Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1229

Archive 1225

←

Archive 1227

Archive 1228

Archive 1229

Archive 1230

Archive 1231

→

Archive 1235

Remove existing redirect of person for article creation?

Hi, while I was reading news I noticed that the article for Abraham_Hamadeh redirects to 2022_Arizona_Attorney_General_election#Republican_primary which I found odd, considering this person is a public figure and getting a substantial amount of attention. It seems like they may be the only one of the candidates in the current congressional race who doesn't have an article despite their media coverage which seems odd given they have had a public office prior and a lot of attention now. When I saw that, I thought about creating a start to the article and ran across the redirect.

I'm looking for guidance on how to proceed. I don't know what may have existed on the previous article (archive.org doesn't show anything) and would love to start editing from a previous version rather than creating from scratch.

Thanks for the help! DrGva go (talk) 23:01, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, DrGvago. There has never been an article about Abraham Hamadeh and the redirect was created as a navigational aid for readers. We do not normally have articles about unelected candidates for office, and the usual practice is to redirect such candidates to an article about the election. Please read WP:POLITICIAN and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#Candidates. Cullen328 (talk) 23:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation and resources @Cullen328. Would it be a good idea to update the redirect to 2024_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_Arizona#District_8 in this case then as it is more current? DrGvago (talk) 23:58, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

DrGvago, I have done so. Cullen328 (talk) 00:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello. I want help.

Hello sir/ma’am, I want to know the basics of editing in Wikipedia. If you want to tell me the basics, just create a new post on my talk. Thank you sir/ma’am. hi, my name is Pickleishere. i like Programming, and will be mad if that is taken from me. thanks, check my talk page here -> talk 00:03, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Pickleishere, a link on this page is labeled "Learn to edit". Just click on it and read what you see there. -- Hoary (talk) 01:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

thanks Hoary. Will check it. hi, my name is Pickleishere. i like Programming, and will be mad if that is taken from me. thanks, check my talk page here -> talk 01:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Pickleishere, we read that you like programming, etc, the first time around. (Incidentally, I don't know what it would mean for programming to be taken away from you.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

I think that's their signature.. @Pickleishere I would recommend shortening that a little bit.  miranda :3  03:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

It’s my signature sir (Pickleishere) I like osu! And programming. talk 02:28, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Add topic and reply aren't working

When I try to add a topic to a talk page or reply to a message in a talk page, it does not work, so I have to instead use "Edit" and it's really annoying. Can anyone help? 24.115.255.37 (talk) 20:48, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Reply works on my IPad, but it didn’t work on my computer last night, which was annoying 24.115.255.37 (talk) 11:23, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

it works now 24.115.255.37 (talk) 04:05, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:OWN concern

Hello, I recently raised a WP:OWN concern on a page I had been edited lately the Antioch International Movement of Churches. I noticed 50% of the authorship edits on that page have been edited by a single editor since March. This editor uses speedy deletions/reverts, supposed BRD style edits, which I experienced and discouraged me. The editor is also very particular about approving edits. I am concerned this editor is exhibiting behaviors that appear to be possessive of this page. I assume good faith on this editor's part and don't really have any current disputes other than this. When I raised the OWN issue with the editor on the article's talk page, the editor did not reply. The editor eventually left a message on my user talk page telling me, it's not for the article's talk page, to WP:FOC, and talk to administrators about it on the appropriate boards. I reiterated WP:OWN says "An editor who appears to assume ownership of an article should be approached on the article's talk page with a descriptive header informing readers about the topic." and the concerns of overdoing possessive behaviors. Still, the editor did not respond further to the issue on the article's talk page nor elsewhere. What is the proper way to address this and what is the appropriate board to bring this concern to? Pride2bme (talk) 14:45, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Pride2bme, You should probably bring this to the incident noticeboard or the dispute resolution noticeboard, and let an admin or other person intervene, as trying to quash the issue could end in an edit war, which usually isn't desirable to have. Hope this helps :) Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 14:58, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Also, be sure to leave a message on the user's talk page informing them of an active incident involving them. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 14:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

I left a message on the editor's talk page, the editor denies a WP:OWN issue. I think I'd still like another opinion on that, can you provide one, is the incident board still appropriate, or what else should I do? Pride2bme (talk) 08:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Pride2bme, I suggest you to check out Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Remember that there are no deadlines, often the best option is to just wait for things to cool down. Broc (talk) 14:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

I need assistance submitting the following informative article. Is it following the guidelines?

Copy of User:Ambuj0070/sandbox

Premium Guard Inc[edit] Founded in 1996, Premium Guard Inc. (PGI) specializes in oil, air, cabin, fuel, and transmission filters in the aftermarket automotive filtration industry. PGI has expanded its offerings to include heavy-duty, power sports, and specialty automotive applications, delivering a comprehensive service solution. History and Expansion[edit] Established in New York City, Premium Guard Inc.’s focus from the start has been on providing a turnkey solution with wide application coverage and private label programs for all segments of the North American automotive aftermarket. PGI was initially established as International Distributors USA Inc., but in 2017, the company officially changed its name to Premium Guard Inc. (PGI). The new company name was derived from the company’s Premium Guard brand of automotive filters and supplies. In 2021, Premium Guard Inc. launched its first direct-to-consumer brand, PUREFLOW®, which focuses solely on breathable air at home and in your car. PUREFLOW's line of filtration products, such as automotive cabin air filters and home air filters, are engineered to capture airborne contaminants and allergens. In 2022, PUREFLOW® launched a patented air freshener for cars designed to fit onto a cabin air filter. In 2020, PGI acquired Tenneco's filters business, including its manufacturing facility in Tultitlan, Mexico, and the Interfil and Engine Clean brands. In 2022, PGI also acquired IPC Global Solutions (IPC), a supplier to the aftermarket's fast lube segment and the creator of the ECOGARD® brand of filtration products. References:[edit] Freight Waves The Wall Street Journal Aftermarket News Auto Service World External Links:[edit] Official Website

Ambuj0070 (talk) 08:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Ambuj0070, and welcome to Wikipedia. It seems you might have a possible conflict of interest with the company you are writing about. If so, please note you must disclose your COI and publish the article using the Articles for Creation process. Also note that companies are required to fulfill notability criteria to be allowed on Wikipedia, and that Wikipedia is not a means of promotion.

That being said, if you believe your article fulfills notability criteria and is not written in a promotional tone, go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation, and click "Click here to start a new article". Once you are finished, you can submit it for review and an experienced editor will provide feedback. Broc (talk) 09:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Phrases such as turnkey solution with wide application coverage and private label programs for all segments are meaningless fluff and need to be expunged.Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:19, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Copyright

I recently got flagged for copyright on a photo. I checked the source but the images I gave weren’t subject to copyright since they are either in a public space or made accessible to the public. Can anyone explain how pictures posted to the internet are copyrighted even tho the publisher doesn’t speak about it being copyrighted?? ChillyWilly824 (talk) 14:07, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

ChillyWilly824 Looking at your edit history, I assume you are talking about US copyright law? Before 1989, United States law required the use of a copyright notice, but it then signed the Berne Convention Implementation Act. As a result, the use of copyright notices has become optional to claim copyright, because the Berne Convention makes copyright automatic. You are, therefore, not looking for an image without a copyright notice (as that proves nothing, since a notice is not required), but an image with a relevant copyright release notice. - Arjayay (talk) 14:15, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes so what can you tell me about the 2 images I wanted to upload given one is from a public article taken at an NFL stadium, and the other is taken at the NBA draft. ChillyWilly824 (talk) 14:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

ChillyWilly824 Not knowing what or where the images are makes that an impossible question. Generally, where the images are, and where they were taken, is irrelevant, they are copyright unless they have a relevant copyright release notice. To make life more complicated, Wikipedia does not accept all copyright release notices, as some are too restrictive. However, the odds of an image you find on the Web not being copyright is fairly minimal - unless the image is from a federal government agency, whose images are public domain, and certain websites like Flikr, where many images are suitably licensed. You need to include details of the licence of an image when uploading it to Wikipedia, or Wikimedia Commons, and this will be checked. - Arjayay (talk) 15:04, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

You really need to ask that question at Commons, not here. But the answer that Arjayay has given you is: Unless you can find an explicit statement that the image in question has been explicitly released either into the public domain or under a compatible licence, then you must assume that the image is copyright and cannot be uploaded to Commons. ColinFine (talk) 15:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

adjudication needed

My contributions to the articles listed below have been reverted twice. No reason was provided for reverting my contributions.

Garhajis

Eidagale

Habar Yoonis Solanif (talk) 14:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Solanif, and welcome to the Teahouse.

We don't do "adjudication" - rather, we encourage editors to discuss any disagreements, and try to reach consensus. Please read WP:Bold, Revert, Discuss for how this works. If somebody reverts your edit, the proper thing to do (if you wish to pursue it) is to open a discussion on the article's talk page, and ping the other editor. You could start by asking why they reverted, and perhaps explain why you think your edit was an improvement.

It would certainly have been helpful if Admer9 had explained in the edit summary why they were reverting your edit, but they are not obliged to do so. ColinFine (talk) 15:18, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

2020s in film

Cut to the chase, why is Inside Out 2 not featured in the list of highest grossing films of the 2020s (2020s in film) when it has grossed over a billion dollars? I literally just noticed this, so pardon me if I missed some other talk page discussion about it if that happened. Hoping there's somehow a reasonable answer. TrevortniDesserpedx (talk) 16:20, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done added Timur9008 (talk) 16:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Edit filter log can allow non-admins/oversighters to see deleted/suppressed revisions

Sometimes, when a revision is deleted or suppressed, the revision can still be viewed via the edit filter log. Can you please fix it? 24.115.255.37 (talk) 03:32, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, this seems like a MediaWiki issue. Have a look at Wikipedia:Bug reports and feature requests for details on how to report a bug. Broc (talk) 09:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

ok 24.115.255.37 (talk) 12:01, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't have an account... 24.115.255.37 (talk) 19:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I feel like this is a known issue and oversighters should be supressing the logs as well. If you see any such thing, please report it via WP:RFO. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:15, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

A query on wiki policy

I'd like to know whether it is appropriate according to Wikipedia's policy to re-add information/text which is validly cited, which has been removed from an article coz it was previously inserted by a blocked user...Thanks in advance Janlevinson (talk) 13:35, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Janlevinson, yes, that is permitted. But you are required to verify that the content complies with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and that the references verify the content. In other words, you take full responsibility for your edits. Cullen328 (talk) 19:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

thanks Janlevinson (talk) 21:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I want to create an article

But I am new. Do I need to pay an experienced user so I'm sure it gets accepted? Paolo Maldini è il miglior difensore della storia del calcio (talk) 10:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Answer! Paolo Maldini è il miglior difensore della storia del calcio (talk) 10:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is open to all who can contribute. See Help:Your first article. 『π』BalaM314〘talk〙 10:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@BalaM314 Ok, thanks Paolo Maldini è il miglior difensore della storia del calcio (talk) 10:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are volunteers. All questions get answered in time. Demanding a fast answer is rude. As to your question, there are companies that offer to create an article for pay - almost all of those are scams. meaning you would lose your money and not get an article. David notMD (talk) 10:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@David notMD Ok, sorry if I requested a quick answer. Anyway thanks, I wont pay those Paolo Maldini è il miglior difensore della storia del calcio (talk) 10:28, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@BalaM314 @David notMD I submitted a draft. How much time does it take to get it reviewed??? Paolo Maldini è il miglior difensore della storia del calcio (talk) 10:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is run by volunteers, it might take a while. Make sure your article follows the policies mentioned in Help:Your first article. 『π』BalaM314〘talk〙 10:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@BalaM314 Why don't you review my draft? Or at least could you tell me if you think it is Ok? Paolo Maldini è il miglior difensore della storia del calcio (talk) 10:35, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Anyway I coudnt get bothered reading all that rubbish, but there's nothing offensive or fake, which is what can be I think vandalism Paolo Maldini è il miglior difensore della storia del calcio (talk) 10:36, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Paolo Maldini exists as a Wikipedia article. It already states that he is considered the greatest defender of all time. Do not attempt to create an article about him. I am about to tag your draft for Speedy deletion. Also, your User name should not contain the name of a person for which an article exists, or a person you are trying to create an article about. Abandon this account. Start a new account- with a short User name. David notMD (talk) 10:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I have speedily reviewed your draft for you. Theroadislong (talk) 10:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@David notMD Ok, I understand. I'll abandon this account and create a new one. Paolo Maldini è il miglior difensore della storia del calcio (talk) 10:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Given that it has been Rejected by a Reviewer, I am not going to bother with the Speedy deletion nomination. David notMD (talk) 10:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@David notMD Thanks for your help just to let you know this is my new account. By the way an unknown user left me an inappropriate message. Could you review my talk page?? Random username 1234567890 (talk) 10:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

For info: the "inappropriate message" was an entirely appropriate and polite warning by an experienced editor, and the above account has now been blocked as a sockpuppet. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 151.227.226.178 (talk) 12:04, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Initital account and replacement account indef blocked (socks). David notMD (talk) 21:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Copying text from draft to new page and then blanking drafts ?

I am not sure of the best path forward here, but @SuperMightyBoy is copying text from draft articles into new articles, and then blanking the drafts or setting up a redirect to the new article. This has the result of losing the article history, which is a shame. This does not seem the right path, but I am unsure of the best way to handle this. Any thoughts or guidance is appreciated. DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@DaffodilOcean warn the user about Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and point them to Wikipedia:Moving a page.

You can check out Wikipedia:History merging to see how to request a history merge on the affected pages. Broc (talk) 12:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Example: Special:Diff/1233506751. Broc (talk) 12:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks - I will do that next. I appreciate the guidance. DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

SuperMightyBoy indef blocked. Blanked drafts appear to have been restored. David notMD (talk) 21:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:CITESPAM?

Hi folks. The editor of a website about football, ML072347 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), has been adding dozens of citations to articles from their website. Many of these additions were superfluous. They have responded to my inquiry on their Talk page. What would be the appropriate response to their questions? Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 12:09, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Robby.is.on the source they added seems reliable, but I do see the spamming issue. The user needs to disclose their COI, and stop adding references where they are not needed (e.g.: in the lead section, per MOS:CITELEAD). They should contribute to improving the encyclopedia, for instance by helping remove some {{citation needed}} tags, rather than by adding references just to increase their search engine results.

If the issue continues, WP:COIN is the right noticeboard. Broc (talk) 12:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. :-) Robby.is.on (talk) 21:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

How to merge two pages

I wanted to know how can I merge two sports pages into 1? Would I need to delete the second page after moving the information to 1 page? Mcwamcwa (talk) 12:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Mcwamcwa, see step-by-step instructions at WP:PROMERGE. Generally, you would copy material from one page into the other, then replace the original page with a redirect. Make sure to provide proper attribution in the edit summary and to signal the merge in both talk pages. Broc (talk) 12:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I've just merged content from Mamelodi Sundowns Ladies B to Mamelodi Sundowns Ladies Academy. Mcwamcwa (talk) 22:15, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Submitted Article but was not finished

I was ignorant and submitted my article before it was finished. How can I continue to edit my article? Thebigsixth (talk) 19:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Assuming we're talking about Draft:Richard Adams Hogan, you are perfectly free to edit it while it is awaiting review, but since you've said it is not ready I've undone your edit that submitted it. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 19:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I am not sure how to edit the article, it only gives me a series of codes. Thebigsixth (talk) 19:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Have you tried following the instructions under "Enable VisualEditor" at WP:VE? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:18, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

The stuff at the top is code related to it being in the articles for creation workflow, everything beyond the words Richard Adams Hogan (June 07, 1913 - January 28, 1981) that is the text you submitted. When editing, you see the complete code of all references and internal links will have double square brackets around them, [[like this]]. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:19, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I was able to edit my article, but now I clicked on the wrong icon and lost my updated work.

How can I save my article? Thebigsixth (talk) 20:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Thebigsixth if you did not press 'Publish changes' then you did not save your work to Wikipedia and it cannot be retrieved from the server. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Where can I find newcomer tasks?

I noticed that the Newcomer Tasks would be quite useful for me to be more productive and involved with Wikipedia, but I can't find how to access the modules or anything. Am I missing something, or has it been removed since? LucasR muteacc (talk) 21:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

LucasR muteacc I think you may have the feature turned off. You can enable newcomer homepage at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal, then navigate to Special:Homepage. Does that work? Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:42, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so much - I have the homepage now! It was turned off, yes. LucasR muteacc (talk) 22:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Drama and Wikipedia

Okay, so let's say this user named "Sir Ben" was involved in a heated controversy on Fandom. Being an active Wikipedian, he linked his Wikipedia user page on his Fandom user page, proving that he is the same person. Would he get blocked (or possibly banned) on Wikipedia for his behavior on another website? Thanks, TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 22:35, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

In anything but exceptional cases, we wouldn't block for off-wiki controversy. Also, Sir Ben's link on his Fandom page would not prove that the Wikipedia user is the same person. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Grammar on a direct quote

A retrospective in the Bronxville Press, August 1932: "[H]is presence was always felt by topnotchers [and regulars]. ... Paul Martin was a synonym for all that was clean and wholesome in the game.”  

The above summary-type sentences are at the end of the "Life" heading in “Paul Martin (illustrator)." Is the spot for the period and ellipse mark correct? The quote from the original source is below. I thought it read, in part, somewhat awkward and wordy.

"… events and his presence was always felt by topnotchers as well as by those who could only play an average game. Paul Martin was a synonym for all that was clean and wholesome in the game.”

Thanks for any feedback. JimPercy (talk) 16:42, 9 July 2024 (UTC) PS. I erred. I meant to post this in the "Help Desk" room. I don't know if it matters. JP

JimPercy I think the ellipsis is unnecessary, since the brackets [and regulars] already 'cover' the missing words, though from an article level standpoint you may want to find a way to avoid quoting in the first place.

Teahouse and Help Desk serve the same purpose, but Teahouse is directed toward newer Wikipedians. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Sungodtemple IOWs, the "[and regulars]" is replacing "as well as by those who only could play an average game." So the ellipse mark could be deleted (esp. since a link to the source is given). That quote does help explain way a tennis tournament was named after him for over 80 years. JimPercy (talk) 23:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

vector 2010 reference tooltip

Mere duplicate of a question posed at the Help desk. -- Hoary (talk) 00:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
Recently I've found the reference tooltip in large text, and don't know how to change it to small Jag1762010 (talk) 23:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Standardizing disambiguation parentheticals

Boosting a question from elsewhere - using the example of Property (programming) and Method (computer programming), is there any reference standard for disambiguation parentheticals (i.e, a choice between (programming) vs. (computer programming))? Or are these decided at the WikiProject level? Tule-hog (talk) 23:59, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tule-hog I believe that its' really just up to whoever moves the page. Obviously there are exceptions to this, but for the most part (i.e. the addition of "computer" to "programming") is optional. Also, if you're not sure, sometimes it is best to contact the appropriate WikiProject, as some do have specific rules about what goes inside of those parentheses. Hope this helps :) Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 03:44, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

No wrap

Hello all. An editor using a bot recently converted some no-wrap templates into normal text. I had implemented the templates so that the names "Obi-Wan" and "Qui-Gon" would not wrap onto a second line. Here is the edit. Could someone please tell me whether removing the templates is appropriate, and what the purpose might be? Wafflewombat (talk) 05:26, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Wafflewombat you can use {{nbh}} to insert a non-breaking hyphen. However, please judge if it is really necessary, as it affects search results. I suggest reading Wikipedia:Non-breaking hyphen and MOS:HYPHEN as guidelines. Broc (talk) 05:36, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Commons files from LLNL

I'd ask this somewhere on Wikimedia commons, but I don't know if they have discussion spaces, and I imagine they're not super active. Feel free to point me there if this is the wrong place. There are a bunch of files on Wikimedia Commons that are listed as government works that are from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory website, which is a government contractor, and I think does not automatically release its images into the public domain. I found this CC-BY-NC-SA notice, which I think means the photos aren't in the public domain. I tagged those (this and this one). The problem is, this geese image and this lab image got posted on the US DOE flickr account (which apparently exists) as "United states government works", which I infer are free from copyright (the lab image at least must be taken by an LLNL employee since it's in the lab). Does anyone know if I'm just wrong on how government contractor copyright works? Also, does that count as the DOE releasing the images? Mrfoogles (talk) 05:33, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Mrfoogles, I think you should ask directly on Commons, discussion forums there are quite active. I think the best place for this question is c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Broc (talk) 05:44, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll go there. Didn't know commons had a village pump too. Mrfoogles (talk) 05:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Requesting to ip block exemption

Dear Wikipedians,

I am reaching out to request an IP block exemption. I am a user from Areekode, Kerala, and I am currently traveling. Unfortunately, my IP address showing blocked for the past 8-10 days, Blocking my ability to access and contribute to Wikipedia.

I kindly request that you consider granting me an IP block exemption, as I am a legitimate user who wishes to continue using Wikipedia without interruption. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

S-Aura 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 06:26, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, S-Aura. Please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:IP block exemption. Cullen328 (talk) 06:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello! @Cullen328! I just wanted to let you know that I've added a request on my Talk page. I'm hoping someone can review it and help me out. I'd really appreciate it if someone could take a look at my request and see what they can do to help me get back to using Wikipedia without any issues. Thanks so much! 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 06:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Work as an editor

Hi I want to work as an editor and write to article Gayatri Sunkad (talk) 08:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Gayatri Sunkad Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for wanting to help us out here and contribute to this project. Note that writing a new article isn't the only, or even best, way one can contribute here. Many people are excellent contributors without writing a single article from scratch- which is actually a very difficult process that ideally should have some knowledge and experience behind it first. We have almost 7 million articles that could use improvement, perhaps there are some in areas that interest you that you would want to work on.

I'm going to place some introductory information on your user talk page (User talk:Gayatri Sunkad) that may help you. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Please also note, @Gayatri Sunkad, we are volunteer editors who are not paid for editing Wikipedia. If you are financially compensated in any way for editing Wikipedia, it is mandatory you disclose this by following the instructions here. Qcne (talk) 09:19, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Simple question regarding preferred language.

Hello, this is a general basic question, but on the language section of articles how do I sticky a specific one so that I don't have to scroll through it? This works on mobile but I don't know how to work it on PC. Libertas 777 (talk) 03:26, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry but I don't understand your question. Do you mean like Austria#Language? If not please provide a specific example of what you are trying to do. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Libertas 777, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm guessing that you are referring to the "Suggested languages" that appear at the top of the window when you pick the "(number) languages" box at the top of the article?

There does not seem to be a way to edit the list of suggested languges directly, but mw:Universal Language Selector/Compact Language Links seems to say that if you pick a language to look at an article in, it will automatically add that language to the list of suggested languages.

If you mean something else, then I'm afraid I haven't understood what you want. ColinFine (talk) 10:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

metawiki RFC

Hi, I want to RFC in metawiki:Requests_for_comment/Policy because of I had serious problems with Turkish Wikipedia which resulted in block. However I need to have 250 edits, do I have to wait until I reach 250 edits? Or can I ask and RFC in here? Throat0390 (talk) 11:15, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Throat0390 it seems you were banned on tr.wiki for sockpuppeting, i.e., using multiple accounts. I think your best approach would be to appeal the block on-wiki, by reaching out to the administrators. Check out how to appeal blocks on tr.wiki.

To answer your questions: in order to open an RFC on meta, your account must be 3 months old and you need to have 250 crosswiki edits. Broc (talk) 11:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes correct however i cannot edit my own talk page and the issue much bigger than the ban which ended up by I can't assume good faith anymore.

Thanks for your time/answer. Throat0390 (talk) 12:22, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Avezzano Rugby

Is it possible to improve the page with the translation from Italian Wikipedia? This is the draft in English. You can report in the right project, sorry for my inadequacy in English, thanks for your attention. Marica Massaro (talk) 11:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, for now we do not seem to have a page on the topic on the English Wikipedia. You can follow the hints given at Wikipedia:TRANSLATETOHERE, but keep in mind that we have different requirements for articles than the Italian Wikipedia might have. Lectonar (talk) 12:53, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Marica Massaro (talk) 13:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

You can of course continue to work on Draft:Avezzano Rugby in the meantime. Lectonar (talk) 13:51, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Block on It wiki

We have been blocked on itwiki for inappropriate username. Can we contribute here regardless of the block? Thanks Testimoni di Geova (talk) 13:57, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Better not with the username you have, as it implies shared use. See WP:ISU. But a block on IT-Wikipedia doesn't extend automatically to our Wikipedia here. Lectonar (talk) 14:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Test page

I worked on a test page yesterday, now I cannot see that anymore. Where can I find it? AgroLover (talk) 12:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@AgroLover Unless you made the edits to this test page while not logged in, I'm fairly certain that you forgot to publish your changes, meaning they're now unfortunately lost. What I'd expect to see in your contributions is another page where you made these test edits. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:54, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi...are you sure you used your account to make said test-page? I can find no contributions, deleted or otherwise, apart from your request here. Another possibility is that you did not save your edits. Lectonar (talk) 12:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@AgroLover you have created a test page on ptwiki. Is that what you're looking for? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 12:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Tks God you found it. How can I log in to see and continue to work on that? AgroLover (talk) 12:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure why you created that in the Portugese Wikipedia (considering it's in English), but to continue working on it, just click the 'edit' link on the top right corner of the page. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 13:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, AgroLover. As well as the point that it's in English, so you should be working in the English Wikipedia (for example at Draft:Jack E. Rechcigl - which doesn't exist at present which is why it appears in red, but you may create it), I note that you appear to be trying to create a new article, but like most people who try this task before they have spent any time learning the necessary skills, you have written your draft WP:BACKWARDS, and thus made a difficult task many times more difficult. I also notice you have what look like Wikimedia citations within the text, but they do not correspond to actual citations - have you copied this text from somewhere? If so, there may be copyright issues.

My advice to new editors, always, is to put aside the idea of creating an article entirely for at least a few weeks, and spend the time instead in making improvements to existing articles, and learning about how Wikipedia works: especially, verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view, and notability. Then after that, read your first article carefully, and try creating a new article if you wish. ColinFine (talk) 13:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your advice. I will try to create it in the English Wikipedia. In this case should I start again there? Is there a way I can just change all of it in an easy way or should I start from scratch?

I am using my word copy where I had all the citations organized. But now I will have to insert them again. Thanks AgroLover (talk) 14:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

New article

I would like to create a new article on Wikipedia. Can someone help me doing it? A user of english wiki (talk) 14:05, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I see that A user of english wiki has now been blocked indefinitely. Maproom (talk) 14:40, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Honorary consulates

Hello. Just now, User:Archives908 claims that I am engaging in an edit war in List of diplomatic missions in Armenia claiming that there is no policy forbidding the listing of honorary consulates in Wikipedia articles like that. The main reason why I removed them in the first place is because the honorary consulate lists in List of diplomatic missions in Iceland, List of diplomatic missions in Ireland and List of diplomatic missions in Vietnam got removed as they usually get omitted. I've asked those who have done those edits if there is an existing policy regarding the matter but the user above immediately bashed at me for not adhering to WP:BRD guidelines. What should I do to fix myself? Underdwarf58 (talk) 14:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I have not been "mean" to you. You keep reinstating your preferred version of the article. I've asked you to discuss and seek consensus on the talk page several times, all of which has been ignored. Perhaps try engaging in conversation on the talk page next time :) Archives908 (talk) 14:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

It's my anger issues. The reason why I called you "mean" is because you interrupted me in the Aquintero guy's talk page since I wasn't talking to you. I'm waiting for answers from Aquintero and Carl to see why they removed them in the first place (I should've not mentioned you or else I would have a breakdown of emotions). I'm sincerely sorry for referring you as "mean". 😭 Underdwarf58 (talk) 14:57, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Archives908 I will just point out you have violated the 3 revert rule, which constitutes edit warring. Both of you should be discussing the topic in talk page. Broc (talk) 14:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Done. I have added a new topic on the talk page regarding the matter. Underdwarf58 (talk) 14:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

(Untitled)

How do I get unblocked on wiki for editing an article? Ms Rolanda (talk) 12:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Ms Rolanda you've made this post, which means that you're not blocked. Is there anything preventing you from editing? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 13:02, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Ms Rolanda, you can already edit articles! Some pages might be protected and require you to have autoconfirmed or extended confirmed access. For the first, you need 10 edits and an account 4 days old (this is also the requirement to create new articles); for the second, you need 500 edits and 30 days. Note that the extended confirmed protection is only applied in very special cases (e.g. pages that are vandalized often or deal with contentious topics), so you won't need that to edit most articles. If you want to learn how to contribute, read Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia. Hope this helps! Broc (talk) 13:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Alright then. Thank you very much for the clarification Ms Rolanda (talk) 15:35, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Serious question

Can the Wikimedia Foundation provide our (i.e., Wikipedia editors') data such as location, email, etc., to the government under any circumstances? Best Regards! Youknow? (talk) 12:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Youknowwhoistheman only when required by law, see the Wikimedia Foundation policy for disclosing nonpublic information here. Broc (talk) 13:13, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay . Ms Rolanda (talk) 15:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Broc, thank you. Youknow? (talk) 15:57, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

How do I add a certification edit for Wikipedia?

Like if I want to say that this album sold 3 million copies and I want to edit it and also add that streaming and sales symbol at the end Blooey (talk) 15:39, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Blooey: I'm not clear on your question. If you are asking how to add a citation, check out WP:REFB RudolfRed (talk) 15:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Blooey: Please link the page you want to edit and a page which already shows what you want. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

article submission

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AWroliver%2Fsandbox&action=edit Hello, I just submitted the first 2 paragraphs of an article on dancer/choreographer LaTasha Barnes. It is in my sandbox, at the link above. Would someone be able to take a look and tell me if the references are ok, and if it's formatted properly? Thank you. Wroliver (talk) 18:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC) Wendy Oliver, July 10, 2024

Hi Wroliver - I'm sorry, but copy-pasting some of the text from Draft:LaTasha Barnes is not productive, furthermore your references are not formatted correctly, whereas the drafts references are formatted correctly. I suggest you read Help:Referencing for beginners and then try to improve Draft:LaTasha Barnes, abandoning your sandbox. - best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 18:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello Arjayay,

Thanks for your quick reply! I will read the link you suggested. I could not find my original draft of the article, which is why I ended up with a new sandbox today. I see you've given me a link to the draft, so thank you for that and your advice.Wroliver (talk) 18:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Featuring one of the most accessible AI search engines in the article on Wiki

I'd like to submit an AI search engine in the List of Search Engines.

Bagoodex – (verbatim copy of the press release from below source removed)

Source: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ai-search-tool-bagoodex-reboots-140000298.html Nick Trenkler (talk) 20:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Nick Trenkler, are you aware that Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion? Broc (talk) 21:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Another way of looking at that is to note that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

When there is substantial independent published material about the engine, then it might be possible for an article about it to be written. Note that such an article will not belong to Bagoodex, will not be controlled by Bagoodex, and may be edited by almost anybody in the world except people associated with Bagoodex.

Note also that if you are in any way employed by or on behalf of Bagoodex then Wikipedia regards you as a paid editor, and you must make a formal declaration of that fact. ColinFine (talk) 21:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Can someone else start a wikipedia page about a nonaffiliated nonprofit?

Hello! I have a client that is has had their Wikipedia page filled with false negative information that was pulled and "cited" from opinion articles by a disgruntled prior employee. When attempts were made to correct the information, changes were denied due to bias. They are now considering deleting their Wikipedia page. If they do this, could someone (like this disgruntled past employee) create another page in its place?

Thank you for any help or advice.107.218.250.141 (talk) 19:15, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure how they think they can delete the article (which is not theirs to delete). The place to propose improvements to any article is its associated talk page. What is the title of the article? The fact that they are a non-profit is totally irrelevant. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

The subject of a Wikipedia 'page' does not have the power to delete it: in fact, they are permitted less influence over it than almost anyone else – it is Wikipedia's Article about them, not their self-controlled representation on Wikipedia. It should reflect a balanced Neutral Point of View, which may include facts that the subject does not like if they are well supported by published material. If the subject is what Wikipedia judges to be Notable (roughly speaking, well documented in published media) then there can and probably will be an article created (or maintained in existence) about that subject.

The subject can post new sections on the Talk page of the Article, requesting changes (additions, amendments and deletions) to it which, if they provide Reliable sources published entirely independently of themself to corroborate it, may be implemented by a disinterested editor if that editor considers them appropriate. They are allowed to make minor, uncontroversial edits to correct obvious and trivial factual mistakes, and to remove material that is not cited to a source – if it is cited, they should ask another editor to consider doing so, using an Edit request template. What applies to the subject also applies to anyone directly associated with the subject, whether family, friend or employee.

Please note that, as the subject is your client (implying a paid relationship), you must (by Wikipedia's Terms of Use) declare your WP:PAID status on your User page (if and when you have one) and on the talk page of the article should you edit it. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.82.201 (talk) 20:13, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

This is more to Shantavira than to the OP. I think there are still a few people in the world who are not intimately familiar with Wikipedia and how it works. If a person who has not paid a lot of attention to Wikipedia suddenly finds that there's an article either about him or herself, or about something he or she is directly concerned with, AND it seems that someone has put malicious material, it's natural to wonder how one can get rid of it. And yes, "How do I delete my Wikipedia page?" is not an outrageously unreasonable question to ask. Uporządnicki (talk) 20:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

The first step would be to identify the subject article. If the slant of the article truly is non-neutral and there are not enough watchers of the article talk page to get it fixed, there is a noticeboard at WP:NPOVN dedicated to reviewing and correcting neutrality issues. VQuakr (talk) 21:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Second opinion on "Passing" (gender)

I've been trying to fix up the issues on the passing (gender) article since it is tagged with multiple issues and was kind of a mess. I tried to fix some of the more obvious things like adding sources to unsourced info, removing fake sources and self-published stuff like personal blogs, and removing some weasel words. Since this is my first time doing a major clean up on an article, I was wondering if another editor could maybe look over it and let me know if it's ready to have the multiple issues tag removed and what else there is to correct if not. I'm particularly having trouble understanding how to best make the article cohesive. Thanks. Urchincrawler (talk) 04:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@Urchincrawler I hope someone will answer here, but the Teahouse is probably not the place to request this type of feedback. I suggest asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies or the user that tagged the page (courtesy ping to Ethanpet113). Broc (talk) 07:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

No response

Somebody (not me) has made an extended confirmed edit request at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hindu_terrorism#Extended-confirmed-protected_edit_request_on_7_July_2024 but nobody has bothered to reply. I feel the request is worth considering. The request can be consolidated to, change what is there in the, "Other incidents" section to:-

The Indian Home Secretary R. K. Singh said that at least 10 people having close links with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and its affiliated organisations were falsely named accused in various acts of terror across India.[72] According to released documents by WikiLeaks, Congress(I) party's general secretary Rahul Gandhi alleged at a luncheon hosted by the Prime Minister of India at his residence in July 2009 for the US Ambassador Tim Roemer, that the RSS was a "bigger threat" to India than the Lashkar-e-Taiba.[73] At The Annual Conference of Director Generals of Police held in New Delhi on 16 September 2011, a special director of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) reportedly informed the state police chiefs that Hindutva activists have either been suspected or are under false investigations, in 16 incidents of bomb blasts in the country.

2406:7400:90:92A7:A652:32F8:63C8:1B07 (talk) 06:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Please be patient. There are currently 103 requests waiting to be answered. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@Shantavira: You seem to be active here. Can you click on the link above and do the needful?-2406:7400:90:92A7:1D4B:88DD:A9C4:3D82 (talk) 10:17, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Deleted page: 30 Year old Youth NGO Club "The House" from Latvia.

Hello, everyone!

Our NGO's page has been deleted with the translated texts from Latvian language page, I was wondering what was the reason and how practically we could fix them, to improve the acceptance rate. This was the page that god deleted. Thank you! DanielsLiecis (talk) 10:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@DanielsLiecis I'm not an admin, so I can't read deleted pages. Guessing by the message on you talkpage and Klubs "Māja" - jaunatne vienotai Eiropai, my guess is that you have WP:GNG proplems, see WP:BACKWARD. An en-WP article about this org is supposed to be a summary of independent WP:RS about this org, not repetitions about what it says about itself on it's website. See also WP:COI and Help:Translation#English_Wikipedia_policy_requirements. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

How can I submit an article from my sandbox?

Could you please advise me how to submit an article from my sandbox? Naila Oto (talk) 09:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@Naila Oto I've added the submission template for you so that you could submit the draft when you're ready. However note that the draft is completely unsourced and will likely be declined if submitted at its current state. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 10:05, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

(e/c) Hello @Naila Oto and welcome to the Teahouse. Writing a Wikipedia article from scratch is very challenging for someone new to Wikipedia. I'm afraid there would be no point in submitting User:Naila Oto/sandbox for consideration at present as it currently has no references to reliable sources. I suggest you read WP:Your first article as well as our policy pages at WP:Reliable sources and WP:Referencing for beginners. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@Naila Oto You asked essentially the same question a couple of weeks ago and I gave essentially the same answer, now archived at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1228#Please_help. We are trying to help you but you need to read and act on the pages we link to. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Leave

A member talk me leave wikipedia because my english is not good .What should i do? P/S: I am vietnamese but i want to contribute in wikipedia english . Junurita (talk) 11:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Junurita, they did not tell you to "leave wikipedia", they merely suggested (courtesy ping to CanonNi) that it might be better for you to contribute to Wikipedia in Vietnamese. That being said, there are many non-native English speakers on the Wikipedia in English, including myself.

While you might not be ready to create new content in English, you could help out with many other tasks, such as adding sources to pages or helping with categorization. You can check out the Wikipedia:Task Center, you will certainly find a task that is suitable for you even with limited English proficiency. Broc (talk) 11:21, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much Junurita (talk) 13:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Search results not fully working

So recently I noticed how weird it was that it was spelled "Parliament" and not "parliment" so went ahead a decided to do a search and fix pages that ussed the misspelling. The last result however (Luke Akehurst) doesn't have any uses of the misspelling, and the text around the mispelling that appears in the search also doesn't exist. I checked in the references, the source text (as I am using visual editor), but still nothing. I even checked to see if it was edited recently and the search results just a lagging behind a bit. I still found nothing. Sorry if that's a little confusing, I don't have a great idea of how to explain this. Heres a link to the search: Link Gaismagorm (talk) 13:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Gaismagorm. If you look at that list of search results, you'll see that the entry for Luke Ashurst has a timestamp of "2024-05-29T21:49:30". There's something odd going on, because the earliest version in the article's history was later than that, but the edit summary on that version is "JamesVilla44 moved page Luke Akehurst to Draft:Luke Akehurst: Move to draftspace (WP:DRAFTIFY): Not notable enough and page not ready enough to be in main space yet", so a version already existed, though I can't find its history.

So I'm guessing that that text was in a version from earlier on 29th May, and the search database (or that part of it) has not been updated. ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

ah okay Gaismagorm (talk) 17:57, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Gaismagorm: You did find a search error. Two versions of the article are indexed by our search. A 29 May version currently at [1], and the current 10 July version [2]. The search intitle:"Luke Akehurst" reports both versions with their timestamps. That's not supposed to happen. To make matters worse, there is a third search hit claiming that Luke Akehurst is a redirect to 2021 Oxford City Council election. The time stamp is for the target article so it doesn't reveal which version was indexed to report the redirect but there is a redirect version 29 May [3]. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

well thats weird, is this a common issue? Gaismagorm (talk) 21:53, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Gaismagorm: I haven't seen it before. It's common that an old revision is indexed for a while instead of the current but the double/triple indexing is new to me. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:33, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

ah okay. Well, luckily the bug doesn't effect much. Gaismagorm (talk) 13:43, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Suggestions

As a new Wikipedian, from which types of activity should I start? Random User 4737 (talk) 14:05, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. I've posted a welcome message on your user talk page that contains some good information that may help you, including a link to the Task Center with suggestions on ways you can help. 331dot (talk) 14:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia form

Hello there! Every time I open my laptop to use Wikipedia it turns on the mobile version and not the desktop one. No matter how many times I've put it on Desktop mode at the end of the page it keeps turning on mobile. What can I do to fix that? xx feni (tellmehi) 14:20, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

The only thing I can think of is if you are using URLs with the .m. in them.

Does this happen when you pick a link in an open article? Or only when you start up Wikipedia? ColinFine (talk) 14:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine it happens every time I load the Wikipedia main page and it doesn't change until I change it manually through a button at the end of the page, which is only temporary. I'm wondering if there is something on the Settings that I can do to change it feni (tellmehi) 15:18, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, feni. What is the URL (in the URL bar of your browser) when you open Wikipedia?

How are you loading it? If from a bookmark on your computer, I suggest editing the bookmark to remove the .m. from the URL. ColinFine (talk) 15:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine thanks so much, I'll check it later and if I see that there is still a problem I'll be back. Thanks a lot xx feni (tellmehi) 17:30, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@FENFEN: To clarify further, going to https://en.m.wikipedia.org with .m. is a request to always display the mobile version no matter which device you are on and what you have selected in the past. https://en.wikipedia.org is the normal url which may detect your type of device or remember a previous selection. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Thanks so much! I checked it and it turns out the bookmark was saved with the .m. form. Now it's all fixed!!!! xx feni (tellmehi) 14:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Which page to centralize the discussion

I recently raised an issue about controversial statement in fundraiser banner at Village pump (WMF), however comments started to come there as well at Fundraising/2024 banners, and I also posted it at meta wiki on Talk:Fundraising as written on Fundraising/2024 banners, however it is out of wikipedia so not to bother about. Which discussion should be closed? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 15:11, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Consumer activism

in a tv in india in the 80's (if I am right)there was a serial called rajni where a lady the main character argues on behalf of consumers- that was a tv serial in india but I read ralph Nader also used to speak on behalf of consumers- like common cause ect- is mrs Elizabeth warren doing somewhat similar things- I think mrs Elizabeth warren is a senator- thanks PvinodM85 (talk) 15:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello @PvinodM85. This page is for asking questions about the use and editing of Wikipedia. Do you have such a question? Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

User's data published in a dataset - PhD thesis

Hi everyone.

I am doing a research on Wikipedia and gender, studying the Articles for Deletion. I want to publish copies of the debates as datasets in open data, but they include signatures/user's name. Is this problematic regarding the user's privacy? The debates are attachments of the research document.

Many thanks for your help. Hiperterminal (talk) 11:45, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@Hiperterminal Media and scholarship routinely include WP usernames when they think they should. Sometimes some of us wish they hadn't, but there's not much we can do about it. WP is very public, that is sort of the point, and hopefully we thought of that when we wrote whatever we wrote. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Hiperterminal, all public content on Wikipedia is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 license, so it can be redistributed. If you're starting a research project, you might want to check out Wikipedia:Ethically researching Wikipedia and meta:Notes on good practices on Wikipedia research. Anonymizing and/or pseudonymizing your dataset might be a good idea if you have privacy concerns. Broc (talk) 12:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi! What you are considering involves research about human subjects. While the content is released under an appropriate license, your university should have an ethics committee that will need to consider this research and approve it, given that you will be unable to source permission from the subjects you are looking at. Your supervisor can offer the best advice, but I suspect you will need ethics approval from the university before publishing the data, especially as it may contain identifying information. - Bilby (talk) 14:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments @Gråbergs Gråa Sång @Broc @Bilby, appreciate a lot your feedback. I just want to add that my university approved the research through an ethics committee, following the argument about the CC by-sa license. However, I wanted to double check with the community and you gave me a very good guide. Best, Hiperterminal (talk) 16:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested article

I am looking for someone to consider rewriting the deleted article for the english version of https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Rotmans. Unfortunately the article was deleted and in need of help from someone to restore the deleted page or rewrite it in appropriate format. for reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jan_Rotmans&action=edit&redlink=1. (I work for the article subject but lack proper editing skills). All help is very much appreciated! Therealjanrotmans (talk) 14:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Therealjanrotmans Hello. You say you work for the subject, but your username indicates that you are the subject. If you are not Jan Rotmans, you should change your username immediately, please see Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS to change your username.

Since you work for him, the Wikipedia Terms of Use require you to formally disclose that, please see the paid editing policy. It's enough for you to just write a statement on your user page. 331dot (talk) 14:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for reply. I've just requested a username change as you suggested through WP:CHUS.

I was trying to write the following statement on user page. Can you confirm this will do and where to upload it? Especially since I was working in Safari and i get a message now that my IP has been blocked from editing Wikipedia. :O

Hello,

I am an employee of Smarthouse, the company that handles the social media and Wikipedia content for Jan Rotmans. In accordance with Wikipedia's paid editing policy, I am disclosing my professional relationship with Jan Rotmans.

All my contributions to Wikipedia regarding Jan Rotmans and related topics are made in good faith with the intention of providing accurate and helpful information. I strive to adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines and maintain a neutral point of view in all edits.

If you have any questions or concerns about my edits, please feel free to contact me.

Best regards,

Smarthouse Therealjanrotmans (talk) 14:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

The main issue with the draft is that it was completely unsourced. A Wikipedia article should summarize what independent reliable sources say about the topic. What is acceptable on other language Wikipedias may not necessarily be acceptable here, each Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. 331dot (talk) 14:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Fair point, will providing some sources in english help? If so:

https://www.eur.nl/en/news/transition-expert-jan-rotmans-remains-positive-more-chaos-better

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jan-Rotmans

https://www.erasmusmagazine.nl/en/2020/03/09/climate-change-expert-jan-rotmans-its-our-moral-duty-to-remain-optimistic/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7vNDpa45yU. (this video was posted by ministry of business and innovation) Therealjanrotmans (talk) 15:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Therealjanrotmans. I suggest you read WP:BOSS. ColinFine (talk) 14:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I have thank you, you are right, i don't want to edit anything but I'm trying to get him recognized as public figure as he has been in the media and on the news recently. So someone else can help us with editing his pages. Whats the best way would you say? I am not paid to handle his wikipedia just to get his growing public figure presence across all platforms. Therealjanrotmans (talk) 14:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

If his 'public figure presence' is growing, it is likely that it is Wikipedia:Too soon for him to qualify as Wikipedia:Notable. An en.Wikipedia article must be based solely on what has been published about a subject by Wikipedia:Reliable sources unconnected to the subject. Please note that Wikipedia is not to be used for Wikipedia:Promotion.

The best way is to wait until his presence has grown, at which point someone unconnected to him will probably want to create a Wikipedia article about him. He (and you) will have no control over what is in it. You (and he) might want to read Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.82.201 (talk) 15:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello again, Therealjanrotmans. trying to get him recognized as public figure is called "Promotion", and forbidden anywhere in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

How do I start proposing an edit to a talk page of a protected page?

I wanted to propose a change to a page with "Extended confirmed protection". I wrote down what I considered to be the problem, and suggested what needs to be changed

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_requests You

1. Propose a specific change on a talk page. Don't add an edit request template yet.

I described the reasons for the requested change and what needs to be changed very informally as a starting point of a discussion. I provided links to sources that supports the change.

Yet the entry in the talk page was immediately reverted with the motivation: "not formal edit request by non-ECU"

I then again provided the reasoning and the links, as well as the change in the format

=

Old Text

=

New Text

=

and now I got a threatening message that I will be reported to the administrators again referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_requests

I think the current entry is seriously misrepresenting the facts. It it not allowed to say so?

I can understand that an edit needs to be formatted in a certain way before it is accepted but reverting a talk page entry is a different matter.

I now got a message from the guy reverting "The absence of an edit template is the least concern. You are requesting for a massive shift of tone of the article which would require a more formal discussion and you would be barred from participating due to your non-extended confirmed status."

Is that a valid reason to revert a talk page contribution?

What is needed to get a discussion about a change started on such a page? UlfRSamuelsson (talk) 15:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@UlfRSamuelsson: Please mention the article about which you are talking. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 15:23, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gaza_genocide UlfRSamuelsson (talk) 15:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

On the top of talk page, you see written "You must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days" to edit the pages related to the contentious topics. If talk pages are included in this or not, I believe other hosts can help you with. If yes, then you are not allowed to put forward your comments on the talk page, if you can then you can. Note to hosts: WP:ARBECR may be beneficial to look at. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 15:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Users are allowed to post edit requests to propose specific changes to an article, even in this topic area. This user proposed a dramatic shift in tone of the article, beyond a specific change, and that requires a discussion that due to the CT restrictions they could not participate in yet. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@UlfRSamuelsson: In simple language, there is no problem of any technicality here or procedure like '=' etc. The topics related to 'Arab–Israeli conflict' are considered contentious on Wikipedia for editing purposes. The article of Gaza Genocide contains huge sum of text which is part of these contentious topics. So to keep things under control, it has been decided that editors with less than 500 edits and 30 days of experience should not edit the article (a lock is placed for you), and for the talk page, you are welcome to make constructive comments or suggestions. However, as User 331dot points above, you are proposing changes which could dramatically shift the tone of the article itself. Unfortunately, you cannot participate in a discussion for a thing that could have such a vast impact on that article. However, if you have specific small changes or suggestions, your help is welcomed. I hope your confusion is cleared now.

ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 16:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Any change in the article that suggests that Israel has not committed genocide, then seems out of place

because the whole page seems to be a biased argument attacking Israel.

At the moment I am not welcome to make constructive comments on the talk page since my comments are immediately reverted.

Like this comment from an ICJ judge (Nolte) made in a declaration in May:

https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240524-ord-01-02-en.pdf

"I remain unconvinced that the evidence presented to the Court provides plausible indications that the military operation undertaken by Israel as such is being pursued with genocidal intent"

And he is one of the judges that continuously votes yes to the ICJ orders.

I think such points should be possible to raise in a talk page even if I cannot participate in a discussion.

But you say that I should not even try to address the biases found in the page. UlfRSamuelsson (talk) 16:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

In addition,I can understand the restriction on participating in comments for such pages, but a useful modification would be to the let the experienced authors decide if they want to let the user proposing the change defend the request or not, with default being no. UlfRSamuelsson (talk) 16:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

UlfRSamuelsson That's a significant modification to the contentious topics regime, so you would need to propose that to the Arbitration Committee(ArbCom), see WP:ARBCOM- if you really want to get into the weeds of Wikipedia. It would probably be easier for you to wait until you meet the ECR criteria(30 days/500 edits). 331dot (talk) 16:54, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@UlfRSamuelsson I think it's generally good advice not to start working on contentious topics as a new editor: these topics often involve very long discussions and require a great deal of policy knowledge.

I suggest you start by working in other areas of Wikipedia that are of interest to you, either by adding content or by helping with maintenance tasks (have a look at Wikipedia:Task Center if you want to find out how to help). Once you get the extended confirmed access (30 days and 500 edits), you will be able to participate in contentious topics discussions. Until then, I suggest you focus on learning how Wikipedia works by editing elsewhere. Broc (talk) 17:14, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

How to clean up so much disruptive editing?

The page Rana (clan) has been almost entirely deleted over what seems to be hundreds of edits. What are the procedures to properly cleaning this up? Is there a page to notify admins of this sort of stuff, beyond Wikipedia:Requests for page protection? Thanks. LucasR muteacc (talk) 19:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:RFPP is your best best. I restored back the past few edits and semi'd the page for 3 days. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:13, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Why did Merge bot prepend a `:` to my {merge from} article name?

On the Norton 360 page, I added a {merge from} template linking to Norton 360 (2006-2014). Immediately afterwards, Merge bot made an edit prepending a `:` character to the link (i.e, [:Norton 360 (2006-2014)]). I have seen the colon used to link to a category without categorizing the page, but Merge bot's reasoning was "apparently Norton 360 (2006-2014) moved to :Norton 360 (2006–2014)".

What happened here? Is this a glitch with Merge bot, or is the article 'really' named with a `:` prepended, or some other use of that character I'm not aware of? Thanks :) Tule-hog (talk) 21:23, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Tule-hog. The colon is technically not needed for articles, but it's easier (in terms of code of Merge bot) to add it to every link. See Help:Colon trick for details.

The actual, more interesting change—Special:Diff/1233108520—is about the redirect Norton 360 (2006-2014) where the hyphen is used instead of the en dash as in Norton 360 (2006–2014). In addition to Wikipedia articles linked before, see also WP:NDASH for some details about use of en dash on English Wikipedia. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

See also Special:Permalink/1173207369 with edit summary Redirecting to Norton 360 (2006–2014) because titles with en-dashes are hard to type. Errors? User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/EnDashRedirectCreator. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:55, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tule-hog: The redirect at Norton 360 (2006-2014) said #REDIRECT [[:Norton 360 (2006–2014)]], where the target has an en dash instead of a hyphen. Merge bot simply copied :Norton 360 (2006–2014). The redirect still works with a colon in front but it's unnecessary and confusing so I have removed it.[4] Merge bot copied the colon to a place where it's visible which increases the confusion so I have also removed it there.[5] PrimeHunter (talk) 22:22, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

totally missed the en dash. thanks for the explanations! Tule-hog (talk) 23:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Improving a draft article

Hello! I have been working on improving a draft article for the digital history project titled Engineering Historical Memory (EHM). The page can be accessed here. May I seek your kind advice to check whether the page is ready for submission or if it still requires further improvements, please? Thank you so much! ArgonautOfHistory (talk) 09:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @ArgonautOfHistory the AfC process is meant exactly for you to receive feedback on the page. If you think it's ready to be published, press "Submit the draft for review!". An experienced editor will check the page to verify it fulfills notability criteria, it does not have copyright violations, and it is properly sourced. From a first look, it seems a good start. Broc (talk) 10:54, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Broc, thank you for your quick reply and suggestion. Noted! :) ArgonautOfHistory (talk) 02:24, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Unable to publish translation from english to simple english on the article 'Gyat'

I am not a very experienced editor/translator, and whenever i try to publish the translation, i cannot due so due to the automatic vandalism detection. I am not doing vandalism!! it provides this message: " Automatic edit filters have identified problematic content in your translation. Filter hit: Yolo swag and other vandalism trends ". I don't know what the 'yolo swag' bit means, those words arent used in my translation https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Huntsmcgee/Gyat Huntsmcgee (talk) 02:33, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

This is English Wikipedia, which is a different project from Simple Wikipedia. You might want to ask for help at their version of the Teahouse, Simple Talk. But it looks like they have an edit filter that stops people from adding nonsense words, because people who use those type of words are usually just vandalizing or causing problems. In this case, "Yolo swag and other vandalism trends" is the name of the filter. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:43, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Huntsmcgee Although I rarely edit at Simple English Wikipedia, I can comment on the fact that neither of the two articles you have ‘translated’ for that site seem to fit the purpose of Simple Wikipedia. It’s not just about changing long words for easier words, but should involve distilling down content into a much more comprehensible format. I don’t feel you have mastered that idea yet. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 04:26, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

article by Max Fishman

Please help me. I'm an old man and I don't understand a lot. What should I do? In the article by Max Fishman - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Fishman the following inscriptions appeared: Personality "This section contains too many quotes. Please help summarize the quotes. Consider transferring direct quotations to Wikiquote or excerpts to Wikisource. (July 2024)" I read it and didn’t understand anything. I shortened the links. But transferring direct quotations to Wikiquote or excerpts to Wikisource, but I can’t. Please help me transfer them to Wikiquote or Wikisource Anatolii Ion Levikoan (talk) 17:04, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Levikoan, and welcome to Wikipedia! The tag refers to this Wikipedia policy: Wikipedia:Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources. As I see most quotes on the page are reviews and critical pieces, I suggest shortening them to 1-3 sentences each. Once you've done that, you can remove the tag. Broc (talk) 21:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Broc, Thank you very much for the advice. Levikoan (talk) 06:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Levikoan! Maybe what will help is going through each quote and deciding what the most important part (or perhaps two parts) is for each. So with this one:

"…Thus, not previously mentioned in any source and until recently not included in the orbit of the study of domestic musicology, M. Fishman's Concert Es-dur has not only artistic, but also historical value, as it is able to complement the picture of the origin of the genre in Moldavian music. Moreover, according to Pavel Borisovich Rivilis, who worked in those years as a senior consultant in the Union of Composers of the MSSR, this work is one of the best examples of a piano concerto of the post-war era..."

If I were assessing it, I would say that the important parts are 1) it has been called one of the best examples of a piano concerto of the post-war era, and possibly 2) it complements the picture of the original of the genre in Moldavian music. So perhaps it could be trimmed down:

"Fishman's Concert Es-dur has not only artistic, but also historical value...[it] complement[s] the picture of the origin of the genre in Moldavian music."

And then, with proper attribution to Rivilis, as this is his quote:

"[T]his work is one of the best examples of a piano concerto of the post-war era."

I'm not sure these belong in the Personality section, but they're certainly valuable information from experts in the field. If you'd like, I'd be happy to work on this with you - I'm going to go set up a topic on the Talk page now and ping you over there so any other interested editors can join us and add their views on the important points. StartGrammarTime (talk) 06:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Dear StartGrammarTime. I am very glad that you want to help. How will we do this? I'm old and don't understand much about how Wikipedia works. Levikoan (talk) 06:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Levikoan! I see you've found my comment on the Talk page. We'll talk more there. I'll leave a reply there for you in a couple of hours. Don't worry about not understanding Wikipedia - we'll walk through it together. StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:35, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm waiting. Levikoan (talk) 05:50, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Review my page!

OP blocked and globally locked. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Someone kindly rewiew my page as soon as possible. 3 4 2 1 football eleven 3 4 2 1 (talk) 14:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC) Edit: someone reviewed my page but rejected it for a blatantly invalid reason. Someone please take a look 3 4 2 1 football eleven 3 4 2 1 (talk) 14:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC) @331dot answer also to me you've answered lots of questions here in these minutes 3 4 2 1 football eleven 3 4 2 1 (talk) 14:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC) Draft:The ideal 3 4 2 1 formation for the Italy national team was correctly rejected. Wikipedia is not for posting your personal thoughts on what a good football formation or play for the Italian national football team is. That's what social media is for. 331dot (talk) 14:41, 11 July 2024 (UTC) Hello, 3 4 2 1 etc. Your draft was correctly rejected, as it is nothing like a Wikipedia article. A Wikipedia article summarises what independent, reliable sources say about a subject, nothing else. No Wikipedia article should ever advance an argument, opinion, or conclusion, in Wikipedia's voice. You are in the same position as hundreds and hundreds of other new editors, who think that it is going to work to plunge straight into creating an article before you have learnt anything about how Wikipedia works, and what its criteria are. You are in the position of somebody who has never played tennis, and enters a major competition; or somebody who has never learnt anything about how to build houses, but who chooses a plot of land (without knowing how to survey it, or what a survey might show) and tries to erect a house. I always advise new editors to not even think of creating a new article until they have spent weeks or months learning the necessary skills, by making improvements to existing articles. When they have some understanding of verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view, and notability, then perhaps they can read Help:Your first article carefully, and try it. ColinFine (talk) 14:41, 11 July 2024 (UTC) Note: @ColinFine presumably meant to link to WP:your first article Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 15:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC) The WP: page is a redirect to the Help page, Victor. ColinFine (talk) 17:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC) @ColinFine Actually, your original post contained a typo ([[WP;your first article|WP;your first article]]), which an IPv4 since corrected. I should've probbably removed my comment after that, but decided not to so you're not confused over why you got a ping. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 04:48, 12 July 2024 (UTC) And when I corrected the typo (explained in the edit comment), Victor's comment was not visible to me or I would not have thought the correction necessary. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.82.201 (talk) 09:14, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Delete

My article has been tagged ,<discuss whether to delete or not>. What does it mean? Junurita (talk) 03:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

You created the article Fluoric (iii) acid in mainspace today and it was shortly thereafter nominated for deletion. You are allowed to comment. The AfD process ususally takes 7-10 days, as the end of which an Administrator makes a decision to delete or not. David notMD (talk) 03:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Junurita, might I suggest that you continue creating articles through the AfC process, until you gain a better understanding of our requirements and policies in what comes to notability and referencing? Just because you now can publish directly, doesn't mean that you necessarily should; AfC is still there for you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@Junurita You submitted Draft:Fluorous acid four times yesterday and it was declined on each occasion because you had made essentially no improvements to it. You are wasting the precious time of the volunteer editors who review such drafts. Please do not submit any further draft until you have read and fully complied with all the advice at Help:Your first article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, but publishing directly into the main space, as was done with Fluoric (iii) acid, then pushes that burden onto AfD. I don't know which is worse, both are perennially congested of course, but at least the draft space is (arguably) a safer learning environment. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay, if you find me too useless or annoying, don't hesitate to ban me, thanks for the criticism. Junurita (talk) 00:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Junurita, we do not find you useless or annoying - we are just asking you to listen to feedback, understand what's being asked of you, and to implement that. We all understand that Wikipedia can be confusing and overwhelming for a new editor. We were all new editors once! We get frustrated when people spend their time and energy trying to help you, and it seems like you are not paying any attention. Everyone here volunteers their time. None of us get paid to edit Wikipedia. We are just asking you to respect and value our time, which we are giving to you instead of to do other things we enjoy.

Now that the article is undergoing a deletion discussion, you have the opportunity to hear from editors who have not previously seen your draft. This might be unpleasant but it is also very valuable for you. If it's too hard to read right now, save it for later - deletion discussions are archived so you can look back at it whenever you like. The editors in the discussion will be explaining why they think it's not currently suitable for Wikipedia according to our policies, so you will be able to see what you need to fix. Even if this article is deleted, and even if the topic is not suitable for Wikipedia, you can use these explanations for your next draft. If you genuinely don't understand the policies after reading them, you can ask and we will try to explain more.

People will only get frustrated if they feel that you are not listening, if you don't make any effort to fix your drafts before resubmitting. If you are truly trying to fix things, we will keep trying to help until we think we just can't help any more. It's okay to make mistakes, you just have to listen to people telling you there is a mistake, and then you have to fix the mistake. That's all. You can do that! StartGrammarTime (talk) 04:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for making you angry. Now I realize I made a very serious mistake.Thank you for remind me! Junurita (talk) 09:44, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Language fluency of Wikipedia editors

Many people who edit the English Wikipedia are very clearly not fluent English speakers. Given the vast and increasing articles-to-editors ratio, most of their errors never get fixed. And given Wikipedia's market dominance, it seems likely that the failure to correct basic language errors here will lead to a long term measurable degradation of the English language itself. I find it very strange that people edit an encyclopedia in a language they don't even speak well. I wonder why they do it, and whether other languages experience this too? Does the German Wikipedia, for example, contain very frequent errors introduced by people who don't speak German fluently? 79.32.96.217 (talk) 18:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I take issue with will lead to a long term measurable degradation of the English language itself. From the oldest writing (excluding commercial and monumental texts) we have writers bemoaning the degradation of the language. That's how English happened. English has already changed in response to internationalisation, and one of the drivers for that is people who use it as a second or third language (see International English, for example). ColinFine (talk) 18:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

How do you come to think that "Many people who edit the English Wikipedia are very clearly not fluent English speakers"? Keeping in mind that native speakers of English are just as, if not more, likely to make minor typographic errors than people who learned English later in life. -- D'n'B-t -- 18:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

As a non-native English speaker I can tell you my experience, IP user. I come to the English Wikipedia because I enjoy the global content, as editors from all over the world contribute to it. That means you will find information about US elections, Vietnamese football, Rwandan literature and everything in between. As a reader of both the German and Italian Wikipedias, I find the content there being more "local" (in-depth content of the DACH countries and Italy, respectively, and shallower coverage of the rest). If only native speakers were contributing to the English Wikipedia, the result would likely be content with an even stronger geographical bias than we already have. Broc (talk) 19:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your encouragement, I'm a Vietnamese editor, a few days ago I posted a question quite similar to this topic. Junurita (talk) 09:50, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Rejected draft improvements

Hello, Recently I've created my first wiki page which got declined first about 22 days ago and since then I've implemented some recommended changes. I would value a lot if you could please have a look into it and let me know if you see anything that would need more work and improvement so I can make sure page gets published when it has a second review. This is the link to it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mark_Kotter

Thank you in advance for your guidance and support.

Best wishes, Damjana Damjana12 (talk) 22:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Damjana12, the draft has a photograph of Kotter. It's your photograph, clearly taken with Kotter's cooperation. It seems very likely that you are somehow related to Kotter. Please read, digest, and act on Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. -- Hoary (talk) 00:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Hoary,

Thank you so much for your comment, I read the guide and I uploaded another photo which I found online from Mark Kotter in BBC Surgeons At the Edge of Life. Do you think screenshot of that is okay for Wikipedia and qualifies as fair use under the Copyright law? Thanks a lot for your help. Damjana12 (talk) 01:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Damjana12, a non-free file is never "okay for Wikipedia". It may perhaps be OK for this or that specific use within Wikipedia. A non-free photograph of a living person is virtually never permissible. A non-free photograph is never permitted in a draft. A few minutes ago, I deleted File:Mark Kotter in BBC Surgeons At the Edge of Life.png. As for c:File:Mark Kotter in the Galerie.jpg, is this or isn't it your own work? If it is, then please comment on the question of conflict of interest. If it isn't, then please edit c:File:Mark Kotter in the Galerie.jpg so that it doesn't perpetuate misinformation. -- Hoary (talk) 02:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Dear Hoary,

Thank you for your clear explanation regarding the use of non-free files on Wikipedia. I understand the importance of adhering to these guidelines, especially concerning images of living persons and the restrictions on non-free photographs in drafts.

Regarding c:FileKotter in the Galerie.jpg, I must clarify that this is not my own work. I will therefore remove it to avoid any misinformation. If I can obtain an image with the proper copyrights, I will replace it; otherwise, I will leave the draft without an image.

Thank you for bringing this to my attention and for your guidance. Damjana12 (talk) 10:32, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Article Expansion

Please expand this article. Mohammad Shiraz is the youngest YouTuber in Pakistan, If you have more information, please add it. Janabanigu (talk) 11:12, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Why not help expand it yourself? Cremastra (talk) 11:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

i have no more information pl- Janabanigu (talk) 11:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

If you can't find more information, then it's unfortunately unlikely that we can help you. We have access to the same resources. Also, please remember Wikipedia is not a place to WP:PROMOTE things or people; you need to keep a neutral point of view. Cremastra (talk) 11:23, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

i see on web i'll add mor references thanks for guidance Janabanigu (talk) 11:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Please help me with an article

Hi, I am reaching out with a huge request for help in making the proper changes to the article about Dr. Andrew Pohorille. He was a founder of astrobiology at NASA and passed away on January 6, 2024. Pohorille was a pioneer in the field of modeling the origin of life (OoL), developing computer simulations of biomolecular systems, models of genetic and metabolic networks, and research on the statistical mechanics of condensed phases. His wife asked me to commemorate his life's work and include information about him. https://astrobiology.nasa.gov/news/in-memoriam-andrzej-pohorille/. I would be grateful for your help and support. I'll really appreciate for help with that. Aleksandra6617 (talk) 13:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Aleksandra6617, do you think the subject fulfills Wikipedia notability criteria for academics? If so, I suggest drafting an article using the Articles for Creation process; once you are ready with it, you can submit it and an experienced editor will review it. Make sure to use reliable sources to support the content in the article. Broc (talk) 13:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help and suggestions. I have a lot of external materials, so I will link them in the draft and send it for approval. Aleksandra6617 (talk) 11:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Aleksandra6617 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft(Draft:Andrew Pohorille) is completely unsourced. Writing a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia, especially as a new user without experience and knowledge. Please understand that a Wikipedia article is not a way to honor or memorialize someone(even if in practice it might do so, that's not the intention). A Wikipedia article exists to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability- like a notable academic as Broc states. You need to provide sources to support the content of your article- it would actually probably be best if you first gathered the sources and then summarize them(see WP:BACKWARD). It sounds like sources could exist if he was influential at NASA, you just need to find them so any information they contain can be verified. You can learn more about sourcing at Referencing for Beginners.

If this sounds like a steeper hill to climb than you intended, you might want to consider social media or a personal website as a way you can tell the world about Dr. Pororille.

Since you are acting at the request of Dr. Pohorille's wife, you have a conflict of interest that you should disclose on your user page. 331dot (talk) 14:03, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for these tips. I do not see a conflict of interest in presenting hard facts and information. I will include confirmations from external, well-known sources in the article, so I hope there will be no issues with their credibility. Additionally, I am a completely random person with no connection to these individuals. However, after learning about Mr. Andrew's history and his achievements as a scientist, I believe that his contributions are definitely worth including. Aleksandra6617 (talk) 11:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Articles on obscure things that are exempted?

What sort of articles are the most exempted from notability? - S L A Y T H E - (talk) 23:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

hi @Slaythe and welcome to Wikipedia! nothing would be exempted from at the very least the General notability guideline or any of the more specific guidelines, though if someone may not strictly fit the additional criteria for say, people, they would at the very least have to meet the general notability guideline. at the very least, you would likely want reliable, independent sources with significant coverage in writing the article anyway as these kinds of sources are the most valuable and likely necessary in writing articles, even if they already fit the specific criteria. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:09, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Slaythe I would add that anything made up, and anything that has not been written about and published in detail and in depth by independent sources would be exempted from notability. You should read through both WP:What Wikipedia is not and WP:Notability to gain a clearer understanding. Within many topics (such as sports and music) you will find clear criteria that do have to be met if general notability hasn't been achieved. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Slaythe there are many articles on obscure things on Wikipedia. Niche sources, as long as they are reliable and provide significant coverage, are valid sources for an article, even if they are difficult to access, and count towards notability. So if you have access to niche sources and want to write about an obscure topic, go ahead!

P.S.: When you say "obscure things", Depths of Wikipedia immediately comes to mind :D Broc (talk) 07:44, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Slaythe There are certainly many "obscure" geographical locations in Wikipedia. You may be interested to read Wikipedia:Inherent notability. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Ditto articles about species. David notMD (talk) 11:57, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

a acceptable article

Dear, I have feel my article are kind of similar type that others are in live. is there any language or anything that meet standard? so, what is that? I would like to see article that I contribute. My article is here Draft:Kagoj

Urmeesalma (talk) 11:01, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Note to Teahouse hosts: Kagoj (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has previously been speedily deleted under WP:G5. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 11:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

One deletion was for an article created before the film was released, and the other for being the creation of a blocked account. Leaves open a question of whether this recently released film is article-worthy. David notMD (talk) 13:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

A separate issue - this draft (declined once, resubmitted) is created/edited by what appear to be two single-purpose accounts that have not declared COI or PAID (one appears to be the director). Both should be queried about their connection to the film. David notMD (talk) 13:52, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Question about ArbCom procedures

Hello. I’m specifically asking about pages such as the one for the Oslo II Accord. This page did not receive enough vandalism or disruptive editing to get protected until getting full ECP entirely because it was related to the Israel–Palestine conflict. Do arbitration procedures apply even in cases where nothing actually happened to the article and they just happened to be related to a contentious topic? If so, that is the most supremely dumb guideline on the entire website because you’re protecting a page based on the level of disruptive editing of other pages that may only be tangentially related. If I’m correct, then why is that guideline there in the first place? CharlieEdited (talk) 01:11, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@CharlieEdited see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles for the reason. I can assure you that it is in no way 'supremely dumb'. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 03:16, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't know why I phrased it like that. Thanks. CharlieEdited (talk) 14:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Broadly construing the topic area prevents additional disruption, as it prevents arguments over what is and is not tangentially related. 331dot (talk) 07:43, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Reference Assessment Request

Hello, could someone please passement of these mention article references > Draft:Nadeem Aslam Chaudhry is Province administrative boss of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and second one Draft:Akhtar Hayat Khan police boss of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. Janabanigu (talk) 11:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Pinging the reviewer @Saqib: I'm quite sure the Chief Secretary of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa fulfills WP:NPOL. As for the inspector general of police, there should be enough coverage for a person in such a position to justify WP:GNG. The Category:IGPs of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Police has already quite a few entries. Broc (talk) 11:44, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Broc, How does a civil servant even fall under WP:NPOL? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:34, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Edit-a-thon advice and Simultaneous editing

I am planning an edit-a-thon for electronic literature that will be in person at several locations and together in zoom. Do you have any advice for that? What has worked well and what should I avoid? Can multiple people edit the same article at the same time?

Thanks! 22:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC) LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 22:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@LoveElectronicLiterature Have you looked at Wikipedia:How to run an edit-a-thon? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:45, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

LoveElectronicLiterature, if multiple people are going to be editing the same article simultaneously, then edit conflicts are inevitable. Please read Help:Edit conflict for information about how to manage that. Cullen328 (talk) 23:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I am using that as a template now. LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 15:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

How to address clean up bots? Janet Murray

The clean up bot on WP:ELIT suggests

Janet Murray - Wikipedia Janet Murray October 2019 Unsourced passages need footnotes (October 2019) But this article has been improved since then. I did not find a citation needed? How would I tell the clean up bot that this article is ok? Thanks! LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 15:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@LoveElectronicLiterature If you're looking for citation needed templates in the edit mode then I don't think you'll find them, but if I've got the right page then just ctrl+f in read mode and you'll find there's a single citation needed template on Janet Murray, where it says Murray’s work has been referenced by game designers, interactive television producers, filmmakers, and journalists.[citation needed]. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:04, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I accidentally had a typo in my email when creating my acct

When I created my acct I didn’t notice I had a typo in my email. How do I fix that? GenerallyKate (talk) 16:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

You can change your email address at Special:Preferences. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 16:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Restaurant images

Can I use the third image in this source for this article? TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 15:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@TrademarkedTWOrantula: Very likely not. Any non-free image use needs to meet all the criteria at WP:NFCC. This would fail at #1: Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. RudolfRed (talk) 15:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

But is it non-free? Wikipedia:Freedom of panorama. Not sure if the photo has its own creative element, which would make it a work of its own and thus copyrighted, or if it could be used on Wiki per FoP. Seems like a tricky copyright case. Broc (talk) 16:02, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

That page says that they accept images of buildings and structures taken anywhere in the world and the person uploading it must use the {{FoP-USonly}} template. The building is not a sculpture, mural, or statue, so I think I should be fine. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 16:35, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@TrademarkedTWOrantula my concern is that the picture has been taken by someone else (not you) and if they added their own creative element, it would be copyrighted as their own work. I think in this case the Wikipedia:Threshold of originality might not be reached, as the picture seems rather "straightforward", but I'm not sure. You should probably ask at WP:MCQ. Broc (talk) 16:44, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

TrademarkedTWOrantula, the answer is definitely no. The copyright to that photo belongs to the photographer or their employer. It does not belong to you. You are perfectly free to go to the Embarcadero in San Francisco, take a photo of that restaurant, freely license it, and add it to Angler (restaurant). But you are not free to violate someone else's copyright. Cullen328 (talk) 17:14, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Freedom of panorama gives anyone the right to take a photograph a building that has a copyrighted architectural design. It does not give anyone the right to use someone else's copyrighted photo of the same building. Of course, creative decisions are made when photographing buildings. What angle? How far away? Which lens to use, or which zoom setting? Lighting conditions: sunny or cloudy? Morning, noon or evening? People present or absent? Ground level or from a ladder? How to deal with trees and vehicles? These are all creative decisions. Contemporary photos of buildings are copyright protected the vast majority of the time. Cullen328 (talk) 17:26, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Shoot. I just uploaded it. How do I delete it? TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 17:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

TrademarkedTWOrantula, I am an administrator and I deleted that image. In your upload, you wrote A free illustration cannot be made, as it will infringe upon the original image. I am sorry, but that makes no sense. Well-known buildings get photographed all the time, and a new photo does not infringe on earlier photos of the same building. If you want a photo of that restaurant, go to San Francisco and take it. Or ask an editor in or near San Francisco to take one. Cullen328 (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi. If you're still looking for images, I found a picture of this dish served at their former Los Angeles location that's under a creative commons attribution 2.0 generic license. Here's the flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/68147320@N02/48218802306

Here's the whole album (I think they're all cc 2.0 generic but check to make sure): https://www.flickr.com/photos/68147320@N02/albums/72157709481078091/

Hope this helps Urchincrawler (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

How to mark an article as lacking inline sources?

Specifically Ship of the Line seems to lack inline citations. What template do I use? guninvalid (talk) 17:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@guninvalid, I've tagged it for you. There are a few different templates for this, but I used the one I did because it has a bibliography section, which presumably is the source for much of the text. If you use WP:TWINKLE, it's especially easy to find and apply the various citation-needed templates. -- asilvering (talk) 17:56, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Reference tooltips

I think this is a feature that must have just rolled out onto en-wiki. I've always been able to mouse over references before and see the reference without having to click on the footnote. Now, with "reference tooltips", I can still do that, and it's mostly the same, but the text is G I G A N T I C compared to everything else on the page. This is probably better for comprehending discursive footnotes, but I find it rather harder to read source footnotes, which are, well, 99.9%+ of the footnotes on wikipedia. I can turn off the feature using the new gear icon in the footnote tooltip, but the result is that NO references are visible on hover, rather than a return to the tooltips I used to have. Has anyone else noticed this? I suppose I could suppress it with custom CSS...? -- asilvering (talk) 17:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi asilvering. It's discussed at MediaWiki talk:Gadget-ReferenceTooltips.js#Update request 9 July 2024. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:36, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Re: WP article Template:Reqinfobox

Re: Hello everyone. Good day Teahouse Members and @Novem Linguae:. I joined the Wikify Project and also participate in Project Law. There's an article Re: Dimes V. Grand Junction Canal that an Infobox has been requested ... I submitted a talk page reference here. However, I was unable to create and submit the infobox section within the article. In the past I have on different article submitted an infobox. Uncertain why unable to complete addition of infoxbox here. Any further suggestions for improvement is greatly appreciated. Thanks! TriosLosDios (talk) 19:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, TriosLosDios. When I looked at your discussion in the talk page, it seems like you forgot to add the final two curly brackets ( }} ) to complete the infobox template. I hope this helps you. Meltdown reverter (mail) 19:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

How to handle emotional responses?

Suppose in a talk page or notice board discussion when we come across emotional response, up to the extent expectations are withing policies and guideline we can support. But parts of expectations are not within policy or guidelines or time taking but our peer Wikipedian is overtly emotional, how to handle such emotional responses? also when they are experienced users of otherwise good standing.

As such my WP search for word 'emotional' found Essays: Wikipedia:Mostly negative, Wikipedia:Avoiding talk-page disruption, Wikipedia:Don't demand that editors solve the problems they identify, WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT

Is there any useful essay to help, "How to handle emotional responses?" aspect or you can share own helpful tips and helpful experiences. 09:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC) Bookku (talk) 09:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Bookku. There is WP:CALM and WP:HOTHEADS. Also, not strictly about "emotional responses", but WP:STICK, Wikipedia:Just drop it, Wikipedia:Let it go are also good essays in this kind of situations. —⁠andrybak (talk) 20:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Article about self

Hello. I am trying to draft an article about myself and it was declined for lacking note-worthiness.

I only included two external journalistic articles in which I am mentioned. Should I add more articles that I have published, and a narrative about their significance? I have over 70 articles, several book chapters, and have made methodological contributions to my field. Dashoham (talk) 15:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello Dashoham and welcome to the Teahouse! Per WP:YOURSELF, we very strongly discourage anyone writing about themselves. This is considered having a conflict of interest. The draft as I see it was rejected for not meeting our general notability guidelines as well. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:09, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Also bear in mind that having an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:34, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Dashoham We have special criteria for determining the Wikinotability of academics. Please read that guideline to see whether you meet at least one of the conditions. If you do, base a draft solely on showing that, backed up by reliable sources that are independent of you. Don't add lengthy lists of your publications: perhaps just mention and cite any reviews which the best have received. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Need help dealing with a Vandal

I noticed some vandalism on Incredibles 2 originating from a particular IP Address. Can I have some help reporting it/dealing with it? I've already reverted the edits, but I have a feeling they'll be back given how recent the vandalism is. I've never dealt with this before. Solitaire Wanderer (talk) 20:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Solitaire Wanderer:. If the vandalism continues to happen, you can enable Twinkle by going to Gadgets in your preferences so you can revert edits more efficiently and restore revisions. Another option is that you can report the vandalism here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Meltdown reverter (mail) 20:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Shouldn't vandalism be reported at WP:AIV instead? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes. AIV is for clear-cut vandalism; AN/I is for more subtle and complicated editing problems. Cremastra (talk) 21:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Done! Solitaire Wanderer (talk) 22:10, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

My wiki entry

Hello, please can you tell me why my long-held wikipedia entry has been deleted? Thanks Meedper (talk) 19:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Answered at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Hello,_please_can_you_explain_why_my_long_held_wikipedia_entry_has_been_deleted?_Thanks. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leela Floyd shows deleted in 2022 for lack of notability references. David notMD (talk) 00:15, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Eamwit

why was this draft rejected? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Eamwit 50.45.214.102 (talk) 23:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user and welcome to Wikipedia. The reasons why your draft was declined are in the gray boxes inside the AfC submission templates on the top of your draft. The reasons say: "This submission is not adequately supported by Reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources." Hope this helps. Meltdown reverter (mail) 23:41, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

How would I fix it to make it supported by reliable sources? 50.45.214.102 (talk) 03:14, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1229. To be pedantic, your draft was declined, not rejected; the former implies that if improved, the draft may eventually be accepted as an article, while the latter means that any further time spent on it would be wasted and you shouldn't bother. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello IP user. I corrected the formatting of your references. In addition, I did a few minutes of online research and added info about believed ancestors of the country’s people, and the English translation of Eamwit. I would suggest that, while waiting for the next review of your draft, you do additional research and add additional information about the Eamwit people. Can you find data on their education system, common means of earning a living, and if the tribe’s chief has others helping in governing the people? Since you are interested in publishing an article on Eamwit, it should not be much of a burden for you to do additional online research, using reliable references.

If you haven’t done so already I would suggest you read Help:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources for help in expanding your draft. Best wishes on your Wikipedia draft article. Karenthewriter (talk) 05:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

IP user, I'm not a reviewer, but I am impressed with the expansion you've done to your draft article. Good job! Karenthewriter (talk) 01:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank You! 50.45.214.102 (talk) 04:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Deleted Edits Viewing

Hello! I would like to ask a question about Deleted Edits. Pardon my basic beginner knowledge about Wikipedia's permissions. Why am I not able to view my deleted edits, because if I am able to view them, I can correct my mistakes and not make such errors again.

Thanks for any help! Bunnypranav (talk) 14:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

If an edit is deleted, such as if a page you created or worked on was deleted, it's removed from public view and only available to admins. It's not that you made a mistake, more that the article in question did not meet our guidelines for publication. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh ok, thanks for clearing my question about deleted edits, I was thinking deleted edits refer to reverted edits. Thanks again for the wonderful and quick help Bunnypranav (talk) 04:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Bunnypranav, and welcome to the Teahouse.

There are three circumstances you may be referring to, and it's not obvious which of the three applies.

1. If an edit of yours is reverted, it will still be there in the history of the article (and in your user contributions). But I haven't found any examples of this in your contributions.
2. Occasionally, material on a page may be oversighted, for reasons such as copyright or personal attacks, and it can happen that an innocent edit of your can get caught up in this. When revisions are oversighted, they still appear in the history of the page and your contributions, but with a line through them, and they can't be picked. Again, I don't see an example in your contributions.
3. If a page you have edited is deleted, then your edit is lost with the deleted page. If it was a page you created, or in your user space, the deleting admin will usually put a message on your user talk page, and I don't see such a messge on your user talk page; but I guess this could happen if it was a page that you happened to make an edit to, and then it was probably nothing to do with your edit that caused it to get deleted. If a page is deleted, it is possible that the deleting admin might be willing to send you the content: see WP:REFUND.

Does this help? If not, please clarify your question. ColinFine (talk) 14:34, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, It does help, thanks for the clarification, I was thinking that reverted edits also count as deleted edits. Thanks you again for the help and quick clarification Bunnypranav (talk) 04:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

OK, I see in your edit count that you have made one deleted edit. This is presumably on a deleted page (my 3 above), but not being an admin, I can't tell which page. As RickinBaltimore indecated, it is very unlikely that you did anything wrong in your edit: the most likely case is that the article was unsatisfactory, and your edit brought it to somebody's notice. If you can remember what the name of the article was, you can look in Special:log/delete and see who deleted it and why. ColinFine (talk) 14:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Bunnypranav: You have one deleted edit, removing {{Orphan}} from List of 20th Century Masters: The Millennium Collection releases. The article was later deleted and all edits to it are therefore registered as deleted. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:46, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I do remember this edit, thanks for clearing my doubt about deleted edits. Bunnypranav (talk) 04:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Something helpful

What's the longest audio recording you have at WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia? It kind of helps as background noise while I'm working on something. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 05:50, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

is Susan Spaw listed?

Susan was my ex- wife. is she listed here? 70.119.26.190 (talk) 04:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

There is no article titled Susan Spaw. The fact that it's in red tells me that. Do you believe thee should be such such an article? HiLo48 (talk) 04:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a search facility. This is easy to find and easy to use. Try it! 126.253.240.102 (talk) 05:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Is your interest in creating an article about your ex-wife? Or was it about submitting an Articles for Deletion process, in the hope said article could be deleted? David notMD (talk) 09:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Article page continually denied, what am I doing wrong?

I am attempting to make a page on the first legally recognized invention from space, due to its historical precedent and research significance. It is not a commercial product and I have no financial or social incentive for this beyond my appreciation for the subject. Yet I have submitted twice, each time rejected due to "faulty citations," each by the same admin, whom has argued with me and I expect is biased and targeting me out of spite, despite claiming they have no interest in this page. The sources are primary, diverse, unbiased, and independent of the subject, originating from NASA, NatGeo, and the US Government Patent Office. I just cannot grasp why this is continually being denied. And it doesn't help that this admin fails to state specifics on which citations are even against the rules. Is the patent against the rules? I would appreciate any assistance in putting this through. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gspinty1 (talk • contribs) 02:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy links: Draft:Zero G coffee cup (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) (and Draft:Gspinty1 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)). Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Gspinty1: none of the sources cited is independent of the subject. The first is a video made by Pettit, the second is based on information provided by Pettit, the third is based on information provided by Weislogel, and the fourth is a patent written by Pettit, Weislogel, and their co-inventors. You accuse SafariScribe of being motivated by spite; but he is merely applying Wikipedia policy. To establish that the subject is notable, you need independent sources, not sources written or influenced by people associated with the subject (in this case, its inventors). Maproom (talk) 06:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

In the draft, the description as an issued U.S. patent is not correct. 20110101009A1 signifies a patent application submitted in 2011. This never proceeded to a patent. Upon further research at USPTO, the reference should be changed to issued patent #8074827. This still does not address the lack of independent references needed to confirm notability. David notMD (talk) 08:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I also doubt that the image is your "Own work". However, https://www.space.com/31196-space-coffee-zero-gravity-cup-astronauts.html should qualify as an independent reference. David notMD (talk) 09:31, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Independent yes, but is it WP:BLOG-ish? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:42, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it is a blog really from my point of view. However, information on a blog should be verified for accuracy by seeing what other independent sources says. Soafy234 (talk) 13:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Ooop. An Administrator deleted the draft for G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. Same reason the same Admin deleted a previous version. (The Declines were actions by Reviewers, who are not necessarily Admins; the draft deletions were by an Admin.) Having seen the most recent draft before it was deleted, I agree that it contained promotional wording about how important this invention is - all unreferenced. The Admin did not 'salt' the deletion, meaning you are able to try again, but content must be neutral point of view and independent ref verified. David notMD (talk) 13:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Assessment Article Chief Minister KP

Hy, can Someone please do Assessment (references) for chief secretary Khyber Pakhtunkhwa page.Draft:Nadeem Aslam Chaudhry many chief secretary are already have a wiki Chief Secretary of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa .. the article rejected because of Fails NPOL as well GNG by the reviewer. Janabanigu (talk) 09:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thew fact that for some of the people listed at Chief Secretary of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa there exist articles does not mean that there should exist articles for every person, including Chaudhry. Appointed - as compared to elected - positions do not always qualify. David notMD (talk) 09:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

research say Chaudhry was on very high post including the Additional Secretary at the Prime Minister's Office. he has been on high posts since 2020 from covid time. Janabanigu (talk) 09:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Janabanigu. The question is not what high posts he has occupied, but whether there is enough independent reliably published information about him to base an article on. Nothing written, published, or or commissioned by him or his associates - including the government - will count, and neither will mere mentions (in a list, or in a newspaper item that says he has been appointed, but without at least several paragraphs about him and his career). Those are the sorts of sources that are a non-negotiable requirement to establish notability. ColinFine (talk) 15:31, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

How to change picture on Wikipedia Page.

I'm new to editing a page and I wanted to change a picture on a footballers page I don't know how to. If anybody could help that would be amazing. i will link the page where the picture is. Lloyd Kelly Sauberos (talk) 22:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@Sauberos Depends. We can use that particular image because the copyright holder clearly states that it's ok. Almost all random pics you find online can't be used on WP/Commons because copyright. So the question is, what do you want to change it to? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

to a newer picture of him but i found it online😭 Sauberos (talk) 22:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Nearly all pictures found online are Copyrighted and cannot be used on Wikipedia. Often, there will be a copyright declaration near the image or at the foot of the web page it's on, or on the first page of the website, but even if there is not, copyright must be assumed, as it exists automatically when a new picture (etc.) is made and does not need to be claimed. Some images found online may be illicit copies, but copying and re-publishing a stolen image is as bad as stealing it directly.

A picture found online of a living person (to whom Fair use cannot apply) can only be used on Wikipedia if is covered by Public domain (which will not be the case here), or if the copyright holder has explicitly released it under an appropriate Creative Commons license. Copyright holders can also release pictures to Wikipedia, but have to fill out a specific legal form to do so.

Using copyrighted images without permission can result in legal action. See Wikipedia:Copyrights for more details.

I advise you to read in full all of the texts I have linked to, not because you need to know all their details, but because it will bring home to you how complicated Copyright is, how serious copyright infringement is and why Wikipedia does not allow it.{The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.82.201 (talk) 09:46, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

okay thanks Sauberos (talk) 03:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

How to post emojis that look like you? Thanks a lot Junurita (talk) 03:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

what? Sauberos (talk) 03:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

sorry,How to post emojis like you.My english is not good. Junurita (talk) 04:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:EMOJI may have something helpful. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Junurita (talk) 09:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

If you have a Windows 10/11 computer you can easily input emojis by pressing the Windows (⊞) and period (.) keys at the same time. Masatami (let's talk!) 15:38, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

💥 I've learned something today. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Junurita (talk) 09:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Acceptable references for musicians

What are the acceptable references for musicians and songwriters to include in an article about them. Is there a “tier” ranking among various music publications and blogs? 2605:59C0:130:E210:C4E:A420:3D1:FC6A (talk) 16:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Not to my knowledge, but there is a list of reliable and unreliable sources available to check sources against. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Image add on Former Minister Article

Hi can some one please add a picture on Qazi Muhammad Asad Khan the image source link is https://www.facebook.com/share/u3kQycDRxSYrviKw/?mibextid=xfxF2i from his verified page. Janabanigu (talk) 18:56, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry but we can't just take an image from Facebook. Please read the Wikipedia:Image use policy. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Size class dispute

Hello!

I've noticed that there's been a relatively long-time dispute about the size class of the Toyota Grand Highlander, specifically whether it's a mid-size or a full-size crossover. Based on the citations, its a mid-size, but there were a few users who believed it was a full-size. I feel that this might turn into a mild edit-warring scenario, so what's the best thing to do? Thanks in advance! LlabmuG (talk) 04:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

LlabmuG, you need to discuss it at Talk:Toyota Grand Highlander. Few people here at the Teahouse will even know what a "crossover SUV" is. Maproom (talk) 06:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

LlabmuG. This is a perfect textbook example of an utterly inconsequential content dispute that is not worth wasting electrons on. How about "some sources describe it as a mid-sized SUV ref ref ref while other sources describe it as a full-sized SUV ref ref ref" and leave it at that? These definitions are highly subjective, and trying to cram every topic into a narrow pigeonhole is not a good approach. In the spirit of full disclosure, I recently purchased a Toyota Corolla Cross Hybrid, a somewhat similar vehicle. Cullen328 (talk) 08:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both for the suggestions. LlabmuG (talk) 20:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Entering "depicts" information - painting title

Hi. I have been entering some "depicts" information for paintings on Wikimedia. Most of these paintings have the title already there as a "depicts" entry, but nothing else. Should I avoid repeating words from the title (redundant)? Or does the entry just refer to the specific painting itself and not the subjects within the painting? I hope I am making sense. Thank you! Artfann (talk) 20:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Artfann. I think what you are doing is way outside the purview of Wikipedia (specifically), and you should ask at either Commons, or Wikidata: I'm not sure which. You are editing a file in Commons, but applying the Wikidata property "depicts".

To me it seems that entering a theme like "poverty" and "charity" is original research, and should not be done without a reference; but of course I'm thinking from Wikipedialand, and it might be different in Commons. ColinFine (talk) 20:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

How much is "sufficient" inline citations?

I've been working on Geometric distribution for a little while now, and before I started, there was a template saying the article "lacks corresponding inline citations." After adding some citations, I think that it would be okay to remove the template but there's still more parts of the article that need citations. Is it okay to remove the template even if the whole article isn't properly sourced? Moon motif (talk) 07:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Moon motif, I do not know why you would want to do that. If you have partially solved the problem, then thank you very much for that. But if you have not yet fully solved the problem, as your question seems to acknowledge, then the tag should remain. In short, solve the problem and then remove the tag. Cullen328 (talk) 07:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Sorry, yeah, it's a bit late here and my brain is fried. I've been trying to find sources for the last bits for like a month now, and I genuinely don't know if I can. The biggest is the § Proof of expected value section, and I haven't found a text that uses similar proofs. Also, a bullet point in § General properties and a couple more in § Related distributions remain unsourced. I've been really tempted to ax them, but I don't know where the line between "I personally cannot find a source" and "There is no source" is. Moon motif (talk) 08:50, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Moon motif, this might be a time to tag those specific uncited bits with citation needed tags - use {{cn}} for this. If nothing else it will alert readers that these parts are not currently sourced, and best case scenario another editor will be able to supply sources. Don't fry your brain on a potentially impossible task, we need it for all the other uncited articles! StartGrammarTime (talk) 15:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I probably should've remembered about the citation needed tags lol. Hoping that one day the article will be completely sourced! Moon motif (talk) 23:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I've had a look at Geometric distribution, and removed the "more footnotes needed" as no longer applicable. Ok, the referencing is not perfect; it rarely is in any long article. But it's pretty good. Maproom (talk) 08:58, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

How is the map in Läckö Castle made?

The map on Läckö Castle is great. How is it made? I opened the source code and found nothing. How is that map made? How to make one? Vino Italiano (talk) 09:09, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Vino Italiano: It's made outside Wikipedia. The article uses {{Infobox building}} which can pull data from Wikidata and OpenStreetMap. "Wikidata Item" under "Tools" in the article links to Läckö Castle (Q935973) where "OpenStreetMap relation ID" links to https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1619392. I don't know how OpenStreetMap makes maps. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you @PrimeHunter – Vino Italiano (talk) 08:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Adding promotional Text on Lanka Tiles by its creator

Hi all, i found an article Lanka Tiles sense of promotional content, puffery and peacock words. I tried to clean the page but its creator reverted my edits. I also smell like COI or paid contribution. I did this assuming good faiths. Please also have a look at other articles created by Chanakal. Capital Alliance, Heritance Tea Factory, Hunas Falls Hotel, Heritance Ahungalla, Jetwing Vil Uyana, Dankotuwa Porcelain, Sierra Cables and many more like these. I have a strong feeling of paid COI now. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC) Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

You are diverging the discussion by creating a tea house discussion. I am willing to discuss and agree on a consensus. Chanaka L (talk) 07:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

The creator also removed COI tag. It seems a clear indication of COI and paid contribution here. I would like to hear from other experienced editor on Wikipedia. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Bakhtar40 as I said you are only accusing, not discussing. You removed perfectly well cited facts as well as removed summary from the lead section. Chanaka L (talk) 07:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I removed only promotional and repeated text but you already reverted my edits. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:32, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

You need to read WP:LEAD. Providing a summary of info is the point of the lead section. The fact that Lanka Tiles is one of the most valuable brand is not promotional, it is a fact am afraid. Chanaka L (talk) 07:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Bakhtar40@Chanakal If you want to discuss the article, do so on the article talk page, please. The Teahouse is for answering questions, not for angry content disputes. Cremastra (talk) 07:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I started a discussion on their talk page, it is them who diverge the discussion. But I welcome your opinion on the matter as an uninvolved party. Chanaka L (talk) 07:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

You are both edit warring. I will look at the actual details after I have requested page protection. Cremastra (talk) 07:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure how having the history of the company in the lead is problematic, per, yes, WP:LEAD. That text doesn't look promotional to me. Ceylon Theatres acquired Lanka Ceramic from the government of Sri Lanka. In 2013, Royal Ceramics acquired 80% of the stake in Lanka Ceramic, thus bringing Lanka Tiles under the umbrella of the Vallibel One Group. That sounds like neutral wording to me.

Having "awards and accolades" in a separate section makes more sense than lumping it in "operations". Mentioning that in the lead is, again, summarizing the body and seems fairly neutrally-worded. Cremastra (talk) 07:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Cremastra for looking into the matter and providing a feed back. Cheers Chanaka L (talk) 08:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Ramallah Friends Meeting (Quakers)

My draft at Draft:Ramallah Friends Meeting (Quakers) was declined due to:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The draft contains citations to University papers, reliable Books, and verifiable primary sources. What am I missing for this page to be deemed adequately supported? It is about the only Quaker Meeting in the Palestinian Territories and I have included most citations that are available outside of any possible newspapers in Arabic. Thank you in advance. InquisitiveALot (talk) 16:55, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, InquisitiveALot, and welcome to the Teahosue. What you are missing is independent sources. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 21:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for getting back and taking the time in your reply. Having sourced & cited Books and University papers & archives, would those count as independent sources for publication? InquisitiveALot (talk) 22:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

It would depend on exactly what those sources were and what they actually said. A chapter, or several paragraphs, in a book (not by the subject or someone associated with them/it) published by a university press would doubtless support Wikipedia:Notability, a passing mention or inclusion in a list in such a book would not, but could Verify a particular fact. Archives often contain material from or by the subject, which would not support Notability because they would not be Independent of the subject, though again they could be used to verify uncontroversial facts. The suitability of other papers, such as Doctoral theses, depends on how widely they are accessible (i.e. are they truly 'Published') and whether their author was or has become a recognised authority on the subject.

In short, it depends on the context of the subject in question, but if in doubt put them in and let the next reviewer judge them. Don't be discouraged, many drafts go through several rounds of submission before they become articles. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.82.201 (talk) 10:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Copyvio on Draft:Sandbox

Is it okay to put {{copyvio-revdel}} on the sandbox. As per WP:COPYSAND , copyrighted material is not allowed in the sandbox.

Courtesy link:

• revision history
• copyvio checker
• taken from here

Thanks Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 05:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Miminity Welcome to the Teahouse, and thanks for your question. I have revdel-ed the relevant content, as it was a clear copyright violation. I've also warned the editor concerned. I don't see why that template should not be used, though I'd want to check back to ensure it wasn't removed automatically when the sandbox is cleared for the next editor. I'd not thought about that before, so might consider using the talk page if the template was lost each time the page is blanked. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:36, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 11:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Ashley Folashade Adegoke Ogunwusi

Hi Wikipedia Team,

I am reaching out in utter frustration regarding my article submission. Since the start of the year, I have been diligently re-drafting this article to meet all the requirements specified by your guidelines. It is outrageous that editor Johannes Maximilian has now reiterated the same feedback previously given by other editors, claiming the article lacks the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia and fails to adhere to a neutral point of view. I have meticulously revised the submission to eliminate any peacock terms and ensure it is written from a neutral perspective, as per your instructions.

Furthermore, the accusation that the submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources is simply untrue. I have invested countless hours referencing independent, reliable, published sources to verify every piece of information in the article. It is incredibly disheartening to have my efforts continuously dismissed by editors who seem to be trigger-happy in rejecting submissions without offering constructive feedback. This process is beginning to feel discriminatory and marginalizing. Wikipedia is supposed to be an open, free space for sharing knowledge, yet I am encountering constant obstacles and encountering editors who appear to be mean-spirited and resentful, rejecting my efforts without due consideration.

This cannot continue indefinitely. I have poured significant time and effort into ensuring my submission meets Wikipedia's standards, and it is unacceptable for it to be continually undermined by dismissive editorial behavior. I urge you to review my submission again, taking into account the extensive work I have done to comply with your requirements. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Best regards,

Adefolarin

The article that was rejected:

"Princess Ashley Folashade Adegoke Ogunwusi Princess Ashley Folashade Adegoke Ogunwusi is a member of the royal family of Ile-Ife, married to Ooni Adeyeye Enitan Ogunwusi Ojaja II, the monarch of the Ife Kingdom. She is from the Lafogido ruling house of Ile-Ife and holds a Master's Degree in Accounting and Finance from the University of Greenwich. In addition to managing her businesses in the United Kingdom, she engages in philanthropic activities through her NGO, the Ashley Adegoke Foundation, which supports underprivileged children and widows. As one of the queens in the royal court of Oduduwa, she holds a notable position within the Ooni's household. Her marriage to Ooni Adeyeye Enitan Ogunwusi Ojaja II is part of his history of multiple marriages, including previous unions with Olori Elizabeth Opeoluwa Akinmuda, Tobi Phillips, Adebukola Bombata, Zainab-Otiti Obanor, and Olori Silekunola, with whom he shares a son. Insights from Olori Ashley Ogunwusi: Balancing Roles In an interview, Olori Ashley Ogunwusi discussed her life, her relationship with the Ooni of Ife, and her aspirations as a queen. She emphasized the spiritual connection she shares with her husband, rooted in their mutual spiritual awareness. She also reflected on her upbringing, highlighting the spiritual values instilled by her father. Despite their longstanding commitment, their official marriage was postponed to prioritize her daughter's well-being. As an accountant and entrepreneur based in the United Kingdom, Olori Ashley detailed the challenges of balancing her roles as a queen, mother, and businesswoman. She spoke about her fashion sense, philanthropic work, and dedication to promoting Yoruba culture and traditions. Addressing perceptions of polygamy within the palace, she expressed her vision for fostering unity and cultural appreciation in Ile Ife. Leadership in the Osara Festival Olori Ashley Ogunwusi led the celebration of the Osara Festival in Ile-Ife, demonstrating her leadership and dedication to Yoruba traditions. Before heading to the Osara Groove, she emphasized the festival's spiritual significance and historical relevance. The festival attracts devotees who seek blessings from Osara, a deity revered for granting children to those who pray to her. Oba Isoro Ishola Osunwusi, the Olosara of Ife, highlighted the importance of the annual celebration of the Osara Festival for all Yoruba people. He noted the historical and cultural significance of Osara as the mother of Okanbi, who bore seven notable children, including the Oba of Benin and other prominent Yoruba rulers. Olori Ashley's involvement in the festival underscores her commitment to preserving Yoruba culture and traditions. Participation in the Ayan Atayero Festival in New York Olori Ashley Ogunwusi participated in the "Ayan Atayero Festival" (Festival of Drums) organized by the Consulate-General of Nigeria in New York and the Royal Festival Inc. The event highlighted Nigeria's cultural heritage in the United States. Representing the Ooni of Ife, Olori Ashley conveyed royal greetings and emphasized the importance of Yoruba culture, particularly the significance of drum festivals. She articulated how such cultural expressions influence the broader African diaspora and global cultural diversity. Personal Insights and Cultural Promotion Princess Ashley Folashade Adegoke Ogunwusi, also known as Olori Ashley, shared insights into her life as a queen in a detailed interview. She explained that her official recognition was delayed to prioritize her daughter's safety and well-being. Living in the United Kingdom, she maintains respectful relationships with her sister wives in Nigeria. She highlighted her upbringing in a diverse religious background and her alignment with traditional worship alongside her husband. Olori Ashley expressed confidence in her appearance and emphasized the importance of balancing her roles as a queen, mother, and entrepreneur. She remains committed to supporting her husband in preserving Ile Ife's traditions and fostering cultural heritage. She attributes her ability to manage her responsibilities to divine guidance and the wisdom instilled by her family."

Adefolarin1 (talk) 19:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Note to Teahouse hosts: also asked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk#19:32, 13 July 2024 review of submission by Adefolarin1. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Adefolarin1 This has been answered at that link. Forum shopping is poor etiquette, please do not do it. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:09, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Fails on tone, lack of NPOV, and flawed references. David notMD (talk) 22:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

The notion that utterly non-neutral prose like She expressed confidence in her appearance and emphasised the importance of balancing her roles as a queen, mother, and entrepreneur. She remains committed to supporting her husband in preserving Ile Ife's traditions and fostering cultural heritage. She attributes her ability to manage her responsibilities to divine guidance and the wisdom instilled by her family belongs in an encyclopedia is bizarre to me. That's press release writing, not encyclopedia writing. Cullen328 (talk) 08:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Adefolarin1, it may be that you have immersed yourself so deeply into this topic that you have lost sight of what an Encyclopedia is. It is nothing like promotional Social media. Please read Wikipedia: What Wikipedia is not, particularly Section 2.3, and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

Try to imagine how your Draft would read if it was written by someone with no personal connection to the subject and no particular like or dislike for them, presenting only published facts in a dry, non-judgemental (positive or negative) style. That is what Wikipedia articles require. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.82.201 (talk) 10:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Ashley is one of six wives of Adeyeye Enitan Ogunwusi, ruler of Ile Ife. All married him in the fall of 2022. Any attempt to create an article about her must rest on references to what people have written about her. Wikipedia policy is that published interviews do not count toward eastablishing notability. David notMD (talk) 12:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Requesting deletion

I would like to request deletion for Draft:Riley Strain due to WP:BLP1E, notable for one event. Cwater1 (talk) 13:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Cwater1 since you are the draft's creator and main author, you can request deletion using the {{db-g7}} template. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 13:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Got it. Hopefully I can remember next time. Cwater1 (talk) 13:17, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Article page rejected for lack of resources despite citing The Atlantic, etc.

I'm new to Wiki-editing and would really appreciate some help here! My draft, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Andrew_J._Calis, "is not adequately supported by reliable sources" despite citing a number of legitimate journals and papers, including The Atlantic and America Magazine. I'm not sure what qualifies, then -- thanks for any help! It'sMeowOrNever (talk) 16:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, It'sMeowOrNever, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that you are having a very common experience of new editors who plunge straight into the challenging task of trying to create an article before spending time learning about Wikipedia's requirements.

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

Of your Eight citations, only the last two come anywhere near meeting the requirements for sources to establish notability, in that they are the only two sources independent of Callis. Unfortunately, neither of them says very much about Callis himself: they (and the quotes you take from them) might well be appropriate for the article in addition to more substantial independent sources.

Writing an article begins with finding several sources that meet the criteria in the golden rule. If you cann't find these, then you know that there is no point in spending any more time on this, as the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article will be accepted.

If you find them, then the next step is to forget absolutely everything you know about the subject, and summarise what these independent sources say about it.

If that results in enough content to be an encyclopaedia article, then you can may add a selected bibliography, and some uncontroversial factual data (like dates and places) from non-indpendent published sources. ColinFine (talk) 21:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

That's a huge help -- thank you! This is exactly the sort of feedback I was missing. Thanks again for the clarification! It'sMeowOrNever (talk) 19:51, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Review required

I would request senior editors and admins to have a look at the contributions of User:HingWahStreet of engaged in writing jounals/magazines → The Wikimedia Journal of Hong Kong Transport. See (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/User:HingWahStreet). Thank you. Agent 007 (talk) 18:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

There's no such thing as a senior editor, but even I can tell this is a blatant misuse of userpages. I've tagged them as such. -- D'n'B-t -- 20:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

How can I change a company's logo to the updated one?

Ryman Healthcare's logo is outdated and we would like to update it to the current one. Rutheavh2 (talk) 21:11, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Rutheavh2 hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You said "we" – do you mean that a group of people is using this account?

As to your question – new users aren't allowed to upload files. You can bring this question up on Talk:Ryman Healthcare. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

No i'm the only user. thanks do i just create a new topic? under companies? Rutheavh2 (talk) 21:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Rutheavh2, click "Add topic" at the top, next to "View history". A form, which you've already used here after clicking the "Ask a question" button, will appear. When you're ready to publish the message, click button "Add topic" at the bottom. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Sentence syntax

Hi! I was hoping for some help with a particular sentence. It's part of the plot summary on the Spider-Man (2002 film) page. Below is the first paragraph of the plot summary, with the sentence in question in bold:

On a high school field trip, teenager Peter Parker visits a Columbia University genetics laboratory with his friend, Harry Osborn, and his love interest, Mary Jane Watson. There, Peter is bitten by a genetically engineered spider, and falls ill upon returning home. Meanwhile, Harry's father and Oscorp founder, Norman Osborn, bids for an important military contract. He tests a performance-enhancing chemical on himself and goes insane, killing his assistant in the process.

The syntax feels off to me. Here is a version I proposed:

Meanwhile, Harry's father, Norman Osborn, tries to secure an important military contract for Oscorp, the company he founded.

We don't have to use either version if another better version exists. Please let me know your thoughts. We've tried various versions and discussed on the talk page, but haven't come to a consensus. Wafflewombat (talk) 20:34, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Either is OK; the second (yours) is preferable. (I might simplify that to "Meanwhile, Harry's father Norman tries [...]".) -- Hoary (talk) 21:41, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Archiving using one click archiver

Hello. Can someone help me with an archiving issue? I tried archiving sections from this talk page but instead of archiving it to the linked Archive 1 from the talk page, the bot archived it here which doesn't show up when you access the Archive 1 from the talk page itself. Griboski (talk) 21:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Griboski, hello! OneClickArchiver uses the configuration of the automatic bot archival to find out where the archive page is. This configuration was broken and caused incorrect archival by OneClickArchiver. The configuration has been fixed. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

andrybak Thank you! I knew I screwed something up. Question is what to do with this erroneous archive that it created? --Griboski (talk) 21:52, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

You can mark Talk:Vasojevići (tribe)/Archive 1 with template {{db-author}}, and an admin will delete it. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Withdrawal my request

Is there way I can withdraw my request at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Pending changes reviewer. I don't think I'm ready yet. I like to have better experience and plus I might take a wiki break. Cwater1 (talk) 22:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Yep. I've marked it as withdrawn for you. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:29, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Questions about Detail level and Review

I haven't been editing here for long, but I recently overhauled the Quintus Sertorius page. I understand the points about summary style, but how much should I cut it down? It stands a bit above 9,000 words as of now (which the size page notes is worthy of cutting down), and Sertorius is not a 'major' figure in Roman history like Caesar that can really justify such a large article. I just have a passionate interest in him and thus wrote that much. I would appreciate some recommendations! Should I merge my writings into that of the Sertorian War, perhaps?

As well, what is the process for getting an article reviewed for its content? Sertorius was C-level when I began editing, and I would be interested in seeing what grade it is now after my edits. I admittedly have a lot to learn, but I think I have improved the article from its earlier state. Thank you! Harren the Red (talk) 22:32, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Harren the Red: Well, one thing is that the "Sertorian War" section is far too long. It's supposed to be a relatively brief summary (maybe a couple of paragraphs) of the main article Sertorian War, not a separate full treatment of the war. If any of the sourced information there is not already in the main article, you can move it into that article. Deor (talk) 00:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the information! I'll start cross-referencing and seeing what I can port over. Harren the Red (talk) 00:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi, Harren the Red! The Classical Greece and Rome WikiProject is fairly active, so you can ask its participants at the WikProject's talk for better recommendations on trim the article or on a possible merge, or for an updated class assessment.

As a side note, class assessments are rather informal in my experience, unless taking the article through a formal review process like Good Articles and above (i.e. Featured Article). That may be why the WikiProject's requests for assessments hasn't been meaningfully updated since 2022. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 00:22, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know! I'll get in touch with that project specifically :) Harren the Red (talk) 00:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Harren the Red, you might want to take this one to WP:PR - tell them you're new, interested in taking this article through WP:GA if possible, and aware that you need to cut things down but not sure what needs the most cutting. You obviously have the interest and skills to be able to take this to Good Article status, and some targetted advice from editors who are used to the content review processes will probably be very helpful for you. Of course, read the GA guidelines first and do what you can to clean it up with them in mind first. Good luck and welcome! -- asilvering (talk) 00:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Redirect disclaimer

How do I write a message that says "_____ redirects here. For the _______, see _______."? TrevortniDesserpedx (talk) 01:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Trevortnidesserped: {{Redirect}} Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Changing draft title

How can I do such a task? As my title possesses a spelling error. WikiPhil012 (talk) 02:44, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@WikiPhil012 renaming a draft is usually not necessary, as the reviewer will choose a suitable title if the draft is accepted. However, if you would still like to do it, follow the directions at Help:How to move a page. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the useful response. WikiPhil012 (talk) 03:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Done. -- Hoary (talk) 05:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I have an obscure important document

Alan Dawson, the jazz drummer, was thought to have never published any material. Wrong. I possessed the only copy of "Cymbal Sounds in Jazz". It was a "White Paper" insert in the Zildian cymbal catalog. I sent the original to Berklee for safe keeping.I have copies of the original and would like to contribute to the Wiki page. Vincherry (talk) 08:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Vincherry Published means available to the general public. If it's the only copy, in what sense is it published? Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

The document exist nowhere on the internet so I consider that obscure.No one has so far claimed to have another copy.I contacted Zildjian and they have no record of it although they hold the copyright. Vincherry (talk) 17:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

If this was an insert in the Zildjian cymbal catalog (year? Avedis Zildjian Company), why do you think you are the only person with the document?

Vincherry What content are you wishing to add to the article Alan Dawson? Theroadislong (talk) 17:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Vincherry: One thing you could usefully do is upload a scan of the document to the Internet Archive; it can then - if suitable - be linked to from the article here, either under "External links", or as a citation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 07:18, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Vincherry, archival material that is available to some members of the public, even if restricted or very difficult to access, may be used as a source. If Berklee has the original and they make either the original or a copy of it available, to scholars, for example, then it is considered published for the purposes of WP:Verifiability, and you may refer to it. If Berklee holds it, but provides access to no one outside their institution, then it can't be used. That said, the idea of uploading a copy to IA is a good one. Mathglot (talk) 07:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Admin

How do I submit an RfA? Frozen902 (talk) 21:11, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Frozen902, you have only 55 edits over a period of four years. In practice, administrators must be highly experienced and fully conversant with Wikipedia's policies and guideline, and are expected to have significant creation of high quality new content. Thousands of good edits are expected. Your chance of being selected as an administrator at this time is essentially zero. Please read WP:RFA. Cullen328 (talk) 21:22, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Did you perhaps mean AfC? Your draft Draft:Andrey Kulsha has been declined for reasons given. David notMD (talk) 22:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I know there is no way for me to become an administrator. I'd just like to know how so in the future I can do so. Frozen902 (talk) 00:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Actually, its not even possible to submit an RfA given that they just added a requirement to be extended confirmed (after 500 edits and 30 days of editing) so, definitely zero. And even when a candidate has 500 edits/30 days, candidates will almost certainly fail the RfA. This means that the de jure requirement is 500 edits/30 days, but the de facto, something like 10,000 edits/1 year. It was the case where a non EC user could still submit an RfA, but required an EC user to confirm it which I assume no one would accept the submission. JuniperChill (talk) 19:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I think you mean voters on a Request for Administratorship usually expect at least 10,000 edits and one year as a registered editor.

Work in some of the backroom stuff—Articles for deletion, New Page Patrol, and more. Have a clean record, understand and practice the Five Pillars of Wikipedia. Watch how other editors make changes. Learn to enjoy working with other editors. Use your sandbox a lot for practice. Enjoy Wikipedia—if you don't enjoy editing here, slow down and read the articles on subjects that interest you. Then make small edits. Always add an edit summary explaining what you did and why. — Neonorange (talk to Phil) (he, they) 07:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC) —

Moving the page of an official government entity

I'm trying to correct the page name for Brinkhaven Ohio. It still shows up as "Gann" which has not been the name of the village since the 1800s.

I am Christopher Wyant, the mayor of the village, and I have updated some information on the page but I don't seem to be able to change the page name.

Our official website is https://www.brinkhaven.gov/

Can someone assist? BrinkhavenOhio (talk) 17:13, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi BrinkhavenOhio. I can help move the page. On another note, you're going to need to change your username to something that doesn't appear to represent a whole group/village. Use Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple, and let me know if you run into any issues. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

But it DOES represent the whole village. The email I use belongs to the office, not to me. As I said, I am the mayor presently, but I won't always be. The next person in this seat will own the profile. BrinkhavenOhio (talk) 19:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm afraid not, Christopher. Wikipedia is not like other websites, where you can have "profiles", and shared accounts. A Wikipedia account is required to be owned by, and used by, an individual: role accounts are forbidden. You need to change your username to something that does not suggest that it is a role account, or editing on behalf of an organisation (even a community). You do not need to use your real name: I do, but many do not; and something like "Chris from Brinkhaven" would be quite acceptable.

When somebody replaces you as mayor, if they wish to edit Wikipedia, they should create their own personal account.

Your use of the word "profile" suggests that you think that that there is some connection between the account and the articles that you edit: there isn't. (Almost) anybody in the world may edit (almost) any article in Wikipedia.

However, as the mayor of the village, you have a conflict of interest in editing articles about the village, so you should not normally edit the article directly, but instead should place an edit request on the article's talk page. (See that link for how).

Firefangledfeathers has moved the article to Brinkhaven, Ohio (but the old name is still there as a redirect, so if somebody searches for Gann, Ohio, it will take them to the article). ColinFine (talk) 20:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Name change complete. Christopher from Brinkhaven (talk) 16:49, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

OK. That makes sense. But we've had a longstanding issue with the article being incorrect and outdated. I provided only publicly available information and easily verified data. I made no editorial additions. I added the type of government, the names and roles of village leaders, postal code, official URL, etc...

Apparently a local resident tried to correct the information in the past but it was removed for some reason.

At any rate, I have requested a name change for my account.

Thank you for your assistance. BrinkhavenOhio (talk) 15:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for helping move the page. Do you have an estimate on when that should be reflected? BrinkhavenOhio (talk) 19:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@BrinkhavenOhio Moves take effect immediately. Hence you can now click on either the link Brinkhaven, Ohio or Gann, Ohio to reach the article under its new name. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. BrinkhavenOhio (talk) 16:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Christopher from Brinkhaven: One thing you and your fellow citizens can help with is the lack of images of Brinkhaven (compare what we have at c:Category:Brinkhaven, Ohio with c:Category:Fredericktown, Ohio, for example). You should only upload images which you have taken yourselves, or that are so old that they are out of copyright (there are some other exceptions, but those are the main types). Mobile phone images are fine. There's an overview at Wikipedia:Uploading images. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 07:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Are you really just trying to humblebrag? Is this a Knox County thing? :-D

We haven't gotten to that level yet. As you can see, we literally just got the name corrected. Christopher from Brinkhaven (talk) 01:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Christopher from Brinkhaven: No, I'm trying to assist you. If I wanted to brag, I'd show you the pictures of my home city, Birmingham, England. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

article deletion

I'm new. There are a lot of obscure people on wikipedia that are not really notable. Can I just delete the articles? For example using the suggested edit widget on my home page it took me to this page Kent (Gillström) Isaacs. I can't find any secondary sources so I dropped a comment on the talk page but wondering if I should have just deleted the page. I think a lot of these pages are created by the people themselves for marketing. Here was another that I was tempted to delete: John A. Gauci-Maistre FunFactsFanatic (talk) 15:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, FunFactsFanatic, and welcome to the Teahouse. As you are not an admin, you do not have the power to delete an article; but like anybody else, you can nominate it for deletion: see articles for deletion.

It is not enough that the article does not establish notability: you should make a genuine effort to find sources that establish notability: see WP:BEFORE - if you don't then your AFD is likely to get closed quickly as "keep".

But if you have looked, and not found the sources, then by all means launch an AFD. ColinFine (talk) 15:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I already mentioned I've looked for secondary sources. Is there a listing of what articles have been deleted and why? FunFactsFanatic (talk) 15:45, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@FunFactsFanatic, there sure is! Instructions and helpful info can be found at WP:AFD; you'll also be able to find archives there, as well as currently open discussions. WP:AFDSORT may help find ongoing discussions on specific subjects - try the 'biography' section for similar articles to the ones you're thinking of nominating for deletion. You can always watch some of the current discussions and see how they end up, if you'd like to observe for a little while before committing to the nominations. There's no rush. StartGrammarTime (talk) 16:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Several alternatives to deletion exist; that link also provides some helpful info on when deletion is not appropriate. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:45, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

See Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 16:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I have a related question, since we're here. Does anyone know of a database report, external tool, or maintenance category that catalogues articles with external links in body prose? Folly Mox (talk) 16:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk, do you have any advice how to search for articles with external links in body prose? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:55, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

None that I know of. Cirrus search is not really up to the task because its regex is limited. Someone once wrote a bot that added a bare url template but I don't know if that bot is still running and I don't know if it distinguished bare urls inside <ref>...</ref> tags from those that were outside.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Then WP:TECHPUMP may be the next place to ask. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:41, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, does this search answer your question? Mathglot (talk) 06:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot Glancing at the bolded stuff at the first page, no. As I understand it, @Folly Mox wants a tool/search that can find stuff like "In 2024, Smith started a new political party with James McMurdock." I tried this [6] but that doesn't work. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, Ah, right. You can search for those with this search, but it's slow, times out after finding ~500k results, and does not distinguish between links in citations and other kinds, but will get you part way there. With sufficient fiddling, you might be able to weed out some of the refs by restricting equal signs or pipes just before it, but there would be diminishing returns, probably some false negatives, and it still wouldn't be perfect. HTH anyway, Mathglot (talk) 07:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot Btw, where is the WP-guidance on writing searches like that? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:36, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) Gråbergs Gråa Sång, Here's one level of fiddly search, which cuts out a lot of refs (but not all of them) and may cut out some good results, too, but the general mix of results is a higher proportion of non-ref results than previously. If I knew what the results were going to be used for, it might be possible to tune it better for those goals. Maybe Folly Mox can answer that. Mathglot (talk) 07:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Fiddly search 2. Mathglot (talk) 08:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång you can start with Help:Searching, and then mw:Help:CirrusSearch#Regular expression searches; finally, this may help for some features, but Wikimedia doesn't implement all of that I don't think. Cirrus search regular expressions are a pain in the butt, because it lacks absolutely basic features of regular expressions like alternation (OR) which make a lot of things really difficult; it also lacks positive and negative lookaround, which would've been really helpful to exclude <ref> tags in the current situation, and there's no easy workaround for that. On top of that, the doc we do have is pretty poor. lately I finally got fed up enough to start writing my own crib sheet, and I'm finally getting a bit better at it. I mean to someday either redo the doc entirely, or else (more likely) just write up the crib sheet as a kind of quick-start box which may be useful to those who know some flavor of non-Cirrus regex, to get them going quickly. I'm still learning, though. Mathglot (talk) 08:00, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot Thanks again! I spot checked a few search results, ctrl-f-ing " [http" (with a space before the [, hoping that helps a little) in the wiki-text. Much is ref and EL-section, but I did find [7] and Town#Alabama. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

It seems to me that if we're after a "Hunt for bad WP:EL" search/tool, refs and EL-sections are big obstacles. Ping @Trappist the monk again if you want to add anything. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah. Single, one-line advanced searches are limited in what they can do. A user script or Module could grab the article and exclude all refs fairly easily, and then search what's left for the pattern using Lua pattern matching. That would be a better approach to this imho, if you want good results. Mathglot (talk) 08:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

how to write in wikipedia

how to write in wikipedia JAYDEEPNIMAVAT1518 (talk) 04:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@JAYDEEPNIMAVAT1518 Welcome to wikipedia! For detailed instructions on how to write articles, check out Help:Your first article and Wikipedia:The perfect article. Hope this helps! Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 04:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

More generally, see WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

To add to what GGS said: My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.. ColinFine (talk) 09:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

User box

How do i put user box in my membership page like many member .Thank you Junurita (talk) 00:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

. . . in what's called your "user page", Junurita. Please see Wikipedia:Userboxes#Using existing userboxes. -- Hoary (talk) 02:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I dont understand what you said.I only want to create user boxes in my membership page😄. Junurita (talk) 08:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello Junurita. We do not have anything called a "membership page". I'm guessing (and Hoary was guessing) that you mean what we call your "user page" User:Junurita. ColinFine (talk) 09:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

You're right.Thamk you. Junurita (talk) 10:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

😅 Junurita (talk) 10:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Expand Article

Hi, this is a political party in pakistan please help to expand more things Hazara Quami Mahaz Pakistan Janabanigu (talk) 08:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello. What help is it that you are seeking? 331dot (talk) 08:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

actually article needs more detailing and there is also an incident which should be added.https://www.dawn.com/news/1401278 Janabanigu (talk) 08:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Janabanigu, is your idea that you (i) think of a subject that doesn't have an article, (ii) create a stub about the subject, and then (iii) hope that other people will do the hard work of turning this stub into an article worth reading? Most people at the "teahouse" know little about the politics of X (where X is almost any nation, such as Pakistan), have no particular interest in the matter, and are likely to be unenthusiastic about reading up on it. Suggestion: You might create fewer but better articles. (The good quality of such an article might inspire other editors to read up on the subject and make improvements.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback @Hoary I understand your concern and will aim to create fewer , but higher quality articles in the future. In hopes of inspiring more engagement and contributions from other editors Janabanigu (talk) 08:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Since creating your account on 10 July you have been busy creating short drafts and submitting to AfC, with some accepted (as stubs and orphans) and some declined as not qualifying for WP:NPOL or general notability. I concur that quality needs more attention. David notMD (talk) 11:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Trouble submitting an article

Hello everyone,

I have trouble successfully uploading the article of the artist "Jeewi Lee". Apparently the submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. Jeewi Lee is an artist, who had international exhibitions, has galleries representing her in Dakar, Berlin and New York. She has been exhibited in well known institutions such as "Gropius Bau" and "Hamburger Bahnhof". Further, a book about her works has been published by publisher Hatje Cantz (https://www.hatjecantz.de/products/65857-jeewi-lee). Why does she not qualify for a Wikipedia Article? I added many referenced to proof the information stated in the wikipedia-article. What else can I do so the article is published?

It would be great to receive feedback and help from you.

Thank you in advance!

Best wishes 123creativeuser 123creativeuser (talk) 13:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@123creativeuser I think that the main problem is that your sources are websites like Sexauer, which are galleries trying to promote the artist and, ultimately, make money from her. Thus they are not independent. What we need to be convinced that Lee is Wikinotable is to read that people who have no connection to her have noted her work and commented on it without prompting by her or her agents. A long list of her exhibitions doesn't help: that's what her own website would cover, not Wikipedia. So, cut all that and focus on material about her meeting these criteria. You may find this essay helpful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Can I make my own page?

I don't know how to :/ SillyBilly13 (talk) 14:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SillyBilly13 Welcome to the Teahouse. If you wish to create a page about your involvement with editing Wikipedia, click on your red username above and create the page. Pease ensure it conforms to the user page policy. If you are thinking that Wikipedia is the ideal place for your autobiography, it is probably not. Please see WP:AUTO. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SillyBilly13 If you want to create an article, I recommend that you first edit a few already-existing articles to get the hang of editing Wikipedia. Then you may check out Help:Your first article! Apmh (talk) 15:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I need help to edit a new timeline can you help?

Timeline of presidents of USA 2607:FEA8:3FE1:D900:3888:5E6B:161A:4AF (talk) 15:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you elaborate on your question? If you're trying to make a new article, you may be looking for List of presidents of the United States or History of the United States. — Amph (my talk page, my contributions) 15:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

How to protect content from bots

Hey! I've written a list page of historical plaques and include the text of the plaques in the page (List of Blackburn Historical Plaques).

I've noticed Wikipedia bots making alterations to the plaque text to meet Wikipedia standard, but this makes the information inaccurate. Is there a way to indicate that the text should be protected as is so that automated tools don't alter it? Scooby359 (talk) 17:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Scooby359: You can put {{Nobots}} on the page; or better still discuss the matter with the bot operator (in this case User:Sdkb) on their talk page, so that they can understand and remedy the issue. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Brilliant, thanks for the help! Scooby359 (talk) 17:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Scooby359 Do not place {{nobots}} on the page, as that blocks all sorts of beneficial edits, so please do not do that. Instead, use the template {{as written}} only around the section of text that should remain the same. In your case, that would look like this:

blah blah blah {{as written|on 15th August 1842}}, blah blah blah...

Then the bots should leave it alone, but are still available to fix other problems in the article. Mathglot (talk) 06:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot Ace, I've updated with {{as written}} so hopefully sorted now. Thanks for your help! Scooby359 (talk) 18:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Advice on new page

Hi,

Could I get recommendations/advice on how I can further improve this page?:

Extended content

Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1229 Jeremie Luong at Vietnam National Championship Personal information Full name Luong Jérémie Loïc Nino National team Vietnam Born (2000-07-25) July 25, 2000 Châtenay-Malabry, France Height 1.94 m (6 ft 4 in) Weight 83 kg (183 lb) Sport Sport Swimming Strokes Butterfly, freestyle Club Cercle Paul Bert Rennes, France College team Michigan Wolverines swimming and diving Coach Mathieu Burban Medal record Men's swimming Representing Vietnam ASEAN School Games 2017 Vietnam 200 m individual medley 2017 Vietnam 400 m individual medley 2017 Vietnam 50 m backstroke Southeast Asian Games 2021 Vietnam 4 x 100 m freestyle 2021 Vietnam 4 x 100 m medley 2021 Vietnam 100 m freestyle 2021 Vietnam 50 m freestyle 2023 Cambodia 4 x 100 m freestyle 2023 Cambodia 100 m freestyle 2023 Cambodia 50 m freestyle Luong Jérémie Loïc Nino (born 25 July 2000) is a male athlete of the Vietnam national swimming team. Having won the Gold Medal for team Vietnam at the 31st Southeast Asian Games in the 4x100 m freestyle Relay and silver in the 100 m freestyle, Luong holds multiple national records. Career Early life Luong was born on July 25, 2000, in Châtenay-Malabry, France to a Vietnamese mother and a French father. Growing up in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, he attended the British International School Ho Chi Minh City. Luong started swimming in 2009 at the Yết Kiêu Aquatics Center, and joined the Vietnamese national swimming team in 2018. He later committed to swim for the University of Michigan, starting with the class of 2022. Swimming career In 2020, Luong transferred to Cercle Paul Bert in Rennes where he trains with his coach Mathieu Burban. In 2023, he qualified and participated in the 50 m freestyle, 100 m freestyle, and 50 m butterfly at the 2023 World Aquatics Championships in Fukuoka, Japan. Honors and awards Victorix Ludorum (Overall Player of the Year), awarded by British International school HCMC: 2018 Bằng khen của Thủ tướng chính phủ nước Việt Nam (Certificate of Merite from the Prime Minister of Viet Nam): 2022 Philanthropy Luong organized a toothpaste collection drive at the British International school in Ho Chi Minh city, which resulted in over 3,000 toothpastes collected for a medical expedition to Quảng Nam province. References

 Luong.alois (talk) 17:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Luong.alois I don't think editors here at the Teahouse will give you inputs on how to improve the content of the page, as most of us are likely not experts in Vietnamese swimming. The page seems well-written and sourced. As you declared a COI with the subject, you must go through the Articles for Creation process, where an experienced editor will review the page before approving it for mainspace. Go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation, click the blue button "Click here to start a new article" and follow the procedure. Broc (talk) 20:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

No stashed content found

I have tried repeatedly today to publish after an edit on an article. I get this: No stashed content found for 1228854049/e4392273-3ffd-11ef-a418-cd2fe938f0ef. What does that mean? Beingherenow2 (talk) 20:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Beingherenow2. Unfortunately that means the visual editor has been open for too long, and the cache has emptied. Any work you had in the editor has not been saved and cannot be recovered.

To avoid this, make sure to "Publish Changes" often, backup your text in another application, or use the source editor which doesn't seem to have this issue. Qcne (talk) 20:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

THANK YOU! That explains it. Fortunately it was just some minor things. Beingherenow2 (talk) 21:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

how to put an article about a music group as the artist

hi, I am new and unsure how to get information about our music duo on to wikipedia? Theresa.bentley (talk) 18:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi; writing about yourself isn't what Wikipedia is for. AntiDionysius (talk) 18:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:The Bentley Project - Music Duo was Speedy deleted as being advertising/promotional. See WP:NMUSIC for criteria for music notability. In theory, your group will in time be so famous and written about that someone with no personal or paid connection will craft an article. David notMD (talk) 22:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Blacklisted sites

Hello! My understanding is that there's a list somewhere of websites we are not allowed to link to, or cite, in articles. Can someone tell me where to find the list? Thanks! Wafflewombat (talk) 22:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Wafflewombat: See m:Spam_blacklist. Fabrickator (talk) 23:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Wafflewombat: There is both the global meta:Spam blacklist for all Wikimedia wikis and the local MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist for the English Wikipedia. The software prevents saving of edits which try to link a blacklisted site. We also have Wikipedia:Deprecated sources which may not be blocked from saving but generally shouldn't be used as sources in articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Wafflewombat, you may also be looking for WP:RSPSS which tells you whether certain sources are considered reliable or otherwise. Between the three of us hopefully you've found it! StartGrammarTime (talk) 00:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia front page - specifically the "On this day" article

Do the events shown in the "On this day" article on the front page of Wikipedia (Main Page) repeat every year? Or do you change them out with different facts and events? 159.196.168.46 (talk) 00:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! You can learn about how the "On this day" section is developed at WP:OTD. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 01:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

How do I request for an article to be expanded?

I went to the joint article to find information about the individual parts of a joint, but there isn't any, there aren't even links to articles for those parts. Considering that I am there exactly to find the missing information, I feel unqualified to be the one adding that.

In any case, now I find myself wandering through different forums to search for a place for requesting expansion, yet I can't seem to locate one. I would appreciate some pointers, thank you.

(Edit:there were links in the category section, but still, a summary would be nice)—Mint Keyphase (Did I mess up? What have I done?) 03:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I would normally start by asking a question on the article talk page, but if it looks a bit quiet there, the next step might be the talk page for WikiProject Anatomy. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 03:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I will head there now, thanks. —Mint Keyphase (Did I mess up? What have I done?) 03:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

removing links and source flags.

Hi There, a couple questions on the biography page for Jessie Henderson that I wrote. I got a notification that I may not have the proper sources for the page. Is there a way I can know which cited links might be causing the flag? I tried removing some sources but it won't let me remove only update the information of the source. How can I delete a source? As a back up is there a way for me to delete the biography page if I am not able to get this clarified? Nenarodz (talk) 22:09, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

So, Nenarodz, in this little series of edits you added a three-minute interview on Youtube as the reference for, for, for -- uh, you don't say what it's for, and you deleted the "notability" flag. For a start, attach that (rather dubious) reference to this or that assertion or a number of them. Putting aside the propriety of removing bits of an article, you ought to be able to delete any part of an article: what exactly is the problem you face when you attempt to do so? -- Hoary (talk) 23:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi there, appreciate your response but was simply asking for assistance as I am very new to this platform, I didn't ask for the sarcasm that was added to your message. Very unneeded. I didn't realize the source didn't properly load, will make sure it is adjusted properly. I figured out how to remove the flag after I posted this, but happy to make any further adjustments to references. When I go to edit references it doesn't give me the option to completely remove any references it only allows me to make edits to the pre-existing ones. I can remove any part of article minus references for some reason, unless I'm doing it wrong or missing something. Nenarodz (talk) 23:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm still mystified, Nenarodz. But perhaps you're using the "visual editor" or even the "app": I've never used either, because (after a rather mystified first ten minutes or so) I've never had trouble with the "source editor". Perhaps somebody accustomed to the "visual editor" will recognize and understand the problem you're facing, and give useful advice. ¶ Youtube references tend to be frowned on, for copyright-related reasons. That doesn't seem to be an issue here. What's likely to be an issue is that this Youtube video is an interview (or similar). A person isn't a disinterested source about herself or what she has done; what Wikipedia wants is commentary about the subject from reliable, disinterested sources. -- Hoary (talk) 23:57, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Nenarodz! So Wikipedia is a little bit tricky here - it got me too when I was starting out - the references are in the body of the article, not the reference section. If you click the little up arrow thing (^) next to the reference you're trying to change/remove, it will take you to the part of the article where the reference is used. You then edit that part of the article, specifically the bit that starts with <ref> (after the sentence the reference is attached to). Does that help at all? StartGrammarTime (talk) 23:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Nenarodz: Regarding, "When I go to edit references it doesn't give me the option to completely remove any references it only allows me to make edits to the pre-existing ones." On the Visual Editor, you'll need to edit the text where the inline citation's superscript callout is located.^{[this bit]} You just delete it like you'd delete text. If you click down in the references section, you can modify a reference but not add, remove, or replace one. It's a software limitation. The ability to modify the references from the reference section was only added last year. It has to do with how and where the references are defined in the wikitext source. The Visual Editor is a lot easier to get started with, but it has a lot of little limitations like this. Feel free to ask questions if that's not clear, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:35, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

How do i get this revision oversighted

It appears to have some personal info in it, and I can't email the oversight team right now due to screen time limits. BombCraft8 (talk) 04:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi BombCraft8. I've requested oversight. There are many methods to contact the OS team listed at WP:RFO. Thank you for noticing and reaching out, but please do not link to oversightable material. The goal is to spread it as little as possible while getting OS attention. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

ok thx

will be sure to remember

i think this is streisand effect but unsure BombCraft8 (talk) 04:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Pretty much. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

List AfC in WikiProject

Following the instructions to add WikiProject tags to a new article draft only seems to add the article's talk page to be tracked in 'Recent changes', but does not list the article in the WikiProject's homepage Articles for creation subheader under article alerts. Is there a way to be automatically added to those lists, or is it done manually? Tule-hog (talk) 04:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tule-hog: It is done automatically by the bot, AAlertBot, but not immediately. Check the pages later today. It looks like they should be updated a little over 2 hours from now. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

i figured it might be a delayed refresh. thanks for linking the bot as well :) Tule-hog (talk) 06:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Citation formatting question

I don't know where to start formatting my citation in the page for SEATO. It's a declassified US military document called United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967: A Study Prepared by the Department of Defense with a subsection NATO AND SEATO: A COMPARISON.

I first found a scan copy on https://nara-media-001.s3.amazonaws.com/arcmedia/research/pentagon-papers/Pentagon-Papers-Part-IV-A-1.pdf, but there is also a text version on WikiSource. Assistance much appreciated and sort of needed. RFNirmala (talk) 05:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Make sure to click 'Ask a question' at the top of the page to start a new topic. You currently have asked a question on an unrelated question above yours! The 'unsubscribe'/'subscribe' button exists for each topic. Tule-hog (talk) 05:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello RFNirmala,

* {{Cite report |url=https://nara-media-001.s3.amazonaws.com/arcmedia/research/pentagon-papers/Pentagon-Papers-Part-IV-A-1.pdf |title=United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967 |publisher=Department of Defense |volume=IV. A. 1. |language=en |quote=it is interesting that Dulles was so concerned with avoiding a public identification of SEATO with NATO that he tried to have the new treaty called 'MANPAC,' for 'Manila Pact.' |quote-page=A-14 |section=NATO and SEATO: A Comparison |section-url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_–_Vietnam_Relations,_1945–1967:_A_Study_Prepared_by_the_Department_of_Defense/IV._A._1._U.S._MAP_for_Diem:_The_Eisenhower_Commitments,_1954–1960}}

Generates:

• "NATO and SEATO: A Comparison". United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967 (PDF) (Report). Vol. IV. A. 1. Department of Defense. p. A-14: it is interesting that Dulles was so concerned with avoiding a public identification of SEATO with NATO that he tried to have the new treaty called 'MANPAC,' for 'Manila Pact.'

Hope that helps. |archive-url= is for online webpage archive services. |section-url= lets you give a second URL to link a |section= within a larger work. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 06:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Already added your citation in the article, also added a new sentence for the quoted information. Thanks for cleaning my new topic mishap! RFNirmala (talk) 06:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Table column header caption

I have added a column to a table, but the column header cell does not take style (background color, font boldness) and is not like the other columns. Please see the table https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raptor_Lake#Raptor%20Lake-U%20Refresh

I added the column "Release date" but it is not bold and the background is not as in the other column headers.

How can I have done that properly?

Can you please do the modification so I could see what you done to know what should I have done? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 17:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Maxim Masiutin. Header cells have ! instead of |.[8] Header cells and normal cells can be anywhere in a table. It's not something automatic for the first row. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! These two characters look very similar and are easy to miss, that's what happened in my case. Thank you for your help. Now I will know. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 11:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Help to fix a declined page

Hello dear editors, I meticulously worked to create a draft of my page but it got deleted. Could anyone please help me fix the issues? I am pasting the link here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dessy_Ocean Sehar Awais (talk) 19:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

If Draft:Dessy Ocean had been deleted, you wouldn't be able to see it. It hasn't been deleted, or even rejected. If the subject is notable, you're welcome to improve the draft and to resubmit it. But I struggle to see any sign of notability. -- Hoary (talk) 20:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

thank you for your feedback.I will try to find some more reliable sources to get it approved Sehar Awais (talk) 12:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Sehar Awais, the draft did not get deleted, but only declined. The reasons are explained at the top of the page: the draft you wrote does not show the subject's notability because it does not contain reliable, independent, secondary sources providing significant coverage of the subject. You can add such sources to the article, if they exist, and then resubmit it.

Have a look at Help:Your first article where all of this is explained in detail, and let me know if you have further questions. Broc (talk) 20:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Strange occurrence

I added a Further reading section, with two books, to Mona Lisa. The two books come out on the same line. Why? Maurice Magnus (talk) 10:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

You forgot to add a "space", fixed. Lectonar (talk) 10:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Maurice Magnus. The normal formatting is a leading asterisk to make a bulleted list.[9] A single newline in wikitext is treated like a space unless there is something else causing a line break in the rendering. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I am actually a long-time editor, and I knew to use an asterisk; I was merely careless in this case. But I didn't know that the asterisk prevented there being a space between the two lines, and I was wondering why there was a space between the two lines. I'm glad to have learned that. Maurice Magnus (talk) 12:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Citation bundle confuses me

Can someone help me bundle the 4 citations in the first sentence of 1st paragraph and 2nd paragraph of the article Ada Wong? I cannot bundle a source that is already used; it's kinda tough. Many thanks. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 12:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Influence operation

Hello. This might be the increase in notoriety (with much of erroneous foreign reporting of a victory for Mélenchon), but, similar to an operation that was active in 2021 to promote Éric Zemmour on French Wikipedia, across all language Wikipedias, there seems to be an effort to describe Jean-Luc Mélenchon and La France Insoumise, sometimes even the entire left-wing alliance New Popular Front, as far or extreme left.

This happens in a context of recent elections, which saw a surprise semi-victory (first place, but no majority) for the center-left to far-left (social-liberal Place Publique to Trotskyist NPA) alliance. The campaign raised an important question: is the party LFI "equal" to far-right National Rally, and is it part of the "republican arc/front"? The answers were divers, with many journals going back on their previous line of labelling it "far-left". The ministry of the interior notably classifies LFI as "left" (instead of "far-left", attributed to Trotskyist formations) since it's founding, and National Rally as "far-right" (these classifications happen notably for "purposes of political analysis"). Therefore labeling any of these entities "far-left" exclusively isn't really a possibility. Many experienced users have supported the far-left label, especially on English Wikipedia, however the additions and changes were often made by new users. This is happening on English Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, Spanish Wikipedia, notably, as well marginally on Italian Wikipedia (and more, these are the ones I realized).

How do I proceed, or could an experienced user proceed in my place? 80.209.216.81 (talk) 15:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Taking a look at the edit history of Jean-Luc Mélenchon, there seems to be an ongoing discussion in the talk page. Either way, many other editors are currently aware of this and are reverting edits. guninvalid (talk) 17:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

How is anyone aware of this? I didn't see any discussions on this. In any case, this seems to be a concerted effort, though weirdly French Wikipedia is left out currently. 80.209.216.81 (talk) 11:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

How is anyone aware of this? Most articles about genuinely important subjects are on the Watchlists of many editors, who are alerted every time the article is edited, prompting them to check the validity of the edits. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.82.201 (talk) 18:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I guess? Reassuring? Not really. Let's hope this will resolve itself alone. I've never heard of 87.81 etc. 80.209.216.81 (talk) 23:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

The Zemmour-related influence effort was not across all Wikipedias afaik, but mainly at fr-wiki and en-wiki, and a bit at it-wiki. See details at WikiProject France. If you know of any other aspects of the WikiZedia controversy, please let me know. Mathglot (talk) 08:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello to all.

I just had a look to this article New Popular Front and it seems that a lot of positive work has been done. Especially, the translation are often excellent and the drawbacks of the French article have not been replicated here. Ex: unsourced list of political measures, long list of supporters, etc. If there was an influence, it would be in the French article, during the first week after the dissolution, with a pro-NFP bias. Concerning the left-wing or far-left discussion, this is on French pages an ongoing discussion between seasoned contributors. This is linked to Mélenchon himself or to the name of its party ("France insoumise") and there isn't anything new about it.

As you know, Wikizedia was about paid contributions, in favor of Zemmour's party. There's no proof that NFP or LFI has practised paid contributions on their side.

Please note that the French admins on last February have banned a contributor which could be linked to "Cheep". This contributor was also active on Joe Biden french page. A strange activity (imho) remains on that page [10]. You are welcome to watch this. Xavier Sylvestre (talk) 13:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Old version of Teahouse content

An hour or so ago, I was viewing this page on my smartphone (Android, Chrome, configured to use desktop format), and noticed that all the postings were from February 2024. Now I'm back home using a computer, it's back to normal. I'd assume I'd been dreaming, but it's still like that on my smartphone – correct URL, February content. How can this happen? Maproom (talk) 11:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom: What does it say at "This page was last edited on" at the bottom of the window? Is it possible the smartphone cached the page in February and you just have to reload the page? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, have you tried bypassing your cache? Broc (talk) 12:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

It said "Last updated 24 February 2024". I'm sure I've read it on my smartphone mre recently than that. Anyway, I went from the Teahouse to another page, then to the Teahouse again, and it was fixed. It seems harmless, I'll stop worrying about it. Maproom (talk) 14:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Help with substitution template Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of permanent Ambisonic playback systems

I have no idea what is going on, but the substitution on this page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of permanent Ambisonic playback systems is not actually creating the discussion page. Can someone please assist? VViking_TalkEdits 14:13, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Victor Schmidt mobil for helping with this.--VViking_TalkEdits 14:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Viewmont Viking. In case it wasn't clear from the diff [11], [[WP:PROMOTION|a means of promotion]] was missing the ending ]]. A transclusion would also have failed. When the code of a template call is displayed instead of the output, the reason is usually a missing ]] or }} somewhere. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

serious {trout}

I am wondering if there is a standard template similar to

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

except it is to be taken seriously - preferably with a modifiable message. That is, a template for an important critique (but maintaining a little levity). Tule-hog (talk) 01:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

The lower half of Template:Like/doc has a dizzying number of templates; see also Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace and Wikipedia:Template index/Talk namespace. -- Hoary (talk) 01:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Perfect! Thanks for all the links. {{subst:uw:minor}} was exactly what I was looking for. Tule-hog (talk) 01:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tule-hog: If you use Twinkle, it has a number of standardised templates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect Word Origin Help

Hi there! I need help with the Wikipedia page for the Tanawha Trail. I edited out this line:

"Tanawha, the Cherokee word for fabulous hawk or eagle is an appropriate name for this trail that offers hikers views of distant mountains."

It has since been reinstated. Tanawha is not a Cherokee word. Eagle is ᎤᏬᎭᎵ (uwohali.) Hawk is ᏔᏬᏗ (tawodi.) It's likely the person who wrote this got it from the National Park Service page about the trail, which is also wrong. The NPS person in charge of info about the Blue Ridge Parkway area is checking into it also. Now, this error may have originated with the NPS site, it shouldn't be perpetuated on Wikipedia. If you look at the page for Tanawha, Queensland, the word is sourced as a Maori word for a water guardian. That is the correct origin of the word.

I tried posting this on the Talk page, and also on the talk page of the user who reinstated the sentence, but I haven't gotten any responses. I'm new to the "backstage" area of Wikipedia, so I'm not sure where to go from here. What's next? Lostcheerio (talk) 15:11, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. If the sources provided in an article are in error, you will need to provide more current sources that provide better information, as well as address that with the existing sources(as you already are working on in this case). You should discuss this on the article talk page with other editors to decide how best to change the article. 331dot (talk) 15:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I did post on the article's Talk page, ten days ago. The person who reinstated the incorrect information did so within 24 hours, but so far no response from him on the follow-up. As I understand the rules, it's the responsibility of the person who reinstates the false information to provide sources to back up that decision. Lostcheerio (talk) 15:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Lostcheerio, the source seems to be unverifiable, so I've removed and pinged the other editor to the talk. Valereee (talk) 16:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

That article reads like a brochure guide to the trail. In fact, there seems to be just one source, the US NPS brochure guide to the trail. My guess is, it more or less repeats the brochure. Yes, US Government, so in the public domain. But it's a brochure guide text, not an encyclopedia article. Uporządnicki (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it's basically a copy of the brochure, which is public domain and noted as such in the edit summary for the creation. It could use a copyedit for encyclopedic language. Valereee (talk) 17:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

OK, you agree, then, that there isn't a copyright concern--as I noted. It's still a travel brochure and hiking guide rather than an encyclopedia article. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:09, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Yep. That's why it needs a copyedit. Valereee (talk) 18:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Valereee. Lostcheerio (talk) 17:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Policy on Doping? Neutrality/due weight.

I got two questions. If a swimmer hasn't been found guilty of doping. And Wada has stated that the swimmer is not found guilty of doping. Is it okay to name and shame and make an entire chapter dedicated to claiming that the swimmer is supposedly guilty and claiming they tested positive to doping despite nobody claims that? I think that's just libel to claim they are guilty of doping when Wada has not labelled them as guilty. It's undue and libel do I removed it. I also want to start a new talk discussion (on this topic) on this swimmer's page [12] but have no clue how to do that. Can you help me? 49.186.109.79 (talk) 17:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

ZenChen0, is there a reason you added this information to this article? Valereee (talk) 18:03, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

IP 49, I started a talk page section, and you should be able to use the reply button to respond. Since this is a relatively public venue, I'll say that ZenChen0's version is not definitely "libel", though this is a WP:BLP-sensitive matter and experienced voices would be welcome. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

What can I do better to add my company to Wikipedia?

• snipped* at User:GGCOMM/sandbox

Hello GGCOMM, try having a read of WP:BOSS. That should give you all the info you need. -- D'n'B-t -- 15:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Your account now blocked for multiple reasons. Follow the process for appealing your block. David notMD (talk) 21:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Possible misuse of the "citation needed" tag?

In the article Libya–Vietnam relations, an IP user made a claim: "Currently, the relations between Libya and Vietnam is relatively warm, and There [sic] is a good cooperation between the current Libyan transitional government and the Vietnamese government in various political and economic fields."

They then added the citation needed tag to their own statement. Is this allowed? I don't think the information page makes it clear. Cheers. LucasR muteacc (talk) 23:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I'd just delete it, with the comment "Unreferenced addition" or similar. Additional problems: "Currently" becomes meaningless (if it isn't already); "relations" is plural; "relatively" relative to which bilateral relations (or to the same bilateral relations at what time)? -- Hoary (talk) 00:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Put my edit back.

Dear Wikipedia Adminstrators,

Hello Teahouse community, I recently made an edit to the Bottlenose Dolphin Anatomy article, intending to enhance the comprehensive coverage of the dolphin's anatomy. I added information about various anatomical features such as the dorsal fin, fluke, belly, melon, blowhole, eye, beak, and median notch, supported by reliable sources. However, my edit was reverted, and I'm seeking guidance on how to proceed. Could someone please review my edit and provide feedback on why it might have been reverted? I want to ensure my contributions align with Wikipedia's guidelines and improve the article effectively. Thank you for your assistance! —Moosebag10 (chatter) 20:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Have you tried either posting on the article's talk page, or leaving a message on the talk page of the person who reverted you, asking why? DS (talk) 20:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh, and just so you know - this - is not acceptable. DS (talk) 20:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Moosebag10 Looking at the edit summary you put, "Leave this darn text here, add citations to it by time.", and the edit itself I can tell you right now that that's not going to be allowed on the page.

The burden of providing citations is on you, not on everyone else. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 20:13, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Moosebag10, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is exactly how disagreements between editors are supposed to be resolved: you Boldly make a change, somebody Reverts your change, and then you Discuss the issue on the talk page, and try to reach consensus: see WP:BRD.

Without looking in detail at your edit, I see that you added a significant amount of information , with no citations. That is probably why @Helpful Raccoon reverted it. ColinFine (talk) 20:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) This is the exact reason why I also reverted Moosebag10's edit to the article, as I explained on their user talk page immediately afterwards. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

There is a source. Not a vexillological false edit.

Urs Truly and Please,

—Moosebag10 (chatter) 20:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Please put the thing back.

URS TRULY AND ONE MORE TIME I AM TYING YOU ON A PIÑATA,

—Moosebag10 (chatter) 20:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Now you made me angry… Moosebag10.exe (die) 20:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I understand there may be concerns regarding his contributions. I want to clarify that He used AI tools like ChatGPT to assist in drafting content, with the intent of enhancing the Bottlenose Dolphin article. He apologized if there has been any confusion or upset caused by this.

He values the input and expertise of the Wikipedia community and am committed to adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. He kindly request a respectful dialogue to address any concerns and work together to improve the article collaboratively.

Thank you for your understanding. Moosebag10.helper (help him) 20:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello again, Moosebag10. I don't know what vexillology has to do with it. Nobody is arguing about whether the content you added is correct or not: that is not the point. All information in a Wikipedia article must be available in a reliable published source; and while the rules do not insist that everything actually be cited, if it is not, other editors are entitled to remove it.

The information you added is still there in the article's history. You are welcome to restore it as long as you cite a reliable source for it.

In any case, I would always advise adding information in smaller chunks than you did.

I get that you are frustrated. I'm afraid that that is what often happens when people attempt major edits to Wikipedia articles without first understanding Wikipedia's requirements. Please take the feedback you are getting as intended to help you understand how we work. ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Dear ColinFine,

Thank you for your message and for clarifying the expectations regarding sourcing and editing on Wikipedia. I appreciate your guidance on ensuring all information is supported by reliable sources.

I apologize for any confusion or frustration caused by my recent edits. I understand the importance of adhering to Wikipedia's policies and will take your advice to heart moving forward. I will ensure that any restored content is properly sourced from reliable published sources.

If you have any further suggestions or specific guidelines for adding information in smaller chunks, I would appreciate your advice.

Thank you again for your help and understanding.

Best regards,

—Moosebag10 (chatter) 20:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I have temporarily blocked Moosebag10 for disruptive editing. I advise the editor to stop using ChatGPT or similar software to compose their replies. We need to hear from the human being, not a robot. Cullen328 (talk) 21:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Sounds about right. I put this in the "using AI in the WP-context is probably evil" category. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:03, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Please don't use ChatGPT when you talk to people on WP either. It doesn't help. When you write in WP-articles, animals are not "captivating" or "physiological marvels"[13]. If that's how you want to write, or copypaste ChatGPT-stuff, do it somewhere else. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 02:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Old problems of WP:3TOPE table

The problem of WP:3TOPE table gives incorrect number of polyhedral articles, and it does not work when trying to center align nor break using code <br>. Is there any way to include it in WikiWork factors, or WikiProject 1.0, or whatever the name is? Dedhert.Jr (talk) 02:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Underwater wrecks from WW2

I am a scuba diver diving closed circuit rebreather and my passion is diving wrecks from the first and second world wars. i am in my 70's so i no longer dive cold water. i just returned this year from a trip to Bikini atoll where i dove a few of the wrecks sunk during operation crossroad with the nuclear explosions of "Able" and "Baker" respectively one bomb in air and one underwater. this was for the benefit of the US navy to test the damage these weapons could be capable of on ships.

I do underwater videos on these wrecks for my own pleasure and post them on YouTube for all to enjoy. I often run into situations where information on the vessels is lacking. today i am looking for information on propulsion of the USS Lamson DD destroyer. What type engine: electric/boiler/turbine/steam, fuel type, power generated, etc....most times i can pretty much find the answer on Wikipedia or when i dive and see the boiler and the turbine, although other times it may be too risky to penetrate deep into the wreck especially machine rooms on old wrecks where everything was built tight.

if you can help me with this, id be glad to help with something else if i can. Thank you very much.

Ddafg (talk) 03:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Ddafg, the editors at WP:RD/M might be able to find the answer to your question. -- asilvering (talk) 05:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

User warnings

Hello! I've been going back and reviewing all the recent changes, and reverting the vandalism that hasn't been reverted yet. I have wondered, what is the threshold in which the vandalism goes "stale" and warnings are not necessary anymore? Cyclonical (talk) 02:26, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Cyclonical, thanks for doing that work! I am assuming you have read Wikipedia:Vandalism#How_to_respond_to_vandalism, but it doesn't really explain what to do with stale vandalism. I think it is a judgement call. Do you think it is likely they will vandalise again? If it has been a few days, IP addresses can change so no point in warning them. If it is a registered account, will they benefit from a note about the revert? Maybe it was a test and they need help. Will a passing user/admin find the warning a useful tip off? Lots to consider, but use your common sense. Commander Keane (talk) 06:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I mostly refrain from warning the user if the vandalism is more than a day old and that they haven't made such edits since then. By that time, they could have reconsidered their life choices and moved on, or in rare cases become a constructive editor. Thank you for your help! Cyclonical (talk) 06:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Renaming an RCB

Hello fellow Wikipedians. I’m a new participant in WikiProject Perth. One of the railway lines, the Yanchep line has been recently renamed (from the ‘Joondalup line’). None of the railway stations that I have checked (an example being this) have an updated RCB. Does anyone know how to move the template name from Joondalup Line to Yanchep Line, or alternatively another easier solution? Thanks in advance. TigerTask3 (talk) 02:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@TigerTask3: I used to take the Joondalup line back in the day! That is a pretty tough question for this desk, you are talking about {{rcb}}. @Steelkamp: may know, you could ask on the most relvant WikiProject, or wait for a response here. I will try to take a look, but it could be too complicated for me to fix. Commander Keane (talk) 06:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@TigerTask3: The data seems to lie in Module:Adjacent stations/Transperth but it is too risky for me to change. We need backup! I am sure someone is working on it, just not sure who. Commander Keane (talk) 06:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

And it's fixed. Commander Keane (talk) 08:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

help regarding publishing a page

Hello, I made an wikipedia article and I want to publish it ( I tried two times without any problems but they were declined because of writing style), when I click "publish changes" it says: "No stashed content found for 1233814434/10cc3dcf-3f23-11ef-8b3d-01e0acf07608"- what should I do? I really need your help. this is a link of my page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:EUt%2B&action=edit&section=1 Tamar Chkhartishvili (talk) 07:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tamar Chkhartishvili Your problem is one I am unable to reproduce. Please proceed with your editing 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I am really confused, I tried everything. Tamar Chkhartishvili (talk) 07:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

What do you mean to proceed with my editing? Should I make a new page and copy my material there? Tamar Chkhartishvili (talk) 08:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

the problem is your end, I suggest you clear your browser's cache and try again. Theroadislong (talk) 08:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

That error messages usually means you have left the edit window open for too long. Go to Draft:EUt+ and start again, saving (i.e. publishing) your work at least once every 20 minutes. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

A lot users don't follow the WP:TVSPLIT guideline which causes problem creating episode list in new page?

I know some users saying that episode list in new page should have more than 50 episodes to have a new page based on the articles. But I have seen 24 episodes into new page and sometimes they separate the episode list into two pages with only 12 episodes per page which goes against WP:TVSPLIT guideline. Do they know this guideline. Anime9000 (talk) 10:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Anime9000, welcome to the Teahouse. {{Episode table}} is used in 20,000 pages with probably thousands of editors. You will have to be more specific. Some users don't know or follow a given guideline, and it's a guideline and not a policy so they may have valid arguments. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

There is anime that has 24 episodes in the main article but someone wants to create a new article that will have the 24 episodes and remove the episode table from main article to new page which goes against WP:TVSPLIT guideline. Some users think guidelines are policies. Do you think most users are using WP:IAR even though they don't mention it. Anime9000 (talk) 10:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Anime9000, people who know a lot can choose to ignore guidelines since guidelines are for the general case and sometimes not following them could be the better option. On the other hand, people who don't know much at all are likely to not know many guidelines. Finally, it's possible for even the most knowledgeable editor to have missed any particular guideline or policy completely, since there's a whole lot of them and no one sets out to learn every one of them in an organised manner. Ultimately guidelines are not hard rules. If you are not sure what to do, look up and follow the guidelines. Otherwise, defer to WP:CONSENSUS. Sometimes, that means everyone will agree to not follow a guideline. Sometimes, all you have to do is inform them about the guidelines they're violating and they'll immediately agree to stop. And so on. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Add and remove page protection

How can I add and remove page protection in wikipedia articles? Richie1509 (talk) 12:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Richie1509, welcome to the Teahouse! That functionality is restricted to administrators, but you can request protection or unprotection by visiting WP:RFPP; be sure to read the instructions at the top of that page for more information. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 12:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

OK, thanks Richie1509 (talk) 12:57, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Redundant content fork, I think

I found two Category pages that are basically the same thing (list of different breeds of shepherd dogs). I searched and searched and can't figure out for the life of me how to go about either fixing it or submitting it somewhere for someone's attention. So here I am.

The Category pages in question: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategoria:Psy_pasterskie https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategoria:Owczarki FuturSimple (talk) 12:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

We can't tell you anything about Polish Wikipedia, as that is an entirely separate project. I suggest you ask at pl:Pomoc:Pytania nowicjuszy.

However, I can tell you that articles are placed in categories by editing the articles, not the category, so you would need to edit the various articles. ColinFine (talk) 13:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi FuturSimple, welcome to the Teahuse. I don't know Polish but they appear to be part of different category trees for Dog types and Dog breeds. There can be large overlaps. But as ColinFine says, this is not a question for the English Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Help regarding templates and userboxes

Hi, I need some help regarding templates and userboxes:

Basically, I want to convert this

This user participates in
WikiProject Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

into this

This user participates in
WikiProject Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

(I want both of them to look the same, the former one doesn't match other userboxes in the same category)

I want to make minor changes/fixes to the WikiProject Khyber Pakhtunkhwa template but I need a hint in the right direction.

Thank you for reading, I'd greatly appreciate any help. ExoField (talk) 14:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @ExoField, have you checked Wikipedia:Userboxes? There are some instructions there. Broc (talk) 15:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I've read and understood it, but something seems wrong with this specific instance, I think someone has modified the template and I can't find the modification (I've been at it for hours). ExoField (talk) 17:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

This is the original template, where everything starts: Template:User Khyber Pakhtunkhwa/doc1. Now I cannot figure out what changed between Template:User Khyber Pakhtunkhwa/doc1 and Template:User WP Khyber Pakhtunkhwa/doc ExoField (talk) 17:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I have figured it out, thank you. ExoField (talk) 18:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

How to deal with problematic actions by user?

Sai Baba of Shirdi seems to get a lot of attention from user(s) intending to reinsert a few hagiographical-looking paragraphs that were first unsourced, then after some administrator intervention, were readded with unreliable primary sources. This user keeps reinserting the paragraphs between multiple other users removing them. I don't know a lot about how to report this kind of behavior or where to go - does this count as 3RR on that user's part? I don't want to point it to the wrong place or put a warning on their talk page for the wrong reason. Thank you. Crystalespeon (talk) 16:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Crystalespeon the reverts are quite spaced apart, so WP:3RR does not apply (3 reverts within 24 hours). I would suggest starting a discussion in talk page and strongly recommending the involved editors to discuss there before reverting again. Broc (talk) 16:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll try that. Crystalespeon (talk) 19:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Remove a redirect

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hi - I'm trying to create a separate Wiki page for Elitechrome, a brand of Kodak 35mm film. At present there is a redirect from Ektachrome so I can't just set up Elitechrome as it's own product page (it is a separate product). So any time I search for Elitechrome it just redirects to Ektachrome. How do I remove the redirect so that I can write a new page and put some pictures up for Elitechrome? Thanks. SnarkyDragon (talk) 06:44, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @SnarkyDragon, when you open the page Elitechrome you will be redirected as you mentioned, but a notice will appear at the top of the page:

(Redirected from Elitechrome)

Click on the link and you will be sent to the origin of the redirect, which you can then edit.

Before editing, please make sure the product fulfills the notability requirements for products. Broc (talk) 06:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Broc - I got as far as that but couldn't see where the redirect was in the source - the words Elite Chrome don't seem to have any code next to them. SnarkyDragon (talk) 06:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Replace the text "#REDIRECT [[Ektachrome]]" with your new article. Meters (talk) 06:57, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks v much! SnarkyDragon (talk) 06:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Ah no I've tried and failed. May have to give up on this one and just edit the main Ektachrome page with details of Elitechrome. Trying to remove or bypass the redirect has me stumped. SnarkyDragon (talk) 07:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello SnarkyDragon, and welcome to the Teahouse. What you are trying to do is precisely to create a new article, which is a very challenging task - the fact that the page already exists as a redirect does not change that. I would very strongly advise that, as a newish editor, you do not attempt to create the article in the existing redirect page,but create a draft and submit it in the normal way.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 09:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I do understand that but it still doesn’t allow me to create a new article as the title I want to create is linked as a redirect so I can’t physically create a new article and I don’t want to waste the time and energy drafting something only to find I can’t actually create a page because nobody has explained how to remove the redirect. SnarkyDragon (talk) 09:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

And I am very strongly advising you not to attempt to create a new article at this stage without going through the WP:AFC drafting process. If you use that, you won't have to worry about the redirect, because the reviewer who accepts the draft will sort out the redirect.

The "waste of time" that you are imagining is a chimera - the existence of a redirection will not affect the creation of an article about Elitechrome. But the waste of time - yours and others' - in try to write an article when you have not (as far as we can tell) found the sources essential to establish that Elitechrome meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability may be significant.

If you have already found those sources, it may be a different matter: I would still advise a relatively new editor such as yourself to use AFC. But you could try going ahead and editing the redirect. ColinFine (talk) 10:42, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

You have a bizarre attitude.

My original comment was around redirects and barriers to creating a new article.

Now you're saying that if I don't do things in a certain way it's a waste of my time and others time. You mention about a WP:AFC drafting process in your latest comment, but not in your earlier comment (and nobody else commenting mentions this process) - so how exactly am I supposed to contribute to Wikipedia if the mods are gatekeepers and don't actually answer things specifically or in an accessible way?

Do please show me where I have written that I won't do anything in a way that's advised? But yes you dive straight in and tell me I'm wasting my and others time? I mean if that's the attitude of Wiki then literally why should I bother?

I do object to people acting high and mighty when I am asking simple questions about processes which could have been answered very simply and in a more accessible and less high and mighty way. SnarkyDragon (talk) 10:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Also Colin - 'you have not (as far as we can tell) found the sources essential to establish that Elitechrome meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability may be significant'

I was not aware that not providing evidence for an article I am considering writing constitutes evidence not existing? Also, who exactly is 'we'? And why does my original question not matter? You're bothered about 'evidence' and fixated on that rather than just answering my actual question. Why?

Are you now saying that when I have an idea for an article I need to produce a dossier of evidence to appease you (why you?) and prove that I am not wasting time?

What you're doing is acting in an extremely toxic way and I don't particularly understand why.

What is wrong with just answering the question I asked and trusting that maybe (just maybe) There IS a separate product which someone had considered writing about to improve knowledge on a subject.

https://www.kodak.com/global/plugins/acrobat/en/consumer/products/techInfo/e7014/e7014.pdf SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon I don't see any edits to the redirect page. If you are using the Visual Editor, a pop-up will appear when you click "edit", you just need to deselect "Redirect this page to..." and press "Apply changes". If you are using the source code editor, as Meters suggested above, you only need to remove the text #REDIRECT [[Ektachrome]]. Broc (talk) 09:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

That’s because I haven’t made any yet, I don’t want to invest time and energy only to not be able to actually create the page I want to. SnarkyDragon (talk) 09:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon You can create a draft (by using the Wikipedia:Article wizard for instance), then a page mover will be able to replace the redirect with your draft at a later point. Replacing a redirect is a routine procedure so don't let it be an obstacle to your contribution. Broc (talk) 09:53, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Ah ok - so are page movers actual human mods or wiki automated processes? And how do I flag that I’ve made a draft and it’s ready for review? Thanks SnarkyDragon (talk) 09:57, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon Yes to your first question. As for the review process: you will find a button "Submit draft for review" on the draft page you create via the article wizard. An experienced editor will then review it and, if it fulfills verifiability and notability criteria, will move it to mainspace. Broc (talk) 10:56, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions but now with Colins response I have a deeper understanding of the type of people who run and moderate Wikipedia and I'm not sure I want to invest any more of my time or energy - I'll be picking this up elsewhere. SnarkyDragon (talk) 10:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon for what it's worth, neither ColinFine nor I "run and moderate Wikipedia". There is no such thing as a moderator here. There is a community who built policies using consensus, and there are a few elected members, called administrators, who usually take responsibility of interpreting the outcome of discussions and implementing it (they can block users, delete pages, etc.).

ColinFine's suggestion was simple: creating a new, well written article is difficult. That's why we have the WP:AFC (Articles for Creation) process, where you can take the time to edit a draft article, get feedback from reviewers, and only get the article published once it's ready. This way, you can take all the time you need, and readers of the encyclopedia will get to enjoy a good article. The AFC process was devised to help new editors with drafting their very first article, and I agree with the recommendation of using it.

If you think writing a new article is a difficult task you are not yet ready to take on, Wikipedia:Task Center has many simpler, but not less useful, tasks that can also be performed by inexperienced users. Broc (talk) 11:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Please read my comment and you may have some understanding as to why I viewed Colins comment as purely and simply toxic - and there are some outstanding questions I have asked in my comment relating to that toxicity. SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:17, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

And I wish to write an article - I wish not to be gaslighted into being told I cannot. I thought that the Teahouse was somewhere supportive but clearly it is not and I am now gaining an understanding of the gatekeeping and control of knowledge on wikipedia. SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon I'm pinging ColinFine just to make sure he reads the discussion.

I'd like to mention that Teahouse hosts are only here to help new users in good faith. We don't want to discourage new users, so I'm sorry if you felt that way! That being said, I don't see any personal attack in ColinFine's message, only a suggestion to use a process (WP:AFC) that, as I said already, was meant to help new users in drafting their first article.

So please, if you do wish to write an article, go ahead and start a draft! Feel free to drop me a message if you ever have any questions: I am a new page reviewer, so I can provide you with some guidance on what we are looking for in new articles.

If you want to learn more on Wikipedia's guidelines on writing articles, you can also read Help:Your first article. Broc (talk) 11:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I’ve also emailed various stakeholders about this, I’m not a child and will not be treated as such. SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Colin’s message was toxic and I require an answer to each and every point that I have reasonably made in my reply to him. He needs to be accountable and answer fully especially the questions I have posed asking ‘why’. SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:29, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a volunteer service, nobody is "required" to answer you. We are all spending our time to help other editors as much and as far as we decide to, with no further obligations. Broc (talk) 11:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

And I can say the same about trying to contribute when people aren't especially helpful - all I ultimately wanted was to contribute to Wikipedia and wanted some advice on that. SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I think I gave abundant support in my messages above. If you decide to contribute (and I hope you will), you are more than welcome to reach out for guidance.

Fighting with fellow editors, on the other hand, will not be constructive for anyone and it will certainly not help improve the encyclopedia. Broc (talk) 11:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm not trying to fight at all - but it was reasonable to ask for justification why I was being spoken to like that - there were some exceptionally unhelpful things said to me. Yes, you did give support and for that I am thankful. SnarkyDragon (talk) 12:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

SnarkyDragon, I'm sorry if I came over as toxic: that was not at all my intention.

My intention was to warn you against a path which my experience of helping hundreds of new editors tells me is likely to result in pain and frustration, both for those new editors and sometimes for those who try to help them.

I certainly did not intend to dissuade you from contributing, and I'm sorry if I came over that way. ColinFine (talk) 12:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon: I don't think this explicitly came up yet, but articles that don't cite sources meeting Wikipedia's notability guidelines are deleted. I think this is something understood by active editors but confusing for new editors. If you start out by editing Ektachrome, you can gather the sources for your new article in the process. There's no technical problem with converting a redirect into an article; it happens all the time. Feel free to reach out if you have questions, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks SnarkyDragon (talk) 05:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

back to the original question

SnarkyDragon, this seems to have gone astray from your original help request, so let's see if we can do a reset to get it back on track. Broc's original explanation at the top (@ 06:44) is the way I always do it also, but if that doesn't work for you, the click this link and it will take you to the redirect page. You are welcome to edit it and change it into an article, but that's an involved procedure even for a very short article, and your idea of expanding the section about it at Ektachrome is a better (and easier) idea. I would go that route for starters. Once that section hits critical mass—which is around a couple of paragraphs and a minimum of three very solid citations to reliable, independent, secondary sources—then come back here and ask about how to spin off an article section into a new article. "Reliable" in the Wikipedia sense means a lot of things, but no blogs or social media or sketchy websites for starters; a book chapter or an article in a reputable magazine like Popular Photography devoted to it would be a good start. "Independent" means mostly not from Kodak websites, but follow the link for more detail. Do you need help finding reliable sources, or writing citations, or do you know how to do that already? Help:Referencing for beginners might help for the latter. Mathglot (talk) 19:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, that is very helpful and I will have a think SnarkyDragon (talk) 04:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I’ve decided to give up with wiki. See my other comments. I can’t be bothered with the toxicity. But thank you for commenting. SnarkyDragon (talk) 19:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello - I just ran into this problem for my Patch management draft. There is already an existing redirect at Patch management. Luckily you can just follow the steps at Article wizard using your intended article name as Broc suggested, and automated software (/admins?) will take care of the redirect page once your article is accepted. Tule-hog (talk) 01:13, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you SnarkyDragon (talk) 04:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I’ve decided to give up with wiki after your admin Michael has behaved in a toxic way and reverted another article as retribution for calling this behaviour out. I have contacted the wiki team but doubt they will do anything. It is clear that wiki only wants to work with it’s closed network and not encourage new people to edit for free in their own time and provide true content. SnarkyDragon (talk) 19:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

SnarkyDragon, thats fine, and you are of course free to give up on Wikipedia if that is your choice, but I am trying to follow your reasoning, and I wasn't able to. Help me out, here: there are no edits to Elitechrome or Ektachrome since your first post here, nobody named Michael has posted in this thread afaict, and we don't have an admin named Michael. (There is a user account for a "Michael", but they were banned in 2003.) I see no reverts to any of your edits since this one on June 26. So, who is Michael? Mathglot (talk) 20:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I have literally screenshotted David NotMD saying in his edit that unreferenced facts has been removed, yet he actually deleted everything including my references which had been present! How is that reasonable/ethical/defensible?

The Michael is Michael D.Turnbull who literally admitted that I was responded to based on my username and has not at all addressed the issues of toxicity on wiki which I have raised - here is a link to an article which resonates with me more having actually experienced the behaviours/tactics here.

https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/2/12/pgad385/7457939 SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bringing an article to FA (or at least GA) status

I am trying to bring Algeria, which is a B-class Vital Article, to GA status. How would I do that? First of all, what type of edits should I do to increase the article's level? Secondly, how would I request the article to be reviewed so that someone can see if it should be a GA? I would really appreciate an answer. Also, how much time would it take to improve the quality of the article, and would I need to add even more references too? Apollogetticax|^talk 19:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Apollogetticax: Welcome to the Teahouse! Have you already reviewed examples of what GA- and FA-class articles look like? In my opinion, that's the best place to start if you want to understand the quality and depth needed at each of those levels. In addition, I'll direct your attention to the criteria for good articles and featured articles. Once you have a good grasp of these through some examples, you can take a look at the process for nominating a good article. I hope this helps a bit! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Apollogetticax, you could start by searching on page for citation needed, reading the unsourced content in the article preceding those notices, finding at least one reliable source for the content, writing a citation that verifies the content, and adding the citation to the article in place of the cn notices. Mathglot (talk) 01:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

You might also check the existing references for Algeria to confirm still functional and are in support of the text the refs are supposed to be verifying. After you nominate the article for a GA review, in time (which sadly, could be months), a GA reviewer will identify everything that in their experienced opinion, is not good enough. You are then responsible for fixing everything. I have spent many hours improving an article before submitting, and then many hours responding to the reviewer. David notMD (talk) 02:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

P.S. Content in the Lead (the initial four paragraphs) does not need to be referenced there as long as content in the Lead is elaborated upon in the body of the article and referenced there. David notMD (talk) 02:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Need help improving Biography for Henry Beach Needham

Hi, I posted my first bio Draft:Henry Beach Needham and it said it would take 4 months to publish. I would like help with edits and approval. It is for muckraking investigative journalist, Henry Beach Needham. Logger67 (talk) 00:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Er, not quite, Logger67. You're told that it may take four months or longer merely to be reviewed (whereupon it will be accepted, declined or rejected). But underline the "may" within that. I've a hunch that it will be gratefully accepted, and that the process will take very much less than four months. In the meantime, a note:

• "Charivari" is an odd word. -- OK.
• Charivari is an odd word. -- OK.
• "Charivari" is an odd word. -- Strange: italicizing shouldn't merely duplicate quotation marks (or vice versa).

I suggest that you deitalicize the numerous long quotations. (Of course, newspaper titles and the like constituting mere parts of those quotations can remain italicized.) HTH. -- Hoary (talk) 01:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

The backlog of drafts is not a queue, so could be days, weeks, or (sadly) months before it is reviewed. David notMD (talk) 01:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I updated the page and in the actual citations for the parts of the article that I cited, I removed the "italics" and just made it italics. I wasn't able to figure out how to remove the Find a Grave citation from the main reference list. I did remove [better source] citations in the text body by deleting them - was a little confused there. Thanks again for the help and info. Logger67 (talk) 02:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Hierarchy of Reasons for Declining an Article

Hello!

My article was declined for insufficient references which is understandable, and I will be working on improving the draft. However, I wanted to make sure there weren't other changes to take into consideration. There are multiple criterion for whether a Wikipedia is worth publishing- sufficient references, notability, etc. If my page were not notable enough, would that be the first listed reason for declining? Would other reasons for declining be noted if they existed? Thank you! Proudcatmom (talk) 17:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello Proudcatmom. Volunteer Articles for Creation reviewers are extremely busy and there is a big backlog. Accordingly, it is understandable that they give the most obvious reason of what may be many reasons for declining a draft. Vast swathes of your draft are unreferenced, violating the core content policy Verifiability, which is glaringly obvious to any reviewer in a few seconds. But even if you add a lot more references, your draft is overtly promotional, which violates another core content policy, the Neutral point of view. Promotional content is forbidden on Wikipedia. Onto another matter, I see that you are a paid editor. Wikipedia is a volunteer run project, and many volunteers have long years of experience. I have been editing regularly for 15 years. Paid editors are permitted to contribute, with restrictions, but it is expected that they are fully conversant with our policies and guidelines, and create excellent, policy compliant work. Please do not submit any more poorly referenced promotional content. It wastes the precious time of unpaid volunteers. Cullen328 (talk) 18:26, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your swift and harsh feedback. It is not my intention to waste anyone's time. I am a human learning something new. This project happens to be a paid edit, but I do believe Leslie to be a notable figure in the Climate Psychology discipline. Obviously, there are many issues with the article which I intend to fix in future drafts and make it worthy of Wikipedia's standards. Thank you again for your time. Proudcatmom (talk) 18:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Proudcatmom: for technical reasons, an AfC reviewer can decline a draft for only 1-2 reasons. Sometimes there are 5+ possible reasons, but one must choose two (and, as Cullen328 said, one can choose any two). If those issues are subsequently resolved, and the draft is resubmitted, it may then be declined for entirely different reasons. At that point we sometimes get authors asking "why are you moving the goalposts", or words to that effect. We're not, we're just saying that there are still reasons to decline the draft, even if they're different from the previous set of reasons. And no, there is no fixed 'hierarchy' for declining, some reviewers pick the most fundamental reason; others, the one they first ascertain. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

This makes a lot of sense. Thank you very much for further clarification. Proudcatmom (talk) 19:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I see that you made six edits to articles before you created your draft - and in two cases, added a reference: well done, that is more than many new editors do before they leap into reating an carticle. But how far do you understand Wikipedia's core principles?

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.

I realise that if you are being paid to create an article, you may be unwilling to do this. However, given that writing for Wikipedia is different from almost all other kinds of writing, why would you expect to be able to take on this task without taking appropriate training ColinFine (talk) 20:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

This is really good advice, thank you. I should have taken much more time to learn the ins and outs of Wikipedia before attempting to make this article. During this process, I found I really enjoy contributing and will continue to do so outside of the project I am paid for, but I made many mistakes that could have been avoided had I not rushed. I am taking all this feedback to heart. Big fumble today, but I go on. Proudcatmom (talk) 21:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Proudcatmom, welcome to Wikipedia! You're already much further along than many paid editors - you're willing to listen to feedback and learn about Wikipedia rather than just trying to ram your draft through. That's a fantastic start. Everyone makes mistakes here; the good thing is if you learn from the mistakes, everyone's happy to forget them.

Editors are sometimes harsher to paid editors because we are all volunteers, learning and editing on our own free time, and it can get very frustrating if a paid editor demands help from volunteers. I'm not saying that's what you're doing at all, but many paid editors get very huffy and demanding when their drafts or edits get declined or removed. Asking for help and clarification is of course totally fine! It's just when paid editors expect volunteers to do their work for free that everyone gets pretty annoyed - and you'd be amazed how often that happens.

There is a lot to learn but listening, discussing, and being willing to find consensus with other editors will take you a long way. If you'd like a quick analysis of your sources at some point, feel free to hit me up on my talk page. And in the meantime, good luck with your draft and happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate the warm welcome. I very much understand the feelings toward paid editors. And I will be taking a lot of time to listen and learn. Thank you for your offer! Proudcatmom (talk) 02:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I have a different concern. On your User page you identify that you are paid to edit three existing articles in addition to creating a draft about LD. The rules for paid - at WP:PAID - are that for existing articles you are limited to making edit requests on the Talk pages of those articles rather than edit directly. Instead, you have added a reference to each article for a book authored by LD. For paid editing, this is considered reference spamming, and is forbidden. An editor has reverted your ref additions. Please do not do this again. David notMD (talk) 02:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi David, Thank you for bringing this to my attention, and reverting them. It has become very clear to me that I bit off far more than I could chew in taking on this paid editor project. I apologize for the way I bumbled into this. This is my first and will be my only paid interaction with Wikipedia. Any edits from now on are under my own free time. Thank you for your guidance. Proudcatmom (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Can someone help me with composing an article/list of Spike Lee collaborators?

I've been composing an article on a list of actors who have worked with Spike Lee just like the list for Tim Burton, Quentin Tarantino and Coen Brothers. The problem is that I don't know how to make a table and I could use some help on info if anyone has any. Can someone help? Brigando (talk) 08:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Brigando and welcome to the Teahouse. As with any big content change I would recommend asking on the article's talk page, Talk:Spike Lee to get some input. Wikipedia:Summary style would suggest having a section in the article, then if that gets too big splitting it into a separate list. With Tim Burton, Quentin Tarantino and Coen Brothers you will notice they have some prose and then possibly a table. Don't forget sources.

As to the technical side of things, see Help:Table. You may like to copy an existing table and practice in your sandbox. I know this is a lot of info, please don't get discouraged, just ask here if you get stuck. Commander Keane (talk) 09:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Apparently I missed Draft:List of frequent Spike Lee collaborators. User has posted on Help desk about formatting issue. Commander Keane (talk) 10:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Brigando: I have fixed the table.[14] PrimeHunter (talk) 10:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks bro! Your lifesaver! Brigando (talk) 04:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Most recent version of published draft

I cannot find the most recent version of my draft on the B Reactor Museum Association. I was working on it just 15 minutes ago when my browser crashed, and now I can only see the version from a few weeks ago. Is there any way I can get back all of my recent work? IImostwanted (talk) 18:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IImostwanted. I'm afraid that if you didn't "publish" (i.e. save) your changes, then Wikipedia hasn't got them. Your last saved edit to your sandbox was on 25 June. This is why many editors recommend saving your work reasonably often. ColinFine (talk) 20:11, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@IImostwanted: Special:Contributions/IImostwanted shows no saved edits since June except your post here. If "Enable the Edit Recovery feature" is already enabled at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing then you may be able to recover unsaved text by using the same device and browser to edit the same page or going to Special:EditRecovery. If this doesn't work then your work is lost. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! Didn't know I had to continuously publish. Will do. IImostwanted (talk) 20:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

"Continuously", no. But if you leave an edit window open for +24 hours, it may refuse to save your work. DS (talk) 01:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I see! Thank you IImostwanted (talk) 04:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Regarding a redirect from an article to draft article

I'm totally stuck in process of redirecting the article. There was one user that already created an article a few hours ago while I was editing the draft article with the same title that I created about two days ago and submitted it a couple of minutes ago. Is it possible that I should redirect an article to a draft article? JRGuevarra (talk) 09:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi JRGuevarra, what a sticky situation! I think I recommend that you work on Saving Grace (Philippine TV series) with User:Tyamutz. Stop working on Draft:Saving Grace (Philippine TV series) for now. If the article space version needs to get draftified, an admin will delete your draft and move the new one there. Hopefully another Teahouse helper can give some additional or alternative advice. Commander Keane (talk) 09:26, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Commander Keane I think that's the best case scenario, for now. Thanks for the recommendation. JRGuevarra (talk) 09:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

JRGuevarra, I've linked this conversation at the Afc review. In the meantime, I can tell you that a redirect from mainspace to Draft space is forbidden, and will be deleted (by bot, I think) if created. If you meant a move of the article to Draftspace, that is a very different question. Mathglot (talk) 06:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot I was thinking about moving the article to draftspace as well, but I guess it may be a different topic. I'll be holding off editing the draft. JRGuevarra (talk) 06:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Policy on listing awards/accolades?

The Scandinavian Airlines article lists awards, and in April 2024, someone marked this section as an advertisement. They haven't edited since that day (and edited with an IP), so I don't think it would be possible to discuss with them. I've made some edits to the section, and removed the {{advert}} template.

I was wondering if there was a policy on listing awards, and how to make sure it stays neutral? LucasR muteacc (talk) 03:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @LucasR muteacc, all the awards are sourced to press releases of SAS, and I can barely find any information with a web search for most of those. So yes, I agree with the judgment of the IP user, the section sounds promotional. I suggest you use reliable sources that are independent of the subject as references for the section (e.g.: coverage of the award in the press). If there are no such sources available, then you should rather remove the content. Broc (talk) 06:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

LucasR muteacc, that list of non-notable awards won't increase anyone's respect for the airline. I suggest that you delete it. Maproom (talk) 08:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Giving up with wiki

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I've now got evidence of a toxic environment and admins lying about reasons for reverting articles - but also no way to challenge this because of the way wiki works. There's no point in trying to contribute when all you want to do is control and gatekeep information and toxicly stop any discussion or challenge to your tactics. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon: Respectfully, your talk page shows that you went against one of our more essential policies. When this was brought to your attention, you began attacking other volunteers rather than focusing on the policy issue at hand. At its core, Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia with information verifiable by its readers. I urge you to consider the feedback already provided on your talk page if you consider returning to Wikipedia. Thank you for the spirit behind your contributions—wishing you the best in your future endeavors. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

And I provided references and have proof of this but yet was still lied to that I had not referenced SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Nothing was brought to my attention in a constructive way and one of your admins admitted in a comment that my user name had influenced their response SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

If you're talking about Mike Turnbull in this edit, they aren't an admin. That doesn't mean you shouldn't take their advice into account; you should take the advice of any well-intentioned experienced editor into account. But it's possible you may not realize who is and isn't an admin and what an admin does here on WP. Valereee (talk) 20:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, if you have evidence/proof of wrongdoing, provide it to us in the form of diffs, which are the edits someone made. To find a diff, you go to the article or talk history, click on the date for the relevant version, and copy the URL. Bring it back here and show us. Valereee (talk) 20:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm trying to but nobody seems to take ownership or provide a place for me to do so. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I cant post a screenshot but these were all in the article I posted - they are links

Community Website

Skipness Official tourist website

Skipness

Skipness Castle

Historic Scotland: Skipness Castle

Parish History

Skipness Observation Tower

WW2 History of Skipness Bombing Range SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

So, those aren't diffs. To find a diff, you go to the article or talk history, click on the date for the relevant version, and copy the URL. Paste it here. Valereee (talk) 20:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

The article is 'skipness' it may be easier to look at the edit history as I'm getting really tired of trying to give my own time and energy to contribute here with all the bother it is causing for literally nothing SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay, so what I see at Skipness is that you added what sounds like it might have been copied from a tourism guide, and didn't provide sources. What you need for adding content to any WP article is a reliable, independent source. Then you need to write those additions in your own words. Valereee (talk) 20:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Where have you tried to bring a diff back here? Valereee (talk) 20:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I think I see part of the issue here. You added your sources as external links, not as references. Please take a look at Help:Referencing for beginners for the basics of how to properly create inline citations, which would better clarify what is and isn't cited/verifiable. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

but yet people jumped on it and deleted/reverted without notice - even people who are supposed to be mentors and work on teahouse? how is that at all helpful! SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, I can see you're upset. I'm sorry about that. No one here is trying to be obstructionist, but it's possible you didn't receive the mentorship you were expecting at Teahouse. Wikipedia has a very steep learning curve, and it can be frustrating at first. Valereee (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I didnt get any mentorship or offer of such I was jumped upon and spoken to like I was a child. I've even called out one of your supposed mentors for such. It's really not the environment I expected of wiki at all and it's really really disappointing. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I can't help if you can't show me what you're talking about. I don't see anything like that at Skipness. Valereee (talk) 20:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Valereee: it seems like others are assisting below, but if you're still interested, I believe SnarkyDragon is referring to #Remove a redirect above, here at the Teahouse. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm referring more to an article I wrote on Skipness where a 'mentor' reverted without discussion. SnarkyDragon (talk) 21:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I have to concur with Valereee. However, your repeated statements attacking other editors are not conducive to a collaborative environment. I understand that some people around here aren't as friendly as we'd like to hope, but that's often just the way Wikipedia is. As Valereee mentioned above, there's a steep learning curve and some are more aggressive toward those who don't climb it "fast enough" for them. Now, many of us try to be positive mentors whenever possible, but personal attacks on character make that difficult to do. For example, I just suggested how to improve your changes so the community may accept them, and you responded by further attacking the people you've interacted with. Would you like to focus on how you can contribute to that article and others more effectively, or would you like to continue calling those around you out for their minor mistakes? Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:32, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

It isnt an attack at all - I'm not being supported and feel jumped upon when all I'm trying to do is add content here for free in good faith and I dont see those who are deleting/reverting it offering assistance - they are just acting rather than supporting and that is what I have an issue with. A mentor/teahouse host should try to help rather than just reverting something without talking surely? SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Again, right here, I just tried again to help you, and you are deflecting to comments about the other people you've interacted with. I would prefer to focus on your content, not other contributors. Have you taken a look at Help:Referencing for beginners yet? Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate that. I'm not deflecting I'm genuinely trying to process why things are being deleted without discussion by those who also call themselves mentors - to me that isn't compatible with calling onself a mentor.

I do appreciate your advice - but I also want to understand why some people are acting like this and that doesn't make me automatically attacking or deflecting. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

And I do appreciate advice, genuinely SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Glad to hear we're getting closer to a right track. This is actually pretty common practice in Wikipedia editing. See Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Often, reverting comes right before discussion. Now that we've gotten the "revert" part of the cycle out of the way, this right here (along with the multiple editors on your talk page) is the discussion portion. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

As I pointed out in our exchange on my Talk page and your Talk page (covering same ground as above) External links are not "references." Some of the external links are websites that may qualify as references, and thus content could be restored with those as references, but in my opinion, a lot of what you added to Skipness was either tour guide content (verbatim or paraphrased) or your own observations on the interesting sites and amenities of Skipness. None of that belongs in the article. Not cottages to rent. Not the types of fish that may be caught. Not stores in Skipness or the potential to shop in neighboring towns. I chose to revert the article to before your first edit because in my opinion none of your changes were worth salvaging. David notMD (talk) 20:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I really don't understand why you would make this conclusion as a mentor/teahouse host and act in that way rather than discussing and working with me to improve/educate. It's a very bizarre way to act. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

This thread right here is us collectively discussing and working with [you] to improve/educate. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

after the event and with no constructive discussion from the person who reverted it and calls themself a mentor - so it feels somewhat hollow - although appreciated SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, discussion after reversion is typical for Wikipedia. That's just how we do things around here. Can you now move on from what's already happened to see if we can improve your contributions? At this point, we seem to be going in circles where you ignore constructive feedback to comment on editors' behavior. I ask yet again, have you read Help:Referencing for beginners? Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I still would like to understand why someone who calls themself a mentor would act in this way, and it is entirely valid for me to question this without being told to move on - I mean that respectfully but it is important - mentoring isn't about deleting without discussion - what that person did wasn't mentoring it was deletion.

In terms of other aspects that's something I need to give some thought to - and I do appreciate the helpful/constructive comments and advice. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Deletion and mentoring are not in any way mutually exclusive. The characterization that David notMD, the user who reverted your changes, hasn't tried to mentor you is wrong. He explained why he did what he did (which appears to completely follow Wikipedia's policies, guidelines, and procedures), and even conveniently shared your now-removed content on your talk page in an effort to help you share it again correctly.

It may be valid for you to ask questions about the behavior of the editors you've interacted with, but I personally will no longer be responding to them. If you would like to discuss how to properly reference material for Wikipedia, or any other content-related questions, feel free to reach out at my talk page or here.

Happy editing, if you choose to continue contributing. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 21:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

And that's an issue I see with wiki - these people are unaccountable and seem to be able to act without question or discussion and that isn't really something I feel comfortable with. Of course it's reasonable for you to not want to comment on such but I feel it important to raise that view.

I will have a think about content and if I would like to contribute going forwards and I appreciate the constructive advice. SnarkyDragon (talk) 21:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I would say that David notMD didn't act in a constructive way with how he responded to me (criticising but not guiding) but again appreciate that you may not want to comment on that. SnarkyDragon (talk) 21:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

On this note, @SnarkyDragon, you may even be interested in contributing to Wikivoyage rather than Wikipedia. There, they not only accept tourism-related content but encourage and focus on it. There are still requirements for referencing and such, but your type of content may be better suited there overall. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

This is one article which was the first I had written - so I still don't understand why it was jumped on this way and called inappropriate without discussion/guidance etc that's what I object to. I dont particularly want to write tour guides I just wanted to provide some accurate information about somewhere I know well. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, so, a couple of things here.

1. I just wanted to provide some accurate information about somewhere I know well. We can't add to the article content from your own personal knowledge. We can only use what reliable independent sources say. We need those sources to be cited inline; otherwise the assertions look unsourced and will likely be removed. That's what appears to have happened at Skipness. You can learn more about assessing sources at WP:RS and about how to cite those sources inline at WP:CITING.
2. Again, I'm sorry you felt jumped on. I'm sorry you weren't given the guidance you were expecting from someone you believed was supposed to be mentoring you. There's really nothing more anyone can say about that; we're all volunteers here, every last one of us. But we'd like to offer guidance, and we're trying to.

Valereee (talk) 00:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

But the person who reverted the content and only ever justified their own position and ignored mine has remained silent when challenged and that is really not at all consistent with a community that it trying to help. SnarkyDragon (talk) 00:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, David has responded here. Mike has responded on your talk. Who is remaining silent? I don't see anyone ignoring you. I feel like what I'm seeing is you don't think people are giving you what you think they should. We're all volunteers, here. Literally every one of us is a volunteer, there are no paid employees, there are no bosses. We are all doing our level best. I'm sorry that isn't good enough for you, but if it's not, I guess it's not. Valereee (talk) 00:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

And I’m not paid either and what my contribution is worth is to be removed without the person who removes it being accountable or talking to me or being courteous - I’ve had to challenge him and all he wants to portray is his own fixed view. All I want is for the people who criticise other people’s efforts to be accountable and to actually communicate and advise rather than just unilaterally removing content without giving notice or support - I had to find my hard work had been removed and (not Mike) the person who reverted it hasn’t been at all respectful or courteous he has just removed it and said repeatedly he os right without caring at all about my view point SnarkyDragon (talk) 01:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not sure this is the right hobby for you. Best to you. Valereee (talk) 01:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

It would be if the community was more supportive but there’s no point in trying to add to something only to have people swoop on it and not then be willing to work with me - some people have been supportive but ultimately I’m now pretty disappointed with wiki. SnarkyDragon (talk) 06:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon Just for the record, it was not me who reverted your contribution to Skipness. See this diff. You may wish to WP:STRIKE my name from the comment above where you made some assertions about me. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Noted - I'm not sure how to strike through and feel assertions were also made about me which is much of the issue. SnarkyDragon (talk) 09:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon You strike through as described at the link I provided. One way is to add <s> before the part to be struck and </s> at the end. This renders as bit I want to strike out. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The community is trying to help. I see at least a couple of different tracks here that are going on simultaneously which should be disentangled, because they have different audiences, and different possible solutions. One track I see is your wishing to be mentored at Wikipedia so you can learn the rules and be a more effective editor, and not get your work undone. The other track I see, is calling another editor on the carpet because in your opinion, their reaction to you was toxic. Both of these tracks can be handled at Wikipedia, but they are separate tracks, and the WP:Tea house is not the right venue to deal with either of them, although it is the right place to start to find out *where* to deal with them.

Here at the Tea house, numerous editors have heard you and understand that your frustration is about someone reverting you rather than mentoring and trying to explain. I get that also, and I have the impression that from your point of view, a much better approach would have been to leave your stuff in the article alone, spend some time mentoring you, and then maybe some time later after it had all been explained and you got it, you could have adjusted the content accordingly. But they didn't do that, they just swooped in, and undid all your hard work. Is that approximately what has been bothering you?

If I am anywhere close with that, then it is equally important for you to understand that experienced editors here have to apply the rules of Wikipedia, which in some cases really tie our hands. When an experienced editor removed your stuff without discussing it first, it was because what you wrote was not in accord with the rules, it's not about fighting with you, or being toxic, or shooting first and asking questions later. It is about applying the rules, and we don't really have a choice about that. If we had to explain first, a lot of stuff would remain in articles for an unknown length of time, until the new editor felt sufficiently mentored about it to understand and accept, but that is an untenable situation. (Even so, a minimal explanation is often offered by the reverting editor in the edit summary field, but that is only about 500 characters, and sometimes is enough, and sometimes it is not.)

If you don't understand why your work was undone, or don't agree with the reason given, it's fine to ask for an explanation, and almost any experienced editor (or someone else) will be happy to give you one. But the fact that they reverted first, and you had to ask why after, is not toxic, it is normal, routine procedure here. You can disagree about the removal and contest it—that is one of the main functions of the Talk page which exists alongside of every article. One of our standard procedures to contest reverts is called WP:BRD—Bold, Revert, Discuss. You can read about that, and then contest the removed content, if you wish, by going to the Talk page and starting a discussion there. But it's unfair to accuse an editor of being toxic when they are simply following the rules of Wikipedia in the best way they know how; you Boldly added some content, they Reverted. So far, everything is completely routine. But calling them toxic for their rapid revert is not the right way; the ball is in your court after the revert, and if you want to discuss or contest the removal, you should go to the article Talk page and Discuss it.

Every new editor (and every experienced editor) gets reverted sometimes, so we all know what that's like, and while it can ruffle one's feathers, it's important to understand that there is no dictator sitting at the top of Wikipedia deciding who is right about some disagreement about article content; we all decide that, collectively, by consensus, through various procedures for dispute resolution, starting with discussing disagreements at the article Talk page. If you have a bone to pick about an editor's behavior here, the proper venue to start with is the editor's Talk page. Those venues will be the best bet for you to get satisfaction on either of these two separate tracks. Further questions about how to edit Wikipedia are welcome on this Tea house page. HTH, (edit conflict) Mathglot (talk) 01:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I really don’t think it’s unfair to call out toxic behaviours and it is very much members of the community but not the person who rapid reverted who are trying to help. The issue I have is that the person who rapid reverted was condescending and simply defended their own position without assuming any good will or at all acknowledging my intent to try and provide good and true content. As a mentor I wouldn’t expect them to act like that. I do see and appreciate that other members of the community are trying to provide some good quality advice and throughout I have said I appreciate that. SnarkyDragon (talk) 06:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

No one, I believe, has said it is unfair, and you have called it out several times, but what I am trying to indicate, roughly, is "No one (with the power to do anything about it) will hear you here"; hence, my comment about "wrong venue". About the mentoring, yes you have said you appreciated it, and I am glad. My question to you now, as this thread is quite long here, and if I am correct about this being the wrong venue for both of your concerns, what are your plans for this conversation now? Should it be dropped, left to go stale and get archived, get split into one or two conversations at the right venue? Because to me, it seems to be about have lived out its usefulness. But if you still have things to say in this thread, the floor is yours. If you would like me to close it, either with, or without a pointer to some new conversation, just ask and I am happy to do so for you. Mathglot (talk) 07:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you - I don't really know how to proceed and need to have a think about a few things. I'm also finding it difficult to know who is an admin vs an editor and who is going to be helpful/constructive vs just shooting things down and that isn't helping me to feel comfortable when trying to contribute to wiki. I really do appreciate your insights though. SnarkyDragon (talk) 07:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, if you go to Preferences>Gadgets, you can enable Navigation Popups. That will allow you to hover over someone's username and see information about them, including how experienced they are and what permissions they have, such as admin. Please realize that admins don't have any more control over content than non-admin editors.

But I have to say, I haven't seen any toxic behavior. What I've seen is a dozen people trying to help, here and at your user talk, and your every response seems to be some version of "you aren't doing enough to help/mentor me" and accusing people of being toxic/not assuming good faith. "Helping you" doesn't mean "never revert your edits". "Mentoring you" doesn't mean "never tell you you're wrong". "Assuming good faith" doesn't mean "leave well-intentioned but incorrect edits in place". You seem to be quite fixated on what you believe mentoring should look like. Perhaps we could discuss that at your user talk? I kind of feel like we're going around in circles here and should let this discussion archive. Valereee (talk) 09:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The ultimate issue is how content was just reverted without discussion and in a condescending way. The discussion has only continued because that hasn't been acknowledged. As you'll see I have acknowledged those who have provided support and I don't have any particular desire to expend more energy on these discussions because it isn't helping anyone. I do understand that there are people trying to support here and I appreciate that and have said that already many times. I just feel like something I put effort into was discarded without a care in a condescending way. SnarkyDragon (talk) 10:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

But yes - I do see and appreciate the support offered by the community and need to have a think about that and what to do with the content I’ve been trying to create and that is ultimately why I started using wiki. I also know who has offered support and how to approach them which has been helpful. SnarkyDragon (talk) 10:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I am sorry that you feel that way, but I, for one, given all that I have read and seen, I cannot agree that you were reverted in anything but a normal, routine way per the rules of Wikipedia. If what you are looking for now is an apology or or an acknowledgement that you were treated in a condescending or toxic way, such an apology or acknowledgement is not merited and imho, will not be forthcoming. In my view, this thread is going around in circles; you have been afforded much more attention and far greater care by a great many more editors than is usual here, and it now seems unlikely that you will receive satisfaction here, but then, it is not a requirement that Wikipedia editors satisfy your requirements after having done their best to answer your questions and comments. You have been advised about other venues in which you can pursue your issues; I hope you will take advantage of them. In my humble opinion, it is now well past time to end this thread, and close it. (edit conflict) Best wishes, Mathglot (talk) 10:48, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edit Request Other Language Wikipedia

I have a small edit request for the Hebrew Wikipedia because I'm not sure how to do it myself. Do they have a teahouse there where I can ask? Can I make the request here? Thank you. MaskedSinger (talk) 09:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

The Hebrew Wikipedia(as well as any other language Wikipedia) is a separate project, so you will need to ask about editing its articles there. The best place is probably article talk pages; I'm not sure if they have a Teahouse, but they have a Help Desk. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Ill go there. MaskedSinger (talk) 09:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@MaskedSinger: Wikipedia:Local Embassy#Hebrew suggests asking User:Amire80. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks MaskedSinger (talk) 16:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I see that you've already got a reply. Did you need anything else? Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes thanks @Amire80

If the 3rd link (his english website) in the external links section could please be edited to https://liorsuchard.com/

I thought I could do it myself but it seems far trickier than I imagined. Thanks. MaskedSinger (talk) 06:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@MaskedSinger: You apparently refer to he:ליאור סושרד#קישורים חיצוניים. It's hard to navigate a wiki in a script I don't know and right-to-left scripts confuse the hell out of me but the article appears to use a template which pulls data from the Wikidata item Lior Suchard (Q6795350). PrimeHunter (talk) 22:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I think it's OK now. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 00:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Amire80 It's almost there. If the www could please be removed. Thanks! MaskedSinger (talk) 06:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Why is it needed? It works with the www just as well. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunterme too! Hence I thought it best not to touch it and ask someone else to do it. MaskedSinger (talk) 06:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I have removed www. at the Wikidata item. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

My article proposal was declined and I disagree with the arguments of the reviewing editors

This is the draft Draft:Paul Maxym Sembaliuk. Dmytro Simon (talk) 05:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Your draft was correctly declined it needs editing for neutral tone and it's unclear how they pass WP:NARTIST? Theroadislong (talk) 05:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Theroadislong. I noticed that the editor has added more sources. Let me take a look, though David notMD made a good point that the UCC source would not be an independent source since it was written by the subject's daughter. Let me try to do some rewrites. Bkissin (talk) 15:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Dmytro Simon welcome to Wikipedia! I have a couple suggestions for you:

1. If you disagree with an editor, your best approach is to reach out to them directly to understand the reason behind their edit. Courtesy ping to @SafariScribe and @Bkissin who reviewed the draft.
2. Not everyone can have a page on Wikipedia. Wikipedia's golden rule, to simplify the requirements to the extreme basics, is that articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. I do not see this coverage in the sources you added.

Broc (talk) 06:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

For example, an obituary written by his daughter (ref #7) is not independent. David notMD (talk) 13:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I didn't realize that this source was written by the subject's daughter. Good catch David notMD. Bkissin (talk) 15:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

About sources stating other sources

Some sentence is marked with a citation. The citation says it has taken the information from some other source. That other original source is found. Should that original source be added and that second hand source be removed? Also in another case, you have two sources, one is original non English source, and another is English source which cites the non English one, which should be used? Assume all sources mentioned to be reliable and equivalent in other factors. Thanks, ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: It's difficult to give a general answer to these questions as they're both very situational. As a starting point, you should cite the source that you took the information from. If your source got the information from another source, and they're otherwise completely equivalent, there's no reason to replace it. But if for example one is primary and one is secondary, or one provides more useful context to readers than the other, the situation is different. If the statement is controversial or exceptional it may be appropriate to cite both; if not, it's probably overkill. English vs. non-English sources is a special case: per WP:NONENG, if there is an English source and a non-English source of equal quality, we should prefer the English one on the English Wikipedia. – Joe (talk) 15:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Article Publication

I did revised the article named "Parich Khel, Utmanzai", I did improved the content and added authentic links. Kindly review my article and give me feedback of it. Thanks KhushalKhan01 (talk) 13:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

If you want the draft to be reviewed, KhushalKhan01, you should resubmit it for review through the AfC process. For future reference, please don't remove past AfC reviews, as you did in this edit. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

How to resubmit it according to the said process ? Kindly guide. Thank you KhushalKhan01 (talk) 14:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I've restored the template that you deleted; there's a resubmit button on it. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

From where can I resubmit it ? KhushalKhan01 (talk) 14:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

As I explained above, which you seem to have managed to do now. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I doubt if fixing this one point will bring your article up to speed (I'm sorry to say), but when I read the article, I had to get to the last sentence to find out that you're talking about somewhere in Pakistan. This is the English language Wikipedia, so probably most of the readers are going to be American, Canadian, British, Australian, or New Zealanders. I don't know how well know the places you name are in Pakistan, but most of the readers I've mentioned will not have heard of any of them. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, this is a place in Pakistan. This article will help Pakistani people as many of Pakistani use Wikipedia as a helping source. So this article should be published for the convenience of people. KhushalKhan01 (talk) 14:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I have add information that are available. For the time being, this article should be published as it provide History, Notables members of the "Parich Khel, Utmanzai". So this will help the people. KhushalKhan01 (talk) 14:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Sir how much time will it take to be published ? KhushalKhan01 (talk) 14:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@KhushalKhan01: Hey! As the message on your draft says, This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are thousands of submissions waiting to be reviewed, and it may take some time. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 15:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

can you review it now ? 39.44.144.240 (talk) 15:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm not currently an AfC reviewer, so I can't. However, after a quick look, my main advice is to look at similar articles on Wikipedia and adapt your draft to better match them, particularly in its headings and organization. Please be patient and rest assured that your draft will be reviewed eventually—there is no deadline here, so there is no need to rush to get this article through the process. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 16:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I am seeking a Wikipedia editor to create a wikipedia page for a Jewish organization

 Stanleydiamond (talk) 20:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

If you're willing to pay for the service, prepare for the complete waste of your payment. If you're not willing to do so, it's very unlikely to happen. Instead, people do things themselves (once they've understood policies and guidelines, and have done a lot of preparatory work). -- Hoary (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, if someone contacts you, it's probably a scam. See WP:SCAM for more info. Ca ^{talk to me!} 00:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Stanleydiamond, the minimum criteria for an article is that the subject be WP:notable. To assess notability we ideally want to see three instances of significant coverage in independent reliable sources, at least two of which are from outside the local area and outside of niche publications. Can you provide these sources? Valereee (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Stanleydiamond, quick question: can you find three or more solidly reliable sources, like books, magazines, or very reputable websites that have a significant amount of material—like a book chapter, a magazine article, news article, documentary film, lengthy broadcast interview, or a web page entirely or mostly about the organization that is completely independent of the organization? The website of the org itself does not count, and neither do blogs, social media of any kind, or press releases, even if published in reputable sources. Can you list three such sources below? (Minimally, author, title, and pub. date; any other publication data such as url, isbn, or publisher are helpful.) If you can provide that below, editors here will be better able to answer your question. Mathglot (talk) 01:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Point one (and it's more important than just semantics or terminology). There will never be a "page for" this Jewish organization, whatever it is, because there will never be a page in Wikipedia for any organization. There could some day be an article about the organization. It will ideally be written by people who have no connection to the organization. And it could contain information that the organization would rather not have in there--but if it's relevant, and well an reliably sourced, then there's not much the organization can do about it.

Point two: "Wikipedia editors"--and there are probably tens of thousands of us, if not more--range from people who have largely created many of the finest articles here to people who have gone in and corrected a typo or two. In general, we're all volunteers, undertaking here what we feel motivated to undertake. It might very well be that people have undertaken to do this or that because they read that someone asked "a Wikipedia edit" to do this or that, and it piqued their interest, but I doubt if it's common. As was said above, there are people who will offer to do it for a fee; they're likely scams. If one of them guarantees to put in an article that will be accepted, and that won't be radically rewritten by others, know that nobody can make that guarantee--and run away! Uporządnicki (talk) 17:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

How long to get Rollback permissions?

I have submitted a request to get Rollback user rights, and I meet all the criteria. I was wondering how long it would take for me to recieve an answer and maybe get the rights. Apollogetticax|^talk 23:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Requests for Permission are processed by any admin whose willing, so there isn't really a set schedule. RfP can get backlogged at times, so I recommend waiting a bit longer. Ca ^{talk to me!} 00:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Since I submitted it, three hours have passed (as of the time of writing of this post). There are very few requests, you can go see yourself. How much longer should I wait?

Though, thanks for your answer. Apollogetticax|^talk 01:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Apollogetticax, you'll notice if you look at the other requests that there's about a day between request and reponse - and that's very fast in Wikipedia terms. Wait at least that long, and don't forget that admins are volunteers too. Good luck with your request! StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I was very nervous when submitting, but I realized there was no reason to be, as I finally met the criteria, and was ready for it. I guess I can handle the wait for Huggle ;) Apollogetticax|^talk 02:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Might also help if OP remembers that it's weekday evening in the U.S., the small hours in Europe, lunchtime in Australia, and a weekday morning in Asia. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Very, very true. Based on their contribution times, my CVUA mentor was in Australia, over half a day ahead (or behind, I'm not sure) of me, and I had to be awake at two A.M. to catch them grading my work. So yeah, I guess I should wait. I'll give it twenty four hours. Apollogetticax|^talk 02:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Apollogetticax I think you should "give it" a few weeks rather than 24 hours. Requests for permissions usually take a while to be examined. Wikipedia processes are generally rather "slow" so I would not be worried if it takes a few days. Remember that permissions are forever (or until revoked), so there needs to be thorough vetting prior to approval. Broc (talk) 06:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, for the three requests currently on the page, one reached final consensus after a week (and got the user right)

[In detail, the user made the request on June 10, on June 11 the admin said the user was not warning vandals enough, on the same day the user replied, saying he doesn't warn IPs often, on June 13 the admin replied, and there was a same-day response from the user, and on June 14 the admin asked the user to prove his continuousness in warning vandals by doing a session of RC patrol. The user replied on June 15, and on June 17 the admin saw that he was ready to become a rollbacker.]

Both remaining users were declined in one day.

So basically, the evidence says you're right. If I am to get the right, I should wait for some time. But since I noticed a pattern in the timing of the admin's edits, I think I am to get an answer in five hours. If I did something wrong in my counter-vandalism, I would give it two more days (per the evidence), and that would be more than enough. So yeah, maybe not a week (and definitely not many weeks), but I guess I should give it more time than I expected. Apollogetticax|^talk 06:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Apollogetticax my request earlier this year took seven days. I suggest not to think too much about it, just keep editing as usual in the meanwhile. If you fulfill the requirements, you will soon receive the permission. Broc (talk) 07:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok. Yeah, just thinking about it stresses me out. Thanks for the advice. Apollogetticax|^talk 07:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

User is now CU blocked. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 17:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Looking to make article a neutral point of view

I am looking to make this article CLNS a neutral point of view, as it got declined. I thought it was all neutral, and I'm not sure what parts of the article don't seem neutral. I think I need to work on my references as it probably refers to having primary references instead of secondary but unsure on which ones to change.

Any help would be greatly appreciated Richielemay29 (talk) 20:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your candor about being paid, Richielemay29. As just one sample, Draft:CLNS Media tells us "CLNS Media has played a role in covering significant Boston sports events over the past decade". Has it covered them? If so, then "CLNS Media covered...". If not, then what was this "role"? We can assume that what's insignificant goes without mention, so cut "significant". "Over the past decade" has built-in obsolescence. The humdrum section within which this sentence appears has no reference. Et cetera. -- Hoary (talk) 20:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the help, I fixed that line. Would you recommend I remove any references that seem to be primary? Richielemay29 (talk) 21:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I think you'd better put this draft aside for a moment while you attend to more pressing matters. Is c:File:URX5Gm55 400x400.jpg (the company logo) really your own work, so that you, personally, are in a position to copyleft it? -- Hoary (talk) 21:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

it's the companys work yes, which I stated I am apart of Richielemay29 (talk) 22:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

The reason we're asking, @Richielemay29, is that when you upload something to Wikimedia Commons (as you've done with the logo), you are giving permission for anyone to use it for anything, including editing it however they want and slapping it on whatever they like. This is usually something companies really don't like, because they want their logo to belong to them and only be on things they approve. Besides that, if you are not the artist who originally designed it, you most likely do not own the copyright to it - and the artist may also have some opinions on what people can do with their work. W're trying to make sure you and your company (and the original artist, if that's not you) don't get a very unpleasant surprise someday if someone does decide to have fun with the logo - which they can, under the terms it's currently uploaded under.

There are other options for uploading the logo that don't involve allowing it to be reused, and you might want to use those options instead. For those you would need to wait until the draft is accepted, but I promise that having the company logo or not having it won't make any difference to whether it's accepted or not! The draft stage is to get the article's bones looking good; once it's been accepted you can enjoy adding frills like infoboxes and logos and whatnot. Right now the text and sources are what's important. StartGrammarTime (talk) 23:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

ok thank you for that information, I have removed the logo for now and will focus on text and resources now Richielemay29 (talk) 17:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

A complete outsider's observations here - The lead is ALL jargon. It tells me almost nothing. "Media Talent" sounds wanky. HiLo48 (talk) 00:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I think the lead is trying to say that the subject is a web site. Most, maybe all, of the site's content is about the Boston Celtics basketball team, though this isn't mentioned in the lead. Maproom (talk) 08:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Richielemay. The mistake you are making with the content - as many new editors do, especially ones who have a connection with the subject - is that you are writing what the company wants people to know - even when you are thinking you are writing bald facts.

Wikipedia does not care in the slightest what the company wants people to know - its own website or Facebook page is the place for that, not Wikipedia.

What Wikipedia cares about, almost exclusively, is what other people, wholly unconnected with the company, have chosen to publish about it - even if the company really doesn't like what they've said. Every single claim in the article should be citable to a reliable published source, and the great majority of them to sources wholly unconnected with the company; and those sources must not be cherry-picked for favorable presentation. (I'm not saying that there are sources which are critical of CLNS: I have no idea, and I haven't looked. But it is the duty of a Wikipedia editor writing an article to look for and use such sources if they exist). ColinFine (talk) 09:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Where do I post an edit request on a page about me?

Hey there,

Where on the 'talk' page do I post an edit request for details a page about me?

I've located the talk page I need: Talk:Helen Calcutt

but can't see where you actually post the request, or how. Is someone willing to help? I need clear, step by step instructions :)

Thanks! Helen HelenCalcutt878 (talk) 17:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@HelenCalcutt878 It depends a bit on the editor you want to use (see Help:Introduction) but the basic method is to start by clicking on the "Add topic" tab that you should see at the top of that TalkPage, which you have correctly linked to above. There is a Wizard that may also help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Top tips for a new user

Apart from the links in the welcome section of the talk page - what are your top tips for using/editing Wikipedia? What has saved you most time and frustration? Do you have any positive anecdotes about Wikipedia? SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

SnarkyDragon, going to Special:Homepage lets you choose topics you are interested in and gives you suggestions on articles you can help. If you're interested in sports, you can choose the "Sports" button, and it might pop out results like the "Tunisian Football Federation". If you're interested in European sports, then you may choose "Europe" and "Sports". Regards, — 48JCL 12:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thats an awesome feature! SnarkyDragon (talk) 12:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, this self-guided tutoring series will help you save time and frustration. Valereee (talk) 12:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

For a quick look, I still use it from time to time, see Wikipedia:Glossary and Wikipedia:Wikipedia abbreviations. Lectonar (talk) 12:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

And for some humour, although it might require a little amount of wikiknowledge, see Wikipedia:Village stocks and WP:LIGHTBULB. Lectonar (talk) 12:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Seeing your editing history and the problems you have had, I would highly recommend Wikipedia:Citing sources, you cannot add content supported by your own knowledge, it has to be supported by a published source. Theroadislong (talk) 15:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I like WP:RSPSS. It's explicitly not a comprehensive list of sources, but a) skimming through it gives a good idea of how to determine if a source is reliable, for which purposes, and how such determinations can evolve; and b) it does contain the most commonly discussed sources, so if I want to know which Sky News is reliable and why, they're on the list (with links to recent discussions on their reliability). Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

How to upload original picture relevant to content from PC?

How I can upload picture to the article that has no copyright issue? I have a alot of original pictures that are not upload on internet yet, I have kept save them for my article. KhushalKhan01 (talk) 18:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I’m going to point you to WP:HTUAP and Commons:First steps/Uploading files. Hope that helps, feel free to follow up! LinuxNCats (talk) 18:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Still waiting on review 4 months later! help

Draft:Lucy Heavens

Draft talk:Nic Smal

Hello, I've made pages for Lucy Heavens and Nic Smal bc I'm a big fan of the show Kiff that they created. I believe I've tagged them in relative topics to further along their review but it's been four months. Lucy's drafted wasn't approved several months ago bc all my sources were Kiff-focused, so their notability wasn't inherited but I believe I've changed that now and added more sources etc. Would love some help. I'm trying to be patient but would love to see it live! Thank you. I'm a first time contributor. Brooklyn315 (talk) 17:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Brooklyn315! Unfortunately, sometimes it takes a while for drafts to get reviewed - that's just the way it is. There's not really much you can do to speed it up except keep improving it. Drafts sit in a pool rather than a queue, so there's no expected timeline for acceptance or otherwise. Ones that are obviously great or obviously terrible tend to rush through the process, because they're easy decisions; the rest take longer. We currently have a massive backlog, as you've probably seen on your draft page notices, which sucks for everyone involved. Sorry I can't give you a more encouraging answer. I do encourage you to keep looking for good sources and tinkering with the drafts until you think they're as good as they can be, and hopefully that will at least pass the time. Or of course there's millions of other articles you might be interested in improving! Good luck and happy editing :) StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the quick reply and encouragement. I'll keep tinkering, it does indeed help pass the time and is enjoyable! I have indeed seen the backlog....and I appreciate that real humans are reviewing all the content. It's not easy! Thanks again! Brooklyn315 (talk) 19:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Help in drafting an appeal

Some editors are objecting to the addition of a sentence even with attribution to a reputed Islamic theologian (Azzam) and a professor of Islamic studies (Ayoub) here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Divisions_of_the_world_in_Islam#Removal_of_sourced_content How best can I draft an appeal to post on the Dispute resolution noticeboard? Please help!-Ganeemath (talk) 05:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Ganeemath, I would suggest first trying to engage with the criticisms of the other editors. They have brought up concerns regarding WP:FRINGE and WP:DUE. You do not appear to have addressed those concerns. -- asilvering (talk) 05:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

The truth is, I don't know how to respond to that. I thought Azzam and Ayoub are reputed and since they quote from the hadith, the sentence would be acceptable. I need someone experienced to respond. Kaalakaa has been blocked from Islam related articles for, "POV pushing" and I don't want that to happen to me (I think he is not allowed to reply here also, since we are discussing Islam related stuff but I would have loved to get his viewpoint).-Ganeemath (talk) 08:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

IntGrah has removed this sourced content from the Abdullah Azzam article. Abdullah Azzam has really written that (Kuffaar had provided the source for it and I used the same source) . What am I supposed to do about that?-Ganeemath (talk) 08:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Ganeemath, if more experienced users chime in, I think they will have exactly the same opinion as the other users who have already disagreed with you. For the fringe concern, you will need to show that Azzam and Ayoub are reputable and not fringe - that is, that they are "mainstream", or, if they are not (and it seems clear they are not) that they represent a reasonably common dissention from the mainstream. For WP:DUE, the problem is that you are trying to put these sources next to the far more common take, as though they are two equally prevalent opinions. We can't be doing that. If you do end up adding this information to the article, you'll need to add it in a way that does not imply this viewpoint is held more commonly than it is. -- asilvering (talk) 19:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Removal of sourced content

IntGrah has removed this sourced content from the Abdullah Azzam article. Abdullah Azzam has really written that (Kuffaar had provided the source for it and I used the same source). What am I supposed to do about that?-Ganeemath (talk) 12:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Ganeemath. As always, in case of disagreement between editors, your first step is to open a discussion with the other editor or editors, usually on the article's talk page. Remember to assume good faith, and that our common purpose is to collaborate on making Wikipedia as good as we can. If you are unable to reach consensus in discussion, then dispute resolution lays out the subsequent steps to take. ColinFine (talk) 12:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Moved similar question by same user under existing section. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 14:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Is there any Afc article reviewer?

I want an Afc article reviewer who can review my recent resubmitted article and give me feedback on that. KhushalKhan01 (talk) 17:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, please just be patient. Someone wil review it eventually, and there's no reason to rush it. If anything, this gives you time to make improvements to your draft like those I also suggested earlier. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 17:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, but I need some advises from your side. The advise you gave me was a bit generic, I need to make my article more attractive, need your suggestions. KhushalKhan01 (talk) 17:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@KhushalKhan01: Sure, here are a few things I noticed after a quick skim:

• The lead, or first paragraph of your article needs some work. There shouldn't be a separate overview section; I'd say the content from there should be moved to the lead.
• "Parich Khel" should be bolded in the first sentence, per MOS:BOLDSYN.
• You linked a few times to Khel, which is actually a disambiguation page. You probably mean to link to Khel (clan) instead if I'm understanding the topic correctly.
• The "History of Parich Khel" section doesn't seem to have any history of the ethnic group itself, but rather content that would fit better as part of the "Notable Members" section. Since they seem to be duplicates, I would just delete the current "Notable Members" section entirely and rename "History of Parich Khel" to "Notable members" (also note that the new heading is in sentence case, not capitalizing "Members").
• I'd recommend trying to find some information about the history of the group itself rather than just its members, such as how it originated and changed over time. This could properly go in a "History" section.
• The last photo doesn't have a caption telling who is shown.
• While this is not required, I would recommend using Citation Style 1 templates for consistency in your references.

I hope these give you a good starting point on how to improve your draft. Let me know how else I can help you! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 18:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I was editing my article, but someone has removed the significant content from the article before my resubmission. What is the main reason ? KhushalKhan01 (talk) 19:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@KhushalKhan01: You can see the edit history of the page. It looks like the information about Akbar Khan was largely removed because it belongs more in the article about him than this one, which was the most significant change. (Also, I need to mention that this is not "your article" because no article on Wikipedia is owned by any one editor. See WP:OWN.) Overall, these were honestly some much-needed changes and simplifications. This also makes room for you to research and add more about the history of the group itself, as I mentioned in my fifth point. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 19:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

And as an update, it appears your submission was just declined again. Take a look at the reviewer's reasoning, and again go search for some more history or sources about the group itself rather than just its members. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 19:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

But there is no history available on internet, how may i add it if something is not available on internet. 39.44.157.41 (talk) 19:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

You can cite offline sources too; Wikipedia isn't limited to just what's online. However, everything must still be reliable and verifiable. If there are none of those either, then this group simply isn't notable enough to merit a Wikipedia article. See the golden rule. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 19:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I have only oral history of the article which i want to be published. Howeve, I do not have any documents online nor offline which I used in reference. Instead, I have details about the notable members of the tribe which i want to write article on. 39.44.157.41 (talk) 19:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, it sounds like you're trying to write about a topic that doesn't meet our notability guidelines. It won't be accepted. -- asilvering (talk) 19:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

How to site offline documents 39.44.157.41 (talk) 20:01, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

{{Cite document}} is a good way to start. However, I thought you had no offline documents to use here? Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I will gather the documents that are available off-line and will upload it as a reference. How many references is required for the article which is recently declined ? 39.44.157.41 (talk) 20:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@39.44.157.41: No need to upload them—in fact, that would likely violate copyright laws. Rather, you just need to use them for your research and cite them. Take a look at WP:CITE for a guide to how citations work here. As for how many references you need, please read the entire section at WP:GNG for the information you're looking for. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately, oral history will not work here. We don't accept original research. Feel free to contribute to the articles about these notable members directly, but unless you find significant coverage (not just passing mentions, like "XYZ was a member") about the group itself in multiple reliable sources, your draft won't be accepted, as asilvering mentioned just above. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your valuable time and guidance. I will follow all the aforementioned guidelines in my next step, and I hope it will works. For further clarification and help, I will back. 39.44.157.41 (talk) 20:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Infobox help

Hello! I could use some help with infobox formatting. If you go to Harry Potter (character), you will see that his "House" is listed as "Gryffindor". This is in-universe information. If you visit Albus Dumbledore, you will notice that "House" is inappropriately listed before the in-universe section. I'm trying to get the Dumbledore "House" entry to move down and look exactly like the Harry Potter page, but I've been trying different things and can't figure it out! Wafflewombat (talk) 20:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Wafflewombat: Hey! I just went in and fixed this—you can see my changes here. For {{Infobox character}}, it appears you need to use label/data numbers starting in the 20s for data in that section. So, following how this was done for Potter, I set the house as label/data 21, then adjusted the birth/death from there. Hope this helps! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Perfect! Thank you! Wafflewombat (talk) 20:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Of course—always happy to help. Feel free to reach out with anything else, and happy editing! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

How to find new users

I am looking on how to find new accounts on Wikipedia so I can welcome them. GamrrOverDue (talk) 00:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

GamrrOverDue, you could just click on the link to "Recent changes" that should appear somewhere on your screen, and look there for "[name] ( talk | contribs )"; I mean, entries for which both the username and "talk" appear in red. These are (mostly) new users who are attempting to do something. The user creation log gives you a vast number of new user ID creations; but surely many of these have no intention of contributing anything. -- Hoary (talk) 01:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, GamerrOverDue, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are thinking about this, it would be well to have a look at the reasons for and against doing this automatically at WP:PEREN#Use a bot to welcome new users. I realise that you are talking about welcoming users personally, which is great; but please be aware of the arguments in that section. ColinFine (talk) 09:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Try reading Wikipedia:Welcoming committee. It should give you all the details needed. Waonderer (talk) 21:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Can I pay to get my page reviewed and published faster?

Can I pay to get my page reviewed and published faster? Rrbajaj2011 (talk) 21:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Rrbajaj2011! You cannot. Wikipedia editors (including reviewers) are volunteers and don't generally edit for pay. However, it looks like an Articles for Creation reviewer has already taken a look at Draft:Madanmohan Bajaj and noted that it needs sources and a more neutral tone. Do you have any relation to the subject of the article? Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 21:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Your draft has zero sources which means zero chance of being accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 21:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Moderator Or Referee for Users Who Keep Deleting Facts

So, on the article for the destroyer USS Winslow I am being harassed by these individuals Lyndsships and Wolfchild who threaten to have my expelled and keep reverting my correct edit noting the original Commanding Officer of this ship when it was commissioned was Commander Irving Reynolds Chambers. I posted his Navy order from the National Archives and Lyndaships deleted them. Who do I appeal this to? And I don't know how to do the talk page which these two individuals are asking to do. Why did this Lyndaships delete my public record US Navy document? Barnabywoods (talk) 21:48, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Barnabywoods To clarify why @Lyndaship reverted your edit, they stated in an edit summary "WP:SHIPSNOTCREWS", which essentially states that unless a crew member or commanding officer played a vital role in a major event in the ship's history, it should not be in the article. As I stated in my comment below though, you need to discuss this matter on the talk page. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 22:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

My accurate edit where I posted supporting documentation in the form of US Naval Orders obtained from NARA in St. Louis reflecting that Commander Irving Reynolds Chambers was the plank owner or first commanding officer of the USN destroyer USS Winslow DD-359 when it was commissioned in February 1937, keeps being deleted along with the supporting document I uploaded by a user "Lyndaships", who now has been joined by one "Wolfchild" threatening me with termination of my editing privileges. Is there any moderator here to prevent such harassment and deletion of incontrovertible facts such as my entry and supporting document by the aforementioned? Barnabywoods (talk) 21:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Barnabywoods Based on the edit history of that article and what you're saying here, you may be involved in an edit war. Content disputes follow a simple process, Bold, Revert, Discuss. Be bold in your edits, but when they're reverted you need to discuss it on the talk page, whether the facts are "incontrovertible" or not. That will help you to avoid an edit war, which is what seems to be going on. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 22:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Barnabywoods I'll agree with User:CommissarDoggo in their reading of the edit summary. Doggo is also correct this conversation should be happening on the article's talk page, not here. I'll choose not to discuss any details here, but will appear on the talk page shortly. SHIPSNOTCREWS is not a policy or guideline, but if one looks at the best articles of ships (and there are many) on Wikipedia, you may see what best practice might be on adding even notable crew members. BusterD (talk) 23:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Reopening discussion for a proposed deletion

Hi! I've edited a few pages already, but I'm a bit concerned about contents of the Phillips Academy article and I can't find pages regarding etiquette for reopening discussion a proposed deletion. The topic is about the Phillips Academy Poll, which has been subject to edit wars between various sockpuppet accounts to keep it on the page most non-affiliated sources who agree that it's not particularly relevant to the school. I'm not sure how to navigate the compromises that have been made, but I'd like to detail it on a more formal proposal for deletion. How can I appropriately reopen this discussion? It's been about 6 months from the last update. Ecco2kstan (talk) 21:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The last deletion discussion I saw was long enough ago where you could bring it to WP:AFD. Clarify any new developments that have occured since the last deletion/merge discussion. If an editor challenged a Proposed Deletion, you may also bring ut to AFD. ✶Quxyz✶ 01:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Question about borderline images

I recently came across someone removing the lead image on Webbed penis while monitoring recent changes and reverted it, then told the IP about WP:CENSORED. However, I do feel a bit uncomfortable with my revert and I just don't want to come across as a bad person. Is there any kind of policy, guideline or essay that could clarify my view on the subject here? Am I in the right for reverting? Thank you. win8x (talking | spying) 03:42, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Win8x! In this case, I would say that you did the right thing by keeping a relatively vital image in the article, and you pretty much answered your own question in regards to which essay you should use. WP:CENSORED is probably the best policy for this issue, along with Wikipedia:Content disclaimer. Hope this helps! :) Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 04:32, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Alright. Thank you!! win8x (talking | spying) 04:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)