Wikipedia:Teahouse

Hoary, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help

Wikipedia

Not essays

A reviewer moved my article back to draft, because, " Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because Wikipedia articles are not academic essays.". Does that mean it needs to be "dumbed down"? Any elaboration appreciated, if known. Fixingthingsguy (talk) 20:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Fixingthingsguy, I guess this is about Draft:How the PET bottle became ubiquitous. No, dumbing-down is not the issue. But there's a lot of things wrong with that draft, which would prevent it trom being accepted as a Wikipedia article:

• It's not an article about a subject, it's an essay about how (in your view) something happened. I assume that's what the reviewer meant.
• It uses capitalisation and italics in seemingly random ways: "Polyethylene Terephthalate", "glass", "2-Liter".
• It says "50 years ago" rather than giving a date. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and hopes to exist for at least another 50 years, it's not a newspaper. "Today", likewise.
• The punctuation is chaotic. Some periods are mid-sentence, some sentences have no period. Punctuation should always followprecede references, not precedefollow them.

The last three items will be fairly easy to correct. But while what you've written is not about a notable topic, it has little chance of being accepted. Maproom (talk) 21:17, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, that's very helpful. Fixingthingsguy (talk) 21:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Fixingthingsguy: a Wikipedia article should be a summary of what reliable sources have said about a subject, nothing more. It should not present any argumentation or conclusions at all, except possibly summaries of arguments or conclusions presented in one single source. It could summarise (separately) arguments or conclusions from two or more different sources, but should make no attempt to compare or reconcile them. ColinFine (talk) 22:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks . I'm getting a better picture of what I need to do. My grandson is likely never to ask, how did the plastic-like beverage bottle get ubiquitous! But if he was super observant, he might ask, how come all these beverage bottles in the grocery have a weird shape in the bottom. That might be a subject of interest. In which case I would tell him about these super smart people who tossed around various ideas and came up with a petal like base, that ensured the Coke bottle or Pepsi bottle would stand a lot of jostling around from manufacture to the dining table and stand upright at all times. How did they do that, grandad, and I would say, they made a preform that looks like a syringe with the small end closed, and shoved a burst of hot air that made it into a form that ends looking like a beverage bottle. And they received patents for that from the US Patent office. And, oh, by the way, they made trillions of these and now are struggling to find a way to recycle them without becoming a hazard for future generations.

How does that sound. Thanks in advance for any feedback

Regards Fixingthingsguy (talk) 00:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

That sounds like a great blog post, but like it wouldn't quite fit on Wikipedia. However, that doesn't mean the information you've collected wouldn't be useful, or couldn't be incorporated into Wikipedia!

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. A good way to think of it is that the title of a Wikipedia article should be a noun: Wikipedia articles should describe a single thing, rather than try to answer a question (like "how did X happen").

Once we've chosen a thing, we find and summarize all the information there is related to that particular thing. For example, your article could probably be split up and included in our article on plastic bottles or polyethylene terephthalate! –Sincerely, A Lime 01:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll note your suggestions as I rework the draft. Fixingthingsguy (talk) 21:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

@Fixingthingsguy Do not rework the draft. It is a blatant essay and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an essay hosting service. Hasn’t your WikiEd teacher thing taught you that already? 48JCL^TALK 00:54, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @48JCL, I think your comment might have come across sounding harsher than you intended it to (the use of bold comes across as shouting)—just a friendly reminder of Wikipedia:BITE.

@Fixingthingsguy just to clarify, I believe JCL is saying that the material you've written is not well-suited to a standalone article. Instead, it should probably be merged into a different article after some revision. –Sincerely, A Lime 01:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@Closed Limelike Curves Terribly sorry, I completely forgot. 48JCL^TALK 01:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

No worries, internet communication is hard :) –Sincerely, A Lime 03:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Maproom: On punctuation and reference indices: Really? 126.33.112.247 (talk) 22:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom is mistaken here. Punctuation should always precede references, except in limited circumstances. See MOS:CITEPUNCT. Adam Black ^{t • c} 00:42, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

You're right. Now corrected. Maproom (talk) 07:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

In anser to your question, not good. Articles consist of facts and references, not "telling". And are you aware that Polyethylene terephthalate has a section on bottles? Perhaps you have referenced content that can be added there versus a separate article. David notMD (talk) 00:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Ignore All Rules

Hey editors, I hope you all are well. I want to know when one should use WP:IAR at AfD. It is obvious that the creator of this rule knew it could be misused to save articles. So, what are the limitations of this rule? When can't someone use this guideline? GrabUp - Talk 15:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

@Grabup It seems to me that AfD is a discussion intended to decide whether or not an article should be deleted. As such, rules shouldn't need to be relied upon (or ignored). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

@Grabup: You could use it in your post at AfD but it isn't really meant for discussions and the closer may put little weight on your post. AfD is not a straight vote and IAR is a lousy argument by itself. Do NOT use it to bypass the AfD process, e.g. by hiding links to hte discussion, posting from multiple accounts, changing or removing posts by others, closing the discussion too early or against consensus, damaging the article in hope of getting more delete support, or canvassing. Personally I almost never use IAR and only when a rule wasn't written with the specific circumstances in mind, almost everybody would probably agree with my action, and it doesn't seem important enough to start a discussion. I never use it in discussions. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your detailed information. Another thing I wanted to ask is why this rule was created. We have rules such as GNG, NPOL, NACTOR, and others, so why is there another rule that just skips them? GrabUp - Talk 17:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

It essentially exists to say "it's OK to use common sense". Policies and guidelines shouldn't be interpreted as laws – they exist only to describe principles that the Wikipedia community thinks are generally good, and are intended to help Wikipedia, not harm it. Occasionally, some action that would be indicated by a policy might be so obviously bad for Wikipedia that nobody would reasonably agree with the policy in that scenario, so in those rare circumstances there's no good reason to follow the rule.

Think about it like how a police officer would obviously not expect a doctor to obey a law against jaywalking if someone was having a medical emergency on the other side of the road and there were no cars in sight – the rules don't need to carve out every possible exception, as long as everyone uses common sense. Tollens (talk) 17:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed answer. I was asking about it because I had a small discussion with a person who is likely to use this rule at normal AfDs at the recent RFA. His question was Q26. You can see the discussion if you search for Q26 or see this diff. GrabUp - Talk 18:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

In my 18 years on Wikipedia, the last dozen of which have been as an administrator, I have never had to invoke IAR. I consider it a cop-out. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I didn't say I'd use it personally, I just said I think it would be justifiable in that specific situation. To my knowledge, I've never invoked IAR at AfD. You can scrutinize my votes here, but I'm fairly sure I haven't. Cremastra (talk) 22:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

If you ever have to say you're invoking IAR, you're doing it wrong. It's either for cases where what you're doing is so obviously correct no one would disagree with it even though it may technically contravene a rule, or where there's a really weird corner case there's no rule at all for and you're muddling through it the best you can. As an example of the first at AfD: There are zero independent sources about humans, as every single one (or at least every single one we know of!) was written by a human. But if you nominated that article for AfD on the grounds of failing notability, even though strictly it does, that would get SNOW kept enough to bury Mount Everest in a drift. Everyone pretty much just knows that applying the rule literally in that case would lead to a ludicrous result, so it just gets quietly ignored in that instance, without anyone even having to say so. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I no longer have access to some pages

Hello, I can no longer access some pages that I have been working on for several years. These include: Cardano (blockchain platform). Can anyone tell me what's happened? GreyStar456 (talk) 09:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@GreyStar456: The article you linked has been EC protected since 2021. But your account is already extended-confirmed, so you should be able to edit it. Could you describe the situation with more detail? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. I have made edits to this page many times, most recently 23:34, 26 March 2024 diff hist  +82‎  Cardano (blockchain platform). Now, I see the EC padlock. I noticed it this morning. That's all I know. I've made 1,173 edits since 20 April 2020. GreyStar456 (talk) 10:13, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Does it save your edits when you click "publish"? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 10:15, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Panic over. There's now no problem. I don't know what happened. Apologies for bothering you. Thanks again. GreyStar456 (talk) 10:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

That's good. No problem at all. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 10:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi @GreyStar456: - I see the issue has been resolved. What might have happened is that you tried to edit the page without being logged in. Madam Fatal (talk) 18:15, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I was logged in. The page would not open to edit. I then opened and edited a non-locked page. After that, I went back to the Cardano page and it edited fine. I tried reproducing the error but cannot. No problem since.GreyStar456 (talk) 21:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Chiming in to say I think I experienced a similar issue on a different page. Glad to know I'm not just hallucinating things Sock-the-guy (talk) 21:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Extract info from author interviews to add to entry?

An author who died in 2022 has book reviews but little else written about his work. His WP entry is rated as a stub. He has been interviewed by CBC Radio several times. The articles on the CBC website provide some information but also links to the radio interview recordings. Can information from these interviews be referenced as a reliable source to provide more information for his WP entry? Similarly, can the author's lectures and interviews posted on YouTube by the organizers of the lecture series be reliable sources? If not, are these sources properly classed in the "External Links" section of the WP entry? Marjimac (talk) 03:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, interviews can be used! I would recommend you have a quick look at WP:IV. I believe the lectures and interviews on YouTube should be fine as well. (These doesn't quite fit the bill, but WP:ABOUTSELF and WP:PRIMARY may be useful. I'm not sure if there's a specific policy regarding lectures published by an organizer.) Hopefully this was at least a little helpful! Best, ayakanaa ( t ) 05:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ayakanaa Thank you for the great article referrals! I appreciate your time. Keep up the good work! Marjimac (talk) 22:42, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Marjimac: interviews with the subject may be used to support uncontroversial information about him. But they will generally do nothing to help establish that he's notable enough to warrant an article. Maproom (talk) 09:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom Editing an existing article, so someone else believes author to be noteworthy. Thanks for your guidance on the use of interviews. Marjimac (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Help with copyright violation

I happened across the article Lluís Farré and it appears to be a copyright violation of this webpage (note: I already performed some copyedits of the article before I noticed this problem - the violation is more clear in the original revision here). I've read through the relevant guidance but I'm none the wiser as to what I ought to do about this. I was going to post it to Wikipedia:Copyright problems for review, but I can't even wrap my head around how to log an entry on that page. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. Another Day Wiser (talk) 10:05, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Another Day Wiser Yeah, that doesn't look great. I can't find any evidence that their page is older than ours, but given the promotional nature of the text, I feel pretty confident that our article is the problematic one. I'll nominate it for speedy deletion as a blatant copyright violation. I see the creator's page is littered with these copyright warnings as well, so I'll file a CCI request. Thanks for flagging this, and sorry you didn't get a response until now! In the future, you can always send pages to copyright problems. I agree that the listing process is a bit complicated, however, so I (and most other users there) use a third-party script- but you can always ask me or somebody active in the Copyright Cleanup project to help you list something in the future. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Another Day Wiser (talk) 08:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Search for all articles that contain a particular source?

I'm trying to look at the reliability of a certain source (newspaper/website) and it would be really useful if I could perform a search that pulls up all the articles with this source in the reference. Is there any way of doing this? Orange sticker (talk) 12:35, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Orange sticker - you need to perform an "insource" search, with the name of the newspaper/website as the search parameter - please see H:INSOURCE for the details. - Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 12:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks exactly what I was looking for, thanks @Arjayay! Orange sticker (talk) 12:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Orange sticker: You can also try Special:LinkSearch for online sources. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

There's also Special:LinkSearch, which searches partial URLs that exist in articles, either in sources or as external links. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

What a great suggestion! PrimeHunter (talk) 23:48, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Recreating deleted page?

I've been going through pages that are part of Danielle Steel's body of work as every one I've looked at has virtually no sources, if it has any at all. I've upgraded several of the film adaptation pages this month, and today I've been working on Full Circle. It already had a section for the film adaptation, so I searched AfD and found that back in 2010, Full Circle (1996 film) was turned into a redirect to Quidam.

Since the other adaptations do have their own pages, though, I'm not sure how to proceed. I'm putting all the info on the current page, structured under the pre-existing section.

Do I create a new page (Danielle Steel's Full Circle; a lot of the telefilms are referenced that way in the professional reviews)? Do I undo the redirect on the old page and add all of the info once I've made sure it passes NFILM? Do I leave it all on the current novel page, and if so, how do I handle the naming there?

I don't want to run afoul of a regulation I haven't seen (because I haven't had this particular issue previously). But it seems odd to me to add Wikiprojects to the talk page of a novel for films and television, which I will do if that's what I need to do, not to mention adding film categories to the bottom of a page that has "novel" directly in its title.

Thanks in advance for any advice on how to proceed. OIM20 (talk) 14:16, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

The redirect of "Full Circle (1996 film)" seems to me a little odd (though apparently valid), because the Quidam article itself has absolutely no mention (that I can see) of that so-titled short documentary film about the CdS show. anyone thus redirected might be a little puzzled.

Since the CdS film appears to be fairly obscure I suggest that, assuming you have the Reliable sources for a valid article about the film of the Steel novel, you remove the redirection from the page, insert the new article material, and add a Wikipedia:Hatnote saying something along the lines of ". . . for the 1996 documentary film about the Cirque du Soleil show, see under Quidam." You might also want to WP:Move the page to "Full Circle (1996 TV film)".

There is, as you may already know, a disambiguation page Full Circle in which both films are listed along with several others; those entries would need tweaking.

You might also place a suggestion on Quidam's Talk page suggesting that someone more au fait with the subject might like to add material about the related film.

I'm not particularly knowledgeable about cinematology, so others may have better suggestions. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.67.173 (talk) 16:01, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate the response. I've found three reviews, but they're all from different countries, so I don't think that qualifies for NFILM-1. I mean, Variety is known in the U.S. and The Age is known in Australia, so to each country, that's nationally known, but I still don't know that it passes. So I've opened up a discussion on the novel's talk page.

If it comes to making a page for the adaptation, I do think your suggestion of "1996 TV Film" will solve the problem.

And I'll look into the CdS documentary to see what I can find. I don't see a mention of it on the Quidam page either.

Thanks again! OIM20 (talk) 09:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Citing Presentation Slides (And other sources)

Hello! I have a question about how nitty-gritty our citation types get, and how to cite a particular type of document.

I'm working on cleaning up bare URL citations and ran across reference 56 from Flash memory. It appears to be a set of presentation slides from a conference talk. Do we have a particular template for this use case? I wasn't sure if the Web Page template would be sufficient, or if it would be better to use something that can indicate what slide in particular the information comes from. The presentation video is not currently available to view that I can tell from a cursory search.

In a bigger sense, is there somewhere that I can see all the kinds of citation templates there are on Wikipedia? I see the list on Wikipedia:Citing sources, but is that all types currently supported or are there any other more obscure ones? Beanut H Butter (talk) 19:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Beanut H Butter The full list is at WP:CT. There is one for conferences but not specifically for slides within a presentation, I think. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:28, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the list! On a closer look it does appear I can use the Page modifier for a webpage, so I'll use that for now. Happy Friday!

Beanut H Butter (talk) 20:22, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

hi

Im new to wikipedia can i edit anything — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Ssrbluver (talk • contribs) 22:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ssrbluver: Almost anything. There are some articles that are protected until you get more experience. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ssrbluver, if you haven't, you can set up your homepage and it will automatically produce assorted tasks for you. There is also several editing drives. The current one is one to verify all claims on Wikipedia. ✶Quxyz✶ 00:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Nothing to edit.

It feels like there's nothing to edit. Almost every article has correct punctuation and grammar, is complete, and even those that aren't complete are about some niche thing I don't know anything about. So why bother making an account, if there's nothing that can be made better by beginners? Defaulterror0 (talk) 22:44, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

There is a lot to do! Check ou the Wikipedia:Task Center, or visit your homepage for ideas! Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 22:55, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Defaulterror0: Sorry, forgot to ping you :) Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 22:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Ha ! I get low sometimes because theres too much to do and too much I want to do and not enought time, and other things to do with my busy life ! Matilda Maniac (talk) 22:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Same; for me it feels like there's no time to edit instead of there's nothing to edit ;) Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 23:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, there sure is a lot to do :) Defaulterror0 (talk) 23:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Defaulterror0 If you have a particular interest and it has a WikiProject, you could always look at their list of stub and start class articles. That's always a quick way to find things to improve. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 09:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@Defaulterror0: if you are interested, Wikimedia Commons (Wikipedia's image bank sister site) could use help in categorizing images. For example many bulk imported images like those in c:Category:Images from the National Archives and Records Administration need better categories, and there are plenty of others: images needing category review, images needing categories. MKFI (talk) 08:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello Defaulterror0, you mentioned looking for articles with "punctuation and grammar" issues. Have you seen Category:All articles needing copy edit? This is an automatically generated list of every article tagged with a {{Copy edit}} cleanup notice. Most should have those kinds of issues. Hope that helps, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 06:42, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

New to Templates

I recently created a template Template:NIRSA National Soccer Championships, but when I add the link to the articles (such as at NIRSA National Soccer Championships and 2023 NIRSA National Soccer Championship nothing appears. Why does it not appear? Does the Template: page need to be reviewed first? What else have I not done correctly? a little nudge in the right direction would be awesome. Matilda Maniac (talk) 22:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Now I found the problem which was some "noinclude" text that I had in the Template from when I copied it over from my Sandbox. Phew ! Matilda Maniac (talk) 23:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Matilda Maniac: it looks good now; glad you figured it out! Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 06:39, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Where to review a draft?

The only way I see of doing this is submitting the draft, which would imply it's done. And peer review is only for articles and NOT drafts. So?? Defaulterror0 (talk) 00:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@Defaulterror0: Yes, you work on the the draft until it is ready, and then you can submit it for review. Perhaps I am not understanding your question? RudolfRed (talk) 01:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Submitting a Draft only implies that you think it's done enough to pass muster as an Article. No Wikipedia article is a finally finished product; they all continue to be 'works in progress' and many will hopefully be improved further as more sources are found and information added, or more things happen that are relevant to them. Unless you think it's really below par (in which case you should have ideas of how to improve it), submit it and get reviewer feedback – this is quite normal. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.67.173 (talk) 01:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

So if I understand correctly, the draft has to be in a "finished" state first before it can be reviewed by someone? Defaulterror0 (talk) 02:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Defaulterror0 - The draft has to be in a 'good enough' state before being submitted. That means content and references. However, there is strong advice to put in time improving existing articles before attempting to create and submit a draft.

Hi Defaulterror0. A draft need not be "perfect" to be accepted as an article, but it should be reasonably understandable and (more importantly) clearly establish how the subject of the draft meets Wikipedia:Notability. Formatting mistakes, grammar errors, spelling mistakes, and other copy editing needs are generally considered to be fixable "problems" and thus not considered a sufficient justification for declining a draft, unless they are so bad they can't be fixed without a lot of time and effort being expended. However, it matters not how well written a draft might be if there's nothing demonstrating that the subject has received WP:SIGCOV in WP:SECONDARY WP:RELIABLESOURCES; unclear/questionable Wikipedia notability is too much to WP:OVERCOME and is probably the main reason why drafts are declined. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Reporting an I.P.

How do I report an I.P. who has been disruptively editing the article Elliana Walmsley? 70.50.199.125 (talk) 04:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I see one IP edit other than yours in the last month. How is that disruptive? RudolfRed (talk) 04:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Because this is the third or fourth time they have changed Walmsley's nationality to Greek! Walmsley is not Greek! But I reverted the other I.P's edit, but I just know that they will do it again. Considering they've done it 3 or 4 times beforem 70.50.199.125 (talk) 04:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

There is a persistent history dating back many months of IPs starting with 2a02 editing her being Greek, and being reverted. A request that the article be semi-protected would stop IPs from editing. David notMD (talk) 10:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

70.50.199.125 171.98.199.77 (talk) 22:23, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Can I write an article by myself

Can I write an article about a known person? Sairagav311 (talk) 08:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Writing a new article is the most challenging task to perform on Wikipedia; it is usually recommended that new users first gain experience and knowledge by spending time editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Using the new user tutorial is a good idea too. Users who dive right in to creating articles often end up disappointed and frustrated as they don't understand the many aspects that are being looked for, and get angry when things happen to their work that they don't understand. I don't want you to have bad feelings here, so I would suggest you edit existing articles first.

If you still want to attempt to create a new article now, first determine that the person is notable as Wikipedia uses the word, gather independent reliable sources that provide on their own significant coverage of the person, you may then use the article wizard to create and submit a draft for review by another editor. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

"Critical reception" section of All 'n All

I think that section of the article is a bit too much. Like reviews are written word for word. Wouldn't it be better to just write the number of stars they received instead words from the reviews? Soapforduck(Say what?)(Did what?) 09:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

If you think you can improve an article, then either be WP:BOLD and make your edits (and if somebody disagrees, they'll revert you and then you can open a discussion on the talk page) or (especially if you think your changes may be controversial) go for the discussion on the talk page first. ColinFine (talk) 13:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine Well I was thinking of finding a way of shortening it but was worried that it might be better to leave it like that. Maybe I should start a discussion on the talk page? Soapforduck(Say what?)(Did what?) 13:42, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Soapforduck 171.98.199.77 (talk) 22:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Improving Article

Hey editors, I'm currently working on an article that is a recent incident spread from April to June 2024(the incidents are still ongoing). The topic is very popular in India, and also has gained international media attraction. But the article on it doesn't seem to attract editors, as others do. Can you suggest some tips to improve the article? Redmyname31(talk)(Contribs) 09:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Guessing this is about 2024 Indian bomb hoaxes. The article was created 10 days ago, Be patient. In time, it will receive more viewers and more contributors. David notMD (talk) 10:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

yes, but please suggest some tips to improve the article like suitable templates, thanks for your time.Redmyname31 (talk) 11:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

The first thing that I can tell is that it is written in prose line. This is acceptable but it doesn't help give out enough information or tell about the details. Wikipedia is about giving information about a subject, not spreading out a timeline of that information. Please read, WP:PROSELINE, for more information. Thank you, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 16:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

noted, will be working on it. Thnx Redmyname31 (talk) 18:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Page Image

Why the page image for Jamia Millia Islamia is not appearing during search, the image/logo satisfies all requirements of a page image, I also checked that it is the page image in Page information link Redmyname31(talk)(Contribs) 12:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Redmyname. I believe it is because it is a non-free image. Since one of the conditions for using such an image is "minimal use", they are deliberately not used in previews and searches. ColinFine (talk) 13:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Non-free images are used in popup previews like on Jamia Millia Islamia where only one article is shown but not in search results where lots of page images might be shown. These API queries show that it's returned as page image if you ask for any image but not a free image:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&prop=pageimages&titles=Jamia_Millia_Islamia&pilicense=any

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&prop=pageimages&titles=Jamia_Millia_Islamia&pilicense=free

By the way, your signature should link to your user page User:Redmyname31 and not the non-existing article Redmyname31. If it's a deliberate trick to link a non-existing page then don't, it's disruptive. You are allowed to omit a link on the name when you do link your talk page, but it would be annoying. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

about the signature, it was a mistake, thx for info Redmyname31 (talk) 14:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Editor asking me to contact off-site

There is an editor who recently reached out and asked for help on some articles (which I'm completely fine with), but they recently asked me to contact them off-site, which is something that I'm a bit hesitant about. Do I just tell them no, or report them, or something else? They seem genuinely nice, it's just that I've had some extremely negative experiences meeting people off of a main website. Thanks! (Also the messages can be found at the bottom of my talk page). WxTrinity (talk to me!) 15:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@WxTrinity I'd say just say no, there's no compulsion for you to interact with people off of Wikipedia if you don't want to. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 15:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I'll just do that. Thanks! WxTrinity (talk to me!) 15:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@WxTrinity I think that there is a big difference to meeting people and interacting with them by, say email. I have found email very useful for exchanging copyright source text that another editor has access to but can't be shared on-wiki, so we can work together on articles/drafts. I would have no hesitation in working like that, while I would be very cautious about meeting people. Your Userpage has an "email me" button and anyone who uses it will have their email address supplied to you (as a "reply-to"). There is no obligation for you to reply to any email if you don't want to and no-one will know your address unless you do. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Gianna Bryant notability?

Hello, I'm new to wikipedia. I read an article about the Wikipedia Project Women in Red, and jumped in to try to help. One of the women on the list in red was Gianna Bryant. I tried to submit an article, but it was declined.

I went to the talk page of the person who declined it, and they said if an article was declined that you could come ask questions here. I also looked at the page he suggested with debates last time about whether Gianna was notable.

And it seems many people are saying that she's only notable because of her dad/many articles are led by Kobe (e.g. "Kobe and his daughter Gianna").

She's had 2 Nike shoes come out in her honor. She's on numerous murals with Kobe and had a number of tributes and honors that either included her deeply or were specifically for her (e.g. The University of Connecticut who was already recruiting her in middle school honored her by leaving a seat open for her during a game; that was an honor purely for her, not involving Kobe.)

She was also an honorary member of the WNBA draft class that year.

I believe she had enough honors and enough coverage to warrant her own article. She has indeed been covered at length (not just in passing) by many reputable sources. Yes, sure, maybe her death or her dad were big reasons that her notability rose, but people's notability rises from tragedy or nepotism all of the time, so even if those were the reasons, it doesn't make her *not* notable.

Also, there were many victims in that crash. Not all of them were covered to the extent that she was. Her extensive coverage leads to the argument about her notability.

And even if she often paired with Kobe in coverage, again, that doesn't make her *not* notable. Certain notable people are paired in their coverage all the time because of relationships or business deals etc. Even if one is more famous than the other, if they both are often in coverage, it doesn't make the other one *not* notable.

I truly believe all the evidence points to her being notable enough in her own right to deserve her own page. Is there a way to argue that she is notable enough in her own right to deserve a page? MoreWomenOnWiki (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Gianna_Bryant -- D'n'B-t -- 18:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

MoreWomenOnWiki, it appears that an article about this subject was previously deleted by consensus at this discussion, and by pretty clear consensus too. The concerns was that she was primarily only notable for one event, and that the rest of the reference material was not sufficient to merit an article. Now, of course, that was four years ago, and certainly things could have changed since that time, but I would suggest that you read that discussion and be prepared to answer the question "What's changed since the last time it was discussed?". If the answer is "There's been a whole lot more comprehensive source material written about this subject, look here and here and here", maybe it's time to reconsider that. If the answer is "Not much, really", well, then the question's already been answered, and that answer was a "no", so if that's the case it's probably better to find a different subject to work on instead. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Nike's dropped 2 different shoes (one on what would've been her 16th birthday and one on what would've been her 18th) to honor her: https://www.complex.com/sneakers/a/victor-deng/nike-kobe-8-protro-mambacita-release-date For instance the article above describes the shoes coming out in honor of what would've been her 18th birthday: "'Gigi' is stamped on the left heel, while her jersey number is printed on the right shoe."

Additionally, her name is on an award given yearly by the WNBA intended "to honor someone in the basketball space for their continued advocacy for girls and women’s basketball around the country." https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/basketball/wnba/2024/02/18/kobe-gigi-advocacy-award-ann-meyers-drysdale-wins-honor/72646790007/

Add that to the stuff that happened at the time of her death with being an honoree member of the WNBA draft class, etc., I'm wondering if that might be enough?

Granted, I am new, so maybe I don't understand the ins and outs, but even if she is only notable for one event, isn't that the case of a fair number of people? Aren't there Olympians notable for one Olympics they were in? Or even for instance, the 'Bus Uncle' has a page because of a viral video: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bus_Uncle

I guess I don't have to completely reopen the whole discussion, since people much more experienced than me seem to have already had it, but to what you've said above, do you think there is any merit that with the release of 2 Nike shoes (in '22 and '24) and in 2022, a yearly WNBA award having her name added, that she has crossed the threshold of notability? Or still no, for now?

Thank you for your help MoreWomenOnWiki (talk) 19:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @MoreWomenOnWiki. I took a look at the page and it looks more like a WP:MEMORIAL than as an encyclopedic person entry. While she does meet notability, you had not showed anything about her before her death with her father. It looks and reads as if it's a memorial page. I do believe she is notable under WP:1E but it doesn't really read as an encyclopedic article. Thank you, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 19:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the guidance. I tried taking all the notes and resubmitting, so hopefully the article is better now. Thank you! MoreWomenOnWiki (talk) 22:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

References for translating pages

When translating pages, should I try and find sources in the target language or put the references all in the source language? What if the topic does not has many or any at all reliable sources in the target language? Do I not translate it? Mestre Aranha (talk) 19:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Mestre Aranha, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer is that if there are good-quality sources published in English, they are preferred; but if not, then reliable sources in another language are quite acceptable. See WP:NONENG. ColinFine (talk) 19:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much, to clarify tho, if I'm translating to Portuguese does that same rule apply? Mestre Aranha (talk) 22:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

If you're translating into Portuguese, Mestre Aranha, then I imagine that you're writing for Portuguese-language Wikipedia. And if you're doing that, then the policies and guidelines of English-language Wikipedia don't necessarily apply; those of Portuguese-language Wikipedia do apply. So start looking at pt:WP:Verificabilidade and follow the promising links from there. -- Hoary (talk) 03:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Why tho?

Why do other editors keep reverting my changes even if the changes are fine and do not cause problems? Yournamehere. c o m (talk) 20:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Because these changes aren't fine. If you're here in Wikipedia in order to amuse yourself, you're at the wrong website. -- Hoary (talk) 23:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Second to your non-useful edits, your Edit summaries are not useful. Briefly, describe what you did. David notMD (talk) 03:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Your spelling is another area for improvement. Editors (and users) want to see useful, well written content, that cites sources and makes a meaningful contribution. So if that is what you want to do, then stick around. Otherwise? -Jcbutler (talk) 03:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

ПФК ЦСКА София

Защо в страницата е заличен Директора на Академия ЦСКА -Костадин Ангелов? Той не е уволнен и в момента е действащ на поста си. При положение че нито един играч на ЦСКА все още не е махнат, защо са заличени МАхмутович, Кох,Каранга и Юрген Матей ? Защо го няма третия вратар Орлинов. 62.73.100.119 (talk) 21:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Google Translate translates the Bulgarian for us: PFC CSKA Sofia / Why is the Director of CSKA Academy Kostadin Angelov deleted from the page? He has not been fired and is currently serving in his post. Given that not a single CSKA player has been removed yet, why were Makhmutovic, Koch, Karanga and Jurgen Mattei removed? Why is the third goalkeeper Orlinov gone?

Please bring up the matter at Talk:PFC CSKA Sofia. -- Hoary (talk) 23:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

There was announcment here in which it was declared that the coaching team was declared vacant and that there would be restructuring of the management and playing teams. I assume it was in reflection of that news. - Bilby (talk) 00:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

How to Get Back to the Initial Page When I Signed Up?

Hi, sorry if this is a dumb question, but when I very first signed up (just like last week haha), Wikipedia had this little slideshow-type thing I could click through with suggestions - e.g. articles that needed more internal links, articles that needed more copyediting, etc. But I don't see that anywhere anymore.

Do you know if it still exists anywhere so I can have a launchpad for whenever I'm looking to do smaller edits instead of write pages from scratch? MoreWomenOnWiki (talk) 22:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I think you're talking about Special:Homepage? miranda ^:3 22:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

On Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal, if you scroll down to the bottom, you can enable "Display newcomer homepage", which should set that page as the default when you click your username at the top of the site. miranda ^:3 22:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

establish my biography page

Aubrey Milunsky, MD DSc FRCP FACMG DCH

Aubrey Milunsky, MD DSc FRCP FACMG DCH

     Dr. Aubrey Milunsky is the founder of the non-profit Center for Human Genetics, now celebrating the 42nd anniversary year. He is a Co-Director with his son. He was Professor of Human Genetics, Pediatrics, Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Pathology at Boston University School of Medicine. Boston University named the Aubrey Milunsky Chair in Human Genetics. He was honored by inclusion in the 2022 book A Century of Achievement that selected the biographies and accomplishments of 101 physician scientists from South Africa, including 5 Nobel Prizewinners, who made significant contributions to Global Medicine over 100 years (1890-1990).

    He was born and educated in Johannesburg, South Africa and is triple board-certified in Pediatrics, Genetics, and Internal Medicine. He served as a medical geneticist at Harvard Medical School and the Massachusetts General Hospital for 13 years before his professorial appointments at Boston University School of Medicine. The Center’s laboratories are a major International Referral Center for molecular diagnostics and for prenatal genetic diagnosis, now located in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

He is the author and/or editor of 27 books, including all 8 editions of the world’s major reference work, Genetic Disorders and the Fetus: Diagnosis, Prevention, and Treatment (2021), (1400pages), now co-edited with his son, Jeff, who was Professor of Pediatrics and Genetics and Genomics at Boston University School of Medicine. This book received the “Highly Commended” Award Certificate in 2010 from the British Medical Association. He has published six books for the lay public, the last two being Your Genes, Your Health: A Critical Family Guide That Could Save Your Life, and I Didn’t Know, I Didn’t Know : Avoidable Deaths and Harm due to Medical Negligence. An earlier book (Know Your Genes) appeared in nine languages. His is the author or co-author of over 450 scientific communications.

     He has given hundreds of invited lectures in 35 countries and the Vatican. In 1982, he was honored by election as a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of England. In that year, his alma mater, the University of the Witwatersrand School of Medicine, conferred the D.Sc. degree for his work on the prenatal detection of genetic disorders. He is an elected member of the Society for Pediatric Research and the American Pediatric Society and a Founding Fellow of the American College of Medical Genetics. He has served on the Editorial Board of PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS for over 3 decades.  

He originated and directs an annual conference on Obstetrics, Gynecology, Perinatal Medicine, Neonatology and the Law, dedicated to advances in medicine, standards of care, and the avoidance of errors and medical negligence. January 2024 was the 39^th YEAR of this successful continuing medical & legal education conference.

     He has led the teams that first located the gene for X-linked Lymphoproliferative disease, first cloned the PAX3 gene for Waardenburg syndrome, first demonstrated the 70% avoidance rate for spina bifida afforded by folic acid supplementation, first determined newly recognized genes for Chronic Intestinal Pseudo-Obstruction and first recognized the increased prevalence of narcolepsy in the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. He and his team have made the first prenatal diagnosis of various genetic disorders, including tuberous sclerosis. Amilunsky (talk) 01:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Amilunsky, you appear to be attempting to direct people here to "establish [your] biography page". Not going to happen. -- Hoary (talk) 01:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

If OTOH you are announcing that you are about to "establish [your] biography page", you still have the wrong idea. Please read Wikipedia:Autobiography, carefully. -- Hoary (talk) 04:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Amilunsky Your academic career may qualify for Wikipedia notability, per WP:NACADEMIC. You are allowed to try. What is essential is a need for references ABOUT you. Referencing your books and important journal articles are valid contributions, but do not establish notability in the Wikipedia sense. Use WP:YFA as a guide for creating and submitting a draft. David notMD (talk) 13:22, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Follow-up question

Can I nominate articles to GA status as an IP? 47.153.138.166 (talk) 04:22, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you can. However, you need to be registered to review GA nominations. See Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Create?

After MrBeast surpassed T-Series in subscribers to become the most subscribed channel on YouTube, can i create a page about "T-Series vs MrBeast"? I will add good sources. Bakhos2010 (talk) 04:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

If rivalry between any two anythings becomes notable (as defined by and for Wikipedia) and can't be satisfactorily dealt with in the articles of the two whatevers, then one might create an article about the rivalry. Note that such well-documented rivalries as Gladstone–Disraeli, Coca–Pepsi or Anquetil–Poulidor haven't required entire articles. -- Hoary (talk) 07:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Also, pay attention to the quality of sources. I have seen deletion nominations on pop culture hinged, not on the quantity of sources, but the quality (e.g. several are advertisements or content farms.) ✶Quxyz✶ 20:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Systemic bias?

Hello. I've read a lot about the problem of systemic bias on Wikipedia. I'd like to help address it. How can I get started? RomanBathhouse (talk) 05:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

@RomanBathhouse WP:BIAS is a great essay about the topic. You might also be interested in joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias, though it's not very active. Also see Help:Getting started for a beginner's guide. Happy editing! '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I agree with CanonNi. If you're concerned about a certain type of systemic bias, you might be interested in other WikiProjects as well. Here is a WikiProject directory. Feel free to ask more questions. Pecopteris (talk) 06:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Userpages of IPs

Given the problem with vandals creating userpages or subpages (like sandboxes) for IPs, can we just prevent all non-autoconfirmed users and IPs from creating them? Is there a technical limitation that prevents this? Air on White (talk) 05:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I'd expect this to be easy to implement. We'd then need to document it, and to explain to IPs why they weren't allowed to make sandboxes. And I don't see what harm it does; registered editors have valid purposes for making user pages, and so have IP editors. Maproom (talk) 10:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Not every IP is a vandal and Wikipedia:Perennial_proposals#Prohibit_anonymous_users_from_editing Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

@Air on White Isn't this what Special:AbuseFilter/803 does? Where have you seen new users/IPs creating userpages? Sam Walton (talk) 12:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

This is about new users creating userpages or sandboxes for IPs. There is at least one LTA known for this. Air on White (talk) 19:02, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Hindi Language User Page Spam

I've recently been getting into editing wikipedia, and a few weeks ago, I got a notification that a user page had been created for me in the Hindi language wikipedia. The content appears basically to be spam, and I would like to remove it and/or get rid of my Hindi-local wikipedia account. I am not sure why it was created. Allegory.of.the.blank (talk) 12:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

@Allegory.of.the.blank Unfortunately this can happen if you visit the Hindi Wikipedia whilst logged in here. I agree this can be annoying but other than ignore the message this is something you will need to take up with Hindi Wikipedia. There is nothing we can do about it. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:05, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Allegory.of.the.blank, welcome to the Teahouse. hi:Special:Logs/Allegory.of.the.blank shows your account was created at the Hindi Wikipedia 8 April, probably because you clicked a link to the wiki while already logged in at another Wikimedia wiki. Somebody posted a Hindi welcome message to your talk page hi:User talk:Allegory.of.the.blank. This causes a notification at other wikis. Local accounts cannot be deleted but you can blank the talk page. It's just information and links about the Hindi Wikipedia. I don't know their rules for deleting user talk pages but the user cannot do it on their own. I once suggested at meta:Welcoming policy to disallow welcome messages to users with no edits if their account wasn't originally created at the wiki. It didn't get any significant attention. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

They got rid of the edit I did in the Adolf Fredrick article.

My recent Edit to The article About Adolf Fredrick, I was told that it was changed back to what it was before. Even though the facts were true.. I had done some research to get the facts. So why were they erased and changed back to how they were before. Those facts aren't true!!! 140.141.142.210 (talk) 16:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Adolf Frederick of Sweden Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 17:22, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I suggest bringing it up with User:Rusty4321 on why the user reverted your edits. In addition, make sure to cite your sources as-well of where you found the accurate information otherwise it will be reverted. This doesn't only apply to this one article but all articles on Wikipedia. Soafy234 (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

The existing sentence "Adolf Frederick died suddenly in Stockholm on 12 February 1771 with symptoms resembling either heart failure or poisoning.", followed by text that describes the unconfirmed story that his death was a direct result of consuming a very large meal, are supported by the existing references. Any change to that text requires a valid ref. And given that your contribution was reverted twice, start a discussion on the Talk page of the article, to reach consensus there, before any change to the article. David notMD (talk) 20:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Format help needed

The Atlantic#See also - the first entry is not correctly formatted and I don't know how to fix it. Thank you. deisenbe (talk) 18:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

@Deisenbe I've removed it seeing as the web page is already linked in the infobox, but if you want to place an external link into text in the future then head to WP:EL#How to link. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 18:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Deleting a page

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

---

(non-admin closure) —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 19:27, 3 June 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.

Recent changes?

Has the recent changes page gone through a software update or something? Was it reworked? I haven’t been on in a while, so I just logged onto RCP for the first time in months, and the color coding of the different filters in my saved RC filters are gone, and the buttons to add colors to the filters are gone as well. Shadestar474 ^(talk) 06:46, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

The colors came back. Sorry, must’ve been a bug on my end. Shadestar474 ^(talk) 04:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Wiki editor requesting payments to approve a page

Hi everyone,

I recently had to create my first article - not an easy task. Soon after I published it for approval it was rejected and different people started contacting me requesting payments to get the article approved. This seems very sketchy to me, is it normal, how can I get an article approved a bit quicker? Mario V. Nikolov (talk) 07:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Mario V. Nikolov, it is a scam. Please see this page. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 07:28, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

They're scammers, Mario V. Nikolov. Don't pay anyone anything. But don't (yet) delete the solicitations: these could be useful (although not in any way that the writers intended). Or, failing that, the mail could be unintentionally amusing. -- Hoary (talk) 07:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey, thanks, they were using Whatsapp instead the public Wiki Talk pages. In any case the article is about a business person and I can't pay them even if I want to as we need an invoice... So there is no way to speed up the approval process? Mario V. Nikolov (talk) 07:59, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Not really. Like the submission template says, This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,068 pending submissions waiting for review. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 08:01, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I see, okay thanks. I guess I will just wait Mario V. Nikolov (talk) 08:09, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Mario V. Nikolov. Thank you for declaring your COI on your user page. Howver, your reference to an invoice above suggests that you have more than a conflict of interest, but that you are what Wikipedia regards as a paid editor. If you are in any way employed or paid by or on behalf of Raychev (even if editing Wikipedia is not specifically part of your job), you must make a formal declaration of your paid status.

I hope that you read WP:BOSS before you started. ColinFine (talk) 10:27, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey everyone, nope I was not aware of WP:BOSS, otherwise I would have declared it. Actually I though that I have done it when asked if I am related to the person. In that case I will follow the suggestion and not submit the page again. My main issue comes from this page Raycho Raychev which is now marked for deletion by someone else. I don't really want or need to create a new page Mario V. Nikolov (talk) 15:04, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I noticed that you now have fourteen [sic] citations to back up just two sentences on Raychev's early life and education. That's what we call WP:Citation overkill that is totally unnecessary. What is needed is more text explaining why this individual is noteworthy as defined by Wikipedia, backed up by sources meeting these criteria. You might find this essay helpful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

A small note - Draft:Raycho Raychev has been Declined (now twice), which is not as severe as Rejected. David notMD (talk) 12:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Expand article with new fact

Seems like a consensus has been found on the talk page here. If anyone has time, please add it to the Article. Dubaiianer3 (talk) 11:27, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Dubaiianer3 you may open an edit request by placing {{edit extended-protected}} on the talk page and describing the changes you want to be made in a "Change X to Y" format. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 11:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Done, just made it. Thanks man. Dubaiianer3 (talk) 12:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

There was a misleading addition made by User User:DandelionAndBurdock

Please check Talk Page

Yousuf never claimed to be the first Kurd & Iraqi to climb Everest. He was just the first to summit. 217.165.18.206 (talk) 14:20, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I think a reader would understand climbed to have meant succesfully summitted, but alright I've spelled it out incase anyone managed to be misled there. -- D'n'B-t -- 14:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Every media outlet that reports on his summit says he is the first Kurd & Iraqi. Why are you saying he is claiming that? Why don't you check it? Look who is the first Iraqi if not him. How to make it official and not "he claims"? 217.165.18.206 (talk) 14:40, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

For the curious, this is at Talk:Dadvan Yousuf. David notMD (talk) 12:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Repeated contentious edits?

Hi, what do I do if someone keeps making the same edit on a page, despite me reverting the edit multiple times and asking for discussion? This editor is doing the same thing on this page too. Wafflewombat (talk) 12:41, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

You are both edit warring, and need to stop. Opening a discussion on the talk page is the right thing to do. If you are unable to reach consensus, then see dispute resolution for how to proceed. (Note: I haven't looked at the edits: this is general advice). ColinFine (talk) 13:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I will take your advice and open a discussion instead of continuing to edit war. Wafflewombat (talk) 20:10, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Getting started

please help me i wanna become getting starter user Roblox678956568 (talk) 12:53, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Roblox678956568. You do seem to have got off to a bit of a shaky start whilst editing this encyclopaedia. I have left you a 'teahouse welcome' message at the very top of your userpage. Do please spend some time following and reading the links. It will help you understand more about how we operate. The onus is on you to invest the time and effort to read our guidance pages if you're not sure what to do. You may also like to visit Help:Getting started. If you have any specific questions about editing pages, do please ask. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Article declined due to "no reliable sources"

Hello, My article was just declined by Mr. ‪Iwaqarhashmi‬ due to apparently not having reliable sources. However, I have provided reliable sources for each statement posted on the page. I would kindly ask that to be reviewed again and clarified by a more experienced editor. Here's my draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kalin_Stefanov_(backgammon_player)

Thank you! Kalinators (talk) 13:53, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Kalinators Judging by your username and the nickname of Stefanov, you are trying to write an autobiography, which while not prohibited, nearly always fails for the reasons described at that link. Youtube is not considered a reliable source, for example, as it is the subject talking about himself. Our policy on biographies of living people requires reliable sources for all details, even dates of birth, which must be already published in sources meeting these criteria. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:05, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the response Mike. I wouldn't call it an autobiography, but that is correct, it is an article about myself. I followed the guidelines when beginning which included stating on my talk page that I am editing myself.

As to Youtube, it is only used as a source about the final of the world championship, where it was not the subject (me) talking about himself, it was commented by a third person and I was only present in the video as a player.

I have provided the tournament links of the two quoted results.

While writing the page I looked at a page of another not-world-famous backgammon player as reference to how it should look. Here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Vischjager, and it has only 2 source, both of which open a dead link. On the contrary, my sources are clearly confirming the statements. Kalinators (talk) 14:11, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Kalinators. Unfortunately, Wikipedia has thousands and thousands of seriously sub-standard articles, most of them created before we were as careful as we are now about the quality of referencing. Ideally, somebody would go through those thousands of articles either improving them or deleting them if adequate references don't exist; but as this is a volunteer project where people work on what they choose, that doesn't often happen.

What we do not want is even more bad articles, so in reviewing draft we do not look at existing articles, but judge the draft on its own merits.

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 of course makes it difficult to write successfully about yourself - what you know about yourself is (almost) irrelevant to writing an article: instead you must stick to what people who have no connection with you have published about you. ColinFine (talk) 15:44, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Kalinators: It may also be helpful to you to read WP:OVERCOME for more context about how articles do or do not end up on Wikipedia.   — TARDIS builder^✉     ★       13:05, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Referring to an image (relative appearance) in article text

Most often I visit Wikipedia on my mobile device. I have noticed that, when article text expressly refers to an associated image, it generally says something to the effect of "as seen at right" (see, e.g., Royal Game of Ur: Basic rules). While this may make sense when a page is viewed on a full-screen device like a computer, it's virtually never the case on a vertically oriented mobile screen. I should think that such statements should instead use more general terms, like "as seen in the associated image". However, I figure this matter must have been addressed and probably resolved somewhere already. Do you know where I can find any discussion or resolution of this issue? Al Begamut (talk) 15:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Al Begamut, welcome to the Teahouse. MOS:SEEIMAGE says: "Image placement varies with platform and screen size, especially mobile platforms, and is meaningless to screen readers. As such, article text should not refer to image positions, especially with terms such as left, right, above, or below. Instead, use captions to identify images." PrimeHunter (talk) 15:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!! Al Begamut (talk) 15:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Al Begamut. You make a very good point, and the example you gave shows very poor practice. You are free to amend the text on that page so that it does not refer to the position of the image. Rather than point you to a past discussion, I simply refer you to our 'Manual of Style' on the use of images. The entire page can be found HERE, but a shortcut to the relevant section within that page can be reached via this shortcut: MOS:SEEIMAGE. You'll see it asks for good captioning of images to address the precise point you made. And here are some useful 'do's and don'ts' which you might also find helpful: WP:Image dos and don'ts. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!! Al Begamut (talk) 15:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

One more associated question: In encountering a similar dilemma in the future, what is the best way to find whether a MOS or other resolution of an issue exists? Al Begamut (talk) 15:36, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Al Begamut Another very good and sensible question!

If you visit Wikipedia:Manual of Style, you'll see a table of contents as well as a 'search the MoS' box which lets you look for help relevant to your interests.

We also have innumerable 'shorcuts' to guidance and to policy pages. If you type into the main search box on any Wikipedia page these three characters WP: followed by a keyword relevant to the topic you're interested in learning more about (but without any spaces), there's a very good chance you'll find a link to the relevant help and support. Thus: WP:IMAGES leads to WP:IMAGES, but notice as you type there's a dropdown box offering a range of possible target pages. So, just by typing WP:IMAGE, you'll get three or four possible pages to consider visiting. Choose the one closest to your query. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:46, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Perfection. Thank you again, cheers! Al Begamut (talk) 15:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Encountering an issue

Hey Teahouse, I may/may not have an issue here,

I have been warned by this person for "unconstructive edits" and I wanted to know if there's anything I can do to possibly get this false warn addressed.

As looking at the revert on this article I noticed that the user reverted my changes after I correctly reverted back his changes after he REVERTED an admin's. revision. Of all my heart, the administrators reversion is absolutely correct, because the person that made these unfaithful edits has been blocked,

But heres the problem, after this happened, this user reverted the admins changes after and then I took part and reverted THE EDITORS mistake of reverting the edits there. Like stated above, after this all happened I got warned by the user for unconstructive editing (?)

I'm confused here because I've never been warned before, and it could possibly be false. I need help! GoodHue291 (talk) 19:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Looking at the difference in diffs [1] I don't see a difference between Izno's revision and the current revision. Maybe they misclicked some buttons on Twinkle. Then they seem to have self-reverted themselves. Also quick note that admins merely have extra tools, they don't have extra community power (an "admin" change holds no extra weight on the content side). As for the warning, you can just remove that from your user talk page or archive it - anyone can warn anyone. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 19:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I'll just remove the warning. No need to archive it because it'll already be archived in the page history. GoodHue291 (talk) 21:48, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Will this obscure toy line qualify for inclusion on WP?

XPosted from User talk:Liz; originally posted May 2 with no response so far. WP:WikiProject Toys may be interested, but considering the low activity on their talk page, this thread's contributor decided to use the Teahouse just in case.

An article on Woodsey--a very obscure toy line produced by Fisher-Price at the turn of the 1980s--has sat idle in my sandbox for a decade and a half. At this writing, the only coverage thereof is the barest of a one-line mention in the "Historic brands and products" section of its company's article.

Coming back to it this season as I clean out the sandbox one topic at a time (while transitioning to a brand-new AFC queue), I've found three--make that six--usable citations so far from the fishwrap morgue (via WP:Library) that may be enough for a standalone page. An ambitious task given that most of the WP Library hits are advertisements; if you or I can find more coverage, then we'll remind you!

Like I said...very obscure.

Toys

• Jinkins, Shirley Young (1979-03-25). "Dallas Toy Show previews Christmas '79 extravaganza". West Texas Living. San Angelo Standard-Times. p. 1E. Retrieved 2024-05-02 – via Newspapers.com. (Although this brand gets a one-paragraph description here, this is pretty much the earliest mention anywhere.)
• "This year's gift is tough: Preschool -- Play family". Anderson Independent. Anderson County, South Carolina. 1979-11-13. p. 2D. Retrieved 2024-05-02 – via Newspapers.com. (Description of the toys, dating back to the line's launch.)
• Pywen, Martha (1980-11-17). "Toy guide for parents: 16 experts give uninhibited opinions on eight newcomers". The Cincinnati Post Accent. p. 1B. Retrieved 2024-05-02 – via Newspapers.com. (The line, as the "Woodseys' Log House", is profiled here [with a related picture atop the article].)
• "New toys at library". The Sun Times. Owen Sound, Ontario. 1981-08-14. p. F12. Retrieved 2024-05-02 – via Newspapers.com. ("Fisher-Price has produced two sequels to the Woodsey family house, the Woodsey Store and the Woodsey Airport.")

Books

• Sanders, Linda (1981-11-15). "Books: Woodsey series for children almost too good to be true". The Clarion-Ledger. Jackson, Mississippi. p. 18G. Retrieved 2024-05-02 – via Newspapers.com. (Mostly positive review of the four-book set, entitled the "Woodsey Log Library".)
• B.H.H. (1980-12-20). "Favorites for young". World of Books. The Anniston Star. Anniston, Alabama. p. 8E. Retrieved 2024-05-02 – via Newspapers.com. (Paperback reprints are reviewed; again, mostly positive.)

It might as well be an understatement that this quoted excerpt from one of those tie-in books--Uncle Filbert Saves the Day, the one I've always remembered from my primary-school youth in the Commonwealth of Dominica--aptly serves as a metaphor for my efforts those past several days, and (on a wider scale) for those committed to upholding WP's RS/notability expectations no matter the subject, vintage, demographic, or obscurity. (H/T Etsy product pics.)

"When will he [Filbert] settle down?" said Mama [Milkweed], shaking her head.

"Sometimes you have to run up many trees to find the right branch," said Papa, who often said things that took a while to understand.

But cute and daredeviling as he is, don't expect a separate Uncle Filbert article anytime soon, though...

Once this appeal gets the go-ahead, I'll put this straight in the mainspace--something I hardly ever do nowadays thanks to AFC.

Speaking of old-school cottagecore, I have a Bethany Roberts draft to revive soon enough--blame recent Miraheze duties for the oversight.

All the best...

Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 19:41, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Slgrandson, I have twice skimread the above and still don't understand what it is that you want to say. If you have a question about (or request for) editing, then please express it much more succinctly. -- Hoary (talk) 23:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary: As implied in the title/contents, I'd like to know if the references I've collected are enough/satisfactory for a standalone WP article on the subject before I go ahead and write it. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 00:04, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Slgrandson, I haven't looked at any of the sources you list, but the second and third of those you list for toys and the first of those you list for books sound as if they might, or might not, add up to material for an article. (The others sound minor indeed.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary: If you've got access to WP:Library, you can actually view them; that way, it might influence your decision further. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 01:22, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Slgrandson, Pywen, "Toy guide for parents": "temporarily unavailable", so I can't comment on it. "This year's gift is tough"; Sanders, "Woodsey series": both are usable, but to my mind they don't come close to evidencing notability. -- Hoary (talk) 09:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

"Toy guide" is now showing up where I am, @Hoary. For WP:THREE's sake: Care to check that link again to make sure you're not missing it this time? --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 11:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

P.S. Perhaps we'll tow in Cunard (talk · contribs) to see whether we'll make it after all. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 11:57, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Why are only some claims marked with citation needed?

In the article about Idempotence, why is only the last claim, about quadratic matrices, marked as needing citation?

I understand that routine calculations do not count as original research, I feel that saying that 0 + 0 = 0 is not the same as the claim that "In the monoid  of the natural numbers with addition, only 0 is idempotent".

I realise it is possible the citation needed tag refers to the entire section, but I am not sure this is fully clear. Hambulance (talk) 20:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I should clarify I am referring specifically to the Examples section Hambulance (talk) 20:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

That's a good question. I see that @Jochen Burghardt was the one who added the citation needed tag. If they are still an active editor, perhaps they could provide more context. Pecopteris (talk) 20:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, they are an active editor, and should be able to answer your question. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 21:43, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Transfer WikiCommons picture to page

I uploaded a rare picture of Jerry Newton {Wayne Newton's brother} to WikiCommons. Can someone please get it posted on the site page Jerry Newton ? There is no updated picture on the site! 1984 date of this picture.

Thanks,

Tenneventdave Tenneventdave (talk) 22:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Tenneventdave The file is File:Jerry Newton 1984.jpg, but I am unwilling to add it to the article since there is an expressed concern (by me) at Commons about its licencing, source, etc 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I gave permission for anyone to use the file picture at wikicommons . I don't code !! Tenneventdave (talk) 23:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I see after responses it is the date stamp on the file! I just had several old 35mm slides transferred at my local photo shop recently. I need to show proof of my ownership of the original 35mm slide. The transferred slides all show other guests including myself! I cropped myself out of one of the best file closeups of Jerry. What to do? Take picture of whole slide showing June 1984 with white light under it? If it can't be posted on Wikipedia I'll just email the Jpegs to Jerry Newton's 2 sons. I know them both. Tenneventdave (talk) 00:48, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

(Duplicating the message I posted at the Commons deletion request page): Tenneventdate, are you saying that you took the picture, and therefore probably own the copyright? If so, then you have the power to license it in the way that Commons requires.If you did not, you almost certainly do not own that copyright, and cannot do so. If you can track down the photographer, they may be able to do so; but otherwise the picture cannot be hosted at Commons. It is possible that you could upload it at Wikipedia (not at Commons) as non-free content, but you would have to justify that its use met all the criteria in the non-free content criteria ColinFine (talk) 11:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Tenneventdave, please go to c:Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Jerry_Newton_1984.jpg and respond to the questions that the file poses. -- Hoary (talk) 23:36, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

my article was not approved. i just wanted to upload a bio because i thought it was free

Bio Queen of Junkanoo Sweet Emily (talk) 00:00, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a web host. Your 'bio' was rightfully removed. Wrosh (talk) 00:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello Queen of Junkanoo Sweet Emily. If you are not familiar with what an online encyclopedia is you may want to look at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Karenthewriter

WIKIPEDIA TROLL - HELP

There's a a malicious user that every time we have created a page for our client in the entertainment industry, this person deletes it, anything about him, gets deleted, a a few years back this troll sent an email to my client saying "I will never allow you to have a wikipedia" for no reason whatsoever. What can we do about it? Anyone willing to help on here? Hollywood454545 (talk) 01:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Hollywood454545: what is the name of the deleted article? If you are working on behalf of a client, you must comply with WP:PAID. RudolfRed (talk) 01:43, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

yes, there was nothing wrong with article. It was Victor Turpin, he's an actor. Hollywood454545 (talk) 01:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Hollywood454545 the draft(s), Draft:Victor Turpin and Draft:Victor Turpin 2, were deleted under G13, meaning it was not edited in 6 months. You can request undeletion at WP:REFUND/G13. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 01:51, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks guys. is it better just to start a new draft? Hollywood454545 (talk) 01:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

No, the drafts can be restored for you to continue working on them. Contrary to your prior claims, there was no "troll" and the deletion was not malicious. Simply put, drafts are deleted if they are abandoned, and these hadn't been touched in six months, so they were deleted. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:04, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

How can I restore one of the drafts? and see it's content? Hollywood454545 (talk) 02:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Use the link above and make a request for undeletion. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

This link, @Hollywood454545. Pecopteris (talk) 02:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I already restored it. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

It is now at Draft:Victor Turpin. Back in 2019 much was removed for copyright violation, and then as mentioned above, deleted because abandoned. Now restored. Listing his movies does not convey notability. What ios essential is referenced articles about him. Interviews do not contribute to establishing notability. David notMD (talk) 02:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Announcements for his roles on Dateline and Hollywood reporter work? magazine articles? Hollywood454545 (talk) 02:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, @Hollywood454545, you're on the right track. Use what those sources say about Victor to write your draft article, and cite everything you write in the article directly to one of the sources. Make sure you understand this policy on "original research". If you avoid original research, and cite what you write to good sources, that's a good start. Make sure you also read our conflict of interest policy, since you said that Victor is a client of yours. Cheers. Pecopteris (talk) 02:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Hollywood454545. Mere announcements are not going to help, unless they go into some depth about him (and are not just regurgitating press releases). Basically you need to ignore anything written, published, commissioned, or based on the words of him, his associates, or his agents, and find places where people who have no connection with him have chosen to write at some length about him in reliable sources. Then write an article based on what those independent sources say about him. ColinFine (talk) 11:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, so national news papers? magazines with articles about him? no matter is in other language? Hollywood454545 (talk) 16:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

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

please help me why this keeps getting declined and what do i need to do? GeorgeBergerson (talk) 02:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

GeorgeBergerson, a notice at the top of this page ("This submission's references do not show [...]" explains. It links to pages that have fuller explanations. Which part is (or which parts are) ambiguous or incomprehensible? -- Hoary (talk) 02:31, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

does this mean, i dont have enough info on annabelle reference wise GeorgeBergerson (talk) 04:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Only you know how much material you have amassed about her but haven't yet cited; however, the reviewer is saying that the material you cite as references isn't enough. -- Hoary (talk) 08:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi, GeorgeBergerson, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks to me as if the only one of your sources which might contribute to establishing that Yates meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability is no 3, Border Mail: it's behind a paywall, so I can't be sure, but it looks likely to have in-depth information about her, and be independent of her. None of the rest appear to meet the triple criteria of reliability, independence, and significant coverage. You need several more sources that do. ColinFine (talk) 11:43, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Article wizard

Hello,

I recently created a new account after losing my old one's password (I had no recovery e-mail set) years ago. A lot has changed... well, for starters, how do I turn off the Article wizard? With my previous account, I was at some 70-80.000 edits at the end, so the Article wizard popping up at every click on a redlink is a real pain... especially when you just wanna do a redirect.
Does it go away on its own after a certain number of edits? I cannnot find any way to toggle it in the preferences. I would find it most convenient if - like in the old days - opening a redlink would give the options of searching for the redlinked term, or creating a new article. That was really helpful for housekeeping work - to check if there was an article already using a spelling variant, or if other articles had the same redlink, or if they did not have the term in question wikilinked yet, etc.. Dysmorodrepanis2 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 02:41, 4 June 2024‎ (UTC)

WP:FEET and HP:ES

Hi there,

I have two questions.

1) While editing I find myself wondering if I should be submitting my revisions frequently or in larger submissions. I read WP:FEET and want to make sure I understand. Is it "proper" to edit an entire section, or perhaps even article, for something like grammar and sentence structure in one revision, or should it be broken up more? I do understand that changes should be grouped logically.

2) When writing edit summaries, I wonder if there is a preferred style for them such as when using git. For example, should I be writing in the imperative mood? ("Edit lede for grammar" vs "Edited the lede for grammar") Should I be ending it with a period? Should I capitalize it? Am I massively overthinking this? I have read Help:Edit summary and it touches on style but does not tell me a literal format.

Thank you for your time. Infectedfreckle (talk) 03:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

It's great that you're so conscientious. Good questions.

1) In my opinion, if you're editing an article for grammar and other minor changes, it's okay to make changes that span an entire article in one edit. The more content-oriented or potentially controversial your changes are, the more you should break them up into smaller edits, to allow for potential discussion. Trust your instincts on how "controversial" a particular set of changes might be, and be open to constructive feedback from other editors in real time.

2) You're overthinking it, but that's okay. Editing Wikipedia is a big responsibility, given our reach and influence, so it's better to over-think than to under-think.

I find that every editor writes edit summaries a bit different, almost like an accent. Just use the edit summary to get your point across in a way that feels natural to you, and you'll be doing great.

Cheers. Pecopteris (talk) 04:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much, that’s a huge relief. Infectedfreckle (talk) 11:31, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

What to do

Just realized my article (Okba ibn Nafaa Brigade) is just a duplicate of (Uqba ibn Nafi Brigade). so uhh what do I do 🍫 TheBrowniess (talk) (contribs) 🍫 03:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

So both of them are exactly the same brigade? The best option is to merge both articles. Thank you. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 08:04, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

For the how-to merge details, you can look up WP:PROMERGE. Ckfasdf (talk) 11:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Alternatively, if you remain the main contributor to the article you created, you can request its speedy deletion. IMO, that article may qualify for either WP:A10 or WP:G7. Ckfasdf (talk) 11:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Another thing you can do is redirect one title to the other. That way people end up in the same place by typing either title in the search box. You do this by replacing the entire content of Okba ibn Nafaa Brigade with this line:

#REDIRECT [[Uqba ibn Nafi Brigade]]

Then any attempt to go to Okba ibn Nafaa Brigade will land on Uqba ibn Nafi Brigade instead. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

big problem !!

"As an anti-abuse measure, you are limited from performing this action too many times in a short space of time, and you have exceeded this limit. Please try again in a few minutes. If you are attempting to run a bot or semi-automated script, please read and understand our bot policy, then request approval. Users who run unauthorized bot scripts may lose their editing privileges." why is it coming again and again Tanishkshatriyaaiims (talk) 04:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Tanishkshatriyaaiims. Where are you seeing that message? It is not on your talk page. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:36, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

This is the message you get when you run into rate limits. Most users generally do not run into this issue, and Tanishkshatriyaaiims, I don't see anything in your contributions that would explain why you saw this. The limit for new users is 8 edits per minute, and you were nowhere near that. It might just have been a brief technical glitch. Tanishkshatriyaaiims, please let us know if it happens again. As soon as your account is 4 days old and you've had more than 10 edits, you'll be autoconfirmed and the chances of running into this are much lower. --rchard2scout (talk) 11:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

actually it is happening every time when i do any edit on an article with brief explanation Tanishkshatriyaaiims (talk) 11:50, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Draft:ASEAN Express

How to make it better to publish? Mmjay70 (talk) 05:58, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Mmjay70. The notice at the top of that draft is pretty clear, so there is not much point in my repeating it here. Which part of it do you not understand? Click on those blue links for more information on specific requirements. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Mmjay70.

Writing an article starts by finding those independent sources, and then continues by writing a summary of what those independent sources say. Since you have cited no sources, where does your information come from?

Note that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 11:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

How does one propose a site-wide announcement?

Hello,

On my "watchlist", there are a few announcements at the top of the page, such as:

• "A request for adminship is open for discussion."
• "Want to improve Wikipedia's reliability? Compete in WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive starting on 1 June and replace tags with references!"
• "The RFA2024 phase II review of the ongoing trial of the discussion-only period is now open."

I think that there should also be an announcement that makes Wikipedians aware of the ongoing Wikimedia Foundation election process, which affects all WMF projects, including this one.

What is the proper venue for formally making this proposal? Pecopteris (talk) 06:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Pecopteris You can make a request at MediaWiki talk:Watchlist-messages. Jolly1253 (talk) 08:06, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Seemingly confused IP editor, how to deal with it?

I stumbled across Karvetinagar being edited, one little change at a time. Specifically the template, resulting in it being broken a few times, the editor adding nonsensical things to the template (just the name of the town for the skyline, describing another city as the largest city in the town and so forth).

In the grand scheme of things, I'm still quite new and I'm unsure how to handle a situation like this. It seems like good faith editing, since the IP is from the area, but it seems more like WP:COMPETENCE. What abilities do I have to interfere? Can I give a warning? If not, how do I get someone who can to get involved?

Thanks for your time, Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk me) 08:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Speederzzz Welcome to the Teahouse. In essence, yes, you're absolutely entitled to give a user a warning if their editing is causing problems. You don't have to wait for an admin to spot trouble. If you're experienced enough to notice a problem, we regard you as experienced enough to help resolve it. A gentle but firmly-worded message on their talk page asking them to take more care is often better than a harsh, templated message or warning. You might want to add any pages or templates to your Watchlist and revert poor edits if they occur. Just leave a helpful WP:EDITSUMMARY to explain the rationale for any revert you're making.

Many editors make the task of leaving messages for other editors much easier by implementing a tool called WP:TWINKLE, which automates the process. You can now activate this additional menu tool by selecting it in 'Preferences-Gadgets' See here. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:31, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

FOIA

Hello. Is there anybody to make a Freedom of Information Act request? I've traced Dr Margaret J. Corasick to someone in the Air Force and surprise! there aren't any sources on the internet. She's famous for a 1975 algorithm, so surely there must be some things that can be declassified. Thank you, Comte0 (talk) 09:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Comte0 Welcome to the Wikipedia Teahouse. I'm afraid we can only help here with issues around the mechanisms and policies of editing Wikipedia. Making FOI requests is well outside our remit. You are, of course, welcome to pursue your own researches; just ensure you don't reveal any personal information on this site, please. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Since I'm French, it's also outside of mine. Regards, Comte0 (talk) 10:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

This is outside Wikipedia, but today I learned that FoIA request can be made by anyone - including foreign nationals. Just take a look at their FAQ. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 10:57, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

If you're not able yourself, perhaps there might be someone over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request who might be able to help you. Hope this helps! --rchard2scout (talk) 11:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Uploading images

Can someone direct me to relevant pages or advise me on the below things.

1. Can we get social media images?
2. Do we have to always take consent, even if the image is in a public webpage - The image might be from a person or place of great value. They will not reply to us for a simple consent email. What are the options here.

Shehani98 (talk) 10:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Shehani98. If the image is not explicitly published with a free (as in "free speech") license (e.g. one of Creative Commons licenses) then the image needs to conform to the Non-free content criteria policy, which limits how images without a free license can be used.

If you're not sure what the copyright status of the image is, you can link to it and ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. —⁠andrybak (talk) 11:06, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Guys help me I didn’t do wrong

So I was going in my account page and this happen Somebody deleted my user page!! I’m so angry who did it It was Ruy who did it Now Wikipedia please reply me or fix this happen I dint do wrong! Edit: I fixed my user page but I added new details Claudexspeed (talk) 13:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Your user page was deleted by Explicit, due to you using Wikipedia as a web host. Babysharkboss2 was here!! ^{Dr. Wu is NOT a Doctor!} 13:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Explicit deleted it after Ruy had nominated it for deletion. The deletion log at User:Claudexspeed links to the reason: "U5: Misuse of Wikipedia as a web host. Wikipedia is not a social network and doesn't allow the same on userpages as many other websites. We do accept a lot of userboxes if you want to express yourself with those. If you want a copy of the deleted content (not to just repost it) then you can enable email at Special:Preferences and ask me. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:58, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

You may also want to familiarize yourself with the purpose of and how to use your user page at WP:USER.   — TARDIS builder^✉     ★       18:43, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Video as a source

Hello there! I was just gathering sources for some articles I want to write but due to lack of enough written sources I found some video interviews on YouTube and I wonder if I could use them as sources. To be a bit more specific, they are interviews by radio stations and magazines. Thanks in advance! feni (tellmehi) 13:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @FENFEN: per WP:PUBLISHED, video is an acceptable source format.

Per WP:RSPYT, content from a reputable source's own YouTube channel can be used, even if most content on that platform is not considered reliable.

Interviews are a bit of a tricky area, as many media outlets don't apply the usual fact-checking measures and editorial rigour to interviews, effectively leaving the interviewee to say pretty much whatever they like. And as an interview is a primary source, it couldn't be used to establish notability, in case that's what you're trying to do. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Create A New Item?

I noticed that there is no entry for TeraGogo on Wikipedia. TeraGogo is a mobile browser launched by Flextech Inc. in March 2024, with built-in search and an AI bot. It includes features like Multi Engine Search and Smooth Playback. Available on both Google Play and Apple Store.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tera.verse&hl=en https://apps.apple.com/es/app/teragogo/id6499314679?l=en-GB EmilyShawn917 (talk) 14:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@EmilyShawn917 It may simply be too soon to have a Wikipedia page on TeraGogo, when I tried to find sources related to it I couldn't find any at all. Seeing as it was only launched in March this year, you're likely going to have to wait for a fair amount of time to see any meaningful sources on it in order to establish that it is notable. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 14:31, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

permission to use photo

Hi. If the photographer of a photo has died, do I need to get permission from his next of kin to use the photo in Wikipedia, or is the photo now in the public domain? DaringDonna (talk) 14:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Presumably you’d have to get permission from his estate or something similar. Blueskiesdry (talk) 14:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Daring Donna, and welcome to the Teahouse. No, a photo does not enter the public domain merely because the photographer has died (any more than a book does when the author has died). It will probably pass with the estate, though you may find it hard to find somebody who will acknowledge that they own it and be willing to license it. Note that "permission" is not enough - see donating copyright materials. ColinFine (talk) 15:32, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine I am in touch with the photographer's widow. Would permission from her be enough? I've already spoken to her and she is willing, but can we assume that the copyright is hers? DaringDonna (talk) 19:02, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Re-evaluating a old question

I have been editing several articles regarding the certain premierships of British prime ministers and I am very pleased about the progress we have made in this occasion to re-configure these articles and add more details on these topics. However, as a part of a previous question, how can I join a Wikiproject that is in the interest of addressing issues of this sort? Also, my main question, can we create a separate article each for every prime minister regarding their respective tenures? For example such as the “Premierships of Stanley Baldwin” or “Premiership of Charles Grey” etc? It would be more helpful and useful for any reader to read the key article’s underlying information separately in a wholly new article. So does anyone have any suggestions or advice concerning this discussion? Davecorbray (talk) 14:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Davecorbray. Subtopics like "Premiership of Charles Grey" are usually made when the main article is becoming too long. You have expanded Charles Grey, 2nd Earl Grey but it's still not long by Wikipedia standards and it seems premature to split out a premiership article. See Wikipedia:Splitting for general information about the process. Stanley Baldwin is closer to split-worthy but still shorter than the main article of all prime ministers who have a separate premiership article. You can join a WikiProject by just adding your name to the list of members, e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom/roster. You don't have to be a member to start or join discussions in a WikiProject. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Is British or American English used on English Wikipedia?

Just checking. YellowPuffle (talk) 15:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@YellowPuffle Both, as well as many others. See WP:ENGVAR. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

i just made a theory of real life Godzilla creatures!!

please reply me i want to tell it 😔 Tanishkshatriyaaiims (talk) 16:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

The Teahouse is for asking for help with editing, not an off-topic forum. You may share your theory on some other, more suitable place. Blueskiesdry (talk) 16:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

actually i have no other social media apps 😢 Tanishkshatriyaaiims (talk) 16:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

This is still not the place to post it. There are probably multiple Godzilla or mythical creature forums out there where you can quickly make an account with no cost. If your parents won’t let you you can ask them to post it for you. Blueskiesdry (talk) 17:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Suggest that you familiarize yourself with what Wikipedia is not.   — TARDIS builder^✉     ★       18:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Is it possible to get banned from every edition of Wikipedia?

I'm not actually gonna find out, but is it? 47.153.138.166 (talk) 16:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Sure is; see WP:GLOBALBAN. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

i am 15 years old and it took me 3 years to make a theory about existence of godzilla like creature actually i have no social media app so i want to share the theory here please don't say no to me i am still a child 😢😔

please one time give me a chance you are like my big brother and sisters Tanishkshatriyaaiims (talk) 16:58, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Tanishkshatriyaaiims I am really sorry but this is not what Wikipedia is for. We are a project to build a free encyclopaedia of notable topics, not a forum to talk about your own ideas. Please do not post content like this again. Qcne (talk) 17:00, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

ok 😭😔 Tanishkshatriyaaiims (talk) 17:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Tanishkshatriyaaiims You may want to take a look at Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 18:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

i am actually happy after seeing that you people are really disciplined

i am 15 year old boy can you guide me across Wikipedia or maybe i can be your future friend 🙂 Tanishkshatriyaaiims (talk) 17:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

how many edits will it need for making own article

you can also tell me in a short sentence 🙂 Tanishkshatriyaaiims (talk) 17:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Tanishkshatriyaaiims: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! You can already submit a draft to Articles For Creation, which means that an AfC reviewer will take a look at your draft, and if they determine it to be suitable for Wikipedia, they'll accept it and it will become an official article. To be able to bypass the AfC process, you will have to become confirmed— that is, have made 10 edits (which I see you've done) and have been on Wikipedia for four days (which you are yet to do). Creating an article on Wikipedia is one of the hardest things for someone to do, and I generally recommend trying to do some other things to gain experience before you do that. If you still want to create an article, I would read Wikipedia:Your first article. Cheers! ‍Relativity ⚡️ 17:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Keeping that in mind, please realize that Wikipedia is not social media, and it would not be a good idea to create an article about something that should go on social media instead, such as the existence of a godzilla like creature. However, we'd be happy if you decide to create an article that follows Your first article. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 17:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Biographical article written like a CV

Hello all. I came across this article Frederica Williams that looks biased and violating wikipedia biography standards. Im very new to the site and don't know how to start editing something like this. From what I can tell there are very few real references, the formatting is disorganized and sections might need to be fully rewritten. Any suggestions on who I could flag this to or how I can get started? thank you! Epsilon02 (talk) 19:08, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello Epsilon02 and welcome to Wikipedia. The BLP noticeboard would probably be a good place for this. Blueskiesdry (talk) 19:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)