Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

Shortcuts

• WP:TEA
• WP:TH

RudolfRed, 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.

• To read the newest questions, skip to bottom
• About the Teahouse

Most recent archives
1211, 1212, 1213, 1214, 1215, 1216, 1217, 1218, 1219, 1220, 1221, 1222, 1223, 1224, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1229, 1230

Dear Teahouse, Can I request the update for the page created by me. when it will be published and if I need to do any more edit Page is AmirMehdiKazmi AmirMehdiKazmi (talk) 08:52, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AmirMehdiKazmi, there is no chance of Draft:Amir Mehdi being accepted in its current state, at it cites no sources. Maproom (talk) 09:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it does. There's a list at the end. But, AmirMehdiKazmi, which part of the draft can be found where among these listed references? -- Hoary (talk) 09:41, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have had feedback at Draft:Amir Mehdi and at your user talk page. Please also read the advice against trying to write an autobiography. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:36, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All the reference link are working you can click and check , can you please pin point exaclty what I need to due to get this page accepted. AmirMehdiKazmi (talk) 09:55, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AmirMehdiKazmi I would also suggest that you read about how an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. You offer references, but they are not in-line with the text. Every substantive statement about a living person must have a source. Please read Referencing for Beginners if you wish to proceed, but my advice is that you abandon attempting to edit about yourself and allow an article about you to be organically developed by independent editors that take note of your career in independent reliable sources with significant coverage of you. Go worry about your career, and less about a Wikipedia article. 331dot (talk) 10:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

this article is not for myself. My name is Nagma Amir. how do I contact independent editor and if there is a charge for this AmirMehdiKazmi (talk) 10:44, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not charge for anything. If you are not Amir Mehdi, you should not use his name as your username. Please change your username by visiting Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS to make a request. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. I have requested the name change.

How do I request independent editor for edit of my page AmirMehdiKazmi (talk) 10:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Articles is severely backlogged. You may continue to edit the draft, but you must improve the sources and apply them to statements in the article as I say above. What is your connection to Mr. Mehdi? 331dot (talk) 11:01, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amie Mehdi is my father AmirMehdiKazmi (talk) 11:51, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AmirMehdiKazmi (talk), ya, u probably should Carsongallas (talk) 13:42, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You need to learn how to incorporate your list of references into the text. When you do that properly, the software automatically inserts a ref number in the text and puts the numbered references under References. See Help:Referencing for beginners. For first time editors, I recommend using your Sandbox to format refs, then copy into the article after. David notMD (talk) 10:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In Early life and education, Legal career and Personal life, I deleted a lot of content that does not belong in the article. All remaining content needs to be referenced. The remainder of the article needs a lot of work. Insert the references where they belong, and delete any content that cannot be referenced. David notMD (talk) 11:15, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here and on your Talk page, answer 331dot's question about your connection to Amir Mehdi, as you appear to have a lot of knowledge about him that suggests a personal connection. David notMD (talk) 11:17, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Last, most of your proposed references confirm that he wrote books, stories, speeches, etc. NONE of this contributes to establishing his notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. Same for the descriptions of his actions vis-a-vis Kashmir. Unless you can add references for what people have published ABOUT him, there is no potential that this can be an article. David notMD (talk) 11:31, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Board of Control for Cricket in India needs extensive ce by GA reviewer. I added a banner for ce there, but not many ce editors are doing work on it. How to ask some to work on an article for ce?Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 19:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rock Stone Gold Castle You can make a ce request at the Guild of Copy Editors here. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 19:12, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pyrrho the Skipper, @Rock Stone Gold Castle I did some ce, and I will do more when I get to my desktop computer where it's easier. David10244 (talk) 06:43, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't gotten to this yet, but within 24 hours from now I sould bd able to, David10244 (talk) 04:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some copyedits up to and including "Match-fixing scandal". If anyone can give advice on whether those updates are good, please let me know -- I was guessing what was meant, for a few of them. I need to check other articles to see if team names should be italicized or otherwise set off. Thanks. David10244 (talk) 20:46, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like good editing to me, thanks for doing it. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 20:53, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pyrrho the Skipper thanks, I'll continue. David10244 (talk) 22:53, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

I submitted prior but there wasn't enough articles to support the film, but as of lately it won two awards in a Toronto festival and its been in a lot of press, most recently PLAYBACK and a 9 other articles.

How do we merge or make it a visible page Torontofresh (talk) 19:39, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Torontofresh, you may want to see WP:COI. Although unrelated to your question, as a conflict of interest editor you should read this. Also note that one account cannot be shared by multiple people, see WP:ISU. Sungodtemple (talk) 19:54, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Torontofresh I restored the Comments and put a submit draft template at the top. Per the comments above and on the draft, address whether you have a COI and seek better refs. This may be an instance of WP:TOOSOON. David notMD (talk) 12:25, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand, how it would be an instance of WP:TOOSOON can you please clarify? Upon doing some more research I see that there is a page for another film https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Delicious_(film) which was in the same Reelworld film festival as the film above and had less coverage. It had 4 sources while Bite of a Mango has much more and both movies are mentioned in the same Playback article. Just trying to understand this better. If it make sense then I will move on to another Toronto wiki page to contribute to. thanks. Torontofresh (talk) 00:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bollywood films have a lot of credits where a random name will be in brackets next to someone's name ie John Smith (Dave)

Does anyone know what those random names in brackets represent?

They're not companies, they're not place names, and they're not character names...

So I suspect they're either:

• A surname that they don't normally use
• A middle name that they don't normally use, or
• A nickname

I've tried searching for some of these random names, along with the actual names of the people credited, yet I still can't work out what they're supposed to be. Danstarr69 (talk) 02:41, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I looked and can't find any examples. Could you provide one? Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 05:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Danstarr69: Hello. Do you mean actor's real name or character's name? I guess it may be character's nickname. Not sure though. Like Skipper says above, example would be good. —usernamekiran (talk) 07:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Usernamekiran just random names in brackets next the real names of cast and crew members.

Sometimes it will be things like:

• Companies they worked for
• Places they worked in
• Cast members they worked for

etc in brackets, however sometimes the name in brackets won't be any of them.

It'll take forever to search for all the others in the 1000s of credits I've added/updated lately, however the latest one I've found is in the opening credits of the film 1920 London (I've not gone through the end credits yet, apart from to correct the cast), where it says...

• First Assistant Director - Salar Shaikh (Raja)

What is Raja? Danstarr69 (talk) 08:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pyrrho the Skipper here's another from the film Commando 3 (film)...

• Car Rig - Shahida Parveen Shaikh (Mushtaq)

What is Mushtaq? Danstarr69 (talk) 09:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Danstarr69 As the Wikipedia aticle doesn't go into that level of detail for cast and crew (nor should it) I don't think it matters very much. In this particular case IMDB may actually be a better source. According to the full IMDB listing, the car rig was Shahida Parveen Shaikh (the IMDB equivalent of WP:COMMONNAME) but actually credited as Shahida Parveen Shaikh Mushtaq in that particular film's credits. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:53, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Michael D. Turnbull I added the name to IMDB like that, as IMDB requires "credits to be added exactly the same as they are on screen", yet there's a problem with that as brackets can't be added inside the attribute brackets.

I'm trying to concentrate on updating just 5 Bollywood feature films, however I'm getting distracted with countless more Bollywood productions which have the same cast/crew members, yet have countless names, and countless duplicate profiles, just like with every English production I update, however Bollywood ones are on an even bigger scale with the amount of misspelt names and duplicate profiles they contain.

Right now I'm trying to sort out some of the countless duplicate profiles of 3 different Bollywood music duos (who have worked on some of those films), who have been added to IMDB multiple times with misspelt names as separate people, and again with misspelt names as duos. There must be at least 20 separate profiles for those 3 duos/6 singular people. Basically there should be 9 profiles for them maximum, if you include them as individuals and duos, not 20+ profiles.

Many more of the music related people on the productions those duos have worked on also have 3+ duplicate profiles each, which I'll be merging once I've checked the credits on each production. Danstarr69 (talk) 13:08, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All of that explains why here at Wikipedia we don't consider IMDB as a reliable source. I guess you'll have to take your issues up with them, not us. The websites have no relationship to one another. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:19, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Michael D. Turnbull my issue is...

What do the random names in brackets in Bollywood films mean?

It's a question which applies to both Wikipedia and IMDB.

All the other stuff I can sort out myself, but I can't sort out those two credits until I know what those random names in brackets in the on-screen credits mean. Danstarr69 (talk) 13:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Raja here is a nickname. In case of Shahida Parveen Shaikh (Mushtaq) — Shaikh, and Mushtaq are last names. It seems to be nee, and new name. Not sure which one is which though. Regarding the issue in general, we should remove the bracketed names. —usernamekiran (talk) 14:58, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Usernamekiran finally an answer to one of my questions on Teahouse. I can't remember the last time that happened.

If I see anymore random names in brackets next to names in on-screen credits, I'll just add it as an extra surname in the productions credits on IMDB, then add that extra surname as a nickname on their IMDB profile.

I know that Sikh's like adding the same "Singh" to their names, as I found out a few years ago.

There's a famous Sikh family of 3 brothers who grew up near me (not that anyone in the city realises), who are have always been credited by different names...

• Sometimes they have Singh as their last name.
• Sometimes Singh is used as their middle name.
• Sometimes their first names are abbreviated
• Sometimes their first names are misspelt
• Plus two of the three brothers also have stage names

A few years ago I tried to find out whether Singh was part of their actual names, after randomly finding out that their dad had written some of their songs in a blockbuster Bollywood film, by checking their names on Companies House.

However that didn't reveal any answers as even though their dad uses Singh as his only surname, the 3 brothers still switch their Singh back and forth with other surname repeatedly, on the profiles for the companies they own. Danstarr69 (talk) 06:55, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In an articles edit page I have referenced a trove article by trying to use a Wiki Trove template as follows:

[1]

Under the articles "References" heading it shows, as a link, as follows:

"CITY OF PERTH: Deeds of R.A.A.F. Squadron: The West Australian, Perth, WA; page 4, 25 August 1945". Trove. National Library of Australia. Retrieved 15 September 2022.

However, when I double-click on this reference I just get an error message "Title 51765008 could not be found." but if I if you copy the articles title "CITY OF PERTH: Deeds of R.A.A.F. Squadron" to https://trove.nla.gov.au/search/advanced/category/newspapers the newspaper article comes up right away.

Using this example can you advise me how fill out Wiki's Trove template correctly so the Reference links properly and directly to the article on Trove?

Maybe my problem is that I cant seem to be able to find the correct id-number at the end of the Trove url. Thanks Shellac41 (talk) 12:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC) Shellac41 (talk) 12:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shellac41. See the box starting "This is a template for citing newspaper summary pages on Trove" at Template:Cite Trove newspaper. It can only produce url's starting with https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/title/ like https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/title/123. You don't want a newspaper summary but a specific article with the url https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/51765008. The box says: "To cite an article available at Trove, use a citation template such as {{cite news}}, {{cite web}}, or {{citation}}". PrimeHunter (talk) 13:22, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Shellac41 So, to be specific, I'd use "City of Perth: Deeds of R.A.A.F. Squadron". The West Australian. 1945-08-25. p. 4.. See source code for the markup. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:35, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, please excuse my ignorance but I can't find on Wiki what you call "source code for the markup"? Shellac41 (talk) 03:18, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shellac41 I suspect he means, switch from visual mode to source code so you can see how he's written the reference.

You can also see it in the edit history, or by pressing edit on this post.

It's what I do when I don't know how to do something or forgotten how to do something on Wikipedia, like making a table for example. I just go to an article where I know a table exists, copy the source code for the table, paste the source code for the table in the article I want it, and replace the information in the table with information related to the article I pasted it in. Danstarr69 (talk) 07:17, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info, very helpful. Shellac41 (talk) 12:58, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Have done as suggested so hope references are correct now.Shellac41 (talk) 13:00, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

i want to create a article how can I do to make it Happy ending Pretty mkoliswa (talk) 14:57, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Pretty mkoliswa. Creating an article is usually not easy for newcomers, so it is recommended to get started by helping to improve already existing articles. But for creating a new article, see Wikipedia:Your first article, and try the Article Wizard. It would be recommended to use the Articles for Creation process. Note that the subject of the article should meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and be verifiable by citing reliable sources. Thanks, Kpddg ^(talk) 16:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Currently indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 02:49, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can make the article a draft and once it meets standards then it can be turned over to an article.Cwater1 (talk) 01:51, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so I made a draft about a failed musical written by Stephen Sondheim, Square One. The draft was quickly reviewed and declined. One specific thing was said, “it probably isn’t notable if it hasn’t made it’s debut.” They also said I needed citations of substance, which given the context of the subject material, there is truly only so much a source can give. I feel as though the citations give context for what it is, who wrote it, specific important dates and timeframes. The reviewer obviously thought otherwise. Despite that I’m too stubborn to give up. So if I wanted to get it published, what is my next step? Morgo0915 (talk) 02:37, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Morgo0915, if their is limited source material consider adding a small section to Sondheim's article where it would likely be WP:DUE and then creating the title of musical as a redirect to the section in Sondheim's article. Alternatively, discussion on his talk page about the musical may uncover additional sources or guidance from those more familiar with his careerSlywriter (talk) 02:51, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy: Draft:Square One (Musical) David notMD (talk) 02:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Morgo0915, since Sondheim died about two months after the project was announced, I consider it unlikely that the encyclopedia would benefit from a freestanding article about it. I am certain, though, that this sentence is inappropriate for an encyclopedia article: It is truly not known at present whether or not Square One will make it’s debut, but we hope that one day it may grace the stage and it’s audience. Cullen328 (talk) 02:59, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cullen328 Because of the unnecessary apostrophes? (Just kidding)David10244 (talk) 06:50, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually there are lots if "it's" that are wrong, in the draft. Pinging @Morgo0915 to fix those. David10244 (talk) 06:54, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am trying to improve Busch Gardens Tampa Bay (BGT) to the best as I can, accurately. I am moving onto a section where the physical diameters of the park are to be addressed, with all sources reliable or not pointing to the figure 335-acre (136 ha) (Example 1, Example 2 Example 3). As much as I could slap that statistic on the article and call it a day, historical reporting's point to a different number which amount to around the same acreage the park currently exists upon (The Tampa Tribune). I found that via a county's property appraisal website a way to look up the park's parent company, SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, property. Individually, the total acreage owned by the company amounts to be ~ 353.58 acres (143.09 ha), the BGT park itself being a healthy 249.53 acres (100.98 ha) (minus parking lots or additional property belonging to sister water park Adventure Island).

The problem: no reliable sources support BGT being anywhere near its approximate acreage, and relate the total properties of SeaWorld's Tampa properties to the park's size. Is there a way I can cite the appraisal's website supporting its recorded 249.53 acres (100.98 ha)? If possible, how could I go about citing the total property that Busch Gardens lays upon with its sister park and additional lots owned by the parent company? Since the calculated amount, 353.58 acres (143.09 ha), differs from decades of coverage citing 335-acre (136 ha). Am I just plain wrong and need a trout? Any and all help would be appreciated! Adog (Talk・Cont) 03:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, but since no one else has replied, I'll suggest this: you can cite any source you like, and if it's not reliable or deemed inadequate, someone else can remove it. If you have encountered a situation where the sources are, you believe, wrong, then the best you can do is cite them in the form "XXX reports the area to be...". This means that the (wrong) figure is attributed to somewhere other than Wikipedia, and we are still telling the truth (because XXX 'does' say it). If the sources all differ, you can quote a couple to give the range of estimates floating around. If any of the sources give a clue as to why they differ, by including unconnected properties, or being estimates, you can say so. The only thing you can't do is carry out your own surveying and interpretation of what the figures might be. You can only report what someone, somewhere has said/written. Elemimele (talk) 13:40, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input and consideration. Further information on this question I had posted to another board can be found Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous#Historical acreage accuracy. Question is relatively answered. :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 00:26, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't edit wikipedia at all, but today i got a message saying an edit on a page my ip address apparently made in 2012 (when I was a kid and not on a computer) saying one of my edits had been removed as it " did not appear to be constructive". I was just wondering if any one knew why this could have happened specifically at this time and if there was any danger to my device/online safety. This is a 3 year old laptop. I would appreciate any clarification. Regards 220.244.78.195 (talk) 05:35, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was ten years ago. IPs are not tied to a particular piece of hardware, and they can change with time, so it was not you. Ignore the stale warning or delete it. Meters (talk) 06:55, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

my school doesnt let us use wikipedia. it makes me sad. why wont they let us use it? 2604:2D80:AB02:A100:9885:A9F9:9632:C9C6 (talk) 07:29, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Probbably because Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:45, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

( but people work so hard 2604:2D80:AB02:A100:9885:A9F9:9632:C9C6 (talk) 07:58, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

oh well 2604:2D80:AB02:A100:9885:A9F9:9632:C9C6 (talk) 07:58, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Probably also because either 'they' don't understand how to use Wikipedia properly, or don't have the time to teach you how to do so. Rather than taking anything in Wikipedia itself as correct (for the reasons explained in the essay Victor Schmidt linked above), one should use it as a stepping-stone to the Reliable sources it cites. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.212.157.244 (talk) 08:32, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By "...doesn't let us use..." did you mean not allowed to use Wikipedia as a reference for school assignments (see replies, above), or not allowed to use school computers to edit Wikipedia articles? David notMD (talk) 10:50, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many schools don't want students using Wikipedia because Wikipedia is not always accurate. Another reason could be is because Wikipedia is not censored. Although, there are options to hide certain images. Schools has filters so their filter should be able to hide certain images. I am not an expert on that so what I'm saying may or may not be true.Cwater1 (talk) 15:17, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many schools also do this because they worry that most of their students will only use Wikipedia, and will just produce school work copied from Wikipedia rather than reading around a number of different sources, books, other websites and so on. This is very sad, but it's a valid concern. I am also sad that many schools disapprove of YouTube, although there are many informative and educational things to be found there too. It would be better if schools educated pupils on the trustworthiness of different sources, and encouraged pupils to use every source of information. I think the schools want you to do your own work, and worry that if you just read Wikipedia, you're letting someone else do all the research. But of course it's no better if you read any other encyclopaedia or similar reference book! Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 13:46, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You should see Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source. They didn't want us using Wikipedia because it can be edited by anyone and the information is not accurate or up to date. Many reasons are because some statements are not always sourced. Sometimes that source leads to a dead link and don't have the archived link.Cwater1 (talk) 17:25, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I left a message on talk page introducing myself and explaining why I wanted to edit the Carbrook Hall page As I did not get a response I went ahead and did the edit. The edit has since been removed and It was suggested that I contact this teroom page for assistance.

To Tugs04 (talk) 08:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tugs04 You made a bit of a mess of things. You created Draft:Carbrook Hall and submitted it to AfC, where it was Declined. You also added most (all?) of the same content and refs to the existing artice Carbrook Hall. where it was all reverted. As for the draft, either tag it for deletion, or do nothing, in which case it will be deleted in six months. David notMD (talk) 11:00, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As for the article, you added a mix of information about the building and more about the Bright family. The latter does not really belong. Try again, this time inserting a paragraph between the origins content and the Starbucks content. For the moment, forego the etymology content. David notMD (talk) 11:14, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David notMD

Accept your observation in respect to AfC...this was my first attempt to edit.

However, what was the original purpose of the Carbrook Hall entry? When I read the piece I was left asking questions as to who were the Brights how could they afford to build a stone extension and why did the building end up as a pub/coffee house.

The current page mentions 1620, the Brights and the civil war. All I have tried to do is give it substance: a beginning, the rise of the Bright family through yeoman farmers to gentry. The Middle: Colonel John Bright as a leading Puritan in Sheffield and the dying out of the gentry family. And an ending: the house being left abandoned and its reinvention as a pub and coffee house. And as for the etymology: it establishes the house in the midst of the Norse settlements that were prevalent in this part of the world and explains where the name came from. So I would ask you to reconsider and allow my edit to be published. Tugs04 (talk) 09:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have been behind the article Mammootty to make it a GA. But I have failed after a long time. Talk:Mammootty/GA1 Can anyone explain to me what is the real problem found by the second reviewer. In short and understandable manner can anyone explain it. Did they mention that I copied from any website, or the sources says different things? Please help Paavamjinn (talk) 08:50, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• The reviewer wrote "four of the five footnotes I looked at don't accurately cite the material". The reviewer looked at five footnotes. Each implied that a certain proposition was (or certain propositions were) presented in a particular source. But for four of the five sources, the proposition was (or propositions were) not in the cited source. This is a major problem; and if I had been the reviewer, it would have been enough for me to fail the article. But it's only one of several major problems. (Yes, another is plagiarism.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:22, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any other way to spread the love to colleagues besides Wikilove? I am enjoying being in EnWiki, i love you all. Ruwaym (talk) 10:39, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ruwaym - do you know about the WP:THANK feature? Plus there's always the "old-fashioned" method - leaving a handwritten note of appreciation on their talk page(s). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:21, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nice idea(s). Ruwaym (talk) 16:02, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My reason for the update wasn't concise enough.

The domain name system could be used to create "ASCII art" and even "Word art". eg lo-ok com or 0n0 com, and the most accessible art in the form of cheap media. Radiobutton (talk) 12:07, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be about reverted edit to Word art. Right place to discuss is the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 13:37, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MrOllie/WP:TEAHOUSE "Advisers", Thanks for your feedback and your services to this free and awesome compendium of human knowledge. This is all very valuable learning for this novice contributor. The "conflict of interest" you mentioned does not exist; helping Wikipedia financially is extremely easy, trying to help/mentor/teach via content seems to have many nuances. I hope you will allow me to add a reference in the Wikipedia PyMOL article to a future iCn3D article that I produce as a novice user? RunningStick (talk) 13:18, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RunningStick Your attempt to add iCn3D as a "See also" to the PyMOL article was reverted because iCneD does not exist as a Wikipedia article. First create the iCn3D article, using WP:YFA as a guide. You mention on your Talk page that the creator of the iCn3D software is an asociate. That means you do have a conflict of interest. See WP:COI. This does not preclude you from creating a draft, but you must describe on your Talk page the nature of your connection. David notMD (talk) 13:50, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When I'm done creating my own page and I click submit, it does not go. It stays on the codes I typed in. So I don't make it. Can anyone tell me why or something I may be doing wrong? Thanks. Carsongallas (talk) 13:32, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Carsongallas: did you click "publish changes"? lettherebedarklight〔晚安 おやすみ〕ping me when replying 09:52, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I found an article that is solely and entirely about the failed project. It had a wide variety of useful information to help shape the project to look more useful and finished. I’ve also been using your suggestions here, removing details that don’t seem appropriate, grammatical errors. Anything I could find or fix. So far it’s looking pretty closed to polish and I just wanted to know if there was any other possible fixes you can see in it. Morgo0915 (talk) 13:54, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link to Draft:Square One (Musical)  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:11, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Morgo0915 Did you read all of the comments in the section above on the same topic? David10244 (talk) 04:19, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone help me in creating Draft:Priyanka Choudhary Because as Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priyanka Choudhary and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priyanka Choudhary (2nd nomination) it was deleted because subject had only one lead role but now she is participating in colors tv reality show bigg boss. So i think it would be sufficient for Notability As you can also see in Nimrit Kaur Ahluwalia subject has only one significant role plus she is participating in Same Reality show

I don't know much about wikipedia thats why i need your help Akb bhatia (talk) 15:32, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Akb bhatia. I'm afraid merely participating in a reality show does not make her notable in the sense we mean it at Wikipedia. What might make her notable in our sense of the word is significant coverage in reliable sources. Please see Wikipedia:Notability (people). Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:08, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But there is Reliable sources like Hindustan times and Times of india providing significant coverage

also you can see in Nimrit Kaur Ahluwalia there are same sources Akb bhatia (talk) 16:15, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, @Akb bhatia those sources might be reliable (not sure about Times of India), but the information does not show that the subject, Priyanka Choudhary, is notable (click here). David10244 (talk) 04:25, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Times of India is listed at WP:RSP as "between no consensus and generally unreliable". Better sources than TOI should be used to establish notability. CodeTalker (talk) 04:32, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've received feedback from a couple of admins about my draft space article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jay_King stating that I need to clean up my article before resubmitting, as I now have to the best of my ability.

I have edited it per their suggestions and would love any feedback on finalizing this draft to submit. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you, Pennyframstad (talk) 16:20, 23 October 2022 (UTC)pennyframstad[reply]

@Pennyframstad: I have left a comment in the draft. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:57, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your suggestions Anachronist. Can you check it out now? I really appreciate your support! Best, Pennyframstad (talk) 22:08, 23 October 2022 (UTC)pennyframstad[reply]

I'm working on writing Draft:Silver Fire (1987 Oregon wildfire). A lot of the information comes from a PDF eBook. Am I citing it correctly? 184.21.204.5 (talk) 16:24, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

seems good to me. lettherebedarklight〔晚安 おやすみ〕ping me when replying 09:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Add Talagang In this list Because Talagang Become a district It is a city in Punjab, Pakistan Its Population 572,818 in this list talagang come 14 Number by its Population kindly Add Talagang in this list you Also read about talagang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talagang Cheetomalik4 (talk) 17:07, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cheetomali, it seems from the (very poorly referenced) article Talagang that Talagang is not a city but a district. The single source says: "Former tehsils, Murree and Talagang, have been elevated to the status of districts". 17:42, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

how do I update my information Ira schickman (talk) 20:09, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello welcome to the Teahouse, does your enquiry relate to this Ira schickman deleted 7 years ago for copyright violation? Theroadislong (talk) 20:31, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I see you have tried to do the same here Draft:Ira Schickman and on your user page, we cannot accept copyrighted content. Theroadislong (talk) 20:33, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've recently rewritten a few articles: Special:PermanentLink/1114867099, Special:PermanentLink/1117611703, and Special:PermanentLink/1117848465, but I'm still a little uncertain about citation styles. I used a different style in each one (chapter citations, page number Rp citations, and page number Sfn citations, respectively). I know that it's generally a matter of preference, but I was hoping a more experienced editor could look over the citation formatting in these articles and make sure I didn't do anything wrong or let me know if there's a better way to go about citing these sources. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:14, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thebiguglyalien, as the reader of an article, I find the system used in the Hoover article unnecessarily complex and therefore very tiresome. What's currently the second reference to the article on Pierce is important to the article as it's cited seven times; I can paraphrase it as "somewhere or other within 19 pages of [publication]", which isn't very helpful. And for one source ("Wallner 2004"), the system breaks down. The system used within the article on Harrison is easily the best of the three. -- Hoary (talk) 00:57, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since Template:Rp is so much neater, is there any reason why it's used so rarely? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:19, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can't figure out how to make articles, please help! Unicornthatisamazing&awesome (talk) 23:39, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Unicornthatisamazing&awesome I recommend you go through Articles for Creation Process. Roostery123 (talk) 00:02, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unicornthatisamazing&awesome, you should also spend some time reading and studying Your first article. It explains some very important principles. Cullen328 (talk) 01:57, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My Article Got Declined I Have Made the Necessary Correction Can It be submitted again? Beckyrose233 (talk) 23:58, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Godson_Umeh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beckyrose233 (talk • contribs) 23:59, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Those who denied your article said that the article fails to meet the notability requirements, which upon reading I see aswell. There are also numerous grammatical mistakes in the article, making it unsuitable for an encyclopaedia adding on to the failure to meet the notability requirements. Raymond Kestis (talk) 00:38, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Beckyrose233: Please first read Wikipedia:Golden rule and then tell us which three sources you cite are compliant with that rule. Then you need to work on cleaning up the poor English grammar in that draft. Yes, you can submit it again after you improve it further. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:43, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Beckyrose233. Let's take a close look at the first sentence of your draft, which currently reads, Godson Umeh (born 11 September 1995) is a British-Nigerian jewelry designer based in London, Who is known for his handcrafted custom jewellery, He is a founder of Godson Jewelry. That is an atrocious run-on sentence with terrible capitalization that has no place in an encyclopedia. The reference that you propose to support that sentence is to a website that is obviously regurgitating press releases or public relations activities by the subject of your draft. This is exactly the wrong way to try to write an encyclopedia article. Your draft fails to make a convincing case that this person is notable. Cullen328 (talk) 05:50, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cullen328: I have made some improvements and grammatical corrections pls can you help me confirm this before I proceed with the next step Beckyrose233 (talk

Several refs appear to be derived from press releases. David notMD (talk) 11:45, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@David notMD: I did a Lil bit of cleanup already and the refs remaining there are clearly not press released as I have also submitted them via wiki live help center and they were accepted am confused can pinpoint the refs you are referring to as press releases here? the person in question help is well-known jewelry designer that has clearly worked with tons of celebrities Beckyrose233 (talk

Beckyrose233, the source "I’ve no regrets leaving school early – Jewelry Designer, Godson Umeh" is, as its title suggests, simply based on what GU has said. "‘I have plans to go global’ – Godson Umeh, Jeweller" is the same. "Godson Umeh | The Jewelry Artist Plans His Breakthrough in America" combines a starstruck profile ("shot to fame with his refined sense of luxury items and brilliant strategies to grow his business", etc) with GU's musings about his future. At this point, I stopped clicking on the links to sources. Which of the other sources would you say are the best three? -- Hoary (talk) 22:28, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hoary "I’ve no regrets leaving school early – Jewelry Designer, Godson Umeh" I read this article before adding to the draft (ref) also did some evaluation on this said article to be honest this articles was reviewed by some Wikipedia editors and deemed news worthy #Pass before, I was 100% sure to attach to the said draft and yes it clear what GU said. celebrities make posts about themself things they use to do and because of their celebrity status most of these top papers pick this post and generate it in an article i don't know if you actually read the article pls you should so as to verify this yourself.

https://independent.ng/godson-umeh-set-to-take-underprivileged-youths-off-streets-sponsor-their-education/

https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2022/10/17/godson-umeh-reinvents-himself-as-the-favorite-jeweler-of-football-stars-celebrities/

https://editor.guardian.ng/arts-2/jeweler-godson-umeh-customizes-cartier-glasses-for-meek-mill/

and yes, several news coverages about GU on the internet from independent sources which I felt wasnt necessary to add Beckyrose233 (talk — Preceding undated comment added 01:25, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Beckyrose233 "was reviewed by some Wikipedia editors and deemed news worthy". Which editors did this, and how? Can you link to where these editors deemed these sources to be "news worthy". Thanks. David10244 (talk) 04:26, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@David10244 via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IRC_help_disclaimer He has worked with notable acts like Zlatan Nigeria rapper, Davido, Trevoh Chalobah, Reheem sterling, and a lot of others. Godson is also verified on all his social media platforms.) and has also been featured in other notable UK Magazines, not just one or two. "Still not a notable jeweler"? I will agree, however, that most of the independent sources don't have a byline that was removed, but even then, there are some independent sources in the body. Beckyrose233 (talk

Hi, to whoever can help me get through this. My name is DJ Demmerneck. I am a music artist with lots of music on very different platforms like Spotify, Apple Music, TikTok, Instagram, etc.. I was wondering on how I can get my own wikipedia page for my artist name? If anyone can help me, please let me know.

Hope we can work together on someone showing me how to do it properly or if someone can make one for me.

Luke Emmers, Also Known As "DJ Demmerneck" DJ Demmerneck (talk) 01:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DJ Demmerneck; Wikipedia users are all volunteers, who work on what interests them. You may create an article about yourself, provided you pass the notability criteria. Wikipedia is not social media, but an encyclopedia, meaning that it's not an indiscriminate collection of "pages". If you want to write a well-researched article about anything, please see Your first article. --Quisqualis (talk) 01:17, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DJ Demmerneck, you might want to read An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. If you become notable enough for a Wikipedia article it won't belong to you, it will be an encyclopedia article that anyone can edit. There may be a time when something unpleasant or unflattering about you is reported. That matter can become part of your Wikipedia article, and you won't be able to stop that from happening, or have the article deleted. Karenthewriter (talk) 01:51, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DJ Demmerneck. Please read the Notability guideline for musical performers. When I do a Google search, I find plenty of expected social media profiles of you as a performer, but no significant coverage of you in reliable sources that are entirely independent of you. Can you please point out the sources that meet that standard? Cullen328 (talk) 05:27, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DJ Demmerneck. I did a quick search of your name, and it doesn't look like you would qualify for an article on Wikipedia. To have an article, the subject must be shown to have received significant coverage from reliable sources that are independent from the subject. I have not found any evidence that this is the case. I could be wrong, feel free to show us where this coverage exists. -- Mike 🗩 18:47, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Need someone to create Vinayak Krishna Gokak as redirect to Vinayaka Krishna Gokak.

"Vinayak Krishna Gokak" is used throughout not only in web and offline sources but also Wikipedia. See search results. 103.240.204.243 (talk) 03:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just do [[Vinayaka Krishna Gokak | Vinayak Krishna Gokak]] to redirect properly. Raymond Kestis (talk) 04:18, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think I am not aware of this? A redirect is needed instead of this unnecessary hardwork. 103.240.204.243 (talk) 04:43, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

created the redirect. for future reference, the code for a redirect is #REDIRECT [[Article name]]. lettherebedarklight〔晚安 おやすみ〕ping me when replying 04:59, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you lettherebedarklight! 103.240.204.243 (talk) 05:30, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lettherebedarklight as far as I am aware, non-autoconfirmed users cannot directly create pages in mainspace, redirect or otherwise. 103.240.204.243 I believe the AfC project has a place to propose redirects at WP:AFC/R. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

oh yes, that is true. lettherebedarklight〔晚安 おやすみ〕ping me when replying 09:03, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, redirects should almost always be categorized - note that in addition to the #REDIRECT code, lettherebedarklight put {{R from alternative spelling}} on the page. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:25, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Teahouse,

Can you guide on what kind of information and reference articles are required if I want to write an article on a startup which is doing good work for the society? Parama Dasgupta (talk) 09:16, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Parama Dasgupta Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. From your statement, I gather that you may be associated with this "startup". If so, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclsoures(declaring paid editing, which is not limited to specific payment for edits, is a Terms of Use requirement).

Startups almost never merit a Wikipedia article. Companies must already be established in their field in order to draw the necessary coverage in independent reliable sources that is required for an article about them. Wikipedia articles are also not for telling the world about the good work a company or organization might do. An article about a company or organization must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Press releases, staff interviews, the company website, announcements of routine business activities like the raising of capital or commencement of operations, brief mentions, and the like do not establish notability. "Significant coverage" goes beyond merely telling of the existence of the company and its activities and goes into detail about the signficance of influence of the company as the source sees it, not as the company itself sees it. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 09:23, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How many edits did I create and here I am getting continuously the notification of my tenth edit!so why I can't edit semi protected article Sumedh Mudgalkar Sumedh Mudgalkar (talk) 09:23, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sumedh Mudgalkar I think you still have a few hours before you are autoconfirmed, it is a full four days. I see by your username that you seem to be Mr. Mudgalkar, if so, you should not edit the article directly, please read the autobiography policy. You may, however, make formal edit requests(click for instructions) on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 09:47, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that you are not the Sumedh Mudgalkar described in that article as born in 1996, and an "Indian film and television actor, as well as a dancer." If you are not, you should discontinue using this account and start a new account with a different name - even if your name is in truth Sumedh Mudgalkar. David notMD (talk) 12:07, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can't publish my article, can you help me? 🇺🇳🇺🇳 (UN)official Flag^{To UN🇺🇳🇺🇳} 09:55, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: User:Unofficial flag/sandbox 💜  melecie  talk - 10:13, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Melecie Yes it’s this article 🇺🇳🇺🇳 (UN)official Flag^{To UN🇺🇳🇺🇳} 10:14, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unofficial Flag. I have added a header to your sandbox so that you can submit it for review when it is ready. It is not currently ready because it has not a single reliable independent source. A Wikipedia article must be based on what people unconnected with the subject have published about it. ColinFine (talk) 10:24, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse @Unofficial flag. Your draft is probably inadequate to become an article at present because it lacks the relaible citations to show that this specific flag is notable in Wikipedia's meaning of that term. It is not enough to show that something exists, you must show that it has been discussed in WP:INDEPENDENT sources of scholarly standing (not wikis, for example). Most of the information you have provided could go into the article for the organisation itself, at Central American Integration System. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:25, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that this domain (which I have just removed from Del mio meglio n. 4) is a browser hijacker

• celinedion.us: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

I've listed it at WP:JUDI as it has previously been used for Indonesian gambling spam but should it be reported elsewhere for early attention? Lyndaship (talk) 09:55, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

helo .. i need create a biography for my client ... i tried so many time and submit finally .unfortunately its rejected... could you help me.. how to create proper way and how much time take that biography article publish in google page Shyamthamban (talk) 10:42, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shyamthamban. Before you do anything else on behalf of your client, I strongly suggest you take the time to first carefully read through Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Then, I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability (people). -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:57, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

could you send me a full video of how to create and submit article Shyamthamban (talk) 11:00, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Shyamthamban, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid it sounds as if, like many people, you have a total, fundamental, misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is.

Wikipedia's needs and your needs are utterly different. What you are trying to do is to use Wikipedia for Promotion, which is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia.

More specifically:

- if your client meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - and not otherwise - Wikipedia could have an article about him. This artice would not belong to him or to you, would not be controlled by him or you, would not necessarily contain what he wanted it to contain, and should be based almost 100% on what people completely unonnected with him have pubished about him, not on what he or you say or want to say.

- If, given this, you decide to push on with trying to create an article about him, you must begin by making a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor (see that link for details). This a required by Wikipedia's terms of service.

- Clarify whether you are Shyam or not. If you are, read why autobiography is strongly discouraged. If you are not, change your username so as not to impersonate him.

- Then you should read Your first article, to understand how to go about the diffiult task of creating a new encyclopaedia article, and use the articles for creation process to create a draft. Note that creating an article begins with finding the reliable, independent, substantial sources about the subjct that are required to base an article on. Doing anything else at all before finding these sources is quite likely to be wasted effort.

- You should remove the fake article from you user page. That is not what user pages are for.

If this sounds discouraging, I'm afraid that this is because you are trying to use Wikipedia for a purpose which is forbidden. ColinFine (talk) 11:03, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thank brother...i creating article not for

a promotion.. i want learn more about creating article ..could you help me ..if any video pls help Shyamthamban (talk) 11:27, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has no "how to" videos. There is a strong recommendation for all new editors to put in time improving existing articles before trying to create an article. Again, WP:YFA is a written guide. If you client is in a profession commonly the subject of Wikipedia articles, then look at those articles to see content and referencing examples. David notMD (talk) 12:13, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shyamthamban your very first words above were helo .. i need create a biography for my client. That is what we mean by promotion. Your purpose is to tell the world about your client - in other words, to promote him. That is entirely right and proper if you are his agent or publicist. But what you may not do is try to use Wikipedia to promote him.

If several people unconnected with you or him have already told the world about him (not just repeating what you or he say, but thoughtfully investigating and writing about him) then Wikipedia might be interested in an article summarising what those people have said about him. But Wikipedia has no interest in what he wants to say or in what you want to tell the world about him. ColinFine (talk) 15:24, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Shyamthamban In addition to all of that great advice, there is no easy way to create a new article. David10244 (talk) 23:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone help me figure out what to do if I see potential edit warring as a third party? I tried checking the guidelines but I'm still confused.There's no talk page discussion on the dispute and it seems at least one user has engaged in back-and-forth reverts on more than one occasion this month. Axolotlanarchy (talk) 11:11, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Axolotlanarchy Edit warring may be reported to the edit warring noticeboard. If you aren't yet ready to take that step, you could encourage the users involved to refrain from edit warring and use discussion and dispute resolution. 331dot (talk) 12:21, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help. If I start a new section on the talk page, is there a way I should go about notifying the users involved? Axolotlanarchy (talk) 12:29, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you refer to them by name on the talk page, in the format {{u|TheirName}} then they will get notified. Alternatively, if you need to talk to a user specifically, you can post something on their talk page, and they'll get notified. Elemimele (talk) 13:29, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Teahouse,

Greetings,

I have tried to post an article on Wikipedia, and it was rejected for the reasons below.

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject

The reasons seem a bit unclear to me. Can I ask for advice? K.jawiei (talk) 11:49, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: User:K.jawiei/sandbox Sarrail (talk) 12:11, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the article is up for speedy deletion. It is used for promotion, most likely. See WP:PROMOTION and WP:SPEEDYDELETE. Sarrail (talk) 12:14, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it is about to be deleted. As written, the only ref was the company's website. This is not independent. You can start over using WP:YFA to create a draft, but unless there are multiple references to the business that are independent, reliable and in depth (meaning not just name-only or short mentions), there is no potential to succeed. See WP:NCORP for guidelines for articles about companies. David notMD (talk) 12:18, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

K.jawiei See also your Talk page for a query about your connections to the proposed article's topic. David notMD (talk) 12:21, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@K.jawiei In case it was not clear, those words in blue are clickable links. Click them and read the information there. It's a lot to learn. David10244 (talk) 23:10, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My IP address (when I'm not logged in) has been flagged as a vandal based on activity that isn't mine on several occasions. How can I avoid being marked as one when I am not logged in?Riverbend21 (talk) 15:05, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Riverbend21, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that's likely something out of your control - most internet service providers assign dynamic IP addresses to their clients, which means you may have a certain IP one day, and a vandal may have it the next day. Some companies offer static IPs if you're willing to pay for the privilege. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) Riverbend21 (talk) 16:06, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Riverbend21 Since you have an account, it's better to always sign in when editing. That way it's easier for you to find all of your edits, and you won't be accused of using multiple accounts for bad purposes. Cheers. David10244 (talk) 23:12, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding :)

I always edit with my account. Riverbend21 (talk) 02:09, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Team,

Can you help me create a page for the Waterloo Artificial Intelligence Institute I have tried to create it but it has been turned down by you. Would you be able to help me build it out and get it published?

Best regards, Omar Dari (talk) 15:06, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Omar Dari, welcome to the Teahouse. The first thing to do is establish the subject's notability - has this institute received significant coverage in independent, reliable, published sources? Are there newspaper articles or academic papers about it, written by people not connected with it or the university? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:12, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Omar, and welcome to the Teahouse. As I am not an admin, I can't see the deleted draft; but I'm guessing that you have made the classic mistake of writing an article based on what the Institute says or wants to say. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only 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. ColinFine (talk) 15:28, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your guess was correct, ColinFine. The three references were all published by Waterloo University. Omar Dari, what is required are references to significant coverage in reliable sources that are entirely independent of WAII and the university. Cullen328 (talk) 15:50, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse hosts are here to advise. Some may at times help edit a draft, mostly to improve its compliance with Wikipedia format, but not adding content or references. David notMD (talk) 18:39, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not just turned down, but Speedy deleted for being promotional and a copyright infringement. David notMD (talk) 18:41, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems we have run afoul of some propaganda from right-wingers in the UK. There are currently a number of transphobic articles being trumpeted in the English press. I use the word "press" loosely, as I've seen cave-drawings that were easier to comprehend. Are we required to accept these sources or can we deprecate them due to typical UK transphobia? 2600:1700:1250:6D80:A898:2EBF:BF36:1637 (talk) 17:15, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

what articles are you talking about? Vincent-vst (talk) 17:21, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IP editor. Please refer to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources to check the status of various sources. Those not listed there can be discussed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Cullen328 (talk) 17:25, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have started a discussion at Talk:Rapid-onset gender dysphoria controversy, which is the right place. David notMD (talk) 18:50, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hullo! I have a quick question about dead link maintainance tags - if the original of a url has been archived, shoud the ^{[dead link]} tag be removed or left? I was tempted to remove one as a set of uncontroversial changes to the aticle I have also just made a formal edit request to but I figured checking first might be smarter Memereese (talk) 17:35, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Memereese welcome to Teahouse! If a dead link has an archive link, then yes the {{Dead link}} template can be removed. Happy editing and link-trimming! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:48, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Shushugah good to know! Memereese (talk) 08:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello team, I have created Apache_YuniKorn and it's under review. This is my first-article contribution. Any suggestions or recommendations for publication will be highly appreciated. Also can you guide us what are the things need to consider while creating the new article, do we have any tools which I can validate before publishing the article to check the copyright violations and other important things which consider while publishing? Thanks in advance. Jagadeesan A S

@Jagadeesan A S:, welcome to the Teahouse! Some pages that may be helpful are WP:NOTABILITY, WP:COI, and WP:RELIABLESOURCES. There may also be more pages, so if you want more, feel free to ask. Sarrail (talk) 18:31, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Earwig's copyright violation detector is an automated tool to detect copyright violations; it turned up nothing for your draft. However, looking at the draft, it seems to be based only on what sources associated with the product write about it. Articles on wikipedia should be almost entirely based on what reliable sources that are independent of the subject have to say. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 18:34, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Maddy from Celeste. I tried using Earwig's copyright violation detector and it showed Violation Unlikely 0.0% similarity which is fine? Is there any percentage level which need to consider? Jagadeesan A S JAGAEESAN A S 18:47, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You should not copy text from anywhere except for direct quotations and be wary of close paraphrasing. There is no particular percentage that is problematic; rather, a higher percentage means a higher likelihood of plagiarism. Also, the program may show false positives if another website copies text from Wikipedia which is then flagged. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 19:34, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Sarrail for suggested articles , I will review it. JAGAEESAN A S 18:44, 24 October 2022 (UTC) Jagadeesan A S (talk)[reply]

It's a Wikipedia nuance, but drafts can become "articles" Talk pages are "pages." Too many people conflate creating a "page" with what is allowed in social media. David notMD (talk) 18:58, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @David notMD for pointing it out. Jagadeesan A S (talk) Jagadeesan A S (talk) 19:07, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I submitted a draft for this page. It was very simple, with a infobox and a couple paragraphs of body text. As a newbie, my plan was to make a minimal, non-controversial submission, and once any bugs were worked out and my understandings expanded, I'd add more. As I recall, the page included a link to the subject's blog page, to a list of his publications, and one other link.

To my surprise, the entire submission was deleted within hours of submission by Jimbleak, for reasons that I do not find satisfactory, but, based upon a very low level of experience, I tentatively assume his criticisms are indeed valid. I'd like to explore the criticisms compared to the submitted draft, but cannot find the draft anywhere. I'd like to recover the draft, understand and correct the errors, and resubmit it. How can I recover it?

Incidentally, Jimbleak said: "name is incorrect in the article title". The title was as above. What is wrong with it? Walticular (talk) 19:12, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Walticular: Your draft was deleted because it was unambiguously promotional. I can see why you would not find this reasoning satisfactory; however, the content of the draft gave the appearance of existing for no other reason than to promote the work of the subject. Even if that was not your intent, the draft was nevertheless far from being ready to submit for review, because it failed to establish any evidence of notability of the subject. Please see Wikipedia:Golden rule to get an idea of the kind of sourcing required. It is possible that WP:NPROF notability criteria also apply to this subject. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:32, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How can the draft that I submitted be viewed? It is difficult to really understand the criticisms when I cannot look at the draft. Also, how is the name in the article title incorrect? I intend to follow the suggestions made by the reviewers, but want to first understand exactly where I went wrong in this draft. Walticular (talk) 19:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Walticular Welcome to the Teahouse. The article was speedy-deleted for "blatant promotion," and it appears by your statements that it was not referenced with reliable sources either. I suggest you first read this guide, then start the article over from scratch, but use reliable, independent, third-party sources to write it, not the subject's own work and blog. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 19:32, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In case you cannot see my response to Anachronist, I asked how can the draft that I submitted be viewed? It is difficult to really understand the criticisms when I cannot look at the draft. Also, how is the name in the article title incorrect? I intend to follow the suggestions made by the reviewers, but want to first understand exactly where I went wrong in this draft. Walticular (talk) 19:55, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Walticular: Generally editors cannot view deleted pages. Because I am an administrator, I can. The suggestion by the reviewer was to improve the sourcing. Not a single source you cited meets the requirements summarized in Wikipedia:Golden rule. I further suggested above to look at WP:NPROF. Did you look at either of those links? The deleting administrator's deletion reasoning also referred you to WP:YFA, WP:RS, WP:COI, and WP:Notability (people) — all of which you should review before trying again.

The article title isn't really relevant; it can always be changed. The subject seems to go by "Vince Giuliano" rather than his full name, and we title articles according to the name the subject is commonly known.

Feel free to contact the deleting administrator Jimfbleak if you are serious about improving the draft, and he might restore it. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do not try again unless you have better references. A subject's blog or website, or a list of publications contribute zero toward confirming notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. Must have what people have published about him. David notMD (talk) 03:34, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The name is incorrect because (Scientist) is a descriptor not needed, as far as I know to distinguish him from any other Vincent Edward Giuliano on Wikipedia, and in any case "scientist" isn't a proper noun and shouldn't be capitalised Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:43, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If the draft is accepted, the Reviewer will fix the title. Focus on refs. No valid refs = no article. David notMD (talk) 12:39, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Would appreciate some takes on this. I reverted the addition of some unsourced family and community history to Shelley, British Columbia, but am concerned that the article as it stands contains a lot of sourced content (local newspaper) about named and non-notable people of the recent past. Looks like WP:OR. I'm having difficulty sorting the actually notable events and people from the run of the mill content. Article has been tagged for possibly too much detail for two years. Any views on what could or should be cut would be helpful. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 19:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tacyarg: It may seem extreme, but I would take an axe to the entire list of people, using the essay WP:WTAF as a reason. These are lists disguised as prose, but for lists, it is generally a good practice not to list things that don't already have their own standalone Wikipedia article. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:35, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tacyarg, the main author of that article obviously pored through the archives of a small town newspaper and added a stunningly large number of descriptions of trivial incidents. In my opinion, it is inappropriate and the vast majority of that content should be eliminated. Cullen328 (talk) 23:29, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would remove at least 90% of it. Though I hope that person volunteers at their historical society because wow. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 23:32, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DMBanks1 appears to be in the practice of adding huge amounts of perhaps trivial content to obscure Canada articles. David notMD (talk) 05:01, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's helpful. I have removed 66% of the page and linked to this discussion on the Talk page. There is probably room for further cuts and I have left the "intricate detail" tag in place. Tacyarg (talk) 13:05, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@David notMD: You raise an interesting point which merits a response. I cheerfully admit that the Shelley expansion made in my earlier WP endeavours was excessive. At the time, it was my best effort at having at least more than a stub as the only online resource. As for the response by another regarding the small-town newspaper, I should mention that Prince George is actually a city. According to WP, it was incorporated as such in 1915, but being WP, I cannot vouch for the date.

However, as to my more recent efforts, although one might consider some less significant places or cultures as obscure or trivial, it is probably not ideal to express that point of view especially when largely unfamiliar with the context. The challenge we encounter when addressing stub articles is that there is an indifference in WP to allow them to be merged into larger articles despite attempts that I have made to do so. In expanding many articles beyond stub status, one finds there is limited low hanging fruit to add. Consequently, such an expansion is likely to contain content which would never even make the first draft of a more significant subject.

That being said, where the WP article is the only online resource providing a meaningful overview of a location, readers prefer the specifics of a location rather than the generics of a region, a common problem with many such articles in the KnowBC subscription encyclopedia. Also, some specific content has been added because its ultimate purpose is to be a feeder link on other existing WP articles. Could some content have been excluded? Absolutely! The reason it made it to the final draft without deletion was because it contributed to a grasp of the flavour of the particular place and region during the various eras. Furthermore, what at first glance may appear to be an overkill does reveal a story for the reader who wishes to gain a clearer understanding.

Although I have never resided in the BC interior or belonged to any historical society, through WP involvement I have extensively emailed or had phone conversations with folk who reside or have resided in these places categorized as obscure. As a WP contributor, I believe that it is part of our duty to let their voices be heard. DMBanks1 (talk) 18:10, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Several experienced Teahouse contributors expressed opinions that there was far too much content. One then acted to do major cuts. A discussion on what belongs and what not could be taken up on the Talk page of the article David notMD (talk) 03:14, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Prior to the article being mentioned here at Teahouse, it had a median viewership of two per day. I am not saying that obscurity is reason to not make articles better, but still. David notMD (talk) 03:17, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@David notMD: I am surprised the readership was as high as two per day. I would expect 90% of the BC-related articles would envy such a viewership. Since senior editors are indifferent to culling the countless BC stubs, I can only assume they do not share your views on whether a personal perception of obscurity is a relevant factor. Perhaps they are swinging too far in the direction of the more enlightened view that WP should be encouraging articles that have no international significance but foster a local cultural identity. At the city library where I reside, the librarians consider that if a library book is taken out more than 10 times during its lifetime, that is exceptional.

I possess a fair working knowledge of various parts of the BC interior. Whenever I read WP articles on such places, mostly they are nothing more than a jumble of a few ideas, often with limited relevance to the location and containing a range of longstanding inaccuracies. Until there are contributors willing to research and expand these articles with accurate, cited information, people are not going to expect WP has credible content to offer. DMBanks1 (talk) 16:22, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

the wikipedia snazz line code from department of fun isnt working for me. please help Allaoii (talk) 20:20, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please ask a question in a way that others can understand what you're talking about. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:16, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Allaoii, welcome to the Teahouse. Are you talking about {{User:Listroiderbob/Snazz line}}? What's the problem you're having? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:03, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

its not working for me Allaoii (talk) 19:49, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Allaoii, you've already said that it isn't working for you - in order for someone to help, you'll need to be more specific. Is it not showing up at all? Is only part of it showing up? If only part shows up, which part is missing? Can you try it out somewhere - maybe in your sandbox - and then post a link here, so we can see for ourselves what's going on? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:55, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

none of it is showing up it just puts the code on my user page i tryd using sandbox it also dosnt work Allaoii (talk) 19:58, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Allaoii, I've placed the snazzy line at the top of your talk page, as an experiment and example. I can't edit your user page, since I'm an IP, so can you try copying the code I used to your user page, and seeing what happens? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:05, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

how do i get rid of the words? Allaoii (talk) 20:07, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Allaoii, the words are part of the template. You'd have to create a new template, without the words. This is a bit complicated - I'd recommend asking on the talk page (Wikipedia talk:Department of Fun, you've already been there, I see) how to go about it. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:10, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks Allaoii (talk) 20:14, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You need to use the source editor, or use the "Insert > Template" button. The visual editor doesn't expand template code. WPscatter ^t/_c 20:07, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia uses historical present when describing events in a fictional narrative. However, there are fictional narratives that many people believe are literal history because of religion (examples: the stories of Job from the Bible and Abinadi or Moroni from the Book of Mormon). How should we describe the details of these stories?

Assume that the topic matters primarily for some reason other than its disputed historicity. For example, we would probably describe a false conspiracy theory as a series of claims by real people rather than as a narrative. But the story of Job is not just a disputed claim of fact; it matters mostly for other reasons. Rscragun (talk) 20:42, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rscragun: It probably depends on the context in which the details are relayed. If the details are in a synopsis, for example, one would use present tense, just like a movie synopsis. Past tense would work too. Present tense is also appropriate to describe a detail with attribution, such as "The story of Job in the Bible describes how Job...(present tense description)." But past tense would also work, as in "According to the account in the Book of Mormon, Job...(past tense description)." I don't know the specifics of the article you're working in, but I'd say use whatever tense just seems the most natural without stating religious beliefs as facts in Wikipedia's voice. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:22, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My partner just passed and I want to write a Wikipedia article on him. He was a published architect working on embodied carbon in the built environment. I know people personally involved aren’t supposed to write articles, but it would mean a lot to me, and I have academic training in writing in a detached, objective style. Let me know if it’s possible. Lizcampbell22 (talk) 22:45, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lizcampbell22 Welcome to the Teahouse. While it's good that you recognize potential conflict of interest, the biggest consideration for new articles is whether the subject is notable enough for inclusion. I have no doubt your partner was talented in his field and made contributions. But many successful people don't have articles here, simply because there is not enough independent, reliable coverage of them out there in books, media, etc. I recommend you first read this small section and decide if you think you'll be able to provide enough sources. Feel free to ask about specific sources here. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 22:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lizcampbell22, I second what Pyrrho the Skipper wrote above; however, for notability criteria see also this small section. (An article on an architect needs to demonstrate that he satisfies either the general guideline that Pyrrho points to or any one of the four criteria that I point to, not both, let alone all five.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:32, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lizcampbell22. Before you start trying to create an article about your partner yourself or start trying to get someone else to create such an article on your behalf, I think you might want to take a look at WP:NOTMEMORIAL, WP:OWN, WP:LUC and WP:PROUD. You might see Wikipedia as a great way to introduce your partner to the world and perhaps even honor their legacy, but there's lots of things about Wikipedia that you might not be aware of. There can actually be a downside to being written about on Wikipedia and many persons find out too late that being written about on Wikipedia isn't exactly as great as they thought it would be. If your partner turns out to be Wikipedia notable so that an article may be written about them, it's going to need to be written in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. You possibly may be able to do such a thing yourself, but you might find it hard to avoid the article unintentionally becoming a kind of wikt:hagiography about your partner (i.e. focusing on all that's good about them but perhaps ignoring their flaws). Another person unconnected to the subject matter might be able avoid such a pitfall, but they in turn might not share your "vision" for the article and the end result may be something that you don't approve of. Wikipedia article content can include the good, the bad and the ugly about their subjects as long as it in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guideline, and neither you nor anyone else connected to your partner will have any final editorial control of the article. If your goal is to preserve the memory of your partner, then perhaps you might want to considered an WP:ALTERNATIVE way of doing so. On the other hand, if your goal is to have an encyclopedic article written about your partner (for better or worse) and your partner satisfies one of Wikipedia's various notability guideline like WP:BIO, then maybe ask about this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture and see if some of the members of that WikiProject might be able to help (1) assess your partner's Wikipedia notablity as an architect and (2) offer suggestions on how to best go about creating an article about your partner if they're deemed to be Wikipedia notable. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:48, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habiru has both BC and BCE, sometimes in the same sentence; in one of them BCE was changed to to BC recently. From a quick look at Teahouse archives I get the impression that the policy is to to use BCE rather than BC in articles like this. Is there a general policy about the use of BCE and CE rather than BC and AD? Presumably use should be consistent in all articles. Mcljlm (talk) 01:07, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can refer to this section for guidance. Hope that helps! Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 01:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That section doesn't appear to deal with my question, apart from "Use either the BC–AD or the BCE–CE notation consistently within the same article" which is logical.

Incidentally, I wasn't notified of your reply though I notified about totally unrelated Village pump and Teahouse page changes in threads to which I hadn't contributed. Mcljlm (talk) 10:59, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcljlm, the lack of a notification was due to the lack of a ping by the responding user. See WP:PING. --Quisqualis (talk) 23:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Quisqualis. Does that mean it's advisable to ping in most replies?

Since my original question hasn't been answered would it be better posted at WP:Village pump Mcljlm (talk) 17:17, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcljlm: Now that people can subscribe to talk page sections, pinging someone isn't needed as much to get their attention, but it's still useful to do so to make it appear as an alert () to differentiate it from notifications (). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:30, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcljlm, I believe you have been pointed to the advice at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Era_style regarding BC / BCE. If that material doesn't answer your question, you might want to post at the WP:Help desk --Quisqualis (talk) 20:17, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcljlm I think that section is all we have to refer to, so I think the answer is "pick one," and if there is a contextual reason you feel one is more appropriate than the other, let that be your guide. Otherwise flip a coin. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 20:25, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per MOS:RETAIN, the answer is 'use whatever the article originally used'. The article in question looks to have been using BCE / CE around when it was started. MrOllie (talk) 20:29, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We have a Turkish book dating back to 500Ad written in 600 B.C good binding book is about 2 inches thick 2001:569:7FBC:7E00:7102:360A:4F51:FCF (talk) 02:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Is this a question? If you are using this book as a source, please see H:REFB. Sarrail (talk) 02:59, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand any of this; the book was written in 600 BC but somehow dates "back" to 500 AD? Was it republished? The note about the binding makes me think the OP wants to put the book, whatever it is, up for sale. And the note about the thickness is strange... David10244 (talk) 04:36, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My draft got rejected and the reviewer stated: "Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format."

Can anyone here independently rewrite or help me rewrite the draft and move to mainspace? Thank you. মহিউদ্দিন শরীফ 1 (talk) 09:18, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hey মহিউদ্দিন_শরীফ_1, i've taken a crack at it (see my sandbox page); i definitely think the article will be worthy of publication once it is cleaned up. Feel free to correct and complete my notes, i will be back in a few hours to finish the article. Good luck! Fbrh47 (talk) 11:25, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - Declined is not as severe as Rejected. Good luck with the draft. David notMD (talk) 11:27, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Fbrh47, thank you so much. মহিউদ্দিন শরীফ 1 (talk) 17:45, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

it's just so i can improve my editing Redrhuadri (talk) 09:44, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Redrhuadri and welcome to Wikipedia editing. I note that several of your additions have been reverted for various reasons, so I'm glad you realise you need to slow down and do a bit of reading up on how editing works. I'll add a list of useful links on your Talk Page in a few moments. That will keep them handy for you in a way that putting them here won't, as the Teahouse sections get archived quite quickly. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please start by being honest in your edit summaries. You did not improve the grammar in this edit, but in your edit summary that's what you claimed you did. -- Hoary (talk) 11:22, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Practive making references in your Sandbox until they look good. No hyperlinks in body of article - only in an External links section.— Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs) 13:38, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On Pamela Ruskin I have added an image. In the infobox template I have added a caption which now appears under the photograph but again underneath outside the photo frame. It is entered only once in the template. Hasn't happened to me before. Can anyone assist please? Thank you Jamesmcardle^(talk) 09:47, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jamesmcardle I removed the |image_size=thumb parameter which is not needed and was causing the double caption. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:14, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Michael - genius! Jamesmcardle^(talk) 10:16, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone make an automatic tool to change the word "Pokemon" to "Pokémon"? I don't think there's ever a good reason to spell it incorrectly. I found page links that had it spelt wrong on the "What Links Here" part. ButterCashier (talk) 10:19, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blind searching and replacing of text is never a good idea. There may be quotations that use the "incorrect" spelling, or there may be a discussion of the different spellings, so your suggestion is not going to happen. However, I see no reason why you shouldn't search and correct the links manually. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ButterCashier The search needs to be done carefully but this one should give articles that use the word Pokemon but lack Pokémon. As advised, any changes would need to be done carefully. There are between 300 and 500 hits. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:27, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was not entirely aware how to search for things like that, thank you. The manual editing may commence. ButterCashier (talk) 13:36, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ButterCashier For future reference, bots and automatic tools that automatically fix spelling mistakes are forbidden due to issues around context, see WP:SPELLBOT. There are situations where misspellings should be preserved, e.g. in quotations, and there may be unexpected situations where the misspelling is actually correct. Also Help:Searching is worth a read if you get a minute, the Wikipedia search engine can do a lot of stuff (like looking for pages with certain templates, categories or wikitext). 163.1.15.238 (talk) 15:03, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed many of the misspellings. ButterCashier (talk) 15:04, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ButterCashier A significant number of those fixes weren't correct. In edits like these [1] [2] You've changed the title of the article being cited, but the original articles use e instead of é. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 15:23, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise and may attempt to revert some such errors o' mine. Thank you for informing me. ButterCashier (talk) 16:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, you made this error twice at List of Black Mirror episodes, ButterCashier, after being warned here by three separate volunteers that you needed to tread carefully. Since you are responsible for your edits (see WP:MEATBOT), I would hope that rather than that you "may attempt" to correct your mistakes, you will correct them. — Bilorv (talk) 19:39, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The German Wikipedia entry Lutz Kaufmann should also appear in the English version of Wikipedia. How does this work? Can I create a new (English) entry? Schirrawhu (talk) 10:54, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Schirrawhu, you are welcome to create Draft:Lutz Kaufmann, if you can demonstrate in this draft that Kaufmann is notable according to one or other of the criteria set by en:Wikipedia. However, I don't recommend that you do this until you have become accustomed to improving articles that already exist here in en:Wikipedia. Additionally, the first edit in which you translate from the German-language article should have an edit summary that makes it clear that what you are publishing is, or includes, a translation from there. -- Hoary (talk) 11:16, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Schirrawhu thanks for wanting to improve the English Wikipedia. I see that you were a major contributor to the German article but haven't edited much else. As Hoary said, our criteria for notability is likely to be much more stringent. The German article has very little cited to WP:SECONDARY sources WP:INDEPENDENT of Kaufmann. As to the technicalities, please read WP:TRANSLATE. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:22, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hello, my account was blocked, and I don't understand why 88.12.3.152 (talk) 11:12, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody here will either, until you divulge the name of the account. -- Hoary (talk) 11:18, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Talk Page of the account will have the reasons for the block and is the only place where it can be appealed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:24, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Teahouse Editors,

I am hoping to change Liz Truss's image on the article on the United Kingdom to Rishi Sunak. What is the proper image link so I can edit it? A1139530 (talk) 12:58, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- nevermind someone already did it

A1139530 (talk) 12:58, 25 October 2022 (UTC)A1139530[reply]

Fusa Miyake is a scientist who discovered the Miyake Events. These are spikes in Carbon 14 levels in tree rings.

Miyake Events is an entry on Wiki. But, Fusa Miyake does not have an entry. I don't know enough to create a page but perhaps someone else can. Edwin Hustead (talk) 13:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: 774–775 carbon-14 spike   Maproom (talk) 13:30, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Edwin Hustead Welcome to the teahouse. Her most highly cited paper appears to be doi:10.1017/RDC.2020.41 but the senior author was someone else. She was the senior author on doi:10.1038/nature11123, with ~390 citations according to Google scholar. Can you cite about three WP:INDEPENDENT sources about Miyake as a person, as distinct from the work done? If so then WP:NACADEMIC might be met and an article could be drafted. You could put the best sources here for us to make a judgement. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:36, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, here are some links about her and her work :

• A Q&A to her at APS
• Review at Phys.org about the article mentioned above
• Idem at New Scientist
• Idem at Scientific American
• As anecdote, she is mentioned in a study about vikings, at the New York Times and National Geographic

Also, she is co-author of a book about it (Extreme Solar Particle Storms: The hostile Sun, 2019). Cheers. Alexcalamaro (talk) 05:33, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexcalamaro The problem is always to show notability. For that, interviews are no good, except for basic facts, while paradoxically, "anecdotes" in main-stream newspapers/magazines may be fine. The New Scientist and Scientific American sources are brief but do seem WP:INDEPENDENT. There may be source in Japanese, too, if they can be teased out. Reviews of the book in reliable sources would also help. Would you be willing to start a simple draft? Then @Edwin Hustead could chip in either directly or via its Talk Page with more sources. Folks at WP:WikiProject Women in Red may be interested, too. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:26, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to do a draft. I originally found the name in an article in Archeaology today so I'll include that.

Should I just respond here, or to your e-mail, or somewhere else? Edwin Hustead (talk) 14:59, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Edwin Hustead The best thing to do is to use the WP:AFC process (see that link for details). This will create Draft:Fusa Miyake (currently a red link as the page doesn't exist). Then others can chip in. We like to be completely open about what we are doing, so rarely use email. The Talk Page of the draft will be a good place for discussions if you get stuck with anything and I'll keep an eye out for that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:37, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They're bad, but they're funny sometimes. Is it a bad thing to laugh at such? Slaythe (talk) 15:14, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Slaythe. You can laugh if you want, just as long as you revert the vandalism. Do not let vandalism remain just because you think that it is funny. Cullen328 (talk) 16:42, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Duh. Slaythe (talk) 17:10, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Slaythe And please do not accuse others of vandalism when you have no evidence they have done so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:13, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In full transparency, I work for Mayo Clinic and I am working to help Dr. Q with his page. I do not have wikepedia expertise and my primary goal is to remove the banner below.

This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. (May 2020)

How does someone go about doing this? Here is his the link to his page. Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa

Joshcortez30 (talk) 15:51, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Joshcortez30 Welcome to the teahouse. Please don't attempt to remove the banner, although that's technically easy. An experienced new-article reviewer, @Theroadislong has been working to revise that article today and would have removed it if that was justified (which it may be after he has completed work). Note that you must, under Wikipedia's terms and conditions, notify other editors of your conflict of interest. Please read the WP:PAID information for the steps you may need to take. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:09, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joshcortez, and welcome to the Teahouse. You begin by making the mandatory formal declaration of your status as a paid editor (see that link for details). You should also clarify which edits you have made to the article: I see you only created this account a few days ago, so presumably some of the edits by IP addresses were you.

You should not make any further edits to the article, but should instead make edit requests on its talk page. But, as another editor has said on the article's talk page, it really needs rewriting by somebody not involved.

Note that your primary goal is to remove the banner, but that is not Wikipedia's primary goal, which is to have a neutral summary of the independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 16:11, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thank you very much. I actually do not recall making any edits. I do not know this Physician personally but we do work at the same institution. His office called my office and asked for help. I The only reason that I have created a page is to find a way to get help on this specific issues. It sounds like @Theroadislong is editing and potentially may be able to remove if they see fit. If they do not see fit, what would my next step be?

I apologize if I am not following proper protocol this is all very new for me and very different than work I typically do. Joshcortez30 (talk) 16:18, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We would consider working on behalf of someone else at the same institution as you to be a conflict of interest, and if you are using work time or resources to carry out this editing then you are also effectively a paid editor, even if this is not formally part of your job description or a direct quid-pro-quo arrangement. I'll also add that if Dr. Quiñones-Hinojosa is concerned about COI/UPE tags being placed on the article about him, he should stop hiring people or haranguing his colleagues and/or employees into writing about him on Wikipedia. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:21, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that the account Doctorqmd (talk · contribs) edited the article extensively in 2012, so if not paid editing, certainly a COI tag is warranted until every edit has been examined and either removed or accepted. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:10, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am a paid editor and trying to request to add information to an existing stub article. I am gonig to do this through the Talk page but am not familiar with the format and how to add specific information to parts of the page. Can you please let me know how to request to add information to an already existing page? Amphitwrite (talk) 16:16, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Amphitwrite. Please read Wikipedia:Edit requests and follow the instructions there carefully. Cullen328 (talk) 16:28, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I am having is making the edit request on the Talk page because the format is in Source mode and I prefer to type in Visual mode. How can I switch to Visual mode to propose edits? Amphitwrite (talk) 16:34, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I am having is making the edit request on the Talk page because the format is in Source mode and I prefer to type in Visual mode. How can I switch to Visual mode to propose edits? Amphitwrite (talk) 16:34, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Amphitwrite. Thanks you for being open about your status as a paid editor. I'm afraid that the VE is not currently available on talk pages (see WP:VE#Limitations). ColinFine (talk) 16:43, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Amphitwrite (talk) 20:10, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Technically it is (you just change a part of the URL to force it to load the page in the visual editor) however it is not recommended as some things may not function correctly due to not being designed to work with the visual editor. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:15, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Amphitwrite, have you tried using the edit request wizard? Alternatively, clicking the "Start a discussion" button on the talk page, then switching to "Visual" above the editing box, should allow you to use visual editing mode. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:51, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I was looking at the page for Noninvasive prenatal testing or 'NIPT', after looking it up on google. This page is informative, but it seems to be lacking key features like a table of contents among others. Usually I see those template message things at the top of those pages, but I don't see one. I also don't know much about the topic, and I don't know the proper way to help the page out by sending it to the proper group, putting the template message, etc. Thanks so much! MatthewJenkins02 (talk) 17:32, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MatthewJenkins, and welcome to the Teahouse. The article has no TOC because there is only one named section in it: tables of contents are generated automatically once they would have four entries.

The article is already associated with a work group, the WP:WikiProject Medicine/Reproductive medicine task force, (as you can see by looking at its talk page), so I'm not sure there is much more you can do in the way of bringing it to anybody's notice. If you think there are appropriate tags from Category:Wikipedia maintenance templates, you are welcome to add them. Further, you are welcome to contribute to the article, either directly or by suggestions on the talk page; but of course you are not under any obligation to do so. ColinFine (talk) 17:57, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Colin, I appreciate the help! MatthewJenkins02 (talk) 18:25, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I need to refrence the website ctrsoccer.com but can't find the citation or know where to put it other than the bottom. Do I put it after the [refrence] or in it? Please help Krishnakalola24 (talk) 18:55, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Krishnakalola24, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you have more immediate problems - your draft has been nominated for speedy deletion due to being overly promotional. It is very much not ready to become a Wikipedia article. Please spend some time reading Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners, or perhaps you'd find Help:Introduction more useful. Before making a new attempt, I'd recommend first finding reliable, independent, secondary sources with significant coverage of your subject. If there are none, abandon the project. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:21, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok once I find a nuetral source and have nuetral language can you email me I'd like to send it over to you first if thats possible? Krishnakalola24 (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Krishnakalola24, not many Wikipedia users are willing to do things over email; it's better to keep discussions on-wiki. If you rewrite the draft with less promotional language and better sources, feel free to come back to the Teahouse and post a link to it, and folks here may give you further advice. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:30, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Wikipedia business, particularly content creation, should be on Wikipedia and publicly viewable by anyone. Email isn't the way we collaborate here. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:04, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. On the wiki article about October 25, i added the birth to Roy fox, because he wasn't there on the list. The edit i made was removed afterwards because I didn't "include any sources". But The information I got that he was born on october 25, was from the wiki article about him. What was I supposed to do? Jantabass (talk) 19:35, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jantabass Your addition has already been restored, thanks for improving Wikipedia. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:41, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and welcome! While it's true that citing Wikipedia sources within Wikipedia sources is not done (which I bring up only due to its tangential relevance), I think the editor who reverted your addition jumped the gun. His birth date is sourced reliably on his own page, so you shouldn't have to copy that source to every article that mentions him, as I'm sure you saw was the case with the other articles on that list. It's been re-added by someone else already. WPscatter ^t/_c 19:43, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am a communications professional working with a non-profit organization, Arthritis Foundation which exists as a resource to the one in four American adults who have been diagnosed with a form of arthritis, and 300,000 children with Juvenile Arthritis. Some of the information on the existing page is outdated or incomplete. I understand there are rules about who can update information. May someone from inside the organization do it? May I do it as an agent and communications professional? Or do we need to locate someone unrelated to Arthritis Foundation to do it. If the latter, where do I find an authorized writer? Thank you. Mary Gendron 917.340.1006. Mgendronaugustyn (talk) 19:42, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see here and here for guides on how to edit with a conflict of interest. You are discouraged from editing the page directly in lieu of making edit requests and allowing other editors to make it if they see fit.

Do note, though, that if you were to simply pay someone else to make the edits for you, that's still just as much of a conflict of interest—the reason these rules exist is so that the articles maintain a neutral point of view, and someone who is paid to add the things you want is really no different from adding them yourself. WPscatter ^t/_c 19:47, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All of this, plus I would add, @Mgendronaugustyn, that if the edits are just updating basic information, and you follow the above advice about making a COI edit request (which you can read about right here) there should be no problem and an editor will likely follow up if they see it. I will keep an eye out for it, too. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 19:52, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Will do. 2600:4040:A6C7:1700:1C6A:994C:3D32:AAAB (talk) 19:57, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - My name is Kevin McCrea and I manage professional recording artist Calvin Richardson. We need assistance updating the Influences Section by deleting the sentences below. If you have any questions, please contact me at (Redacted). Thanks.

...He also cites R. Kelly: "R. Kelly is somebody I really wanted to work with. He has run into some unfortunate situations as of late, but it doesn’t take away, for me, the greatness that’s there. I have always been impressed by his depth of creativity. When the opportunity was there, I didn’t do it. But he has always been someone I looked up to on the creative side."... Cre.kmccrea (talk) 19:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mr. McCrea, unfortunatly due to your close relationship with Calvin Richardson any edits you would make would be a clear conflict of intrest and go against Wikipedia's strict Wikipedia:NPOV rule. Also, definitely not a wise idea to advertise your phone number online. FishandChipper 🐟🍟 20:01, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @FishandChipperThe information currently posted needs to be removed for professional reasons. We are simply making the request to have some remove that please. Cre.kmccrea (talk) 20:04, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can't just remove something if you don't like it. The quote is well sourced and has no reason to be removed. Perhaps it would be best to advise Mr. Richardson on not making these remarks in the future if he wouldn't want to be quoted on them. FishandChipper 🐟🍟 20:07, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've just 86'd the entire section as practically a copyright violation via excessive quoting. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:07, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And it's now become something of an edit war... please take it to the talk page. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:10, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If so it's a patently foolish one, as the section was pretty much all quotes ripped from the same source (and it's trivial to prove that even without the copyvio-checker tool). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:19, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Quite true, and I can see valid arguments for removal (not including "it's professionally damaging", which, of course, is not really one of our concerns). Someone has already taken a stab at a rewrite, thank you Darth Mike! 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:25, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your assistance. That is greatly appreciated. Cre.kmccrea (talk) 20:13, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you able to remove it again, it looks like someone put it back, thanks. Cre.kmccrea (talk) 21:17, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cre.kmccrea, if you want to present a policy based reason for removal, please use the talk page, Talk:Calvin Richardson. Also, please declare your status as a paid editor per WP:PAID. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:19, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cre.kmccrea: I only removed it because of the excessive quotes. As the section now is, that issue has been addressed. I will say it again: we do not care about what your client wants. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 21:33, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jéské Couriano Thanks Jeske, but respectfully, this quote is misrepresenting the way it was redrafted as an Influence. Below is the original quote from the story which is discussed as someone to make good music. This is not an Influence.

Is there an artist or producer who you’ve always felt you could make great music with?

R. Kelly is somebody I really wanted to work with. He has run into some unfortunate situations as of late, but it doesn’t take away, for me, the greatness that’s there. I have always been impressed by his depth of creativity. When the opportunity was there, I didn’t do it. But he has always been someone I looked up to on the creative side. Cre.kmccrea (talk) 21:50, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That wording does as much to indicate he was an influence on Richardson's work than it does to say Richardson wants/wanted to collaborate with him. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 22:05, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Calvin Richardson - the item appears to be reliably sourced, and no reason for removal has been given. @Cre.kmccrea, please discuss this on the talk page, Talk:Calvin Richardson. I will remove some unsourced personal information from the article shortly, per our guidelines on WP:BLPs. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:05, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That sentence is cited to https://qcitymetro.com/2018/10/15/n-c-music-hall-of-fame-inductee-calvin-richardson-shares-highs-lows-and-inspirations/. That being said, that entire section verges on an excessive quote and needs to be heavily cut down, if not eliminated entirely. And we don't care about what your client wants. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:05, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cre.kmccrea: In order to comply with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure policy, could you please tell us if you work for/paid directly by Calvin Richardson? Or are you employed by an agency and he is a client? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:04, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hello people. I wonder if you can kindly offer tips at improving chances of being published? Richiebloomberg (talk) 21:03, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Richiebloomberg: People don't get "websites" here. See MOS:LAYOUT for starters. It shows how the sections of an encyclopedia article should be layed out. Also add an infobox; see Template:Infobox artist for usage instructions. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:12, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no requirement for an infobox; many editors (myself among them) believe that they degrade articles about artists (and many other subjects), as they give undue prominence to relative trivia and repeat what is anyway easily retrievable from decently written prose. The problems with this draft are elsewhere. It says very little, and much of what it does say is hard to understand. Example: his work features in numerous public collections such as The Last Tommy Harry Patch and Henry Allingham both veterans of WW1. "Features" means anything or next to nothing. ("Are in"?) And though this appears to give two examples of public collections, neither sounds to me like a public collection. Or again: Dan Llywelyn Hall became the 133 artist to officially paint a portrait of Queen Elizabeth II the portrait entitled Icon. Does "133 artist" mean "133rd artist"? What is the distinction between painting officially and unofficially? Et cetera. -- Hoary (talk) 22:32, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Richiebloomberg as long as you have reliable references give more details about Hall’s work, to help persuade a reviewer that the artist is notable.

Your 2013 The Guardian reference about Mr. Hall being the 133rd artist to paint the Queen states that the portrait was commissioned by the Welsh Rugby Union to mark the 60th anniversary of Queen Elizabeth’s coronation, and that the queen sat for him for an hour at Windsor Castle. Your 2020 BBC website reference states that a gallery in Bath bought the oil painting of Harry Patch, and that the portrait of Patch was displayed at the National Portrait Gallery in 2009, and was featured in a BBC documentary. And your Royal Collection Trust website reference states that Study of Henry Allingham: ‘The Last Volunteer’ was presented to Queen Elizabeth II by the artist in 2009. Instead of just writing “his (the artist’s) work features in numerous public collections” (which sounds vague, and could be referring to a small venue that only a dozen people ever visited) you should be specific and say his work was displayed at the National Portrait Gallery, and that he presented a sketch to Queen Elizabeth. Show that his work has been seen in impressive circles.

What other work has Hall done? Can you find referenced information on two or three other works that have been displayed to the public? Can you find a newspaper or magazine article about Hall, giving his date of birth, where he studied, or if he won any prestigious art awards? I would advise you to do a little more research on Hall, to help show he meets notability requirements. Karenthewriter (talk) 05:01, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Very kind of you to take the time to respond. We have edited the page a bit more now. I wonder if you might give it one final look!? Richiebloomberg (talk) 12:17, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Richiebloomberg I'm not a reviewer, but the draft has been improved, and looks more notable to me. In your Public collections section there is a .jpg that isn't showing and, unfortunately, I don't have the time to try and figure out what the problem is. Best wishes on your draft being accepted. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:23, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Teahouse. Relatively new editor (~200 edits in last month). First time editing Teahouse, hopefully I get this right (no visual editor available?)

I operate mostly in visual editor.

I find myself editing Wikipedia in the following fashion: 1. Find a reliable source like a newspaper, journal, or book. 2. Read through the source, follow the subjects in Wikipedia, edit the Wikipedia pages to add information from the source that may be missing from the articles.

So I find myself wanting to cite the same source but across multiple articles. I see how to re-use a citation from within the same article. Is there a way to re-use my "recently-used" citations? Is there a way to re-use a citation from another article? If not, any recommendations how I can request this feature from WMF? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vipavipa (talk • contribs) 22:35, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vipavipa, you might bring it up at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab), if anywhere. In your place, I'd simply write the reference within a text file on my hard drive, and copy and paste it when/where appropriate. I don't know how this is unsatisfactory: your proposal sounds like a lot of work for little benefit. As for how to edit the text file, many excellent text editors are "free", both libre ("free software") and gratis ("freeware"); I use Geany myself. -- Hoary (talk) 22:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Vipavipa welcome to Teahouse! A simple solution I use is finding an existing citation I like, changing it to edit mode (both visual/wikitext work) and then copying the citation I want. I can simply paste it in any future articles I want, so if I wanted to bulk insert it in 10 different articles, I'd past them all inside. No need for a text editor even. I do wish there was an easier way to copy a citation, without having to switch to edit mode though. Similarly, I wish I could drag text, and have it copy the wikitext for links, images etc.. easily ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:02, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoary @Shushugah

Your suggestions are most satisfactory, I was just too dimwitted to come up with them on my own. I've tested this method, works well enough for me! Thank you for successful cup of tea, I'm happy to close this (don't know how) Vipavipa (talk) 23:11, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I don’t know how to change my username color, I just want the highlights of my username to be pink (following hex #f743d9) Could one of you guys please do an easier step by step instructions? I would just want the background basically. And the word could be Ilikememes128. The reason why I am so confused is because my Dislexia is acting up right now. Thank you! have a nice day! Ilikememes128 (talk) 23:14, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ilikememes128, welcome to the Teahouse. Save the below in the "Signature" field at Special:Preferences, mark "Treat the above as wiki markup", and click "Save" at the bottom to get this signature: Ilikememes128 (talk). PrimeHunter (talk) 23:24, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[[User:Ilikememes128|<span style="color:#f743d9">Ilikememes128</span>]] ([[User talk:Ilikememes128|talk]])

I'm a high school English teacher with 6 years of experience in school project editing of WP. I noticed this year that our school's IP address has been blocked for "disruptive editing". It wasn't my students, that's for sure! How can I enable my students, who need to pass Wikipedia Adventure training before doing their edit/add project, to edit WP pages? I can provide the IP address that's blocked, if needed. Swim123blue (talk) 23:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Swim123blue: This link may help. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:23, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can I use sites like google maps for describing features, like rivers, especially if I use both? Mitch199811 (talk) 01:08, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mitch199811, Welcome to the Teahouse!

Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources:

Google Maps and Google Street View may be useful for some purposes, including finding and verifying geographic coordinates and other basic information like street names. However, especially for objects like boundaries (of neighborhoods, allotments, etc.), where other reliable sources are available they should be preferred over Google Maps and Google Street View. It can also be difficult or impossible to determine the veracity of past citations, since Google Maps data is not publicly archived, and may be removed or replaced as soon as it is not current. Inferring information solely from Street View pictures may be considered original research. Note that due to restrictions on geographic data in China, OpenStreetMap coordinates for places in mainland China are almost always much more accurate than Google's – despite OpenStreetMap being user-generated – due to the severe distortion introduced by most commercial map providers. (References, in any case, are usually not required for geographic coordinates.)

I can't really sum it up better than this. Hopefully this helps, and feel free to reach out if you have any further questions! echidnaLives - talk - edits 01:45, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, if I verify something with both OSM and Google maps, can I put it in an article? Mitch199811 (talk) 01:56, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mitch199811 Yes, you should be able to! echidnaLives - talk - edits 02:01, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to have link to ballotpedia embedded in my name link on 2022 TN House candidate page so users can click to find out more information about me like my competitors incumbent link.

how do I get this accomplished? https://ballotpedia.org/Kevin_West_(Tennessee) 2001:5B0:241B:6168:7495:AEA5:6DC0:CC0E (talk) 03:12, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure what you want, Kevin, but it doesn't seem to be related to Wikipedia. If it indeed is not, then you'll have to ask elsewhere. -- Hoary (talk) 03:18, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin, you managed to add the Ballotpedia URL next to your name, but I removed it, as it's not appropriate for Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:28, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. External links are rarely permitted within Wikipedia articles - see that link for details. You have a conflict of interest in editing that article, and should not edit it directly: rather you should make an edit request, and an uninvolved editor will choose whether and how to implement your request. ColinFine (talk) 11:00, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've been wondering what the rule is for pages of songs which were obscure upon their original release but had a much more popular cover version. I noticed that some of these are written as if they were only about the cover (with the lead infobox being about the cover), even though the opening sentence suggests otherwise. For example, Nothing Compares 2 U was originally written by Prince for The Family, but the article reads as if it were by Sinead O'Connor. Clearly, the version on which the article is centered isn't just the most popular version, as Respect is centered on the Otis Redding version, with the Aretha Franklin version as a subsection further down even though it's easily more popular. WP:NMG says that "[n]otable covers can have a standalone article provided it can be a reasonably-detailed article based on facts independent of the original", but these pages clearly aren't exclusively about the specific covers (using Nothing Compares 2 U as an example again, Prince's posthumously released solo demo version is included as a subsection), so what determines this? ForeverStamp (talk) 04:20, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ForeverStamp There is some interesting and relatively recent discussion about this at Wikipedia talk:Notability (music)/Archive 23#Really, a cover can never have an independent article?, which provides The Star Spangled Banner (Whitney Houston recording) and the covers of We Are the World done after the 2010 Haiti earthquake as examples of a separate article for a cover version of a song. Whatever consensus exists looks pretty shaky, but the general idea right now seems to be that cover versions should be folded into whatever "main" article there is for a song, with few exceptions. Shells-shells (talk) 06:34, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but if the original song isn't viewed as notable enough, should it only be mentioned? Girls Just Want to Have Fun is another example - is it correct the way it is or would it be better if the main infobox was about Robert Hazard's version and "Cyndi Lauper version" was a subsection? ForeverStamp (talk) 18:46, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hound Dog (song) may not be a "Good Article" (capitalized), but it strikes me as a very good article, dealing adeptly with the (stunning) original, a far better-selling cover, and various other covers. -- Hoary (talk) 07:16, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir/madam, recently I have translated a another language Wikipedia page into English using Wikipedia:Content translation tool (reason: the page was not available in English) and the page was reviewed and it was successful and the page got published in the mainstream. I have also added relevant English citations to the translated content rather than the other original language citations.
My doubt here is:
1. Does it lead to copyright violation for not giving credits to the person of the original language creator?
2. Am I supposed to reward credits to the original creator?
3. Am I actually required to take permission from the original creator before translating?
4. If I am supposed to give credits since I violated the rule, what is the remedy available for me now?

I am really worried since it was my first Translation. Please guide me, Thank you 456legend(talk) 08:51, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@456legend: you can put {{translated page|1=<language code>|2=<article name>}} on the talk page of the article. by the way, what page is it? lettherebedarklight〔晚安 おやすみ〕ping me when replying 12:44, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lettherebedarklight it is this page Teegala Krishna Reddy 456legend(talk) 12:55, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@456legend: you have attributed the translation in your edit summary, and that is sufficient. lettherebedarklight〔晚安 おやすみ〕ping me when replying 12:57, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lettherebedarklight Thank you too for the response. 456legend(talk) 12:59, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, 456legend. To understand what you're required to do when translating articles for publication on English Wikipedia, please see Help:Translation#License requirements. For what to do to fix situations where attribution wasn't given, see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia#Repairing insufficient attribution. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:50, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cordless Larry Okay Thank you for your reply, I have just done that. 456legend(talk) 12:58, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hello my page is made beautifully but i am unable to upload it cann u help me out its still in sand box User:Akshayparmar.gu/sandbox RASHID ZIRAK (talk) 09:06, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RASHAD ZIRAK Hello. Wikipedia is not a place to post your resume or tell the world about yourself. Please read the autobiography policy. If you meet the notability criteria, someone will eventually write about you- though an article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 09:38, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm creating a page on wikipedia for my first time about Sergei Varentsov, and I can't for the life of me figure out how to use templates. I'm trying to use a biography template, but it says that you have to substitute it. How do I substitute my content into the template? SherlockHolmes23 (talk) 09:37, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SherlockHolmes23: what template are you trying to use? lettherebedarklight〔晚安 おやすみ〕ping me when replying 12:37, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SherlockHolmes23: You are using VisualEditor. Most template documentation is written for the source editor. See Help:VisualEditor#Editing templates, or switch to the source editor to add a template. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:56, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I created a draft and then another copy paste article (that is wrong, I learned). Now what I have to do please? Can I remove the Article I created as e copy or I have to remove the Draft and to let the Article?? I am talking about ORDO Store. It has and a draft page also. P.S. I am a new editor on Wikipedia:-) Nrt0011 (talk) 09:56, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirming that you created Draft:ORDO Store, which was Declined and then Rejected, and also ORDO Store, which has been nominated for deletion. David notMD (talk) 10:27, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do not attempt to remove the article. The AfD process takes 7-10 days. At the end, an Administrator will decide to either keep or delete the article. David notMD (talk) 10:33, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good thank you @David notMD. So what about the draft page please? Nrt0011 (talk) 10:39, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nrt0011 What is your association with Gru088? 331dot (talk) 10:41, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was Rejected by a highly experienced Reviewer, which means that in that person's opinion, the draft (similar/identical in content to the article), has no potential to become an article. One option is to abandon the draft, meaning stop all editing. At the end of six months it will be deleted. I leave to others to explain a process for faster deletion. Separately, answer 331dot's question, as it is suspicious that Gru088, as a newly created account, has taken an active interest in your article. David notMD (talk) 10:51, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand you @David notMD and I have not any personal interest with this article. All this is because that was my seconde article I created and I really worked so much to edit and create it, to make it looks correct and collecting as much informations as its possible. For these reasons I would like if my work is in compatible with Wikipedia standards. @331dot I don't know anyone here I swear and also I don't know @Gru088. I don't know what this Editor have made and I don't know how to do this because I am new here and I don't know many things except editing articles and trying to add new articles. Nrt0011 (talk) 11:07, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nrt0011 It would be very unusual for a new account to find and edit an existing article at random. Is this article or draft being discussed off wiki somewhere? 331dot (talk) 11:19, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot Maybe there is anyone in interest with this one, I really don't know nothing about this. I have not share in any place outside Wiki this Article, never. Nrt0011 (talk) 11:24, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gru088 has been asked on Talk page why four of five edits in a new account are about ORDO Store. Separate from that, the article is heading toward deletion and the draft was Rejected, so I recommend stopping all efforts to create an article about ORDO, and move on to other topics. I also recommend that you use the AfC process rather than directly creating articles, until you have more experience and AfC success. David notMD (talk) 11:37, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

this is my family business and i wanted to edit something on it. it is on its job and without wiki. i just want to edit something was there. Gru088 (talk) 15:32, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i having problems submitting my article to the draft. Draft:Mile 17 - Wikipedia also it seems dificult to write an article need some help and also how to navigate Wikidata.

Ecobrown (talk) 11:03, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Mile 17 was submitted and Declined for lack of valid references. It appears to be an intersection on the N8 road, not a named town or city. David notMD (talk) 11:46, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently been reading about the policies of Wikipedia (eg. WP:BLP) , and I'd like to ask, is there a simplified version of the policies that experienced editors use? Dinoz1 (chat?) 12:37, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dinoz1 In my experience, delving into policies is a poor idea. You'll get much more of an introduction of what actually matters by adding this Teahouse to your watchlist and occasionally looking to see what others are asking about and being helped with. There is a tutorial you can access from Help:Introduction but I don't know whether it is any good as I haven't tried it. You will also get a lot of ideas about policies by looking at the Talk Pages of articles with many editors; in the case of living people, that would be almost any well-known politician. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:29, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Dinoz1 (chat?) 13:34, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Last week someone suggested I could post my links here for them to be checked for notability. Could someone please let me know if these 3 are strong enough for my article to be approved? Thank you.

[3] [4] [5] GlobalAaloo (talk) 12:57, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GlobalAaloo I assume this is in relation to WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1168#Buzz_words and the article is Draft:Center for Central European Architecture. @Tigraan was the one who suggested supplying the references. They all seem to be in Czech (?) which I can't understand; the second one asks me to log in, so is unhelpful! Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:19, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GlobalAaloo. The first one almost certainly does not help because as far as I can see it is about the two people, not about the Center. Furthermore, it is just short biographies of them, without a named author, so it must be presumed that it is not independent of them, and so is of limited use, and no use at all for establishing notability, either for them or for the Center.

The second one I can't read, for the same reason as Mike

The third one may possibly be helpful. But it appears to be mainly about a particular exhibition, with only a paragraph about the Center. Reading the Google translation, it looks to me very much as if that paragraph is based on a press release, and so is not independent. So, while bits of information from that article may be acceptable for an article, it does not seem to me to contribute to establishing notability. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only 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. ColinFine (talk) 16:17, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Teahouse reader,

I have submitted the article 'Radiosands' for review 6 months ago, and have been waiting 6 months for approval but there has not yet been a review. The same article has already been published in the German language here: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiosands I would be happy to link the English translation of the German page to the already existing German page. You can find the draft page of the English version here: Draft:Radiosands

It would be very helpful if the English page could be reviewed soon.

Many thanks for your work! Artandarchives (talk) 13:24, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Artandarchives Perhaps triggered by your post here, the draft has now been reviewed and declined. There are a few comments from the reviewer that you should take care to try to resolve before re-submission. Note that the draft has not been rejected and may well be capable of improving to the required standard. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:33, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the draft had been waiting 3 months (since July), not 6 months. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:13, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I want to know if you have an idea of a wiki-tool that can be used to monitor co-ordinated edits aside organisers using outreach dashboard & the Hashtag tool. Jwale2 (talk) 14:55, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jwale2 If you want to investigate suspected coordinated editing, there are tools such as this one. Otherwise, you may have to rephrase your question. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 16:14, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the OP is referring to an edit-a-thon or some similar (legitimately coordinated) event. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:33, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

this should be simple but I'm having trouble inserting an image into a biography page.

Advice? Candice Wilmore (talk) 17:13, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Candice Wilmore, welcome to the Teahouse. In order to be included, the image must first be uploaded either to Wikimedia Commons or locally to English Wikipedia. The image also must be compatibly licensed, or meet the WP:FAIRUSE criteria - most pictures you find on the internet are not. What image are you trying to insert, and where did it come from? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:20, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My wiki user talk page is User talk:Toreezy00, my Draft is Draft:Torikatelyn, I am reaching out because I created an article about myself as a singer, I including the links to my songs, and was told I need non primary sources, how can I find non primary sources on an article about myself? How is that possible? Toreezy00 (talk) 17:16, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Toreezy00 You are advised not to write an article about yourself, because it is nearly impossible to be neutral when writing about yourself. But more importantly, your article did not cite any sources at all. A non-primary source is like an article written about you, or a significant mention of you in a book. You'll need to add those to the article, if they exist. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 17:23, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Toreezy00: Please see WP:RS for detailed info about identifying reliable sources. But it'll be very hard and very frustrating trying to write an autobiography unless you have much more editing experience. As an example, anyone can create songs and link to them, or post YouTube videos. We need to show that someone working for an independent third party media outlet felt the songs and the musician were notable enough to write about. You'd be better off working on a less restrictive social media platform such as Facebook. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:51, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Toreezy00. To enlarge on what Pyrrho says above, articles in this encyclopaedia have to demonstrate that their subject is "notable", which boils down to sufficient material having been published about them by people unconnected with them in "reliable sources", which the article must "cite." This is because Wikipedia only summarises what has already been published elsewhere, so that everything in an article can be verifiable, at least in theory, by anyone who reads it.

Most of an article should consist of information summarised from independent reliable sources (which excludes their own or their relatives' and friends' social media, published or broadcast interviews with them, and publicity material released by their management or record label, for example). An individual's personal knowledge about a subject (whether it's themself or somebody else) that hasn't been published can never be included in an article, because it can't be verified by readers. Also, if the subject is still alive or only recently dead, the more stringent rules of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons apply to the article, for their own (and their relatives') protection and privacy.

For a singer, the particular requirements for notability are covered WP:Notability (musician). The vast majority of singers and other musicians in the world have not been sufficiently written (or broadcast) about to meet these requirements (although some may do so in the future as their career progresses – see WP:Too soon).

So: are there at least three separate pieces each of at least several paragraphs (or equivalent) that have been written or broadcast about you in newspapers, magazines, journals, books, programmes, or similar "reliable sources"? If so, their contents can be summarised in different words – except for short, marked quotes (to avoid copyright infringement) – to form the basis of a draft article, which can then be built on by adding further material from other similar sources, all of which must be cited. If not, then regrettably it's probably too soon for a viable Wikipedia article about you.

Remember (or be advised) that Wikipedia forbids promotion of any kind, which is another reason why articles about singers, musicians and other artists are almost never successfully written by themselves or anyone directly connected with them. Remember also that the subject of an article has no control over its contents and is strongly diiscouraged from editing it directly (except for totally uncontroversial facts), so anything reliably published about them can be added to it even if it is not to their liking.

I hope all this is helpful, and good luck with your career – if it continues to be successful, sooner or later someone else will undoubtably want to write a Wikipedia article about you. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.212.157.244 (talk) 20:15, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I recently revised the Delivery Solutions page and was wondering if someone could take a look and let me know if they think it is good to publish? Or if there is more revision needed? Thank you so much! Draft:Delivery Solutions Carolinecllw (talk) 18:59, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Carolinecllw It looks like it was deleted for blatant promotion, so no, it was likely not "good to publish". I recommend you check out this page for more information on why that might be. Hope that helps! Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 19:24, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WIkipedians,

I'm working on improving the article for The Mac Weekly student newspaper. It was deleted in 2018 because it was very short and deemed not notable enough.

My rewrite was just re-deleted because it didn't contain enough secondary sources. I've since added some, could someone review it and give me feedback before I try publishing again? It's in my sandbox, I'm not sure if/how drafts work: User:Sockwell162/sandbox.

Also, there are a lot of sources for the notable alumni section, most of which are from the paper's archives. Is this ok? If not, what should I change?

Thank you. Sockwell162 (talk) 19:45, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sockwell, and welcome to the Teahouse. It would be surprising if a student newspaper had garnered enough attention in reliable independent sources to establish that it was notable. I haven't looked at your multifarious sources in detail, but I notice that a good number are citations to the paper itself. Not one of those is capable of playing any part in establishing notability. Most of them should be removed, and any information sourced to them removed from the article (See WP:PRIMARY for the very limited kinds of information which can be sourced to primary sources). Looking at a couple more - the Scarlet and Black is a student newspaper, so unlikely to be regarded as a reliable source and in any case the article doesn't say very much about The Mac, and what it does say based on an interview with The Mac's editor, so it is not independent. The ACP reference merely mentions the paper, and cannot contribute to notability. Alumni are neither here nor there - notability is not inherited. I haven't looked further.

The very first step in writing an article - without which it is likely that every single minute put into the article has been wasted time - is to find several sources, each of which meets all three of the following criteria: 1) the source is a reliable source; 2) the source is independent of the subject - neither the publisher, not the writer, is associated with the subject, and it is not based on a press release or interview from the subject; 3) it contains significant coverage of the subject. If you have three or more references which satisfy all these conditions, please point us at them; otherwise I recommend you don't spend any more time or effort on this. ColinFine (talk) 20:33, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sockwell162, in addition to what Colin Fine has explained, my impression, having edited the article, is that the Weekly is not much different from the average student newspaper, most of which strive diligently for their own level of notoriety. --Quisqualis (talk) 21:54, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am writing a bio article for an academic.  I submitted the article, and it was rejected because my sources were not "reliable".  I asked why, and was told because they were connected to the subject of the bio.  So they told me one thing I could do is use Google Scholar to find articles he has written, and to see how many times they were cited.  He had over 100 scholarly articles published, and I did the search and they all came up, and I can see that each of them was cited many times by others.  I'm writing to ask how I can use this in my article in such a way that it's accepted.  Can I provide a link to the search results generally?  Or, so I have to just provide links to individual papers?

ElvisTheMan (talk) 20:38, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Hoping to get some advice on how I could get my page accepted. Can anyone help out?

Thanks so much!

Lucas Lucasgorelick (talk) 21:30, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are zero "pages" on Wikipedia, only articles on notable topics, there is nothing in your draft to suggest that you are notable yet sorry. Theroadislong (talk) 21:39, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lucasgorelick: Please be aware there is no such thing as your page in Wikipedia. If your draft is ever accepted it will become the Wikipedia's article about you. You'll have no more rights to it and no more control over its contents than any other editor. Please see WP:OWN and WP:5P. --CiaPan (talk) 21:53, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi..I edited my Edit Notice. But it still shows the previous one. Is there any way to refresh it. Eagle Site (talk) 22:15, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Purge or bypass your browser cache. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 22:42, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Eagle Site: It will look the same - you changed the link it goes to, not the visible text. But if that's not it, then per above, visit [[6]] for Chrome. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:44, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]