Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1234

Archive 1230

←

Archive 1232

Archive 1233

Archive 1234

Dead link of book sources

I found a dead link that isn't archived and the page of the author that's on the website is devoid of his books, so I thought I can find another website hosting information about the book. I used the ISBN to find an Amazon and Walmart page of the book but I'm not confident about some of the factors pertaining to the replacing the dead link with alternate sources. (I'm not sure what's the dead link suppose to show because there isn't a snapshot on wayback machine, archive.today and google cite).

The reason I'm considering to change the dead link with other sources is because the first paragraph of this section said to "consider finding an alternative source" with fulfilled condition of "all attempts to repair the link will be unsuccessful" (Which I think it is because the author page doesn't have his books and there's no found snapshots on some of the most popular archive services.). With my interpretation, the second sentence "Alternative sources about broad topics are usually easily located" implies there can be a broad selection with the only following stated conditions to be "but be extremely careful to avoid citing mirrors and forks of Wikipedia itself, which would violate Wikipedia:Verifiability.".

Some of the information I'm trying to find to help what to do are: What are the conditions to choosing and listing an alternate source for a dead link, specifically when entailing a book. If the condition of "all attempts to repair the link will be unsuccessful" is fulfilled, should there be attempts to replace the dead link with alternate sources, not at all or some other actions? I haven't found information on how to properly link to a book source so, what's expected to be of the reliability, legality and other factors when linking to a book source (copyrighted, not public domain) on both of the circumstances of book metadata and book content. DedoraTuolloin (talk) 09:23, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@DedoraTuolloin I'll try to answer the specific question rather than the general. The dead link in the article just confirms he wrote and published a book. There's no problem in finding a link to the book: for example this one at google books The article already has as its next citation a secondary CBS source. In this case, therefore, I'd be inclined to create a {{cite book}} reference to replace what's currently there, with the Google books link as the |URL= parameter. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:22, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Since you can only answered 1 of the questions. Can you list or link any articles or information that might help me in answering the rest of the questions? DedoraTuolloin (talk) 13:32, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

If the book is already the best and most reliable source, then showing people what they can do to get the book (giving them a link to where they can buy it, and links to where they can borrow it or view it if that's possible) is good enough. "If you bring me that book I can prove to you that the information is in there" IS a good enough reference, as long as it's said truthfully and the book really is a reliable source.

It's always good to also have other reliable sources, but don't take away the book info. "You'll have to buy the book to know for sure" is a pain, and of course nobody really likes it, but it's still legitimate. TooManyFingers (talk) 16:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

TooManyFingers, no, I am sorry, but we do not routinely link to bookselling sites, whether it is the publisher or a company like Amazon. That's promotional editing and not permitted on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 17:53, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Are you implying dead links of book sources can be linked to a page that doesn't directly provide access to the book (through selling or file upload)?. There's many projects that catalogs books, magazines and other literacy and it's information without promotional or monetary incentive, is there any negative and positive factors in having choosing from some of those alternative sources for dead links of books? DedoraTuolloin (talk) 03:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

There does not have to be a link. It's sufficient to give the full bibliographical details of the book: these would enable anyone to obtain the book from its publisher (directly or via vendors) if it's in print, or from second-hand vendors if it isn't. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 19:02, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

If a speedy decision on finding alternative links isn't much viable then I should consider alternating with filling as much "bibliographical details of the book" and the cite-books template as possible? DedoraTuolloin (talk) 02:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the cite-book (or cite journal, etc) template is ideal. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 01:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@DedoraTuolloin You should find WP:Link rot useful for the more general issue. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Question about using an editor as a source

Hello friends,

I'm trying to help make Shalë, Lipjan nicer. It seems like someone who lives there went to a lot of trouble to share information about the location with us. I want to do right by them so I wanted to ask if anyone could help guide me on how to edit their material in a respectful way? Is there anyway to use their material and cite them? I understand that the answer may be to delete most of it. I was hoping someone might have a nuanced take on how to approach this.

Thank you very much for your help,

ViolanteMD (talk) 00:46, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

The article lacks enough references , there are just 3 with 1 empty. One of the ways you can help improve it is to get enough independent citations as I wonder how the article stands till date without those. Tesleemah (talk) 01:45, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply! I am having some trouble finding good articles on the subject but will try tomorrow! ViolanteMD (talk) 02:49, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Great @ViolanteMD Tesleemah (talk) 05:57, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tesleemah, in this case WP:NPLACE applies since Shalë is a village and so it can get away with fewer independent citations (although of course the article would be better with them, as always!). StartGrammarTime (talk) 04:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright! @StartGrammarTime Tesleemah (talk) 05:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Fix my userpage please

Hello Teahouse, I would glad if anyone here could help me in fixing my userpage. I find it difficult to arrange the userboxes below, even the infobox is messed up, thanks. Jõsé ^hola 03:19, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

User pages should not have an Infobox or CategoriesDavid notMD (talk) 05:19, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@David notMD: User pages shouldn't have article categories but on User:Josedimaria237 I only see user categories which belong there, and {{Infobox Wikipedia user}} is meant for user pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:42, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

You can check out similar userpage as yours and see how they are arranged.

Also, I think someone did something already. The floating flags look nice by the way! Tesleemah (talk) 06:05, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I am corrected. David notMD (talk) 11:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tesleemah: Thanks. I wish you luck in the elections. Jõsé ^hola 15:06, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so much, I appreciate Tesleemah (talk) 16:16, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Help determining notability

Hello. Lately I've been doing research about an activist investor and hedgefund manager, J. Carlo Cannell, who has had an interesting and successful career. Among his investment strategies is buying shares of mismanaged/dysfunctional companies, and urging board members to make changes in public, written letters (which are often fiery and fun to read). In other words, activist investing. His company has received quite a bit of coverage in financial news circles for its antics.

I've been working on gathering sources to establish the notability of the company, which I put in my sandbox. I would love somebody to take a look and tell me if they think he or his company have received enough coverage to be considered notable.

More specifically:

• I've found one article that provides a direct, detailed profile of the founder/company. The website that published it seems no-name, but the author of the article is a domain expert in finance (CIO of an asset management company, former hedgefund analyst), and author of 4 books (not sure if they are popular?) about value investing and activist investing.
• I've found many articles that are from reliable, independent sources (New York Times, Associated press) about actions that his company has taken, particularly their activist battles. While these sources don't give direct profiles/coverage of the company, they talk with detail (more than just brief updates) about the notable actions of the company. Does this constitute "significant coverage"?
  • In WP:ORGDEPTH, it says "Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization." It seems like these articles (which you can see in my sandbox in the second section) may provide commentary/description of the company (in particular, its actions).
• I've also found some miscellaneous other stuff which I would love a second pair of eyes on.

Is J. Carlo Cannell or his company, Cannell Capital, notable? Fantasyfootball420 (talk) 07:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

For the penultimate source listed in your sandbox: you can use it to support the statement that he rejoined the company, but it's not independent and so doesn't contribute to notability. Maproom (talk) 08:02, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I just spot-checked one of the "about actions" ones, this one: [1]. I'd say that this is significant coverage, in the sense that it is clearly more than a passing mention. It also gives me hope that there's quite a bit more coverage out there for you to find, since this is actually an article about Lee Enterprises, in which Cannell Capital is nonetheless a major element. But I wouldn't want to base an entire article on a company on mentions like this one. WP:NCORP battles at AfD aren't as easy to predict as many others, so I wouldn't want to tell you that you couldn't do so, but if this is the kind of thing you're finding and nothing better, my advice is to hang onto all of this and wait until you have some more experience with corp articles and lurking/participating at WP:AFD before giving it a try. Once you stick around long enough to become an extended-confirmed editor (30 days, 500 edits), you can use WP:TWL's access to newspapers.com for free, and that will probably help you find a lot more. Given the dates on these articles, you're definitely losing some to the "digital gap" of the early 2000s - stuff that wasn't born digital, but also wasn't seen as "important old stuff to digitize". So there's more out there and I think you can probably do this, just maybe not now.

I don't like that direct, detailed profile. I don't think it's all that direct and detailed, for one thing, but also, it certainly can't count for notability purposes because it's tied too closely to promotional purposes - there's a link in there about paying to go to a conference at which he's speaking. So in this case whether the author is a domain expert or not isn't relevant. -- asilvering (talk) 17:06, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

ClueBot III delay?

Page: User talk:Ss0jse

Question: "This page has archives. Sections older than 1 hours may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present." Is "may" the operative word there? Ss0jse (talk) 15:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

ClueBot may be broken at one time, and not at he other. from what I unerstand Luhanopi (talk) 19:58, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

One hour archiving is very short. Usually the time is set to many days. I'm not sure how often the bot checks any particular page. RudolfRed (talk) 21:30, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

When I set my archives up the first time, I think it took a couple of days for the bot to arrive. -- asilvering (talk) 17:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

AWB and Kingbotk

I'm about to begin tagging articles for WP:WikiProject Anthropology/Oral tradition taskforce. I've gotten AWB to work however I'm stuck regarding KingbotK (TL;DR the KingbotK plugin fails to load). Is KingbotK still used for tagging WP banners? I assume so since it's listed at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Plugins, however on its main page it says it's kept for historical reference. I've followed the instructions and have downloaded it and moved it into the same file as AutoWikiBrowser.exe.config. When I load AWB and click the 'Plugins' tab I get two options: 'Load...' and 'Manager...' Load takes me to the file and I click on 'Kingbotk AWB Plugin.dll'. Nothing changes, and when I click Manager it tells me it failed to load with no further information or options. Kowal2701 (talk) 15:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@Kowal2701: You'd do better to ask at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser, where the AWB experts hang out. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:25, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing thank you for replying, I did a few days ago but haven’t had a reply Kowal2701 (talk) 21:36, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Not an AWB expert here, but I'd assume that the main page is correct over the AWB plugins list. -- asilvering (talk) 17:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Template:Redirect reason

Idea to reason redirects Currently uses a single box and dosent function at all (The reason why i made this is so that people can look at WHY that redirect page exists) Can someone add some way to fill in the reason? _shJunpei talk >:] 18:29, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Shjunpei: This probably shouldn't be a template; we already have redirect categories for explaining the purpose of redirects. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I have a CoI

So the high school I go to (won't link it here) has an article. I know that I have a conflict of interest with it, but I do want to improve the article someday. What should I do? Thanks, TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 18:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, TWOrantula, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see WP:PSCOI. In short: you are welcome to make edit requests on the article's talk page. ColinFine (talk) 18:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Revert attack against me

Complete discussion is here and action is not yet taken against the user. Here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1164#User:Shivam Thiruppathi. I do not understand why the user keeps reverting all my edits for no reason on various other articles apart from the article in conflict. They neither mention any reason in the edit summary nor responds in the talk pages or their user page. Additionally, his edit summary was in the nature of an attack in one of the instance, it doesn't provide any explanation for the revert and the other edits do not have any explanation. Here:[2] 456legendtalk 13:48, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

An admin tagged the user already to participate in the discussion. Kindly exercise patience while the matter is investigated. Tesleemah (talk) 16:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tesleemah: User:Liz did that on 22 August, and has been ignored, while Shivam Thiruppathi continues to revert 456legend's edits without explanation. I don't think the latter is being impatient by asking here how to proceed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

oops, I saw that the request was made today maybe I mixed up. Yes, you can follow up Tesleemah (talk) 23:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@456legend: Please follow the process at WP:DR - you can open another WP:ANI request if you wish. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Citing for nitroglycerin

Hello! I wanted to know if The Anarchist Cookbook is a reliable source to cite for this article. It contains some info about this chemical, but I question its reliability. There is a copy of it on the Internet Archive, I believe. Kurnahusa (talk) 02:01, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Kurnahusa, clearly the Cookbook neither is an academic work nor was written by somebody with an advanced degree in chemistry. So if you want a simple answer, then it's no. But what do you want to cite it for? -- Hoary (talk) 02:15, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary The Nitroglycerin#Manufacturing part, which needs more citations. Kurnahusa (talk) 02:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Kurnahusa, try a chemistry text. -- Hoary (talk) 02:29, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I've found some sources [3] [4]. Some websites aren't open access unless log in through an institution which sucks. I'm a little too tired to edit at this point and my competence is at the bare minimum so I'll give editing a rest for now. Kurnahusa (talk) 03:02, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

A bombmaking and illegal drug manufacturing manual written by a teenager is not a reliable source. Cullen328 (talk) 04:34, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Kurnahusa, thank you for confessing that your "competence is at the bare minimum". As it's been decades since I last opened a chemistry textbook (either a very elementary one or one from the 1930s (!) that even then I only partially and hazily understood), my own competence would be seriously inadequate. Perhaps ask for help at WT:WikiProject Chemicals? -- Hoary (talk) 06:10, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Kurnahusa In this case, it is easy to find reliable manufacturing references from the compound's PubChem entry. If you could add the two cited sources to the article, that would be great. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Excuse me for being incessantly annoying, but should I cite the website itself, or the books like Lewis, R.J., Sr (Ed.). Hawley's Condensed Chemical Dictionary. 13th ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1997., p. 797? Kurnahusa (talk) 01:48, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@Kurnahusa That's not annoying and is a useful point. We should always cite the underlying source of the information, so the book in this case. PubChem is a database that brings links together but can sometimes be wrong. You should, ideally, check that the book does actually support what the Wikipedia article says. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@Kurnahusa, I'll just add to this, since you're getting stuck behind paywalls: Internet Archive allows temporary borrowing of books if you make a free account there. IA's search function isn't great, so I tend to just google "Internet Archive "name of book"". They've got at least a few different copies of Hawley's Condensed Chemical Dictionary. -- asilvering (talk) 17:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering I can't borrow the copies; all of them say "Book available to patrons with print disabilities". Kurnahusa (talk) 23:50, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Bummer. Can't say I've ever been blocked from checking out a book for that reason. -- asilvering (talk) 23:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

And there we go. I cited the 15th edition since I couldn't access the 13th one. The text should be the same; only the pages are different. Kurnahusa (talk) 00:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Three students fell ill after drowning while giving relief, allegations of negligence in hospital treatment

learn more Siam7t9 (talk) 07:49, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

This page is for questions about the use of Wikipedia. If you have such a question, feel free to ask it. -- Hoary (talk) 08:19, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Proofread followed by edit - resistance against the edit

This is to bring to your kind notice that the information given on the Wikipedia is not correct, maybe someone did not try to look into it. 1. Name Spelling Correction, Party Status as active not dissolved hence pertaining text like existed till 1977 to be romoved. OmGanGanpataye (talk) 07:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

You have already asked this, and been answered, at WP:Help Desk#EDIT REVERT. If you want to continue the discussion please do so either there or at the Talk page for the article. Please don't start another thread in another place. ColinFine (talk) 10:24, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Article Talk Page Issue

Hey guys, I've created a new article and moved it from my sandbox to the main space, but the article talk page redirects to a different article's talk page. What have I missed and how may I go about correcting it? Article - St George's Anglican Church, Bluff Point OxygenToxicity (talk) 07:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Talk:St George's Anglican Church, Bluff Point is no longer a redirect. You may wish to add templates to it. -- Hoary (talk) 08:33, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Hoary OxygenToxicity (talk) 11:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Content insertion

Hi, I'm going to write an article on ICC Development Awards but, all the awards are listed at ICC Awards. So, should this content be inserted at ICC Awards or have a different article.?

Moreover, the subject is looking bit promotional. However, I've gathered the required reliable sources. Should I start writing about it? If yes. Then, where it should be featured.? —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 11:01, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

From the hyperlink you provided: "Launched in 2002, the ICC Development Awards sheds light on the world-leading work being carried out in ICC Associate Member countries to grow the game globally, whether through innovative development programmes or through inspiring efforts on the field of play." I know nothing about cricket, but that sounds like something to insert into the existing ICC Awards article. David notMD (talk) 12:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks.

I'll add that content at ICC Award#ICC Development Programme Awards. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 12:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

AfC comment

Hi, The article Irish Cricket Awards has been created. But, the AfC comment is still there. Should I remove it or not.? —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 14:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto Yes, feel free to remove it as it’s not in draft space. Kurnahusa (talk) 14:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 14:31, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

New cars for the car brand

Can help me in my draft article for Draft:Supercars of the World. Because I want more Bugattis more Lamb's and more brands for the cars let me know with a link if it's on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NinjaMiura (talk • contribs)

Your draft is not suitable for Wikipedia as it contains no citations whatever. Please read the instructions in the box at the top of your draft, delete everything in the draft, and start again after finding reliable independent sources and studying WP:Your first article.Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Quoting: Everybody knows how excellent Ferrari is. Just look at the prancing horse. It is a great supercar for you. And has great handling. No, NinjaMiura, I know how expensive to maintain (and how fast to depreciate) a Ferrari is, but not how excellent it is. I'm pretty sure it would not be great for me. Before continuing to work on this draft, perhaps spend a little time reading existing articles and thinking about the way they're written. -- Hoary (talk) 22:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I removed all of the images, as those were supersized, and not relevant to getting the draft approved, but this hodgepoge of personal opinions should be Speedy deleted. David notMD (talk) 12:31, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Gotta be honest here; while I respect the enthusiasm, this whole article seems like something for your personal blog, not an encyclopedia. Anything that likely could be useful in an article such as this would more appropriately be at Supercar or possibly a not-yet-created List of supercars. And everything has to be reliably sourced, not just your offered opinions. If you'd like to improve supercar content here, your best path would be to find key, reliably sourced, encyclopedic material on supercars, either generally or individual supercars, and make those articles even better. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 15:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Google index

Hi, The recently created article Irish Cricket Awards's talk page Talk:Irish Cricket Awards is getting indexed on the search page rather than its actual article page, whenever I try to reach the article by searching Irish Cricket Awards on Google. Is there anything to fix it manually.? or it will get fixed automatically? —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 16:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto "recently created" is the main thing to look at here, for more you can see WP:INDEXING but I'll break it down quickly. Articles that are older than 90 days are automatically indexed, as are those that are reviewed by new page patrollers. Seemingly, article talk pages are automatically indexed regardless. Articles can take a while to be reviewed by NPP, as there is a hefty backlog at approximately 14k articles needing review, so don't be alarmed that it's not indexed yet, it will be in good time. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 17:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 17:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Micah Abbey and Shamon Brown Jr. have no sources.

Why does Micah Abbey and Shamon Brown Jr. have no sources and need more sources to establish notability? Julian Louis (talk) 14:55, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Julian Louis: Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you check your spellings and supply us with links to the pages you're enquiring about, please? I can't find any articles with those exact titles, so it's hard to know how to answer you, except to say that article content should always be based upon proper sources to establish Notability.

If it's a newly-created article you're looking at, it might not yet have been scrutinised for notability. You can check if an article is very new by clicking the 'View History' tab, and looking at the dates of all its edits. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Micah Abbey;  Courtesy link: Draft:Shamon Brown Jr. These BLPs, both about voice actors from the U.S. Midwest, were sent to AFC for lack of references when they were reviewed early last month. Now it's your job to {{Find sources}} that discuss their careers in depth; for starters, beware fansites and Amazon-owned platforms. If you can't find any, then they both likely fail WP:NACTOR. Come back and tell us if you have any further problems. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 17:13, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Replacing redirect with article

Hi, I'm working on an article for the bumblebee subgenus Alpinobombus (User:Dicynodont/drafts/Alpinobombus). Alpinobombus currently exists as a redirect to List of bumblebee species § Alpinobombus. I've read most of the help pages about redirects, how to create/delete a redirect, etc., but I'm still confused about how to handle this redirect and replace it with the actual Alpinobombus article. Am I supposed to do any moving of pages, e.g. move the userspace draft into the article namespace (which it says isn't possible because the article name is taken) and deal with the section redirect separately? Or do I just blank the redirect on the current Alpinobombus page and paste the draft content into it? Thanks for any help. Dicynodont (talk) 17:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Dicynodont. Please read WP:RTOA, which should give you the information that you need. Cullen328 (talk) 17:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

By chance, we had a similar question earlier today, now at WP:Teahouse#Draftifying a redirect which gives some more advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Great, thank you. Dicynodont (talk) 17:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Thank you! Not sure how I missed that. Dicynodont (talk) 17:34, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Article Deletion; An Inquiry into my Part_

I am Qazi Muhammad Asad Khan, a former Minister of Higher Education in Pakistan and i served as a member of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa assembly for two terms. I don’t see my Wikipedia page anymore. In fact there was a link earlier which offered it as follows; Qazi Muhammad Asad Khan. Can you tell me why this article has been deleted? I’m worried since it was relevant to my political career as well as my public service. Qmapk (talk) 07:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Qmapk. The placeholder left behind after the article Qazi Muhammad Asad Khan was deleted states that it was created by a banned or blocked user, in violation of their ban/block. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:24, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Click on the link and one reads "Created by a banned or blocked user (Thekhyberboypk) in violation of ban or block". "Uohabacasu" was blocked (i.e. prevented from editing, because of misbehaviour). Instead of appealing persuasively that the block was unjust or unneeded, the person using the name "Uohabacasu" thought "I'll just call myself 'Thekhyberboypk'; that will fool them!" Bad decision. It's called block evasion, and any draft or article created via block evasion is deleted. This deletion says nothing about your integrity or notability. -- Hoary (talk) 08:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

This means the article will not created again ? Qmapk (talk) 08:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

It does not mean that it will never be created, but it will need to be quite clear that it is not the blocked user or anyone associated with them. Please know that an article about yourself is not nececessarily a good thing. There are good reasons to not want one. My advice is that you go on about your life as if you had never heard of Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Qmapk Note that we have a Project called WP:WikiProject Pakistani politics and that page lists some of its active members (there are not many). You could enquire via the Project Talk page or via one of the member's talk pages, whether they think you would meet our notability criteria for politicians and, if so, whether they would like to work with you to draft an article about you. See also WP:YFA. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Mike i have done with this now. Qmapk (talk) 11:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Qmapk! As a former government member, and an elected member of a state parliament in a federal state, you do meet WP:NPOL and would be presumed notable. In other words, if someone (other than the blocked user) wrote a new article about you from reliable sources, it would certainly be kept. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Is there a max for ordered lists in source?

I am trying to add myself onto the list of participants for the Roots Music WikiProject and followed the formatting in source for ordered lists. The list as is has 39. points and when I add anything below marks it back down as 1. I'm not sure what's happening. Any help/advice/suggestions are greatly appreciated! Seanbhean-chríonna-caite (talk) 18:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Special:Diff/1243663772 seemed to work perfectly fine. Perhaps you added an extra line, creating an entirely new list instead of adding to the existing one? Please see WP:LISTGAP for details. Thank you, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I'll keep an eye out for that in the future, and thank you for the link to the page too! Seanbhean-chríonna-caite (talk) 19:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

User:Ignatius_Keeling vandalizing user pages

User:Ignatius_Keeling seems to be doing the same thing that User:Simeon_Mortensen did.

Special:Contributions/Ignatius_Keeling

"User Simeon Mortensen was vandalizing user pages and has been blocked."

98.248.161.240 (talk) 20:33, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

That user has since been blocked, another sockpuppet in a long line of others. Please see their talk page. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 20:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Editing correcting a page.

Regarding Category:Songs written by Sunny Skylar

There is an important omission.

The most important song he wrote was "Don't Wait Too Long", which he wrote in 1965.

The song was recoreded by Frank Sinatra, Tony Bennett, and others. Can you tell me how to make the update? Thank you.

Regards, Scraigm55 Craig (talk) 05:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The article need to be present on Wikipedia main space first before adding it as a category of songs by the artiste, but the Don't Wait Too Long song I can see here is by Madeleine Peyroux in 2004.

Once it's available in the main space, all you need to do is add the category template, Category:Songs written by Sunny Skylar inside a double bracket [[]] and the list will be updated automatically Tesleemah (talk) 05:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Draftifying a redirect

Hello there, I was wondering whether I can draftify an article that is currently a redirect, so that I can improve it and subsequently republish it in the mainspace? Thanks in advance, Mr Sitcom (talk) 07:33, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Mr Sitcom, what you can do is create a draft with the same name as the redirect (except that it's a draft). If you submit it for review and it gets accepted, it'll be the reviewer's job to sort out the redirect. Maproom (talk) 08:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Mr Sitcom You are quite experienced and have created several articles. If you are confident your new article will survive the new pages patrol, you can simply overwrite the redirect with your new text. See WP:RTOA. I would advise you to create the bulk of your new text in your sandbox or offline, so that when you copy/paste it into the redirect it already looks fairly complete. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both for the advice! I will write up the article in my sandbox instead. Cheers! Mr Sitcom (talk) 06:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

how do I handle an offensive comment from a Barnstar Editor?

how do I handle an offensive comment from a Barnstar Editor? Walter Tau (talk) 00:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Walter Tau, can you clarify what you mean? I don't see any recent barnstars on your Talk page, or any barnstar templates in your recent contributions. Do you mean "how do I handle an offensive comment from an editor who has barnstars"? If so, the short answer is "the same way you handle an offensive comment from anyone else". What's the trouble? -- asilvering (talk) 00:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

>thank you for your reply. Here is the offensive comment:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Slavic_languages&action=history

curprev 2024-09-02T20:54:09‎ StephenMacky1 talk contribs‎ 70,620 bytes −227‎ Reverted 1 edit by Walter Tau (talk): Do cite sources instead of inserting your ignorant opinions here. undothank Tags: Twinkle Undo

curprev 2024-09-02T20:35:47‎ Walter Tau talk contribs‎ 70,847 bytes +227‎ →‎Branches: the previous text has some factually incorred statements. Particularly, South Slavic Croatian usee Latin alphabet, while mutually intelligible Serbian uses Cyrillic. Macedonian is nothing , but a dialect of Bulgarian. Also, the paragraph about mutual intelligibility between Slavic languages was factually wrong infor and no references. I fixes the infor and I will add references later. undo Tags: Reverted Disambiguation links added

>The trouble is that, based on my experience with wikipedia "some pigs are more equal than other pigs". I think, it is pretty clear , that StephenMacky1 violated Wikipedia's Code of Conduct (whatever it is), and I feel like taking it to the next appropriate stage. BTW, my editing is FACTUALLY CORRECT , and the previous text on wikipedia had NO citations. Walter Tau (talk) 00:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Well, I do think it's rude to revert someone's edit and say they have "ignorant opinions", but if you're willing to accept some advice, I'd suggest taking positive actions rather than retributive ones. That is, I think you can probably solve this problem fairly easily simply by reinstating your edit with the appropriate sources, or going to the talk page to discuss (again, with sources). I should warn you that "Macedonian is nothing but a dialect of Bulgarian" is unlikely to be a winning argument, since our article Macedonian language appears to disagree. -- asilvering (talk) 00:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

thank you for your advice. I understand, that this is a contentious topic, and my Bulgarian friends disagree with their Macedonian cousins. The truth is, that Macedonian and Bulgarian are more mutually intelligible in the spoken forms, than American and British Englishes (I deliberately typed "Englishes"- do not correct me). I will add supporting references from American linguists later. "ignorant opinion" is an offensive comment, especially if the writer did not provide any support for their argument.

Note, that the original text did not have any references. Walter Tau (talk) 01:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Walter Tau, if you haven't read them, you might find the articles South Slavic languages and Eastern South Slavic of interest.

I'm English (and a book collector), and agree about 'Englishes': when books are translated into French, for example, they are often described on the Copyright page as being 'from the English' or 'from the American'. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 07:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

JSTOR Access

Hi, I might be wrong, but I remember Wikipedia gave me access to some libraries and websites like JSTOR where wikipedians can access research papers. I don't remember what accesses were given, and can't seem to find the message in my inbox or Talk Page archives. Can someone please help me with this? Do we get access to JSTOR? I need to read a paper. Waonderer (talk) 22:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Waonderer I'm fairly certain that The Wikipedia Library is what you're looking for. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 22:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Thanks a lot. Waonderer (talk) 22:51, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Waonderer, you can create a JSTOR account that will let you read 100 articles per month online. Just go to their homepage and click on "register." FactOrOpinion (talk) 00:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh yeah. Thanks a tonne. Waonderer (talk) 08:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm IP blocked and I need to change my password

I've been trying to log in with my other devices, but I forgot my password. I can't change it because I'm IP blocked even though I have my email address linked. Is there a way to change it from a device that's already logged in? BadEditor92 (talk) 17:26, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Blocks have no impact on merely logging in. If you have forgotten your password, and the recovery email does not work, or you didn't have one, you may end up needing to create a replacement account. 331dot (talk) 17:33, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I have a recovery email, I just don't know how to use it. BadEditor92 (talk) 19:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not entirely certain how it works as I've not forgotten my password, but it should be providing instructions. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

What was wikipedia's first article?

What was wikipedia's first article? 2601:483:400:1CD0:1541:589A:8F1E:588F (talk) 00:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Please see History of Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 01:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Or better yet, WP:Oldest articles, which mentions Nupedia, William Alston, and List of female tennis players as candidates. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 09:41, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

A Confusion Regarding Multiple Accounts

As someone who frequently handles sockpuppet issues across various Wikimedia projects, I've recently noticed that multiple accounts(Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Бмхүн) and VPNs have been used in discussions related to Talk:Prayagraj_Airport#Requested_move. (I state this with certainty because meta.wikipedia.org has already confirmed this through a check.)

My confusion is simple and not a complex issue: Are the discussions on Talk:Prayagraj_Airport#Requested_move still valid under these circumstances? Rastinition (talk) 03:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Multiple !votes are not valid, and vote-stacking is one of the types of deceptive practices that makes socking so disruptive. I added a note to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Бмхүн. DMacks (talk) 13:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I have reviewed the text from the SPI. Thank you for your feedback. Rastinition (talk) 10:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Massive issues with BLP

The page on C. S. Yogananda is as far as I can tell completely unsourced and from what the page tells me he’s still alive. How do you nominate a page for deletion? Because based on what I know of Wikipedia policy this page needs to be deleted. 22FatCats (talk) 09:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

C. S. Yogananda, just follow the recipe at Template:AfD in 3 steps. -- Hoary (talk) 11:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@22FatCats There has been some possible vandalism on that page. This revision from 23 April had many more sources. It will take a fair bit of work to sort out what should be done but WP:AfD is probably not the correct approach. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I've restored the article to the state it was in before User:BekhruzTursunboev took out a large chunk. I'll now work to tidy it up a bit. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

on rcats, again

r from title with diacritics is normally used for redirects with the same title (think pokemon for pokémon), which is cool and good, but does the presence or absence of the word "the" count as a big enough difference to warrant not including it (like the pokemon center, which i was just about to retarget to pokémon center)? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

It would be incorrect regardless, since the link you're about to retarget doesn't have a diacritic in it. -- asilvering (talk) 13:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! @Cogsan you can use {{Redirect category shell}} to include multiple RCAT templates namely {{r from title with diacritics}} and {{r from alternative name}} in this case. In some cases, like The New York Times it is warranted, but in case of the pokemon center I'd remove the from linked examples ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 13:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Reliable source

Hello there! Quick question, is last.fm considered to be a reliable source? Thanks in advance - feni (tellmehi) 09:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Greetings from an occasional fellow scrobblite. LFM is primarily a music-tracking service, and also contains user-generated bios. That said, it doesn't meet the WP:RS requirements. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 09:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@FENFEN pretty much agreed with @Slgrandson but if there's a subject-expert who has a recording, for example a Professor/journalist of the relevant topic, you could use it per the exceptions outlined in WP:SPS (self published sources). Other sourcing is preferable ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 13:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Criação de uma página sobre mim como sendo compositor

Estou criando uma página sobre mim Guilherme de Souza Camillo Guilherme de Souza Camillo

Sabendo que as políticas do Wikipedia não permitem autobiografia

Mas te pergunto o que pode ser feito no meu caso

Inclusive já tive problemas de vandalismo e o IP bloqueado

Não sou nenhum vândalo

Guilherme de Souza Camillo.2024 (talk) 17:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Guilherme. If you know that Wikipedia's policies do not encourage Autobiography, why are you trying to do it, and in a language you apparently don't speak?

Autobiography is very strongly discouraged because it almost never works: most people are not capable of writing a neutral article about themselves.

If you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then somebody could write an article about you - but they will not be writing it for you, they will be writing it for Wikipedia. If you do not meet those criteria, then no article about you is possible, whoever wrote it.

I very strongly advise you to give up this idea, and spend your time and your energy on something which is more likely to be successful: either editing Wikipedia on subjects unconnected with you (and probably on Portuguese Wikipedia, not English) or work on your career somewhere other than Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 18:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Alguém se prontifica

alguém teria a vontade de criar um artigo sobre mim

Meu nome é: Guilherme de Souza Camillo

Um novato compositor

De Araraquara/SP

Estou começando agora

Mais o que não entendo Mesmo se outra pessoa mesmo do Wikipedia a questão de fazer um artigo sobre mim não seria a mesma coisa a realização de uma

Guilherme de Souza Camillo.2024 (talk) 19:24, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Guilherme de Souza Camillo.2024 Welcome to the Teahouse. Because this is English Wikipedia, we expect everyone to communicate in English. According to Google Translate, you asked (in Portuguese) "Would anyone be willing to create an article about me? My name is: Guilherme de Souza Camillo. A novice composer...I'm just starting out..."

Please be advised that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia of NOTABLE THINGS. Has the world taken notice of you yet? Has mainstream media written about you in detail and in depth? Have you won major awards or had a chart success? You post here suggests that you have not.

So, if the answer is 'no', then the time is not right for there to be a page about your life or your achievements. Please use other social media platforms or websites to promote yourself. Once you become famous and are written about by mainstream media, or have musical success, then someone will surely want to create a page about you. Our criteria of notability for musicians can be found at WP:NMUSIC, and for people in general, at WP:NBIO. But even if you do become 'notable' and merit a page in this encyclopaedia, it would not be your page, and you would have no control over it. Everything in it would have to be based upon what published, independent sources have written about you. I regret to suggest that it is simply, TOOSOON. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

((edit conflict), more or less, with above comment saying mostly the same things) Well, first of all, please note that this is the English-language Wikipedia, most of us do not read or understand Brazilian Portuguese, I had to use Google translate just to determine what your question is. The short answer is that all article subjects have to be demonstrably notable as indicated by them alreadybeing the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. So, as someone just starting out, that probably isn't you.

(machine translation)

Bem, antes de tudo, observe que esta é a Wikipédia em inglês, a maioria de nós não lê ou entende português brasileiro, tive que usar o Google tradutor apenas para determinar qual é sua pergunta. A resposta curta é que todos os assuntos de artigos devem ser demonstravelmente notáveis como indicado por eles jásendo o assunto de cobertura significativa em fontes confiáveis. Então, como alguém que está começando, provavelmente não é você. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 19:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Problemas na minha página

Fui bloqueado por ip eu já mandei para o e-mail unblock-ptwiki@wikimedia.org e nada

continuo bloqueado

Guilherme de Souza Camillo

Pra mim este wikipedia é perda de tempo Guilherme de Souza Camillo.2024 (talk) 12:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Guilherme de Souza Camillo.2024

Olá, Teahouse/Questions, bem-vindo(a) à Wikipédia! Apesar de esforços para melhorar a Wikipédia serem sempre bem recebidos, infelizmente suas contribuições não foram escritas em um nível de inglês bom o suficiente para ser útil. Você parece ser mais familiarizado com o Português; sabia que existe uma Wikipédia em português? Talvez você prefira contribuir lá em vez de aqui. De qualquer forma, bem-vindo(a) ao projeto e obrigado(a) por seus esforços! Se precisar de ajuda, por favor, sinta-se livre para me comunicar em minha página de discussão. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 13:05, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Guilherme de Souza Camillo.2024 Na Wikipédia em inglês, não podemos ajudá-lo mais, desculpe. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 13:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

This user appears to be blocked indef on pt.wiki, which is perhaps what they're trying in some way to resolve here? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Editing

I heard I can get help editing here. My article won't get accepted. Kudzuboss123 (talk) 14:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Kudzuboss123 Currently the article has no sources. This is a major issue, without any sources it will never be accepted. Additionally, upon searching for some sources for you I couldn't find any. Due to that, I'd advise that you put that article on the backburner for now until it has some sources, instead doing some tasks to build up your experience on Wikipedia. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 14:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Kudzuboss123, welcome to the Teahouse. Please stop resubmitting the draft; without reliable sources, it will not be accepted, and if you persist it may eventually be rejected, which is the end of the line. Also, you seem to have a conflict of interest here - please read WP:COI. 57.140.16.35 (talk) 14:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello Kudzuboss123. After looking over Draft: Nightshift at Barry's I thought it might be helpful for you to study Help:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Encyclopedia articles are not posted in order promote anything, articles inform people about what reliable references, not connected to the article subject, have to say about the article subject. Also “Officially written by Kudzuboss 123 himself” is not appropriate. If you look at other Wikipedia articles you will see that the writer never gets a byline. Articles are written anonymously, and others are free to come along later and make any edits that improve the article. Best wishes on your future Wikipedia projects. Karenthewriter (talk) 16:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so if I remove it will it get approved? Kudzuboss123 (talk) 22:02, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

When Kudzuboss123 himself has written the article, that proves that the article is worthless. Everyone knows he is going to lie to make himself look good.

To be a good article, we have to prove that it DOESN'T come from Kudzuboss123. We need to be able to show that all the words in the article come from people who don't know him and are not his friends or employees. TooManyFingers (talk) 17:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok thanks, I understand. Do you think that would fix it and get it approved? Kudzuboss123 (talk) 22:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I doubt it. I think you should give up on it, unless you can write it forward instead of backward. Read WP:BACKWARD (really, read it), you went about it all wrong. You should start over from scratch, finding reliable sources that are independent of you first before you write even a single word. See WP:Golden Rule (and memorize the three criteria) for the sources required. Every sentence you write must be verifiable in a reliable source. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

If no one has published about the game then there is no possible path to success. If you agree, put DB-author inside double curly brackets {{ }} at the top of the draft. This will be a request for an Administrator to delete the draft. David notMD (talk) 03:22, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Kudzuboss123 (talk) 14:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Help me fix the coordinate

On this article, I am finding it difficult to perfectly fix the coordinate I got from Google maps using the minutes and seconds method. I would like an editor to fix the situation and then explain to me how the minutes and seconds method is used (which I don't understand) when the coordinates exceeds 60 seconds. Jõsé ^hola 14:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The coordinates I got from Google maps is 6.8650426°N, 3.7036977°E, Thanks.

Jõsé ^hola 14:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237 It looks as though you have found the decimal degrees values. These need to be converted into degrees, minutes and seconds to work with the template {{coord}}. The article explains how to convert one to the other. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

.... or as the template page explains, you can make it format correctly using decimal degrees. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I made the change with this edit. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Article

I am not great with my English. Also, this is my first time trying to create an article and I don't know how or where to start. DiarrhoeaDemon (talk) 16:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

OP is blocked. Anyone who shares OP's question should read WP:FIRST. -- asilvering (talk) 16:51, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Blocked for need to change name or abandon this account and start another. Has created Draft:Lusei, Declined. David notMD (talk) 18:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Proposing changes to an article

What is the best way to go about this? Rather than editing the page directly, is there any way to propose changes before an edit is made? Preferably to have them vetted by some higher-ranking user Pruning0252 (talk) 17:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Pruning0252, you can use Template:Edit request. But if you use this on a page that you can edit, you'll probably just be declined and told to make the edit yourself. If you think your edit is particularly contentious and might need some prior discussion, the first place to try is the article's Talk page. If you're just nervous about doing something wrong in general and not for some specific reason - be WP:BOLD! You can always come back here and ask a Teahouse host to have a look at your edit, if you're really unsure. -- asilvering (talk) 18:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Article heading assessment

Hey I really need a kind of quick acknowledgment to suggest me a perfect heading attributing the genuine name I can real determine framed in the article conventing the meaning to refine the historical approach towards the topic of Rathi Jats Clan but the plot twist it also contain the objective to cover the subtopic of Khap system “a prejudice body exist in HelpJat dynamic in the conservative society “ So which can be the most appropriate tittle suit in this complex case please help me to sort this out भारतसरकार-विभाग (talk) 15:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

In my personal remarking I found conjunction such as Rathi Khap of Jats (lineage) and Rathi-lineage of Jat community but i don't get any accumulated outcomes so far भारतसरकार-विभाग (talk) 15:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Bharatasrakar-Vibhag, and welcome to the Teahouse. I can only vaguely understand what you are asking, and I'm not sure which article you are talking about. But whichever article it is, the best place to discuss its name is on its talk page, and try and get consensus. If the editors involved in the discussion are unable to reach consensus, then dispute resolution gives ways to proceed.

You may also want to put a note at WT:WikiProject India inviting people to join the discussion you start on the talk page. ColinFine (talk) 18:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Draft Declined

I completed significant edits to Draft:Microsoft Azure Quantum with feedback from the live chat and reviewers. Is there anything else that should be fixed before submitting the draft for review? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CBathka (talk • contribs) 20:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The best way to get feedback is to resubmit it. 331dot (talk) 20:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Dummy edits to user talk page

I just noticed that an editor has been making WP:Dummy edits (but without any edit summaries) to a user talk page where he previously posted a warning message. He's been doing this on an irregular basis for eight months (sometimes over a month goes by without him doing it, sometimes he does a half dozen in a single day), but he's accumulated well over 50 such edits to this user talk page. I can't recall seeing anything like this in my more than 15 years editing Wikipedia. Anyone have any idea what he's doing? Martin IIIa (talk) 13:37, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

If it's a new user, could be inflating their edit count, to game some sort of extended confirmed or other status?

Annoying the page owner by notification-bombing them?

Some sort of bot or similar automated tool malfunctioning?

I'm out. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Martin IIIa Welcome to the Teahouse. Would you care to link to either a diff or the talk page in question. One other potential explanation is that I occasionally give my permission for another editor to leave me test warning messages or make other edits to my talk page as part of my attempt to help them learn or test out what they're doing. Maybe they're doing the same? You might like to look at how the recipient reacts to these minor edits as that could be key. Or you could ask one of them directly what's going on. Without knowing who or what page you've been looking at, we can't comment further, or take any action. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:59, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

I prefer not to say anything that might identify specific editors when making an inquiry; I've done that before and it tends to blow up in my face, often with admins threatening to block me under the premise that asking about an editor's behavior is the same as accusing them. The recipient is largely inactive, having made less than 20 edits since this started, none with any apparent relevance to his talk page activity. If I'm feeling brave I might ask the posting editor about it. Thanks for the replies. Martin IIIa (talk) 18:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Martin IIIa sometimes these are signs of a WP:Sleeper account or WP:Gaming the system. Worth keeping an eye on it longer term. Such edits would remain visible if they do disruptive edits. At the same time, if it's not doing anything harmful or disrupting anything outside their own user pages, leave them alone? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:37, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

It sounds like they're making edits to someone else's user talk page, though? Which sounds annoying at the least, harassing at the worst. -- asilvering (talk) 01:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, it's to someone else's user talk page. Sorry, I didn't realize until now that I hadn't made that perfectly clear in my initial post. Martin IIIa (talk) 22:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Request for review of my Draft

I created a draft called Draft:Siege of Madrid (1197) and i would like to see some comments to improve the page or even turn it to an article! Yaqub al-Mansur (talk) 14:11, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

You have submitted it for review, which may take place days, weeks, or sadly, months from now. The backlog is not a queue. You can continue to work on the draft while awaiting a response. If Declined, the reviewer will state reasons. David notMD (talk) 15:35, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello Yaqub al-Mansur. I am not a reviewer, but I looked at your draft article and thought it was a good start, but it is only six sentences long. While you're waiting for the draft to be reviewed you are able to do additional work, and you may want to go over your references once again and see if you can add some more details to your draft about the Siege of Madrid. Best wishes on getting your draft article approved. Karenthewriter (talk) 02:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Yaqub al-Mansur, I find it interesting that this siege is not mentioned at Madrid. Cullen328 (talk) 03:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Cullen328 The siege indeed happened Yaqub al-Mansur (talk) 21:16, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Yaqub al-Mansur, I am not questioning that the siege happened. I was just curious about why it isn't mentioned in the history section of Madrid. Cullen328 (talk) 21:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment! And i will always make sure to find more details about the siege. Yaqub al-Mansur (talk) 21:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

References

FYI – Yaqub al-Mansur is a suspected sock puppet, and has been blocked. Karenthewriter (talk) 04:40, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Remove citations

How can I remove citations from my page? Bethg1996 (talk) 16:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Bethg1996 What page would that be? Citations are important around here, but context matters? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:15, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Presumably Draft:Adam Bierman, where the OP made their only other edit. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Then WP:TUTORIAL may be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Fix article I cant

Please I am trying to fix an article but instead it look even more worse someone help and fix Umaru Musa Yar'Adua article infobox problemOneLastTruth (talk) 07:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@OneLastTruth: done. There was only a single closing square bracket in one of the wikilinks. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Why can I not view the revision history of some articles?

The article Michael Middleton, for example in the revision history, if you go to protection log, and click on revisions history, it shows the date (10 March 2024), crosed out, and I cannot click on Prev (which means previous) but in other articles like Caillou I can. Why is this? Why is it crossed out like that? 142.114.181.79 (talk) 04:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

They're deleted revisions. Administrators have the ability to delete revisions from the page history. They usually contain vandalism and so on. The deletion log for the page often has a record of the deletion. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 04:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Just going to add that revisions tend to only be revdeleted due to serious policy violations such a WP:COPYVIO and WP:BLPREMOVE. There's still a record of such edits kept for Wikipedia licensing purposes, but leaving them publicly viewable is potentially more of a problem than it's worth and could bring the project into disrepute. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

In this case, a vandal had added a false death date to Michael Middleton, the father of Catherine, the Princess of Wales. Middleton is still alive. Cullen328 (talk) 08:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Editing help and advice

Hello Wikipedians. I gather this is where I can get help and advice on text and logistics. My first Wikipedia contribution was to update the page for David Cappo AO at David Cappo. The previous version had no information about his activities since 2012 so I provided them. However the entry has been flagged as having text written in a "promotional tone" and an Wikipedia editor also told me it was "problematic" that I had referenced an organistion's website. I think I know what the offending words are, and have developed a second draft, but clearly I can't just make the changes myself, and certainly can't delete the flag, without input from others. So I'm hoping someone can tell me what would make the entry acceptable to Wikipedia standards and how I would then be able to get the flag removed. And by whom. The new information is pretty straight forward and I would have thought non controversial, so I'm assuming its just the odd word or sentence. Thanks in advance. Nick2103 Nick2103 (talk) 08:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Nick2103: I can see no obvious issues with the article, so I have removed the {{Promo}} tag. Another editor left a generic message on your talk page which talks about things that may be wrong with your edit, but has not replied to your follow-up there. They may not have seen it, so I have just "pinged" them (as I pinged you here) to draw their attention. It would be useful if you could confirm whether or not you have any connection to David Cappo, so we know whether our COI policy applies, and can advise you accordingly. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Andy. I'm new to all of this. I know of David's past work as I live in Adelaide and a friend of his told me what he is doing now. He wondered how that could be added to his Wikipedia page so I said I would give it a go. Is that a conflict? The only new information is that he co-founded a new organisation in 2016, now lives jointly in Kampala and Adelaide, and no longer has an affiliation with one university but does with another. Nick2103 (talk) 09:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

It might be a conflict, but perhaps more relevantly that information isn't from a WP:Reliable source. Speaking of sources, what is the reason you removed the source from the sentence "Cappo was born in Adelaide and educated at St Joseph's Primary School at Kingswood and at Rostrevor College"? It's not clear from the edit summary. CMD (talk) 09:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I will wait to see what is decided re conflict. Andy did not seem to have a problem with the source but maybe others will. As I said, this is my first time. The source you mention is at the end of the next sentence. It seemed more relevant to that early work that to his actual schooling. Thanks for the feedback. Nick2103 (talk) 09:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Reg: Maharaja Ranjit Singh's information

Dear Moderator, The page containing information on Maharaja Ranjit Singh need some serious edits as the present one is devoid of its merits as per the history. I need to contact the editor of this page. Warm Regards Sandeep Singh Sukherchakia Kanwar sandeep (talk) 10:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Kanwar sandeep, I'm not quite sure which article you're asking about. If the article is titled XYZ, then write your message at the foot of Talk:XYZ; so if it's Ranjit Singh, then write it at the foot of Talk:Ranjit Singh. -- Hoary (talk) 11:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Kanwar sandeep I see that you have now posted your concerns at the Talk Page of the article. However, you have not provided reliable sources for the details which you say are wrong. All Wikipedia articles are based on citing information already published elsewhere, so readers can verify what is said. Please provide your sources on the Talk Page or you are likely to be ignored there. Note that Wikipedia does not have content Moderators. All content is based on consensus. That particular article has had contributions from many editors and currently has over 200 people who watch it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:41, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The reliable sources for Sikh history particularly on my family is umdut-ut-Twarikh which is know as durbar book by Lala Sohan Lal suri which are based on Roznamcha. According to Umdat-ut-Twarikh at page No.56 the date of birth of Maharaja Khadak Singh should be 24th Feb, 1800 (as per english calander). Secondly, in the info under "Issue" section the names should be in the following sequence Maharaja Khadak Singh, Kanwar Rattan Singh, Kanwar Fateh Singh, Maharaja Sher Singh, Maharaja Duleep Singh in precise, but 2 names are missing. These two names along with the other names reflects in the family section below. My contention is that I am the direct living descendant of 8th generation of Maharaja Ranjit Singh I myself is an source of information and can provide you with the correct information.

In the "Early years" section It says Ranjit singh was born in a sandhawalia Jat Sikh family in Gujranwala Which is completely wrong and baseless because Maharaja was born in Badrukha in Sangrur district of Punjab and he was a SURYAVANSHI RAJPOOTRA of Kashyap Gotra which can be proved from the symbol of SUN decorated on his SAMADH which can be verified from many pictures in the internet and also can be witnessed by visiting that place. Maharaja Ranjit singh married one Laxmi Sandhawalia in his lifetime which means his wife Laxmi Sandhawalia was born in a Sandhawalia Jat Sikh family and not vice-a-versa.

Thanks & Regards,

"corrections sought for WIKIPEDIA page on Maharaja Ranjit Singh Kanwar sandeep (talk) 10:50, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Challenging

Talks about Gene's interested Jweighed1 (talk) 11:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Jweighed1 Almost all your contributions so far have been reverted and I have just reverted one you made to a policy page. If you continue to disrupt the encyclopaedia in this way you are likely to be blocked. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Article

Can someone please tell me how to start the introduction in an article? YourWorstNightmareDemon (talk) 14:14, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

MOS:LEAD goes into great detail about how to write the lead section of an article. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 14:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi! The article lead (the first few paragraphs before the sections) are usually a summary of the article's key points. It is not the easiest part to write, and the trick is to actually write it last once you have the rest of the article already done – you just have to summarize it! Ideally, the first sentence should tell what the subject is, followed by what makes it notable if it isn't immediately obvious. The rest of the lead can summarize the article, for instance chronologically (if it is a biography or a historical event) or by aspects of the topic. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Dead link

When editing an article with a reference that has a dead link, is it best to remove it? LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk) 16:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@LeónGonsalvesofGoa No, please don't. There is good advice on options at WP:LINKROT. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull:While I realize that you have provided the (general) canonical answer, IMO, it's really not going to be much help. The first part the reader comes across is "preventing link rot". In the given use case, this is completely irrelevant. So if somebody figures that much out, they then move on to usurpations. This goes on to an explanation of usurped domains, which in the situation that is explained, is a comparatively infrequent occurrence. Additionally, it's really extraneous to the issue of repairing a dead link. By this time, we'll have likely lost all but the most persistent of those editors who went to "LINKROT".

IMO, better to just state that some automated process may come along and fix it or perhaps some other editor will fix it. Good directions for recovering a link using archive are just plain complicated, and while many times these links can be fixed without too much difficulty, the general solution is beyond the scope of what (to the best of my knowledge) we explain anywhere in "LINKROT". Fabrickator (talk) 17:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Fabrickator All that is true. I give that sort of quick answer because my just saying "No, please don't" to the question asked would be terse to the point of incivility. That is, however, what the "Nutshell" part of the Linkrot how-to guide advises. If the OP had asked a more specific question (e.g. by giving the article name), then I would have tried to give a more customised answer. Mike Turnbull (talk) 08:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Fabrickator @Michael D. Turnbull For context, please take a look at Reference 11 (2024 Bangladesh anti-Hindu violence). LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk) 14:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@LeónGonsalvesofGoa That one's easy. It's at the Internet Archive at this URL. You can readily add that into the article: see {{cite web}} for the parameters to use, including |archive-url= Note that I don't speak Bengali so I can't confirm that the citation supports what our article says. I don't know why the bot couldn't fix this, since it is supposed to look at that archive. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

WP:DEADREF may be of help. LizardJr8 (talk) 22:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Can I use screenshots I took to improve an article?

I have been doing some work on the article for the game Redout, and I want to add an image for the gameplay section showing off the UI and look of the game. I can't find any images that I can legally use, so is it ok for me to use a screenshot I took that shows off those elements, or does that fall under original research or self published resources? I own a copy of the game, so there shouldn't be any legal issues. ApteryxRainWing (talk) 12:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I recommend you read the entirety of Wikipedia:Software screenshots. Redout is still copyrighted software (even if you own a license to play it), so you must be prudent with it. This doesn't fall under original research or self published resources, but make sure the gameplay section itself isn't original research. win8x (talking | spying) 12:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@ApteryxRainWing While you are working on the article, you might like to fix the duplicated references #4 and #8, using named refs and remove the tag someone placed at the top. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Question about citing sources

So I haven't done much yet because I have a small question about whether or not the rule of common knowledge applies to Wikipedia, and if so to the extent it goes to. I've tried adding things that I didn't know what to source with because it seemed like community knowledge, but it seems that those have been removed so I guess I don't quite understand it. Thank you in advance TheGoofyGobo (talk) 15:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, TheGoofyGobo, welcome to the Teahouse! Generally speaking, "common knowledge" isn't a thing on Wikipedia. One of Wikipedia's fundamental principles is verifiability, which means that every statement in a Wikipedia article must be able to be verified by a reference to a reliable source. That doesn't necessarily mean that every statement needs an explicit citation attached to it, and whether to put one in or not can be subject to editorial judgment, but the rule of thumb is: if someone were to challenge it or remove it, you would need to be able to add that citation to address their concerns; if that's not something you'd be able to do on challenge, then you probably shouldn't put it in the article to begin with. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@TheGoofyGobo One of Wikipedia's policies is that readers must be able to verify what articles say. Since our readership is very wide, we can't assume much "community knowledge". There is an essay about WP:SKYISBLUE (much weaker than a policy) that suggests some things are so obvious they don't need to be cited but that's risky and if you are reverted, the policy is always to provide a citation. Biographies of living people require particular care in their citations. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Biography article models

Hi and apologies in advance if this has already been asked, but I couldn't find it in the search (possibly I'm using the wrong terminology).

I am a very occasional contributor. I was trying to create a first article and wondered if there were any discussions or agreement on model biography articles that I could follow (particularly short ones).

Which ones do more experienced Wikipedians think are best practice? I've looked at a lot, long and short and they all seem to have different styles and headings of where they put author's works, articles, podcasts, videos etc. I have seen some discussion and general rules, which are useful, but are there any articles that are considered models by most?

For example, I was not sure where to put book review references- it seemed natural to use as a reference for an author's book, but they were all edited out, where should they go?

Thanks in advance for your help. ITellComputerYes (talk) 14:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@ITellComputerYes Welcome to the Teahouse. We have a manual of style with general guidance for biographies: see MOS:BLP. If your subject is alive, then it is important to also read the policy at WP:BLP, in particular the bit about inline citations. In general, you should use articles rated good or featured as models but these are unlikely to be short ones. Note that your main task is to show how the person is wikinotable. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks @Mike Turnbull, that's really helpful. Makes me think I should have chosen a different / better new article (everything else on my list already had a page, but maybe that means I just need a better list). Also, that I should have asked more questions. Thanks again. ITellComputerYes (talk) 15:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Mike TurnbullAnd with regards to reliable sources and notability, I suppose I was mistaking book reviews for notability and citing them, when references needs to independent discussion of the person's life and work to pass the notability test. ITellComputerYes (talk) 15:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@ITellComputerYes The specific notability guidance is at WP:AUTHOR. Sometimes, for a well-received book, that can meet WP:NBOOK while the author themselves doesn't have quite enough coverage. Book reviews (other than ones printed on the back of the book itself) may be detailed and match all the criteria in the golden rules for notability sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Mentor

Hey all so I think I’m losing my mentor. Would I be able to request for one through here. Not sure if this is the place for this. Thank you. T24boo 17:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@T24boo I'm a mentor and I believe I can "claim" you, which I'll do in a moment.  Done Meanwhile, feel free to ask any questions on my Talk Page (or here where others will chip in). Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

a question possibly already answered

hi again, if I were to make an article about let's say, pizza. Does the history of the origins of that food need to be added? [=T Jude Marrero \=D (talk) 17:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you can add a bit of the origin to give insight about the particular topic of dicuss. However, make sure there are notable references to back your claim upTesleemah (talk) 17:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

ok, does it depend on how the claim is worded? or not, because I feel like if I word it differently then I;m gonna have to modify it Jude Marrero \=D (talk) 18:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Probably best to base what you write on what the sources say (without close paraphrasing). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:05, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

ok, thanks [=) Jude Marrero \=D (talk) 18:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree with @Chaotic Enby Tesleemah (talk) 18:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Nothing is truly necessary to add (if your article has enough sources to meet the Wikipedia:General notability guideline, even a short article is okay), but it's always a positive if you can write more about it! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I believe Help:Your first article will have the answer. Adam P. Larry (talk) 17:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Jude marrero, well written articles about culinary dishes and beverages usually summarize what reliable sources say about their origins. But there are often disputes about food and drink origins, so you need to present all sides of the story proportionally. Cullen328 (talk) 18:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Would it be apropiate to make a article about this?

I am talking about this video;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4-csEm16Og I want to make a article for it. Adam P. Larry (talk) 17:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Adam P. Larry: Is this specific video discussed in multiple news articles published by reputable newspapers, or covered by some other publication that meets WP:RS? If not, then no, it's not appropriate to make an article for it. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I will get an article I remember about suicide prevention. Adam P. Larry (talk) 18:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, individual videos are rarely notable, but if it has been discussed multiple times in, say, news media, you could write something based on this coverage. (Self-published sources like blogs or other YouTube videos don't count for notability coverage) Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

How many times should it have been mentioned? Adam P. Larry (talk) 18:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Usually, three is good, provided each is in-depth enough to write some of the article based on it. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

.Thank you. Adam P. Larry (talk) 18:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Flags of Finnish municipalities

A lot of pages for significant Finnish municipalities show flags that are just edited versions of the coat of arms. This is despite the fact that these don't tend to be official. Could someone look into this? KurkkuStadist (talk) 18:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

KurkkuStadist, since you say you are from Helsinki, then I think that you are the best person to look into this. Cullen328 (talk) 18:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Sandy hook weapons seem to not have category

I think the sandy hook page should have it's own weapon category with links to the weapons articles. Like on the columbine high school shooting article it has this category. Thank you! Adam P. Larry (talk) 17:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Note to resonder, this user is most likely talking about the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012, and the Columbine High School massacre in 1999. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 17:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Correct. Adam P. Larry (talk) 17:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I will also want to include to the edit the 2 links: Bushmaster XM-15 and Saiga-12 Adam P. Larry (talk) 18:10, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

From all the sources I could gather it seems it would be appropiate. Adam P. Larry (talk) 18:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Why am I ceasing my donations to Wikipedia effective today?

tl;dr: How dare you ask me to cite my edits?

I have been a monetary and article/comments/changes contributor for many years. Never has Wikipedia found any of my proposed entries to be false or inaccurate. You have arbitrarily decided that I lack credibility. Your holy grail is the ability of a contributor to provide citations/references. This I believe is naive and erroneous. Rather consider the history/credibility of the proposed editor. Just because someone has a reference or footnote doesn't make the proposed change true or accurate. I could cite Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf to support a basis for the hatred of the Jewish people. Would that make the change proposed accurate? Obviously not. You need to distinguish critical/negative posts from generic/harmless posts. When I tell you I have seen a movie ten times and propose a change based on that you should not get high and mighty on me. The process of making changes is ridiculously not user friendly and I will have none of it, hence no more money for you. Don't get me wrong, I will endeavor to use Wikipedia as a reference, yet I could make a career of pointing out items you have omitted. See my post on the television performance in 1962 by Lon Chaney Jr. for instance. PatBrennan (talk) 18:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC) PatBrennan This is a place for new users to ask questions about using Wikipedia, not a place to air grievances with Wikipedia. Note that donations go to the Wikimedia Foundation, to operate the computers Wikipedia is on and other Foundation activities. Us editors do not see the money, and donating or withholding donations has no impact on content or editing practices. Of course, you may use whatever criteria you wish to determine what donations you make- but also know that the Foundation's finances are stable at the moment, so you aren't really hurting them too much. Verifiability is one of the more important principles of Wikipedia. That is why references are required. We can't reference any individual's personal experience or knowledge- because we have no way of verifying that any particular user is who they say they are- and because what they say can change over time. Truth is in the eye of the beholder these days(when Capitol rioters who sought to execute the Vice President of the United States are dismissed as "tourists") so we focus on what can be verified; see WP:TRUTH. This does not mean that inaccurate information cannot be corrected. Is there a particular situation that we can help you with? 331dot (talk) 18:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Employ AI-driven animation software to ensure smooth and professional character movements.

Employ AI-driven animation software to ensure smooth and professional character movements. 45.124.15.205 (talk) 04:41, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to do it yourself. -- Hoary (talk) 05:25, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Animation software already does this. No AI is necessary for such trivia. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

This is not relevant to Wikipedia in any way. CharlieEdited (talk) 00:07, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

This might be some piece of automated software to post advertising anywhere it can find text editors on the web. 22FatCats (talk) 09:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place for self-promotion or advertising. The purpose of Wikipedia is to create a place to learn about things, entirely community-driven. MacaroniPizzaHotDog (talk) 03:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Sir, I want you to explain what in god's name you are trying to ask? Wikipedia is one the biggest online encyclopedia's, not an advertisement. Artificial Intelligence, is worse than human artists. Please shut your mouth, your username looks like an IP address, and you sound like a bot. It's simply facts. Nojboj (talk) 23:42, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

How to add an image to a userbox in the UBX creator?

I'm currently hoping to make some new userboxes and I want to include images in the ones I hope to create. Some userboxes will contain only one image while others contain two on both sides. However, I'm struggling to figure out how to add images to the given code in the creator. Any advice on how to do so would be greatly appreciated! Surayeproject3 (talk) 20:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Surayeproject3: What do you mean by "the UBX creator"? If you refer to something specific you saw somewhere then please link it. Or do you just want to create userboxes? With a template like {{userbox}} you can choose to add image code in the id parameter. For example, User:UserBox/User Earthling says id = [[Image:The Earth seen from Apollo 17.jpg|43px]]. {{Userbox-2}} has two parameters id1 and id2 which can both be used for images. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I just want to create userboxes, and I meant the Userbox creator provided. How can I see the specific code for a userbox so I know how to base my own template for userboxes I wanna create, especially for two images? The process is kind of confusing me as it is my first time making userboxes. Surayeproject3 (talk) 00:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Surayeproject3 You don't need to use User:UBX. You can have a userbox anywhere in your userspace (which is what you should do) such as User:Surayeproject3/Userbox BlahBlah. You can see the code for {{userbox}} (that's the userbox creator) at it's documentation. Paste the code in Template:Userbox/doc#Usage on your userbox page, and edit the values you want, and you can look at examples here Template:Userbox/doc#Examples. Once you're done, preview the page and if it looks good, publish it! win8x (talking | spying) 02:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Surayeproject3: I don't know what you mean by "the Userbox creator provided". I asked for a link. {{Userbox-2}} has documentation of its parameters. You can click the edit tab at User:UserBox/User Earth to see an example use with two images. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter This is the link I'm referring too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Userbox_Maker Surayeproject3 (talk) 23:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Surayeproject3: Wikipedia:Userbox Maker uses {{Userbox}} which does not have an option for images in both sides. Use {{Userbox-2}} for that. I don't think it has a "Userbox Maker" but you can just copy and adapt code from the documentation or an existing use like User:UserBox/User Earth. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Surayeproject3: Please make sure you carefully read through WP:UBX#Caution about image use before adding any images to an userbox. Not all images you see used on Wikipedia are licensed the same way, those licensed as non-free content can't be used in userboxes. If you try to do so, they will almost certainly be removed (perhaps rather quickly) by either a WP:BOT or a Wikipedian that reviews how files are being used. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I should be good to use images that are on Wikimedia Commons, no? The images uploaded there have to be in public domain either way, but let me know if there are other rules surrounding this Surayeproject3 (talk) 23:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Surayeproject3: Commons images must have a free license or be public domain. It's not the same but both are allowed in user boxes. If it's not public domain then the image must link to the file page but it does so by default. You are only allowed to disable the link with |link= in the image code if the image is public domain. Some images were uploaded to Commons with an invalid license and aren't actually allowed there but if you didn't upload it yourself then just assume that the license is valid. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Changing date format

I recently changed the date format on a stub article Escape from Germany (2024 film), an American film about German events, over to the American mdy format. It was undone by Szagory who claimed since they created the page, they get to choose which format is used per MOS:DATERET. This seems to me like WP:OWNBEHAVIOR. Was I wrong here? Limmidy (talk) 11:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Limmidy I'd say a mix of yes and no. Although the film is an American film, it is set in Germany and thus has ties to both, so really it is a bit of a toss-up and you should probably follow the initial date formatting as per DATERET. Although I can definitely see where you're coming from due to how they worded the revert, I wouldn't see citing DATERET as a case of ownership behaviour as they are using sound reasoning.

What I would advise is that you follow BOLD, Revert, Discuss in the future, it's a really good method for settling these sorts of issues. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Howzit Limmidy,

Just to clarify my position: I personally have no objection to mixing date formats (MDY vs. DMY) and English spelling variants (American English vs. Commonwealth English), provided that they are not side by side.

But at the same time there is first major contributor rule - and it was me who created that article, I use Commonwealth English spelling and I prefer dates to be in DD-MM-YYYY format. I realise that this film is American - but at the same time it is about events in Nazi Germany, not USA. For somebody to complain now that non-American spelling and non-US date format is used - pardon my honesty, but that sounds a bit rich: the film was released in the States since April (for almost 5 months), and nobody has bothered to create an article for it. But now that I've created it, for somebody suddenly to decide to change the spelling and date format - such changes can't be regarded as "major contribution", don't you agree? 😕

Once again: please feel free to use American date format and spelling - but at the same time please respect my prerogative as article's creator and first main contributor to use spelling and date format consistent with my original text. Hopefully no bad feelings, mate? 😉

Cheers,

Szagory (talk) 12:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

No bad feelings at all - this isn't even a complaint, just looking for clarification on guidelines. I originally made the change because the article only described the film as an "American historical drama film" from an American director released in the US at that time of the change, and the infobox was using the mdy format, so I switched it over similarly to how another American film relating to Germany Fury (2014 film) had it. Nothing more! Limmidy (talk) 14:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Szagory: That's not a "rule", and even if it were, it does not give you a veto. It says (my emboldening) "If an article has evolved using predominantly one date format, this format should be used throughout the article, unless there are reasons for changing it based on the topic's strong ties to a particular English-speaking country, or consensus on the article's talk page." Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Andy,

I see your drift and agree with it, to large extent - and of course I acquiesce completely to your point that ideally consensus should be reached regarding changes to date format or English spelling variant to be used throughout any given article.

At the same time there is no such rule that articles on all US-related topics should stick to American date format and/or American English, is there? And MOS:DATERET clearly says:

The date format chosen in the first major contribution in the early stages of an article should continue to be used... Where an article has shown no clear sign of which format is used, the first person to insert a date is equivalent to "the first major contributor".

And there was a clearly date in DD-MM-YYYY format in article's WP:Lead, wasn't there? 😉

============================

Hi Limmidy,

Yes, I'm not aware of a way to customise Film date template to display dates for WP:Infobox in a specific format (you know, like "is_UK" parameter for Infobox weapon). Hence dates in Infobox film might indeed look inconsistent with date format in the article, unfortunately.

But so far as my "barney" with you (if it were to be regarded as adversarial 😋) goes: like I said, I wouldn't insist on all future changes to Escape from Germany (2024 film) being made strictly with non-US date format and British English spelling (IMO, date formats and English spelling variants could be mixed within reason in the same article) - so if you want to, we could remove Use dmy dates from the article altogether. But please just don't expect me suddenly to change the spelling (and to lesser degree, date format) in an article which was created by me. 😎

P.S. Could somebody go ahead and add a theatrical release poster image for Escape from Germany (2024 film) to the article, please? Because I'm never sure where people get such images without violating Wikipedia's copyright restrictions... 🙄

Szagory (talk) 15:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

You are quite correct that a rule which I neither claimed or implied exists does not exist. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Limmidy,

I've started watching the film and quickly lost all interest in it - it's one thing for a film to be made on shoestring budget, but it's something else to see an inexpensively made production with stilted acting, riddled with historical inaccuracies, and with dialogue that can only be described as "Bible bashing" (what really got me was a line spoken by a Mormon missionary and addressed to American consul-general: "Heber J. Grant has a better source of intelligence than US military", meaning obviously God)... 😕

The article is all yours, mate - and you can change the dates in it to US format, if you want. But if possible, I'd appreciate it if my original British English spelling in the text were left unchanged.

Good night,

Szagory (talk) 23:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Szagory: @Limmidy: As an American myself, I'll say that while British spelling appears to my eyes as archaic and sometimes pretentious, I must say that the US/American way of representing dates is downright stupid! I'm all in favor of adopting the dd-mm-yyyy and yyyy-mm-dd formats in all articles. All Americans understand both, anyway! An American film, even about an American topic, is not harmed by using internationally-accepted date formats. Let's lose the US format. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Szagory @Anachronist Both of these comments are hilarious!! Personally I have no interest in the article or the film, but I like this answer about the harmlessness of using internationally-accepted date formats. I should've considered that. Thank you all! Limmidy (talk) 00:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Szagory, above you said I personally have no objection to mixing date formats (MDY vs. DMY) and English spelling variants (American English vs. Commonwealth English) and again IMO, date formats and English spelling variants could be mixed within reason in the same article. Please be aware that this idea is inconsistent with the Manual of Style, which at MOS:CONSISTENT says The conventions of a particular variety of English should be followed consistently within a given article, and at MOS:DATEUNIFY says Dates in article body text should all use the same format. CodeTalker (talk) 00:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Category:Pages using WikiProject [insert project] with unknown parameters

In Special:WantedPages, a lot of the most wanted pages are empty categories for pages that use a WikiProject with unknown parameters. In fact, the most wanted page, with nearly 120,000 pages (most appear to be talk pages) linking to it, is the empty category "Category:Pages using WikiProject Lepidoptera with unknown parameters". Why is that? BombCraft8 ^{(talk) (contributions)} 00:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, BombCraft8. The banner template is causing that. You'd get the most informed answer by posting to this talk page: Module talk:WikiProject banner. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@BombCraft8: Some users make articles about most described species. Lepidoptera says "About 180,000 species of the Lepidoptera have been described". Around 120,000 talk pages use {{WikiProject Lepidoptera}} which uses Module:WikiProject banner which uses Module:Check for unknown parameters. I haven't examined the details but I guess the latter always checks for existence of a category for unknown parameters so the talk page can be added to the category if an unknown parameter is found in the call of {{WikiProject Lepidoptera}}. Such an existence check can have the same effect as a link and make it look like the category is extremely wanted. I don't know how many of the 120,000 talk pages would actually be added to Category:Pages using WikiProject Lepidoptera with unknown parameters if is was created but it's probably very few, unless an allowed parameter is incorrectly registered as unknown. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

The category is empty, the pages just link to it. BombCraft8 ^{(talk) (contributions)} 13:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@BombCraft8: They don't actually link to it. They only make an ifexist check to se whether the category exists. This is registered as a link in some MediaWiki features even if there is no link. For example, the pages are listed at Special:WhatLinksHere/Category:Pages using WikiProject Lepidoptera with unknown parameters. Help:What links here#Overview says: The parser function #ifexist: causes a listing in "What links here" among the normal links, even though no link is produced. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I'd suggest removing the ifexist check, since it causes all these categories to clog up WantedPages BombCraft8 ^{(talk) (contributions)} 01:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Ok BombCraft8 ^{(talk) (contributions)} 13:30, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

German Infobox trouble.

I am asking a question for a German translation article of George Finey. Is there any sort of Infobox that can work with comic artists or just a regular person. I used Infobox by itself but it seemed insufficient. Any advice will be greatly appreciated. Nojboj (talk) 23:30, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Asking this question on German Wikipedia would have provided you with the best answer! Tesleemah (talk) 01:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Nojboj: Ask at de:Wikipedia:Fragen_von_Neulingen RudolfRed (talk) 01:25, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Pay walled sources

What is WP's policy regarding the use of pay-walled reference's as reliable sources. If the source cannot be viewed by the reader without payment what purpose does it serve. It is basically not available since most readers will not pay. Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 12:43, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Buster7 The easiest way to explain this is to look in the general direction of The Wikipedia Library. Paywalled sources are fully acceptable on the assumption that if the person providing the source can access it and can state what's on there when prompted, it's fine. You can also ask someone at the Resource Exchange to look at it for you. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:49, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 12:50, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Buster7, for many topics, the best sources will be books written by academics and published by university presses. I do not think we should exclude those sources because the text is not available for free online. Cullen328 (talk) 17:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Cullen, yes. True enough. But it does present a problem when the source cannot be read to verify that what is claimed is actually in the article. I can't check to read for myself and, in so doing, verify that the claim has not been misunderstood or mis-represented. Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 01:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

If you're concerned that a source added by someone else is being misrepresented and are unable to verify it yourself, you can discuss it on the article's talk. Perhaps someone who can access the source can provide the verification you seek. You can also ask about it at WP:RX or WP:RSN since one the regulars at those noticeboards might be able to verify the source. If you're unable to read a source yourself that you want to add in support of some article content, then you probably shouldn't use it until you're able to verify its WP:RSCONTEXT. Wikipedia policy only requires that source be reliable, published and accessible. See WP:PUBLISH and WP:PUBLISHED for some more information on this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:52, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

How can I add a new page about a music artist if I'm a brand new editor/member?

Hello! I am a 51 year old musician living in New York, and I have had an extensive career performing/touring/recording with many artists. Could someone begin a page about me that I could then edit? Thank you ! Linktree.com/Benoir Benoir Metzger (talk) 03:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Benoir Metzger. Please be aware that autobiographical editing is strongly discouraged, and that you should follow the guidelines for editing with a conflict of interest. We have a notability guideline for musical performers that you should read. My brief internet search failed to find evidence that you are a notable musical performer as Wikipedia defines that term. Cullen328 (talk) 04:55, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Checking for recent discussion activity across multiple wikiprojects?

There are a ton of wikiprojects under the WikiProject Music umbrella, and I'm wondering if there's an easy way for me to tell which sub-projects have had recent discussions without having to click on each one individually. Ideally I'd love if there was a way to sort the directory by recent activity, but if not, would my best bet be to add all the talk pages to my watchlist and just check that on occasion? Does anyone else have experience with looking for recent/active discussions across several wikiprojects? Thanks in advance! Violetstork (talk) 03:06, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Violetstork, try clicking this search link. In the search box, replace the words in all-caps with your own search keywords, and hit the blue search button and check out the results. Come back and lmk if it is working for you, and if not, what problems you are seeing. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 06:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Seeking advice regarding a musical artist's notability

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

---

Hi everyone. I've posted this as a question over on the Talk page of WP:MUSICIAN, but wanted to ask it here as well. I stumbled upon some news for an Israeli-Palestinian pop group called as1one, of which, a draft already exists. I've since edited the draft based on the new news/existing press in the draft. They have some decent press (Billboard, Variety, People, some newspaper coverage) but have yet to release anything. Conventional wisdom tells me that they're notable/approaching notability based on the publications reporting on them (based on traditional WP:V and note 1 of WP:BAND), but I'm curious what outside opinions would say about this situation, considering they haven't produced any songs/videos. A documentary about the group is due to be released on Paramount+, but obviously has not been released yet. I'm curious, does the existence of good quality articles dictate their notability despite not having released any content? 30Four (talk) 23:24, 4 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.

Help!

Are you allowed to use ChatGPT for Wikipedia? Please let me know if i should use ChatGPT for editing or not! DANiHeARTz. .MEE (talk) 15:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, DANiHeARTz. .MEE, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The answer is that is is discouraged. Please see WP:LLM for the reasons. ColinFine (talk) 15:33, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@DANiHeARTz. .MEE Welcome to the Teahouse. In essence 'NO' (but see below).

You should carefully read these two essays Wikipedia:Large language models and Wikipedia:Large language models and copyright (including the 'See Also' links at the bottom of each page) to understand the serious pitfalls and traps in using any AI tool to create content to place ni Wikipedia. Basically, don't let it regurgitate nonsense which you then paste into Wikipedia believing it to be neutral and true, and as if you had written it when you hadn't.

As you know, AI tools have sucked up tons and tons of proper, high-quality, human-written content (including Wikipedia articles) and is now regurgitating it to others as if it were written and analysed by a human when it has not. It's a rapidly developing field, and I don't believe we've yet got any formal policies on its use or application here on Wikipedia. But please avoid it. I fear for a bland and error-filled future if AI content is repeatedly used and reused to generate content that other AI tools then use and reuse to generate more 'new' content.

That said, if used indirectly, and with caution, it can have its uses - and I've been using it extremely carefully myself recently whilst drafting an article on a very obscure European glacier. Basically, I used ChatGPT to "write an article on XX glacier in the style of a Wikipedia article and supply a list of relevant sources". I then pasted that response into an offline word processor and am working my way through the references it found to assess their accuracy, content and usefulness to me. I'm simply looking at the response ChatGPT gave me as a quick layout and content prompt. But I'm still writing the content myself based upon me actually reading and checking those references!!! You must do that to should you ever be tempted - and do the actual writing yourself.

We have a saying here in the UK that You can't polish a turd. So, if you think that without any critical or analytical skills we should let editors use AI tools as a lazy way to avoid doing any proper editing work ourselves, I'd have to ask you why you'd bother coming here to contribute in the first place? Once you've let AI generated content into this encyclopaedia, why not simply encourage everyone else to use AI tools directly and simply blow up Wikipedia with all its human input, oversight and analysis? So please tread extremely carefully, and avoid it if you don't have confidence in your own ability to judge accuracy of Reliable Sources for yourself. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:49, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Adding to what Nick Moyes said, I would not recommend using ChatGPT in WP-discussions either (not that you did). See for example Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_206#Madame_Tussauds_COI Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Ok thanks for this amazing info. DANiHeARTz. .MEE (talk) 06:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Ive clicked on both links and read them on my mind, also watched some of the video that's "06 Lighting Talk" in WP:LLM. DANiHeARTz. .MEE (talk) 06:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Here is an article that suggests some ways AI could be used to actually improve Wikipedia. [5] Thellosnellow (talk) 02:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

You technically can, but I wouldn't suggest using it. Wikipedia is better when actual writers, with talent, contribute. Maybe work on essays, and you can try an article. @Thellosnellow does mention AI's contributing, but leave the writing to humans. ChatGPT can't tell us how many r's are in the word strawberry, I don't think we should allow it to write. Citations would be horrible to find. Same with links. Overall, even if AI was advanced enough, it shouldn't be writing in a place where facts matter a lot, and you must be able to prove them. Nojboj (talk) 23:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

With ongoing rapid advancements, I think there is a role for AI in writing articles. Thellosnellow (talk) 02:24, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Well agree to disagree. Nojboj (talk) 10:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Whatever happened to {Color|Gradient}

I dont know what happened to the option to use the gradient option on a Color template. Seriously what happened? shJunpei talk 17:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Shjunpei, can you be more specific? What template? Do you have an example where it is not working as you expect? Mathglot (talk) 06:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Mainly all the color templates ive tried. shJunpei talk 09:52, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

How do you think somebody who want to answer your question should know which templates you have tried? Even two examples only would be better than this answer. 2A02:3032:307:F168:CD3E:8CD1:DA3E:C693 (talk) 10:09, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Shjunpei: {{color}} does not have a gradient parameter and never has. See Template:Color § TemplateData. Bazza 7 (talk) 10:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

What.... but i thought it did. shJunpei talk 11:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

donation

i have used QR CODE to UPI pay 312/- through mobile but that is not recorded on the payment page. and that page prompting to pay. find a solution to direct the payment acknowledgement in that manner. many will be feeling that. 103.241.225.164 (talk) 16:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

We can't help with donation questions here. send your inquiry to donate@wikimedia.org RudolfRed (talk) 16:32, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Is this article now ready

An article I created but still in the draftspace Draft:Ndagi Abdullahi was previously deleted by WP:PROD, see deletion log. I don't know if the one I recreated is now ready to be moved to the mainspace. Is it now verifiable with my added references. Jõsé ^hola 07:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Josedimaria, I noticed very quickly that the content about his early life and education was copied directly from your first reference. That is a violation of WP:COPYRIGHT and you cannot use a long quotation not clearly indicated as a quotation as a complete section. Your prose must be your original writing, not a cut and paste job from your references. Use of direct quotations should be a small percentage of your prose, and the reader must be able to distinguish quotations from originally written content, which should constitute most of the prose. Cullen328 (talk) 08:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Apart from that, is there any other improvement you think should be done?

Secondly, can you help me re-write that section. Thanks @Cullen328: Jõsé ^hola 10:45, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Josedimaria, I am sorry but I am not familiar enough with the reliability of Nigerian sources to assist you any further. Cullen328 (talk) 18:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

How do I redirect a page fully?

I need help redirecting the page Draft:El Er Cyrillic to Draft:El Er(Cyrillic) and i already put the stuff for the redirecting but still doesnt redirect to the page Draft:El Er(Cyrillic) please help i need help making a wikipedia redirect 2001:8F8:1D1C:A09E:74AF:CC6F:BABB:6867 (talk) 16:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done. You placed the redirect but did not remove the AfC template at the top, which is why the redirect didn't work. If you are User:MateuszKapicki10, please do not edit while logged out. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 21:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Adding NXX info to an NPA

I am trying to edit the wikipedia page for whale code and add the NXX info under the section where the NPA is listed. I thought I added it correctly as I received no error, but it doesnt show when i test the edit. Im sure its a syntax thing, back I cant seem to get it right. Can someone provide me a suggestion or an example of the Syntax I need to use as Id like to add this information for other remote communities.

here is the link: Whale Cove, Nunavut Much appreciated,

regards, Vacantcode Vacantcode (talk) 19:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Vacantcode, and welcome to the Teahouse. I can see that you tried to add a parameter for 'NXX' to the article, which uses Template:Infobox settlement. Being in the UK, I don't know actually know what NXX actually refers to (telephone dialling code for the area, perhaps?), but it's clear that this is not a parameter which that template supports.

I wonder if you'd have any success if you used the approved parameter 'area_code' and 'area_code_type'? A full list of the displayable parameters can be seen in the documentation for Template:Infobox settlement. If you try to add any new ones of your own, it simply won't show them in the article. But, if you believe this is an important parameter to have in articles that use that template, then I would suggest starting a discussion on the template's talk page to explain your rationale, and see what other editors feel about it. Does that help at all? Nick Moyes (talk) 20:14, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

sort of helps and you are correct about your assumption of the NXX, similar to in the UK which is identified here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_numbers_in_the_United_Kingdom In North America, the numbering plan is CC-NPA-NXX-xxxx, so where the NPA is used,ie: 867, I was hoping to add the NXX identifier below it. Sadly, I cant seem to get the syntax right.

Now for the other part of your answer, is it needed, well that's a debatable question as this info can be found elsewhere on the web, but in smaller communities in Canadas far north, it may be a little more helpful.

My hope was to learn how to add the info below the NPA field but it seems my understanding of how to do so is incorrect. So if any Wikipedians can advise, that would be wonderful. Vacantcode (talk) 16:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Vacantcode, and welcome to the Teahouse. A template, such as Template:Infobox settlement, only understands those parameters which have been defined for it. It is possible to edit the template itself to add a new parameter, but you can't successfully just add an extra parameter in the article where the template is used. See Template. ColinFine (talk) 22:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Question

hello and good afternoon, how are the little icons for articles made? Jude Marrero [=D (talk) 21:09, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey. Could you clarify? If you are talking about good articles, the file is c:File:Symbol support vote.svg and for featured articles, it is c:File:Cscr-featured.svg. Some templates let us put them in the corners of articles. win8x (talking | spying) 21:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

ok, thanks a bunch! [=D Jude Marrero [=D (talk) 21:24, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Jude marrero: Articles that have those symbols have gone through strict reviewing processes. The one with the green check mark is called a Good article and the one with the star is called a featured article. Editors work hard to bring their articles up to these standards, so they're marked in honor of that and to let the reader know that the article has been properly reviewed. The icons on the articles can only be added if an article passes one of the respective review processes. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 02:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

We should have a talk page on Wikipedia.

This talk page would be called "Wikipedian Dissocia" and it will be accessible for anyone and it would be about people who are plural explaining their plurality. Sisixive (talk) 13:06, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Sisixive I don't think that would be sensible, as it would, IMO, fall into the category of things that Wikipedia is not to be used for. In that connection, you have created and linked from your userpage a number of drafts for languages you made up, which is also inappropriate use of Wikipedia as a web host. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

To add to Mike Turnbull's reply: that's not really what talk pages are for? Talk pages are for collaborating and discussing improvements to an article (or other page, depending on the talk page type). Anything that might affect your editing or communication with others can just go on your userpage if it's short or as a user subpage if longer. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 13:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Sisixive Judging by your total contribution history and your Talk Page, you seem to have added virtually nothing to Wikipedia other than inappropriate drafts about stuff you have made up. Continuing in that vein is likely to lead to a WP:NOTHERE block. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:43, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I tried to make conlangs for everyone but no one takes the time to learn them. And about not contributing, I want to but I don't know where to start. Sisixive (talk) 15:30, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Sisixive, may I suggest another website which is more appropriate for your conlang works, for example reddit.com/r/conlang or linguifex.com. Wikipedia is only for topics which are mainstream and notable, which your conlang are not. Sorry.

You should back up your current drafts before they get deleted, as they are not appropriate for Wikipedia.

For improvements to Wikipedia, check out the suggested pages on SPECIAL:HOMEPAGE. Qcne (talk) 15:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

I have nominated all of your conlang drafts for deletion per WP:MADEUP. Please do read that page as it covers why these are not permitted.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:43, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Romanian LGBTQ magazine

I reverted an IP user on Gay 45 for replacing content with the magazine's about page, and they're now saying on the article's Talk page that the article has serious issues. Could someone with more knowledge about working with the subjects of articles fix this? Thank you for all your hard work! QuietCicada chirp 20:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with the revert. This version by an IP user has serious issues as it doesn't even come off as encyclopedic and appears like WP:PROMO. You were right to call out the potential WP:COPYVIO on the talk page. Just talk with the IP user and see what changes they're looking for. It doesn't matter if they are who they claim to be, they can't just do as they please here. Limmidy (talk) 21:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Limmidy: True, but our article is probably pretty bad. See the talkpage. Polygnotus (talk) 21:30, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Polygnotus It seems like it was created a few days ago. From my initial read of the article in its current form, I was able to generally understand what it was about and why it's considered notable, so I think that's a good start. Limmidy (talk) 22:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I believe this article was created by a sockpuppet; see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Armoiregrimoire. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 19:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Helpful Raccoon Oh wow I was not expecting this development. Well, @Polygnotus and I can't seem to verify anything clearly over on the talk page, so this whole topic is a blur to me. Limmidy (talk) 03:05, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Interesting! I watchlisted the page. This rabbit hole is super deep. In addition to this I am also curious if the person is who they say they are, but sadly we will probably never know. Polygnotus (talk) 06:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Changing title

Hello, i would like to know how to chnage my sandbox title for the first time ever.

Thanks. Kraft News (talk) 18:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Kraft News: It's not clear what you mean. Your Sandbox will always be at User:Kraft News/sandbox. You can create another, at User:Kraft News/sandbox 2, or any similar title, if you wish. If you want to change what your sandbox says, just edit it. If you mean something else, please explain. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:18, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

You can move it to User:Kraft News/Box of sand or whatever if you wish. But doing so won't remove the STOP sign from it. 126.53.182.199 (talk) 04:23, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for your time! Kraft News (talk) 09:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Help moving page

Hi, I think the page Huerta Norte should be moved back to Horta Nord, I exposed the reasons in the talk page (the official name in Valencian instead of the Spanish translation, like all the other Valencian regions' pages) I tagged the person that changed it without receiving a response, but I think the moving was probably a mistake. In any case I cannot move it as the original page now already exists as a redirect, can someone give me a hand (or contribute to the talk page)? Thank you, Bsckr (talk) 07:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Bsckr  Done. For such requests in the future, you can make it at WP:RM/TR where pagemovers and administrators will move the article accordingly if reasonably requested for. – robertsky (talk) 11:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Citing Sources in Introduction

I've noticed that a lot of good-quality articles do not cite sources at all in the introduction. Is it not necessary to do so if the information is supported by the body of the article? Spookyaki (talk) 02:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Spookyaki: Correct. Information in the lede should be a summary of the already cited information in the article body. See WP:LEDE RudolfRed (talk) 03:20, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Spookyaki, direct quotations in the lead must be referenceed, along with any claim that has been challenged or is likely to be challenged. Cullen328 (talk) 09:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

See WP:LEADCITE for details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:34, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

How to edit language label link in Template:Lang-___

I want to edit the language label link on Template:Lang-pdc to direct to Pennsylvania Dutch language instead of Pennsylvania German language, which is currently a redirect to the former. But I couldn't figure out how to do so. Can someone help?

Also, should the language label itself be changed to "Pennsylvania Dutch"? Alisperic (talk) 04:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

You cannot change it, it comes directly from the IANA language-subtag-registry file. And no, it should not be changed. It is a variant of German. Mathglot (talk) 06:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. Alisperic (talk) 10:57, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Alisperic: It would be possible to change in Module:Lang/data/iana languages but it would affect other things, e.g. adding articles to Category:Articles containing Pennsylvania Dutch-language text instead of Category:Articles containing Pennsylvania German-language text. The official language name for pdc is Pennsylvania German and I don't think it's worth changing just to avoid a redirect. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:14, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for the info. Alisperic (talk) 22:00, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

"Dutch" is really an unfortunate name, because it has nothing to do with Netherlands, but rather a mispronounciation of German word for its language – Deutsch. and now is ambiguous with the same English word for the language of Netherlands Dutch language. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:52, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

New way of Citation

Hi, few days ago an ad appeared after log in says that a new way of citation has arrived, i forgot the name of that but it described that now you can cite multiple pages of a book from single citation. Can anybody locate me to that.–– kemel49^{(connect)(contri)} 08:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

KEmel49: Do you mean meta:WMDE Technical Wishes/Sub-referencing? (That info page is hosted on the global Wikimedia site and the test is taking place on a beta site, so it's not the easiest thing to find when the announcement has disappeared!) — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 09:39, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Meanwhile, a simple way to cite the book once in the references, combined with named references to allow various individual pages to be cited is to use the {{rp}} template. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:12, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Michael D. Turnbull, Yeah that's an useful information too. Thanks ––kemel49^{(connect)(contri)} 11:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@ClaudineChionh,  Thanks I was searching for that as it has previously appeared as banner after logging in. and i was looking for that now.–– kemel49^{(connect)(contri)} 11:55, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

What license do I need for a BLP infobox image

What license of image do I need for a BLP infobox image? I believe it is CC0, but I want to confirm. I am looking at adding an image of this woman named Franziska Michor, but when I restrict my searches of images to those in the public domain or free to use more generally it does not have any. There are lots of images of her though from her own sites like this, can I use those in the same manner as I would upload a non-free book cover, film movie poster, or corporate logo? Iljhgtn (talk) 13:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

The image simply needs to be compatible with Wikipedia's license, so CC0 works, as does CC BY-SA 4.0. For living persons, such an image can still be produced (by having someone take a photo of the subject and having the photographer release the photo), so any non-free content would fail the first non-free content criteria (Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent...could be created, italics mine).

Someone once found a free image for a subject by taking a screenshot of a YouTube video under a compatible license that the subject appeared in. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 13:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh so screenshots of YouTube videos, IF the YouTube video is CC0, is acceptable? What would I upload that as then? I am not familiar with uploading images of people/BLPs. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn Here are a couple of examples [6][7]. Such videos are rare, but they exist. That golf-video was a bit of a gold-mine. Any Commons-acceptable license is fine. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn The website you linked has a copyright sign at the bottom of the page, so that certainly can't be used. Sometimes it is worth emailing an article subject to ask them to place a suitable image (e.g. a selfie) on their website with an explicit CC BY license. Or, of course, they could upload one to Commons but that would be more of a hassle for them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

That is an interesting idea. Seems like a lot of work though. I was just hoping to be able to learn the process to quickly upload something within the rules here. Maybe I will send an email though if that is the only way for things like this and I find some time. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, freely distributable knowledge is a lot of work ;) —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 06:53, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Reliability of Youtube

Is it possible to site specific YouTube videos as references if you are writing an article on a youtuber? Kalbome22 (talk) 04:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

You can use YouTube if they are independent of the concerned individual and they are videos from reputable sources like news outlets, especially in cases where there are limited citations available. However, you can only add the youtuber's video as external links as citing their videos directly is not allowed. Tesleemah (talk) 06:01, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Editors are allowed to cite Youtube videos directly, see WP:VIDEOREF for more info :) -- NotCharizard ^🗨 06:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Kalbome22 See WP:BLPSPS and WP:BLPSELFPUB. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Citing YouTube has come up repeatedly very recently at Steve Wallis, where I'd been removing questionable information about the subject's departed wife (who cannot be found in reliable sources and who was never an integral part of the subject's regular work; only casually mentioned and rarely by name). StonyBrook _babble 07:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Kalbome22: You are allowed to cite videos made by that YouTuber as primary sources under BLPSELFPUB. Please make sure your usage of the videos follows that policy. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Barnstar

Hi,

I wish to award someone a Barnstar for helping me out recently. Can I do it by myself.? or an admin decides it.? —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 00:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto, Yes. You can award barnstars to other users. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 02:02, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

barnstars are awards given by the community to signify something great. Stuuf7 (talk) 02:21, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto: Nearly all barnstars are given by individual editors without discussion and it doesn't have to be for something great. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

You can add barnstar to a user's page by clicking on the 'love' icon on their page (works on desktop site) if you edit with mobile, click on barnstar and add the template you want.

You will get a message like this

"Let's get started!

Select the type of WikiLove you wish to send

Add details to your WikiLove

Send your WikiLove!"

I hope this helps! Tesleemah (talk) 08:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto: Depending on how helpful you think the edits are, you can award them with a Barnstar of your choice or a smaller award like a cookie or a kitten. There are no rules on who can award these. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:58, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 14:13, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Should we stop using Wayback Machine and Internet Archive?

In light of recent developments in the U.S. court case Hachette v. Internet Archive, should Wikipedians stop using Internet Archive? What about Wayback Machine? If so, should that stopping be limited to Wikipedians in the U.S. (like me)? Ss0jse (talk) 21:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

What about U.S. government web pages, or other public domain content? Ss0jse (talk) 21:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

I mean, what about using Wayback Machine archives of U.S. government web pages or of other public domain content? Ss0jse (talk) 21:52, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

A question on changing policies would be more suitable for policy over at the Village Pump, but I see no reason for this to have any effect on us here whatsoever. The case here was very specifically about controlled digital lending. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 22:23, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Ss0jse (talk) 14:54, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Simple tips

I am fairly new to the whole editing system for wikipedia and was wondering if i could get some tips and knowledge about editing a page Watersprinkler (talk) 08:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Watersprinkler: Please see the links that were left on your talk page, yesterday. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:49, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

New editors are strongly advised to put in time working to improve existing articles before essaying to create a new article (as you have started). Submitting a draft without reliable source references (WP:42) properly formated (Help:Referencing for beginners) would just waste a Reviewer's time. David notMD (talk) 11:10, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@David notMD: I'm at a loss to understand why you're telling me this. Also, the OP explicitly asked about "editing a page". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:56, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Andy: David possibly picked the wrong "Reply" and intended to reply to @Watersprinkler. Watersprinkler has indeed created a draft Draft:Black Souls, after they posted here, but before David's reply.

Watersprinkler, I echo what David says. You have started writing your draft by writing text, rather than by finding sources: that is doing it BACKWARDS. ColinFine (talk) 17:56, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

AFD Question

how do i add a AFD such as 2023 Halla Airlines Embraer Brasilia crash into the category Category:AfD debates (Places and transportation)) after using twinkle to automate the AFD for me? Lolzer3000 (talk) 18:50, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

You tagged 2023 Halla Airlines Embraer Brasilia crash for proposed deletion or PROD, a totally different deletion process. At this point, my suggestion is to follow the instructions on the PROD banner on the article: If this template is removed, do not replace it. The article may be deleted if this message remains in place for seven days, i.e., after 18:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC) (formatting original). If someone else removes the template, then go to AfD. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:33, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Tag: "use of deprecated (unreliable) source"

Hi. Just curious: what conditions trigger the automatic tagging of edits with the above?
Saw it on an edit that added a Talk section. The edit links to The Daily Mail, but not as a ref. galenIgh 12:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@.galenIgh: It's done by an edit filter. For further background, see WP:RSP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:37, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

The edit was tagged by Special:AbuseFilter/1132 which currently includes:

Extended content

dep3recated := "\b(sputniknews\.(africa|cn|com|in|lat|ru|uz)|armeniasputnik\.am|almanach\.be|sputnik\.(by|kz)|jacobite\.ca|ntdtv\.(ca|com(\.tw)?)|globaltimes\.cn|mintpressnews\.(cn|com|es|ru)|(thecradle|vibrantdot)\.co|epochtimes\.(co\.(il|kr)|com|cz|de|fr|it|ru|se)|(dailystar|mailpictures\.newsprints|mailplus|royalcentral|thescottishsun|thisismoney)\.co\.uk|thesun\.(co\.uk|ie|mobi)|(cracroftspeerage|dailymail|englishmonarchs|newsoftheworld|mailonsunday)\.co(\.uk|m)|(actualidad-rt|b(aike)?\.baidu|campaignlifecoalition|cgtn|checkyourfact|cinemos|crunchbase|dailycaller|dreamteamfc|epoch-archive|epochtimes-romania|frontpagemag|frontpagemagazine|glitchwave|huanqiu|lifenews|lifesitenews|mailonline\.pressreader|martinoticias|newsblaze|newsbreak|newsmax|newsmaxtv|nndb|nspirement|ntd|oann|occupydemocrats|okeefemediagroup|page3|projectveritas|rateyourmusic|republicworld|rt|secretchina|sonemic|sputnikglobe|sputnikmediabank|takimag|the-sun|theepochtimes|thegatewaypundit|thegrayzone|thepeerage|unz|urbandictionary|vdare|visiontimesjp|voiceofrussia|washingtonpress|wnd|worldnetdaily|worldstatesmen|zerohedge)\.com|visiontimes\.(com(\.au)?|fr)|baike\.baidu\.hk|(hispantv|presstv)\.(com|ir)|last\.fm\/|anna-news\.info|redfish\.media|(almayadeen|lifesite|royalark|telesur(english|tv)|trithucvn)\.net|(almanachdegotha|alternet|chivalricorders|jihadwatch|journal-neo|unz|voltairenet|worldstatesmen)\.org|epoch\.org\.il|(rt|sputnikportal)\.rs|(radiosputnik\.ria|russiatoday)\.ru|ruptly\.tv|sciencedirect\.com\/topics\/)";

PrimeHunter (talk) 12:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

----

@Pigsonthewing @PrimeHunter

Thanks. Will go read up there. Seems over-eager, as it flagged a non-ref. galenIgh 18:47, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

It should probably only act on the Main, and maybe Draft: namespaes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:19, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Those namespaces already have Special:AbuseFilter/869 which also warns the user. Special:AbuseFilter/1132 is a version which only tags the edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:53, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Why is it like this?

When I type a page title into the URL without a Wikipedia account, or click a redlink, and that page doesn't exist, there's a link to search for it. But now that I made an account, there's nothing there except messages telling you how to create a draft, or how to edit in general. That doesn't help me (or most new users); it's too difficult to create a page, and sometimes we just searched for the wrong title. Can the admins please do something about this? My username can be whatever I want! (talk) 13:47, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, My username can be whatever I want! That's not something that admins can change; it's a function of the Mediawiki software that Wikipedia runs on. However, the second bullet from the top contains the link to the search you're looking for; specifically, the line that says You can also search for an existing article to which you can redirect this title. The link in the word "search" is what you need. HTH, Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:54, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Writ Keeper

1. Okay, what's the group of people who can change it? Developers? It's different on Simple English Wikipedia, so I know it can be changed.
2. The word "search" doesn't appear on the page at all. See the screenshot on the right.

My username can be whatever I want! (talk) 14:07, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@My username can be whatever I want!: The screenshot is from Wikipedia:New user landing page which is seen on the English Wikipedia by users who have accounts but are not autoconfirmed which requires four days and ten edits. Last time we had this discussion it was not technically possible to add a search link but the software has changed and it may be possible now. I will look into it and may be able to do it myself today. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@My username can be whatever I want!: I have added "You can also search for an existing article", where "search" is a link to a search on the page name.[8] The necessary software change was phab:T204234 which means that {{PAGENAME}} can now be used in the message. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:44, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter That's good. I compared the other page to this one. The other one says "Search for "Redlink" in existing articles." with the link on the words "search for redlink". This one now says "You can also search for an existing article." with the link on the word "search". I think this might be harder to understand, because someone wouldn't know that by clicking on the word "search", they would be led to search results for "redlink". Maybe that should be clarified. My username can be whatever I want! (talk) 16:02, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@My username can be whatever I want!: I based it on the message seen on a redlink by logged in users who are autoconfirmed: "You can also search for an existing article to which you can redirect this title." You have to be autoconfirmed to create a redirect so I omitted that part. You can post further suggestions to Wikipedia talk:New user landing page. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter I don't know about autoconfirmed, but I think that most of the time when someone goes to an page that doesn't exist, they don't want to redirect the title, they just want to search for the relevant page. Did you see what shows up on that page if you're logged out? My username can be whatever I want! (talk) 16:32, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@My username can be whatever I want!: I saw that. I think it's rare to search for an article by manually modifying the url, and most registered users know that a red link means no page. I guess few of them will click it to search for the page name unless they already know it can be done and then they only need the search link. But this is getting beyond the Teahouse scope. Wikipedia talk:New user landing page is the place to discuss the message. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

system errors

I'M new to Ubuntu 22.04 I loaded it and worked great for a month then I got pages of errors when booting up, cant tell if it's memory. I have 32 gig of memory and 1 terabyte ssd drive any help would be welcome!! Northern mn rob (talk) 18:42, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

You're going to have to consult an Ubuntu or Linux forum, I'm afraid, since this is for questions on how to use or edit the English-language Wikipedia. Best of luck, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:54, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Northern mn rob: You can also try Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing if you want to use Wikipedia but we are a general encyclopedia. Maybe you saw one of our articles and thought it was a website about that subject. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Citations

How do I put a citation in an infobox? CallieCrewmanAuthor (talk) 22:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@CallieCrewmanAuthor I dunno about anyone else, but I tend to make the citation in the visual editor, swap to source editing, find the citation I just made and then copy and paste it into the infobox either by finding where I want to place it in the source editor or by again swapping to visual editing and placing it into the infobox that way. It's a bit convoluted, but it works. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 22:46, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Haha. I do exactly the same. Does the job, but would like to know a better way (if any) from experience wikipedians. Waonderer (talk) 22:50, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Waonderer: That sounds like a decent way to handle it. If you want a similar experience to the Visual Editor's method of filling out a citation form, the source editor has something similar in the toolbar under "Cite > Templates", but it only supports the 4 most widely used citation templates. There is an optional gadget called ProveIt that can support more citation templates in the source editor, but still not all of them. @CallieCrewmanAuthor: the reason that the solution is wonky/complicated is that the Visual Editor can't edit references or templates done within a template, and infoboxes are all made with templates. Almost all infoboxes are somehow calling Template:Infobox. If you look at the reference count in the Visual Editor and the actual article you'll notice that the articles usually have a few more references than what the editor shows; that's because the Visual Editor isn't rendering any of the references inside infoboxes or other templates. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 01:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@CallieCrewmanAuthor: Please don't. Citations belong in the body of the article which the infobox should very briefly summarise. There should be nothing in the infobox (save an image) which is not in the body of the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

There are some specialist infoboxes which do have citations. For example, the featured article hydrogen has ten of them and many articles on chemicals and drugs at least one. Aspirin has nine. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:59, 3 September 2024 (UTC

Yes, there are a small number of infoboxes which are exceptions to my point; including some where the citation is auto-generated. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

When in doubt, I refer to articles marked as Good articles or Featured articles for standards. How come there are good articles such as Narendra Modi and even featured article like Aston Martin Rapide have citations in their infobox? Waonderer (talk) 16:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Because GA and FA processes have historically failed to address such matters, or to do so correctly. And perhaps the articles have been edited after such a status was achieved. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Makes sense. Thanks for answering. Waonderer (talk) 21:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Duplicating content between articles

Hello, I have recently been editing article Paul Boyton, and expanded the section "Rivalry with Matthew Webb" by copying two paragraphs directly from the Matthew Webb article. I understand that this is allowed, and have read WP:COPYWITHIN (I actually wrote the original text in the Matthew Webb article), and I did it because it would be a waste of time to rewrite my own writing for a separate article.

But is this really best practice? I feel it is a bad idea to duplicate information across the wiki, but the subject is not notable enough for it's own article. It is a wonderful world (talk) 10:33, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

What "subject is not notable enough for it's [sic] own article"? Softlavender (talk) 11:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

The subject of the duplicated content, titled "Rivalry with Matthew Webb". It is a wonderful world (talk) 11:05, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

You did the correct thing if you followed the copywithin guidance. There is no easy way to check whether given information is duplicated in multiple articles and in any case it often happens deliberately, e.g. where there is a {{main}} article that's mentioned elsewhere. Some articles even deliberately transclude parts of other articles so that the two are kept in step. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for clarifying It is a wonderful world (talk) 15:15, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

There is a somewhat easy way, if one is familiar with article search. Example: this search finds both articles:

"and Boyton got off to a very fast start"

The idea is to choose a fairly short, but unique phrase that would be highly unlikely to occur by chance, were it not for direct copying, and double-quote it in the search. But note that this was my third try, as two previous searches failed; I suspect you must have changed a few words around during the copy? Adding @Michael D. Turnbull and It is a wonderful world:. Mathglot (talk) 21:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes I did change a few words. This is useful to know. Thanks. It is a wonderful world (talk) 22:31, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Sandbox cut and paste or move

If I wanted to edit a page by copying it to a sandbox should I finish my contribution by copy and pasting or by moving the sandbox to the page? Treetop-64bit (talk) 16:45, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Treetop-64bit welcome to the Teahouse. Neither is really the right approach, and trying to move your sandbox to an existing page would not really work or be at all acceptable.

What you would be better advised to do is to make piecemeal edits to the existing article, one paragraph at a time. Yes, you can work on those in your sandbox, then paste in the final text. But leave some time between each edit, and leave an WP:EDITSUMMARY explaining each one. That way, if another editor feels one of your edits is not really appropriate, you won't end up having all of your edits reverted - just the one causing an issue.

Now, if you genuinely believe an article is in such a dire state that it really needs to be blown up and started all over again, it would be a very sensible idea to first raise your concerns on the article's talk page, explaining what you propose to do, and why. Give it a few days for others to respond. Then, working in your sandbox, you should return and link to it in the thread about reworking the article and give time for others to view your alternative wording and offer their opinions. A week maybe.

I strongly suspect that if you were simply to replace an article wholesale, you'd end up finding one or more editors object and simply revert all your work. The more contentious the topic, the more likely that revert is to happen. So, working slowly, one section at a time would make the most sense.

Perhaps you could tell us what article you are concerned about? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not really concerned about any article I just felt a bit uncertain about using the sandbox for making changes, Thank you for your help! Treetop-64bit (talk) 23:32, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Rename page that is just a redirect

Statutory city (Minnesota) is listed on the disambiguation page of Statutory city but redirects to General-law municipality, but other states in the U.S. have statutory cities and towns, including Colorado. Statutory city (Minnesota) should be renamed "Statutory city (United States)". I don't know how to do this or suggest this, other than Talk: General-law municipality. Seananony (talk) 02:22, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey Seananony. I'd recommend creating Statutory city (United States) as a redirect to General-law municipality. You may also want to change the target of Statutory city (Minnesota) so that it goes to the section about Minnesota, though I haven't looked into the content at all and maybe that'd be less helpful. At the dab page, I'd swap in your new redirect for the Minnesota one. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:26, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

citation

hello there, im trying to get used to editing on wikipedia and i ve been editing with the automated recommended articles by wikipedia. however it is now recommending me to raise the difficulty and start working on citing better the articles. i was wondering if anyone has an effecient way of doing so, as it takes me more than an hour to find good citation for an article, read it and paraphrase it on wiki. thank you <3 Psixtras (talk) 14:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Psixtras, and welcome to the Teahouse. If there were a quick and easy way to find and summarise sources, then we wouldn't have so many poor articles, I'm afraid. That is, precisely, the bulk of the work in creating an article. ColinFine (talk) 23:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello Psixtras, at the risk of missing the point, I mostly look up sources for subjects where I would be glad to better understand them regardless of anything I write here. Then writing content on Wikipedia almost feels like a justification for spending three hours reading about long-dead pirates.

One thing I will say may help with efficiency: expect previous editors to have made mistakes. If the article says X and the reliable source says Y, go ahead and make the change with an explanation in the edit summary. It can be a huge time-sink sometimes to try and find a source backing up claims that turn out to be bogus. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:20, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Confusing article

Hi, I have inserted the info. at ICC Awards#ICC Development Awards as per the suggestion. But, I found that maximum section of the article, starting from ICC Awards#Men's awards require serious changes as it looks very confusing, for example Decade Awards. I fixed a few of them, but, couldn't fix all as I have no idea about how to arrange these things properly. If anyone knows how to fix these, do it. Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 16:39, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Perfectodefecto, when you want help improving an article, the best place to request that is on the talk pages of the WikiProjects listed on the article's talkpage. In this case that would be WP:WikiProject Awards, WP:WikiProject Cricket, and WP:WikiProject Women's sport. Please post your help request on the talkpages of those projects. Softlavender (talk) 02:12, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks.

By the way, I have made some necessary changes. Now, it is ok. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 04:35, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Need help with template

Hi! I am trying to add 3 parameters ("close", "destroyed" and "demolished") to Template:Infobox urban feature, but I'm not sure how to do that, and probably need some help before I break the entire template. Thanks! :) Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 12:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

• Also, to clarify, I did add the parameters on there, but they just aren't popping up on the infobox itself (see Austin J. Tobin Plaza). Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 13:18, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Sir MemeGod. You have only edited the documentation at Template:Infobox urban feature/doc and not the actual template. Maybe you used the edit link next to "Template documentation" on Template:Infobox urban feature but it goes to the documentation page. Use the edit tab at top to edit the template itself. If you don't know how then you could post a suggestion to the talk page and ping Alaney2k who made the template in 2010 but is still active. Three new parameters for the end may be a bit much. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Sir MemeGod: That worked;[9] the parameters are now in the actual template. I've just made Template:Infobox urban feature/sandbox and Template:Infobox urban feature/testcases. You can use the sandbox (on any template) to test new features before putting them into live articles. You can then make comparisons on the testcases page. It's not always necessary, but it helped me a lot when I was figuring things out. Check out this edit to the sandbox:[10] New parameters should be added down there. Module:Check for unknown parameters is pretty commonly used in templates. It creates a maintenance category for pages using templates with bogus parameters, often typos like "loctaion" and so on. Good luck! Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:57, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Help identifying unreliable sources

Regarding Draft:Kimberly Weinberger, it was declined for not being supported by reliable sources. After double checking, I am having issues deciding which sources are not reliable, and if the draft was only declined for that reason. I have contacted the reviewer on this matter but have not heard back, and I'd like further opinions. Filmforme (talk) 19:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Filmforme. To me, the problem is not so much the reliability of the sources, although I have my doubts about a few of them. The problem that I see is that most of the sources do not devote significant coverage to Weinberger. They amount to trivial mentions of Weinberger, and those passing mentions of Weinberger contribute nothing to establishing her notability. So, which of your references are clearly reliable, fully independent of Weinberger, and devote truly significant coverage to her as a person instead of productions that she has been a part of? Cullen328 (talk) 20:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328 thanks for the response. 1 I am aware I will need more significant and independent sources that go in depth, but of the references cited, I am curious which you have doubts about the reliability. I got the same alert for Draft:Raye Richards too. Filmforme (talk) 18:44, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

I have doubts about the reliability of Horror Society, Loud and Clear, Morbidly Beautiful, Trinity Theater Company and the Daily Aztec. In my view, it is best to stick with impeccably reliable sources for establishing notability. What do you think are the best reliable independent sources that devote significant coverage to Weinberger? Cullen328 (talk) 21:20, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

As for the referencing of Raye Richards, that is really bad. Quality is vastly more important than quantity. Cullen328 (talk) 21:25, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328 This is the best source I've found for Weinberger so far. The Trinity Theater Company was one I was questioning too. I found Horror Society at WP:WikiProject Horror/Sources. And double checking I see that Morbidly, Loud and Clear and Daily Aztec are outlets that assign coverage through an editor or an editorial board.

As for Richards, I've had success with quantity at WP:AFC before, though not very often. I'll usually include the best citations in the lead, but in this case, a previous reviewer had declined it. So I'm left confused about it while looking for more. Filmforme (talk) 22:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Filmforme, one of our most important policies is Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, which says Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources, and that is why I am being firm. Let's take a look at what you say is your best source, the article in Village Life, a hyper-local publication serving the unincorporated community of El Dorado Hills, California, which I happen to know quite well. This is not even a review of the high school play in question, since it was published before the play was first performed at that school. Basically, it is a tiny local publication promoting the local high school theater production. In no way is it an independent source because it quotes Weinberger three times. It is basically an interview combined with an upcoming event listing, complete with performance dates, ticket prices and a phone number to call. It actually includes the names of 19 local people who helped build the sets. Many editors believe that "attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not necessarily an indication of notability".

On to the Horror Society source. In my view, if a local Wikiproject says a source is reliable, that is just the opinion of a small group of people. A communitywide assessment at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard is the only way to state with confidence that a source is reliable. But there is no need to pursue that, because in addition to being reliable, a source must devote significant coverage to the topic, and all that source says about Weinberger is Other cast members include Savannah Porter, Alex Chernow, Kimberly Weinberger and Sutheshna Mani. That is a trivial passing mention and pretty much the opposite of significant coverage, even more so since it is discussing a future production. Worthless for establishing notability.

The Trinity Theater Company source is clearly not independent since she was an actress with that theater company, and theater companies routinely promote their productions and actors. Fully independent sources are required to establish notability.

The Daily Aztec source is a student run college newspaper, and many editors believe that such a source cannot be used to establish the notability of students or faculty, since such papers exist in large part to promote student and campus activities. But there is no need to delve too deeply, since this review of a campus film festival devotes just four sentences to the film she was in, and the words "Kimberly Weinberger" appear nowhere in those four sentences. Egregiously, that reference is used to support the claim in the "Accolades" section that she won an award, although the source mentions neither the award nor Weinberger. Frankly, that is bizarre.

The coverage in Loud and Clear consists of a single sentence, Kimberly Weinberger is very impressive as Rosie and managed to successfully deliver even the weakest lines of the film, making us root for her character from the very beginning to the very end of the movie. That is nice but is not significant coverage.

The coverage of Weinberger in Morbidly Beautiful consists of a single sentence, Our protagonist, Rosie (Kimberly Weinberger), binds this film together, giving a very strong performance. That is nice but is not significant coverage. It is a passing mention.

In conclusion, the references that you have provided to date fail to establish that Weinberger is a notable actor as Wikipedia defines that term. As I said earlier, quality is vastly more important than quantity. Four or five outstanding sources are dramatically better than 14 mediocre sources. Cullen328 (talk) 03:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Thanks for the insight and bringing my attention to the noticeboard, I will look at that further. I was under the impression that quotes are allowed as long a journalist or reporter is writing significantly more than what is quoted in their own words.

As for the rest, I think you misunderstood. I am aware none of those articles are significant coverage, I just wanted to know about the reliability of them. Weinberger's name is at the bottom of the Daily Aztec, but their alias is "Kimmy Weinberger" on that article. Typos and different name spellings has not made it easy to track down further sourcing, but I do what I can. Thank you for your help, I appreciate it. –Filmforme (talk) 05:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

They aren't sources, so it doesn't even make sense to ask if they're reliable. Think of it this way: would those be considered reliable sources if the article was about me? Of course not, they're not writing about me, right? But they're not writing about Kimberly Weinberger either. That's the problem – she needs to be the main topic, not a mention or a participant. TooManyFingers (talk) 05:23, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

scans of software boxes

i am deep into documenting vintage software. i would like to add scans of the box cover. is that allowed? Smilesdavis2024 (talk) 08:52, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

@Smilesdavis2024 Welcome to Teahouse! Covers are usually copyrighted, so cannot be uploaded directly to Wikimedia Commons and instead should be uploaded to English Wikipedia with limited use. This likely would be allowed under WP:NFCC fair use similar to Wikipedia:Upload/Non-free album cover. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 09:42, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Right hand sidebar cannot be closed without JavaScript?

I use a 14 year old phone that cannot run JavaScript. I prefer to use old Vector but as I have to manually append the use skin param to every url to do so, sometimes I skip it. In new Vector, the right hand sidebar cannot be closed. It has no contents. It takes up over a third of the phone screen. Any way to fix this? Registering is not an option. 216.80.78.194 (talk) 06:33, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Please explain why registering an account is not an option. Cullen328 (talk) 06:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

To my POV, reading articles and discussions is a win for the volunteers, who deserve all the love. Registration is a win for the WMF, who deserve nothing in exchange for their greed, deceit and mishandling of assets. They have not earned my username. 216.80.78.194 (talk) 06:55, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Registering doesn't benefit WMF. But it benefits other volunteers, who know that you are the same person you were yesterday. TooManyFingers (talk) 05:05, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately, 14 year old phones are not really supported. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 06:49, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks anyhow. Will just deal with the single columns of text and squished tables. Wish the devs had stuck to their standards of a Mediawiki that works without JavaScript. (Don't ask me to find the diff from here, I can't even run autocorrect anymore and these two replies took about 15 minutes.) 216.80.78.194 (talk) 07:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Actually, registering an account is a win for you, your privacy and your user experience. The WMF does not care a whit about whether or not you register. Cullen328 (talk) 07:12, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

For those who may come across this later, I solved the issue by blocking the entire right hand column with an ad blocker rule. While I hate to deprive you all of another opportunity to treat an IP as subhuman, the issue of registration was not a properly formatted RFC, let alone an RFC/U. And no, I am nobody's sock. I've been reading your talk pages mostly quietly since 2006. Ta. 216.80.78.194 (talk) 13:03, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

help to make the article named oviul maruf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Oviul_maruf?redirect=no Hamasnigar (talk) 13:47, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Your draft here Draft:Oviul Maruf and here Oviul maruf has been rejected there is zero indication that the person meets the Wikipedia criteria of a notable person. Theroadislong (talk) 14:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

At the end of the Sam Nujoma article, a source cites a film as "epic film".

I am talking about this article; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Nujoma. Am I unaware of what exactly a "epic" film is? Adam P. Larry (talk) 17:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I meant to say at the "book and film" section. Adam P. Larry (talk) 17:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

ok, thanks [=D Jude Marrero \=D (talk) 17:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Are you going to change it? Adam P. Larry (talk) 18:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

see Epic film for contextual meaning Tesleemah (talk) 18:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

It probably refers to the genre of Epic film. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

oh, just seemed a bit strange to me to call a film "epic". But oh well. Adam P. Larry (talk) 18:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I can imagine!

But, it's a genre of movie focused on heroic character. See the previous links shared. Tesleemah (talk) 18:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

That word probably now gets used more often for its slang meaning than for any of the other meanings, so I can't blame you – but the other meanings are still good in an encyclopedia. And most of the old official meanings are a lot like the slang meaning anyway! (The original was the name for the type of ancient Greek poems that includes the Odyssey, and pretty much all the other meanings are just borrowing the fact that those poems have larger-than-life characters in a long highly dramatic story.) TooManyFingers (talk) 14:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

An apology

Graham87 was wrongfully block me by mistake. I didn't disrupt and abuse editing on Wikipedia. I am innocent of any wrongdoings. I'm behaving appropriately. I didn't cause any trouble. Please believe me. I want to apologize. 108.21.67.83 (talk) 03:50, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

This IP address is not blocked. What is the username of your blocked account? Cullen328 (talk) 04:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I would like to explain about my good results. 108.21.67.83 (talk) 04:20, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Again, what is the username of your blocked account? Please answer. Cullen328 (talk) 04:24, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I think this might be regards User_talk:108.21.67.83, rather than a blocked account - based on similar language. -- D'n'B-t -- 04:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I need you to report the user Graham87 has committed vandalize the articles and disrupting. He will not longer editing anymore because he violated the terms on Wikipedia. Ban the Graham87. Thank you. 108.21.67.83 (talk) 05:18, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

A Chris80 which I no longer use since I was block indefinitely because I never vandalized nor disrupt editing in 2018 for the past 6 years. I'm sorry. Because I already have my old account is A Chris80 for which I don't remember the password for login in. I came to apologize for my past wrongdoings. That is never happened again. I respect that. 108.21.67.83 (talk) 05:11, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

If you are, in fact, the user behind A Chris80, then this is definitely a good block. A block is a block of you, not just the account that you are using. Every edit you've made since the block in April 2018, using any account or IP address, on any computer, anywhere in the world, is textbook block evasion. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:44, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to @Graham87: I can't help but notice is says on this IP's user talk that they are blocked, but they are still making edits. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -- D'n'B-t -- 05:46, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Fixed. Wow, seems like I posted the notice but forgot to do the actual block ... and thanks to that we've worked out that it was real block evasion all along, as I suspected. Graham87 (talk) 07:25, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

ticket:2024090710005359 Cabayi (talk) 16:03, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Merged sources

Hello! I'm trying to figure out how to merge references using the visual editor. I tried to use multiref and multiref2, but am not sure how to generate a text-based citation, of a website, to put into the different inputs. I can see what other people have done and type everything manually, but I hope there's a better way! Thanks for your time Placeholderer (talk) 16:17, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Placeholderer. Every editor has their own workflow and if you read Referencing for beginners, you can learn about various methods of creating and improving references. I have been editing for 15 years and the visual editor didn't even exist back then, so I use the source editor on the desktop site operating on my smart phone. That gives me the precise level of control that I prefer. I use Wikipedia:Citation templates to ensure consistent formatting and I use the named reference functionality to deal with duplicates. I have all the most common templates in my userspace, formatted just the way I like. It it not so much typing them manually as a series of cuts and pastes. I have created many thousands of references that way and I am sure of their accuracy instead of relying on a software tool. For me, that's the best way but you need to find your own best way. Cullen328 (talk) 19:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Placeholderer, the Visual Editor will treat any citation that begins with "{{" as if it contains a single citation template. The Visual Editor also will not use the "Insert:<template>" dialog for templates called within templates. The third option at Wikipedia:CITEBUNDLE, "Use a bullet list", would allow you to use the "Insert:<template>" dialog in the visual editor for each of the bundled citations, because it does not begin with "{{" or wrap the citation templates within another template. The Visual Editor has been around for a while, but it still has a lot of small limitations like this, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

What I tend to do is make multiple VE references all in a line, then open SE and cut out the extraneous ref tags. You can generate new "bibliography entries" in SE, which will create the citation template without the ref tags, or you can generate new refs all in a line and then delete the extra ref tags that way too, I guess. But I prefer the citation generator that VE has, and I really, really prefer being able to one-click highlight a footnote to be able to move it around, so I tend to work in VE and then just swap back to SE to tinker with references in ways VE doesn't allow for. -- asilvering (talk) 16:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Divyansh Dwivedi

•  Courtesy link: Draft:Divyansh Dwivedi

The draft got declined. Need help in editing Adwivedi78 (talk) 10:35, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I am trying to draft a page for Divyansh Dwivedi, a child actor who has appreared in multiple TV shows and web series in India. He has also appreared in various news channels for his talent.

I am looking for a volunteer who can help me in getting his page approved and published on wikipedia. Adwivedi78 (talk) 10:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

@Adwivedi78 Teahouse hosts and others who help here like to advise on general issues but rarely get involved in co-writing articles. At a brief glance, your text His impactful character in web series Mirzapur season 1 was highly appreciated. He also played a very important role in another web series immediately poses the questions "Who said his character was impactful?", "Who appreciated it" and who decided the role was "important"? If these are quotes, then you need to source them and if they are your own opinion, you need to remove them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

ponit taken. Thanks Adwivedi78 (talk) 11:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I am not looking for assistance in Co-writing, instead I want to understand where I am going wrong in writing this article and how this can get approved. I'm new in this space, hence seeking help. Adwivedi78 (talk) 11:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Do you have an association with this actor? 331dot (talk) 12:22, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

It is very difficult to succeed in writing an artlce here without first familiarizing yourself with Wikipedia's policies. Please take note of the helpful advice and links on your talk page, and also WP:Your first article.Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Refs must be incorporated into text. David notMD (talk) 18:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia page for a journal

Hi I recently created a wikipedia page for a research journal that my supervisor asked me to do. He is one of the editors in the journal. We contacted the journal office and the editor in chief to get their permission. After I created the page, I received message that it was falgged for speedy deletion due to unambiguous copyright infringement. I cannot modify the language too much as it is about the journal and I have to copy it from the journal webpage. Also I received message that I have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic. This is not true. How to fix this. The page has been deleted.

thanks Kshitijsri82 (talk) 12:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

For a rather detailed explanation of why we can't just import text from anywhere else, including that journal webpage, see WP:COPYOTHERS (the entire page may be of interest, but this is the specific section). The person who wrote that text (probably) owns the copyright, and we unfortunately cannot use it without permission.

While you may not get paid, you do appear to have what we call a conflict of interest. Please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.

You can see the reason given for the deletion here: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.bloodtransfusion.it/bt/libraryFiles/downloadPublic/4 -- WP:CLOP close paraphrasing

Thank you, Polygnotus (talk) 13:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

The journal staff gave me permission to make a wikipedia page for the journal. The page is about the journal and thus will have information from the journal website itself.

I have published in the journal and have reviewed for it a couple of times but I am not part of the journal staff (the editors and reviewers are not paid for the review work). Kshitijsri82 (talk) 13:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

There is a procedure to get permission to use copyrighted works, see WP:PERMISSION. But it may be best to start fresh, without any possible copyright infringement. Polygnotus (talk) 13:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Kshitijsri82 (talk) 13:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

It may be wise to check WP:NJOURNAL to see if it would be considered WP:NOTABLE. Polygnotus (talk) 13:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Kshitijsri82: Wikipedia editors (including you) do not need permission from the journal publisher or its editorial staff write about it; and they have no say in what we write about it. You may find WP:BOSS useful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Kshitijsri82: The journal staff giving you permission to use material doesn't mean diddly squat, because you aren't the publisher of any article on Wikipedia. The Wikimedia Foundation is the publisher of Wikipedia articles. Therefore, the Wikimedia Foundation, not you, requires permission to publish the material. And that permission cannot be granted by the say-so of some random Wikipedia account, but by verifiable communication from the copyright holder releasing the material. And, the material must be released under an acceptable free license; the journal cannot reserve "all rights" as is typical. See WP:CONSENT for details.

This is why it's better to start from scratch and don't use anyone else's words. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:14, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Kshitijsri82, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Apart from the issues of copyright others have mentioned, you should understand that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. This means that hardly any material published by the journal is of any relevance at all to an article about the journal, so the legality of copying text from its website rarely need arise. ColinFine (talk) 19:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

My article on Wikipedia page was deleted

My article was deleted and I was not happy with it, it took me more 7 hours to write it down Officaillychibuzor (talk) 22:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Officaillychibuzor, a sample:

The prestigious Titans of Tech Awards was established to celebrate and acknowledge the accomplishments of tech visionaries in Nigeria, Africa and the Global Tech Space. / It is the authoritative yardstick to measure performance in the ICT sector in the African continent.

Let's start with the second word. What are the grounds for saying that it's "prestigious"? What's the purpose of saying that it's "prestigious"? -- Hoary (talk) 22:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

i don’t have any bad in mind or a hope of doing promotions for the brand, Wikipedia would have given me a chance to edit or do some corrections to me . It hurt me that article that I used 7 hours to write was deleted Officaillychibuzor (talk) 23:04, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Please if you will help me and do some change and upload it back I will appreciate that, all the information you need is online Officaillychibuzor (talk) 23:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Officaillychibuzor. Please read WP:NOTPROMO and WP:BOSS carefully. ColinFine (talk) 19:26, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Please can someone help me and publish article here ?

Why I’m asking if someone will help me to publish article here is that the one i published it was deleted Officaillychibuzor (talk) 23:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Officaillychibuzor, please don't start a second topic. You can keep responding in the one you started above this one. -- asilvering (talk) 23:23, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Okey I have heard you Officaillychibuzor (talk) 23:25, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

No, and for three reasons. First, Draft:Titans of Tech Awards is terrible. Secondly, I have no reason to believe that you would improve it if allowed to do so. (You seem to expect that others will do this.) Thirdly (and a new discovery): Draft:Titans of Tech Awards was first created by "Samsonfriday526", who's blocked as an illicit alternative ID for "Johnken21", who's blocked. -- Hoary (talk) 00:55, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Okey, it fine can you guide me on how to create successful Wikipedia articles without been deleted Officaillychibuzor (talk) 01:35, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Titans of Tech Awards has been Rejected and Speedy Deleted. If you try again, very likely your account will be indefinitely blocked and the topic 'salted', meaning that it would require an Administrator's approval for anyone to try again. If you intend to contribute to Wikipedia, start with working to improve existing articles. David notMD (talk) 02:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Officaillychibuzor, since I am an administrator, I can read your deleted draft. There is not a single sentence in it that is not overtly promotional, and promotion, advertising, marketing and public relations behaviors are not permitted on Wikipedia. You complain that you spent seven hours writing unacceptable content that got deleted. Your time would have been better spent if you read our core content policy, the Neutral point of view for seven minutes, and you could have saved six hours and 53 minutes. The general life principle is do not waste your time trying to play a very complicated and serious game without studying the rules first. Defeat is pretty much guaranteed. This is the #7 website on Planet Earth, and you need to know what you are doing to be successful here. Cullen328 (talk) 03:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I never have an a ideas to promote the brand I I’m just writing what I know about the brand, but it fine please can you help me and edit in Wikipedia standard so that I will not repeat the work again from the bringing and if possible can I retrieve the original article and edit it again Officaillychibuzor (talk) 07:44, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

@Officaillychibuzor WP:BACKWARD might be of help to you. Your first (not only) hurdle with with creating a WP-article is finding the sources that meets the demands of WP:N. If those don't exist on a subject, you can't make a WP-article on that subject. For example, this [11] mentions ToT, but it doesn't tell us much about it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:03, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I don’t know if I can share my WhatsApp number here for you to explain more to me because I don’t get it all, during the article you can see that the article I publish about the brand has all the Wikipedia requirements to be published but it was not, if there is a mistake they should be a people that will make the correction and published it, please in case you need my WhatsApp number you can tell me because I don’t mind given it out Officaillychibuzor (talk) 10:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello again, Officaillychibuzor. Nobody here is interested in your WhatsApp number. It is unlikely that anyobdy here will communicate with you in any way other than on this page and other similar (project or talk) pages of Wikipedia.

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

If you want to create an article on that prize, you begin by finding places where people wholly unconnected with the prize have chosen to publish substantial material about it in reliable places. If you can't find any such sources, then you stop wasting your own and other people's time, and choose a different subject. If you can find several such sources, then you forget everything you personally know about the subject, and write a neutral summary of what those sources say. ColinFine (talk) 19:32, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Officaillychibuzor, do not post any personal contact information here. Wikipedia does not work that way. Just read and study Your first article and the Neutral point of view and do the work yourself. We are here to give advice, not to write the article for you. When you write all the Wikipedia requirements to be published, you are wrong. Wikipedia does not publish overtly promotional content. That is simply not going to happen. Cullen328 (talk) 19:08, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I want to create a new article but my dashboard has change

I want to create new article but when I enter a place to create new draft to submit the dashboard have change what is the problem Officaillychibuzor (talk) 08:11, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Your attempts at creating an article have been deleted as blatant promotion. You have also flooded help pages with questions- please ask one question in one place at a time, to avoid duplicating effort. You should learn more about Wikipedia before attempting the very difficult task of creating a new article, please use the new user tutorial and spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you first, to learn how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content.

If you are associated with these awards, that must be disclosed, see WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 09:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Email error ?

Your edit has triggered an automated filter and has been disallowed. It looks like you're trying to add an email address to this page. Doing that, especially with a personal email address, is usually a bad idea as it can attract large amounts of spam. Though there are a few legitimate reasons to include an email address, in most cases Wikipedia will remove email addresses that are added to articles or discussion pages. If you want to communicate with a particular user via email, Wikipedia has a built-in email function you can use. If you would like to request general assistance, the fastest way is usually to post a question at the Help Desk. Wikipedia also provides a guide to asking for help — including via email — if you feel that is necessary. If you are attempting to add a link to a Mastodon account, and this filter is preventing you from doing so, please do not file a false positive report. Instead, please follow the instructions at Template:Mastodon user to add a link to the account. If you are experiencing trouble using the template, please visit the Teahouse for assistance in doing so. If you believe you received this message in error, you may report it here.

I have got this error and i dont think i have mentioned any email as so.. Whats the fix to this error ? HarmonyHubber (talk) 15:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Erasing all the @ signs you can find may help. TooManyFingers (talk) 15:23, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you helped me alot HarmonyHubber (talk) 15:32, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

@HarmonyHubber: The filter only applies to users with less than 100 edits. I have linked BHK Bhalla@Halla.Kom in your sandbox.[12] If you get problems later then you may have to remove the link again or ask an experienced user to make the link. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:55, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

About autocomplete

Hi.I wanted to ask a question about Wikipedia autocomplete. Usually when we write stuff on Wikipedia search bar, after writing a word an autocomplete appears. There are certain articles that are less popular and not significant that will appear on the autocomplete. Is there a way to alter the autocomplete in such a way that these article suggestions will not appear when we write a word on the search barKnightknight12345 (talk) 14:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

One of the really good features of Wikipedia is it shows topics that are in any way related to each other. That includes rivals and people who famously don't like each other or are opponents on some issue. People want to read about someone's rivals, and they want to read about the other side of the issue. And if "the other side of the issue" is actually well known to be a trash argument that doesn't make any sense, we want Wikipedia to come out and say that it is.

Which articles are you talking about? TooManyFingers (talk) 14:57, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

... and if you mean something appears that's really really irrelevant to your topic, just let it keep showing up. People need to be able to search for that other thing! (It would be insane to make a certain article non-findable.) Nobody owns article titles or search bar results. TooManyFingers (talk) 15:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

No. We don't use an algorithmic search based on popularity anywhere as far as I am aware. If a particular article really shouldn't be coming up, because it actually has the wrong title in the first place, you could suggest it for renaming at WP:RM. -- asilvering (talk) 16:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Autocomplete suggestions are controlled by the software, not the editors. There is no way to disallow an existing page. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

No page creation restrictions!

where can I ask that the page creation rectrictions be removed? 2603:8001:6940:2100:8A58:E42:3ACF:9A69 (talk) 23:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

There are different types of page creation restrictions. What do you have in mind? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:04, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

For an anonymous IP address, page creation restrictions cannot be changed. If you want to create a page, you can create a draft and submit it for review. See WP:AFC for instructions. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

No, but where can i make a proposal for the removal of anonymous IP address page creation restrictions 2603:8001:6940:2100:8A58:E42:3ACF:9A69 (talk) 00:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Well, there's Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals), but don't even try, you would be wasting the community's time. There are good reasons why, which have evolved over the decades Wikipedia has been running. If you want to create an article, follow the instructions at WP:AFC. Otherwise, create an account and get enough activity to get autoconfirmed, and you can create pages, but as a new contributor it's still a good idea to use WP:AFC and submit drafts for review.

What possible reason would an anonymous IP address have to create a page directly rather than via the process already available? ~Anachronist (talk) 00:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I want to know how weather works

OK please tell me how it works 132.147.192.240 (talk) 01:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Check out the article Weather. If you still have questions ask at WP:Reference Desk. The Teahouse is for asking questions on how to use Wikipedia. RudolfRed (talk) 01:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Is Jorge Rivera-Herrans notable enough?

I see there has been a few AFC declined for the subjected person. Was wondering if they are not notable enough? Or if the references provided in the article drafts were not sufficient.

Wanted to check prior to submitting an article for creation.

Additionally Epic: the musical currently only redirects to article Odysseus, is this due to the content being not notable enough as well? PigStuffy (talk) 00:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

I tried to see these drafts but I can't find too many of them at the moment, maybe you could add the link here. But, the reason for a draft decline is usually stated by the reviewer.

I also tried to surf the Internet now for notable references on the subject, they are hardly available. I can't judge as my location may influence the number of citations I'm seeing about them. However, I will suggest that before creating any article about them. Make sure they are available independent references to them.

And to your last question, there are usually redirects when they are no enough information for a topic of dicuss to stand alone and they are deeply connected with the parent topic. Rather than completely discarding them, they are attached instead and redirected. Tesleemah (talk) 01:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

The draft in question is Draft:Jorge Rivera-Herrans. Cullen328 (talk) 02:06, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!

It was as I suspected, lacking enough independent references. Tesleemah (talk) 05:10, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

A person does not become notable by their good work. They become notable by reliable independent publishers writing about their good work.

There's a famous old cynical comment about bank loans, that they will only give you a loan if you can prove you don't need one. Wikipedia is like that. People want recognition from others, and they think Wikipedia will bring it to them, but the first thing they have to prove to get a Wikipedia article is that they've already received tons of recognition. Wikipedia intentionally blocks any article that's part of a marketing strategy, and that's a good thing. TooManyFingers (talk) 04:11, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your response! I now understand that the original article that was submitted did not include enough independent sources. I was surprised he didn't have an article already because of his following, 1 million followers on socials and 2 million monthly listens on Spotify.

I Googled Jorge Rivera-Herrans under the news tab and found a number of independent published works such as https://thetacomaledger.com/2024/05/13/musical-review-epic-by-jorge-rivera-herrans/

I believe this source follows the guidelines, please correct me if I'm wrong. Thank you PigStuffy (talk) 09:28, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Social media is meaningless on Wikipedia. If someone has 900 million followers but no coverage in published media, they don't count.

The link you gave is only a student newspaper, not a reliable source. TooManyFingers (talk) 19:44, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I have been criticized a little bit for saying this, but it's close enough to the truth: You have to prove that the person is already "IRL famous" before they can have an article on Wikipedia. TooManyFingers (talk) 19:49, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate the clarification! In the original denied draft, could you please advice me which sources are reliable? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jorge_Rivera-Herrans

And to clarify university and college news sites are not reliable?

How about this?

https://puertoricoreport.com/jorge-rivera-herrans/ PigStuffy (talk) 01:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

What to do when a reputable source that is citied is factually incorrect

Hello all,

I have been adding more information and editing a specific page that has been neglected for a long time, knowing that a reputable source that is cited is factually incorrect on this rare occasion. The historical document cited is just not correct. I would love to change it but I know that if I do, the edits will just be reversed, citing the source and I might be banned. What do I do to actually make the information on the page factually correct? Is there a way to escalate the edits to senior editors, so that they don't get rejected? Anjkerjeox (talk) 08:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

You mean the source is notable but not saying the right thing? If so, you might not really have a case as how sure you are it's not correct (Wikipedia does not obey the law of personal opinions!). Also, you might Cite a correct one in addition to it.

You might also share the link to the article here so we all can review together. Tesleemah (talk) 08:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. If a source is accurately summarized, but in error about what it says, you will need to either take that up with the source itself to get them to issue a correction, or offer more current sources with more accurate information. It would help to know what article you are talking about, but it's not enough for you to just say it's wrong, which is essentially just your opinion- you need to show that it is wrong. I mean, Donald Trump and his die hard supporters say it is wrong to claim Joe Biden won the 2020 United States presidential election, but that is not what sources say. 331dot (talk) 08:29, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

The document is an official document referring to the heritage of a historical building. It is not a matter of opinion. In effect the document says the building is of a certain size and has certain features. You only need a pair of eyes and to visit the building to know the information, which is from an official document is wrong. No idea how or why but it is wrong. Anjkerjeox (talk) 08:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh dear. What's the building? -- asilvering (talk) 08:54, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

[Edit conflicts] There are no "senior editors" as such, but a sound argument is sound whoever makes it.

We have a standard approach called the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle.

The thing to do is to find a subsequent source which indisputably shows the first source is incorrect, and Boldly rewrite the passage citing the newer source. If the misconception is widely believed, you might say something along the lines of : "While X was formerly thought, for instance as according to Source A, [cite A] it is now known that Y is the case. [cite Source B]". (I realise the situation might be even more complicated than this.)

It would also be advisable first to open a new section on the article's Talk page, and explain what you are about to do, and why.

Be prepared anyway to be Reverted, and then to Discuss with the reverter. If your better source is sound, your proposal should be accepted. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.83.137 (talk) 08:37, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

The document is an official document referring to the heritage of a historical building. It is not a matter of opinion. In effect the document says the building is of a certain size and has certain features. You only need a pair of eyes and to visit the building to know the information, which is from an official document is wrong. No idea how or why but it is wrong Anjkerjeox (talk) 08:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Then, as I said, you need to take that up with whomever produced the document so they can correct it, or you need to provide other sources that offer more current or more accurate information, so the discrepancy can be noted in the article(that sources disagree). 331dot (talk) 08:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

• Anjkerjeox, the only article that meets your description is Cairo Flats. What exactly is your beef about the article? Stop beating around the bush and let us know. And what change would you like to make to the article? Softlavender (talk) 10:26, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

  As shown above, they dispute the given figures for the size of the structure, saying that their observations do not match what documents state. 331dot (talk) 11:07, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

  stated number of apartments is 28, as per citation. Actual number is 36. Anjkerjeox (talk) 11:13, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

  We have an interesting essay on the topic of erroneous sources, WP:WSAW, which may give some guidance. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

This site was in the article's Further reading section. It seems like the building's official website and it talks about these factual conflicts. The essay WP:MINE might interest you: often the thing you're looking for is already linked. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 11:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Anjkerjeox, the official website that HansVonStuttgart mentions above says "There are 36 apartments in total including 26 studios and 10 with separate bedroom. The site, previously under single ownership, was sold and subdivided in 1999." The citation you are referring to was published 25 June 1999. Always check the date of sources when you think they are inaccurate or out of date. Softlavender (talk) 00:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Anjkerjeox, can you imagine how much precious volunteer time would have been saved if you had just given us the name of the article in question at the very beginning of this conversation? We are encyclopedia editors here, not detectives. Cullen328 (talk) 04:05, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

• Looks like Anjkerjeox may be a troll. Not only has he not updated the article in question with the citation and information we provided him nearly two days ago (and that I reminded him of here [13]), he just left this message on my talkpage [14] after I reverted an extremely deceptive edit he made unjustifiably removing a citation-needed template with the edit-summary "grammar", on an article he created [15]. -- Softlavender (talk) 00:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

  Citations go at the end of a sentence, not in the middle. I put it there by mistake and then removed it. I did not realise that there was a 48 hour limit on when to apply edits by. Stop trying to make a storm in a tea cup into a big thing and find another page to edit. Anjkerjeox (talk) 01:38, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

  Anjkerjeox, you have no right to tell another editor what to work on or what not to work on. Stop that misconduct immediately or you will be blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 01:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

  waiting for your strongly worded reply reminding another editor to not call me a troll for fixing my own mistake, on a page I created in ...3.....2........... Anjkerjeox (talk) 02:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

  Stop lying. The citation-needed template was added by 331dot, not you [16], and you immediately removed it with a deceptive edit summary. Softlavender (talk) 02:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

  Anjkerjeox, that's bogus and you know it. 331dot added the citation-needed template, not you [17]. You then left a deliberately deceptive edit summary and completely removed (rather than moved) the citation-needed template from a completely uncited sentence [18]. It doesn't pay to lie on Wikipedia, because proof of what actually happened is always in the edit history,

  Also, when are you going to update the Cairo Flats article with the information and citation that you requested here and that editors painstakingly provided you with, above, over a day ago? Once an editor displays problematical behavior like ignoring the information they requested and acting as if they never received it [19], other editors naturally follow their edits to detect any further problems. Softlavender (talk) 02:09, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Websites for road lengths

Hello. I was wondering if somebody could help me find a website for road lengths. On the A508 road, I used the "measure distance" tool, however last week, it was taken to AfD (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A508 road), as it appeared to be original research in some editors' eyes. However, the only reason I used it was because the only other place I could find this kind of information was on SABRE Roads - an unreliable website made by road enthusiasts. Therefore, I was wondering if you lot could help. Is Google Maps OK for something like this if it is the last resort? Or is it OK all the time? Can you find any other free websites that presents this kind of information? Many thanks in advance! Regards, Roads4117 (talk) 19:56, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I suspect perhaps the real message is "stop wanting to put precise lengths". Finding a source is not the point. The point is finding a trustworthy, easily-verifiable, stable source. Google gives slightly different answers each time and is not necessarily stable.

Is there a publicly accessible government document on this? TooManyFingers (talk) 22:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

There is probably no such source, because such information is unimportant. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:50, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Shantavira, actually, such information is important, as it shows how important the road is: there is a big difference between the A1 at approximately 410 miles (660 km) and the A38 at 292 miles (470 km), compared with the A79 at 7.7 miles (12.4 km), or the A3215 at 0.2 miles (0.32 km). Furthermore, the road length needs to be found somewhere in the article (especially in the infobox), so actually it is really important to have in road articles! Roads4117 (talk) 08:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't "need to be found". If the single road length cannot be found from a reliable source then it should be deleted/not-given. Yes that probably affects the quality of the article but no information is always better than unsourced information or original research. Verifiability trumps the truth every time. Also, there is a big difference between an overall road length, which is a single number, and what we get in some articles which is excessive detail of the distances between multiple waypoints. The former is of encyclopaedic interest if it can be properly sourced (the subject of this discussion) but the latter is really not relevant. 10mmsocket (talk) 07:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

So are you basically saying that every road length on every article infobox and/or junction table that is not sourced has to then be removed due to WP:V? If that is what you are saying, then although I do agree that policies and all that come first, I also think that then the quality of the articles deteriorates. Roads4117 (talk) 08:26, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Why do you think that removing unverified information causes article quality to deteriorate? Removing such information is a GoodThing™ 10mmsocket (talk) 08:36, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes it is a good thing, but it just removes important information from the article. Roads4117 (talk) 19:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Importance is subjective and cannot trump Wikipedia's standards. 10mmsocket (talk) 21:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

No, not that I can find (apart from on roads like the A1), which is the problem; other than oh major roads, your options are (1) add a unreliable source like SABRE roads, made from road enthusiasts, which is more than likely to be reverted, or (2) add Google Maps 'measure distance' tool, which gets challenged as original research or copyvio when the article goes to AfD. So either way, you cannot win (unless someone else finds another source). Roads4117 (talk) 07:57, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

The answer is really simple. If you cannot source it, don't add it. 10mmsocket (talk) 07:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@10mmsocket, and I just remembered, the third option is to program the route of the road into Google Maps, from A to B, via C, D, E, etc., like the example at R102 road (Ireland). Does that count as original research/being unreliable etc.? However, my only problems with this way are: (1) you have to eyeball the route from start to finish, which on a 6-mile-long suburban road in outer London is not that bad, but on the A1, that might be a slight problem, as it is 410 miles (660 km) long, but also as you can only add seven stop off points in total, and (2) if the road is shut for whatever reason, then it may say that the road length is substantially longer than it actually is. What are your thoughts on this?... Roads4117 (talk) 08:21, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes it is original research. 10mmsocket (talk) 08:34, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@10mmsocket, but just out of interest, how is that classified as original research? Roads4117 (talk) 19:39, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

See WP:SYNTH. You may consider WP:CALC means that you can add up distances, but if those distances are not clearly stated on the source then interpretation of individual section lengths calculation of the total road length is not a simple operation - it is synthesis. 10mmsocket (talk) 21:25, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

And also, could we just do the 'measure distance' tool thing, but only to one or two decimal place(s)? Roads4117 (talk) 19:47, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

It is original research. 10mmsocket (talk) 21:20, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@10mmsocket OK, then. In that case, how are we then supposed to prove the road lengths? Roads4117 (talk) 07:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Find a source. For motorways and A roads in the strategic roads network, it is feasible that National Highways might have documents - as they're the road owner. 10mmsocket (talk) 08:02, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@10mmsocket Good point! I will have a look now! Roads4117 (talk) 08:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Road lengths in Great Britain statistics: Methodology and quality note outlines the collection of such data, including the Major Roads Database (MRDB) and the Ordnance Survey (OS) MasterMap Highways Network dataset. As ever, the datasets may not be directly available to the general public or without payment. NebY (talk) 09:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I looked on the Department of Transport website on GOV.UK, and I have found the following citations (it is not what we are looking for, but it is still useful). I will check the National Highways website now. Roads4117 (talk) 09:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@10mmsocket, I have just checked the National Highways website, and I cannot find anything to do with road lengths. Even if there is something on that website, it would be like finding a needle in a haystack. Roads4117 (talk) 19:12, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

And what is the in-house view on this? @Maproom, @Nick Moyes, @Cullen328 etc.? Roads4117 (talk) 07:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Roads4117, I rarely if ever work on articles about roads. In day to day life off-Wikipedia, I often need to calculate driving distances for my small family business. I use Google Maps and find it quite accurate. But you have to gain consensus for whatever you end up using. Cullen328 (talk) 07:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328, thanks for that advice! Roads4117 (talk) 08:08, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I suggest that common sense, possibly WP:IAR, says that a road article needs a figure for its length, to distinguish a 10-mile road from a 200-mile one. Google maps seems reliable enough to offer that single figure, perhaps with "about" to give a little bit of wriggle-room. I note that Good Article A82 road cites Google Maps for its length. PamD 08:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@PamD, I totally agree with you on that. Even if we include a footnote, just to say that 'this figure is not 100% accurate', or that 'this is an estimate', then I think that should be fine. Roads4117 (talk) 19:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@10mmsocket and @PamD, I was just thinking, how do we know that Google Maps doesn't round up (or down) its mileage figures? Like how do we know that the A5 is 243 miles long, not 242.5 miles long or 243.4 miles long, as potentially a 0.5mile difference or a 0.9mile difference is quite a big difference! Roads4117 (talk) 19:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

And also, when a road is closed, then when the Wikipedia editor clicks on the link to verify this information, and then see that this link actually says that the road is xx miles longer, their automatic thought would be to change the Wikipedia article, to have false information, even if the edit was good faith, instead of eyeball a road going from London to northern Wales (which would take forever!) Roads4117 (talk) 19:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@NebY, @PamD, @10mmsocket, BTW there was a similar disccussion in September/October 2022 about whether Google Maps is a reliable source or not at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 388#Google Maps. Also see WP:GOOGLEMAPS, which, in a nutshell, states the following: Google Maps and Google Street View may be useful for some purposes, including finding and verifying geographic coordinates and other basic information like street names. However, especially for objects like boundaries (of neighborhoods, allotments, etc.), where other reliable sources are available they should be preferred over Google Maps and Google Street View. It can also be difficult or impossible to determine the veracity of past citations, since Google Maps data is not publicly archived, and may be removed or replaced as soon as it is not current. Inferring information solely from Street View pictures may be considered original research. Roads4117 (talk) 10:11, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-09-16/News and notes#A fork in the Roads WikiProject for one consequence of such discussions. (I provide this for your information, Roads4117, not to open a fresh discussion on the difficulties some editors have found with WP:RS w/regards to roads and maps; that has already been covered at length in high-profile discussions, statements and actions, and the Teahouse would not be the place anyway.) NebY (talk) 10:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@NebY, sorry, I do not understand what you are trying to stay. Roads4117 (talk) 19:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I'll try again. You mentioned some earlier discussions. They had consequences. Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-09-16/News and notes#A fork in the Roads WikiProject describes one. I mention it because you might like to read that and learn about it. I don't mention it in order to open a fresh discussion. NebY (talk) 19:17, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

How long is a piece of road network? CMD (talk) 11:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Longer than a piece of string (mostly) 10mmsocket (talk) 12:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis, the average road length in the UK on average varies between 10 miles long and 50 miles long. However, the is the occasional anomaly, with some roads (especially in urban cities) being 5 miles or less, and some going towards the other extremity, with them being hundreds of miles long. Roads4117 (talk) 19:03, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

And @NebY, @10mmsocket, @NebY, @Chipmunkdavis, @Cullen328, @Shantavira, @TooManyFingers, I forgot to mention this earlier, but an example of this unreliability of sources can be found at the A1 road (Great Britain) article. Like I said at Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/A508 road on Tuesday 20th August, on Wikipedia, it says that the length of the road is 410 miles (660 km), on the SABRE roads website here, it says that the length of the road is 396 miles (637 km), but on this other website I found, it says that the road length is 490 miles (790 km) long. And just for the record, the length of the road as the crow flies is approximately 331 miles (533 km). This just shows that it is just not the Axxx or Axxxx roads that have this problem on Wikipedia, it is one of the most famous and notable roads in the entire country. There is quite a big difference between 331 miles and 490 miles (159 miles - the equivalent of London to Hull, or Milan to Venice), so getting the correct figure is really important. If there is a small difference of 100 metres or something, then that is standard, but a 159-mile difference is something else!! I know that the sources that I gave were unreliable, but it further emphasises @PamD's point further upthread about how we should just have Google Maps as the main source of this kind of thing, but just as an approximate figure, or alternatively have it as a footnote saying that it is not 100% accurate. Roads4117 (talk) 20:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Would you trust any website with "gpt" in its name and no indication of who has written it? I think we can ignore your 490 miles. I happened to have had a look for this one myself earlier in this discussion: I think we can believe it to be 410 miles, because the government says so. PamD 20:11, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

OK then, we will go with that reference then for the article. Roads4117 (talk) 07:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

But I am just thinking about it, technically the whole point of junction tables is to verify road lengths. Am I dorrect in saying that @10mmsocket and @PamD? Roads4117 (talk) 19:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

And what is our conclusion to this discussion? Roads4117 (talk) 19:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

• Use Google Maps, but only if we can use an 'about' or 'approximately' in the answer, so that we have some wiggle room, which is like what @PamD said, or alternatively, yet similar to this idea, we could use a footnote to say that this source is not 100% accurate, but it is the best that we have! Any thoughts? Roads4117 (talk) 19:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The Teahouse isn't really the place for any sort of consensus-producing discussion, so there's no "our conclusion". There may be some advice from one or two experienced editors. PamD 22:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

And UK-roads-interested editors might like to have a look at A6 road (England), which I looked at to see whether it mentioned that the A6 disappears for some parts of its length, as between Levens Bridge and the Kendal bypass when it "overlaps" (our article's term) with the A590 and A591. Are those 4 miles included in its length? (It's also about a mile longer southbound than northbound, as a numbered road on maps, as there's a section which is only southbound, while northbound joins the A590 further south!) But quite apart from that it seems a pretty dreadful article, with almost no content apart from a blow-by-blow route description. Nothing about its history, (Romans? Turnpike roads? Upgrades prior to M6? Currrent developments?). Perhaps it isn't really notable? (No, I'm sure it is, but the article really needs some attention!) PamD 08:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Wow, that's horrible. A great example of why lots of UK road articles need a massive prune. 10mmsocket (talk) 08:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@10mmsocket and @PamD, yes I agree that this article does need a lick of paint. However, I also think that this road is way too notable to be redirecting. When you compare this to other Ax or Axx road articles, you can clearly see that this article needs a massive clean-up. It still needs a junction table, a lot more information in the History section (and basically everywhere else apart from the Route section), and more citations in the route section. But I do agree that it does need some attention! Roads4117 (talk) 09:05, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Also, @10mmsocket and @PamD, can I move (copy and paste) this conversation to Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography, as, like you said, the Teahouse is not really the right place for this kind of conversation. Roads4117 (talk) 07:09, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Just post a link to it so people can read if they want to. Once it gets archived change the link to point to the archived version. 10mmsocket (talk) 07:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

References

Reliable sources

How can I determine if a source is reliable and considered widely useful of the English Wikipedia? When I say sources in this instance, I mean websites. What qualifies a website to be considered reliable, independent and investigative? Wår (talk) 08:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Please read about reliable sources here but in short, a source is reliable if it has a reputation of fact checking and editorial control- they don't publish stuff without checking for accuracy and without someone other than the writer looking at it(i.e. an editor). This disqualifies things like most blogs and podcasts(though not all). 331dot (talk) 08:09, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you @331dot. I do appreciate. Wår (talk) 08:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Article entry rejected

Dear Wikipedia community,

I submitted Wikipedia entry for my NGO and it was rejected a couple of times. Each time the article is rejected, someone sends an email to me offering their services for writing wikipedia articles. Does the mean the same person is voluenteering with Wikipedia, otherwise how he/she gets to know our submission is rejected? 91.75.24.106 (talk) 16:30, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Please read WP:SCAM and be very, very cautious. Wikipedia is an open, transparent platform and malicious people are perfectly able to see what is happening on Wikipedia. There is no reason for a good faith volunteer to contact you this way. Cullen328 (talk) 16:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

An email offering services for writing wikipedia articles could be unintentionally amusing; consider pasting it here. -- Hoary (talk) 21:53, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. I realise that this is not directly what you are asking about, but have you read WP:BOSS? If you haven't, I recommend you do so. ColinFine (talk) 19:24, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

IP editor, please consider forwarding the emails you have received to paid-en-wpwikipedia.org so that they can be investigated. This is a common type of scam, as Cullen above notes; the Wikipedia community has uncovered various such cases earlier (e.g. Orangemoody). JavaHurricane 10:28, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Vincent Van Patten

 Courtesy link: Vincent Van Patten

There is no mention on Patten's page about his role on the 70s television series "Hawaii Five-0". Te86O62%orro (talk) 00:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Then find a reliable source (not IMDB) and add it in. The series isn't mentioned in Vincent Van Patten and he isn't mentioned in either of the Hawaii Five-O articles, so it's possible that you may be mistaken. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

As Anachronist says, IMDb isn't a reliable source for Wikipedia articles; that aside, it does not list Vincent Van Patten as appearing in the show, but does say that Joyce Van Patten, his aunt, did – a possible source of confusion. The relevant entry reads "Joyce Van Patten: Lila Daniels / Rhoda Lovejoy (2 episodes, 1970–1972)." {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.83.137 (talk) 12:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Missing Q-prompt

What happened to the Q-promt on the portal of wikipedia.en?

Since several days, it has vanished from my portal, and to open a specific subject or topic, I now have to enter other language versions of wikipedia, if the subject exists there at all, and then change from there to the english version. Needless to say, this is only an awkward workaround.

Hope someone here can help!

Thanks,

Oceanos Procellarum Oceanos Procellarum (talk) 14:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I see the same as you. I'm normally on mobile, and mobile still works fine, but I switched and there's no search box / Q-prompt / typing area thing.

You could even try the stupid workaround of going to en.m.wikipedia.org for searches, until there's a proper solution. IDK if that even works on a normal browser though. TooManyFingers (talk) 15:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt reply!

At least I Know now I am not the only one with this fundamental bug.

So, should we report this, but where? Oceanos Procellarum (talk) 15:32, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Going into Preferences -> Appearance, and switching skins to an older version, is a much better temporary workaround for normal browsers. TooManyFingers (talk) 15:21, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Oceanos Procellarum, are you using dark mode by any chance? Lately the search box has been changed so that it doesn't start working until you click the magnifying glass icon, and on my dark mode the magnifying glass is black on a black background. But if I blindly click near the beginning of my username, the invisible magnifying glass still works and the search box gets focus. So on my machine it's a glitch in how dark mode is set up. TooManyFingers (talk) 17:26, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Wow, that's it - although in my case it's actually the reverse from dark mode, which I usually do not use.

When I point the curser to the left of my user name, there appears a barely visible square with slightly off-white color on white background.

And if I then click on this ghostly square, the missing "Search Wikipedia" box reappears!

So, with this secret knowledge, I am now in business again.

But what about all the other people, who don't know about this secret fix.

Clearly this calls for a bug fix!

Thanks once more to TooManyFingers, who figured this out,

and cheers to everybody! Oceanos Procellarum (talk) 18:11, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#No search box for default skin. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Creating an article about someone we have little information about

I want to complete the list of Alaafins of the Oyo Empire, that is my goal.

Problem is, between two very important kings there was an unimportant one who had little to no change in policy and is overlooked by most sources and that is why my article draft was rejected.

I do still want to have an article that can at least give information of what we do know and make it so you can click through via the succession - predecessor links. Jupiter Omishola (talk) 08:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Oluodo

Hi @Jupiter Omishola: that is a laudable goal. Alas, there is an inherent difficulty in writing an article about a subject that isn't covered in reliable sources. Wikipedia essentially summarises what reliable published sources have previously said about a subject. Moreover, for a subject to be considered notable, coverage needs to exist in multiple such sources. If sufficient sources don't exist, they cannot be summarised, and hence no article can be published on Wikipedia. I'm not saying categorically that there couldn't be an article on Oluodo, only that the single source your draft cites isn't enough to base one on. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I found another book that talks about him in slightly more detail. Would that suffice? Jupiter Omishola (talk) 09:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@Jupiter Omishola: impossible to say without knowing what book it is and what is says about the subject. But as a general comment, in order to establish notability we normally require three solid sources. (I say 'normally', because it's not a hard rule, and exceptions could be made both ways, depending on the case.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

In looking at articles about the other Alaafins of the Oyo Empire, many cite a book by Samuel Johnson, and have no refs other than Law and Johnson. David notMD (talk) 09:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

That partially is also my goal for the other articles on the Alaafins, to find more credible sources and expand the articles as they are often just one sentence oblivion. Jupiter Omishola (talk) 10:39, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I have now found a third reputable source talking about him. I will include as a reference in my draft and reapply for publishing Jupiter Omishola (talk) 10:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Jupiter Omishola! I hope you succeed in finding enough sources for a separate article about Oluodu, as I agree with your remarks about using the succession and predecessor links. However, if you cannot, I suggest that alternatively you could add a Section about him to the article about his predecessor or successor, and create Ouodu as a redirect to it. Good luck. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.83.137 (talk) 12:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I hope I can convince the staff he was notable enough, if not I will probably do your suggestion. Thanks for the kind words Jupiter Omishola (talk) 12:18, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I've accepted this. Well done @Jupiter Omishola for finding more sources. Poor man didn't get a proper funeral, but at least he now has a Wikipedia article! -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

thanks @DoubleGrazing you were very helpful Jupiter Omishola (talk) 13:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

A point needs clarifying. There is no "staff" on Wikipedia. There is no editorial board, no central authority on content. There are only volunteer editors like you and me. Put another way, you are part of the "staff". ~Anachronist (talk) 14:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

IP Block question?

My IP was blocked when I attempted to create an account. I submitted an appeal explaining what I believe had happened and attesting to my updated knowledge of newer Wikipedia rules. It gave me a link where I could check on the appeal, but that link does not work. I just get an error. Can anyone tell me how I can check on the status of my appeal or how, if ever, someone from Wikipedia will get in touch with me about it? 130.44.145.55 (talk) 14:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Just to clarify, since I was not able to create an account, I don't understand how I am supposed to find out that my appeal has been seen. I cannot log in. 130.44.145.55 (talk) 14:54, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Your IP is not blocked otherwise you wouldn't be able to post here. What was the name of the account that you tried to create? Perhaps it did not conform to our Wikipedia:Username policy. Did you try using a different name? Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

The name of the account was VoltaireHollande. Actually, that was my second attempt, which I realize after reading the rules I should not have attempted. I frankly no longer remember the original. I believe what happened is that I had not turned off my VPN. Since I thought that was the problem and it still would not allow me to log in with 130.44.145.55 (talk) 15:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Since that happened, I then tried to create a new account (later reading this was against the rules). And no, I am not logged in. 130.44.145.55 (talk) 15:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

In fact, I ended up on Teahouse because it is possible to post here without logging in. 130.44.145.55 (talk) 15:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

We don't have any user named VoltaireHollande ([20]). I also don't see any blocks on your IP at all. So as far as I can tell you're clear to create a new account named VoltaireHollande from the IP you're currently at, and nothing should stop you. It's possible that you'll get blocked on this new account, for ban evasion, but then you can explain this to the blocking admin, who will actually have the information required to help you out. -- asilvering (talk) 16:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

So how do I get in touch with the blocking administration. I don't want to attempt creating a new account since I read that this was against the rules. 130.44.145.55 (talk) 16:09, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

To be clear, I already put in the appeal acknowledging that I had read the rules, and that included not attempting to create another account. 130.44.145.55 (talk) 16:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

It's okay to create another account now. I presume what happened to the other one is that you were blocked because you were on a VPN at the time. If that's the only reason, simply creating a new account is fine. If your earlier account was blocked because of some other misconduct you haven't mentioned, it's possible that an administrator will block you for ban evasion, at which point you can explain what happened like you've done here. But since we can't look up your old banned account from your IP address, there isn't anything else we can do to find the other account you were blocked on. -- asilvering (talk) 16:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I believe you need an account to be able to edit but it is generally possible to post to Talk without logging in. The block came about when I was trying to create an account to edit. 130.44.145.55 (talk) 16:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

If anyone knows how I can get in touch with the blocking administration without having a Wikipedia editing account, I'd much appreciate it. 130.44.145.55 (talk) 16:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

In case the comment above is not clear, you can create an account at your current IP (130.44.145.55). In the off chance it is blocked for ban evasion, you can talk to the blocking administrator then and get the account unblocked. You don't need to talk to the 'blocking administration' now. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 16:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Are Wikipedia templates Turing complete?

It seems to me like someone skilled with templates could write a text adventure game with them.

Dvallin (talk) 00:54, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Not by themselves no, templates do not write data. You can use templates to run Lua but I don't think that's what you're asking. Somebody has created The Wikipedia Adventure though. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Templates could write data with a twist. If a template had to write data it could generate a link where the url contain that data and on a click the pagename could contain that data. So every click is a clock pulse. 2A02:3032:304:A5C6:2013:F147:E32C:1E64 (talk) 18:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't know why my article is getting rejected. I have a righteous cause.

I have written a draft article for submission for Nick Oliveri the author, as I am a fan of literature and this specific novelist is often conflated online and in archives with the musician from queens of the stone age who is much older, different, and this all does Nick Oliveri the novelist a disservice. I keep getting rejected for vague reasons that all seem to be different, even though I have been journalistic, objective, and informative in my approach as I have almost 40 sources from credible institutions and outlets. I need help please Theartistsenpsychlopedia (talk) 02:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Nick_Oliveri_(author)

Resubmitting the draft without making any changes, as you did, is not going to help your case. RudolfRed (talk) 03:23, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello Theartistsenpsychlopedia. It was rejected for the same reason both times: "This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article." I looked at the article, and it does not seem objective to me. Phrases like "granted Nick Oliveri the opportunity to tell stories of great visions for positive impact" and "Restless in his pursuit to share his work" don't look like something you'd see in an encyclopedia, they look promotional. The only purpose of Wikipedia is to neutrally document information about things that are notable. Righteous causes and promotional content aren't accepted. A lot of the sources you're using are store pages, public relations, or minor outlets. We're more interested in what Reuters or The New York Times, for example, has to say about someone. If this is to be an article, you'll want to find reliable independent sources that cover his career in detail and then write about it in an impartial tone. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:28, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

ok this is helpful. Can you please delineate every time where there is any grandiosity in prose here? The reason why I ask is because this young novelist keeps being overshadowed and essentially plaigiarised by wikipedia because the older Nick Oliveri has a wikipedia, and according to many google searches these books written by Nick Oliveri the Ukrainian American are being attributed to someone ese becaus eof the very platform you're upholding Theartistsenpsychlopedia (talk) 03:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Every time? Thebiguglyalien has other things to do. And plagiarism doesn't mean what you seem to think. 126.33.84.133 (talk) 04:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Understood, but there still remains a serious problem that one of my favorite authors *practically* gets attributed to someone that he is not. That is what bothers me, regardless of semantics. I'm just trying to be productive and serve this platform for its purpose, as I see it being misaligned right now based on searches etc. Theartistsenpsychlopedia (talk) 05:13, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Theartistsenpsychlopedia: Is Wikipedia misattributing his works? If so, please tell us where. If not, this is not the place to resolve the matter; nor is it the purpose of Wikipedia to do so. Take it up with whoever is doing the misattribution. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

• Theartistsenpsychlopedia, no one cares about your "righteous cause". See WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Nor does the Nick Oliveri you are writing about appear to pass Wikipedia thresholds of notability. If the person wants to differentiate themselves from other persons of the same name, have them create a personal website. Wikipedia is not a webhost for personal information. If you yourself are Nick Oliveri, you should not be writing a Wikipedia article on yourself. Lastly, no one cares about the trivial life details of an obscure writer who has self-published a handful of novels. Best cease this Wikipedia endeavor and stop wasting your time. Softlavender (talk) 05:48, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

  he’s one of my favorite authors who is a betseller and whose sales ( I met him at a signing on the west coast) are encumbered by having a different Nick Oliveri’s persona being wrongly attributed to his books… I will not apologize for trying to do the right thing and have his (by the way, secretive personal gripes) isssues of detection WRONGFULLY overshadowed and essentially assigned to someone who is not him.

  sorry but I’m not sorry for standing up for what I thought was a core cause of Wikipedia’s…. 100.0.220.84 (talk) 05:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

  Is a #1 bestselling author not notable? Just because you don’t know this figure does not mean that I don’t know your favorite/ preferred public figures. 100.0.220.84 (talk) 06:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Please remember to log in each time you edit, your draft requires WP:TNT and a complete re-write in a neutral, dry encyclopaedic tone. Theroadislong (talk) 06:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Theartistsenpsychlopedia, please log in to edit. Your draft is overtly promotional from beginning to end, and promotional editing is not permitted on Wikipedia. The Neutral point of view is a core content policy, and compliance with that policy is mandatory. You must remove all of the promotional content from your draft if you are to have any hope of having this draft accepted. It was a bad idea for you to write essentially plaigiarised by wikipedia because that can be interpreted as an accusation that Wikipedia editors are violating the law somehow, which is, to be frank, ludicrous. Wikipedia editors place a high priority on accuracy and logic when advancing an argument. So, get to work cleaning up that mess that you incorrectly think is journalistic, objective, and informative, or an administrator may come along and clean it up by deleting it entirely. Cullen328 (talk) 06:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

You can add the distinguish template to the Nick Oliveri article to inform readers that the article is not about Nick Oliveri the author. Constant314 (talk) 18:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I deleted a lot of subjective crap, but the draft is still a non-encyclopedic mess. David notMD (talk) 06:54, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Aside from other matters, you have to work on the prose. Within a single, short paragraph:

• at the turn of the 2010s decade: Why both "the 2010s" and "decade"? (And why not just say "in spring 2021"?)
• fell to dark depths: What does this actually mean?
• as soon as [...] promptly: Why both?
• belittling himself as [...] a self-proclaimed "weirdo": What does "self-proclaimed" add to this?

-- Hoary (talk) 09:02, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary: We don't say things like "in spring 2021" because this is a global project, and one half of this planet has spring around March time, the other around September. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:49, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

An excellent point, Andy Mabbett. Certainly it should be observed in general; but we're told that this fellow "promptly moved across the country to San Luis Obispo, California in the Spring of 2021". The hemisphere identifies which spring is meant; also, "the Spring of 2021" is the clearest time reference that I notice in the draft for this series of events. But of course the draft has problems more serious than the awkwardness of its wording. -- Hoary (talk) 21:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Ok folks, I think I have gotten the point here and will work on something dry and neutral. My emotion in this one came from clear overstatements based on Nick’s story he told me during our interaction at one of our book signings, and I’d never accuse Wikipedia of anything specifically, because all I meant by “plagiarism” was that Google will attribute nick’s books to a different Nick Oliveri , which, I’m sure you’d agree, would be frustrating and enraging, even if he pointed that anger wrongly at Wikipedia, there is still little he can do. I appreciate all the help here where it was constructive and objective, and I’ll ignore the insults, as I think so long my wiki draft is torn apart, and not the author himself nor his story, is good and productive for me. I appreciate this and will completely continue to make it dry and functional and to your high standards. 100.0.220.84 (talk) 08:56, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Of note: A tweet by the author from yesterday, which simply reads ""Fuck Wikipedia": [21] (archived [22]). --Softlavender (talk) 08:12, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Adding a subpage to an existing article

@Johnjbarton: I have been around awhile, but I have never added a subpage to an existing article. It seems like this would be a good way to extend an article without bloating the article. I would like to have advice. Is it a good idea? Is it a bad idea. Can it piggyback on the references already in the parent page or does it need its own, full, citations? Does it inherit notability from the parent page. For example, if there is a page X that has content about Y, can I create a subpage X/Y where I move information about Y and perhaps add information. Is this non-controversial. Do I need to meet all the new page creation guidelines? Constant314 (talk) 18:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Constant314. Subpages are not permitted for articles, and that function is disabled in the software. Please see Wikipedia:Subpages for more information. Cullen328 (talk) 18:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Splitting for the procedure used to deal with the type of situation you describe. Cullen328 (talk) 18:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Constant314 (talk) 18:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

• Answered Constant314 (talk) 18:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Coronation Street

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.

---

My Name is christopher cogan i love to take part of platt family i don't know my actor name if you pick my name i love born 1970's or 1980's or 1990's my actor is not christopher cogan that's my character name Benjamin j. Davis (talk) 11:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Benjamin j. Davis, this is a help forum for editing Wikipedia. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Qcne (talk) 12:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Coronation Street, i do have a question about editing wikipedia my name christopher cogan i am charater my name is christopher platt on corrie

can you helping my actor name and date of birth real life Benjamin j. Davis (talk) 12:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

 Note:User seems to be WP:NOTHERE judging by their talk page. We're sorry, but Teahouse will likely not be able to satisfy your request. Have you tried asking it on the relevant Fandom page instead? ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 12:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Coronation Street, i do have a question about editing wikipedia i am charater my name is christopher platt on corrie

can you helping my actor name and date of birth real life Benjamin j. Davis (talk) 12:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

As ABG said above, no, we cannot. 126.33.64.135 (talk) 13:35, 8 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.

"Karwal" Article without any single source

 Courtesy link: Karwal

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.

---

The article I want to highlight with the moderator have lack of dedicated consensus material or any significant acquisition to make it occurrence in main space, so I think this article should be intervened by some expertise . DISCOVERY OF HISTORY (talk) 03:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@DISCOVERY OF HISTORY, your move to draft was reverted because the article is too old to send back to draft space. Please have a look at the messages on your talk page. If you think this article should be deleted entirely -- that is, you think there are basically no sources about the topic in existence anywhere -- then you can nominate it for deletion at WP:AFD. -- asilvering (talk) 03:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@DISCOVERY OF HISTORY, I've proposed the mentioned article be deleted. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 07:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

So thats what i an looking to sort this out thanks for assisting me out I appreciate it@AlphaBetaGamma DISCOVERY OF HISTORY (talk) 10:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

The article is not "without any single source"; it quite clearly cites "The 2011 Census of India for Rajasthan". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:34, 8 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.