Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

Shortcuts

• WP:TEA
• WP:TH

GoingBatty, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

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

Most recent archives
1214, 1215, 1216, 1217, 1218, 1219, 1220, 1221, 1222, 1223, 1224, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1229, 1230, 1231, 1232, 1233

I know I've made a post here before, but I think I'm gonna need some real help now, I've been debating on the interracial marriage wiki and its clear to me that someone is here to abuse report, but I'm not sure what to do because I also suspect them of sock puppeting, but I might be wrong and I might just have to take it to a Dispute Resolution, I don't wanna do something thats going to get me into trouble because I love editing wiki and I'm so glad I'm part of this community which I have trust in, I just want some help on this situation because I think its way over my head -- Toby Mitches (talk) 15:33, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Cleaned the talk page up a bit, posted to AN at WP:AN#Interracial marriage, watching the article and editors in dispute as they talk to each other and report one another, will chime in where appropriate or when asked. Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:22, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me how to edit semi protected pages Eroberar (talk) 06:44, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Eroberar. You have two choices. You can wait until your account is autoconfirmed, or you can file a properly formatted edit request on the article's talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:50, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To edit semiprotected pages you must become autoconfirmed, which means your account is 4 days old and you have made 10 edits. For you, this means doing 4 more edits and waiting 3 days or so (occasionally there is some lag in updating your user rights). Giraffer ^munch 07:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Be aware that semi-protected articles tend to have editors who are avid watchers of every change. As a new editor, you are likely to be reverted for making a change that has already been proposed and rejected in the past. I recommend you first look at the article's Talk pages to see past discussions. David notMD (talk) 08:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw the past discussion in the talk page but I have sources to support what I am claiming Eroberar (talk) 07:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Eroberar, consensus can change when new evidence is brought forward. So, if you have it, you can either make an edit request as advised or start a simple discussion on the talk page and see what others think of your new sources. If others agree, they may make the edit for you. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:31, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! An editor appears to be targeting some of the articles I've worked on, and I'm trying to get my bearings on what's okay and what is not okay. To start with can you advise me if the 3RR rule has been broken?

On 21 September 2020, between 21:07 and 22:06, one editor made eight reversions to the article on Andrew Hastie (politician), removing about 100,000 bytes of information, which you can see here. At the time I kind of accepted it and started working through the material on the talk page. But I'm starting to realise that, under wiki guidelines, that perhaps I shouldn't have quietly accepted it at all. That the "three-revert rule" means "an editor must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material, on a single page within a 24-hour period."

Should I have reported this? Should I now? Should I offer a warning?

I'd appreciate any advice. The Little Platoon (talk) 11:24, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Little Platoon, when you make an accusation against another editor, it's polite to notify them. I'll notify Onetwothreeip now. I see the deletions are explained in rather thorough edit summaries, and I'm inclined to agree that they were warranted. In any case, I don't see the 3RR rule as relevant, any more than it would be if they had deleted all the material in one edit rather than eight. What you should do now is discuss the deletions at the article's talk page. Maproom (talk) 11:42, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) No, 8 consecutive edits count as one revert, even if all of them should revert previous edits, per WP:3RR: An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert. In addition, you are misreading the article history slightly: as can be seen here, one editor made a series of edits, not all of them reverts (and in each case explaining their edit) between 21:07 on 21 September and 22:06 on 22 September (UTC). You did the right thing by opening a discussion on the article talk page. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:48, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute between editors appears to have spilled over to Tim Smith (Australian politician). Maybe it is something in the water (or beer) of Australia? David notMD (talk) 11:52, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, The Little Platoon, also realize that just because you see the same editor working on two articles you also are interested in doesn't mean they're 'targetting' you or your edits. It's much more likely they just have interests similar to your own. If you can find a way to work with each other, you may have found someone you can collaborate enjoyably with on future work, which can be one of the best parts about editing Wikipedia. —valereee (talk) 12:22, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Little Platoon: you say that you are a lowly staffer receiving a salary in Australian politics. Although I can't tell from those details, I see that you have also said ". If I announced that I was working for a particular person at the top of the page, then people in parliament would work out who I am, and all the anonymity would be undone". It looks as though you may have a choice, forsake anonymity and declare, or stay out of Australian politics. Doug Weller talk 12:50, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will express a different opinion. For years, I was a paid consultant to dietary supplement companies while editing Wikipedia articles about dietary supplement ingredients. Since retired. I said as much on my User page, adding that none of my clients ever requested that I edit Wikipedia, nor were any aware that I was doing that. If I was concerned that I might have an unconscious bias rather than a true NPOV on a particular article, I declared as much on the article's Talk page. That said, given that you and other editor(s) are expressing contending opinions on what belongs in Aussie-themed articles, perhaps consider starting discussions on those editor(s) Talk pages before the article itself. David notMD (talk) 15:27, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Little Platoon I'd agree with DavidnotMD. As long as you mention on your user page that you've got a potential COI in Aussie politics, and you can draft a list that includes not only your boss but anyone your boss is a big supporter or detractor of. That'll protect your anonymity but reassure the community. —valereee (talk) 18:09, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My thanks to you @Valereee:@Doug Weller:@David notMD:@Maproom:for your time. I came to see if the 3RR rule had been broken and the consensus is it hasn't. I also note everybody's thoughts on anonymity and disclosure. Roughly, I'm being given the same thoughts that I was given when I outlined my situation on the COI page a couple of months ago: to declare a connection with the subjects (which I do on my talk page and on the talk page of the relevant subject). So, I will continue to do that. I note the suggestion that perhaps I should abandon writing about the topic which I love and enjoy, and I must say that leaves me feeling pretty sad. The Little Platoon (talk) 19:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Little Platoon, I feel like as long as you declare, you should be able to edit in the areas of your primary interest. You can't change the fact that since you aren't comfortable declaring exactly who you are employed by, other editors may tend to consider you a paid editor at any article. You might consider just not editing boldly except for things no one would ever object to -- unambiguous corrections -- and instead discussing any actual content changes first. That'll go a long way to gaining community trust, even in your situation. —valereee (talk) 10:18, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea: thanks for your clear explanation. And {ping|Valereee}} I actually enjoy editing with others collaboratively! We'll see what happens on the article talk page over the next few days. I'm hoping there will some genuine to and fro which, I think, always happens for a real consensus to form. We'll see.The Little Platoon (talk) 21:31, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the source code for this template? Can it be exported to other non-wmf sites? Starzoner (talk) 14:44, 4 October 2020 (UTC) Starzoner (talk) 14:44, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At the top of Template:Birth date and age there is a tab labelled "View source". --David Biddulph (talk) 15:01, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find much. Does that work? Starzoner (talk) 19:31, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that template works. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:33, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there one where the text is consolidated on one page? Not on wikipedia I mean. Starzoner (talk) 20:06, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The key age calculation is performed by Module:Age. DMacks (talk) 06:53, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please i created a new wiki page it's is in the main space but has a no index tag any help Amah_Chinbudu Lynn (talk) 22:11, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You moved this from draft to main space, but in my opinion none of the references establish his notability. Most are name-mentions: picked for team, scored hat trick, scored goal. Perhaps someone with knowledge of sports notability can comment. David notMD (talk) 22:36, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Players that have played in the Nigerian Professional Football League are considered notable. However, the name given by the cited sources is Chibundu Amah, so that needs to be fixed and explained. Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:35, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response it's awesome, Usedtobecool ☎️ I've verify the name and move it to Chinbudu Amah Note since he's a football player in Nigerian Professional Football League he's considered notable.

Could it be indexed now — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lynndonald (talk • contribs) 10:02, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lynndonald, the sources say "Chibundu". You've used both and titled it "Chinbudu". Which one is correct? Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:38, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks my keyboard auto correct its at fault it's Chibundu Amah so I will correct it Usedtobecool ☎️ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lynndonald (talk • contribs) 09:27, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Newly created articles are NOINDEXed until they have either been reviewed through the new pages patrol process or 90 days have expired. Special:NewPagesFeed shows over 6000 pages awaiting review. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:39, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It will be indexed when it has either been reviewed through the new pages patrol process or 90 days have expired. Special:NewPagesFeed still shows over 6000 pages awaiting review. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:35, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do you add citations? Glome premacamposmercedes (talk) 23:32, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Glome premacamposmercedes. The Tools menu in you editor contains a 'Cite' button for you to use. See WP:REFBEGIN for detailed guidance. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:36, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Glome premacamposmercedes, please go through WP:REFB, and we'll be happy to answer any questions that may remain. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Glome premacamposmercedes (talk) 23:01, 5 October 2020 (UTC)Thanks Usedtobecool and Nick Moyes, I’ve worked out citations.Glome premacamposmercedes (talk) 23:01, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have hard doing road junctions. When I do add to road junctions list or add to it, the list messes up and it looks like vandalism. I would some help. Cwater1 (talk) 00:23, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that you have trouble with tables? If so, yes, table syntax is complex and mistakes are easy to make. I can't think of any short cut for avoidance of mistakes. Why not write your suggested changes to the content of a table to the talk page of the relevant article? (Specify your sources, of course.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Cwater1: To avoid that issue, you should always 'Preview' your changes to check things work OK. Better still, it's worth copying the table code to your sandbox and experimenting with edits to it there. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 07:26, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Glome premacamposmercedes (talk) 23:07, 5 October 2020 (UTC)Don’t worry ([[User::@Cwater1:, Table syntax is tough, but everyone works it out in good time.Glome premacamposmercedes (talk) 23:07, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Would anyone like to help me create an article for Little Mix’s new album Confetti? There is both an Instagram post and a tweet revealing the album’s release date, that could be used as citations. It would probably be a stub article, since there isn’t a lot of information and the track list hasn’t been revealed yet, but it would be nice to at least get an article going.

Well, Crazychickennthang, those sound like dubious sources. Why the rush? Little Mix discography says that the album will be out just one month from now. Just wait a month. -- Hoary (talk) 03:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Crazychickennthang: Please see WP:CRYSTAL. We don't like to guess at things that haven't happened yet, at least not in any detail, based on pre-release information (even if it's "official"). You can always start working on it in your sandbox so you'll be ready when it is released. Keep in mind that others may be interested in that artist, too, and may also want to create the articles, so you might want to discuss it on the artist's article talk page (Talk:Little Mix). (Please also take note of MOS:CURLY.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:42, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I recently found out that there is a draft; someone has already started an article. I’ll probably try and contribute to it somehow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazychickennthang (talk • contribs) 02:39, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to be able to edit semi-protected pages? ShreyasBS1501 (talk) 05:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ShreyasBS1501: two ways:

1. make 4 more valuabke contributions elsewhere so you get WP:AUTOCONFIRMED and can edit the page yourself.
2. use the edit requests mechanism. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:04, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What does it mean to make a valuable contribution inorder to edit semi-protected pages? ShreyasBS1501 (talk) 06:17, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to make a semi protected page fully protected? ShreyasBS1501 (talk) 06:19, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ShreyasBS1501, Valuable contributions mean that you improve articles on the Wikipedia and not add something that is vandalism. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:22, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ShreyasBS1501, you can post requests about pageprotection on this page: WP:RFPP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tea House, there's problem of copy-and-paste wikitable content of Oteckovia in Slovak language to the List of Oteckovia episodes with full translation to English, that I failed to do action. Can you copy the Part section of the Slovak language of Oteckovia to the English Wikimedia list article by yourself? The Supermind (talk) 06:51, 5 October 2020 (UTC) The Supermind (talk) 06:51, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello The Supermind, welcome to the Teahouse! Looking at your edit that didn't work[1], it seems that the article you want to copy from uses WP:Templates that the Slovak Wikipedia has but not this one. I do not know if it will be as simple as just importing those templates here to make it work, or if you have to create similar templates yourself or bring in the actual text manually. Let's see if Paine Ellsworth or Sdkb have an idea, or advice. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:53, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an expert on translation, so I'm not sure beyond what Usedtobecool identified. I asked WikiProject Intertranswiki to help us. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:04, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer, but very much wish I did. So I keep it brief here. I put a longer answer saying the same thing at the "WikiProject Intertranswiki" page. I suspect that's the only answer you'll get there - not too much wiki-footfall there these days - but would be delighted to be proved wrong on that.

Success Charles01 (talk) 08:03, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,

I have tried to upload information on a Wikipedia page called " Malgre Tout Media". It got declined because of not enough reliable resources but afterwards, I added one more link from 3rd party sources. Now, it still shows as being declined so I'm wondering why it's still not approved. I think that given the amount of content, there is enough reliable sources. But if not, how much more should I add?

Also, I have seen a lot of other Wikipedia pages that have less sources and references but are still published.

Thank you in advance! Adelina Maria Stana (talk) 06:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Adelina Maria Stana: Please see WP:OSE. As this is a volunteer project, we can only act on things we know and its entirely possible for articles to go undetected for years. As for Draft:Malgré Tout Media, it looks better but I am still concerned if this was changed sufficiently to meet WP:NCORP. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 07:09, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Adelina Maria Stana: It's not the quantity of the sources that matters, but the quality. The sources you have offered are not independent reliable sources with significant coverage, showing how the magazine meets the Wikipedia definition of notable web content. All articles should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject; please see Your First Article for more information.

I see that this digital magazine is the only topic you have edited about. If you have some association with it, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you could be required to make.

Please feel free to point out these other similar articles that could also be problematic, we could use the help. As noted, it is possible to get inappropriate content by us. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to add image in wikipedia and how to add introductory columns such as name , born, died etc Charanjeetsinghvirk (talk) 09:18, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charanjeetsinghvirk Regarding images, your account must be four days old and have 10 edits or more to be able to upload images to Wikipedia, though you can upload certain images to Commons; please see WP:UPIMAGE for more information. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've been wanting to ask this even if it's very simple, but I just wanted to ask it here anyway for those who want to respond and enlighten me. Why are there other pages that are semi-protected? Is it limited to most editors? And how does an article garner a notice "semi-protected"? Much thanks. Bekkadn (talk) 10:27, 5 October 2020 (UTC) Bekkadn (talk) 10:27, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We're happy to answer simple questions. You'll find an answer at WP:SEMI. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:30, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Thank you very much! Bekkadn (talk) 03:52, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mulayam Singh Yadav died yesterday. I changed that "blp source" template with "more citation needed" template, but still when I go to edit source, I see the BLP notice. How to change this? Is there any template for that? Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 10:37, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lightbluerain. You probably can't and shouldn't change that. It's called an WP:EDITNOTICE and most likely an administrator or someone with the appropriate WP:USERRIGHT will need to remove it. However, you should be aware that WP:BLP sometimes still applies to articles about persons who have recently died (see WP:BDP for more). My guess is that the notice will be eventually removed at some point so I'm not sure you need to worry about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:44, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I juat learned that it was not this person who died. I got confused. Thanks anyways. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 10:50, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article I wrote about Ardmaleish boatbuilding company the last shipyard to the Scottish island of Bute was rejected for ( not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia ) by Salimfadhley who lives in London in England and is of Arab descent, has rejected my article on part of Scottish shipbuilding history I find this very offensive I wish for a ethically Scottish person to review my article some who should under stand the importance of shipbuilding in Scottish history , I was say this again I find this very offensive that my article was rejected for ( not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia ) by some I believe who does not understand Scottish history .

thank you your time.

when there are other article about other shipyards that have not been rejected

here are 25 article on other British shipyards that were not rejected for being ( not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia )

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferguson_Marine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotts_Shipbuilding_and_Engineering_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkol_Marine_Engineering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hall,_Russell_%26_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dunston https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_W_Miller_%26_Sons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McTay_Marine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_%26_McKenzie_Shipbuilders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appledore_Shipbuilders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ailsa_Shipbuilding_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swan_Hunter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yarrow_Shipbuilders_Limited https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Shipbuilders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VT_Group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Lithgow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_Shipbuilding_and_Engineering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A%26P_Group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooke_Marine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cammell_Laird https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clelands_Shipbuilding_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Govan_Shipbuilders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwall_Yard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Robb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith%27s_Dock_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Doxford_%26_Sons Greenock1998 (talk) 11:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, Greenock1998, as you will find here, the fact that other flawed articles exist does not excuse a flawed article being accepted. It is likely that the rejection of the article has nothing to do with the nationality and heritage of the person who rejected it. Additionally, as you may find here, just because someone may be biased doesn't mean that they definitely have a conflict of interests. If you have a problem with the notability of other articles, it may be advisable to bring this up on the talk page of other articles and propose them for deletion on the grounds of lack of notability. Also, your search was solely of British shipyards, ignoring the other shipyards that would indicate a lack of bias in adding articles about shipyards. I hope this explains this properly, but it probably doesn't because I'm bad at this stuff, sorry

––– [ Vedvod | My (bad) contributions to this site | Talk ] 12:41, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"[T]he importance of shipbuilding in Scottish history" is not the issue. The demonstrable significance of the Ardmaleish boatbuilding company is. Demonstrable via the attention paid to it in independent, reliable publications. Your Draft:Ardmaleish boatbuilding company (2) doesn't cite a single book, magazine or newspaper, and Salimfadhley can see this just as clearly as could somebody who's "ethnically Scots". As long as they abide by Wikipedia's policies, a Londoner (or a Mexican) may write about Scotland and a Scots person (or a Finn) may write about London. There's no ethnicity bar in Wikipedia (though white male speakers of English as a first language are overrepresented). -- Hoary (talk) 13:08, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am a U.S. citizen who has never been to a shipyard. I would also reject your draft. None of what you provide in support is formated as references, and simple information confirming that ships were built contributes nothing to notability. If there is not published content ABOUT Ardmaleish this will never be article-worthy. David notMD (talk) 14:09, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Greenock1998, I have raised this on your talk page as a matter of importance. I see your post as displaying racism, and wholly inappropriate Fiddle Faddle 22:58, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, all! Very happy to be part of this wonderful community. My question is about autoconfirmation. Per the guidelines I've read (4 days and 10 edits), I should be autoconfirmed at this stage. Is this something for which I would receive a notification of some sort, or is it more of a quiet change to the account?

Many thanks! Ryanwwiki (talk) 12:02, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ryanwwiki, you can find your status here: https://xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org/Ryanwwiki. As revealed, you are in fact autoconfirmed. It is indeed a quiet change. I hope you enjoy your time here!

––– [ Vedvod | My (bad) contributions to this site | Talk ] 12:41, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you 24.172.172.171 (talk) 13:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC) Sike[reply]

Click on any user name to find out more. -- Hoary (talk) 13:17, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse is a place where volunteer hosts answer questions about editing Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 14:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Quick question....Is quoting an author or a book allowed? I just wanted to ask. Also, can anyone see my sandbox, like other people, or is it just me who can see it? Thanks so much, DaniHart08 (Talk). 13:27, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DaniHart08: it is sometimes OK to insert brief quotations. More info here. Your sandbox is still public, just like last time you asked. --bonadea contributions talk 13:36, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

DaniHart08 (Talk). 13:38, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi wikiepdians! My edit on TNT disambiguation was reverted and labeled minor edit when it was not obvious vandalism. Please take action. (accusing Bkonrad) (Help given by Dave Biddulph) (Please read Help:Minor Edit before answering if unfamiliar). Acidic Carbon (Corrode) (Organic compounds) 13:56, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Acid Of Carbon, Hi welcome to the teahouse! Ask him on his talk page on why he reverted it. It seems like a reasonable revert, not all reverts are because of vandalism. Heart ^(talk) 14:02, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HeartGlow30797: But i think it is wrong to label a non-obvious vandalism revert as minor edit. See User talk:Acid Of Carbon/Archive 1.Acidic Carbon (Corrode) (Organic compounds) 14:06, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Acid Of Carbon: Sorry for reverting your edit, but on the face of it, it looked a lot like vandalism as it introduced multiple errors. There is no option for NOT marking a revert using rollback function as minor. older ≠ wiser 15:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @Acid Of Carbon: You have far, far more important things to worry about than whether another editor should or should not have marked a revert of your rather daft edit to that DAB page as 'minor'. You are about to get blocked unless you respond immediately to serious questions being asked by Maxim on your talk page about your behaviour and your competence here. Go and address those matters first, my friend! (And whilst I'm here, please don't waste time reporting old, single test edits at WP:AIV, as you did here. As someone who believed themselves competent enough to stand at an RfA, you should have known better. Or are you just trolling us?). Nick Moyes (talk) 15:50, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently adding to the Super Mario Bros. 35 article, in the reception heading. There was a table of info already there, but it needed description, which I started doing. Whatever I write, instead of the table staying in the top right, it moves to the bottom of whatever is written. How can I keep the writing where it is but keep the table in the top right where it should be? Le Panini (talk) 14:19, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Le Panini, hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Does the edit I made help? Heart ^(talk) 14:54, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HeartGlow30797 Yes, that's exactly the problem. Thank you! Le Panini (talk) 15:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Le Panini, for future reference, just move the template to the top of the section! Happy editing! Heart ^(talk) 15:34, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hello i wonder how i can delete my account Cimz666666 (talk) 14:47, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cimz666666, hello, we are sad to see you go. You can't really delete your account. See WP:RETIRE for alternate options. Heart ^(talk) 14:50, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do i add my biography on wikipedia life time? Lolabiaarif (talk) 14:51, 5 October 2020 (UTC) Aarif Shakeel Lolabi[reply]

Lolabiaarif, before starting, make sure it is notable
Click here to start a new article
--Heart ^(talk) 15:00, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be more clear, Wikipedia is not social media. Articles are about people who are notable. Your not-submitted draft does not contain any information that you meet those standards. If you submit it, it will be rejected. I recommend you abandon it. David notMD (talk) 15:14, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, you have created article-imitating content about yourself on your User page. This is not allowed. Content on a User page is supposed to be about your intentions and activities as a Wikipedia editor. Please delete it before an administrator does. David notMD (talk) 15:17, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hur raderar jag mitt konto

how do I delete my accountCimz666666 (talk) 14:53, 5 October 2020 (UTC) Cimz666666 (talk) 14:53, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cimz666666, I'm sorry was this an accidental repost? Heart ^(talk) 14:55, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cimz666666, another option is WP:RTL Heart ^(talk) 14:56, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HeartGlow30797: That is not a helpful answer to give to a user with just one prior edit to their name. You really should have checked first! Whilst WP:REVDEL might be the place to point Cimz666666 if they want any personal information deleted in that edit, the actual answer is that we don't delete accounts. Just stop using it and forget the password. Talk page or userpage blanking is acceptable, though. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:21, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I wanna create a company's page here on Wikipedia... Fist the brand I wanna write about is a fast rising brand and has existed before the creation of the brands website (according to my little research) but I will be needing other people to join in the page creation, how do I do that? Also, how do I really create a company page that would be approved cuz I have seen a lot of time for company pages they often use words that looks like promotion, so how do I avoid all those? Because it's coming from a neutral voice...

Lastly how do I get images that are not copyrighted?

That's all for now.... Dremo24 (talk) 14:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dremo24, first, please make sure that your company is notable, and read WP:PCD and WP:COI before starting your article. Second, you must upload an image, see WP:UPI to learn how to do this. Let me know if you have any more questions. Happy editing! Heart ^(talk) 15:03, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Dremo24 (I'm afraid HeartGlow30797 forgot to say that to you!) They also forgot to point you to these Notability Guidelines for Companies which usually require at least three, in-depth and completely independent sources to have written about that company or business before we accept an article about it. So many people waste time trying to promote their favourite business when it stands no chance of getting over that high bar. I hope that helps. You might wish to read this page about creating your first article here. regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:04, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am teaching a university class and I want my students to build a tutorial on the use of a certain open-source software. Is Wikipedia an appropriate place for this type of knowledge? I look forward to your advice. Regards, Juan Lorenzo  Juanlorenzo (talk) 15:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Juanlorenzo, yes it is. See this page to be an official educator. Heart ^(talk) 15:12, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not!!! The guidance for education programs helps teachers enroll students in supervised efforts to improve articles. It is not a place to create a tutorial article on how to use a specific software program. There is a possibility that the software program itself may be notable (in the Wikipedia sense of the word) to warrant creation of an article, but that should not contain how-to-use content. David notMD (talk) 15:21, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just pinging Juanlorenzo to make sure they see this updated advice from David. I'll also just add that Wikipedia is not an appropriate place if you view it as somewhere to put an article about using certain types of open source software. See WP:NOTMANUAL for the rationale. However, Wikipedia might contain articles about certain notable software programmes and, as such, might be a good starting point for anyone wanting to find citations that link to published information about them. But we would neither want to host nor link to student-built tutorials. It sounds like an excellent project - but just not one for this encyclopaedia. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the clarification. I have had students build Wiki projects in the past of a more general nature. But I have not had them build tutorials before and so I was in doubt as to we should proceed in this direction. I can see that I must find another avenue to publish the tutorials. Thanks again for your quick advice. Juanlorenzo

Just created an account yesterday after several years away from Wikipedia. Wake up this morning to find that an admin has deleted both my user page and a user box that I created for myself. WTF?  LarsJohnson93 (talk) 17:06, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would hardly call a WP:U1 deletion request harassment, nor any other deletion, but particularly in this case as you requested it. Praxidicae (talk) 17:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LarsJohnson93, hello, Welcome to the Teahouse! According to the deletion log, you requested to delete it. You can always restore your user page at WP:REFUND. Happy editing! Heart ^(talk) 17:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't request it!!! This is a fraudulent U1. I never requested to have my page deleted! --LarsJohnson93 (talk) 17:12, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LarsJohnson93, I did not see the request on your contribs page. Do you have a second account, our admins are careful in deletion of pages and all of Wikipedia. Wait for deleting user to respond to your message on their talk page. Heart ^(talk) 17:19, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This was a User page deletion followed by an indefinite block (see LarsJohnson93 Talk page). It was not a WP:U1 deletion, so not clear why Praxidicae thought so, but issue is moot. David notMD (talk) 18:30, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

David notMD, see the deletion log Heart ^(talk) 18:33, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm working on a draft article about someone who originally went by one name and now officially goes by a different name (not a stage name, but a legal name change along with a gender change). I am trying to cite an award he won several years ago, but he won the award under the old name. In the prose where I discuss the win, do I need to say something about how he won the award under the name [name 1]? Because clicking to the citation, his current name is of course not listed, so it looks like I'm incorrect. Does that make sense? Is there a standard for how I should go about this? Apathyash (talk) 17:33, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Apathyash:, You can mention two names in the lead section. For example, This (also known as That). I don't think it is a big issue. Have a look at Sayyid Muhammad Abid and Aziz al-Hasan Ghouri. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 17:55, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@TheAafi:, thank you for your response. My concern is that the individual is openly trans and the old name is considered a “dead name”. Members of the trans community often find it very offensive and upsetting to be referred to by the old name. I know this isn’t really a concern for an encyclopedia. So, I am wondering if there is a compromise I can find. For example, could I explain the name discrepancy on the talk page and avoid using it on the main? Apathyash (talk) 19:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, Apathyash, I would say it is a concern for Wikipedia. If you haven't done so already, it's worth consulting MOS:GENDERID. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:07, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@TheAafi: It is certainly a "big issue", and the subject of much discussion here in recent years (which is hopefully distilled coherently at MOS:GENDERID and the other pages to which it links). @Apathyash: You might also see examples at high-profile articles for people with similar backgrounds, like Caitlyn Jenner and others at Category:GA-Class WikiProject LGBT studies - person articles. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:12, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AlanM1, seeing the above explanation, I see this is definitely a big issue. Thanks AlanM1 for pointing out towards it. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 04:20, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I somewhere read in a policy/guideline that usually there is no need to add a sidebar if there is an infobox in an article. I have tried to search a lot but couldn't find that page. Can anyone give me the link? And am I correct in my understanding about sidebars guideline? Thanks. Zayeem ^(talk) 17:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

​There's no need to add a sidebar in general, but I don't recall specific advice against having both an infobox and a sidebar. You might be interested in this recent discussion about just dropping sidebars. – Thjarkur (talk) 18:56, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have made an !vote there. And I think this is the page I was looking for. --Zayeem ^(talk) 19:30, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kmzayeem: It sounds to me like it's just discussing where to put it, not whether to use it at all. They serve totally different purposes, and I don't see a reason (other than a general dislike of them, which some editors have) not to use both if they're applicable. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:47, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AlanM1, Yes, as I understand it, sidebars shouldn't be added to the lead section of an article when there is an infobox. What prompted me to open this discussion are some short-sized articles with multiple sidebars, causing a substantial layout error. I'm also not really averse to sidebars in general; I've created few of them myself. --Zayeem ^(talk) 17:04, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am a new editor and still learning the ropes with editing and creating new articles. I recently started a new article on the Kim Loo Sisters, a group of Asian American Sisters who performed in vaudeville circuits and Broadway from the 1930s through the 1940s. I am using a book that have compiled interviews from the sisters and am unsure of whether I should write down all details in the parenthetical in-line citations or if I should use "Ibid" for repeating the author name and publication date.

Thank you!

Zmdrecidoro (talk) 19:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can use tags to give a citation a name, which means you can then use that name inside its tags to link back to the source in question. The only time this has issues is when referring to specifc pages if required. See this section on the relevant page on citing sources. Koncorde (talk) 19:19, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

​"Ibid" doesn't fit very well for Wikipedia since the text could be moved around later. If you're using the VisualEditor you can just copy-and-paste a citation to other locations, that will share the same citation and it will only appear as one at the bottom of the article. You can also write your own short footnotes on the form "Leslie (2020), p. 23–29" if you want to point out specific pages, you just go to Cite > Manual > Basic form to write it in. – Thjarkur (talk) 19:34, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic, thank you so much for clarifying that! Zmdrecidoro (talk) 19:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zmdrecidoro: Just to add: to reuse a reference, you give the reference a name, then on subsequent uses you 'call it up' by that name, without having to re-enter all the details again. See WP:REFNAME for a full explanation. You can then use the {{rp}} template to add specific page numbers immediately afterwards, like this:

First fact found on page 29 of a book.^[1]: 29

Second fact found on page 114 from the same book.^[1]: 114

Hope you find this helpful, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:46, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

can you help publish this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Young_Spit Era257Iwacu (talk) 00:23, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Era257Iwacu, hi and welcome to the Teahouse! Submit the draft to WP:AfC. Heart ^(talk) 00:27, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First, your draft has not been submitted to Articles for creation (as Heart noted, WP:AfC). Second, if submitted, very likely it will be Declined, if not outright Rejected and Speedy Deleted. None of the refs are about Young Spit. Instead, all they do is confirm that he has released songs. The draft uses promotional language. See Wikipedia:Notability (music) for criteria for articles. Third, given that your User name is a composite of two of YS's songs, I am guessing you are either him or connected to him, so WP:COI and/or WP:PAID might apply, ditto WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Last, User names cannot be names of companies, so you are likely to be blocked from any more editing unless you do a name change. David notMD (talk) 00:43, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to know what is reliable sources from where we can add reliable sources if two reliable sources of different types or meaning which one is accepted Adsmohali (talk) 01:00, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adsmohali, Have you looked at WP:RS? ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:57, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How i can contact wikipedia administrator for improvement of articles. Adsmohali (talk) 01:02, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to bother administrators if your goal is to improve articles. Almost all article have a "talk" page which is where you can talk about ways to improve that article. People have their favorite articles on "watch lists" so they will notice when you put a note on an article's "talk" page. Administrators deal with boring tasks such as keeping internet trolls at bay, deleting pages which don't belong, and enforcing rules when necessary. The rest of us - and administrators too if they have time - get to do the fun work of improving articles. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:07, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am Peter Schaeffer (Redacted) and would like to edit a Wikipedia article. However, it appears that the article is protected. What do I need to do to edit the article? Thank you Peter Schaeffer Pschaeffer (talk) 04:08, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever article it is, it will have an associated "Talk" page. Please say there what should be changed (and how), added, or removed. Please specify a reliable, independent, published reference for this if appropriate. -- Hoary (talk) 05:03, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Appears you have properly raised the issue at the Talk page of 2012 Benghazi attack after having your edits to the article reverted. Continue there until you and other editors reach a consensus. David notMD (talk) 16:03, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I recently add some of the contents User:Shahoodu/sandbox to Kerala Blasters FC article. Shahoodu gave may permission to use in that article. But how can I use the CC-BY-SA license to the article WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 07:11, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello WhiteFalcon1. Any text added recently to Wikipedia is freely licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0. You can copy that to another place on the encyclopedia, as long as you attribute the source. The easiest way is to say "copied from (specific page)" in your edit summary. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:28, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Cullen328 Thanks for your reply. But i didn't mentioned it in my edit summary.And this {{CWW|User:Shahoodu/sandbox}} template was added in the Kerala Blasters FC article. So what should I do next ?? WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 08:11, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

​Have added an edit summary for attribution (WP:RIA). – Thjarkur (talk) 09:29, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thjarkur Thanks for you help.WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 09:30, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Political manipulation on Wikipedia regarding acts of self-immolation in Poland after 2010

Warsaw Bruvver (talk) 09:42, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Warsaw Bruvver Concerns regarding article content should be raised on the talk pages of the articles involved. 331dot (talk) 09:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I received a notification (or alert) that one of my articles has been tagged for speedy deletion. The instruction leads me to find a button called "Contest this speedy deletion" in the tag which I cannot find. No clickable buttons with this content, can I get some help please? Freshclover (talk) 09:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Freshclover Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It appears that someone else removed the speedy deletion notice from the article; you no longer need to contest it. If the article has a red speedy deletion notice at the top, the Contest button will be within it, or you may also just post on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Freshclover: The only such message I see in your talk page history is Special:Diff/785890789, from over three years ago (see the timestamp at the end), which was dealt with long ago. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:48, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_Scotia_Power which was updated on 11 July 2020, you folks omitted the Stora =Port Hawkesbury Paper biomass generating plant??? -great resource -thank and take care. Music cb (talk) 11:56, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Music cb There is no "you folks", just volunteer editors. You, as an editor, can add that facility if you add a reference at the same time. David notMD (talk) 12:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I wish to create another article, but I am not sure if I use the sandbox it won't delete the previous page created by me. Kindly suggest.Thanks 51moont (talk) 14:26, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@51moont:Hello! You can always create another article without deleting what's in your sandbox. Type in WP:FIRST in the search bar, and an article will explain how to do it all. Le Panini (talk) 14:48, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, for reference, click on your username (which is currently red) and it will allow you to create a user page, for a bio and a personal talk page.

If you go to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:51moont/sandbox&redirect=no you can blank the page, or edit it to replace with new content. David Biddulph (talk) 15:59, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When I Start Edited. Leonardox2020 (talk) 14:56, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Leonardox2020: I'm sorry, but your question is not clear. You can see your contributions, if that's what you mean, at Special:Contributions/Leonardox2020. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:37, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Plytixcommunication (talk) 15:20, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Plytixcommunication, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid the answer is that you probably don't, especially if the business is Plytix and you work for them. If the business meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then somebody will eventually create an article about it; but ideally nobody associated with the company should be involved in that. If it is created and accepted, it will not belong to the company, it will not necessarily say what the company wants it to say, and employees and associates of the company will be limited to suggesting changes on the article's talk page.

If given that, you still wish to try the difficult process of creating an acceptable article, here are the first steps:

1. Abandon your account and create a new one with a name which does not imply that it might be used by multiple people, or on behalf of a company. (Something like "PatatPlytix" would be acceptable)
2. If you are in any way employed or paid to do this, you must make the declarations explained in Paid editing. Also read about editing with a Conflict of interest.
3. Read Help:Your first article to see how to go about it. This will involve you finding at least three places where people who have no connection with the company, and have not been prompted or fed information by the company, have chosen to publish enough material about the company in reliable sources to provide the basis for an article. You will then need to forget everything you know about the company, and write an article based solely on those independent sources. --ColinFine (talk) 21:15, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Still editing Super Mario Bros. 35. Got a lot of progress, but ran into another problem.

There is a table which shows news sources and their reviews, and I'm trying to add one from imore. It looks like this:

|imore = 2.5/5^[1]

It's messed up right now, but if you click edit you can see the coding.

When I preview the article, it shows the old table, and my new source isn't in there. Am I adding the new piece in improperly? Sorry if I worded this question weird. Le Panini (talk) 15:22, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I tried a whole bunch of tweaks and the imore rating and ref always shows up in edit mode, but invisible in the article. My only guess is that there is a program that turns MC, JVX, Nlife and SN in edit mode into the names of the rating systems in the table, but imore is not in the program. David notMD (talk) 15:47, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. "imore" is not a supported parameter. See Module:Video game reviews/data. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:53, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it's up to parameters? That's why. Okay, thank you. Le Panini (talk) 15:56, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I created a new article and published it. It exists as a draft waiting for review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_Dobie.

A few days ago I was rather surprised that I found my article on another Wiki: https://wikitia.com/wiki/David_Dobie, even though it has not been reviewed, and not as a draft.

What is the purpose of this "wikitia"? What is the sense of copying draft pages and publishing them elsewhere? Bojustme (talk) 16:11, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bojustme: once something is submitted on Wikipedia, the licensing allows other sites to cut and paste but they are supposed to provide attribution. Not all do. Wikipedia has no control over reuse. Indeed there are many articles that are submitted and rejected that show up on other mirror sites. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:27, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitia is a separate website, not connected with Wikipedia. To learn about it, try reading https://wikitia.com/wiki/Wikitia:About . Their page does give attribution saying where they had copied it from, so they are complying with the licence under which you released your contribution to Wikipedia. David Biddulph (talk) 16:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly, Wikitia have added a {{Infobox person}} to your article. You could copy that back into your draft, which would be an improvement and make it more likely to be accepted. For what it's worth, I'd be happy to accept the draft for Wikipedia but I'm not confident to do that, owing to my relative inexperience of these things. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 16:44, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all.--Bojustme (talk) 17:15, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bojustme: It certainly looks to be a worthy article. I'm glad that you attributed the translated contents to this Dutch page, but I really think it would be nice if you could now try to find sources that are in English, rather than just copy them straight across - especially, Cornelius Ryan's book, 'A Bridge Too Far'. There are quite a few wikilinks worth adding, and you can even link to them on Dutch pages if they aren't present yet on en-wiki by using the {{illm}} inter-language link template. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:26, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bojustme: I don't know about it in this particular case, but often I see that especially the larger websites will have versions of their content in multiple languages, making it fairly easy to go to them, click on the selector to change to English, verify it's the same content, and then copy/paste the new English URL into the article here (and set |language=en in the citation parameters). It's not required, but it sure helps English-only (or primarily English) readers. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:45, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My article has been rejected because I did not cite correctly. Could you please help me cite the following website so that it gets approved by Wikipedia? Here is the website:Jjevtic123 (talk) 16:12, 6 October 2020 (UTC) https://www.andoverprop.com/ Jjevtic123 (talk) 16:12, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse! The problem with your article is not technicalities of creating citations but because it does not use reliable sources. A company website is not a good source for an article on that company. Wikipedia wants third-party sources who have discussed the company extensively to show that it is notable. See WP:COMPANY. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 16:18, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link. Draft:Andover Properties LLC. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:24, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I declined the draft some 12 days ago for not having any reliable sources and today Theroadislong left a beautiful AfC comment there. this is just blatant advertising. Jjevtic123, you need to have a look at WP:42 at least. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 16:52, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hi 2601:442:4680:5220:A896:A729:C1F1:D08E (talk) 16:53, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP, welcome to the Teahouse - home of helpful tips on Wikipedia editing. Do you have need of editing assistance? Nick Moyes (talk) 17:00, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, guys I want to ask of a local spam report can be deleted? Wanna know Dremo24 (talk) 17:14, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Helllo, Dremo24. I am afraid I am unclear what you are asking. Could you explain exactly what you mean, or link to the page containing the spam report? Thank you, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is the link below Two users spammed it & it's a notable music website in my country but has a spam report from unprofessional editing, why?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/9jadailyfeeds.com.ng — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dremo24 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So can it be deleted?

Dremo24 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:48, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, those logs are not deleted – there's no reason to do so. The website has been heavily spammed but it is not (yet) on a spam blacklist. --bonadea contributions talk 18:22, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Teahouse,

I was working on correcting, adding and editing the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valensia It's a page about the artist Valensia. I am the artist Valensia. How do I correct errors and add content without it being deleted? I am aware all has to be verified and must have a source. Is there a way to work in draft mode? It takes time to link all stories to all sources.

Thank you so much Danbelinsky (talk) 17:29, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse! Basically, WP:COI should tell you all you need to know. Stick to edits on the article's Talk page and you should be fine. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Danbelinsky User:Guillermo Sulbaran added HUGE amounts of unreferenced content to Valensia, you added modest amounts more, and then Jonesey95 reverted everything back to before the GS deluge. Turnbull's comment is that as the article is about you, you are recommended to first state on your User page that you intend to edit an article about you, and then, instead of editing the article directly, use the article's Talk pages to suggest specific edits. Hopefully, a non-connected editor will review your proposed changes and implement them, or not. By the way, do you know Sulbaran? It was very odd that Sulbaran's first ever edit, on 5 October, was this massive and misguided addition to the article. David notMD (talk) 18:32, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answers. Yes, Sulbaran works for me and I asked him to correct and update the page, since there's a lot of inaccurate info on it. I also noticed I cannot upload pics of myself, of which I own the copyright, probably because they've been on the internet for many years. But I got the same problem with uploading to YouTube: I'll get a copyright claim for my own material. I will ask Sulbaran to look into it. However, I see references to interviews I did which aren't too accurate as a source in the first place. I'm not into editing pages at all, I do worry about having this fan-made page online with so much errors and not knowing whether accurate information will be viewed as inaccurate. It's not that big of a deal but it would be nice to have it accurate. There's plenty of info which is pre-internet or quotes which aren't documented. For example, there's an entire Armenian hotel chain using my name and logo: the source is the hotel chain itself, of which I can't upload a picture because it's not mine, which makes the entire story a bit funny. But I guess all will have a source if I do a couple of interviews. Anyway thank you for your help and assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danbelinsky (talk • contribs) 19:22, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Danbelinsky. Wikipedia is keen on getting its articles accurate according to independent reliably-published sources. Information which has not been published does not belong in a Wikipedia article, period. Information which has only been published coming from the subject of the article (which includes anything in interviews or press releases, as well as their own publications) can be used only in limited cases: see WP:PRIMARY. On the other hand, sources do not have to be online: as long as they have been published by a reputable publisher, so that a reader can in principle get hold of them (eg through a library), that is fine.

As David said, you and your employees and associates should limit your involvement with that article to making edit requests on the article's talk page.

And concerning images: you are welcome to use any image to which you hold the copyright, provided you explicitly license it in a way that anybody may alter or reuse it, for any purpose, commercial or not, as long as they attribute the source. Most artists, understandably, are not willing to do this; but if you wish to, see donating copyright materials for how. --ColinFine (talk) 21:26, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ColinFine, thank you for your kind explanation. That's perfectly alright, virtually everything has been published either in books or online and my employees and associates were asking me to provide them with all the sources. I myself went to have a look and started to clean the page up, thinking I'd have a day or even two days to add all the sources (there are quite a few). I just didn't expect it to be deleted that quickly. I noticed I couldn't upload my own copyrighted pictures which are known and used all over the internet. I don't mind donating, I don't even care about people attributing the source. I would care about donating and losing my copyright to Wikipedia, like I do care, to some extend, that the information about me, put on Wikipedia by some obsessed fans, is as accurate and complete as possible. I just wished there was a bit more time to actually complete it. It's funny however, how an Armenian hotel chain took my name and logo and I run into copyright issues and source issues: there's humor in there, somewhere. My sincere apologies to have bothered you with this, I can promise you my intentions were to have an as accurate Wikipedia page as possible, that's all. Thank you for your help, suggestions and support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danbelinsky (talk • contribs) 22:32, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at the list of all time winningest NFL coaches and noticed it has Paul Brown with 166 wins at 16th overall. He actually has 213 wins and is 6th. 2 wins above Andy Reid. But I didnt want to edit because its in that table and wasnt sure if it would sort it properly. Or just show Paul Brown at 16th with 213 wins.

Link to article in question. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Football_League_head_coaches_with_50_wins

Source for correct wins. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/ Dilltopia (talk) 17:57, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dilltopia: The Wikipedia list does not include AAFC wins, and your source does, so that is likely the difference. You can start a discussion on the article's talk page if there is some other error. RudolfRed (talk) 18:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

why was my edit on chris smalling deleted? I stated a fact and contributed by stating how good the team he used to play for was. 73.223.190.117 (talk) 18:17, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IP editor. You inserted a description of his old team in the middle of the description of his financial arrangements with his new team. That is out of place and does not improve the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:30, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have been working on a page called CourseNetworking, it is a local Indianapolis educational company, very similar to Schoology, D2L, ClassDojo, and Edmodo, which ALL have Wikipedia articles published. I do not understand what the issue with CourseNetworking and why this company would not be able to be published on Wiki. I kept getting deleted for advertising and promotion, which is confusing when I am getting all my information from external searches. Can you please give me tips on how to get this article published, I have been working on it for months. Very much appreciate your time. XxCNxxCL (talk) 18:32, 6 October 2020 (UTC) XxCNxxCL (talk) 18:32, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Content on your Talk page explains that CourseNetworking was moved from main space to draft because of inadequate referencing. You moved it back to main space rather than wait for a reviewer, and it was Speedy deleted. The next day you created it as a draft and it was SD'd. The day after that you created it as an article and it was SD'd. Always, reason was being advertising/promotional. The fact that other articles exist is not a valid argument - perhaps those should be AfD'd (nominated for deletion) instead. David notMD (talk) 18:40, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@XxCNxxCL: Welcome to Wikipedia. Creating an article is not easy. I suggest you focus on working on improving existing articles to gain Wikipedia experience, and then return to creating a new article. There is also WP:YFA which will guide you through the steps of creating an article. If you are affiliated with the company you need to declare WP:COI and WP:PAID. RudolfRed (talk) 18:43, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all, Le Panini here.

This is going off of my previous question. I know about the parameters now, and I found another review that is a parameter, being Destructoid, and I'm trying to add it to the Super Mario Bros. 35 article reviews table. So I know it'll work, I just don't know how to get it to work. Can somebody help? Le Panini (talk) 18:33, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You still haven't used the parameter name as defined in Module:Video game reviews/data. I've corrected it in this edit. David Biddulph (talk) 18:53, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's kind of cryptic, but you have to look at Module:Video game reviews/data that David linked above and find the row for the parameter in which you are interested (by scannng manually or using the browser's find function), which contains rows of pairs (one for each possible parameter): an opening brace, a description in double quotes (usually a pipelink), a comma, then the actual name of the parameter you want (in single-quotes), followed by a closing brace and a comma. E.g., your desired parameter is described by:

{ "[[Destructoid|''Destructoid'']]", 'Destruct' },

showing that the parameter name you want is Destruct. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:00, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Ashley Fairbairn was one of 4 breeders who bought Sir Galahad the race horse and brought him to America. You spell his name Fairburn. Throughout all your articles on William Woodward Sr and on Sir Gallahad you spell his name wrong...He was my great-grandfather ...please correct. Thank you

 73.142.33.89 (talk) 21:33, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for calling this to our attention. I have fixed the errors. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:41, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am so confused, I tried to upload a image and use the non free logo template that I filled out for File:Borden Dairy Logo.png and it automatically created a speedy delete template stating that fair use is not used on Wikicomons. My question is where can I upload a image and use a none free image template so that I can use this logo on Wikipedia. BigRed606 (talk) 23:26, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@BigRed606: Are you trying to use the yellow cow logo for the infobox in the Borden Dairy article? TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:37, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) @BigRed606: That is correct – fair use is not allowed on Commons. Images for which you want to make a fair use argument (see WP:NFCC, which is necessarily very picky, and must be followed exactly) for use in a specific English Wikipedia article are to be uploaded directly to English Wikipedia at Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:40, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of I tried upload the Borden dairy yellow cow logo on Wikicomons and used the Wikipedia:Non-free content/templates, but it automatically created a speedy delete template and said i could not use fair use on Wikicomons BigRed606 (talk) 23:44, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

—[AlanM1 (talk)]— I tried to use that link but it does not take me anywhere.BigRed606 (talk) How do I access it then?BigRed606 (talk)

It works for me and here it is again to click on WP:File Upload Wizard. Note that this is within English Wikipedia, it is not a Commons page, and you should check you are logged on when you use it. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 10:53, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm a newbie, and I've recently been reading around Wikipedia's documentation and essays. They have left me with one question though - how does one start or find an edit war?

I found this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BOLD,_revert,_revert,_revert which I found helpful in how to continue in an edit war, but I'm still confused as to how to start one, or where the revert button is.

I also found this page really helpful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sarcasm_is_really_helpful

Thanks very much! Cheers,  Aviage64 (talk) 00:57, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aviage64: Just focus on improving the encyclopedia. If someone reverts you, start a discussion on the talk page instead of redoing your edit. RudolfRed (talk) 01:37, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Aviage64. Here is my very strong advice to you. Do not try to start edit wars. Do not participate in edit wars. Never, ever ever. This behavior is a bright line blockable offense. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:01, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I was wondering whether "post-compromise security" is in fact a notable topic for an article?

I saw it in the cryptography requested article section but wasn't sure that it would actually be considered notable. If it could, I might try to create the page. I just wouldn't want to create the article only to find it's not notable.

I'm not sure how to find secondary sources on a topic like this (so my lack of finding them doesn't necessarily indicate that they don't exist). I did find quite a few primary sources on the topic through a Google Scholar search so I don't think it's really an obscure topic and I'm sure there would be people interested in it.

So how could I determine whether this is notable? What do you think? Thanks for any help!! IllQuill (talk) 03:34, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IllQuill, it's hard for me to give you a firm yes/no answer, since I'm not an expert in cryptology. As with most articles, its notability will be determined by the general notability guideline; the existence of scholarly literature about the subject is certainly a good sign. You could try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cryptography, although you may not receive a response since it's not the most active WikiProject. You could also leave a message for SimonEast, who added the request, but he hasn't been around in a few months. One thing to note is that cryptology articles are not scrutinized for notability quite as intensely as biography/company articles, since there's not a flood of people trying to add them. Overall, you'll need to use your best judgement, but even if it's not ultimately found notable, I'd guess the content would likely be moved to a related page. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:20, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I wonder if someone can review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kin_Lane and let me know your feedback on what's missing, how to improve it and more. Thank you. GoodNickBB (talk) 03:37, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello GoodNickBB. Your first reference does not mention Kin Lane, and your last reference is a press release, which is not acceptable. An acceptable Wikipedia biography will summarize entirely independent reliable sources that devote significant coverage to Kin Lane as a person. Passing mentions and sources affiliated with the person do not establish notability. So, ask yourself, which sources meet that high standard? If they do not exist, then it is not possible to write an acceptable Wikipedia biography. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:56, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why my draft should be deleted from admin. Please Point out the reason. Elizabeth Verghese (talk) 06:03, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Verghese, welcome to the Teahouse! Could you give us the name of the draft so we can help you look it up? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:06, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Elizabeth Verghese Dr. Mrs. Elizabeth Verghese is the Chairperson of Hindustan Group of Institutions based in Chennai. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elizabeth Verghese (talk • contribs) 06:15, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The explanation for the deletion is at Draft:Elizabeth Verghese, and at Draft:Dr. Mrs. Elizabeth Verghese for a previous version. If the draft looked like this], it is not surprising that it was judged in that way. It had no references to published reliable sources independent of the subject. If you feel tempted to recreate it, please read Wikipedia's advice against autobiography. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:27, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was mostly unreferenced, the few refs being to her own speeches and company pages, and the text is just pure self-promotion. Selected highlights include Her husband, Dr. K.C. G. Verghese was a pioneer visionary, who established one of the first hugely popular vocational training institute... She is ably assisted and supported by her two Sons (Engineers) and her daughter (Doctor and Ophthalmologist) and successfully balancing both professional and personal life... Her focus has been to impart quality education and has taken the unique initiative to globalize education and established links with universities across the globe... a unique career whereby, she has touched thousands of children's lives... thousands of students have been equipped with vocational skills and encouraged self-employment and small business development. She is empowering many women... She has been a philanthropist contributing for many community, church and social service initiatives., but the rest is equally self-serving "I'm wonderful" stuff. It's the same as David Biddulph linked, with a few self-refs. If it reappears in anything like a similar form again, given the COI warning, I'll indef the account. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:53, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated the Anand article for G11, implemented by ReaderofthePack. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:10, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak: Do you want to address the apparent alternate account HGIChancellor? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:16, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I want to create an article for Wikipedia but lacking ideas for doing the same. Kindly suggest some. Editingwork8 (talk) 06:13, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requested articles/Biography/By profession is brimming with ideas. Some of them are even good ideas. -- Hoary (talk) 07:01, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't say what sort of things you like / have expertise in, although your page mentions librarianship. A good way to proceed is to join a Project in an area that interests you. See WP:WikiProject_Council/Directory for a list. If you click through to a few, you'll be able to join a narrower community of editors working in an area that appeals to you and they'll always have a "to-do" list. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 11:13, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

My article was recently deleted for been too promotional... however i have edited in accordance with the wikipedia guide lines. my question is ..Can i create same article again?

thanks Smilejorge (talk) 06:24, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Smilejorge, You can not write the same because it would be again deleted for being Unambiguous advertising or promotional article. If you want to create this article again you need to re-write it in accordance with neutral point of view and there should be no puffery. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:37, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

thanks (^talk) I said i have re-written the article in accordance with NPOV. I was article if i could create a new article with same title as the deleted ? Smilejorge (talk) 07:23, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smilejorge. Under normal circumstances, it would probably be OK for you to re-create the draft if you like by going to Draft:Sharon Okpamen and starting again if you're sure you can do so in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines; however, in this case you might want to wait and see how your discussion with HickoryOughtShirt?4, the administrator who deleted the draft, at User talk:HickoryOughtShirt?4#Deleted draft: SHARON OKPAMEN goes before trying to do so. If what you posted on HickoryOughtShirt?4's user talk page is what you intend to add to the new draft, then I'm afraid that it's only likely going to end up be speedy deleted once again.

You might also want to look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Notability (people), Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing for reference as well since you and perhaps Ms. Okpamen (who seems to be paying you to create the article) might not quite understand what a Wikipedia article is. Even if an article about Ms.Okpamen was to be created and survive any deletion challenge, neither she nor anyone representing her or connected to her would have no editorial control over the content of the article; article content (even negative content) will be assessed soley based upon whether it's in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, not be what's best for Ms. Okpamen. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:08, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good day house please help look up this re-write and let me know if all NPOV criteria has been met, and if not please help edit where needed.

Many thanks

SHARON OKPAMEN

Smilejorge (talk) 08:37, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, not all NPOV criteria have been met. Your draft was rejected, not declined. What rejection means is: Stop. So please stop. -- Hoary (talk) 09:17, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your second draft is no better. Still highly promotional, peacock-worded, and still no references. David notMD (talk) 12:03, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I'm creating a page about someone from C19th who had connections with lots of institutions. I've created a table with a list of about 40 institutions and want to add links to the relevant Wiki page if there is one. Is there any way I can do a quick search to flag up which have wiki pages and which don't, or do I have to search for each page individually in the wiki search engine? Ruthhenrietta (talk) 08:55, 7 October 2020 (UTC) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 08:55, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You could just link them and see if the links are blue or red. NB the 19th century was big on grandly/vaguely named institutions, and it wasn't rare for a single name to be shared by two institutions (usually at different times). So you should check that the bluelinked title is about the institution that you have in mind, not merely a namesake. -- Hoary (talk) 09:22, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Of course - I didn't think of that - thank you Hoary (I'm very new to all this) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 10:42, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruthhenrietta: Another little tip is to switch to the Visual Editor, highlight the institution name you want to wikilink to, and then click the chain symbol in the editor's Tools bar to add a wikilink. This rather cleverly then gives you a dropdown of potentially matching names for you to select from. Sometimes it's easy to see which is the right one to choose, but you can always 'right-click' the name to open that link in a new page to check. Hope this helps, too. Nick Moyes (talk)

Hello,

I have an unpublished document by someone who has researched information by using a public archive. Is it ok to use the Archive as a Primary Source reference, even though the archive catalogue doesn't mention the subject of the page, and similarly, is it ok to use websites as a reference, even if they don't mention the detail?

This is what I'm talking about: I'm writing a page about someone called Thomas Daniel. The unpublished research says he was a silver token holder at Bristol Old Vic Theatre. Bristol Archives holds the archival material - http://archives.bristol.gov.uk/Record.aspx?src=CalmView.Catalog&id=TR - and there are references to the Silver Tokens online e.g. https://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2015/june/old-vic-silver-tickets.html which refers to the original research done by the person whose unpublishe document I have.

But I don't have a published reference to the fact that Thomas Daniel owned a silver token.

So do I not mention it, not give a reference, or give the references above? (It's a bit odd that the Bristol Old Vic page doesn't mention the silver tokens - but I'll leave that for another day!) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 09:42, 7 October 2020 (UTC) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 09:42, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My article has been pending since 3 months, it was supposed to be reviewed within 2 months. Can someone please review it ? Draft:Tallukh WikiSantashines (talk) 10:11, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiSantashines There is a limited number of editors that review articles, and they are volunteers who do what they can when they can. They are also reviewed in no particular order; you will need to continue to be patient. You are welcome to do other work in the encyclopedia while you wait. 331dot (talk) 10:13, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you get your "3 months" from? You first created your draft on 2 August, so just over 2 months ago, and it was reviewed and declined the following day. You resubmitted it for further review on 4 September, so it had been waiting just over 1 month, not 3. It has been reviewed again today, and declined for a second time. David Biddulph (talk) 10:43, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'd be grateful for any help, as I may have misunderstood the new article approval process.

It was my understanding that a new article has to be approved by the Wikipedia community - but it seems that, just by moving an article from draft space, I've kind of stumbled into publishing it to the main space, without having to send it off for approval. It certainly looks published anyway!

Here's the draft I mean: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAIRR_(Farm_Animal_Investment_Risk_%26_Return)

Have I misunderstood the new article process, or have I been reading old instructions? Is the article now published?

Many thanks,

Iona Oiona (talk) 10:27, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oiona Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft is now formally part of the encyclopedia, but I would urge you to move it back to Draft space and run it through the Articles for Creation process. Unless you have a great deal of experience in article creation, you will save yourself a lot of grief if you do that. If you directly create an article in the main encyclopedia, it is assumed by other editors that you know what you are doing, and if they do see an issue with the article, they will treat it more harshly than they would if you left it as a draft and asked for a review.

I can see several reasons why the text your wrote is problematic; it only tells about the organization and what it does; Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the organization have chosen on their own to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. The sources you have offered seem to be press-release type sources, announcements of routine business, or brief mentions, which do not establish notability. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has moved it to unsubmitted draft: Draft:FAIRR (Farm Animal Investment Risk & Return) David notMD (talk) 12:09, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, i want to correct and update some numbers. I'm doing this since 2016. Simis333 (talk) 12:07, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What article(s)? David notMD (talk) 12:12, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Simis333. I assume you are referring to List of European countries by average wage? You are welcome to update the contents, but remember to ensure that the sources and url's cited also link to reliable pages which includes that updated information. It's easy to update a table and forget to check whether the source links still point to the right place. Should you feel that other editors might take issue with your updates and sources, you could always discuss this first on the relevant article's talk page. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:37, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Simis333: Did you have a specific problem editing the page? I see that you last edited it in August. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:10, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Simis333: Please do remember to add edit summaries. Especially on a big, complex page like that, it is helpful to tell other editors what you're doing. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:14, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to know if my source is reliable but other person's who is senior editor but not administrator dont accept my source what i should do.

If two persons have different but reliable sources both have different views and opinions on same article's how i can improve the article's one person say my source is correct other say mine is correct Adsmohali (talk) 12:38, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Adsmohali: Please take more care when posting your questions - you seem to have deleted another user's question - that is not helpful to anyone. I have now reinstated it. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:44, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

please excuse me i am new by mistake i have deleted other person's post — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adsmohali (talk • contribs) 12:48, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, are there any bots in the wiki system, that like to revert pages. I am trying to edit the Yamaha FZ6R wiki page, and actually fill it with solid information instead of a re-direct to something else that has zero information. Every time I do it, someone or something reverts it back to the Re-Direct page. What can I do here. RideThe6 (talk) 12:43, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@RideThe6: Welcome to the Teahouse. It was not an automated bot, but an experienced editor who redirected Yamaha FZ6R back to Yamaha Diversion#XJ6 Diversion, XJ6 N and XJ6 Diversion F. This is an encyclopaedia, based on reliable sources, and not a list of unsupported specifications and petty minutiae which nobody can verify. You included no references at all and, as such, this machine does not merit a stand-alone page. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:38, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Moyes: , yes I understand what you are saying but all this info and specs are from the Yamaha FZ6R operators manual. I own two of these motorcycles and can say that the information is accurate. Why would I go through such a lengthy process to fill out false information. If the senior editor is such an expert, ask him to show me any information on the re-direct page for the FZ6R. The current links and data for this motorcycle is completely inadequate. I was hoping to change that. But I guess not. I thought this was a place for information. Well right now I see none, other than my edits. If it sources I need, then just say we need sources and not completely revert the article. I will upload sources, if it suits your highness.

@RideThe6: Please see your talk page, where I have left a message that explains some of the things with which you are having issues. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:24, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My friend's IP address and my friend's account are all blocked. His IP address is (redacted) and his name is Ben Preston OHLA. Someone please unlock your account and help my friend's IP address. If something goes wrong, my friend has corrected it and is looking forward to their forgiveness. He asked me to help. He's naive, so everyone including Deepfriedokra will let him go and forgive him for once. 222.109.223.177 (talk) 12:45, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Preston OHLA (talk · contribs) has an open appeal at UTRS appeal #35552, at which he has not addressed the reasons for his block. This is not a moral issue, requiring "forgiveness". It is a matter of preventing further disruption. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:51, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know him very well. He never did anything wrong or anything bad. He told me that he did so for a reason. He told you already but you don't understand so I had to ask for my help because I was close to him since I was a child and I consider him like a real brother. He already knows his fault, so please if you still have some conscience, Deepfriedokra. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.109.223.177 (talk • contribs) 13:45, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

222.109.223.177: Please do not copy someone's signature formatting and place it at the end of your own comments, and then not sign your comment yourself. It makes it look like the comment came from that other person, not you. The correct way to mention another user is {{U|Username}}. I've corrected the instances above. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:32, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hi there I am not a history writer of something like that I am having some information regarding some influential members of sikh empire which is not available on internet Griffinjunior (talk) 12:45, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I wonder if someone can review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Saath_Nibhaana_Saathiya_2 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ghum_Hai_Kisikey_Pyaar_Mein let me know your feedback on what's missing, how to improve it and more. Thank you. Unknownnreasonn (talk)

Hey, I've been editing this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Roam_(Musician) for a few months now, improving upon the version that was previously rejected & I think it should be ready for another review and quite possibly inclusion, HOWEVER before then I need to know which is the better format for the discography: what I have there already or do I have to put everything in a table of some sort? Does it even really matter? Tiddlewinker (talk) 12:58, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tiddlewinker, I just reviewed Draft:Roam (Musician), & I’m sorry it may not be the response you were expecting. Asides the notability issue, it is also very promotional which isn’t why I declined it, but just so you know another editor may come across it and tag it with a CSD G11. Celestina007 (talk) 13:37, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain difference between visual editing and normal editing Adsmohali (talk) 13:22, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Adsmohali: The Normal Editor (better known as Source Editor) is the powerful editing tool preferred by most experienced users. It writes using a very simple set of instructions for bold, underline, italics etc called 'wiki-markup'.  Visual Editor is a cut down version, more WYSIWYG in appearance, often preferred by newer users. You don't need to write using that simple 'wiki markup', but there are some things that are much harder to do with it. But writing content and adding references can be done easily with either editing tool. You can switch between editors whilst editing an article, simply by clicking the dark sloping pencil icon on the right side of the editing toolbar. You are using Source Editor here on this page, and we tend to answer questions based on that being the tool of choice unless someone tells us otherwise. You will find a lot of your newcomer questions answered by working trough some of our Help pages. Help:Introduction should help you with this one. I suggest you take our interactive tour called The Wikipedia Adventure. If you complete it all you can collect 15 separate competency badges along the way. Best of luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 13:49, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Adsmohali, “Normal editing” is subjective as it depends on the preference of an editor. However I think you are asking what the difference between 'Visual' & 'Source' editing is, Visual editing, is an easy way of editing whereby you are able to see in 'real time' how the output of your edit would look like once you save your edit whereas in 'Source editing' which is 'normal editing' for me, is a more complex form of editing because you’d be editing the 'Source' & this requires an editor to understand Wiki coding to a satisfactory level. Furthermore you seem to be testing your edits on mainspace, please do not do that again and you might want to cut down on using emoji's as they may make you look like you are not serious or just trolling. Thanks for your time. Celestina007 (talk) 13:57, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

on 6 th October,2020 I wrote my conjecture, which I think,can be a generalization of the G.C.. But a person deleted it .Now I only request Wikipedia to prevent my post in the cancellation box ,so that no-one can steel and deliver it with their name ,because it was invented by me. Debdoot guha (talk) 13:44, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Debdoot guha I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place for original research. If your generalization of the Goldbach Conjecture is noted by reliable sources in mathematics then it may be recorded on the GC's article. You may want to look elsewhere to get it published. Also keep in mind that text written on Wikipedia is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. realsanix (Hello!) 13:54, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Debdoot guha. Wikipedia does not permit the publication of 'Original Research', so you will need an alternative platform on which to publish your thoughts, ideas, conjectures or theories, sorry. This edit was certainly not in keeping with our encyclopaedia format! I would however point out that whenever anyone publishes and text here, the terms of service show that they are releasing it for free use or re-use by absolutely anyone, albeit with attribution. So perhaps that wasn't a good idea after all. See WP:NOTESSAY and WP:NOTWEBHOST for more on these limitations. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:58, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Debdoot guha If you would like the edit to be removed from the page history, you can request for revision deletion.Wikipedia:Revision_deletion#How_to_request_Revision_Deletion. realsanix (Hello!) 14:02, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, how do I add a page I created Karmen Karma to a Wikiproject. I need more assistance in expanding it. 154.160.9.116 (talk) 13:57, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]