcoming committee finds new users to welcome.

You can also join the welcoming committee if you'd like, there are no barriers to entry!

If you have any other questions, feel free to ask --QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 20:42, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@MercuryOxide With little experience (just 14 mainspace edits) and no idea yesterday how to create your own userpage, I seriously question what is the point of you at this stage welcoming other editors? You don't have the experience to answer any questions they might ask you in return and, if you welcome accounts which have yet to make any edits, you'll just be wasting your time. You would need to view each new user's contributions and assess whether a welcome is actually appropriate; if not you could simply be encouraging their misuse of Wikipedia. I love your enthusiasm, but I suggest you should focus on improving your own skills a bit more first. Oh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Nick Moyes (talk) 21:02, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

This page:List of homeschooling programmes has programs misspelled. How do I change it's title?