Wikipedia:Teahouse

Nick Moyes, 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

i work for the marketing team of a temple

Why is it a conflict or interest if I edit the wiki page with the history of the temple. where do i have to update this detail?

Snehajanfy (talk) 12:34, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

@Snehajanfy It is difficult for employees of an institution to make updates based on already-published sources (not personal knowledge) as is required by Wikipedia policy WP:NOR. Also, you may not write neutrally. So, please read WP:PAID and make the mandatory declaration of your status as a paid editor. Then make suggestions for addition to the article on its Talk Page, not directly. If you use the edit request wizard, your suggestions should be implemented by uninvolved editors quite quickly, or they will explain why the new content is not appropriate. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:53, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Note that it is acceptable for paid editors to create draft articles using the WP:AfC process. Hence you may continue to edit Draft:Peringottukara Devasthanam directly but still need to make the paid editor declaration. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:57, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

How exactly do i do this?

But where to add this on the article page?

{{paid|employer=name of employer|client=name of client}} Peringottukara Devasthanam Temple (talk) 13:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

You will need to add that to your user page(User:Peringottukara Devasthanam Temple), you will also need to change your username so that it represents you personally, not your temple(your real name is not required, just something representing you). I have placed instructions to do this on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 13:14, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

I have used my personal account to make edits, added the paid claim to my user page as well. what else can i do to get this approved? please help Snehajanfy (talk) 17:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Snehajanfy, please be aware that marketing behavior is strictly forbidden on Wikipedia, as are all related behaviors such as advertising, promotion and public relations. This is a neutral encyclopedia. Conduct yourself accordingly. Cullen328 (talk) 20:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Ofcourse I understand this. I have in no way tried to claim or promote anything about my client. All we want is a valid Wikipedia page for the temple. It because of this specific reason why wiki page is so important for any institution to have. I'm sorry if I may have offended anyone by using the term marketing 2001:8F8:1F3F:33E:559B:E09D:5682:ED1 (talk) 20:23, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

There is no guarantee, after doing everything correctly, that the article will be approved for mainspace. The same guidelines and policies apply as it would with any other article with regard to notability and citing reliable sources. --ARoseWolf 20:16, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

I have tried to use as many reliable sources as possible. I have over 30 pr links. I'm just not sure as tow here to use them to prove our credibility. Also how do we prove notability? 2001:8F8:1F3F:33E:559B:E09D:5682:ED1 (talk) 20:26, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Simply put, you really shouldn't use those as they're not independent nor reliable to establish wikinotability, which would require quality sources that aren't affiliated with the temple. Please remember to sign in when making comments. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:38, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

• Note: As a courtesy I fixed the template on Snehajanfy's user page. --ARoseWolf 20:12, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

  truly appreciate it. I'm still wondering how you fixed it. Kindly pardon my unawareness 2001:8F8:1F3F:33E:559B:E09D:5682:ED1 (talk) 20:27, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Please log in to edit. I have reviewed and declined the draft. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:07, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

HI, I am trying to resubmit my draft again. However I see AFC submission and missing template. Im unable to understad how to proceed. Kindly help Snehajanfy (talk) 17:52, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Snehajanfy. Generally speaking, a Wikipedia article about a temple needs to focus more on facts like "It is the country's biggest and most ancient Vishnumaya temple, with a tradition of nearly 400 years" and less on the birth of divine beings. Can you find independent sources (e.g., a newspaper article, a tourist guide book, a scholarly work?) that describe the physical building and its construction? Is there anything unusual about its appearance, or are there any activities (e.g., an annual festival) that have attracted attention from people unrelated to it?

Also, searching for "Vishnumaya Kuttichathan Swami", I found Kuttichathan (disambiguation) and Kanadikavu Shree Vishnumaya Kuttichathan Swamy temple. It's possible that the birth story would be better off as a separate article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:27, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

If I made claims of it being the biggest and the oldest, it deviated from being neutral and sounded like puffery. Hence avoided it. I will definitely try and find some material about the structure of the temple and it's architectural significance. Snehajanfy (talk) 18:47, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

I have now added birth story as a separate page. Hopefully that gets approved Snehajanfy (talk) 06:32, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

i hope i have resubmitted the draft as I am not able to see it anymore, Could you please check for me? Snehajanfy (talk) 06:35, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Snehajanfy It is still at Draft:Peringottukara Devasthanam, awaiting another review. You may work on it while it waits, if you think of further improvements. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:11, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

:Pardon my irrelevancy here, but am I the only one here who has a reaction to the concept of a temple having a marketing department ??? A publicity department selling postcards and simple souvenirs, I could understand, but a marketing group ??? Autokefal Dialytiker (talk) 17:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Autokefal Dialytiker in that city temples of this deity is a business more than anything else. Their competitors all have a wikipedia pages which is affecting them when it comes to authenticity. This is also why they're trying so hard to get this page active.

These temples have been passed on for generations and it's really hard to find exact citations about them unless they're manage by rich families who afforded to publish books about these temples years ago. Other temples lose out in this aspect and are left to prove their authenticity. Snehajanfy (talk) 17:37, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Also, it's typical for groups to use the up-to-date terminology. Most "publicity departments" are now called "marketing", even when they're 100% volunteer-run. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:02, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, all I can say to that, is that if they call themselves a marketing group while being attached to a presumed religious institution, then they have lost the plot even before they started their work... Autokefal Dialytiker (talk) 18:14, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

In non-profit land, the main alternative is "outreach", but that usually means something more like recruitment or proselytizing. Compare, e.g., the Wikimedia Outreach: wiki. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:21, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Having a "publicity department" would work, also, as a religious group would want to publish their point of view, and the history of their edifices. But marketing is a term that directly implies being for-profit as the main goal, and that simply doesn't fit; a(n honest) religious society (possible example: a monastery) would only seek enough wealth to sustain their life and work. Autokefal Dialytiker (talk) 21:37, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

"Market" doesn't necessarily imply an exchange of money; after all, there's a Marketplace of ideas. The Wikimedia Foundation has a marketing team. The American Red Cross is hiring for two marketing positions this week. Goodwill Industries has a Chief Marketing Officer. The Nature Conservancy has a Chief Marketing and Communications Officer. The goal might be a little different, but the work's very similar, so they use the same names. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:38, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

You're right on point with that. Snehajanfy (talk) 18:34, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Wow, even religion is competitive and capitalistic now. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 23:15, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Regarding pop-culture pages, but especially comics.

Hello, my user name is Sewnbegun and here we go! I am here at Wikipedia for editing various lists/tables (obviously not exclusively) regarding comics, tv series and films. Can you tell me which pages of Wikipedia rules and regulations I have to read before starting; and what common mistakes I should not do while editing those lists and tables. Sewnbegun (talk) 05:38, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Sewnbegun, if you're working on lists, Help:List, Manual of Style/Lists and Stand-alone lists might be helpful. But don't worry too much about reading every word of these. Just use them as references if you get stuck. Really, the best way to learn is just to get started and try to do what you see on similar articles. If you're not sure whether you did something right, you can always have someone else check it afterward. It's really easy to undo mistakes if needed. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:01, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien, thanks for helping me but I have one last question. As I said I'm more interested in editing comic, films and tv series pages; it would be helpful for me to know that which of the following mentioned can be used for reliable sources and which ones can't be:

• Comic Book Resources
• AIPT
• ComicBook.com
• Screen Rant
• SuperHeroHype
• Official website of Marvel (Marvel.com)
• Dexerto
• Gizmodo
• GamesRadar+
• Bleeding Cool News
• IGN
• Popverse

Sewnbegun (talk) 09:11, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sewnbegun You should look at the archive search box at WP:RSP, which also gives instructions for how to start a new enquiry about a source you want to use but are unsure about. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Michael D. Turnbull, I searched the above mentioned sources in that list and was surprise that only two (Screen Rant and Gizmodo) are considered as reliable source, for one (Dexerto) is advised to find alternative source while others are missing. After some time, I will definitely start a new enquiry about some sources that constantly tells about comics (CBR and Aipt). Sewnbegun (talk) 17:56, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sewnbegun A couple of guidelines that might help you - anything that can be edited by anyone (like fandom Wikis or IMDB) will not be accepted as a reliable source. English Wikipedia is very good at keeping articles reliable, but many other user-contribution sites are not. Meanwhile, websites of the companies that own the characters/comics/franchises are primary sources and should be avoided if possible. Good luck in your search for reliable sources and happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 08:18, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@StartGrammarTime, so what if you have only the primary source for the edit you are going to do but one editor is reverting your edits on the basis of no reference, so can I include that appropriate primary reference into that article? Sewnbegun (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sewnbegun It may be that the information is only available from the primary source, so what I would personally do is be bold, add the citation, and see whether that satisfies the other editor. If it doesn't, then have a look at Bold, Revert, Discuss as your guide to how to proceed. Always keep in mind that Wikipedia functions on consensus, and edit-warring is very much frowned upon, so if someone reverts your addition then you need to start talking to them (ideally on the article's talk page) so you can hash out a compromise together. Hope that helps you! StartGrammarTime (talk) 10:16, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@StartGrammarTime, thanks! it did helped. Sewnbegun (talk) 13:59, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sewnbegun I'll also note that some of the sources you listed are at WP:VG/RS. For example, IGN can be a reliable source (but Make sure news items are not user-submitted info or blog postings; blog postings from site staff are most likely acceptable. Articles submitted by N-Sider should be avoided. TLA^tlak 02:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I want to improve an article so is there any way I can get my proposed improvement of that article/page reviewed by someone? Just like what we do reviewing drafts for creating new pages. Sewnbegun (talk) 06:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

ok 41.113.239.129 (talk) 08:18, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Template documentation

Could I trouble someone who's familiar with template terminology to take a look at Template:For-multi/doc § TemplateData?

Broadly, odd-numbered parameters are the "use" texts and even-numbered ones the "page" texts in the "For [use], see [page]. For [another use], see [another page]. [...]" output. Both types may be blank, with "other uses" and "[current page] (disambiguation)" as defaults. For both types, there's an additional complication in that a blank parameter is affected by and/or affects other parameters.

I just now added the second sentences to the "use"-type descriptions - "if unused or blank, defaults to [...] and ignores parameters [...]" - to try and cover that, based on experimentation. I also think the parameter numbers in the "page"-type descriptions are each off by one - parameter 4 refers to "parameter 4", itself, instead of "parameter 3", the corresponding "use"-type parameter, which I suspect was the intention.

As I don't have a full understanding of terms like "unused", "blank", "exists" in this context, the latter edit should be made by someone else, and the former edit may need rephrasing.

Cheers! :)

- 2A02:560:5821:6C00:6961:BA0A:AD59:72C4 (talk) 14:27, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth and Sdkb:, if you can please. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:37, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

 Corrected – thank you for the ping, editor Usedtobecool! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 10:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of a page spreading misinformation

I had reviewed a page House of Romay thoroughly ad the page is significantly spreading misleading information about the Romay family. Moreover, a user has been constantly reverting the cleanups and removed unreliable sources. How can i delete this page? Daliaxer (talk) 13:52, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, you seem to have already sort of figured out, though there are formatting issues, make sure you precisely follow the instructions at WP:AFD. 331dot (talk) 14:00, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Information being out of date is not grounds for deletion, it is grounds to fix the problems. 331dot (talk) 14:02, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I would have fixed it if the information was out of date but the information on page is literally misleading. Most of it i cleaned up which was either cited by dead links or unreliable sources. Other than that, WP:PROD criteria was also utilised upon the suggestion of an administrator (username: Explicit). This user removed the speedy deletion template and suggested WP:PROD which was followed. Even after 7 days, no one rectified this article or added any reliable sources, but still the template was removed by same user calling it ineligible. Same user suggested to utilise WP:AFD criterion now but still no one appears in the discussion page to talk about the deletion or retention of this page. What else should i follow? Daliaxer (talk) 14:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Daliaxer, I have fixed the formatting issues, I think. If I missed something, someone else will fix it. All you need to do is wait for other people to join the deletion discussion and convince them of your position. An uninvolved administrator will evaluate the discussion in seven days and determine the result, delete the article if that's the result. Meanwhile, you should read up on notability (WP:GNG) and the deletion policy (WP:DP) so you are able to make policy-compliant arguments. Votes that come with arguments non-compliant with policy are likely to be disregarded. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:14, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Daliaxer Just a passing observation that it's a) ok for another user to remove unreliable sources (assuming that's what you meant to write!). And b) the topic may actually be notable if there are lots of RELIABLE SOURCES talking about it as being a fantasy construct. In which case the whole tone of the article needs to focus on it being a well-known fake or hoax, not a real thing. So deletion might not actually be the best route after all. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:45, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

For multiple reasons, I am losing faith in this platform which is reflecting that its bias for certain type of information while strictly following the guidelines for other type of information. I tried publishing a page strictly following the WP:N and WP:BLP guidelines and using very strong reliable sources, page is still in AFC under review after almost a month. :/ Daliaxer (talk) 17:47, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Daliaxer Every single one of us here who helps maintain this encyclopaedia of over 6.7 million articles is a volunteer! We give our time freely to support and guide users, fend off vandals and give feedback when it is sought. Not a penny changes hands. But there are currently over 1,760 draft articles waiting for a volunteer to donate their time and effort to review articles like yours, and to give feedback to the person who created it if it isn't good enough.

Sometimes, of course, an interesting-sounding draft can catch a reviewer's eye and they might well assess it immediately. It might be about a high mountain, a species new to science or a Nobel prize winning scientist. Certainly, I am biased towards those types of articles, even though I do not participate in the review process myself. Rarely, however, are draft articles about venture capitalists of great interest to many reviewers, as they're so very often promotional and make pretty dull reading. It's up to reviewers how they volunteer their time, and to what topics. Some focus on the dregs that others have left unreviewed - and their efforts are indeed greatly appreciated. So please wait your turn and try not to lose faith. The review process can take a couple of months or so, as the notice on your draft submission clearly stated. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:53, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

How convert standard TEX paper to Wikipedia format, particularly references

I have a standard formatted math/physics paper in TEX format. How do I convert it to Wikipedia format. Beisenbe (talk) 15:17, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Beisenbe Welcome to the Teahouse. I can't help you directly, but you might find something of relevance at Help:Displaying a formula. We do have various conversion tools, though I've no idea if we have anything relevant to your question, as it's a bit above my paygrade. But a hasty Google search found this, if it's of any use.

Be aware that you must ensure you don't infringe anyone's copyright if adding more than a mere formula from a maths or physics paper. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:44, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Beisenbe, and welcome to the Teahouse. If the paper in question is then one you have put in Draft:Maxwell's True Current, then I'm afraid it doesn't look much like a Wikipedia article to me (and I'm talking about the content, not the formatting).

A Wikipedia article is a summary of what several independent reliable sources say about a subject, nothing more. It may not contain any argumentation or conclusions, unless it is directly reporting what a single source argued or concluded. Your draft looks to me like original research.

If you begin writing an article by doing anything at all other than finding several independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject, then you are certainly making your task difficult, and possibly wasting your time. ColinFine (talk) 21:54, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia page:

How is a photograph added? How is a page uploaded to visualize on the web under Wikipedia? J. Patrick Johnson, MD (talk) 17:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Please see WP:Images and WP:Your first article Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:24, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Judging from the content of your user and talk pages, you might also do well to read:

• WP:USER to see that your user page and user-talk pages are not for self-promotion;
• WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY
• WP:SELFPROMOTION

Bazza (talk) 17:29, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@J. Patrick Johnson, MD I very nearly deleted your userpage as Wikipedia is not a web-hosting platform. However, I've moved it to Draft:J. Patrick Johnson, MD. Whether it survives remains to be seen. Wikipedia articles must be based upon what independent, published sources say, not what the subject wants to tell us about themselves from their own personal knowledge.

@Bazza 7 has just given you some extra useful pointers, so has saved me a job. Please use LinkedIn if you want to promote yourself, and read WP:NBIO on our criteria for notable people, and WP:NPROF for academics. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:33, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@J. Patrick Johnson, MD I would add that including a photograph to which you own the copyright is not necessary to establish NOTABILITY (the critical criterion for acceptance. I suggest you focus on addressing that by the use of published RELIABLE SOURCES in your draft about yourself, and worry about adding images much later on. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:37, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Provide references for everything and reduce "Selected publications" to no more than ten. If there is content that lacks valid references - even if true - delete it. David notMD (talk) 03:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Can somebody help me review my article before I publish it?

My article was declined, I corrected some mistakes and it's ready to be publish. Can somebody help me and review it to make sure It doesn't have mistakes? I see some red words about citations. I believe is typo problems not issues with context. Thanks in advance. OFTB (talk) 17:46, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello OFTB. This is about Draft:Claudia Uceda. Anything published by Univision is not an independent source, and seven of your eleven references are to things published by Univision. You need to build your draft around sources entirely independent of Uceda and her employer. Non-independent sources should be used only in a minor way. Cullen328 (talk) 18:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

There isn't really a pre-review system for drafts, you should click submit to get a review. Theroadislong (talk) 18:49, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi there. Looks like you haven't seen the new version and my corrections. Thanks for the pre-view comment though. OFTB (talk) 19:15, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

The Articles for Creation process is specifically designed to review articles before they are published. Use that. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 20:31, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

There is nothing in policies or guidelines that prevents an editor from asking for informal comments or feedback on drafts here at the Teahouse. This is not the place for formal reviews but nobody should be discouraged from asking for advice and hints for improvement. Any editor who chooses not to comment on a draft can simply refrain from commenting on that draft. Cullen328 (talk) 09:15, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Inquiry About the Status of My First Published Article

I recently made my first contribution to Wikipedia by publishing an article. As this is my initial foray into editing and contributing, I'm eager to understand the process that follows the publication of a new article. I've noticed that my article is live, but I'm unsure about how to interpret its current status and what steps I should expect next. Could someone kindly explain: How can I check if my article has been reviewed or needs further improvements? Are there specific signs or notifications I should look for that indicate its acceptance or if any issues have been identified? As a new contributor, are there common post-publication steps I should be aware of to ensure my article meets Wikipedia's standards? I'm committed to contributing positively to the Wikipedia community and would greatly appreciate any guidance or advice you can offer to a newcomer. Thank you for your time and assistance. Hichem872642 (talk) 22:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Hichem872642, you tried to create an article on your userpage. That's not actually published. If you would like your article to be reviewed and to actually be live, please go see WP:AfC. Aside from that problem, you don't have any reliable sources to back up some of your claims in your article, and your section titled "Cultural Significance" is filled with a lot of puffery and non-neutral language. Cheers ‍ Relativity 23:52, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your response and the valuable feedback. I genuinely appreciate the guidance on the correct process for publishing an article through Wikipedia's Articles for Creation (WP:AfC) and the insights regarding the need for reliable sources and neutral language in my article. As a newcomer, understanding these nuances is crucial for me, and your advice has shed light on areas I need to improve.

I will revisit my article to address the issues you've highlighted, particularly focusing on substantiating my claims with reliable sources and revising the "Cultural Significance" section to ensure it adheres to Wikipedia's neutrality standards. This learning process is incredibly important to me, and I'm committed to making the necessary adjustments to contribute effectively to the Wikipedia community.

Once I've made these revisions, I plan to submit my article through the AfC process for review. If you have any further advice on finding reliable sources or tips on maintaining a neutral tone, I'd be grateful for your insights.

Thank you again for taking the time to help me navigate these initial steps. Your support is invaluable to me as I strive to become a constructive member of the Wikipedia community. Hichem872642 (talk) 11:09, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Hichem872642 I have moved your draft from your user page to Draft:Beef Negimaki, where you should work on it and base it upon RELIABLE SOURCES. You should consider whether continuing with it is actually worthwhile, bearing in mind there is already a page entitled Negimaki, which could be expanded upon, if appropriate so to do. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree that rather than try to get this draft accepted, you abandon it and consider if you have interesting, referenced information that can be added to Negimaki. David notMD (talk) 03:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your straightforward advice. I understand the importance of contributing valuable and well-referenced information to Wikipedia, and if enhancing the existing Negimaki article is the best way to do this, I am open to taking that path.

I will review the current content of the Negimaki page to identify areas where my research and insights could provide additional value or fill gaps in the existing information. My priority is to ensure that any contribution I make is backed by reliable sources and adds to the collective knowledge on the topic.

I appreciate your guidance and the opportunity to learn more about the editorial process on Wikipedia. This experience has been incredibly educational, and I'm grateful for the feedback that helps me understand how to be a more effective contributor.

Thank you once again for your time and for helping me navigate these decisions. I look forward to applying this advice and continuing to contribute to the Wikipedia community in a meaningful way. Hichem872642 (talk) 11:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for taking the time to move my draft to the appropriate space and for your valuable advice on focusing on reliable sources. I appreciate your guidance on the proper procedures and the suggestion to consider the existing Negimaki page as a potential avenue for contribution.

I will thoroughly review the current Negimaki article to understand how my research and writing might complement and enhance the information already available. My goal is to contribute meaningfully to the topic, and if expanding upon the existing page is the best way to do so, I am more than willing to adapt my approach.

I'll dedicate some time to gathering more reliable sources to support my draft and ensure that any contributions I make align with Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and neutrality. Your reminder about the importance of reliable sources is well-taken, and I commit to upholding these standards in my revisions.

Thank you again for your assistance and for helping me navigate this process. Your input is invaluable to me as a new contributor seeking to add value to the Wikipedia community. Hichem872642 (talk) 11:11, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Are you using an AI to write these posts? Please don't, we want to hear from you. 331dot (talk) 11:15, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for reaching out and expressing your concern. I understand where you're coming from, and I want to clarify that I don't use AI to create my posts. My native language is French, and I often rely on Google Translate to help with my English orthography and ensure my messages are clear. Rest assured, the thoughts and content I share are entirely my own, crafted in my native language before being translated. I'm committed to maintaining authenticity in our interactions and appreciate your understanding of the extra step I take to communicate more effectively in English. Hichem872642 (talk) 11:36, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

There are a lot of problems with the language in this article. I urge you to read WP:WORDSTOWATCH and recognize that your language is not neutrally phrased or encyclopedic in tone. For example, "Served in bite-sized pieces, beef negimaki is accompanied by a dipping sauce that complements the marinade, making it a versatile dish that can be enjoyed as an appetizer, side dish, or main course" is an inappropriate sentence for an encyclopedia; the notions that the dipping sauce "complements the marinade" or is a "versatile dish that can be enjoyed" are WP:PEACOCK-type language that expresses a non-neutral opinion in Wikipedia's voice. We want facts here, not opinions about how good a food tastes. And also, neither "beef" nor "negimaki" should be capitalised except as the first word in a sentence; this is not a trademarked name (like Big Mac) and food/dish names are lowercased except for individual words that are proper nouns (as in oysters Rockefeller). Thanks. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 19:24, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing out the issues with neutrality and tone, as well as the capitalization errors. I'll make the necessary revisions to ensure the article adheres to Wikipedia's standards. If you have a moment after I've made these changes, I would greatly appreciate it if you could review the modifications to ensure they meet the community's expectations. Your expertise would be invaluable in guiding these improvements. Thank you again for your help. Hichem872642 (talk) 20:36, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Any way to download Wiki pages directly?

Every so often, I come across a Wiki topic that article that I'd like to make a copy of in my word processing application. Without finding a download tool, what I've done is a copy and paste of articles from time to time — but it's very tedious because I have to delete a lot of extraneous things I don't want.

Is there a download tool somewhere for each article? Augnablik (talk) 04:21, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Augnablik: There should be a "Print/export" section under the "Tools" dropdown menu near the top of a page (or on the sidebar if you haven't collapsed it), where you have three different options to choose from. Do any of them help? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:31, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

What is the word processing application you're using? Microsoft Word, LibreOffice, OnlyOffice or something else? - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉(talk|contributions) 15:49, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@Augnablik The standard download tools provide .pdf files. If you have a modern browser (I use MS Edge) you may find it better to use the immersive reader tool of the browser and copy/paste the result out into a local wordprocessor. When I do that into MS Word or LibreOffice, I can get just the main part of the article in editable format with links. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:16, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

There are external (to Wikipedia) third-party services that are able to convert .pdfs into .docx. Searching pdf to word in a search engine gives some options. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:42, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull, what is the “immersive reader” you mention that you use? And is it found only in Edge? Augnablik (talk) 16:35, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Augnablik According to a Google search, that reader is only available in Edge (shortcut there is F9 when viewing a webpage). The search offered an extension for Chrome which offers the same sort of functionality but it is a 3rd party extension which I have not used and would be wary of. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:14, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Jothefiredragon, I use MS Word. Augnablik (talk) 16:33, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Jonathan Burrows page

I am trying to edit my father's wikipedia page. He has made several embellishments about his career, aswell as a long and erroneous section regarding his hobbies. What can I do? Zanelburrows (talk) 04:34, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Jonathan Burrows is a disambiguation page: which of the two individuals listed there is the subject in question? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.24.45.226 (talk) 05:42, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Zanelburrows, I have nominated Jonathan Burrows (producer) for deletion. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:38, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Interesting history here - draft created in 2018, soft deleted 5/2023, restored 6/2023, Zanelburrows recently (and before the delete as IP) removed large sections of content that were restored by others. The article is now at AfD. Zanelburrows given you claim to be his son, you are not supposed to edit the article directly, but rather to propose changes on the article's Talk page. At the AfD, you can state that you recommend the article be deleted (if that is your intent). David notMD (talk) 13:52, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Using a sponsored source for more information about a BLP's project

Hi all, currently working on Draft:Divya Thakur and there's some information about her work with Marriott Hotels that is briefly briefly in an New York Times profile. I found this source on Vogue that is published by Marriott with a lot more info. Could this be used to gather info? TLA (talk) 04:35, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

It could be used to corroborate some factual information (e.g. when she did a particular thing), but not to support her notability or to provide evaluations of her (e.g. how good a designer she is), since the publisher is one of her employers/clients. {The poster formerly known as 897.81.230.195} 176.24.45.226 (talk) 05:47, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm tla, that seems to be a supplement paid for by Marriott. Effectively, you'd be citing an advertisement. Not impressive. Better look elsewhere. I read in the draft that this person is a designer and architect. And I read that "Her 2016 installation, 'Design: The India Story' [...] attracted approximately 250,000 visitors. The same year, she was named 'Best Dressed' by Verve magazine." A quarter of a million is a vast number of visitors to an installation. Presumably some architecture/design journalists/critics were among them. What have they written about it? In comparison, praise for her clothing seems utterly trivial (perhaps even slightly demeaning, as I'd have thought that her works would be a lot more important than her looks). -- Hoary (talk) 05:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

That's fair, I'll just say "one of" Marriot's campaigns as the New York Times mentions as it's not really a big part of the article anyway. I just created the article, so I might add some more info to the paragraph about her installation "Design: The India Story" if it comes back to my mind.

What do you mean that being named 'Best Dressed' by Verge is demeaning? It's just a fact and it's only a tiny part in the whole article. TLA (talk) 06:11, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm tla, she's a designer and architect (or so I read here). Her significance is, I would have thought, in what she does rather than in what she looks like. -- Hoary (talk) 12:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

It is. But isn't it appropriate to mention that that was one of the awards she won? It's cited in a bunch of the sources. TLA (talk) 21:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree: it might not contribute to her notability, but it does give a fuller picture of her as a person, and if the magazine itself is notable I think a mention of her receiving an award from it is a fact worth mentioning. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.24.45.226 (talk) 21:27, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Declined Li Ziting AFC

Hello, my AfC was just declined by user Broc reason being that the article does not have an Rs and independent source of which the article obviously does have. Please I would like a more review on the above article, I want to know if there is any other error on the article that I should be fixing because the person about the article is highly notable. Thanks. Thisasia (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Thisasia please have a look at notability criteria for musicians. Does Li Ziting fulfill any of the criteria listed there? (example: did they have an album on national charts?) It is generally unclear from your article what the achievements of the singer in question are, and why they would be notable on their own; the band they were part of is indeed notable, but that does not mean each of the individual members are. Broc (talk) 08:08, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes of course, the musician is highly notable and popular, she now a solo artist with many albums and with many achievements, this are what I ought to be adding gradually while the article is approved. Thanks Thisasia (talk) 08:15, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Thisasia please add said achievements, then resubmit for approval. In the current article state, notability is not shown. Broc (talk) 08:45, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

alright I will do so, thanks for your time. Thisasia (talk) 08:51, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Thisasia There are formatting errors (please read WP:FORMAT) and a lot of the sources you use are just artist profiles. I would suggest looking for articles in newspapers/magazines about Li Ziting. TLA (talk) 10:05, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

How to edit and submit a draft?

I have a draft that I need to edit before submitting it for review. The instructions to do this were as follows:

"You will need to edit the draft article..., and then you will need to save those edits into the draft (by hitting the blue Publish changes button. But that merely publishes those edits to the online Draft. It is not yet a published article...

Once you have completed all your edits, and saved them (i.e. publish changes), then you will still see the blue "Submit the draft for review" button again. Only when you click that will your submission be made."

When I edit the draft and hit on Publish changes, the submission button does not appear in the editing tab. If I go back to the reading tab after publishing the changes, I can see the submission button, but the draft only shows the old version and not the one I have edited. What am I not getting here? JoIrMu (talk) 08:17, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, you cannot hit the submission button on the editing terminal, you can only do so on the article's page or after when you hit your publish button.

If your article keeps showing the previous version of the page after your published change, then kindly refresh the page. But note that situations like this don't normally occurs unless you are having some technical or network issues. Thanks Thisasia (talk) 08:28, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, but I had already tried that and tried again, but it does not help. I cannot get the new version of the article visible. Thank you also for the comment you left; I have addressed that problem/mistake in the edited version among others. JoIrMu (talk) 12:04, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @JoIrMu. The only draft I see in your contribution history is Draft:Joakim_Oldorff? But that was from December. Could you let us know the name of the Draft you are working on? Qcne (talk) 09:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that is the right draft. It has taken a while, since we created a Finnish Wikipedia article in the meantime as was suggested by our mentor. I have the new version ready based on the feedback given by our mentor, but editing the draft accordingly and submitting it for review seems impossible. The network connection is fine, but I must be doing something wrong anyway. JoIrMu (talk) 12:06, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @JoIrMu, I am not sure what is happening as I see nothing in your contribution history. Two suggestions:

- are you pressing Publish changes...? This is akin to 'Save' on a Word Processor, and means the new changes are being committed to Wikipedia but it doesn't mean the article itself is being published (slightly confusing wording).

- are you sure that draft is the correct one? Check the URL / spelling is the same as the one you are working on.

As for the Submit draft for review! button not appearing, don't worry about it: I can add it manually for you if you publish your changes as above. Qcne (talk) 13:53, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I had tried clicking on Publish changes numerous times, but I think it might have worked now. If the draft you see already features COI at the top of the page and a reference to Finnish Championships 2024, that is the version I would like to submit for review. I would be so grateful, if you can still add the submit button for me. Big thanks already at this point! JoIrMu (talk) 21:20, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Great, I have added the Submit draft for review!. Before you do though, you have a couple of links in the Lead that point to other Wikipedia articles. Please use WP:WIKILINKS instead of external links for these. Qcne (talk) 21:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the tips and for your patience in helping a newcomer! I will check the Wikilink issue before submitting. 193.111.119.176 (talk) 07:45, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

a serious obscene interference with one of your articles

When my search engine returns the results of looking for Marwan Bishara it returns the two lines including a very toxic characterization of his birth. If I click and open the article that same text is not there. Somebody is causing some serious harm to your website. Can you please look into this as quickly as possible. Here is the link. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=marwin+bishara+Wikipedia&t=fpas&ia=web 171.98.18.238 (talk) 10:54, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

That is a Google problem which will presumably be solved when robots do the rounds again. Theroadislong (talk) 11:16, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Google may be blamed for many things, but not for Duckduckgo's activities. Unfortunately Duckduckgo happened to spider this page during the few hours on 12 February when some fool's revision was visible. -- Hoary (talk) 11:23, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

There was some vandalism to the article Marwan Bishara a week ago, which was reverted a few hours later and hidden from the history - presumably because it was offensive or obscene. Wikipedia has no control of how often search engines update their databases. ColinFine (talk) 11:27, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I hid it from the history just a few minutes ago, primarily in order to deny the troll the pleasure of showing it to any similarly stupid friend. -- Hoary (talk) 11:33, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

New article by a new editor

I noticed that, as a new editor, I cannot create a new article from scratch. I know that I can publish a draft. And still, what are the criteria for publishing a new article? Neville the long 1 (talk) 10:59, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Creating a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia. You will greatly increase your chances of success by using the new user tutorial, and spending much time editing existing articles, to learn how things operate here and what is expected of article content. This will include things like notability, the test for a topic to merit an article.

If you would still like to create a new article now, please read Your First Article and then use the Article Wizard to create and submit a draft. 331dot (talk) 11:06, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

OK, understood. And yet, could you please elaborate on the requirements an editor should accomplish to be able to start a new article? I tried using the translation tool, and it didn't work either. Neville the long 1 (talk) 11:25, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

You must be autoconfirmed, which means your account must be at least four days old with 10 edits or more, to be able to directly create articles. This is highly inadvisable for new users without experience to do.

You mention the translation tool, are you attempting to translate an article from another language Wikipedia to this one? Each Wikipedia is separate, with their own editors and policies, and what is acceptable on one is not necessarily acceptable on another. 331dot (talk) 11:29, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Neville the long 1, and welcome to the Teahouse. The technical restriction allows you to create a new article directly when you are autoconfirmed - that is, your account has existed for four complete days and made ten edits.

Trying to create an article directly after four days and ten edits is an almost certain recipe for disappointment, frustration, and disillusionment. Would you enter a major competition four days after you first took up a sport? Or start building a car when you had just decided to start studying engineering?

I always advise new editors to spend at least a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles, before even trying the challenging task of create a new article. Once they have learnt about concepts such as verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view, and notability, they can read your first article and create a draft.

I would also point out that creating new articles is not the only way, and not necesarily the best way, to contribute to this vast resource. ColinFine (talk) 11:33, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

That said, it's apples and oranges, no? If someone's interested in creating an article, presumably they see a legit opportunity to do so, and suggesting they edit existing ones instead could be seen as, well, sniffy, though I know you're not really like that. 😉 – AndyFielding (talk) 10:37, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Neville the long 1, 331dot has pointed you to information that should be useful to you. Which part of it needs a further explanation? Or what is not explained? (And translation from which language to which language?) -- Hoary (talk) 11:28, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Jane Parker (academic)

Hello, Could the academic field that follows my name on a Wikipedia page please be changed. I am an 'Industrial Relations' (not Management) academic and the distinction is quite important in terms of conveying the focus of my research. If this could be changed, that would be much appreciated, Jane

Academic discipline following name (please remove 'Management' and change to 'Industrial Relations' - thank you. 213.86.145.216 (talk) 11:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I have moved the article to Jane Parker (academic) which is simpler. Theroadislong (talk) 11:14, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I have done a tidying exercise, but more is required. The section of selected works is far too long: this is not an academic directory. Aim for 10 maximum. You should also remember you have a WP:COI in this article. Bazza (talk) 12:34, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

How to add an image to any Wikipedia article?

please help me,I'm really confused about how to add an image. Sheikbaba36524 (talk) 11:26, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

For starters, Sheikbaba36524, please specify the image. I mean, here, in this thread, please link to it. -- Hoary (talk) 11:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Uploading logos – local vs global

Hello everyone,😊
I would appreciate some guidance here:
I uploaded two logos to Wikipedia and they both stay on the English Wikipedia:
– File:Kurk_Lietuvai_logo_(2024).png
– File:Kalnapilis_logo_(2024).svg

They are not available on Wikimedia Commons:
– Commons:File:Kurk_Lietuvai_logo_(2024).png
– Commons:File:Kalnapilis_logo_(2024).svg

However, other logos are available globally on the Wikimedia Commons::
– Commons:File:Microsoft_logo_(2012).svg
– Commons:File:SANDVIK.svg

What causes this difference?
Frequently.by.train (talk) 15:40, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Frequently, and welcome to the Teahouse. Because the latter are below the COM:Threshold of originality and so are regarded as public domain, and Commons will accept them. Note that the law relating to this varies from country to country. ColinFine (talk) 15:47, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, ColinFine.

But how does one upload logos to Wikimedia Commons?

How do you "test" the logos for c:COM:Threshold of originality?

The logos I uploaded certainly fit the licensing info used on other logos:
This logo image consists only of simple geometric shapes or text. It does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright protection, and is therefore in the public domain. Although it is free of copyright restrictions, this image may still be subject to other restrictions. See WP:PD § Fonts and typefaces or Template talk:PD-textlogo for more information.

Frequently.by.train (talk) 15:54, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

You'll need to ask on Commons. Try C:COM:VPC, ColinFine (talk) 17:05, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Refer by first or last name?

In any Biography or non-biography article, should we use the first or last name while referring to the person again and again? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 15:55, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

That'd depend on whether their last or first names are used elsewhere to refer to different people on the page. Usually I'd use last name, but if that's used elsewhere on the page to refer to a different person I'd use first name (like if brothers or members of the same family are on a page). If you get incredibly unlucky and both the first and last names are used for different people on the page, just use their full name. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 15:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

It is customary not to refer to a person by their full name. It is considered derogatory to call by surname only TindDIrving (talk) 04:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Please see the section of Wikipedia's manual of style about surnames mentioned further down. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

After the opening of the lede, where the subject's full name is shown (or their more widely-known professional name, should the article have that title), it is WP (and general encyclopedic) style to use the subject's surname only, except where you must use their given name to distinguish them from others of the same surname (e.g. family members, relatives).

Also, please, once you've used the surname in a paragraph—especially the start of a new section, where it's especially warranted—it's much less cluttered- and more professional-looking to use the subject's preferred or appropriate pronoun (e.g. he, she, they) rather than using the surname over and over, as though one were writing for amnesiacs. (Okay, I can dream, can't I?) – AndyFielding (talk) 10:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Are their any guidelines for this one? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 16:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography#Subsequent use. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:22, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

There is a guideline: Please see MOS:SURNAME. You should never use a person's given name unless there is the possibility of confusion (such as two or more members of the same family being referenced in the same paragraph) and then only use the given names to the extent necessary to avoid confusion in that limited portion of the article. Referring to people by their given names is unencyclopedically overfamiliar. For example, in an article about Kirk Douglas one might have to say "Kirk" in a sentence in which his son Michael Douglas is referenced and there might be a possibility of confusion (but see the second sentence of Michael's article, in which it is clear that "Douglas" refers to Michael, not Kirk... and this sentence itself illustrates the type of circumstance I'm referring to), but for any parts of the article without any other Douglas family members mentioned, he should be called "Douglas". - Julietdeltalima (talk) 19:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Sources from videos and such.

Hello, I wanted to edit the trivia/video games area of the "Numbers Stations" article. The trivia is because the popular videogame "Omori" uses the Achtung numbers station broadcast as part of one of it's tracks. The only way I can prove it is due to a Youtube comment under the video that has the track, can a youtube comment be used as a credible source?

Article: Numbers station I dunno about this (talk) 16:47, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, if an independent source has not commented on the use, then it is too trivial to be mentioned in a Wikipedia article: see NOTINDISCRIMINATE. If it is accepted that it is worth mentioning, then, yes, it can be its own source, along the lines of WP:PLOTSOURCE. ColinFine (talk) 17:11, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Michael Isikoff Wikipedia entry

Hi there. I updated my Wikipedia entry last week to reflect that I no longer work for Yahoo News and added name of my most recent book. I also made a few other minor, non-controversial fixes. Although it now says the entry was updated last week, the actual changes are not showing up on my life Wikipedia page. Can you help so the updates get added? Michael Isikoff Misikoff (talk) 16:56, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello Misikoff, and welcome to the Teahouse. The only edits showing in Special:History/Michael Isikoff in the last week were made by Mikeross22 and Joe Friendly, and they have not been reverted; so if looks as if you did not save your edits.

However, as you have a conflict of interest you are very strongly discouraged from editing the article directly, and instead should make edit requests on the talk page, citing reliable published sources for any information you wish to add, and an uninvolved editor will be along to review the requested change. ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I would also encourage you to think about it as a Wikipedia article about you, rather than my Wikipedia entry ; just as if The New York Times wrote an article about you. 331dot (talk) 17:22, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Ft Ritchie, US Army Counter intelligence Corps, Henry Kissenger, WW2, Ritchie Boys

Henry Kissinger served in ww2 in a divisional counterintelligence regimental team, see https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/henry-kissingers-world-war-ii/ I thought I read someplace else, that he received counterintelligence training at Ft Ritchie, but I may be wrong. Further research by your editors, may be required. 2600:8805:A886:D200:C8ED:2759:1A96:36C (talk) 19:19, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

If you have suggestions to improve an article, start a discussion on that article's talk page. If you want to do more research, that's up to you. RudolfRed (talk) 20:59, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are volunteers here to advise, not to research nor co-author. David notMD (talk) 21:43, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. You are as much one of "our editors" as anybody else.

Generally, if you have an idea for something to be added to Wikipedia, there are really only two effective ways to do it. One is to add it yourself; the other is to enthuse another editor with the idea so they want to do it. It is possible that somebody reading your post here will be interested enough to look into it; but not very likely. Better places to suggest it would be the talk pages of a relevant article (eg Talk:Henry Kissinger or of a relevant WikiProject (eg WT:WikiProject Politics or maybe WT:WikiProject Espionage). Either way, as you say, it will need some research, because unsourced information that is added to Wikipedia articles tends to get removed pretty quickly. ColinFine (talk) 22:04, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Overlapping dab pages

I came across a dab page at The Resistance the other day, and cleaned it up a bit. Just now, I came across the dab page at plain Resistance. They have close to 20 and 100 entries, respectively - some overlapping, some not. The former links to the latter, but not vice versa - actually, the former is pretty much orphaned, though I dunno how relevant that is for a dab page. This doesn't feel like a very happy state of affairs. Should they be integrated better, or simply merged, or what?

- 2A02:560:5821:6C00:4D3D:867E:F3EB:2F3C (talk) 21:05, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

It is good that a dab page is orphaned, because no articles should be linking to a dab. It is there for convenience of readers to help them find the topic they are looking for. RudolfRed (talk) 21:11, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Resistance has a bunch of incoming links from {{other uses}}-type hatnotes on the one hand and other dab pages on the other, all via the Resistance (disambiguation) redirect. The Resistance having none at all may or may not be unusual, I dunno. The Resistance (album) uses the "wrong" one, at any rate, which does make the "right" one seem a bit superfluous.

- 2A02:560:5821:6C00:4D3D:867E:F3EB:2F3C (talk) 22:51, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Aha, here's a close parallel, using a joint page: The Oracle -> Oracle (disambiguation), with explicit "Oracle or The Oracle may also refer to" opening. Clearly the cleaner solution, no?

- (OP) 2A02:560:5821:6C00:8927:F475:6FA6:FF53 (talk) 14:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Aha again, here's another nice parallel, this time for the other approach: The Sea/Sea (disambiguation). That pair looks nicely maintained: Little or no overlap, and the pages link to each other and are both linked to from the main hatnote at sea.

- 2A02:560:5821:6C00:8927:F475:6FA6:FF53 (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Linked Words To Pages Which Don't Exist

If there are words and/or sentences which are linked but the pages aren't created (can tell when it's red), should I unlink it or just leave it alone? CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine (talk) 21:22, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine: Usually you should leave it alone. See WP:REDLINK for guidance. Redlinks can inspire editors to create missing articles. RudolfRed (talk) 21:25, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Do you have a specific article in mind? David notMD (talk) 21:45, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

It is on 2024 Haneda Airport runway collision. There are two names which have Redlinks. It is in Commemoration content in the Aftermath content paragraphs. There are few more above it. CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine (talk) 21:50, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Having glanced at the article, I would say that all three currently red links are of subjects who/which could quite plausibly merit their own articles, so they should be retained. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.24.45.226 (talk) 08:23, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Recently made a new page on a film

Hi, I made a new Wikipedia page on a Filipino film recently called "Pamilya Ordinaryo", since there hasn't been any page on that for nearly 8 years since it's release. I got my sources from websites and thought of making one since it appeared on Netflix, and it caught my interests. I was sad when I found out that there was no independent page on this movie, so I decided to create one today. I created the page through Wikipedia:How to create a page and I think it immediately got published, however I am not sure whether it needs to be reviewed and if it's published already. I'm still not sure whether the page is suitable enough as I think it needs to be reviewed first. If there is anything that may be concerning, please could I have some advice on it? WedgeWinglet (talk) 22:40, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Along with that, I believe they have a release poster (here) and I was hoping to add it, but I am not sure because of copyright. WedgeWinglet (talk) 22:42, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@WedgeWinglet All new articles which don't use the articles for creation process will in due couse be reviewed by the new pages patrol, who can be fairly strict in ensuring they meet our inclusion criteria, especially for notability. Search engines won't index the article until it gets NPP approval (or 90 days have elapsed). You can add the poster to the English Wikipedia as WP:NONFREE content but make sure you carefully follow the instructions at that link. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:24, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Addition to article of photographs in the pubic domain

I wish to add to an article recent photographs of an historic building that were commissioned by an agency of a US state government. To my knowledge, unless specifically designated otherwise such properties are by definition in the public domain. What is the procedure for proving that such a work is freely reproducible when adding it to Wikipedia? DatFiend (talk) 22:44, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@DatFiend: Work by the US federal government is public domain. The same rule does not apply to US state government work. Which state was it for? RudolfRed (talk) 00:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Interesting; thanks. Virginia. DatFiend (talk) 17:19, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

ProQuest

Does anyone here have access to the ProQuest database? I am looking for a NCJW Journal from 1998. I was unable to find it in the Wikipedia Library. https://www.proquest.com/docview/229503392?sourcetype=Scholarly%20Journals Polygnotus (talk) 22:56, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Someone may be able to help at the Resource Request page. LizardJr8 (talk) 01:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I have posted the request there. Polygnotus (talk) 04:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

reverting back to previous version of page

Hello, I have worked on an article and recently one user went in and made over 50 changes/additions to the page in a span of a few weeks, and I do not agree with many of these changes. What are the options in a case like this? Ravin9976 (talk) 02:35, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ravin9976: Discuss it on the article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 02:45, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Copyediting

Hello! Excuse my unfamiliarity with specific Wikipedia pages, but I was wondering if there is a place that I could find articles on books and literature that require copyediting work. Thanks in advance! Neo Purgatorio (talk) 02:52, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@Neo Purgatorio: Welcome, and thanks for wanting to fix articles. Go to Category:All_articles_needing_copy_edit and there are links there to filter for various topics including books. Also, check out Wikipedia:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors where you can join other editors also interested in copy editing. RudolfRed (talk) 03:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I appreciate the assistance. Neo Purgatorio (talk) 03:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Organisation changed trading name

Hello! The Australian_Market_and_Social_Research_Society_Limited rebranded to "The Research Society" in 2020.

The (then) CEO wrote, "We will remain the Australian Market & Social Research Society in our constitution but our new trading name will be The Research Society." Does this mean the name of the page should be changed? Or should it be treated like X (which is still found at Twitter)?

The current article also has a "This article contains content that is written like an advertisement" flag.

I am a member of The Research Society (with membership fees paid for by my workplace). Does this disqualify me from making changes?

And if I'm allowed to make changes, what is the process addressing the rebranded name? DivePeak (talk) 03:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

hi @DivePeak and welcome to the Teahouse! to answer your first question, it should probably be moved or renamed to something like Australian Market and Social Research Society due to the guideline that states Use commonly recognizable names. the article name should remain as the most recognizable form of the name, not the trading name (unless it is most recognizable by other people under that trading name than any other names). for example, our article on DuPont is not named DuPont de Nemours, Inc. in addition, the "limited" should also be dropped per the naming conventiosn for companies which also states that legal suffixes are not included in titles. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 03:49, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

...and to answer your last question, you may not edit the article directly, however you are allowed to post edit requests for the article, however before doing so please make sure you are famillar with the Conflict of interest and Paid editing policies, which are mandatory for anyone editing an article about something (or someone) one is personally connected to and paid by, including companies they are working under. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 03:51, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Removal of my updates

I am aware that a malicious person is going and putting my edits back to where they were. One case is where, on the North Highland Way page, that I had changed www.letsgoexploring.co.uk to www.friendsofthenorthhighlandway.com. It was changed back almost immediately. Also, people keep removing my Christian name and putting Irving. There is a lot of controversy about this project and always has been.

I would request that the page is deleted. North Highland Way TindDIrving (talk) 03:59, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

You do not own or get to control what is on any Wikipedia article, and you are highly discouraged from editing articles where you may have a conflict of interest. Remsense诉 04:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Please be kinder, Remsense, especially to living people who raise concerns about how they are covered on Wikipedia, even we ultimately are not able to accommodate them. Regards! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:11, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, you're exactly right. Remsense诉 04:13, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I developed the project. It would not exist without me. I have done this for 20 years on a voluntary basis. The Caithness Waybaggers route was different. From what I know of them, they would not have the knowledge or interest in editing Wikipedia. [[redacted] I should not be villified for bringing a project to the table which has been wanted for 30 years. TindDIrving (talk) 04:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello TindDIrving, are you Tina Irving? If so, you have a conflict of interest and it's best you don't edit the article directly, so as to not compromise the neutrality of the article. That said, we take concerns of living people about how they are portrayed on Wikipedia very seriously, and I would be willing to help if I can. Did you want the article to say in places, "Tina" instead of saying "Irving"? That may not be possible. Wikipedia is written in formal professional English and it is my understanding that in the west, people are referred to by their last name, not their first. You will have to explain why you want the website changed. It is not helpful to accuse another editor of malice without specific evidence. Can you compile some WP:DIFFs to show what exactly has happened? Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:08, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I developed this project. It would not exist without me. [redacted] I want the words to say Tina Irving, not "Tina" or "Irving". That is my name. I most certainly do have speciic evidence. I can email it to you if you wish. What are WP:DIFFs. I am abused on Facebook every time I put anything about this project. I have even been to Police Scotland about it. TindDIrving (talk) 04:14, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

You can click the word WP:DIFF and it will take you to explanation and instructions. It mentions the full name when mentioning it the first time in a paragraph and only the last name thereafter. That looks correct to me. Repeating the full name every time is incredibly distracting, unless the text happens to be talking about more than one person named Irving. Yes, if other people involved in real-life conflict with you are also editing that article, it would be a violation as well. And they should use the talk page as well. And if any party is using Wikipedia to deliberately harass/harm other people, they will be removed by admins when provided with a complelling evidence. If your evidence includes things that have only happened on Wikipedia, you can share the evidence publicly here. Or you can mail me it, and I will look if there is anything there and bring it to admins' attention as necessary. If your evidence involves disclosing real-life identity of one or more editors on Wikipedia, you should send that evidence to someone who has signed the NDA which isn't me, but I can suggest names. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:32, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Wikipedia can only cover what has been written by independent third party sources, such as newspapers, though not everything that's in newspapers needs to be included here. We try to find a balance between sharing knowledge and protecting people involved. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:38, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

TindDIrving, Wikipedia has a Manual of Style, and its relevant section is MOS:SURNAME. After first mention, we refer to William Shakespeare as Shakespeare, and Taylor Swift as Swift and Abraham Lincoln as Lincoln and Margaret Thatcher as Thatcher. And so you will be called Irving on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 04:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Then delete my name altogether. I object. As you quite rightly say, it is distracting to have the name repeated. I will send to you, Used to be cool. I am a journalist myself, and have my own newspaper. https://letsgonorthnewsservice.wordpress.com/ I am also on Muckrack

https://muckrack.com/tina-irving-1

I also write for the Daventry Express, though not on this subject.

https://www.daventryexpress.co.uk/ TindDIrving (talk) 04:49, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

TindDIrving, your own newspapers would hardly be independent, third-party sources. Your name won't be removed just because you don't like the way it is written, but I will take a look later on to evaluate whether mentioning you in that article is WP:DUE. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:25, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

So,, this is suppression of Freedom of the Press then? Just because I am a journalist and developer of the project, is irrelevant. I have already sued Google for matters relating to this kind of thing, and won. Wikipedia should not be used to bully people, and that is what these people are doing, and stealing my project. TindDIrving (talk) 05:33, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I took a look, and I don't see anything urgent about how you've been covered in that article. You'll have to drop the attitude and raise your concerns politely on the talk page of the article if you want to get anywhere. Further direct editing of the article or WP:SOCKing to persue that goal may result in loss of editing privileges. Also a no, is accusing any and everyone that edits that article as malicious actors out to get you. I have not received your mail, if it is me you sent it to. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

This is not my newspaper. I just write for it. TindDIrving (talk) 05:33, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

TindDIrving, Icelandic, Vietnamese and various other names require different treatment; but people with the surname Irving are generally referred to as "Irving". This practice is of course not universal outside Wikipedia, but it is very common. As for whether "this is suppression of Freedom of the Press", I don't understand what the referent of "this" is. If you'd like to change an external link (e.g. change from www.letsgoexploring.co.uk to www.friendsofthenorthhighlandway.com) it's a good idea to signal your reason for doing so on the talk page of the relevant article: for the article North Highland Way, this would be Talk:North Highland Way. -- Hoary (talk) 06:13, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

OK. I am bored with this now. I don't care if Wikipedia want information to be erroneous. Not about the name. Clearly www.letsgoexploring.co.uk no longer exists. Suppression of freedom of the press is because I am a journalist and developer of the North Highland Way, yet I am told I have conflict of interests. How can that be. I developed the project, with the support of 40 businesses, The Highland Council and Nature Scot. For this I am penalised yet other people who edit the entry aren't. I won't bother contributing to Wikipedia. Thanks. TindDIrving (talk) 06:27, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia not linking to a "newspaper" doesn't constitute "suppression of freedom of the press". You're still free to publish whatever you want. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:16, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

TindDIrving, so letsgoexploring.co.uk no longer exists. Thank you. (Well, in a sense it does still exist ... but it's rather underwhelming.) I don't see any indication above that anyone thinks your journalism should lose its readership, or any suggestion of any conspiracy towards that end; so I'm puzzled by your talk of suppression of freedom of the press. How it may be that you have a conflict of interest (COI) is explained; see this in particular: simply, to say that somebody would have a COI if they edited an article in no way vilifies or even criticizes that person. And people with COIs are welcome to make suggestions on the talk page of the relevant article; you are most welcome to make them in Talk:North Highland Way. (Yes, such suggestions may go unnoticed -- but there are ways of bringing them to wider notice. If, after a few days, a request on Talk:North Highland Way got no response, I'd post a simple message on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scotland inviting people to take a look.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:36, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Not interested. Of course you think I should lose my readership. As explained, which you do not understand is that I am both a journalist and lead in this project. I have sent documentation to one of your editors to prove it. The North Highland Way.com project, has a conflict of interests, but I don't see you removing his blog, only mine. 2A00:23C7:7829:9B01:9193:26D2:96CE:2971 (talk) 07:44, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

TindDIrving, I understand that you are both a journalist and a lead in the project. If you're a lead in the project, (i) I (personally) thank you; (ii) you have a COI. I'm quite happy to remove the link to friendsofthenorthhighlandway.com. (Anyone here object?) You are of course free to fantasize about what I think. -- Hoary (talk) 08:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

friendsofthenorthhighlandway.com is the real project, supported by VisitScotland and The Highland Council.

the northhighlandway.com link also has a personal interest. If you are going to remove the Friends, then you should remove the other one as well. 20 years of this project, and now Wikipedia want to ruin it. You must be in touch with the other editors. If I find out that you are, as with Google, you will be taken to court. as a journalist, I can always find out. 2A00:23C7:7829:9B01:9193:26D2:96CE:2971 (talk) 08:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

no legal threats. ltbdl (talk) 08:11, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Little help

What are your advices to a new editor on Wikipedia? Connorrk812 (talk) 06:18, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

For starters, read and digest Help:Introduction, and the pages it links to. -- Hoary (talk) 06:21, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Feedback requested for a draft after trying to implement 1st round of suggestions

Hello! I am writing to request feedback for an article that I have been drafting with the help and feedback of others, including Teahouse members. Can you please take a look at the latest and advise me about ways to improve the article? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bhargav_Sri_Prakash

Thanks in advance. KrisJohanssen (talk) 06:42, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I read: He is the founder of FriendsLearn and serves as Carnegie Mellon University Digital Vaccine Project's founding partner and as the resident inventor for research translation-innovation. / According to Carnegie Mellon University's website for the Digital Vaccine Project, "Digital Vaccines are a subcategory of digital therapeutics [etc etc]". Better to provide a description of "digital vaccines" that's based on reliable sources that are independent of both BSP and CMU. -- Hoary (talk) 07:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion @Hoary. May I include the following excerpt as a description? If necessary, can you please help me rewrite this in language that would be an appropriate interpretation of the definition in the report?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/digital-vaccine-global-market-report-100300622.html

"A Digital vaccine is a tool that trains the brain and encourages good habits using a variety of digital technologies, such as virtual reality, smartphone apps, and artificial intelligence. Moreover, digital vaccines are cutting-edge technologies that can aid individuals in enhancing their mental health and encouraging positive behavior. They are affordable, simple to use, and adaptable to different demands. Also, they have the ability to help where it is most needed and reach a huge audience.

Digital vaccinations hold great promise for enhancing mental health and encouraging good conduct in people. These vaccinations have the ability to assist people in forming healthier behaviors and leading better, more meaningful lives by combining neurocognitive training and nudging strategies. The potential for digital vaccines to promote positive change is enormous and exciting as digital technologies continue to develop."

Thank you for your guidance and help.

KrisJohanssen (talk) 05:18, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

KrisJohanssen, BSP is working for the Carnegie Mellon University Digital Vaccine Project. CMU is a university. Now, universities do sometimes do the strangest things, but I'll start with the assumption that the Digital Vaccine Project is something that's intellectually sound and of academic value. Are there no academic descriptions (independent of BSP and CMU, of course) of "digital vaccines", perhaps articles in journals of educational psychology? (If educational psychology is not the relevant field, then which are the relevant fields?) Why does the draft have to depend on a piece from finance.yahoo.com that's unsigned and (with talk of "cutting-edge technologies", etc) why does it read like an advertising puff? (And what do "neurocognitive training" and "nudging strategy" mean, anyway?) Google Scholar does offer a lot of hits for the string "digital vaccine"; but many are obviously false positives (whereby for example "digital vaccine records" aren't records of digital vaccines but instead digital records of vaccines) and a lot more look as if they're likely to be false positives, but I really can't be bothered to investigate. -- Hoary (talk) 08:08, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback @Hoary. Based on your questions I did further research and am even more convinced of the Science as this is backed by solid publications in indexed journals + reported on by multiple Universities. I will use the the article published by Brown University Alpert School of Medicine Center for Digital health for the description of digital vaccine, instead of the market report on digital vaccines
<be> I just want to clarify that no where in my research did I find that "BSP is working for the Carnegie Mellon University Digital Vaccine Project", as you suggest. Is there such a reference? I have seen that he is consistently attributed as a collaborator of Carnegie Mellon and that he is the founder of FriendsLearn and the developer of fooya.

According to this article which is cited by the article draft, published by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Center for Communication Programs it is stated that "Bhargav Sri Prakash, Founder & CEO of FriendsLearn, which developed the game". As for academic descriptions, here is an article published by Alpert School of Medicine at Brown University, which I have also cited in the draft.. It states "A different type of vaccine, called a “digital vaccine”, might offer a solution to the problem of creating sustained behavioral change. These are not typical vaccinations in the sense of promoting biological immunity to a pathogen, but they have this name because they create resistance to disease through a different mechanism. Digital vaccines are a subtype of digital therapeutics, which use neurocognitive training to promote positive human behavior using technologies like smartphone apps"

A peer reviewed publication in JMIR mHealth and uHealth based on a randomised controlled trial states this in Conclusion "Implicit and gamified learning about healthy eating delivered via a mobile app can significantly improve children’s food choices immediately after the game. While additional scientific evidence is needed to confirm that such apps can serve as a digital vaccine with long-term impact, this study provides novel insights about the potential drivers of the observed positive short-term effect".

This peer reviewed publication has been cited by 6 other peer reviewed publications and in one book/policy document

The citations include :

Journals

Lagu A, Thaha R, Syafar M, Hadju V, Kurniati Y. Using Games to Promote Healthy Behavior in Children: A Narrative Review. Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences 2022;10(E):1904

Limone P, Messina G, Toto G. Serious games and eating behaviors: A systematic review of the last 5 years (2018–2022). Frontiers in Nutrition 2022;9

Brown J, Franco-Arellano B, Froome H, Siddiqi A, Mahmood A, Arcand J. The Content, Quality, and Behavior Change Techniques in Nutrition-Themed Mobile Apps for Children in Canada: App Review and Evaluation Study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 2022;10(2):e31537

Schaafsma H, Jantzi H, Seabrook J, McEachern L, Burke S, Irwin J, Gilliland J. The impact of smartphone app–based interventions on adolescents’ dietary intake: a systematic review and evaluation of equity factor reporting in intervention studies. Nutrition Reviews 2023

Hovadick A, Cardoso M. Family-based WhatsApp intervention to promote healthy eating behaviors among Amazonian school children: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint). JMIR Research Protocols 2023

Ren J, Xu W, Liu Z. The Impact of Educational Games on Learning Outcomes. International Journal of Game-Based Learning 2024;14(1):1

Books/Policy Documents

Cabascango S, Andrango I, Guerrero G. Sustainable, Innovative and Intelligent Societies and Cities. View KrisJohanssen (talk) 15:01, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

KrisJohanssen, it seems that I hastily misread "serves as Carnegie Mellon University Digital Vaccine Project's founding partner" as "is Carnegie Mellon University Digital Vaccine Project's co-founder", or similar, but of course its meaning is different. Sorry about that. -- Hoary (talk) 22:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Not at all, dear @Hoary. I'm really grateful for your patience and insightful questions which has driven me to dive deeper in to researching the subject. Since I am a first time editor + the topic of digital vaccines is new to me I could use all the help I can get! :) If you would please give me any further feedback or suggestions to improve the draft I'd be additionally thankful. KrisJohanssen (talk) 04:49, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

The draft repeatedly (12 times) uses the phrase "digital vaccine" without ever mentioning that they aren't actually vaccines. The subject comes across as a fraud. Maproom (talk) 08:44, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, by contrast, the article Prairie oyster swiftly informs the reader that the subject isn't an oyster. And the prose on which a description of "digital vaccine" perhaps wafts (the stuff I abbreviated above as "[etc etc]") seems to be designed less to inform, more to impress. -- Hoary (talk) 08:56, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Maproom for your feedback. I failed to count it as you have done but totally agree with you that 12 times is far too repetitious! I will edit to reduce the number of times 'digital vaccine' finds mention in the draft. I sincerely seek your help with my draft to ensure that the subject does not come across as a fraud. I request so based on conviction I gained through the research that I have done on the person and the work. I believe that there is significant impact and humanitarian value in the subject's long tenure of commitment to research and disease prevention science. Furthermore the subject's progress is not commercially bolstered by venture capitalists or private equity which can tend to fuel more fraud than impact. Moreover the global award that he has received from Financial Times and the International Finance Corporation World Bank. and first patent by the US PTO makes me believe that the subject deserves the best possible article as a historic record for creating a new field that benefits humanity.

Thanks,

KrisJohanssen (talk) 05:40, 21 February 2024 (UTC) KrisJohanssen (talk) 05:40, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

References

Assessment banner not at the top of the Talk Page

I recently came across two Wikipedia articles which shows up as an unassessed article. When I went to the talk page I found that the assessment banner was not at the top of the page. I moved it up to the top of the talk page and the article began showing as 'A B-class article from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia' on the article's main page. Is there any reason why the assessment banner was not at the top of the talk page to begin with? Should I revert my changes? This is one of the article. -Yuthoob (talk) 08:38, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Yuthoob, here is Talk:The Yellow Kid immediately before you edited it. Despite the unconventional placement of the template, it's in the categories specified by the template. Why wasn't the template at the top? Well, look at its immediate surroundings, which I think explain. -- Hoary (talk) 08:47, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary: Just to confirm, are you saying that it was placed there because the article was modified by InternetArchiveBot and therefore might need to be reassessed?

In the other talk page I saw, it was inside a bracket on the first sentence of a section of the talk page. This edit by Cewbot placed it there and I couldn't understand why. Thank you for the reply.

--Yuthoob (talk) 10:59, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

will you add a Non-Migrant Black, not of Hispanic Origin wikipedia page

will you add a Non-Migrant Black, not of Hispanic Origin wikipedia page.My Race is : Non-Migrant Black, not of Hispanic Origin. Just like wikipedia has a wikipedia page for african americans and some others races? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans Terrance19888 (talk) 10:20, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Terrance19888, are you American? I do not know how you could be a non-migrant black person who isn't an African-American, if so. The answer is most likely no. If you're in Africa or the Pacific, it's possible you belong to an ethnic group that can be described as non-migrant black, and if an article on the group is missing, it could be created. Ultimately, it comes down to WP:GNG. Respectable academics need to have written about a group as a distinct race or ethnicity in order for them to be included in Wikipedia. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:49, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I am American. I am born in Saginaw, Michigan on August 3, 1984. On my Health Portal saids that I am Non-Migrant Black, not of Hispanic Origin from Michigan Department Of Health and Human Resources Terrance19888 (talk) 11:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Why do you think that that is a "race"? It is not. https://i.imgur.com/ajn3v9k.png They also use "Non-Migrant Unknown". Do you think "Non-Migrant Unknown" is also a race? Polygnotus (talk) 11:02, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I think Non-Migrant Black, not of Hispanic Origin is a race because On my Health Portal saids that I am Non-Migrant Black, not of Hispanic Origin from Michigan Department Of Health and Human Resources as a race/culture. I web capture my Health Portal showing Non-Migrant Black, not of Hispanic Origin. Terrance19888 (talk) 11:15, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

As you can see in the screenshot, these "HIPAA Race or Ethnicity Codes" are just labels used by that department of health services. It is not a race. Polygnotus (talk) 11:18, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Your race is "human", or "homo sapiens" if you like Latin. Please read WP:1DAY. Polygnotus (talk) 10:55, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't think either point you've made here is the most helpful for the asker. Remsense诉 11:15, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I disagree. Polygnotus (talk) 11:18, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

You know that they were not referring to biological species, and that they did not "make up" the topic one day. Remsense诉 11:19, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I am a timetraveller, but only in one direction. The HIPAA codes certainly were made up one day. The consensus among scientists is that race is a social construct. Among humans, race has no taxonomic significance because all living humans belong to the same subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens. Polygnotus (talk) 11:23, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Polygnotus, even if you're usually right, if you can't be nice about it, teahouse is not the place for you. These shifting of goalposts to double down on your unhelpful side-arguments are not helpful either. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Well as you've already been told, it comes down to the policy explained at WP:GNG. That page specifies whether a topic is suitable for Wikipedia. If it isn't, there's not much anyone can do about it. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:31, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@Terrance19888 It may be that the Wikipedia article Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act would benefit from addition of a subsection explaining the use of its race or ethnicity codes (backed up by reliable sources which are independent of the act) but IMO that article needs a lot of work! Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

parapsychology fairness?

An organisation 'Guerilla Skeptics' is alleged to have been editing articles on parapsychology and remote viewing in addition to the UAP topic. Doing things like removing people's PhDs and relevant background and other tactics to discredit serious scientific interest in these topics. Is this complaint accurate? As a donator to Wiki, I'm concerned. Nick 2A02:C7E:5A12:EA00:9915:667A:93E1:D7A (talk) 11:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

It wasn't an organization, just some people with a blog. That was 5+ years ago. There is no serious scientific interest in remote viewing (but there is in UAPs). And you shouldn't donate to the WMF, they got more than enough money, see WP:CANCER. The Mick West/Metabunk/GSoW story is nonsense. Polygnotus (talk) 11:33, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

The "debate" is more about UFO:s atm, see for example Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Change.org_petition_re._Wikipedia_and_UFOs. WMF is in decent financial shape, and they keep fundraising to stay in decent financial shape. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:02, 20 Feary 2024 (UTC)

As for the narrow matter of how to refer to people with PhDs, this is well established in the Manual of Style, and the relevant language can be found at MOS:CREDENTIAL. If any notable person earned a legitimate PhD from an accredited university, then that will be reported in the "Education" section of their biography. But outside the "Education" section, we do not mention the PhD or refer to the person as "Dr. So-and-so", except for rare cases like Doctor Ruth, because that is her show business moniker. This applies to almost every single PhD holder, not just advocates of pseudoscience and mind reading and levitation and Bigfoot and UFOs and faith healing and perpetual motion and other forms of quackery and fringe beliefs. Read WP:FRINGE. As for the Guerilla Skeptics editor group, they are obligated to comply with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines, which they understand far better than those who criticize them. As for your financial support for the Wikimedia Foundation, they are rolling in cash. Use your money to take a community college class in the scientific method instead, and be aware that mention of financial support or threats to withdraw support has literally zero impact on Wikipedia content. You may benefit from reading Wikipedia:Lunatic charlatans as well. Cullen328 (talk) 03:30, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Sources

Hello. As time advances, sources get older and older. I've been skeptical about using sources from the 40s lately, tho you can often spot one. Are there any guidelines on this? Are pre-ww2 sources still usable? On some articles you might even see sources from the 1830s, 1820s, 1750s... Are these still considered reliable sources? On the other hand if you can't use that source from 1911, can you use Tacitus? Encyclopédisme (talk) 13:20, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Encyclopédisme. Please see the discussion at WP:AGEMATTERS. ColinFine (talk) 13:45, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Like Colin said, some guidance at AGEMATTERS. It depends on context. Some works on religion, history etc can be useful for a long time. Tacitus or Josephus can be decent WP:PRIMARY sources, but any use of their comments on actual events should probably have a modern historian as "interpreter." You may find something interesting in these discussions:[1][2] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:50, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes. But, for example, Britannica 1911, or any work of the 17th, 18th, 19th centuries on history, is that usable? Weirdly, it seems like Tacitus is more reliable than a 1892 work on the franco-prussian war. For exemple, the spanish articles on the Muisca Rulers have 19th century sources only, plus some official sites of the Columbian government. In this case the traditional history seems to be taught only in schools and on, well, government sites. The subject isn't very seriously studied when it comes to history, and the recent works go for a rather different approach, indicating that the idea of a 'Muisca state', as described by the spanish chroniclers, is eurocentric, and they weren't an imperial administration likes the incas. In this very specific case, what should I do? This brings me to another similar case. In the 1920s, it was mainstream academic knowledge that the Inca Empire was socialist ... (liberal economists, like Louis Baudin, wrote books about this 'paradox'). What should I do there? And when, after the invention of the printing press, is the line between a good primary source and an outdated primary source? Encyclopédisme (talk) 14:02, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@Encyclopédisme, your problem may be that as you say, the subject isn't seriously studied, so your most recent reliable source might be quite old. If there is a distinct change in views over time - so that older sources say the Muisca rulers had an empire, and newer sources disagree - then I think you might look into using both, describing how the chroniclers said one thing but current research is suggesting something else. Does that seem like a reaasonable idea for this specific situation?

Also, thank you for mentioning the Muisca - just skimming the article I'm fascinated and as soon as I have time I'm going to have to investigate more thoroughly! StartGrammarTime (talk) 03:48, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

As an extreme example, for medicine/health articles, a preference is stated for no references more than five years old if newer reviews that qualify for WP:MEDRS are available. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine). David notMD (talk) 14:21, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

In some cases, you might not just source, but attribute. "In 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica described it as etc etc." DS (talk) 17:14, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Advertising

Hello, Teahouse. Today my question is: does [[Saving Mr. Banks#Cast:~:text=Credits adapted from The New York Times.[10]|this]] specifically break the advert policy? Asking because I don't want to start a revert war that could be avoided. Thanks! UnexpectedSmoreInquisition aka USI (talk) 13:33, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't know how it would break advert policy. But it certainly confuses me. Why is it in boldface? Why doesn't it work as a wikilink (or at least, a misformatted wikilink) when it's encased in double square brackets? What is the "[10]" doing? Maproom (talk) 13:44, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Saving Mr. Banks § Cast

unrelated to the original question, but @Maproom: part of that seems to be copied from the article itself, and the single brackets inside the link that used to be the reference broke the wikitext parser, making it think that was not a link. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 13:55, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Resolved now. As for the link I provided, not sure- I think it broke. The [10] was from the incline citation within my link. UnexpectedSmoreInquisition aka USI (talk) 03:34, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

It's a straightforward reference. I don't see why you think it might be construed as an advertisement. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I just feel if it was a reference it could use incline citations, the way it's written makes it feel more like an advert. UnexpectedSmoreInquisition aka USI (talk) 18:07, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

As someone who sees promotional wording somewhat frequently when copyediting, I don't find this promotional. The editor could've omitted the reference entirely, as Wikipedia's Manual of Style's take on film casts really only suggests that uncredited roles should require verification, and that the cast information should be allowed "unreferenced" as taken from the film it's from as a primary source.

I suspect it's because the editor wanted to note where the information is being taken, but felt that a lone citation looks weird if it was by itself in its own line or appended to one of the actors' names, which would make it seem like the others were taken elsewhere. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:56, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Fair point. I'm just not used to this type of in-text citation since I haven't encountered it before. Thanks! UnexpectedSmoreInquisition aka USI (talk) 03:21, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Schwartzberg Historical atlas of South Asia?

Are we allowed to use screenshots of the Historical Atlas of South Asia by Joeseph Schwartzberg on Wikipedia articles for medieval Indian kingdoms and states?

It seems to be the most reliable source for placing them. Or is there a way to create custom maps based on the information in the atlas?

Thanks Ixudi (talk) 15:20, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Ixudi, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is very strict on copyright. I'm afraid that https://dsal.uchicago.edu/reference/schwartzberg/ says "No part of this atlas may be stored, transmitted, retransmitted, lent, or reproduced in any form or medium without the prior written permission of Joseph E. Schwartzberg", which is a pretty clear No! to using a screenshot.

I would think that if you created a map with information from the Atlas, that would be like summarising a book in your own words, but I am not an expert. Try asking WP:MCQ. ColinFine (talk) 17:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Art Brut -- splitting hairs -- need help

Hello!

Quick recap --

ISSUE 1: Art Brut is a historically significant art term coined in the 1940s that is fundamentally centered on naive, primitive, child-like art. It currently re-directs to a page called Outsider Art (an English term coined in the 1970s) -- which is an umbrella term for any art created by untrained artists. The majority of the information in the Outsider Art page is based on Art Brut.

Question-- Can i split this page into two (keeping like information with like information) and keep the majority of the content without having to rewrite and recite everything?

---

ISSUE 2: The current page for Art Brut goes to a rock band.

Question-- Is there a way to fix the title so that is says Art Brut Band leaving the term Art Brut free to use for a page dedicated to the topic for which the term was originally coined?

Needless to say -- this feels like a complex endeavor so if you fee like jumping in and helping -- I would be much obliged. Slacker13 (talk) 15:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Probably would need to move the band to Art Brut (band). LegalSmeagolian (talk) 15:56, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@Slacker13 The main issue seems to be whether the existing article at Outsider art would be better titled as Art Brut. In that, Wikipedia would normally follow the guideline at WP:COMMONNAME, that is we would use whichever term is most commonly used in English sources. Once you have gained consensus for that (best discussed on the article's Talk Page), then the move of the band's page over the existing redirect at Art Brut (band) is relatively easy, as is the move to the new title for the art term. I don't see any need to split the existing art term article if "Outsider Art" is basically synonymous for "Art Brut", as the lead implies. The former title can just become a new redirect. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:33, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Slacker13, I have been following art for many years, and I believe that, at least in the United States, outsider art is a far more common name than art brut, which I had never heard of until today. Cullen328 (talk) 02:01, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Maybe? But as an encyclopedia, our feel like our job is to educate. Outsider art is an umbrella term whereas Art Brut was its pre-curser and an actual movement. If feel like this is an important distinction. Otherwise we run the risk of being seen as US-centric. Slacker13 (talk) 14:52, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Slacker13, the issue is whether or not these are really two distinct topics or simply the French and English terms for essentially the same thing. If "Art Brut" is widely used in other English language speaking countries and "Outsider art" is rarely used there, then you may have a point. Cullen328 (talk) 19:09, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Seeking Advice on Article Maintenance and Profile Development

Dear Wikipedia community,

I trust this message finds you well. As a relatively new contributor to Wikipedia, I am reaching out to seek guidance on two key aspects of active participation within the community: article maintenance and profile development.

1. Article Maintenance: Ensuring the continued accuracy and relevance of Wikipedia articles is paramount. I am eager to learn effective strategies for ongoing article maintenance. What are some best practices to keep articles up-to-date and in compliance with Wikipedia guidelines? Additionally, how can I actively contribute to article discussions and collaborate with fellow editors to address concerns?
2. Profile Development: As I aspire to become a more integral part of the Wikipedia community, I am interested in insights on profile development. How can I engage meaningfully in discussions, participate in WikiProjects, and contribute constructively to the community? For experienced editors, what strategies did you find most helpful in building a reputable profile within Wikipedia?

I am particularly interested in hearing from seasoned contributors like BOZ, a former administrator, about their experiences and any valuable tips they might have on these topics. Your guidance and advice will be immensely appreciated as I continue to navigate and contribute to the Wikipedia platform.

also, I just submitted a new article to the mainspace of an article that has been deleted several times for lack of reliability on sources, The article has been carefully revised, expanded, and verified with reliable sources to ensure accuracy and reliability. It provides a comprehensive overview of Doha Moustaquim's background, career, and contributions to the filmmaking industry, meeting Wikipedia's standards for notability and verifiability, please give me your opinion is matter to me.

Warm regards, Noone02 (talk) 17:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Noone02, the Recognition section of the draft mentions three acceptable-looking sources, but cites none. I wonder why not? Maproom (talk) 19:26, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello,

Thank you for your prompt response. I've taken your advice into consideration, and I have now incorporated mentions of three reputable media sources in my article. Additionally, I have provided direct links to these sources for your reference. The articles contain quotes that are directly relevant to the main content, adding credibility and depth to the information presented.

Feel free to take a look at the updated version whenever you have a moment. Your continued guidance and feedback are highly valued. Noone02 (talk) 19:36, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy: draft is Draft:Doha Moustaquim David notMD (talk) 19:40, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

what do you thnik now of the article ?? Noone02 (talk) 20:24, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

A little better. Why not let the reader know what those sources say about her? That's how citations here generally work. I'd do it myself, but my French isn't great. Maproom (talk) 21:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Noone02, Maproom is giving you good advice on content. If you haven't seen Wikipedia:Notability (people), you should probably look at that. Regarding your second question about "profile development", I find the question a bit odd. In your use of the word profile, I understand you to mean not your user page (which some new users erroneously call their "profile page", or just "profile"), but the esteem or regard that others have for you here; is that correct? If so, it's important to note that we are an online encyclopedia, and while asking, say, how to help develop articles is in line with that goal, asking how to develop your own reputation here isn't really. That will come organically as a result of your contributions over time. If you are asking more about how to meet and collaborate with other editors, then looking into our WP:WikiProjects would be a good start. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 01:42, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Noone02, what you write above looks like the pulp that comes out of a large language model (LLM). (Example: "I am eager to learn effective strategies for ongoing article maintenance." Meaning "I want to learn how to maintain articles", but irrelevant where written.) Please don't subject us either to LLM output or to prose that resembles this. The draft mentions three films. Nothing is said about two of the three. As for the third: "The film attracted notice for its distinctive storytelling and cultural portrayal." This is very uninformative. (How is it distinctive? Cultural portrayal of what, or portrayal of which culture?) But at least it comes with a reference to a source. Well it appears to do so; however, the source fails to say this (it merely describes the premise for the film). I note that there's an article in French-language Wikipedia about this film -- but that that article too says almost nothing about the film. If you can't find sources that provide substantial information about this filmmaker or her work, no article about her can be created. Perhaps it would be better to wait a year or two. -- Hoary (talk) 02:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Notability

"A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline). Evidently, independence requires a "third-party source...that is entirely independent of the subject being covered." If that is meant literally, there seem to be tons of published articles that fail this test, particularly those in specialized, technical topics.

I'm thinking in particular of articles in mathematics. I may feel that Solution_in_radicals is notable (I do), but I see nothing in that article that satisfies the requirement above. Its three references are not at all independent of the subject. Am I missing something?

I understand that there are some subject-specific guidelines, but there doesn't seem to be a set of guidelines for mathematics (at least Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mathematics doesn't have any). Where might I get more information about this? Johsebb (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Johsebb. The article in question is a stub, our lowest quality level. We have millions of articles that need to be improved. If you believe that the topic is not notable, then you are welcome to nominate it at Articles for Deletion. However. I see references to works by three different authors. What leads you to believe that none of these sources are independent? Cullen328 (talk) 19:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

The third source appears to be an algebra textbook, which is independent. Cullen328 (talk) 19:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Based on its title, the first source appears to be a report by one mathematician on the work of another mathematician. Cullen328 (talk) 19:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

One of the reviewer's comments of my Draft:Aliasing_(factorial_experiments) (a recently revised version) says, "Notability is also not clearly established." If a textbook is considered independent, it seems to me that my article has several independent sources. What more would be needed to establish notability of this topic? Johsebb (talk) 03:47, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I should have answered your question about the sources cited in Solution_in_radicals. I do feel that the subject is notable, and would not flag the article for deletion. On the other hand, Notability#General_notability_guideline asks that sources be "entirely independent of the subject being covered". I would have thought that textbooks (or papers) that cover the topic of a particular article are not "independent of the subject".

If textbooks that deal with the subject of my article are "independent" sources, then the reviewer of my article flagged it incorrectly for being on a non-notable subject. I am eager to learn how to deal with that. I hope you will respond. Johsebb (talk) 20:37, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Johsebb - it might help to look at notability a little differently. A thing may (or may not) be notable, but an article cannot be notable (some exceptions may apply). An article can demonstrate notability, but it is possible to have a poor article about a notable thing. Madam Fatal (talk) 19:48, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Doha Moustaquim

Previous discussion : #Seeking Advice on Article Maintenance and Profile Development

I recently encountered a situation where one of the articles I created was moved from the mainspace to the draft, despite my efforts to recreate it. Although the article has faced deletion challenges in the past, I have successfully refreshed and reinstated it. However, it now resides in the draft section. I am seeking advice on how best to improve the article and potentially move it back to the mainspace. What steps can I take to enhance its quality and increase the likelihood of it being accepted in the mainspace? Noone02 (talk) 19:22, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

See my response above. (If you have questions about a draft, it's helpful to keep them all in one section.) Maproom (talk) 19:29, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy - now at Draft:Doha Moustaquim. David notMD (talk) 19:41, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

with names

(sorry if this is worded odd, as i dont really know how to put it.) If a film has a different name, but a similar name, would it still be normal to add dates to the end? I was looking a the Netflix Texas Chainsaw movie, and it has a unique name (lacking the in it's name), but still has the (2022) in it's name, as if there was a different movie also called "Texas Chainsaw Massacre", but checking wikipedia (here) shows nothing. so why is the (2022) on the title? If a movie has a different-but-similar name would we still put the date on the end? (sorry again for grammar and/or bizarre structure) Babysharkboss2!! ^{Killer Queen} 19:35, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre is the original 1974 movie. David notMD (talk) 19:47, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

yes, i know. it's THE Texas Chainsaw Massacre. it has the in the title. but the 2022 movie is simply titled Texas Chainsaw Massacre. lacking a the in it's title. Babysharkboss2!! ^{Killer Queen} 19:49, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (franchise) lists all the films in the franchise. Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022 film) has the year in the title because David notMD (talk) 19:51, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

title because because of what? Babysharkboss2!! ^{Killer Queen} 19:53, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Sorry. ...because there are so many films. David notMD (talk) 19:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

oh, okay. so it's just a numbers thing? Alright, thanks! Babysharkboss2!! ^{Killer Queen} 19:55, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, like there is also The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003 film). David notMD (talk) 19:57, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

It's not just a numbers thing although that makes adding disambiguation like this more likely but also one way to think about why it is this way: the 1974 movie could be seen as (and is currently treated as) the primary topic for the exact title of Texas Chainsaw Massacre so that is a redirect to The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, which means we need to disambiguate the 2022 film. (Other solutions be to have that redirect to the franchise article or if the 2022 film was see as significant enough it at the name without the disambiguate but I don't think in general that'd improve the experience for readers.) Skynxnex (talk) 20:31, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

The original post is unclear because it omits the actual names being discussed but I think it asks whether Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022 film) should be moved to Texas Chainsaw Massacre (film) since it's the only film by that title without "The" in front. Texas Chainsaw Massacre (film) currently redirects to the 1974 film The Texas Chain Saw Massacre which is far more notable and started the franchise. I support that since the 1974 film looks like the primary topic for a film referred to as "Texas Chain Saw Massacre" even though the title is only an exact match to the 2022 film. It's common to omit "The" when referring to a work, and probably also when looking it up. For comparison, The Batman (film) is about the 2022 film without having the year in the title while Batman (film) is a set index. None of the other films are ever referred to as "The Batman" as far as I know. It's not common to add "The" when referring to a work. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:29, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Article needs more links

Is there a template I could use to let editors know that there needs to be more wikilinks in an article, specifically the article for Yi Won (writer). Thanks! TheWikiCyclone (talk) 23:14, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Hey @TheWikiCyclone! There's {{Dead end}} for zero wikilinks, and {{Underlinked}} for not enough wikilinks. Panini! • 🥪 23:59, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! TheWikiCyclone (talk) 23:17, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Male American Actor List missing.

When I go to "List of Actors" I see a bunch of links but to not see any Links to Male American Actors. How can this be corrected? Ddutcher1 (talk) 23:22, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Ddutcher1, Scroll down to § Nationality, click List of American actors, at the bottom next to "Categories", click "American actors", scroll down until you see "American actors" and click it. Another way to correct it, is if you step up and volunteer to write an article called, American male actors, which could very well be added to the first list once it is ready. Mathglot (talk) 00:28, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ddutcher1: We do have Category:American male actors. List of male American movie actors was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of male American movie actors so I don't think you should try to create something similar. However, List of American film actresses was kept at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of American film actresses, and List of American television actresses was kept at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of American television actresses. They are rather long and lists for male actors would probably be longer. I don't think it's practical. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

hacked

someone put a virus 0n my computer 2600:1700:A8E0:E780:C513:BF5C:8335:289E (talk) 02:24, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

As explained at the top of this page, this is not the place to ask about it. (And when you do find a place to ask about it, nobody will help you unless you provide a lot more information about it.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:33, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Also, WP:Reference Desk, Stackoverflow or other related forum would've been a more appropriate to ask. Just saying. - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉(talk|contributions) 15:44, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Actor Amit Kumar Mishra Biography

Assumed autobiographical article draft

Title: "Amit Kumar Mishra: A Journey Beyond Boundaries" Introduction: Amit Kumar Mishra, a versatile individual hailing from Ranchi, India, has carved a unique path that spans the realms of engineering, business, and acting. Born and raised in Ranchi, Mishra's journey is marked by a blend of technical expertise, business acumen, and a deep-rooted passion for the performing arts. Early Life and Education: Amit Kumar Mishra's educational journey began with a degree in Information Technology from SIR MVIT in Bangalore. This engineering background laid the groundwork for his future endeavors. Building upon this foundation, Mishra pursued an MBA with a focus on Marketing at the esteemed SP Jain School of Global Management, further enhancing his skill set for a dynamic career ahead. Professional Journey: Upon completing his MBA, Amit Kumar Mishra ventured into the corporate world, securing a position with a multinational company in the bustling city of New York. His experiences in the corporate landscape added a global perspective to his repertoire. However, his true calling lay elsewhere. The allure of the acting world proved irresistible, prompting Mishra to make a courageous decision. After completing the shooting of the US portion of "Karma Strikes," he bid farewell to his corporate job, embarking on a new chapter in the world of entertainment. Theater Roots and Passion for Acting: Amit Kumar Mishra's love for acting transcends his professional pursuits. Since class 6th, Mishra has been actively involved in theater, honing his craft and nurturing a passion that would later define his identity as an actor. His early exposure to the stage laid the groundwork for a seamless transition into the world of cinema. Notable Works: Amit Kumar Mishra's acting prowess gained recognition through notable projects, including "Karma Strikes," "The Neighbor," and "Smoking Kills." His ability to portray diverse characters with authenticity and depth has solidified his position in the entertainment industry. Transformation Journey: One of the most captivating aspects of Mishra's career is his commitment to authenticity. In preparation for an upcoming movie, he underwent a remarkable physical transformation, shedding an impressive 18 kilograms. This dedication to his craft speaks volumes about his passion for delivering compelling and realistic performances. Personal Life: Amit Kumar Mishra, identified as a male artist, not only excels in his professional pursuits but also exemplifies resilience and determination. His ability to balance an engineering background, an MBA, and a thriving acting career reflects the multifaceted nature of his personality. Future Endeavors: As audiences eagerly await the next chapter in his acting journey, Amit Kumar Mishra continues to evolve as an actor, leaving an indelible mark on the entertainment industry. His story serves as an inspiration, illustrating that with dedication and courage, one can successfully navigate diverse fields and make a lasting impact.

Conclusion: "Amit Kumar Mishra: A Journey Beyond Boundaries" encapsulates the story of a trailblazer who defied conventional norms, seamlessly transitioning between engineering, business, and acting. His pursuit of passion, coupled with a relentless commitment to his craft, defines a narrative that resonates with aspiring individuals looking to carve their own unique paths in life. ActorAmitMishra (talk) 04:29, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@ActorAmitMishra: hello, please take a look at WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY, which explains a bit about why we don't generally encourage autobiographies on Wikipedia, or accept any articles whatsoever about non-notable subjects, as verified in reliable sources. If you'd like to write a different article, take a look at Your first article, and feel free to ask if you have any more questions. Cheers! Remsense诉 04:35, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@ActorAmitMishra: Your several attempts (Sandbox, User page) to write about yourself are all promotionally worded and have no references, so all have been Speedy deleted. All factual content about a living person must be verified by independent references. Non-factual content such as "...not only excels in his professional pursuits but also exemplifies resilience and determination." is forbidden. David notMD (talk) 11:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Hart, South Australia

Everything I have discovered on Hart SA has explained in writing that it is located in the far high NORTH...and others tell me that it is located in the mid-high north of SA...However, clearly, when you see it on any map, not matter who puts it out there, it is just above Adelaide in the far SOUTH. Any further south and it would be in the ocean. I am a volunteer for FamilySearch.org and one of my jobs is to research and locate the exact location of places and find their latitude and longitude. My supervisors have said, "We come across things like that all the time but we can't change it". I said, "Well, that isn't good enough, I want to discover how we can get the correct information. We use Wikipedia most of the time because it is usually the most accurate and gives the best information, but not here. I was actually working in NT and came across Hart, so I went into our FamilySearch spreadsheet to look for Hart NT to find out if we had it listed and ended up in SA by accident. I really enjoy working on finding places and their correct information. When people are looking for their ancestors, it is good if the place is where we say it is. I am sure you get complaints when things are in the wrong place, but this is not a complaint, I am trying to help. Many people trust Wikipedia and rely on it for accuracy when travelling or planning a trip. It would be good if you could give me feed back on what changes you are going to make to your article as to the location of Hart, SA. It says I can do it myself, but I wouldn't do that unless you knew what my intentions are. I prefer to let you know about the situation first. Kind regards, Evelyn Butler. 2001:8003:1471:DE00:A155:E74:EDB2:34E3 (talk) 05:28, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, Evelyn. Wikipedia does not really have a representative or a position of authority over content decisions. If you started editing that article, you would immediately be part of Wikipedia, with no more or no less say on the matter of what that article should say. If you want to discuss first, I suggest asking the opinion of ScottDavis who started that article almost nine years ago. The article has not been edited for almost a year, so no one is imminently working on improving it, unless you volunteer to take the job. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

It all looks correct to me? Hart, South Australia is in the Mid North region of South Australia, north of the Adelaide Plains and south of the Far North and the outback. Theroadislong (talk) 09:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

The Mid North region of South Australia is in the south of South Australia, as shown in the map in its article. Maproom (talk) 09:06, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

That's correct, so what is the problem? Theroadislong (talk) 09:17, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

The article starts with "Hart is a locality in the Mid North region of South Australia." And as noted above, Mid North is south of Far North, also a region of South Australia. Your query mentioned that you were researching the state Northern Territory and came across a mention of Hart. It ain't there. David notMD (talk) 11:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@2001:8003:1471:DE00:A155:E74:EDB2:34E3: Hi Evelyn. As others have said, Hart is in the Mid North region of South Australia, which on a map, you are right there's a lot more space north and west of it. I'd say the Mid North article could do with some care and expansion at some stage. The Mid North is dominated by farming on arable land. the Far North is dryer and generally only suitable for large runs of pastoral grazing. Environmentally, they would be divided by Goyder's Line which was surveyed in the 1860s and remains surprisingly accurate, based on the change in native flora corresponding to the reduced rainfall available. South Australia is strongly Adelaide-centric. The Mid North is accessible in a day from Adelaide, the Far North is not. There is also a Hart, Northern Territory, ultimately deriving its name from the same person. If I've said anything here that isn't in the articles, please let me know. I'm happy to find references and add it. If you want a one-on-one conversation, I'm happy to do that too, or user:Donama I think grew up in the Mid North but I only visit it. I spend more of my time lately on WikiTree than Wikipedia, so you and I have similar interests in spatial accuracy of historic placenames. --Scott Davis ^Talk 10:48, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Mobile interface

Hi I'm User:BurningBlaze05 a notable editor of the F1 Feeder Series community. There is a issue I would like to point out, the mobile version of the website looks weird now, as in I have to press to many buttons. Formerly I could do all my work quickly, but now I find it challenging and I have to work a slow as a tortoise. Is their a way that the user the revert the changes make to the site. I hope this new interface isn't permanent.

Yours sincerely: BurningBlaze05 (talk) 06:40, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

As of this comment, your last three edits aren't on the mobile interface, judging by the lack of a "mobile edit" tag in your contributions. If you did not intentionally force desktop mode, please try clicking the "Yes" button at this link and seeing if it fixes matters. Otherwise, we would need some more information and perhaps a screenshot to further troubleshoot. Cheers, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 08:21, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh. I'm a twit BurningBlaze05 (talk) 08:30, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

sorry for causing any trouble BurningBlaze05 (talk) 08:30, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I can't thank you enough! BurningBlaze05 (talk) 08:36, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

No worries; happens to the best of us. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:04, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I WANT TO CREATE MY OWN PAGE

Kabelo PercyKM (talk) 08:52, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@percykm: read up on help:your first article. ltbdl (talk) 08:54, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Please don't SHOUT. Theroadislong (talk) 08:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@PercyKM: If you are talking about creating an article about yourself, I guess there is no rule prohibitng it, but generally such articles are quickly deleted because the article is not notable, you are considered unreliable source for your article etc. See WP:ABOUTME. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 10:36, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@PercyKM and @ExclusiveEditor: Writing an autobiography on Wikipedia is an example of conflict-of-interest editing and is strongly discouraged - see WP:AUTO for more information. GoingBatty (talk) 17:30, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Yeah, that's generally what I am saying, just forgot about CoI. Thanks. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 19:45, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

If zero would be even, ...

I am commenting page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parity_of_zero

If zero would be even, then we would say the following.

1. snakes have zero legs, if zero would be even,
we would say: snakes have an even number of legs.

2. pigs have zero wings, if zero would be even,
we would say: pigs have an even number of wings.

Zero 0 objects divided in groups of b > 0 objects,
will count 0 complete groups of b objects and 0 objects leftover,
that means 0/b = (q, r) = (0, 0) for any b > 0.

Even numbers are named even, because divided in groups of 2,
will count at least one group of 2, but not less, having no leftover.

Considering "0 is even",
suggesting that 0 will count at least one group of 2,
that is false.

Generalization:

For a >= 0 and b >= 0, where a/b = (q, r) => b * q + r = a
a is incomplete aggregation, if q >= 0 and r > 0
a is complete aggregation, if q > 0 and r = 0
a = 0 is neutral aggregation, if q = 0 and r = 0
109.185.67.40 (talk) 09:39, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

If you wish to argue that the content of the article Parity of zero is mistaken and needs correction, then the place to do this is Talk:Parity of zero. -- Hoary (talk) 09:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I tried so often, that they blocked me for any further suggestions.
109.185.67.40 (talk) 09:52, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello IP user. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. It doesn't matter whether your argument is right or wrong, earth-shaking or trivial, Wikipedia is simply not interested in it until it has been not only published, but indepedently discussed, in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 10:35, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

If you have been blocked, then you shouldn't be editing logged-out either; that is block evasion. Just saying. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:16, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

If you want to have math related discussion, you may use Mathematics Refernce Desk. I hope you find it helpful. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 10:29, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I do not know what to do in such a case, because that article "induce in error" a lot of people, taking seriously that article as "true argument". What to do?
109.185.67.40 (talk) 11:30, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

All you can do is try to understand why people might find the arguments on the page useful. We cannot help you feel good about them. Remsense诉 11:33, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

If I understood correctly, it is desired Wikipedia to be a Reference of Knowledge, but if the information is false, resulting Wikipedia has no more Argument of Trust, it is just a "garbage of information". That is why I am insisting on correctness of information, no matter who and where was it published. 109.185.67.40 (talk) 11:39, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

No one wants to take any individual's word for it, only reliable sources like those the article cites, which are part of the history of mathematics that arrived at the conclusion that zero is even. No one here can help you if your only mission is to remove material you do not like. We go by sources, but we are not ourselves sources. Perhaps reading some of the sources in the article could help get a sense of what people are talking about. Remsense诉 11:42, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, from that point of view, I understand, sources matter, but from another point of view, resulting Wikipedia promote information that has no counterarguments.
109.185.67.40 (talk) 11:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Neutral point of view does not mean "no point of view" or "all points of view", and it's not our job to decide which subjects are more multifaceted than others. Reflecting the body of reliable sources in the world is the best yardstick we have, which is why we do not allow original research. Remsense诉 11:56, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank You. Understood. Therefore, I am going to write an article, that maybe in the near future, will be published as a reliable source for Wikipedia in the future. 109.185.67.40 (talk) 12:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Best of luck on your journey, cheers. Remsense诉 12:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Re the "blocked" mention, there is no evidence in the history of Parity of zero that any account or IP has been blocked, although there have been warnings. The dispute involving this editor appears to date back to July 2023. Talk page content suggests other editors have had disagreements with this article. The article itself dates to 2007 and became a Featured article in 2013. David notMD (talk) 12:34, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

This is wandering off-topic, but I quite like the article in its present state, it seems one of our best mathematics articles—and doesn't seem that it's one keen eye away from FAR, like some other FAs from decades gone by. Remsense诉 12:45, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

If to cite that article, will result that 13 * 0 = 0 also demonstrate "0 is even", because 0 = 2 * 0 = 0 + 0 = 13 * 0, where "0 is even" suggests that 0 will count at least one group of 2, but that is false. Therefore, that article is not logic, but "ideology", because it is against any logic. 109.185.67.40 (talk) 13:07, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

no one is going to listen to you. ltbdl (talk) 13:47, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

(Not necessary in the Teahouse, better to WP:DENY the LTA; took me long enough to realize) Remsense诉 13:52, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I think is better to say: no body think, everybody believe. Believing is not knowledge.
109.185.67.40 (talk) 14:02, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

IP editor. Have you read the article? Parity of zero#Defining parity explains that to say that 0 is even is a convention. The article has good explanations of the consequences of deciding that the even numbers do not include 0 and why most mathematicians don't do so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

If "0 is even" is a convention, then conventions have no demonstration, nevertheless this fact, they bring a demonstration, saying 0 = 2 * 0 = 0 + 0 demonstrate that "0 is even", that suggests that 0 counts at least one group of 2, but that is false. More than that, if 0 = 2 * 0 = 0 + 0 demonstrate "0 is even", if to follow this idea, will result 0 = 0 + 0 + 0 = 3 * 0, will demonstrate "0 is odd" also.
109.185.67.40 (talk) 14:57, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

109.185.67.40, which of these numbers do you believe are odd, and which do you believe are even (-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5} ? Maproom (talk) 15:07, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

-5, -3, -1, 1, 3, 5 are odd.

-4, -2, 2, 4 are even.

0 is neutral aggregation when divided in groups of b > 0.
109.185.67.40 (talk) 15:32, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I have zero belief that this discussion can lead to a useful improvement to the article in question. David notMD (talk) 10:26, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

The IP has been blocked for disruptive editing. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Infobox title MoS

I can summarise my question by asking if this edit is valid or not. Are Is there any specific guideline for naming infobox (title). ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 10:24, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

This particular thing is actually rather unguided—which can drive me crazy, actually—but a rule of thumb is that generally, it doesn't help the vast majority of readers of any English Wikipedia page if text is only provided in a non-Latin script, since they cannot read it. So, generally where there is non-Latin script (which at least for MOS:ZH should almost never be in the running text of an article), there should probably also be a romanization, which a reader will be able to identify and remember, if not necessarily understand. Cheers! Remsense诉 11:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

BLP and articles about children

I'm looking at Megha Wijewardane, which is an article about a child who is now 13 who became an ambassador for NASA aged 10. I'm wondering whether WP:BLP1E would apply in this context, and also whether there are specific policies about BLPs on children. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 11:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

If there's little significant coverage of, for example, specific acts he has been performing as ambassador and only of the fact he became an ambassador then BLP1E could apply, yes. There's no specific policy about BLPs on minors from my knowledge. AlexandraAVX (talk) 13:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Not a policy, but WP:MINORS exists. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:24, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both, and those who have improved the article since. Tacyarg (talk) 11:00, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

blame view for wikipedia

is there something like githubs blame view for wikipedia articles? mostly just because walking backwards through the diff pages is time consuming natelabs (talk) 15:24, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Natelabs, you might find WikiBlame useful. Madam Fatal (talk) 15:42, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

how do i install it? natelabs (talk) 16:26, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@Natelabs: Welcome to the Teahouse. It's browser-based, so you don't. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:45, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

well then how do i use it? its not in my gadgets panel or anything so im kinda lost natelabs (talk) 16:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

The page that Madam Fatal linked explains how it can be used. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 16:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

looks like i glossed over the most important part of the article

alright thanks for the help natelabs (talk) 16:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@Natelabs: If you'd like to add WikiBlame to your Tools menu, I've added a script to Wikipedia:WikiBlame. GoingBatty (talk) 17:28, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

thanked you in my common.js natelabs (talk) 19:39, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

What kind of electric plugs are used in South Africa?

electric plugs used in South Africa Taluksangay (talk) 17:52, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is not a general question asking forum; I'd suggest using your preferred search engine for assistance, or you could ask at the Reference Desk. 331dot (talk) 17:57, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Taluksangay, AC power plugs and sockets answers your question, but Wikipedia is not a reliable source. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello MKDDijaspora

@WikiDiaspora Can u help me with something ? When you are active, contact me. Mnd-bitola (talk) 18:04, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Mnd-bitola, this is not really how you contact specific editors. Every user has their own talk page. Did you have any questions about editing Wikipedia? — Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:26, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

No. I've already written to his talk page. Thank you. Mnd-bitola (talk) 16:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Meme attribution

I'm currently thinking of working on a draft for the "Change My Mind" meme. I've found reliable sources which document the meme and am going to make it into a draft. To improve the article, I'm intending to release an example of the meme. How would I go around attributing that? Flux55 (my talk page) 18:13, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Flux55. I'm afraid I don't quite understand the question. What do you mean by "release"? If you are creating a new work, you own the copyright, and can upload it, licensing it as you go. If you do not own the copyright, then you cannot upload it, unless you can argue that it meets all the non-free content criteria. Once your draft has been accepted into the encyclopaedia, I think you may well be able to make that argument, but non-free content may not be used except in articles (i.e. not in drafts). The presence or not of an image will not affect whether your draft is accepted or not. ColinFine (talk) 18:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFineI am guessing they mean that they are making a "Change My Mind" meme for the example. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 04:25, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Text World Theory

Hey all,

I was told that my Text World Theory article was neither formal nor neutral enough. Could somebody help me out with this? I tried to stay as neural as possible (it's something I'm pretty excited about and I'm more than willing to acknowledge that it might have influenced the way I write!) but I would just like some pointers about which aspects in particular need some TLC. Any help would be greatly appreciated. I think I can include the link here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Text_World_Theory) but I'm not a very good or experienced editor so I might be wrong!

Thanks in advance! :) Mr Blumenthal (talk) 18:29, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Mr Blumenthal: when giving a link to a draft, you can do it like this: Draft:Text_World_Theory. But you did give a link (unlike the person who started the thread two above this one), that's what matters. I've had a few goes at reading your draft, and found it unusually soporofic. After a few sentences, I wake up and think "What's all this about? Why am I reading this? Maproom (talk) 23:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Personally, I disagree with Urban Versis 32's assessment: I find the presentation a little dry, but in no way informal or ad-like. If the sources are sound (I haven't myself checked), I would be inclined (were I a reviewer) to accept the draft.

I do think the draft would benefit from some judiciously placed illustrative examples of short texts being analysed according to the theory. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.24.45.226 (talk) 08:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

I've had another read of the draft, after some more coffee. I agree with 176 (né 87) more than with Urban. But Text World Theory sounds more like a way to kill the reader's interest in a poem, than to encourage engagement. Maybe some examples would correct that impression. Maproom (talk) 11:53, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh righttt that makes sense I understand. To be honest, based on feedback I have had in the past, I was reluctant to deviate too much from the sources (not in terms of direct copy-pasting obviously but in terms of the style of language) so I will have another look at making it more accessible. There are several examples of this being used in schools in the literature so I will add a worked example of how it can be used in a classroom setting.

If I am understanding you correctly, I think it would also be beneficial to add an example to the lead? Or to the 'origin and development' section? To make it clearer to someone unfamiliar with cognitive poetics?

Thank you for all your help. Mr Blumenthal (talk) 19:03, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes this sounds like an excellent idea! Thank you for suggesting this will really help to illustrate exactly what the purpose is.

This also helps to clarify what was impenetrable about the article in the first place: I need to focus on the fact that this is a theory about how language is understood rather than an type of literary criticism. This has been really revealing about the work I need to do thank you :) Mr Blumenthal (talk) 19:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

on a semi-related note, is "text world theory" even a proper noun?

from a quick look, other theories (like dead internet theory, see the lowercase t) don't seem to be, so that might be part of the reason it was said to read like an ad cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:23, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Interesting question! The answer is broadly yes: it is capitalised by a lot of the researchers who work on it (Cushing,Giovanelli, Gavins) but the guy who made it up (Werth) didn't. I personally think go with the majority perspective? Mr Blumenthal (talk) 19:25, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, wondering if I could get help :)

I was wondering if I could get help with the title of my page. I can't see to correct it from a misspell and I think i've tried everything with the move option.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Dance_Music_Awards TimBello (talk) 18:33, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello @TimBello! Somebody added a lowercase title template, so I've removed it. Happy editing! —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 18:39, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Modrn Legends deletion

Can you help me re-write the page so that it doesn't need to be deleted? ScratcherSonic (talk) 19:01, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@ScratcherSonic: Welcome to the Teahouse. Looking at it, I strongly suggest you work on something else, as Wattpad stories are virtually never considered wikinotable, especially when there are no independent secondary reliable sources that talk about it in significant detail. I agree with the reviewer rejecting the draft outright, as it is wholly unfit to be an encyclopedic article. You may wish to use an alternative outlet like Miraheze. Furthermore, if you were given permission by the author to pen this draft, you have a conflict of interest and are supposed to disclose it outside of the main text. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:24, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Wasn't a few shows originally a Wattpad book? If it was an anime that aired, would you agree to help me rewrite it? ScratcherSonic (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I would not. Like I said previously, you have to demonstrate that the article you're writing about is wikinotable.

I strongly suggest you take a look at featured and good articles to understand what makes them high quality. For one thing, a section on theme songs is inappropriate. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I see...Thank you! Now I can finish school, mope around, create my anime, and make a Wikipedia page about that, and have a Fandom page on it too! And you can't do anything about it. Unless someone else makes one. ScratcherSonic (talk) 19:47, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Good luck with that. Until your hypothetical anime becomes wikinotable and has reliable sources covering it, I foresee that draft being rejected as well. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:49, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, I know people. ScratcherSonic (talk) 19:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

And a sketcher. ScratcherSonic (talk) 19:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan! After you and your friend get Modrn Legends published and and popular and reviewed by well-known reviewers, then someone with no connection to you may decide to craft a draft. David notMD (talk) 10:39, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah... ScratcherSonic (talk) 15:00, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Dab and {{section link}}

Are "§"-formatted section links okay in dab page entries? MOS:DABPIPE and MOS:DABSECTION only clearly deal with "raw", "#"-formatted links.

More specifically, I'm trying to decide between redirects like Finally Famous: The Mixtape and their targets like Big Sean discography § Mixtapes. Personally, as a reader, I'd definitely prefer the latter in a case like that, because they give a way better idea of the amount and type of information I can expect to find there.

I suppose a piped link in the vein of (again from the MOS page)

• Ten or Tenshinhan, a character in Dragon Ball media

splits the difference in a way, but I'm not really seeing the upside. Obviously, they're more prose-y, but "§"-links are fine in articles, as long as they're used judiciously, and purely stylistic considerations ought to apply less, not more, to dab pages than to articles proper, no?

- 89.183.221.194 (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

References/citations showing up funny

Can anyone help me make these citations better so this article gets accepted? Draft:James Ford Goldfishgoldfish (talk) 21:54, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I have fixed the formatting for you, but most of the sources are not reliable so it has been declined. Theroadislong (talk) 22:29, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

thanks for correcting the formatting. i updated the links to point to the original news source, not the youtube clip. Goldfishgoldfish (talk) 22:54, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, how do I use userboxes?

I would love to use them on my user page :D How do I get and put them on there? Jesoysauce (talk) 00:06, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Jesoysauce. More info on this topic can be found at WP:UBX. Thanks! ⸗ Antrotherkus ^{❲ Talk to me! ❳} ⸗ 00:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Page ID question

Hullo friends. I was curious about something involving page IDs, and I figured someone here would know. Why is is that page IDs seem to randomly cut off at 5281 and smaller numbers? To me, it would make sense if page IDs were given by order of page creation, but that doesn't appear to be the case. That's all. Thanks! ⸗ Antrotherkus ^{❲ Talk to me! ❳} ⸗ 00:16, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Appears to be slightly above our paygrade, Antrotherkus. WP:VPT maybe? Or perhaps WP:RD/C even. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Ok thanks! ⸗ Antrotherkus ^{❲ Talk to me! ❳} ⸗ 16:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Reel Tapes a "No No" in Discographies??

In many album discographies, contributors also often note the vinyl album was available in other formats such as cassette tapes, 8 track tapes, and CDs. I recently noticed someone awhile back deleted all my additions on one singer's album discography for pre-1980 cassettes and reel tapes and said in their comments that "reel tapes are a no no" or something like that. Is this true? I find it hard to believe a popular format in the 1960's (and to a lesser degree, early 1970's) should not be listed among the formats in which an album was released. Have no clue why they deleted 1968-1979 cassettes as they were certainly available in that era. Proof of the release of the recording in either format can often be found in photographs on Discogs and in Ebay auctions and likely as well in Scwhann catalogs of the era. VintageVinylLPS (talk) 02:16, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@VintageVinylLPS: Hi there! I hope you followed the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle and discussed it on the article's talk page with the user who reverted your edit. There's a dormant proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies/style - I don't know that there's anything current. GoingBatty (talk) 02:56, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

You may be interested to note that Rachmaninoff's "discography" (rightly) includes recordings released for reproducing piano, i.e. punched-paper piano rolls designed to be played by a mechanical/pneumatic system! There have been many ways to release recordings over the years, and will no doubt be many more to come. Elemimele (talk) 14:19, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

I need to be unblocked

Hi everyone, I was recently blocked from Wikipedia for repeated genre warring. I added some sources that weren't reliable and I realized I made a mistake. Do you know how can I ask to be unblocked. Iamthegoat524 (talk) 03:22, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Seeing as you've located and followed the instructions left on your talk page about how to be unblocked, you seem to know the answer to this question already. There's not anything additional anyone at the Teahouse can do for you. Remsense诉 03:25, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

You might want to read the message sent by Liz on your talk page, if you are actually realizing the mistakes. As they stated, unblock requests aren't something that goes through by writing a 3 minute message or anything like that. Due to the fact that you've been blocked multiple times for the same issues, even I can tell that the administrators aren't willing to unblock you, unless they see some sort of understanding from you. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 03:29, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

What do you mean understanding? Iamthegoat524 (talk) 05:08, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks, which Liz referred you to on your talk page. Anything you post about your block which does not follow all the guidelines in that guide will be a waste of your time and anybody's time who has to deal with it.

You have been told that the effective way for you to continue contributing to Wikipedia at present is to make edit requests for the changes you want to see. ColinFine (talk) 10:18, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Or admit the error of your ways and promise to never edit song genre again. David notMD (talk) 10:24, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

But here is the problem, I want to keep editing genres with reliable sources.  Iamthegoat524 (talk) 05:21, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Help! The draft of the Chile–South Korea relations has been declined

Chile–South Korea relations has been declined. I've never created a document. I'm looking for help. I think it's reliable information by quoting trusted media (official sites in China and newspapers in Korea). Can you give me any help? LandAndTree (talk) 04:10, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Look at the comment that came with the decline message. You need to provide sources for every high-level visits. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 04:27, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Several ip users keep on adding in the same change, which contains grammatical mistakes. What can I do?

In Li Yundi article, several ip users (looks like same person) keep on adding in the same change, which contains grammatical mistakes. The users also claim that grammar is a non-native English syntax. What can I do? I have no experience handling this. Thanks a lot!

Is this vandalism : Special:Diff/1207622328,Special:Diff/1207630506,Special:Diff/1207663491,Special:Diff/1209374639 EleniXDD (talk) 04:24, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@EleniXDD: No it is not vandalism. See WP:VANDAL for how the term is used on Wikipedia. It looks like a plain content dispute, please discuss it on the article's talk page, and if it can't be resolved there, try WP:DR. Do not engage in an edit war. RudolfRed (talk) 04:44, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

thanks for the advice EleniXDD (talk) 04:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Notability Issues

So I saw a page where it says "an editor has performed a search and found that sufficient sources exist to establish the subject's notability".

I am curious on how the editor found the sources. What type of sources do we look for when editing wikipedia pages Legendcrest (talk) 05:53, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@Legendcrest: which specific page are you referring to? Moniepoint Inc? If so, we can ping the editor who added it yesterday for their explanation. If you haven't yet done so, please also refer to the {{sources exist}} template page for more information. To answer your last question, we look for reliable sources when editing Wikipedia pages in accordance with WP:RS criteria. Left guide (talk) 07:59, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Template:Nowiki

Hello!

I happened across this template today; can anyone help me to understand its exact function? The actual page doesn't say anything I can work with. Thanks in advance. Knightoften (talk) 06:53, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

That template page should certainly link to H:NOWIKI, which explains the <nowiki>...</nowiki> tag that {{nowiki}} is a wrapper for.

If you're not familiar, don't worry too much about this, but MediaWiki has wikitext that "extends" HTML, so that you have special tags that work like HTML for the user, but do special wiki stuff, like <score /> for sheet music and <references> for reference lists. Sometimes people use templates that just wrap HTML or tags for various reasons, e.g. {{strong|hi}} just emits <strong>hi</strong>, which displays as hi.

I'm going to make sure that link is somewhere on the template page! If you have more questions, please let me know. Remsense诉 07:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@Knightoften In short, the nowiki commands let you type other commands without the software acting on those other commands.

This is useful when you want to write a sentence that shows how the command looks when typed, but without actually activating that command.

It comes in two halves: the first to turn ON the instruction to ignore the code that follows (and simply shows it as text. Then a second half that turns it OFF. Any subsequent code commands will then be acted upon by our software, as normal. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@Remsense诉, @Nick Moyes Thank you both!! That's very helpful. Knightoften (talk) 21:06, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

I have a question

What happens if you criticize Wikipedia in a rude unpleasant way on this website? Do you get banned or something? Also I do not hate Wikipedia and I will never criticize it, I'm just wondering what happens. MJGTMKME123 (talk) 13:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

It's like discussing anything else. Personal attacks, legal threats, libel are not allowed, and generally Wikipedia is not a forum. Plenty of editors vocally express dislike for aspects of the site or the WMF often, and when it doesn't fall into those categories or other behavioral guidelines, there's nothing to be concerned about.

(Personally, I think it's gauche to complain about a website on said website as a matter of course, but that's neither here nor there.) Remsense诉 13:36, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Merely posting criticism of Wikipedia is permitted; one user I'm familiar with puts a disavowal of the Wikimedia Foundation in every edit summary. Many people have statements critical of Wikipedia on their user pages. It it goes beyond mere criticism to the realm of a vulgar rant, that may be a different matter. 331dot (talk) 13:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Page Deleted

I'm really new at editing on wikipedia. I tried to just change the title of a page and ran into unexpected problems. I was trying to change the title from "Blanche Grant" to "Blanche Chloe Grant". I was just trying to add her middle name. Someone. I guess an admin or something deleted the page completely. Can anyone help me get it back online?

Hdgknsn (talk) 16:00, 22 February 2024 (UTC) hdgknsn

Hdgknsn, it's at Blanche Chloe Grant. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:04, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Liz, is there anything in the history of Blanche Grant or its talk page to make it worth restoring instead of recreating it as a redirect? — Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Never mind. Now it's at Draft:Blanche Chloe Grant so mainspace titles don't matter. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:10, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@Hdgknsn I hope you intend to improve the article, since whatever title it uses it is in a poor state. There are minor issue like adherence to MOS:SURNAME guidance and major ones like the absence of citations for nonsense statements like Blanche Grant died in June of 1948. Although as of yet, not much has been found about her obituary or her funeral, but we can assume that many important people from Taos paid their respects. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:08, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

It has been draftified and is now at Draft:Blanche Chloe Grant. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Are you alse editing while not logged in, showing up as IP 100.40.102.126? Going forward, always log in before editing. David notMD (talk) 17:54, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

What's wrong with Wikipedia

I made a reply on a talk page. I thought it was incorrect so I wanted to do a strike through and do a better comment. But I never done strike through before so maybe I did it incorrectly. I also tried to add in simultaneously the correct reply where I say some stuff which isn't offensive. But I keep getting messages that edit filter recognise my reply as "disruptive editing". I never had this problem before and I can't seem to add my reply in. Can you please tell me how do I resolve that? 49.180.164.128 (talk) 16:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

I will defer you to WP:EFFP to make a false positive report. Someone over there will be able to determine what is going on. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 16:14, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Here's the log, if you can make sense of it: [3] — Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:17, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for that. However I seem to be able to get around it just now, by writing a completely different comment altogether. So maybe don't need to bother them as it's maybe no longer an issue for me. But thanks for you giving me that info. :) 49.180.164.128 (talk) 16:26, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Perils of IP editing, I suppose. Anyway, good luck! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:29, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

accessibility modifications

is there any way to enlarge text when viewing source editor? or a .js add on i can use to be able to do that? even while editing my user page, i'm making small mistakes with certain characters and i want to be able to see the text. thx >:3 -Astral-(he/him/his) 17:40, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi AstralAlley, welcome to the Teahouse. You can add code like this in your CSS:

.wikiEditor-ui textarea {font-size:18px;}

Many browsers can make text larger with Ctrl++, smaller with Ctrl+-, and return to normal with Ctrl+0. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

tysm!!! i have no idea where half this stuff is documented so this will help alot :3 -Astral-(he/him/his) 18:02, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@AstralAlley: A lot of it isn't documented. I know some CSS and inspected the HTML of edit pages to work it out. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:45, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

that sucks that they literally don't document possibly the best accessibility feature :[ i would atleast like to figure out why but we might never know. -Astral~(he/him/his) 18:53, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Simply put: This is a question of how large the text gets presented on the screen, and that's part of the job for the browser, not the web site. Autokefal Dialytiker (talk) 21:08, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Login page doesn't have forgot password

The [login page] doesn't have the forgot password link. Bzik2324 (talk) 18:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

It does for me. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:12, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@Anachronist I'm on a public WiFi Internet connection, otherwise, I'm on a cellular Internet data connection, how am I supposed to reset my password if I forgot it? I noticed that link only appears to "unblocked" IP addresses like a home WiFi network, which I don't have. How are users in my situation supposed to reset our passwords in case we forgot it and are locked out? Bzik2324 (talk) 19:17, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@Bzik2324: I didn't know it behaved that way. The only advice I can offer is to find a non-public connection like your employer or school, or a friend's home. You can also discuss this at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical); for all I know this may be a bug, and unintentional. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@Bzik2324: The link goes to Special:PasswordReset. Does that work for you? PrimeHunter (talk) 21:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter no when logged out it reads "Internal error

Your IP address is blocked from editing. To prevent abuse, it is not allowed to use password recovery from this IP address.

Return to Main Page." Bzik2324 (talk) 21:22, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@Bzik2324: OK. The message is MediaWiki:Blocked-mailpassword. See phab:T109909#2934299 for background. Blocking access to password reset seems a bit extreme but I guess constructive users who really need a password reset will be able to find a way, e.g. asking somebody else to make the request. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

how do i contact the mayor of medellin south america

want to contact the mayor of medellin south america 2600:6C65:623F:B1DD:85DB:37D:26FF:536C (talk) 19:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have contact with bureaucratic figures like mayors. Please use a Medellin website to find the contact information you're looking for. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I'm violating protocol here, but on Spanish Wikipedia, I found es:Medellín, and I notice that the "external links" section has a link to the "official" page of the Medellín Mayor's Office]. Fabrickator (talk) 23:40, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

on the most innovative shooter i've played in years

heads up: this is mostly a matter of curiosity, because i have no real plans of actually making this redirect

if someone were to create "The most innovative shooter I've played in years" as a redirect for superhot (as that's a plot point in the game, mentioned in the target, and also very likely a plausible search), do you think it would be more likely to be deleted for being vandalism, or for how easy it would be to mistake that for actual shilling? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:25, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@Cogsan I have no idea if it would get deleted, but whenever I make a redirect that I think people in the future will have trouble understanding the background of, I try to make the edit summary with the creation explaining it. If you do that no one will mistake it for promo/blatant nonsense at least. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Interesting question, @Cogsan. New redirects are patrolled as part of the WP:NPP process, so it'd come down to how the reviewer acted. Given that reviewers are often going through dozens or hundreds of new redirects in a run, and that such a redirect would be pretty easy to mistake for vandalism, I don't think they would be super likely to check the article to search for a mention. So if it lacked a descriptive edit summary it'd likely be deleted (at which point its creator would need to contact the deleting admin to explain). Sdkb ^talk 21:13, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

I would delete this redirect if I came across it, but I wouldn't really consider it vandalism unless it was part of a larger pattern of behavior. Remsense诉 05:23, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Article makeover

I took out all the conversational details out of the the article. I was wondering if anyone could look it over and see if they think it is uo to snuff. The page is at Draft: Blanche Chloe Grant. I already submitted it for review. Was that a mistake? Hdgknsn (talk) 19:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Blanche Chloe Grant - 57.140.16.1 (talk) 20:12, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Hdgknsn (talk) 21:14, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello Hdgknsn. I think Nick means "good sources which talk about this person". ColinFine (talk) 21:52, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Hdgknsn. Not necessarily! Any feedback you receive from a reviewer can be helpful in improving it prior to resubmission.

My initial reaction was to wonder why there are pictures of four women in the article, when three of them are not mentioned at all. What is their significance, if any? I think you should continue to look for good sources which talk about this article whilst awaiting for a review. However, I'm not sure she'll meet our notabilty criteria for artists in its present form Nick Moyes (talk) 21:27, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

I want your help to

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § I want your help to

 – —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:45, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

I want your help to continue a forum 196.191.32.5 (talk) 20:42, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not host forums as such - I'm afraid we're not going to be able to help you here. Do you have any other questions about using or editing Wikipedia? 57.140.16.1 (talk) 21:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Image load timeout on wiki pages

Hi, I've had issues with images loading intermittently for the past few days on Wikipedia and Wikimedia. Failing to load, like upload.wikimedia is sometimes wholly unresponsive. I'm just talking about when I'm browsing, not uploading or anything. Who should I talk to? Temerarius (talk) 21:54, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Temerarius since this is an issue with images, you should probably raise this at Wikimedia Commons (commons:COM:VPT). I personally haven't had any image loading issues recently. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

MediaWiki may also be a good place to report the bug (since it is likely a software issue). Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

New Here - How to Best Bring an Existing Article from German Wiki to English Wiki

Hi there - am new on wikipedia and interested in intersections of US and German history/literature. There is an author with an existing page on German wikipedia, and none on English wikipedia. I read starting a new page from scratch can be daunting/take a long time, especially when a new contributor to wikipedia. Is there a "streamlined" way to bring the (translated) version of the existing German wikipedia into English wikipedia, or would I have to start "from scratch" with a new English page? If so, would that be possible with the help/under the supervision of more experienced contributors, to make sure this goes smoothly? Any help much appreciated. Thank you! HCR24 (talk) 22:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

HCR24 see WP:TRANSLATETOHERE and Help:Translation - it should answer your question. The Content Translation tool is available to extended confirmed editors. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:10, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for this. So, if I understand this correctly, even though an article already exists on a person on the German wiki, I still have to go through WP:YFA and create a new article from scratch? Which might take six weeks or longer to go live? Wikipedia:Requested articles does not help this situation, or speed it up? HCR24 (talk) 23:51, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@HCR24: Welcome to the Teahouse. As an autoconfirmed user, you do not need to go through YFA, but it is strongly recommended. WP:RA does nothing to speed up the process. The most important thing to note here is that policies and guidelines are different between different Wikipedia projects, so I'd evaluate the sources currently being used on deWikipedia and determine if they demonstrate that the author is wikinotable by enWiki's standards. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:01, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Henschel Hs 129 and others

There is an editor by the name of Denniss who keeps changing my edits regarding German aircraft nomenclature. Now, I realise this is not the most exciting subject here, however, it is absolutely correct that the Germans did not have a gap/space inbetween the aircraft model number and any variant. For example, Hs 129B or Hs 129 B. She is completely incorrect to maintain that to have a space inbetween the 129 and the B. Every reference I have provided, every book I own, all clearly state/show that there is no space between model and variant.

This may seem trivial to most people here, however, this is an encyclopaedia and surely it should reflect correct information, no matter how small? If she is insistant on doing this to my contributions, why doesn't she go and edit every single page regarding German aircraft that correctly shows the correct aircraft nomenclature, and change it to the way she desires? Either it's correct or it isn't. I can provide hundreds of source material if you need? If this pages information regarding aircraft nomenclature is incorrect, surely every page on Wikipedia regarding this subject needs to be changed as well for consistency and historical accuracy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henschel_Hs_129 Troy von Tempest (talk) 22:50, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Troy von Tempest you should try to discuss this with Denniss first. I see you have replied on User talk:Troy von Tempest. Per Nimbus227 on User talk:Denniss, WT:AIR may also be a good place to establish a consensus on the space (if there is a good argument in the negative). Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:03, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Sungodtemple, yes I have and I have been dismissed out of hand here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Bf_110 "Restoring proper aircraft designations - just leave those if don't know better". Regarding a consensus, if you look at any number of other pages, he/she either doesn't care or hasn't bothered to edit all those pages correctly, why would that be? Thanks for your pleasant reply Troy von Tempest (talk) 00:31, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Troy von Tempest! Pinging @Denniss. Have you tried discussing this with the user? See the dispute resolution guide. Also, they have only reverted you once, as it appears. Happy editing! —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 23:03, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello asparagus, no, it has happened again. As above, I was dismissed out of hand. I don't understand why he/she feels the need to only police a handful of pages instead of all relevant pages. Either it is factual or it isn't? Thanks for being civil - Troy Troy von Tempest (talk) 00:34, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I am quite puzzled by this editor's claim. This enthusiast has scanned 65 flight manuals of German WWII aircraft which are downloadable PDFs, the front covers show spaces and hyphens as would be expected. These are official manufacturer's manuals approved by the RLM. The German Wikipedia uses spaces and dashes for variants, evident at the Messerschmitt Bf 109 article. the diff given above is for a single reversion, this subject needs to be discussed at WT:AIR to gain a new consensus, edit warring is not the way forward. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 11:56, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreed that some sort of centralised discussion is needed to get a proper consensus. I have seen both styles used in WP:RS's so it doesn't appear to be an open and shut case.Nigel Ish (talk) 12:45, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

A further example is [4] which sells copies of official aircraft manuals. Books are no real reference for naming because they often omit spaces or even use flat-out wrong designations because authors/editors don't know or don't care. --Denniss (talk) 13:27, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

And he happily continues despite opposing evidence ...... --Denniss (talk) 13:29, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Do I have any chance?

Hi there. I am making an article for T-Money, an old school hip-hop rapper. I've been getting into MTV archives and he's a pretty cool dude. I'm having trouble getting my article approved, I was wondering if someone would be able to take a look, and tell me if this guy has any chance of getting an article approved? I think he is notable enough for his own page, but I am new to wikipedia editing. Thanks! Taevchoi (talk) 23:23, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

If someone is willing to take a look, I'll link my draft. Thanks guys Taevchoi (talk) 23:24, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Taevchoi, this is about Draft:T Money (rapper). There are a lot of helpful recommendations at the top. Remove the reference to Wikipedia because Wikipedia is not a reliable source per WP:CIRCULAR. Remove the references to IMDb, per WP:IMDB, as that is not a reliable source. Remove the reference to the US Sun, which is not a reliable source per WP:THESUN. Remove the reference to a book sales listing on Amazon. We do not link to commercial sales sites except in articles about those sites. You can use Google Books instead. I doubt that WhoSampled is a reliable source. Remove the reference to eBay. Again, we do not link to commercial sales sites. Beats, Boxing and Mayhem looks like a blog, and does not appear to be a reliable source, per WP:BLOGS. Genius is a dubious source that should be used with great caution, per WP:GENIUS. Remove all content referenced to unreliable sources, and keep in mind that quality is more important than quantity. Cullen328 (talk) 00:08, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

OMG..... thank you so much. @Cullen328 I was cautious about removing info because I thought there wouldn't be enough text about the subject. I'm going to revise now. A lot of the information on this subject is in books about old school hip hop, so I found a cool online archive I'm going to dig around. I didn't realize that taking out info would serve me better than adding. Thanks again! Taevchoi (talk) 00:56, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Taevchoi, more information is fine, within reason, as long as it is referenced to reliable sources. Books issued by established publishing houses are usually very good sources. Cullen328 (talk) 01:09, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Books do not have to be accessable online to be references. David notMD (talk) 03:25, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

List of redheads

Why aren't Rick Astley and Bryan Adams on this list? Although both a different shade of red, they are it for sure. 145.53.192.20 (talk) 23:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Because you haven't added them yet! Feel free to do so with a published reliable source for each one. If you'd like to discuss it with other interested editors, you may post at Talk:List of redheads. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:11, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

New Editor Help

Hello! As a new editor, what are some tips/guidelines to follow as I start editing? Pezfishy (talk) 02:36, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! There are actually quite a few pages we've written, but I think you would like Wikipedia:A primer for newcomers. If you have any other questions, let me know. Happy editing. Remsense诉 03:45, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Don’t forget to ask any questions you have here! Pablothepenguin (talk) 13:06, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Redirect

Could someone please redirect Wakan Island to Harriet Island since that is an alternate name for the island? It won't allow me to do it. Ominateu (talk) 03:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done, cheers! Remsense诉 03:43, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Ominateu (talk) 04:09, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Interwiki links

Are interwiki links to a page tracked? We have Special:WhatLinksHere but that only includes links from the same wiki. Kk.urban (talk) 03:56, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Kk.urban, if you go to the Tools menu and click on "Wikidata item," and then scroll to the bottom, it'll give you the list of interwiki links for a topic. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 05:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sdkb That's not quite what I was looking for. If I create a link on enwiki to fr:Insurrection tchétchène de 1932, it won't show up on fr:Special:WhatLinksHere/Insurrection tchétchène de 1932. Are such links tracked anywhere? Kk.urban (talk) 05:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T3886

Ah, I see. I know that file pages these days include usage on other wikis, but there does not seem to be a way to look at incoming links. I found a technical ticket on Phabricator related to this issue that was written all the way back in 2005, so I wouldn't hold out hope it'll be fixed anytime soon. Sdkb ^talk 05:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Need more eyes on my first article

For the past several months I have slowly been completely rewriting the Appalachian temperate rainforest article and I think I have added just about everything I can. I want to submit it as a featured article candidate, but it hasn't had many eyes on it other than mine. If y'all could peek at it and give content/copyediting/citation advice or edits it would be greatly appreciated. Cheers! Brooklaika (talk) 07:57, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Looks pretty good to me, I only spot one awkward phrase "These impacts grew" but can't figure how to change it at the moment. Good luck. Theroadislong (talk) 08:36, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Brooklaika My advice would be to go for good article status first. The process to get to WP:FA can be quite difficult and frustrating. There was a discussion of that in a recent Signpost article (and its earlier part). Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:29, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree go for GA first. That will give you one reviewer, and from my experience, GA reviewers are generally friendly. I am in the middle (I hope) of raising a GA to FA. My first nomination was rejected as premature. I did weeks of improvement edits. My second nomination recveived DETAILED criticisms from four (so far) FA reviewers. Examples of minutia: the titles in the article's 200 references were a mix of title case and sentence case; I was asked to make all one or the other. Page numbering was either complete (16211-16219) or truncated (16211-9) and I was asked to make all one or the other. All image captions needed work (including one that was not a sentence and yet had a period, while another was a sentence but lacked a period). I was asked to remove the great majority of references from the Lead as long as the content was elaborated upon and had the same references in the body of the article. And lots more. Good luck with your endeavor. David notMD (talk) 11:45, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and submitted it for GA review. Thank y'all for the feedback and advice! Brooklaika (talk) 18:05, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

restore Article

Please restore my article as draft, I'll rewrite it with neutrality and resubmit it again. Noya Boi Bazar (talk) 09:59, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

According to the notifications on your talk page, you need to contact JBW, the deleting administrator. Leave a comment on their talk page. In the future, you can find the username of the deleting admin by clicking the link on your talk page titled deleting administrator. This will take you to the page's deletion log. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 11:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Actually, your draft was Speedy deleted by DoubleGrazing for bewing promotional/advertising and your User page (same content?) by JBW. I advice you contact DoubleGrazing. DG also asked you to state on your User page if you have a paid (see WP:PAID) or conflict of interest (see WP:COI) with the proposed article. Do that first. DG may advise you to start over rather than attempting to revise the deleted draft. David notMD (talk) 11:53, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Slight clarification: I only requested the speedy, didn't execute it (can't, as I'm not an admin). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

YouGov article

Hi all,

My name is Andrew and I’m an employee at YouGov. I am currently looking to make some updates to the article and wanted to see if anyone would be up for reviewing my proposed changes and feeding back any advice. As someone employed by the company I am keen not to make the changes myself, but instead work with neutral editors.

All my proposed changes are located at Talk:YouGov – I’ll be very grateful for any advice you could share. Thank you

Asfarmer (talk) 12:45, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Asfarmer Thank you for following the correct procedure, and I'm very impressed with how you've laid out the proposed changes in an easy to read way on the Talk Page. I have looked through the text and it all looks fine to me. I would recommend getting rid of some of the double spaces, and in-line citations are placed after adjacent punctuation without a space, so that would need tidying up throughout.

A brief glance at the sources shows no major issues: I would personally not use Who's Who for the first source and would try and find a more reliable source, even if it is primary. Qcne (talk) 14:52, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Qcne,

Thank you so much for your speedy feedback, it is very much appreciated.

I have updated the Talk:YouGov formatting as you suggested.

Regarding the who’s who source, this is currently in the existing article, hence why I have not tried to remove it but instead build on what has previously been approved.

Would you be happy to go in and implement these suggested edits now that you're happy?

Thanks so much, and have a great weekend when it comes.

Asfarmer (talk) 17:01, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

"signature song"

What is Five Iron Frenzy's signature song? I would assume Suckerpunch, since thats the one most know Five Iron for. But i googled it, and While Supplies Last (From Until This Shakes Apart) is apparently the bands most popular. i just want to know before i edit List of signature songs Babysharkboss2!! ^{Killer Queen} 14:04, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Babysharkboss2! I would recommend finding a reliable source that states which it is, instead of guessing based off of consensus from here. Otherwise, you could go to the reference desk for entertainment. Happy editing! —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 14:22, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Alright, then. i'll find a source. thanks, i just didnt want to add it and it be controversial. Babysharkboss2!! ^{Killer Queen} 14:25, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Why does the Template: Vandalism information on my user page indicate a moderate to high level of vandalism?

Hello everyone! Recently, I have uploaded some of my photos to Wikimedia and displayed them on my user page. When I check my Template: Vandalism information, it shows me moderate to high level of vandalism. I don't know why it show me that. This is my recent contributions. Can anyone tell me the reason? Thank you very much! Lam Nguyen (talk) 15:06, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Lam Nguyen, that template on your user page shows the same as it would anywhere else: a moderate to high current level of vandalism over English-language Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 15:29, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Hanoifun In other words, it has nothing to do with your own contributions. Incidentally, your WP:Signature may be confusing people, as it has no relationship to your username. I suggest you change it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:44, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom, @Michael D. Turnbull Okay, thank you very much! I was a bit nervous when I checked my Wikipedia vandalism yesterday. I thought this reflected the current level of vandalism on my Wikipedia account. Recently, I've changed my signature to my user name so everyone won't be confused. Hanoifun (talk) 15:25, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@Hanoifun I agree this is confusing. I don't think it's very helpful for the average user, inasmuch as you need to always apply common sense when you encounter dubious information on WP (similar to when using chatgpt, it may often be right, but there's nobody you can hold liable if the info is wrong). Fabrickator (talk) 16:17, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Deletion discussion

Hello! My name is Ignat. I am totally new here, and I would like to start commenting in deletion discussions in the future. Are there any prerequisites for this activity? Also, could anyone give me some advice about what a good deletion comment should be based upon? I found two Q&As (Wikipedia:Before commenting in a deletion discussion and Wikipedia:Arguments to make in deletion discussions), but maybe there are more materials. Thanks in advance for your assistance! Ignat.Lolov (talk) 16:26, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Ignat.Lolov you should have a solid understanding of the notability guidelines. Articles for Deletion mainly revolves around whether subjects are notable or not. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 16:44, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

With only 4 edits to Wikipedia in your history, I would strongly suggest you gain more experience with general editing first. Theroadislong (talk) 16:53, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ignat.Lolov I agree with Sungodtemple. You will do far less damage or disruption if you first learn to build this encyclopaedia by adding content to existing articles, rather than inputting in areas where you do not (at this moment in time) have enough experience to be able to comment fairly. However, monitoring existing discussions by putting them on your WP:Watchlist and seeing how they develop could be the first step in understanding how this this area works. It's also not just about 'commenting', but about going off and looking for sources that others have missed that might make an article better, and demonstrate WP:N. But with 7 edits under your belt, I suggest working elsewhere to begin with. Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 16:54, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks to you both! I see, I will put the Deletion discussion on hold. I found the local SuggestionBot and will try to polish my editing skills there. You have been very helpful. Ignat.Lolov (talk) 17:14, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Birkensee new article

Is it allowed to make an article about Birkensee? (lake at the nature park Schönbuch, Germany) Schönbuch is the article where a picture of the Birkensee is. David73232 (talk) 16:50, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, David73232. That depends entirely on whether or not multiple reliable, independent sources have devoted significant coverage to this lake. Passing mentions are not enough. Cullen328 (talk) 17:19, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Cullen328. Thanks for the answer. I found many sources about the lake on the internet. David73232 (talk) 17:48, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

David73232, your next step is to evaluate the reliability of those sources, and whether or not they truly devote significant coverage to Birkensee. Set aside those that don't meet those standards. Create references to those sources. Read Referencing for beginners. You can then start summarizing in your own words what those sources say. You can find lots of good advice at Your first article. Cullen328 (talk) 18:02, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Cullen328, I only found 2 reliable sources. I found a source for the lake at the official Schönbuch page and at another website. A newspaper also had the lake in the text but with not much information about it. This has not enough sources and it is better if it is just in the Schönbuch article as an section, right? David73232 (talk) 18:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

David73232, yes, in that circumstance, a section about the lake in the Schönbuch article would be the best solution. Cullen328 (talk) 18:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Cullen328, thank you very much. I have a solution now. I will create the Birkensee section at the Schönbuch article. You have been very helpful. David73232 (talk) 18:55, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

David73232, happy to be of assistance. Cullen328 (talk) 19:08, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

David73232, you might or might not have noticed that Birkensee is currently a redirect to Langwieder lake district which also has a lake so named. This is not a problem for your draft, since when a reviewer accepts it as an article they will make the necessary changes, possibly making Birkensee a disambiguation page rather than a redirect, and modifying the title of your article. You might want to have this in mind when writing. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.24.45.226 (talk) 19:27, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, there are multiple Birkensee lakes. As you know, I will not create a new article, I will just create the section Birkensee at the Schönbuch article. Thank you for the information. David73232 (talk) 19:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Color violation maintenance template

Hi ! Can you tell me the maintenance template for color violation? For example: If any article's section have an issue of color then at that case which maintenance template will be used. Fade258 (talk) 16:54, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Fade258 You can use {{Cleanup colors}}. See also Category:Accessibility templates. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:04, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Article review

Do articles get automatically reviewed after a certain period of time? I made one back in November that still has not yet been reviewed. No rush, just not sure how that works. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:15, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Iljhgtn. If you provide the name of the article, I can check on it. You can find out more about the review process for new articles at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. You can find out more about the review process for draft articles at Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Cullen328 (talk) 19:26, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

The Foundation for Harmony and Prosperity, I know there is a backlog, no rush. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Iljhgtn & @Cullen328: Wikipedia:New pages patrol has a link to the query at Special:NewPagesFeed. Running the query for unreviewed articles created by Iljhgtn shows that The Foundation for Harmony and Prosperity (created November 13) and VIADER (created December 10) have not yet been reviewed. GoingBatty (talk) 19:36, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn: I suggest reviewing WP:MISSION. GoingBatty (talk) 19:37, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes. I know they had not yet been reviewed. THank you though. I forgot I had one other too that has been awaiting review for a while I think. No rush though, I know there is a major backlog. I was just curious if there is automatic patrol after like 6 months or if it truly drags on for a long time. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:38, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Iljhgtn new articles are not automatically reviewed; in fact, NPP has a massive backlog of 10000 articles right now. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 19:29, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I am eventually going to try and get auto-patrolled. All of my articles have been reviewed and retained eventually, I just need to get up over 25+. I am at 13 or something right now. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sungodtemple@Iljhgtn Well, from the POV of the editor who puts it in mainspace, it's "automatic", isn't it? As in something they don't have to apply for, it just happens. Or is supposed to, backlog or not. And after 90 days, even if not formally reviewed, they get indexed by search engines (as in shows up on google). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:18, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

The Foundation for Harmony and Prosperity is an interesting read. It mentions the aspirations claimed by the Foundation, and appears be be neutrally written, with no criticism of the Foundation. Yet all three of the independent sources it cites are extremely critical. Iljhgtn, in creating an article, you should report what the independent sources say. Maproom (talk) 21:38, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Update for current page

I have updated material for Stephen Holland, artist. How do I send the information for review? JNGHfromStephenHollandStudios (talk) 19:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, JNGHfromStephenHollandStudios. Your first step is to make the mandatory Paid contributions disclosure, and familiarize yourself with the guideline on editing with a Conflict of interest. The article Stephen Holland (artist) is very poorly referenced, so your first priority is to identify reliable sources completely independent of Holland that devote significant coverage to him. You should then make formal, well referenced edit requests at Talk: Stephen Holland (artist). Cullen328 (talk) 19:18, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Suggested edits

I am trying something new and working on only suggested edits from the newcomer homepage. These are all tagged and need help. One page that came up in my feed was Space art. This page had numerous suggested edits, or maybe these were just AI generated examples of SIMILAR sounding edits? I am not sure, but it showed examples in the "Suggested edits" window on the middle right hand side of my screen that included very space-like and important grammatical or copy edit type edits to correct for. When I entered on my keyboard, control F the various specific "suggested edits", or even portions of them, they were nowhere to be found on the page. Were those just fake suggestions of lookalike type things to update? If so, they were all "on theme" space related to this space oriented page, so that was just either an amazing coincidence, or the tool itself is smart enough to make similar sounding suggestions. I was stumped. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:10, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn I would be inclined to assume that the newcomer home page software is fairly dumb and is making suggestions based on the tags clearly visible on the articles it is suggesting as needing edits. Space art is deficient mainly because it has no sources/citations in the section on astronomical art that was merged into it. Fixing that would be very worthwhile. Note that there is a very detailed list of possible article cleanup listings at this URL. There, you can look for cleanup work in areas that interest you, downloading the details to a local spreadsheet for sorting if you wish. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:17, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I will check that link out. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:00, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Userfication

Hi. I was wondering you do you move a draft that is almost 6 months old into your userspace? Thanks for your help in advance. Roads4117 (talk) 20:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Roads4117: Just pull down the menu on the "Page" tab and select "Move".

If you're just trying to prevent its deletion due to being stale, you can make one edit to the draft to restart the clock for another six months. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Anachronist and @Cullen328, where do I find the menu? I tried reading the Wikipedia help page on the issue, but didn't find it useful. Roads4117 (talk) 20:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Roads4117, the location of the move function depends on whether you are editing on the desktop site or the mobile site or some app, and which skin you are using, which for new users will usually be Vector 2022. I prefer Vector 2010 and the desktop site on my smartphone, and for me, the move function is easy to find in a pull-down menu at the top of the screen. So, I suggest that you ask at Village pump/Technical, describing in detail the hardware and the software that you are using. Cullen328 (talk) 21:14, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Cullen328 and Anachronist, I have found it, thanks for your help :) Roads4117 (talk) 21:25, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Creating an Article

Hi I am very much struggling to create a Wikipedia article. I tried submitting one then got helped from the Wikipedia chat and rewrote the article and found more sources. I haven't put that one fully together yet, because I realized this might be better for another person to write, so I was going to put in a request for someone else to create the article, but then I couldn't figure out how to submit a request. So how do I submit a request for someone else? When I originally was trying to submit it (I don't think I was doing it right), but it said that one of the links I was using was blacklisted for spam? I don't know if that's just because I was using the website link multiple times today because I was very lost or something else. AnnaRae803 (talk) 21:32, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your account has no edits other than the above; could you tell the name of the draft? 331dot (talk) 21:38, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes. I like writing articles. Perhaps I could help. Please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:15, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

I am not paid to make this contribution to wikipedia

Previous discussion : #Update for current page

I am the wife of Stephen Holland, I am trying to update information. I have images, copy and citations, ready for the update. We hold the copyright for all the images, and permission for the one snapshot taken in 1960. How do I proceed? JNGHfromStephenHollandStudios (talk) 21:45, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@JNGHfromStephenHollandStudios: If you trying to edit information about Stephen Holland (artist), you need to make a conflict of interest declaration and follow those instructions. Basically, I advise you to make an "edit request". Click here, select "I have a conflict of interest", and follow the instructions there. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 22:50, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

JNGHfromStephenHollandStudios, your username indicates that you work in the artist's studio, which means that you have a financial interest in the artist's success. As the artist's spouse, you have a financial interest in the artist's success. Accordingly, your first step is to comply with WP:PAID, as I advised you above. This is mandatory and non-negotiable. Cullen328 (talk) 22:53, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I understand that I have a conflict of interest. How does one get the information, that only we have and the copyrights of the images which we own? JNGHfromStephenHollandStudios (talk) 00:36, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

If you want to add information that only you have access to, the short answer is that you can't. Sources on Wikipedia have to be published. See WP:RS. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 01:12, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Right. They must be in a secondary source or a published primary source. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:16, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@JNGHfromStephenHollandStudios If you want to make pictures available for WP-use, we have a separate site where we keep most images, see Wikimedia Commons and Upload Wizard. You may be required to confirm that you have the copyright via mail contact at some point. Hope this helps some. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:34, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Citation bot on fr.wiki

Most fr.wiki editors live in europe (and I do too, and am in great need of pills..), so I won't get an answer there. I want to use Citation bot on an article on fr.wiki. Does he exist back there? Is there anything similar? Encyclopédisme (talk) 23:07, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, Citation Bot only runs on English and Simple Wikipedia. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 23:12, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Encyclopédisme: Wikipedia operates around the clock. You just need to be patient for answers. Each Wikipedia is different, so you need to ask at the FR wikipedia about using this template there. Maybe they have their own bot that does similar work. RudolfRed (talk) 06:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

You may be able to get similar results using fr:Utilisateur:CodexBot. Reconrabbit 18:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

How do I activate it? Encyclopédisme (talk) 18:47, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

That I do not know. You will have to ask on fr.wiki. Reconrabbit 19:18, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

You can also use WP:REFILL which works on fr.wiki. Reconrabbit 20:30, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

AfC Review Requests

AFC draft review seem to be taking way longer than usual. Requesting these two to be reviewed by anyone who has time:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:UndetectableAI

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Copyleaks Comintell (talk) 23:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Comintell, there are currently 1850 drafts waiting for review. Why do you think that your two drafts deserve special attention? What do you think would happen if 925 editors came to the Teahouse asking for the same thing? I recommend patience. Cullen328 (talk) 23:47, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Copyleaks was Declined on 19 Feb. You revised and resubmitted. Draft:UndetectableAI was created and submitted on 19 Jan, and is awaiting a reviewer. Given the system is not a queue, either may be reviewed in days, weeks, or (sadly) months. David notMD (talk) 01:10, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Same source, multiple page number citations?

Hello! I am working on my first article. It is a BLP and so has a high standard for citations, which I am working hard to meet. As a writer and researcher in other areas (mainly history), I'm used to adding footnotes that refer to a specific page or pages of a reference, often multiple different places in the same source, with different page numbers for each citation. Unless I'm missing something, I can't see the best way to do that for Wikipedia references. I can add a page number to a reference -- but if I want to reuse the reference, I'm reusing the page numbers as well. What I want is to do what I do in other writing and have multiple citations to the same source with different page numbers: Swecker2010 p. 44, Swecker2010 pages 78-80. Best way to do this? Any way to do this? Thanks! Slane00 (talk) 01:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Slane00 Here is what I did: I created a reference which had the page range for an entire chapter, pages 95-165. I used the page name convention so that the reference showed as multiple uses of the same reference (in my case lettered a thru q). THEN, after every use of the reference, after the >, I added double curly brackets {{ }} and inside those put rp|pages= and the page numbers. If only one page, then page= and the page number. This shows in the text as the superscripted reference number followed by superscripted page numbers. David notMD (talk) 03:41, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @David notMD, that seems to be just what I need. Slane00 (talk) 11:54, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Slane00! There are a couple ways to do this that you can choose from: WP:CITEPAGE has a description and examples for each, either the second or third option on that page is equally acceptable. Tollens (talk) 03:38, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Tollens that is a very helpful and complete guide! Slane00 (talk) 11:55, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Template:Irreligion sidebar

Some of the sections of {{Irreligion sidebar}} (Irreligion, Agnosticism, People, Books, List of irreligious organizations, and Related topics) aren't working for me. There seems to be some missing template or incorrect transclusion. Kk.urban (talk) 01:37, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@Kk.urban:  Fixed Tollens (talk) 03:47, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Kk.urban (talk) 12:47, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Infobox image

How is it determined to change an infobox image, especially of a highly notable BLP? For example, the infobox image for Javier Milei is updated almost every few weeks it would seem. I do not for one have any problem with that, but seems to almost be change for change's sake sometimes on many a BLP especially. I know that the image (for BLP's especially) have to be completely free use, but how is it determined which to use? Given that some can be more favorable looking and others less so. Would appreciate some guidelines on that. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:03, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn Unless there's some reason it shouldn't, WP:BOLD applies. Some loose guidance at WP:LEADIMAGE. The current one [5] is very recent and apparently donated by the Italian government, so it's a decent choice unless there's an actual official portrait that can be used. Consider starting a "Can we agree on the lead-image, at least for now?" discussion on the talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:11, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Aurora Teagarden Mysteries

I want to know why I don't see the episode "Cut, Color, Murder" on the website https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora_Teagarden#External_links That's all. 201.171.189.208 (talk) 02:31, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

huh? ltbdl (talk) 04:05, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

That movie does not seem to be an Aurora Teagarden story. You can ask at the reference desk for more info: WP:RDE. As always, if you have suggestions to improve an article, you can discuss it on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 05:16, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

What is moratorium

What is a moratorium Maestrofin (talk) 03:28, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Maestrofin! A moratorium is a temporary pause on something – for example, if there is a moratorium on a specific request, making that request is not allowed for the time period specified. Tollens (talk) 03:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

More on that at WP:MORATORIUM. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Maestrofin (talk) 01:51, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Maestrofin! A moratorium in law is a temporary suspension of an activity or law. If that's not the definition you needed, here is a disambiguation page. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 03:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Maestrofin, I am almost 72 years old, and am therefore old enough to remember the Moratorium to End the War in Vietnam, which was a gigantic mass antiwar movement back when I was a teenager. Cullen328 (talk) 09:47, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

No Maestrofin (talk) 01:51, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

The comment above was a accident Maestrofin (talk) 01:53, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Acceptable to remove subtitle?

I am not sure if this is acceptable but I think there has to be a rule against it but just don't know what rule it breaks. But maybe I am wrong. One editor firstly removed a lot of people's edits on a chapter in Amnesty International.[6] Then they unilaterally removed the specific subtitle chapter of (2021 alteration of Alexei Navalny's status) and changed it into just (Russia).[7] Despite the topic isn't meant to be that broad but more focused on specifically Amnesty changing the status of the individual Navalyn. I see such an editorialising only serves to make an easier environment that would allow to shift attention away on what Navalyn did, and the issues pertaining to what Amnesty have said about Navalyn. And in doing so, justifies in deleting a lot of key details on Amnesty's statements towards their decision on Navalyn, after framing it as not centred on (Navalyn status change) but broadly on (Russia) instead.HarmonyCrusador (talk) 08:17, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, HarmonyCrusador. You are a new editor and you should be aware that conflicts pertaining to Eastern Europe are considered contentious topics that are subject to stringent monitoring by administrators. Given that you have only 23 edits to date, I suggest that you stay far far away from the Russia-Ukraine topic area, and consider improving articles about butterflies or asteroids or the history of Nebraska instead. Or something else entirely unrelated. Cullen328 (talk) 09:35, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

The Teahouse is a place to ask for advice on Wikipedia practices and policies in general. Your question is being addressed vigorously and vehemently at Talk:Amnesty International and elsewhere, so asking here is not useful. David notMD (talk) 11:18, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

This specific question was not raised on talk. I didn't tell him it was wrong to change the subtitle because I don't even know what rule it breaks. And is why I am here to learn. Like you all remind me. I am a newbie. I hope you understand what I am trying to say.

Amnesty said it was an internal decision that made them revoke Navalyn's status at first and nothing to do with Moscow.They deleted that.'

Amnesty said they don't approve of Navalyn's actions in the past but they stated they now have refined their policy to no longer disqualify someone based on their past for POC. They deleted that.

If anyone did that. I would label it as vandalism as they are removing information that's relevant and well sourced.

But what violation did they do when they do the above but also change the subtitle to make it seem like it's offtopic to now include the forementioned recently deleted info?

I feel concerned that it is some sort of trickery at censorship of info they want removed, but at the same time, I am at complete loss on how to identify the rule they broken. The information I am defending, has stayed on that article for over 2 years and nobody deleted it until recently. I find genuine difficulty in labelling the rule they broke by changing the subheading and then making the recently removed information seem bit irrelevant. I'm saddened by the loss of valuable contributions by the many editors over the years. I'm eager to learn and receive mentorship on combating this issue. But if you still think this discussion belongs elsewhere, please let me know. I have no intention of causing annoyance or wasting anyone's time. Wishing you all a good day."🙂 HarmonyCrusador (talk) 13:27, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Your concerns are understandable, and laudable, but the Teahouse is simply not the appropriate forum to discuss them – the article's Talk page is.

There are grey areas between Content dispute and Vandalism, because human discourse is complicated. This particular issue promises to be a drawn out, knock-down fight because national interests and propaganda are actively at play.

Beyond the above links, I can't think of a more specific reply to your specific question, but Wikipedia's policies, guidelines and established practices are diverse, so perhaps others can. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.24.45.226 (talk) 13:49, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

How do I get to my sandbox on phone?

Hello I’d like to use my sandbox on phone but don’t know how can someone teach me? Blackeyedpea2 (talk) 12:55, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Personal sandbox is typically found at User:username/sandbox or similar. Pablothepenguin (talk) 13:04, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@Blackeyedpea2 Welcome to the Teahouse. In mobile view, log in and then tap the person icon on the top right of the screen. You'll get a dropdown menu, first giving a link to your username (=userpage), then your talk page, and thirdly your sandbox.

Although I use my small iphone screen to edit Wikipedia a lot, I rarely if ever use it in mobile view. I prefer still having desktop view on a mobile. To switch between viewing modes, scroll the the very bottom of any page. There, hidden away from view (for no obvious reason) you'll see a link to "Mobile view" or "Desktop". Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Announcement

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egov.Press The article requires corrections. 37.99.45.135 (talk) 13:36, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

what kind? ltbdl (talk) 13:38, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

I think this user is evading a block. 331dot (talk) 13:39, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

This IP - now blocked for a week - is suspected of being the creating editor while not logged in. Creating editor blocked 23 Feb for 60 hours. David notMD (talk) 16:03, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Seems to be indef now. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:51, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Uploading images to Wikipedia

Hello,

Can anyone tell me how to know if an image is copyrighted? I found one online I want to upload to Wikipedia. The photo does not seem to have any known author, date taken, or copyright symbol. In this case, is it safe to upload?

If you would like to see the photo for yourself, it is this photo. I hope that link works.

Thank you, CallieCrewmanAuthor (talk) 16:04, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Our rule-of-thumb is to assume that any image found on the Internet is copyrighted unless there is a specific statement to the contrary (which might be to the effect of it having been released under a Wikipedia-compatable license: see Wikipedia:Copyrights and Creative Commons license). There are exceptions, such as images created by US Federal employees as part of their job, but none will apply here. In general, copyright issues are complicated, and subject to various international laws which Wikipedia must be very careful not to infringe, for obvious reasons. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.24.45.226 (talk) 16:17, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

How to make public comments in articles

I frequently see other editors’ comments on articles such as “citation needed” but I don’t know how to do that. If it’s done with a template, then I’d like to know not only how to use one but also how to write a more specific comment that may not have a template.

This has come up for me in the article on baton twirling where many twirling tricks are listed but not described. I want to point out that descriptions would be very helpful, even if Wikipedia may not require clarification of jargon as such.

Augnablik (talk) 17:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Augnablik, these are not comments, these are inline tags added by editors. Examples of these tags as mentioned are {{citation needed}}, as well as {{dubious}} which creates . This description alerts users when a statement is unsourced or inaccurate. All of them are templates. Toadette ^{(Let's discuss together!)} 17:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@Augnablik there are many of these, more than you think! Many I need to remind myself to use more, even. You can see a list of them here. Remsense诉 17:51, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@Remsense: What a great resource! Thank you! Augnablik (talk) 23:25, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

You could possibly use {{unclear|section}} and then start a discussion on the talk page. --Onorem (talk) 17:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Let's not overlook the fact that you can simply make suggestions on the article talk page. These will not be as visible, but it does not have to "fit" into some existing template and you can provide more details on the nature of the improvements you propose. Just keep in mind that it's WP:NOTFORUM. Also bear in mind that there's nobody who's obligated to do anything to improve the article, and it could literally be years and years before somebody else does something. Sad but true, if there's something you think could be improved on a WP article, the only way to be sure that happens is to do-it-yourself. Fabrickator (talk) 18:18, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Augnablik. In general, if you want to add a template or anything similar to an article and you don't know how to do it, you can always try to find another article that contains an instance of the thing you want to add. Then click the Edit button in that article to view the underlying code. Then copy the relevant code to the article you are editing. You might need to make some adjustments, such as to the date, but at least you will have something to start with. Mike Marchmont (talk) 18:26, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@Onorem: I would have thought of {{unclear|section}} as meaning "this information is unclearly written" rather than "this information could really use explanation." I wonder if there are two different inline tags for these purposes. Augnablik (talk) 23:36, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Defining who should (and should not) be consided a Ziegfeld girl

Apologies for the length of my question.

One of the issues I confront is "who should (and should not) be considered a Ziegfeld girl?" This is surprisingly a complicated subject. The Ziegfeld girl article states that: "Ziegfeld Girls were the actresses, singers, chorus girls, showgirls and other female performers appearing in Florenz Ziegfeld's theatrical Broadway revue spectaculars known as the Ziegfeld Follies (1907–1931, 1934, 1936, 1943, and 1957), produced in New York City. Ziegfeld girls also included female performers who participated in the Ziegfeld Midnight Frolic (1915-1921) and the Ziegfeld 9 O'Clock Revue (1919-1920)." Full disclosure: I contributed to the definition.

Florenz Ziegfeld, Jr. also produced other Broadway musical spectacular such as Rio Rita and Show Boat that relied on a host of female performers, at least some of whom did not participate in the "Ziegfeld"-branded shows. In addition, during the 1920s and 1930s there were many similar musical revues on Broadway for which Florenz Ziegfeld, Jr. had no involvement.

The bottom line is that I have found a number of instances in Wikipedia articles where specific performers are named as "a Ziegfeld girl" when, in fact, they do not meet the definition noted above. I make this judgement after a dig deep into sources such as the Internet Broadway Database and Playbill.com; I also troll through the Internet Archive text corpus, which contains a contemporary sources that have detailed information about show casting, such as "Variety" and "Billboard." Finally, I search for performer names on NewspaperArchives.com to see if they are linked to a "Follies" show.

I suspect that well-meaning editors use "Ziegfeld girl" rather broadly to describe performers who were on Broadway in the 1920s and 1930s. Also, since "Ziegfeld girl" was often considered flattering, especially in later years, the term tends to show up in friendly bios in places like IMDB.com.

Am I splitting hairs or is it valid to prefer a source conformation before naming someone as a Ziegfeld girl in Wikipedia articles? Conversely, if someone can't be confirmed via the method above, should the article be edited to reflect that?

Finally, if my nit-picking is indeed justified, should I publicize the issue? Via a user subpage? Another method?

Thanks! Bixly777 (talk) 20:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Bixly777, there should only be one criterion, and that is whether or not reliable sources call the performer a Ziegfeld girl. Wikipedia editors are not permitted to do our own original research. Cullen328 (talk) 20:27, 24 February 2024 (UTC) Cullen328 (talk) 20:27, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

I concur with Cullen328, and would add that original research includes making judgments about whether someone meets the definition offered in the Wikipedia article concerned. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

IMDb is not a reliable source, per WP:IMDB. Cullen328 (talk) 20:29, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

I think you're confusing the Internet Broadway Database with the Internet Movie Database, Cullen328 (I don't offer a view on whether the former is reliable). Cordless Larry (talk) 20:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Cordless Larry, the OP mentioned IMDb. Cullen328 (talk) 20:38, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Ah, so I see now. Thanks. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:43, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Archive bot doesnt work

For some reason the talk page archiving bot doesnt work for me anymore. It last worked on 14 February https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:FMSky&diff=prev&oldid=1207434867 but since then it stopped. I didnt change anything. What could be the problem? --FMSky (talk) 22:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@FMSky: Did you ask a question at User talk:Σ? There was a report last month that got fixed. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:53, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

archived vandalism on a talk page

I recently removed vandalism from Talk:Debate and noticed that some of it had already been archived. My question is: what should I do - and is there even a point in doing anything? Oh, also: looking at the page's source, it looks like there are two different bots for archiving implemented on it, what's that about? JackTheSecond (talk) 23:12, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JackTheSecond. I think you did the right thing by removing current 'off-topic' posts from the talk page. Most probably weren't really vandalism as such - especially considering the topic of the article. It would have been best had you included an EDITSUMMARY with each undo, so as to explain your reasoning. However, i wouldn't bother going back into archived talk pages to under off-topic or vandalism, and I certainly wouldn't 'warn' an editor if the post was more than a week or two old. Just let sleeping dogs lie, unless such posts are deeply offensive, libellous, or a copyright infringement. In that situation, pop back here with DIFF or a link and we can advise you on a case-by-case basis.

Regarding archiving methods, I think I'm right in saying that a talk page - like Talk:Debate - will be using an outdated archiving code (i.e. MiszaBot) whose functions are now carried out by a different archiving bot, such as Lowercase sigma bot, but is still acting upon the configuration settings used before the old bot ceased operating. See the documentation at User:MiszaBot/config and User:lowercase sigmabot III for details. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:56, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Got good pictures of various LED strip lights?

Article: LED strip light

I'm looking for better pictures for that article. I'm not sure what users own the necessary LED strips coming in various colors, sizes, and capabilities, so I'm requesting them here. If anyone's interested. 2601:703:280:9C80:3007:C216:C9C:6163 (talk) 23:50, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

I checked the LED strips category on Commons, but didn't find any good pictures for the variants. Here's a video of an "LED strip sample book" being tested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhVH80ONu5Y — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:703:280:9C80:3007:C216:C9C:6163 (talk) 23:56, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Welcome to the Teahouse. This help forum isn't actually the right place to ask. We're more to give advice on editing problems, not for finding images. I was going to suggest the Commons category, but you've beaten me to it with your follow-up post.

I'd suggest posting on the talk page with your suggestions for the most appropriate image that the article could do with, in the hope someone might be motivated to take and upload one. It is possible to search for images on Google using the 'tools' filter which shows only those images licenced for commercial re-use. The element of 'commercial re-use' is absolutely critical as we cannot use images licenced under Creative commons which are marked as 'Non-commercial' reuse. Unfortunately, this usually filters out all the good images and leaves you with some fairly crummy examples. Take a look at this selection, which you could legally upload (providing you include the appropriate attribution and identical licencing conditions).

Looking on Flickr can also be worthwhile but, again, the licence its released under is critical. The default is All rights reserved, but the owner can easily change it for a single photo, if they wish. I have had some success in asking a Flickr user if they would change their licencing so that I can use it on Wikipedia or elsewhere. But it's a faff, and has no guarantee of success. So it might not be worth it. Hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:10, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Ip editor: I'm going to add that your editing rights are perilously close to being removed! I've looked at some of your contributions, and you need to stop inserting your personal opinions or knowledge into articles. Most have been reverted and some of the IPv6 addresses you've used have been warned again and again about this. Unless you can include citations, you must stop trying to improve articles with your own views and thoughts, no matter how well-meaning that may be. Thank you. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Too late to save you - you continued adding inappropriate content, and now you have been blocked from editing for a week across the whole /64 range. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:46, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

When your block is over, you could add {{reqphoto}} to Talk:LED strip light, and even add a section describing the details of the photos you think would enhance the article. GoingBatty (talk) 01:02, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Why I am encouraged to create an account?

Why I am encouraged to create an account? 100.11.111.79 (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Primarily because of all the neat things you can only do with a registered account. As a simple example, I don't believe you can become extended confirmed without being a registered user. You also can't access the Wikipedia Library without being a registered user, which is an incredibly helpful resource that's saved my bacon on several occasions. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 00:04, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Additionally, without being registered, you can't edit on any pages with active protection templates, regardless of the level. I've added a welcome message to your talk page. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 00:09, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

In addition, no template editor privileges, no administrator privileges, no autoconfirmed privileges. Not even to create a page. 100.11.111.79 (talk) 00:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Without an account, you cannot upload images or directly start new articles. An account gives you better anonymity because IP addresses can disclose your location. Cullen328 (talk) 00:28, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

If you edit without your own registered account username, your IP address is used to identify you instead. Creating an account is easy, free of charge, and requires no personal information. You don't need to be registered to edit most articles, but using an account provides many benefits, which are described in this page: Wikipedia:Why create an account?. The privileges that you mention above are Wikipedia:User access levels, which can be earned or granted as you gain experience helping to build and improve the encyclopedia. —Scottyoak2 (talk) 00:39, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

See more at Wikipedia:Why create an account? RudolfRed (talk) 00:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Is okay to clear my user-talk page?

I would like to clear my user-talk page, and I just wanted to make sure there is no protocol I have to follow before clearing it. Slamforeman (talk) 00:03, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

You can archive certain messages from your talk page. 100.11.111.79 (talk) 00:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Shouldn't be an issue to my knowledge, you might be interested in instead archiving your talk page's messages, you can see an example of this on my talk page. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 00:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Slamforeman You are permitted to remove most content from your user talk page per WP:BLANKING; there are exceptions related to some community processes, but none of those apply to you. 331dot (talk) 00:08, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

That’s seems like a good idea. I'll look up how to do that. Thank you for your help :) Slamforeman (talk) 00:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Slamforeman If you haven't found it, Help:Archiving (plain and simple). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Slamforeman. Note that everything that has been on your Talk page will remain in its history forever, so if you or anybody goes looking, they can find it. Since it remains accessible, you mighty as well archive it (so that somebody who wants to look at it can find it more easily), but not compulsory. ColinFine (talk) 15:51, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes I think that is a good idea. I’ve done so at User talk:Slamforeman/Archive 1, in case it is important to say. Slamforeman (talk) 18:57, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Are cut-paste moves between my user pages okay?

I was drafting a new version of my userpage in one of my user sandboxes, and now I want to replace the current userpage (User:PenguinEncounter2) with it. However, the move button won't let me because the existing user page is still there.

Because I am the sole contributor to both pages, would it be okay to copy-and-paste the content from the sandbox to my userpage, then {{db-u1}} the sandbox? WP:CUT says this isn't okay for copyright reasons... and I really don't want to have to get a history merge done

Or do I need to request a technical move?

Thanks! penguinencounter2@enwiki:~/talk/contrib$ 06:52, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

PenguinEncounter2, yes, it's fine. When you are the sole contributor, copyright considerations do not matter. But when it's an actual article, it may help to have the history of exactly how the page developed instead of the final version only. It's your userpage, so it's completely fine. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:21, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Why is WikiProject Fascism defunct?

I would like to participate in the development of this project, but it is not functioning. How can it be reactivated? Bennorey (talk) 11:42, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Instructions, with three different links, are given in the template boxes displayed on the page you link. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.24.45.226 (talk) 15:42, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Danish withdrawal from the European Union

Is it possible to show the text and this reference on Danish withdrawal from the European Union page? == Political opinions == The Facebook page lists around 11,000 Danes who want to leave the European Union. This Facebook group was created on July 14, 2019 and consists of 5 administrators and moderators. Wname1 (talk) 12:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

References

TLDR, no. WP:Facebook is made up of WP:user-generated content and also there's no way to know how reliable the 11,000 figure is (how many are bots, or people who aren't Danish, or just there to see what happens), if it's been covered in a reliable source then maybe, but the group itself isn't a reliable source. Shaws username . talk . 12:39, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Previous discussion at Talk:Danish_withdrawal_from_the_European_Union#Facebook_group. Said pretty much the same thing but with more words. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

"Emeritus" or "emerita"

In Claudia Sheinbaum we have "...her mother, Annie Pardo Cemo, is a biologist and professor emeritus..." I understand that we have eliminated the use of gendered English terms for professions (e.g., actor can refer to a man or a woman), but Latin is an inherently gendered language. Do we have a policy on collapsing gendered terms into the traditionally masculine form? Peter Chastain ^[¡hablá!] 12:29, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

• Luckily, we're often spared the necessity of reaching our own moral decision! We can follow what sources call her. If sources refer to her situation as professor emeritus, then we can also do so. In fact there are plenty of situations where we are obliged to use the correct, official term for a title, even though it's obviously mis-gendered, because to do otherwise would mean making up our own words that have no acceptance elsewhere and would create positions that don't exist. For example, the Lord Lieutenant of Norfolk is currently the Lady Dannatt MBE, who should be referred to as My Lord Lieutenant... go figure. But there is no such thing as the Lady Lieutenant of Norfolk, so we have no right to make up the term. It may be that the university of which Sheinbaum's mother is an emerita does not formally recognise the word emerita as referring to an honour they bestow. Elemimele (talk) 12:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México website calls her Profesora Emérita en el Departamento de Biología Celular. It's worth noting that emérita (as opposed to emerita) is a Spanish word, not Latin, and the UNAM website consistently uses gendered terms. Peter Chastain ^[¡hablá!] 12:58, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Which is irrelevant to what she should be called in English. DuncanHill (talk) 13:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, if we follow the language of the institution where the professor has emeritus status, as suggested by User:Elemimele, supra, we need to do some translation here. More broadly, checking the University of California website, I see that they consistently refer to their female retired professors as emerita. I would like it if, as a matter of style, Wikipedia did the same. Peter Chastain ^[¡hablá!] 13:19, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

And Oxford uses emeritus. DuncanHill (talk) 16:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I was hoping to get some guidance at either Emeritus or wikt:emeritus#Usage_notes, but now I'm, if anything, more confused. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Infobox style, (honorific prefix)

In infoboxes, there is no His Excellency in Many infoboxes, For Example Joe Biden, in Joe Biden's Wikipedia Article there is no honorific prefix, so should we remove it or not?!. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 15:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy note to hosts: same question asked at Talk:Mohamed Muizzu#Infobox style, (honorific prefix) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:27, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Citogenesis incident and moving an image within Wikipedia

I was looking through a (non-Wikipedia) list of PS2 games, and I came across a name I hadn't heard of before: Secret Service – Ultimate Sacrifice. Having heard of the Secret Service game, this piqued my interest. I couldn't find it in the ReDump Project which keeps extremely meticulous, comprehensive track of retro video game metadata, but sure enough, on Wikipedia, it showed right up. Having scoured reliable sources, however, I can find no evidence in contemporary sources, from reliable archivists like ReDump, on game covers, within the game itself, etc., for this subtitle. I'm highly certain the creator of the article simply misremembered and fabricated the subtitle out of thin air in 2009, it was never scrutinized, and now 15 years later it's lazily repeated without fact-checking in other sources like TV Tropes.

My question is as follows: I'm trying to purge this subtitle from the article to hopefully stem the tide, but the image name still remains. However, it doesn't seem like there's a 'Move' option under 'More'; is it possible to move it to a more accurate title? TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done @TheTechnician27 I've renamed it File:Secret Service cover art.jpg for you. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:48, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

MFD

How do I close an MFD I opened as "no consensus"? There are many errors with it. Mseingth2133444 (Did I mess up? Let me know here) 16:53, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Mseingth2133444: Generally, you should not close a discussion you yourself opened unless you want to WP:WITHDRAW it. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 17:33, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Template Construction needed

I need a new template created based on Template:NFL final roster that uses a different set of parameters — "Quarterbacks" "Halfbacks" "Fullbacks" "Ends" "Centers" "Guards" "Tackles" (in that order). The form used for player entry can be the exact same...

I need it for All-America Football Conference rosters, but it would also be directly usable for early NFL rosters during days of the one-platoon system. Can anyone slam something like this out for me? Thanks! —tim ///// Carrite (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Could be named Template:AAFC final roster or Template:1Platoon final roster ... Carrite (talk) 17:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Carrite, Please post your request at Wikipedia:Requested templates. Mathglot (talk) 09:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Space question involving a prolific authors

I’m working on an article about a noted author who’s written almost 50 books and even more stories and articles. He’s also done many presentations, interviews, and podcasts, and received many honors.

When I began my work on this article (still on my computer, not yet in Wikidom), I planned to make a categorized list of all his writings, etc., rather than just a selected one, in the certainty that many people interested in him would want to see all his contributions.

The “flip side” of including so much is that it will take up a large amount of space, even though at the end of the article. But I think the value of doing this outweighs the alternative of making a selected list, which would also take extra time and effort to create.

I’m sure similar questions about space for contributions from other prolific authors must have come up before. Guidance/insights/tips, please. Augnablik (talk) 17:50, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Augnablik, it really depends. Prolific publication does not necessarily make an author notable as Wikipedia defines it. So, the first concern would be that. After that, the question would be whether reliable secondary sources have cared about all his books or select few. If there are reliable sources about all the author's work, then space in itself would not be a problem. Select works could be added to author biography and a sub-article, a list, could be created to list all their works. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:59, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Augnablik: Have you tried looking at an article for one of the prolific authors you mentioned? Here's one, and another, at random. Bazza 7 (talk) 18:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Issac Asimov was probably the most prolific author of the 20th century, with over 500 books published along with many short stories and articles. He was sometimes called a "one man Book of the Month Club". We have five separate bibliography articles listing his works. The bottom line is that lengthy bibliographies should be in separate articles. Biographies should list a much smaller number of the author's best known and most widely reviewed works. Cullen328 (talk) 21:49, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Article submission declined: Dan Slepian

Hello,

I need some assistance finding more independent sources for the notability of Dan Slepian, NBC Dateline Producer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dan_Slepian

Thanks! PomPomLover96 (talk) 22:02, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

PomPomLover96 Teahouse hosts are here to advise, not to be your reference searchers or co-authors. David notMD (talk) 22:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Translating an article that already exists as a stub in the destination language

I translated the article Winter-Stielporling into English ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lentinus_brumalis ), as the existing English version was only 2 sentences. How to I overwrite the 2-sentence version of this article, with the longer version I have translated? I have published it as a draft for now, but I can't move it to the mainspace, given it shares the same name as its 2-sentence version. Зэгс ус (talk) 23:28, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Зэгс ус since the current version is only two sentences, you should be able to easily merge the contents of both articles. Merge the draft you created into the existing article to avoid issues with attributing the original authors of the two-sentence stub. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 00:53, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Ok thanks! Зэгс ус (talk) 20:18, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Once I have merged the articles, should I delete the draft? Зэгс ус (talk) 20:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

AI generated images

A few days ago I asked if the image of Bapthomet statute was usable on my user page. The answer was no because it was restricted to use only in the article by the copyright license. I don't know if this is the right place to ask but I have a few more related questions:

1) Are AI-generated images usable in general? 2) If they are usable, would they be usable if they were AI-generated images of copyrighted artworks in Bapthomet? 3) If they are not usable, would original artistic renderings of copyrighted statues like Bapthomet be usable? Teras malum (talk) 23:38, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I found public domain images I can use over on Commons, thanks all! Teras malum (talk) 01:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Teras malum. It is not possible to generalize about all AI images but I think that it is fair to say that they present major challenges in the area of original research which is not permitted, and copyright violations. There are pending court cases regarding these technologies. Personally, it is difficult for me to imagine situations where using AI images on Wikipedia would be appropriate, except in articles about artificial intelligence. On your third question, an artistic copy of a copyrighted image is a derivative work, and is therefore also restricted by the original copyright. Cullen328 (talk) 01:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

MoS requirement

I'm editing a section. What's a "MoS requirement" and what's meant by the following note: "There should be a couple paragraphs here that summarize the articles above. This is a MoS requirement."? rootsmusic (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Rootsmusic: See WP:MOS, the encyclopedia's Manual of Style. RudolfRed (talk) 00:39, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

That note is saying that the section is missing a summary for the article linked in the "main article:" hatnote. See WP:Summary style. Perception312 (talk) 01:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Adding New Hall of Fame

Hi - would appreciate assistance in recognizing New York City Basketball Hall of Fame as NYCBHOF_year = 0000 Thanks in advance! Pundit02 (talk) 01:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Pundit02: Please clarify what you are asking for help with. What does NYCBHOF_year = 0000 mean? RudolfRed (talk) 02:13, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

| HOF_player = kareem-abdul-jabbar

| CBBASKHOF_year = 2006

| NMBHOF_year = 1995 Pundit02 (talk) 04:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

is it possible to show a screen shot? Pundit02 (talk) 04:15, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Adding parameters and other changes to popular templates like {{Infobox basketball biography}} require consensus. I do not know how likely it is for such a thing to happen. I notice Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's article has no inline citation for his NYC Basketball Hall of Fame induction, and that is much easier to fix, I think. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Valaurum

Hello! I want to create an article about Valaurum, but when I go to create it, it says that a previous version has been deleted and to contact the person who deleted it if you are unsure if the content your creating might be simmaler. The person who deleted it is blocked and can't edit their talk page. I assume that the content I write would be diffrent, as it was deleted under G11, and I do not intend to promote the company. However, seeing as this is the first article I'm creating, I want to make sure I'm doing things by the book and make sure that I'm good to start the draft. GrayStorm^{(Talk|Contributions)} 02:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Valaurum

@GrayStorm: It was deleted for being promotional or advertsing. Write a neutral draft and you should be fine. RudolfRed (talk) 02:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! GrayStorm^{(Talk|Contributions)} 02:40, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello

Hey, I want to talk about the block for repeated genre warring. I understand that it was very wrong of me but I've come here to talk. I want to keep making genre edits with reliable sources. I have tried reaching out to the administrator who blocked me, but he never answered. I'm not trying to call him out, I just need to see if he will answer. It's something I like to do on my free time. And the thing is, I'm not trying to vandalize Wikipedia, I just want to make edits. The reason why I did replace genres like the one on "Russians" by Sting was because there wasn't a reliable genre source and I replaced it with a sourced one. But I didn't realize that was wrong. I promise that I'll find a way to see if the source is reliable by asking someone, or unless there's another way to find out if a source is reliable. Iamthegoat524 (talk) 03:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Reread User_talk:Iamthegoat524#February_2024, for instructions on how you can attempt to have your partial block lifted. By writing here, you're merely wasting your and others' time. -- Hoary (talk) 03:35, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Sorry if I wasted your time, I tried contacting the administrator, he never answered. So I was trying to see if there were other ways. Iamthegoat524 (talk) 04:52, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

You have now posted the template on your talk page. That page, not this one, is where any further discussion belongs. -- Hoary (talk) 08:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Image uploader won’t stop buffering

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T358414

I recently emailed the author of these 2 photographs, asking him if it was okay to upload them, (https://www.flickr.com/photos/pallrokk/9561070628/in/album-72157635161495105/ and https://www.flickr.com/photos/pallrokk/39866005895), and he emailed back saying it was alright to upload them, and he changed the licence to allow this. However, every time I've attempted to upload them to the commons it gets stuck on the "describe" stage of the upload wizard, no matter what I do.

I would appreciate advice on what to do here, or (if it is not too much of a bother) if someone else could upload them. Thank you! Slamforeman (talk) 04:49, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Slamforeman. That sounds like a technical (systems) problem, rather than any sort of issue with the contents. Maybe a bug. Whatever it is, you need to ask at Commons rather than here - try C:COM:Help desk. ColinFine (talk) 12:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks! Slamforeman (talk) 12:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Slamforeman: there is currently a problem importing Flickr images to Commons, see Phabricator link. MKFI (talk) 15:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Lua error: not enough memory.

On this section, there are multiple source errors in the table with the code "Lua error: not enough memory.". When I try to look at the Lua debugging page I wasn't sure what to do. The error also dissapeared whenever I switched to source edit. Could someone fix this and tell me how I can correct this error for the future? 三葉草 San Ye Cao 06:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello San Ye Cao. The problem is simply that there is too much (probably too many templates) in the article. It needs either to be greatly simplified, or to be split up. ColinFine (talk) 12:18, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Is this an appropriate use of file space?

See this page. Not sure what to make of it, but it looks like a resume and a long unsourced article that might violate WP:NOTWEBHOST. I believe it's related to Draft:Balasubramanian prabhakaran from the same user which I draftified, since it's a long unsourced article, and it also looks resume-like. What do others think? Left guide (talk) 10:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree, Left guide. Take it to WP:FFD. ColinFine (talk) 12:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up, Left guide. It was blatant advertising, and now it's gone. -- Hoary (talk) 12:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the cleanups Hoary, much appreciated! Left guide (talk) 12:52, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

references

I added a citation but did not follow the pattern of a short citation (only the author and date) and then add the short citation's source to the reference section. The reference section has bullet points, and I cannot figure out how to add a reference following exactly the same format.Thanks Tmarac (talk) 12:24, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Tmarac, the issue is that citations used Template:sfn, where a shortened citation is present in the paragraph, and the full ref is added separately at the end. I've fixed the issue. Please let me know if you need any further help. Sincerely, Novo Tape^{My Talk Page} 17:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Very much appreciated! Tmarac (talk) 20:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome! Sincerely, Novo Tape^{My Talk Page} 21:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

1970's Sci-Fi TV film where Humans were the "fuel" for the planet (1970's)

When I was working in Hong Kong in the 1970's I watched a TV Sci-Fi Film. It was based inside a small apartment style room. Food came via a "hopper" in the wall, TV style communication with neighbours. every day a siren went off. One day the siren went and a Red Light flashed in his apartment."Ah, My turn now" and he walked out and joined a silhouetted queue walking orderly towards a glowing Red Dome which was "running" the planet. Humans were the "fuel"! I cannot remember the name or the actor. I have looked through ALL of your listed info but cannot find it. ANY assistance would be most welcome. Many Thanks. Keith. KeithWoodard1 (talk) 12:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@KeithWoodard1: Probably best to ask at The Reference Desk, because this forum is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. (Incidentally, the siren, the dome, and the using-humans-for-fuel part reminds me of The Time Machine, but that's not it) 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 13:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Sounds like Soylent Green. 331dot (talk) 13:24, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Convention on placement of citation

Hello fellow editors, I'm reaching out to gather insights on Wikipedia's convention regarding the placement of citations. For content supported by a citation within a single sentence, it's clear that the citation is placed before the period at the end of that sentence. However, I'm curious about the best practice when a citation supports the entire content of a paragraph, which could be 4 to 5 sentences long. Should the citation still be placed at the end of the paragraph before the period or somewhere else? Looking forward to your guidance on this. HerBauhaus (talk) 12:33, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @HerBauhaus: actually, a citation comes after punctuation, not before (with a few exceptions, see WP:REFPUNCT). HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @DoubleGrazing, thank you for your very speedy response. I'll make sure to incorporate your advice in my future edits and also apply a general tidy-up lens in periodic reviews of articles I've edited. HerBauhaus (talk) 13:40, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@HerBauhaus: And when a whole paragraph is derived from a single source, placing the citation at the end of the paragraph is fine. (If more than one consecutive paragraph has the same source, it may be helpful to cite the source at the end of each paragraph.) Deor (talk) 15:12, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Deor, thank you for your very relevant suggestion. In my editing work related to the telecommunications and energy sectors, I've found government and semi-governmental sources to be invaluable. They provide reliable information for substantiating various facts across different subtopics within articles, resulting in their more frequent citation. HerBauhaus (talk) 15:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Multiple Stub Templates

Can we put more than one "This xyz-related article is stub, you....' templates in article as few articles do or shall we only put one which categorizes the article most. If the first, then shall we put all the templates that categorize the article, as it seems disruptive. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 13:37, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Presumably you mean with different versions of xyz. I don't see why not, especially if some stubs already do that. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

xyz is just an example. For other example, in an article, say for a Russian car company or Japanese football team, we can tag it with car-related stub or football related stub, but then we can also tag it with Russia related stub/ Japan related stub and Sports related stub and so on. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor It seems a bit pointless to have too many tags: I'd use only those for active Wiki Project(s) mentioned on the Talk Page of the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:56, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: yes you can have multiple stub templates in a same article. See for example 63rd Indian Infantry Brigade which has two stub templates. But check first if there is a specific stub template which already combines the topics, for example {{Japan-sport-stub}} is for Japanese sports stubs. MKFI (talk) 15:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Blacklisted Usernames allowed?

'noob' is specifically mentioned on Blacklist of usernames, still many accounts like User:Noob282, User:NoobThreePointOh, User:NOOBSKINSPAMMER are active, and others like User:Noob cannon lol, User:Noobeditor though not active, but are still not blocked? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:44, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor May I ask why you think my account should be blocked? I've been on here for about 3.5-4 years, making constructive edits (mostly). What makes you think I am part of the blacklist? I changed my name about a year ago since I wanted to avoid my information getting leaked. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 14:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

What happens is that a bot posts the username to a page for admins to review. An admin will review the username and decide if there needs to be a block NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 14:49, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@NightWolf1223 Exactly. When I changed my username, the admin who reviewed it knew that it was an acceptable username and allowed the change. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 14:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@NoobThreePointOh: I have not just used your user name, but also 4 others as an example to ask why is it listed on blacklist if not enforced. Answer to the question as I conceive it now is 'noob' word cannot be used to defame mostly other people/ things in username. Regards, ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 15:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor I only chose this username because it sounds perfect and it's also much less cringe compared to other usernames I was contemplating in my mind when changing it. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 15:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

The blacklist you linked in not an official list. Wikipedia's username policy will be found here. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

ExclusiveEditor, I am an administrator who frequently patrols WP:UAA. That list is not a list of usernames that are banned. Rather, it is a list of character strings that are sometimes part of usernames of disruptive editors. The list is used by a bot that reports to UAA. An administrator then evaluates the contributions by that editor. Only if the account is actually disruptive does it get blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 19:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

B-Class article

Hi there, i was revamping this article Hunza–Nagar Campaign to meet article criteria for B class article. Now that the reviewer stated the area's which needed improvement in Talk:Hunza–Nagar Campaign, I have improved most of those areas except one which i cant figure how can i improve it, which was of story telling and non-neutral article. I dont know much about how can i fix that problem. Is there any guide or advice i can get on this issue. Rahim231 (talk) 15:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Rahim231, it's hard to give instructions about tone and neutrality in articles. It is something one usually learns one example at a time as one gains experience. That said, there's WP:BETTER. Please see if it and other pages it leads to are of help to you. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I've re-written a page... what next?

@Nick Moyes a couple of weeks ago (or so!) I asked about when it's ok to re-write a page, and you suggested doing it in my sandbox. I've now done it and want to know a) if it's acceptable and b) what I should do next! My sandbox page is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ARuthhenrietta%2Fsandbox&wvprov=sticky-header and the original article is here Antony Gibbs & Sons Ruthhenrietta (talk) 15:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ruthhenrietta I haven't had a chance to go through your revised version in detail. But it looks pretty good, and I've fixed a few formatting errors for you.

I do have concerns that you have copy pasted a number of small paragraphs from other sites. These need to be removed and be rewritten in your own words, please, as we do not permit use of other people's copyrighted text. We have a tool to identify such issues. See HERE.

Because you are citing some printed books, please ensure you've not made the same mistake with these, too. In addition, I recommend citing individual pages, rather than expecting a user who wants to VERIFY a statement to read the entire work. You don't need to redo the citations; just use the {{rp}} template to add the appropriate page number after each reuse of the single citation (and remove any page numbers within a multiple-use citation, as this will cause a conflict)

OK, so, once you've sorted that, I suggest going back to the article talk page and adding a new thread to state that you've now re-worked the page; link to it (perhaps pointing out major differences and errors you've fixed); and propose that the article is replaced with your sandbox revision; and seek feedback. Looking at the page history, I don't see any major contributors in the past that would merit 'pinging' - especially as the original article creator was blocked long ago. You could go to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies and link to your thread, and seek comments to be made there, too. Wait a week or two for any feedback or comments. If no, simply WP:BEBOLD with a nice clear WP:EDITSUMMARY explaining the revision coming from your sandbox (include a link). Hopefully, that'll be job done. Does this all make sense? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:47, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Nick Moyes, yes, that's really helpful - I love the earwig copyvio detector. I'll do as you suggest. I've read the BEBOLD page - not quite clear if I literally delete all the old article and put mine in, or do I do it paragraph by paragraph... or how?! Ruthhenrietta (talk) 10:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Opinions Without Sources

Hello, I hope this message finds whoever reads it well. I’m new here and want to contribute doing the “copy editing” that was recommended to me.

One part of the copy editing tutorial talked about removing opinion statements. I’ve done this a few times and wanted to check if that is okay.

Also, there are a few instances I’ve seen an opinion that could be coming from some sort of source but none is listed, is there a way to note something is lacking a source? As if there was a source I would feel wrong removing it. Apologies if I don’t do this signature right, I’m still figuring it out. Satellite5Editor (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Yup, you can use the citation needed template to mark something as, well, needing a citation.

Generally speaking, if it's completely obvious and would be to anyone else that something is the opinion of the editor you're A-OK to get rid of it, just make sure you're stating that's why in the edit summary; of course you may have already been doing that, but gotta make it clear. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Great, that template is exactly what I was looking for. Thank you! Satellite5Editor (talk) 16:30, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Satellite5Editor Welcome to the Teahouse. Your signature is fine. Opinions may not be expressed unless they are backed up by a reliable source that is cited. Anything else is original research, which is not allowed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

That makes sense, thank you very much for your help. Satellite5Editor (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

what is math

like stuff 72.204.209.14 (talk) 16:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Try asking WikiProject Mathematics, they'd be happy to answer that. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

.... or read math. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

... or definition of mathematics. Sincerely, Novo Tape^{My Talk Page} 16:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

69+420=489 Abdullah raji (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

How do you report a vandal?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:91.196.30.232 This user has been told multiple times by others to stop their actions, but continues to be a disruption. ZestyBurrito (talk) 17:25, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi ZestyBurrito! If they are vandalizing or spamming, and they have been warned, you can follow the instructions at WP:AIV to report them. If it is less clear and may require some discussion, you may report them at WP:ANI. Hope this helps, v/r - Seawolf35 ^T--C 17:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Wrong background language

Hi, It's entirely my fault, really. I recently started editing, but chose to do so in Portuguese, which is not my native language. Understandably, the system assumed I would be more comfortable with Portuguese as my background language (the stuff in the margins), but I'm struggloing today to access Sandbox. Please can you point me in the right direction? Thanks Pamela Francis Arthur (talk) 17:55, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Does this link work?: wikipedia:sandbox. 🇺🇲JayCubby✡ plz edit my user pg! Talk 17:59, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Pamela. You can change your interface language back in your preferences ("Preferências"). Near the bottom of the first tab, there's a heading "Internacionalização", where you can select "Língua:" ColinFine (talk) 18:04, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Note that the link that JayCubby has provided is to the (shared) Wikipedia Sandbox (which is for practice editing, and gets cleared frequently) not for your personal sandbox, which is at User:Pamela Francis Arthur/sandbox. It's not clear which of those you want. ColinFine (talk) 18:13, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

If you want to stay in Portuguese, your personal sandbox (which does not yet exist) is available under the personal menu (top right, in the Vector 2022 skin) under the entry "Testes". ColinFine (talk) 18:15, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Direct link to the interface language preference shown in English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences?uselang=en#mw-prefsection-personal-i18n. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:30, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Linking an article

I am in the processing of updating Wright's Biscuits page, as it was a former member of the London Stock Exchange, and along with it's sister firm Moores Stores, were one of the largest grocery chains of the 50s and 60s. One of the firms they purchased was tge grocery business of H. Garon (known as Garons) of Southend on Sea. Garons is mentioned in the Southend page, so I linked Garons to the Moores Stores section on Wright's Biscuits as I am adding further info regarding Garons and it is not notable enough for its own page. However an editor has reverted it. I contacted to explain but he basically reverted again stating "Why is this relevant, this talks about stores that have cliosed, not who took them over" and in the conversation said I should read WP:NOT. Could I have some advice on where to go, if I am right or if the editor is just being silly? Davidstewartharvey (talk) 18:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Davidstewartharvey, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's not a matter of whether it is "right" or "wrong". You thousht it was an improvement; Slatersteven disagreed. This is normal in editing Wikipedia, and the next step, if you wish to pursue it, is to open a discussion on the article's talk page, and invite Slatersteven: the aim is not to be "right" but to achieve consensus (see WP:BRD), and if you are unable to get there, there are further steps in WP:dispute resolution.

For what it's worth, I thought your addition was appropriate. ColinFine (talk) 18:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I have done as advised and the editor has replied but I don't think it will be resolved.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

need help for Bangladeshi playback singer

sock, blocked

Ariyan Mehedi is 100% eligible for Wikipedia page, but a user created “G11 Promotional article” but it’s not like that. He is is Orgininal and Authentic Bangladeshi music artist. Don’t delalet it Page is: Ariyan Mehedi This page approved by user @Wikishovel He is is Orgininal and Authentic Bangladeshi music artist. Don’t delalet it (please protect it) This person also available on VIAF : https://viaf.org/viaf/23167440891088532257/ Ahhabib24 (talk) 20:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC) I already told you when you asked at my user talk page: I haven't "approved" anything. Please stop trying to drag me into this. Wikishovel (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2024 (UTC) Please don't post the same thing in more than one place. Asked and answered at the Help Desk. ColinFine (talk) 21:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Citing a primary source from Ancestry.com

I'm in the process of creating an article and need to cite from a voting record available on Ancestry.com to establish the date of birth for my article subject. I understand guidelines on how to use primary sources and know about WP:ANCESTRY, but I can't cite this particular detail any other way. The information will not be interpreted. It will only be used to establish a birth date. In case anybody is wondering, I already have a number of solid secondary sources lined up for use in the article. Thank you all for your help. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 20:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

If it's only being used to state a fact then it should be fine. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 20:49, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh, sorry! I forgot my question! :P How do I cite this source? Again, thanks for the help! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 20:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Ohhh, you should be able to cite it either automatically or manually using the website source style. If you're using The Wikipedia Library to do that and you're using the link from there a bot will come along and sort the citation out to remove the WML proxy in it.

Just whack your source down as close to the birth date as you can (within reason) and you'll be right as rain. Something similar is done on Ren Gill where Genes United is used to identify his birth date. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 21:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, friend. :) —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Cite source error

So I added an archived link of a news article on this page University of Massachusetts Lowell#Alumni and notable people but I can't figure out how to get rid of the error. Anyone know what I did wrong? Soafy234 (talk) 21:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Lemme take a quick look at it. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 21:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

 Fixed Hello, as you can see in my edit fixing the error, a <ref> tag was missing the </ref> tag for it, I have fixed it. The error was in the source code for the page. Geardona (talk to me?) 21:09, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it. But now it includes un necessary information about the references/sources in the paragraph such as the dates and such. Soafy234 (talk) 23:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

 Fixed. The second reference didn't have ref tags, so I added them in. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't notice that the second reference didn't had the ref tags. Thank you for the assistance and have a great rest of your week. Soafy234 (talk) 00:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

help with Wikipedia page publishing

Hi Teahouse! I am looking for help with/guidance in improving sources for a Wikipedia page submission I am trying to get approved. I am wondering if you would be able to help me with navigating successful revisions for this page to make it a better submission for wikipedia publishing. Thank you in advance! Cratedcube82 (talk) 22:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

This may be about Draft:Pablo Rodriguez-Fraile. If it is, there are two ways you could improve the referencing:

1. Where there are unreferenced claims, add references for them, or remove them.
2. Where there are uncontroversial statements with multiple references, remove most of those references, keeping only the best. A good source is reliable, independent, and has etensibve discussion of the subject. Maproom (talk) 23:12, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Translate from another Wikipedia pages (es and fr)

Hi, I would like to contribute this time by translating (making some modifications and adjustments) the Wikipedia page (actually in Spanish and French) of Spanish born author, photographer and former journalist Ruth Baza, who is also on the news worldwide for a couple of months, due to a dramatic event she lived in the act of service as one of the youngest and more respected former correspondent, aged 23, ill but strong and determined, in 1995, with a celebrity in Paris after interviewing this man for one of the most important film mags of Spain, Cinemania. According to WOMEN PRESS FREEDOM and The Coalition of Women in Journalism: "Ruth Baza has bravely come forward with her allegations against Gérard Depardieu. Her courage in speaking out about a rape that allegedly occurred nearly 30 years ago is not only commendable but also essential in the ongoing fight against sexual violence and the culture of silence in the media and entertainment industries. We believe that Ruth Baza's decision to file a criminal complaint, despite the significant passage of time and the legal hurdles, is an important step towards achieving justice, not just for herself but for all survivors of sexual assault who have felt powerless against influential figures. By coming forward, Baza has reignited critical conversations about sexism within the film industry, particularly in France, where recent reports have shed light on deeply ingrained misogynistic attitudes." This is an important step and a stormn in France and the Film Industry. Her career is very interesting as she belongs to the Generation X as author of a book that marked a generation, several stories, her way of writing in journalism and also her work as photographer (mostly rock stars). I will probably need help.... Or if any of you, editors wish to translate itor make your own version based on the existing pages and the hundreds references, I will be pleased to help . Thank you! Sylvie Siminovich (talk) 23:33, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to create "Draft:Ruth Baza". The summary for your very first edit that incorporates material from the French-language Wikipedia should say this (and should specify the page); the summary for your very first edit that incorporates material from the Spanish-language Wikipedia should say this (and should specify the page). Do not depend on machine translations (such as Google Translate). Do not incorporate long quotations (even if these are equipped with quotation marks). -- Hoary (talk) 23:50, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! One question: how to specify the page (French and/or Spanish) Sure, I won´t depend on machine translations since they are far from being "perfect". I prefer to make any mistake and being corrected by an editor rather than depending on a machine. Besides, my english is good enough to write long texts or stories; so, no problem with that. Of course, I may make mistakes but will do my best and not put a burden on pro editors. Sylvie Siminovich (talk) 00:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

You can link to a page on a different language's wikipedia site by prefixing the link with its two-letter language code, delimited by colons. So you could say "translated by me from [[:fr:Ruth Baza]]" and it would appear as "translated by me from fr:Ruth Baza". DMacks (talk) 04:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

And, as the other perhaps-useful example, "translated by me from [[:es:Ruth Baza]]", which would appear as "translated by me from es:Ruth Baza". ("Fr" and "es" are slightly unusual as being not only language codes, which are what you want, but also nation codes, which are irrelevant here: by contrast, "ja" is Japanese-language and "jp" is Japan.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Can you create a page on MAPTO ?

Hello friends, can someone create a draft company page for mapto.com? I'm new here and the page I opened was instantly deleted. I hope it would be better if a third person opens it. With my thanks and good intentions Eartechnic (talk) 00:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Eartechnic, it almost never happens that someone else creates an article for you upon request. It's especially unlikely they'll do so for a business. I am not an admin, so I can not tell yout whether you were close to demonstrating notability. Please consult WP:NORG and/or WP:NWEBSITE, and try again if you determine the company may be notable. It usually is not, so you may be wasting your time. Wikipedia is not the place to promote a nascent business; its purpose is to document/summarise information about topics that are already very well-established. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Eartechnic, in addition to Usedtobecool's comments, if you're going to recreate it make sure you write it in a WP:NPOV (neutral point of view). But make sure to use sourcing that is WP:RELIABLE, WP:INDEPENDENT, and WP:SIGCOV before submitting for review. TLA^tlak 02:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Do photographs help establish significant coverage in notability refs?

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § Do photographs help establish significant coverage in notability refs?

 – —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:GNG requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", where

"significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail...Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.

This doesn't give sufficient conditions for significant coverage, so I wonder if references that

• cover the subject as the main topic and
• include photographs of the subject

provide significant coverage (in particular, this would exclude trivial mentions).

A case in point - Dmytro Kushneruk, where notability concerns were raised. Thank you

~~ Trzb (talk) 00:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Trzb, did you have a specific source used in that article in mind? There's too many there. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I would say no, absent some special circumstance. Since the photo would be attached to an article or similar material (I can't imagine why any publication would publish a photo of a person with no accompanying context at all, except as "Left to right, X, Y, and Z"; in that case Z would definitely not get notability from just that.) I think you'd go with just the text. Newspapers throw in photos of people into articles, it doesn't make them any more notable than what the accompanying text does. (You have got enough material to meet the GNG anyway, it seems, three articles about him (and that's not looking at the other 12 refs). Herostratus (talk) 07:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreeing with @Herostratus, unless it's a notable magazine cover or something (possibly). I read the New York Times, and they often tell stories by using the story of a non-notable person (in the context of Wikipedia), and they can end up having a paragraph or two about them as well as a photo in the NYT, which Wikipedia regards as a top source. TLA^tlak 08:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Handling sock/meatpuppetry

I recently nominated an article for deletion, and some users, in response to that nomination, edited the article I nominated. From reading WP: AFD, I'm aware that this is (usually) normal. Unfortunately, I have reason to believe that the edits made are inorganic. I believe that multiple accounts are coordinating to save the article, and I have reason to believe that at least one of these accounts belongs to someone with an undisclosed conflict of interest.

How should I report actions which I think breaks both WP: COI and WP: SOC? The AfD in question is here, in case more context is needed. It's my first AfD nomination and I'm aware that these aren't light allegations, so I want to make sure I do things the right way. I also deliberately haven't put the evidence here, because my question is about where to send the evidence. Thanks! HyperAccelerated (talk) 00:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

What is meant by an "inorganic" edit? 126.254.227.110 (talk) 00:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

All those comments somehow read as if churned out by a "large language model". 126.53.182.81 (talk) 01:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, you can go to WP:SPI to open a sockpuppet investigation, there are step-by-step instructions there. (I'd be more helpful if I could, but I haven't personally opened one) Shaws username . talk . 01:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Understood, thanks. HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@HyperAccelerated: Is this about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jiabao Li? If so, I'm suspicious too. Those accounts have hardly made any edits outside of that "realm" and I would say that it's very likely they're violating WP:SOCK. What you should do is go and create an investigation at WP:SPI (and if you want, I can do it, although it would be a great learning experience for you) and show "diffs" of edits you find strange, along with other evidence. But I would say that this might even pass the WP:DUCK test and doesn't even need to go to SPI. In that case, I would go to WP:ANI for (much) quicker action. It's your call. ‍ Relativity 01:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

It is, yes. I wrote in my original question that "The AfD in question is here", linking to that AfD, but I guess it's easy to miss. I will reply again if I need more help, but I think I've got it from here. Thanks for looking! HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:18, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

And, I would bet $100 that the AfD defence is made by ChatGPT. TLA^tlak 02:36, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Just got warned..

I recently moved a page, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone to NTT and got warned relatively quickly after, and was told that I was "moving a page disruptively". I have read the WP:s regarding moving a page and don't believe I have done anything wrong. May someone explain to me what I did? Formyparty (talk) 01:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

You moved several pages many times within a short time span. That's disruptive because it creates a mess out of the move histories and makes it hard to tell what the page names should be. My suggestion is to make requests at the technical move requests board and avoid moving pages yourself. The regulars there can tell you if the page moves are allowed or if they need someone with advanced page mover permissions. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:08, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Formyparty, to me, it just looks like you made one bold move, although it did involve moving other pages around too. I see nothing to justify a final warning, or even a warning actually. The encyclopedia that anyone can edit also means user talk pages anyone can edit, and sometimes, it can mean unpleasant things like this happening. You've already asked why; at this point, the best thing may be to wait for an answer. Best guess is, they thought you were one of those editors, who sometime show up, move a whole bunch of pages everywhere in a short period and leave, and it is not even technically possible for ordinary editors to undo the moves. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Moving to draftspace

How to request for a move to draftspace? I once moved an article to mainspace, and it's creator and some other editors agreed to make the article better as it was written in a certain POV, and not in an encyclopedic form. The article is Delhi Sultanate-Mewar conflicts. Creator intentionally made an article to push Mewar POV by creating an infobox and a wikitable, full of Mewar victory. As discussed in the talk section, the infobox was cleared. Though the wikitables are still present. It is misrepresentation as the viewers might assume all the military conflicts between the both parties were won by Mewar, which is indeed a misunderstanding. The user who moved the draft article to mainspace is blocked due to edit warring, and has a history of disruptive editing. Imperial^[AFCND] 07:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

It's a poorly-written article. The map in the infobox shows neither the Delhi Sultanate nor Mewar. The lead has some greengrocers' apostrophes. Maproom (talk) 08:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes. That's why some of ours decided to make an entire copyedit for that article, but a user moved it into mainspace without even leaving a messege in talk section. How can I request for a move to draftspace? Imperial^[AFCND] 09:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Moved as requested. Maproom (talk) 11:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Delhi Sultanate–Mewar conflicts David notMD (talk) 12:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Is this something to be worried about?

I have just completed Su Zhu (businessperson) an hour or two ago. I don't think it's indexed, but now, if you search up Su Zhu, the disambiguation page Su Zhu shows up and it's rather odd on Google. Under Su Zhu's "knowledge panel" it says Su Zhu, birth name of Hua Guofeng (1921–2008), former Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party. Zhu Su (1361–1425; Chinese: 朱橚), scientist, physician, botanist. Su Zhu (businessperson), a founder of cryptocurrency hedge fund Three Arrows Capital in the 2010s..

Obviously, there are many people who do not particularly like the Chinese Communist Party, so it might affect the image of a public figure at mass-scale, as I'm sure this same thing probably happens every day. I'm assuming if Su Zhu (businessperson) was indexed it would be fine, but I'm not autopatrolled, and many other editors aren't. Just worried it might affect the public image of some person online, especially if a page isn't reviewed in a while. TLA^tlak 07:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Some people may dislike the Chinese Communist Party, others certainly dislike the man responsible for Three Arrows Capital. But that's not for us to worry about: Wikipedia aims to reflect what is written in reliable published sources. Google will not be aware of the existence of a new article until it's been assessed as suitable for indexing, or six months have passed, whichever is sooner. Maproom (talk) 08:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

That's true. I would imagine Su Zhu isn't the most liked person in the world. Okay, sounds good, thanks I will forget about it for now! TLA^tlak 08:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

There's always the feedback button, which doesn't always not work. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I got declined

Hey my image that i took of famous 'Adam Bobrow' was declined when i attempted to add it to Adam Bobrow's wiki page Ijijijbigy (talk) 08:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

User is now blocked. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

"What links here" false results

I have noticed on numerous occasions that the "What links here" search function appears to contain results that don't actually link to the page in question. Quite often, the number of such spurious results seems to vastly outnumber the number of actual results. As an example, check the "What links here" results for Bhadarwahi language. There are 287 supposed results, but going down the list, none of at least the first several pages (such as Hindi, Indo-Iranian languages, Marathi language etc.) appear to actually link to Bhadarwahi language.

If I am mistaken, can someone show me, for example, where in the Hindi article there is a link to Bhadarwahi language? If I'm right, what's the explanation for such a basic functionality being so broken as to be borderline useless, and are there any workarounds? Brusquedandelion (talk) 10:36, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

The link is in the navbox {{Indo-Aryan_languages}}. Therefore it is not immediately seen when Hindi is opened, as the navbox is collapsed, nor is it found in the source of the article, as it is brought in by a template. Nonetheless, the link exists. I use User:PrimeHunter/Source links.js to pick out only those links that are explicit in an article, and ignore links brought in by templates. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 10:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Is there really no way to use the default search functionality to exclude links that only appear due to template transclusions? And why does the "Hide transclusions" checkbox seem to not actually this? Brusquedandelion (talk) 11:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

(e/c) I agree this is a pain, but those links are invariably in one of the navboxes at the bottom of the article. The boxes are often collapsed by default so you may not immediately see the wikilink. The Hindi article inevitably has many of these navboxes. In that case the link to Bhadarwahi is within the Indo-Aryan languages navbox. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

But shouldn't "Hide transclusions" exclude such entries? It doesn't seem to. Brusquedandelion (talk) 11:27, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I think "transclusion" here refers to links made with {{:Bhadarwahi language}}. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:37, 27 February 2024 (UTC)