Wikipedia:Teahouse

Maproom, 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

Crazy

There's something somehow crazy about Wikipedia on article's citation and notability. A notable article I created with references but had been earlier deleted is even being denied dratification talk less of undeletion, see, while another article that I moved to the draftspace for further improvement as the article creator failed to cite any source was returned to mainspace. What do you advice me to do to the latter article as I can't find enough references (for now) to improve this article. Jõsé ^hola 07:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237 I'll comment just on Demas Akpore, which was the one you draftified and was restored to mainspace by an admin. That article was first created in 2010, when Wikipedia didn't have the strict requirements for inline citations in biographies of living people it has today. (Actually he is dead but the same principles apply.) It is not correct to say it has no sources, however: they are listed in a separate section of the article. The article has many faults but the individual would probably pass our political notability requirements. So, what is needed is someone motivated to improve the article, not to draftify it as a route to deletion (which it would be by a bot if no-one edited it after six months in draft). We have a policy that says older articles—as a rule of thumb those older than 90 days—should not be draftified without prior consensus at AfD. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237 With most articles that don't get accepted, having too few references is not the problem, but rather having the wrong kind of references. When a person writing a new article hears there is some problem with references, they tend to assume that giving larger and larger numbers of low-quality references will fix it, and that's never true. The key is learning which kind of references are the good ones, for the kind of topic you have. (For example, good references for an article about some kind of machine are quite different from good references for an article about a person.) When your references are all good ones, you don't need a large number of them. TooManyFingers (talk) 15:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

@TooManyFingers: Looking at this article, do you think the references are good? Jõsé ^hola 08:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

No. There is nothing to show that he really works at a university (it doesn't even say which university!), and there are no independent sources describing his work. We need to see recognition of his work from people who don't know him, and who are not involved in the same causes as he is. Right now we see only his friends and supporters, and we don't care what his friends and supporters say about him - of course they will say only good things! For example, we want large reports about his life and work (not interviews with him, but to see that outside reporters are saying a lot about him) from people who are not part of the Nupe community, or at least we can see they are not his friends and do not know him or work with him, and that they are trustworthy published sources.

If my friends write great things about me, you should not believe everything they say. If reporters from major newspapers in far away cities write great things about me, then you will start to believe it. TooManyFingers (talk) 13:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I think you have done what they call "writing the article backwards". You seem to be saying things about him because you know him, and that will never work. If you want to write an article about a person, it would be better for you to write about someone who is not from your country. TooManyFingers (talk) 13:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

It is not a bad thing to see what he has written himself, but those are not references. If you hear that I wrote fifty or a hundred books, you will not become more interested in me, because you don't know yet if my books are good. (I could be brilliant, but I could be only a hard worker who didn't write anything useful.)

But if you see articles in three major newspapers or magazines from different cities with my name in the title, THEN you might be interested, because you know I can't be friends with all those reporters and editors. TooManyFingers (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

After reading a bit more carefully, I'm sorry to say it's even worse. He has strong ethnic opinions and he wants to rewrite the history books.

Maybe you didn't understand, but people from other ethnic groups will be allowed to rewrite your article and you cannot try to stop them.

And Wikipedia rejects ideas for changing the history books. Wikipedia will only say what is already in the history books. If a person wants to change the history books, they have to finish doing that first. THEN Wikipedia can tell the world. Changing the history books is a very hard task, and people who succeed are normally only written about after they die. There can be exceptions of course, but it's unusual. TooManyFingers (talk) 15:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237: to sum up my response, it seems like you know this man, or you support him, maybe you even work for the same organization, AND he seems like he's probably involved in ethnic controversy, AND the references are very poor. This could turn into a disastrously bad article, even the kind of article that makes him look like a bad man, and I honestly recommend that you stop trying. Let a person from a neutral place far away write this article instead. I recommend that if you want to write articles, do not write about any person from Nigeria, but choose a completely different kind of topic. I hope this helps. TooManyFingers (talk) 19:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay thanks.

Actually, I am doing this because of a campaign on Nigerian educators. Personally, I hardly create biographies and I do not try hard to do so. @TooManyFingers: This particular article has been deleted earlier but it is named as an article that needs to be created at WP Nigeria and may pass GNG. Jõsé ^hola 20:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Honestly, the man is somewhat notable but like you said, there are no external sources confirming his notability because I can hardly find any online (a major problem with articles related to underdeveloped countries) and I DON'T KNOW OR SUPPORT HIM, I am only doing so because of the WikiProject nomination. Jõsé ^hola 20:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

If you really don't support him, and if you can find real references (showing for sure where he works, and showing that third parties have published stories that are all about him), then it could work. But right now the article unfortunately looks just like something his friends might write, and that can't work. I hope you understand, and I'm sorry that I immediately thought of you being his friend. Most of the time, people involved in ethnic or political controversy get written about by their supporters. TooManyFingers (talk) 20:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Was I the one you were referring to in multiple comments at different time? @TooManyFingers: Jõsé ^hola 20:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes it was. How did you find the information you wrote? Surely his enemies do not keep careful lists of his books ...

And how do you know he is a professor without knowing which university? A professor without a university, is not a professor. TooManyFingers (talk) 20:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@ 80.83.29.194 (talk) 11:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

A question of not so much importance

I have long searched for a picture I saw once about how excrement longer than a certain length must be lowered by hand into the toilet. It was on one of the advisory pages of wikipedia, possibly a humor page. I can't find it :( 75.142.254.3 (talk) 15:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

IP editor: the file is this one. Finding it via the advanced options in Special:Search is an interesting exercise. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

I commend your competence and bravery. -- asilvering (talk) 23:07, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I could not find it. 75.142.254.3 (talk) 08:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

My daughter is the last of famous bloodline

Hello, my daughter is the last bloodline of General Gordon Meade. I want to add her to his page. She is 12 and I want her to be proud of her family and learn all the history Amcraig82 (talk) 01:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Amcraig82, whether you have in mind General George Meade, the poet Gordon Meade, or somebody else, your daughter is most welcome to read the article, to learn from it, and to be proud of her family. But she has no place in the article (unless reliable sources with no connection to her have described her and her relationship with the subject of the article). -- Hoary (talk) 01:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Yup, I'm from the bloodline of Charlemagne, King of the Franks, and I don't add my name to his article. See WP:NOT. tgeorgescu (talk) 01:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Not to mention that Matthew Fox and Mark Rockefeller, both related to George Meade through his daughter Sarah Wise Meade, would likely be surprised to find out that neither they or their children actually exist. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 02:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Since you want these things, you should just tell her yourself. TooManyFingers (talk) 13:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Sir, your daughter has not personally done anything notable (at least yet). It is fine for her to read his article, but it is not fine to include her in it due to nepotism. Drdr150 (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I gonna admit

Wikipedia donations are NOT NEEDED, you may say why? Well Wikipedia earns 154,7 millions dollars as of 2022. All that money goes to the ones that maintain Wikipedia, however the ones who converted Wikipedia in what it is today are THE USERS. The users, admins, and stewards who have created many articles don’t receive nothing. The donations only end up in the ones who maintain Wikipedia engine, but not it’s articles, which let’s gonna admit is not too hard to maintain. Wikipedia has just text, and the images aren’t even of Wikipedia but they are of commons. With this I’m not disrespecting this wonderful encyclopedia nor it’s users who have created this wonderful articles. Just that I feel that the users should gain something, because they are spending their time editing and fixing Wikipedia and they are not receiving nothing. That means that They are WORKING FOR FREE. The Wikimedia ones also are working but by less time that the users, and the Wikimedia ones are getting all the money, and the users nothing. I already said this but I gonna say it again, IM NOT DISRESPECTING THE USERS NOR THE PERSONS WHO WORK TO MAIN THE ENCYCLOPEDIA. But rather I’m saying this because all reasons gave above, truly disappointing. Protoeus (talk) 05:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Donations go to the Wikimedia Foundation which hosts, amoungst many other things both Wikipedia and Wikicommons. I'm not super knowlegeable about web severs and whathaveyou but I'm glad someone is keeping an eye on them. You're under no obligation to donate to that if you don't want to. What do the editors get out of it? They get Wikipedia. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Protoeus, the Teahouse is a place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. It is not the place for a rant against the Wikimedia Foundation, which has no day to day involvement with developing content on Wikipedia. If you do not like the WMF, then don't donate any money to them. As for me, I donate time to improving Wikipedia as opposed to donating money to the WMF. Cullen328 (talk) 06:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

The purpose of donation is to keep the Wikimedia projects alive. But it's not necessary to donate as the WMF has sufficient funds to run for one and half decades. Ahri Boy (talk) 12:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Yeah, I feel that it’s better collaborate to edit to Wikipedia, instead of donating for them. I knew the teahouse wasn’t for this, but I needed that some important people here know that. Protoeus (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Protoeus, for a better understanding of the depth and breadth of the Wikimedia Foundation's activities and responsibilities, you might find these articles helpful:

On the English Wikipedia: Wikimedia Foundation

On Meta-Wiki: meta:Wikimedia Foundation

If you'd like a better understanding of the motivations, viewpoints, and advice of volunteers who create, monitor, and maintain the actual content; you could spend many evenings reading over 2,000 essays that they have written on a wide range of Wikipedia-related topics.

— Scottyoak2 (talk) 07:09, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

And yet, where do they get that money from? Donors. Drdr150 (talk) 21:18, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Redirection pages to a page that merely mentions the title

This is a general query. I found a redirection page Palki Sharma that redirects to Firstpost. The Firstpost page does not even have a section about Palki Sharma. It merely mentions her as Managing Editor once. Is this standard? I don't think so.

There are far too many names of people (Even on Firstpost) who don't have an independent pages. I think it is not advisable to create a redirection for them, unless they at least have significant mention on the related page or a section dedicated to them.

There are mentions of Executive editor and Deputy executive editor as well who don't have a redirection. Managing editor, also is not a significant role for a redirection. Although, she has wide media presence, we can create an individual page for her. Just curious about the redirection to a page that merely mentions her name. Waonderer (talk) 11:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm just going to provide a general answer to your general query: When it comes to redirects, a mention is better than nothing and redirects are cheap. I would just like to mention that you should always check both 'what links here' and the page logs (I suspect your question may have been a bit different if you'd seen them). -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 12:04, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Agreed with the "redirects are cheap" point. I was just thinking if that's allowed then many such wikilinks can be created by people that just fool people. You click on reach an article that barely talks about the title you wished to read more about.

By "What links here", do you mean on the redirection page (here Palki Sharma)? Even that doesn't seem much. Waonderer (talk) 14:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

If you wish to read more about Palki Sharma, I suggest doing a Google search. If you believe this redirect should be deleted, you should nominate it at WP:RFD, following the instructions there. If you wish to create a Wikipedia article on Palki Sharma, start the article in draft space via WP:AFC, and then nominate it when you are satisfied with it. Softlavender (talk) 14:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Special:WhatLinksHere/Palki_Sharma shows for example a previous AfD discussion. I'd also note there is at least one extant draft, and one refundable draft (of course you already know this). I don't know where a deletion proposal for the redirect would land. I'd estimate about even odds. Personally I don't take great offence from these types of harmless redirects for borderline people. They may encourage more content, or provide some information to the end user, both of which may plausibly exist. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Previous deletion discussion: WP:Articles for deletion/Palki Sharma. -- Softlavender (talk) 02:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Religious institutions

Can we add a list of all churches, temples, synagogues, mosques, etc. to an article about a city? 73.170.137.168 (talk) 20:04, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

No, that's not appropriate for an encyclopedia article. Might be a better fit for the city's entry at Wikivoyage, but you might want to ask first.https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Main_Page RudolfRed (talk) 20:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

OK. 2601:644:9083:5730:B42B:A5F0:DBF7:4CD (talk) 21:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

It depends. Wikipedia is not a guide for religious institution, however if a specific institution is notable in Wikipedia terms, e.g Cathedral of St. John the Divine is rightfully so linked in Morningside Heights (a neighborhood within New York City that's appropriate. A list is another possibility like in Synagogues of Kraków ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:38, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Why would you want a list like that? What would it be good for?

Somehow I think I sense "We want more recognition for our church, and we think we can get it on Wikipedia, but how can we keep it from being deleted? We need a clever strategy against deletion... I know! Let's add all the other churches in town too!" TooManyFingers (talk) 23:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Because it's a relevant feature about a city? You could ask: Why would you want a list of highways in a state? Why would you want a list of schools in a town? Why would you want a list of villages in a tehsil? 2601:644:9083:5730:1D92:8684:37CF:EE71 (talk) 05:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Wikipedia isn't concerned about that, as it is not intended to be a directory. WikiVoyage is a potential alternative, as RudolfRed pointed out. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@TooManyFingers: Please assume good faith; doubly so here at The Teahouse. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

You could check that they all have entries in Wikidata (and expand any that already exist), and take photos of each and add them to Wikimedia Commons. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm new

As the title says, I'm new and nervous, and even the newcomer pages don't help. I worry about even clicking on the edit button. The reason why is because I'm afraid (make a big mistake) to get banned from Wikipedia and plainly just is confused going through a tutorial. What is your number one advice to get over this fear? Tri Comment (talk) 00:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tri Comment: Welcome to the Teahouse. Just make tiny edits to start out. As a new user, you should have a homepage enabled at Special:Homepage, which should show you some suggestions for "easy edits" like correcting a typo. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tri Comment Just be bold! If you believe a change is right, do it. Explain the reason in the edit summary, if an editor disagrees, they'll explain why instead of reverting without reason. As Tenryuu said above, start by making small edits. You'll get more comfortable over time. If you have any other questions don't hesitate to ask. Regards, win8x (talking | spying) 01:00, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Edits may be reverted (reversed, undone) - often for not providing a reference in support of added content - without the erroneous editor being blocked. Blocking offences include stuff like vandalism, threatening other editors, threatening to start legal action... David notMD (talk) 01:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tri Comment: Further to the good advice given above by others, you can make some practice edits in your sandbox. Please do! Also take our short tutorial. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi! You asking how to overcome fear is the first step to overcoming it. There is nothing to worry about here. As others have said previously, see videos and check the edit guides.

In addition, try to join the Wikimedia affiliates in your community for offline guidance. You can also come here to ask questions you are not sure of, you can also reach out to me on my talk page as I'm open to guiding new editors Tesleemah (talk) 12:19, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I have a general critique about Wikipedia use of language for defining 'racism'.

I have been personally experiencing this problem, via cancel culture. So, understanding the problem I have a critique on the use of language and lack of facts on theories that are used to define racism. I feel I'm introducing a new, or if not new, ignored point.  The Misuse of Academic Language: How Complex Theories on Racism Become Tools for Discrimination.

Academic theory, particularly from left-leaning scholars, has developed complex and 'nuanced' definitions of structural or systemic racism, often presenting these theories as indisputable fact. This approach has, in some cases, led to what can be seen as a narcissistic phenomenon, where contradictions about reality and truth in human behavior justify discrimination against white men. As per these definitions, white people, seen as the top of a power hierarchy, cannot themselves be discriminated against. This mirrors a narcissistic method of control, wherein 'academic language' is used to push philosophical theories as fact, misleading people into interpreting structuralism and related concepts of 'implicit bias' as conclusive proof of racism. Basic social behaviors, like homophily—our tendency to trust those similar to us—are misconstrued as racism. Using unequal outcomes as proof of discrimination is problematic. When the intricate definitions of 'structural' or 'systemic' racism are distilled into everyday understanding, they often translate into the oversimplified belief that 'all white people are racist and don’t realize it.' This, as Noam Chomsky has pointed out, shows how postmodernist language, when reduced to plain terms, reveals the philosophical theory as fantasy. In this way, left-leaning academics have created language that can be used narcissistically to abuse or vilify individuals based on skin color or sex. AstroSQ (talk) 01:36, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

hi @AstroSQ and welcome to the Teahouse! are you intending to have this theory posted onto the Racism article, or is this intended a critique on Wikipedia or certain academic papers that Wikipedia uses as sources? 💜  melecie  talk - 01:45, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I did make an attempt to post it on the Racism article. I thought I submitted it. But I was directed to use Teahouse. So here I am. AstroSQ (talk) 02:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

You posted the above content on the Talk page of the Racism article and it was reverted (removed). Talk pages are the proper place to debate/discuss/reach consensu when editors disagree. It is not aplace for your thoughts on the topic. A note to this effect was left on your Talk page. If you believe that the content belongs in the article, then references are required. David notMD (talk) 02:46, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

What kind of references are required?  AstroSQ (talk) 02:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

WP:RS is the very basis for how Wikipedia works. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 11:16, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

• AstroSQ, you are free to post your personal musings on a blog, forum, social media, or published article/book, but Wikipedia is not a forum and thus it is not the place to post such personal theses -- not on a talkpage, or Teahouse, or userpage. You might try some place like Reddit. If you are here to build an encyclopedia by adding cited facts to articles, then welcome. If you are here to soapbox your own views, then you will not last long. Softlavender (talk) 03:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

  So, citing for a past published public policy as accounting for the history of laws governing race would be very relevant to the article, as far as I can tell. If I were to collect stories of hundreds of people who have experienced racism relative to a philosophical theory that claims to seek to reduce racism but in fact increased racism, would that be relevant to Wikipedia as the history of racism? AstroSQ (talk) 04:45, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

  No, that would be Original Research and possibly also Synthesis, neither of which belong on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not the venue you are seeking. Find a venue which supports and allows the posting of original research. It's fairly clear that you are not here to add facts to an encyclopedia, but rather to put across your own viewpoint, which is not what Wikipedia is for. Softlavender (talk) 05:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

As for "What kind of references are required?", the article has more than 250 references. Look at existing content and references. Are there reliable source references that support your idea that "...a philosophical theory that claims to seek to reduce racism but in fact increased racism."? David notMD (talk) 11:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

My draft has been rejected because it "requires a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic"

I have written an article about a scholarship there is little information about outside its primary sources: Draft:Georgia Rotary Student Program (GRSP)

It has been rejected and it says it meets the criteria for speedy deletion because it sounds promotional. I am unsure how I can rewrite it to make it sound more neutral or "encyclopedic". I used the Rotary Youth Exchange wikipedia website as a guide. Can anyone provide me with examples of how i can rewrite a sentence to sound more neutral? or what should I change to get it approved? Wikiproject2024 (talk) 04:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Please abandon this idea as what you are trying to do is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Please start by reading Wikipedia:Golden rule. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Rotary Youth Exchange has multiple significant flaws, for which it has 'tags' at the top. This makes it a not-good model for your effort. David notMD (talk) 11:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I am aware, but it exists and is allowed on wikipedia and it is a pretty similar kind of program, which is why I used it. Wikiproject2024 (talk) 16:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

That article is "allowed" on Wikipedia in the sense that somebody created it twenty years ago, when we were eager to get Wikipedia populated, and didn't worry so much about standards. In an ideal world, every one of the thousands and thousands and thousands of seriously substandard articles we have would have been looked at by now, and either improved or deleted; but this being a volunteer project where people work on what they choose, this tends not to happen. But we have higher standards for new articles. ColinFine (talk) 16:57, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Wikiproject2024, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that if you have a subject where "there is little inhformation about outside its primary sources", then almost by definition it is impossible for the subject to meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article is possible. Therefore every single moment you spend on trying to get an article on this subject is time and effort wasted. Sorry. ColinFine (talk) 16:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I understand. Thank you so much for your help! Wikiproject2024 (talk) 00:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I would like to apply for one month of editing time for the geji entry

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

 Courtesy link: Gējì, Talk:Gējì

I'm really sorry.This entry is not perfect now. I have been slowly improving it, but due to controversy, I cannot edit it now. The sexual issues of this group of female performers are being held up. Some people must define them as sex workers and must think that all of them are prostitution.For the specific situation and explanation, please read all I said in the discussion forum, if it is convenient.[[Talk:Gējì|https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:G%C4%93j%C3%AC]] I hope someone can have a discussion and define the identity of this group of female performers, rather than them continuing to be exported as they are now.I know this is presumptuous, but if anyone could help, I'd really appreciate it, thanks.Sorry to bother. Now some people even think that all the contents of this entry, even the name of this entry, should not exist, and that the entry must be given a wrong definition.

I want to apply for a month to complete this entry, and then come back to it if there is any problem. In the current situation, this entry may be locked for life. So I really hope someone can take a look at this question, thank you very much.

清风与明月 (talk) 07:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

added courtesy link since the intended link used nowiki 💜  melecie  talk - 07:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

It's a little difficult to parse this request, but if I'm interpreting your question correctly, there is no mechanism for "applying" for exclusive editing time for a live article. Your edits have no special priority over any other editor's edits. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 11:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

This issue is at WP:ANI#User:清风与明月 Continued Tendentious editing. and is outside the scope of the Teahouse. My suggestion is when multiple people ask you to refrain from editing, you comply with such requests regardless of correct you [may think you] are. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 11:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Based on this post, I have proposed an indefinite block. This simply isn't working. —Wasell^(T) 17:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

The answer is No. Cullen328 (talk) 17:30, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Some of my students cannot post external links to my talk page

This problem is affecting only a minority of my students; as far as I can tell this is pretty random, as in, it affects only some students. Many students with new accounts can do this, but a few cannot. The links are the same (they need to take a screenshot of the training for students page, upload it to imgur or such and link it in their post). We already had a similar activity last semester and no student reported this problem back then. Some of the affected students include Poeyal (talk · contribs), Xukeying2022039098 (talk · contribs) and Hee Jung, Yoon (talk · contribs) (there are more - see my talk page if you need more data and look for student posts without links). FYI my first thought was that this is some security feature affecting just created accounts, but this does not appear to be the case, looking at the logs I see that students who created accounts today could send me links, but others, like Poeyal, who created an account few days ago, could not. I also had them try alternative browsers and even computers, which did not help, so it is not the fault of their PCs but rather some weird account issue. What's up?

PS. Ping @AlphaBetaGamma - perhaps this is related to the issue you reported on my talk page? (But the students should be logged in...) _{Piotrus at Hanyang| reply here} 08:27, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Piotrus at Hanyang. New users have to enter a CAPTCHA when they add external links. This is no longer required when the account becomes autoconfirmed after four days and ten edits. You could try asking them to disable "Enable quick topic adding" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing. They still need a CAPTCHA but the inferface may be different. I don't know how CAPTCHA interacts with quick topic adding. AlphaBetaGamma referred to old issues in the logs.[1][2] There is only one log entry since June and that was an IP. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Huh. I thought I saw an IP triggering "prevent new users from editing other's talk pages" filter in your talk page. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 10:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Help with checking any COI and Notablity issues

Hi, I'd be grateful if an editor can lookover article Nick Jordan (artist) and check for any specific COI issue or problems with sources that don't meet notability guidelines. I have answered question on the article's talk page, giving several examples of secondary sources, and no speicific COI issue has been identified. However, the templates are still present on the page after many months, and I'm hoping these can be removed if article meets guidelines. any help or improvements much appreciated. Jorbert30 (talk) 16:33, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

The COI should stay. Your account and two single-purpose IP addresses 84.92.55.233 and 130.88.238.61 have made the great majority of edits to this article (and also to the related Jacob Cartwright and Nick Jordan article.) You have declared COI for this one. IP 84.92.55.233 and 194.74.185.34 each deleted the COI tag (reverted). Have you also been editing as these three IP addresses? If that is from forgetting to log in, Stop. If deliberate, and continues, then sockpuppetry and grounds for being indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 17:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

{{COI}} should never have been placed there; the template's documentation is unambiguous (highlighting in original):

Like the other neutrality-related tags, if you place this tag, you should promptly start a discussion on the article's talk page to explain what is non-neutral about the article. If you do not start a discussion, any editor will be justified in removing the tag without warning. Be careful not to violate the policy against WP:OUTING users who have not publicly self-disclosed their identities on the English Wikipedia.

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

What qualifications does one need to approve Articles for Creation?

Title. What do I have to do to approve and decline articles on Wikipedia:Articles for creation and Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects? Drdr150 (talk) 21:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Drdr150, I'll put this as gently as I can: if you cannot figure this out yourself, you are not yet qualified. -- asilvering (talk) 21:22, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

thank you. sorry, I am relatively new to the site as a whole. Drdr150 (talk) 21:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. Everyone starts somewhere. Glad to have you around! -- asilvering (talk) 21:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

You can see qualifications for reviewing Articles for Creation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants and for New Page Reviewer at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers. Tsarivan613 (talk) 22:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Section header singular vs. plural

If an article has only one person listed in a section called "notable person", shouldn't the header still read "notable people"? I think I am right, but I can't find a relevant part in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. I am looking at Arkabutla, Mississippi. Tsarivan613 (talk) 22:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tsarivan613: I don't know of any specific guideline for "Notable people" lists; but MOS:NOTES says about reference sections "the heading should be plural even if it lists only a single item", and it seems logical to extend that to other sorts of lists. Deor (talk) 22:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Are there plans to add more people? If the list only contains one entry, then maybe there is no need for a list. If sources mention the person in connection with the town, perhaps the person could be mentioned in prose somewhere, and possibly in the lead if the person contributes to the notability of the town. Perception312 (talk) 22:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Point taken. From my standpoint, more notable people could have existed even if Wikipedia hasn't recorded them, and in any case, the number could soon change. Better to have it as plural. Tsarivan613 (talk) 23:33, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

East Bay Regional Park District

I see some job descriptions listed at East Bay Regional Park District#Staff members. Should they be removed? 2607:F140:6000:816A:ED02:ED81:4C2:7E3E (talk) 23:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Absolutely. -- asilvering (talk) 00:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

How to add an item to a semi-locked page?

I would like to add to the Pornography page the following information but don’t know how? Sexart is an attempt to replace the outdated terminology of ‘porn’ and ‘pornography’ with a description that emphasises the artistic elements of the erotic arts. ButIsIt (talk) 23:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

You suggest the addition in a new thread at the foot of Talk:Pornography, of course providing a reliable source for what you say. -- Hoary (talk) 00:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

ButIsIt Please review comments I left on your page regarding the decline of Draft:Sexart. Unless you can provide sourcing that demonstrates the addition would be sufficiently notable, it isn't suitable for inclusion. ~Liance^talk 00:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

ButIsIt, your first attempt at a user page (since deleted) had a one-sentence description of "sexart", followed by "Www.SexartWorld.com". This address redirects to https://sexartworld.wordpress.com/about/, which has what it titles a "Business Pitch". This reads in part "How long before billions of people are surfing to www.SexartWorld.com as opposed to another outdated porn site?" There's something mildly amusing about the copywriter's suggestion that what's advertised is just "another outdated porn site"; but that matter aside, are you here in the hope that billions of people will surf there? -- Hoary (talk) 02:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Drafts and Redirects

Hi, I hope someone can help me. I am new to Wiki and have made a few errors as I've been learning. I submitted my first draft of an article but it was rejected because I didn't do my citations correct. I thought I fixed them and resubmitted but then haven't heard anything in months. I tried to edit the original article but then I just decided to start over. I entered {db-userreq} (but with double { }) at the beginning of the article to delete it (I found this in a wiki article on how to delete a draft).

I wrote a new article in my sandbox, made some improvements from the first article and redid all my citations, and then tried to move it to the mainspace and I'm not sure what happened. Even though I thought the original page was deleted, it said I already had an article with that name so I tried changing the name of my article. Then somehow I ended up with a bunch of redirects and now I think I have two articles with similar names.

The link below is the article I want to submit. I'm lost though...

DeAnn L. Prosia (Artist). CrissCollab (talk) 04:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I turned the duplicate at Draft:DeAnn L. Prosia into a redirect to the existing article at DeAnn L. Prosia (Artist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), which is waiting for a new page patroller to review it. If you leave the other redirects alone, a bot will come along and fix them as needed. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 05:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I have two other questions. When I go to my sandbox and click on the user page it redirects to the article - is that correct? I didn't think my sandbox was supposed to redirect to an article.

Also, I can't seem to remember how I submitted my last article. This article doesn't show as a draft - do I need to move it somewhere first to submit it for review? Thanks again for your help. CrissCollab (talk) 15:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Any page move you do will create a automatically create a redirect at the old title; this is to avoid breaking any wikilinks to the old title. For example, the "(Artist)" page now has a redirect, so any wikilinks to "(Artist)" still lead to the intended article.

In the case of your sandbox, breaking wikilinks is not really a concern. You can go to the redirect itself at User:CrissCollab/sandbox and replace it with something else ({{User sandbox}}, for example).

As for the article, you bypassed the submission process entirely. That's fine when the article creator has no conflict of interest with the article subject. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh, hmmm, not sure how I did that. Do I need to submit it somewhere or everything is fine? CrissCollab (talk) 18:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

If I just google "DeAnn L. Prosia wikipedia", the talk page comes up - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:DeAnn_L._Prosia

But if I go to wiki and then type "DeAnn L. Prosia" into the searchbar the regular page comes up...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeAnn_L._Prosia

I guess I'm just not sure if the page is live or if I still need to do something else. Thanks so much for all of your help and support. I'm a learn as I go kinda person and I've realized wiki doesn't really operate like that. CrissCollab (talk) 18:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

do I need to move it somewhere first in short: I would refrain from any more page moves unless someone else suggests it. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay thanks! I got confused and thought I needed to move it to the mainspace in order to submit it for review. That's how I ended up with all the redirects. CrissCollab (talk) 18:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

For that matter, I moved the article back to DeAnn L. Prosia because [the English-language] Wikipedia prefers the shorter title whenever posible. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 05:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much! CrissCollab (talk) 15:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment moved to restore threading

Actually, if I type the page name into wiki it says the page does not exist and to make a draft and submit it, but then the page also shows below: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=DeAnn+L+Prosia&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrissCollab (talk • contribs) 18:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Please excuse the moving of the above; I try to avoid this per the rules on editing other people's comments. However, the comment was interfering with the threading—affecting readability. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Sometimes clearing your browser's cache or page's server cache solves the problem. Usually problems do not persist beyond a day. As for appearing on search engine results, that will occur after ninety days or after a new page patroller marks the article as reviewed (details at WP:NOINDEX). Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Confusing redirects

I noticed "municipal home rule" redirects to Home rule in the United States but "home rule municipality", "home rule town", and "home rule city" redirect to Devolution. This is confusing but I'm not sure what to do about it. Disambiguation? Also, "Charter city" is synonymous with "home rule city", as far as I know, and I've proposed merging Charter city into Home rule in the U.S. Thoughts? Seananony (talk) 04:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to teahouse! I do not see how Disambiguation would help here. I would edit change the targets of the 3 redirects Home rule municipality home rule town home rule city to Home rule in the United States. The redirects were created in 2006, while Home rule in the United States was created in 2010. Regarding your merge, I see you started a discussion at Talk:Home_rule_in_the_United_States#Merger_proposal:_Charter_cities which is the right way to go. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Close discussions

Do I need to log in to close discussions? 2001:4456:C7F:EF00:9061:DDFC:B88A:4496 (talk) 09:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Can you give more information? Which discussion do you want to close? 331dot (talk) 09:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I'd also like to add that you may want to check out Closing discussions, a page about how and when to close discussions. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

George Russell composer

George Russell (composer) As George Russell's biographer, I want t0 edit his Wikipedia entry. Can anyone tell me how to do this? I am not techie, so please keep it simple. Dr. D. A. Heining (talk) 10:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Dr. D. A. Heining Hello and welcome. I edited your link to the article, the whole url is not needed. Please first declare your conflict of interest on your user page(User:Dr. D. A. Heining). If you write out a statement, that will suffice. Please see WP:COI for information on best practices, and also see edit requests for how you can propose changes to the article. You should do that on its talk page(Talk:George Russell (composer)). 331dot (talk) 10:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I've added information to your user talk page, which provides some more explanation. 331dot (talk) 10:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, being new to this I am not sure what my conflict of interest might be. The article contains errors, is incomplete and it seems strange that it includes no reference to the only official biography on Russell. Dr. D. A. Heining (talk) 11:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

You wrote that you are his biographer. I take that to mean that he designated you as such before he passed. That is clearly a conflict of interest. This does not mean that you cannot contribute, only that you do so as I described. 331dot (talk) 11:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Does that mean that I cannot amend the entry? That seems strange. If you look at Grove, for example, many of the musicians' entries are by their biographers. Likewise, the entry for Biography in Britannica was written by the doyen of biographers Paul Murray Kendall, author of the Art of Biography. Dr. D. A. Heining (talk) 11:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is different from other websites. Articles are typically written by independent editors unaffiliated with the subject. (example, White House staff shouldn't be editing the Joe Biden article directly) As I said, your conflict of interest does not mean that you cannot contribute. it only means you will need to propose your changes in the form of an edit request on the talk page(unless they are the most minor like fixing spelling). If you find doing so too challenging, please post on the article talk page anyway, proposing a single change you want to see, and I can mark it as an edit request for you. (it's better to propose a change at a time than a wholesale rewrite or many changes simultaneously) 331dot (talk) 11:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Templates

Are articles or entries based on pre-established templates or can they be contributed using p-lain English prose? TrevorGlynLocke (talk) 13:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

You can edit it with plain English as long as it is constructive to the article. TypoEater (talk) 13:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Help with page moves at Hard Rock Cafe

Hello! Matthew here with Seminole Hard Rock Support Services at Hard Rock International.

Over on the Hard Rock Cafe talk page, I've proposed splitting the Hard Rock Cafe page to Hard Rock International and Hard Rock hotels and casinos, in order to separate out text about the restaurant brand from the parent company and Hard Rock's properties. I've saved Draft:Hard Rock International and Draft:Hard Rock hotels and casinos to show what the pages would look like. Another editor has supported the split but suggested I seek help with the page and section moves. I've asked for assistance at a few pages and an editor recommended I come here.

Are any editors here at the Teahouse able to help? Thanks! MattHardRockInt (talk) 13:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Subject: Help with Writing an Article for Wikipedia

Message: Hello, I am Vinod Kumar Chaudhary, and I have achieved 20 Guinness World Records, including surpassing Sachin Tendulkar's 19 records. I have also been involved in social work and run an institute that helps students gain skills in computer training and typing. I want to create a Wikipedia article about my achievements, but I need help ensuring that the article meets Wikipedia's guidelines for neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sources.

Could someone please guide me on how to properly structure my article and ensure it complies with Wikipedia's core content policies? I would also appreciate advice on how to cite reliable sources for my accomplishments. WorldTypistMaster (talk) 13:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. My advice to you is to abandon this effort. Writing about yourself, while not absolutely forbidden, is highly discouraged, please read the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone says about themselves, or merely documenting their achievements. Wikipedia articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the subject, and summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability, like a notable person. You would need to set aside everything you know about yourself, all materials you put out(like interviews), and all mere documentation of your activities, and only summarize what other choose on their own to say about you. Most people have great difficulty doing that. The best indicator of notability is when an independent editor takes note of a topic in reliable sources and chooses to write about it.

Also be aware an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. There are good reasons to not want one. If you just want to tell the world about what you see as your achievements, you should use social media or a personal website. 331dot (talk) 13:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Uploading a Film Poster

Hi! I want to learn how to upload a film poster on an established wiki page. Can someone guide please? Albertan2014 (talk) 14:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Files for upload/Wizard. NotAGenious (talk) 15:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure but I think film posters are usually "fair use" images. 331dot (talk) 15:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Correct (non-free). NotAGenious (talk) 15:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Albertan2014 So see WP:NONFREE and ensure you follow all the guidance in doing the upload. You can look at how others have done their upload to see what details are needed: for example at file:Godse (film).jpg. A bot will reduce the pixel size automatically if you upload a high-resolution version. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, but I need to know where do I start? Is there any tutorial? Albertan2014 (talk) 15:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't think there is any tutorial for uploading film posters, Albertan2014, but I'll leave a message on your talk page in a while, explaining briefly how you can upload them. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much, my friend! Albertan2014 (talk) 14:46, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Source self-published by awarder of prize

Hello all, yesterday I appended additional info and a citation to the (previously unsourced) listing of the award Premio Cinema Ludus in the "Selected filmography section" of Emmanuelle Riva. I see that this generated a tag "citing a blog or free web host" on my edit in the revision history for the article. It's true that the source is self-published on Blogger by the entity that awarded the prize. I think that's acceptable in this instance, because they're not really making a claim about the person (Riva) but rather a claim about themselves, namely the inarguable assertion that they have awarded this prize to Riva. But I'd like to hear others' takes on this. Thanks in advance for your input. Monkeysoap (talk) 15:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Monkeysoap. I agree that a SPS is adequate for supporting that claim; but if you can't find any independent sources about that award, I wonder whether it is really encyclopaedic? Not all available information about a subject necessarily belongs in an article about it. ColinFine (talk) 16:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

If the award doesn’t have its own article showing notability it shouldn’t be mentioned. Doug Weller talk 19:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Source insufficiency related en:Draft:Thind

Hi I eventually found a topic which I think need an minimal to brought this topic in limelight due to lack of source certainty and impartiality to relay on a single source is not an solution so I would like some genuine intervention from other wikipedian for better assessment showcasing Thind clan origin 38.25.26.28 (talk) 16:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I'm having difficulty understanding exactly what you are asking, but I think you're saying that you think there should be an article about the Thind clan, but you can't find much in the way of sources?

If you can't find any (or very few) sources which are reliable, independent, and contain significant coverage (see 42) then almost by definition, the subject does not meet Wikipeda's criteria for notability, and no article is possible. If you think the subject does meet those criteria, it is up to you to find the sources: it is unlikely that anybody else is going to be willing to do this fundamental part of the work on the article. ColinFine (talk) 16:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I drafted a page in wikipedia sandbox and published

I drafted a page in wikipedia sandbox and published, how long will it take to approve i Gorinu (talk) 16:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Your draft at User:Gorinu/sandbox has not been submitted to Articles for Creation (AfC) for review. ("Publish" means save.) David notMD (talk) 16:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Abdulla Al Nuaimi, submitted and Declined. David notMD (talk) 19:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

First Article Support Needed

Hello - I'm in the process of writing my first submission and would value support/feedback before I publish.

Is there someone available to do that? Staceyrich (talk) 16:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Staceyrich, this is exactly what the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process is for! You can write a draft and submit for review, which will be reviewed by experienced editors. Qcne (talk) 17:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The answer you got to a query to an editor was to read Help:Your first article as a way to create and submit a draft for review. An experienced reviewer would either approve, decline, reject or speedy delete. As always, references are required (WP:42). Standard advice is to gain experience improving existing articles before attempting a new article. P.S. "Publish" means save. David notMD (talk) 17:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I replied all at once to the first comment...this is all new to me, appreciate the help! Just needing a bit more clarity as I want to make sure I follow the process correctly. Staceyrich (talk) 17:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you...and as all of this is brand new to me...I'll reply to both Qcne and David notMD...of the 2 recommendations provided, where is the best place to submit it for review prior to publishing. I do have references and have done my best to model the format after what I see available in other published articles, but would prefer to have feedback. Staceyrich (talk) 17:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Staceyrich both I and David's process is the same - you'll end up making a draft article that can be reviewed by editors (just slightly different ways of getting there). :) Qcne (talk) 17:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay, great! And how do I submit that? What format will it need to be in (PDF, copy/paste, etc.)? Staceyrich (talk) 17:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

We don't accept direct uploads. We have our own text editor (similar to the one you used to write this reply) which will allow you to build an article.

I would recommend reading the tutorial on how to use it at WP:VE. It's akin to a word processor with one very important difference: it does not save automatically, so please regularly back up your work (you can copy and paste into Microsoft Word). To save manually you have to press the big blue Publish button. This doesn't publish the article, but "publishes" (saves) your edits. Qcne (talk) 17:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I really appreciate the help and instructions. And once I've "published" it...will it only be viewable by people who can help edit it? I'd like to double and triple check that I'm doing this correctly :) Staceyrich (talk) 17:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Ah, no, so everything on Wikipedia is public (apart from your personal user account settings). This means the draft you create and edit will technically be available to be viewed by anyone in the world. However they won't appear on search engines, and members of the public don't really go around looking at random drafts (of which there are thousands).

Once you are happy with the draft you'll see another big blue button that will say Submit the draft for review! which will put it into the review pile for the reviewers to review. Qcne (talk) 17:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay, gotcha. So is it only available to edit after I've submitted it for review? And how do I make sure if it really needs some work, the editors who see it...don't flag it for being deleted immediately?? Staceyrich (talk) 18:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

We might be having different uses of the term "edit"- any page is available to be "edited", you will create and then edit a draft which you can Publish to save your edits/changes, and then Submit for review in order for it to go to the review pile. Sorry - terminology is quite confusing!

Take a look at our core content policies: as long as your draft meets those it won't get deleted. Qcne (talk) 18:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Staceyrich. Drafts are unlikely to be deleted quickly; it's expected for them to be messy.

To get the draft accepted as an article, and to keep the article from being deleted, check out Wikipedia:Notability. "Notability" is the criteria for keeping an article. As that page says, "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." If you have sources already, feel free to make a post here to get an idea of whether they do establish notability. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:56, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, this is really helpful and yes...the terminology is a lot to learn, appreciate you saying that because I thought it was just me! :) 2601:8C0:B01:8D50:1CE9:EA73:A501:E42A (talk) 11:07, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate your help on this, thank you! I do have sources, but I'm not sure I understand the difference between what I see in other articles where there will be internal links/sources to other Wikipedia articles and then...actual external sources. Does an article need both (I do have both linked in the draft I've created on my computer)? Is there a certain number of external sources that improve Notability? Thank you! Staceyrich (talk) 11:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

There are:

- Wikilinks, which are links to existing articles on Wikipedia, in the body of the text.

- References which are links to the sources and the way readers verify all the information in an article.

- External Links which are a short number of relevant links to websites that may appear at the bottom of an article.

Notability is shown through the reference links to your sources: the rule of thumb is that we're looking for at least three reliable sources that are independent of the topic and provide in-depth significant coverage.

Your article should actually be paraphrased from the sources you find: don't write your article backwards: find the sources first, then write your article based on what those sources say.

Ideally every statement you make will have an in-line citation to the relevant reference. The tutorial WP:INTREFVE shows how to make these using the visual editor. Qcne (talk) 11:38, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Once submitted, it can be reviewed in days, weeks or sadly, months, as there is a backlog of drafts and the system is not a queue. You can continue to work on it while waiting, and if Declined, improve and submit again (and again). Each reviewer will give reasons for the declined. David notMD (talk) 19:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, this is helpful and really insightful. I've used Wikipedia as a reader for years, but had no idea how extensive the process to participate was. I'm amazed really. But it sounds like when reasons for something being declined are given...if that's the case...I'll have time to make any necessary changes and possibly course correct prior to it being deleted? Staceyrich (talk) 11:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

That's correct- when a draft is declined you'll be given feedback and be able to re-submit it once you've addressed the issues. Drafts can also be rejected which means no re-submission is usually possible. Drafts are automatically marked for deletion after six months of no activity, but you'll get a warning posted on your talk page. Drafts will otherwise only be deleted if they very obviously contravene the purpose of Wikipedia by being spam, vandalism, etc. Qcne (talk) 11:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Gotcha, okay...so I have a draft written (when I put all the links and references and wikilinks) in a Google doc...can I copy and paste that into the Wikipedia platform or do I need to re-type everything within this system? Staceyrich (talk) 16:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

And is there a way for me to let you know where it's at as I would be very grateful to have it looked at by someone who understands I make no claims to know that I'm doing this right, but very teachable and willing to modify whatever needs to be changed :) Staceyrich (talk) 16:13, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

You can copy and paste from Google Docs into the Visual Editor, but it'll likely break some of the formatting and you'll have to go through and re-apply any formatting. You'll also have to do the referencing from scratch in the Visual Editor using the referencing tool.

More than happy for you to leave me a message on my User Talk Page (click the talk link in my signature below then click the Click here to leave me a new message button at the top ) and I can have a pre-look at a draft before you submit for review. I'm an experienced reviewer myself so will be able to give you an indication on if it's notable or not. Qcne (talk) 17:07, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I really appreciate that! Okay...so step 1 would be to input everything into the Visual Editor...? And then before I click what exactly...how do I send it to you to review pre-submitting for review? Staceyrich (talk) 18:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Staceyrich Step 1: Go to the Wikipedia:Article wizard and go through the various steps. The last question will ask you to title the name of your new Draft, and it will then create it and load the Visual Editor for you to start inputting text.

Step 2: Click the blue Publish Page... button to create the draft and make it live (this doesn't publish your draft to the review pile).

Step 3: You draft is now live in our draftspace, and you can edit it once more by clicking the Edit button in the top toolbar. To save these edits click the blue Publish changes.... It's a good idea to Publish changes regularly to "save" the content.

Step 4: Once you're ready to have it reviewed, click the blue Submit the draft for review! button

Hope that helps! Qcne (talk) 19:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

THANK YOU! This step by step is incredibly helpful! Staceyrich (talk) 16:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

QUAD A - info page

Hi, I am trying to create a wikipedia page for QUAD A , a medical accreditation company. There are several medical accreidation companies on wikipedia, so im unsure why QUAD A is being flagged Janacgodshall (talk) 16:58, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Janacgodshall. You wrote a draft which was overly promotional. This is prohibited on Wikipedia. Please carefully read the following policies:

- Wikipedia:Neutral point of view

- Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) Qcne (talk) 17:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

really - i didnt promote it at all - it was information based saying the programs it had - im not sure how anyone even had time to read or flag it because it happened within miliseconds of submission Janacgodshall (talk) 17:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

That's promotion. Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about something and its offerings. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Not every company merits an article, even within the same field. 331dot (talk) 17:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

We have articles as part of the encyclopedia, not pages. That other articles exist has no bearing on whether an article about this company exists. Each article or draft is judged on its own merits. That one article exists does not mean in and of itself that other articles must exist- not every member of a field gets an article just because one does, it depends on the criteria, like a notable company.

If you work for this company, that must be disclosed, see WP:PAID as well as WP:COI. 331dot (talk) 17:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

well, iw ould like to try again as it is strictly informative and information on what QUAD A is. Janacgodshall (talk) 17:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's promotion. Wikipedia is not a place for businesses to provide information about themselves. We want to know what others say about the business, not what it says about itself. 331dot (talk) 17:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

The Joint Commission and AAAHC have Wikipedia pages. They are identical companies to QUAD A. This is very unfair that both of these can have wiki pages but we cannot.

The Joint Commission: Wikipedia page

AAAHC (Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care): Wikipedia page Janacgodshall (talk) 17:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I haven't examined those articles to know if they meet the criteria to merit an article. It could very well be that they don't, but again, each article is judged on its own merits, not based on the presence of other articles. If you wish, you can initiate a deletion discussion if you truly feel those articles should not exist, or just mark them for attention from other editors- but you will first need to declare your relationship with QUAD A. If you work for them, the Terms of Use require disclosure. 331dot (talk) 17:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Those organizations do not "have pages" that they own and control. Wikipedia has articles about those organizations. Our articles are typically written by independent editors. 331dot (talk) 17:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

well, how can QUAD A have pages that we do not control. I would be happy to just have articles about our organization. How can we proceed? Janacgodshall (talk) 17:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

You need to make the paid editing disclosure, this is a Terms of Use requirement. I will provide instructions on your user talk page.

Your organization trying to force the issue of creating an article is not likely to be successful. The best thing you can do is go on about the work of your business, and once enough independent reliable sources choose on their own- and not based on materials from your organization like interviews- to write about it, eventually independent editors will take note of that coverage and choose to write about your business.

Be advised that an article about your business is not necessarily a good thing. There are good reasons to not want one. Any information about your business, good or bad, can be in an article about it as long as it appears in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. Disgruntled customers could vandalize the article which others could see before it is removed. Think carefully about this. 331dot (talk) 18:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

In sum, a company (or a person) does not "own" the article. Once it exists anyone can edit as long as content is verified by references. References need to be independent, and ABOUT the company. Writing what the company wants to publish about itself is useless. David notMD (talk) 19:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Janacgodshall: If you can write a whole page of more than 450 words of such blatant marketing-speak as "committed to ensuring high-quality services", "continues to drive excellence in the industry", "high-quality, cost-effective", "adherence to high medical guidelines and commitment to patient protection", and so on and so on and so on... and really honestly not think that it's promotional then you will probably never be able to edit in the neutral way required for Wikipedia. Also if you really honestly can't see the difference between that kind of thing and the way that the articles Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care and Joint Commission are written, then ... well, words fail me. JBW (talk) 20:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Where is a good place to arbitrate a disagreement?

Another editor and I disagree about the usefulness of some material I added to an article. Is there a place I could get input from a third party if we can't reach an agreement ourselves? Moonreach (talk) 18:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, see dispute resolution channels. 331dot (talk) 18:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Perfect, thank you. Moonreach (talk) 18:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Moonreach, if this has to do with your recent edit to Saturn in fiction, then your first step should be to explain your edit at Talk:Saturn in fiction, and ping the editor who reverted you. The Bold, revert, discuss process is highly recommended. That particular article has achieved Good article status, and interested editors want to maintain its status. Cullen328 (talk) 18:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

It is, thank you. I left a message on the other editor's talk page, but if the conversation continues I'll try to move it to the talk page. Moonreach (talk) 19:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Moonreach, I suggest that you take it to the talk page now. That is the best practice and encourages participation by other editors. Cullen328 (talk) 23:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

wikiconsultancyinc.com

This firm has contacted me and for a fee offered to write a page. Has anyone else used them? Maggie Humm (talk) 19:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Maggie Humm Not to disparage them at all before anyone answers this, but I wouldn't touch anyone coming to you saying they can write a page for a fee with a 10 foot pole. Or any pole, for that matter. Please see WP:SCAM.

People can't guarantee that the page will even pass the notability criteria or the articles for creation process, so trying to extract a fee for writing a page just sounds... Fishy, in the simplest terms. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 19:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

The person who writes an article for pay is required to state that they are paid, and there is no guarentee that an article would not be soon deleted if it does not meet Wikipedia standards. Volunteers in New Pages Patrol try to look at all new articles, and have the option of converting to draft state or even Speedy deletion. David notMD (talk) 19:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

An editor employed by Wiki Consultancy to create or merely work on an article XYZ is required to state conspicuously that they've been paid by Wiki Consultancy (or some minor spelling variation thereof) to do this. But when I search for "wikiconsultancy", "wiki consultancy" or "wikiconsultancyinc", all I find is Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/BrookeCook/Archive#09_January_2024_2. There are various imaginable explanations for this: (i) the declaration was made, but on a page that was subsequently deleted; (ii) the declaration was made (on a page that still exists) but subsequently deleted; (iii) the declaration wasn't made (a breach of Wikipedia's terms of service); (iv) "Wiki Consultancy" (or however you care to spell it) hasn't actually done any work here. Maggie Humm, consider asking them where you can see evidence of their good work. (I expect that you'll get either no response or an entirely vapid response.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Any time you get a cold contact to write a Wikipedia article for you, it's a scam. If you want to move forward with it, first demand to know the identity of the account that will write the article and where the account discloses its paid editing status. If they won't answer, or give some excuse not to answer, or deflect the question, the run away.

This might get added to Wikipedia:List of paid editing companies. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

US Census Records

Are US census records considered reliable, published sources? DonL tx (talk) 19:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Depends on the context. In my experience, I see US census records used as primary sources and thus subject to the caveats and considerations on their use. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 22:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, DonL tx. The reliability of national census results is never 100%, and there is always a small margin of error. The 2020 census was especially challenging because it took place in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic which led to increased distrust of government. Here is a link to a US Census description of its statistical accuracy. Cullen328 (talk) 23:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I would like to use specific individual lines in the US Censes for 1900, 1910, 1920, 1930, 1940 and 1950 to provide documentation of a specific location in a specific year. DonL tx (talk) 00:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@DonL tx There is a specific template {{US Census population}} that is widely used (see "what links here" on the template page) if that's the use you had in mind. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Request help with edit/approval for Women Scientist bio Judith J. Warren

I created a bio article for Judith J. Warren, Nursing Infomatics pioneer Draft:Judith J. Warren (Nursing Informatics Specialist), but I am struggling to get help with editing and approval. I have gone to the women in science project, but those talk pages haven’t had anything on them since 2018 and I am wondering if I am looking in the wrong places to post, but I have been pretty thorough in looking and I just keep coming up short. This is my second article and I would like to publish more especially for women scientists. I want to know my mistakes with the article and of course I do want it approved, but I am trying to learn from my mistakes.

Another question I have - can I publish articles without needing it to be approved? I have 31 edits via my account? If so, is there a different type of creation process? Meaning am I using the wrong type of sandbox? Logger67 (talk) 21:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Logger67, have you checked the notability guidelines for academics and the other related guidelines–NPOV, verifiability, etc? There is a backlog of around 1600 drafts, please have patience and enjoy the place. A reviewer will soon review the draft and decide further. Meanwhile you can improve your submission and ask for the help from WP:WOMEN. --Ratekreel (talk) 21:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

New accounts cannot directly create articles; even if you can, it's inadvisable until you get some experience in having drafts accepted. 331dot (talk) 21:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Logger66. I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Citation overkill because it looks to me like your draft suffers from that problem, which can make Articles for creation reviewers suspicious. I see one assertion in your draft followed by nine references. Why? That implies that the assertion is highly controversial. Is it? You made a simple statement of fact In 2003, Warren was elected as a Fellow in the American College of Medical Informatics which is followed by three references. One reference should be sufficient unless there is some kind of doubt about the truth of this statement. Please keep in mind that the quality of the references is vastly more important than their quantity. Six excellent references are far better than 30 mediocre references. Cullen328 (talk) 23:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

For help with writing biographies of women, take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. Jesswade88 is a physicist and an editor acclaimed for creating thousands of biographies of women scientists. Maybe she will have a comment. Cullen328 (talk) 00:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

There's quite a bit of editorializing. Example, "She holds the distinction of being [...]", meaning "She was [...]". And yes, full agreement with Cullen328 (above) on the matter of multiple references. -- Hoary (talk) 01:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I was struck by

Her research on the SNOMED CT Nursing Problem List Subset, co-authored with Susan A. Matney, Jonathan L. Evans, Tae Youn Kim, Amy Coenen, and Vivian A. Auld, has significantly advanced nursing informatics.

It's rare to come across a claim that research X has significantly advanced field Y; but of course it can happen, and this claim comes with four references. I looked at them.

One source (nim.nih.gov) is a description of "Nursing Problem List Subset of SNOMED CT". Near the end of this description, we read:

We welcome any questions, comments or suggestions that would improve the quality, accuracy, and usability of the subset. Please send feedback to Dr. Judy Warren and Dr. Susan Matey.

[from which I have removed email addresses]. So it seems to have been cowritten by Warren and even if not is tied to her. Two more references are to papers cowritten by Warren. The fourth reference is to a page about Warren from the institution of which she is Professor Emerita.

So although the claim that "Her research [...] has significantly advanced nursing informatics" comes with four references, not one of them is to a disinterested source for the claim. -- Hoary (talk) 03:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Refs 31-41 are to journal articles for which she is one of many authors, so those do not verify the text those follow. David notMD (talk) 03:36, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

More than eleven, David notMD. The article Judith J. Warren currently has 49 references (though it's obvious that several are repeated). At a quick count, 25 of these references are described as having Warren as a coauthor. (The count may be faulty, but I'm pretty sure that there are over 20.) Where these are used as references, they're feebly adequate at best. Where they're being used for other purposes (e.g. to provide examples of generalizations), they should instead be presented as notes (probably using Template:Efn or one of its minor variants, such as Template:Efn-lr.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Triple: What to ask on the Help Desk, am I a newcomer by now, and what do do for a citation.

I was going to post this on the Help Desk, but I thought this would be a safe option, but then I had thoughts on if I was considered not a newcomer yet, and my original question was on how to add citations. Pardon me if that sentence seems like a run-on. 3.14 (talk) 21:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

3.14, try Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1 et seq. -- Hoary (talk) 22:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I may be biased, but Teahouse Hosts are usually (not always) nicer than Help responders. Just don't ask the same question at both. David notMD (talk) 03:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@David notMD: I read an archived discussion where people floated the idea of closing Help:Desk, to have one place to ask questions. Several editors said they did not like that people were required to be courteous at WP:TEA. The explanation they offered was that people were brusque or downright hostile on other talk pages, so it gave them an inconsistent user experience.

@3.14159265459AAAs: I don't think anyone should ever get turned away from this page for being too experienced. It's a benefit to the project to have a starting place to ask questions. Are you doing citations in the visual editor or the source editor? Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:38, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I believe that Teahouse Host self-select to be patient, even when over and over again, a new editor asks how to create an article about themself, their business, etc. Howeve, showing up with an attitude can elicit a reply that is not hindered be an excess of tact. David notMD (talk) 11:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I use the visual editor, because I do not understand coding. 3.14 (talk) 15:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@3.14159265459AAAs: Yeah, you're not alone there. Check out Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/2. It's linked from the page Hoary suggested. It's pretty straightforward to add automatic citations or use one of the 4 common templates ({{cite web}}, {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}, and {{cite news}}). If you make automatic citations be sure to check them because the software can make errors.

To use other templates (like {{cite AV media}} or {{cite patent}}): go to "Cite → Manual → Basic and either type {{ or select +v → Template. That'll bring up a search box to type in the name of the template you need, and you can just fill it out like a form. Some people also hand write their citations instead of using templates (WP:CITEVAR). Feel free to ask any follow up questions, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 15:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Thumbnail image that appears when searching an article

How does one get the thumbnail image to appear when typing in a search? CrissCollab (talk) 00:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@CrissCollab: See mw:Extension:PageImages#Image choice. If you are thinking of DeAnn L. Prosia then note the image has to be in the lead section, meaning before the first section heading. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@CrissCollab: Regarding the Prosia article, you might also consider using Template:Infobox artist. It's pretty common in articles on artists. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Me at the zoo to FA

Hello, Wikipedia editors. My current goal is to get this article to featured article status before April 2025. However, a couple of editors have brought two major issues: the article's confusing structure and its overuse of quotes. I've went ahead and (kind of) took care of the first issue, though I could use a bit more advice on how to cut down quotes. Any other constructive feedback is appreciated. Thanks, TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 02:50, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

STATUS: Me at the zoo is GA and from the history, you proposed it for FA two days ago, got comments, and decided to withdraw the nomination for now. You did take it through two cycles of peer review before nominated for FA, so definitely on the right track. David notMD (talk) 03:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

how to thumbnail image to appear when typing in a search?

First question in my mind, how to thumbnail image to appear when typing in a search? Fewword (talk) 04:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Fewword, are you asking which image becomes the thumbnail? That would be the first freely licensed image in the lead. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank You Fewword (talk) 05:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Fewword: There are more detailed rules at mw:Extension:PageImages#Image choice but it usually just gives the first freely licensed image in the lead (excluding small icons). PrimeHunter (talk) 12:07, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Layout differences in Wikipedia language editions

I noticed that there are huge differences how the content is presented in e.g. the English, French, and German Wikipedia. How come? Dos the admin team leave a lot of freedom to their respective teams editing certain language editions? Evelox (talk) 07:20, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Evelox This was answered on the live chat by @Jmcgnh, but you may have missed their response. Here it is for reference:

Each language Wikipedia is an independent project and relatively few editors work on more than one project. Editing decisions are made by volunteer editors; admins have nothing at all to do with determining who edits what. Qcne (talk) 08:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I just saw the answer. Understood. Just looking at the translation tool now. Evelox (talk) 09:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

want to donate, but not want to give PAN details

hi

as per subject I want to donate, but I do not want to give PAN details. Pls exclude PAN details, thanks 180.94.35.43 (talk) 08:16, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what "PAN" means; but there are many ways to donate, including mailing a paper check. Click "other ways to give" at the bottom of the donation page https://donate.wikimedia.org/ 331dot (talk) 08:18, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

"Note that we currently cannot accept checks from France, India, Italy, or Spain" 180.94.35.43 (talk) 08:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

You didn't say where you were from. Perhaps you can communicate with the Foundation to explore ways you might be able to donate, email donate@wikimedia.org to contact them. Also know that the Foundation's finances are stable; it's not vital that you donate. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

okay 180.94.35.43 (talk) 08:34, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

PAN means "permanent account number", used by the Ministry of Finance in India. Apparently it's analogous to the US social security number. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

my edits keeps on being rejected and im really trying hard :(

Hi everyone,

I’ve been working really hard to create a page on Wikipedia: Draft:Hikmat Abou Zaid, but I keep facing rejection due to the sources I’ve provided. I’ve gathered 18 sources that I spent a lot of time researching and verifying, but it seems like they still don’t meet the requirements.

I would really appreciate any help or guidance on how to improve my draft and ensure my sources are acceptable. If anyone could take a look or offer some advice, that would be amazing!

Thank you in advance for your time and support! Mradmrad1 (talk) 12:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC) Hello Mradmrad1 Your sources are very weak, www.antoineonline.com is merely a book store mentioning your references, you need a notable sources that detailed the author you are writing about, also glco.org is not accessible and one other only summarises the author. Work more on your references. Tesleemah (talk) 04:05, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Mradmrad1 Strictly speaking, your draft was not rejected (which would mean you would have to stop work on it) but repeatedly declined, meaning that it could possibly be improved. As I don't speak Arabic, I can't comment on all your sources but I can immediately see that the draft does not meet the mandatory requirements of a biography of a living person. Please read that policy carefully. So, for example, you say that Zeid has a law degree and a Masters degree but you provide no citation to back up these facts. Any draft has to show that the subject is wikinotable in the way that Wikipedia defines notability. So, for example, your citation to omt.com is useless in that respect as it is not independent of him. Do you have any sources at all that meet all of the golden rules? If so, read the essay on how to use them and them only to show notability. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:15, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Mradmrad1, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid your experience is a common one for new editors who attempt the difficult task of creating a new article before they have spend significant time learning about Wikipedia's policies and procedures. (Would you enter a major competition when you only took up a sport for the first time last week?)

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

The stages of successfully writing an article can be simply stated:

1. Find several places where people wholly unconnected with the subject of the article have chosen to write at some length about the subject, and been published in reliable places. If you can't find these, go and do something else, because you will not be able to write an acceptable article.

2. Forget everything you know about the subject, and write a neutrally-worded summary of what those sources say.

Please see WP:YFA for more detail. ColinFine (talk) 13:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

You need to establish why Zaid is notable. According to the draft: He's a board member of "OMT SAL", whose own web site says it provides "financial solutions", without explaining what they solve or what services it offers. He was the chairman of the Lebanese office of Opel. He founded a non-notable chamber of commerce to foster trade between two small non-neighbouring countries. He's written two books, but there's no evidence anyone has read either of them. Maproom (talk) 14:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

GA/L

Hello mates, I have seen Featured Lists on WP:SWIFT and WP:EILISH. However, I have never seen a "Good List" so my question is, can a list (like discography or videography) ever become GA? Can it be nominated for GA? dxneo (talk) 16:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Dxneo There is, in fact, no such thing as a Good List. I'm absolutely certain there's something out there showing the side by side progression of lists and articles but I can't for the life of me find it. I don't believe they can be nominated for GA status. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you CommissarDoggo. Thought it was possible, what a pain. dxneo (talk) 16:18, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Dxneo, the criteria for FL are more equivalent to GA than they are to FA, so if you find FA overwhelming that doesn't mean you won't be able to put together a list that meets the FL criteria. -- asilvering (talk) 20:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Asilvering, thought I had no chance. I will notify you on how it goes on your talk. Again, thank you so much. dxneo (talk) 22:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I think for now, I'll go for PR first. dxneo (talk) 00:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Found it: WP:MHA#SCALE CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:18, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Adding images to an article

Hello. I recently deleted the images I had in my article because I wasn't sure if I had uploaded them correctly. I originally uploaded them to wikimedia commons a few months back and guess I had selected "own work". I am not the artist nor did I take the pictures, but I did get permission to use the images. I did not want my error to affect my article so I deleted the images. I then tried to upload directly to wikipedia, but I'm not sure if that is correct either. Would the actual artist or organization which gave permission for the images have to upload the images themselves? I feel like articles about artists really need a few images. Thanks for your help! CrissCollab (talk) 16:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

So I just saw my article had been reviewed and I guess everything was okay with the images - do you think I can just add them back? CrissCollab (talk) 16:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, CrissCollab. There are two ways for images to be used in English Wikipedia.

The preferred way is to use free images, which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. This means either images which are in the public domain (either by explicit statement of the copyright holder, or by reason of their age), or images which the copyright holder has specifically released under a copyleft licence such as CC-BY-SA, which allows anybody to reuse or alter the image for any purpose, requiring only that they attribute the source. This licensing by the copyright holder is required, and "permission" of any other sort, from anybody, is irrelevant.

The second way is that English Wikipedia (unlike some other language versions) allows non-free images to be used in certain restricted ways, as specified in NFCC. Permission from anybody is irrelevant.

So, if your artist is willing to license their work under such a license, then it can be uploaded to Commons. There are three ways they can do this: they can make a public declaration (eg on their website) that it is so licensed; or they can upload the image to Commons themselves, declaring it as their own work, and releasing it; or they can email the WMF as detailed at donating copyright materials. But you cannot do it (though you could be the one to upload it).

If they are not so willing, it is possible that a representative work of the artist might be justified as a non-free image - but not more than one.

See Help:Upload for more. ColinFine (talk) 17:04, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your speedy response! I just want to make sure i'm abiding by the proper rules. I will look into these options. CrissCollab (talk) 17:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@CrissCollab Just to say that we don't allow WP:NONFREE images for living people, so Colin's option 2 is not possible. If you have a good relationship with the individuals and already have permission from them to upload to Commons, you can do that on their behalf and then ask that they email the volunteers at Commons to confirm you have been authorised to do the uploads on their behalf. This is explained at WP:IOWN. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh, right. Without looking at the article, I assumed this was about pictures of works by an artist. ColinFine (talk) 21:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct, they are artwork images by an artist. So if the artist themselves have not licenced their images under either wiki commons or creative commons, does that basically mean they cannot be used in my wiki article?

Should I be deleting the images I added to wikicommons then? Colin above mentioned that it does not matter if I had "permission". CrissCollab (talk) 21:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@CrissCollab Apologies, I misunderstood the type of picture you had uploaded. The principles are the same. For File:Prosia DeAnn L Oasis LineEtching 12x12 in 2022.jpg and any others you uploaded, you need to get the artist to email the Commons volunteers from an email address that is obviously personal to them, giving the filenames and your username, saying that they have indeed authorised you to license them for Commons. See WP:IOWN. As we don't allow nonfree images of artwork anywhere except in an article specifically about that artwork, you should not use the files in the meantime. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:14, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I have deleted the images for now. I can see if I can get ahold of the artist directly for this, otherwise I guess I will just have to leave off images. Appreciate your help so much! As I'm sure you can tell I'm new to wiki and learning as I go :) CrissCollab (talk) 17:18, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@CrissCollab You deleted the files from the article DeAnn L. Prosia but I'm afraid that is not enough. You must delete them from their storage location on the Wikipedia servers as well, as they are copyright infringements. Include this one you uploaded to en:Wikipedia. Deletion is achieved by placing the template {{Db-g7}} on each file's page. Alternatively, get the artist to approve retention, as I mentioned above. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:22, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay got it! I will delete the file. I'm in touch with her gallery to get in touch with the artist directly so hope to have that all cleared up soon. Thank you for your continued help and support! CrissCollab (talk) 14:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I just added the template you gave me - I hope I did it correctly. This message comes up now:

This file may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as a page where the author of the only substantial content has requested deletion or blanked the page in good faith. See CSD G7.

If this file does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, please remove this notice.

This page was last edited by CrissCollab (contribs | logs) at 14:13, 13 September 2024 (UTC) (0 seconds ago)

Hey guys! I have a question about references.

I was wondering how to use General References on an article. I was informed that this place will probably have some answers. So how would i use a general reference if i wanted to reference something but there was no relevant place to put an actual inline citation? thanks! Elliott (talk) 17:18, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

You can create a "Bibliography" or "General references" section uner the "References" section. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:07, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Don't call the "Bibliography" -- that's for books the subject has written. Call it "Sources" if you have used the source in writing the article. Call it "Further reading" if you have not actually needed/used the resource when you wrote the article. Softlavender (talk) 05:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

okay, thanks! Elliott (talk) 12:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

As a matter of pedantry, the heading we use for references that are cited in the article is "References". —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:24, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, Im saying if i cant figure out where to put an inline citation, where do i put it? The question has been solved already though. Thanks anyway man! Elliott (talk) 15:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

How to reduce discord between Wikipedians?

There is an article in which one user has been doing some edits that were (IMO) problematic. I posted a (kind and civil, I hope) comment on that user's talk page regarding one of the edits. However another user has responded (to the first user, not to me) with invective, which seems to me to be counter-productive.

Is there anything useful I can contribute to this situation, other than seeing how it plays out?

Thank you for any insight or suggestions you might provide. Trackerwannabe (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

The relevant policy is Wikipedia:Civility and the relevant guideline is Wikipedia:Assume good faith. Repeated violations of the civility policy is a blockable offense. Drop a warning on the offender's talk page. The appropriate first-warning template would be {{uw-bes1}}, escalating from there, but there is no requirement to start with level 1 for an egregious offense. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:58, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I just noticed that the 'victim' has told off his fellow Muslim editor quite effectively and with civility. I see no need for further action except perhaps to issue a warning to the abusive editor, if you feel so inclined. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Digging a little deeper, I notice that the User in question has a history of responding with invective to polite admonishments on his own Talk page. I have not examined his other contributions in detail; someone else might care to, and to take further action if it seems warranted. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.83.137 (talk) 18:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

If the problem persists, then reporting the behavior at WP:CESSPIT may be in order. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Kevin Hays jazz pianist

The “Sangha Quartet” was co-lead by Seamus Blake and Kevin Hays, and should be listed under the section which features Kevin Hays as a co-leader. In fact, the liner notes for the CD lists Seamus and Kevin as co-producers as well. Thank you for your consideration of this proposed amendment. Dan Blake Danblake41 (talk) 19:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Danblake41. The article Kevin Hays is not protected. Feel free to edit it. Cullen328 (talk) 19:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

If you are not comfortable making the change yourself, the place you should propose it is at Talk:Kevin Hays. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Question about notability and a new subject

Hello,

I'm considering creating a new article (having made a number of new articles on living individuals and other subjects in the past) on a living individual named Carroll Stevens. I know this person, but have no family, financial, or organizational relationship with him. Before doing so, I wanted feedback on whether this individual, prima facie, merits inclusion in Wikipedia per significance and notability.

==> If this is the wrong place to post this type of question, I would greatly welcome feedback on where the right place to post a question like this! :)

Here's a summary of this person's bona fides:

• Associate Dean for Development at Yale Law School, and leadership or governance positions at five other colleges and universities.
• Senior Fellow and strategic advisor to the Stupski Foundation, created by the emeritus COO and Vice Chairman of the Charles Schwab company, where he provided quality-assurance of the Foundation’s interventions in 23 urban school districts.
• Co-founder of Achievement First, one of the premier charter school networks in the country.
• Senior Vice President at Mott MacDonald, where he guided their education reform work in North America
• Senior executive at Cambridge Education, a leading provider of education services in the United States with projects in nearly 600 districts that improve learning outcomes by highlighting programs that build capacity for teachers and education leaders. Cambridge Education was conceived and born at Cambridge University.
• President of the Loan Repayment Assistance Programs (LRAP) Foundation, a leading organization devoted to promoting accessibility and success in higher education.
• Trustee at the Lillian Goldman Charitable Trust.

Source: https://www.cmc.edu/news/carroll-stevens-named-cmc-vice-president-of-advancement

I have a few more sources mentioning Stevens, but no dedicated articles in major media. He seems like a person with significant recognition in terms of his credentials and roles. Is that enough?

• On the last page of this Yale PDF: https://ylr.law.yale.edu/pdfs/v51-2/NiB51-2.pdf
• Interim role announcement on University of Oxford's website: https://www.rpc.ox.ac.uk/honorary-fellow-to-serve-as-interim-president-of-rhodes-college/
• Quote from Stevens on subject matter from Taipei Times: https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2004/05/04/2003154058
• Video of Stevens presenting from University of Kentucky: https://heyburncollections.org/items/show/429
• University of Kentucky list of "visiting committee" members: https://law.uky.edu/alumni-giving/uk-j-david-rosenberg-college-law-visiting-committee

Does this kind of media suggest notability? If so, I can work more on a full article, but I don't want to invest time in creating an article from this, if the material itself is obviously unacceptable. Thanks for any input! Stevemidgley (talk) 20:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Stevemidgley, for someone like this you're looking at WP:NPROF. Most of the links you've given aren't useful here (no one really cares, for notability purposes, if someone has made such-and-such a presentation somewhere), but an associate dean at Yale sounds like someone pretty likely to be notable. Unfortunately in this case it looks like he may have that job because he's good at fundraising, which isn't the same thing as being a notable professor. Have a look at the guidelines at WP:NPROF and see what you think. -- asilvering (talk) 20:38, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Question about page for speedy deletion

Hi, recently i submit article for review, its tagged now for speedy deletion. Please let me know why, Let me know in detail please how i can improve things in it to be able to get published Thank you Danishseo421 (talk) 21:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

It was deleted as blatant promotion. If you were attempting to write about yourself, that is inadvisable, see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 21:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Expanding a stub

I'd like to make an article on this musicologist. d:Q55943190 Can I use Afc or is the process different? Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 22:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

You can wither submit a draft through AfC or just create the article directly, provided you are confident the subject meets our notability guidelines. Cremastra (talk) 23:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

You can use WP:AFC to create an article. Make sure to read WP:Your First Article and be mindful of WP:NBLP. ✶Quxyz✶ 23:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

A stub is an article already created that needs to be improved. What you are trying to do is create a new article. Kindly follow the guideline stated above by @Quxyz. Best of luck! Tesleemah (talk) 03:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

"Head of state" and "head of government" as short description

What should I propose of WP:SDNOTDEF for the "head of state" and "head of government" for titles of European monarchs, unlike presidents, prime ministers, or monarchs have titles in short description. For example, WP:SDNOTDEF does not apply to some titles, like President of the United States, Prime Minister of Canada and Emperor of Japan? Ferretville (talk) 22:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

hen I say "the point of a short description is to serve as a navigational aid", do you feel you know what that means? Remsense ‥ 论 23:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

"Navigational aid" does not exist at Wikipedia:Short description. Ferretville (talk) 23:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Do you know what "navigational aid" means? Remsense ‥ 论 23:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

It's part of the scope, "head of government" meaning a navigational aid for titles of any prime minister. @GhostInTheMachine: Any questions? Ferretville (talk) 23:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I wish I didn't have to be insistent about this, but given your responses so far it seems almost certain to me that your English comprehension is very poor, to the extent where I think you should really refrain from making sensitive edits to an English-language encyclopedia. Remsense ‥ 论 00:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Have I made sufficiently clear that "navigational aid" means "a tool to aid readers trying to navigate the site"? If a reader comes across the article title "Monarchy of Monaco" in a search or after visiting the article on mobile, the scope of that article is not going to be unclear to them. It is not likely that they will confuse what that article is about with any other article. As such, they do not need anything more to help them navigate to the article they want. So, a short description is not required. Does that make sense?Remsense ‥ 论 01:37, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

OP blocked as sock of user:SwissArmyGuy Meters (talk) 08:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I really have to start trusting my instincts that say "this person knows what they're doing" more. Remsense ‥ 论 08:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

What can I do if my Draft Review keep declining

Hello,

I have this Article I've been working on for a couple of weeks now [3] I'm trying really hard to see it approved. I tried as much as I could to show that the source provided nobility of the living person.

Please I'm Optimistic and I really want to see the Article approved, I need help! Denovoj (talk) 22:39, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello Denovoj, to avoid rejection, you must address the issues raised by the reviewer(s). Since this is a biography of a living person, you should probably see WP:NBIO. Tip: The opening statement must be about why the subject is notable/famous, name dropping people they have worked with doesn't help. Please do reach out (on my talk) for further assistance. dxneo (talk) 00:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Denovoj, your first sentence says that he is "award winning" followed by heavy duty name dropping. Consider Bob Dylan, who has won awards including the Presidential Medal of Freedom, an Academy Award, a Pulitzer Prize and the Nobel Prize for Literature. And many, many more. But Dylan's biography does not call him "award winning" because that is promotional language which does not belong on Wikipedia. The lengthy list of people Lombardi has worked for implies that he is notable because he has notable clients, which is incorrect. In this case, your draft later says he has won just one non-notable award, given by a non-notable trade publication called Pro Sound News. And I had to use Google Translate to read your reference to learn which award it was because you do not tell us in your draft. Why should an encyclopedia even mention this non-notable award?

Phrases like driven by a passion for music and sound engineering and Throughout his career, Lombardi has contributed to numerous projects that integrate diverse musical genres and traditions and His expertise has been utilized in significant events and garnered significant recognition are not acceptable in an encyclopedia. These phrases are promotional and convey no genuine information to the reader of an encyclopedia. The Neutral point of view is a mandatory core content policy.

There are several other problems with your draft but these are the big ones that I noticed. Cullen328 (talk) 02:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree with all of this, as well as the word “notable”/“notably” being used a lot, which is odd and just looks like it’s trying to prove notability. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 02:12, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I am an AfC reviewer. Something that stands out within a second is that there are three citations after the subjects name, the first word of the article. What is being confirmed by the citation there? His name? That he exists? It looks like reference bombing which can make a reviewer suspicious of all citations and if they’re actually relevant at all to what statements they claim to be supporting.

As said before, a list of people he’s worked with in the lead is not appropriate. He needs to be notable by his own merit.

Note that when a reviewer says “not supported by good sources” they do not mean add more sources, they mean more independent (not connected with him) and reliable sources are needed to show notability. While everything needs to be sourced, pick the most quality source for each statement and just use that - multiple sources for a statement (unless it’s controversial) does not help at all.

Im on my phone, so can’t do full review of all the sources right now, but these issues stand out to me at first glance. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 02:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

After having a look at a few random sources in the career section, they do not seem to actually mention Lombardi (purely based on searching the page for his name) which confirms the earlier suspicions. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 02:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Editing an entire book plot

Hello! I was looking up a book series that I love, and when I read the plot on Wikipedia for the first book, it was wildly different than the book. If it's a big edit like that, how does that work? It would take an entirely new write up to fix the errors that the current plot description has. Thank you for your help! DannyBearDW (talk) 05:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi DannyBearDW. There's some information on this Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Contextual presentation, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Novels#Plot and Wikipedia:How to write a plot summary. The key thing to remember is that a "plot summary" is intended to be nothing more than a "summary" of the key parts of the book without adding any personal interpretations to them. It's also not expected to cover every minute detail mentioned in the book. Perhaps by taking a look at Wikipedia:Featured articles#Literature and theatre, you'll find some examples of articles about book series that have been assessed as being very well written and thus possibly good references for how to write a plot summary. You can also ask for assistance at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Books or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels to see whether others share your assessment of this particular plot summary and can offer suggestions on how to improve it if they do. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I will look into those things and see what I can do. :) DannyBearDW (talk) 20:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Could you check that your book and the book described by the article are really meant to be the same and not two books that have the same title by random chance from different authorship? 176.0.144.43 (talk) 07:41, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

The book that I am referring to is book one in a series of 37 books. The characters mentioned in the plot are characters from the series, but some of them are not introduced until much later in the series. Also, some of the plot points are things that happen much later in the series or are about different characters than what is listed currently. The current plot is riddled with spoilers or completely incorrect information. If I hadn't have read all of the books, I would have thought I was looking at the wrong book description for sure. Have you ever heard of this happening before? DannyBearDW (talk) 00:27, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

No,but of the opposite case. A whole book was published and later, in the second edition, it was split into a series for maximum revenue. Of course the plot had to be changed somewhat. 176.0.155.8 (talk) 08:17, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Is there a list of cities notable enough to not include the province/state names in the title?

I noticed recently that most internationally known cities simply have their titles in their names; for example, New York City, Los Angeles, Vancouver, Seoul, Tokyo, Jakarta Rome, and London. Meanwhile, most cities have province/state names in their page titles; for example Albany, New York, Monterey, California, or Victoria, British Columbia. I presume this is because the cities without province/state names are more famous, and because some cities have the same name as another in a different location (such as Albany sharing the name as Albany, Oregon and Albany, Western Australia), but I'm wondering if there is a list of the cities deemed notable enough to not include province/state names. Unnamed anon (talk) 07:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Unnamed anon, the fame of the cities is irrelevant. What matters is whether there's another city, of comparable fame, with the same name. Worminghall is not world-famous, and is not a city or even a town, but it's the only place with that name, so no disambiguation is needed. Maproom (talk) 07:47, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

What Maproom says above is correct, and is the answer to your question. What you may however be intuiting is that within the text of a given Wikipedia article, it is often not necessary to provide the state/province name of a well-known city where something happened or is located, unless the context of the wiki article or paragraph is insufficient to indicate which "Albany" (or similar multiple city) is being referred to. Softlavender (talk) 08:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom: and @Softlavender: Thank you for your answers. I assume the "comparable fame" part is why some cities that share its name with another have the most well-known one treated as the primary topic with no province/state in its title? For example, Vancouver, Washington exists, but Vancouver, British Columbia is simply titled "Vancouver", I assume because the Canadian Vancouver is more well known? Similarly, there are about 14 US states with cities named Rome, but the Rome, Laizo in Italy is given precedent and treated as the primary topic? Unnamed anon (talk) 08:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Unnamed anon: WP:PRIMARYTOPIC may explain things more, as does the following WP:DETERMINEPRIMARY. Bazza 7 (talk) 09:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Unnamed anon, Vancouver is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and likely the only Vancouver most readers have ever heard of (its metro population is more than 10 times that of Vancouver, Washington), and therefore it needs no disambiguation. The same goes for Paris, London, Troy, Athens, Rome, and all other cities that have multiples but only one primary topic. Softlavender (talk) 01:51, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

United States places are treated as an exception to the rule per WP:USPLACE, but for the rest of the world normal disambiguation is followed. CMD (talk) 08:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed users and a question about notices

G'day!

While editing recently, I came across a notice indicating that only autoconfirmed users are permitted to edit a particular page. Upon further investigation, I discovered that an autoconfirmed user is defined as someone with 4 days and 10 edits to their account, while an extended confirmed user has 30 days and 500 edits. My question is: Should I keep an eye on my own user status, or can I assume that if I am able to edit a page, it means my user status meets the necessary criteria? KiltedKangaroo (talk) 08:14, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. The system will only permit you to edit articles/pages that you have the ability to edit. You don't need to specifically monitor your status to avoid editing articles/pages that you shouldn't, as that can't happen. Certainly you can follow your edit count/account age for your own personal information. 331dot (talk) 08:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi KiltedKangaroo. I believe the Wikipedia software is able to detect when your user status meets the requirements for editing protected articles; so, being able to edit the article in question means your account has been upgraded to a new status. Whether you want to monitor your progress is completely up to you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Species articles

Just wondering, what is the point of the species articles when Wikispecies exists? CrushedAsian255 (talk) 08:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@CrushedAsian255 different sourcing/notability requirements, but more importantly a Wikipedia article like Zebra finch has written prose, more images meant for regular reader. Contrast that with species:Zebra finch circovirus which is a lot more clinical. Or a more fleshed out pairing of Ugandan kob and species:Kobus kob thomasi. Wikidata and Wiktionary overlap with Wikipedia too, but have distinct purposes as well. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 08:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

See more at meta:Wikispecies/FAQ. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

species:Zebra finch circovirus is about a virus, not a finch. They're much less photogenic. Maproom (talk) 12:13, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom less photogenic ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 20:41, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of old username

Hello,

I would like to delete my old username which is redirecting to my current my username. Can you help me with this request?

The link to the page is (Redacted)

Thank you and regards Benzekre (talk) 12:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Benzekre, a Wikipedia account can't be deleted. But you can easily delete the redirect from the old username. Maproom (talk) 12:16, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom Noted with thanks. I have one further enquiry. I wish to delete the third revision of my user log which shows my old username. Can this be deleted?

Link is Special:Log/Benzekre Benzekre (talk) 12:24, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I believe that would be possible, but only an admin could do it. And I don't see it mattering enough to bother about. I see now that you don't actually have an "old username". That user never existed. What you did, with your Benzekre account, was to create a user page for an imaginary user. Then Cabayi put a redirect on it. Maproom (talk) 12:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Pinging Cabayi, who may understand this mess better than I do. Maproom (talk) 12:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Not exactly. At first I created my Wikipedia account using my real name and surname. Later, I decided to change it to Benzekre due to privacy concerns. Cabayi then created my new username but my old username is still available. Since you state that it cannot be deleted, I now wish to have it deleted from my current user log. In this respect, can you please refer me to an admin? Benzekre (talk) 12:41, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

The problem with trying to clear up in the pursuit of privacy, as opposed to preventing its loss in the first place, is that the job is very messy and hardly ever thorough enough. For this reason we normally suggest in various places that a WP:CLEANSTART is the best method to use. I've deleted a few things for you. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 12:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a million! I'm still rather new to Wikipedia and have much to learn where Wikipedia operations are concerned. Benzekre (talk) 13:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Feedback on My Submitted Draft

Hello, I just submitted my 3rd draft for a biography: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Moses_Kpughur_Tule. The first two had been rejected because according to the reviewer, I had not provided enough sources to support some claims and use of the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. I've spent some time working on it and I believe I have made the necessary changes. Can you let me know what you think? what am I doing wrong and how do I fix it? Bluntsupremaci (talk) 12:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Bluntsupremaci. I'm afraid to say that the draft still needs a lot of work to be acceptable. Large parts are unsourced. Which source did you get the information "He began his education at N.K.S.T. Primary School in Makurdi, graduating in 1975" from, for instance? Cordless Larry (talk) 12:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I am related to the subject, he is my father, so alot of the information is from a place of knowing. Although i'm not sure the kind of sources i could cite to support these type claims (about his personal life, educational background etc). How can i improve this? Bluntsupremaci (talk) 12:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Bluntsupremaci: Wikipedia articles essentially summarise what reliable published sources have previously said. Which is a way of saying that if the information comes from your personal relationship with the subject and cannot be corroborated by a published source, then it cannot be included and must be removed.

Also, as you clearly have a conflict of interest (COI) regarding this subject, you must disclose it. I will post a message on your talk page with instructions. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:49, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Politician's wiki format

While updating politicians pages, I noticed two different styles, one that had one section for election description with table of election results. Another that had two sections one that had election description, and at bottom of page the election table results. Seems the first seems to be a better format, why would you separate a photo/graph from the caption/description? Love your idea/comments Michaelwarpedu (talk) 13:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Michaelwarpedu Welcome to the Teahouse. I don't have a view on this but there is an active politics Project where specialists will hang out. You could ask again at WT:PLT. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Lowercase Sigmabot user talk archiving issue

After some discussion here Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Deal_with_user_talk_pages_that_are_way_too_long, I attempted to fix or add the coding for talkpage archiving to User_talk:Masao and User talk:Dr. Sroy. Someone else had already added the code some time ago but the archiving never worked for some reason. My fixes didn't help matters after I read the bot documentation. I cannot figure out what the problem is. Does anyone else know why the bot is ignoring these pages? Lowercase Sigmabot talkpage says the bot owner cannot help and to ask at the Teahouse for help. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 15:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Iggy pop goes the weasel. Your fixes look right. Archiving only runs once a day and skips some days. User talk:Masao has been archived now. Today's run is ongoing and may still get to User talk:Dr. Sroy. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Ok, thank you so much! :D Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 20:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Request to add information to this article: Gay_village

I understand this page Gay village was semi-protected due to vandalism. I would like to add some information regarding Bangladeshi hijrapollis with a few sources, as I think it is relevant. Please let me know if I can provide further information Zahrank777 (talk) 16:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Zahrank777 You can make an edit request on the associated talk page. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Zahrank777 (talk) 16:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Need help with references for a page!

Hello!

I've been working on a page (currently a draft) on the game Cryptid Crush. The thing is, despite adding references and information to push the writing, i can't get the page to be uploaded because "This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article."

I have absolutely no idea of what to add/edit, despite the time i spent searching on the Notability and sources page... Does anybody can help or have ideas on what i should add?

The page is Draft:Cryptid Crush .

Thanks! Linkfandos (talk) 16:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Linkfandos as mentioned in the decline reason you should look for multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject

None of the sources you added satisfy all of these requirements. So far. If you can't find any such sources, then the game is probably not notable. Hope this helps. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 17:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Linkfandos, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid that, like most editors who try the challenging task of creating an article before they have spent significant time learning how Wikipedia works, you have written your draft BACKWARDS.

First, find sources that are independent, reliable, and have significant coverage of the subject. Ignore anything written, published, or commissioned by the article subject or its associates, and anything based on an interview or press-release. (See WP:42 for the criteria in more detail).

If you cannot find at least three such sources, then stop trying, and work on something else: the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article is possible.

If you have found sources, then forget everything you know about the subject, and write a summary of what the sources say.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 17:37, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Requesting a deleted article to be reinstated

Hello,

A wikipedia article about a famous Pakistani actress (her name is Uzma Beg) which was deleted. The deletion was a mistake based on people not knowledgeable about her. They questioned the veracity of the article and did not do enough checking. In order to request the article being restored I wrote some basic facts in this talk page.

However there has been no interest and no response for some months. I'm not very savy with Wikipedia and was wondering if someone could look into this. I love the idea of wikipedia and the democratic idea of people editing to supply information and to improve things. But in this case the folks who deleted the article acted on incorrect assumptions and lack of knowledge about the subject.

All I want is for someone to independently look into it. Here is the talk page that I contributed: Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Uzma Beg - Wikipedia

Best Regards,

Sahgalji Sahgalji (talk) 17:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Sahgalji you placed the comment in the wrong place. You can ask for the page to be undeleted so you can work on it as a draft and establish notability. Make sure to address the reasoning at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uzma Beg when editing. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 17:30, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Sahgalji: Don't waste the community's time with an undeletion request. They are always denied if the deletion was the result of a deletion discussion, as it was in this case at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uzma Beg. Instead, ask the deleting administrator, in this case User:Liz, if she would consider restoring the article to draft space for you to work on and submit for review. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I apologize I am just unaware of the processes to follow. Many thanks for your guidance. I will reach out to User:Liz and do exactly as you advise.

Many thanks ~Anachronist and Sungodtemple for taking the time to educate me. Sahgalji (talk) 18:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Editing Company Wiki Page

Hi! I'm wondering if there's a verification process for employees of companies to update their company's page with lesser risk of having said updates be taken down? Say, if I have info that has no outside source yet but is accurate? Tmtiggs (talk) 17:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tmtiggs: All information must be verifiable by published sources. You may post an edit request on the article's talk page. You can preface your request with the tag {{Edit COI}} to cause your request to be listed on a category page. Make sure you make a well-formed request, like "change X to Y", or "add X after Y" or "delete X", along with your reasoning and citations to reliable sources if applicable. Note that Wikipedia is not interested in what a company has to say about itself, so citations to secondary sources (independent of the company) are preferred. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Then you can not add that information! No information can be added without outside source. 176.0.144.43 (talk) 17:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

ok, thank you! Tmtiggs (talk) 18:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tmtiggs: Some limited information can be added by citing the company's own website: a new headquarters location, for instance, or a CEO leaving. But still use the talk page to make such requests. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Starting a biography page

I have made an account with Wikipedia. My goal is to do a biography of my father who was a major figure in the oil industry in North America...primarily Pennsylvania. Not only is he an oil industry scholar but an expert on John Wilkes Booth. He has published over twenty books on these subjects. Two PA historical societies and a couple museums have agreed to assist me with this page. Here is my dilemma: I am 76 years old and not exactly computer literate and have no clue where to go next with Wikipedia to start the biography. Help please. Mary Jane Miller (talk) 18:16, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Mary Jane Miller: I'll leave some links to guidance on your talk page. We generally discourage people from writing about relatives, but if you are scrupulous in following our guidelines on sourcing and neutrality, you may start the article by following the procedure here where it will remain in draft status until reviewed by a neutral editor. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Mary Jane Miller, and welcome to the Teahouse. I want to caution you that people who try the challenging task of creating an article before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works often have a frustrating and miserable time, even without the issue of editing with a conflict of interest. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.

When you do come to try writing the draft, you will find that - unexpectedly - what you know about your father cannot go into the article unless it is supported by a reliable published source - and preferably a source wholly unconnected with your father. So the best way that your associates in the historical societies and museum can help you is by identifying sources about your father than meet all the criteria in golden rule: they are published by a reliable publisher, they are wholly unconnected with your father and his associates, and they contain significant coverage of your father. ColinFine (talk) 19:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

It would in fact be easier and better for a random person from a foreign country to write the article. Basically all the knowledge you have that is special (to you, to your family, or to the company) is going to get erased from the article anyway, leaving only what any random person can see was printed in the papers at the time those things happened. TooManyFingers (talk) 06:30, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

(This does mean that the more you act like a random person from a faraway country, who knows nothing about your father and can only look through already published materials, the more successful the article would be.) TooManyFingers (talk) 06:48, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Contributions

I want to make a contribution using a check. Would you send me an address, please? 2601:204:100:B1A0:44A0:5697:42F9:1E0F (talk) 19:50, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

We don't handle donations, please see https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ways_to_Give for how to mail a check. Inquiries about donations should be directed to donate@wikimedia.org. 331dot (talk) 19:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Also note that a scammer could post a false claim here but not at https://donate.wikimedia.org. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:59, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

No original research policy

My grandfather has a page on wikipedia and I was thinking about interviewing him about his life and making some additions to his page based on his responses. Would this violate the no original research policy? I would put the audio recording as a source. Fred Hansen Nfh66 (talk) 22:18, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Nfh66 according to WP:PUBLISHED, as long as it is generally accessible somehow it should work. However, you can't use your grandfather's own words to cite many things in the article about him (see WP:ABOUTSELF). Nevertheless I would support such an interview and it may be also useful outside of Wikipedia. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:34, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. A raw interview would be a primary source, only useful as described in that policy, and even then you just posting it on the internet somewhere makes it difficult to verify, for example, that it was indeed your grandfather being interviewed. If you were a journalist working for a newspaper, an editor would examine your interview before publishing it. 331dot (talk) 22:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Nfh66. For the sake of other readers, your father is an Olympic gold medalist and former world record holder in the pole vault. Those are considerable accomplishments that must be a source of great pride to your father and your whole family. If I was in your shoes, I would approach the editors of various track and field magazines or magazines or journals focused on Olympic athletes. Try to make a deal with one of them to publish your interview with your father. If published in such a magazine or journal, the interview could be used as a reference in your father's biography. There is no doubt that he is notable, and, personally, I hope that you will pursue your project. Cullen328 (talk) 07:01, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

You could also do a video interview and publish it on YouTube, which could be referenced as a primary source. But Cullen326's suggestion above is much better. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:57, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

But that would not count as a reliable source, @Anachronist ColinFine (talk) 16:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

ratemyprofessors.com

If several students said they're the best professor at (famous university), can I cite ratemyprofessors.com in the professor's bio? Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 00:19, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Allthemilescombined1 no, you shouldn't, since ratemyprofessors isn't a reliable source and so doesn't deserve coverage in the article. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 00:36, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Allthemilescombined1: Welcome to the Teahouse. Going into a little more detail into Sungodtemple's answer, the site isn't a reliable source because its content is user-generated. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:35, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Not a reliable source Tesleemah (talk) 06:22, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

• Hi Allthemilescombined1, user-generated sources and user-reviews can never be used as citations on Wikipedia. For future reference, consult WP:RS. Also, WP:RSN is a noticeboard to ask genuine questions about the reliability or usability of any given source on Wikipedia. Softlavender (talk) 06:31, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

To add to the other answers, the only circumstances in which this might be appropriate is if secondary sources have reported on the RMP ratings (e.g. a newspaper had mentioned their high rating). Cordless Larry (talk) 08:40, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 09:59, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Heraldry of the World

Is Heraldry of the World a reliable source? WikiPhil012 (talk) 00:20, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

WikiPhil012 it says in the URL that it is a wiki, so no. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 00:36, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Gravitation of The Moon

Please correct this page (first paragraph).— Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.176.122.147 (talk) 03:28, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Gravitation of the Moon Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 03:32, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

122.176.122.147, If it's a simple and uncontroversial change, you can do it yourself, otherwise you should discuss changes on the talk page of the relevant article, which is Talk:Gravitation of the Moon. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 04:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Bigle Legal article creation

Hello, I would like to ask for help in creating a Wikipedia article. It is about creating a page about the history of the legal tech company Bigle Legal. The draft I proposed was rejected for lack of references, but every piece of information provided in it is referenced by external media and pages.

This is a Spanish software company that has been in the legal technology sector for 10 years and has notoriety in the industry, so I would like to know what kind of sources I should include for it to be considered a notorious article.

I would also like to ask if this is a language conflict: if I were to create the article in Spanish, would the sources already added be valid?

Thank you very much for your help.

Draft:Bigle Legal Beñat Huartemendia (talk) 07:53, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. I see that you declared a conflict of interest; instead, you need to make the stricter paid editing disclosure, a Terms of Use requirement, as you are an employee of the company.

The Spanish Wikipedia is a separate project, with its own editors and policies, what is acceptable there is not necessarily acceptable here. You would need to ask them about what they consider acceptable.

Wikipedia(this one, at least) is not a place for business to tell about themselves, what they consider to be their own history, and what they do. Wikipedia articles about businesses summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the business, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business. You have just described the existence of your company and told what it does, not said what is notable about it according to independent sources.

Sources are not required to be in English, as long as they meet all other requirements of being a reliable source. 331dot (talk) 09:49, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] Beñat Huartemendia, the Draft has not been Rejected (meaning "will likely never become an acceptable article, please give up"), it has been Declined (meaning "not up to standard yet, please improve as suggested and try again").

It was not declined because the references are not correct as far as they go, it was declined because they do not demonstrate Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) (which the Reviewer already linked for you in their assessment) as required by this English-Language Wikipedia. The reviewer mentioned that they were only trivial mentions and routine business reports; en.Wikipedia requires at least three different sources that discuss the subject at some length – substantial paragraphs or whole articles all about the subject – to demonstrate Notability (as Wikipedia uses the term). The sources you already have may be useful to WP:Verify particular facts, but they cannot confirm the notability of the subject as a whole.

Different language Wikipedias have different standards: they are all separate projects. En.Wikipedia is generally considered to have the strictest standards; if you were to submit your draft written in Spanish to the Spanish-language Wikipedia at https://es.wikipedia.org, they might or might not accept it, we here at English Wikipedia cannot say. You are welcome to try to improve your Draft here, or to submit it to es.Wikipedia, or both. Good luck!

(A minor point – in English, 'notorious' and 'notoriety' mean that something is known for bad reasons, not that it is 'notable' or has 'notability'.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.83.137 (talk) 10:05, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Relationship to the subject

I would like to write an article about one of the first women to run a political party in the UK as national secretary for the SDP. She was also part of the first women's team to race in the Middle East Rally Championship. However I am related to this woman, so I understand I shouldn't be the one to write the article. But this also means that I am in possession of hard copies of print media from the time that I can use as reference. Whereas as far as I can see, there is barely anything about her in online media.

Does anyone have any thoughts on what to do ? Scripttopage (talk) 08:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

You are allowed to create a draft article and submit it through the Articles for Creation process, assuming that you properly declare your conflict of interest. See Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline, particularly our guidance for writing about your family and friends (and see also Wikipedia's guideline for writing or editing an article about yourself, which has many of the same considerations).

Alternatively, if you say who it is that you think should have an article, it is possible that some other editor may be inspired to create it. (From the details you give I cannot work out who it might be: the only National Secretary for the SDP I can find any information about online is Richard Newby.) For a woman politician, you could try asking at the Women in Red project or the UK Politics project. In that case, it would be helpful to tell other editors where they can find sources - even if they are only available as print media, many editors have access either through their local or institutional libraries, or the Wikipedia Library project. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 09:51, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Scripttopage and welcome!

You can write the article, but you shouldn't publish it yourself, you should instead prepare a draft and submit it for review through our Articles for Creation (AfC) review system. You can find pretty much everything you need to get started, including an interactive wizard which gets you started on the AfC process, at WP:YFA.

You also need to disclose your conflict of interest (COI). I will post a message on your talk page User talk:Scripttopage with more info on this, and instructions for disclosing.

Bear in mind that Wikipedia articles are mostly composed by summarising what reliable published sources have previously said about a subject. So while you obviously know a lot about this person, you should not include your own commentary, unless this is backed up by published sources. You also need to write in a neutral, factual manner, without any attempt to make the subject appear in a positive (or negative!) light.

Finally, since you mention that some of the sources are not available online, you may find this essay on citing offline sources useful: WP:OFFLINE.

Good luck, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Advice with "Draft:Hector Izquierdo Triana"

I have included WP THREE and more inline citation. Hector is in charge of the reconstruction from a huge natural disaster: this interesting link from National Geographic shows https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/article/lava-built-this-island-then-entombed-towns-in-stone-feature and it was the beginning because the volcano lasted 85 days. The total damage caused by the volcano amounts up to 1,000 million euros. The lava flow covered over 1,000 hectares (2,500 acres), prompting the evacuation of around 7,000 people. The lava flow was about 3.5 kilometres (2.2 miles) wide at its widest point, about 6.2 kilometres (3.9 miles) long and reached the sea, destroying more than 3,000 buildings. Hector Izquierdo left his job as Secretary of State of Finance in Madrid (which is a great job) to help his people because he was born closed to the volcano and his parents were evacuated. Last month he was awarded as knight with the Grand Cross of the Royal Order of the Civil Merit (it could be, more or less, like the Presidential Medal of Freedom in the United States or Knight of the Order of the British Empire, I could qualify the subject under WP: NBIO. ). You have much much more experience in Wikipedia, could you have a look the draft and tell me what can I do to improve it? Cuentaderevision (talk) 10:41, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Sample: He was Secretary of State for Finance Ministry of Finance, President of the Spanish Tax Agency and Professor at IE Business School. In May 2013 he was Financial Times "Professor of the Week". Well then, what, according to reliable sources, did he do and how did he perform as Secretary of State for Finance Ministry of Finance, President of the Spanish Tax Agency and Professor at IE Business School? What did the FT give as the reason(s) for naming him Prof of the week? Put book titles in italics, not between « » guillemets. And please use Template:ISBN. -- Hoary (talk) 11:35, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Unable to upload image to my article

I've been tasked to create a Wikipedia page for a late Professor Olayinka Odewale, firstly I don't know if creating a wikipedia page for him aligns with Wikipedia's guidelines. My main question is relating to the uploading of a petrait of the prof. I get an error when I try to upload it.

I wanted share a screenshot of the error and share that, but even uploading that is somehow not allowed. Any advice would be appreciated. Brianmvk11 (talk) 10:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are trying to upload the image to this Wikipedia itself, new accounts cannot do that. If you personally took the image of the professor, you can upload it to Commons. If you didn't personally take it, it would be harder to upload it. The good news is that images are not relevant to the draft submission process(via the article wizard), which only considers the text and sources. You can worry about images later.

Note that you will need to provide sources for your information, see Referencing for beginners. You will need to show that the professor meets the definition of a notable academic narrowly or more broadly a notable person.

Whom tasked you with this work? 331dot (talk) 10:56, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

A friend asked me to do it for his boss, but I'm not sure if the prof is a notible person. I guess I have to do a bit of research. Thank you for the info and the quick response! Brianmvk11 (talk) 11:16, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Should you pursue this further, you will need to declare a conflict of interest. You may want to show your friend WP:BOSS as well. 331dot (talk) 11:19, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

And you should probably check Wikipedia:Notability (academics). DS (talk) 14:40, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

On tagging

Hello, @Johnuniq and (less tactfully) @Softlavender have noted that my tagging efforts may have issues, so I would like to get an understanding on how to proceed further. I've cobbled together a python script (will clarify even if I hope it's obvious with the edits I've made that I'm not running an unauthorized bot) that spits out a "link density" ratio, and while I wish I had the technical skills to refine the results, I feel like I've been able to bring attention to a lot of very old pages (pretty much every page I edited in the last day or so was created before 2005) that are in need of such. I'm aware of the issues, though apparently not enough, about overtagging, I "clearly" feel like they were constructive (or else why would I have made the edit?), but some apparently disagree, so I would like to know in particular which of my edits contained "bogus tags". Akaibu (talk) 11:32, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

I looked at your list of contributions and picked this. As I look at the article I notice no shortage of internal links. I'm puzzled by the addition of the template and not surprised by its removal. -- Hoary (talk) 11:45, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh is that why I've had so many watchlist notifications about this category. @Akaibu, I think you might want to tweak the script a bit so that it takes the size of the article into consideration? A much longer article, if it's not repeating the same wikilinks over and over, will naturally have a lower link density than a shorter one. -- asilvering (talk) 12:18, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary @Asilvering while yes I agree the case of Fresnel's article is already pretty well linked, it nonetheless showed up as among some of the lowest that my script has found(in the lowest 5k out of the ~million pages scanned so far), I will note that there are a number of references to "biaxial" of various nature, of which Index ellipsoid looks to have a redirect of that name, is not linked on Fresnel's article, and in fact does mention Fresnel in the article itself. I'm not sure where exactly this should/would be reference, but that's one of the reason I added these templates, is that they bring eyes to an issue, the underlinked template is in fact a newcomer task and many of the pages I've put it on has had plenty of productive edits made by other newcomers(I still regard myself as such). Akaibu (talk) 13:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Akaibu: The instructions for {{underlinked}} say there is no consensus on what constitutes "too few" links. Use editor discretion: you should not just be blindly tagging articles based on the output of a script. The fact that an article is in the lowest 0.5% for link density is not sufficient information to judge whether or not it is underlinked to the point of needing a cleanup tag. It would be much more useful for you to find one article which you think on your own judgement is underlinked, and then add some needed links, than it is for you to blindly tag any number of articles.

In general both script-assisted editing and adding maintenance tags are things which are probably better off left to people who have some experience with Wikipedia. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 15:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Page about a cult marked as promotion

I'm having a hard time understanding why anyone could consider a page about a cult to be a promotion. When we use the word "cult" in the English language it usually refers to a dangerous cult, so I don't see why anyone would write a page to promote it. Why is it being marked as such? Grad0507 (talk) 13:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Anything can be promoted(though you don't tell which article you're referencing). Perhaps the person who marked the article is promotional is concerned that a dangerous cult is being promoted(even if that's not the intention). 331dot (talk) 13:56, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Which article are you referring to? An article about a cult can be promotional if it says positive things without providing sources. Or something can be promoted as a cult that wasn't traditionally a cult (I've seen this charge in the media recently in reference to the US Republican Party). ~Anachronist (talk) 15:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

US Migrant Crisis

Is there an article on wikipedia about this? I couldnt find one and i would be interested in creating one. SunnyScion (talk) 15:38, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Depends what you're looking for:

• 2014 American immigration crisis
• Migrant crisis
• Mexico–United States border crisis

Consider expanding one of those as appropriate. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:49, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

How does wikipedia prevent political or religious bias from affecting accuracy of information?

see above Tomsinsky (talk) 16:05, 13 September 2024 (UTC)