Wikipedia:Teahouse

jmcgnh, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2–3 days.

Help Wikipedia

Personal help

Hey! I’ve been a fairly active editor for the past year, but lately have felt emotionally drained editing and have felt like I’ve come across poorly to fellow Wikipedians. Is there any sort of “support group” or community discussion areas where one can converse positively? I was running through this page and saw how kind all the responses have been despite the confusing and occasionally trying questions. It gave me hope after a bit of feeling pretty down about my involvement for a while and want to be more substantive. If this isn’t the page to ask these questions, I apologize; I’m still getting the hang of the “back-end” pages. Thanks! ~ 05:36, 24 April 2020 (UTC)Pbritti (talk)

@Pbritti: I'm sorry to hear you feel that you're burning out. Wikipedia focuses intensely on improving and creating good articles, so there aren't official spaces (that I'm aware of) where support groups are held. Have you thought about taking a WP:BREAK? Please put your emotional health before editing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:22, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

@Pbritti: I try to stay upbeat on Wikipedia by reading the weekly/monthly "on the bright sides" Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2020-03-29/On the bright side. If you're looking for less formal places to discuss issues, I'd suggest joining the English Wikipedia WP:DISCORD. The conversation is certainly varied, and not structured as a support group, but I find it quite helpful and chat in there a great deal. A good place to ask for instant help/feedback or just share a funny page you saw while editing. Tenryuu is right though, if you're burnt out, sometimes its good to step back for a bit and do something else. Take care of yourself! Smooth sailing, CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 10:31, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu and CaptainEek, thanks for your advice! I'm going to look into the break option, but probably will be taking a look at the "Bright Side" page as well! I'm glad that there are some aspects of community here! ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:56, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

@Pbritti: I believe your comments on the page you and I are on, are constructive and well thought out. These times are emotional for most people, the world is in turmoil. Thank-you, for all your help with wikipedia that I'm aware of, and beyond. GunnisonMarmot (talk) 23:51, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

GunnisonMarmot, thanks for all your editing! You've been the first person I've met outside of a Wikiproject that has constructive and kind in your comments! Best hopes for you! ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:33, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Sometimes when I feel drained from WP, I will work on more mindless tasks like fixing orphan articles. These tasks are unlikely to involve arguing or people reverting me.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 14:31, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Pbritti, I feel for you. This place (not Teahouse, but Wikipedia in general) is driving me nervous (apologies to Alice Cooper). I think the huge infux of people with only passing interest in Wikipedia editing out of boredom due to the "current situation" is very contributory. Unfortunately, even general updates and such are difficult these days. Better days will come, and folks will be less uptight. John from Idegon (talk) 00:51, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

John from Idegon, thanks for your kind words. I'm looking forward to the end of this quarantine; hopefully with that off our collective shoulders stress will be far less heavy. ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:33, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@Pbritti, we're all in this together. The big blue planet, and this little encyclopedia project. You're very kind, too. I count you as a wiki-friend and co-author.GunnisonMarmot (talk) 06:05, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@Pbritti: -  ToDo Relax your mind; Get up every 10 min and walk around; Enjoy life outside of wikipedia; We all have these bad times. I have PTSD and I deal with a lot and I always find solace in just sitting on the floor with my legs crossed and just trying to get my brain to stop and just listening to the sounds around me. I find it helps me a lot. I am not a professional in any means, this is what works for me. Plus I have a needy, needy, needy cat that likes to fart on me when she is sleeping on my stomach (so go figure). - We will be here to chat with you anytime. Not everyone is bad, we just make mistakes. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 18:58, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Galendalia, thanks! Been playing with my dog and spending more time offline. Been nice. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:41, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Pbritti - Post a pic of the dog to my talk page please. I wanna see! Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 20:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft: PLANETISATION

Resolved

Hi. I would like to ask for support regarding my attempt to write an article about the term Draft:planetisation. Can some body please give me an advise how to make the next steps to improve my draft. thanks in advance. Mike 06 (talk) 07:02, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Mike 06, welcome to the Teahouse. You may want to read WP:REFBEGIN to learn how to cite references for Wikipedia articles. Please note that we do not cite Wikipedia as a source, as you did with Noosphere and Globalisation. The references you use should be cited to the sentences using footnotes.

Another question to ask is, aside from providing information on the subject as some of your sources provide, do the sources establish the subject's notability? Wikipedia only accepts articles if the subject has proven to be notable by Wikipedia's definition of WP:NOTABILITY. If you have any questions please get in touch with the reviewer who may be able to explain why they declined your draft. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:25, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Mike 06, Tenryuu is right. Your next steps must be to find some reliable published sources which discuss de Chardin's concept of planetisation. Then you should base your article on what they say, citing those sources. Maproom (talk) 07:12, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Mike 06:, I have found several articles and journal papers to expand the draft and cite proper references. If you do not mind, I would like to work with you directly on the draft, what say you? NawJee (talk) 08:41, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tenryuu, Hi Maproom, thank you both for your fast response and valuable input. Mike 06 (talk) 14:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @NawJee:, thanks so much for your offer to work with me on the draft. thats wonderful. looking forward to it. How shall we proceed. Mike 06 (talk) 14:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Mike 06:, the first step would be to do an extensive research of the topic. Since it is an academic subject, we should be able to find sufficient journal entries and articles about it. A quick Google search shows that are quite a few available on de Chardin's Planetisation, written by other independent scholars and writers. The draft's talk page is the appropriate platform to discuss further matters related to collabortion.

Also, please sign all your posts and comments by adding four tildes (~) at the end. This way everybody can easily identify who wrote what. Thanks. NawJee (talk) 14:54, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @NawJee:, great. i will switch to talk page Mike 06 (talk) 14:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Question about links in article for review

Hi there - hoping you can help

I recently submitted this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Contentsquare for review, and it was rejected on the grounds of references not showing significant relevance or coverage. I researched what references should be cited in detail before submission, and compared the ones I had to pages of similar companies in the same industry (including, but not limited to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glassbox, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tealeaf, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotjar)

Please can you clarify in detail the links that are considered as non-independent or unreliable, as all of those pages contain citations to the company websites, which I thought was not allowed? And is it a case of having too many citations?

Thanks, and looking forward to your response Klattkins (talk) 16:50, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Klattkins. Non-independent sources (such as the suject's own website) can be cited for very limited kinds of information: see primary sources. The bulk of the information in any article should be taken from sources wholly unconnected with the subject. Sewe third party sources. It is not helpful to compare existing articles, unless you know that they are of high quality (ie Good articles or Featured articles). Among our six million articles are many thousands of sub-standard articles - often they were created a long time ago, before we were as careful as we are now about sources. Ideally somebody would go through those thousands and thousands of articles either bringing them up to standard or deleting them; but that is not a task which many of our volunteer editors seem eager to engage with, for some reason. If you find sub-standard articles, you are welcome to work on them, or even nominate them for deletion if that seems appropriate (but you should be very cautious if you are connected with a company in competition with the subject in question: that would be a conflict of interest.) --ColinFine (talk) 18:55, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, ColinFine for your response, and really appreciate the additional information. What would be really useful if anyone can find time to help, is feedback on which specific sources are deemed unacceptable in this case? All of the links (as far as I can tell from the reference documents) are from reputable sources, so in order to aid this submission, and any others in future, it would be really constructive if I knew exactly where I was going wrong. Really appreciate your help. Thanks --Klattkins (talk) 09:49, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Klattkins, Cremades is an entrepreneur and investor, and it's an interview, looks like a mutually beneficial venture, doesn't add to notability. Forbes piece is based on press releases and direct reporting from Cherki, it's not independent, isn't a significant coverage of contentsquare either. RETAIL TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION HUB seems to be a one-editor source, not reliable, is routine coverage of acquisition, doesn't count. Reuters is another non-independent coverage of acquisition. UK Tech News says the author is Industry Press Release, doesn't count. 7 to 11 are routine coverages that do not include independent SIGCOV, raise capital is what new companies do, the information is not of any use to developing a neutral encyclopedic article. I only see the table of contents in Gartner. Maybe, the Deloitte list is prestigious, maybe it's not, but there are no points for achievements in WP:NCOMPANY, only coverage helps and there is not one sentence in there. The Wired article looks like it contributes to notability, four more like it might be enough. Silicon Canal coverage looks independent, but the organisation doesn't appear to be a reputable media firm, rather a startup just like the companies it has covered; so, it may not count for much; it doesn't help that it doesn't bring anything new not covered by Wired. Binintelligence includes contentsquare in a crowded list, membership to that list may or may not be impressive but it doesn't help either way since NCOMPANY only cares about significant coverage.

The "multiple" WP:SIGCOV criteria is generally understood to mean at least three; I would add Wired+Silicon to between 3/4 to 1 SIGCOV, and that may be being too generous. The rest of the sources, which hardly bring anything new that would be encyclopedic anyway, may be used to source the article once notability is established, but they do not contribute to establishing notability itself. That's my opinion.

See WP:Other stuff exists. Unless you are looking at featured articles, looking at other articles may hinder as much as help. There is a lot of junk in Wikipedia, and too few editors to maintain standards everywhere, and with the rise of spamming and other covert advertising attempts in the platform, the notability criteria have become more strict compared to the early days of Wikipedia boom.

Hope it helps! Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Humble request for an article review

Hello, I humbly request you to kindly review the draft I created in my sandbox (User:Cuurentarticle/sandbox), and see if it is appropriate to be used as an article here. I would really appreciate your every suggestion regarding how to improve it further. Thanks. Cuurentarticle (talk) 09:21, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Cuurentarticle, I have one minor comment. You have included a link "Tonk district", which, as you'll see if you click on it, is not very useful. It would be better to do the link like this: "Tonk district", so that it goes to the relevant article. Maproom (talk) 09:50, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I will add that the coordinates you've given actually pinpoint to a field in the middle of nowhere. To see where it comes out, click (this link) I suggest you use the following in your infobox: 25.891812, 76.184715 I cannot find this town anywhere nearby on Google maps. I would also like to see each statement that you make to be followed immediately by a supporting reference. And many of your numbers are over-accurate, as well as being unsourced. Don't split hectares down into smaller amounts -at least don't go beyond one decimal point, and note that you have given two different figures for agriculture, yet your only reference doesn't seem to function, so this is unverifiable. See WP:EASYREFBEGIN for a guide on how to add or reuse inline references. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I've incorporated some of the suggestions and trying to do the other, but I wanted to know if the article okay to be used on Wikipedia now. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuurentarticle (talk • contribs) 13:11, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Cuurentarticle, For anyone to do anything, please ensure you have read Your First Article and followed all of the instructions in that article. Once you have completed this, there are instructions for getting it published. Once that happens, please open a new topic here in the Teahouse, and we can help you with the next steps so we can get the article up to a good article status at a minimum. Thanks, Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 06:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC) Courtesy ping @Nick Moyes:

tracing source of quote

Problem of induction has footnotes 18 & 19 referring to 2 quotes. I can't trace either note to a page in a volume with a title. Please help. Thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 12:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC) TBR-qed (talk) 12:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

The quote for ref 18 is on page 38 at isbn 978-0-19-825060-9. Ref 19 doesn't refer to a quote. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:27, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @TBR-qed: - Did this answer help you or do you need more assistance? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Why is there a picture and a reference to the debunked russia collusion hoax posted on the OPM WIKI page? Stupid and kind of implies that the fact that wikipedia is open to edits opens the door to anyone with clear BIAS to add STUPID and irrelevant content in pages.

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

 216.81.94.70 (talk) 14:17, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Our disambiguation page OPM points to fifteen different things that can be referred to as OPM. How can we possibly investigate your point if you don't tell us which article you are referring to? --ColinFine (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Please remember that civility is part of Wikipedia's code of conduct, especially when asking your fellow volunteer editors for help. See Wikipedia:Civility for further information. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:27, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm loving the fact that this post is from an IP editor within America's 'DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY'. Yep, Wikipedia is "open to edits [that] opens the door to anyone with clear BIAS to add STUPID and irrelevant content in pages". We have lot of volunteers who check and quickly remove vandalism and biased editing -though inevitably some stick around longer than others. We'd even let President Trump edit it, if he wished, though, like I say, we do remove edits that have a clear BIAS and are STUPID, so I couldn't guarantee how long they'd remain here. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:28, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Subtle @Nick Moyes: Love it!!!! Galendalia (talk) 09:15, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I don't think Donald Trump would last five minutes as a Wikipedia editor, but him editing would be interesting to see. 09:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

He probably considers WP fake news. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:50, 30 April 2020 (UTC) Like

What is meant when "account created automatically"?

For the account here it says it was created "automatically" whereas for the handful i've looked at once i found how to see this there isn't the word automatically. What does that signify? For context, the user is trying to add unsourced info that another user had just tried to do as well which makes me think it's a shill of the other (although the term I guess here is sockpuppet). i've read on what to do for that, but would like to know the significance of that word automatic before taking another step. thanks. ToeFungii (talk) 14:26, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi ToeFungii. It means the account was originally created at another wiki and later created automatically here when the user viewed a page while logged in. Special:CentralAuth/Meow1224233 shows the account was created one minute earlier at the MediaWiki wiki. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:43, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

TY. I think i understand. i was hoping it would give me a strong clue whether it is a shill and don't think it does that. oh well. much appreciated for the assistance. ToeFungii (talk) 14:47, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I think you're onto someting, ToeFungii. I was just behind PrimeHunter in looking at why that account was "created automatically"; but I did wonder why the account was created on mediawiki (but made no edits there), and then immediately came to enwiki, and started re-adding unsourced material to Kelly Oubre Jr., that was previously added by another brand new account. A third new account has repeatedly added different unsourced material to the same article recently. --ColinFine (talk) 15:13, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: I've had accounts created on wikis I've never visited (like slwiki), and have heard of it happening to other users as well. Perhaps there are ways that content from other wikis gets retrieved and displayed on pages here in the context of the logged-in user. Interwiki transclusion doesn't seem to work here, but I wonder if that could cause it and, if so, if Commons supports it. Also, I think I've seen searches show content from other wikis in some cases, like maybe if there are no or few hits here. Maybe the retrieval of the preview of the foreign article can cause it? Speaking of previews, I wonder if it can be caused by mousing over an interwiki link with the default previewing tool (the one that is used if you don't have Navigation Popups enabled; NavPops itself doesn't preview interwiki links). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, AlanM1, I've had messages from other Wikipedias, and indeed it does create you a local account when you go onto another Wiki: Special:CentralAuth/ColinFine shows 225 accounts. But it seems odd that an account would be created on www.mediawiki.org, and then edit only on en-wiki. --ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Your account can be created automatically at a wiki if they import a page you have edited at another wiki. Importing is not enabled at slwiki so it's not the reason AlanM1 was created there. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:16, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Greetins @ToeFungii: - Did the answers help you understand? I actually just asked about this too so I got my answer as well. Tagging @Puddleglum2.0: as a courtesy as she didn’t know either! Please let me know. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

It did. Unfort it didn't help me to figure out if there was a relationship between the two accounts which become moot as a kind admin (Materialscientist) blocked them and protected the page stopping the problem. I never realized, or thought about, all the wiki's being so connected but it works so ya!! thx and tc ToeFungii (talk) 08:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

what way to improve

I have tagged me the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

See note at talk page.

What is another way to improve it  ? User:Mustafdesam

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

North8000 (talk) 13:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC) Mustafdesam (talk) 15:33, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

FYI I did not put the above post here. It was copied to here by S. Gopalakrishnan. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

? It appears that it was posted and signed by Mustafdesam at 2020-04-29T15:33 UTC, here. It is regarding S. Gopalakrishnan (writer). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1, North8000, and Mustafdesam: - I was just checking to see if there is more discussion to be had here or can this request be closed? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:09, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I left suggestions at the talk page of the article prior to the above. Mustafdesam, were you able to view that? Also I'm ready to help further. But from my end I have no open items or issues. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 11:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorting out a red link

Hi I am new to this and was updating Bauer Radio Limited (The Breeze Network) and put a Breeze station that people thought Nation Broadcasting had but Bauer Radio has it and it gave me a red link so what do i do Phil8482 (talk) 16:43, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Phil8482. The red merely means that there is no article (yet) with that name on Wikipedia to which the link can go. This might be because:

(a) an article does exist, but with a sufficiently different title that the software didn't recognise your link (and what you've tried to link is implausibly long for a Wikipedia article title), or

(b) there is no such article because no-one has written it yet.

To address the possibility of (a), you might check that your supposed station name is correct, and/or look for an article with a different but appropriate title (such as the same three areas but in a different order).

To address (b), you might yourself create a new article about this particular station (though successfully writing an article is harder than it might seem to a newcomer). Once an article (not merely a Draft) exists with the name you tried to link, the linked name in Bauer Radio will turn blue.

If none of the above answer the problem, don't worry! We sometimes leave redlinks as a signal that someone thinks an article on that subject is desirable. Since the other six Breeze Network stations listed do indeed already have articles (which is why their links are blue), it would certainly make sense to have an article on the seventh, so perhaps another editor with an interest in the subject will see the redlink and decide to create it. (As you may know, all Wikipedia editors are unpaid volunteers, so no-one can be tasked to do anything.)

I hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.121.161.127 (talk) 17:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Phil8482: Further information can be found at WP:REDLINK --Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 17:11, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Phil8482. You inseted a link to The Breeze (East Hampshire, South West Surrey & North West Sussex), which doesn't exist, so it is red. Did you mean The Breeze (East Hampshire & South West Surrey)?: (I am far from sure that the sources in that article establish that it is notable.) By the way, I see you have been inserting information without citing sources. It is hugely preferably to cite any information you add. --ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

How do i put in where i found my information and The Breeze (East Hampshire & South West Surrey) takes me/you to The Breeze owned by Nation Broadcasting who only have the radio licence for Southampton, Portsmouth and Winchester which Nation Broadcasting call The Breeze (South) where as The Breeze (East Hampshire & South West Surrey) is Bauer owned.Phil8482 (talk) 19:39, 29 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil8482 (talk • contribs) 17:34, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Phil8482:

• To learn how to cite sources, consult WP:REFBEGIN.
• To link to the correct jurisdiction, use the correct disambiugator in parentheses. Please don't use run-on sentences as it makes it hard to understand what you are trying to say. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:26, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Phil8482: - I hope things are going well. I was wondering if you were able to read through the comments and figure it out or do you need more help as I’d be glad to help you out with this as there are certain criteria for red links. Please let us know! We eagerly await your presence. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

How would I sort out The Breeze (East Hampshire & South West Surrey) from the Nation Broadcasting one and put it under Bauer Radio Phil8482 (talk) 10:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Phil8482, Bauer Radio already exists. Did you want to WP:MERGE the content? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:55, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tenryuu.I know Bauer Radio exists already.All i want to do is put the information for The Breeze East Hampshire & South West Surrey under Bauer Radio and leave Portsmouth,Southampton & Winchester as The Breeze South which falls under Nation BroadcastingPhil8482 (talk) 18:05, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright for a Google Maps photo?

Greetings! I want to make the article titled Florida State Road 997 better by adding a picture of a road sign taken from Google Maps street view. Would this be a violation of copyright? I want to write about how Krome Ave is notorious for having, unfortunately, a sizable amount of traffic related deaths every year, and the sign I am looking to take from street view is a record of how many deaths there are. It would be a screenshot taken from my browser. Regards Stapmoshun (talk) 17:14, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

yes, adding google map pictures are violating copyright --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 18:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Stapmoshun: and welcome to the Tea House! As a side note if you can find an alternate article that shows the same information you can add that text and cite the page you got the information from. That is usually the best way as a picture of a street sign is not the most informative and I’m pretty sure the street sign doesn’t get updated often. If you need any help, please let me know and I’ll be glad to assist you. Galendalia (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Stapmoshun: - Were you able to figure this out or do you need more assistance, perhaps trying to find a photo you can use or how are you planning on implementing this information into the article? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Galendalia:! You know, there has been this sign a mile or so from my house for the longest time that I've always wanted to photograph. But I don't have a car so I can't drive and pull over and take it myself, and now that we are in quarantine, it is even further out of the question. Can I link you to a screengrab of what I'm talking about, or is even posting a link here a violation of copyright? It wouldn't be in an article.. I think I am going to go ahead and write a new section of the article talking about its notoriety for being dangerous. Although I will have to come up with a more succinct heading, you know. I would love to have some help finding a free photograph of this sign. It has fascinated me ever since I was a kid. Thank you, Stapmoshun (talk) 00:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Why can’t I get awnsers from my submission sooner?

Dear teahouse,I am a new user to Wikipedia. One month ago, I submitted an article. I had about given up hope, until today. I received an answer: my submission was declined! I wish it had came sooner so I could’ve just deleted my account. What is your advice? Best of wishes, 0713125012PiperleeCopley. 0713125012PiperleeCopley (talk) 17:29, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@0713125012PiperleeCopley: There is a large backlog of unreviewed articles, and all the reviewers all volunteers, so it can take quite some time for an article to be reviewed. No reason to delete your account, just improve your draft based on the reviewer's feedback. Also read WP:YFA for info on how to create an artcile. RudolfRed (talk) 17:47, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi 0713125012PiperleeCopley. You submitted User:0713125012PiperleeCopley/sandbox six days ago, right after creating your account. It was declined after 90 minutes. That is very fast, and you were immediately notified at User talk:0713125012PiperleeCopley#Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (April 23). Your draft has no chance of being accepted. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:00, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, 0713125012PiperleeCopley. It looks like global lockdown is distorting everyone's perception of time! You actually created an article in your sandbox just six days ago. Its sole contents (apart from some recently added links to Wikipedia) was "Cats are mammals. They have whiskers. They usually are covered in fur, though some species do not have fur.". This comes nowhere close to being anything like a serious, informative encyclopaedia entry, and we have one on Cat already, of course. So, in a sense, you have rather wasted your time. My advice is to read Wikipedia:About and maybe try The Wikipedia Adventure if you really want to contribute. Alternatively something like Google's Blogger is a great way to create your own personal webpages which nobody else can interfere with. Because creating a new Wikipedia article on a subject nobody else has yet written about is the hardest thing anyone can achieve here (and there are over 6 million articles in existence here already), you might be better off focusing on making small corrections and improvement to existing articles, first. There isn't actually any way to delete an account here - simply abandon it and forget the password if you really want to give up at this early stage in your editing career. We all have to start somewhere, but unfortunately you did rather set off on the wrong foot. Regards from lockdown UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey @0713125012PiperleeCopley: - Where you able to get this worked out and have an understanding? I see you did start in the Wikipedia Adventure so that is a great start to get you going! Please do let us know if you need any other help on this topic or not. We look forward to serving you more tea but we are out of biscuits and cookies Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Question About improving a article.

I want to ask about improving a article.I want to improve Shah Sulaimān Nūri and want to give more detail about the person.but whenever i add some information,some user undo my contribution although i add reliable and 3rd party source and citation Saadulhassan2 (talk) 17:36, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Saadulhassan2, You did not provide appropriate sources, much of it appeared unsourced. Also, your additions were not neutral and in an encyclopedic tone, nor did they follow our manual of style. Our pages are for writing factual and succint accounts of our subjects, not long winding hagiographies or devotionals. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:28, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek, Ok I get it but what if the article's basic things cant be added in article and biography article become incomplete without these details?what should i do then? User:Saadulhassan2

@Saadulhassan2: Look for professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources about the subject, and then summarize the relevant parts and then paraphrase that summary (to avoid copyright violations). This guide I wrote has a section on finding sources. Also, write in a plain and simple way that even someone who hates the subject has to agree with what you wrote. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Ian.thomson.Thank you very much.I want to ask one more question. the source which I cite on a article should be available online or I can also cite a source which is not available on internet? User:Saadulhassan2
Greetings @Saadulhassan2: - To answer your question about the sources they need to able to be accessed on the internet (preferably free websites if you can) however free registration and membership sites are ok, however my POV is they are not very conducive to a user reading an article to have to sign up or pay for anything. You can have a look at WP:Cite and WP:BLP as well as in the article Ian linked in his response. On your user page you should have a welcome page from someone (if not go to my talk page and let me know and I will happily put one up for you) that will have a link to the Wikipedia Adventure which will help you get very well acquainted with WP. Please do let us know if you need any further help or if you are ok now. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:33, 1 May 2020 (UTC) User:Galendalia thank you very much for your support.I have welcome page.One more thing i want to know is what happen if the sources given are in some local national langauge i.e Urdu.In this case ,will my source be considered as reliable source or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saadulhassan2 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

unable to link to existing wiki pages

When try to link to for ex. Fond for Utøvende Kunstnere, which has a wiki page, it still is linked as an external link and says that it is no wiki page for this company yet. Why is that and any way to fix it? Best May MaySundAnd (talk) 18:01, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@MaySundAnd: That URL is for a different language Wikipedia. Is there an article here on the English Wikipedia? RudolfRed (talk) 18:04, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

That article is on the Norwegian Wikipedia. The link {{ill|Fond for utøvende kunstnere|no}} will render as Fond for utøvende kunstnere (including the "no" link to the Norwegian article), see Template:ill. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:07, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Note also that as well as that Bokmål version, another version of the article exists in Nynorsk, at nn:Fond for utøvende kunstnere. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey @MaySundAnd: - Did these suggestions help or do you need more assistance? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey! Thanks and sorry late reply! I havent looked at it properly yet but will get back to you if I cant make it work :)! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaySundAnd (talk • contribs) 12:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Which edits should be discussed on the talk page, and which should not?

On [[1]], it says, "Before engaging in a major edit, a user should consider discussing proposed changes on the article discussion/talk page." Yet looking at various talk pages, it seems like there isn't a lot of this– or am I looking at articles without a lot of changes? (I would link them but I don't remember which ones they were.) What types of changes need to be discussed on a talk page, and how would you express that you want to make a change? Agdearshah (talk) 21:28, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Agdearshah. Welcome to the Teahouse. Great question and, yes, you're right - not a lot of article talk pages get much activity at all - whereas others are buzzing with discussion and editing arguments. It's almost an impossible question to answer precisely, but once you've been around here a bit you get a sense of how easily other editors might react to something you want to do. So, a plan for a major rearrangement of an article might be well worth raising on the talk page first. Addition or removal of anything you think might be contentious could also be worth raising first - especially if, in your heart or hearts, you know that someone else is likely to take a totally different point of view to you. Whilst you can just 'BEBOLD' and make the change immediately, it can be demoralising to work for hours on end, trying to improve something (at least, as far you see it) only to then have another editor revert all your changes with those four killer words: "Discuss on talk page!". Merging articles or splitting off large parts into a separate article are well-worth raising. Earlier today we had another editor ask whether discussing something on a talk page is worthwhile (see here). It may take a while to get a reply, and if you don't then be bold and go make those changes after a few days to a week. Alternatively, listen to any responses and aim to come to a consensus. 99.999% of editors here want to improve articles, though with over 6 million such articles, that's an awful lot of talk pages and not so many editors. So mostly we simply go ahead and make the edits were are confident will improve Wikipedia, and then discuss if someone objects by reverting us. Does this, admittedly rather waffly, answer help? Nick Moyes (talk) 21:46, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

That was very helpful, thank you! --Agdearshah (talk) 21:56, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Whether you first seek consensus or boldly edit, there's a fair likelihood that somebody will object to your actually excellent proposal/edit. OTOH, there seems to be less likelihood of getting a massive wave of two or three editors supporting your excellent change. Your best bet is just to keep your expectations low. Fabrickator (talk) 07:51, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey @Agdearshah:. I see you completed the introductory course so congratulations! I wanted to see if there is anything else we can help you with on this request? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:54, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Rename a person page

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Is it possible to rename a person's page?

This page is about my uncle. His middle name was not "J". He did not use his middle name; almost everywhere you look he was just "Fr James Quinn SJ". The incorrect wikipedia title seems to be the root of many incorrect citations online.

It'd be a great start to rename his page to "James_Quinn_(Jesuit)".

Thanks. 109.153.129.59 (talk) 22:29, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I agree - none of the sources cited uses a middle initial, so I have moved the article to James Quinn (Jesuit). Thanks for pointing this out. --ColinFine (talk) 22:41, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I've also removed the J from the lead of the article itself. --ColinFine (talk) 22:49, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks ColinFine! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.129.59 (talk) 11:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Free trials and the url-access parameter

I was editing a page that had a citation to the service Westlaw. Westlaw is principally subscription only, but also offers free trials, as described on on the service's page about plans and pricing. Help:Citation Style 1#Registration or subscription required outlines the recognized values for the parameter url-access as subscription, registration, and limited. For long term use, I see "subscription" as the most accurate, but for a single source one could get a free trial through registration and so that seems most accurate. Does there already exist any consensus on what to pass to the url-access parameter in situations like this one? Thanks for the help and please ping me in your reply. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 01:54, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@The Editor's Apprentice: - If the free trial will not bill a users account and automatically terminate I don’t see a reason why you cannot pass the Registration. However, if it will bill or require a credit card then Subscription would be your best choice. I would think it would be better all together if you can find an alternate source that is free that says the same thing. Galendalia (talk) 08:54, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

The Editor's Apprentice, if a given user or email address is limiotd to a single free trial, or only one per year or soem such, i would still list this as "Subscription", perhaps with a note "Free trial available". Galendalia sources that are not free are poerfectly acceptable, although if a free source with the same content and equal or better quality and reliability is available, that is probably a better source to use. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:03, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel - I am aware of that which is why I mentioned it however, I also look at if you have to pay to access information it may not be important enough to have to pay the large fees Westlaw charges ;) That is why I suggested to find a free alternative. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 15:27, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Galendalia Fair enough. I have much more experience with things liker newspaper.com, which charges a much lower fee -- in fact I pay for an annual subscription just for Wikipedia editing. I wouldn't do that with Westlaw. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC) Galendalia DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel and Galendalia: Thank you both much for the feedback. I'm a little confused about DESigel's reply since I can't think of a service that doesn't restrict the availability of free trials for each user and/or email address. In fact, if any service didn't restrict access to free trials it would basically defeat the idea of it being a trial. I'm also unaware of anyway to make a note in citation other than to use <!-- --> comments, which wouldn't be visible to a casual reader. If there is some other way, I would be very interested to learn more about it. In response to Galendalia's reply, on the page describing the details of applying for a free trial it is stated that "[n]o credit card [is] required" and that one can "[c]ancel anytime during the trial period", so in accordance with what Galendalia recommended, it seems that registration would be reasonable to pass. I still hesitate a little bit about passing registration to the url-access though, because the page I linked to is only to request a free trial. After the form gets submitted, it seems that it needs to be manually approved. Despite that though, I still think registration makes the most sense. It really does seem to me to be a sticky situation. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel and The Editor's Apprentice: - What is the link you need to make? My understanding of Thomson Reuters is they do not grant individuals access. You have to be associated to an organization or agency with the need and to even pay for it beyond a trial it expensive, requires them to call you and get all of the information, etc. I remember dealing with this software many years ago in law firm. I would honestly go the route of seeing if the information can be found somewhere else. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 17:40, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Galendalia: I'm not actually trying to work towards accessing the information Westlaw has to offer, I am only trying to figure out what the best way to mark a preexisting citations accessibility. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 17:47, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@The Editor's Apprentice: - I understand that but if it cannot be accessed and since Westlaw is very expensive, I am not sure if that would be a great source to get anything from; basically it is not available to the general public to be honest. I think maybe a reviewer can hop in here and make a comment. I am out of thoughts otherwise! Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 18:08, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Moving a page

Hi, I'm new to wikipedia editing. I tried to move the pager https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gr%C3%A9gory_Katz to the same name but without an accent in the first name. The page was already taken by a redirect to the page with the accent. I then completed the page "Editing Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests" as follows:

Uncontroversial technical requests

However, the published page shows the following page change request:

Uncontroversial technical requests Microcanthus strigatus → Stripey (redirect to Microcanthus strigatus) (move · discuss) – use common name (where available) to avoid use of genus name for the only species in a monospecific genus Quetzal1964 (talk) 07:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

This looks like an example or something. So I'm not sure if my request has gone through. Could someone help me on this. Thanks. Jkorsunsky (talk) 07:43, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

You want to move the article Grégory Katz to Gregory Katz. This is justified, as the sources cited mostly (I haven't checked all of them) don't use the accent. However, this will be a "move over a redirect", which, as I understand it, can only be done by an admin. In my experience, mentioning the need for such a move here on the Teahouse is likely to cause a helpful admin to do the move. Maproom (talk) 08:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Jkorsunsky. What you have done is, instead of inserting a new request, you have edited the existing sample code to be your request - and, moreover, the sample you have edited is an instruction to editors, inside a comment, and doesn't appear in the page at all. I have undone your edit. You need to edit it again, but this time copy the line {{subst:RMassist| current page title | new page title | reason = reason for move}} to underneath the last entry - currently neatypus obliquus - and edit the copy. (I would have done this for you, but it would have been recorded as my request). --ColinFine (talk) 08:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Colin, I hope I got this right. It's not so simple, I find. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkorsunsky (talk • contribs) 12:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Jkorsunsky: - How did those suggestions work out for you? Were you able to get your desired results or are you still having issues? Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Galendalia:. Don't know if I did it right, the page still hasn't been moved to "Gregory Katz" without accent.

Hi, Jkorsunsky. That's because you haven't taken my advise and made the request again. --ColinFine (talk) 14:22, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @ColinFine:. I wanted to declare the fact that I am a paid editor before repeating the request. I just did it now.

How do I add a previously used reference number to the main text

 Firework1000 (talk) 10:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Firework1000! Have you seen the WP:REF page? I hope it should be able to answer your question. If it doesn't, please add more details about what you need to achieve. --CiaPan (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Firework1000. If you are asking how you can repeatedly use the same reference, again and again, in different parts of an article, you'll need to ensure it already has a "ref name= " added to it. Usually this is a short memorable word added manually via the 'Cite' button and drop-down template when using WP:Source Editor. Though if references have been added using the equivalent 'Cite' button in Visual Editor, then it will have an automatically assigned and much less intuitive "ref name= " given to it. This is just a sequential number preceded by a colon (:0, :1, :2, etc). There is specific advice in re-using any existing reference at WP:REFNAME. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:06, 30 April 2020 (UTC) 

Doing articles for social media influencers

If I'm creating an article for a social media influencer, does their social media count as a reliable source? And also, roughly how many references should a Wikipedia page have? Frogface08 (talk) 11:16, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Frogface08 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A person's social media accounts would be a primary source, which are only acceptable in certain situations. Wikipedia articles should primary summarize what independent reliable sources say about a subject. Often, people using social media naturally write favorably about themselves, and Wikipedia tries to have a neutral point of view. This is partially why independent sources are preferred. I would add that most "social media influencers" rarely meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable person.

In terms of a number of sources, there is no set number, but in general most reviewers and editors look for at least three sources with significant coverage. "Significant coverage" goes beyond brief mentions, press releases, or routine announcements. Primary sources do not establish notability. 331dot (talk) 11:19, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I see that you have attempted to declare a conflict of interest, is your conflict of interest with the subject?(you put your own username in your notice) 331dot (talk) 11:25, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Impostor editor of a wikipedia page

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.

---

Resolved

 – Account in question blocked for impersonation, WP:UAA mentioned as a more appropriate venue. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Not sure if this is the right place for this, but someone has impersonated Mike Hatton and made edits to the page Draft:Mike_Hatton, which has now been taken down. The user User:Mikehfilms is not Mike.  Caliwolfus (talk) 13:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Caliwolfus and welcome to the Teahouse. The usual place to report such issues is at WP:UAA (Usernames for AAdmin Attentioon) but in this case this report will do. I will look into it. Do you have any public information which suggests that Mikehfilms is not the actor? That user claims to be the actor on his user page. Please do not post any7 private or confidential info -- you my use "email this user" to send any such info to me. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:46, 30 April 2020 (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.

Article titled "Niagara Falls State Park" appears to have the wrong governor signing the Niagara Falls Bill during the wrong year.

According to a Buffalo Evening News article published Thursday, April 30, 1885, the Niagara Falls Park Bill was signed into law by Governor David Hill at noon of the day the article was published.

 Abiquaed (talk) 13:50, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Abiquaed: and Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia allows anyone to edit any article. If you have a reliable source, you can make the change and cite the source (also when you publish the edit, be sure to fill out the edit summary stating what you did). I will post a welcome message to your talk page that will contain many links to help get you started! Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 17:52, 30 April 2020 (UTC) (Update - Added Welcome message to your talk page - Feel free to chat on my page with me if you need any other assistance.)

Are deleted pages archived somewhere?

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

I am looking for a page I had bookmarked some time ago. The article I am looking for is List of fictional medicines and drugs. Would this article be archived somewhere? Jaisgossman (talk) 14:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Jaisgossman Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Deleted pages are deleted, not archived. The deleted content is visible to administrators. Some outside websites have copies of pages deleted from Wikipedia itself. 331dot (talk) 14:12, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Jaisgossman, it is in the servers, but only admins can view it. Sometimes, the deleting admin may agree to email a copy to the editor who created it. Deleted articles are sometimes available from websites that mirror Wikipedia's content. There's Category:Fictional medicines and drugs if all you're looking for is an index of Wikipedia articles. Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, Thanks for pointing me there. The article was probably was turned into this index at some point.

Neutral Point of View

I am trying to upload a page for a friend on his business. I am having trouble with writing in a neutral point of view. Does anyone have tips or suggestions on how to do this? I am referencing this wiki page

Sun Basket  Skussmann (talk) 14:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Skussmann Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Since you say you are working for a friend, you must review the conflict of interest policy and make a formal declaration. If your friend is compensating you in any way(doesn't have to be money), you need to comply with the paid editing policy as well. What you are writing is little more than an advertisement for your friend's business. A Wikipedia article on a business should summarize only what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about a business, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable business. Not every business meets the criteria for a Wikipedia article. Many of the sources you offer do not seem to be about the business at all, and the ones that do seem to be routine announcements or press releases, which do not establish notability. You need sources that are independent of the subject and have chosen on their own to give the business significant coverage. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 14:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

My suggestion was rejected. I must have made a mistake. Can I have that and any other mistakes explained to me?

Americn Institute of ManagementNorman Clairmont (talk) 14:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC) Norman Clairmont (talk) 14:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Norman Clairmont The edit filter prevented you from editing because of the information in your post. Please see the message on your user talk page for more information. 331dot (talk) 14:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Bliss Team

Need help editing

I need help with editing the Bliss Team page Marinated Potato (talk) 14:35, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Covid19 Marinated Potato (talk) 14:37, 30 April 2020 (UTC) We can get through this Wikipedia!

Marinated Potato Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your changes to that article were removed because they don't seem to make much sense(you introduced a misspelling to the article, among other things) and appeared to be vandalism. If there are edits you wish to make to that article, please describe what they are on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 14:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Question about Adding Additional Citations

Hello there,

I am wondering if an added citation counts as a minor edit that I can do independently or as a major edit that needs to be submitted as an edit request? I have been submitting formal edit requests to add content to the William L. Armstrong page and it's been going well! I'm very happy with my wiki-manager's engagement. However, I'm wondering if I only want to add an additional citation to content that already exists, whether that also has to be an edit request? Hope to hear from you soon! Thank you!2019crisissimus2 (talk) 14:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC) 2019crisissimus2 (talk) 14:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello 2019crisissimus2 and welcome to the Teahouse. That is a question without a clear-cut answer. If the statements are already in the article, if the source i9s fully independent of the article subject, and is clearly reliable, and the statement is very explicitly supported in the source, adding the source probably does not need an edit request. But as a paid contributor you want to err on the side of caution. If the source is an important one, or is supporting statements important to the article, you might want to use an edit request to have the addition reviewed. If there is any possibility that the addi9tion would be viewed as promotional, definitely use an edit request. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:17, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

2019crisissimus2, as DESiegel said, continuing via edit requests is best. I would say to quote the content you want to add the citation to, include the link, and wait for an editor to review it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:28, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Email

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

How do I email you guys? Marinated Potato (talk) 14:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Marinated Potato and welcome to the Teahouse. Mostly you don't. Some users, including myself, have enabled the "email this user" function, which can be reached from the user mor user talk page for such a user. Many have not. In general, questions about or comment son a Wikipedia article or page should be made on the corresponding talk page, or at a help page such as this one. Questions addressed to a particular editor should be made on that person's user talk page. Use email only where confidentiality is a serious issue, or there is some other good reason not to post on-wiki. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:11, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Marinated Potato: And in a case when the use of email is necessary, you can email any editor at Special:EmailUser. --Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 16:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Not quite any editor, Hillelfrei. Only those editors who have opted in to allow this function can be emailed in that way. In my experience, most admins have opted in, but many editors have not. No policy requires an ordinary editor to opt in. Does that clarify things, Marinated Potato? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:36, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Marinated Potato: Thanks! Just figured it out though😎 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marinated Potato (talk • contribs) 16:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Thanks for the correction. I meant "any" as opposed to going to their user page, you can type in any user who has opted in but my bad wording. Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 16:43, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Help with tag removal

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

hello! I am new to Wikipedia, and I was hoping someone can help me with my article: Paul J. Tesar. I officially declared COI. I have worked with a few editors and have made substantial changes to both the content and tone over the past few months. The COI tag still remains on the page, and it says the article still requires cleanup, particularly neutral point of view. I have made many changes, and I believe the article is now written in a neutral and encyclopedic tone. I have made all the recommended changes from editors. I engaged in a short discussion with other editors about removing the COI tag on the talk page, but the conversation went dormant several weeks ago. I am wondering if someone can review and determine if the COI tag is ready to be removed. If not, can someone please suggest any edits necessary for the COI tag to be removed. Thank you so much for your help! Marissascavuzzo (talk) 15:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

HI @Marissascavuzzo: as a member of the Copy Editors team I will be happy to take a look in a little bit. I will post to your talk page when I start looking at then I will let you know the results. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 17:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Marissascavuzzo: - I also help out with the copy editing team. I just gave the article a quick look and made some minor punctuation changes and replaced the press release sources. It looks pretty good now but let's see what Galendalia thinks. The only area of concern might be listing the research papers. To show they are notable enough to list, some editors want to look them up to see how much they are cited. Otherwise the article veers into CV territory. Good luck. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Marissascavuzzo: - I put it on my to do list for today, May 1, 2020. I am in San Diego So I am UTC -8. I will close this conversation and get the article over to our team.

Climacteric fruit

In this review/article relating to Climacteric fruit (especially tomoato) there are no references to the fundamental research and publications conducted at GCRI (Littlehampton, UK) and other UK organisations. The UK has a leading and important role in understanding the physiological, gentic and biochemical regulation of fruit growth, development and ripening and this should be represented! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c6:bb05:8001:95ef:af27:4477:1f59 (talk • contribs)

You're welcome to add anything you think notable, with proper sourcing. Ideally the best research is reported in reliable sources. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

A question

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

Over the past few days, I came across this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_and_colleges_in_Tigrai. It appears to me that one user is repeatedly adding a piece of promotional content from an unreliable source (one formatted incorrectly as well), the website of the college in question. I'm guessing this person works for the college and is trying to add them to Wikipedia.

What should I do here? I don't want to violate the three-revert rule, but I don't think the content should stay on the page. If I'm wrong, or missed a policy, sorry. Just let me know. Heyoostorm (talk) 17:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Heyoostorm, given you have already asked them on their talk page, I would wait to see if they repeat the additions. If nothing changes, and the edits are readded, you might want to open a thread at the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 18:23, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Coronavirus

 41.114.12.222 (talk) 18:10, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a question to ask about it? REDMAN 2019 Stay at home:Protect the NHS:Save lives (talk) 18:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Working on a Stub... can it be reviewed?

I am working on what I think will be considered a Stub and would like to make sure it complies with the 'rules' of Wikipedia, which I believe it does. The point of this Stub is to provide encyclopedia-type content about a company. I went through the Wikipedia 'Training Game' and spent a lot of time on Wikipedia guideline pages but seem to see some Wikipedia pages that feature the type of content I wrote for this page and some that have been banned or 'disciplined' for similar content.

How would I go about submitting a sandbox piece for review here, or elsewhere? Do I provide the sandbox url here?

Thank you! Oceanaspen (talk) 19:16, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Oceanaspen: Presuming you don't have any conflict of interest, you could move your User:Oceanaspen/sandbox to Draft:Nimbix, and submit it to the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process. Before you do that, I suggest you add more WP:RS reliable sources to show that Nimbix meets Wikipedia's definition of notability. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:35, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Confusion

 Courtesy link: Draft:Amulet Hotkey page

I have no idea what i'm doing and just want to submit the article I was told to submit for review but can't seem to do it right. SCopeland97 (talk) 19:20, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello SCopeland97. Is the article in your sandbox? An easy way I submit articles is through the Wikipedia:Article wizard. If it is in your sandbox and you are struggling to submit it, maybe open the Wikipedia:Article wizard in a new tab and copy/paste what you wrote into the Article Wizard. That is an easy way to submit the article for review. Hopefully this helps. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:25, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Elijahandskip. I did manage to submit the article but it was immediately rejected because they said it was promotional. In that critique, I was told to specify if I work for the company that asked me to publish the page, which I do, in fact, currently intern for. Once I specified that it was rejected because apparently by disclosing that I can no longer publish the article? If that's how it works, how am I supposed to get this article published and what am I supposed to tell my bosses?? SCopeland97 (talk) 19:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello. So Wikipedia's Article wizard is a good place to get the steps to disclose even if you aren't using it to submit an article. Click the article wizard then click the next button 2 times (You want to be on page 3.) Once you are on page 3, you can choose if you are being paid to edit or just writing about the company you are in. Once you pick, it will tell you the steps to disclose. Once you complete those steps, you should be ok to resubmit the article from your sandbox (Just back button out of Article wizard once the steps are completed.. Hopefully this helps. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:42, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

SCopeland97, I suggest you read up on Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. Wikipedia is much more interested in what secondary sources have to say about the subject; that is, while primary sources are appreciated for filling in information, they are insufficient to produce citations for an article by themselves. Looking at the draft I see only information being cited by the company's website while there are stray references in the References section left unused. To the best of my knowledge it is fine to work on an article while it is a draft (provided it is not promotional), but once it migrates to the main articlespace, your contributions (and contributions from others affiliated with the company) should not be added directly to the article unless they are factual errors that are citable. Most contributions should be vetted through the article's talk page using edit requests. See Talk:Wheely for an example of how a paid contributor is properly collaborating with uninvolved editors. Nick Moyes, AlanM1, is my talk about edit requests accurate enough? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I moved your PAID declaration to your User page. The second Declined was solely because you put PAID in the wrong place. Yes, what you wrote on your first attempt was worthy of Speedy deletion. You can try again. I left some guidance on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 19:58, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

AND, it's gone. You can ask the administrator who did the last delete to send it to you, but reality is that if you really want to try this again, start fresh, in your Sandbox. Then it can be moved to draft and submitted to AfC. The real problem is there may not be enough written about the company. Rehashing of press releases does not convey notability. David notMD (talk) 23:13, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Question from DaniHart08

I was wondering if anyone knew how to insert a picture in your talk page or in your user page. Does anyone know? Dani Hart (Talk) 19:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

DaniHart08, the same way an image is uploaded to any other article. If the image is already uploaded, either to here or commons, just follow the instructions at Help:Pictures.

For example,

[[File:Squirrel Sandanski.jpg|thumb|example caption]]

example caption

produces the image seen here

If the image isn't already here or at Commons, and you personally took the photo, just upload it via the Commons upload wizard, then follow the steps above.

If it isn't here or at Commons already, and you didn't take it, you probably can't use it. If you have an image in mind that meets this, ask here, as it might be permitted under some circumstances - i.e. if it is quite old.

Thanks,

~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 19:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Album Cover Art

I’m a fan of an up-and-coming indie rock band and I’d like to create pages for the albums in their discography linking back to their main Wiki page. This includes uploading the cover art image for each page, like every page for an album has on Wikipedia. What licensing option should I select when uploading? (And, obviously, keep it a small-medium resolution image.). Do I need written permission from the band or label? How does this all work? 96.255.57.10 (talk) 20:04, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello editor with IP ending in 57.10, and welcome to the Teahouse. Written permission is neither required nor useful on an album cover image, unless the permission is in the form of a fre license compatible with CC-BY-SA, and permits anyone in the world to reuse the i9mage for any purpose without fee or further permission. The usual method is to upload the image to the english-language Wikipedia (not to wikimedia commons) and use it under a claim of fair use. However, you cannot upload an image here without first registering an account, and being logged in when you upload, and a fair use image can only be displayed on an article, not a draft.

So the first order of business is to make sure that the album is notable and the article about nit is solid. Only then will there be any point in co9nsidering an album cover image.

Note that albums by "up-and-coming indie rock bands" are most often not notable. See WP:NALBUM for the specific criteria that should be met for suh an artivcel to be created and remain on Wikipedia. Note that Wikipedia does not have "pages for" things,l it has articles about things. This is a subtle but important difference. Creating a new article is harder thyan it looks, about the hardest task a new user is likely to tackle here. Here are some steps thjat, when followed, often lead to success:

• First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our specific guideline on the notability of musical topics. Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
• Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
• Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
• Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
• Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
• Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
• Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request here or at the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:01, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Need assistance with a user

Hi. I would like a neutral person to please assist with another editor who has continued to make me feel uneasy. I am a new editor. I have been trying to be helpful. Also, if you would please read the section called "pneumothorax" on my talk page. That is the problem I am having. I have asked this user to refrain from further comments in that section. They have not done so. I feel this is harassment. Any assistance would be appreciated. Wikipedia is supposed to be friendly space. Thank you! Battykin (talk) 20:53, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Battykin: Added Template:Closed to the talk page section to emphasize that you want the conversation to be over. Unfortunately, everyone's passion to improve articles (combined with communicating without verbal tone and body language) can lead to heated discussion sometimes. There are 6 million other articles we can work on. From one "batty" to another! GoingBatty (talk) 21:10, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for reply, but you have deleted the first section on my Talk page which I did not want removed. Also, I did not want to archive that section. I simply wanted the user to respect my request of ending the discussion there. I still want that on my talk page in case it happens again. I don't want to archive it.Battykin (talk) 21:20, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Battykin: Oops! I tried to look at your archive, but accidentally archive your first section. Sorry about that! I have restored it for you. GoingBatty (talk) 21:26, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Me thinks GoingBatty has finally gone batty and is talking to their alto ego! Fly batty, fly away! Lol Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 09:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Articles

I want to edit this page, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/?title=Kaylee_Bryant&redirect=no, but am unsure what the best sources to choose from would be. I also don't see much info anywhere on formatting and graphics help. Lessers23! (talk) 21:07, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Lessers23!, You should see our guidance at your first article. You need reliable sources, which is usually things like reputable newspapers, magazines, and news sites, at least when it comes to living people. You'll need at least three very good sources, but having at least five sources is generally good. Such sources need to discuss the subject at some length, at least a few sentences or paragraphs, not just a passing mention. If such sources do not exist, we cannot write about the person. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Lessers23!: Welcome to the Teahouse! I believe the best reliable sources would be interviews with Bryant and critical reviews about her performance. If you haven't done so already, please read the notability discussion at Talk:Kaylee Bryant. You might be interested in Help:Your first article for guidance on creating a draft article, which you could submit for review once you have collected the right sources. You could also invite the people who edited the previous article to help you. Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography have some good info for you. You might also want to copy a well-formatted article about another actor and paste it into your sandbox, then replace things with info about Bryant. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Lessers23 and welcome to the Teahouse. I must disagree with GoingBatty slightly, i8n that interviews with the subject of an article are usually consider notm to be independent and so contribute little or no0thign to n otabili9ty, althoguh they can be good sources for what the subject has said about him- or herself. News stories, whether in print or online, can be good sources. If there exist reputable books about the subject, biographies or the like, those can also be good sources, but beware of the "quickie" biography written to exploit a subject's celebrity with little or no depth of research. Similarly tabloid-style "news" coverage is often best avoided. User-generated forums, fan sites and personal blog posts are almost never reliable sources and should generally be avoided. See our guideline on reliable sources for more details. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:14, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

should dead wp links be kept

i;m coming across a bunch of dead wikipedia links on articles. I try to see if i can find them, but mostly they don't exist. If I ignore ones that are clearly bogus (ie vandals), should these dead wp links be kept. The argument for would be that an article might be created for the item at some point, but the counter is until then it makes the text show up in red. I can't find any guidance that says what to do. ToeFungii (talk) 21:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

ToeFungii, Do you mean red links, such as this? If so, see our guidance at WP:REDLINK. The gist of it is: unless the link is abusive, it should be kept. Usually redlinked things should be created someday, but just haven't yet. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek this is exactly what i was asking. thx for the guidance. i looked but must have read right past it or missed it. ty.ToeFungii (talk) 21:46, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: the Cap'n has given you some correct advice. But I could expand a little by saying that if you encounter articles with a lot of red links that clearly and definitely are never likely to ever merit an article on Wikipedia and - as long as you feel confident in making that judgement - you could remove those redlinks. Thus Joseph Vallot is a valid redlink to have in an article about the Alps, whereas my extraodinarily ordinary wife, Cynthia Moyes, and her equally fictitious business (Cynthia's Dog Shampooing Parlour) probably aren't. So always leave 'em in if you're not confident; take 'em out if there's no doubt! Nick Moyes (talk) 22:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)    

Editing an article about me.

The article name is Lee Mroszak.

It's about me. There are numerous issues with it. Factually, missing information, and hearsay.

My Wikipedia user name is Cabbie333 My identity has been verified by Wikipedia. I've tried to provide the correct information and do simple edits and an (editor named Metric) keeps basically telling me that I'm doing everything wrong.

I've never done anything like this before. I'm a Disabled Veteran in #Isolation at a VA hospital. Covid19 has hit us hard.

I just wanted to get the proper information on the article and facts. I have government documents that provide all the information. I have my college transcripts. Everything

Please help. Cabbie333 (talk) 21:50, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I suggest that anyone taking this on familiarize themself with the almost two-weeks' of discussion on the user's talk page: COI, ownership, OTRS, WP:V, WP:RS, requesting edits, posting personal information all covered, much of it several times. Meters (talk) 22:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Cabbie333. It is not a good idea for you to try to edit the article about you. Please read WP: AUTOBIOGRAPHY for full details. Government documents and college transcripts are of no value on Wikipedia, because we rely on published reliable sources. The best place for you to discuss your concerns is Talk:Lee Mroszak, where you can leave an edit request.

Now, I will read the discussion on your talk page.Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:15, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Cabbie333: Welcome to the Teahouse! I'm sorry you're having a hard time, both in isolation and here on Wikipedia. In order to comply with the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, I suggest you use the article talk page Talk:Lee Mroszak to suggest edits and provide the reliable sources you have. Start small by making one suggestion with the {{request edit}} template, so other editors can help. GoingBatty (talk) 22:16, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Cabbie333. First off, if there's anything in the article about you that is unsourced to reliably published sources (i.e. plain hearsay) you are welcome to remove it. That action accords with our policy on the biographies of living people (shortcut: WP:BLP). We delete everything personal that is not linked to a reliably published source.

Secondly - and this bit might sound unreasonable to you because you know yourself the best - but I'm really sorry: we cannot use stuff like government documents, transcripts, or personal knowledge, to populate a Wikipedia article about you. The reason is that we require anyone, anywhere in the world, to be able to Verify that what has been added is valid and correct. Those sources MUST, I'm afraid, have been properly published. Birth certificates, tax returns, award certificates, personal memories and so forth simply can't be accepted unless they have been reported upon in properly published books or newspapers, with proper editorial control. It's for that same reason that we don't accept either personal websites or social media accounts as sources, nor indeed valuable and original archival content found in national museums unless those archives have been made publicly available. We cannot expect someone in India or Indiana to have to travel half way around the world to visit an individual museum, government office, or your family home to verify a fact on Wikipedia.

The user who has got you so frustrated Meters seems quite right in what they've been trying to tell you. The sad reality is that Wikipedia doesn't set out to make every article factually correct (as you would perceive it) - it tries to collate what has been written about that subject, but in a neutral manner. It puts in the published good stuff and the published bad stuff; even the published wrong stuff. It leaves out all the unpublished stuff.

Look, this is going off-topic a bit for me, but can I give you some earnest advice? I can see you don't want people messing with what you see is 'your' article about the 'facts' about you. But there is a way around that, and that's to register to use a free webservice like Google's Blogger which allows you to create a blog or a website about yourself that only you, or only those you permit, to add content to. I've created a number of websites with it over the years - it's very easy to set up and use. You can add whatever government records, photos taken by friends, tales of your life etc that you want to, and with no comeback. And it will remain there long after you abandon it. By way of example, a Dutch lady I had dealings with some years back (over the subject of birds of prey) had built herself a highly technical and detailed personal website (that she paid for) and also ran a free Blogger account. Sadly, she passed away suddenly in March 2009. Her website content disappeared 6 months later, once her annual contract came to an end, as there was no-one there to renew it. But her blog remains to this day, and is a testament to her fascination with this particular topic. See here). There really is nothing to stop you doing exactly the same about your own personal life, your situation and, indeed, your frustrations and fears at this most difficult of times. There are also ways to submit urls to such websites so that they are permanently archived online, too. I mean no disrespect, but I suggest this might be a much better route for you to follow to achieve your aim. Best wishes from the UK. Take care and stay safe, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:37, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Historic Franklin Millhouse

How to add to an existing information site.

We would like to find out as to include our Historic Franklin Millhouse in Franklin, Ida. Or should we just submit our information on the Millhouse? 2601:681:5801:3810:8480:A229:78D4:9435 (talk) 22:22, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is not a website to "submit information" to. This is an encyclopedia, which has articles about subjects shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Historic structures are usually notable, as long as independent sources have written about them. There is also an additional complication in that it appears that you have a conflict of interest(please review). I would suggest that you designate one of you to create an account(it must be a single individual and that individual may not grant others access to the account). Once the account is created, the user can make the required conflict of interest declaration. You could then use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft article. Be advised that you could only summarize what independent sources state about your building- Wikipedia is not interested in what a subject says about itself, only in what others say about it. Most people in your position have difficulty writing in such a manner, but if you truly feel that you can, that is the path forward in my opinion. 331dot (talk) 22:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse! The Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide states that you cannot add the information yourself, but has lots of good information on how to proceed. GoingBatty (talk) 22:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

There is an article for Franklin, Idaho. On the article's Talk page you could request that a sentence be added to the History section if you can provide with it a reference to a published document identifying the house and mill as historic. Tag that with an edit request. An editor will then review your proposal and either incorporate or not. David notMD (talk) 23:29, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Musical notability criteria

Greetings,

I recently wrote an article but its submission got declined as apparently it didn't appear to indicate which of the musical notability criteria it satisfied. Could you please specify what this criteria is for classical music? I haven't been able to gather it from the musical notability criteria page. Thank you in advance. Here is the link to my article: Draft:Petals (music)

Regards,

--Raeshouse (talk) 22:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Raeshouse Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The criteria for musical groups(regardless of the genre of music) is written at WP:BAND, as you were informed. 331dot (talk) 22:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Raeshouse and 331dot: Since "Petals" is a piece of music (not a music group), Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Recordings is probably more appropriate. GoingBatty (talk) 23:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, please excuse my error. 331dot (talk) 00:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

How do I create a page fast?

 Uonnywitz666 (talk) 00:12, 1 May 2020 (UTC) How do I create a page fast?

Uonnywitz666 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have "pages", it has articles. Unless you already have much experience in article creation, it is extremely unlikely you will be able to "create a page fast", at least successfully. As there are no deadlines on Wikipedia I'm curious as to the reason for the urgency. Successfully creating a new article is the absolute hardest thing to do on Wikipedia. It takes much time and practice. A Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources state about a subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. I usually suggest that new users spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest them first, so they can learn how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 00:17, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

why wouldn't an article in the Simple English Wikipedia also appear in Wikipedia

My header pretty well sums up my question. It's prompted by finding Heather Heyer in the Simple English Wikipedia but not in Wikipedia. Cheers! Tarkiwi25 (talk) 01:04, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Tarkiwi25: Welcome to Wikipedia. Each Wikipedia i a seperate project and articles are created by volunteers. Also, each Wikipedia has its own rules and guidelines for what may be an article. So either no one at this Wikipedia has taken an interest in creating that article, or the subject of that article is not Notable under the guidelines here. RudolfRed (talk) 01:43, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I found that Heather Heyer exists as a redirect to part of another article. Is that what you are looking for?

Forgot to sign. Isn't signbot supposed to catch that? RudolfRed (talk) 01:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

By default, Sinebot won't sign for experienced editors. You can opt in as described at User:Sinebot#Opting back in for experienced editors. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Tarkiwi25, RudolfRed, and David Biddulph: I tried to connect Heather Heyer at Wikidata, but I receive a message stating "Could not save due to an error. The save has failed." Any clue how to resolve the error? GoingBatty (talk) 03:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: That sounds like a question to ask at Wikidata rather than here. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:15, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Of course you're right. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 12:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Arrgh. I wrote a response but it got lost--and now I'm going batty--because Going Batty got in before I managed to publish it. Thanks, y'all.Tarkiwi25 (talk) 03:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

And the answer for English Wikipedia would be that people who are only known because of one event e.g. victims of an attack, are usually not notable enough for a separate article about them. Which is why Heather Heyer has a section about her on Charlottesville car attack, but she would not be notable enough for a separate article. Relevant guideline is WP:BLP1E. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:43, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

maybe someone can help me with the vandalism question

I'm trying to contact one of the counter vandalism academy trainers to sign up, but they're pretty booked and you all usually are able to give awesome fast answers. For what ever reason, I'm attracted to trying to stop vandalism, I think because it lets me see lots of varied articles. So here's the question: I've read the material and it says to revert vandalism with no comment, but that is so contrary for me probably because having started with real edits. It also says that not feeding the vandals including not posting on their talk page, but that also is hard for me because you can't refer someone to AIV unless they've been warned. This is the page that got me wondering Link. If you check it's history you'll see that it was being hit by 3 vandals at the same time and another user and myself were trying to keep them at bay. After all that, the more specific question I can lay out is: 1) with obvious vandalism is it acceptable to not put any comment>; 2) in obvious vandalism, should a warning be put on their talk page? I differentiate the vandals on this page today from those that I know are AGF and it's usually pretty obvious who's here for good intentions and not, but if I err I err on the side of assuming they are here to be a positive. Anyway, hope that makes sense and I appreciate all feedback in advance. ToeFungii (talk) 01:45, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for being interested in counter-vandalism! You're right to err on the side of AGF. The denying recognition comes into play when it's either a) an obvious sockpuppet (which is a bit deeper into the Wiki-world) or in any normal case, leaving the templates but not adding extra commentary. The templates don't really count as giving them attention, I'd say - that would be more like engaging an obvious troll on a talk page, say, or becoming visibly frustrated in edit summaries. Happy editing, and good luck! -- a lad insane (channel two) 01:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I got bit on one of my first edits just trying to improve a problem sentence (I actually came here for some input), but a user that i've come to learn was coming at me due to WP:Ownership. I was fortunate as a couple very experienced editors came in on the issue and one of them effectively made the change I was trying to do but in a more creative way and it stuck. Have to say that this virus has got me situated to be on wp quite a bit so i'm full on absorption, but for every problem there are 10 fantastic positives, and that includes getting help here. TC ToeFungii (talk) 02:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

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.

---

Closing this as it is a duplicate to the one below it. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 06:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 Floridians (talk) 04:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Floridians, Howdy hello, and welcome to the teahouse! If you have any questions, we'd be happy to answer them. Otherwise, glad to have ya around. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Your user page was deleted because it was used for purposes contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia. If you want to make new user page, first read WP:USERPAGE.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:23, 1 May 2020 (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.

creating and editing an article

Hello,

I am new here and apparently already got in trouble with Justdafax. I am trying to Crete e apace and copied a template since I am still learning to navigate. it seems like I have made some mistake and may even have compounded them by fixing them. I believe I am getting closer and wondering if I just need to erase everything and just create a new used. Floridians (talk) 04:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Floridians, No need to erase everything. Don't worry, we are all new once, and it can be a bit confusing to start out. I'm not sure what your userpage had on it or why it was deleted, perhaps @HickoryOughtShirt?4: can give some more guidance, as they deleted it. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Floridians, your user page was deleted because it was used for purposes contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia. If you want to make new user page, first read WP:USERPAGE.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:30, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism

Don't Panic, Captain Mainwaring! I found some cookies and crackers in a stockpile of PPE. Enough for everyone, I'm sure

I see vandalism sometimes on Wikipedia pages. What is best manner to stop vandals? Beobaer (talk) 05:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Beobaer, You might wish to read Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 05:42, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Long read, will try to understand. What tool better: Vandal Fighter, WikiMonitor, Huggle, STiki, Igloo, SWViewer, RC patrol script, Twinkle? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beobaer (talk • contribs) 05:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Beobaer A majority of those folks require certain permissions on your account and since your account is only 3 days old they won’t be granted. If fighting vandalism is what you really want to do I suggest you sign up and take the WP:CVUA. I’ll be glad to assist you as that is what I do a lot of. Welcome to the tea house due to high demand we are out of cookies and crackers. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 06:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I like crackers! I reading all this material you posted. I installed Twinkle, because need experience to levelup for other tools.Beobaer (talk) 06:48, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I attempted to correct

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Duplicate of next item down.
 JjlPierpoint (talk) 06:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I attempted to correct a page and was vandalized. Please advise

 JjlPierpoint (talk) 06:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

You were not vandalized, JjlPierpoint. You allowed yourself to enter into an WP:EDITWAR with another user. You should go to the article's Talk page and discuss it with the other editor(s), per the linked article.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Could someone help translate this source from Persian into English?

Link:[[2]]

I think this source could potentially be valuable but I can't really make use of it because I don't speak Persian and Google Translate just spits out gibberish when I try to copy-paste the text. Would anyone who speaks Persian be willing to help translate it for me? I apologize if I'm in the wrong place or if this is too much to ask. 3 kids in a trenchcoat (talk) 06:45, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse u: 3 kids in a trenchcoat. We actually have a list of people who can help you this. Go to WP:Translators_available and follow the instructions on the page. You should be able to find someone to assist you there. Please let us know if you have any problems or if you got it handled! Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 09:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Uploaded image in my sandbox and would like to have it deleted

Hello Teahouse!

I'm a very new user/contributor and was testing various templates in my sandbox. I was trying to understand the naming criteria in order to upload an image (which I do have permission to use), and was successful. Then I realized that I could not permanently delete the image and it is in the image library.

I have requested deletion on the image file itself using the speedy deletion template.

Was this the best way to go about it &/or how long does this process take?

Any other "pitfalls" I should be aware of using the sandbox?

Thanks so much for your advice & feedback in advance! Radarthanherbs (talk) 07:51, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Radarthanherbs: welcome to Wikipedia, and to the Teahouse. No, deleting images and pages is something that ordinary editors cannot do; but you found the way to do it. The image you uploaded has been deleted from Commons: see https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/upload&user=Radarthanherbs . I'm not sure which "pitfall" you encountered (uploading images is entirely separate from anywhere you might use them). There is a lot of useful information on your user talk page, but if you have specific questions, please ask them here. --ColinFine (talk) 08:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks ColinFine for the quick reply!

I thought the sandbox was a safe zone in that anything I did, I could also undo. It was my own fault for not checking into the ins and outs of uploading images beforehand.

Nice to know that there are so many helpful folks out there - thanks again! Radarthanherbs (talk) 15:32, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

How do I get new page reviewer role

I have been a registered active editor for over 90 days, autoconfirmed, extended confirmed, and a record of over 3,000 edits, edited over a hundred articles, and have created a few articles.

Please admins in the house, I need additional roles to keep me motivated to continue editing Wikipedia. Best regards. Ugbedeg (talk) 10:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I assume that you haven't read WP:New pages patrol? --David Biddulph (talk) 11:02, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Ugbedeg, you have already made a request at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/New page reviewer. The admins active at requests for permissions will consider the request there. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 11:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :Welcome to the Teahouse, Ugbedeg. You have already lodged a request for WP:NPP rights just a couple of days ago (diff). Coming here asking how to get that role suggests you may not yet be ready. Have you read the guidance/requirements and worked through the NPP tutorial? Be patient - NPP rights carry a lot of responsibility, and your past editing history and experience will be assessed. Like most things in life - and especially with reliance on a volunteer community - these things take time. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Article completion questions

Please somebody help me edit and add article "Rats cave" Виктор Пинчук (talk) 09:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Rats Cave Nick Moyes (talk) 11:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Viktor, and welcome to the Teahouse. I think it would have been better to have created a new draft about Eua's National Park, before focussing on a very small geological feature within it. Then you could have listed some of the Park's features with impunity, including the reference to your own travel book. I would certainly remove most of the images, leaving just one map and one cave photo, properly referenced the available sources (see WP:EASYREFBEGIN). After that, I would still be unsure of the feature's lone notability without a good source. Your initial rejection pointed you towards WP:NGEO, but there do seem to be enough sources to just about get this through. Best way is to ensure references are inline, and not added as external links. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:47, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Nick. Do you think, need to do two articles or one (about the National park) and include Rats Cave? Виктор Пинчук (talk) 12:09, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Виктор Пинчук: You will have far more success with just one article on the Eua National Park. It would make a great link from the Eua article, and could contains a 'Features' section, or some-such name mentioning the main characteristics and features of the park. You might get some ideas from pages listed at List of national parks of Panama - which I chose because most are quite short. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 13:22, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft article / Draft:Mohammad Reza Mesbah

• I write an article draft:Mohammad Reza Mesbah, he is an Iranian film producer. I ask wikipedia administrators to help me for change the Draft:Mohammad Reza Mesbah to an wikipedia article Mohammad Reza Mesbah. thanks.

Keyhan narimannia (talk) 11:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps you haven't read what it says in the submission box on your draft: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,643 pending submissions waiting for review."? --David Biddulph (talk) 12:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Keyhan narimannia: I made some layout updates to your draft. You can continue working on it while you're waiting by inserting additional reliable sources. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

David Biddulph yes of course, thank you. Keyhan narimannia (talk) 12:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

GoingBatty thank you for edit.Keyhan narimannia (talk) 12:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Quite a number of the Wikilinks in the article point to articles in the Persian Wikipedia, making then all-but-useless in an English Wikipedia article. Is this standard practice?--Quisqualis (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Quisqualis yes, it's possible. the links are who use Persian wikipedia, are a movie or an director who are have just Persian wikipedia. we can use their or not use. however they are just some of links. Even WP:RS in other languages can be used, see WP:NOENG. Keyhan narimannia (talk) 07:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

how to resolve the tag {{COI}}

My question concerns the entry Dr Alan Howard

I want to do the right thing for Wikipedia. I have created three entries so far as well as small edits on others. I don't understand fully the wikipedia processes. Before I wrote the entry for Dr Howard, I contacted an editor and explained my connection which is declared on my page talk. I was told to go ahead and to be careful how I wrote the entry.

I have done my best to write the entry according to the rules for Wikipedia. However, the {{COI}} tag has been applied and I do not know how to resolve this.

Could someone advise please?

thanks for your help. Tom Tomp-uk (talk) 12:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I've changed the template to a link to the template. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 12:08, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Article shortened by 10% and COI tag removed. David notMD (talk) 14:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Under "unintended consequences," article shortened an additional 30% and other tags added. David notMD (talk) 15:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I have trimmed a bit of WP:COATRACKING and WP:FAKEREFS. The sources that remain are almost entirely primary. ~t is not surprising that articles on academics would be almost entirely primary, but it is uncharacteristic for an academic without secondary coverage to have an article beyond a stub. Usedtobecool ☎️

Thank you David notMD and Usedtobecool for the time you have taken on this. It's late now in the UK and I will review the details tomorrow. Tomp-uk (talk) 21:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Help

I am new here. I made a couple of edits and an admin, Vanamonde93 reverted them all, see this. Please let me know how to make a sentence based on the references cited correctly (and it should still mean what I am trying to convey). Thanks. Venue9 (talk) 14:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Vanamonde explained why in their edit summary:"1) material about persecution belongs at Persecution of Hindus, where it has already been covered; 2) your sources still do not support the content you are adding, and original research is something you can be blocked for; 3) please use only reliable sources. indiafacts.com does not count. " The talk page is really the best place for this, but sentences such as "The English Media houses worldwide have been trying to build a narrative against the culture, festivals, ideas and practices of Hindus" are never going to be acceptable. Your sources don't back the statement and it's simply not true. Doug Weller talk 15:10, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Edit request

I made an edit request here and was asked to establish consensus for it. How do I do that?Venue9 (talk) 15:08, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

There was a discussion just above your request about the same issue. That was just a few days ago. You can join in that and try to change everyone's minds, but please don't suggest other editor's are prejudiced. And EB is not a particularly good source even if our articles do use it. It certainly has nothing like our NPOV policy and many articles give just one perspective. I rarely use it. 15:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Messaging

How do you message another editor about their contribution to a particular page? Random Tyke 15:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Random Tyke 15:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RandomTyke (talk • contribs)

@RandomTyke: You could post on the editor's talk page for a 1-on-1 conversation, or you could post on the article's talk page for a group conversation and use Template:ping to notify them of the conversation (as I did in this note to you). GoingBatty (talk) 15:22, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Help for newbie

I have drafted my first ever Wikipedia article and submitted it. This was rejected (no problem, I understand why). I now want to gradually edit this and re-submit in the future.

However, article has been moved from my Sandpit to another page with a redirect. When I edit the page I can’t see how to save changes, only how to publish changes which I don’t want to do yet (not until I have finished all my edits).

Please advise.

Philip Walker PJE Walker (talk) 15:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

The button "Save changes" was confusingly renamed as "Publish changes" by dictat of the WMF. It doesn't mean that the changes are published to mainspace, but merely that a new version of the draft is saved. When you've made all your changes the button to submit the draft for AFC review is that labelled "Submit". --David Biddulph (talk) 15:46, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

"Declined" (not "Rejected"). The reason for "Publish" is that drafts are visible to other editors even though not in mainspace and not 'seen' by Google or other search engines. David notMD (talk) 15:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Can someone tell me how to hide an edit?

So, I accidentally edited a page without logging in, and I want to hide my IP address. Can someone tell me how to do that? Thanks! Thanoscar21 (talk) 16:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Thanoscar21: See WP:OVERSIGHT for instructions. RudolfRed (talk) 16:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Thanoscar21 (talk) 19:28, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

What is the Best University for AI

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.

---

Extended content

What is the Best University for AI when talking about the best Univesity for Artificial intelligence program there is few most common technology university which offers the program of admission in Univesity Al NAFI Al NAFI is the best online learning when we talk about the online best website which provides the best international program of computer science the best online opportunities specially designed for software and best online learning engineers and artificial intelligence the most of software engineers from Europe United ComputerTeacher computer teacher reading free online and 2, of course, is also bad for the students of all over the world and is the best opportunities for Pakistan is and all over the world who want to learn and grow their skills to computer teacher program Udemy is the one greeting online computer programming is offer the test was leading computer programming which online computer programming available understand programming and online computer programming physical training table-wise tablewise is the new and most highly professional educational platform which provides online learning opportunities for all over the world students most of the students there and their distance and pastes education system it is online professional educational platform which provides you

Welcome to Wikipedia. It is not clear to me what you're trying to do, but Wikipedia is not for advertising for promotion. See WP:NOT for more info. RudolfRed (talk) 17:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

References

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.

photo

I am trying to add a photo of Professor Goodson but am having problems - do you have any suggestions? Best wishes Elizabeth Elizabeth fleur briggs (talk) 18:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey Elizabeth fleur briggs and welcome to the Teahouse. You can't insert a picture from your computer directly to a Wikipedia article, like you tried to do at Ivor Goodson. You need to upload it to Wikipedia first. In order to upload the pic, you have to own the copyright and be willing to release it as per the Wikipedia:Image use policy. If the pic is from online, unfortunately you won't be allowed to upload it. Hope this helps, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 18:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Georgii Nelepp references:

 Courtesy link: Georgii Nelepp

Someone has edited the references on the Georgii Nelepp article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgii_Nelepp) from 39 to 16--over half. The deleted ones include links to his performances on Youtube, social media discussions of his KGB work, a list of available primary sources, a link to a group of photos of him, links to Google translations of secondary sources (Russian to English), and links to photos of him.

I can't tell if this was a Wikipedia editor or anonymous reader, or what this (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Georgii_Nelepp&action=history) means. However, the article was better referenced prior to the deletions as the list of deleted material suggests. What should I do to restore these sources? Opera Snob (talk) 18:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Opera Snob (talk) 18:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Opera Snob: That would be because Youtube links are generally discouraged and social media discussions are not seen as reliable independent sources. I'll ping Voceditenore for more input as they are more involved. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – Merged section below and renamed heading slightly. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Georgii Nelepp references 2nd part:

Iam chiming in agaisn. to note the following: This article was approved by Wikipedia awhile back. The title was written in green when I added a picture recently. Is there no end to this constant insistence on revision, despite the fact of prior Wikipedia approval?. What does does having Wikipedia approval mean? See the history of this article from the beginning: Templates removed when I followed editor requirements. And now you delete over half the references (which were earlier deemed satisfactory). I'm frustrated with Wiki lack of fixed authority whereby given approval means nothing.

Also, my name is not Muhammad. I followed instructions about the tilde signature. Opera Snob (talk) 18:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Opera Snob (talk) 18:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Article is Georgii Nelepp. David notMD (talk) 19:15, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Opera Snob: Just because the article was approved to move from a draft to an article doesn't mean the text is fixed forever. Yes, it's possible that there is no end to possible revisions to the article. From the policy Wikipedia:Ownership of content:

“ Once you have posted it to Wikipedia, you cannot stop anyone from editing text you have written. As each edit page clearly states:

Work submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used, and redistributed—by anyone

Similarly, by submitting your ideas (for article organization, categorization, style, standards, etc.) to Wikipedia, you allow others to challenge and develop them.

”

Looking back at the December 6, 2017 version of the article, you can see a lot of work has been done by you and other volunteer editors working in good faith to improve the article since then. It's OK to disagree with other editors work (as long as it's done civilly). The place for you to start that conversation is the article's talk page: Talk:Georgii Nelepp. Good luck and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Opera Snob, you asked "Is there no end to this constant insistence on revision?" No, there is no end. Look at the article on dog. It was in a perfectly acceptable state 15 years ago, but is still receiving an average of one edit a day, most of them improvements. Maproom (talk) 08:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I was pinged above by Tenryuu and am the editor who recently cleaned up the article. This came about as a request for assistance at WikiProject Opera from another editor, Marchjuly, [3]. He quite rightly had serious concerns about the article's references, external links, and other issues, which were shared by Beetstra, an administrator whom he had also consulted. [4]. As pointed out above, the appropriate place for discussion of the recent changes is Talk:Georgii Nelepp. However, before doing so, Opera Snob, you need to read very carefully Wikipedia's key policies and guidelines on: Verifiability, Reliable sources, No original research, and the Correct use of external links. When I began cleaning up the article, it was in violation of all of them. Voceditenore (talk) 10:09, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

HELP ME THIS DRAFT

PRODIGY MATH GAMEPLAESE HELP [[5]]

--HISTORIAN (talk) 18:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC) HISTORIAN (talk) 18:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Andrewhistory and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia articles should be about notable topics, a term which Wikipedia uses in a special sense. Wikipedia articles demonstrate the notability of their subject by citing multiple, professionally6 published independent reliable sources, usually at least three sources that discuss the topic in some detail. Other wiokis and fan fora are not considered reliable sources. Please read Your First Article for more information. The draft article Draft:Prodigy_math_game does not (yet) contain sufficient sources to demonstrate the notability of the topic. Note that many topics really exist but are not notable in the Wikipedia sense. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Andrewhistory, your draft is only two sentences, which is most definitely not enough for an article. Second, please find better independent sources that talk about the subject, not Fandom and a listing site. Kindly stop using all caps as it is seen as shouting. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Declined Article

Hello House, Am a new user and just got my article declined. Can anyone assist me on the reviewers comments and how best i can edit to suit Wikipedia Standard Below is the url https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Shopnaw Thanks for your assistance Kojo Essel (talk) 18:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kojo Essel and welcome to the Teahouse. First of all, your article reads very much like an advertisement, and for that reason, the editor who declined your article did a good job pointing you towards WP:ARTSPAM, which I suggest you take a look at. You may have a better chance of your article being published if you improve your references. Right now, all your sources are from the website of the organization in question. On Wikipedia, notability is established by the subject of the article being covered by multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. I suggest you search Google News (news.google.com) to get these, because I see several articles about Shopnaw there. Once you add sources, cite them properly (perhaps see WP:EASYREFBEGIN if you need help with that) and then try to make the article read less like an advertisement. At that point, feel free to submit it again. Hope this helps. Regards, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 18:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Project to implement plain-language guidelines?

Hello, I'm curious about whether any Wikipedians have undertaken an effort to widely implement Wikipedia's own plain-language guidelines. Two relevant guidelines I'm aware of are Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section.

This question arises from my own experience as a WP user, in that I've consistently found that articles on scientific and other technical subjects are written at too high a comprehension level for the average user. Even the lead sections often contain terms that are more arcane than the title topic itself. To me this undermines the whole purpose of a public encyclopedia, and represents a missed opportunity to help motivated learners raise their science literacy.

I imagine any broad-based initiative along these lines would be an enormous undertaking, but still just wanted to see what work may already be under way (aside from the oft-ignored guidelines themselves).

Thanks for any help. DaveM92 (talk) 19:02, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

DaveM92, We try to tag pages with "too technical" and "cleanup" tags when possible. But please remember all articles are a work in progress, and they need help from folks like you to make them better. I know that whenever I write or approve articles, I try to ensure that they are easy to read for the average individual. We very much want all articles to be accessible, and we make sure that our best rated articles are. But we have six million articles, most of which are in need of lots of work. If you would like to help out with improving such articles, we'd sure appreciate it. You can always look in Category:Wikipedia articles that are too technical. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 19:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. DaveM92 (talk) 23:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

A question

I was looking at random user pages and came across user:ROXELANA22. Upon further inspection, I found this. Isn’t there a way to ban a users IP adress so they can’t create more accounts? Thanks, Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 19:02, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Rodrigo Valequez There is, and we do, but it is not difficult for someone intent on doing so to change their IP address. 331dot (talk) 19:12, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, there is an IP block, but that may hit more than one user due to dynamic addresses. RudolfRed (talk) 19:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

​ ​ Thanks for the quick replies! Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 19:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't know how to insert an image

I do not know how to insert an image when editing a page, please help me. Bobby Neir (talk) 19:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Bobby Neir, first question: is the image copyright-free or non-free (if the latter, does it fit all 10 criteria in WP:NFCCP)? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:28, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey Bobby Neir and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are talking about an image you found online, please answer Tenryuu's question so we can answer your question appropriately. If you are talking about inserting an image of your own, you can upload it through the Upload Wizard, provided you agree to release the photo's copyright as per Wikipedia's Image Use Policy. Once you go through the process of the Upload Wizard, you will be given the code on the final page which you can copy and paste into the article. Hope this helps, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 19:31, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I believe that the image is copyright-free, because it is used on two different web-sites, also it does not have a copyright image (c) on it however I am not certain and would need to look more closely into it. Bobby Neir (talk) 20:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

If the image has been published elsewhere then by default it is copyrighted, unless it has been released under an appropriate licence or it satisfies various other conditions. It does not need a (c) symbol to make it copyrighted. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

James H Johnson, Jr (Lieutenant General)

Two questions: (1) The title of my Wikipedia bio is incorrect, as reads, James H. Johnson. It should read, James H. Johnson, Jr. How do I correct it? (2) The photo with my bio is outdated. I have a digital photo to replace it. How do I do that? Thank you. Roselb (JHJ,Jr) Roselb (talk) 19:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Roselb (talk) 19:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Roselb:

1. Someone has already renamed the article.
2. If you would like to submit your own photo (provided that you hold the copyright for it and are willing to waive it for any use), please read WP:IUP. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:36, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

what's the deal with the visual editing?

ok, i've been driving myself crazy this morning trying to figure out why the visual editing change box in the upper right of the edit box appears to appear and disappear randomly. First, not sure if this is the right place to ask, so if it's not please point me. In case this is the right place, at first i think twinkle was causing it so i turned off twinkle, flushed cache, and retried, but that isn't it. I tried to go full screen just out of curiosity and screwed it up such i had to move a mountain to undo that (big bug). So does anyone know why the visual/source editing drop down box doesn't stay home? ty ToeFungii (talk) 19:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: Where do you see it disappear? Visual editing is only available for article pages, not talk pages or other pages. RudolfRed (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Yep it's disappearing on article pages. I've tried different browsers to see if that might be an issue and it might be. I normally use the latest firefox, but i tried opera and for the same page opera showed me the visual edit whereas firefox did not. opera is based on chrome I believe. i've actually noticed this for awhile but it was in trying to edit Now you see me where i needed the visual editor that i actually bit the bullet and took a look. ToeFungii (talk) 20:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: You may want to take this technical question to VPT where they are more suited to help you. Regards, Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 20:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thx. I just opened a random article and not via edit button. the article was William D. Skeen House. I'll go to vpt. thx again. ToeFungii (talk) 20:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Submitting a musician entry

I am reading all of the tutorials and still don't think I understand the steps to get an entry for my husband who is a musician. Many other entertainers in the same genre have pages. I also have his discography and other sources/references for articles that have been written about him. Please help. PepperZydeco (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

PepperZydeco Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would first note that if you intend to write about your husband, you should read the conflict of interest policy. Please be aware that Wikipedia has articles, not mere "pages". Those articles summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about a subject, showing how the subject meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. In the case of a musician, Wikipedia has a specific definition of a notable musician. Because meriting an article depends on meeting that definition and having independent reliable sources, not every musician merits an article, even within the same genre of music. If you have reviewed the definition and truly feel that your husband meets that definition, and have the sources to support it, you could attempt to write an article at Articles for Creation- but typically, articles are written when independent editors take note of a subject and choose to write about it.

Also be advised that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one. You cannot lock it to the text that you or your husband might prefer and cannot prevent others from editing it. Any information, good or bad, about your husband can be in an article about him as long as the information appears in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. I realize this is a lot to consider, and feel free to ask any additional questions. 331dot (talk) 19:57, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

In case you missed it, Articles for Creation (above) is the process. read again notable musician. What you want to create is a draft, which will then be reviewed - accepted or declined. Articles about musicians with a similar career to your husband's does not mean his will be accepted. There are thousands and thousands of existing articles that would not meet present-day higher standards. David notMD (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Privatisation of The West

Are there any significant connection between the current presidency to the privatisation of public structures in and out of the states.

Since it is probable having government change of legal statuses to private by the process of division between ownership and control. Created to maintain power in order to enter new contracts and act or resolve legal or other issues due to its original ownership as business grows through legal binding.

This can be seen in the attempt to merge two automotive companies among other. Through this process, directors may have to disclose information in order to act on the "economies of scale" emerging. Is impeachment included on this implementation?

I'm not from the States. Altvypr (talk) 20:22, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Altvypr. The Wikipedia Teahouse is really a place to ask questions about Wikipedia editing or Wikipedia in general; it’s not really intended to be forum for a general discussion such as this. If you’d like to discuss specific ways on how to improve a certain Wikipedia article, then you can try doing so on said article’s corresponding talk page; a more general discussion of something such as this, however, is probably more suited for the Wikipedia Reference Desk than anywhere else on Wikipedia. — Marchjuly (talk) 20:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Altvypr - I would urge against asking questions about American politics at the Reference Desk. American politics has been found to be an area in which encyclopedic editing is difficult because some editors are disruptive, so that any discussions of American politics that are not strictly related to encyclopedic content are undesirable. The Arbitration Committee has had to impose special provisions allowing restrictions on editors in areas that are battlegrounds. So it is best to find an off-wiki virtual community for those discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:29, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Chase the Comet

I was wondering if someone could help me with my Article Draft:Chase The Comet. I have been told it will not pass WP:NBAND. which makes no sense to me but I am no expert just a newbie. Any help and or guidance would be greatly appreciated and welcomed. Thanks in advance! Adumbgeek (talk) 20:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Adumbgeek, Well to understand WP:NBAND, one must understand notability. The gist of it is: we don't write about just anything. Topics need to show that they meet our standards for inclusion. For bands, we have a list of 12 criteria that bands can meet. If they meet even just one of the criteria, they can have an article. But if they meet no criteria, they generally can't have an article. If you take a look at NBAND, can you show how the band meets at least one of those criteria? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:08, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek, Thank you, for your explanation and quick response, I really appreciate it. I will get this revised and re-submitted. Thanks Again! Adumbgeek (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2020 (CST)

HELP!!!!!!

Is it possible for me to ban myself? Thanks. User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 21:11, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Shadowblade08 If you think it is necessary, you can be blocked at your request, but is there some reason that you cannot just refrain from editing Wikipedia on your own? 331dot (talk) 21:17, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Since I there are so many people on Wiki that hate me, there is no point in being on Wiki anymore, and on top of that, i've been getting pictures of porn. and seeing pages with the word fuc* a lot on Wiki. No reason to be here. User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 21:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Shadowblade08: We are sorry to see you go, and I assure you that many more people here like you than hate you, but if you insist, you can block yourself from logging in using the enforcer. Alternatively, you can be blocked from editing by requesting an admin to do so, but you will still be able to log in. Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 21:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, i've had too many people saying unmentionable stuff to me. By the way, is there any way I can put up one of those "Retired" signs on my talk page, before I quit? Thanks.User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 21:29, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Shadowblade08: You can put {{Retired}} on your userpage. RudolfRed (talk) 21:30, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 21:31, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

As agreed with this user, I have now blocked their account for an initial period of two months, but for multiple reasons.Nick Moyes (talk) 22:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Michael Price Composer

 Courtesy link: Michael Price (composer)

 2A00:23C7:AE86:7200:6D56:63A4:4867:534F (talk) 21:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP and welcome to the Teahouse. What is your question about Michael Price (composer)? Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 21:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Michael Price Composer (UK)

Please include correct personal information for Michael Price Composer; my name is Zoe and I was Michael’s wife. I was Zoe Moore later becoming Zoe Price. We were married for a number of years.

Should you require further confirmation please contact Michael Price.

I think it impertinent to include this information on his personal link.

Thank you for your kind attention.

With very best wishes,

Zoe Boyden (nee Price) 2A00:23C7:AE86:7200:6D56:63A4:4867:534F (talk) 21:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

If you wish to propose changes to an article, the place to do so is on the article's talk page. You would need to support your proposal with references to published reliable sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Whilst it is not impertinent, we cannot simply add details to an article based on what any user asserts, nor do we contact subjects of articles to 'check' details. Wikipedia simply collates what is out there and published in the public domain by reliable sources. Unsourced statements about living people and their relatives should be deleted from any article, not added. (As an aside, I assume you remarried someone called Boyden, though I cannot see how you can be nee Price. I'm sure you meant nee Moore?) Either way, we cannot take yours or his word, sorry. But what we can take is a photograph you took of him yourself. As creator and copyright owner of any photo, you can create an account and upload an image to Wikimedia Commons for use in his article. It's often images that we are unable to get hold of, as those on most websites are copyright of someone else, which we cannot use without their direct release under a 'Creative Commons' licence. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Userbox with image

FYI

 – Heading created by Tenryuu

.

Hello! How do I make an user box with and image in it? I want it to be written "This user is a student of Bangladesh International School, Dammam" with the schools image. Rahbab Chowdhury (talk) 22:04, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

MRC2RULES, if you're looking for someone to help design a userbox for you, go over to Wikipedia:Userboxes/Ideas. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Guidelines on mentioning sexual assault accusations

Could anyone pinpoint me to a guideline or best practice on how to weigh the worthiness of mentioning a particular allegation of wrongdoing - sexual assaults in particular - in a biography of a living actor? I understand the general rule that these should be described as allegations instead of being treated as outright true, unless/until they are proven in court or by indisputable evidence. But even the mere mention of accusations (however unfounded) on a page is not to be taken lightly. So I'm wondering, what is the best way to go about it? Charmanderblue (talk) 23:09, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

That is a really excellent question, and well-worth asking, Charmanderblue. Welcome to the Teahouse, by the way. We have a policy designed to protect people's privacy and reputation against the promotion of false allegations. See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, and in particular  the section entitled Presumption in favor of privacy, which states "If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out." So, use your judgement and err on the side of caution. Ask yourself, is this a public figure with genuine and public allegations made against them by more than one serious and reliable news source, or just a bit of smoke puffed up by some two-bit news outlet to undermine an innocent person. Note also the sentence later in the polciy which states: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced and not related to making content choices should be removed, deleted, or oversighted, as appropriate.". So, when in doubt, leave it out! Does this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 00:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the swift reply and the warm welcome! Helpful indeed, but let me elaborate a bit on the example of Timothy Hutton. Buzzfeed News broke the story in March 2020 that he had sexually assaulted a child in 1983. At what point did this become appropriate for inclusion, and at what point will it be considered for removal should the accusations be tossed out by the investigators? Now I understand that readers are expected to remain unbiased until more facts are present. Though it troubles me that, there might not be a lot of information to give given how long ago this incident had allegedly taken place. Which begs another question: should this case remain pending with no notable advancement, is the sexual offender label going to simply hang around Hutton's article? Charmanderblue (talk) 00:28, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Charmanderblue, I do not believe BuzzFeed is considered a newsworthy source due to the fact they are considered leftwing, which essentially makes them biased. I encourage you to read BuzzFeed. If you can find other, more reliable sources, then it could be added provided that there is enough coverage of it. One article mentioning it is not considered notable enough for inclusion. If you need any help in finding anything, please let us know. Courtesy ping @Nick Moyes: Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 05:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Galendalia, thanks for the answer. Should I assume by your message that the sexual assault section on Timothy Hutton's article is subject to removal based on the fact that the accusations are based off of BuzzFeed News reporting? Or is it still considered admissible as other reliable sources have retold the same story based on BuzzFeed's original reporting? I guess what I'm trying to ask here is, if a non-newsworthy source breaks a sexual assault story that wouldn't merit inclusion in its own right, does the right of inclusion arise if other reliable, secondary sources pick this up from said non-newsworthy source? Charmanderblue (talk) 07:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

​ I am looking more into this and it appears it originated with Buzzfeed and all of the other sources that have picked it up are also not exactly news sites. It would also appear that this accusation just surfaced of something that happened in 1983. Of the links you mentioned, none are reliable that I can see, including the National Post as they basically copied/paste most of what has been said on other articles. Maybe @Nick Moyes: and @GoingBatty: can chime in on this as well? My recommendation is to remove that particular statement. --Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 07:33, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Galendalia and Charmanderblue: Looks like there's a difference between Buzzfeed and Buzzfeed News, and that this story is from Buzzfeed News. Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources says that "Editors find the quality of BuzzFeed articles to be highly inconsistent." and "There is consensus that BuzzFeed News is generally reliable." Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Public_figures states "In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out." Maybe the question of how long to keep an allegation on a BLP should be asked at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons? Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 15:12, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@GoingBatty:You're right in your observation that BuzzFeed News and BuzzFeed are two different entities with a varying degree of reliability. The "multiple reliable third-party sources" is also an interesting observation and I wonder if the lack of any such sources allows for that particular statement on Timothy Hutton's article to be challenged? Charmanderblue (talk) 15:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Update: I have followed the suggestions here and opened a ticket at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons as to attract the attention of more seasoned editors on this. Charmanderblue (talk) 19:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I'm trying to post a bio about a very good person who has touched many lives. It got rejected and Im not sure why. How can I get help

 Thumper1001 (talk) 23:36, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. See the note on your talk page. You had not edited the draft for more than six months, so it was deleted. If you are ready to start working on it again, you can ask for the draft to be restored at WP:REFUND. RudolfRed (talk) 23:38, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

My bad that is a very old note. What is the draft you are currently working on that was declined? RudolfRed (talk) 23:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Thumper1001: I'm afraid we can do no more than point you towards the reply to your post, made earlier today  on this user's page, although, as said above, you were replying to a rejection message left for you six years ago by Anne Delong, back in 2014. The only content relevant to your query seems to be at User talk:Thumper1001/sandbox, which, at this point in time, is wholly unsourced and unsuitable for a Wikipedia article, and is the same content as that deleted in 2014. Looking at that deleted content, two editors at Articles for Creation gave you the following advice:

• Please find and add references to sources not connected with Mr. Wilson, such as news reports, reviews, magazine articles, etc., to confirm the information in this article and to show that he has been written about extensively by journalists and other authors. Left by Anne Delong (January 2014)
• The article also is not written in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. That needs to be corrected as well. Left by Joe Decker (May 2014)

I should also add that the way you have referred to him throughout the article as 'Doug' suggests to me that you might well know this individual. If so, you will have a clear Conflict of Interest which you must declare on your user page. (See WP:COI on how to do this). Nick Moyes (talk) 23:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Churkendoose

Churkendoose was a children's hardbound picture book published in 1946 written by Ben Ross Berenberg. Subsequently it was made into a record album narrated by Ray Bolger. The only Wikipedia mention of Churkendoose is in the Ray Bolger article, but it doesn't mention the book or the author.

Searching for Churkendoose on google one can find many many copies for sale, testament to the popularity of this book. I was unable to find an article that says, "This book was popular" nor can I find, as I did some years ago, many articles from the conservative political side that blamed this book on the liberal relativistic way of valuing things. "It depends on how you look at things" is the refrain of the book.

THIS BOOK WAS IMPORTANT

Someone should start an article about this book or at least the author. Conscientia (talk) 00:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Conscientia: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can be the someone to start an article! (Presuming you have no conflict of interest, of course.) First, you need to find enough reliable sources to satisfy Wikipedia's definition of notability for books or notability for authors, and then see Help:Your first article to get started. If you're not ready for that, you can list your requests at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Arts and entertainment/Literature. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:13, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello, Conscientia and welcome to the Teahouse.

That a book sold many copies, or even that it was said to be "popular", does not mean that it should have an article about it on Wikipedia. The standard here is that a topic must be notable, a term which Wikipedia uses in a special sense. Here it means that multiple independent reliable sources have taken note of the topic, by writing about it at some length and publishing those writings. We normally want multiple independent professionally published reliable sources. This means things like professional reviews of a book, not fan sites, or user fora, or blogs, or personal sites, or wikis. It could also include published biographies (not autobiographies) of the author, or academic studies in which the work is treated at some length. If you are able to find and present such sources, others might be able to help in writing an article. Sources do not have to be available online, although that makes them easier to access. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I would dd that I do not recommend using Wikipedia:Requested articles to anyone. So few of the requests are ever fulfilled, that it is a better use of one's time and effort to buy a lottery ticket. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:27, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Conscientia! Try to dig up a few more sources like this [6], then see HELP:YFA. A WP-article on any topic is meant to be a summary of the WP:RS references you can find. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

The Churkendoose. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:42, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Replying to a comment on my page

Wabends (talk) 03:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)A tag has been put on top of my page that my biography reads as if someon has been paid to edit th epage. That is false because I have not paid anyone to do so. How do I respond to the original message placed on my page? Thanks in advance for your help. Wabends (talk) 03:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wabends: If you are referring to the Daniel Asua Wubah article, and you are actually Daniel Asua Wubah, then you shouldn't be editing the article, per Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline. If that is the case, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI. GoingBatty (talk) 04:05, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to @Newslinger:. GoingBatty (talk) 04:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

So, undisclosed paid is wrong, because you created the article about yourself? That is now the least of your worries, as the article has been proposed for deletion. Per Proposed deletions, "You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason. Although not required, you are encouraged to explain why you object to the deletion, either in your edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, do not replace it." David notMD (talk) 11:49, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion tag removed by an article-independent editor, and undisclosed paid tag removed. Wabends should declare on User page the COI of creating an article about self. David notMD (talk) 13:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Have a dilemma and trying to avoid 3rr

Resolved

 – User in question blocked. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:54, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok, got a dilemma. A user has tried 5x to change info on a blp article to something different than a 2019 WP:RSP says (it's not contentious/libel/defaming, just a difference in # of records sold). 4 users (including myself) have reverted the change. If they change it again, I can't fix it without 3rr. I was the first editor to mention what the cite said, and this other user got two sources that are over a decade old which would obviously have fewer record sales.

Would I meet the WP:3RRNO based on exemption #7 because they are using a decade old outdated source? In case it helps, the article is Gloria Estefan and it's 114.141.54.139 (talk · contribs) that is trying to put in this bad info. They've also been reverted on 5 other blp articles.

Also, I think the person is a not acting in good faith, because they seem to be trying to put the #75 on 4 articles. What makes it odd is that for Estefan's page the cite they offered had the #70 and not the 75 they put into the article. So I think they're just trying to insert 75 into articles.

Thanks ToeFungii (talk) 10:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: It appears they have been blocked already. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I see that now having gotten some sleep. fortunately. ToeFungii (talk) 17:23, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia servers slow? (lagging)?

Wikipedia servers slow? (lagging)?

hi. Are wiki servers experiencing overall too much demand due to the pandemic?. Whenever i try to edit like very large pages its very unresponsive and sometimes lags when i type. There is no problem with my computers ram or other. Rahbab Chowdhury (talk) 11:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Headline with artist name

Hey again and thanks for all the help I have gotten here so far!

currently working in my sandbox. Will the headline appear when i send the article for review. Like this:

Peter Lodwick (right font) __________________________________________________________________________ From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Best May MaySundAnd (talk) 12:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@MaySundAnd: The text "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" currently appears on User:MaySundAnd/sandbox, and will appear when you move it to the draft space (as you can see on any other draft, like Draft:Beirut Yacht Club). However, the page name should be Draft:Peter Lodwick. Once it becomes an article, the page name will be simply Peter Lodwick. Keep working to add the reliable sources, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, MaySundAnd, and welcoe back to the Teahouse. Your draft User:MaySundAnd/sandbox has a button at the top that says "Submit your draft for review". When you think it is ready for review pick that button, and it will go on the list of drafts waiting for review. Review might take days to months, since we are all volunteers here, and work on what we choose. If a reviewer decides that your draft is suitable for Wikipedia, they will move it to main article space, and it will be named as an article.

However, I'm afraid that if you submit it in its present state, I am confident that it will quickly be declined. This is for several reasons, but the main one is that, as far as I can see, the draft does not cite a single independent source. This is a problem because Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything said or published by the subject or their associates, employers, or clients. All Wikipedia articles should be almost entirely based on material that has been reliably published about the subject by people who have no connection with the subject - for an artist, this most often means reviews in major publications (provided the reviews talk about the artist, not just about the works), or books from reputable publishers which contain substantial material about the subject.

This leads to the more fundamental point: Wikipedia accepts articles only about subjects which are notable in Wikipedia's special sense of the word - which normally means exactly what I have said above - that there are sufficient reliably published independent sources about the subject. Not every artist meets this criterion, but if the subject does not, then an article about them is not possible. Since your sources are not independent, at present your draft does nothing to establish that Lodwick is notable, and the draft will not be accepted.

There are some lesser problems with the draft as well. One is that even the sources which are cited are not cited in a useful way. Ideally each sentence, or at least each paragraph, should be cited to a source (and a place in the source) which supports the specific information in that sentence or paragraph: without this, a reader has no way of checking whether the information in the article is correct. (Even if it was initially correct, somebody may have changed it since - this is the encyclopaedia which anybody can edit). I don't think a reviewer would decline a draft just because a few statements were not sourced, but I think they would decline one with no inline citations. Also, there is far too much detail in the draft. This is an encyclopaedia, not the artist's website.

The amount of detail makes me wonder if you are associated with Lodwick in some way. If you are, please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's recommendations on editing with a conflict of interest. If further, you are doing this in any way in a paid capacity (eg if you are employed by one of the companies or theatres mentioned), you are required to disclose this - see paid editing. --ColinFine (talk) 15:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

The spelling of the heading of an article on a person and his name throughout the artcle

Resolved

 – Referred to the article's talk page for further discussion. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Syama Prasad Mukherjee He used to spell his name as SYAMA PRASAD MOOKERJEE. So did his father Sir Asutosh Mookerjee. His signature of his full name at the bottom of the infobox may kindly be seen. These changes ought to be made right through the article. AnilaDebesh (talk) 13:41, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I have initiated a discussion at Talk:Syama Prasad Mukherjee#Name. Please join the discussion. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Can my articles been noticed for speedy review?

dear Users, Kindly note that i have submit 2 articles on April 25th and waiting for review feedbcak, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lebanese_Yacht_Club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Beirut_Yacht_Club and i have been informed that the revire might took between days to month to receive the feedback,

however, the yellow page on the top of each draft indicate that i can do smthg to speed up the review time i.e. this what i mean: "quote: Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, try searching for a relevant WikiProject. For instance, if you wrote about a Kenyan astronomer, you might want to search for "Biography", "Astronomy" or "Kenya" to find WikiProject Biography, WikiProject Astronomy, and WikiProject Kenya. You can then add Template:WikiProject TOPIC at the top of the talk page of this draft, like this. This will let the WikiProjects know a new draft has been submitted.* Unquote".

Kindly to explain if there is anything i can do to my articles related to what is mentioned on improving odds for a speedy review so that i can do. Your kind reply will be veryyy appreciated and have a lovely weekend all. Princesse Marissa (talk) 14:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)Princesse Marissa Princesse Marissa (talk) 14:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

You could try adding Wikipedia:WikiProject Sailing inside of double curly brackets {{ }} to the Talk page of the draft, but my personal advice is just be patient. The drafts-to-be-reviewed list is shorter than it used to be, and thus likely your two drafts will be reviewed within weeks rather than months. David notMD (talk) 14:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Dear David notMD(talk)

Thank you very much for your quick reply, i will follow yoir advise and will be patient :) Thank you again, much appreciated. Princesse Marissa (talk) 14:22, 2 May 2020 (UTC)Princesse Marissa

Just to warn you one of my submissions took 4 months to be reviewed :) However as David said, the list is not as long as it used to be and its unlikely yours will take that long.
REDMAN 2019 Stay at home:Protect the NHS:Save lives (talk) 15:10, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your reply REDMAN 2019 Stay at home:Protect the NHS:Save lives (talk), Stay Safe Stay Home :)

Princesse Marissa (talk) 15:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)Princesse Marissa

How to improve my article?

Hello tea lovers. I'm new here. Please could you suggest a step or two that I may take to improve my article in progress about the designer Bethan Laura Wood?: wiki/Draft:Bethan_Laura_Wood Thank you! Jim --Jim Rokos (talk) 16:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

More content, fewer lists. See articles at List of contemporary artists for examples of articles about artists. Use only refs that contain at-length content about her, as reviewers dislike refs that are merely name-mentions. David notMD (talk) 16:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jim Rokos: Welcome to the Teahouse! Please review Wikipedia's notability requirements for artists and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. GoingBatty (talk) 16:44, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Help with editing

In the Wikipedia article on Sonia Gandhi, there is a sentence, "After completing her primary education at local schools, she moved for language classes to Cambridge, England, where she met Rajiv Gandhi, and later married him in 1968." I want to add this after that: "Despite marrying Rajiv Gandhi in 1968, she took 16 years to become an Indian citizen and got her Citizenship of India by signing her Citizenship certificate as Antonia Maino Gandhi." Venue9 (talk) 17:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Is it OK or will it get reverted?Venue9 (talk) 17:05, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Venue9: Put it in and see; WP:BEBOLD. If it gets reverted start a discussion on the article's talk page (in fact, this entire question is more suited for the article's talk page). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Revising article

My wife and I are working on some revisions to this article, which we did not post initially. We're also completely new at this, but have read with varying understanding some of the how-to articles. Our broad question is: Do we append revisions to the original article, or start a new one? Thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hittner Procdm (talk) 17:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Procdm: You may make revisions in the appropriate section of the original article, or post your suggestions for improvement at the article's talk page: Talk:David Hittner. Be sure to provide reliable sources for your revisions. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:42, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Procdm, and welcome to the Teahouse. You should definitely not create a new article on the same topic as an existing one. Most often one edits an existing article by making changes in existing p0arts of the article. These can be as small as correcting the spelling of a single word, or as large as adding multiple paragraphs of text, or linking images or both. One may also add new section(s) when adding sub-topic(s) not previously covered. These are put in an appropriate place in the existing article, which will not usually be at the end, so one adds to the article, but does not strictly append to the article.

You mention My wife and I. A Wikipedia account should be strictly for a single person. If both you and your wife intend to edit, each of you should have a separate account, and should not know each other's password, although of course you may discuss your edits and agree on the best way to improve an article. My wife has a Wikipedia account separate from mine, albeit she is far less active.

Also, in future please link to an article when discussing it her or on another talk page, rather than using its URL. In this case one would type [[David Hittner]], which would render as David Hittner. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

How should I write an article on this confusing subject.

Hi there, I am Koridas and I was going to write an article about the song Feeling Good On A Wednesday, from the South Park episode The Cissy. The reason this is confusing is because it is actually sung by Sia, who performed the song in South Park, acting as Randy Marsh, who, in the show, is actually Lorde. If I actually write the article, who would I put the song to be by? Kori (@) 20:26, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Koridas, and welcome to the Teahouse. The song is by whoever actually wrote it, whether that person (or people) ever performed i9t or not. Any article should say that. Then it could say "The song was performed by X, acting in the role of Y, on Program Z" This should all be explained in prose, it is too complex for a table or infobox, in my view.

But before yo0u worry about how to write the article, make sure that the song is notable. Please read our guideline for the notability of songs. Make sure that you have sufficient independent published reliable sources that each discuss the song in some detail -- usually at least several paragraphs in each source. Many songs are not notable, even when the writer or performer is clearly notable. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Koridas: You might want to start by expanding the song information in "The Cissy" article first. If you find enough reliable sources for the song that it meets Wikipedia's notability for songs, you could break it out into a separate article. I created a redirect from "Feeling Good on a Wednesday" to "The Cissy". GoingBatty (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Article Contains Instructions for Poaching Endangered Species

This article contains detailed instructions of how to prepare an endangered species for use after poaching: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neobalanocarpus. I believe this content should be deleted but I do not know what the appropriate procedure to ensure it is not re-posted. Note that the species is now considered Endangered by the IUCN rather than vulnerable: https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/32314/2813845. Cryptobranchidae (talk) 22:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Cryptobranchidae, there are no "instructions for poaching", whatever that might be, in that article. WP:NOTCENSORED and WP:RGW apply. There are no policy based reasons to delete the article. John from Idegon (talk) 22:59, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Cryptobranchidae: whilst John from Idegon is quite right, there is, however, undue emphasis in trivial detail about processing the timber, and not enough about the species itself. I have removed some clear copyright violations that were added in 2013, and some of the tabular information is available on the external link, and seems quite unnecessary in the article itself. Thanks for your concern. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)  

@Cryptobranchidae: as other say above, we generally do not censor information is it is true. I did add the IUCN endagnered states to the lede of the article, and you are welcome to add a section about its status as well. WP:BEBOLD and jump in. Be sure to include sources.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Cryptobranchidae: The article talk page - Talk:Neobalanocarpus - would be a wonderful place to share your concerns and suggestions about the article. GoingBatty (talk) 23:30, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, I spent a long time editing and adding detail to the Augustus article, and then somebody came and deleted it all. It discouraged me from contributing to Wikipedia and it feels like I just wasted lots of my time writing it out and having it deleted. JuliusCaesar16 (talk) 23:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)