Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1032

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1025←Archive 1030Archive 1031Archive 1032Archive 1033Archive 1034Archive 1035

Using the article's talk page as a draft page

May I know if this is allowed? Shouldn't this be done on the user's sandbox? I think this might cause confusion to some.   Sub |HMU  16:30, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Subwaymuncher, I just made a few BOLD edits. Guess we'll see what happens next. Cheers! Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 16:54, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
@Usedtobecool: Much better! Thank you!   Sub |HMU  17:07, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Subwaymuncher, there are actually very strict rules about editing other people's comments. I think my edits are allowed exceptions under the spirit of community guidelines if not strictly the words. But, I'm not really sure. That's why I called it a BOLD edit. So, we'll indeed have to wait and see whether I get in trouble for that. Do read WP:TALK and write what you think. It is an interesting read, if a little too "succinct" for my liking. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 17:20, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Usedtobecool, while the guideline says it's purpose is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article, it also says under Share Material that New material can be prepared on the talk page until it is ready to be put into the article but I'm not sure if that applies here. So yeah, I guess we'll just have to wait.   Sub |HMU  19:49, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
@Usedtobecool and Subwaymuncher: If the materiel had been a proposed draft for a new version of the article, or a section to be added to it, it would have been fine and should not have been deleted. It would have been reasonable to archive it rather than just delete it, but it is all available in the history. I added a short note to explain what had been removed and provide a diff showing the removal. In future, this is a good idea in such cases at the time of the initial edit. It lets other editors know wha tis going non, and allows anyone who wants the content, perhaps for a new draft page, to find it more easily. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:20, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

How can i add a background of Nolan Hilard aka starflashdude if it won't let me?

my article got deleted because I added advertisement to my background by telling what is instagram is. I didn't mean it to advertise, I meant it to say it so people can see who he really is if people didn't know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SavageBoyBack (talk • contribs) 03:02, 15 November 2019 (UTC) \

Hello, SavageBoyBack. I suppsoe this is about User:SavageBoyBack which was deleted as promotional. There are several issues here:
  1. your user page is to introduce you as a Wikipedia editor. It is not a place to tell the story of your life, nor to draft an article.
  2. Wikipediua strongly discourages posting autobiographies that is articles or other pages about oneself.
  3. If an article is to be written about a person (or any other topic) that person must be Notable that means the person must have had multiple independent professional published (not blogs or fan sites) reliable sources that disscuss the person in some detail. Without this, there just cannot be a valid Wikipedia article.
  4. All articles must be factual in content and neutral in tone, neither promoting mnot attacking anyone or anything.
  5. Oh and there is no "it" here, an expriened human editor determined that the page you created should be deleted.
I hope that clarifies things a bit. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 03:56, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism

There is a fraudulent reference that looks genuine but links to inappropriate content. I deleted one reference and did a search and found five similar links. Can someone give me assistance. Anthony Staunton (talk) 00:41, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello Anthony Staunton. Is this on William Napier (VC) ? It always helps to provide a link to the article of interest. I will take a look. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:09, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
@Anthony Staunton: Is it vandalism or just WP:LINKROT where a previous good link was taken over? Also, we can't help you unless you tell us what problem you found and on which articles. RudolfRed (talk) 01:10, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
RudolfRed it looks like link rot, or more precisely link usurpation, to me. See my recent edits to both William Napier (VC) and Talk:William Napier (VC). Anthony Staunton, did that deal with the issue that you found? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:28, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
I think 'link usurpation' is the best description. I will delete the five other examples. Anthony Staunton (talk) 04:23, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Please do not simply delete usurped links, Anthony Staunton, instead replace them with archived versions if these can be found, as I did in this case. I only deleted the one in the External links because it duplicated a site that was cited as a source. Se WP:DEADLINK for more on this topic. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 04:28, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

uploading historic photos owned by me

Greetings, I was hoping to upload some photos to C-5 (blimp) that were taken by my grandfather of this airship in 1919 but it will not allow it as it seems to think I don't have copyright. How can these be uploaded? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diggerdoog (talk • contribs) 05:11, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Diggerdoog and welcome to the Teahouse. You may have copyright, if you are your grandfather's sole heir. But there is no way for Wikipedia (or commons) to know that this is true. What you should be able to do is upload, selecting one fo the CC (creative commons license tags or possibly the PD-old tag. and then send email to [email protected] mentioning the file name and explaining the situation, including the text from Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for details. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 05:25, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Oh and by the way, images are not uploaded to an article. They are uploaded as files, and then used (linked to) in an article, see Help:Pictures and Wikipedia:Uploading images for more details. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 05:30, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Note also that only autoconfirmed users may upload to the english-language Wikipedia, and you are not yet autoconfiremd. However this restriction does not apply at the Wikimeda commons (see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard). DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 05:37, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

ComicbookDB.com shutting down

There are about 4,500 articles which include links to comicbookdb.com (mostly using the "comicbookdb" template). This site has announced that it is shutting down as of 16 December 2019.

What is the best approach to mitigate the effect of this?

A few points:

  • Most of these pages are probably available on the Wayback machine.
  • I presume that IAbot won't be smart enough to work on pages where link is done using comicbookdb template.
  • Some pages on comicbookdb.com are restricted, meaning you have to get a login, which is currently done easily, but these pages will not be available on the Wayback machine.

Fabrickator (talk) 00:23, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

When it shuts down, there may be a bot or automated process (i.e. AWB user) that will add the URL links as dead and provide an archived version. It has not shut down yet, so you should probably archive a version of it (most efficiently on archive.org) and wait from there. If the link still displays as active after the 16th of December, the best thing would probably be to contact a bot owner, AWB user, or manually do them yourself. In a nutshell, you should wait until December 16 until you classify the links as dead. dibbydib 💬/✏ 01:11, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
However, Fabrickator, |archive-url= and |archive-date= can be added starting right away, which will reduce the effort and delay when and if the site shuts down, and make it easier to verify that the archived content matches the current valid content. Would you agree, Dibbydib?
Template link: {{comicbookdb}} DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:34, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
@Fabrickator: WP:URLREQ is the best place to post about this. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 07:27, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Asking requests on your talk page

If I create a new section on my talk page then write a request, will somebody see it and reply?Prana1111 (talk) 23:35, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello again, User:Prana1111. If you use {{Help me}} in your request, then someone should see it and respond. If not, than quite possibly no one will respond, unless someone is watching your talk page. Alternatively you could WP:PING one or more active editors. Such editors would be likely to see the notification, but there is no guarantee that any would respond. Or you could post about the issue here, where many experienced users are pretty much certain to see it. If the issue concerns article content you could post on the article talk page, possibly attracting editors interested in that article. You can use {{Help me}} on an article talk page also, thus having two chances of attracting help. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:45, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
@Prana1111: Your talk page is generally a place for other people to initiate contact with you. To contact others, where to go depends on the subject, for which DES gave some examples. Also available are the Help desk (kind of like the Teahouse), Village pump for general discussions, WP:VPT for technical issues, and WP:ANI to reach admins (use sparingly!), to mention a few more. There are others listed at Help:Menu/Asking questions, too. It's always a good idea to read the page first to get an idea if you're in the right place. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 07:39, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

IP block help!

Some kids have vandalized Wikipedia At my school, resulting in an IP ban, and for some reason, because I live near my school, the ban has taken effect at my house, why is this? Gumshoe97 (talk) 23:05, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Gumshoe97 Are you editing from a different location at this time?(as you couldn't have made the above post if subject to an IP block) Do you use the same ISP or computer network as your school? 331dot (talk) 23:30, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes Gumshoe97 (talk) 00:46, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Gumshoe97 I will take that to mean 'yes' to both questions. If you are using the same computer network as the school when at home, then you will be affected by a block on the school's IP. You could try to request unblock and explain your situation, though there are no guarantees as we only know which network you are using, not where you physically are located. I'm not sure if you could get an IP block exemption or not. 331dot (talk) 08:49, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Missing addition

Hi, I recently added the name Zachary Sim to the list of Australian child actors, as he is my friend, but he recently passed away in November 2019 and now I can't find his name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HunterGetsHunted (talk • contribs) 09:37, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

HunterGetsHunted Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I am sorry for the loss of your friend. According to the article edit history, your addition was removed because the subject does not yet have a Wikipedia article. List articles are not for listing every possible member of the list, only those that merit Wikipedia articles(this ensures that everyone in the list meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability). If your friend meets Wikipedia's definition of a notable actor and you have independent reliable sources to support it, you are welcome to create one; you can use the Article Wizard to help. 331dot (talk) 09:53, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Who writes the articles about politicians and government officials?

Hi, I want to know Who writes the articles about politicians and government officials? or do Politicians ask their PR team to it done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akashvaa (talk • contribs) 10:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

@Akashvaa: - these articles, like all articles on Wikipedia, are written by various volunteers most of whom are anonymous. Some editors may particularly focus on writing about the politicians of a particular country or region, but there is no set person or team who writes all the articles. Broadly speaking, anyone can write and contribute to articles about politicians although as they are often the subject of vandalism, some may have restrictions on. It is possible that politicians also ask their PR teams to write/edit their articles and no doubt this has happened in the past, but it is a serious conflict of interest and strongly discouraged by Wikipedia. Generally other editors will spot when an article is being written in a promotional way, and will edit it to be balanced. Hugsyrup 10:39, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

I want any contributor

I want anyone to write an article about my constituencies MLA Jalandhar North Assembly Constituency [1] Avtar Singh Junior (Bawa Henry) as He is the first time MLA and no one has created an article for him! I could have written but I'm not that experienced in writing a Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akashvaa (talk • contribs) 11:38, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Akashvaa, there are many subjects that deserve an article but haven't got one because noone has gotten around to it. This is especially true of countries like India. If you can not write it yourself, you'll just have to wait for someone who can to get to it. You can also add a request for the article at WP:Requested articles. But that's about all, since this is a volunteer project. Regards! Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 12:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Akashvaa, if you'd like to give it a try yourself, you can try your personal sandbox (link is at the very top, probably in red) or you can start a WP:Draft. There are tutorials and editors to help you with it. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 12:23, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

I have copied a photograph from the web. https://thumbnail.myheritageimages.com/288/193/288193/500/500004_321803m8c23zy5h0g1ai82_C_398x570.jpg It derives from the web site https://www.myheritage.com/search-records?action=person&siteId=288193&indId=1000037&origin=profile. Am I right in assuming that I cannot add it to my draft AfC, even though the subject of the photo died in 1901? Also, would the source be acceptable in terms of reliability? BFP1 (talk) 15:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)BFP1

Hello again, BFP1 a photo does not need to derive from a source which would be reliable for citation as long as it is reliable enough that we can trust thait it is not faked or mis-described, and I think this source is at least that reliable. If the photo was published before 1901, or indeed before 1924, it is public domain under US law. Since it was taken before 1901, there is a reasonable chance (but no certainty) that the photographer died before 1950, and so the photo would be PD in all countries which use the life 70 rule, that is most countries. I think it might reasonable be uploaded to commons with a claim of PD due to age. If commons objects it could probably be used on en.Wikipedia under a claim of fair use, but tht can't be done while then page is in draft status. There is no ciopyright claim on the source page, but that is not definitive. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:43, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
Dear DESiegel, Thank you for your reply which I have just discovered. It is much appreciated. I will try uploading the photo to Commons. If it is successful I will not add it to the draft, but wait and see if it is accepted. I'll give feedback. Regards BFP1 (talk) 17:01, 11 November 2019 (UTC)BFP1
It has been blocked. In case I have made some mistake in the procedure, I have copied the question to the Commons Help Desk. Regards BFP1 (talk) 18:16, 11 November 2019 (UTC)BFP1
This is the reply I received. 'Hey BFP1. Unfortunately, without additional information it's hard to say. Wikimedia Commons does allow upload of very old images where the date of publication and the author are unknown, but in order to meet this the image must be at least 120 years old. Since we know only that the image was created 1901 or earlier, this image falls short of that by a couple of years. If we could find the source for the image in the site you reference, we may be able to adjust that, and demonstrate that it is suitable for upload here. GMGtalk 18:22, 11 November 2019 (UTC)' As I can't verify an earlier date for the photo, could you direct me to where I could check/get guidance on the fair use option? Sorry to be such a nuisance. Regards BFP1 (talk) 21:17, 11 November 2019 (UTC)BFP1
I've found the guidance I needed. Thanks BFP1 (talk) 17:07, 12 November 2019 (UTC)BJP1
@BFP1: BTW, on a totally cosmetic note, you don't need to type your username after the ~~~~; that's apparently why you're getting the duplicated name. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 02:49, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
​​ Good grief, 120 years? Given that William Oliver lived in England and there's no record of him travelling outside the British Empire, can't we assume that British copyright law applies? (The man in the photo doesn't seem over 77, I'd guess it was likely taken before 1899, but that's a separate argument.) I wish there was some way to get in touch with R. Oliver, who presumably uploaded the photo to My Heritage, to find out more (not just for copyright but also authenticity). Pelagic (talk) 20:10, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
@Pelagic and BFP1: since Wikipedia is, in effect, published in the US, US copyright law always appliues, but Commons wants content that is free of copyright everywhere. In this case, UK law is as much of a problem as US. The photographer, not the subject, owns the copyright unless specific arrangements to the contrary are made. Thus under UK law, copyright lasts for the life of the photographer, plus 70 years, not the life of the subject plus 70. If the photographer was young, say 20, in 1900, s/he might have lived another 60 years or more, dying in 1960 or later. 70 years after that is is 2030. Under US law if the photo was published before 1924, it is now in the public domain. But if it was never published, it could have a copyright of 120 years from the date of its creation. The editors on Commons take a cautious approach, particularly when the source and copyright holder are not known. This might be uploadable to en.wikipedia as a fair-use image. (Commons does not accept fair use, because not all countries recognise it, it si a strictly US legal concept.) But that will ahve to wait until the page is out of draft. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:40, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the interestng discussion Pelagic and DESiegel. If the page gets out of draft AfC I will try the fair use route. Thank you also from AlanM1 BFP1 (talk) 16:26, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Yes, @DESiegel: is correct here. The two dates that most frequently matter for the purposes of copyright are the date of publication and the date of death of the author (not necessarily the date of creation). There are a number of scenarios where these could be irregular in a way that means that even very old images would still be covered under copyright, where they normally otherwise wouldn't be. The 120 year mark is the community accepted "good enough" standard for Commons, in the case there is simply no other information available about the media. Even then, this content may be subject to deletion in the case that additional information became available that called into question the copyright status of the work. GMGtalk 14:28, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Editing my university unit's page

How do I go about getting content updated on my university unit's page? The content is very much out of date and contains errors. I made the newbie mistake of trying to update it myself, and of course was quickly busted and blocked! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.207.130.28 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

To edit any Wikipedia page, you need to have sources that show why you are editing. I don’t doubt that the edits you made were true, but you need to provide a source that is scholarly that shows those edits. I hope this helps.Elijahandskip (talk) 15:02, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello IP editor. You could post a suggested change, allong with citaions to appropraite sources, to the talk page of the article where you want the changes made. Then add {{request edit}} and an experienced editor should respond and try to help. Be sure to be clear what changes you are suggesting and to have reliable sources listed. Otherwise it may well be that nothing will be done.
Also, if you were actually blocked please do not just edit logged oout, make an unblock request instead. The bock message should describe exactly how to do that. (Sometimes people get a warning such as "If you do X again you may be blocked." and mistakenly think that they are actually blocked. Sometiems people are blocked for a limited time and do not realize that the block has expired.) DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:09, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Article quality assessment

Can someone tell whether Special Group (India) meets B or C class criterion for Wikiprojects Military History and India? The article covers all aspects of the topic. Since I created it, will doing it myself considered biased?— Vaibhavafro 💬 14:26, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Not a good idea to do it yourself. The editor User:Yoninah created the current ratings in early October. You could ask for a reassessment. David notMD (talk) 16:51, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Follow-up to 2019-20 winter

Someone Start Working On 2019-20 winter soon — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProGamerYT676 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

I have been working on an article over Winter Storm Bessie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Winter_Storm_Bessie_2019 I am going to make articles for any weather event notable enough. Read up above to see my post on winter storm Bessie.Elijahandskip (talk) 16:47, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Model would be 2018–19 North American winter. David notMD (talk) 16:59, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Creating a Page that was deleted

I have submitted content on XinFin Hybrid Blockchain last year and due to the template, I had to delete it and now no content on XinFin is able to publish. Everything is getting rejected. I have made a document and list of reference links for XinFin separately, so I need someone who can help me to publish the page on XinFin in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nadar Suresh (talk • contribs) 14:53, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Nadar Suresh, and welcome to the Teahouse. Draft:XinFin has not yet been submitted for review. If it were submitted and reviewed as it now stands, i am confident it would be declined. It has no cited inline sources. it has a great many URLs listed under "References" but no indication of what part of the article each supports, and they would have to be followed even to guess which ones are reliable sources. It would be much better to cite inline a smaller number of high-quality sources. Each should be independent (no press releases or cites to the topic's pown site, or to people who are closely involved with the project), each should be reliable (no blogs or fan sites or self-published sites or sources) , each should discuss the topic in some detail. If a reviewer has to look though 17 web links with no metadata, s/he is likely to move on and review soemthign else instead.
Also the long bulleted list in the "History" section is a poor idea. Please have fewer items but explain each one in more detail, limit to the more significant events, please, and provide dates if possible. Each item should be supported by a source if possible.
I will return to discuss the former deletions of related articles. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:29, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
{*{U|Nadar Suresh}} The article XinFin was tagged for deletion under G11 (promotional) and G12 Copyright issue. Before an admin could revei3w this and decide whether or not to delete under either of those grounds (and a fair number of such requests to delete are declined by the reviewing admin) you added a tag for G7 (Author request) and it was deleted on that basis. You were not required tto do that. Ther is no ban on the recreation of an article about XinFin, provided that it does not use copyrighted content, is not excessibvly promotional, and can demonstrate notability. (More to come.) DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:23, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
So be careful going foeward. Do not simply copy from a web site or othe copyrighted source, and be careful to be neutral and factual, not promotional. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:17, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Changing the username

Hello, I want to change my username and set a new one. Could anyone tell me how I can do that in simplest way? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhi179 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Abhi179, welcome to the Teahouse. Since you don't have very many edits so far, it might be simplest to just make a new account and leave this one behind (see Wikipedia:Clean start). You can request a new user name though, if you like. There are instructions at Wikipedia:Username policy § Changing your username and further instructions at Wikipedia:Changing username › Mortee talk 17:16, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
To add, a rename request by an account with very few edits will most likely be declined. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 17:21, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Notability Question/Debate

So this Teahouse post is more of to get others reaction and reasoning on why this article is notable (Deserving it's own article) or why it is not notable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Winter_Storm_Bessie_2019

I will give my points on why it deserves it's own article. Winter Storm Bessie effected a good amount of the United States for days in a row. It also received national coverage. I know not every storm is notable, but receiving national coverage on multiple sources, in my opinion, push it over the notability line.

Please feel free to comment and leave all opinions below. Elijahandskip (talk) 14:52, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

The draft has been submitted, but not yet reviewed. In its current form it will be declined, as there are references, but no connection between the references and the content of the draft. Independent of the status of the draft, a reviewer may be of the opinion that the topic itself is not notable. Any discussion here at Teahouse will have no impact on the reviewer's decision. Best path is to continue to improve the draft and hope for the best. David notMD (talk) 16:55, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Elijahandskip If the storm really was notable, it should be possible to write more than two one-line paragraphs about it. In any case the references should be used inline to support statements in the draft. If a reviewer questions notability, evidence of continuing coverage, beyond the days that the storm was active, would be significant. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:30, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

How to translate a draft into an article

Hello, how do I change this draft (Draft:Samarkand economy and service institute) to an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olimbek zayniddinov (talk • contribs) 01:54, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys, I'm Olimbek Zayniddinov. I've submitted a Draft:Samarkand economy and service institute, This draft is written about one of the institutions of Uzbekistan, How do I post a draft to an article?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olimbek zayniddinov (talk • contribs) 07:08, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Olimbek zayniddinov, and welcome to the Teahouse Draft:Samarkand economy and service institute is not even close to being redy for the main article space. There are several problems whoch would need to be fixed. Specifically:
  • The draft currently cites no sources at all. To be a valid article, there should normally be multiple independent professionally published [[WP:RS|reliable sources (not blogs or personal sites, and not the institutes own sites, and not based on press releases) that each cover the institute in some detail. This is the main way to establish notability. See our guideline on the notability of organizations.
  • The second paragraph of the lead section of the draft seems to be just a list, in prose form, of the topics the institute covers, with no detail. This is not helpful.
  • The sections "Faculties" and "Departments" are just numbered lists with no details of what these do or how they are organized. If there is no more than this to say about them, leave them out.
All these issues would need to be corrected before the draft could possibly be approved. If it were moved to the main article space without review, it would likely be moved back to draft or deleted. Please don't submit this for review before fixing the above, especially the source issue. It would only waste the time of all involved.
Please read all the linked pages above. Please also read Your First Article and referencing for Beginners if you plan to work on the draft.
I note that your account has made no edits to this draft, but Ozaynddinov has made several. Is that perhaps another account of yours? If it is, please see Using Multiple Accounts
I hope this is helpful to you. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 08:08, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I have edited this article: Draft: Samarkand economy and service institute, but it has not changed when the article changes. Sorry if my questions are inappropriate — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olimbek zayniddinov (talk • contribs) 11:14, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

The draft is still totally devoid of references, so would not be suitable to be published as an article. It is also overlinked. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:21, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Can I create a new article by deleting this project (Draft: Samarkand economy and service institute)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olimbek zayniddinov (talk • contribs) 11:30, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Please don't keep creating a new section on the same subject. Just click the edit link at the top of the section. There is no need to delete the existing draft; just edit it to resolve the problems. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:36, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

please tell me what is wrong with the edited draft, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olimbek zayniddinov (talk • contribs) 11:49, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

how long is this draft (Draft: Samarkand economy and service institute) published? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olimbek zayniddinov (talk • contribs) 12:15, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

​I've added a button on top that you can click on to submit the draft. Don't forget to add reliable secondary sources to the article before submitting. – Thjarkur (talk) 12:47, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Still no references. No references will result in declined. Once submitted, most drafts are reviewed within eight weeks, but some longer. (The list of to-be-reviewed is in the thousands.) David notMD (talk) 13:12, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Reporting an IP for Vandalism

Is there a way I can report an IP whose contributions are Vandalism only? Example: 92.148.164.112   Sub |HMU  09:56, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Subwaymuncher Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You can report vandalism to WP:AIV. 331dot (talk) 10:02, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks!   Sub |HMU  12:06, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Snippet

How much time it takes to feature Wikipedia information in google Snippet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krishnajannu69 (talk • contribs) 11:01, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

​If Google is already showing a snippet from Wikipedia, it can take anywhere from 10 minutes to 2 days for it to reflect the latest changes here. If Google isn't showing a snippet, then that's just something Google's algorithm has decided and is unlikely to change soon. – Thjarkur (talk) 12:55, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Incorrect photo

Hi there, I have come across a page that has the incorrect photo listed... it won't let me change it and I don't know what else to do haha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniellecroft (talk • contribs) 14:24, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

​What page is it? – Thjarkur (talk) 14:27, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
The Blue Castle
The photo was originally captioned as 'first edition'... it let me change that to 'second edition' but then I figured, the photo should probably be changed to show the actual first edition for people.
This is the reasoning (with sources): The picture shown is of the second edition of this book. ‘Almost all editions of The Blue Castle lack dust jackets. The true first edition, does not have a castle on the front boards, it was added after Montgomery commented on it, "Not so pretty. A plain cover." http://lmmontgomeryliterarysociety.weebly.com/collecting-l-m-montgomery.html The same information can be found in the book: A Collector's Guide to L.M. Montgomery Firsts. [Charlottetown, P.E.I.]: F. and J. Lechowick, 2009
Here's a photo of the actual first edition:
Blue Castle First Edition
It's on my bookshelf and it has been approved by the L.M. Montgomery literary society as a true first. It is very rare which is why this may be helpful to see an actual picture.
(I apologize because to non book collectors this may not seem a big deal haha) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniellecroft (talk • contribs) 14:30, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
I'm unclear as to why you're unable to upload the image - I should note the caption has now been appended to read "second edition"; however, since you have a good source regarding its publication history, and actually own a picture of the first edition, I'd encourage you to upload an image of the first edition to the article.
Also - if you feel you can improve the article, please do! I'm going to add a tag at the top indicating it's mostly a plot summary - if you have any good and referenced information on publication history and the like, I'd encourage you to add it to the article under a new heading.
You mentioned that you're a book collector; that's great! We always need people with niche interests to fix up the little articles in that area of interest (I'm one of those people myself!). If there are any other pages you feel you could improve, I'd encourage you to do that as well; I hope this helps. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 15:00, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
@Daniellecroft: done. You don't need to overwrite the original BlueCastle.jpg. Since you've already uploaded the image under BlueCastleFirstEdition.jpg, just have it display the latter image rather than the former. Thank you so much for the correction, and happy editing! Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 17:30, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
@Rotideypoc41352:thank you:)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniellecroft (talk • contribs) 19:23, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Pictures of Prophet Muhammad PBUH

Some pictures depicting Prophet pbuh are uploaded on His wiki page. It is disturbing for Muslims. Please remove them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.36.55.187 (talk) 15:44, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Please see the Frequently Asked Questions box on Talk:Muhammad for a fuller explanation, but in short, Wikipedia is not censored for any reason. If you create an account, you can suppress the display of images that might offend you. 331dot (talk) 15:48, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
"Suppress" meaning you will not see the images. The images will still be part of the article. David notMD (talk) 01:17, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Edits

How are my edits? SpyChase808 (talk) 16:15, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, SpyChase808 and welcome to the Teahouse. Your edits so far are in my view rather less than perfect, but you are new here and should be able to learn.
  • When posting about a future event, please be sure to WP:CITE a reliable source as per WP:CRYSTAL (but then Kings Island timeline is woefully undercited, and that is hardly your doing).
  • Please do not mark as minor edits that add (or remove) content, Minor edits are ones which fix spelling, grammar, or formatting errors, or otherwise leave the meaning unchanged, and which no editor could plausibly question.
  • There is no point in asking here about your rights on another Wiki, particularly one that is not even a MediaWki project.
As long as you are doing your best to improve the project, and are willing to listen, you should be fine. I have posted a welcome message with some helpful links to your talk page. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:26, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Okay SpyChase808 (talk) 22:45, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

How can I get rollback rights?

How can I get rollback rights? I tried to add a request and it was denied. The reason was to request rollback rights was so I can use Huggle. I can revert vandalism and even welcome new users. Cheers! CentralTime301 16:28, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

CentralTime301 You may visit WP:PERM. 331dot (talk) 16:32, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
331dot Even when I tried, it says declined. Cheers! CentralTime301 16:33, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
I don't see where you posted a request to WP:PERM/R(the specific board to request rollback). 331dot (talk) 16:36, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
@331dot: Most recent denied request was here, which also links to the previous one. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:09, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Maybe you should check it out now, because I posted a request 331dot. Cheers! CentralTime301 17:07, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
CentralTime301 request now declined. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:53, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi CentralTime301. It's good to be enthusiastic, but you're going to have a hard to convincing other editors that you should be granted the ability to do things like "roll back", etc. when your user talk page is pretty much filled with nothing but warnings or concerns about your edits, etc., many of which were posted by administrators or other editors who lots of experience when it comes to editing. You've been editing for only a few months so maybe it would be better for you to better establish yourself as a reliable editor before requesting permission to do certain things. You don't need to have special tools or user rights to be WP:HERE, and editors, especially fairly new editors, who focus too much on getting such things tend to viewed more cautiously by those who have the ability to approve such requests. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Blatant Self-Advertising (G11) Check Requested

Hello Teahouse Editors,

I've been working on an article that I have a conflict of interest with, which I have been careful to disclose on my User page. Prior iterations of the article have been marked for speedy deletion under G11, but after talking with some very kind editors, they've allowed me and some colleagues to continue working on the draft.

Can I politely request another set of eyes take a look at the article draft, Draft:GraphBLAS, to give me their honest opinion on whether it reads like an advertisement (or would otherwise not qualify for inclusion in Wikipedia)? Any other feedback and ways to improve the article would also be greatly appreciated. I'd like the article to be similar to those of the LEMON (C library) and Basic Linear Algebra Subprograms, since they are similar technologies.

Thank you so much in advance! --ScottKolo (talk) 17:49, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, ScottKolo, and welcome to the Teahouse. I lookeed over the draft. I don't think it is now particularly promotional, nor do I think that G11 applied when the tag was placed. Neither, apparently, did the reviewing admin. I wouldn't worry about that. I do have some concerns with the draft which I will state below, but overall I think it looks pretty good. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:42, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
  • You cite Graph Algorithms in the Language of Linear Algebra. But this is a book, and a page reference should be provided. If you intend to cite only the online abstract, that should be made clearer in the citation. — DESiegel 18:42, 10 November 2019 (UTC) — continues after insertion below
I have now added page numbers. --ScottKolo (talk) 22:16, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
  • You cite the IEEE "Standards for graph algorithm primitives" But this is a sizeable work, and a page reference would be helpful, perhaps a quote as well, using |quote=. Moreover, this source requires registration to view, please show this with |, to notify the reader. — DESiegel 18:42, 10 November 2019 (UTC) — continues after insertion below
I have added an arXiv link that does not require any registration, and added a quote. As for its size, it is less than two pages. --ScottKolo (talk) 22:16, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
  • The section "Linear Algebraic Foundations" should ideally include a citation to a source for the math involed. An offline text will do, with page numbers. — DESiegel 18:42, 10 November 2019 (UTC) — continues after insertion below
The Mathematical Foundations of the GraphBLAS reference is meant to be that. I have also added a textbook reference. --ScottKolo (talk) 22:16, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
I have added three additional news articles and a few more journal articles further backing up some of the text. --ScottKolo (talk) 22:16, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
I hope those comments are helpful. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:42, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
@DESiegel: Thank you so much! I've done my best to address your concerns and improve the article. I've also cleaned up the edit window by converting several references to named references. I hope it's getting close to submission quality! --ScottKolo (talk) 22:16, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
That is looking significantly better, ScottKolo. I think it is worth submitting to get into the review pool. Note that you can still work on the draft while it is waiting for review. A couple of points:
  • When the author(s) of a work are known, please include them in the citation. I have done this one one cite as an example. — DESiegel 23:38, 10 November 2019 (UTC) — continues after insertion below
I have added author lists to references where they were previously omitted. Thanks for the example! --ScottKolo (talk) 02:33, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Which of these sources is an Independent source tht discusses this specification in some depth, say at least three parageaphs devoted to the topic? There really should be at least two such sources cited. There are now several independent sources, but all seem passing metions, not indepth discussion. see WP:SIGCOV. — DESiegel 23:38, 10 November 2019 (UTC) — continues after insertion below
Given the technical nature of GraphBLAS, it's hard to find content that goes into that much detail that isn't written by a GraphBLAS contributor. Here's what I could come up with for independent not-written-by-a-contributor sources that give more than a passing mention:
The first is written by a research lab press office who, to be fair, has someone on staff who has contributed to GraphBLAS, but the article was not written by a contributor. I don't think it's fair to flag it as WP:PRSOURCE, given that the focus of the article is very much on GraphBLAS and its history, rather than simply back-patting. The second is an interview with a contributor, but written/conducted/published by an independent entity (ACM), thus not "produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it." There are many academic papers, tutorials, and presentations on "What is GraphBLAS?" but they are commonly written by contributors to the spec or authors of implementations - those are of course not Independent.
As you point out, there are several clearly independent news sources referencing GraphBLAS, but they generally only give a passing mention to it. I think I'll go ahead and submit the article as you suggest and continue to build the case for notability in the meantime. Thank you again for your ongoing help! --ScottKolo (talk) 02:33, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
If those can be dealt with, I think this should easily be approved. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:38, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
  • @ScottKolo: It's generally not a good idea to insert comments into the posts of other editors like you did above with your responses to what DESiegel posted. Not only can it make thing confusing for others trying to follow the discussion, it can mess up the formatting (e.g. WP:LISTGAP) or make it seem as if a post was left unsigned. I understand that some online forums do commonly do things is such a way, but it doesn't work very well on Wikipedia and it's better to simply add your response below the other person's. If, however, you are going to do this type of thing, you should try and use Template:Interrupted when you do, so that others are at least aware of what's going on. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:52, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Sorry about that! I'll be sure to not do that anymore. Thanks for putting in the Template:Interrupted tags. --ScottKolo (talk) 13:53, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

In the article on Jan Fredrick Wiborg is a reference to an article in the California Aviation Org but this web page no longer has that article. The web page may have been hijacked by bad people or it may be that the CAA stopped paying for the site or maybe the CAA just decided to redirect the site to only be information about Chinese drone products. But in any case it no longer has the article mentioned relating to Jan Fredrick Wiborg. I can't understand how to edit the page to alert readers that they don't want to click the link. I find the link to be distrustful and would not want to visit it. How do I edit to make this correction? The reference is in the page already but it takes me to [1] Ruth Berge 22:58, 10 November 2019 (UTC) rberge0108 or <redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rberge0108 (talk • contribs)

Courtesy link: Jan Fredrik Wiborg
Hi Rberge0108- first thing I normally do is check if there is an older version of the page saved by one of the archiving sites, like the Wayback Machine. In this case there was, so it was possible to fix it. It should now direct to a saved version of the original page. There is more information on what to do at WP:DEADREF- if you cant find another version of the page. Curdle (talk) 23:53, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Rberge0108, You can find a detailed answer to this, with steps, at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1030#Archives PGN/ Gloria Casarez It describers the process which Curdle just helpfully performed on the article, and described briefly here. Don't forget to add or adjust |url-status= please. When the link still works but goes to a compeltely different page, as user, use |url-status=unfit. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:58, 10 November 2019 (UTC)


@Rberge0108: Reference listings appear at the bottom of a page by default (see WP:Citing sources). So if you use a reference when adding a section to the bottom of a Talk page or a page like this, the reference will appear right after your material as soon you preview or save the page after adding it, and that will look right. But as soon as another section is added, your reference will stay at the bottom of the page, after the new section, which is the wrong place for it.
The solution is to insert the template {{Talkref}} where you want the footnote to appear, at the end of your section or just before your signature. That template will capture your reference and display it properly, under a heading "References", and it will not stay at the foot of the page or be picked up by someone else's "Talkref", as your footnote did in my most recent post here, #Tag for outdated announcement?. So I have just added {{talkref}} to the bottom of this section, to capture and display your footnote in the right place.
Oh, and please always sign your posts on talk pages or pages like this one (but not articles) with four tildes: ~~~~. They will be replaced by your "signature", i.e., your username, with links to your user page and talk page and a date-time stamp, like mine here: Thnidu (talk) 03:30, 13 November 2019 (UTC)


References

  1. ^ http://www.californiaaviation.org/syma-x20-drone-review/>

Is there a maximum accepted length of a Wikipedia article?

I tried checking in the Manual of Style, but I must have missed it.

There probably is a point where an article gets problematically long, but is there an agreed-upon cutoff? How is it measured? Maximum number of sections? Character count? TangoFett (talk) 00:08, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

TangoFett, Check out WP:AS. Interstellarity (talk) 00:11, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Question about using references

Greetings, I have a quick question about the use of books in references. I see that most books that are put in them, are Google Books. Does this mean Wikipedia doesn't allow books which are not in Google Books to be used as a source of any kind? Well I don't think Wikipedia will allow me to use some random blog that mentions books on its page, but will it let me use books as references if they come from another reliable web platform if it is not Google Books? Prana1111 —Preceding undated comment added 00:38, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Prana1111. There is no policy or guideline that says that a book that is not catalogued in Google Books is not allowed or unreliable. Similary, the fact that a book is catalogued by Google Books does not mean that the book is a reliable source for use on Wikipedia. Google Books tries to be a comprehensive catalog of all books, good and bad, and they do a pretty good job of it. They have scanned about 40 million of the estimated 130 million books. That site is especially helpful because you can find all of the bibliographic information needed to cite a book right there. But it is up to you to assess the reliability and suitability of any specific book yourself. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:48, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Prana1111. Just to add to what Cullen328 posted above, links to Google Books are done more for WP:CONVENIENCE reasons than anything else. Reliable sources are only required to be published and accessible for Wikipedia purposes; they are not required to be online and can still be cited as explained in WP:SAYWHERE. It does, however, make things easier for others to verify when the source can be found online so links allow the source to be checked can be helpful. Anyway, when people are adding links to Google Books, they are citing the book, not Google Books, as the source and it's the suitability of the book as a reliable source which needs to be assessed. Convenience links can sometimes be a problem when the linked-to website is questionable, etc., but in such cases the link can be removed and the book simply cited if you sure that it's a reliable source and it's used in the proper context. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:13, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I would add, Prana1111, that Google Books can be very convenient when searching for sources, but it often does not find the best sources, or the needed pages may not be included in its available view. People willing to take the time and trouble to cite from a physical book in hand, provided it is a reliable source, add to our articles in ways that those who stick to what can be found online may not be able to. Note also that sources need not be in English, although when an English-language source is available of comparable quality, it is preferred. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:15, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Editing tutorial

Hi, I just want to ask how the editing is done?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ifeputi (talk • contribs) 03:32, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Ifeputi, Bonjour et bienvenue à la maison de thé. If you are looking for a tutorial in editing, the Wikipedia Adventure or this tutorial could be what you're looking for. Interstellarity (talk) 03:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Another dumb noobie question: messaging

Hi folks. Is there a way to send a private message to another editor, not on their "talk" page? Thanks, CharlesGlasserEsq (talk) 03:50, 11 November 2019 (UTC)CharlesGlasserEsq

Welcome to the Teahouse, CharlesGlasserEsq. Some but not all editors have email access enabled, which will show up on the toolbar on the left side of their userpage. There is no "private messaging" that is part of the wiki software. This project is based on transparency and openness, so email communication should be limited to specific situations where confidentiality is essential. Examples include dealing with child safety, death threats and other similar situations with significant legal implications. As an administrator, I sometimes get emails about situations that should be discussed openly, and I always encourage those editors to discuss the issues right here on Wikipedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:07, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Got it. Thanks for your time, and have a great week!CharlesGlasserEsq (talk) 04:43, 11 November 2019 (UTC)CharlesGlasserEsq
@CharlesGlasserEsq: it's definitely better to communicate on-wiki for most purposes, as Cullen328 said. Still, if you should decide to use the email feature, you should read the WP:EMAIL policy page, so you know what to do and what to expect. Airbornemihir (talk) 17:32, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Article submission

Please experienced editors Help me check my article Draft:The Voice Nigeria season 2. Is it good enough for submission . If not, what should I do? Taymeedeeray (talk) 05:40, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

The obvious problem is that most of the references are from the channel which aired the show (so not independent), and that many sections are totally unsourced. If you can't find sufficient independent sources the answer may be the one which you received earlier, that the season may not justify its own article. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:28, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

How to translate a draft into an article

Hello, I have edited this draft (Draft: Samarkand economy and service institute) but it has not moved into the article field — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olimbek zayniddinov (talk • contribs) 07:26, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Olimbek zayniddinov You've basically asked about this already above at WP:THQ#How to translate a draft into an article and have received a number of responses. So, please refer to that discussion for reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:39, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
You were also told not to keep creating new sections on the subject. I wonder whether perhaps English is not your first language and you are struggling to read the replies? If you have trouble understanding English, you may be better editing a Wikipedia in your own language; see the list at meta:List of Wikipedias. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:00, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
A) you have not submitted the draft for review. B) the draft still has no references, which means it will be declined. David notMD (talk) 11:06, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
@David notMD: A) He had submitted the draft for review, at 07:18 UTC this morning, despite having received advice not to do so. B) Correct. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:55, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Consistent vandalism of a Wikipedia page - please help!

Hi there,

I would be extremely grateful if somebody could help me please. I work for a school and our page has been consistently 'vandalised' by a couple of users (or maybe it's just the same person). At the moment I am just playing cat and mouse up. I delete what they say, then they put it back up again. One is a registered user, the other isn't so it's just IP addresses. I am pretty IT literate, but am finding trying to navigate Wikipedia pretty difficult in terms of trying to find out what our options are. I would be extremely grateful if anyone could walk me through what we can do please.

Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shrewsbury1865 (talk • contribs) 09:11, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Shrewsbury1856 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, you will need to visit Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS to change your username, so that it reflects that a specific individual is exclusively operating your account(role accounts are not permitted). You don't need to use your real name. You will then need to review conflict of interest and paid editing as you have some formal declarations to make.
Regarding your question, you seem to have reversed the vandalism that had occurred on the article about your school(I would guess that it was a student or students). If vandalism is a habitual problem, you can request that the page be protected against editing from IP users at WP:RFPP. You can report specific instances of vandalism to WP:AIV. 331dot (talk) 09:18, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Creating Artist's Page

Hello, 

I am Ali Shahbazi, Music composer. I'd like to know how can I creat my page on wikipedia.

I already created a page on sandbox, But i dont know how can I change it to published page. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali.shahbazi (talk • contribs) 09:24, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Ali.shahbazi Different people will tell you this with different levels of sarcasm, but generally, it's a bad idea to attempt to make a page about yourself. Please read through the policy page, WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY to learn why. Airbornemihir (talk) 09:29, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Ali.shahbazi Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You seem to be confused about what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is not a place like social media for people to write about themselves. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves. Please review the autobiography policy.
What you have written is more appropriate for a social media page and would not be accepted. In order for you to be successful in writing about yourself, you would need to forget everything you know about yourself and only write based on the content of independent sources, sources unrelated to you. Most people find this difficult to do. Wikipedia does not have "pages"; it has articles about subjects like people. A Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable, either, there are good reasons to not want one. If you truly feel that you merit a Wikipedia article and think that you can write it yourself, you should use Articles for Creation. 331dot (talk) 09:32, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
You can, however, have a page at EverybodyWiki – their policies are different from ours. Pelagic (talk) 20:16, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Visibility of deleted contributions

I'm aware that deleted contributions are restricted to being viewed by admins, but I've sometimes been able to see a listing of deleted pages created by a user on an Xtools application (example). I was surprised, therefore, when I came across an ANI report on a long-gone user, of no interest to me other than that their contributions were not visible on Xtools. What do you think explains the difference? Airbornemihir (talk) 09:29, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@Airbornemihir: The edit count page shows that they created no articles. They had 23 edits to pages (they did not create) deleted. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 14:55, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
@AlanM1: OK, it seems like the explanation was a lot simpler that I'd have thought. Thanks! Airbornemihir (talk) 17:32, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Adding new movie to the upcoming movie list

Im unable to add Psycho tamil movie directed by mysskin to the upcoming movie list. Could anyone help me out how to do it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devotta (talk • contribs) 09:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

asking what teahouse about ?

Hey!what is this Teahouse about? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaden innocent mthwane (talk • contribs) 10:03, 11 November 2019 (UTC) Thank for invite me guyz!! I really pretiate your invitation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaden innocent mthwane (talk • contribs) 10:10, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@Jaden innocent mthwane:. Welcome to Wikipedia and to The Teahouse. This is a board where you can ask questions about how Wikipedia works, how to edit, etc. Other users, most of whom are quite experienced here, will give you answers. And just a tip - please 'sign' your posts by typing four tildes like this ~~~~ at the end of your post. That inserts your username and the date/time you posted, which is very helpful for other users. Hugsyrup 12:06, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Infobox format problem

I'd be grateful if someone would look at my edit today to Template:Muskingum County, Ohio and tell me what I've done wrong, causing my addition not to display. Thank you. deisenbe (talk) 13:25, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

I've fixed it. The parameter names should be title1, body1, title2, body2, etc. You'd typed "list6" instead of "body6". Maproom (talk) 13:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Mother-Tongue Editing

Hoi folkies! (This is my 3rd question by the way)

I am a bengali, I know bengali. I want to edit a page to show what a bengali word actually means. May I do that? Or do I need sources or something?

Sincerely, BrightSunMan (talk) 13:41, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

BrightSunMan, This would be more appropriate on Wiktionary. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 13:42, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi BrightSunMan, welcome back to the Teahouse. Sometimes it can be appropriate to add a translation of a word to a Wikipedia article, but often it is not – which article are you thinking of? And yes, in general you should always have a reliable source for information you add. More info about that here. --bonadea contributions talk 13:49, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
bonadea Thanks! The page I am mentioning is this page: section 2.3, where it says 'deb is a honorific name' whereas 'Deb' actually in bengali means 'deity'.

Adding a photo

How can I add a photo in any article of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iufragknr (talk • contribs) 13:52, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

That's a broad question, here's a broad answer: Wikipedia:Images. However, random images you find on the internet can not be used, since they are almost always copyrighted (in the wrong way for our purpose). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:54, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Feedback on draft page

Hi all, I was wondering if I could get feedback on a page I'm working on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Carpentries

The page was initially removed under speedy deletion under A7, and I'm hoping to improve on this so it will be published. I've added a number of external sources outside of the organization, but am wondering if these will be enough. I'd appreciate any guidance the community can provide! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punkerplus (talk • contribs) 13:53, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Punkerplus, and welcome to the Teahouse. I looked at the cited sources in Draft:The_Carpentries. Most of them seem to be from the project itself, or from people or organizations clsoely associated with i, particularly funding it. None of the rest seemed to offer any in-depth coverage. It doesn't look to me as if notability had yet been established, please see our guideline on the notability of organizations. Additional independent coverage from published reliable sources that each discuss the organization or program in some detail is needed. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:07, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Uploading an image to the common wiki files

I would like to know how to upload an image to the common files without having it taken down for copyright violations? The picture that I am trying to upload belongs to a public figure and is already available to the public through their social media channels, however it was removed right after I uploaded it, the editor that commented on the thread alleged that this picture was not free for use even if it is already public, however the owner of the image has expressly authorized the use of the image. What can I do to re-upload it without having it removed by another editor? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MariaDelgadoDKM (talk • contribs) 14:04, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Available via social media is not good enough, copyright law is trickier than that. The owner must upload it themself to commons or release it with the right licenses, see WP:DONATEIMAGE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Explaining a Conflict of Interest

I am writing my first article on the National Herbarium of Guinea.
After a previous discussion on here it has been decided that I should declare a conflict of interest as, although I have no direct connection with the subject myself, my partner works with them on one of their projects. Neither she nor the organisation asked me to write the article, it just seemed like a good subject for my first foray into Wikpedia, but both have provided me with information. So to declare this COI I have added the {{Connected contributor}} tag on the article and the {{UserboxCOI|1=Herbier National De Guinée}} on my User page.
My question is where and how do I explain my connection to the organisation? Can an explanation be added to the tags or does it get written in plain text on the my user page and/or the article's talk page?

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipikeia (talk • contribs) 14:05, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey Wikipikeia. The important thing is that you make a good faith effort to be open and honest about your connection to the subject. Despite the way it might seem sometimes, Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, and we work more on common sense than we do about strict adherence to rules.
In terms of conflicts of interest, for the most part we are talking about people who have financial interests in the subjects about which they write. Yes, you may technically have a conflict through your partner's association. But lots of editors start out contributing to areas that are closely related to them personally, things they've studied, local landmarks, people they've met. The really important thing is that your goal in contributing is to create a neutral and useful educational resource, and not primarily to promote the subject, to work on behalf of readers, and not on behalf of the subject. GMGtalk 15:05, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Wikipikeia, and welcome! The approach you have now on your user page (i.e. explaining your interest in the context of a pages-I-have-created list, and mentioning that you had consulted the Teahouse) works really well. Best wishes, Pelagic (talk) 20:09, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

What are tags?

I see the use of the word several times on Wikipedia but I'm not 100% sure what they are. Do they come automatically or is there something you need to click on in order to use them?Prana1111 (talk) 9:00, 11 November 2019 (CST)

Hello Prana1111! Tags mostly refers to stuff here Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup, it can be a "banner" at the top of an article or section, or small inline stuff like [citation needed]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:06, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Hey Prana1111. When people talk about tags, they're normally talking about the notification on articles and sections that serve two primary purposes. First they alert readers that some content might not currently meet Wikipedia standards, and so they should consider this when relying on the information there. Second, they automatically add the article to various lists of article that need cleanup work for whatever reason.
You can find a list of these tags at Category:Cleanup templates. There are a few automated tools that help make adding these easier, but you can also add them manually into the Wiki markup. So for example, if you find an article that reads like an advertisement, you can just click edit, and add {{Advert}} to the top of the page, and the tag will display at the top of the page once you hit publish. GMGtalk 15:10, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Prana1111, In addition to the cleanup templates described by GreenMeansGo, the term "tag" is often used for other templates which insert more or less temporary text into an article, particularly the speedy deletion templates such as {{db-a7}} and {{db-g12}}.
Somewhat confusingly, the term "tag" is often used for HTML elements enclosed in angle brackets, such as <ref>...</ref>. It all depends on the context in which the term is used. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:22, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Prana1111, tags can also be the seen in revision history like "Tags: visual edit, mobile edit, PHP7". Those are added automatically and seem to be used for statistical analysis on various aspects of the MediaWiki software. Sorry, I don't have a link to a more detailed explanation on hand right now. Pelagic (talk) 20:32, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Am I engaged in an edit war?

So, I came across this article, Tauthali, which was tagged for issues. I did what I thought was cleanup and left it in the best shape I could without actually getting invested in digging up better sources and expanding the article. Contrary to my initial impression that the article had degraded over time, it now appears that it was actually maintained that way by an IP-hopping anon editor. I reverted their attempt to revert my cleanup a couple of times already, and now I am wondering if I'm in an edit war instead of just protecting the article. Doesn't their version need to be plausibly acceptable for it to be content dispute? I don't know because I have never worked in areas prone to a lot of challenges from other editors. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 15:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes I think you are, Usedtobecool, albeit a mild one and with good intent. Lets see if I have the sequence of events corect:
  1. You made a number of changes to Tauthali which you felt served as cleanup to improve the article.
  2. An IP editor then made a series of edits which were not exact reverts but which undid many of your changes, and made a few new changes.
  3. You then reverted the IP's edit to restore your cleanup changes.
  4. The IP editor then reverted your reversion.
  5. You then re-reverted to restore your cleanup changes.
Neither of you made any talk page comments, nor even anuy descriptive edit summaries.
Back-and forth reverting, and the IPs changes, while perhaps not good, were not blatant vandalism. Yes that is an edit war. Please don't revert any further without discussing the matter on the talk page. If you think the IPs edits truly constitute vandalism, make a case on the talk page. If you think the IP is being disruptive enoguh for a block, report on WP:ANI or ping me to the article talk page. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:18, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

.

FWIW, your preferred version is much better. It does not have absurdly large images, and all the text is in English. Maproom (talk) 17:28, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you @DESiegel and Maproom: I have left my rationale at Talk:Tauthali. We'll see how it goes. An uninvolved user showed up, from RCP I imagine, and reverted them in the meantime, so I feel more comfortable going forward. Feel free to look it over and suggest improvements (lest we get started on the wrong foot, or if I have unknowingly given an IDLI argument or sth), or join in, if necessary, if you can. Again, many thanks! Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 14:49, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Your rationale looks good,Usedtobecool. I have left a talk back on the IP Editor's talk page sugesting posting to the article talk page. We will see what happens. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:38, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Submitted draft

plaease help me how to submit a draft for review.‎Draft:Samarkand economy and service institute, or how can I know if it's sent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olimbek zayniddinov (talk • contribs) 9:10 pm, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@Olimbek zayniddinov:Hi greetings welcome to teahouse. You can submit a draft by adding this template--"{{Submit}}" on the top of the page. Also don't forget to sign with four tildes-- ~~~~ after your posts. --PATH SLOPU 16:06, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
It's already submitted and under review, which can take days to months. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 16:14, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
@Olimbek zayniddinov: Unfortunately, though you have added "references", they are really just poor footnotes, not a record of which sources you used for the information in the article. For this reason, it will be declined. See University of Central Asia#References for an example of what a reasonable attempt at proper referencing looks like (though it still should have more independent sources, and fewer cites to the university's own web site). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:53, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Moving an article with the same name

Hello. I have created an article in my sandbox titled: Karl van Beethoven. He was the nephew of Ludwig van Beethoven, famous for the bitter custody battle between the composer and his sister-and-law, Johanna van Beethoven. I would like to move it to the main space, however; when one enters "Karl van Beethoven", it re-directs to his father: Kaspar Anton Karl van Beethoven, who is sometimes referred to as "Karl" (and also "Kaspar"). How do I move the article to the main space, create the name "Karl van Beethoven", and remove it from "Kaspar Anton Karl van Beethoven" ... or better yet, how do I place a link: "This article is about Karl van Beethoven,the nephew of Ludwig van Beethoven. For his father, see Kaspar Anton Karl van Beethoven." as a header? Thanks in advance. Maineartists (talk) 15:40, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Maineartists, without commenting on the suitability of subject for an independent article, the way to convert a redirect to an article would be to get to the actual redirect page and clicking on edit. To get to the redirect page, when you enter the subject's title and it redirects to another article, there should be a link at the top saying (Redirected from Karl van Beethoven). If you click that one, it will take you to the redirect page. Or, you can click "what links here" on the left side bar of the article that the title redirects to. The redirect page is listed there and also takes to the actual redirect page without redirecting to the target when you click the title there. Regards! Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 16:26, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
I use {{about}} template to add distinguishers that you ask of, to the top of the article. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 16:29, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, Usedtobecool! This is very helpful! Best, Maineartists (talk) 16:31, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, how do I set up a new page for a recently new UFC athlete/ entertainer — Preceding unsigned comment added by JabanB85 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello JabanB85, Wikipedia is not social media, so we can't set up pages for just anybody we would like to. We write encyclopedic articles on subjects that meet our notability guidelines. WP:MMANOT has detailed information on what's likely to make a fighter notable. Please read that page, go over the independent reliable sources that you can find which cover the life and career of the fighter you want to write an article about, and if you think the fighter passes the notability criteria, you can start working on a DRAFT. If you have a connection with the subject (personal, professional, financial, etc.), please review our conflict of interest guidelines at WP:COI. It's likely it's WP:TOOSOON to write an article if the athlete/entertainer is very new like it appears they are. In that case, we'll need to wait for the person to become notable enough to deserve an article. Hope this helps! Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 16:45, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

How can I invite contributors to improve a page?

Hi there, another than the RfC, what are the other ways I can invite independent, reliable editors to an existing Wikipedia page so they can help improve the page's quality? --KatherineBusby2019 (talk) 15:53, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@KatherineBusby2019: Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. The Village Pumps are for discussing Wikipedia's internals, not the content. If you wish to find people to help you on a certain page, WikiProjects are usually the best way to find some. Check the page's talk page, oftentimes there are banners there indicating which WikiProjects are interested in this topic. Regards SoWhy 16:04, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
@SoWhy: Thanks for the support! --KatherineBusby2019 (talk) 16:07, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
@SoWhy: I've filed a WikiProjects Council proposal here. Would you recommend doing anything else? --KatherineBusby2019 (talk) 14:38, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
@KatherineBusby2019: I don't think there is any basis for a Project dedicated to a subject with only a few articles. What I meant was to ask specific existing WikiProjects to help out, not propose a new one. That said, the language you use suggests you might have a conflict of interest with these subjects, something you should declare. Please also be aware that the Terms of Use require paid contributors to publicly declare that and by who they are paid to edit Wikipedia and failure to do so will result in being barred from editing Wikipedia. Regards SoWhy 14:55, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
@SoWhy: The COI has been declared. When you say "existing Wikiprojects" do you mean adding a note on the Talk pages of say, Wikiprojects Companies? Thanks for your guidance. KatherineBusby2019 (talk) 16:13, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello! What should I do if i spotted a dead link and haven't found a substitute? Should i delete it and add a citation needed notice or just delete? Thank you! --Less Unless (talk) 16:39, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

If it's a reference, as distinct from an external link, you'll find advice at WP:DEADREF. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:57, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Less Unless To summarize, you should not usually just delete such a link, because it can be helpful in finding an archived version or a replacement. The possibility of links going dead is one reason why information beyond just the URL should be supplied for citations, such as the date, the access-date, the title, the author when known, the name of the work or site or the publisher, and so on. But do read WP:DEADREF for a fuller explanation. If you want to fix the issue,see Help:Archiving a source and see Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1030#Archives PGN/ Gloria Casarez where this issue was discussed in some detail. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:31, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

What is the fastest way to find templates?

Greetings once again, I've been learning how to use templates, yet if I want to find specific ones I need to go through a bunch of different pages so I can see what code they are written in. Is there a way I can find them quicker maybe by some kind of word search or is there a certain pattern in which they are written? Signature error fixed. Prana1111 (talk) 17:42, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

We now seem to have your signature 5 times on that one message, including one corrupted version pointing to the nonexistent user User:Prana. If you've tried to customise your signature in your preferences, I would strongly recommend that you reset it to the default. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:03, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Prana1111. In the source code of pages, templates are used by putting them between double curly brackets, like so: {{tl}}. You can use Special: Allpages with namespace "Template" to list all templates. Also, many templates are collected into appropriate categories, for example Category:infobox templates. --ColinFine (talk) 18:22, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Prana1111 A great many templates used for putting messages on various sorts of pages are indexed at Wikipedia:Template messages. Most templates include documentation spelling out the parameters they use and the purpose they are intended to achieve. When there is good documentation, it is usually not essential to read the actual template code to learn how and when to use the template. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:30, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Searching in the dedicated searchbox at Wikipedia:Templates can help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:24, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
​The way I do it is to use Google to search for "wikipedia template infobox horse". It usually points me to the correct template. Some templates are almost impossible to find if you don't know what they're called, in those cases I just wait until I come across them somewhere else and then try to remember them. – Thjarkur (talk) 23:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
@Prana1111: As Þjarkur said above, Google can help but sometimes a template is near-impossible to find; that's when I personally go ahead and ask a question at the Teahouse. Airbornemihir (talk) 12:33, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Rail transport guru needed

Rail transport outline, category, and articles need super-help. Paptilian has commenced organization and categorization here, in which a project for Wikipedia:Asia month appears and organization of rail-related topics are now forming, maybe a new page will appear for collaboration. Paptilian has super-organization skill, yet lacks the other cool (Wikipedia) know-how, Editors who may fall into this latter category as expert or at least knowledgable are encouraged to fill in here.amendedPaptilian (talk) 17:59, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Greetings Teahouse, what would be necessary to accomplish a Rail transport over-haul? Paptilian (talk) 17:43, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

I assume that rather than here you meant to link to User talk:Paptilian? --David Biddulph (talk) 17:48, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Trying this again. User:Paptilian/Rail transport, and its associated talk page.Paptilian (talk) 18:04, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Publishing straight into Main page without Review

Hello everyone, I have thought that one can either Publish straight into Main space with the risk of it being taken down OR submit it for a review with the risk to wait for two months for it to be reviewed. However, when pressed Publish changes it only offered me to submit it for a review. Is it because I am a newbie editor? The background is that I created an article about a Lebanese public figure and given the situation in Lebanon I was keen for it to be live sooner than later. Many thanks (I hope it isn't a stupid question, probably is...)! MarthaBergman (talk) 17:55, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, MarthaBergman and welcome to the Teahouse. If you have created a draft, either in "draftspace" (such as Draft:New Example or in userspace (such as User:MarthaBergman/New Example or in a sandbox, it can be transfered to the main article spavce with the move function. This is only available to autoconfirmed users, that is users that have had an account for at least 4 days, an have made at lest 10 edits. You are not yet autoconfirmed, but you soon will be if you keep editing. It is also possible for an autoconfirmed user to start a page directly in the main article space. Howe veer, I advise strongly against doing that. I, as a rather experienced user, never do it. I work up an article in user space or draft space, and move it to the main article space when I think it is ready. This is because I cannot create an article that is ready for readers to see in a single edit, and few editors can (unless they do the draft stage off-line)
I think you have misunderstood the meaning of the Publish changes button. All mit does is save the page (or sectiuon) you are editing, with the same name it had when you started the edit. It does not move the page to the main article space. It does "publish" in the sense that every Wikipedia page is public, and can be viewed by anyone unless it is deleted oe specially hidden. The button used to be simply Save changes but the caption was changed to remind people that anythign saved would be public. I think this caused more confusion then help. In any case "Publish changes' is just "save", to publish as an article the move fuction is needed. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:21, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Oh, and the main page is Main Page the introductory page for all of Wikipedia. I think you meant the main article space. If not, there are significant restrictions in what content appears on the main page. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:24, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello DES thank you so much! Very helpful. So yes, I remember reading about the Move button and I expected it to appear after I hit Publish changes, but as you explain given that I am not autoconfirmed, this wasn't option. I fiddled on the article draft for over two months now, so it isn't in any way a first edit and hit approach. And because I fiddled for ages and in the meantime the Lebanese situation is topical, I wanted to publish straight into main article space. What can I do now - can I 'de-Publish the changes' and take it out of the draft review process and do more other wiki edits to get autoconfirmed and Publsh the article? Many thanks again! MarthaBergman (talk) 18:59, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Once you are autoconfirmed, MarthaBergman, which should happen shortly, you will have access to the move function. Please read that link to see how to use it. It does NOT start from the "Publish changes" button. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:12, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
All clear, thank you very much again DES!! MarthaBergman (talk) 20:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Just a mention that, even when your article is moved to mainspace, it will not be indexed by Google for 90 days or until it has undergone new page review. Dbfirs 22:39, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

help with sam zell

hello! i would like some help with a banner and some cleanup at sam zell. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sam_Zell thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CocoTwinkletoe (talk • contribs) 18:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

CocoTwinkletoe see my comments on Talk:Sam Zell, please. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:35, 11 November 2019 (UTC) CocoTwinkletoe DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Name change

How do I change my name on Wikipedia? Porygon-Z (talk) 18:18, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@Porygon-Z474: See Wikipedia:Changing username. --CiaPan (talk) 19:21, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
So how do I contact the Global Name Changer? Porygon-Z (talk) 17:47, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
See WP:Changing username#Venues. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:52, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Bob Steele

I have heard that the popularity of Bob Steele waned because of his stature. It is my understanding he was of short stature and it just did not look right for a small man to be whipping up on big men. Is there any truth to this? I enjoyed the western movies with him. Just curious about this rumor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.226.118.236 (talk) 18:42, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Teahouse is the wrong venue for this question. If any sources have talked about this rumor and veracity of it, folks at WP:RD/E, the entertainment reference desk might be able to find out. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 21:27, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Keep the pages

Hello, I would like to draw the attention of the house to the mass deletion of articles created by a blocked user User:Tyt0791. I am not here to address the block but the deleted articles are very notable names in the Ghanaian community. Names like the Ghana Education Service, Peace Fm, Kasapa FM, Tema Senior High School amongst others are very known in Ghana. Please, we should come together and help restore these pages, such a work cannot be taken off an encyclopedia like Wikipedia. Refer to https://xtools.wmflabs.org/pages/en.wikipedia.org/Tyt0791 for the deleted contributions. --154.160.6.171 (talk) 19:14, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately from your viewpoint, Unregistered Editor, Wikipedia has a rule, known as CSD G5 that if an editor is blocked (usually for improper behavior of some sort) and then returns under a different name in violation of that block, and creates pages or articels while breaking the block, all such pages can be deleted no matter how desirable they might be, until some other editor,who is not violating a block, chooses to recreate them. (This only applies to pages that no other editor has made significant contributions to.) Strictly speaking, the G5 rule does not say that such pages must be deleted, but it does say that they can be without discussion, and in practice such pages are usually deleted. Not everyone here thinks this is a good idea, but many do.
In the case of User:Tyt0791, it seems that a great many pages were created, and quite a few fake identities were used. That user is, I gather, considered a particularly egregious case, and there was a special project to delete all the pages that user had created, which i believe is now complete or largely complete. Much of it was done by Berean Hunter, and a significant part by TonyBallioni and quite a few others were also involved. While you could ask, I doubt that the decision to delete these pages will be changed or undone.
I am afraid that the only option is for some other person or persons to recreate these articles without the help of the versions that have been deleted. It might be possible to get a list of the articles involved, But I cannot promise that. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:05, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Why have two users deleted a category unnecessarily twice using HOTCAT?

I work on libertarian subjects. There's a page for activist Ed Lopez (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ed_Lopez&action=history) I've edited for some time here and there and I noticed that recently it's been afflicted by an erroneous edit twice: two different editors have deleted an alumni category for Durham University. The subject is a graduate of the university. I notice the deletions have taken place through HotCat. Can someone please help me understand why this is happening and how it can be stopped given the fact that the subject is a graduate of this university in England?--Grant18650602 (talk) 21:14, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@Grant18650602:The article is already in the category, Category:Alumni of Ustinov College, Durham. This category is in the category Category:Alumni of Durham University. So, adding that category to the article is redundant. That's why it's being removed. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 21:23, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
@Usedtobecool: Thank you, I understand how that seems redundant but for universities with colleges in England (and I believe Scotland too), having both the college and the university seems reasonable: I search for alumni under the university first when I research subjects that graduated from these, and ultimately that is the mothership of the alumni structure. I hope whatever has triggered that practice can be reconsidered; I understand the rationale - it just seems like a poor practice unless they just delete the overall category: so long as it exists it should include the aggregate of the alumni of all the colleges for these institutions. Thank you for your help, again!--Grant18650602 (talk) 21:41, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Grant18650602. There is a policy about articles appearing more than once in the category hierarchy, but I can't find it on a quick look. However, I think that PetScan will be able to help you find what you want even in this case. --ColinFine (talk) 22:31, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
@ColinFine: Thank you - I hope they revise it if that's the policy, it really does seem to be in public interest to span both the broader universities and their colleges. Frankly, for a more universal familiarity, if anything, including the broader university rather than the college would be more useful.--Grant18650602 (talk) 22:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Grant18650602, ColinFine my memory is that some categories are considered to be "diffusing" and some to be "non-diffusing". In a "diffusing" category, a page may not be a member of both the parent category and a sub-category, while for non-diffusing cats this is permitted. The logic controlling which categories are diffusing I never fully grasped. It is explained at WP:SUBCAT and its sub-section WP:DIFFUSE reading those might help you. Part of the point is to avoid parent or high-level categories having so many members that they are of no value. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:10, 11 November 2019 (UTC) @ColinFine: DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:11, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
There is also some relevant comment at Category talk:Alumni of Durham University. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:14, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you - it seems confusing. I really hope at some point they can use both categories: I saw that as a consumer of Wikipedia articles that pays attention to that type of thing.--Grant18650602 (talk) 02:47, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
@Grant18650602: The key is to use the right tool for the job. It's not as easy as just clicking on the category at the bottom, but PetScan (mentioned above) should get you what you want (and has lots of other options to customize the results). Easier still in this case, since there are no more than 5 levels of sub-categories or more than 256 categories in total, the deepcat: option on the standard search should do what you want. I just put Alumni of Durham University in the "Pages in these categories" field to get this. However, this search is only returning 527 hits, while PetScan returns 1392 (including Aba Andam, an example who is missing from the other set), so stick with PetScan for now. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 03:49, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! I have never used these tools so I need to get acquainted with them!--Grant18650602 (talk) 17:08, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Need advice for managing data/references for price history chart

I've spend bits of time slowly improving Ferrari 250 GTO over the past couple years. My next target is to fix up the Price history section, which is currently mostly comprised of a rather ugly and uninformative bulleted list that doesn't have many references. I have access to a variety of sources that will improve the quality/reliability of the information, including Ferrari periodicals, books, auction results etc. My current plan is to replace the current bulleted list with a matplotlib plot, plotting the price of each sale over time. While I'm familiar enough with generating the plot and building a table of the data, I'm at a loss as to how to present the data itself on wikipedia in a way that is accessible, readable, and easily updated so the plot itself can be updated by another user if needed.

Basically I'm imagining somehow sharing the table of price/date data used to build the plot, along with a metadata column showing the source for each row of data? Should this literally just be a table in the article below the plot itself? Or is there a better way to do it that won't crowd the article with a giant table that is already represented by the plot?

Similarly, I was planning on sharing the code used to make the plot on github and linking the repo from the commons page where I upload the plot. Good idea or is there another way I should do it?

Overall, I'm wondering what the best documentation/archiving practices are for contributing data-driven plots to WP and making sure both the data and the code used to generate the plot are accessible, reusable and maintainable. Thanks for any advice!!! Prova MO (talk) 21:54, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Prova_MO, and welcome to the Teahouse. My first thought is that the whole section should be removed, as per Wikipedia is not a sales catalog. Failing that, a tabular form would in my view be preferable to any sort of chart or plot, with a source column to provide a source (a citation) for each row of the table. There should be no uncited rows allowed. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on removing the section, per WP:NOTCATALOG: "Encyclopedic significance may be indicated if mainstream media sources (not just product reviews) provide commentary on these details instead of just passing mention". There is extensive coverage (including citations already in the article) of the 250 GTO's price history in both the general-interest and automotive press. This is due to the model's tendency since the 1980s to routinely break records for most expensive car ever sold. To be clear, I'm not asking the best way to completely replace any tabulated data with a chart, I'm asking what is the best practice for including both the data in tabular format and a chart. If per your suggestion, the best way is to just put a regular old table in that section as well as a chart, I will do that. Totally understand about removing uncited rows, I will be removing the uncited price data "bullet points" already present in the article if I cannot find a reliable source. Thanks! Prova MO (talk) 23:22, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
That is a reasonable approach to take. I will let others with more experience buiding charts answer as to the best way or ways to do that. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
@Prova MO: Chart-only would be accessibility-unfriendly, so definitely provide the table. Producing the chart on-wiki would be preferable for consistency of style and maintainability. Have a look at {{Graph:Chart}}; there may be others. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 04:25, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks AlanM1, will definitely be providing the table as well. I just looked through {{Graph:Chart}}, glad to see that you can make a scatter plot with that template. Somehow I missed that capability looking through other how-to articles. That was my main reason for using matplotlib, but since the chart template can do it I will use it instead. Prova MO (talk) 18:42, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Translating an article from a different language into English

In order to translate an article from another language into English, you must create the article in English, and then link it to the original article's language entry, right — Preceding unsigned comment added by ViscontiEnsi (talk • contribs) 22:12, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Basically, yes, ViscontiEnsi: you can only link articles in different languages together once they exist. You may use an article in one language as the basis for the article in another language (and then you must attribute it properly, to satisfy the licensing requirements); but you may change it and add or delete material, or start completely from scratch. Sometimes you need to make changes, because the article in one language contains material that is not acceptable in the other Wikipedia (each language Wikipedia has its own rules and procedures). See Translation for more information. --ColinFine (talk) 22:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

What cool features are there in Wikipedia?

Are there any features that are mostly unknown and are cool? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mobalegend1 (talk • contribs) 22:39, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Mobalegend1, Not really a feature per-se, but most non-editors don't seem to realise that most volunteers have a sense of humor. WP:FUN. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 03:50, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Mobalegend1. If you want to know anything about how Wikipedia operates behind the scenes, then type WP: followed by a keyword into the search box. For example, WP:NOT takes you to an informative list of all the things that Wikipedia is not supposed to be. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:24, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
It's so easy to intimidate people. You can cite all sorts of rules, and the exceptions to the rules, and the exceptions to the exceptions. And sooner or later, you will come to understand that Wikipedia really is not a reliable source. Fabrickator (talk) 04:37, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Special:Nearby shows you articles about things in your area. I didn't know it existed until a few days ago. Pretty neat. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 08:34, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

In regards to Television films

If an actor/actress were to be in a television film, would the television film be in the television section of the filmography or the film section of the filmography? --FromFrank✎Talk♬ 22:54, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, FromFrank, and welcome to the Teahouse. That varies in different articles, depending in part on the zise of the Filmography and how far it makes sense to break it down, and the views of the editors working on the page. There is no hard and fast rule -- indeed no rule says that a filmography must be included at all, although it is not uncommon in articles about actors. WP:FILMOGRAPHY has some style suggestions, and shows several possible styles. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:22, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
FromFrank, It seems that that style guide I linked says: Please note: When using separate film and television performances tables (ex. #1), television films belong in the television table. So there you are. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:33, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. --FromFrank✎Talk♬ 23:35, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Using talk pages to communicate with other editors

Is it ok if I send messages to other editors by creating a new section on their talk page or are the users who own the talk page only allowed to publish changes on it? Heads up, the new sentences added beneath mine by DevilDrama do not belong to me, but I wouldn't care if you answered the question.Prana1111 (talk) 01:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

The purpose of user talk pages is to communicate with other users, so yes, it is definitely okay to leave messages there. I split the other user's question into a different section to prevent confusion. :) SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 01:30, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Prana1111. You seem to be asking two questions. The first one was answered above by SpicyMilkBoy, but second one might still be unclear so I'll elaborate a bit. Anyone can post on any Wikipedia page (except in some certain specific cases); so, yes if you want to leave someone a message, you can add it to their user talk page. Discussions about article content, however, should generally take place on article talk pages because doing so makes it easier to for others interested in the subject matter to participate, keep all relevant discussion in one place and archive such discussions for future reference. User talk pages tend to be more for general requests or questions, behavioral matters, notifications, etc.
Users do have the right to blank their own user talk pages (again there are some exceptions to this), but they typically should avoid doing the same to other users' talk pages unless there's a really really strong policy or guideline based reason for doing so. Users should also refrain from editing posts left by other editors as explained in WP:TPO (even if their intentions are good, e.g. correcting a spelling mistake), unless (once again) there is some serious policy or guideline reason, or formatting error that needs to be addressed. Users who post something on another user's talk page or an article talk page can remove or edit their posts after the fact as long as it has not yet been responded to, but they should follow WP:REDACT once someone does respond (except in some really obvious cases). Any attempt to change one's own posts or someone else's posts to try and mislead others, however, is not going to be permitted under any circumstances and is likely to lead to a strong rebuke or even a block from an administrator. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:10, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Prana1111. The above advice from MarchJuly is quite good, but a couple of exceptions. Some editors, including myself, have given blanket advance permission to others to correct spelling and formatting mistakes. (That is listed on my user page And some editors, including myself, treat all posts to their user talk page as if each post had been replied to, and will revert any blanking. Some editors ask that particular subjects be addressed on particular sub-pages of their user talk page. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 05:38, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Adding images

Please Some one tell me how to add a image in any person's page on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by DevilDrama (talk • contribs) 01:06, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, DevilDrama, and welcome to the Teahouse. See Help:Pictures for the syntax of including an iamge on a Wikipedia page. Se Wikipedia:Images for more about image use in general, and Wikipedia:Uploading images for how images get onto Wikipedia (and commons) in the first place. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 02:25, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

About the TFA

I need to update some bits of information in several TFAs, particularly the one on Operation Catechism, where in the TFA it links as [[RAF Bomber Command|Royal Air Force heavy bombers]] where in the article it links as [[Royal Air Force]] [[Heavy bomber|Heavy bombers]]. How do I update the TFA with this information and others I have found? (note: I can't edit it straight from WP:TFA, as I can't find the template in the text) Thanks! dibbydib 💬/✏ 01:40, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Like any other article. Ruslik_Zero 08:16, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
@Ruslik0: I can't find the location of the template itself though (in this case {{Wikipedia:Today's featured article/{{tomorrow|long}}}}). dibbydib 💬/✏ 01:04, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
@Dibbydib: If you look at the talk page of the article, you will find the necessary link. Ruslik_Zero 17:49, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Does this fit in Wikipedia?

I want to know if Wikipedia is the right page for a proposed "List of train departures in China", where I plan to put down the two termini for each train departure, after my previous page (which included all the stops as well as the time of arrival/departure was proposed for deletion (and I requested its deletion). (See my talk page.) If it doesn't work, does Wikivoyage work? Thanks.

This means I am planning something like this:
High Speed Rail train services (G1~G3)
Train Departure Start Station End station
G1 Station 1 Station 2
G2 Station 2 Station 3
G3 Station 3 Station 1

Please reply to me ASAP. 數神 (talk) 04:29, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

@數神: Asked and answered at Wikipedia:Help desk#Does this fit in Wikipedia? (please don't post the same thing in multiple places). See especially WP:NOTDIR #4 and WP:NOTTRAVEL #2, etc. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 04:45, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
@AlanM1: Okay and sorry - so it's still a no? Because my second question here (where the table was attached) is still unreplied. I was thinking that there might have been an understanding, so I went here to ask. I mean - there are many pages that list out the bus routes' starting and ending points, and this page should also serve a similar purpose except to trains (e.g. MTR#Rail network). So is this suggestion okay if these other pages are deemed acceptable? 數神 (talk) 05:00, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi 數神. In general, just because something is done in one particular article doesn't mean the same thing should be done in all similar articles as explained in WP:OTHERCONTENT; there could be some special reason why it is being done in one article that is particular to that article, or it could be just as easily the case that it shouldn't have been done to begin with. Wikipedia has millions or articles and their are people from all over the world editing them every day; some editors have the best of intentions in trying to improve articles, but go about doing so in ways that aren't really in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. These editors may make lots of similar changes to lots of similar articles, but nobody notices the edits until much later on. It's quite possible that information about train routes/time schedules might be OK to add as part of a larger article about a particular train service, but not really something appropriate to create a stand-alone article about. If you'd like further clarification on whether this is the case with what you're trying to do, try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains because that's where you're likely going to find editors experienced in articles related to trains. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:21, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. 數神 (talk) 05:27, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Article publishing, i published this article on behalf of Oshodhara Team, i am also followers of Osho SIDDHARTH: User:Osho Siddhartha Aulia

Hi Team, I published the article on behalf of Oshodhara Team, if wiki team ask for any document i will provide, copyright policy need to verify again due to i have only two sources to verify about Mater Osho Siddharth, 1.Oshodhara website (After communication with this team i used content from there) 2.My study through the different sources About biography:- I mentioned all detailed due to currently community belong to him presence in future me & any wiki contributors will contribute as per their knowledge. Kindly have a look & let me know how can i process with this article. Thanks.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ravishashtri (talk • contribs) 06:15, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Ravishashtri, you created a user page for a Wikipedia user "Osho Siddhartha Aulia" who has not registered a Wikipedia account. It has been deleted as the user page of a non-existent user of Wikipedia. I assume that you were trying to create a Wikipedia article about Oshodhara, or Osho Siddarth. Are you connected with this person or their team? Maproom (talk) 10:07, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Maproom, i want to create article about Osho Siddharth Aulia, i am connected with his team, i am new on wiki i read multiple article will you help me to process step by step for a article or i will email my content to any contributor with reference detail, looking for help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ravishashtri (talk • contribs) 10:55, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
You need to read about conflict of interest, and (if appropriate) about paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:07, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Template error

I can't post User:Aman.kumar.goel/sandbox (this version) on Template:UN Population as seen here. Any experienced template editors out here should take a look and let me know what was is the problem here. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 19:06, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Aman Kumar Goel, welcome to the Teahouse. Your diff added 2352 non-breaking space characters instead of normal spaces. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:38, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Okay so, how I do identify non-breaking spaces in my version? I can't see any. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 08:04, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
@Aman.kumar.goel: The diff hints they are after pipes. You can also copy-paste source text to the "Characters" field at [2] and click "View in Uniview" to look for special characters. In [3] I clicked "Advanced" in the toolbar, clicked a search and replace icon to the top right, copy-pasted one of the non-breaking spaces to the "Search for" field, wrote a normal space in the "Replace with" field, and clicked "Replace all". I use the desktop site. Start by clicking "Desktop" at the bottom if you are on the mobile site. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:08, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Linking names

While linking names is it possible to link the English Wikipedia page to any other language page of that person (Angunnu (talk) 08:14, 12 November 2019 (UTC))

@Angunnu: Hello and welcome to the teahouse. Yes, you can link to other wikis, though generally you shouldn't within an article. What would you like to link? DannyS712 (talk) 08:23, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Why my wikipedia article draft declined

I have written my article and got a rejection here. I have put the source, then also it went rejected. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ranu_Mondal#

Rocky 734 (talk) 12:38, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

@Rocky 734: Your article appears only to have been rejected once from what I can see, and the reason given is that "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". Simply adding sources won't solve this problem unless they are reliable, independent, secondary sources that show significant coverage. If you have an issue with the decision, it is better to address this at WP:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk rather than here at the Teahouse, though. Hugsyrup 12:48, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Ok sir thanks @Hugsyrup:
DESiegel - The standard decline template only says 'If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk'. The optional Teahouse-specific message says 'If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse' (my bold). Since you post here are lot, you are surely well aware that I frequently answer questions here about declined drafts, often at length. However, the fact is that specific issues with a decline decision are best addressed at the proper noticeboard and the tendency for the Teahouse to become the default place for these queries does not do us any favors, in my opinion. Hugsyrup 16:44, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Rocky 734 on a moderately quick look, the main problem is depth of coverage. The draft has a number of cites to independant reliable sources, but most of them are to relatively brief stories about the singer, none seem to be really in-depth coverage. See our guideline on significant coverage. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:14, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
    • A subsidary issue is that the citation metadata is badly messed up. I suspect that the cites were created with the VE cite tool or a simialr semi-automated tool. This an example of why such tools are a good starting point but cannot be trusted without checking, rather like machine translations from one language to another. The cites have confusedly put tiemstamps in author fields, and other miss-identifications of bibliographic data. There were also some duplicated cites, which i combined, and there may be more. Fixing these wpould make a review easieer, but should not affect the outcome. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:14, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
@DESiegel:Thanks sir, i will try to avoid those tools.

Real names on Notable Alumni

On a famous school which warrants a Wikipedia page, does the Notable Alumni section need the real names of people or do you just add the fake name (when an actor has a fake name, his/her fake name is also the name of their wikipedia article). A bit confused, need help. --FromFrank✎Talk♬ 13:02, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello again, FromFrankIf a notable person is known primarily by a stage name, pen name, or other alternate name, it might be best to use that name. For example one might use Mark Twain rather than [[Mark Twain]|Samuel Langhorne Clemens]]. This is an issue that can be discussed on the article talk page of the article involved, an might differ depending non the person. But since there should be a link in any case to the article about the person, anyone who follows that link will know both names.
I would not use the term "fake name" for a pen name or stage name or the like, by the way. And not all articles about schools inclkude a "Notable Alumni" section, although many do. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:15, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
I don't know if there's a standard for this, but I would use "Mark Twain (Samuel Langhorne Clemens)". —[AlanM1(talk)]— 04:00, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Make a disambiguation

Hey everyone! Recently I tried to make one of the requested articles and since it has the same name as a German surname, I moved it to this page. So I was thinking to make the old page a disambiguation page and list these two pages (surname and clothing) there, but I'm not sure how to do it? I'll be thankful for any help. Best wishes, --Thesecondcoal (talk) 16:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC) thesecondcoal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesecondcoal (talk • contribs) 13:24, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Thesecondcoal, KÜHL doesn't seem like a good title for the disambiguation page listing Kühl, the surname. You could conceivably create it at Kühl (disambiguation) though. I would suggest just moving the article back whether or not you create that disambiguation page. If you decide to create a disambiguation page, you can simply copy wikitext from other similar pages and modify it. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 17:49, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia for an editor that is coming back?

Ive recently returned to editing on Wikipedia, what should I know(anything changed significantly?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by YuriGagrin12 (talk • contribs) 22:49, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, YuriGagrin12: it rather depends how long you've been away. Many people now edit using the visual editor or from mobile devices (I do neither). The Draft space was introduced as the preferred place to develop draft articles, and we're stricter than we used to be about accepting substandard articles into article space. Is that the sort of thing you meant? --ColinFine (talk) 23:19, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
@Colinfine Thank you for the info! How do I get to the digital editor from my computer? So the draft space replaced the sandbox basically? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by YuriGagrin12 (talk • contribs) 01:38, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
YuriGagrin12, Howdy hello! We're glad to have you back! I see that you've been away for about 2 years, and ColinFines recommendations below are really only the main changes. Otherwise, Wikipedia is the same 'ol platform its always been, and is in constant need of good folks like yourself to help improve it. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:22, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
@CaptainEek Thank you! I came back because I notice a lot of people hostile to younger users because they sometimes vandalise pages, so I am slowly trying to reverse that stigma haha.
YuriGagrin12, Read Wikipedia:VisualEditor for instructions on how to enable the visual editor, always or as a choice, and for information on how it works. It does not require an editor to use or learn wiki-markup, and many think it easier to use. There are some things, however, which it still does not handle easily, although it is much improved over its first version, in my view. But if you are comfortable editing in wiki-markup, there is no requirement that you ever use the visual editor. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 02:01, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
YuriGagrin12: you can still use sandboxes, and there is still the presumption that other users will not normally edit in your sandbox unless you invite them to. But Draft space is preferred for working up articles. --ColinFine (talk) 17:56, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Simple Question

Hi all! Is it wrong for us to ask for an article to be reviewed? Diogo Silvado (talk) 10:53, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Are you talking about an article or about a draft? If you mean Draft:Aethel Partners it has already been submitted for review. As it says in the box on the draft: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 8 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,624 pending submissions waiting for review." --David Biddulph (talk) 11:04, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Thank for your answer. I know that but would it be 'unethical' to ask a reviewer for a review? I'm new at this and still didn't wrap all the rules and conventions. Diogo Silvado (talk) 11:43, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Diogo Silvado, I don't think the ethics of it has been nailed down yet, but many editors will refuse to review on request, yet some might do so. Making too many requests all around could be seen as disruptive though, if unwelcome. Usually, my observation is that, if an article is a clear pass or fail upon only a brief perusal, it's more likely to get reviewed on request, if it needs detailed investigation, it will almost certainly, always be declined (not the draft, the request to review). How your request is received might also depend on whether you are writing about something you are connected to, as opposed to solely to add to the sum of human knowledge. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 12:12, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Diogo Silvado I'd agree with Usedtobecool above. As a reviewer I'm usually happy enough to take a look at draft articles on request if they are either a quick fail (which frankly most are) or an easy pass. One of the issues you may have with yours is that a number of the sources are not English and one is paywalled. None of that is against the rules or makes the sources invalid, but it does make it harder for many reviewers to conduct a quick review. There may be no way to avoid this - if these are the only sources you have, there's not much you can do except wait for someone who has the time, the language ability, and the WSJ subscription. However, if you want to increase the likelihood of a quick pass, you'd be better off with three or four high quality sources, in English, that are not paywalled. The other sources can then be added back in once the article is approved. Hugsyrup 12:21, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Half of your references are to an attempt by Athel to but a company, which in the end did not take place. This adds nothing to the notability of Athel, and should be deleted. Often, when people attempt an article about a company it is because they are in the employ or are otherwise compensated. Is that your situation? If so, you must comply with WP:PAID. This involves posting a declaration of paid on your User page. David notMD (talk) 12:37, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

@Diogo Silvado: Who is “we” in your question, where you ask “Is it wrong for us to ask for...”? Are you a group of people?
The Wikipedia:Username policy explicitly states that Your username must represent you as an individual person – see the policy section Wikipedia:Username policy#Guidance for new users.
Please also see the section on WP:SHAREDACCOUNT. --CiaPan (talk) 13:04, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for the answers.
When I say 'we' I'm refering to 'editors' in general as a group in which I'm included.
This company recently gain a mining permit near my village and I think people should have more info on them, I'm not being paid or anything.Diogo Silvado (talk) 13:53, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

And one more thing, just because you lack context doesn't mean an issue is not relevant, it may not be close to you but there's life beyond our perspective.Diogo Silvado (talk) 17:56, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Requesting a Page to be Made

I am a PR representative of Brown Books Publishing Group in Dallas, Texas, and am trying to learn how to request a Wikipedia page to be created for one of our authors. I have tried to create the page myself, but it was rejected for coming off as too promotional, even though it simply contained facts about our author and did not explicitly advertise her book. Please advise on how this is possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katcrol (talk • contribs) 18:02, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

The first thing you need to do is to make the mandatory declaration of paid editing, and then read about conflict of interest. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:09, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
and then. Katcrol, please see the second paragraph of my reply to #Kassa Overall Wikipedia Page abovebelow. --ColinFine (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC) Archived.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:15, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Kassa Overall Wikipedia Page

Hello, I am Kassa Overall. Musician born and raised in the USA. There is a wikipedia page on me but it is somehow based in Germany. I would like the page to be made English based . It is also extremely outdated, including an incorrect birthday. I was born October 9th.. 1982.

Here is more info that would be helpful for page accuracy:

proposed article content

Kassa Overall is, as Time Out New York puts it, “a Renaissance man: part chopsy, super-funky jazz drummer, and part rising producer-MC.”

Since it's January release date, Kassa's debut album, “Go Get Ice Cream and Listen to Jazz” has earned rave reviews from The New York Times, Afropunk, WBGO, WNYC, KNKX and Downbeat. "It’s one of the few genuine-sounding, full-scope amalgams of contemporary hip-hop and jazz to surface in recent years” wrote Giovanni Russonello of the NYTimes in January.

Aside from his own work, Kassa is currently working as a spoken word and laptop artist with drummer Terri Lyne Carrington's Social Science, drumming with singer Carmen Lundy, and producing as well as drumming with Arto Lindsay.

While percussion is his main focus, Overall has a passion for electronic-based production and often incorporates the use of laptops and samplers into his music. He’s performed with a formidable list of artists, including Christian McBride, Donald Byrd, Vijay Iyer, Dee Dee Bridgewater, Terri Lyne Carrington, Francis & the Lights, Yoko Ono, Marc Ribot, Mayer Hawthorne, Ravi Coltrane, Gary Bartz, and many more. He spent several years as a key member of pianist Geri Allen's Timeline band and appears regularly with trumpeter Theo Croker (whose last album he co-produced) As a rapper and producer, Overall has collaborated with the hip-hop outfit Das Racist, and with Kool A.D on their Peaceful Solutions project. He also DJs on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert's house band, Jon Batiste & Stay Human.

PRESS QUOTES

"It’s one of the few genuine-sounding, full-scope amalgams of contemporary hip-hop and jazz to surface in recent years” -Giovanni Russonello, The New York Times

"The most refreshing release of the year." -Tarik Moody, NPR Sound Opinions

"The reality of Go Get Ice Cream's release is staggering." -Stephanie Jones, Downbeat Magazine

"An album that begs active listening from start to finish." - Stephanie Jones, Downbeat Magazine

"Listen to it from start to finish because this is a sonic experience." - Matt Fleeger, Music Director, KMHD

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kassa Overall (talk • contribs) 14:13, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Courtesy link to de:WP: Kassa Overall.   Maproom (talk) 17:20, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
User:Kassa Overall Each language edition of Wikipedia is separate and independent. If someone at the German language edition (code DE) chose to write about Kassa Overall, they can do that, and it doesn't affect a possible article in the English-language edition (code EN). Note that policies and standards are not the same and it might well be that a topic would qualify on DE but not EN, or vice versa.
For there to be an article about a person on the EN Wikipedia, there must be multiple Independent published reliable sources that discuss the person in some detail. Please follow those links, and see our guidelines for notability of biographic topics and our guideline for the notability of music-related topics. Please note also that writing autobiographies is strongly discouraged, and articles are written by those volunteers who choose to tackle a topic.
Please understand that Wikipedia does not have "pages" in the sense that social media does, it has articles like any other encyclopedia reference work. And the subject of an article does not control the content. If there is unfavorable content included in a reliable source, the Wikipedia article may include that content, and it will not be removed on request.
Please note also that brief "press quotes" such as those above are of no use in writing a Wikipedia article. All sources must be verifible and so full bibliographic information (date, publication, title of article, and page number and author where available, or url if online) are needed so that the editor can read the entire source and judge what parts to use, and if it is usable at all, and so that the reader can check any sources used by the editor.
Please also understand that while I presume you are who you say you are, we would need a reliable source for such details as the birth date. Indeed we often do not include berth dates beyond the year for living people unless they have already been widely published, or published by the person him- or herself.
Since your user name is the same as the name of a well-known person (yourself) please email [email protected] with evidence of identity. This is a precaution against someone impersonating you or any other well-known person. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Kassa Overall. The reason that there is an article about you on the German Wikipedia is that a volunteer decided to write one. The reason that there is not one here on English Wikipedia, is either that no volunteer here has chosen to write about you, or that somebody has thought of doing so, and found that you did not currently meet English Wikipedia's criteria for notability. (Note: I'm not saying that you do not meet these criteria: I have not looked. From the quotes you give above, it is quite possible that you do. I am simply putting that forward as one of the possible reasons). What I will observe is that the material that you have posted above is not appropriate for a Wikipedia article, and that the German article does not cite enough sources to establish notability to the extent that the English Wikipedia requires. (They are different projects, with different rules).
It's always a problem advising somebody who wants there to be an article about them. There is no reliable way to make it happen (because Wikipedia cares about Wikipedia's needs, not the wants of people who happen to be the subject of article s). You could post a request at requested articles, but in honesty, the take-up there is very poor. Writing an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. The best you can do, probably, is to interest somebody in writing an article about you, but there's no guarantee you will find anybody. (I do not recommend you pay somebody to do so: this does happen, but the paid editor is required to declare their status as a paid editor, their work will get very strictly reviewed, and they cannot guarantee any particular result, not even that any article will be accepted).
I know this is not what you want to hear; but it is a consequence of the fact that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a medium for promotion. --ColinFine (talk) 17:53, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Creating a Bio

Hi

I am thinking about creating a bio for my daughter, who has been in two Hollywood films and two TV series. I was reading the rules about notability and references, and I couldn't really understand what the threshold was.

She is referred to in 3 wikipedia pages, so I wanted to create a bio page for her, and link the three pages she is referred in to her bio page, so that people who read the pages can click on her name and find her bio.

She has three external references.

Any advice about how to go about this would be much appreciated.

Kind regards

B — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bravo 7719 (talk • contribs) 18:53, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Bravo 7719, Well for starters we highly recommend you don't create articles about people you know, as that represents a conflict of interest. When you write about someone you have a COI with, you must disclose that using the steps linked at conflict of interest. If you do, the notability requirements require enough sources. You need at least 3 reliable sources that give her significant coverage. Think profiles in the New York Times, articles in magazines, mentions in books, that sort of thing. You also cannot use any of your personal knowledge, as that is original research. For example, if you know her birthdate, but is not published, do not add it. Again, writing articles about people you know is strongly discouraged, as it is hard to write neutrally about them. If you still wish to, you may follow the steps at Your First Article, where you can use the article wizard to get started. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:24, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

hi. can you please link to one of the pages she's mentioned in here? Bill cage (talk) 19:21, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

If your proposed article can be accepted, there can be Wikilinks from those other mentions of her name to the article about her, but those links cannot be used as references. The critical issue is whether there are independently written published articles about her - at length, not just a name mention. Keep in mind that Wikipedia is 'articles,' not 'pages,' and that once an article is created, anyone can edit it. The creator has no control. David notMD (talk) 19:36, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi all, thank you for the advice, much appreciated. It's clear to me now the threshold, and that has been really helpful. thanks everyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bravo 7719 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Aggressively merge or aggressively split?

In the wake of the new Oprah's Book Club television series on Apple TV , I've been having a lot of fun contributing to Oprah's Book Club and especially drafting my first from-scratch article on the new TV series, which which User:AngusWOOF has been instrumental in reviewing—as I understand it, we're currently awaiting any oppositions to the speedy deletion of the redirect currently at the Oprah's Book Club (TV series) namespace. If there are none it'll be published!

Next I want to do some major reorganization and cleanup on the other OBC articles.

For context, Oprah's Book Club now has three distinct iterations:

  • The original talk show segment on the Oprah Winfrey Show (1996–2011)
  • An online-only version of the club which has has its own article since the day of its 2012 launch
  • The aforementioned standalone streaming television series on Apple TV (the article for which I drafted)

My gut is that each of these iterations are notable enough for their own articles, and furthermore that Oprah's Book Club itself could become a fourth article describing the history, impact, and any future developments of the OBC franchise overall. See, for example, the article Star Trek, which now describes the overall franchise's history and lists its iterations (while the original series by the same name has become its own article). I proposed something similar for the OBC franchise earlier this week.

However I've been informed in response that four articles is overkill and that instead I should aim to consolidate into one.

This is where I'm confused and could use some guidance: what's the best next move here?

Seems to me it should either be one article or four—anywhere in between seems potentially confusing. You can already sense this in the Oprah's Book Club article as it stands today, switching frequently between past tense (to describe the now-defunct talk show segment) and present (to describe the Club's current iterations and impact on the book industry). And given the fact that by all reasonable definitions an Apple TV series is notable enough for its own article, I personally gravitate toward four.

I'm all for being bold but I'm a new editor and would like to know what the established precedence is in cases such as these. ~~~~Jacob Ford (talk) 18:25, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

The franchise should be described in the main article that goes with the original TV segments, so no, there doesn't need to be a (franchise) article. If you want to aggressively merge the 2.0 and TV series, that would be fine too. If the actual list of books gets too big, then List of Oprah's Book Club books can be created. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:56, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks again for your input, AngusWOOF. However I don't understand how merging OBC2.0 into the TV series article makes logical sense. Could you cite some precedence or show me a similar example in another established article? Someone looking for information on Oprah's Book Club 2.0 wouldn't logically expect to find it in Oprah's Book Club (TV series), as OBC2.0 was specifically non-televised and long preceded the TV series. That said I do like the idea of a unified List of Oprah's Book Club books and can get to work on that.
@Unitof: I don't necessarily agree with AngusWOOF that you can't have separate articles. If you feel strongly enough about trying to make them separate yet individually meaningful, yet are also prepared that consensus might be to merge the info, you can try to write what you see fit. You might consider creating a category for the Oprah books, to add each book to, as well as a list. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:04, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Protecting Articles

Hi all, I just completed a new article that I wrote from scratch. I believe that the page will be vandalised to some extent if it isn't semi-protected, but I can't seem to figure out how to change its protection status. I myself am "only" autoverified, i.e. I can edit semi-protected articles. For reference, the page is titled Massimo Pericolo. Thanks in advance for your help! Actualcpscm (talk) 20:08, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

@Actualcpscm: Only administrators can protect pages, and pages are not protected pre-emptively. If there is actual ongoing vandalism, then you can request protection at WP:RFPP RudolfRed (talk) 20:13, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Good to know, thank you! Actualcpscm (talk) 20:16, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Courtesy: Article is Massimo Pericolo. Created today, and only editor so far has been creator. David notMD (talk) 20:26, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Getting entry published

Hello Editors: Can someone give feedback on my entry about flute player Jonathan McCollum? I hope it can be published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luresblow (talk • contribs) 21:41, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Not as it stands at the moment, Luresblow, because it contains no references that are independent of McCollum: they're all published by organisations he is affiliated with. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject has said about themselves, or what their associates have said about them. It is only interested in what people unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish (at some length) about the subject. Until you can find and cite some examples of that (in reliable sources, the draft will not establish that he meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and it will not be accepted. --ColinFine (talk) 22:07, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Courtesy link: Draft:Jonathan McCollum
Hello, Luresblow, and welcome to the Teahouse. I quite agree with what ColinFine says above. In addition, the independent sources ColinFine mentions should clearly show that McCollum meets at least one of the criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (academics) or else that McCollum satisfies the general notability guideline by citing several independent published reliable sources which discuss him in some depth.
Once you have found such sources, and cited them in the draft (see referencing for Beginners for how to do this, although you seem to have the basics down) you can add {{subst:submit}} to the draft to place it in the review pool for the articles for creation project. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:22, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Problem with the article

Hallo, I created page "Annina Alexis Fedorkova" 5 months ago. But it was stopped, because the reasons, I dont understand. There are relevant sources in that article, she is real person. I dont know, what another sources are needed. Anyway, creating new pages is very copmlicated here. I would be forced to PAY to any person, who is able to make it. Sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Postajkovska.univerzita (talk • contribs) 22:13, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Postajkovska.univerzita. Yes creating pages is rather complicaed here, and there are a number of things to learn. I and several other regulars here, generally advise that new editors start by making small improvements to existing pages before trying nto create a new page. Many people do not follow this advice, however.
You created Draft:Annina Alexis Fedorkova and it wqas reviewed by an experienced editor CASSIOPEIA who said that the draft did not at that time demonstrate the notability of the subject (Annina Alexis Fedorkova, an actress, TV presenter and writer). You then apparently did nothign further, and when the draft had been untouched for 6 months or more, it was deleted. The idea is that the feedback for a declien should be used to improve a decliend draft so that it can be accepted. When a draft goes untouched for 6 months, it is supposed that the author is no longer interested. However, such a draft can be undeleted. You can ask at WP:REFUND, or ask here or at my talk page and I will restore it for you. (If you ask at refund, someone elae is likely to restore it.)
Please understand that to be accepted there must be several (usually at least 3) sources cited that are both Independenat and reliable and that each of those sources must discuss the subject (here Fedorkova) in some detail (not a directory entry or a brief mention). Without such sources, the draft will not be approved.
I strongly urge you not to pay anyone to write an article. Such a paid editor must disclose that s/he is paid, and who made the payment, and such articles t3end to receive particularly strict scrutiny. And no paid editor can honestly promise that a successful article will result. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:42, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

How do you upload a photograph to Wikipedia?

I just don’t get how someone gets to upload an image to Wikipedia, I want to, please help me! — Preceding unsigned comment added by The person who should not be named (talk • contribs) 20:59, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello The person who should not be named and welcome to the Teahouse. See Wikipedia:Uploading images, Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup/1, and Help:Pictures for lots of detail. Pay attention to copyright status. Images which are in the public domain, or have bene r4elased under a free liceense, and most often uploaded to the Wikimedia commons (see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard). Other images may be uplaoded to en.Wikipedia if they fit our policies, Feel free to ask more specific questions once you have read those pages or tried the upload wizard. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:54, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Please Review!

Hi my name is Amy, and I was wondering if you could please review the article I have been working on. I have made a decent amount of changes since last time and wanted feedback! There should not be anymore copied and pasted content. Let me know what else needs to be done! Thank you!

Draft:Continental Express, Inc.

Scotty B 11 (talk) 20:44, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

i'll review it for you! you'll just have to leave a link. you do that by adding [[ ]]. Bill cage (talk) 21:25, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

There you go! Thank you Bill cage Scotty B 11 (talk) 21:29, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

it's good. needs a little improvement in the copyright area, but still good. also, you don't need a guy's name to be treated fairly. make your username whatever you want it be. Bill cage (talk) 21:34, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! What copyright changes do you suggest be improved? I want it to be perfect for when I submit it to be reviewed! Thank you for the feedback Bill cage Scotty B 11 (talk) 21:53, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

@Scotty B 11: I made some changes to the article but it's still not likely to be approved. You need better sourcing, and less trivial info such as the construction of larger parking lots and expanded office space. I marked two sentences needing citations. The source you included says nothing about service to Canada or Mexico - that's why you don't want to use a primary source for any info. I removed everything but the fact that they offer service to the continental 48 states. You also want to use the company infobox, rather than creating a hard to update custom version that doesn't look right. See [[4]] Good luck! TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:23, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

My Sandbox

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § My Sandbox
 – -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:45, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Please how can i name what i created in user:f5pillar/sandbox, and how to published it like other pages F5pillar (talk) 22:25, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi F5pillar. First of all, I moved your question from the Wikipedia Teahouse talk page to the Wikipedia Teahouse main page. The Teahouse's talk page is mainly for asking questions or making suggestions about the Teahouse itself (e.g. change the formatting, fix a syntax error), whereas the Teahouse main page is for asking questions like yours about Wikipedia and editing.
As for you question, it's not clear what you want to do. Do you want to change the name of your sandbox page to something else? If you want to do that, then you can WP:MOVE the page to a new title yourself.
Do want to know whether it the content you posted in your sandbox is something which can become a Wikipedia article? If that's your question, then the answer is going to be no, at least at this time. For more information on why, please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. If you still have questions after reading that pages I linked to above (the words in blue), feel free to post them below and someone will try and help you out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
That what am trying to ask, WIKI:ARTICLE. Alright thanks F5pillar (talk) 22:33, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi again F5pillar. The current version of your sandbox is not something suitable for a Wikipedia article, at least not as is. You seem to have listed some things that you'd like to write articles about, and if that's the case then perhaps you can write articles about them. For more information on how to do so, please see Help:Your first article, Help:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. The first two pages provide information on some of formatting and other things that are used when writing articles and the last page explains which subjects are generally OK to write about. The last page is particularly important because only subjects considered to be Wikipedia notable are deemed suitable to be written about. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:59, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Alright, i understand now. Thanks those are list of article i'll be working on F5pillar (talk) 23:44, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

I need help with posting an article

Can someone please help me write an article about myself? I am a composer, published ethnomusicologist, musician, and university professor in Los Angeles. The article is nearly complete, and links/references collected. So many projects are keeping me from learning how to do this correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sashiko*100 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

@Sashiko*100: This may be about User:Sashiko*100/sandbox/Jonathon_Grasse. Writing an article about yourself is very difficult and very much not recommended. Please read WP:AUTO. RudolfRed (talk) 00:38, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Where to go to report editors after multiple warnings

Where do you go to report editors after them not stopping their Vandalism? Thanks.--The4lines (talk) 02:01, 16 November 2019 (UTC)The4lines

The4lines Welcome to Teahouse. It dependents when type of warning you refer to. For vandalism, report it to WP:AIV. Make sure the edits are blatantly vandalism and provide hist diff when reporting. If the issue is not about vandalism, then kindly specify. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 02:10, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks!--The4lines (talk) 02:16, 16 November 2019 (UTC)The4lines

Would this be accepted?

Hi I just wanted to ask if a page I want to create is likely to be accepted. I want to create an article about Liverpool F.C's 4-0 win over FC Barcelona last season as I believe it's a important and notable game in the history of both Liverpool and the Champions league history. as the biggest comeback in their European history for the former. and as the biggest semi-final comeback of all time for the latter. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 15:02, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

REDMAN 2019 Individual games are rarely notable. Was there continuing coverage, say several months after the game was over? Usually games are written about as part of an article on a season or a particular team or club. If a game has enduring notability, with significant coverage in multiple [][WP:RS|reliable sources]][ on a continuing basis, that might make an article possible. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:07, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
@REDMAN 2019: See WP:NSPORTSEVENT. I'd also suggest raising the question at WT:WikiProject Football for more specific guidance from editors active in that area. My read is that it's pretty unusual for a single non-tourney-final match to be notable. There are lots of unusual events that occur in all sports (e.g. losing 6–5 after being up 5–0 going into the bottom of the 9th in baseball, losing by 10 after being up 30 in the 4th quarter in basketball, etc.) that are not worthy of an article. They may even have occasional mention in sources and continue to hold a "most extreme" record for years. They might be worth mention in the individual team articles and in an article about unusual events in that sport. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 02:59, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Hire someone to help me

Hi, I'm new here, I posted an article that got shot down for looking like an ad. Can I hire someone to help edit or re-write my article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HabanaJoe (talk • contribs) 01:48, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, HabanaJoe. I just reviewed Draft:RxBioLabs of Freehold NJ and it was indeed promotional. Remember that a Wikipedia article summarizes what the news media and other reliable sources have written about a company, not what a company has said about itself -- self-statements are of very limited interest to a Wikipedia editor. Articles must be neutral. And only notable companies will have articles stick. See our guideline on the notability of companies.
There are people who will write Wikipedia articles for pay. I strongly advise you not to hire one. Many are scammers, who will take your money and do little or nothing for it. Even ones who try to be honest cannot guarantee an article sticking.
If the subject is in fact notable, all that is needed is to find independent, reliable sources with in-depth coverage and summarize what they say, avoiding any trace of marketing language. A paid editor must disclose who paid for the article, which doesn't look good. If they don't disclose and are caught, the editor is blocked and the article is apt to be viewed quite negativly by experienced editors. And they often are caught.
Also, do you own or are you8 affiliated with this company? if so, you yourself have a conflict of interest. Please read that guideline. Wikipedia is not social media, and is not for promotion of anyone or anything. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 03:04, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Template help

I have gone somewhere wrong with Template:Poznań with the formatting, can someone help please? Abcmaxx (talk) 15:37, 15 November 2019 (UTC) moved from talk page by Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 17:01, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

OK, I definitely did something, and that something could very well be the fixing of it; but knowing me as I do, I wouldn't bet your life on it. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 19:32, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
@Abcmaxx: Shouldn't the sections under "Research organisations" be called "Active" and "Defunct" like the others above? Also, under "Administrative division", aren't the correct plurals Dzielnice and Osiedla? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 03:11, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Is this original research

I'm overhauling an article about a K-12 school that is part of a network. As part of researching this, I went to the parent organization's webpage where they feature a list of all the schools in the network, and I clicked through to see how the schools compare. In doing so, I observed that the school I'm writing about is the only one in the network that's coeducational K-12. I wrote a sentence reflecting this in the first paragraph of the draft in my sandbox, and now I'm having misgivings that this is OR.

What say you? Ottoump (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Ottoump. In my view, it would be OK from the point of view of OR, because it can easily be verified by a reader looking at just that one source; but I'm not sure that I would regard it as encyclopaedic information. --ColinFine (talk) 18:15, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, ColinFine. I appreciate the OR guidance; I've already scrapped several sections that were more akin to analysis than secondary source collection and I'm trying to be careful. As to your point about encyclopedic information, the lead of the article I'm overhauling had a sentence that began, "It is one of very few coeducational schools [in the network]; most are all-female." Besides lacking documentation, I thought the phrasing was sloppy: How many are there? So I'm trying to preserve what pieces I can from the pre-overhaul article, but in a more accurate form. This is part of WikiProject:Schools. Ottoump (talk) 20:25, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
@Ottoump: To me, it seems like a pretty fundamental characteristic of a school, and being unusual for the group is worth mentioning. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 03:22, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
@AlanM1: Thank you, AlanM1.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1032&oldid=1027921921"